Letter #21: Benedict: “Non praevalebunt”

“And in today’s Gospel there emerges powerfully the clear promise made by Jesus: “the gates of the underworld,” that is, the forces of evil, will not prevail, “non praevalebunt.” —Pope Benedict XVI, Homily, Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, St. Peter’s Basilica, June 29, 2012 (today)

“From some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God” (“Da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio”) —Pope Paul VI, Homily, Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, St. Peter’s Basilica, June 29, 1972 (40 years ago today)

======================================================

Pope Benedict XVI spoke some dramatic words today during his homily for the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul — his own feast day, in a sense, as he is the successor of St. Peter, and so is for this reason also named Peter.

The words give us a glimpse of his state of mind and spirit.

Benedict, during a ceremony in which he granted the pallium, a sign of episcopal authority and close connection between the bishops and the Pope, to 41 archbishops, said that the power of evil will not prevail over the Church.

He said, using the words of Christ himself, that the “gates of hell,” though they will assault the Church, will not prevail over the Church (“non praevalebunt,” “they will not prevail”).

It is a homily that Benedict reportedly wrote entirely on his own, without the help of his staff.

The last time a Pope spoke such dramatic words was precisely 40 years ago today, when Pope Paul VI used the occasion of the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul — on June 29, 1972 — to utter those famous and troubling words showing his profound concern for what had happened to the Church in the years following the Council. On that occasion, Paul said that it seemed to him as if, against all expectations, after the Second Vatican Council, “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God.”

Both Popes faced the terrible reality of evil, of sin. Both were profoundly disturbed by that reality, especially inside the Church herself.

We now know that what Pope Paul was referring to was the scandalous levity with which many priests after the Council treated the liturgy, the worship of God (see below for the interview with Cardinal Virgilio Noe where Noe gives us this interpretation of Pope Paul’s words).

We know that Benedict has faced the terrible reality of evil in his own pontificate — the pedophilia scandal; the scandal of Church officials who covered up the scandal; the scandal of apostasy, as many theologians and teachers deny key truths of the faith; the scandal of corruption, as Church funds and properties have been squandered, with churches built by the faithful of an earlier age turned into beer halls; the scandal of betrayal, as believers have abandoned the faith of their fathers, and as members of the Pope’s own household have broken faith with him, stealing his own personal documents and handing them over to public display.

But all of this evil will not overwhelm and sink the Church, Benedict said today.

The “gates of hell,” despite their destructive power, “will not prevail,” he said.

And this gives us a glimpse of Benedict’s mind and mood at this time. He clearly feels the weight of the sin and betrayal in the Church, but he also senses the grace of Christ, a grace sufficient for him, and for all; a grace which will not depart from the Church, and will preserve the Church, not from suffering, which will come as it has come, but from final destruction.

The Church will not be destroyed by all the evil around her, and inside her, Benedict told the archbishops to whom he granted the pallium.

And that was the essence of his message today.

Here is a link to a video of today’s ceremony:

And here is the complete text of today’s homily;  I have highlighted some of the passages that seem key to me:

Your Eminences,
Brother Bishops and Priests,
Dear Brothers and Sisters,

We are gathered around the altar for our solemn celebration of Saints Peter and Paul, the principal Patrons of the Church of Rome.

Present with us today are the Metropolitan Archbishops appointed during the past year, who have just received the Pallium, and to them I extend a particular and affectionate greeting.

Also present is an eminent Delegation from the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, sent by His Holiness Bartholomaios I, and I welcome them with fraternal and heartfelt gratitude. In an ecumenical spirit, I am also pleased to greet and to thank the Choir of Westminster Abbey, who are providing the music for this liturgy alongside the Cappella Sistina. I also greet the Ambassadors and civil Authorities present. I am grateful to all of you for your presence and your prayers.

In front of Saint Peter’s Basilica, as is well known, there are two imposing statues of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, easily recognizable by their respective attributes: the keys in the hand of Peter and the sword held by Paul.

Likewise, at the main entrance to the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls, there are depictions of scenes from the life and the martyrdom of these two pillars of the Church.

Christian tradition has always considered Saint Peter and Saint Paul to be inseparable: indeed, together, they represent the whole Gospel of Christ.

In Rome, their bond as brothers in the faith came to acquire a particular significance. Indeed, the Christian community of this City considered them a kind of counterbalance to the mythical Romulus and Remus, the two brothers held to be the founders of Rome.

A further parallel comes to mind, still on the theme of brothers: whereas the first biblical pair of brothers demonstrate the effects of sin, as Cain kills Abel, yet Peter and Paul, much as they differ from one another in human terms and notwithstanding the conflicts that arose in their relationship, illustrate a new way of being brothers, lived according to the Gospel, an authentic way made possible by the grace of Christ’s Gospel working within them.

Only by following Jesus does one arrive at this new brotherhood: this is the first and fundamental message that today’s solemnity presents to each one of us, the importance of which is mirrored in the pursuit of full communion, so earnestly desired by the ecumenical Patriarch and the Bishop of Rome, as indeed by all Christians.

In the passage from Saint Matthew’s Gospel that we have just heard, Peter makes his own confession of faith in Jesus, acknowledging him as Messiah and Son of God. He does so in the name of the other Apostles too.

In reply, the Lord reveals to him the mission that he intends to assign to him, that of being the “rock”, the visible foundation on which the entire spiritual edifice of the Church is built (cf. Mt 16:16-19).

But in what sense is Peter the rock? How is he to exercise this prerogative, which naturally he did not receive for his own sake?

The account given by the evangelist Matthew tells us first of all that the acknowledgment of Jesus’ identity made by Simon in the name of the Twelve did not come “through flesh and blood”, that is, through his human capacities, but through a particular revelation from God the Father.

By contrast, immediately afterwards, as Jesus foretells his passion, death and resurrection, Simon Peter reacts on the basis of “flesh and blood”: he “began to rebuke him, saying, this shall never happen to you” (16:22). And Jesus in turn replied: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me …” (16:23).

The disciple who, through God’s gift, was able to become a solid rock, here shows himself for what he is in his human weakness: a stone along the path, a stone on which men can stumble – in Greek, skandalon.

Here we see the tension that exists between the gift that comes from the Lord and human capacities; and in this scene between Jesus and Simon Peter we see anticipated in some sense the drama of the history of the papacy itself, characterized by the joint presence of these two elements: on the one hand, because of the light and the strength that come from on high, the papacy constitutes the foundation of the Church during its pilgrimage through history; on the other hand, across the centuries, human weakness is also evident, which can only be transformed through openness to God’s action.

And in today’s Gospel there emerges powerfully the clear promise made by Jesus: “the gates of the underworld”, that is, the forces of evil, will not prevail, “non praevalebunt”.

One is reminded of the account of the call of the prophet Jeremiah, to whom the Lord said, when entrusting him with his mission: “Behold, I make you this day a fortified city, an iron pillar, and bronze walls, against the whole land, against the kings of Judah, its princes, its priests, and the people of the land. They will fight against you; but they shall not prevail against you, for I am with you, says the Lord, to deliver you!” (Jer 1:18-19).

