Humanitas christian anthropological and cultural review n° 1 by Revista Humanitas

C H R I S T I A N A N T H R OP OL O GIC A L A N D C U LT U R A L R E V I E W/ N º 1 / Y E A R I

YEAR I Livio Melina Avery Dulles Juan de Dios Vial Correa Angelo Scola Francisco Javier Errázuriz Angelo Amato Stanislaw Grygiel Carl Anderson Samuel Fernández Pedro Morandé Slawomir Oder Stanislaw Dziwisz Mauro Piacenza Jaime Antúnez Josef Seifert Gianfranco Morra

JOHN PAUL II

GIFT OF THE DIVINE MERCY

HUMANITAS Christian Anthropological and Cultural Review Twice-yearly edition, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. HUMANITAS review fulfills the need of serving the academic community and the public in general with an intellectual and research instrument that may reflect the concerns and teachings of the Magisterium (University Decree Nr. 147/95, §2) EDITOR Jaime Antúnez Aldunate EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Hernán Corral Talciani Samuel Fernández Eyzaguirre Gabriel Guarda O.S.B. René Millar Carvacho Pedro Morandé Court Ricardo Riesco Jaramillo Francisco Rosende Ramírez Juan de Dios Vial Correa Juan de Dios Vial Larraín Arturo Yrarrázaval Covarrubias ASSISTANT EDITOR Bernardita M. Cubillos ADVISORY BOARD AND COLLABORATORS Honorary President: H.E. Cardinal Francisco Javier Errázuriz Ossa Héctor Aguer, Anselmo Álvarez O.S.B., Carl Anderson, Andrés Arteaga, Francisca Alessandri, Antonio Amado, Felipe Bacarreza, Jean-Louis Bruguès O.P., Rocco Buttiglione, Massimo Borghesi, Carlos Francisco Cáceres, Cardenal Carlo Caffarra, Cardenal Antonio Cañizares, Jorge Cauas Lama, Guzmán Carriquiry, William E. Carroll, Alberto Caturelli, Cesare Cavalleri, Fernando Chomalí, Francisco Claro, Ricardo Couyoumdjian, Mario Correa Bascuñán, Francesco D’Agostino, Adriano Dell’Asta, Vittorio di Girolamo, Carmen Domínguez, Carlos José Errázuriz, José María Eyzaguirre, Luis Fernando Figari, Alfredo García Quesada, Juan Ignacio González, Stanislaw Grygiel, Gonzalo Ibáñez Santa-María, Raúl Hasbun, Henri Hude, José Miguel Ibáñez, Raúl Irarrázabal, Jesús Colina, Paul Johnson, Ricardo Krebs, Jean Laffitte, Nikolaus Lobkowicz, Alfonso López Quintás, Alejandro Llano, Raúl Madrid, Javier Martínez Fernández, Carlos Ignacio Massini Correas, Mauro Matthei O.S.B., Cardenal Jorge Medina, Livio Melina, Augusto Merino, Dominic Milroy O.S.B., Antonio Moreno Casamitjana, Fernando Moreno Valencia, Rodrigo Moreno Jeria, José Miguel Oriol, Máximo Pacheco Gómez, Francisco Petrillo O.M.D., Bernardino Piñera, Aquilino Polaino-Lorente, Cardenal Paul Poupard, Javier Prades, Héctor Riesle, Florián Rodero L.C., Alejandro San Francisco, Romano Scalfi, Cardenal Angelo Scola, David L. Schindler, Josef Seifert, Gisela Silva Encina, Robert Spaemann, Paulina Taboada, William Thayer Arteaga, Olga Ulianova, Luis Vargas Saavedra, Miguel Ángel Velasco, Juan Velarde Fuertes, Aníbal Vial, Pilar Vigil, Richard Yeo O.S.B., Diego Yuuki S.J.

Council of Consultants and collaborators Héctor Aguer: Archbishop of La Plata, Argentina Anselmo Álvarez O.S.B., Abbot of Santa Cruz del Valle de los Caídos Carl Anderson: Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus Andrés Arteaga: Assistant Bishop of Santiago, professor at the Faculty for Theology, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile (PUC) Francisca Alessandri: Professor, Faculty for Journalism, PUC Antonio Amado: Professor of Metaphysics, Universidad de Los Andes Felipe Bacarreza: Bishop of Los Ángeles, Chile Jean-Louis Bruguès O.P., Secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education, Bishop Emeritus of Angers, France Massimo Borghesi: Italian philosopher, Senior Professor of the University of Perugia, Italy Rocco Buttiglione: Italian political philosopher Carlos Francisco Cáceres: Member of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences, Institute of Chile Cardinal Carlo Caffarra: Archbishop of Bolonia, Italy Cardinal Antonio Cañizares: Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Cult and the Discipline of Sacraments Jorge Cauas Lama: Member of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences, Institute of Chile Guzmán Carriquiry: Secretary of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America William E. Carroll: Professor, Faculty of Theology, Oxford University Alberto Caturelli: Argentine philosopher Cesare Cavalleri: Director of Studi Cattolici, Milan, Italy Fernando Chomali: Archbishop of Concepción, member of the Pontifical Academia Pro Vita, PUC Francisco Claro: Dean of the Faculty for Education, PUC Jesús Colina: Director of Agencia Zenit Ricardo Couyoumdjian: Professor History Institute, PUC. Member of the History Academy, Institute of Chile Mario Correa Bascuñán: Secretary General PUC, Professor at the Law Faculty, PUC Francesco D’Agostino: Professor of Philosophy of Law at the University Tor Vergata of Rome, Former President of the National Bioethic Committee of Italy Adriano Dell’Asta: Professor, Catholic University, Milan, Italy Vittorio di Girólamo: Professor, Universidad Gabriela Mistral Carmen Domínguez: Lawyer, Director of the UC Centre for the Family Carlos José Errázuriz: Consultant of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Professor at Pontifical Università della Santa Croce José María Eyzaguirre: Professor, Law Faculty, PUC Luis Fernando Figari: Founder of “Sodalicio de Vida Cristiana”, Lima, Peru Alfredo García Quesada: Pontifical Consultant for the Cultural Council, Professor of the Pontifical and Civil Faculty of Theology, Lima, Peru Juan Ignacio González: Bishop of San Bernardo, Chile Stanislaw Grygiel: Polish philosopher, Tenured lecturer of the John Paul II Chair, Lateranense University, Rome Raúl Hasbun: Priest of the Schöenstatt Congregation, Professor at the Pontifical Senior Seminary of Santiago Henri Hude: French philosopher, former rector of the Stanislas College, Paris Gonzalo Ibáñez Santa-María: Professor and former Rector of Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez José Miguel Ibáñez Langlois: Theologian and poet Raúl Irarrázabal Covarrubias: Architect, President of the Chilean Association of the Order of Malta Paul Johnson: British historian Ricardo Krebs: Chilean National History Prize, 1982 Jean Laffitte: Bishop of Entrevaux; Secretary of the Pontifical Council for the Family Nikolaus Lobkowicz: Director of the Eastern and Central European Studies Institute, University of Eichstätt, Germany

Alfonso López Quintás: Spanish Philosop,her. Regular member of the Real Academia for Moral and Political Sciences Alejandro Llano: Spanish Philosopher, former rector of the University of Navarra, Spain Raúl Madrid: Professor, Law Faculty, PUC Mauro Matthei O.S.B., Benedictine monk and priest, Historian Cardinal Jorge Medina: Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments Javier Martínez Fernández: Archbishop of Granada, Spain Carlos Ignacio Massini Correas: Professor at the Universidad Nacional de Cuyo, Argentina Livio Melina: President of the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for Studies of Marriage and the Family Augusto Merino: Political Scientist, Professor at Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez Dominic Milroy O.S.B., Monk at Ampleforth, former Rector of the Ampleforth College, York (G.B.) Antonio Moreno: Archbishop Emeritus of Concepción, Chile Fernando Moreno: Philosopher, director of the Political Science program, Universidad Gabriela Mistral Rodrigo Moreno Jeria: Member of the Chilean Academy of History Máximo Pacheco Gómez: Former Minister of State, Ambassador to the Holy See, Member of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences, Institute of Chile José Miguel Oriol: President of Editorial Encuentro, Madrid, Spain Francesco Petrillo O.M.D., General Superior of the Orden de la Madre de Dios Bernardino Piñera: Archbishop Emeritus of La Serena, Chile. Aquilino Polaino-Lorente: Spanish psychiatrist Cardinal Paul Poupard: President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Culture Javier Prades: Dean of the Faculty for Theology at San Dámaso, Madrid, Spain. Member of the International Theological Commission Héctor Riesle: Former Ambassador to the Holy See and the UNESCO Florián Rodero L.C., Professor of Theology, Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum, Rome Alejandro San Francisco: Professor at the Institute of History, PUC Romano Scalfi: Director of the Christian Russia Center, Milan, Italy Cardinal Angelo Scola: Archbishop of Milan David L. Schindler: Director of the John Paul II Institute for Studies of Marriage and the Family, Washington D.C., U.S.A. Josef Seifert: President of the Liechtenstein International Academy of Philosophy, Granada, Spain Gisela Silva Encina: Writer Robert Spaemann: German philosopher Paulina Taboada: Medical doctor, member of the Pontifical Academy Pro Vita William Thayer Arteaga: Member of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences, Institute of Chile Olga Uliánova: Ph. D. in History,University of Lomonosov, Moscow. Researcher at the Universidad de Santiago Luis Vargas Saavedra: Professor, Faculty of Literature, PUC Miguel Ángel Velasco: Director of Alfa y Omega, Madrid, Spain Juan Velarde Fuertes: Member of the Royal Academy for Moral and Political Sciences. Príncipe de Asturias Prize in Social Sciences (1992) Aníbal Vial: Former Rector of Universidad Santo Tomás Pilar Vigil: Medical doctor, member of the Pontifical Academy Pro Vita Richard Yeo O.S.B., Abbot and President of the Benedictine Congregation, England Diego Yuuki S.J., Former director of the Museum of the 26 Martyrs of Japan, Nagasaki

H U M A N I T A S

H umanitas Nº 1 2011/2012 – Year I

Editorial THE STRENGHT OF A GIANT Jaime Antúnez Aldunate

LOVE IN THE HORIZON OF RESPONSIBILITY ACCORDING TO KAROL WOJTYLA Livio Melina

JOHN PAUL II ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM Cardinal Avery Dulles

VISIT OF JOHN PAUL II TO PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE Comment of the rector Juan de Dios Vial Correa Speech addressed by the Pope

“THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY PASSES BY WAY OF THE FAMILY” Carl Anderson

GOD HAS MADE HIMSELF FAMILY Cardinal Angelo Scola

JOHN PAUL II ON CONSACRATED LIFE Cardinal Francisco Javier Errázuriz Ossa

THE JOHN PAUL II PHENOMENON Cardinal Angelo Amato

ECCE HOMO! Pedro Morandé

INQUIRING INTO THE MISTERYOUS TEXT OF OUR BEING Stanislaw Grygiel

116

A CULTURE OF LIFE VERSUS AN ANTI-CULTURE OF DEATH Joseph Seifert

138

KAROL WOJTYLA, A POPE FOR EUROPE Gianfranco Morra

154

MAN ACCORDING TO CHRIST Samuel Fernández

162

Interview with Monsignor Slawomir Oder, Postulator of the cause: JOHN PAUL II’S BEATIFICATION PROCESS HAD BEEN CANONICALLY NORMAL

170

We highlight in NOTES A JOURNEY THAT CHANGED THE WORLD Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz

In the front page: John Paul II

178

Summary Editorial Notes The Pope in his own words The Church and the world Books About the authors

3 8 178 188 218 241 150

In order to facilitate the contact with our readers and eventual subscribers, it is possible to consult in Internet the contents of this and the past issues of Humanitas review in English and Spanish language. The information is delivered through summaries of each one of the published articles.

HUMANITAS

Sixteen years serving the encounter of faith and culture

HUMANITAS (ISSN 07172168) publishes articles by its regular, national and foreign collaborators. Likewise of authors whose subject matter is in harmony with the goals of HUMANITAS. The total or partial reproduction of articles published by HUMANITAS requires authorization, except commentaries or quotes. Design and Production: Publicidad Universitaria UC Printing: Ograma Impresores Subscriptions and letters: HUMANITAS. Centro de Extensión de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Av. Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins 390, 3rd floor, Santiago / Chile. Tel: (56-2) 354 6519, Fax (56-2) 354 3755 - e-mail: humanitas@uc.cl

HUMANITAS Summary N° 1 (October 2011-March 2012)

LOVE AND RESPONSIBILITY IN THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF JOHN PAUL II, by Livio Medina. Love is not an adventure among many, but rather a challenge that involves man completely and determines his destiny. How can the communion of persons be realized that promises the fascination of the first meeting? How much does it depend on human liberty? In his work Love and Responsibility, Karol Wojtyla makes a detailed analysis of the dynamism of love, distinguishing and integrating three dimensions: psychology, metaphysics and morality. His doctrine constitutes a renewal and enrichment of the study of conjugal love. At the level of the contents proper to the good, on which he bases himself, the traditional doctrine of the Church had indicated three ends of the objective content of marriage: procreation, mutual help and the remedy to concupiscence. A personalist perspective, such as that developed by Wojtyla, is not satisfied here. Love alone is the appropriate attitude towards the person of the other. Love is the essence of marriage, which regulates it from within and in whose life the traditional ends acquire their moral meaning, being in this way how sexuality is seen in relation to the nature of the person himself. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 10 - 25 JOHN PAUL II AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, by Cardinal Avery Dulles. Beginning with Vatican Council II, religious liberty became a central theme of Karol Wojtyla’s program, both with reference to ecumenism as well as to the positioning of the Church in today’s world. Thanks to the contribution of bishops like him, Dignitatis humanae proposed a positive doctrine of religious liberty based both on revelation as well as reason. When the Church calls for religious liberty, she is not asking for a present, a privilege or a permission dependent on contingent situations, political strategies or the good will of the authorities. Rather, she asks for the recognition of an inalienable human right. It is not a right linked to the Church as institution; it is in fact a right linked to all persons and all peoples. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 26 - 41 JOHN PAUL II’s ADDRESS AT THE PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF CHILE. On April 3, 1987, during his apostolic visit to Chile, John Paul II visited the central quarters of the Pontifical Catholic University in Santiago to talk to the representatives of the world of culture and to the builders of society. Reproduced in these pages is the address the Holy Father gave, introduced by a reflection of the then rector, Dr. Juan de Dios Vial Correa, about the meaning of that event in the midst of an atmosphere charged with profound unease vis-a-vis the future, of skepticism on the role of the university and of the temptation to hand culture over to the prevailing ideologies. In his wise words, the Blessed said: “the Church, moved by her undeniable vocation of service to man, addresses her appeal to all Chilean intellectuals – beginning with the children of the Church themselves – to carry out that integrating work, proper of true science, to lay the basis of a genuine humanism. In this perspective, the ever new process that the document of Puebla calls evangelization of cultures, acquires current importance. This evangelization is addressed to man as such. Beginning with the religious ‘dimension,’ it takes into account the whole man and makes an effort to reach him in his totality.” Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 42 - 55

H 3

“THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY PASSES BY WAY OF THE FAMILY, by Carl Anderson. Astonishing is the speed with which John Paul II committed himself to establishing the basis of a pastoral action in favor of marriage and the family. The corner stone was laid during the Synod of Bishops of 1980. Then, in 1981, the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and the Pontifical Council for the Family were created. That same year, the Exhortation Familiaris consortio provided the foundations for the pastoral work of the Institute and for the Council’s pastoral plan of work. This was followed in 1983 by new initiatives regarding civil and canonical law, with the publication of the Charter of Rights of the Family and of the new Code of Canon Law. In 1993, John Paul II affirmed that the mission of the Church in favor of the family should be placed “at the center of the New Evangelization.” And not only did he say it on repeated occasions, but he gave the Church —which already had essential material on the centrality of the family— the instruments to guarantee that this would become a reality. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine the pastoral mission of the Church with families worldwide at the beginning of the Third Millennium, without the magnificent legacy received from John Paul II. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 56 - 59 GOD HAS BECOME FAMILIAR, by Cardinal Angelo Scola. Being a witness of the tragic age of great ideologies, of totalitarian regimes and their fall, John Paul II was profoundly aware of modernity’s transition to what it has now been agreed to call post-modernity, a stage marked by new tensions and contradictions. These are reflected in an increasingly secularized world in which a universal disenchantment prevails. As a consequence, the Christian faith is considered by many as a mere subjective conviction which is not rational, at most gifted of legitimacy to survive along with the other religions in the name of a universal right to difference. Moreover, the great techno-scientific advancements have ended by elevating experimental science as the only one to which it corresponds to give valid answers to the great human questions. In contrast to this reality, the witness, reflection and teaching of Karol Wojtyla-John Paul II remind us that post-modern man needs to take up again interest in the Person of Christ. The affirmation of Christ, our contemporary, presupposes an interpretation of his Person in so far as salvific Person and to give an account of the reason for his coming to the world. In the historical person of Jesus Christ are found really unified and projected all the anthropological dimensions. The question of the reason for is pedagogically timely and decisive for the new evangelization Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 60 - 67 JOHN PAUL II TO CONSECRATED LIFE, by Cardinal Francisco Javier Errázuriz. John Paul II’s papacy was so universal that it would be an error to attribute a subjective role to him, either in his message to the lay world or the ecclesia. Looking at the different realities of the Church, the Holy Father was able to give his all to each of them, including to consecrated life. He dedicated two apostolic exhortations to the latter —Redemptionis donum (1983) and Vita consecrata (1996)—, a series of catecheses in 1994 and innumerable addresses and homilies, special attention in each of his trips and in his meetings with the two Unions of Superiors General, as well as with the communities that were received in special audience on the occasion of the general chapter they were holding in Rome. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 68 - 83

H 4

THE “SENSUS FIDEI” AND THE BEATIFICATIONS, by Cardinal Angelo Amato. The Catholic sensus fidei is present in a particular way in the processes of beatification and canonization. The faithful are gifted, by divine grace, with an undeniable spiritual perception to discover and recognize, in the concrete life of some of the baptized, the heroic exercise of the Christian virtues. Blessed Teresa of Calcutta and Saint Pio of Pietrelcina were admired, followed and imitated, already in life, for their holiness. Another good example of this clamor of the people of God can be seen in the initiation of the rapid process of beatification of Pope John Paul II and it was manifested in the proclaimed petition Santo subito heard in Saint Peter’s Square a few hours after the Pontiff had gone to the house of the Father. It is possible to identify the vox populi, which expresses the veneration of persons who have had a holy life and death. For an empirical verification of the fama sanctitatis et signorum of Pope John Paul II, suffice it to observe also the interminable queue of faithful who go on pilgrimage every day to his tomb in Saint Peter’s. This confirms that his reputation for holiness is a communis opinio. The vox populi is also accompanied by the vox Dei, namely, of those graces, heavenly favors and genuine miracles, obtained through the intercession of a Servant of God. Finally, there is the vox Ecclesiae that, after examining and evaluating positively both the heroism of the virtues as well as the authenticity of the miracle, has proceeded to the beatification and opened the doors to a future canonization. Pope Wojtyla’s reputation for holiness is thus present in the consideration of the faithful and in the recognition of the action of God. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 84 - 93 ECCE HOMO!, by Pedro Morandé. On June 2, 1980, at the headquarters of UNESCO, John Paul II gave one of the most memorable addresses of his pontificate, speaking about human culture. The Church’s concern about present-day culture had already been delineated in Vatican Council II with the motto: “to try to make human life ever more human.” John Paul II took on this challenge in his address, whose summary can be expressed in three arguments that manifest his vision and future task: “Man’s future depends on culture! The peace of the world depends on the primacy of the Spirit! The peaceful future of humanity depends on love!” Condensed here is the plan of action that characterized his pontificate and his passion for man shines which moved him to make an appeal: “man must be affirmed for himself, and for no other motive or reason: only for himself!” The fruit of this is also the birth of a vocation to love all the relations that constitute him: culture, family, school, nation and work, giving them a personal dimension as possibility for the plenitude of man’s being, removed from the purely instrumental conception that can be had of them. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 94 - 103 INQUIRING INTO THE MYSTERIOUS TEXT OF BEING, by Stanislaw Grygiel. The spiritual void in which today’s society is drowning is the product of the fact that in man’s innermost being the unity between truth and liberty has broken: reason has broken the bond with the verum and the will with the bonum of every being. The so-called transcendentals in which metaphysics lives, no longer describe the reality of the universe or of man himself against the truths built by reason and against the interests considered valid by the will in keeping with the circumstances. In his encyclical Fides et ratio John Paul II defends the man from the spiritual void stemming from forgetfulness of reality, he reminds him that the latter really exists, that it is well thought of and well loved, which awaits us faithfully. Hence, whoever returns to reality, will be able to understand from what perspective it is possible to link authentic philosophy with theological thought and faith. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 116 - 137

H 5

A CULTURE OF LIFE VERSUS AN ANTI-CULTURE OF DEATH, By Josef Seifert. Blessed Pope John Paul II coined two original terms that had a tremendous impact by the way in which he interpreted and used them: “culture of life” and “culture of death.” He directed a vociferous appeal to all human persons of good will that they build a “culture of life” and he brought it uniquely home to us that this “culture of life” is gravely menaced today by a “culture of death.” Many human life movements and heroic commitments have drawn their inspiration from the perceptive and deep ways in which Pope John Paul II developed his profound insights into the importance of a “culture of life” and the danger of a “culture of death.” The contrast and dramatic battle between these two anti-thetical “cultures” and attitudes became, by being interpreted so deeply by Pope Wojtyla in the light of a philosophy of man and ethics and in the religious light of what the Pope called the “Gospel of Life,” the Evangelium vitae, a tremendous inspiration for millions. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 138 - 153 KAROL WOJTYLA, A POPE FOR EUROPE, by Gianfranco Morra. Particularly important subject in John Paul II’s teachings were his considerations about Europe. The philosophy expressed even before he became Pope in works as Person and Act and Love and Responsibility, followed the intellectual line of great European thinkers as St. Augustine and St. Thomas, together with more contemporary ones as Husserl and Scheler. John Paul II achieved to integrate Europe’s modern conquests, as science, technology, democracy, and women emancipation, with the origins that made those ideals possible as they could only flourish rooted in the spirit of Christianity. Today, when the identity of Europe is questioned by its own peoples, it is worthy to return to Blessed John Paul II’s doctrine in view of reaching the unity of this Continent that gave birth to Occidental Culture. For Karol Wojtyla Europe eminently constituted a spiritual reality and the identity of European man had been forged in the Christian values that reunited in them all what was truth, good and beautiful in the Classic civilization. Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 154 - 161 MAN IN THE LIGHT OF CHRIST, by Samuel Fernández. The fundamental intuition that illumined the writing of the encyclical Redemptor hominis was going through Karol Wojtyla’s mind long before he was elected Pope, as he asserted. This was the central idea that inspired the writing of Gaudium et spes. The appropriateness of this insistence is rooted in the anthropological turn that makes possible the understanding of man from Christ. This has as its foundation a true appreciation of the humanity of the Son of God incarnate and implies that Jesus of Nazareth not only is revealer of God in favor of men, but reveals man to man. (RH 10). Thus in Jesus the face of God is reflected and also the face of true man. Both aspects are inseparable, because the true face of God is only accessible to man through the Incarnation. Understood thus is the affirmation that the nature and destiny of humanity and of the world can only be definitively manifested in the light of Christ, dead and risen: “Jesus Christ remains present as light of the world that illumines the mystery of man.” Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 162 - 169

H 6

A CANONICALLY NORMAL PROCESS OF BEATIFICATION, Interview with Monsignor Slawomir Oder. The postulator of John Paul II’s cause describes as a “most beautiful” personal “adventure” his involvement in the process that, as he explains, fulfilled all the canonical requirements, the only dispensation being not having to wait five years for its introduction, given that the necessary miracle for beatification took place a few months after the Pope’s death. The postulator’s work meant immersing himself in a profound knowledge of Wojtyla’s person and acceding to personal details of the life of the now Blessed. In face of the search for extraordinary anecdotes, he points out the transparency of Wojtyla’s life: “He was, in fact, exactly as we knew him in public. There was no split personality, but a perfect transparency of the person.” It is impressive to discover to what point the source of his activity, of the profundity of his thought, was his close relationship with Christ. “Undoubtedly, a mystical man has come into the light. A mystic because he was a man who lived the presence of God, who let himself be guided by the Holy Spirit; who was in constant dialogue with the Lord, who organized his life around the question: ‘Do you love me?’ His life was an answer to this essential question of the Lord. I think this aspect is the greatest treasure of the process.” Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 170 - 177 NOTES A trip that changed history. Interview with Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz. The Archbishop of Krakow, and intimate collaborator of John Paul II during the whole of his pontifical ministry, gives details of the first apostolic visit to Poland, describing that occasion as the “trip that changed history.” The Cardinal asserts that the Holy Father was convinced that the Polish nation, so strongly rooted in the faith, merited his visit: “We can say undoubtedly today that his first pilgrimage to Poland was the most important of all his papal journeys because it unleashed a process of incredible changes at a global level. It all began in those days,” and later: “John Paul II released the nation’s inner energy. In this connection, he laid the spiritual basis for the birth of Solidarnosc the following year.” The dialogue with artists, by Cardinal Mauro Piacenza. Pope John Paul II will be remembered for his peculiar capacity to address all types of persons, formulating with an appropriate language the same convinced invitation to be united with Christ. He did so also with the world of art, in regard to which the document in which the Pontiff expressed, in the most systematic way, his own thought is the Letter to Artists, published at Easter of 1999. Identified in this brief essay are some of John Paul II’s recurrent themes regarding sacred art, through a comparison between the mentioned letter and the homily given in the Holy Mass for artists in Brussels on May 20, 1985 — two documents placed respectively in the last and first years of the pontificate. Using the category of the “covenant” he speaks — in the line of Vatican Council II and of Paul VI — acknowledging art’s autonomy in the realm of earthly realities. However, the closeness of the respective fields induces the Pontiff to seek a convergence in the discovery of the spiritual reality. “A world without art would hardly open to faith”. (n. 4). Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 178 - 187 BOOKS “Red Hot Stones. The poetry of Karol Wojtyla” reflection of Antonio Spadaro S.J.; “Juan Pablo II habla al mundo” by Cardinal Angelo Comastri (Ediciones San Pablo); “Mousiké” by Karol Wojtyla (Universidad de La Sabana); “Por qué es Santo” by Slawomir Oder (Ediciones B). Humanitas 2011 - 2012, I, pp. 241 - 249

H 7

The Strength of a Giant

he exceptional group of authors and articles included in this edition, and its unusual size in terms of pages, is the virtually spontaneous result of the profound gratitude born from a communio of persons —who by age embrace more than one generation— brought together for sixteen years around the publication of HUMANITAS, and who make their own Benedict XVI’s recent words at the beatification of John Paul II: What the newly-elected Pope asked of everyone, he was himself the first to do: society, culture, political and economic systems he opened up to Christ, turning back with the strength of a titan – a strength which came to him from God – a tide which appeared irreversible. By his witness of faith, love and apostolic courage, accompanied by great human charisma, this exemplary son of Poland helped believers throughout the world not to be afraid to be called Christian, to belong to the Church, to speak of the Gospel. In a word: he helped us not to fear the truth, because truth is the guarantee of liberty. To put it even more succinctly: he gave us the strength to believe in Christ.

In fact, we are in accord with the Holy Father that something fundamental happened in our lives beginning that October of 1978, when those first words —“Do not be afraid!”—, were launched with a voice that seemed to make all the bells of Rome resonate, calling to witness. The succession of notable events that would mark indelibly the history of the 20th century —beginning with his unconsummated martyrdom on May 13, 1981, followed later by his leading role in the fall of the ideological Wall that separated Europe— was marked, as Benedict XVI also pointed out, by his profound reflection on the confrontation between Marxism and Christianity and by his permanent message, trustworthy echo of Vatican Council II, that man is the way of the Church and Christ is the way of man. As the testimonies of persons who knew him evidence in these pages (cf. pages 104 - 115), the strength of Blessed John Paul II to convoke millions of souls in the whole world to rise and be on their way, to awake “from a tired faith,” stemmed from permanent recollection and a spirit of prayer born from living submerged in the presence of Jesus Christ and Mary, to whom he was consecrated as a slave of love when he was still very young, following the school of Saint Louis Marie Grignon de Montfort. The very close connection of John Paul II’s whole life with the mystery of Divine Mercy inspires the title of this special issue. We believe, in fact, that it is what at the end of the centuries will summarize his passage through the history of the Church and the history of peoples in the transit to the third millennium, which, not in vain, he coined with the standard “crossing the threshold of hope.” It is not just the fact that the Great Pope dedicated his second encyclical to Divine Mercy; that he canonized St. Faustina Kowalska, the

H 8

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 8 - 9

EDITORIAL Lord’s interlocutor of Divine Mercy; that he established, at her request, the feast of Divine Mercy on the second Sunday after Easter, in which, as a greater sign, God wished to call him. In reality, there is more to it. If one penetrates his vast magisterium, as the most qualified authors do in this edition, one will see that the whole of him is a prophetic call addressed to modern man —settled in the autonomy that his material capacities give him— to change his gaze and to turn it to a creaturely perspective —“in Him we live, and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28)— without which he could not escape from the horrors he experienced in the last century or find the way of his salvation.

Front page of HUMANITAS 63, year XVI, in Spanish language.

Having written in his last book Memory and Identity that “the limit imposed on evil is, finally, divine mercy,” it can be perfectly affirmed, in the light of the events that accompanied his life and his pontificate, that he himself, who “with the strength of a giant reversed a tendency that seemed irreversible,” was a gift of Divine Mercy to the Church and to the world. Born with the stimulus of that “not having fear of the truth, because truth is the guarantee of liberty,” precisely when in 1995 John Paul II proclaimed his encyclical Evangelium vitae, HUMANITAS had the grace to accompany the last ten years of the holy Pontiff and to receive the certainty of his support and blessing. These were the times of Fides et ratio, of the Jubilee of the Year 2000 with its many initiatives and important documents, up to his final encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia. Times that, under the rudder of Benedict XVI, have had, over the past six years, a continuous and luminous deepening of knowledge, which stimulates and commits, God willing, to a long-term task. May this English language edition (No 1/ Year 1) be our principal homage of gratitude to Blessed John Paul II, as well as a lofty appeal for his intercession so that it will render a fitting service and enjoy a long life. JAIME ANTÚNEZ ALDUNATE

Editor

Translated by Virginia Forrester

H 9

H 10

«For Wojtyła, it would be profoundly reductive and an extrinsicism to consider love as just one of the ends of marriage. Love is the very substance of marriage. It regulates it from within and the traditional ends acquire their moral significance from it.»

Love in the horizon of responsibility according to K arol Wojtyla BY LIVIO MELINA

Love, love pulsating the temples, Love in man becomes thought and will: Teresa’s will to be in Andrew; Andrew’s will to be in Teresa. ‘Tis strange yet necessary to distance a little from the other, Since man cannot remain in the other without end, and he suffices not. How can you achieve this, Teresa? How can you remain in Andrew forever? How can you achieve this, Andrew? How can you remain in Teresa forever? How can it be done if one cannot endure in the other? If man suffices not?

hese are the words of the chorus at the end of the first act of Karol Wojtyła’s The Jeweller’s Shop. They were written in 1960, at the same time as his work, Love and responsibility, to accompany his developing philosophical reflection in the poetic language of drama and through lived experience. Love is not merely one adventure among others; far more than that, love is a task or a challenge that involves the whole person and determines his destiny. How can love endure forever? How can it achieve the communion of persons promised in the fascination of the first encounter? Above all, how much of this task of love depends on human freedom? These are the questions of the drama which underlie the philosophical approach of Wojtyła’s Love and responsibility.

