WYD: Benedict paints his own shade of green
Print Friendly VersionBy JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Pope Benedict XVI continued to paint his distinctive shade of green in Australia yesterday, repeatedly voicing environmental concerns while linking them to a broader range of Christian doctrines and moral teaching.
In a session with leaders of other religions held in the Chapter Hall of Sydney’s St. Mary’s Cathedral, the pontiff said religions have a unique capacity to foster “sacrifice and self-discipline,” including “a moderate use of the world’s goods.”
That ethos, the pope said, leads men and women “to regard the environment as a marvel to be pondered and respected, rather than a commodity for mere consumption.”
“It is incumbent upon religious people,” the pope said, “to demonstrate that it is possible to find joy in living simply and modestly, generously sharing one’s surplus with those suffering from want.”
Benedict XVI also called upon the religions to challenge “sinister and indiscriminate forms of violence,” promoting peaceful conflict resolution and respect for human dignity. Benedict defined himself as an “ambassador of peace.”
The pope challenged religious leaders to make “goodness, compassion, freedom, solidarity, and respect for every individual an essential part of our vision for a more humane future.”
At the same time, the pope cautioned against defining inter-religious relations exclusively in terms of practical cooperation towards social aims. Dialogue should also focus, he said, upon efforts to understand “the profound meaning of human existence,” which Christians believe is revealed in Jesus of Nazareth.
Later in the afternoon, Benedict addressed a group of disadvantaged youth served by a rehabilitation community of the University of Notre Dame. Once again, the pope hit an environmental note. In the course of commenting on abuses of power, Benedict cited a tendency “to exploit the natural environment for selfish purposes.”
“This is to make power into a false god,” the pope said. “Instead of bringing life, it brings death.”
Once again, the pope’s words on the environment were part of a broader continuum of concerns, including alcohol and drug abuse, a “permissive approach to sexuality,” and what he described as a modern “cult” of material possessions.
Acknowledging that some of the youth gathered in Sacred Heart Church had gone down these paths, the pope applauded their “courage in choosing to turn back.”
“I see you as ambassadors of hope to others in similar situations,” Benedict said.
Since arriving in Australia earlier in the week, Benedict has missed few opportunities to strike environmental themes, picking up on Australia’s strong political and social commitment to ecological awareness. In virtually every case, however, these have not been stand-alone comments, but rather the pope has inserted his environmental message into broader treatments of Christian faith and social teaching.
In essence, the implied argument seems to be that the self-mastery required to address environmental challenges, especially to reconsider modern consumerist lifestyles, presupposes the spiritual and moral commitments supplied by Christianity.
Benedict’s other major address yesterday came before leaders of various Christian denominations, gathered in the crypt of St. Mary’s Cathedral.
The pope reiterated his commitment to the goal of unity among the divided branches of Christianity, including the celebration of a common Eucharist. At the same time, he insisted that fellowship cannot be achieved at the expense of truth.
“We must guard against any temptation to view doctrine as divisive and hence an impediment to the seemingly more pressing and immediate task of improving the world in which we live,” Benedict said. “Praxis is not only inseparable from, but actually flows out of didache, or teaching.”
Benedict called upon the leaders of the various Christian denominations to offer a “common witness to Christ” and to “Christ’s truth.”
Some observers heard in the pope’s comments an implicit reference to the current crisis in the Anglican Communion over homosexuality, the ordination of women as bishops, and other matters threatening to further divide Canterbury and Rome. Benedict, however, did not single out any particular denomination or set of issues in his remarks.
The Pope has set forth his
The Pope has set forth his concerns about the inversion of praxis and teaching. In his remarks to Latin American bishops in 1996 he said: "Where do I find a just action if I cannot know what is just in an absolute way?" and "Mere praxis is not light." He was arguing against Liberation Theology here, but his remarks apply generally to the praxis-oriented ecumenical movement as well. Simply allying ourselves with those who "practice" or who have similar views on social or ethical issues does not lead to the conclusion that unity is near. And praxis by itself will not help us to realize that unity. Benedict's call for a "common witness" to Christ AND to Christ's truth is a serious throw-down to those in the liberal mainline Protestant groups as well as to evangelical Protestant groups. Everyone cites the Anglican Communion as the target of Benedict's remarks, but witnessing to Christ is also a function of correct doctrine, which is not fulfilled any better by evangelical Protestants.
Do you know if there's a
Do you know if there's a place we could find the text of those remarks? I'm curious to know what sort of thing he had in mind. From the various stories I've heard about ecumenical cooperation, it tends to be the practical applications that bring laymen together to work toward common goals. Theologians may get together on the basis of teaching, because they love to argue, but that's not generally true for the rest of us. I think it's hard to avoid the conclusion that the "common witness" (at least the recognition that we have a common witness) arises out of praxis, not didache. The only way you can bring didache into those experiences is if you assume doctrinal teachings are not all thoroughly intertwined so that each implies the others. Otherwise we would never see serious Christians from different backgrounds cooperating.