In truth, the promise that Jesus makes to Peter is even greater than those made to the prophets of old: they, indeed, were threatened only by human enemies, whereas Peter will have to be defended from the “gates of the underworld”, from the destructive power of evil.

Jeremiah receives a promise that affects him as a person and his prophetic ministry; Peter receives assurances concerning the future of the Church, the new community founded by Jesus Christ, which extends to all of history, far beyond the personal existence of Peter himself.

Let us move on now to the symbol of the keys, which we heard about in the Gospel. It echoes the oracle of the prophet Isaiah concerning the steward Eliakim, of whom it was said: “And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open” (Is 22:22).

The key represents authority over the house of David. And in the Gospel there is another saying of Jesus addressed to the scribes and the Pharisees, whom the Lord reproaches for shutting off the kingdom of heaven from people (cf. Mt 23:13).

This saying also helps us to understand the promise made to Peter: to him, inasmuch as he is the faithful steward of Christ’s message, it belongs to open the gate of the Kingdom of Heaven, and to judge whether to admit or to refuse (cf. Rev 3:7). Hence the two images – that of the keys and that of binding and loosing – express similar meanings which reinforce one another. The expression “binding and loosing” forms part of rabbinical language and refers on the one hand to doctrinal decisions, and on the other hand to disciplinary power, that is, the faculty to impose and to lift excommunication. The parallelism “on earth … in the heavens” guarantees that Peter’s decisions in the exercise of this ecclesial function are valid in the eyes of God.

In Chapter 18 of Matthew’s Gospel, dedicated to the life of the ecclesial community, we find another saying of Jesus addressed to the disciples: “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 18:18). Saint John, in his account of the appearance of the risen Christ in the midst of the Apostles on Easter evening, recounts these words of the Lord: “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven: if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (Jn 20:22-23). In the light of these parallels, it appears clearly that the authority of loosing and binding consists in the power to remit sins. And this grace, which defuses the powers of chaos and evil, is at the heart of the Church’s ministry.

The Church is not a community of the perfect, but a community of sinners, obliged to recognize their need for God’s love, their need to be purified through the Cross of Jesus Christ.

Jesus’ sayings concerning the authority of Peter and the Apostles make it clear that God’s power is love, the love that shines forth from Calvary. Hence we can also understand why, in the Gospel account, Peter’s confession of faith is immediately followed by the first prediction of the Passion: through his death, Jesus conquered the powers of the underworld, with his blood he poured out over the world an immense flood of mercy, which cleanses the whole of humanity in its healing waters.

Dear brothers and sisters, as I mentioned at the beginning, the iconographic tradition represents Saint Paul with a sword, and we know that this was the instrument with which he was killed. Yet as we read the writings of the Apostle of the Gentiles, we discover that the image of the sword refers to his entire mission of evangelization. For example, when he felt death approaching, he wrote to Timothy: “I have fought the good fight” (2 Tim 4:7). This was certainly not the battle of a military commander but that of a herald of the Word of God, faithful to Christ and to his Church, to which he gave himself completely. And that is why the Lord gave him the crown of glory and placed him, together with Peter, as a pillar in the spiritual edifice of the Church.

Dear Metropolitan Archbishops, the Pallium that I have conferred on you will always remind you that you have been constituted in and for the great mystery of communion that is the Church, the spiritual edifice built upon Christ as the cornerstone, while in its earthly and historical dimension, it is built on the rock of Peter. Inspired by this conviction, we know that together we are all cooperators of the truth, which as we know is one and “symphonic”, and requires from each of us and from our communities a constant commitment to conversion to the one Lord in the grace of the one Spirit. May the Holy Mother of God guide and accompany us always along the path of faith and charity. Queen of Apostles, pray for us! Amen.

=========================================

The Testimony of Cardinal Noe

In 2008, Father John Zuhlsdorf, drawing on the Petrus website, published on his website the following interview with Cardinal Virgilio Noe, who died in 2001. (There is no date given for the interview itself, but it was evidently sometime during the spring of 2008.)

In this interview, Noe tells his interviewer, the Italian journalist Bruno Volpe, that he knew what Pope Paul VI meant by his reference to the “smoke of Satan” entering the Church, and that the reference was to priests who celebrated the mystery of the Eucharist in an unworthy way.

The entire interview is worth reading, but I have highlighted the key paragraph.

PETRUS: Amazing interview with Card. Noè: Paul VI’s “smoke of Satan” remark concerned liturgy

Posted on 15 May 2008 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

On the site Petrus there is an interview by Bruno Volpe with His Eminence Virgilio Card. Noè, [pronounced "No-eh"] “former papal MC, the predecessor of Archbp. Piero Marini.

These are very interesting comments. He speaks of the phrase of Paul VI that the “smoke of Satan” had entered the Church and what Paul VI meant by that phrase…

Exclusive: the revelation of Card. Noè:” When Paul VI denounced the smoke of Satan in the Church, he was referring to liturgical abuses following Vatican II.”

by Bruno Volpe

The late Cardinal Noe (30 March 1922 – 24 July 2011)

CITTA’ DEL VATICANO – He speaks with a thread of a voice and at times laboring for breath he it is so difficult he has to stop. But his mind is lucid and his heart is sound.. The interview with Virgilio Card. Noè, 86, Master of Liturgical Ceremonies during the Pontificates of Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II, once the Archpriest of the Basilica of St. Peter and Vicar of the Pope for Vatican City, showed himself to be at the same time both touching and engaging. The Cardinal, who has very much abandoned public life because of the infirmities of old age, helps us, taking us my the hand, better to know a Pontiff – wrongly forgotten in history’s haste: Giovan Battista Montini. He reveals for the first time what Paul VI was referring to precisely when in 1972 he denounced the presence of the smoke of Satan in the Church.

Your Eminence, who was Pope Paul VI?

Cardinal Virgilio Noe: A real gentleman, a saint. I remember still how he lived the Eucharistic Mystery, with passion and participation. When I think of him I tear up, but not in the way of a hypocrite. I am truly moved. I owe him a great deal, he taught me a lot, he lived and paid a great price for the Church.

You had the privilege to be Master of Liturgical Ceremonies precisely because of the assignment from Papa Montini in the time of the post-Conciliar reform. How do you remember those times?

Noe: Splendidly. Once the Holy Father said to me, personally, and in a very tender way, how the MC (Master of Ceremonies) ought to carry out his role in that particular historical period. He came into the sacristy. I drew near and he said: “The MC must foresee everything and take everything on himself, he has the task of making the Pope’s road smoother.”

Did he add anything else?

Noe: He affirmed that the spirit of the MC must not be shaken by any things, large or small, that may be his own personal problems. An MC, he stressed, must remain also the master of himself and be the Pope’s shield, so that Holy Mass can be celebrated in a dignified way, for the glory of God and His people.

How did the Holy Father take the liturgical reform desired by Vatican II?

Noe: With pleasure.