1. Love in the horizon of responsibility Love and responsibility: the association of these two terms in the volume’s title can almost sound contradictory to our sensibility and might frighten us away from looking deeper at the schema that makes their association possible. The object of the work is to “give reasons for the norms of Catholic sexual ethics” by reference to the “more fundamental goods and values”, among which the good of the person must be emphasized.2 Accordingly, it is “love which constitutes the characteristic good of the world of persons”. The specific theme of

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 10 - 25

THE TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH HAD POINTED IN THREE ENDS THE OBJECTIVE OF MARRIAGE: PROCREATION, MUTUAL HELP AND THE REMEDY FOR CONCUPISCENCE. A PERSONALISTIC PERSPECTIVE SUCH AS WOJTYŁA’S REMAINS UNSATISFIED WITH ANY ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH THE UNION OF MAN AND WOMAN MERELY ON THESE FOUNDATIONS * Article published in HUMANITAS 63, in Spanish language. English version from L. Melina, “Learning to Love at the School of John Paul II and Benedict XVI”, Trans. Joel Wallace, Modotti Press (Connor Court Publishing), Melbourne, 2011. 1 K. Wojtyła, The Jeweller’s Shop: A meditation on the Sacrament of Matrimony, passing on occasion into a drama, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1980, p. 41. 2 K. Wojtyła, Love and responsibility, Ignatius, San Francisco, 1981, p. 16.

H 11

WOJTYŁA CONSIDERS THE SCHOLASTIC INTERPRETATION OF LOVE WHICH PREVAILS IN CATHOLIC THOUGHT TO BE INSUFFICIENT. THIS INTERPRETATION IS CHARACTERIZED BY AN “ANTHROPOLOGY OF THE FACULTIES” WHICH DIVIDES THE HUMAN ACT INTO MANY PARTIAL ACTS ATTRIBUTED SEPARATELY TO THE FACULTIES OF REASON AND WILL AND DEFINED BY THEIR PARTIAL OBJECTS WITHOUT REFERENCE TO PERSONAL SUBJECTIVITY. THIS THEORETICAL MODEL, PROPOSING AN EXTRINSIC CONTROL OF REASON OVER THE DYNAMISMS OF INSTINCT AND AFFECTIVITY, IS UNABLE TO GRASP THE DYNAMIC UNITY OF LOVE AND NEGLECTS ITS INTERPERSONAL CONTEXT.

3 Ibid., pp. 61-63. 4 The extreme fruit of this reductionism is the current “gender theory”. See, for example: J. Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, London 1990: For a critique: P. Donati, “La famiglia come relazione di «gender»”, in Idem., Manuale di sociologia della famiglia, Laterza, Bari 1999, pp. 123-180. 5 Op., cit., Love and responsibility, pp. 109-113. 6 In this regard: G. Angelini, Eros e agape. Oltre l’alternativa, Glossa, Milano 2006, pp. 23ff, 32ff, 63ff.

H 12

Wojtyła’s essay is to “put love into love”, that is, to introduce love, understood as everything that originates from the sexual impulse between man and woman, to love’s horizon, understood as the ethical responsibility of one person toward the other. To reach this objective, the first thing to be done is to overcome the reductive interpretations of the sexual experience and of love which would prevent us integrating love and personal responsibility. In Wojtyła’s work, we can find reference to three main reductions which foil an adequate understanding of the experience of love. Firstly, the naturalistic interpretation which, starting from the scientific objectification of the biological and physiological dynamisms of the body, reduces sexuality to libido and therefore to the mechanical world of nature, undermining in this way the sphere of ethics.3 According to this interpretation, sexuality belongs to a sub-personal dimension which necessarily dominates all of nature’s aspects. In this perspective, man himself is distinct from the passive functions of his body and if, on the one hand, he is completely determined at the level of his instincts, on the other hand, he emerges as spirit, claiming to be able to manipulate the body according to the exercise of his autonomous freedom.4 The seemingly opposed romantic interpretation of love5 emphasizes love as passion, considering this to be the essence of love: an irrational event which avoids any possibility of control on the part of freedom or of principles. The sexual dimension is subordinated to sentiment: the body remains absorbed in the turbulence of passion. The measure of love becomes the intensity of the feelings which are experienced. One rejoices aesthetically in the affective experience of the moment but without opening to the reality of a relationship with the other or to the building up, in time, and publically, of a shared life together. However, Wojtyła also considers the scholastic interpretation of love which prevails in Catholic thought to be insufficient. This interpretation is characterized by an “anthropology of the faculties” which divides the human act into many partial acts attributed separately to the faculties of reason and will6 and defined by their partial objects without reference to personal subjectivity. This theoretical model, proposing an extrinsic control of reason over the dynamisms of instinct and affectivity, is unable to grasp the dynamic unity of love and neglects its interpersonal context. Underlying these reductive interpretations of human love which remain dialectically opposed and contrasting is a common deficiency: they all fail to adequately consider the person as the subject of love, in his relationship with the other person. For Wojtyła, the solution does not involve the superimposition of a new theory, more comprehensive than these last, but, above all, a re-encounter with

the original experience of love so as to adequately consider all of its constitutive factors. In this study, he applies for the first time a method perfected in his Lubliner Vorlesungen (1954-1957).7 It concerns an original integration of the phenomenology taken above all from the school of Max Scheler, but critically evaluated in its constitutive limits by enlisting the perspective of the ontological realism of St Thomas Aquinas.8 The first step consists in grasping the essential elements of phenomena and the important relationships among them; the second step consists in illumining the essence of the phenomenon, situating it in the context of the human person in his totality and his interpersonal relationships.9 In this way, the perspective of the subject proper to modernity is assumed without falling into subjectivism precisely because “every subject is at the same time an objective being; he is objectively something or someone”, as Wojty�� ła says at the beginning of the text.10 At the same time, it is the perspective of the person, not just of the substance, which constitutes the culmination of metaphysics and, therefore, impinges upon ontology, especially the interpretation of love. However, beyond the philosophical references, the author’s ultimate point of reference is lived experience: the book “does not constitute the exposition of a doctrine; rather, it represents before all else the fruit of a constant engagement between doctrine and life”, developed in the daily exercise of pastoral activity.11 So we have here the meaning of the method adopted by Wojtyła: reference to experience is not exhausted in the analysis of content in order to grasp its significance, but in receptivity to its reality as something greater than ourselves.12 True, it is an experience of love; but it is also an experience of responsibility. Surprising as it may seem, we must observe that this concept is quite a recent one in ethical reflection, given that it was introduced only in the first decades of the 20th Century by Max Weber.13 To introduce it critically, we must clarify three variables that are implicit: that which is relative to the subject of responsibility (who is responsible?); that which refers to the object which he is responsible for (what is he responsible for?); and, lastly, the variable of intersubjectivity (before whom is he responsible?). The analysis of responsibility points us toward the context of the experience of moral praxis and, specifically, toward the connection between person and act. We see in Love and responsibility that Wojtyła always conducts his analysis of love parallel to his analysis of moral experience. This is particularly significant: for him, love is not just a gratifying event which occurs at the level of the emotions, but an invitation to love, that is, to learn a way in which freedom achieves the promise of fulfilling what is given seminally in the experience of love.

7 K. Wojtyła, Lubliner Vorlesungen, Seewald Verlag, Stuttgart 1981. For an excellent approach to this work: K.L. Schmitz, At the Center of the Human Drama. The Philosophical Anthropology of Karol Wojtyła / Pope John Paul II, CUA Press, Washington DC, 1993, pp. 30-57. 8 Concerning the method of this work, see: R. Buttiglione, Il pensiero di Karol Wojtyła, Jaca Book, Milano 1982, pp. 103-114; J. Kupczak, Destined for Liberty. The Human Person in the Philosophy of Karol Wojtyła / Pope John Paul II, CUA Press, Washington DC, 2000, pp. 63-81. 9 �� Wojtyła does not clearly separate these two moments in Love and responsibility, although it is more noticeable in the second part. It will be more noticeable in the theoretical work, Person and Act, of 1969, K. Wojtyła, The Acting Person, Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1979, pp. 3-22, where he introduces his methodology. 10 Op. cit., Love and responsibility, p. 24. 11 Ibid., p. 15. 12 Cf. J.J. Pérez-Soba, La experiencia moral, Facultad de Teología «San Dámaso», Madrid, 2002. 13 This work in based on: Amor y responsabilidad y en el ensayo fenomenológico del maestro de K. Wojtyła: R. Ingarden, Sulla responsabilità, Italian translation by A. Setola, Cseo, Bologna, 1982. The classic points of referente for ethics are: M. Weber, Politik als Beruf, (1919) (Italian translation: La scienza come professione. La politica come professione, Einaudi, Torino, 2004); H. Richard Niebuhr, The responsible Self. An Essay in Christian Moral Philosophy, Westminster, John Knox Press, Louisville Kentucky, 1999 (1st edition: 1963); H. Jonas, Il principio responsabilità. Un’etica per la civiltà tecnologica, Einaudi, Torino, 1993 (German original: 1979); P. Ricoeur, Il concetto di responsabilità, in Idem., Il Giusto, SEI, Torino, 1998, pp. 31-56; P. Ricoeur, Sé come un altro, Jaca Book, Milano, 1993 (French original: 1990). For a general presentation: A. Fumagalli, “Interpersonalità, comunità e responsabilità”, in L. Melina – D. Granada (Editors), Limiti alla responsabilità? Amore e giustizia, Lup, Roma, 2005, pp. 119-134.

H 13

2. The experience of love and the revelation of the person WOJTYLA CONDUCTS HIS ANALYSIS OF LOVE PARALLEL TO HIS ANALYSIS OF MORAL EXPERIENCE. FOR HIM, LOVE IS NOT JUST A GRATIFYING EVENT WHICH OCCURS AT THE LEVEL OF THE EMOTIONS, BUT AN INVITATION TO LEARN HOW FREEDOM ACHIEVES THE PROMISE OF FULFILLING WHAT IS GIVEN SEMINALLY IN THE EXPERIENCE OF LOVE. UNDERLYING THE REDUCTIVE INTERPRETATIONS OF HUMAN LOVE IS A COMMON DEFICIENCY: THEY FAIL TO ADEQUATELY CONSIDER THE PERSON AS THE SUBJECT OF IT, IN HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OTHER PERSON. FOR WOJTYŁA, THE SOLUTION INVOLVES A RE-ENCOUNTER WITH THE ORIGINAL EXPERIENCE OF LOVE. 14 Op. cit., Love and responsibility, pp. 67-68. 15 It is sufficient to mention, among others: J. Lacroix, Personne et amour, Seuil, Paris, 1955 and M. Nédoncelle, Vers une philosophie de la personne et de l’amour, Aubier-Montaigne, Paris, 1957. For a complete panoramic view and a critical approach: J.-J. Pérez-Soba, La pregunta por la persona. La respuesta de la interpersonalidad. Estudio de una categoría personalista, Facultad de Teología «San Dámaso», Madrid, 2004. 16 St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 37, a. 1. On this subject, see: J.-J. Pérez-Soba, “Amor es nombre de persona”. Estudio de la interpersonalidad en el amor en Santo Tomás de Aquino, Pul- Mursia, Roma, 2001.

H 14

The adoption of experience as the point of departure for the analysis of love implies for Wojty�� ła the consideration of some of its constitutive elements. We shall demonstrate at least three such fundamental aspects. Firstly, there is the personal and interpersonal context in which such experience occurs: beyond the multiplicity and complexity of its factors, “love is always a reciprocal relationship of persons”, an event of the person and an event among persons.14 This is the concrete point of departure that enables us to avoid the abstraction and objectification of the phenomenon of love, which tends, fatally, to identify love with only one of its partial components. It is precisely in reference to the person that all other factors must be assumed: the impulses of the body and the psychological dynamics of affectivity and of feelings. Moving on to the second element, the body is always considered as a living body which reflects a personal interiority and intentionality directed toward the reality of the exterior world. Certainly, the analysis of the human sciences, particularly that of physiology, finds its place here and it is considered very carefully in Love and responsibility. However, the author is always careful to avoid allowing the reductive factors which influence the method of these sciences to prevail over the concrete experience of love. Finally, the experience of love always implies personal freedom, which is expressed in action. The practical mediation of acting is the concrete place where love is realized. In this way, Wojtyła makes room, right at the beginning of the volume, for an analysis of the verbs “to use” and “to enjoy”, as an expression of those actions in which the person is at the same time both the “subject and object of action”. In the experience of love, the profound connection between love and person emerges, which constitutes that central nucleus of Wojtyła’s reflection and brings him closer to the philosophical current of French personalism of the last century.15 Referring to the Holy Spirit, St Thomas Aquinas said, in the context of his Trinitarian theology, “Love is the name of the person”.16 The statement has an anthropological extension: only the person is worthy of love and only love enables an authentic relationship between persons. It is impossible to understand love except in the perspective of the person; on the other hand, it is impossible to understand the person except in the light of love. So what is it that manifests the personal experience of love? What do we gain from assuming the personalistic perspective when considering love? In the first place, it is love that reveals the person. Philosophical reflection affirms that man is “someone” and this distinguishes him from other beings of the visible world that are always and only

“something”. He is a subject and can never be considered merely as an object. The term person was chosen to underline that man is not enclosed in the notion of an “individual of a species”, as Wojtyła points out. In him, there is something more, namely, a fullness and perfection of particular being which cannot be expressed in any other way than with the word “person”.17 However, it is precisely love which leads us to understand that the person in his singularity is irreducible to any other category of thought.18 In love, the beloved is unique and unrepeatable; she is revealed to be non-substitutable by any other. In fact, love has for its object, not the common qualities of the species, nor the singular qualities of the individual as such, which could very well be found in others and perhaps in greater measure. On the contrary, its object is the person of the other in his singularity and mystery, in the destiny of fullness to which he is called and to which both feel attracted. On the other hand, only when love is developed to the point of touching the person at this level, then and only then, is it forever. On the other hand, the person is open to a relationship with other persons, as one subject to another. Personhood is not individuality enclosed in self-sufficiency; it is freedom open to encounter and acceptance in which a person can find himself again as subject. It is precisely intersubjectivity, the recognition of the other in his quality of subject, which prevents the person from being reduced to a mere object to “be used”. However, Wojtyła wishes to emphasize something more: the communication which love consists in cannot remain merely within intersubjectivity because the person is not reducible to his consciousness. Interpersonality must involve the person in his integrity and therefore in his corporeity and be realized in a communication of the good.19 Love is directed toward achieving a communion of persons based on a common orientation toward the good loved by both which, in this way, becomes the common good and establishes the relationship. Secondly, only in love does the person achieve the fashioning of himself. Let us all take to heart the prophetic strength of the words of John Paul II in his first encyclical: “Man cannot live without love. He remains for himself an incomprehensible being, his life remains without meaning if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it, if he does not make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it”.20 Love, particularly sexual love, has a unique, existential value for the person: it decides the meaning or the meaninglessness of his life. The call to freedom, that is, the reference to moral experience, is inserted precisely here. In effect, the person realizes himself as a person through his acts. The moral dimension of experience is constituted

PHILOSOPHICAL REFLECTION AFFIRMS THAT MAN IS “SOMEONE” AND THIS DISTINGUISHES HIM FROM OTHER BEINGS OF THE VISIBLE WORLD THAT ARE ONLY “SOMETHING”. THE TERM PERSON WAS CHOSEN TO UNDERLINE THAT MAN IS NOT ENCLOSED IN THE NOTION OF AN “INDIVIDUAL OF A SPECIES”. IN HIM, THERE IS A FULLNESS AND PERFECTION OF PARTICULAR BEING WHICH CANNOT BE EXPRESSED IN ANY OTHER WAY THAN WITH THE WORD “PERSON”. IT IS LOVE WHICH LEADS US TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PERSON IS IRREDUCIBLE TO ANY OTHER CATEGORY OF THOUGHT. IN LOVE, THE BELOVED IS UNIQUE AND UNREPEATABLE; IS REVEALED TO BE NONSUBSTITUTABLE BY ANY OTHER.

17 K. Wojtyła, Love and responsibility, cit., p. 24. Cf. R. Spaemann, Personen. Versuche über den Unterschied zwischen “etwas” un “jemand”, KlettCotta, Stuttgart, 1996. 18 A. Wierzbicki, La persona e la morale. Introduzione, in K. Wojtyła, Metafisica della persona. Tutte le opere filosofiche e saggi integrativi (edited by G. Reale and T. Styczen), Bompiani, Milano, 2003, pp. 12191227. See in this regard: J. Crosby, The Selfhood of the Human Person, CUA Press, Washington DC, 1996, pp. 41-81. 19 Op. cit., Love and responsibility, p. 73-79. 20 John Paul II, Redemptor hominis, n. 10.

H 15

THE EXPERIENCE OF LOVE CLARIFIES THE MEANING OF MORAL EXPERIENCE AND RESPONSIBILITY. THE PERSON IS AWAKENED TO HIS MORAL SUBJECTIVITY BY THE PRESENCE OF THE OTHER PERSON WHO CALLS HIM TO RESPOND TO THIS PRIMARY AND GRATUITOUS GIFT OF THE LOVING PRESENCE. CONSIDERATION OF THE EXPERIENCE OF RESPONSIBILITY IS NECESSARY FOR OVERCOMING THE SPHERE OF THE PURE “I” SO AS TO EMBRACE THE PERSON WITH ALL HIS CHARACTERISTICS. RIGHTLY THEREFORE, WOJTYŁA’S CRITIQUE OF UTILITARIANISM IS VERY SEVERE SINCE IT DENIES PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND REPRESENTS A REDUCTION OF THE TRUTH OF LOVE.

21 Lévinas’ reading is particularly important here, although the gaze of the other, for him, is resolved in the commandment and is not understood to be the presence of an original gift which invites one to follow a way and makes this way possible: E. Lévinas, Totalité et Infini. Essai sur l’exteriorité, Nijhoff, La Haye, 1961, p. 230. 22 For a critique of the limitations of Husserl and a clarification of the ontic fundamentals of responsibility, see R. Ingarden, Sulla responsabilità, cit. p. 69-76. 23 Concerning this: J.J. Pérez-Soba, La experiencia moral, cit., p. 14.

H 16

precisely by the inescapable bond that unites the person to his action on the strength of a call to the good which seeks to be achieved in a free response which decides the identity and meaning of the life of the one who acts. At this point, the category of responsibility appears which enables us to relate moral experience to the experience of love: through my acting, I am called to respond to a presence filled with promise, which is given to me in an encounter. In this encounter, the gaze of the other is intentionally directed toward me. It precedes my action and opens it to meaning, precisely because it orientates it toward a good to be achieved, namely: the communion of persons.21 The experience of love clarifies the meaning of the moral experience and of responsibility. The person is awakened to his moral subjectivity by the presence of the other person who calls him to respond to this primary and gratuitous gift of the loving presence, achieving in this way a communion in the good. We are accountable then for our acts, not for consequences that are exterior to them. Consideration of the experience of responsibility is necessary for overcoming the sphere of pure consciousness and of the pure “I” so as to embrace the person with all his characteristics.22 Rightly therefore, Wojtyła’s critique of utilitarianism is very severe since it denies personal responsibility in acting and represents a reduction of the truth of love. The inadequacy of the question in which the Anglo-Saxon normative ethic has been swamped is clear: “Why must I be moral?” This question is born of a separation of the act from the concrete experience in which it becomes an act of the person. If morality is understood as a series of previously existing principles to be applied to action, then the question is understandable, but cannot be answered. However, in reality, morality is a constitutive dimension of experience and by asking itself the question, “Why must I be moral?” it is already, from the start, adopting an immoral posture toward life by undermining the responsibility that the experience of the other and the call to love inevitably imply.23

3. The dynamism of love The experience of love, particularly the love between man and woman, has then a realistic and dynamic character. It is awakened by the concrete reality of a presence and is intentionally guided toward the other person so as to construct a communion with her. In the second part of Love and responsibility, Wojtyła makes a careful analysis of the dynamism of love, distinguishing three dimensions: the psychological, the metaphysical and the moral. It is of interest to us here to detain ourselves above all with the first, integrating into

«If the essence of love is donation, we can understand why, according to the author of Love and responsibility, the love of a man and a woman in the context of marriage, which is certainly only one particular context of love, represents the place where the totality of love’s characteristics is reflected with particular clarity. We cannot disregard the profound agreement here with the central statements of the first encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est.»

H 17

IF MORALITY IS UNDERSTOOD AS A SERIES OF PREVIOUSLY EXISTING PRINCIPLES TO BE APPLIED TO ACTION, THEN THE QUESTION IS UNDERSTANDABLE, BUT CANNOT BE ANSWERED. HOWEVER, IN REALITY, MORALITY IS A CONSTITUTIVE DIMENSION OF EXPERIENCE AND BY ASKING ITSELF THE QUESTION, “WHY MUST I BE MORAL?” IT IS ALREADY, FROM THE START, ADOPTING AN IMMORAL POSTURE TOWARD LIFE BY UNDERMINING THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT THE EXPERIENCE OF THE OTHER AND THE CALL TO LOVE INEVITABLY IMPLY.

24 Op. cit., Love and responsibility, note 64. 25 Ibid., pp. 74-80. 26 Ibid., pp. 89-90.

H 18

it some elements of the second. We will dedicate the last part of the reflection, which will concern Karol Wojtyła’s personalism, to the moral dimension. Our first observation is that the author’s analysis integrates the contribution of psychology and modern phenomenology. These point to the motivations which drive action. At the same time, he introduces a Thomistic analysis of the passions and the will, which enables us to discover the role of the end, that is, the ethical value for the personal will.24 The individual elements of the analysis of the dynamism of love are not understood as isolated fragments but as integral parts of a single personal act of love. Partial aspects can only be understood in the unity of this act. Only from this united perspective do they receive their full intelligibility. At the beginning of love, we find an experience of attraction. It begins by perception, that is, by the reaction of the senses and the excitement caused by their objects. Such a reaction is always accompanied by emotion, that is, by the psychological reaction not only to sexual values but also spiritual values which the encounter with the person brings. Sensuality, the complex sphere of response to masculinity or femininity through the body of the person of the opposite sex, is always linked to the recognition of personal values. Indeed, the body is an integral aspect of the person and can never be dissociated from him. If the corporal dimension is separated from the interpersonal context of the relationship, it will come to be characterized by a utilitarian and inevitably unstable orientation. Here we can locate the phenomenon of disordered desire which Catholic doctrine calls concupiscence and which implies an intentional reduction of the other to a mere object of pleasure. In this way, the body of the other is used without recognizing his or her personal value. However, a special experience of the value of the person as such is anticipated in the emotions. This experience concerns the deepest and most intense emotions related to the encounter with another human subject and to the promise of communion revealed in it.25 In this sense, affectivity plays a decisive role. Wojtyła defines affectivity as the capacity to react to the person’s masculinity or femininity with an appreciation for the person’s complexity and not merely on account of sexual values considered in a narrow sense. The affective reaction is expressed in the “desire to always be together”.26 Affection has a decisive importance in the dynamism of love because it leads to discovering the values of the other in a concrete way. Affective experience points essentially to the other as a person. In this sense, affectivity prepares reason and will respectively to understand and accept the person in his truth, beyond his usefulness and

capacity to provide pleasure. It enables, even from the beginning, the unification of the various elements which interiorly drive one person toward another, on the basis of the recognition of a primary, gratifying gift, namely: the satisfaction experienced on account of the presence of the beloved, with an awareness that this corresponds to a profound longing of the heart. However, affectivity in itself remains ambiguous. For example, I can affectively withdraw into myself and take pleasure merely in what the other awakens in me, without going beyond myself and grasping the value of the other as a person. Here is the true and proper level of love: to grasp, as a personal act and by a judgement of reason, the value of the person in and for himself and, by an act of the will, to seek what is truly good for him. There is a transcendent movement here in the dynamism of love which prevails over the concupiscible self-referencing of instinct or affectivity; by following the original orientation, the other is understood as a value in himself that merits his being recognized and affirmed for his own sake, in an act of ecstasy and dedication. The attraction of the sexual tendency and the experience of sympathy for the other, so characteristic of the affective moment, must be transformed into friendship, the specific trait of which is benevolence, namely: to want the good of the other. This is the characteristic formula of love. Here Wojtyła makes his own the affirmation of St Thomas, with all the richness of his interior analysis: “In hoc precipue consistit amor, quod amans amato bonum velit” (“Love principally consists in this: that the lover wants the good for the beloved”).27 Love is in the will as “the final authority; without its participation, no experience has full personal value or the gravity appropriate to the experiences of the human person”.28 The will’s volition does not arise from a vacuum, as we have seen, but is formed by assuming the dynamisms of the sexual and affective tendencies. For its accomplishment, this act of the will must be founded on a rational judgement which grasps the unique and irreducible value of the person as such. In the development of the interpersonal relationship of love, the content that makes communication possible also appears, namely: the good whose truth establishes and determines the act of love. So we come to what constitutes, simultaneously, love’s essence and its paradox, that is, donation. “To give oneself” is more than just “to want”. It implies a supreme act of freedom, which is found in a specific way in spousal love.29 Now, how can a person who is by nature self-possessed, inalienable and non-substitutable (sui juris et alteri incommunicabilis) give himself to another in a true gift of self without thereby alienating himself? Personal maturity consists,

THE BODY IS AN INTEGRAL ASPECT OF THE PERSON AND CAN NEVER BE DISSOCIATED FROM HIM. IF THE CORPORAL DIMENSION IS SEPARATED FROM THE INTERPERSONAL CONTEXT OF THE RELATIONSHIP, IT WILL COME TO BE CHARACTERIZED BY A UTILITARIAN AND INEVITABLY UNSTABLE ORIENTATION. HERE WE CAN LOCATE THE PHENOMENON OF DISORDERED DESIRE WHICH CATHOLIC DOCTRINE CALLS CONCUPISCENCE AND WHICH IMPLIES AN INTENTIONAL REDUCTION OF THE OTHER TO A MERE OBJECT OF PLEASURE. IN THIS WAY, THE BODY OF THE OTHER IS USED WITHOUT RECOGNIZING HIS OR HER PERSONAL VALUE.

27 St Thomas Aquinas, Contra gentiles, III, c. 90 (Marietti n. 2657). This definition taken from Aristotle, Rhetoric, II, c. 4: 1380 b 35-36. 28 Op. cit., Love and responsibility, p. 117. 29 Ibid., pp. 99, 84, 117.

H 19

30 Vatican II, Pastoral Consititution, Gaudium et spes, n. 24. Concerning the concept of “donación” in Karol Wojtyła, see: G. Reale, Karol Wojtyła, un pellegrino dell’assoluto, Bompiani, Milano 2005, pp. 103107; also: P. Ide, “Une théologie du don. Les occurrences de Gaudium et spes, n. 24, § 3 chez Jean-Paul II”, in Anthropotes XVII/1 (2001), pp. 149-178 (the first part of the article) and Anthropotes XVII/2 (2001), pp. 313-344 (the second part). 31 St Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, III, c. 111 (Marietti, n. 2858): «Constat autem ex praemissis (cap. XVII) finem ultimum universi Deum esse, quem sola intellectualis natura consequitur in seipso, eum scilicet cognoscendo et amando, ut ex dictis (Ch. XXV �� ff.) patet. Sola igitur intellectualis natura est propter se quaesita in universo, alia autem omnia propter ipsam». 32 Cf. M. Waldstein, Introduction, in John Paul II, Man and Woman He Created Them. A Theology of the Body. Translation, Introduction, and Index by Michael Waldstein, Pauline Books & Media, Boston, 2006, pp. 23-34, where he speaks of “Wojtyła’s Carmelite personalism”. 33 Cf. St John of the Cross, Fiamma viva d’amore B, 3, § 78-80, in Opere, 4th edition, Postulazione Generale dei Carmelitani Scalzi, Roma, 1979, pp. 818-820. (In English: The Works of St John of the Cross, Vol. 3, London, Burns, Oats & Washbourne, 1947, The living flame of love, pp. 15-226). 34 Cf. J. Noriega, “La prospettiva morale del ‘dono di sé’”, in G. Grandis – J. Merecki (Editors), L’esperienza sorgiva. Persona – Comunione – Società. Studi in onore del Prof. Stanisław Grygiel, “Sentieri della verità” n. 2: Cattedra Wojtyła, Cantagalli, Siena 2007, pp. 53-60.

H 20

for Wojtyła, in self-possession and self-mastery, by means of which the tendencies of the impulses and affections are ordered by the judgement of reason and facilitate the free self-determination of the personal subject. At the same time, love constitutes the greatest realization of the person’s intrinsic potentialities. Love culminates in going out of oneself in a free gift of self to the other person. It involves a paradox because “enrichment and personal growth” can only happen by means of this gift. Here is the secret of human freedom, which is born of a love and is made for love: the person, who belongs essentially to himself, can belong to the other only through a free act of his love. In the freedom of love, the person continues to possess himself but, simultaneously, is given totally to the other. Of course, perceiving the echo, in advance, of the great anthropological affirmation of Gaudium et spes, John Paul II often loved to repeat: “…man, who is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself, cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of himself”.30 In this conciliar text, the two pillars of Wojtylian personalism present in Love and responsibility come together, namely: the person as end; and the gift of self. The first pillar has its ultimate foundation in Christian theological anthropocentrism, admirably expressed by St Thomas Aquinas: “The ultimate end of the universe is God who only the intellectual creature attains by knowing and loving Him as He is in Himself. Therefore, in the whole universe, only the intellectual creature is desired for his own sake, so that all other realities exist in relationship to him. 31 The second pillar reaches back to the mysticism of St John of the Cross as has been convincingly documented. 32 The Spanish mystic spoke eloquently of the soul’s “gift of self” to God, which is rooted in God’s prior gift to the soul. It has a nuptial character and has its deepest root in Trinitarian love.33 The originality of the moral perspective, when it speaks of the gift of self, consists in seeing it in its tension toward a good life, that is, in relationship to excellent acting which implies a life well-governed. Free acting, precisely insofar as it is directed to another person and to the gift of self, calls the person to a communion and enables him not only to “subsist in himself” but also “to subsist in communion”, experienced in the act of love. 34 If the essence of love is donation, we can understand why, according to the author of Love and responsibility, the love of a man and a woman in the context of marriage, which is certainly only one particular context of love, represents the place where the totality of love’s characteristics is reflected with particular clarity. We cannot disregard the profound agreement here with

«In this conciliar text, the two pillars of Wojtylian personalism present in Love and responsibility come together, namely: the person as end; and the gift of self. The first pillar has its ultimate foundation in Christian theological anthropocentrism, admirably expressed by St Thomas Aquinas: “The ultimate end of the universe is God who only the intellectual creature attains by knowing and loving Him as He is in Himself. Therefore, in the whole universe, only the intellectual creature is desired for his own sake, so that all other realities exist in relationship to him.” (St Thomas Aquinas, by Beato Angelico. Fresco of the Convent of San Marco, Florence).

the central statements of the first encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI, Deus caritas est: “Amid this multiplicity of meanings, however, one in particular stands out: love between man and woman, where body and soul are inseparably joined and human beings glimpse an apparently irresistible promise of happiness. This would seem to be the very epitome of love; all other kinds of love immediately seem to fade in comparison”. 35

AFFECTION HAS A DECISIVE IMPORTANCE IN THE DYNAMISM OF LOVE BECAUSE IT LEADS TO DISCOVERING THE VALUES OF THE OTHER IN A CONCRETE WAY. AFFECTIVE EXPERIENCE POINTS ESSENTIALLY TO THE OTHER AS A PERSON. IN THIS SENSE, AFFECTIVITY PREPARES REASON AND WILL RESPECTIVELY TO UNDERSTAND AND ACCEPT THE PERSON IN HIS TRUTH, BEYOND HIS USEFULNESS AND CAPACITY TO PROVIDE PLEASURE.

35 Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter, Deus caritas est, n. 2. See in this respect: L. Melina – C. Anderson (ed.), La vía del amor. Reflexiones sobre la encíclica Deus caritas est de Benedicto XVI, Monte Carmelo – Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, Burgos, 2006.