Crazy Diamond, Go to the
Crazy Diamond,
Go to the Vatican website: http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm
Choose the button for Sydney. Click on 'speeches'; choose 2008/July. Go down to the following speeches:
Chapter Hall of St. Mary's Cathedral, Sydney
Friday, 18 July 2008
Crypt of St. Mary’s Cathedral in Sydney
Friday, 18 July 2008
I see as I read the gospels.
I see as I read the gospels. Jesus' instruction on praxis (feed, clothe, forgive etc.) I wouldn't call that mere praxis. Where is His insistence on correct doctrine?
John Allen makes a very good
John Allen makes a very good point here about Pope Benedict's comments on issues and what I see as Pope Benedict's pedagogical style and it reveals the Pope's innermost philosophy or reasoning. "In virtually every case, however, these have not been stand-alone comments, but rather the pope has inserted his environmental message into broader treatments of Christian faith and social teaching." John Allen
The Pope's quote: "In essence, the implied argument seems to be that the self-mastery required to address environmental challenges, especially to reconsider modern consumerist lifestyles, presupposes the spiritual and moral commitments supplied by Christianity."
In the above quote by Pope Benedict there are several layers to unveil to try to comprehend what he is teaching. By his choosing the words "self-mastery" "to address environmental challenges" he seems to be saying that the requirement to address environmental challenges is "self-mastery." This makes more sense when we read the next sentence where he continues "especially to reconsider modern consumerist lifestyles." Again here, he is addressing the issue from what I see on a personal note towards individuals, consumerist, and their "lifestyles." Then he goes on to say that the answer or presupposition is in the "spiritual and moral commitments supplied by Christianity."
I really have to wonder what he is talking about here and what he is teaching and to whom he is addressing the need for "self-mastery" and what he really means by "reconsider modern consumerist lifestyles" and what "spiritual and moral commitments" in particular he is referring to that are "supplied by Christianity??"
Guesstimating what the Pope might possibly mean: Is he saying that consumers need self-mastery when it comes to the energy companies increasing the price of oil per barrel while making record profits while not building new refineries which would allow for an increase in supply and lower the cost? Is he saying that we have actually had a choice in installing environmentally friendly energy systems into our homes that are cost & energy efficient and that we can afford to install? If he's implying that we should not buy gas guzzling automobiles, why doesn't he just come out and say it? The Pope always has me wondering what it is that he is saying exactly and it seems that anyone of us could come up with a different take on his comments. The Pope seems to want to blame the consumer rather than multinational global corporate conglomerates for our environmental woes. Is he talking about the consumerist lifestyles of the rich and famous? Most of us don't live like kings, but are struggling to make ends meet day to day, or month by month. His words are too general to really grasp what he truly means.
Next, I never liked the term "consumer." The term lends a very crude way of looking at people who have basic needs such as food, clothing, housing, furniture, bedding, kitchen utensils, transportation, energy needs for heating and cooling, education, dental or medical care at one point or another. In running a budget for a household I can only buy what we can afford, but the American way has become the credit card way of buy now and pay later, at excessive interest rates, because our incomes are not increasing with the pace of inflation, the increased taxes and the cost of goods to keep the basic household running. Our government runs on this concept and is borrowing in billions from the Chinese. And worse, our government has set things up so that we are consuming goods from China and giving our jobs to them. I don't see the consumers at fault for buying their products because we don't really have a choice as most things nowadays are made in China, but for an economic policy that leads to the American worker being replaced and tossed into homelessness and/or poverty.
The "self-mastery" I can garner in all of this is to not buy any products that are made in China, not consume more debt through credit card use, only buy what is absolutely essential for survival. This existence would presuppose the fall of the entire economic system in America and perhaps around the world if we were to try it. In a sense this is already happening when we cannot afford to buy anything except the essentials and we pay down our debts.
The problem in the environment is not with consumerism per se, but with dependence on oil and coal, the fossil fuels industry and the oil wars that have and will continue to brew in this century. The "self-mastery" would be for creativity and investment into green technologies and make them available for broader need and use, or consumption if you prefer to use that word instead. This green technology would create new jobs here and around the world and eliminate the need to fight with our neighbors over energy that is increasingly becoming scarce and too expensive and causing a lot of cancer by its pollution and causing shifts in weather patterns and increased temperatures and more deadly and costly storms.
As to why Pope Benedict is mixing the message with doctrine and practice, one can only assume or presume what he really means or intends it to mean. He seems to be mixing apples with oranges and the forest for the trees. Are consumers or the laity now the scapegoat left holding the entire bag for an economy that has run amuck under a greedy and gluttonous form of capitalism? I suppose if we were to vote for the continuance of this type of system that we could be held accountable for the consequences of such a system.