It is said that Paul VI was quite a sad man, true or legend?

Noe: A lie. He was a good and gentle father, a gentleman and a saint. At the same time, he was saddened by the fact of having been left alone by the Roman Curia. But I would prefer not to talk about that.

As a whole, against the historians, You, as one of his closest and trust collaborators, describe Papa Montini as a serene person.

Noe: He was. Do you know why? Because he also affirmed that whoever serves the Lord cannot ever be sad. He he served Him especially in the Sacrifice of the Mass.

Paul VI’s denunciation of the presence of the smoke of Satan in the Church is unforgettable. Still today, that discourse seems to be incredibly relevant…

Noe: You from Petrus, have gotten a real scoop here, because I am in a position to reveal, for the first time, what Paul VI desired to denounce with that statement. Here it is. Papa Montini, for Satan, meant to include all those priests or bishops and cardinals who didn’t render worship to the Lord by celebrating badly (mal celebrando) Holy Mass because of an errant interpretation of the implementation of the Second Vatican Council. He spoke of the smoke of Satan because he maintained that those priests who turned Holy Mass into dry straw in the name of creativity, in reality were possessed of the vainglory and the pride of the Evil One. so, the smoke of Satan was nothing other than the mentality which wanted to distort the traditional and liturgical canons of the Eucharistic ceremony.”

It is thought that Paul VI was the real culprit as the cause of all the ills of post-Conciliar liturgy. But based on what you have revealed, Eminence, Montini compared the liturgical chaos, even if in a veiled way, actually to something hellish…

Noe: He condemned craving to be in the limelight and the delirium of almighty power that they were following the Council at the liturgical level. Mass is a sacred ceremony, he often repeated, everything must be prepared and studied adequately, respecting the canons, no one is “dominus” [lord] of the Mass. Sadly, in many after Vatican II not many understood him and Paul VI suffered this, considering the phenomenon to be an attack of the Devil.

Your Eminence, in conclusion, what is true liturgy?

Noe: It renders glory to God. Liturgy must be carried out always and no matter what with decorum: even a sign of the Cross poorly made is synonymous with scorn and sloppiness. Alas, I repeat, after Vatican II it was believed that everything, or nearly, was permitted. Now it is necessary to recover, and in a hurry, the sense of the sacred in the ars celebrandi, before the smoke of Satan completely pervades the whole Church. Thanks be to God, we have Pope Benedict XVI: his Mass and his liturgical style are an example of correctness and dignity.

Source

 —Robert Moynihan

June 9, 2012 — Pray not only for, but also with, the Holy Father…

“The Holy Rosary is not a pious practice banished to the past, like prayers of other times thought of with nostalgia. Instead, the Rosary is experiencing a new Springtime.” –Pope Benedict XVI, May 3, 2008, a Saturday, at the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome; he prayed the Rosary in the Basilica on the first Saturday of May that year

“In the current world, so dispersive, this prayer helps to put Christ at the center, as the Virgin did, who meditated within all that was said about her Son…” –Ibid.

“May Mary help us to welcome within ourselves the grace emanating from these mysteries, so that through us we can ‘water’ society, beginning with our daily relationships, and purifying them from so many negative forces, thus opening them to the newness of God. The Rosary, when it is prayed in an authentic way, not mechanical and superficial but profoundly, brings, in fact, peace and reconciliation.”—Ibid.

==========================

An invitation to join with Pope Benedict as he prays the Rosary each evening at 6:45 p.m. (Rome time)

Catholics around the world are being invited to not only pray for the Pope, but also with him, starting now, as he faces some of the greatest challenges of his pontificate.

This initiative originated among German Catholics in Rome, and is not something sponsored by Pope Benedict himself.

But the Pope has been informed that the initiative has been launched, and is said to be heartened by the thought that others around the world will start to pray with him.

The German lay Catholics who are sponsoring the initiative believe the knowledge that others are praying with him will lessen the Pope’s sense of isolation and vulnerability in these days, after the privacy of his own household has been betrayed by one of his closest collaborators (the “Vatileaks” affair, with documents being taken without his knowledge from his own apartments).

The initiative began on June 7 with an article by German writer Paul Badde, editor of Vatikan magazine (the German-language monthly magazine which Inside the Vatican helped to launch in 2006, shortly after Pope Benedict’s election).

Here is how it works. Each evening in Rome, Pope Benedict walks in the Vatican Gardens beginning at 6:45 pm to pray the Rosary with his personal secretary, Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, accompanying him and praying the responses (photo).

No one else is present; the Vatican Gardens are closed off to other visitors. (If it rains, they pray the Rosary in the papal apartments.)

But now others are being invited, wherever they are, at that hour, to pray the Rosary with the Holy Father.

On the east coast of the United States, this will be at 12:45 p.m. — in other words, shortly after noon. On the west coast, it will be at 9:45 a.m.

If one prays the Rosary daily at this time, there will not be any direct physical connection with the Holy Father, but there can be a spiritual one.

I asked Badde if the Pope and his secretary know about this initiative.

“They know about it and appreciate it, of course,” Badde told me. “But the initiative was all ours. Websites will join in, of course, but without registration. That’s the beauty of this initiative: its complete freedom.”

I asked whether the Pope and his secretary pray the Rosary in German, Latin or Italian.

“They pray in German, basically, but switch easily to Italian or Latin,” Badde told me.

English-speaking people who wish to join this initiative should therefore pray in whichever language they feel most comfortable, whether English, or Latin, or another language, he said.

====================

The Rosary Initiative like Juliana’s Vision

In his article announcing the initiative “to strengthen the Holy Father” but not only “to pray for the Pope, but to pray with him,” Badde begins by referring to St. Juliana of Liege’s famous vision of a “spot” on the full moon — something missing in the liturgical life of the Church.

Her vision served as inspiration for the introduction of the Corpus Christi celebration in the mid-1200s.

Badde argues that there is a shocking “spot” on the face of the Church today: the isolation and loneliness of Pope Benedict.

“The loneliness of the Pope is particularly shocking,” Badde writes. “Therefore, we want to call on this feast of Corpus Christi to immediately pray not only for the Pope, but to pray with him.”

He continues: “This can be done in the family, among couples, in twos, in threes, in fours, in groups, in orders and congregations, and in all of the new gathering places on the social networks and websites. It can be done anywhere, loudly or quietly — at home, at church, on the street, in cars, in gardens. And all free. Without Secretaries, without control, steering, no organization, no postage, no dues, no stopwatch, no address lists, but in the simplest way in the world: with a Sign of the Cross at 6:45 in the evening, and then the prayer of the Rosary with the Holy Father.”

(The original German article may be found here, at the kath.net web site: http://kath.net/detail.php?id=36871)

====================

How Does One Pray the Rosary?

The usual Rosary contains five “mysteries,” events from the life of Christ to reflect upon. The reflection continues through the praying of five “decades” of Hail Marys for each mystery — a “decade” (from the Latin word for 10) is made up of 10 Hail Marys.