H 21

4. The truth of love

HOW CAN A PERSON WHO IS BY NATURE SELFPOSSESSED, INALIENABLE AND NON-SUBSTITUTABLE (SUI JURIS ET ALTERI INCOMMUNICABILIS) GIVE HIMSELF TO ANOTHER IN A TRUE GIFT OF SELF WITHOUT THEREBY ALIENATING HIMSELF? PERSONAL MATURITY CONSISTS, FOR WOJTYŁA, IN SELF-POSSESSION AND SELF-MASTERY, BY MEANS OF WHICH THE TENDENCIES OF THE IMPULSES AND AFFECTIONS ARE ORDERED BY THE JUDGEMENT OF REASON AND FACILITATE THE FREE SELFDETERMINATION OF THE PERSONAL SUBJECT.

36 �� See especially the following paragraphs: op. cit., Love and responsibility, pp. 114-118; 135-137. 37 Ibid., pp. 80-82. 38 Ibid., p. 91. 39 Ibid., p. 38.

H 22

As we approach the end of this chapter, let us now return to a popular wojtylian expression, already encountered, which is decisive for grasping the meaning of his personalism. I am referring to the expression, the “truth of love”. 36 The moment of truth is highlighted as necessary in order to prevail over the ambiguities of the spontaneous impulses and of affectivity so that the freedom of love may emerge, that is, the capacity to affirm the person for his own sake. However, a new difficulty seems to arise precisely here. According to the most wide-spread opinion, as Wojtyła explains, love is related above all to the subjective truth of sentiment, 37 to authenticity; it avoids truth imposed from the outside, which would be purely intellectual, disconnected from life and would impose its criteria and rules on experience extrinsically. The question is then: how can we overcome the subjectivism of a “love without truth”, without falling into an intellectualism of a “truth without love”? The road travelled in Love and responsibility explores the logic proper to love from the inside. This road begins with the importance offered by the very experience of love which contains already the necessary reference to the good in any truly loving, interpersonal relationship. A love which wants the good for the beloved is authentic, that is, it is oriented toward a true and real good, in a way that conforms to the nature of that good. 38 It is not just that “I desire you as a good for me”, but that “I desire your good”, “I desire what is truly a good for you”. This requires a certain level of disinterest so as to affirm the objectivity of truth in relation to the good; it is constituted neither for me nor for the other but refers to the objective reality of personal goods, as the Creator planned them. On the other hand, every appreciation of the good is realized in a communicative environment, between persons and by means of a language which implies a certain objectivity based on the rational content of the good. Precisely in this way, the wills of those who love are found to be united in a new and particular bond, namely: the recognition of the “common good” which is truly good for each of them. 39 We seem to have evidence here, within the dynamic of love, of reference to a truth concerning the good that has its ultimate origin in God the Creator. It is the very condition of possibility and authenticity for love itself in its effective “exodus” toward the other. Therefore, Wojtyła dedicates the fourth part of his work to the theme of justice toward the Creator, affirming in this way that

«The second pillar reaches back to the mysticism of St John of the Cross. The Spanish mystic spoke eloquently of the soul’s “gift of self” to God, which is rooted in God’s prior gift to the soul. It has a nuptial character and has its deepest root in Trinitarian love. Free acting, as it is directed to another person and to the gift of self, calls the person to a communion and enables him not only to “subsist in himself” but also “to subsist in communion”, experienced in the act of love.»

there is an at least implicit and unavoidable reference to God in every experience of love. The argument of Love and responsibility is always developed on a rigorously philosophical rather than theological plane, although it is always open to theology. The reference to God the Creator belongs to a truly rational reflection concerning human love. Such a reference provides the foundation that sustains and defines its nature, determining the norms that govern it: an original love precedes and establishes the human love which necessarily has an analogical and responsorial/dialogical character. At the level of the contents proper to the good, on which conjugal love is based, the traditional doctrine of the Church had pointed to the objective content of marriage in terms of three ends: procreation, mutual help and the remedy for concupiscence. A personalistic perspective such as Wojtyła’s remains unsatisfied with any attempt to establish the union of man and woman merely on these foundations. Only love is an adequate attitude of one person toward another. Some early forms of personalism applied to sexual morality had proposed a revision of the doctrine of the ends, identifying love tout court with mutual love and making this the primary finality of marriage. This reduced procreation to a secondary, merely biological end and eliminated the reference to concupiscence as an expression that might promote a now surpassed, negative vision of sexuality.40 Instead, for Wojtyła,

LOVE CONSTITUTES THE GREATEST REALIZATION OF THE PERSON’S INTRINSIC POTENTIALITIES. LOVE CULMINATES IN GOING OUT OF ONESELF IN A FREE GIFT OF SELF TO THE OTHER PERSON. IT INVOLVES A PARADOX BECAUSE “ENRICHMENT AND PERSONAL GROWTH” CAN ONLY HAPPEN BY MEANS OF THIS GIFT. [...]

40 Obviously, we are referring, above all, to H. Doms, Significato e scopo del matrimonio, Cathedra, Roma 1946. For a critical reading: A. Mattheeuws, Union et procréation. Développements de la doctrine des fins du mariage, Cerf, Paris 1989; G. Mazzocato, «Il dibattito tra Doms e neotomisti sull’indirizzo personalista», in Teologia 31 (2006), 249-275.

H 23

[...] HERE IS THE SECRET OF HUMAN FREEDOM, WHICH IS BORN OF A LOVE AND IS MADE FOR LOVE: THE PERSON, WHO BELONGS ESSENTIALLY TO HIMSELF, CAN BELONG TO THE OTHER ONLY THROUGH A FREE ACT OF HIS LOVE. IN THE FREEDOM OF LOVE, THE PERSON CONTINUES TO POSSESS HIMSELF BUT, SIMULTANEOUSLY, IS GIVEN TOTALLY TO THE OTHER.

41 See in particular the importance of note 19 in op.cit., Love and responsibility, p. 294. 42 Cf. R. Buttiglione, Il pensiero, op.cit., pp. 120-121. 43 Cf. Op.cit., Love and responsibility, pp. 40-43. 44 Ibid., p. 67. 45 �� Cfr. L. Melina - J.-J. Pérez-Soba (Editors), Il bene e la persona nell’agire, Lup, Roma, 2002. 46 The entire third part of Love and responsibility is dedicated to the topic of chastity. For a systematic development of a sexual morality in the perspective of the virtues, see: J. Noriega, El destino del eros. Pers�� pectivas de moral sexual, Palabra, Madrid, 2004.

H 24

it would be profoundly reductive and an extrinsicism to consider love as just one of the ends of marriage. Love is the very substance of marriage. It regulates it from within and the traditional ends acquire their moral significance from it. On the other hand, it is not the biological finality as such that establishes the ethical value to be respected: that would be naturalism. Rather, precisely in the light of the experience of love, the moral significance of sexuality appears in relation to those goods, which belong to the nature of the person himself.41 So there is no need to rearrange their hierarchy or find error in their meaning: the ends of marriage are the concrete determinations which the truth of love involves in the sexual sphere so that the goods to which they tend may be realized.42 The truth of love demands the attitude of respect which Wojtyła calls the personalistic norm, a fundamental point of his entire ethical thought which he takes up again and integrates starting from the well-known Kantian formulation: “Whenever a person is the object of your acting, remember that you must not treat him only as a means, as an instrument; rather, he is, or ought to be an end in himself”.43 The heart of the sexual moral problem consists then in this: How can one “enjoy sexual pleasure without treating the person as an object of pleasure?”44 Sexual morality will consist then in an ongoing synthesis and an ever increasing maturity of the natural finalities of the sexual tendency and the personalistic norm. More precisely, it will consist in assuming, within the naturalistic perspective of love, those goods for the person which are constitutive of his nature.45 The truth concerning the good illumines the way of personal love from within and facilitates the ordering of the tendencies of instinct and affectivity. This is the decisive dimension of the moral virtues, by means of which the appetitive dynamisms are shaped and orientated toward the good of the person, becoming in this way a positive energy in favour of a fully human expression of sexual love. Through the virtues, particularly chastity, the acting subject achieves integration; the fragmentation and disintegration of concupiscence is overcome in this way and the personalistic norm is perceived to be connatural to the subject.46 Affectivity plays a decisive role in this transformation of the subject and in this interiorizing of the personal truth of love. Particularly involved are the great and profound emotions which, in the experience of love, accompany and precede the recognition of the unique value of the person loved. In this way, the truth concerning love, rather than being imposed from outside the subject, is recognized as intrinsic to his sensibility. It is the most intimate and secret substance which reason illuminates and guides to its fullness. The exercise of freedom, sustained by grace, contributes by impressing

this truth on the affective orientations as the personal life of the individual increases in excellence. And this virtue is not extrinsic to the interpersonal context either, because it is clearly evident in the relationship between those who love.

Conclusion How can that love which pulsates the temples last forever? How can that love which glimpsed the promise of communion in the fascination of the first encounter endure in the ongoing construction of a common destiny? The question of Andrew and Teresa in The Jeweller’s Shop has been explored with diligence and depth in the reflections of Love and responsibility. Having treated the question as decisively existential, since life’s entire destiny depends on love, the search for increasingly adequate ways of response must now be embarked upon and continually be deepened. At the end of this journey, we can say that the personalistic way, pointed out by Karol Wojtyła, is always relevant and promising in the convincing response that it offers the men and women of today. This is primarily because it presents the experience of love as that place where the unique and unrepeatable value of the person and his vocation to the gift of self is revealed. It is also because a concrete approach to the dynamic unity of the person and his acting enables us to re-establish a positive nexus between freedom and truth, overcoming in this way the unilateral oppositions of, on the one hand, subjectivism which reduces love to a subjective authenticity and, on the other hand, objectivism which misunderstands personalistic richness. Only that love which becomes a responsible act of the person can endure in time.

IT IS POSSIBLE TO PERCEIVE THE ECHO, IN ADVANCE, OF THE GREAT ANTHROPOLOGICAL AFFIRMATION OF GAUDIUM ET SPES, JOHN PAUL II OFTEN LOVED TO REPEAT: “…MAN, WHO IS THE ONLY CREATURE ON EARTH WHICH GOD WILLED FOR ITSELF, CANNOT FULLY FIND HIMSELF EXCEPT THROUGH A SINCERE GIFT OF HIMSELF”.

H 25

H 26

The Archbishop of Kracรณw, Mons. Karol Wojtyla, takes the train to Rome for the Council.

SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL

John Paul II on Religious Freedom BY AVERY CARDINAL DULLES, S.J.

here is a widespread opinion to the effect that in the Second Vatican Council’s Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis humanae,1 the Catholic Church belatedly accepted principles that had by that time come to be seen as self-evident in most of the civilized world. Some suspected that the Church was embracing a fundamental principle of the Enlightenment after having opposed it for three centuries. Writing in January 1965, John Courtney Murray maintained that the principle of religious freedom was “accepted by the common consciousness of men and nations. Hence the Church is in the unfortunate position of coming late, with the great guns of her authority, to a war that has already been won.”2 Such interpretations might be justified if the Catholic Church had simply repeated what had already been recognized, for example, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. But the reader should not underestimate the essentially Christian and Catholic character of the council’s teaching. For a better appreciation of these aspects one cannot do better than to follow the statements of John Paul II over the past thirty-five years. As a young bishop and, after 13 January 1964, archbishop, Karol Wojtyla took a keen interest in the conciliar declaration. Subsequently, as cardinal and pope, he has continued to celebrate the achievements of Vatican II, applying them to changing situations and interpreting them in the light of his own philosophical and theological perspectives. In his Sources of Renewal, a book written in 1972 for a synod of his archdiocese of Kraków, Cardinal Wojtyla devoted considerable attention to religious freedom. He has returned to the same theme in a number of his encyclicals, such as Redemptor hominis, Centesimus annus, and Veritatis splendor, as well as in many of his speeches and in his book Crossing the Threshold of Hope. The following quotation from his World Peace Day Message for 1988 is indicative of the importance he attaches to the topic:

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 26 - 41

THE POSITIVE CONCEPTION OF FREEDOM MAKES IT CLEAR THAT HUMAN PERSONS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED AS INSTRUMENTS OF SOCIETY, SINCE SOCIETY IS INSTITUTED FOR THEIR BENEFIT. RELIGION MAY THEN BE SEEN AS THE HIGHEST REALIZATION OF HUMAN NATURE, CONSISTING IN THE FREE, PERSONAL, AND CONSCIENTIOUS ADHERENCE OF THE HUMAN MIND TO GOD.

1. This declaration, approved on 7 December 1965, will henceforth be abbreviated DH. 2. John Courtney Murray, This Matter of Religious Freedom, America 112 (1965): 43. Again in his commentary on DH Murray wrote that the principle of religious freedom has long been recognized in constitutional law, so that “in all honesty it must be admitted that the Church is late in acknowledging the validity of the principle.” See Walter M. Abbott, ed., The Documents of Vatican II (New York: America Press, 1966), p. 673.

H 27

Religious freedom, an essential requirement of the dignity of every person, is a cornerstone of the structure of human rights, and for this reason an irreplaceable factor in the good of individuals and of the whole of society, as well as of the personal fulfillment of each individual. It follows that the freedom of individuals and communities to profess and practice their religion is an essential element for peaceful human coexistence. […] The civil and social right to religious freedom, inasmuch as it touches the most intimate sphere of the spirit, is a point of reference for the other fundamental rights and in some way becomes a measure of them. 3

SOME BISHOPS AND THEOLOGIANS, APPROACHING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AS A POLITICAL PROBLEM, WANTED THE DECLARATION TO PROFFER A PURELY NEGATIVE AND JURIDICAL DEFINITION, NAMELY, IMMUNITY FROM EXTERNAL COERCION IN THE PRACTICE OF RELIGION. […]

3. John Paul II, Religious Freedom: Condition of Peace, World Peace Day Message, 7 December 1987, Origins 17, no. 28 (24 December 1987): pp. 493-94. 4. The numbers I through V in parentheses in my text refer to the following: (I) speech of 25 September 1964 in AS III/2, 530-32; (II) written intervention in AS III/2, 838-39; (III) written intervention in AS III/3, 766-67; (IV) speech of 22 September 1965, in name of the Polish bishops in AS IV/2, 11-13; (V) written intervention in AS IV/2, 292-93. The abbreviation AS refers to the Acta synodalia of Vatican II (Vatican City, 1970-78).

H 28

At Vatican II Bishop Wojtyla made no fewer than five interventions on religious freedom, two oral and three in writing.4 Thanks to criticisms such as his, the schema was significantly revised. In the initial stages it was little more than an effort to defend the Catholic Church from the charge of being intolerant. But in the end the document did far more. It set forth the basic principles of a positive theology of religious freedom quite different from the liberalism of the Enlightenment. In his last two interventions, Archbishop Wojtyla expressed his satisfaction with the changes that had been made up to that time. John Paul II’s understanding of religious freedom may be summarized under ten major headings, all of them touched on by the council’s declaration.

A theological doctrine Although the early drafts of the declaration seemed to treat religious freedom from a perspective similar to that of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the civil constitutions of many states, Archbishop Wojtyla, among others, insisted that it would be unworthy of the council simply to issue a repetitive statement of this type. The world, he said, was not looking to the council for a lesson in political philosophy. Presupposing these basic constitutional principles, the council should present the doctrine of the Church with its basis in divine revelation (IV, 11; V, 293). The very principle of religious freedom, Wojtyla contended, was grounded in revelation, which affirms the dignity of the human person as a responsible subject made to the image and likeness of God and destined to enjoy eternal life in union with Christ the Redeemer (V, 11). According to a properly theological anthropology human persons, as moral subjects, achieve their full humanity by acting on their own initiative and with their own responsibility (Sources of Renewal, 23). This is eminently true in the realm of religion, since God cannot be rightly worshiped except by a free decision in the spirit and in truth (John 4:23; III, 767). Adherence to the Christian

religion requires faith, a free acceptance of God’s word and of his self-revelation in that word (Sources of Renewal, 23). The early drafts of Dignitatis humanae, following a post-Enlightenment Scholastic methodology, began by expounding the doctrine as knowable by natural reason and then presented the additional insights obtainable from Christian revelation. Archbishop Wojtyla consistently urged the council to proceed in the opposite direction. Its teaching on religious freedom, he argued, was in fact based on revelation, which is required for human beings to be delivered from captivity to sin and error. If the principle of religious freedom could be perceived to some extent by the light of reason alone, so much the better (V, 293). But the Christian moral order, according to Bishop Wojtyla, “contains in itself the moral order of nature and all the rights of the human person, and yet elevates, animates, and sanctifies them” (III, 767). As late as the fall of 1965, the schema of the declaration was still divided into a first chapter with the title “The Doctrine of Religious Freedom Taken from Reason,” followed by a second chapter entitled “The Doctrine of Religious Freedom in the Light of Revelation.” Karol Wojtyla objected that the two chapters taught the same doctrine of freedom from the vantage points respectively of reason and revelation. Revelation, however, gives a deeper understanding of the basis for religious freedom in the dignity of the human person (IV, 11; V, 293). To Wojtyla’s satisfaction the words “Taken from Reason” were in the end stricken from the title of chapter 1. In presenting the teaching of the council to his archdiocese of Kraków, Cardinal Wojtyla seemed to be satisfied with the strategy whereby the declaration had expounded the right of religious freedom “primarily on rational principles before proceeding in the second part of the document to expand on it from a theological standpoint, analyzing religious freedom in the light of Revelation.”5 Again, in his first encyclical, Redemptor hominis, John Paul II pointed out that in Dignitatis humanae religious freedom was vindicated not only from a theological perspective but also “from the point of view of natural law, that is to say from a ‘purely human’ position, on the basis of the premises given by man’s own experience, his reason, and his sense of human dignity” (RH 17). While he expects Catholics to draw their doctrine primarily from revelation, the Pope is conscious of the practical advantages of presenting the doctrine as far as possible in terms that are meaningful to believers and nonbelievers alike.

[…] WOJTYLA WAS AMONG THOSE WHO OBJECTED TO THIS DEFINITION AS PARTIAL AND INADEQUATE. AS HE PUT IT, THIS DEFINITION CORRESPONDS TO THE NOTION OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE RATHER THAN FREEDOM (III, 766). THE MERELY NEGATIVE DEFINITION COULD EASILY BE EXPLOITED TO PROMOTE UNACCEPTABLE FORMS OF LIBERALISM OR INDIFFERENTISM

5. John Paul II, Sources of Renewal San Francisco. Harper & Row, 1980, p. 409.

H 29

FREEDOM IS GIVEN TO HUMAN BEINGS SO THAT THEY MAY PERSONALLY ATTAIN AND EMBRACE «Thanks to the input of bishops such as Wojtya, Dignitatis humanae proposed a positive WHAT IS TRULY GOOD. doctrine of religious freedom based upon revelation as well as upon reason.» ACCORDING TO THE (Mons. Karol Wojtyla. Photography of Second Vatican Council’s archive). DECLARATION ALL MEN ARE “AT ONCE IMPELLED BY NATURE AND ALSO BOUND Positive and negative concepts BY A MORAL OBLIGATION TO SEEK THE TRUTH, Some bishops and theologians, approaching religious freedom ESPECIALLY RELIGIOUS as a political problem, wanted the declaration to proffer a purely TRUTH. THEY ARE ALSO negative and juridical definition, namely, immunity from external BOUND TO ADHERE TO coercion in the practice of religion. Wojtyla was among those who THAT TRUTH, ONCE IT IS objected to this definition as partial and inadequate. As he put KNOWN, AND TO ORDER it, this definition corresponds to the notion of religious tolerance THEIR WHOLE LIVES IN rather than freedom (III, 766). The merely negative definition could ACCORD WITH easily be exploited to promote unacceptable forms of liberalism or THE DEMANDS OF indifferentism (IV, 12). TRUTH” (DH 2). It was imperative, therefore, to work with a positive conception

of religious freedom, rooted in a theological understanding of the dignity of the person in relationship with God. In this perspective, freedom is not an end in itself but a means whereby men and women work out their destiny in a manner befitting their dignity as persons. Religious freedom makes it possible for them to commit themselves consciously and deliberately to the transcendent (III, 766; cf. Sources of Renewal, 23). The positive conception of freedom makes it clear that human persons may not be considered as instruments of society, since society is instituted for their benefit. Religion may then be seen as the highest realization of human nature, consisting in the free, personal, and

H 30

conscientious adherence of the human mind to God. Since religion by its nature transcends everything worldly, it should be evident that no human authority may interpose itself, coercing people in the intimately personal sphere in which they relate to God (I, 532; Sources of Renewal, 22). In the words of Dignitatis humanae, civil government “would clearly transgress the limits set to its power were it to presume to command or forbid acts that are religious” (DH 3).

Freedom and Truth Freedom is given to human beings so that they may personally attain and embrace what is truly good. According to the declaration all men are “at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to that truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth” (DH 2). These statements are in full agreement with the teaching of John Paul II. In his first speech at Vatican II he faulted the current draft of the declaration because it neglected to emphasize the dependence of freedom upon truth. “For freedom on the one hand is for the sake of truth and on the other hand it cannot be perfected except by means of truth” (I, 531). In this connection he quoted the words of Jesus, “The truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). This same theme continues to echo through the present pope’s encyclicals. In Redemptor hominis he asserts that the words of Jesus just quoted: Contain both a fundamental requirement and a warning: the requirement of an honest relationship with regard to truth as a condition for authentic

THESE STATEMENTS ARE IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE TEACHING OF JOHN PAUL II. IN HIS FIRST SPEECH AT VATICAN II HE FAULTED THE CURRENT DRAFT OF THE DECLARATION BECAUSE IT NEGLECTED TO EMPHASIZE THE DEPENDENCE OF FREEDOM UPON TRUTH. “FOR FREEDOM ON THE ONE HAND IS FOR THE SAKE OF TRUTH AND ON THE OTHER HAND IT CANNOT BE PERFECTED EXCEPT BY MEANS OF TRUTH” (I, 531).

freedom, and a warning to avoid every kind of illusory freedom, every superficial and unilateral freedom, every freedom that fails to enter into the whole truth about man and the world (RH 12).

In Veritatis splendor John Paul II traces many of the recent deviations in moral theology to the denial of the dependence of freedom on truth. Authentic freedom, he says, “is never freedom ‘from’ the truth but always freedom ‘in’ the truth” (VS 64). Later in the same encyclical he asserts: “The essential bond between Truth, the Good, and Freedom has been largely lost sight of by present-day culture” (VS84). In Centesimus annus he pursues the same theme in its political ramifications:

H 31

It must be observed in this regard that if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism. (CA 46)

Wojtyla’s analysis of the self-destructiveness of freedom without accountability coincides to a great extent with the reflections of thoughtful writers such as Michael Polanyi and Václav Havel.6

Freedom and Responsibility

DIGNITATIS HUMANAE STATED THAT “IN THE USE OF ALL FREEDOMS, THE MORAL PRINCIPLE OF PERSONAL AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IS TO BE OBSERVED” (DH 7). IT ALSO ASSERTED: “RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, THEREFORE, OUGHT TO HAVE THIS FURTHER PURPOSE AND AIM, NAMELY THAT MEN MAY COME TO ACT WITH GREATER RESPONSIBILITY IN FULFILLING THEIR DUTIES IN COMMUNITY LIFE” (DH 8). […]

Avoiding the excesses of liberalism, Dignitatis humanae stated that “in the use of all freedoms, the moral principle of personal and social responsibility is to be observed” (DH 7). It also asserted: “Religious freedom, therefore, ought to have this further purpose and aim, namely that men may come to act with greater responsibility in fulfilling their duties in community life” (DH 8). These passages responded to the desires of bishops such as Wojtyla that the declaration should emphasize that human beings are responsible to God and to others for the use they make of their freedom. It is not enough, he reminded the Fathers, to say “I am free in this matter” unless one also says, “I am responsible.” This, he said, is the doctrine of the Church of the confessors and martyrs. Responsibility is the necessary complement of freedom (IV, 12). Commenting on Dignitatis humanae for his archdiocese, Cardinal Wojtyla repeated that liberty and responsibility are mutually interdependent. Unless we are free, we cannot be responsible; and conversely, we cannot evade responsibility for what we do freely (Sources of Renewal, 292).

Rights of conscience The first draft of Dignitatis humanae seemed to base the right of religious freedom on the personal right to follow one’s conscience. In later drafts this argument was significantly muted. Wojtyla would have agreed, I think, with the following statement of John Courtney Murray, one of the principal drafters of the declaration: It is worth noting that the declaration does not base the right to the free 6. Michael Polanyi, The Logic of Liberty (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1998); Václav Havel, Living in Truth (London: Faber & Faber, 1987).

H 32

exercise of religion on “freedom of conscience.” Nowhere does this phrase occur. And the declaration nowhere lends its support to the theory for which the phrase frequently stands, namely, that I have the right to do

what my conscience tells me to do, simply because my conscience tells me to do it. This is a perilous theory. Its particular peril is subjectivismthe notion that, in the end, it is my conscience, and not objective truth, which determines what is right or wrong, true or false.7

According to Dignitatis humanae “the highest norm for human life is the divine law-eternal, objective, and universal-whereby God orders, directs, and governs the entire universe and all the ways of the human community, by a plan conceived in wisdom and love” (DH 3). The imperatives of the divine law become known to us through the mediation of conscience. For this reason we are bound to follow the judgments of conscience, even when it is erroneous. Wojtyla, commenting on this teaching, contends that we have the right and duty to follow a certain and true conscience, but that we have no such right to follow an erroneous conscience, although we may have a subjective obligation to obey it. Strictly speaking, he said, conscience is not the means whereby we know the divine law, but only a means of applying the law to concrete acts (III, 766-67). In Veritatis splendor John Paul II has a great deal more to say about conscience. He points out that the conception of conscience has been deformed by modern thinkers who have lost the sense of the transcendent. They often depict conscience as a supreme and infallible tribunal that dispenses us from considering law and truth, putting in their place purely subjective and individualist criteria such as sincerity and authenticity (VS 32). The voice of conscience summons us to obey the law of God but does not by itself tell us what that law is. “Because it attests to a higher intelligence and will to which we are subject, conscience arouses a concern or anxiety to find out what course of action is here and now required to do good and avoid evil. Far from overriding authority, conscience on the contrary impels us to seek guidance from competent authority”.8

Limits of religious freedom An early draft of the declaration stated that no human authority was entitled to exercise coercion to prevent people from following an erroneous conscience. Archbishop Wojtyla commented that this statement should be amended to say that no human power has the right to exert pressure on human persons holding error unless they are doing harm to themselves or to others. Quite evidently parents and other legitimate superiors may exercise a certain pressure on erring persons, proportionate to the grav-

[…] THESE PASSAGES RESPONDED TO THE DESIRES OF BISHOPS SUCH AS WOJTYLA THAT THE DECLARATION SHOULD EMPHASIZE THAT HUMAN BEINGS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO GOD AND TO OTHERS FOR THE USE THEY MAKE OF THEIR FREEDOM. IT IS NOT ENOUGH, HE REMINDED THE FATHERS, TO SAY “I AM FREE IN THIS MATTER” UNLESS ONE ALSO SAYS, “I AM RESPONSIBLE.” THIS, HE SAID, IS THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH OF THE CONFESSORS AND MARTYRS.

7. John Courtney Murray S.J., Commentary on Dignitatis humanae in Abbott, ed., Documents of Vatican II, 679 n. 5. 8. For further discussion of these points see Avery Dulles, “The Truth about Freedom: A Theme from John Paul II,” in J. A. DiNoia, O.P., and Romanus Cessario, O.P., Veritatis Splendor and the Renewal of Moral Theology (Chicago: Midwest Theological Forum, 1999), pp. 129-42, at pp. 135-37.

H 33

IN VERITATIS SPLENDOR JOHN PAUL II HAS A GREAT DEAL MORE TO SAY ABOUT CONSCIENCE. HE POINTS OUT THAT THE CONCEPTION OF CONSCIENCE HAS BEEN DEFORMED BY MODERN THINKERS WHO HAVE LOST THE SENSE OF THE TRANSCENDENT. THEY OFTEN DEPICT CONSCIENCE AS A SUPREME AND INFALLIBLE TRIBUNAL THAT DISPENSES US FROM CONSIDERING LAW AND TRUTH, PUTTING IN THEIR PLACE PURELY SUBJECTIVE AND INDIVIDUALIST CRITERIA SUCH AS SINCERITY AND AUTHENTICITY (VS 32).

9. Brian W. Harrison, in Religious Li berty and Contraception (Melbourne: John XXIII Fellowship Coop Ltd., 1988), 99, traces a similar revision in DH 7 (the textual change from “public order” to “objective moral order”) to the influence of Wojtyla’s intervention. 10. John Paul II, “The U.N. Address,” Address to the U.N. General Assembly, 2 October 1979, in Origins 9, no. 17 (11 October 1979): p. 265.

H 34

ity of the danger, to prevent harm from being done (III, 768). At another point the same draft stated that persons may be restrained in the exercise of religious freedom as required to safeguard the common good. This statement, Wojtyla objected, was open to misunderstanding unless false notions of the common good were excluded. In our utilitarian culture, the common good is often equated with the interests of a particular party (III, 768). A subsequent draft stated that religious freedom could be limited “according to juridical norms that were required by the needs of public order” (V, 292). Archbishop Wojtyla objected that this statement was likewise unsatisfactory because it could be understood as permitting human legislators to impose limits on a divinely given prerogative. Only divine law, he argued, could limit a divinely given right. He therefore proposed to substitute wording to the effect that abuses of religious liberty could not be forcibly restrained unless they were morally evil (V, 293; cf. IV, 12-13). Perhaps as a result of Wojtyla’s intervention, the language of the text in numbers 2 and 3 was modified by the insertion of the word “just” before the words “public order.”9

Social ramifications Religious freedom has social ramifications. As stated in Dignitatis humanae, “the social nature of man itself requires that he should give external expression to his internal acts of religion; that he should participate with others in matters religious; that he should profess his religion in community” (DH 3). Wojtyla in his interventions at Vatican II had insisted, with the Polish situation in mind, that this right involves the freedom of individuals and communities to transmit their sincere convictions by bearing witness to their faith. It also implies the right of parents to have their children educated in accordance with their religious convictions. These rights are not adequately protected by the principle of tolerance alone (I, 532; III, 766). In his first encyclical John Paul II protested against the denial of religious freedom to individuals and communities under totalitarian regimes of the day (RH 17). In his address to the United Nations General Assembly in 1979 he quoted the passage from Dignitatis humanae 3 cited above. The religious needs of individual persons, he stated, are not protected unless freedom is accorded to institutions that serve religion.10 In an address of 1995 John Paul II called attention to another threat to religious freedom, which he called “more subtle than overt persecution.” In many democratic societies, he pointed out,

«Since the council, John Paul II has made religious freedom a central theme in his program for ecumenism and for situating the Church in the world of our day.». (Mons. Karol Wojtyla. Photography of Second Vatican Council’s archive)

the citizens are put under social pressure to keep their religious convictions private and not to let them influence their public behavior. “Does not this mean,” he asked, “that society not only excludes the contribution of religion to its institutional life, but also promotes a culture which re-defines man as less than what he is?”11 This question seems to be particularly pertinent in the United States, where it is taken as almost axiomatic that religion ought not to make itself felt in the public order.

Ecumenical Implications The Declaration on Religious Freedom originated in the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, where it was drawn up with the intention of removing a serious obstacle to relations with other Christian groups. The state in some traditionally Catholic nations had used its authority to inhibit non-Catholic organizations from publicly professing their faith and worshiping according to their

BECAUSE IT ATTESTS TO A HIGHER INTELLIGENCE AND WILL TO WHICH WE ARE SUBJECT, CONSCIENCE AROUSES A CONCERN OR ANXIETY TO FIND OUT WHAT COURSE OF ACTION IS HERE AND NOW REQUIRED TO DO GOOD AND AVOID EVIL. FAR FROM OVERRIDING AUTHORITY, CONSCIENCE ON THE CONTRARY IMPELS US TO SEEK GUIDANCE FROM COMPETENT AUTHORITY.

