Benedict's 'Grey Eminence'

May 14, 2008

Following Benedict XVI's recent visit to America, there was some grumbling from social justice activists that the pope said relatively little about matters ranging from climate change to third-world debt. This reflects, they suggested, the pope's disinterest in "real" issues.

From his papacy's beginning, Benedict has indeed proved remarkably reluctant to enter into detailed discussion of policy questions. There are two reasons for this. First, just after being elected pope, Benedict reaffirmed that the Catholic Church does have non-negotiable positions on particular matters, most notably the protection of innocent human life, marriage, and religious liberty properly understood.

But Benedict also reaffirmed the Church's teaching that, as far as other policy issues are concerned, lay Catholics are free to make their own prudential judgments, guided, of course, by Catholic principles. Even within the Catholic Church, it is not well-understood that Catholics enjoy remarkable liberty to take a variety of positions on most policy questions.

The second reason for Benedict's disinterest in policy details, however, ultimately reflects his view about how Catholics ought to approach social-political questions.

In this regard, perhaps the greatest influence upon Benedict's social thought--his grey eminence--is a French Jesuit theologian who died 17 years ago. Born in 1896, Henri de Lubac experienced the twentieth century's upheavals at first hand. He fought in the trenches of World War I, participated in the French Resistance during World War II, worked as a theological expert at Vatican II, and served as friend and intellectual interlocutor to both Karol Wojtyla and Joseph Ratzinger.

Like Ratzinger, de Lubac was considered somewhat avant-garde before Vatican II. He consequently experienced considerable unpleasantness at the hands of overzealous church officials.

But after Vatican II, de Lubac--like Ratzinger--emerged as a formidable defender of Catholic orthodoxy. De Lubac also continued to endure harassment for his views. This time, however, the odium theologica came from heterodox theologians such as Hans Kung whose agenda amounted (as it still does) to dissolving Catholicism into a secularized, hyper-politicized, bureaucratized, and doctrinally-empty pseudo-Christianity.

But Ratzinger and de Lubac's similarities go beyond this. They shared the conviction that the road to Church renewal is not immersion in whatever happens to be the latest intellectual fashion.

Authentic renewal, de Lubac held, could only occur by going back to the original sources of Christian inspiration--most notably, Scripture grounded in the Church's Tradition as well as the Church Fathers--and then using this as a basis to think about the present. This, de Lubac argued, was the best way to articulate a distinctly Christian message to the modern world.

A good example of how this applied to social issues is de Lubac's book, Catholicisme: Aspects sociaux du dogme (1938). In his Memoirs, Ratzinger recalls the impact this text had on his own thought. Indeed, it is directly cited in Benedict's encyclical Spe Salvi.

Catholicisme draws upon Scripture and early and medieval Church Fathers to think through what the nature of the Church itself suggests about the individual's place in society. The beauty of this approach is that it brings to the surface ideas that cannot be neatly categorized as "right" or "left." Rather, it produces a distinctly Christian perspective that explodes our increasingly sterile secular political categories.

This method was on display during two recent speeches delivered by Pope Benedict.

One was his United Nations address in which Benedict politely but firmly noted that the very notion of human rights was first conceptualized by Catholic theologians and only ultimately made sense when grounded in a biblical vision of man. This is a way of talking about rights that cuts through the morass of much contemporary rights-talk, which is reflected in the typically incoherent statements about rights produced by most international organizations.

The second speech was Pope Benedict's recent May 3rd address to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Here the pope reflected upon the nature of subsidiarity and solidarity. Drawing upon Scripture and commentaries from Augustine and Aquinas, Benedict reminded his audience that the ultimate purpose of these principles is not efficiency or equality. Rather, it is "to place men and women on the path to discovering their definitive, supernatural destiny."

Neither solidarity nor subsidiarity, Benedict stated, have purely "horizontal" (i.e., earthly) meaning. They also have "vertical" (i.e., transcendental) significance. Solidarity, Benedict wrote, is ultimately about helping others to encounter life in all its fullness, something only completely realized through life in Christ.

Subsidiarity, Benedict maintained, "liberates people from a sense of despondency and hopelessness, granting them the freedom to engage with one another in the spheres of commerce, politics and culture". But above all, Benedict added, subsidiarity makes "space for love... which always remains the most excellent way."

None of this is to suggest that Benedict or de Lubac thinks that politics or public policy is unimportant. Their point is that if you truly believe in the truth found in the sources of orthodox Christianity, then you will think and act as if the transcendental destiny (heaven or hell) that everyone can freely choose for themselves is real, and such considerations will shape every moral decision you make, including your political choices.

That's the core of Benedict's social message. It's hard to imagine a more radical one.

Dr. Samuel Gregg is research director at the Acton Institute and author, most recently, of The Commercial Society (2007).

Comments

Edward Louis Peffer: elpeffer@sbcglobal.net

At age 81, journalism degree 1950 U of Minnesota, 37 years in ad sales at The Tidings, Catholic weekly Los Angeles, we saw transition from Cardinal McIntyre (building churches and schools), Manning (very spiritually advancing), and Mahony (apparently rejecting Humanae Vitae's prophetic advice for married persons). Muslims have large families. Catholics worldwide tend to reject H.V. and populations are dropping, especially in Vladimir Putin's Russia, where average of six abortions is akin to Roe v Wade logic on human life. Perhaps Muslims see "Satan" in America as USAID-UN funding thrusted contraception, sterilization and abortion on the world. Reagan halted that, and the rule stayed under Bush. Clinton reversed policies to fund UN anti-population evils. Bush has appointed pro-life Justices, and Clinton appointed pro-Roe v Wade Jewish Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Reagan wrote "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation" --made into a book on the 10th anniversary of Roe v Wade. However, the media will NEVER mention it. So called "Catholics" as Ted Kennedy, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Nancy Pelosi (powerful Speaker of the House) are gung-ho for Roe v Wade. Pray to turn the tide!!!