The mysteries are the Joyful Mysteries, the Sorrowful Mysteries, the Glorious Mysteries and now the Luminous Mysteries, introduced by Pope John Paul II.

Begin with a Sign of the Cross and an Apostles’ Creed.

Say an Our Father and three Hail Marys then a Glory Be to the Father.

Announce and meditate on the first mystery and say an Our Father.

Say 10 Hail Marys, and end the decade with a Glory Be.

Begin the cycle again with an Our Father, meditateon  the second mystery according to the same schema, and so on for the third, fourth and fifth mysteries.

End with the Prayer After the Rosary and a Sign of the Cross.

Sign of the Cross

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Apostles’ Creed

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell; the third day He arose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting. Amen.

Our Father

Our Father, Who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen.

Hail Mary

Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death. Amen.

Glory Be to the Father

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

Prayer After the Rosary

Hail! Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy, our life, our sweetness and our hope. To you do we cry, poor banished children of Eve. To you do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn then, O most gracious advocate, your eyes of mercy toward us; and after this our exile, show unto us the blessed fruit of your womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary.
Pray for us, O Holy Mother of God.
That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
O God, whose only-begotten Son, by His Life, Death, and Resurrection has purchased for us the rewards of eternal life; grant, we beseech You, that, meditating on these mysteries of the most holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, we may imitate what they contain, and obtain what they promise. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.

==========================

Why Pray the Rosary?

More than a century ago a proud university student boarded a train in France and sat next to an older man who seemed to be a peasant of comfortable means.  The brash student noticed that the older gentleman was slipping beads through his fingers. He was praying the rosary.

“Sir, do you still believe in such outdated things?”, the student inquired.

“Yes, I do. Don’t you?” the man responded.

The student laughed and admitted, “I do not believe in such silly things. Take my advice. Throw the rosary out the window, and learn what science has to say about it.”

“Science? I do not understand this science. Perhaps you can explain it to me,” the man said humbly, tears welling in his eyes.

The university student noticed that the man was deeply moved. To avoid hurting further the older person’s feelings, he said, “Please give me your address and I will send you some literature to explain the matter to you.”

The man fumbled in the inside pocket of his coat and pulled out his business card. On reading the card, the student lowered his head in shame and was speechless. The card read: “Louis Pasteur, Director of the Institute of Scientific Research, Paris.” The brash science student had unknowingly been speaking with his country’s leading chemist and bacteriologist.

(Link: http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/rosarymarkings12.html)

June 8, 2012 — Interview with Fellay

“An analysis of the situation rooted in reality.” –Father Alain Lorans, Editor of the website Documentation Information Catholiques Internationales (DICI), the communication agency of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X, introducing the interview posted on the DICI site with Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, on the present situation with regard to the possible canonical recognition of the Society by Rome in the near future. (Note: this is the official site of the Society; it therefore reflects the official view of the society, and does not reflect the views of those in the Society who differ with that official view.)

“So the attitude of the official Church is what changed; we did not.” –Bishop Fellay, in the same interview

“At the time of the Arians, the bishops labored in the midst of errors to convince those who were mistaken about the truth. They did not say that they wanted to be outside, as some say now.”—Ibid.

“In our Society, we distrust Rome because we have experienced too many disappointments; that is why some think that this could be a trap.”—Ibid.

==========================

Waiting for Benedict’s Decision — Perhaps in July?

Pope Benedict is said to be weighing a decision in the near future on whether or not to canoncially recognize the Society of St. Pius X.

Many are regarding it as one of the key decisions of his pontificate.

Some even see in the recent turmoil in Rome, in the “Vatileaks” case and in the general uncertainty and confusion that case has generated, a possible attempt to influence, delay, or distract attention from, this important decision.

Because how this Pope decides this case will go a long way to “setting the parameters” in coming decades and pontificates for the Church’s continued reception and reinterpretation of the Second Vatican Council, and what role more traditional Catholic views and interpretations, like those of the followers of the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (d. 1991), will have in the Church in the decades to come.

In this situation of uncertainty and expectation, the head of the followers of Lefebvre, Bishop Bernard Fellay (photo, from DICI), has offered an interesting, wide-ranging analysis of what Pope Benedict may be considering, and of what it may mean.

Here are the two key questions and answers:

Are you concerned about the delay in the response from Rome, which could enable those who are against a canonical recognition to alienate some priests and faithful from the Society of Saint Pius X?
Bishop Fellay: Everything is in God’s hands.  I place my trust in the Good Lord and in His Divine Providence;  He knows how to manage everything, even delays, for the good of those who love Him.

Was the Pope’s decision adjourned, as some magazines have said?  Did the Holy See tell you to expect a delay?
Bishop Fellay: No, I have had no information about any calendar whatsoever.  There are even some who say that the Pope will deal with this matter at Castel Gandolfo in July.

Here is the complete text of the interview, preceded by the introduction of Father Lorans.

Father Lorans’ Introduction

The decision from Rome on a possible canonical recognition of the Society of St. Pius X is still pending. Despite this, commentaries on this not-yet-published decision will not be long in coming ! One can discuss it, interpret it or extrapolate it… Each one becomes a little Superior General. Fiction is appealing, but reality is more certain.

This is why DICI has chosen to allow Bishop Bernard Fellay to speak for himself as the Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X, so we may know how he might judge a canonical solution that might happen before a doctrinal solution; what his attitude might be in view of the obvious doctrinal problems that remain; what the relationship of the Society of St. Pius X with the diocesan bishops might be in the possibility of a personal prelature; and finally, what is his interior disposition as he awaits the decision from Rome.

His answers, inspired by supernatural prudence, give an analysis of the situation rooted in reality.

Interview with Bishop Bernard Fellay on relations with Rome
June 8, 2012

DICI: Are you concerned about the delay in the response from Rome, which could enable those who are against a canonical recognition to alienate some priests and faithful from the Society of Saint Pius X?
Bishop Fellay: Everything is in God’s hands.  I place my trust in the Good Lord and in His Divine Providence;  He knows how to manage everything, even delays, for the good of those who love Him.

DICI: Was the Pope’s decision adjourned, as some magazines have said?  Did the Holy See tell you to expect a delay?
Bishop Fellay: No, I have had no information about any calendar whatsoever.  There are even some who say that the pope will deal with this matter at Castel Gandolfo in July.

A canonical solution before a doctrinal solution?

DICI: Most of those who are opposed to the Society’s acceptance of a possible canonical recognition allege that the doctrinal discussions could have led to this acceptance only if they had concluded with a doctrinal solution, in other words, a “conversion” by Rome.  Has your position on this point changed?
Bishop Fellay: It must be acknowledged that these discussions have allowed us to present clearly the various problems that we experience with regard to Vatican II. What has changed is the fact that Rome no longer makes total acceptance of Vatican II a prerequisite for the canonical solution.

Today, in Rome, some people regard a different understanding of the Council as something that is not decisive for the future of the Church, since the Church is more than the Council. Indeed, the Church cannot be reduced to the Council;  she is much larger. Therefore we must strive to resolve more far-reaching problems. This new awareness can help us to understanding what is really happening: we are called to help bring to others the treasure of Tradition that we have been able to preserve. So the attitude of the official Church is what changed; we did not.