11. John Paul II, Message of 7 December 1995, to an International Conference on Secularism and Religious Freedom sponsored by the Becket Fund for Religious Freedom and held at the Pontifical Athenaeum “Regina Apostolorum.” The text, signed by the Pope himself, is in L’Osservatore Romano (20/27 December 1995), 4 and 7.

H 35

AN EARLY DRAFT OF THE DECLARATION STATED THAT NO HUMAN AUTHORITY WAS ENTITLED TO EXERCISE COERCION TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM FOLLOWING AN ERRONEOUS CONSCIENCE. ARCHBISHOP WOJTYLA COMMENTED THAT THIS STATEMENT SHOULD BE AMENDED TO SAY THAT NO HUMAN POWER HAS THE RIGHT TO EXERT PRESSURE ON HUMAN PERSONS HOLDING ERROR UNLESS THEY ARE DOING HARM TO THEMSELVES OR TO OTHERS. […]

12. John Paul II, “The Pope Reviews His Pontificate,” Address to the Roman cardinals and members of the Curia, 28 June 1980, §17, in Origins 10, N. 11 (28 August 1980): p. 171.

H 36

Mons. Karol Wojtyla. Photography of Second Vatican Council’s archive.

conscience. When the document became separated from the Decree on Ecumenism, its initial preoccupation with the intolerance of established churches was expanded into a concern to vindicate religious freedom as a human right against whoever might oppose it, including atheistic regimes. Archbishop Wojtyla objected to the schema presented in the third session of the Council on the ground that it did not sufficiently distinguish between the issues of Church and state and those of ecumenical action. In the civil sphere, he said, the issue of toleration is central. But in the ecumenical sphere it is not enough to say that different religious groups should tolerate one another. This program might simply harden the existing differences. The goal of ecumenical action is to overcome schisms and unite Christians in the truth. It should be clearly understood that the purpose of ecumenical dialogue is to make progress toward the full acceptance of truth by all participants. Nothing but the truth will liberate Christianity from its manifold separations (I, 531). Archbishop Wojtyla’s interventions on this subject at Vatican II foreshadow one of the major themes of his pontificate. He is committed to ecumenism as a high priority, but ecumenism does not consist, for him, in ecclesiastical diplomacy. Christ, he holds, wills all his disciples not simply to be one, but to be one in the truth. In an address to the Roman Curia on 28 June 1980, he declared, “The union of Christians cannot be sought in a ‘compromise’ between the various theological positions, but only in a common meeting in the most ample and mature fullness of Christian truth.”12 In his major encyclical on ecumenism, Ut unum sint (1995), he wrote: “The

unity willed by God can be attained only by the adherence of all to the content of revealed truth in its entirety. In matters of faith, compromise is in contradiction with God who is truth” (UUS 18). John Paul II therefore denies that ecumenical or interreligious dialogue is an alternative to proclamation. Authentic dialogue, he asserts, includes proclamation as an inner dimension of itself. This refusal to compromise stands in perfect agreement with the teaching of Vatican II’s Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis redintegratio, which warned against a false conciliatory approach and insisted that the Catholic Church had alone preserved the full deposit of revealed truth and all the means of grace instituted by Christ (UR 4 and 11). Similarly, Dignitatis humanae teaches that God has made known the way of salvation by which we are to serve him and be saved in Christ. “We believe that this one true religion subsists in the catholic and apostolic Church” (DH 1). The declaration explicitly left intact “the traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty and men and societies toward the one true religion and toward the one Church of Christ” (ibid.). Religious freedom, therefore, does not foster indifferentism or relativism. The nature of the duties of society toward the true religion will be considered below, under the rubric of Church and state.

Religious violence In paragraphs that John Paul II would frequently quote in his later writings, Dignitatis humanae taught that no coercion should be used to bring people to profess the true religion. In its second chapter it pointed out that the act of faith, being by its very nature free, cannot be coerced (DH 9). It called attention to the meekness and humility of Christ himself, who refused to impose the gospel by force (DH11). John Paul II agrees that “God absolutely does not want to force us to respond to His word” and that “man cannot be forced to accept the truth.”13 Turning to the historical record, the declaration insisted that the Church has always taught that the act of faith must proceed from a free and conscientious decision, but it acknowledged that as the Church “has made its pilgrim way through the vicissitudes of human history, there have at times appeared ways of acting that were less in accord with the spirit of the gospel and even opposed to it” (DH 12). The theme of penance for sins of violence committed in the name of religion was a major component of John Paul II’s program for the celebration of the Great Jubilee of the year 2000. In his apostolic letter Tertio millennio adveniente of 1994 he recalled:

[…] QUITE EVIDENTLY PARENTS AND OTHER LEGITIMATE SUPERIORS MAY EXERCISE A CERTAIN PRESSURE ON ERRING PERSONS, PROPORTIONATE TO THE GRAVITY OF THE DANGER, TO PREVENT HARM FROM BEING DONE (III, 768).

13. John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope (New York: A. A. Knopf, 1994), pp. 189-90.

H 37

IN AN ADDRESS OF 1995 JOHN PAUL II CALLED ATTENTION TO ANOTHER THREAT TO RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, WHICH HE CALLED “MORE SUBTLE THAN OVERT PERSECUTION.” IN MANY DEMOCRATIC SOCIETIES, HE POINTED OUT, THE CITIZENS ARE PUT UNDER SOCIAL PRESSURE TO KEEP THEIR RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS PRIVATE AND NOT TO LET THEM INFLUENCE THEIR PUBLIC BEHAVIOR. “DOES NOT THIS MEAN,” HE ASKED, “THAT SOCIETY NOT ONLY EXCLUDES THE CONTRIBUTION OF RELIGION TO ITS INSTITUTIONAL LIFE, BUT ALSO PROMOTES A CULTURE WHICH REDEFINES MAN AS LESS THAN WHAT HE IS?”

«When the Church demands religious freedom she is not asking for a gift, a privilege or a permission dependent on contingent situations, political strategies or the will of the authorities. Rather she demands the effective recognition of an inalienable human right. […] It is not a matter of a right belonging to the Church as an institution; it is also a matter of a right belonging to every person and every people.» (John Paul II addresses to a multitude gathered at Plaza de la Revolución, La Habana). Another painful chapter of history to which the sons and daughters of the Church must return with a spirit of repentance is that of the acquiescence given, especially in recent centuries, to intolerance and even the use of violence in the service of truth. […] From these painful moments of the past a lesson can be drawn for the future, leading all Christians to adhere faithfully to the sublime principle stated by the council: “The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it wins over the mind with both gentleness and power.” (TMA 35, quoting DH 1)

14. John Paul II, “The Depth of the Holocaust’s Horrors,” Origins 29 (6 April 2000): p. 679.

H 38

At the penitential service in St. Peter’s Basilica on the first Sunday of Lent, 12 March 2000, the Pope asked God’s pardon for sins of seven categories, among which figured sins of violence committed in the service of truth. Then on 23 March, speaking at the memorial to the Holocaust in Jerusalem, he expressed the deep sadness of the Catholic Church at the persecutions directed by Christians against Jews at any time and any place.14

Church and State In Dignitatis humanae Vatican II taught that the civil government should foster conditions favorable to religious life and safeguard the religious freedom of all its citizens. It rejected any union of Church and State that would authorize the State to force a particular religion upon the population or to prevent persons of different persuasions from publicly practicing or professing their religion. Some voices at Vatican II urged the council to rule out the idea of an established religion, but Cardinal Heenan of Westminster pointed out that the style of religious establishment that obtains in England today is entirely compatible with religious freedom. Thus the council contented itself with saying that “if special legal recognition is given to one religious body, the right of all citizens and religious bodies to religious freedom should be recognized and made effective in practice” (DH 6).

H 39

IN THE CIVIL SPHERE THE ISSUE OF TOLERATION IS CENTRAL. BUT IN THE ECUMENICAL SPHERE IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO SAY THAT DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS GROUPS SHOULD TOLERATE ONE ANOTHER. THE GOAL OF ECUMENICAL ACTION IS TO OVERCOME SCHISMS AND UNITE CHRISTIANS IN THE TRUTH. THE PURPOSE OF ECUMENICAL DIALOGUE IS TO MAKE PROGRESS TOWARD THE FULL ACCEPTANCE OF TRUTH BY ALL PARTICIPANTS. NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH WILL LIBERATE CHRISTIANITY FROM ITS MANIFOLD SEPARATIONS (I, 531).

15. Vatican II, “Closing Message to Rulers,” in Walter M. Abbott, ed., The Documents of Vatican II (New York: America Press, 1966), 730. 16. John Paul II, “The Inaugural Homily,” Origins 8, no. 20 (2 November 1978): p. 307. 17. Wojtya, Sources of Renewal, 417, quoting Vatican II, Gaudium et spes 76. 18. John Paul II, “The United Europe of Tomorrow,” Strasbourg, 11 October 1988, in Origins 18, no. 20 (27 October 1988): p. 332.

H 40

As noted above, the declaration also claimed to be leaving intact the traditional Catholic teaching concerning the duties of society toward the one true Church (DH 1). The Church’s preeminent concern, it later declared, was that she “should enjoy that full measure of freedom which her care for the salvation of men requires” (DH 13). Paul VI, in a message to political rulers issued at the end of the council, put the question, “What does the Church ask of you today?” And he answered: “She tells you in one of the major documents of this council. She asks of you only liberty, the liberty to believe and to preach her faith, the freedom to love God and serve Him, the freedom to live and to bring to men her message of life. Do not fear her. […] Allow Christ to exercise his purifying action on society.”15 These words prefigure the inaugural homily of John Paul II, in which he called on the nations of the world to “open wide the doors for Christ.”16 Following Dignitatis humanae and Paul VI, Cardinal Wojtyla in his Sources of Renewal refrained from calling upon the state to give any special privileges to Catholicism as the true religion. He asked only that it assure to the Church “true freedom to preach the faith, to proclaim its teaching about society, to carry out its task without hindrance, and to pass moral judgments even in matters relating to politics.”17 In a 1988 visit to the Parliament of Europe at Strasbourg, John Paul II invoked the distinction made by Christ between the things that belong to Caesar and those that do not. “Integralism,” which tends to exclude from the civil community those who do not profess the true faith, oversteps this boundary. Medieval Latin Christianity, in the Pope’s estimation, failed to distinguish sufficiently between the spheres of civil and religious life. Even more deplorable was the early modern principle, Cuius regio eius religio (“The religion of the people is that of the ruler”), which led to forced conversions, cruel expulsions, and bloody martyrdoms.18 In our day the chief offenders against religious freedom have been Marxist atheistic regimes, but the exclusive establishment of certain non-Christian religions in various Asian and African nations has also caused difficulties. In the name of human rights the Pope protests against religious oppression wherever it exists. In the early years of his pontificate he mounted a very effective moral appeal against the Marxist governments in Central and Eastern Europe. In his 1998 visit to Cuba he returned to the theme of religious freedom in the following terms: When the Church demands religious freedom she is not asking for a gift, a privilege or a permission dependent on contingent situations, political

strategies or the will of the authorities. Rather she demands the effective recognition of an inalienable human right. […] It is not a matter of a right belonging to the Church as an institution; it is also a matter of a right belonging to every person and every people.19

Conclusion Starting from the objection that Vatican II, in its Declaration on Religious Freedom, merely reaffirmed a principle already acknowledged in the law of most civilized nat ions, I have soug ht to show t hat while the declaration did accept the juridical concept of freedom as immunit y from coercion it did not stop at that point. Thanks to t he i nput of bishops such as Wojtyla, DigniCard. Avery Dulles S.J. (1918- 2008) tatis humanae proposed a positive doctrine of religious freedom based upon revelation as well as upon reason.20 According to this doctrine the right to freedom is grounded in the dignity of the human person as made to the image of God and as called to share in divine life through Jesus Christ. Freedom is oriented to truth and is a means of achieving personal union with God. This theological perspective, unlike utilitarianism and pragmatism, provides a solid rationale for understanding religious freedom as an inviolable right. Like all genuine freedom, religious freedom is inseparable from the true and the good. Inevitably, too, it entails moral responsibility. Since the council, John Paul II has made religious freedom a central theme in his program for ecumenism and for situating the Churc h i n t he world of our day. In some respects, suc h as in his rejection of integralism, his call for repentance for the religious violence of times past, and his denunciation of the contemporary tendency to confine religion to the private sector, he has gone beyond the council. Just as the conciliar declaration built on the prior work of recent popes, so it continues to bring forth, in interpreters such as John Paul II, things new and old.21 .

ARCHBISHOP WOJTYLA’S INTERVENTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT AT VATICAN II FORESHADOW ONE OF THE MAJOR THEMES OF HIS PONTIFICATE. HE IS COMMITTED TO ECUMENISM AS A HIGH PRIORITY, BUT ECUMENISM DOES NOT CONSIST, FOR HIM, IN ECCLESIASTICAL DIPLOMACY. CHRIST, HE HOLDS, WILLS ALL HIS DISCIPLES NOT SIMPLY TO BE ONE, BUT TO BE ONE IN THE TRUTH.

19. John Paul II, “Remarks to the Nation’s Bishops,” in Cuba, 25 January 1998, Origins 27, no. 33 (5 February 1998): p. 563. 20. I do not attempt in these pages to measure the influence of Bishop Wojtya as an individual. He was in contact with other bishops, not only Polish but also Italian and French. In many respects his input overlapped with that of Carlo Colombo, Giovanni Urbani, and Alfred Ancel, who spoke for numerous Italian and French bishops. The combined effect of their insistence on the grounding of freedom ontologically in truth is discussed by Walter Kasper in his Wahrheit und Freiheit: Die “Erklärung über die Religionsfreiheit” des II. Vatikanischen Konzils (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, Universitätsverlag, 1988), pp. 26-28. 21. This article is based on a lecture given at Oxford University under the sponsorship of the Becket Fund on 26 October 2000.

H 41

The message addressed by John Paul II at

H 42

the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

hen John Paul II visited Chile in 1987, he wanted to address the representatives of the “cultural world” and the “builders of society”, and selected Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile as seat for his encounter with them. At present, after a quarter of a century since that memorable occasion, our souls return to our past visitor, who has been proclaimed as blessed by the Catholic Church to be venerated by Christianity. Those who experienced the university’s environment during those days, remember well the burden of suspicions and misgiving, the deep anxiety towards the future, the skepticism about the purpose of the university as institution, the temptation of surrendering our culture as a prey to the ideologies struggling for power. And for that reason we shall never forget the meaning of the presence of the Pope between us. It was not just because of his words and his doctrine. It was his warm, confident and serene attitude that reached the hearts of people of good will. The crowds that enthusiastically praised him, knew that the message brought by him was a message of peace as a gift of Christ our Lord. The Pope spoke to us about culture which is “the common style of life that characterizes a people and that encompasses the whole of its life”, and reminded us that the cultural world “belongs to the people’s conscience”, is there where “The heart of every culture rests upon”, meaning, “the attitude with which a people affirms or denies a religious bond with God”. This supposed a “demanding work and the grave responsibility” for “every man who proudly bears the title of a ‘man of culture’”.

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 42 - 55

WHILE THE POPE OUTLINED A PROPOSAL OF THE UNIVERSITY AT SERVICE OF CULTURE, HE TOOK US AWAY FROM THE ATMOSPHERE OF STERILE CONTROVERSY, AND DROVE US TO CONFRONT THE ESSENTIAL ISSUES. THE SPEECH ADDRESSED DURING THAT OCCASION IS NOT LONG AND SHOULD BE READ AND MEDITATED EVEN UNTIL TODAY. IT WAS SINGULARLY APPROPRIATE THEN BECAUSE THE ENVIRONMENT WAS PENETRATED BY A STATED SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE SENSE OF THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY.

H 43

The rector Juan de Dios Vial Correa and the Great Chancellor S.E.R. Cardinal Juan Francisco Fresno escort John Paul II during his visit to Universidad Católica de Chile.

While the Pope outlined a proposal of the university at service of culture, he took us away from the atmosphere of sterile controversy, and drove us to confront the essential issues. The speech addressed during that occasion is not long and should be read and meditated even until today. It was singularly appropriate then because the environment was penetrated by a stated skepticism about the sense of the catholic university. The Pope told us that: “the Church, moved by her essential vocation in service to man, calls upon all Chilean intellectuals – beginning with her own children in the Church – to bring to completion this work of integration proper to true science, which provides the basis of an authentic humanism. This outlook will allow the ever-new process the Puebla document calls (the evangelization of cultures) to be made relevant today. This evangelization is directed to man as such. Starting from the religious ‘dimension’, it considers the whole of man and seeks to reach him in his totality. An authentic evangelization of cultures is obliged to follow this process, given that in the final analysis man is culture’s first author as well as its beneficiary”. When we listened to the words of the Pope, the vehement call of Paul VI acquired new vigor: “Today, more than ever, the church is in need of Catholic universities. Woe of us if one day we shall forget it”. The visit of the Pope occurred in a very meaningful moment for the University, because the celebration of the centenary of its foundation was approaching. The rector remembered it in his welcome speech: “In a few months it will be a hundred years since the day that a

H 44

group of Chilean priests and laics conceived the project, audacious for its time, of creating this university as a labor of the Church at the service of the truth for the education of the youth and the integral benefit of humanity. The presence of His Holiness comes to enliven the beginnings of our jubilee festivity: it crowns the work of many who preceded us, and formally committees us, the ones of the present day, to remain faithful to the holy mission we have received”. The impression that this visit produced on us was very deep. Perhaps it is worth reminding some comments published in the press soon after the Pope left. First, that the Pope had spoken to us not just with words, but also with gestures and attitudes. The first of those gestures was to search, inside a really tight schedule and in spite of the multitudes eager of listening to his words, an encounter with a reduced group of people which acted as a symbol of “the cultural world and the builders of society”. There he said to us that this was a “compelled appointment” and that “the Church needs culture, just as culture needs the Church”. The second gesture was to place this encounter in our Catholic University. It meant to give a special emphasis to the catholic educational institutions. The third attitude was the benevolent, warm and truly affectionate quality of the visit. The Pope could not ignore our imperfections, yet he offered us a warm reception, that was perceived by everyone as a loving and vehement call to improve. This is a characteristic of the message of the Gospel, to take the other there where he is, and as he is, without dwelling in his shortcomings, but rather contemplating his immense capacity of self- improvement. With his gestures and words the Pope called to a “service to culture maintaining a Catholic identity without adulteration” and proposed, in the perspective of Gaudium et spes, a great task which is “promoting a culture of solidarity that embraces the whole community”. We could never be satisfied in our progress through: “the narrow path we ought to follow”. But the word and example of John Paul II, his passionate charity, his acceptation of the Cross, illuminate our memory of his visit and confirm us in our purpose of serving our brethren. May God grant us through the intercession of John Paul II, the grace of always maintain faithful to our mission in the university.

JUAN DE DIOS VIAL CORREA Former rector of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (1985- 2000)

H 45

Address of John Paul II to representatives of the chilean world of culture Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Friday April 3, 1987

Your Eminences, Your Excellencies, Distinguished Rectors, Academic Authorities and Professors, Directors of Campus Ministry, All Friends from the World of Culture and Science, Dear Students, 1. My visit to your noble nation would be incomplete without meeting with

you who represent the world of culture, science and the arts. During my travels in traditionally Catholic countries, this is a required meeting that fills me with joy, and one to which I attribute particular importance. The problems and misunderstandings that formerly arose over some of science’s postulates happily have been overcome, and today there exists between the Church and culture a lively, cordial and fruitful dialogue. Allow me to reiterate also here among representatives of the Chilean intellectual world and university community: the Church needs culture, just as culture needs the Church. It is a living and, in some sense, mysterious interchange that brings about a sharing of material and spiritual goods for the mutual enrichment of each. On this occasion, I also wish to address myself to the “builders of society,” and I desire to encourage them in their efforts on behalf of the common good. I am here among you to tell you —by my presence and with my words— that the Church needs you and that, at the same time, you can receive much from her that will aid you in responding to the many demands of your scientific and professional mission and vocation. 2. Before the vast horizons that the world created by God offers you, [a

world] in which man, the glory of creation, carries out his transforming and humanizing activity, you must assume —with full awareness— the personal responsibility you share with men of culture and science

H 46

throughout the world. Science and culture are without borders. In a more concrete and specific way, your responsibility extends to the nation and people of Chile, and it is a moral responsibility that you have before God and to your fellow citizens. Today the Church wishes to warmly remind you of this fundamental commitment, and she offers you her support and collaboration in its realization. The culture of a people, according to the words of the document Puebla de Los Angeles, is “the particular way in which, within a people, men cultivate relationships with nature, amongst themselves and with God, so as to attain to ‘a true and full humanity.’”1 Culture is therefore “the common style of life”2 that characterizes a people and that encompasses the whole of its life: “the set of values that animate it and the non-values that weaken it … The forms through which those values and non-values are expressed and established; namely, the customs, language, institutions and structures of human society.”3 In a word, culture is the life of a people. However, it is you —men of the world of literature, of science and of the arts— who in addition to participating intensely in this life, are in a position 1 Puebla 386. 2 Cf. Gaudium et spes 53. 3 Puebla 387.

H 47

to discover and to analyze the characteristic features of the culture of your people. It is you who discover and, to a certain extent, are able to shape the future of the culture, also by suggesting new trends. 3. In this sense, the world of culture belongs to the people’s conscience; you are

therefore called to assume an active role in the formation of this conscience. “Man lives a truly human life thanks to culture.”4 Culture, on the other hand, in the variety and wealth of its creativity, serves as a witness to the fact that man is a being both different from and superior to the world that surrounds him. Therefore, “man cannot remain uninvolved in culture.”5 Through his recognition of “being different and superior,” there also arises in man the anthropological and ethical question. The heart of every culture rests upon this foundation, i.e., “the attitude with which a people affirms or denies a religious bond with God”; and this in turn leads to “religion or irreligion inspiring all the other orders of culture —family life, economics, politics and art— inasmuch as it frees them for an ultimate transcendent significance, or encloses them within their own immanent meaning.”6 4. You see, therefore, the demanding work and the grave responsibility that

belong to every man who proudly bears the title of a man of culture. Allow me on this occasion to remind you of a number of them that seem to me particularly urgent. First, a process of reflection is needed that leads to a renewed diffusion and defense of the fundamental values of man as such, in his relations with his fellow creatures and with the physical world in which he lives. In this regard, I strongly encourage you to put forth and to rightly portray a culture of being and of acting. Man’s “having” is neither decisive for culture nor is it a creative factor of culture; it is so only insofar as man, through his “having,” is able to “be” more fully man in all the dimensions of his existence, in all that characterizes his humanity.”7 A culture of being does not exclude having: it looks upon it as a means for seeking a true and integral humanization, so that “having” is placed at the service of “being” and of “acting”. In concrete terms, this means promoting a culture of solidarity that embraces the whole community. You, as active subjects in the nation’s conscience, and sharing the responsibility for its future, must take upon yourselves the needs that the whole national community today faces. I invite you, therefore, all of you, men of culture and “builders of society,” to develop and to strengthen an atmosphere of solidarity that contributes to and ensures the common good: 4 Ioannis Pauli PP. II, Allocutio Lutetiae Parisiorum ad eos qui conventui Consilii ab exsecutione internationalis organismi, compendiariis litteris UNESCO nuncupati, affuere, 6, die 2 iun. 1980: Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, III/1 [1980] 1639. 5 Ibid. 6 Puebla 389. 7 Ioannis Pauli PP. II, Allocutio Lutetiae Parisiorum ad eos qui conventui Consilii ab exsecutione internationalis organismi, compendiariis litteris UNESCO nuncupati, affuere, 6, die 2 iun. 1980: Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, III/1 [1980] 1640.

H 48

H 49

The rector of Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Juan de Dios Vial Correa, welcomes Pope John Paul II.

food, housing, health, dignity, respect for all the inhabitants of Chile, giving attention first and foremost to the necessities of those who are suffering. Give full and free expression to what is just and true, and do not avoid participating responsibly in public governance and in the defense and promotion of the rights of man. I am aware that each day you also must face many difficulties. The particular circumstances the country is going through have caused a certain disorientation and insecurity even among your ranks. 5. The Church —charged at this hour with great responsibility—

accompanies you in your essential mission to seek the truth and to serve the men of Chile untiringly. From the sphere of this responsibility, she invites you to deepen the roots of Chilean culture, to strengthen your service to the community with ever more reliable and rigorous levels of scientific competence, avoiding the temptation to isolate yourselves from real life and the problems of the people. In this way, you will provide a truly great and irreplaceable contribution in the awakening of your people to their cultural identity. Cultural identity presupposes both the preservation and the reformulation in the present of a patrimony of the past, so that it may be extended into the future and assimilated by new generations. In this way, the identity and the progress of a social group are ensured. In your people, who in a special way preserve the memory of the past and are directly involved in the transformation of the present, will you find the roots of those traits and characteristics that make your culture one that

H 50

H 51

H 52

shares common features with the other nations of the Latin American world - a Chilean, Christian and Catholic culture, a noble and original culture. 6. If being united with the people guarantees the lastingness of a faithful

memory to a nation’s roots and the deepening of what may be called its cultural identity, the preferential option for young people is the guarantee of the future. Culture is a reality that is integrated into historical and social growth and development.8 Society receives it, creatively modifies it and untiringly transmits it through a process of handing it on from one generation to the next.9 Young people are by their very nature one of the vehicles for the transmission and transformation of culture. The presence of young people at a University helps to make this [transformation] a certain ideal in guiding a cultural renewal, which over the course of time promotes the development of the human person in all his capacities. Therefore, the Church within her proper sphere intends to renew and strengthen the ties that bind her to the university institutions of your country from their birth. Far from expecting to restore older forms of patronage that today would be unfeasible, the Church, moved by her essential vocation in service to man, calls upon all Chilean intellectuals —beginning with her own children in the Church— to bring to completion this work of integration proper to true science, which provides the basis of an authentic humanism. This outlook will allow the ever-new process the Puebla document calls “the evangelization of cultures” to be made relevant today.10 7. This evangelization is directed to man as such. Starting from the religious

“dimension,” it considers the whole of man and seeks to reach him in his totality. An authentic evangelization of cultures is obliged to follow this process, given that in the final analysis man is culture’s first author as well as its beneficiary. Universities carry out a particularly important role in this task. They stand as institutions with a vocation to serve man as such, without guise or pretext. In this regard, I would say that a duty that may be deemed institutional belongs to Catholic Universities, and in particular to this Pontifical Catholic University of Chile. Allow me, on this occasion, to express my esteem for this worthy University which welcomes us this morning, by conveying my gratitude for the work it has accomplished and by encouraging it to continue to strive to attain the objectives proper to a Catholic university: scientific and professional quality and competence, the search for truth at the service 8 Cf. Gaudium et spes 53. 9 Cf. Puebla 392. 10 Puebla 385.

H 53

of all; formation of persons within a climate of an integral understanding of the human being, with scientific rigor, and with a Christian vision of man, of life, of society, and of moral and religious values;11 and participation in the Church’s mission for the advancement of culture. In the midst of these many duties, it is necessary to bear in mind that the “Catholic University must offer a specific contribution to the Church and to society,” and that it finds “its ultimate and most profound meaning in Christ and in His salvific message, which embraces man in his totality, and in the teachings of the Church.”12 8. To this University, which in virtue of its being Pontifical enjoys special

bonds with the Apostolic See, I address a pressing invitation to renew its commitment to its task in service to man and to the people of Chile for the love of God, by deepening that moral and spiritual vision of the person with which the Second Vatican Council, particularly in Gaudium et spes, wished to respond not only to the hopes, but also to the anxieties and problems of modern man. Starting from its own proper vocation and its Christian and Catholic identity, the University with all of its various components must become a witness to truth and justice, and along with other university centers must also give testimony to moral values before the nation. This implies —in fruitful dialogue between the revealed order and the “human” sciences, according to the expression of St. Thomas Aquinas13— fidelity to the Church’s Magisterium; it involves a deepening and dissemination of those principles that form the indispensable patrimony of Catholic doctrine; and it requires a close adherence to those teachings which the Church has been explaining in the social arena.14 Moreover, it is undeniable that in its service to culture, several principles must be maintained: a Catholic identity without adulteration; a generous openness to all outside sources of knowledge by which [this identity] may be enriched; and a critical discernment of these sources so that they conform to that identity. Without an identity immovably grounded in the Christian faith, outside contributions turn into facile and passing syncretisms that dissipate with time. Without the necessary openness to these other sources – so rich and varied in your own age – Christian thought becomes closed and lags behind. And without an indispensable critical discernment, false and destructive synthesis arise which cause harm to the consciences of the faithful. In a special way, the Pope exhorts believers not to fall into the temptation of turning to atheistic ideologies, or to those imbued with theoretical or 11 Ioannis Pauli PP. II, Allocutio ad alumnos doctoresque Studiorum Universitatum catholicarum Mexici nonnullarumque aliarum nationum Americae Latinae habita, die 31 ian. 1797: Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, II [1979] 306 ff. 12 Ibid. 13 Summa Theologiae, I, q.1, art.1. 14 Puebla 475.

H 54

practical materialism, or still yet to those which are enslaved to the principle of immanence or immanentism and, in general, are incompatible with the Christian faith. Even more, ideological thought alone, in the current sense of this expression, brings with it simplifications and reductions which the Christian conscience must stand guard against, attentive to the difference that exists between doctrine and ideology. 9. As the third millennium approaches, humanity finds itself in a critical and

decisive moment of unprecedented change “that cannot take place in the sense of salvation if not in virtue of a new culture of global dimensions.”15 What is asked of the Latin American Church, and particularly of the pilgrim Church of Chile and of this nation —on the eve of the celebration of the 5th Centenary of the beginning of evangelization on the American continent— is an original contribution to the formulation of a renewed synthesis that offers adequate responses to the “new age of human history.”16 In expressing my gratitude for your presence, I want to emphasize my profound respect for the work you carry out for the advancement of culture; and at the same time, I want to encourage you in your efforts to make our world once again a more fraternal, human and welcoming place, and for this very reason, more worthy of God. I pray that the Almighty might grant you the necessary strength to continue to work for the service of Chile. To all here present, to your families and to the institutions you represent, I affectionately impart my Apostolic Blessing.

15 Ioannis Paulii PP. II, Allocutio ad intellectuals in urbe “Firenze” habita, 8, die 18 oct. 1986. 16 Cf. Gaudium et spes 54.

Translated by Diane Montagna

H 55

“The future of humanity passes by way of the family” Familiaris consortio, nº 86

BY CARL ANDERSON

THE CHARTER OF THE RIGHTS

n Gaudium et Spes it is and Family was establisOF THE FAMILY ESTABLISHES evident that the Second Vahed as well as the Pontifical FUNDAMENTAL CRITERION FOR tican Council intended a Council for the Family. Also PUBLIC POLICIES CONSISTENT renewal of pastoral ministry that year the apostolic exhorWITH THE UNDERSTATING OF to Christian families that tation Familiaris Consortio THE FAMILY AS THE NATURAL was not merely marginally provided both a theological UNIT OF SOCIETY. THE CHARTER enhanced, but one that was foundation for the work of DOES SO BY INSISTING THAT AS “A substantially and even rathe Institute and a pastoral NATURAL SOCIETY,” THE FAMILY dically renewed as the only blueprint for the work of “EXISTS PRIOR TO THE STATE OR adequate response to the the Council. These developANY OTHER COMMUNITY AND unprecedented challenges ments were followed in 1983 POSSESSES INHERENT RIGHTS that contemporary society by new initiatives in both WHICH ARE INALIENABLE.” makes to the family. Gaudium civil and canon law when INSUFFICIENT ATTENTION HAS et spes (n. 47-52) established a The Charter of the Rights of BEEN GIVEN TO THE CHARTER AND foundation which opened up the Family was promulgated PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY THE new and dramatic possibiliand the new Code of Canon ANTHOLOGY THAT UNDERLIES IT, ties for the presentation of a Law issued. BY CATHOLIC LEGAL SCHOLARS. pastoral theology rooted in The revised Code of Canon a more convincing vision of Law provides a fundamenthe human person. During the early years of the tal, and many would argue, an essential pontificate of Pope John Paul II this pastoral con- step forward in the pastoral mission of the cern was manifest to an extraordinary degree. In Church as it rejected a narrowly legalistic a way, this Christian anthropology of marriage understanding of the institution of marriage: and family became the interpretive key for the “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man entire pastoral mission of the Church in our time. and a woman establish between themselves a The speed with which John Paul II moved to partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature set a foundation for pastoral work in regard to ordered toward the good of the spouses and marriage and family was extraordinary. The the procreation and education of offspring; cornerstone was set during the 1980 Synod of this covenant between baptized persons has Bishops on the Family. Then in 1981, the Pontifi- been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity cal John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage of a sacrament” (CIC, n. 1055).