Still-on-earth:

You are missing the entire point. "Solidarity, Benedict wrote, is ultimately about helping others to encounter life in all its fullness, something only completely realized through life in Christ."

"Subsidiarity, Benedict maintained, "liberates people from a sense of despondency and hopelessness, granting them the freedom to engage with one another in the spheres of commerce, politics and culture". But above all, Benedict added, subsidiarity makes "space for love... which always remains the most excellent way.""

POPE BENEDICT EVEN CONCLUDES " and such considerations will shape every moral decision you make, including your political choices." IT'S ALL VERY SIMPLE - IT STARTS WITH LOVE AND ENDS WITH LOVE - THAT IS ALL THAT IS NEEDED IN EVERY ASPECT IN LIFE. But with man, life is not that easy is it? I must read your perspective on corruption from your book "A Theory of Corruption (2004)", there is NO theory - only reality that corruption is the world's greatest current enemy. There is great evil going on in the most deceptive ways under the very roofs of hospitals. Euthanasia in our country where it is "so-called" illegal. Laws are being changed to protect the evil-doers. Murder of the innocent. All is happening under the cover of darkness. Many are involved in the corruption, the evil. But would the evil so easily thrive if love was in all of man? THE POPE DID SPEAK ON THE "REAL" ISSUES!!! Go to: www.myfoxny.com and search video using words: organ donation controversy - but know, this young man did NOT have strokes - do you now understand?

Rich Newhouse: Rich@SeeNewhouse.com

There is little obfuscation in the American political theatre on the right to life issue presented by the right and the left. However, because Catholics do not hear about the churches "NON-NEGOTIABLE" stance from the pulpit in almost all churches, they seem to think that this is an issue on which may form their own conscience. The USCCB needs to issue a specific and clarion call to all Priests that they must proffer this message to all Catholics through the pulpit and any other media or venue they have available.
Catholics need to hear that abortion and all "life issues" are non-negotiable and they have a primary obligation to vote for pro-life candidates at all levels of government but most importantly the Presidential race where future Supreme Court nominees will be selected. The right to life is primary if true subsidiarity and solidarity are to be achieved for mankind. Catholics should not and must not be swayed to consider this as a non primary issue in their analysis of a candidate.

David Whitkin:

I'm glad to hear that some guys in the US understand what Mr. Hans Küng is all about.
His 'Projekt Weltethos' is diluting what he actually wants to achieve. Human Rights aren't what we understand and what is meanwhile anticipated worldwide as such if you substract Christianity from the equation.
Küng believes in kind of Christian Ethics in all worldreligions. Apple trees, dog rose, thistels do all bear apples, right?
When you hear about the 'Interreligious Dialogue' be aware of the fact, that this is not really about religions and 'understanding the other' but about a new utopia in order to save the world. The movement is thouroughly secular, in the tradition of the French revolution and the different kinds of socialisms we had and know; the religions are only the donkey they ride while persuing their man-wrought heaven-on-earth.
Islam becomes really nice unter their words. But there is a bit of a downside, a price to pay while merchandising truth, or 'truths': Jesus can't remain Christ anymore. The others don't like HIM that way. There's where we have to cut back.
America has probably its own Küngs & Pals, but good to know that you know ... .

gb:

jim, I'm just a layperson without a degree in theology or whatever & I understand what's being said in this article. My suggestion is that it might be beneficial to open the Cathecism & read the definition of the terms that aren't understood or look them up online. Catholics really need to take responsibility for educating themselves.

Steve:

Jim: The basic point is that B16's teachings reveal a man who will not become a shill for any political faction. Some teachings will appear to some to be "conservative" by today's definition (e.g. abortion, protection of marriage, etc.). But those who think this makes him or the Church beholden to the political right are fools. His teachings on immigration, worker's rights, etc. may seem to some to be catering to the political left. This is also nonsense.
If one takes the time to read his writings carefully and prayerfully, what will emerge is a non-political and extremely competent scholar who can bring enormous theological truths down to earth. The Church is not to be secularized or politicized, and B16 is the perfect leader to engage on these issues with many different political sects and point them toward the Truth of Christ in language they can (sometimes) understand. Those, even within the Church, who do want to politicize her teachings (an unfortunately common desire) will not find an ally in this pope. We, too, need to think nonpolitically when considering Church teaching, forming our conscience for the actual political decisions we have to make. It's hard, but necessary and worth it.

Tshisuaka Pierre Kamuasayi : tshiskas@yahoo.fr

Glad to read out the finding of this impact of De Lubac on Benedict XVVth's thinking. I will search out and Read De Lubac's Catholicisme. I further wish to figure on the list of your Web's productions receiver. Thank you!

jim: pvdjimbo@yahoo.com

any chance that the above can be put in everyday "english" so that those of us without a degree in theology or whatever, might be able to understand it?

Acton Commentary