We were not the ones who asked for an agreement; the Pope is the one who wants to recognize us. You may ask: why this change? We are still not in agreement doctrinally, and yet the Pope wants to recognize us! Why?
The answer is right in front of us: there are terribly important problems in the Church today. These problems must be addressed. We must set aside the secondary problems and deal with the major problems. This is the answer of one or another Roman prelate, although they will never say so openly; you have to read between the lines to understand.

The official authorities do not want to acknowledge the errors of the Council.  They will never say so explicitly. Nevertheless, if you read between the lines, you can see that they hope to remedy some of these errors.
Here is an interesting example on the subject of the priesthood. You know that starting with the Council there was a new concept of the priesthood and that it demolished the role of the priest. Today we see very clearly that the Roman authorities are trying to rehabilitate the true concept of the priest.

We observed this already during the Year of the Priest that took place in 2010-2011. Now, the Feast of the Sacred Heart is becoming the day consecrated to the sanctification of priests. For this occasion, a letter was published and an examination of conscience for priests was composed.

One might think that they went to Ecône to find this examination of conscience, it is so much along the lines of pre-conciliar spirituality. This examination presents the traditional image of the priest, and also of his role in the Church.  This role is what Archbishop Lefebvre affirms when he describes the Society’s mission: to restore the Church by restoring the priest. The letter says: “The Church and the world can be sanctified only through the sanctification of the priest.” It really places the priest at the center.

The examination of conscience begins with this question: “Is the first concern of the priest his own sanctification?” The second question: “Is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass”—and that is the expression that they use, not the Eucharist, the Synaxis, or I don’t know what else—“the center of the life of the priest?”
Then it recalls the ends of the Mass:  the praise of God, prayer, reparation for sins…. It says it all. The priest must immolate himself—the word “immolate” is not used, but rather “give himself”, sacrifice himself to save souls. It does say that.

Then comes a reminder about the last things: “Does the priest think often about the last things? Does he think to ask for the grace of final perseverance? Does he remind his faithful to do so? Does he visit the dying so as to give them the last rites?”

You see how, in a clever way, this Roman document clearly recalls the traditional idea of the priest.
Of course, that does not do away with all the problems, and there are still serious difficulties in the Church: ecumenism, Assisi, religious liberty…, but the context is changing, and not just the context, but the situation itself….

I would distinguish between the external relations and the internal situation.  The relations with the outside have not have changed, but as for what goes on within the Church, the Roman authorities are trying to change it little by little.  Obviously, a major disaster still remains today, one must be aware of that, and we do not deny it, but one must also look at what is starting to happen.  This examination of conscience for priests is a significant example.

What should be our attitude toward the doctrinal problems?

DICI: You acknowledge that some serious difficulties remain with ecumenism, religious liberty….  If a canonical recognition came about, what would be your attitude with regard to these difficulties?  Would you not feel obliged to be somewhat reserved?
Bishop Fellay: Allow me to answer your question with three inquiries: Did the novelties that were introduced during the Council start a trend of growth in the Church and an increase of vocations and religious practice? Do we not observe, to the contrary, a form of “silent apostasy” in all the countries of Christendom? Can we be silent when faced with these problems?

If we want to make the treasure of Tradition fruitful for the good of souls, we must speak and act. We need this twofold freedom of speech and action. But I would mistrust a purely verbal denunciation of doctrinal errors—a denunciation that would be all the more polemical because it was only verbal.

With his characteristic realism, Archbishop Lefebvre recognized that the Roman and diocesan authorities would be more responsive to numbers and facts presented by the Society of Saint Pius X than to theological arguments. And so I would not hesitate to say that, if a canonical recognition were to come about, the doctrinal difficulties would still be emphasized by us, but together with a lesson taught by the facts themselves, tangible signs of the vitality of Tradition.

And for that to happen, as I already told you in 2006, concerning the stages in our dialogue with Rome, we must have “faith in the Traditional Mass, the Mass that demands in and of itself integrity of doctrine and of the sacraments, the assurance of all spiritual fruitfulness in the service of souls”.

DICI: The year 2012 is not 1988, the year of your episcopal consecration.  In 2009 the excommunications were lifted, in 2007 it was officially acknowledged that the Tridentine Mass had “never been abrogated”, but now some members of the Society lament the fact that the Church has not yet converted.  Is their a priori refusal of a canonical recognition due to forty years of an exceptional situation, resulting in a certain inability to understand submission to authority?
Bishop Fellay: What is happening these days clearly shows some of our weaknesses with regard to the dangers that are created by the situation in which we find ourselves. One of the great dangers is to end up inventing an idea of the Church that appears ideal, but is in fact not found in the real history of the Church.  Some claim that in order to work “safely” in the Church, she must first be cleansed of all error. This is what they say when they declare that Rome must convert before any agreement, or that its errors must first be suppressed so that we can work. But that is not the reality.

It is enough to look at the Church’s past: often, and almost always, we see that there are widespread errors in the Church. Now the reforming saints did not leave the Church in order to combat these errors. Our Lord taught us that there would always be weeds until the end of time. Not just the good crop, not only the wheat.

At the time of the Arians, the bishops labored in the midst of errors to convince those who were mistaken about the truth. They did not say that they wanted to be outside, as some say now.  Of course, we must always be very careful about these expressions, “inside”, “outside”, because we are of the Church and we are Catholic. But can we for that reason refuse to convince those who are in the Church, on the pretext that they are full of errors?  Look at what the saints did!  If the Good Lord allows us to be in a new situation, in close combat in the service of the truth….  This is the reality that Church history presents to us. The Gospel compares Christians to yeast;  and do we want the dough to rise without us being in the dough?

In this situation, which some currently depict as an impossible situation, we are being asked to come and work just as all the reforming saints of all times did.  Certainly that does not do away with the danger. But if we have sufficient freedom to act, to live and to grow, this must be done. I really think that this must be done, on the condition that we have sufficient protection.

DICI: Do you think that there are members of the Society who, consciously or not, espouse sedevacantist ideas?  Are you afraid of their influence?
Bishop Fellay: Some may indeed be influenced by such ideas; that is nothing new. I do not think that there are that many of them, but they can do harm, especially by spreading false rumors. But I really think that the main concern among us is rather the question of trust in the Roman authorities, with the fear that what might happen would be a trap.

Personally, I am convinced that that is not the case. In our Society we distrust Rome because we have experienced too many disappointments; that is why some think that this could be a trap. It is true that our enemies may plan to use this offer as a trap, but the pope, who really wants this canonical recognition, is not proposing it to us as a trap.

Finding out what the Roman proposal will allow de jure and de facto

DICI: Several times you have said that the Pope personally wants the canonical recognition of the Society.  Do you have a recent personal assurance from the Pope himself that this is truly his intention?
Bishop Fellay: Yes, the Pope is the one who wants it, and I have said it repeatedly. I have enough precise information in my possession to declare that what I say is true, although I have not had any direct dealings with the Pope—rather, with his close collaborators.