H 56

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 56 - 59

Similarly, The Charter of the Rights of the Fa- Mulieris dignitatem as it furthers our undersmily positioned the Holy See and the Church tanding of the “community of persons” also generally to more effectively enter public largely remains undiscovered. So too do the policy debates. International human rights implications of this document for the pastoral documents have long recognized the family care of women, their role in the Church as as a basic unit of society. The Charter of the well as the consideration of a new model of Rights of the Family not only recognizes this Christian feminism. basic truth but establishes fundamental cri- Thus by 1983, Pope John Paul II had organized terion for public policies consistent with the a Synod of Bishops on the Family, promulgaunderstating of the family as the natural unit ted an apostolic exhortation summarizing the of society. The Charter does findings of this meeting and so by insisting that as “a setting forth a comprehenBY 1983, POPE JOHN PAUL II HAD natural society,” the family sive pastoral plan for the ORGANIZED A SYNOD OF BISHOPS “exists prior to the State or evangelization of family life, ON THE FAMILY, PROMULGATED any other community and established a new approach AN APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION possesses inherent rights to marriage in canon law, SUMMARIZING THE FINDINGS which are inalienable.” Indeveloped a charter of faOF THIS MEETING AND SETTING sufficient attention has been mily rights for the influence FORTH A COMPREHENSIVE given to the Charter and of international law and PASTORAL PLAN FOR THE perhaps more importantly domestic public policies, EVANGELIZATION OF FAMILY LIFE, the anthology that underlies and explored through his ESTABLISHED A NEW APPROACH it, by Catholic legal scholars. Wednesday audiences a TO MARRIAGE IN CANON Also during this time, the new theological anthropoloLAW, DEVELOPED A CHARTER Church experienced one of gy. In addition, the pope had OF FAMILY RIGHTS FOR THE its most extraordinary deveestablished two institutional INFLUENCE OF INTERNATIONAL lopments in papal teaching pastoral initiatives of global LAW AND DOMESTIC PUBLIC during the weekly general importance: the Pontifical POLICIES, AND EXPLORED audiences between SeptemCouncil for the Family and THROUGH HIS WEDNESDAY ber 1979 and November 1984 the Pontifical John Paul II AUDIENCES A NEW THEOLOGICAL when John Paul II presented Institute for Studies on MaANTHROPOLOGY. […] his “theology of the body.” rriage and Family. Within The implications for the five years of his election as Church’s pastoral mission pope, John Paul II had put to families of his “catechesis of the body” are forward a comprehensive pastoral plan to yet to be adequately explored in the context strengthen the Church’s mission to evangelize of the diverse cultures throughout the globe. family life. During this time of extraordinary The new insights into the relationship between change, perhaps what was most extraordinary men and women represented by such concepts was that these initiatives were undertaken duas the “nuptial” meaning of the body, original ring the same time in which the Holy Father “solitude,” “unity,” and “nakedness” provide led the dramatic events leading to the birth of a rich and, as yet, relatively untapped source the Solidarity Movement in Poland and would for pastoral theology. Moreover, the advance eventually end the Cold War with the liberation in thinking about subjects such as the equality of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union as well of men and women in marriage undertaken in as the movement toward democracy in Latin

H 57

America and while he was recovering from a near-fatal assassination attempt. Many of these initiatives would in time themselves give rise to important initiatives. For example, the Pontifical Institute would launch an unprecedented advance in global theological education in 1988 with the opening of an English-speaking campus in the United States which would eventually lead to the establishment of similar sessions throughout Latin America, Asia, Africa and Europe. In 1994, the Pontifical Council for the Family would respond to developments during the United

H 58

Nations International Year of the Family by organizing, the First World Meeting of the Holy Father with Families in Rome. This initiative would evolve into triennial meetings with Pope John Paul II in Rio de Janeiro (1997), Rome (2000), Manila (2003), Valencia (2006), and Mexico (2009). Especially during the International Year of the Family, the mission of the Church to the family was of special concern to John Paul II. For example, in his 1994 Holy Thursday letter to priests, he made clear that ÂŤthe pastoral care of the family is in a way the quintessence of

[…] IN ADDITION, THE POPE HAD ESTABLISHED TWO INSTITUTIONAL PASTORAL INITIATIVES OF GLOBAL IMPORTANCE: THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY AND THE PONTIFICAL JOHN PAUL II INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES ON MARRIAGE AND FAMILY. WITHIN FIVE YEARS OF HIS ELECTION AS POPE, JOHN PAUL II HAD PUT FORWARD A COMPREHENSIVE PASTORAL PLAN TO STRENGTHEN THE CHURCH’S MISSION TO EVANGELIZE FAMILY LIFE.

«It would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine the pastoral mission of the Church to families around the globe at the beginning of the Third Millennium without the magnificent legacy of John Paul II.»

priestly activity at every level» (L’Osserva- tore Romano English edition, March 30, 1994). In 1995, the Congregation for Catholic Education issued Directives on the Formation of Seminarians Concerning Problems Related to Marriage and the Family. The Directives identified ten areas in which the intellectual formation programs of seminarians should be “qualitatively” improved in order to improve their pastoral care of married couples and families. Number 25 of the Directives states that there now exists a doctrinal and pastoral corpus composed of documents of the papal magisterium which

includes Humanae vitae, Veritatis splendor, Familiaris consortio, Christifideles laid, Mulieris dignitatem, and The Letter to families as well as Persona humana and Donum vitae. We could now add numerous other documents to this list including Evangelium vitae. In 1993, John Paul II stated that the Church’s mission to the family must be placed “at t he center of t he new evangelizat ion” (L’Osservatore Romano English edition March 31, 1993). Not only did he say this on repeated occasions, but he gave the Church the tools by which to assure that it could be a reality. The Church already possessed a substantial teaching on the centrality of the family. However, until the pontificate of John Paul II that mission was supported primarily by the encyclicals Casti connubii and Humanae vitae. The integration of his magnificent doctrinal corpus on the pastoral and academic levels still challenges many institutions of the Church and will continue to do so for decades to come. Yet, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to imagine the pastoral mission of the Church to families around the globe at the beginning of the Third Millennium without the magnificent legacy of John Paul II.

H 59

H 60

GOD HAS MADE HIMSELF FAMILY

The teaching of karol Wojtyla-John Paul II and postmodern man BY ANGELO CARD. SCOLA

1. The contemporary world’s “claim” A witness of the tragic era of the great ideologies, of totalitarian regimes and of their collapse, John Paul II had a profound awareness of the transition from modernity to what by now has come to be called post-modernity. He saw in advance humanity’s entrance into a phase of intense travail marked by new tensions and contradictions. a) Faith: one option among others? The first of these tensions lies precisely in the current phase of the secularization process. If modernity’s principal characteristic had its crowning expression in theories of a radical and militant atheism, post-modernity seems to be distinguished instead by a less hardened yet perhaps far more defiant attitude towards religion. As Taylor affirms, “we have passed from a society in which it was ‘virtually impossible’ not to believe in God, to one in which faith, even for the staunchest believer, is one human possibility among others.”1 This does not imply a disappearance of the religious. On the contrary, precisely in today’s phase of advanced secularization, we are witnessing a return of the sacred —albeit one that, while opening new horizons, is not without ambiguity,2 as the same John Paul II recognized. The current tendency actually attests to a lingering universal disenchantment in which the Christian faith— considered by many to be a purely subjective conviction and not something rationally demonstrable - would be at most legitimized by living beside the other religious expressions, in the name of a universal right to difference. Through an incorrect application of the principle of equality one reaches the point, in fact, of maintaining that the religions are all different and all the same. Lectio Magistralis pronunced by Cardinal Angelo Scola on the occasion of his awarding as Doctorate Honoris Causa from the Catholic University “John Paul II” in Lublin, on December 9, 2010.

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 60 - 67

A WITNESS OF THE TRAGIC ERA OF THE GREAT IDEOLOGIES, OF TOTALITARIAN REGIMES AND OF THEIR COLLAPSE, JOHN PAUL II HAD A PROFOUND AWARENESS OF THE TRANSITION FROM MODERNITY TO WHAT BY NOW HAS COME TO BE CALLED POST-MODERNITY.

1 C. Taylor, L’età secolare, Feltrinelli, Milan 2009, 14. On the meaning of religion in the modern era according to Canadian philosophy and sociology see also C. Taylor, La modernità della religione, edited by P. Costa, Meltemi, Rome, 2004. For a presentation of his position see G. Brena, La modernità della Religione, in La Civiltà Cattolica 2004, III, 381-393 and A. Russo, “Abitare il pluriverso. L’ultima sfida alle religioni”, in Rassegna di Teologia 45 (2004) pp. 833-854. 2 John Paul II, Redemptoris missio 38.

H 61

PARTICULARLY IN VIRTUE OF THE ASTONISHING DISCOVERIES MADE IN THE FIELD OF BIOLOGY, OF BIO-CHEMISTRY AND OF NEUROSCIENCE, A POPULAR TALK WITH A TONE OF SCIENTISM THAT TENDS TO REDUCE ALL OF MAN’S EXPRESSIONS AND FACULTIES TO PURELY CEREBRAL ACTIVITIES IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE WIDESPREAD.

3 M. Jongen, Der Mensch ist sein eigenes Experiment, “Feuilleton. Die Zeit”, August 9, 2001, 31. 4 P. Sequeri, “Una svolta affettiva per la metafisica”, in P. Sequeri-S. Ubbiali (ed), op. cit., 85-116; B. Schellenberger, Von Unsagbaren reden: wie lässt sich heute Gott zu Sprache bringen?, Geist und Leben 79 (2006) 81-88; A. Kreiner, Das wahre Antlitz Gottes – Oder was wir meinen, wenn wir Gott sagen, Herder Freiburg-Basel-Wien, 2006. 5 E. Jüngel, “Verità metaforica”, in P. Ricoeur-E. Jüngel, Dire Dio. Per un’ermeneutica del linguaggio religioso (edited by G. Grampa), Queriniana, Brescia 1978, p. 169. 6 Ibid.

H 62

b) Contemporary man: simply his own experiment? The objectivity that today’s culture denies to the faith —and here we come to a second claim made by the contemporary world— ends up being given to experimental science, which alone would be expected to provide —if not a certain definition— at least a comprehensive description of man. Particularly in virtue of the astonishing discoveries made in the field of biology, of bio-chemistry and of neuroscience, a popular talk with a tone of scientism that tends to reduce all of man’s expressions and faculties to purely cerebral activities is becoming more and more widespread. According to this perspective —it is affirmed— these could even be man-made. In this sense, no longer would it be possible, strictly speaking, to talk about a personal subject endowed with an intrinsic dignity, a bearer of rights and responsibilities; rather, man would be nothing more than his own experiment. 3

2. Christ the center of the cosmos and of history: the perfect figure of postmodern man? The issues —recalled here all too briefly— place the Christian faith at a crucial turning point. If we reflect more deeply, we see that what at the end of the modern era —which debated the death of God and of the subject— was considered to be the question of the day: Does God exist? assumes in post-modernity another, perhaps more pressing, formulation: “How do we name God today? How do we talk about Him, and communicate Him as the living God to real men?”4 Within the Christian perspective, God is He who comes into the world. He distinguishes himself from it, but without excluding the possibility of our taking Him in as a friend, as family. To talk about God, “one must venture the hypothesis that it is God Himself who enables man to become His friend, His family. And, indeed, the Christian faith lives from the experience that God has made Himself known, that He has made Himself family.”5 In order that God might be known, it is first necessary to establish familiar relations with Him. Then “God becomes a discovery that teaches us to see everything with new eyes.”6 The reflection of Karol Wojtyla, particularly in light of the Trinitarian teaching of John Paul II, offers a persuasive response to this question, showing not only the prophetic strength of his thought, but also his relevance today. A. Methodological keys In order to encounter God, post-modern man has to search for Him along the paths and in the places where God reveals Himself to man the enigma (man is a being who exists but who does not possess within

himself the principle of his own existence), and there continually seeks to establish him in familiar relations with Himself. The reflection and teaching of Karol Wojtyla–John Paul II indicate at least three such paths. 1) Man’s common experience The first path is man’s shared common experience. Even if we take into account all of the questions arising from the complexities of post-modern man’s life, nonetheless we must conclude with Karol Wojtyla: “Yet there exists something which can be called the common experience of man”, of each man. It manifests, first and foremost, his integrality (the real is intelligible and man is able to welcome it) as well as his being elementary (every man has in common with every other the living out of loves, work and rest); that is to say, his indestructible simplicity. Wojtyla goes on to note: “This experience in its essential simplicity overcomes all incommensurability and all complexity.”7

As Taylor affirms, “we have passed from a society in which it was ‘virtually impossible’ not to believe in God, to one in which faith, even for the staunchest believer, is one human possibility among others.”.

2) The person in relation. Man and woman The second path passes by way of man’s original structure, in his three constituent polarities that identify the dual unity of the I. This is the essential anthropological fact that sees man as one in the duality of soul-body, of man-woman and of individual-society. In particular, I want to recall the centrality of the theme of man-woman and of the nuptial mystery within the research and teaching of Karol WojtylaJohn Paul II.8 The Pope taught us —on the basis of all that is contained in the Genesis accounts of creation— that man cannot exist alone, but “only as a ‘unity of the two’, and therefore in relation to another human person.”9 He is constituted so as to be open to the other. The human being is not, in fact, only an individual (identity), but also a person (relation/difference) capable of transcending himself. This original anthropological element is adequately explained in the light of Revelation. On the one hand, it serves as an analogy for the encounter between God and humanity; and on the other, as John Paul II ingeniously intuited, it bears the imprint of Trinitarian communion.10 c) Salvific suffering The third path that sustains man’s irrepressible desire for God in its discovery of His being a friend and familiar to us surrounds the question of human frailty and, above all, of evil, pain and suffering. In many pronouncements, and above all in the Apostolic Letter Salvifici doloris, John Paul II demonstrated that the human experience of weakness, suffering and evil is inseparable from the question of salvation and redemption. The proper response to this question can be glimpsed in the human attitude of the total gift of self; that is, of

7 K. Wojtyla, Persona e atto, edited by G. Reale e T. Stycze, Rusconi, Sant’Arcangelo di Romagna 1999, 45. Cf. A. Scola, L’esperienza elementare. La vena profonda del magistero di Giovanni Paolo II, Marietti 1820, Genoa-Milan 2003. 8 Cf. A. Scola, Il mistero nuziale 1. Uomo-donna, Lateran University Press, Rome 2005. 9 John Paul II, Mulieris dignitatem 7. 10 Ibid.

H 63

self-offering: suffering melts into grateful love,11 Cardinal Wyszynsky wrote during his years in prison. If life is given to us as a gift, then it can only be fully realized by giving it away. The proof of this rests in the fact that, if you do not give your life away, time robs you of it.

THE REFLECTION OF KAROL WOJTYLA, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE TRINITARIAN TEACHING OF JOHN PAUL II, OFFERS A PERSUASIVE RESPONSE TO THIS QUESTION, SHOWING NOT ONLY THE PROPHETIC STRENGTH OF HIS THOUGHT, BUT ALSO HIS RELEVANCE TODAY.

11 S. Wyszynski, Appunti dalla prigione, 18 gennaio 1954, CSEO library, Bologna 1983, p. 59. 12 A. Scola, L’esperienza elementare…, cit., pp. 21-59. 13 John Paul II, Redemptor hominis 1. 14 Ibid., p. 8.

H 64

B. Christ, our contemporary It can be clearly demonstrated —although this is not the appropriate forum12— that the three methodological keys here proposed provide Karol Wojtyla-John Paul II with a sufficiently firm philosophical basis to withstand the objections that contemporary thought has directed toward metaphysics and ontology. They show him to be a thinker in step with contemporary philosophers. It is therefore also possible to show, in a well-grounded manner, how the proposal of God formulated by John Paul II —particularly in his three Trinitarian encyclicals— responds to man’s desire for God, which is insuppressible even when buried beneath the rubble of the current nihilistic climate of post-modern man. The royal road chosen by the Polish Pope is that of the timeliness, and timelessness, of Jesus Christ, our Contemporary. a) Redemptor hominis From the outset of his pontificate, John Paul II vigorously formulated a decisive reading of the Second Vatican Council, based upon the vivid affirmation: “The Redeemer of man, Jesus Christ, is the centre of the universe and of history.”13 With the encyclical Redemptor hominis, he programmatically proposes a christocentric perspective so as to allow for a right understanding of the constituent nucleus of the Christian experience, understood as the fullness of the common, integral and elementary experience of man. This initial affirmation is further deepened in paragraphs 6-9, which maintain not only the primacy of Christ the Redeemer, but also Christ’s primacy tout court. Christ is the Head through whom all things exist. In Him, man is thought of, willed and created and not only redeemed. “In Him —the encyclical continues— has been revealed in a new and more wonderful way the fundamental truth concerning creation.”14 At this point, the Pope takes up once again the passage from Gaudium et spes 22 that inspired his whole life as a man and as a priest: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light.” He then goes on to affirm with ingenious precision that “the redemption of the world […] is, at its deepest root, the fullness of justice in a human Heart —the Heart of the First-born Son— in order that it may become justice in the hearts of many human beings, predestined from eternity in the Firstborn Son

«The proposal of God

formulated by John Paul II —particularly in his three Trinitarian encyclicals— responds to man’s desire for God, which is insuppressible even when buried beneath the rubble of the current nihilistic climate of post-modern man.»

H 65

to be children of God [and here is the decisive affirmation] and called to grace, called to love.”15 The passages culminate in the crucial affirmation: “This revelation of love is also described as mercy; and in man’s history this revelation of love and mercy has taken a form and a name: that of Jesus Christ.”16 In this way, John Paul II guides us in the passage from Jesus to the Father, along the way Christ Himself has shown us in revealing the Trinity to us: from Jesus to the Father in the Spirit.

THE PATH LEADING FROM THE EVENT OF JESUS CHRIST TO THE INTIMATE LIFE OF THE TRINITY IS COMPLETED IN JOHN PAUL II’S THIRD TRINITARIAN ENCYCLICAL, DOMINUM ET VIVIFICANTEM, WHICH DESCRIBES THE VITAL DIALOGUE THAT THE SPIRIT ALLOWS BETWEEN THE TRINITY AND MAN.

15 Ibid., 9. 16 Ibid. 17 John Paul II, Dives in misericordia 1. 18 Cf. Benedict XVI, Address at the Italian Ecclesial Convention, October 19, 2006 19 Cf. John Paul II, Dives in misericordia 4. 20 John Paul II, Dominum et vivificantem 59. 21 Cf. H.U. von Balthasar, Uno sguardo d’insieme al mio pensiero, “Communio. International Theological and Cultural Review”, 105 (1989), pp. 39-44.

H 66

b) Dives in misericordia This theme is further investigated in the second encyclical in the Trinitarian triptych: Dives in misericordia, which - by deepening its christocentrism - unhinges the false contrast between theocentrism and anthropocentrism proposed by “the various currents of human thought.”17 This is possible because Jesus —who is mercy incarnate— in revealing God in the impenetrable mystery of His being, also clearly demonstrates His love for man. It is within the horizon of the Logos-Love, as Benedict XVI also unceasingly affirms today, that [man’s] desire for God encounters an adequate response. In this God, in fact, reason —understood in all its fullness— faith and true religion discover their most profound and fruitful nexus.18 The self-revelation of the Father’s mercy in Christ explains the exact meaning of the mystery of creation, while also shedding light on the mystery of the election of every man19 in Jesus Christ. c) Dominum et vivificantem The path leading from the event of Jesus Christ to the intimate life of the Trinity is completed in John Paul II’s third Trinitarian encyclical, Dominum et vivificantem, which describes the vital dialogue that the Spirit allows between the Trinity and man. This encyclical demonstrates the extreme significance of the claim of Jesus Christ, who is described as the perfect image of the Father, and therefore as the figure (form, Gestalt, silhouette) of man, since he, in turn, is created to the image of God. Through the grace of the Spirit, “man discovers himself as belonging to Christ”20 and through this belonging better understands the meaning of his dignity.

3. Interest in Christ, interest in man In what way, then, can the historic and cosmic centrality of Christ, the Alpha and the Omega,21 still meet the interests of men today? What does Christ offer to his hyper-demanding reason and to his frequently dissatisfied freedom? He offers an exhaustive response to the enigma

which constitutes him without taking away his freedom, since Christ does not predetermine the drama of the individual. According to theological reflection on the uniqueness of Jesus Christ, today proposed with notable arguments by theology, the Incarnate Son of God, in revealing Himself to be at once both the universal redeemer and also the head of creation, reveals Himself as the Event that explains man to man. In such an Event, the infinite freedom of Deus Trinitas bends down, through Logos-Love, to man’s finite freedom, thus liberating it. Christology does not replace anthropology, and so the latter can give to the former all of its indispensable space. The affirmation of Christ, our contemporary, as a proof of the possibility of naming God today, presupposes a reading of His Person as a salvific Person – as He emerges from John Paul II’s Trinitarian triptych. Such a reading allows us to recognize the interest in his coming into the world. In the historic Person of Jesus Christ, all anthropological dimensions are truly unified and extended, in the eschatology of the new heavens and the new earth. In this way, interest in the new man also emerges, without which interest in Christ would be only nominal; and at the same time, interest in Christ is highlighted, without which interest in man would ultimately remain void. The issue of interest, which takes up Thomas’ theme of con-venientia, is pedagogically extremely relevant today, and therefore decisive for the new evangelization. In my opinion, however, the issue is being proposed less and less, and so we risk losing sight of its preciousness as well as the commitment it requires of the faith. The reflection and teaching of Karol Wojtyla-John Paul II does not cease to remind us, however, of postmodern man’s great need for this interest in his person.

THE INFINITE FREEDOM OF DEUS TRINITAS BENDS DOWN, THROUGH LOGOSLOVE, TO MAN’S FINITE FREEDOM, THUS LIBERATING IT. CHRISTOLOGY DOES NOT REPLACE ANTHROPOLOGY, AND SO THE LATTER CAN GIVE TO THE FORMER ALL OF ITS INDISPENSABLE SPACE.

Translated by Diane Montagna

H 67

H 68

John Paul II on Consecrated Life BY CARDINAL FRANCISCO JAVIER ERRÁZURIZ OSSA

he impact of the teachings of the Vatican Council II and the impulse towards renovation that it originated were impressive. Pope John XXIII prophesised, at the conclusion of the first stage of the work, that the application of the Council would be a new Pentecost, that the innermost richness of the Church would flourish and reach all human activities. Thus, to understand Pope John Paul II, whose the Magisterium of Pope John Paul II on consecrated life we beatification we have celebrated need to look at it within the context of its evolution, starting in Rome and in the whole world. from the Council.

With the insight of a teacher, with the ardor of a saint and the heart of a shepherd, he would approach the hopes raised in the religious communities by Vatican Council II, proposing the best ways to live the mystery, the communion and the mission of the Church, and supporting with creative fidelity their founding charisma.

In the first place, the Council’s proclamation about the universal vocation to sainthood and apostolic work of all the baptized, aroused an almost revolutionary reorganization of the status of life in the Church, not in reference to doctrine, but to what was in the mind of the disciples of Christ. It put an end to the idea, as generalised as mistaken, that the vocation to sainthood and apostolate, save rare exceptions, cannot be achieved unless we join a religious institute or a seminary. The Council’s proclamation produced a strong impression. Laymen who are called to sainthood can realize their vocation within the family as well as within their work. So, what reason could there be to look for the path to sainthood and apostolic work in the institutes of consecrated life and in the societies of apostolic life? Are there not numerous apostolic movements and other new foundations that offer a lay spirituality in the midst of this world? This rearrangement, which even today keeps on renewing the face of the Church may well be one of the factors that have determined the decrease in the number of youths that knock at the doors of those institutes whose life and mission are almost not different from the life and vocation of celibate lay people who live a life consistent with their baptismal consecration. Moreover, the Council prompted and extraordinary dynamism within the communities. In order to renovate themselves, the Council proposed that their spiritual patrimony become a living spring. To achieve it they should return to the Evangelical source of all Christian life and to the inspiration that originated the institutes, to the knowledge and observance of the spirit of

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 68 - 83

H 69

their founders and their goals, as well as to their pure traditions. The Council proposed that they should participate in the life of the Church, in its projects and aims, to make them their own and promote them with all their might, according to their own charisma. Likewise, it urged them to better consider the circumstances of men and the times, as well as the needs of the Church. The Perfectae caritatis grand program of renewal of religious life, proposed a profound revision of the constitutions, the directives, the books of usage and the rules of life, prayer and work of the communities, in accordance with the physical and psychic nature of its members, the needs of the apostolate, as well as the demands of culture and social and economic circumstances. Moreover, this decree stressed the necessity to examine the rules of the institutes. All of this, according to the said document, in order to accept the guidelines of the Council and abolish what had become The Confederation was obsolete. Perfectae Caritatis opened a door and determined the inspired by religious life goals for the refundation work of the communities in fidelity in the countries under its to the purpose and spirit of their founders. rule, furthering the renovation As it was to be expected it aroused profound joy and great and cultivation of religious activity within the communities. They rediscovered joyfully life, but breaking with and enthusiastically the charisma of their founders and their traditions, interfering their vocation, sprouting from the richness of the Gospels, which are autonomy and the service the good news for society. Amongst other things, the renovaof the General Superiors of tion originated a noteworthy internal dialogue in seminaries the institutes, and not only and decisive general chapters for the institutes; a fertile particiautonomously, but also pation in the life and pastoral work of the dioceses; a sincere confronting the hierarchy. effort to live the communion, devoid of formalities; new ways of prayer more personal and attuned with life, a new style of government, the insertion of communities in shanty towns, and an initial and permanent instruction, more profound and far reaching. We could verify that it also provoked internal tensions and ruptures with the past, leaving behind signs of belonging, and in different communities a deep insecurity and confusion in congregational life, the vows, life of prayer, and community, the help of the poor by denouncing injustices and in the strife together with the workers for a worthy life, jobs, education, health, salary and participation. Neither was it easy to discern which were the options more akin to the intuition of the founders, in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s circumstances, so different from theirs. The Council foresaw that the character and genuine spirit of the institutes would mean abandoning some of their original work. It is worthwhile to recall that these searches destabilized many communities. For example, the turmoil that shook those institutes whose founders had constituted them as institutes of apostolic life, and which very soon were turned into contemplative communities, Letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s also remember the hesitation provoked by reflection about their own work and the adoption of different evangelizing work and actions, when it was understood that the founder had assumed the task of teaching in villages and towns abandoned by the State,

H 70

as their main work of mercy and it was confirmed that this task â&#x20AC;&#x201C; although far from the project of Christian education â&#x20AC;&#x201C; had been assumed by the State. Letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not forget some of the strange experiences that happened due to the noble and hasty eagerness to transform culturally the religious life and apostolic action. It is evident that certain practices in the life of the communities and its members should open a path of greater personal freedom and reasonability in certain institutes, because they suffered from formalism. Due to the spirit of communion proclaimed by the Council, the abovementioned search happened in a whole new milieu, optimistic towards collaboration with lay community. Few were the institutes that did not invite them to share their spirituality and community life; and even a very small number included them in decision-making. With The fifth centenary of the various degrees of organization, new lay movements appeared arrival of Christopher assuming and adopting in their lives the spirituality that had, Columbus was fast up to then, been reserved to the consecrated members of the approaching and with it the Institute. An important number in some institutes opted, how- arrival of the Gospel. During ever, not to accompany but to assimilate and share the social, nine years the Pope had been political and family life of the laity, distancing themselves working on the celebration from the life and commitment to which they had been called of that anniversary, so that by God to a consecrated life, within the world but without it would be a Thanksgiving celebration, without belonging to the world. It is evident that numerous experiences enriched the life and concealing the enormous work of many consecrated communities, their path to saint- suffering caused by the hood and their communion and collaboration with other Conquest. For the Board communities, becoming prophetic signs of the kingdom of of Latin American priests God in society. But there were those that presumed to be and religious there was prophetic, following confused paths sometimes secularised, nothing to celebrate. incompatible with their vocation. I recall, amongst others, some American communities that ruled out poverty, because it would be contrary to the life in the world of a mature person, and also with obedience, as they felt they could solve their problems by ballots. They diluted the communitarian apostolate, as each member had to live like a professional, and they also diluted community life, as the modern world expects a single person, conscious of his mission, to live in his own abode. The culture of society had shaped the essence, life and work of these institutes, and they had left behind the prophetic and evangelical ferment of society. Naturally they lacked vocations. Something similar occurred amongst the different religious communities in Holland and other countries. Referring to the problems confronted by the consecrated life in the years before the Synod, which dealt specifically with the life and mission, the Pope wrote: During these years of renewal, the consecrated life, like other ways of life in the Church, has gone through a difficult and trying period. It has been a period full of hopes, new experiments and proposals aimed at giving fresh vigour to the profession of the evangelical counsels. But it has also been a time of tension

H 71

ÂŤIn December 1990, in the midst of an extraordinary activity, unknown in these times of renovation and debate in the institutes of consecrated life and its members, I received a call from the Holy Father to collaborate with him in the Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Societies of Apostolic Life, as Archbishop Secretary to the Roman Dicastery.Âť

and struggle, in which well-meaning endeavours have not always met with positive results.â&#x20AC;? (VC 13) Few years after the closing session of Vatican Council II which gave the Church a great understanding of the doctrine, about itself and its mission of the world today, and the impulse to display fruitfully its mission in our times for the good of humanity, on the 16th October 1978, the Conclave elected Pope John Paul II, whose beatification we have celebrated in Rome and in the whole world. With the insight of a teacher, with the ardor of a saint and the heart of a shepherd, he would approach the hopes raised in the religious communities by Vatican Council II, proposing the best ways to live the mystery, the communion and the mission of the Church, and supporting with creative fidelity their founding charisma in relation to their commitment to Christ and the Church. Sometimes, also correcting and pointing out some deviations, due to misunderstandings of the past Councilar renovation which impelled to change rather than renovation, to assimilate forms against their own identity instead of assimilating them with faith, courage and hope in the service of the world and of the most afflicted.

H 72

In December 1990, in the midst of an extraordinary activity, unknown in these times of renovation and debate in the institutes of consecrated life and its members, I received a call from the Holy Father to collaborate with him in the Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Societies of Apostolic Life, as Archbishop Secretary to the Roman Dicastery. The process, of unsuspected magnitude, which was guided and prompted by the Council, had concluded its first stage, and a great number of institutes had worked out their own constitutions. The Pontifical approval of them was in its closing stages, after having been experimented in their life and apostolate for several years. When I became part of the Congregation, the experts recalled the good work done by many institutes in their General Chapters, and the difficulties encountered in some when, carried away by enthusiasm for change, they had lost part One of their noted of their founding inspiration, and the requests of approval theologians wrote that for new observances from some of the institutes that had a at present there are no fruitful tradition within the Church, these requests were due founders of religious to diverse and opposing secularised interpretations, which communities. Now, the departed from their initial charisma. only founder would be the

II After having described briefly and partially the post Conciliar fruitful excitement in the vast majority of the communities of religious life, I would like to talk about some of the difficult situations that I encountered and had to face as collaborator of the Holy Father, in which I recognised with admiration his attitude, which should also characterize my service to consecrated life. Further on, I want to state the important impetus for renovation that he gave to the communities in order to execute the task received by God by virtue of his Papal ministry.

people that surround this “communities,” and who evangelizes them. To achieve this it is necessary that the religious yield their culture, formation and their projects of evangelization, even their own and the Institute’s charisma, and thus creating a new homogenous universal communitarian way of life.

1. Because I was born and bred in our continent, I was called to the service of

the Latin American religious communities in order to help solve many complex situations. Amongst them, in the first place, the crisis that CLAR (Latin American and Caribbean Confederation) was going through. This Confederation comprises the national conferences of Superiors, Superior Generals and Provincials of all the countries of South America and the Caribbean. In those years, the Confederation was inspired by religious life in the countries under its rule, furthering the renovation and cultivation of religious life, but breaking with traditions, interfering their autonomy and the service of the General Superiors of the institutes, and not only autonomously, but also confronting the hierarchy. One of their Counsellors confided to me: “We wanted to give and altruistic service and we transformed ourselves into an imposing power, lacking in respect.” By the end of the sixties the President of the Confedera-

H 73

tion of Religious of Chile, the well remembered Father Egidio Vigano S. D. B., perceived the impositions of CLAR and proposed certain subjects discarded by CLAR, yet essential to religious life, so that they would be studied and discussed in the assembly of the Conference of Religious in Chile. Chile was not the only country that did not follow the guidance of CLAR. As an example of their conflictive attitude, I remember some events. The Board of CLAR at the time, wanted to edit, autonomously, without the hierarchy, a commented translation of the Bible, but at the last moment they reached an agreement with the President of CELAM so that it would be a joint venture. Yet the second volume was going to be sent to the printer without the approval of CELAM because “united religious shall never be defeated.” On the other hand, the fifth centenary of the arrival of Christopher Columbus was fast approaching and with it the arrival of the Gospel. During The damage to the action of nine years the Pope had been working on the celebration of the Spirit would have been that anniversary, so that it would be a Thanksgiving celebraunimaginable. He is the author tion, without concealing the enormous suffering caused by the of the unity of the people of Conquest. For the Board of Latin American priests and religious God and the origin of all there was nothing to celebrate. There should only be an act or the authentic ministries and repentance and to achieve it they were planning to summon charismas of the Church, a meeting of all the Latin American General Superiors and of its diversity according to Provincials, some time after the conclusion of the IV ConferGod’s plan. No human plan or ence of Bishops of Santo Domingo. The reason: to give different ideology can supplant God. pastoral guidelines, that would not accentuate the gratitude for the first Evangelization, but in the first place acknowledge the suffering of the indigenous people, and induce their liberation, because in this continent: “we are more powerful than the bishops.” Another element of confrontation was that CLAR pursued a specific form of acculturated religious life, opening a path for a unified model: CRIMPO, meaning religious communities inserted in popular milieus, ignoring and undermining or denying the force of the all the other charismas that God had bestowed on the different foundations, as an example, the charisma of education, of the pastoral for hospitals, of catechism, etc. One of their noted theologians wrote that at present there are no founders of religious communities. Now, the only founder would be the people that surround this “communities,” and who evangelizes them. To achieve this it is necessary that the religious yield their culture, formation and their projects of evangelization, even their own and the Institute’s charisma, and thus creating a new homogenous universal communitarian way of life. The damage to the action of the Spirit would have been unimaginable. He is the author of the unity of the people of God and the origin of all the authentic ministries and charismas of the Church, of its diversity according to God’s plan. No human plan or ideology can supplant God. He inspires the priests to discern which charisma comes from God, and to animate and coordinate the initiatives of Evangelization of God’s people. CLAR had to be re-oriented

H 74

or eliminated so that it would stop promoting a parallel magisterium and would not demand the obedience of religious and their institutes in Latin America in regards to specific objectives that would take away the freedom of the charismas bestowed by the Spirit on the Church. Already in 1990, the Pope had taken an important decision. He had sent an Apostolic letter, The roads of the Gospel, to the priests and religious of Latin America, but his letter had not been received by CLAR as a guidance and help that came from the heart and knowledge of the Pope. Many had dismissed it assuming that it had been written by Cardinal Alfonso LĂłpez Trujillo, a great fighter against the influences of Marxism in certain groups of Latin American Catholics, an against deviation in consecrated life. Before coming to a decision, John Paul II listened to all the Apostolic Nuncios from Latin America and the Caribbean. Many asked for the removal of CLAR. Some time later, in January 1991, he called CLAR had to be re-oriented the six General Superiors and the six Mother Superiors of the or eliminated so that it would most important continental religious institutes, to a meeting stop promoting a parallel in Rome in order to listen to their views. I remember that the magisterium and would not Provost General of the Jesuit Order, father Peter Hans Kol- demand the obedience of venbach, came from Asia. In his view, the problem would be religious and their institutes unsolvable unless all the major heads that intervened in the in Latin America in regards to conflict were removed. specific objectives that would John Paul II opted not to eliminate that place of encounter and take away the freedom of the dialogue for the priests and religious of Latin America. He took charismas bestowed by the certain steps to make them go back to their original path and Spirit on the Church. really contribute to the service of religious life in Latin America. He wanted to free the Charismatic communities of the undue pressure that was being exerted to make them change their identity: that which God had bestowed on them. He wanted to help CLAR return to the mission of being an instrument of communion and in this way renew the ties of communion with the Bishops, with the Holy See and with the institutes themselves. To achieve this he intervened the elections. The assembly that would take place in the month of February would not be allowed to elect the members of the new board, but they could propose names for the person he himself would designate. He named a Pontifical Delegate for the Conference, with right to veto the resolutions taken by the board, and encouraged a permanent dialogue of the Roman Congregation with CLAR. When I left for the assembly he gave me his blessing and encouragement, assuring me, with faith and hope: â&#x20AC;&#x153;They will react well.â&#x20AC;? And so they did, after the first stormy days. The change came after a pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe. It was an awesome experience of death and resurrection, Paschal experiences that day and the following years. On my return to Rome I informed the Holy Father what we had experienced by the Guadalupe lake. When he heard that the worst day had been the 22d. of February, date when the Church celebrates the Seat of Saint Peter, he had a good laugh.

H 75

2. During my first weeks in Rome I received another assignment from the Holy

Father, quite different from the previous one. It dealt with the renovation of the rules of life of an Order that was very dear to him and to all the Church. He greatly appreciated the writings of Saint Therese of Avila and of Saint John of the Cross. He was familiar with them since his studies of Theology. His contemplative soul, full of thirst for God, ascended Mount Carmel with them. He did not want to loose for the Church such a grand gift. So he followed attentively the revision of the constitutions of the Carmelite convents. Unfortunately, important representatives of the Carmelite monasteries were not invited to take part in the renovation of the rules and constitution of the contemplative communities or to re-write their own constitutions. With the obligation to listen to them, the work was entrusted to priests of the Orders that shared the same spirituality. Many Carmelite sisters, who had in their mind and heart Saint Thereseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s style, did not feel interpreted by the post Conciliar language of these highly esteemed men, their Carmelite brothers. It was too different. Moreover the instructions they had received generic constitutions, that would exclude what was not ruled in all the convents of the world, more than 700 of them, ended with a jejune text. Because of this and other reasons, the Pope did not approve the text prepared during years by the Carmelite Fathers and the institutes of consecrated life. Another text, prepared by a few Spanish convents, headed by two Prioresses: Mother Superior of the Convent of the Hill of the Angels, and the Prioress of the Community of Saint Joseph of Avila. Some collaborators of the Holy Father assured him that these last constitutions were faithful to the intentions of Saint Therese and would be adopted by all the monasteries that lived in the strict observance established by Saint Therese. A letter from the Secretary of State assured the other monasteries that constitutions for their observance, which had distanced themselves from the genuinely Theresian tradition, would be obtained. The Pope was surprised that 600 convents rejected the constitutions he had approved in 1990. I visited some convents to learn about the reasons of their disapproval. In no way did they differ from the faithful observance of the Rule of Saint Therese. The reason was not a slackening of strict observance. More than anything else, they did not want to loose their Carmelite Confessors and Preachers, admirers of the Theresian Reform, who had been excluded in the approved constitutions. Those personal encounters with the Pope revealed his knowledge and sainthood. Surprised by the wrong information he had received and sharing the sufferings of the convents that did not have their constitutions approved, he asked me to revise the other texts that had been written but not approved. I did it with the competent help of two priests that were trusted by both parties. The Holy Father approved our work, and enclosed a letter, dated First October 1991, with the second text, which reveals his understanding, wisdom and generous spirit. I herewith include three paragraphs of that letter:

H 76

During my pontificate I have had the occasion of expressing my affection for all the Discalced Carmelites, and of highlighting the importance of your charisma during the visits to some monasteries as well that in the beatification of some of your distinguished Sisters that I have been granted to raise to the altars, by grace of the Lord. Among them I would like to remember the blessed: María de Jesús Crucificado, Isabel de la Trinidad, the Carmelite Martyrs of Guadalajara—María Pilar, Teresa, María Ángeles—, Teresa Benedicta of the Cross (Edith Stein) and Teresa de Jesús (in the Andes). With those beatifications I wanted to present to the whole Church the witness of the contemplative life and to put before your eyes examples of sainthood that may guide your steps in this hour of history. On this occasion, I greet with affection all the Discalced Carmelites, in connection with the approval of a new text of the Constitutions. This ends a long process in which the Holy See, aware of the importance of your specific vocation, Before coming to a decision, both for the family of Carmel and the entire Church, has undergone a John Paul II listened to particular insight your legislation, to safeguard the spiritual heritage all the Apostolic Nuncios from Latin America and the of Saint Teresa. Both texts, also approved by the Church, want to be a faithful inter- Caribbean. Many asked pretation of the charisma of Teresa. This remains unchanged, and the for the removal of CLAR. lifestyle proposed by the Holy Mother in their constitutions and other Some time later, in January writings. Their differences do not refer, therefore, neither the substance 1991, he called the six of the Carmelite contemplative charisma of Teresa and the constant General Superiors and the need to return to its original inspiration rather correspond to different six Mother Superiors of the ways of interpreting the adaptation to the changed conditions of our most important continental times (cf. Perfectae caritatis, 2), and making the law of religious religious institutes, to a institutes, whose approval is the exclusive competence of the Holy See meeting in Rome in order to Code of Canon Law , canons (578 and 587). It is, therefore, different listen to their views. assessments arising from a same spirit of fidelity to the Lord and the Holy See sought to observe and respect the freedom that each monastery has to choose one or other of the constitutional text approved. With this spirit, full of respect, fatherly love and hope, the Holy Father encouraged the renovation of the institutes, without budging at small differences and controversies, but encouraging the generous surrender and filial obedience to the wish and guidance of God. The Holy Father, who dearly loved the Blessed Virgin, wanted to learn from her example of good-will and acceptance of the divine plan, also manifested in the voice of the Lord of all times and History. Thus shined the interior disposition that illuminated his thoughts and life: Totus tuus. I could go on with more difficult situations that we approached as collaborators of the Pope, on his behalf and with the same perspective. This would show the living contexts that guided his actions and would help us to appreciate in his interventions the qualities of his pastoral love. But if I were to do this, I should also mention a number of admirable experiences, for example, in the process

H 77

of founding new communities of consecrated life, which manifested the will of He who leads the Church. Let us try instead to describe briefly, but in a more ample scope, the relationship of John Paul II with consecrated life.

III The Pontificate of His Holiness John Paul II was so universal, that he can not be termed unilaterally as the Pope who gave men more protagonism in the Church, or the Pope of the ecclesial movements, or the Pope of youth and family, or the Pope of the shrines, or the Sheppard of the great journeys reaching out to the faithful in many countries. In the same way we could call him the Pope of consecrated life. He dedicated two Apostolic exhortations – Redemptionis donum Because of this and other in 1983, and Vita consecrata in 1996 – a series of catechisms in reasons, the Pope did not 1994, innumerable allocutions and homilies, special dedicaapprove the text prepared tion in each of his trips and during his meetings with the two during years by the unions of General Superiors, as well as with the communities Carmelite Fathers and the that he received in a special audience on occasion of their institutes of consecrated General Chapter celebrated in Rome. It is possible that the life. Another text, prepared Pope addressed consecrated life in more occasions tan other by a few Spanish convents, ways of life. headed by two Prioresses: Someone could be deceived, thinking that the Pope devoted his Mother Superior of the energy to meetings, speeches and homilies according to the cirConvent of the Hill of the cumstances. More than that, he was a Good Shepherd who went Angels, and the Prioress out looking for the flock of Jesus Christ, his own ones, by their of the Community of Saint names, receiving them, protecting them of the bad shepherd and Joseph of Avila. robbers, he preceded them, inspired them and opened the way taking them to the greener pastures and the pure fresh water that sprouts from the torrents of living water which is the Spirit. The Holy Father was first and foremost a man of God, a contemplative of the Holy Trinity and of their action in the Church and the world. That is why, aware of the presence and work of God, he never tired inviting the institutes and God’s people to consider the founders, the charismas that God had entrusted them and the communities they had founded as a gift of God to the Church and to humanity, all done by the Pope with a zeal which engages and fills us with admiration and gratitude. Let us bring to mind some of his statements written in the apostolic exhortation Vita consecrata, which he presents as a great gift of God to the Church: In effect, the consecrated life is at the very heart of the Church as a decisive element for her mission, since it “manifests the inner nature of the Christian calling” and the striving of the whole Church as Bride towards union with her one Spouse. At the Synod it was stated on several occasions that the consecrated life has not only proved a help and support for the Church in the past, but is also a precious and necessary gift

H 78

for the present and future of the People of God, since it is an intimate part of her life, her holiness and her mission. The present difficulties which a number of Institutes are encountering in some parts of the world must not lead to a questioning of the fact that the profession of the evangelical counsels is an integral part of the Church’s life and a much needed incentive towards ever greater fidelity to the Gospels. The consecrated life may experience further changes in its historical forms, but there will be no change in the substance of a choice, which finds expression in a radical gift of self for love of the Lord Jesus and, in him, of every member of the human family. This certainty, which has inspired countless individuals in the course of the centuries, continues to reassure the Christian people, for they know that they can draw from the contribution of these generous souls powerful support on their journey towards the heavenly home. (VC3) How can we not recall with gratitude to the Spirit the many different forms of consecrated lives which he has raised up throughout history and which still exist in the Church today? They can be compared to a plant with many branches, which sinks its roots into the Gospel and brings forth abundant fruit in every season of the Church’s life. What an extraordinary richness! I myself, at the conclusion of the Synod, felt the need to stress this permanent element in the history of the Church: the host of founders and foundresses, of holy men and women who chose Christ by radically following the Gospel and by serving their brothers and sisters, especially the poor and the outcast. Such service is itself a sign of how the consecrated life manifests the organic unity of the commandment of love, in the inseparable link between love of God and love of neighbour.

The Pontificate of His Holiness John Paul II was so universal, that he can not be termed unilaterally as the Pope who gave men more protagonism in the Church, or the Pope of the ecclesial movements, or the Pope of youth and family, or the Pope of the shrines, or the Sheppard of the great journeys reaching out to the faithful in many countries. In the same way we could call him the Pope of consecrated life.

The Synod recalled this unceasing work of the Holy Spirit, who in every age shows forth the richness of the practice of the evangelical counsels through a multiplicity of charismas. In this way too he makes ever present in the Church and in the world, in time and space, the mystery of Christ. (VC5)

The post sinodal apostolic exhortation Vita consecrata has been considered the most important document of the Pontificate of John Paul II. It contains his hope and guidance, and is the most complete and inspired text for the implementation of the Council at the conclusion of the renovation stage he proposed and vigorously supported (see section). We find the fountain of the rich magisterium of John Paul II in his resolve, as a man of God, to love with all his heart the people and communities, which God loves especially, and proclaim the mission they have within God’s plan. He gave them his love, time, guidance, compassion and wisdom. Amongst these facts, as he often expressed it, was the sanctity of consecrated life, which the Church loves as its dearest treasure. It could not be otherwise. He himself explained it with these words: There is a need for people able to show Continues in page 82

H 79

A KEY DOCUMENT: VITA CONSECRATA The post sinodal apostolic exhortation Vita consecrata is the most important documentation on such matter by Pope John Paul II. Moreover it has the merit of having been written in collaboration with the bishops and priests who participated in the Synod. As this Exhortation summarizes the ideas of John Paul II, let us remember and enjoy its contents. Already the titles of the different paragraphs give an overall insight of its doctrinal and spiritual richness. On the first paragraphs John Paul II contemplates the work of the Holy Spirit and presents consecrated life with admiration as an icon of the Transfigured Christ. Those who, by the initiative of the Father, adhere to it, are consecrated by the Holy Spirit to the glory of the Blessed Trinity, and by following Christ through the enactment of His evangelical advise, become reflections of the Trinity. The Pope approaches the Pascal and eschatological dimension of consecrated life and presents the Blessed Virgin as a model of consecration and pursuit. Then he shows the originality of this special consecration amongst God’s people, composed of the faithful that were consecrated to Christ in baptism. As an expression of the sanctity of the Church he recognises that consecrated life, “which mirrors Christ’s own way of life, has an objective superiority. Precisely for this reason, it is a especially rich manifestation of Gospel values and a more complete expression of the Church’s purpose, which is the sanctification of humanity.”(VC32) The Church has the mission of giving testimony of the Gospels, of the Beatitudes and of being a living image of the Church-Spouse. For this there must be coherence with the call received and faith with creative fidelity to the charisma of the foundation. It will be achieved assuming in constant prayer the spiritual struggle that leads to sainthood, incumbent to the vocation of Christian life and to life according to the advise of the Gospels. The second chapter of the apostolic exhortation dwells on consecrated life as a sign of brotherhood. In the first place, as a sign of communion in the Church-communion in image of the Trinity, and also of the Apostolic community. The Pope stresses the fraternal dimension in the context of a divided and unjust world, and speaks about the mission of the authority in the community, of the role of the old, of the dignity and mission of consecrated women, and of the associate and volunteer laymen. As it was to be expected, he invites the different institutes to a dialogue and communion amongst them, with the help of those organizations in charge of coordination and communion, and not to forget the value of the hierarchical communion, especially in the Church. John Paul II invites the institutes to look at the difficulties of our times with realism, be it because of the dominant tendencies in society against obedience, poverty and chastity as an option for life for the Kingdom of Heaven, be it because of the dwindling number of members and, consequently, of the presence and activity in specific cultural environments, while in other their presence and activity increases in favour of society. He invites them to look with hope at the present trials, knowing that the ecclesial mission of consecrated life cannot falter. He points out the need to give a new impulse to the vocational, pastoral and

H 80

the commitment to the initial and permanent formation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; personal, commentary and apostolic â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that will respond to the demand of these times, keeping, renovating and delving into the initial fidelity in each stage of consecrated life. In the third chapter of his apostolic exhortation the Holy Father values the mission whom those called by Christ to the service of God and men consecrate themselves, animated by an apostolic spirituality and collaborating with other ecclesial requests, working always in communion and dialogue. The Pope reveals the appreciation of the Church for these vocations to service and to love to the extreme, as it prolongs the love of Jesus Christ in all corners of the earth, pledged to the acculturated Emmanuel proclamation in the first and new evangelization, in favour of the love for the poor, the care of the sick and the promotion of justice. The Pope recognizes and appreciates the prophetic character of consecrated life, faithful to its mission even in martyrdom, as well as it essential importance in the contemporary world. In this context it encourages the consecrated to respond to the challenges set forth by this world to those who have embraced the Gospel to comply with the will of he Father, listening to the word of the Lord, and living in communion with Christ. He states his hopes on the contribution of consecrated life, called to the service of Christian unity and to the dialogue of those in search of God and to be present at the great centres of the mission, especially within culture, education and social communications.

The full text of the apostolic exhortation Vita consecrata can be read in www.humanitas.cl

H 81

the fatherly face of God and the motherly face of the Church, people who spend their lives so that others can have life and hope (â&#x20AC;Ś) (VC105). The whole Church finds in her hands this great gift and gratefully devotes herself to promoting it with respect, with prayer, and with the explicit invitation to accept it. (VC106) Peterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s successor wanted to place himself generously and wisely at the service of this portion of Godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s people as Vicar and Good Shepherd. He gave it his love, prayers, thoughts and teachings, encouraging them with the inspiration that comes from the Gospel. When necessary, he continued the pruning of the shoots done by the Owner of the Vineyard, liberating the charismas of whatever might prevent them of being the fruitful and original ferment that God gave the Church and the world, liberating them so they would welcome the breath of life and the invitation to communion, service and mercy that proceeds from the Spirit, as well as the torrent of living water that comes from the Father and the Lamb. In order to end this homage to Pope John Paul II, on his beatification, let us recall his beautiful simile of consecrated life with Mary of Bethany and the fervour with which she manifested to Christ all her admiration and love with deep gratitude:

H 82

From page 79

Those who have been given the priceless gift of following the Lord Jesus more closely consider it obvious that he can and must be loved with an undivided heart, that one can devote to him one’s whole life, and not merely certain actions or occasional moments or activities. The precious ointment poured out, as a pure act of love, and thus transcending all “utilitarian” considerations, is a sign of unbounded generosity, as expressed in a life spent in loving and serving the Lord, in order to devote oneself to his person and his Mystical Body. From such a life “poured out” without reserve there spreads a fragrance, which fills the whole house. The house of God, the Church, today no less than in the past, is adorned and enriched by the presence of the consecrated life. What in people’s eyes can seem a waste is, for the individuals captivated in the depths of their heart by the beauty and goodness of the Lord, an obvious response of love, a joyful expression of gratitude for having been admitted in a unique way to the knowledge of the Son and to a sharing in his divine mission in the world. (VC104) The Pope frequently prayed for consecrated life and placed it before the Blessed Virgin. That imploring prayer of he who loved her dearly, was his first contribution for the renewal, which the Council expected, of the consecrated. Let us recall then the prayer to the Blessed Virgin with which he closed his Apostolic Exhortation:

Mary, image of the Church, the Bride without spot or wrinkle, which by imitating you “preserves with virginal purity an integral faith, a firm hope and a sincere charity”, sustain consecrated persons on their journey towards the sole and eternal Blessedness. To you, Virgin of the Visitation, do we entrust them that they may go forth to meet human needs, to bring help, but above all to bring Jesus. Teach them to proclaim the mighty things, which the Lord accomplishes in the world, that all peoples may extol the greatness of his name. Support them in their work for the poor, the hungry, those without hope, the little ones and all who seek your Son with a sincere heart. To you, our Mother, who desire the spiritual and apostolic renewal of your sons and daughters in a response of love and complete dedication to Christ, we address our confident prayer. You who did the will of the Father, ever ready in obedience, courageous in poverty and receptive in fruitful virginity, obtain from your divine Son that all who have received the gift of following him in the consecrated life may be enabled to bear witness to that gift by their transfigured lives, as they joyfully make their way with all their brothers and sisters towards our heavenly homeland and the light which will never grow dim. We ask you this, that in everyone and in everything glory, adoration and love may be given to the Most High Lord of all things, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

H 83

H 84

THE JOHN PAUL II PHENOMENON

The “sensus fidei” and the beatifications BY ANGELO CARD. AMATO THE JOHN PAUL II PHENOMENON

The “sensus fidei” and the beatifications

HUMANITAS Nº 63 pp. 000 - 000

«In Pope Wojtyla’s fame of sainthood, the acknowledgement of the faithful and the recognition of God’s intervention are ever present.*»

H 85

THE FAMA SANCTITATIS DOES NOT ISSUE FROM THE HIERARCHY, BUT FROM THE FAITHFUL. GOD’S PEOPLE, IN THEIR VARIETY, ARE PROTAGONISTS OF THE FAMA SANCTITATIS. IN THIS, THE VOX POPULI IS OF FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE. THE FAMA SANCTITATIS IS A CONCRETE HISTORICAL SOCIOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIAL PHENOMENON THAT APPEARS SPONTANEOUSLY IN GOD’S PEOPLE.

* Intervention of the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints on “Sensus fidei” and beatifications, that took place in Rome at he University of the Holy Cross, on the eve of the beatification of John Paul II. Abbreviated version taken from L’Osservatore Romano.

H 86

he dynamism of the sensus fidei is applied and achieves its legitimacy in the whole ecclesial body, including its teachings. There is an undeniable and necessary osmosis between the intuition of the faith on the part of the faithful and their formation and maturity on the part of the teachers. The Christian and Catholic sensus fidei is not outside or above the ecclesial communion; it is not the forma fidei of the non-teaching subject of the Church, nor is it a re-appropriation “from bellow” of the Catholic faith. Rather, the essence of the theological notion of the sensus fidei comprehends the recognition of the Magisterium as a gift for the understanding of truth and for the communion in the Church. The teachings of the Church need the stimulus, experience and testimony of the sensus fidei of the faithful, and the sensus fidelium needs the ministry of truth and the apostolic backing of the Magisterium. The sensus fidei unites, it does not divide, uniting all the baptised in one conscience of faith, whatever their ministry in the Church. In these last centuries, the sensus fidei has been manifested in a concrete way; for example, in the proclamation of the Marian Dogmas of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in 1854, and her Glorious Assumption, in 1950. The lay spiritual intuition of the Church about the truth of the absence of original sin in Mary and her celestial glorification in body and soul was confirmed by the solemn and infallible teachings of the Pope. The sensus fidei, moreover, is present in a very special way in the processes of beatifications and canonizations. In fact, the faithful are endowed through divine grace, with an undeniable spiritual perception to discover and recognize in the life of some of the baptised, the heroic exercise of the Christian virtues. Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Saint Pio de Pietrelcina were admired, followed and imitated during their lives because of their sanctity. “They lived in sainthood,” “Died in the concept or perfume of sanctity,” are typical expressions of the conscience of faith of the baptised regarding some of the eminent witnesses of the virtues of faith, hope and charity of a Servant of God. In the processes of recognition of the saintly life of the faithful, the sensus fidei originates the so-called fama sanctitatis (or fama martyrii for martyrs) and the fama signorum. A process cannot be started without a generalised and spontaneous fame of sanctity. According to Pope Benedict XIV (1740 – 1758) recognised as the Magister in this field, the fama sanctitatis is the generalised opinion amongst the faithful about the integrity of life and the practice of Christian virtues, practised relentlessly and with an intensity far above the common practice of good Christians. The fama signorum

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 84 - 93

is part of the fama sanctitatis, which means that graces and favours can be obtained through the invocation and intercession of a servant of God who died in sanctity. The Magister adds two distinctions. First it makes clear that we can talk about fama sanctitatis when the life and work of a Servant of God is proposed as an example to be imitated by others. The second has to do with the diffusion of such fame. If it only exists amongst a small group of people and not in the greater majority of the people of God, we would talk of a rumour, more than fame (non fama, sed rumor). In any case, the most important aspect of the concept of fama sanctitatis is the excellence of the practised virtues, perceived as such by the faithful. This means that the servant of God, living heroically – that is to say, in a way superior to the common goodness of the other faithful – provokes amazement, admiration, imitation and stimulus to ask for his intercession before the Holy Trinity. It is not about the recognition of intelligence on matters of Theology and Human Sciences, nor of acts of charity. Neither is it enough to say that it is about a “good priest” or a “good parent.” It is indispensable to consider him properly a “saintly priest” or a “saintly parent.” It is about perceiving him as an image of Christ, as an authentic interpreter of the Evangelical beatitudes. Moreover, an isolated case of charity, even if significant, should not be appraised, but a constant charitable attitude – a habitus – as an expression of the continuous communion of grace with the Holy Trinity. The fame of sanctity has to be spontaneous and not caused by exasperated propaganda. That spontaneity is a sign of the grace of the Holy Spirit that causes in the heart of the faithful special admiration towards a Servant of God. In this respect, dealing with recent cases, preferably in testimonies in visu, those declarations in favour of the fama sanctitatis are gathered for the canonical process, stressing them with personal knowledge and the recounting deeds, sayings, behaviour and actions that are specially eloquent about the Servant of God. Therefore, it is necessary to gather the testimony of those who, from scientia propia, have witnessed the heroic exercise of the virtues by the Servant of God. The fama sanctitatis or the common opinion that the faithful have of the sainthood of a Servant of God, is only the first step, although indispensable, for starting he process of beatification. Of itself, the fama sanctitatis does not yet imply that it is about an effective sainthood. To avoid errors, its authenticity has to be evaluated and eventually recognized during a long and articulated process during the diocesan investigation, as well as during the Roman process, which foresees the intervention of historians, theologians and pastors of the Church.

THE CHRISTIAN AND CATHOLIC SENSUS FIDEI IS NOT OUTSIDE OR ABOVE THE ECCLESIAL COMMUNION; IT IS NOT THE FORMA FIDEI OF THE NON-TEACHING SUBJECT OF THE CHURCH, NOR IS IT A RE-APPROPRIATION “FROM BELLOW” OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH. RATHER, THE ESSENCE OF THE THEOLOGICAL NOTION OF THE SENSUS FIDEI COMPREHENDS THE RECOGNITION OF THE MAGISTERIUM AS A GIFT FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF TRUTH AND FOR THE COMMUNION IN THE CHURCH.

H 87

IN THE PROCESS OF BEATIFICATION THERE IS ABOVE ALL A VOX POPULI THAT EXPRESSES THE VENERATION TOWARDS INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE LIVED AND DIED IN SANCTITY. OFTEN THIS VOX POPULI IS ACCOMPANIED BY THE VOX DEI, ALBEIT: THOSE GRACES, HEAVENLY FAVOURS AND AUTHENTIC MIRACLES THAT ARE OBTAINED THROUGH THE INTERCESSION OF A SERVANT OF GOD. FINALLY, THERE IS THE VOX ECCLESIAE THAT AFTER EXAMINING AND EVALUATING THE HEROISM OF THE VIRTUES AS WELL AS THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE MIRACLES, PROCEEDS WITH THE BEATIFICATION AND AFTERWARDS WITH THE CANONIZATION.