DICI: The April 7 letter signed by the three other bishops of the Society was unfortunately circulated on the Internet;  does the analysis that it presents correspond to the situation in the Church?
Bishop Fellay: I do not rule out the possibility of a development in their position. The first question for us who were consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre was the question of the survival of Tradition.

I think that if my confreres see and understand that de jure and de facto the Roman proposal contains a genuine opportunity for the Society to “restore all things in Christ”, despite all the troubles that continue to exist in the Church today, then they will be able to readjust their judgment—that is to say, with the canonical status in hand and the facts on the table.

Yes, I think so, I hope so. And we must pray for that intention.

DICI: Some people throughout the world, including members of the Society, have made use of passages from an interview that you granted to Catholic News Service;  these passages seem to indicate that in your view Dignitatis humanae no longer poses a difficulty. Did the way in which this interview was edited change the meaning of what you wanted to say? What is your position on this subject in relation to what Archbishop Lefebvre taught?
Bishop Fellay: My position is that of the Society and of Archbishop Lefebvre.  As usual, in such a delicate matter, we must make distinctions, and a good part of these distinctions disappeared in the televised interview that had been reduced to less than six minutes. But the written report that CNS made of my remarks recovers what I said that was not included in the broadcast version:  “Although [Bishop Fellay] stopped short of endorsing Pope Benedict’s interpretation [of religious liberty] as essentially in continuity with the Church’s Tradition—a position which many in the Society have vocally disputed—Bishop Fellay spoke about the idea in strikingly sympathetic terms.”

In fact, I simply recalled that there is already a traditional solution to the problem posed by religious liberty, which is called tolerance. As for the Council, when they asked me the question, “Does Vatican II belong to Tradition?”, I answered, “I would like to hope that that is the case” (which a faulty French translation transformed into:  “I hope so.”)

This is quite along the lines of the distinctions made by Archbishop Lefebvre to read the Council in the light of Tradition: what agrees with Tradition, we accept; what is doubtful, we understand as Tradition has always taught it; what is opposed, we reject.

Relations of the Society of Saint Pius X with diocesan bishops

DICI: A personal prelature is the canonical structure that you mentioned in recent statements.  Now, in the Code of Canon Law, canon 297 requires not only informing diocesan bishops but obtaining their permission in order to found a work on their territory.  Although it is clear that any canonical recognition will preserve our apostolate in its present state, are you inclined to accept the eventuality that future works may be possible only with the permission of the bishop in dioceses where the Society of Saint Pius X is not present today?
Bishop Fellay: There is a lot of confusion about this question, and it is caused mainly by a misunderstanding of the nature of a personal prelature, as well as by a misreading of the normal relation between the local ordinary and the prelature. Add to that the fact that the only example available today of a personal prelature is Opus Dei. However, and let us say this clearly, if a personal prelature were granted to us, our situation would not be the same.

In order to understand better what would happen, we must reflect that our status would be much more similar to that of a military ordinariate, because we would have ordinary jurisdiction over the faithful. Thus we would be like a sort of diocese, the jurisdiction of which extends to all its faithful regardless of their territorial situation.
All the chapels, churches, priories, schools, and works of the Society and of the affiliated religious Congregations would be recognized with a real autonomy for their ministry.

It is still true—since it is Church law—that in order to open a new chapel or to found a work, it would be necessary to have the permission of the local ordinary. We have quite obviously reported to Rome how difficult our present situation was in the dioceses, and Rome is still working on it.

Here or there, this difficulty will be real, but since when is life without difficulties? Very probably we will also have the contrary problem, in other words, we will not be able to respond to the requests that will come from the bishops who are friendly to us. I am thinking of one bishop who could ask us to take charge of the formation of future priests in his diocese.

In no way would our relations be like those of a religious congregation with a bishop; rather they would be those of one bishop with another bishop, just like with the Ukrainians and the Armenians in the diaspora.
And therefore if a difficulty is not resolved, it would go to Rome, and there would then be a Roman intervention to settle the problem.

Let it be said in passing that what was reported on the Internet concerning my remarks on this subject in Austria last month is entirely false.

DICI: If there is a canonical recognition, what would happen to the chapels affiliated with the Society and independent of the diocese? Would the bishops of the Society continue to administer Confirmation and provide the Holy Oils?
Bishop Fellay: If they work with us, there will be no problem:  it will be exactly as it is now.  If not, everything will depend on what these chapels mean by independence.

DICI: Will there be a difference in your relations with the Ecclesia Dei communities?
Bishop Fellay: The first difference will be that they will be obliged to stop treating us as schismatics. As for future development, it is clear that some will draw closer to us, since they already approve of us discreetly; some others, no.  Time will tell how Tradition will develop in this new situation. We have great expectations for the traditional apostolate, just as some important personages in Rome do, and the Holy Father himself. We have great hopes that Tradition will develop with our arrival.

DICI: Again, if there is a canonical recognition, will you give some cardinals in the Curia or some bishops the opportunity to visit our chapels, to celebrate Mass, to administer Confirmation, perhaps even to ordain priests at your seminaries?
Bishop Fellay: The bishops who are in favor of Tradition and the conservative cardinals will come closer. One can foresee a whole development, without knowing the particular details. And certainly there will be difficulties, too, which is altogether normal. There is no doubt that people will come to visit us, but as for a more precise collaboration, such as the celebration of Mass or ordinations, that will depend on the circumstances. Just as we hope that Tradition will develop, we hope to see Tradition develop among the bishops and the cardinals. One day everything will be harmoniously traditional, but how much time that will take, only God knows.

DICI: While awaiting the Roman decision, what are your interior dispositions?  What dispositions would you wish for the priests and the faithful who are devoted to Tradition?
Bishop Fellay: In 1988, when Archbishop Lefebvre announced that he would consecrate four bishops, some encouraged him to do it and others tried to dissuade him from it. But our founder kept the peace, since he had nothing in view but the will of God and the good of the Church.

Today these are the same interior dispositions that we should have. Like its holy Patron, the Society of Saint Pius X has the desire to “restore all things in Christ”. Some say that now is not the time, while others on the contrary say that this is the opportune moment.

For my part, I know only one thing: it is always the moment to do God’s will, and He makes it known to us at an opportune time, provided that we are receptive to His inspirations. For this reason, I asked the priests to renew the consecration of the Society of Saint Pius X to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, on His feast day, June 15, and to prepare for it by a novena, during which the litanies of the Sacred Heart will be recited in all our houses. Everyone can join in asking for the grace to become docile instruments of the restoration of all things in Jesus Christ.  (DICI no. 256 dated June 8, 2012)

Here is a link to the original interview: http://www.dici.org/en/news/interview-with-bishop-bernard-fellay-on-relations-with-rome/

June 3, 2012 — The Butler Was (Evidently) Not Alone

“Christian life is a journey, it is like hiking up a mountain path in the company of Jesus. With these precious gifts [of the Holy Spirit], your friendship with Him will become ever closer, and ever more true.”—Pope Benedict to young people in Milan receiving their confirmation on Saturday, June 2, during a World Day of Families celebration

==========================

The “Vatileaks” case is not closed.