H 88

As we can infer, the fama sanctitatis does not issue from the hierarchy, but from the faithful. God’s people, in their variety, are protagonists of the fama sanctitatis. In this, the vox populi is of fundamental importance. The fama sanctitatis is a concrete historical sociological and ecclesial phenomenon that appears spontaneously in God’s people. It is not an intentional fact, it “emanates” from the servant of God; it is caused by his life and saintly work. The fama sanctitatis, for example, is manifested in pilgrimages to the tomb of the Servant of God, in personal and community prayer – not liturgical – aimed at him, and in the dissemination of his biography and writings. Summing up, in the process of beatification there is above all a vox populi that expresses the veneration towards individuals that have lived and died in sanctity. Often this vox populi is accompanied by the vox Dei, albeit: those graces, heavenly favours and authentic miracles that are obtained through the intercession of a Servant of God. Finally, there is the vox Ecclesiae that after examining and evaluating the heroism of the virtues as well as the authenticity of the miracles, proceeds with the beatification and afterwards with the canonization. This theological concept full of sensus fidei, understood as fama sanctitatis or as fama signorum, has strongly emerged in the preparation of the process of beatification of John Paul II. In fact, from the day of his death, the second of April 2005, God’s people immediately started calling out the sanctity of the dead Pope. After the solemn funeral rites, when the body of the Pope was being carried to the Vatican grotto, some spontaneous posters with Santo subito [Saint immediately] written on them, begun appearing in Saint Peter’s Square, and were acknowledged with enthusiasm by the crowd who started repeating the outcry. Santo subito expressed the generalised feelings amongst the faithful in the world. The pastors of the Church acknowledged immediately, with great joy this spontaneous invocation. The third of May 2005, the Vicar of Rome, Cardinal Camillo Ruini, presented Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, then Prefect of the Congregation for the Cause of Saints, the petition of the dioceses of Rome to become the promoter of the Cause of Beatification and Canonization of the Pontiff, together with he petition of a dispense ex toto of the five years period established from the date of death to start the diocesan investigation. The ninth of May 2005, the recently elected Pope Benedict XVI accepted benevolently the petition for a dispensation. Some days later, the thirteenth of May, during the meeting with the Roman clergy in the Basilica of Saint John Leatheran, the Pope himself broke the news that was received with applause by the assembly. It was the beginning of an itinerary that with a favourable attitude, devoid of the obstacles of other processes, has had a swift

«For an empirical verification the fama sanctitatis et signorum of Pope John Paul II, it is enough to observe in Saint Peter’s Square any day of the year, the interminable queue of faithful that come in pilgrimage to his tomb in the Vatican grotto. This confirms that his famous sainthood is a communis opinion.» (John Paul II’s grave at St. Peter’s Basilica, until april of 2011)

development, carried out with great care and professionalism. The invocation of God’s people had been heard, but the millenary prudence of the Church suggested the meticulous obedience of the norms enforced by Pope John Paul II himself in 1983, in the Apostolic Constitution Divinus perfectionis magister. Santo subito yes, but more so Santo sicuro. An incautious haste should not be detrimental to the exactitude of the process. The Vicar of Rome, therefore, assumed his task of certifying the existence of the fame of sainthood, in other words, of the generalized opinion amongst the faithful regarding the purity and integrity of the Servant of God, John Paul II, and the virtues he practised in a heroic manner. Moreover, it was demonstrated that this fame had not been artificially stimulated, but was spontaneous, stable, generalized amongst reliable persons and was present in most of God’s people. The fame of the signs, meaning the common opinion amongst the faithful about the graces and favours received from God through the intercession of the Servant of God. Moreover, for an empirical verification the fama sanctitatis et signorum of Pope John Paul II, it is enough to observe in Saint Peter’s Square any day of the year, the interminable queue of faithful that come in pilgrimage

H 89

to his tomb in the Vatican grotto. This confirms that his famous sainthood is a communis opinio, a generalised opinion amongst the faithful concerning the goodness of the Servant of God, heroic witness and example of the sequela Christi. In John Paul II’s fame of sainthood, we can clearly see the two dimensions that constitute them: one that proceeds from below: from the conviction that the faithful have that his virtues were extraordinary; and one that comes from above, which consists of the grace of God that make possible the heroic exercise of the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. His sainthood is the fruit of grace as well as of his constant human effort at choosing what is good.

«This theological concept full of sensus fidei, understood as fama sanctitatis or as fama signorum, has strongly emerged in the preparation of the process of beatification of John Paul II. In fact, from the day of his death, the second of April 2005, God’s people immediately started calling out the sanctity of the dead Pope. After the solemn funeral rites, when the body of the Pope was being carried to the Vatican grotto, some spontaneous posters with Santo subito [Saint immediately] written on them, begun appearing in Saint Peter’s Square, and were acknowledged with enthusiasm by the crowd who started repeating the outcry. Santo subito expressed the generalised feelings amongst the faithful in the world.»

H 90

The vast Positio, in several volumes, prepared for the postulation and carried out by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, contains: a documented critical biography, the exposition of heroic actions, the practice of each theological virtue, the demonstration of his fame of sainthood and the interrogation of witnesses. The fame of the Pope’s sainthood and signs is endorsed by many eye witnesses, by the veneration at his tomb, by the indication of favours, both spiritual and material, received by invocations and prayers directed to him, and finally, by the authentic extraordinary events that constitute a testimony and a confirmation “from above” of that fame. The examination of the testimonies has been delicate in extreme and with attentive discernment. For example, one element of the fame of sainthood of a Servant of God is his Catholic orthodoxy, primarily in matters of faith and morals, that has to be present in his words, attitudes and writings. From this point of view, the teachings of Pope John Paul II constitute a chapter of outstanding importance for the Catholic faith, because of the clarity with which it deals with the most relevant issues encountered by today’s evangelization. In fact, his teachings represent a rich patrimony of enculturation of the Gospel in our contemporary world. The witnesses called upon have explained the origin of the heroism of his theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. This heroism confers on the Pontiff a perfection that surpasses the strength of human nature; that is to say: his virtues are not only a human effort, but a gift of the grace of God and a consequence of its efficacy in the heart of one that does not put obstacles, but on the contrary, collaborates with this gift. The examination of the virtues done by theologians in different stages and then by the Fathers of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, concluded with the authorization of the Holy Father Benedict XVI, to proclaim the decree on the heroic virtues, the nineteenth of December 2009. From that moment on John Paul II was declared Venerable. The divine seal of a miracle constituted the apex of his fame of sainthood. The postulation presented for the beatification of Pope John Paul II, was the cure of a French nun, Sister Marie Simon Pierre Normand, who was born in Cambrai in 1961. In 1981 she got the diploma of Child-Care Assistant. She entered the congregation of the Sisters of Catholic Maternity, where she professed her vows the sixth of August 1985. In 1988, while being examined for her “First Aid” diploma, she felt that her left hand trembled – she is lefthanded. She thought it was due to the emotions of the moment. In 1990 she started feeling tired and loosing weight, and for one year she interrupted her studies of nursing. She resumed them in May

THE NINTH OF MAY 2005, THE RECENTLY ELECTED POPE BENEDICT XVI ACCEPTED BENEVOLENTLY THE PETITION FOR A DISPENSATION. SOME DAYS LATER, THE THIRTEENTH OF MAY, DURING THE MEETING WITH THE ROMAN CLERGY IN THE BASILICA OF SAINT JOHN LEATHERAN, THE POPE HIMSELF BROKE THE NEWS THAT WAS RECEIVED WITH APPLAUSE BY THE ASSEMBLY.

H 91

THE INVOCATION OF GOD’S PEOPLE HAD BEEN HEARD, BUT THE MILLENARY PRUDENCE OF THE CHURCH SUGGESTED THE METICULOUS OBEDIENCE OF THE NORMS ENFORCED BY POPE JOHN PAUL II HIMSELF IN 1983, IN THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION DIVINUS PERFECTIONIS MAGISTER. SANTO SUBITO YES, BUT MORE SO “SANTO SICURO.” AN INCAUTIOUS HASTE SHOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE EXACTITUDE OF THE PROCESS.

H 92

«The sensus fidei, moreover, is present in a very special way in the processes of beatifications and canonizations. In fact, the faithful are endowed through divine grace, with an undeniable spiritual perception to discover and recognize in the life of some of the baptised, the heroic exercise of the Christian virtues. Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Saint Pio de Pietrelcina were admired, followed and imitated during their lives because of their sanctity.»

1991, obtaining her diploma and becoming a nurse in 1992. While working she started feeling an acute pain in her left hand and leg, which made it difficult for her to write and walk. The neurologist who visited her in August 1992 diagnosed juvenile Parkinson to her left side. Examined by specialists, she was given an anti Parkinson treatment, which produced a slight but brief improvement. When the illness got worse, an illustrious neurologist confirmed the diagnosis. The illness kept on getting worse. Finally, during the first hours of the afternoon of the second of June 2005, during a canonical visit of the Mother General the patient asked that, due to her physical disability, she be exonerated from her work. The Mother General urged her to resist and to await the help of the dead Pontiff. All the Nuns started praying for this. That afternoon, the patient slept and rested peacefully until dawn. On waking up, she felt cured. She suspended the anti Parkinson medicine and on the seventh of June she went to the neurologist that had treated her for years. The doctor verified the disappearance of all the symptoms, confirming twice again (the fifteenth of July and the thirtieth of November 2005) that the patient was in good health. Moreover, other specialists recognized that the patient did not suffer from psyquiatric pathologies, or tendencies to

invent or conceal. The clinical history of the patient and numerous tests confirmed the physical nature of the symptoms. Regarding the theological aspect, the evaluation of the dates and nature of the petitions made to the Servant of God, it was proven that the Nuns, invited by the Mother General, had already started asking for the help of the “saint” Pope in May 2005, intensifying their prayers on the afternoon of the second June 2005. And precisely the next morning, sister Marie Simon Pierre felt she had been cured. After the meticulous scientific examinations and after confirming that the invocation to the Servant of God had presided the sudden and lasting cure of the Nun, the Holy Father Benedict XVI, on the fourteenth of January 2011, authorised the Congregation for the Causes of Saints to decree the proclamation of the miracle. Thus, after a careful process of verification, the generalised sensus fidei on the fama sanctitatis et signorum of Pope John Paul II was officially legitimized by the Magisterium. That same day, the fourteenth of January, the date for the solemn Beatification was announced at Saint Peter’s Square, it would take place the first of May 2011. The undeniable and constant pressure of the faithful and of the media for the swift conclusion of the cause – contrary to what can be imagined – has not disrupted the procedure. Moreover, it has been possible to examine the testimonies and facts with great care and attention. Thus the “holy” Church tries to reach moral certainty about facts and individuals that contribute to the splendour of the Spouse of Christ, the All Holy Church. The beatification of Pope John Paul II opens the door to his canonization that, as it is well known, demands an ulterior intervention from above. Obviously, the process about the miracle for his canonization will require time but the period between the beatification and the canonization should not be considered a vacuum. Instead it will be a time of great importance during which the faithful are invited to learn more about the holy life of the blessed Pope and to try to imitate his virtues: a time to remind us all of the promises of Baptism and to confirm our loyalty to Christ and His Gospel of Truth and Life after the example and in imitation of Pope John Paul II.

THE TEACHINGS OF POPE JOHN PAUL II CONSTITUTE A CHAPTER OF OUTSTANDING IMPORTANCE FOR THE CATHOLIC FAITH, BECAUSE OF THE CLARITY WITH WHICH IT DEALS WITH THE MOST RELEVANT ISSUES ENCOUNTERED BY TODAY’S EVANGELIZATION. IN FACT, HIS TEACHINGS REPRESENT A RICH PATRIMONY OF ENCULTURATION OF THE GOSPEL IN OUR CONTEMPORARY WORLD.

Translated by Carmen Bullemore and Luis Vargas Saavedra

H 93

ÂŤHe evidently thought that the human being could alienate himself, that sin could bewilder the rightful conscience of himself, and that in the tragic twentieth century this had actually happened. To found or recognize again his injured dignity, the human being only had to be faithful to the itinerary of his own conversion. This is beautifully reflected in the most moving moment of his speech at the UN, when recalling Pilateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s words, he proclaims plainly: Ecce homo. Without intending it, Pilate had pronounced at that moment, the most profound truth about man.Âť

H 94

ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Ecce Homo!

BY PEDRO MORANDÉ COURT

he second of June 1980, John Paul II went to UNESCO in Paris, to deliver one of the most important and memorable speeches on human culture. Shortly afterwards he created the Pontifical Council for Culture dedicated to the pastoral care and the promotion of dialogue between the Church and all cultures. The pastoral concern of the Church for culture today comes from Vatican II and it is contained in one whole chapter: Pastoral Constitution, Gaudium et spes. Well known is the theme it proposed to resume the Christian itinerary in the field of culture and taken up by the former Pontifical Magisterium: “strive to make human life more human.” This means that human life is not only a gift, individually assumed and accepted, but a vocation of communion amongst peoples and cities, and as Paul VI taught in Populorum progressio and Benedict XVI followed up in Caritas in veritate, the authentic development and progress of humanity not only implies material welfare, but most important, the spiritual development in solidarity and charity. The Council certainly had in mind, as context, the destruction of Europe produced by the Second World War, the reshuffling of international geopolitics and the alignment of the Cold War, the hopeful creation of a worldwide judicial order through the organization of the United Nations and the process of decolonialization produced later in various regions of the planet; all of which made indispensable the start of a new dialogue, one that took into account the inviolable dignity of human beings, and that respected and furthered the legitimate effort of many countries to recover the originality of its history and traditions, where they had been forgotten or submitted to the ideological imperatives of the dominating powers. To make human life more human was an itinerary of reconstruction and reconciliation in a worldwide scale, which the Church wanted to serve with special solicitude. The Church’s faith in the Incarnation of the Son of God, who assumed the human condition, made the Church strongly proclaim that “the mystery of man only became clear in the light of the mystery of the Verb Incarnate” as stated in Gaudium et spes (n22) that John Paul II never tired to repeat. And in that same paragraph of the Constitution it is suggested that the Holy Spirit,

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 94 - 103

THE COUNCIL HAD IN MIND, AS CONTEXT, THE DESTRUCTION OF EUROPE PRODUCED BY THE SECOND WORLD WAR, THE RESHUFFLING OF INTERNATIONAL GEOPOLITICS AND THE ALIGNMENT OF THE COLD WAR, THE HOPEFUL CREATION OF A WORLDWIDE JUDICIAL ORDER THROUGH THE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE PROCESS OF DECOLONIALIZATION PRODUCED LATER IN VARIOUS REGIONS OF THE PLANET […]

H 95

(…) ALL OF WHICH MADE INDISPENSABLE THE START OF A NEW DIALOGUE, ONE THAT TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE INVIOLABLE DIGNITY OF HUMAN BEINGS, AND THAT RESPECTED AND FURTHERED THE LEGITIMATE EFFORT OF MANY COUNTRIES TO RECOVER THE ORIGINALITY OF ITS HISTORY AND TRADITIONS, WHERE THEY HAD BEEN FORGOTTEN OR SUBMITTED TO THE IDEOLOGICAL IMPERATIVES OF THE DOMINATING POWERS.

H 96

though mysteriously, also promotes sanctity amongst unbelievers. “Since Christ died for every man and the ultimate vocation of man is effectively only one: divine vocation, we must sustain that the Holy Spirit offers every one the possibility, in a way only known to God, to associate with the paschal mystery.” Thus we may consider, using the Patristic expression, that there exist “seeds of the Verb” in all cultures, which show the human being as the image and likeness of his Creator. So, the consideration of culture has at its centre man himself, his dignity, his vocation and mystery. John Paul II recalls this on the first part of his message to the UNESCO, he states: “The fundamental dimension [human cohabitation] is man, man as a whole, man living at the same time within the sphere of material and spiritual values. The respect for the inalienable rights of the human person is the basis of everything.” (Quoting his own speech at the UN on October, 1979) (n 4). The need for this respect stems from the human being himself, “from the dignity of his intelligence, of his will and of his heart” (ibid). This dignity is the premise of every culture. For this reason, it is interesting to point out that Pope Wojtyla never considered in his anthropological thought, that human dignity should be justified or deduced from other arguments apart form man’s own existence, conscious of it by his intelligence, his will and his heart. He evidently thought that the human being could alienate himself, that sin could bewilder the rightful conscience of himself, and that in the tragic twentieth century this had actually happened. To found or recognize again his injured dignity, the human being only had to be faithful to the itinerary of his own conversion. This is beautifully reflected in the most moving moment of his speech at the UN, when recalling Pilate’s words, he proclaims plainly: Ecce homo. Without intending it, Pilate had pronounced at that moment, the most profound truth about man. The following paragraphs are devoted to explain this truth in its intimate and indestructible relationship with culture. He relies on the assertion of Saint Thomas Aquinas: Genus humanum arte et ratione vivit (n.6). “The essential meaning of culture consists, according to the words of St. Thomas Aquinas, in the fact that it is a characteristic of human life as such. Man lives a really human life thanks to culture… Culture is specific way of man’s ‘existing’ and ‘being’. Man always lives according to a culture which is specifically his, and which, in its turn, creates among men a tie which is also specifically theirs, determining the interhuman and social character of human existence” (ibid). In the same way as no one chooses from whom to be born nor what family to belong to, neither does he choose the culture which becomes

«One can be a great producer without being a cultivator. In this sense a person can be civilized without culture, even against culture. I can see how ‘producture’, this technical civilization based on possessions, has reduced itself, has locked itself in its own immanence, and automatically becomes anti culture, because it is contrary to love, liberty, dignity, justice and peace.» (In the picture, Stanislaw Grygiel)

to him the gift that receives him, the set of personal and social relationships that will help him to conform to the community that makes possible such relationships. Zubiri, the philosopher, teaches that the dynamics of the person is not his formation, but his conformation, since before the person can have conscience of his originality and of the unique responsibility which it implies, others have come first to welcome him and offer him their world as something worthy of inhabiting. In fact, many thinkers also talk about culture as a “second nature,” since it determines for men, as the Pope says, the specific way of existing and being. This manner of insertion of the human being into reality, invites him to understand that within culture “being” comes before “having,” priority which has been altered so many times in the society of comfort, consumerism and opulence. Says the Pope, “Man who, in the visible world, is the only ontic subject of culture is also its only object and its term. Culture is that through which man as man, becomes more man, ‘is’ more, has more access to ‘being’… The experience of the various eras, without excluding the present one, proves that people think of culture and speak about it in the first place in relation to man then only in a secondary and indirect way in relation to the world of his products” (n.7). This statement reminds of an interview given by the Polish philosopher and disciple of Karol Wojtyla, Stanislaw Grygiel, which appeared in Humanitas No. 31, Winter 2003, in which interpreting the idea of the Pope opposed culture and “producture.” He remarked, “Culture resides in desiring, in acting, in meaning, in loving and knowing, in practicing justice, peace and acting in a peaceful way. This is culture. If we reduce our life only to the making of eyeglasses, books, shoes, to producing things, we do not live within culture but in “producture.” One can be a great producer without being a cultivator. In this sense a person can be civilized without culture, even against culture. I can see how

IN FACT, MANY THINKERS TALK ABOUT CULTURE AS A “SECOND NATURE,” SINCE IT DETERMINES FOR MEN, AS THE POPE SAYS, THE SPECIFIC WAY OF EXISTING AND BEING.

H 97

“producture,” this technical civilization based on possessions, has reduced itself, has locked itself in its own immanence, and automatically becomes anti culture, because it is contrary to love, liberty, dignity, justice and peace.” This distorted vision of culture by technical civilization ends up damaging the image that human beings have of themselves, giving priority to the values of efficiency and productivity above those of dignity, love, and liberty. Consequently the Pope adds: “This man who expresses himself and objectifies himself in and through culture, is unique, complete, and indivisible. […] Consequently, he cannot be envisaged solely as the resultant —to give only one example— of the production relations that prevail at a given period. […] A culture without human subjectivity and without human causality is inconceivable: in the cultural field, man is always the first fact: man is the prime and fundamental fact of culture […] in his totality: in his spiritual and material subjectivity as a complete whole” (n.8). In other documents of his Magisterium it is precisely in this human subjectivity and human causality that he bases the sovereignty and the freedom of men and their cultures. Consequently at the same time, human beings are called to assume their responsibilities towards themselves and towards others for their acts of sovereignty and for their consequences within the conscience that each person has of his own dignity. In Wojtyla’s anthropology, man was always considered according to his acts, thought being one of them; but which does not exhaust his subjectivity or the explanation for his causality. Love, on the other hand, summarizes the whole of the dignity of conscience that man acquires from his free actions, hence he can think of culture, in the aforesaid quotation, as “a truly human system, a splendid synthesis of spirit and body.” The Pontiff resumes his speech: “the organic and constitutive link which exists between religion in general and Christianity in particular, on the one hand, and culture, on the other hand” (n.9), which manifests itself in diverse specific expressions as in education and art, for example, without forgetting the popular religiosity of common people, make of it an essential component of their cultural identity. He mentions Europe as an example from the Atlantic to the Urals, whose history would be impossible to understand without the substratum of their religious experience. He proclaims his “admiration before the creative riches of the human spirit, before its incessant efforts to know and strengthen the identity of man, this man who is always present in all the particular forms of culture” (ibid). And concludes the explanation of the anthropological basis of culture with one of the most outstanding paragraphs of his teach-

H 98

«In the same way as no one chooses from whom to be born nor what family to belong to, neither does he choose the culture which becomes to him the gift that receives him, the set of personal and social relationships that will help him to conform to the community that makes possible such relationships. Zubiri, the philosopher, teaches that the dynamics of the person is not his formation, but his conformation, since before the person can have conscience of his originality and of the unique responsibility which it implies, others have come first to welcome him and offer him their world as something worthy of inhabiting.» (In the picture, Xavier Zubiri)

ings about the meaning of the Incarnation and its consequences on human dignity. Says the Pope: “ the fundamental link between the Gospel, that is, the message of Christ and the Church, and man in his very humanity. This link is in fact a creator of culture in its very foundation. To create culture, it is necessary to consider, to its last consequences and entirely, man as a particular and autonomous value, as the subject bearing the transcendency of the person. Man must be affirmed for himself, and not for any other motive or reason: solely for himself! What is more, man must be loved because he is man. Love must be claimed for man by reason of the particular dignity he possesses. The whole of the affirmations concerning man belongs to the very substance of Christ’s message and of the mission of the Church” (n.10). This statement on the human being as “the subject bearing the transcendence of the person” seems to me of incomparable precision and beauty. It reminds us that the concept of person was applied first and foremost to Christ and the Holy Trinity, then to the human being; however, the human being has been converted by the Incarnation of the Verb in an icon of the Trinity. To talk about person is to talk about God himself, of the mystery of the communion that unites the Trinity in one and the same nature and dignity; to apply to human beings a qualification of person is, then, to talk of his participation in the Christological vocation of becoming “sons in the Son,” as defined

A CULTURE WITHOUT HUMAN SUBJECTIVITY AND WITHOUT HUMAN CAUSALITY IS INCONCEIVABLE: IN THE CULTURAL FIELD, MAN IS ALWAYS THE FIRST FACT: MAN IS THE PRIME AND FUNDAMENTAL FACT OF CULTURE … IN HIS TOTALITY: IN HIS SPIRITUAL AND MATERIAL SUBJECTIVITY AS A COMPLETE WHOLE” (N.8).

H 99

THIS STATEMENT ON THE HUMAN BEING AS “THE SUBJECT BEARING THE TRANSCENDENCE OF THE PERSON” SEEMS TO ME OF INCOMPARABLE PRECISION AND BEAUTY. IT REMINDS US THAT THE CONCEPT OF PERSON WAS APPLIED FIRST AND FOREMOST TO CHRIST AND THE HOLY TRINITY, THEN TO THE HUMAN BEING; HOWEVER, THE HUMAN BEING HAS BEEN CONVERTED BY THE INCARNATION OF THE VERB IN AN ICON OF THE TRINITY. […] Front page of “L’Osservatore Romano” announcing the election of Karol Wojtyla for the Papacy in October 1978 with the name John Paul II

in Gaudium et spes, adding that when He prayed to the Father, “that all may be one… as we are one” (John 17:21-22) opened up vistas closed to human reason, for He implied a certain likeness between the union of the divine Persons, and the unity of God’s sons in truth and charity “ (n.24). This same teaching that John Paul II applied to the relationship of the human being with his culture, he also applied to the nuptial mystery, bestowing an impressive strength of renewal to the theological anthropology as referred to the person, marriage and the family.

H 100

On the second part of his speech before UNESCO, the Pope shows the consequences of these essential anthropological statements, which I enumerate briefly in the same order that they appear: a) Education. The first and essential task of all culture is education. “Education consists in fact in enabling man to become more man… For this purpose man must be able to ‘be more’ not only ‘with others’, but also ‘for others’… he most important thing is always man, man and his moral authority which comes from the truth of his principles and from the conformity of his actions with these principles” (n.11). b) Family. “There is no doubt that the first and fundamental cultural fact is the spiritually mature man, that is, a duly educated man, a man capable of educating himself and educating others… what can be done in order that man’s education may be carried out above all in the family?” (n.12). Parents basically have the necessary moral authority to educate. c) Alienation and manipulation of man. “In the process of education as a whole, and of scholastic education in particular, has there not been a unilateral shift towards instruction in the narrow sense of the word? … a real alienation of education instead of working in favour of what man must ‘be’, it works solely in favour of what man can grow in the field of ‘having’, of ‘possession’. The further stage of this alienation is to accustom man, by depriving him of his own subjectivity, to being the object of multiple manipulations: ideological or political manipulations which are carried out through public opinion; those that are operated through monopoly or control, through economic forces or political powers, and the media of social communication; finally, the manipulation which consists of teaching life as a specific manipulation of oneself” (n.13). Most important is to teach to manipulate oneself. These dangers menace specially the technically developed societies. There is a growing lack of confidence in the meaning of the fact of being a man. Instead false “imperatives” are established like the priority of behaving according to what is in fashion, to what is subjective and of quick success.

[…] TO TALK ABOUT PERSON IS TO TALK ABOUT GOD HIMSELF, OF THE MYSTERY OF THE COMMUNION THAT UNITES THE TRINITY IN ONE AND THE SAME NATURE AND DIGNITY; TO APPLY TO HUMAN BEINGS A QUALIFICATION OF PERSON IS, THEN, TO TALK OF HIS PARTICIPATION IN THE CHRISTOLOGICAL VOCATION OF BECOMING “SONS IN THE SON,” AS DEFINED IN GAUDIUM ET SPES

d) The nation. “… it is, in fact, the great community of men who are united by various ties, but above all, precisely by culture. The Nation exists ‘through’ culture and ‘for’ culture, and it is therefore the great educator of men in order that they may ‘be more’ in the community” (n.14). Referring to the example of Poland, which survived thanks to its culture, he adds: “What

H 101

I say here concerning the right of the Nation to the foundation of its culture and its future is not, therefore, the echo of any ‘nationalism’, but it is always a question of a stable element of human experience […] There exists a fundamental sovereignty of society which is manifested in the culture of the Nation. It is a question of the sovereignty through which, at the same time, man is supremely sovereign” (ibid). This is a condition to overcome the remains of colonialism. e) The media. They must be the expression of the sovereignty of the nation and not an instrument of dominion of the agents of political and financial powers. They should strive to be useful in building a more human life.

THIS SAME TEACHING THAT JOHN PAUL II APPLIED TO THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE HUMAN BEING WITH HIS CULTURE, HE ALSO APPLIED TO THE NUPTIAL MYSTERY, BESTOWING AN IMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF RENEWAL TO THE THEOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY AS REFERRED TO THE PERSON, MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY.

H 102

f) The education of the people and the suppression of analphabetism. The popularization of education is necessary to dispose of and administer the means they have, for their own and the public welfare. It also avoids bloodshed for power. g) The right of Catholics to a Catholic education. The Church through the centuries has founded schools and universities. The Church supports “the right which belongs to all families to educate their children in schools which correspond to their own view of the world, and in particular the strict right of Christian parents not to see their children subjected, in schools, to programs inspired by atheism. That is, indeed, one of the fundamental rights of man and of the family” (n. 18). h) The cultivation of science. Man’s vocation to knowledge, as well as the constitutive link of humanity with truth, that become a daily reality in the institutions of education, especially in universities (n.19). After paying homage to scientists the Pope adds: “we must be equally concerned by everything that is in contradiction with these principles of disinterestedness and objectivity, everything that would make science an instrument to teach aims that have nothing to do with it” (n. 20). “The future of man and of the world is threatened, radically threatened … because the marvellous results of their researches and their discoveries, especially in the field of the sciences of nature, have been and continue to be exploited—to the detriment of the ethical imperative—for purposes that have nothing to do with the requirements of science … Whereas science is called to be in the service of man’s life, it is too often a fact that it is subjected to purposes that destroy the real dignity of man and of human life” (n. 21). The speech gives as examples: genetic manipula-

«The Pontiff resumes his speech: “the organic and constitutive link which exists between religion in general and Christianity in particular, on the one hand, and culture, on the other hand” (n.9), which manifests itself in diverse specific expressions as in education and art, for example, without forgetting the popular religiosity of common people, make of it an essential component of their cultural identity.»

tion, biological experiments, chemical and bacteriological and nuclear warfare. “The cause of man will be served if science forms an alliance with conscience” (n. 22). In conclusion the Pope gives three statements that summarize the arguments exposed and that at the same time express a vision and a task for the future: “The future of man depends on culture. Yes! The peace of the world depends on the primacy of the Spirit! Yes! The peaceful future of mankind depends on love!” (n. 23). Many of the elements present in his speech were developed more extensively in other documents of the fruitful Magisterium of John Paul II. Their relevance in this document is related to the fact that it is an early document of his Pontificate that was to announce a future course. Personally, however, I am moved by his passion about man in his specific circumstances: historical and social. “Man has to be asserted because of himself and because of no other reason or motif: just because of being himself” and because of it we have to love all the relations that constitute his being: culture, the family, school, nation and work. In contrast with the instrumental vision that prevails today over all these realities, the Paris speech reminds us that all these realities participate of the being of man and the possibility to carry out his vocation of person.

A REAL ALIENATION OF EDUCATION INSTEAD OF WORKING IN FAVOUR OF WHAT MAN MUST “BE”, WORKS IN THE FIELD OF “HAVING”, OF “POSSESSION”. THE FURTHER STAGE OF THIS ALIENATION IS TO ACCUSTOM MAN, BY DEPRIVING HIM OF HIS OWN SUBJECTIVITY, TO BEING THE OBJECT OF MULTIPLE MANIPULATIONS: IDEOLOGICAL OR POLITICAL WHICH ARE CARRIED OUT THROUGH PUBLIC OPINION; THOSE THAT ARE OPERATED THROUGH MONOPOLY OR CONTROL, THROUGH ECONOMIC FORCES OR POLITICAL POWERS, AND THE MEDIA OF SOCIAL COMMUNICATION; FINALLY, THE MANIPULATION WHICH CONSISTS OF TEACHING LIFE AS A SPECIFIC MANIPULATION OF ONESELF (N. 13).

Translated by Carmen Bullemore and Luis Vargas Saavedra

H 103

What characteristics of the sanctity of John Paul II should be highlighted? The sanctity of John Paul II, the Great, was shown through the world illuminating it with a deeply heroic pontificate, committed with the great challenges of its time. His death, on April 2, 2005, summoned a multitude that reunited around the illuminated window at Saint Peter’s Square, prayed to farewell their Pope, whom they already considered a saint. Those same crowds raised their voices as soon as John Paul II had left for his encounter with the Father with the message Santo subito, as a request or a demand, acknowledging the manifest union with Christ that vivified the Pope, in an uproar which seemed to break out of the very heart of the Church, manifesting itself through its believers. Sanctity extends itself vividly, as an ever growing wave which touches the hearts of human beings. Those who somehow had a chance to relate themselves with John Paul II can give proof of a supernatural experience reflected in small details or in great events. HUMANITAS has collected the testimonies of some personalities of the catholic world, compiled as an answer to the question stated to them: Which aspect of the sanctity of John Paul II would you like to highlight?

Cardinal Raymundo Damasceno Assis Archbishop of Aparecida – President of the CELAM (2007 – 2011) I had the grace of meeting Pope John Paul II on various occasions, at private audiences and in some other circumstances. I can personally testify the deep love this Pope felt for the Eucharist, for the Blessed Virgin Mary, as well as his intense life of prayer. On some occasion I was granted the privilege of concelebrating with His Holiness and accompany him in his visit to the Holy Sacrament, at his private chapel. The silence, the spiritual absorption and the piety surrounding the personality of the Holy Father at this moment of prayer, deeply impressed me. That encounter with Christ in the Eucharist, and with the Virgin of Czestochova, through the painting placed next to the tabernacle in his private chapel,

H 104

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 104 - 115

appeared to be the most important and decisive moment for him in his daily agenda. All the time I had the impression that at the tabernacle and next to the Mother of God, the Pope found the force he needed -particularly when he already was visibly ill- for the arduous mission of leading Christ’s flock and confirm it in the Faith. The deep silence of that sacred environment was on occasions broken by some stammering in form of prayer coming from his lips. Amongst so many memories of John Paul II prevails in me his image in such an attitude of spiritual absorption, contemplation and prayer in front of the tabernacle and next to the Virgin of Czestochova.