At least one more person is still releasing secret Vatican documents, according to an article published this morning in Rome’s La Repubblica newspaper, and one of those documents is a letter written by American Cardinal Raymond Burke to the Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone, expressing perplexity for the fact that he was not informed about an important liturgical decision taken without his knowledge (see full text below).

And the person who has revealed these three documents claims to possess “hundreds” of other, not-yet-published, Vatican secret documents.

If this is true, more revelations may lie directly ahead.

In La Repubblica’s account, the source releasing the new documents, who is evidently someone who works in the Vatican, aims to strike two highly placed Vatican officials very close to the Pope: Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Benedict’s increasingly controversial Secretary of State, who is now 77; and Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, 55, one of Benedict’s two personal secretaries.

The attacks on Bertone, according to sources here I have been able to consult, stem from the fact that Bertone has profoundly offended a number of other cardinals by the way he has exercised his authority. These sources say that Bertone, for example, has written letters to other cardinals telling them Pope Benedict wishes them to do something, like step down from an office they hold; however, the sources say, when the cardinals involved have directly contacted the Pope, the Pope has said the wishes expressed in the letters from the Secretary of State were not, in fact, his wishes; the cardinals have, therefore, stayed at their posts. Note: I have not been able to confirm that this is what actually happened; I can anly say with certainty that this is what is being said happened, and that this is being held out as a key reason a number of cardinals and other high-ranking prelates have turned sharply against Cardinal Bertone.

Why Monsignor Gaenswein is under attack is not entirely clear. But the La Repubblica source claims that the contents of letters signed by Gaenswein are not being revealed because they would be “offend the person of the Holy Father” (“non pubblichiamo in modo integrale per non offendere la Persona del Santo Padre”) and that the letters regard “shameful cases inside the Vatican” (“vergognose vicende all’interno del Vaticano”).

================

A Concert at La Scala

About one million pilgrims came to Milan for Church’s 7th World Family Meeting. More than 100 speakers from 27 countries spoke in defense of traditional family life at the event.

On Friday evening, June 1, the Pope attended a concert of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, directed by Daniel Barenboim, at the famed La Scala Opera House.

Following the concert, the Holy Father praised the work, treating Beethoven’s music as a way into a profound theological reflection on the meaning of suffering, especially in light of a terrible earthquake that struck central Italy last week.

The 9th symphony is famous for its final movement, often called the “Ode to Joy” after the poem by the late 18th century German playwright, poet and philosopher, Friedrich Schiller, whose words provide the texts for the four solo voices and chorus that have parts in the symphony’s culminating section.

“At this concert,” said Pope Benedict, “which was to be a joyous celebration on the occasion of this meeting of people from almost all nations of the world, there is the shadow of the earthquake that has brought great suffering of many inhabitants of our country.”

He continued, “The words of Schiller’s Ode to Joy sound empty to us – indeed, they do not seem real. We do not feel the divine sparks of Elysium at all. We are not drunk with fire, but paralyzed by grief and so much and such incomprehensible destruction that has cost so many human lives, that took away house and home from so many others.”

The Pope went on to say, “Even the assumption that above the starry sky there must live a good Father, seems questionable.”

“Is the father is just above the starry sky?” asked Pope Benedict. “Does not His goodness reach us down here? We seek a God who does not stand at a distance, but comes into our lives and our suffering.”

The Holy Father continued, saying, “We do not need unreal talk of a distant God and an easy brotherhood that requires nothing of us. We are in search of God who is near. We are looking for a fraternity that, in the midst of suffering, sustains its fellows and thus helps to go forward.”

Pope Benedict concluded, noting that after this concert, many would go to Eucharistic adoration – to adore the God, who “has introduced His very self into our suffering and continues to do so: the God who suffers with us and for us, and so has made men and women capable of sharing the suffering of others and of turning that suffering into love.”

“This,” said Pope Benedict, “is precisely what we feel called by this concert to do.”

====================

The Reuters report on the new documents

Here are excerpts from a Reuters report on the publication today of the new secret Vatican documents.

Pope’s top aide Bertone at the centre of Vatican furore

By Philip Pullella

MILAN | Sun Jun 3, 2012 9:11am EDT

(Reuters) – Pope Benedict got no rest on Sunday from a leaks scandal when an Italian newspaper published documents showing that his butler was not the only person in possession of confidential correspondence indicating a Vatican in disarray.

…In its Sunday edition, the Rome newspaper La Repubblica published documents it said it had received anonymously after the arrest of the Pope’s butler on May 23.

A note received by the newspaper said there were “hundreds more” documents and that the butler, Paolo Gabriele, was just a scapegoat…

One letter, dated January 16, was sent by Cardinal Raymond Burke, an American who heads a Vatican department, to the pope’s secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone.

Burke complains that a decision regarding a liturgical matter was taken without consulting his office, which is responsible for such matters.

The person who sent Repubblica the documents also provided two letters signed by the pope’s private secretary, Monsignor Georg Ganswein. The newspaper said those letters had everything but the letterhead and the signature whited out.

The newspaper said that in the note accompanying the documents, the person who sent them said the contents had been whited out “so as not to offend the Holy Father” but threatened to reveal the contents…

The person who sent the documents to the paper said Bertone and Gaenswein were “those really responsible for this scandal”…

Last week, Italian journalist Gianluigi Nuzzi published the book “His Holiness,” which contained more documents…

(Reporting By Philip Pullella; Editing by Angus MacSwan)

Here is a link to the complete Reuters story: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/03/us-vatican-butler-idUSBRE85206N20120603

The La Repubblica Story containing news of the three new documents

Here is the complete text, in Italian, of today’s La Repubblica story, containing the news of the three new secret documents.

One is a letter of January 14, 2012, from Cardinal Raymond Burke to the Secretariat of State, complaining to Cardinal Bertone that he had not been informed in advance about the Vatican’s approval of a liturgy for the Neocatechumenate movement, though Burke’s office, Burke says, is supposed to be consulted on such matters.

The other two are letters evidently signed by Monsigner Gaenswein, the Pope’s private secretary, but the contents of both letters have been whited out.

Vaticano, il corvo colpisce ancora
lettere contro Bertone e Gaenswein

Secondo la nuova indiscrezione, c’è uno scambio di documenti e un patto segreto tra il numero due della Santa Sede e il segretario particolare di Ratzinger. Repubblica è in possesso di tre documenti riservati. Sul quotidiano, il testo integrale di una lettera inviata dal cardinale Burke al segretario di Stato

di MARCO ANSALDO

MILANO – “Cacciate i veri responsabili dal Vaticano. Ancora una volta a pagare è il solito capro espiatorio. Quale migliore vittima del maggiordomo del Santo Padre. La verità va ricercata nel potere centrale”. Il corvo vola ancora in Vaticano. Volteggia, osserva e colpisce, mentre Benedetto XVI si trova in visita ufficiale per tre giorni a Milano cercando qualche momento di serenità dai veleni che lo assediano. Il corvo sforna a sorpresa nuovi documenti. Tre, per la precisione, di cui Repubblica è in possesso e che oggi presenta. Ma, avverte subito la fonte, di carte come queste ne abbiamo “centinaia”. Lo scrive in una lettera – che prelude ai tre documenti – battuta sul computer. Dimostrando, qualora ce ne fosse ancora bisogno, che il maggiordomo del Papa accusato di essere il postino delle missive fuoriuscite in passato dalla Santa Sede, “il capro espiatorio” come lo definisce la lettera, non è per niente il solo. Perché il corvo, in realtà, è ancora attivo. “La verità – denuncia – va ricercata nel potere centrale”. E spiega: “Ovverossia, nell’archivio privato di mons. Georg Gaenswein segretario particolare del Santo Padre, dal quale fuoriescono di continuo innumerevoli documenti riservati a favore del Segretario di Stato Cardinale Tarcisio Bertone”.

Un’accusa forte, che la fonte fa propria, al segretario particolare di Benedetto XVI, uomo in cui il Papa ripone invece la massima fiducia, e che da molti anni rappresenta la persona cui affidarsi per le questioni non solo di carattere personale, ma anche spirituali e politiche. Negli ultimi anni, infatti, monsignor Gaenswein ha accresciuto notevolmente la sua influenza all’interno dell’Appartamento, maturando un ruolo di certo del tutto informale, eppure tangibile e chiaro a tutti, di consigliere di Joseph Ratzinger, del quale è anche connazionale. Aggiunge il corvo nella sua missiva preliminare alle tre carte: “Non sempre le cose vanno per il verso giusto e tra Mons. Georg ed il Cardinale ci sono passaggi incontrollati di documenti ed atti riservatissimi”. Come a dire: i documenti e gli atti interni che transitano dall’Appartamento papale all’ufficio del Segretario di Stato, e viceversa, talvolta prendono anche altre strade. E il loro controllo si perde.

Il corvo presenta così “tre delle centinaia di documenti in nostro possesso”. La prima è una “lettera riservatissima” indirizzata a Bertone dal cardinale prefetto del Supremo Tribunale della Segnatura apostolica, e che riguarda quella che bolla come “la vergognosa vicenda dei neocatecumenali, sulla quale vi è un lungo appunto scritto a mano dallo stesso Benedetto XVI”. Le altre sono due lettere con la firma, in apparenza, di monsignor Gaenswein. E che riguardano, vi si dice, “alcune incresciose, nonché vergognose vicende all’interno del Vaticano”. I due scritti portano in alto lo stemma della Santa Sede con l’intestazione “Città del Vaticano”. E in calce la firma estesa, a mano, di “don Georg Gaenswein”. Sotto, la dicitura stampata “Segretario Particolare di Sua Santità Benedetto XVI”. Una delle due è datata 19 febbraio 2009. Il testo delle lettere è stato omesso. Spiega il corvo: “Non pubblichiamo in modo integrale per non offendere la Persona del Santo Padre, già molto provata dai suoi inetti collaboratori”. E avverte: “Per correttezza ci riserviamo di pubblicare i testi integrali nel caso ci si ostini a nascondere la verità dei fatti”. Conclude poi: “Cacciate dal Vaticano i veri responsabili di questo scandalo: Mons. Gaenswein ed il Card. Bertone”. Accuse durissime, non provate, e qui non circostanziate.

La lettera invece indirizzata a Bertone, presso la Segreteria di Stato, porta la firma del cardinale Leo Raymond Burke. È datata 14 gennaio 2012 e risulta pervenuta, come si evince dal timbro, il 16 gennaio. Nel testo il numero uno del Supremo Tribunale della Santa Sede scrive di aver trovato sulla sua scrivania un invito a una celebrazione del Papa prevista sei giorni più tardi, “in occasione dell’approvazione della liturgia del Cammino Neocatecumenale”. L’alto prelato appare molto turbato in proposito, arrabbiato. “Non posso – si legge – come Cardinale e membro della Congregazione per il Culto Divino e la Disciplina dei Sacramenti, non esprimere a Vostra Eminenza la meraviglia che l’invito mi ha causato. Non ricordo di aver sentito di una consultazione a riguardo dell’approvazione di una liturgia propria di questo movimento ecclesiale. Ho ricevuto, negli ultimi giorni, da varie persone, anche da uno stimato Vescovo statunitense, espressioni di preoccupazione riguardo ad una tale approvazione papale, della quale essi avevano già saputo. Tale notizia era per me una pura diceria o speculazione. Adesso ho scoperto che essi avevano ragione”. Termina così il cardinale Burke la sua lettera a Bertone: “Come fedele conoscitore dell’insegnamento del Santo Padre sulla riforma liturgica che è fondamentale per la nuova evangelizzazione, ritengo che l’approvazione di tali innovazioni liturgiche, anche dopo la correzione delle medesime da parte del Prefetto della Congregazione per il Culto Divino a la Disciplina dei sacramenti, non sembra coerente con il magistero liturgico del Papa”.

L’argomento è di primaria importanza per gli addetti ai lavori. Proprio all’inizio di quest’anno infatti la Santa Sede aveva approvato, dopo 15 anni di studio da parte della Congregazione per il Culto, la liturgia proposta dal Cammino neocatecumenale. Organismo nato in Spagna verso la metà degli anni Sessanta su iniziativa del pittore Kiko Arguello, il movimento ha l’obiettivo di formare i suoi membri nel cattolicesimo e la riscoperta del battesimo. Il loro modo di celebrare è stato oggetto di diverse discussioni. I neocatecumenali, in estrema sintesi, svolgono le celebrazioni in piccole comunità il sabato sera, e ricevono la comunione al proprio posto, ma in piedi e non seduti.

Le nuove lettere del corvo sono, in ogni caso, il segno che la battaglia dentro il Vaticano è tuttora in corso. E dimostrano che “Paoletto”, il cameriere di Benedetto XVI arrestato dieci giorni fa dalla Gendarmeria vaticana con l’accusa di aver fatto uscire documenti riservati dell’Appartamento papale, anche se fosse colpevole, è solo un pesce piccolo. Il corvo è tornato. E, come è stato chiaro fin dal principio di questa vicenda, non si incarna in una sola persona. Appena mercoledì scorso, durante l’udienza generale in Piazza san Pietro, il Pontefice aveva voluto ribadire la sua piena fiducia “a tutti i miei collaboratori”. Proprio i principali collaboratori del Papa sono citati in questi scritti: il cardinale Bertone e don Georg. Una battaglia dunque che continua. E che fa apparire questa partita come solo alle prime battute, presagendo l’ombra di nuovi colpi di scena.
(03 giugno 2012)

Here is a link to the original La Repubblica story, in Italian: http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2012/06/03/news/vaticano_il_corvo-36447247/?ref=HREC1-102012