Cardinal Angelo Scola Patriarch of Venice (2002 – 2011) – Archbishop of Milano The first time I went up to the altar with him in 1979, I was impressed by his way of celebrating the Mass. John Paul II was a “mystic” Pope, who had an extraordinarily close bond with God. It is not surprising that people have claimed sanctity for him since the day of his death. Watching him pray was enough. When one was having lunch with him, one had to stop by the chapel to recite the Angelus. All of us thought it was a matter of half a minute. Nevertheless, sometimes it was so long that one could no longer stay kneeling on the floor. The Pope really submerged into prayer and, for him, time and space no longer existed. That could also be seen on the movement of his lips. In his prayer I perceived – rather, I saw- a deep and uninterrupted dialogue with God. As if he were breathing, the Holy Father emitted sounds resembling the never ending rumour of a stream; something very impressing. Amongst the numerous characteristics of Pope John Paul II, there are two that seem outstanding to me. First, he was a man in the deepest sense of the expression; a man, because Christ was the affective centre of his being: through his way of living and his way of dying he had shown the supreme convenience of following Christ. Second, he was a man of liberty. All humanity perceived that John Paul II, given his personal experience and his doctrinal strength and by way of his teaching and his passion for all of what is human, was a testimony that encourages liberty, makes it “arise” lovingly, supports it. Who of us is not in need of something like that? The first time I met the future John Paul II it was in the environment of the international editorial premises of the “Communio” review. He was the Cardinal of Cracow and wanted to launch a Polish edition of “Communio”. He got everything ready, up to the point of establishing an adequate editorial board, but then the Polish regime did not allow him to achieve his project. It was then that [Hans Urs von] Balthasar decided to include Karol Wojtyla in the editorial board of the German edition of the review, and it was in that context that I had the opportunity to establish a certain contact with him, even though a rather brief one. Our

H 105

relationship deepened after he was elected Pope, from February 1979, when I participated for the first time in his personal morning Mass and he invited me for lunch. I remember well that conversation, because he communicated his vision of the Church in a fascinating way. He overwhelmed us with questions: As every creative man he was profoundly curious, he wanted to understand, to know. The collaboration intensified at the beginning of the 1980s, when I was called to take part in the task of establishing the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. It was then that I gave up my teaching at Freiburg, in Switzerland. Sometime later, when I was designated consultant for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I had more occasions to meet him and to work with him. I believe that at present, in this time so close to his beatification, the best way of conveying the memory of John Paul II consists in taking seriously the path he every day requested from the Lord: The path of testimony. Why was Jesus convincing? Because he was personally committed to what He said. Wojtyla, as Christ’s follower, was committed with all his being to what he proposed. That is the meaning of Blessed Wojtyla for the Church. That is how we must endeavour to be ourselves, with our humble strength, with our shortcomings: Such an example leads us to give testimony of our faith, to show to what an extent we are committed to what we profess. I do not want to forget, in any case, the relevance of the contents of his teachings, whose deep meaning will take decades of study. I think about the teachings on the theology of the body and on the relationship between man and woman, about the extraordinary triptych of the Trinitarian Encyclicals, about the development of the Eucharist topic, about the social researches linked to the topics of solidarity and subsidiarity, about the pre-eminence of the subject of labor over the capital… And with these, I only have mentioned some aspects. All this is an enormous patrimony, and it will take decades to deepen into it. Thus, his legacy is really very important, but Benedict XVI, his successor, has given proof of an extraordinary strength to continue it during these six years of pontificate. He is following in his own way the renewal of the Church, in favour of all the human family. I truly believe that the Holy Spirit chooses and prepares these men with painstaking care.

Monsignor Jean-Louis Bruguès Secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education Regarding John Paul II and the strong imprint his personality produced on me, an expression from my spiritual family –the Dominican order- which had already been ascribed to its founder Saint Dominic, comes to my mind. The texts of his time, talking about his work and his personality, proposed him to the veneration of the believers as an “Athlete of Faith”.

H 106

John Paul II was that precise Athlete our time was in need of. An athlete evokes physical strength and endurance. Certainly, both were necessary to assume such a heavy task of government, but also to visit on their own land, each continent, all the Christian communities, all the men of good will who accepted to meet him and talk with him. He travelled more than a million kilometres! This aged sportsman also needed strength of character and stamina to endure the long agony of which we became to be compassionate witnesses. The Pope offered us a lesson of various dimensions. His body, often reduced to silence, taught us that physical decline does not exist for the Christian Faith. The diminished means and the disadvantages inflicted by age and illness only indicate that our body, destined to everlasting glory, is preparing to take the great step, our own passage towards the plenitude of Eternal Life. It does not loose even an ounce of its dignity. In the midst of a society urging for retirement, the Pope gave proof up to the end of his fidelity to a mission that came from beyond his person or even the body of electors which had chosen him to be Pope twenty seven years before. The Athlete of Faith knew that faith is not a cry, not even a sentiment, but a lucid adhesion to a whole and organic vision of mankind and society, of the world and of God, in brief, to a doctrine. This doctrine he expounded in numerous writings, appeared at a rhythm of one every year and a half. The readers sometimes had difficulties to follow them. The Athlete converted himself into a Doctor. John Paul II wrote about a diversity of themes, from the woman and the family, to Eucharist and the Holy Spirit, passing through suffering, human toil and the sense of forgiveness. In a certain sense, everything had been already announced in his first encyclical, Redemptor hominis, perhaps the most representative of his style. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the decade of the 1990s gave rise to the plenitude of his genius. Three are the most outstanding texts he left to us. Veritatis splendour, whose title was an eye wink to Plato, published in 1993, analyzes the relation between truth, liberty and moral law, for these three concepts are at the centre of the philosophical problematic of our time. The second document, the encyclical Evangelium vitae, from 1995, appealed to a distinction which fortunately is coming into fashion amongst people involved in politics, between a culture of death and a culture of life. Whilst the culture of death, marked by abortion, suicide and euthanasia, takes society to violence and nihilism, the Pope spoke in favour of life, the love for life, life in all its forms and, in the first place, the most eminent of all, human life. The third encyclical still challenges present day intellectuals, because proposed between faith and philosophical reason crossings beneficial for both of them: “Faith and reason are like two wings allowing the human spirit to ascend to the contemplation of truth” (Fides et ratio, 1998). Let us leave to the fans of clichés the task of finding out if this man was a conservative, a reformer or a progressive, as if these categories could be in any way pertinent for qualifying an unmatched temperament. Let us also leave to the specialists in prêt-à-penser the task of asking themselves how this Pope could defend, with the ardour we all know, the rights of man and at the same time preach a moral considered old-fashioned and reactionary, as if this moral of demanding and giving oneself in fact does not constitute the first foundation those same rights. In regard to us, let us keep in our memories

H 107

those humble words uttered by Christ at each appearance after his resurrection, that were also the words of the unceasing call of John Paul II when he appealed to courage: “Do not be afraid!”

Do not fear to live! Do not fear to live like Christians!

Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Bishop Emeritus of Valparaíso - Chile In every beatification process there is a necessary stage of acknowledgement from the authority of the Church that the candidate had practiced the Christian virtues to an heroic degree. One must take into account, that the supernatural “organism” cannot be parcelled, but that, as happens with any vital expression, it constitutes a unity in which the various aspects are solidary and interdependent one in respect to the other. A heroic faith would be unconceivable if it could not project itself through an ardent charity, as a daring fortitude could not be conceived if it did not run parallel to a profound humility. And so on. It is true that some saints’ characteristic is their admirable practice of some virtue, but that does not mean they did not practice the rest, too. Pope John Paul II was a mature fruit of God’s grace, that taked him to be an authentic witness of Jesus, our Lord. His life is a model of pastoral charity and his inexhaustible apostolic work was a living commentary of Saint Paul’s programmatic phrase: “For thou, I will spend and will spend myself with the greatest delight”. His surrender to the responsibility of succeeding the Apostle Peter was an expression of the highest poverty, of his self-renouncement when the spiritual integrity of the people of God was at stake. In this context, nevertheless, I particularly wish to highlight his humility. I often saw him praying: During the solemn public ceremonies, and during the moments in which, submerged in God, he prepared to celebrate the Holy Mass at his private chapel. Not a single gesture of distraction, not one prying look. It was as if he had been penetrated by the presence of God: on his knees as long as his health allowed it, humiliated as the smallest of the believers, he looked crushed before the majesty of the One who had said to Moses: “I am who I am!”. When Saint Benedict instructed his monks in “reverence during prayer”, he did it in a close relation to his teachings about humility.

H 108

On one occasion, working with him at his study, Pope John Paul II gave a sign of annoyance. Immediately he recovered his calmness and with a slight stroke on his forehead, said with sadness: “And to think I confessed myself this morning!” He recognized himself as imperfect and in need of the Mercy of God, and that profound feeling led him to emphasize the mystery of Divine Mercy, something to be understood only by those who have a truly humble heart. With time elapsing and the evolution of his illness, inexorably and progressively the Pope’s health deteriorated. His fair countenance began to appear rigid and inexpressive and his body lost mobility. From his lips saliva began to flow, painful sign of his physical decline. It was the moment of truth and Pope John Paul II did not want to hide it: Aware that humbleness is the truth, assuming it. He did not wish to avoid it and the world could see how the Vicar of Christ paid tribute to the approaching sister death; he paid it serenely and, I believe, joyfully. He loved truth because he was free and because he was genuinely free he is authentically a blessed one.

Cardinal Lluís Martínez Sistach Archbishop of Barcelona Blessed John Paul II lived intensively his ministry of shepherd of souls, always imitating Jesus, the Good Shepherd. We Christians and the world as a whole have known the practice of his shepherding of the universal Church during the long years he occupied the see of Peter. He always practiced his Ministry with generosity, surrender and fidelity, as an expression of his love for God, the Church and Humanity. Let us only remember his innumerable and extended apostolic journeys around the world. He was an authentic man of God. Young people know how to detect if a priest is or is not a man of God. And they always considered him as such. One could say that Pope John Paul II was the Pope of young. They considered him as a man who was consistent with his message, who loved them and who brought Jesus to them. The roaring Santo subito at the moment of his death has been something real. His sanctity can be imitated by everyone because it consists in the perfection of love by way of the dedicated accomplishment of ones own responsibilities. Another feature of the sanctity of John Paul II has been his emphasis on the fact that sanctity is a gift for the Church and for the world. The service rendered by the Pope through his life and particularly during his pontificate has been arduous. Let us only think about his rich and large collection of encyclicals, his solid teaching and his presence in the churches of so many countries around the world in order to announce Jesus Christ and his Good New. His service to the world as successor of Peter has been historic, with his permanent endeavour for peace, the development of the peoples, the dignity of the human person and the changes experienced by the European continent and the world as a whole after the fall of the iron curtain.

H 109

Likewise, the sanctity of John Paul II contributed to his leadership in the world. A leader stands out amongst the rest of the people. The unbreakable faith of the Polish Pope, his boldness and courage, expression of love, turned him into a leader recognized by so many personalities and so many men and women, without forgetting the millions of young people who held him as their saint and followed him. And he was a leader in a world in need of leaders and badly in lack of them.

Monsignor Emilio Carlos Berlie Belaunzarán Archbishop of Yucatán – Mexico I highlight his profound silence that recalls the silence of Jesus facing the Sanhedrin, the scoffing of the people, the insults of the Roman soldiers, and the shame of his nudeness on the Golgotha hill, etc. The Divine Providence forged him in ‘silence’ (imposed by the regime that ruled his country) and prepared him in order to achieve in the appropriate time that the deepness and intensity of his ‘silence’ would become an exemplary experience of the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. It always was instructive to watch him in a contemplative attitude, in a silence that kept him immobile after his Communion during the Holy Mass he celebrated every day at his private chapel (or in other place). And when his enormous ability of consummate public speaker was diminished by the illness which consumed him, his ‘silence’ did not made itself a wound bleeding each time he tried to communicate, but a luminous flash that emanated the teaching of a saint. For example, during his courtesy visit to His Beatitude Christodulos, Archbishop of Athens and Primate of Greece, on May 4th, 2001, His Holiness John Paul II faced one of his most tenacious adversaries and listened –in fraternal silence- to a discourse full of claims of his brother in faith. At the end, His Beatitude took seat in order to listen in turn. John Paul II, visibly affected by his state of health, received with his shaking hands the text of his message. After some seconds looking at those papers, Karol Wojtyla handed them back to his secretary and slowly but with resolute pace approached his interlocutor, who, seeing the Pope standing in front of him, couldn’t but stand up himself. Then, letting go his walking stick, Pope John Paul II embraced him strongly and whispered to his ear: “Forgiveness! Forgiveness”! That was all his speech. The speech of a Holy Pope!

H 110

Monsignor Bernardino Piñera Carvallo Archbishop Emeritus of La Serena - Chile I will narrate three anecdotes I could witness during Pope John Paul II’s visit to Chile. Each of them gives a glimpse of his sanctity. We were driving in an open car from Peñuelas, at Coquimbo, the airport of La Serena, to that precise city. As the city’s bishop, I accompanied him. I realized that when greeting the people along our road, on one or the other side of it, he started from the very back and went on up to the first row of those acclaiming him. And then he turned over to the other side and once again began from the very back up to the front, saluting them all, too. I asked him why he began so far back, advancing up to the front line. He answered to me: “The people wish to see the Pope, but are not satisfied with that; they also want to be seen by the Pope themselves. They wish that their gaze crosses with the Pope’s. And as the car runs very fast, when I turn over to greet those on one side, there are plenty of people who already have seen me pass but who I did not greet, I did not see. That is why I begin at the far back”. What a lesson of sensibility, in spite of the exhaustion caused by an endless day! We were approaching the airport. A folkloric ensemble of schoolteachers crossed the way in order to sing and dance for the Pope. The Pope’s secretary and the driver decided to just drive on. And as the Pope asked why they didn’t allow them to perform, they explained him that they were already fifteen minutes behind schedule and that the authorities of Antofagasta, the next stop, were already expecting him at the airport. The Holy Father said nothing. Three minutes later we arrived at the airport. And then he said: “Let come those who want to sing and to dance for the Pope, let them come!” They came and sang and danced for the Pope. John Paul II thanked and blessed them. That was another lesson of his sensibility. Nobody should feel frustrated for not having been heard! The third event came to happen at Santiago. A young lady, opposed to the military regime of those days, had seen her face burned and a military patrol had been accused of the deed. The young lady, supported by her political party, wished to talk to the Pope and tell him what had happened, expecting the Pope would denounce those who had defaced her. The request could not be admitted. But the young lady was instructed to place where the Pope’s retinue would pass on its way to visit the Hogar de Cristo and I myself would tell the Pope that the young lady about whom I had told him would be there for his special blessing. When the Pope saw her, he halted. He approached her. Then he embraced her as a beloved daughter. He put his cheek onto her burned cheek, with great tenderness and said to her: “You and I will pray that there shall be peace and love amongst all of us”.

H 111

When I met the young lady immediately after, she said to me, with tears in her eyes and without believing what had really happened: “Father, he kissed me, he put his check onto my burned cheek and said so beautiful things to me”. And she cried out of emotion and tenderness. The Holy Father knew that words do help, but that gestures do even better. And, more than anything else, as he said soon after to the multitude gathered at the O’Higgins Park in Santiago, amongst the protesting outcries and the tear-gas: “Love is stronger!” Three events, at first glance insignificant but that show the Pope’s charity and the sensibility, the excellence, of that charity.

Richard Yeo O.S.B. Abbott President of the English Benedictin Congregation I have a vivid memory of the Mass with which Pope John Paul II inaugurated his ministry as Supreme Pontiff, back in October 1978. During his homily, he invited us not to be afraid, and to welcome Christ into our lives. I was in St Peter’s Square, and those words, and the intensity with which they were spoken, were thrilling to listen to. Another memory is of a day in 1993, when John Paul II had already been Pope for fifteen years and was his health was causing concern. A friend gave me his view that he had now made his most important contributions to the Church’s teaching. From now onwards, my friend thought, his most significant contribution to the life of the Church would not be his teaching but the witness of his life as his physical health deteriorated. Neither of us knew that Pope John Paul would live and teach for a further twelve years; but that chance remark remained with me, and especially on the last occasion when I was present at an audience in Castel Gandolfo in September 2004, little over six months before his death. Seeing him in his physical weakness made an impression no less intense than that which I had experienced when I heard him preaching in October 1978. There is an immense multitude of men and women who stand out as examples of holiness. Why does the Church declare some of them to be Saints rather than others? There are many reasons: a life to inspire us; an example to be followed; a special form of holiness. Not many of us are likely to exercise the sort of responsibilities that Pope John Paul exercised as Pope, but many of us will be called to the vocation of suffering brought about by illness or old age. The example of enduring fidelity and fortitude shown by Pope John Paul II in his years of suffering is surely one of his most precious gifts.

H 112

Monsignor Jean Laffitte Secretary of the Pontifical Council for the Family; Bishop of Entrevaux Sanctity is the reflection on the human creature of the divine grace manifesting its fruitfulness. There is no grace without a nature that receives it, precisely because grace is a gift granted to men, who cannot receive it out of their corporal or spiritual nature. Every saint has a singular and original resemblance with the person of Christ. When we think about Blessed John Paul II, we evoke many images. One of the most impressing refers to the suffering he went through, accepted and assumed with all its implications. During the homily pronounced on the occasion of the beatification of John Paul II, Benedict XVI repeatedly underlined this aspect of the defunct Pope having part on the Lord’s passion. I would like to insist on it, because I consider this to be the deepest aspect of the sanctity of John Paul II. It seems to be in contrast to that Pope full of vitality and strength we came to admire during the long years of his apostolate. In other words, the one who was a saint as a missionary and gospeller became more and more the image of the suffering Christ.

Monsignor Felipe Bacarreza Rodríguez Bishop of Santa María de Los Ángeles – Chile Pope John Paul II was enthroned on October 22, 1978 and governed the Church until the day of his death, April 2, 2005, that is, almost 27 years. In the light of the events surrounding his pontificate and of all the circumstances of his life, one cannot but recognize God’s clear intervention. The first extraordinary circumstance is that his predecessor, Pope John Paul I only governed the Church for 33 days. It was a light only briefly shining; but God had foreseen that it should be someone else who would rule the Church in those days. In order to discover a similar circumstance, one must look back almost four centuries, into the pontificate of Pope Leo XI, which lasted from April 1 to April 27, 1605. Another extraordinary circumstance is that the Cardinal from Cracow interrupted the series of Italian Popes, which had lasted more than four and a half centuries. The last non-Italian Pope governing the Church had been Pope Adrian VI, from Utrecht, whose pontificate lasted a little more than one year, from August 31, 1522, to September 14, 1523. John Paul II was elected against all predictions and none of the people gathered at Saint Peter’s Square in order to listen to the famous announcement Habemus Papam: Carolum Wojtyla, at once understood who he was. It is absolutely extraordinary that the throne of Saint Peter was raised by a person who had lost his father and his mother as a very young boy, whose only brother had died, too, and who was deprived of other relatives; moreover, a young man who at

H 113

some period of his life had toiled as a worker at a solvents factory in Solvay. Not even the shrewdest of men, at meeting this young worker leaving the factory in the afternoon, would have been able to imagine that he was to be the future Pope. This was only known by God, always preparing the destiny of individuals, people and the world. That is precisely the way God directs history. The horrible attempt against the life of John Paul II at Saint Peters Square on May 13th 1981 provoked absolute consternation all around the world. It seemed humanly impossible to survive after receiving the impact of a bullet from such a short distance. In fact, the young Turkish who shot at the Pope asked amazed after being apprehended: “What? I didn’t kill him?” The bullet that ran through the Pope’s body from one side to the other, found its way out without damaging any of his vital organs. The physicians attending John Paul II said that a 1mm deviation of the bullet would have sufficed to kill him. Such an event was unprecedented in the history of many centuries. The Church felt bewildered and could experience for some moments what happened to Christ’s disciples when He announced: “I shall hurt the shepherd and the flock will scatter”. The Holy Father has affirmed with absolute certitude that his life had been saved thanks to our Lady of Fatima, whose feast was celebrated precisely on that day. It stands clear that God had a particular mission for him. If his pontificate had ended then, after only two and a half years, the world’s history would have followed quite a different course. No other Pope had travelled so much as he did, giving the world an insuperable testimony of his missionary spirit and great apostolic zeal. Save for very few exceptions, he visited all the countries of the Planet, always announcing Christ, man’s Saviour, and bringing with him a message of peace and salvation. No Pope and I dare to say, no man in the history of mankind, has ever gathered so many people and has been seen or listened to by so many people. Wherever he went he gathered around him immense crowds. Chile, our country, experienced the beneficial impact of his visit. It is impossible to summarize the most important lines of his pontificate in a few sentences. From his first words on, when assuming his pontificate, John Paul II proclaimed as an absolute certain truth that Christ is man’s only Saviour. “Open your doors to Christ!” was his first message to the world, and his first encyclical, of the programmatic kind, is entitled, “The Redeemer of Man”. But this is not a void Faith, it penetrates man’s structures and makes them more human and more adequate for the sublime dignity of the human person. Thus, we saw John Paul II opposing –in his speeches and his diverse social encyclicals- to all the systems and structures oppressing man. The first of his social encyclicals was called Laborem exercens (Performing Work). We should also highlight his profound ecumenical endeavour. And we must not forget either his deep love for the Mother of God. He missed not occasion to invoke her, up to the point that his episcopal motto was a declaration of total surrender to her: Totus tuus (Fully yours). Personally, God conceded me the gift of living eleven years of the pontificate of John Paul II in Rome, nine of them at the service of the Holy See, cooperating with his ministry as Universal Pastor. During that service I had to interpenetrate myself completely with his mind. I could see him and listen to him on innumerable occasions. I must confess that I was always surprised by his profound love for Christ and his filial love for Virgin Mary. This is what the world saw in him up to the last moment of his life.

H 114

Only those who do not want to see and stubbornly persist on a preconceived posture will not recognize the signs God has given to us in order to warrant the mission and the teaching of John Paul II. Only few saints, if one, can summon so many witnesses of his heroic virtues. The miracle opening the path towards his beatification is a subsequent intervention of God, who now wishes to give him to the Church as an example to follow and as an intercessor.

Monsignor Juan Ignacio González Errázuriz Bishop of San Bernardo – Chile Brief shall be these words regarding so long a life, so rich and saint. What was it that made the person of John Paul II so deeply permeate our present world? For me, it was his amazing and supernatural inner equilibrium, allowing him to be immersed in all of the aspects of this world and, at the same time, being completely involved with God. Evidently that is a gift of God, to which the Pope reacted with heroic generosity. Those who had the privilege of meeting him, or of just observing him, discovered the loving pace of God amongst men. Not only during his last years, when his suffering appearance led to a deeper devotion, but from the very beginning on, and even earlier, when he still lived in his fatherland. He did not only assist and contribute to the Second Vatican Council, but lived it, not allowing himself to be disturbed by the separation between faith and everyday life, something that outstanding assembly called “one of the gravest errors of our times”. The recently beatified Pope aimed at showing to the world the wonder of Catholic Faith and in full adhesion to the teachings of the Church and of the Council, he re-proposed the essential pastoral and theological topics. It will take many, many years for us to assimilate his teachings and particularly some of his great documents. His frequent travelling may have caused a certain critical strengthening of those who did not understand him. But he knew that in a time of the great confusion and crisis, he, as the Supreme Pastor, had to confirm us in our faith and so he did. For me, as a bishop and pastor of a small flock, Pope John Paul II was an example of how we have to live for the Church and be extremely eager to serve her. At moments of real weariness and exhaustion I appeal to his person, invoking him, remembering the last occasion I had to personally great him, only months before his departure. Almost without talking, with his penetrating and fatherly gaze, carried by other people, he seemed to be an open book. I attended to his funeral and in reverence prayed a long time before his body; I prayed for the Church and for the faithfulness of us all to the Christian calling he invoked for us with all his strength. For this and so many other things, we have requested from the Holy See to allow us to worship him in our diocese, which he himself created. Translated by Martín Bruggendieck

H 115

H 116

Inquiring into the mysterious text of our being —Meditation on Fides et ratio, encyclical by Pope John Paul II— BY STANISLAW GRYGIEL

he spiritual vacuum in which society drowns itself today is due to man’s inner unity being torn between truth and liberty: reason has torn the link with verum and free will with each being’s bonum. The trascendentals in which metaphysics dwells, no longer defend the reality of the universe nor of man himself against truth constructed by reason and against the interests considered valid by free will in accordance with the circumstances. Confronted with the truth that identifies with the interests of the powerful, the weak react in two ways: submitting to those interests, or rebelling when it is no longer beneficial. Every slave is convinced that it is possible to free oneself by means of rebellion. What they do not see is that in the spiritual vacuum, rebellion expresses a reaction towards that which provokes annoyance and not to the knowledge of verum and to the love of bonum. The ideal of reactionary impulses is to eat ad libitum, eat the fruits of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and then of the Tree of Life. Men have already committed offense against the Tree of Knowledge and now they crave for the Tree of Life. Meanwhile, it is guarded by “the Cherubs and the flame of the glowing sword (Gn 3, 2 – 5: 22 – 24); but the avid reason that controls society more and more is starting to exclude “the Cherubs” as well as the “flame of the flaming sword.” The sensibility of man that reacts to stimuli, more vigorously now than what is believed, in the end only responds to heat and cold, cancelling any capacity for making a choice (liberum arbitrium). Even to be able to choose between hot and cold it is necessary to be united to another reality different from this two. In the spiritual vacuum, man being “separated” from the other different reality to that of heat and cold, can only react.

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 116 - 137

THE ENCYCLICAL FIDES ET RATIO DEFENDING MAN FROM THE SPIRITUAL VACUUM CAUSED BY THE LAWS OF REALITY, REMINDS HIM THAT REALITY TRULY EXISTS, THAT IT HAS BEEN WELL THOUGHT AND WELL LOVED, AND THAT IT AWAITS US FAITHFULLY.

H 117

THE SPIRITUAL VACUUM IN WHICH SOCIETY DROWNS ITSELF TODAY IS DUE TO MAN’S INNER UNITY BEING TORN BETWEEN TRUTH AND LIBERTY: REASON HAS TORN THE LINK WITH VERUM AND FREE WILL WITH EACH BEING’S BONUM.

Society, in view that the vacuum that deprives man of the ability to choose, is devastated by the totalitarianism of the stimuli which, as stated, in the end is reduced to hot and cold. Totalitarianism has no names, making use of many adjectives to explain it is a “legion” (Mc 5.9: Lc 8,30). One day it appears in Nazi clothes, another in the form of well-off consumism. Nevertheless, it always tries to withdraw man from his inner self and take him to “a distant country,” in which reduced to react to this or that comfort, “squanders” his own inherited identity (Lc 15, 13). Man’s identity is revealed in the tendency of his reason towards truth and his free will towards good. In this way, reason as well as free will are present in every human being in the union of his being verum and bonum. Knowing and loving human beings in this way, man exists spiritually; he heads towards the horizon and the future, always in-coming, never ending. Thus, man does not pass but becomes something greater, beyond his imagination. Spiritual existence is the field of metaphysics, it is where man feels dominus sui. Man, separated from truth and the good in beings, fills the spiritual vacuum that invades him with the ennuntiabilia made by his reason. The ennuntiabilia —says Saint Thomas— do not lead man towards existing things independent from his reason. Fides, faith, leads to these. It is precisely fundamentun spiritualis vitae1 and – we add – of the reality of life. Through faith man enters into a dialogue with that Other from whom verum and bonum and pulchrum originate and everything that exists.

Grief that has no consolation

1 Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologicae, III, 73, 3. a d3.

H 118

The encyclical Fides et ratio defending man from the spiritual vacuum caused by the laws of reality, reminds him that reality truly exists, that it has been well thought and well loved, and that it awaits us faithfully. Whoever in this manner returns to the thought and loved reality, breathes. Chapter four of the Pope’s encyclical, dedicated to the interaction between theology and philosophy, must be read in this way. The drama of the relationship between faith and philosophy, I think antecedes the problem of the interaction between philosophy and theology. The drama of the encounter between faith and philosophy is that it takes place in man’s innermost self, when, realising that he must die, is wounded by a grief that can not be alleviated. In fact, death represents the end of man’s ecstasies. In this spiritual grief, called suffering, man becomes magna question (Saint Agustine). With all his being, he poses the issue of his own life’s meaning; in other words,

he asks where he comes from, to where he is heading, and the meaning of his lifeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history (cfr. FeR, 26). To the Being-Question only the Being-Answer can reply. In his intimum as soon as man has looked into the eyes of Death, it becomes a challenge-question, thrust to God, because only God knows what is deep inside man, and so only God knows why man has to die. Being magna questio implies being lead again by the verum and bonum of the inner self, which is about to disappear, to the Truth and Good reflected in them. Being magna question means existing in dialogue with oneself and with this Other to whom man is aiming at. Existing as an interrogation, man lives in aiditu; awaiting for an answer. It is precisely in being such a question and such an expectation that man realises himself, in its deeper sense, in thought. Thus thinking, man liberates himself of whatever encloses him in his transient being. He gives himself to the Being-Answer, awaiting him until death, when he shall contemplate and salute Him from afar, as the dying Abraham and Moses contemplated and saluted the Promised Land (Hb 11, 13). So, man becomes sufficiently strong to be able to give his life for Truth and Good, forever reflected on those beings that are transient. Socrates and his disciple Plato gave the name of philosophy to this method of thought and expectancy. This friendship with knowledge (philosophy), revealed in the meditatio mortis, in fact in the preparatio ad mortem, introduces man into the dialogue with the Other. This dialogue constitutes the intimum of the human being, which is intimate only because of the presence of that Other who is the intimior of all that man can think about himself. In the interaction of the Other with him, man thinks and loves in the most profound sense. Philosopher and philosophising are liberated from philosophy itself. It is necessary for man to philosophise. In all, the meaning of his philosophy is not philosophical. The essence of philosophy is not philosophical. Man remains in this dialogue as long as he does not extinguish the desire to know the truth of his own being and does not cease to love it. Philosophy understood as a friendship with Truth in order to know and with Good in order to love, philosophy that goes through its reflexes, in other words, through the verum and bonum of all beings, is inscribed in manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s innermost self. In there arises the mysterious conviction, well founded in experience, that man before being able to choose a determined orientation for himself, is already oriented towards realities that transcend him. He who extinguishes that conviction also effaces philosophy. Then roaming in his intimum obscured by the lack of dialogue, he never becomes himself, because by lacking in hope he is not reached by that Other towards whom Truth and Good are guided.

THE TRASCENDENTALS IN WHICH METAPHYSICS DWELLS, NO LONGER DEFEND THE REALITY OF THE UNIVERSE NOR OF MAN HIMSELF AGAINST TRUTH CONSTRUCTED BY REASON AND AGAINST THE INTERESTS CONSIDERED VALID BY FREE WILL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

H 119

PHILOSOPHY UNDERSTOOD AS A FRIENDSHIP WITH TRUTH IN ORDER TO KNOW AND WITH GOOD IN ORDER TO LOVE, PHILOSOPHY THAT GOES THROUGH ITS REFLEXES, IN OTHER WORDS, THROUGH THE VERUM AND BONUM OF ALL BEINGS, IS INSCRIBED IN MAN’S INNERMOST SELF. IN THERE ARISES THE MYSTERIOUS CONVICTION, WELL FOUNDED IN EXPERIENCE, THAT MAN BEFORE BEING ABLE TO CHOOSE A DETERMINED ORIENTATION FOR HIMSELF, IS ALREADY ORIENTED TOWARDS REALITIES THAT TRANSCEND HIM. […]

H 120

In other words, philosophy occurs in man when he becomes aware that it is a text that has already being written. That is to say, that it is already known and loved before being able to know and love oneself. This text becomes visible in the invisible light emanating from death. Reading it, man opens up to the gift of faith and hope, gift announced by that mysterious conviction of being known and loved before being able to know and love oneself. “Look inside yourself! In your innermost self there is a fountain that never dries up, if you manage to find it,” wrote Marcus Aurelius. In the intimum of man springs the “living water” (cfr. Jn 4, 10) of faith and hope. Man arrives there by continuously reading into himself. He reads with his intellectus (the inter, or as Saint Thomas Aquinas prefers: the intus legere) and not calculates with the ratio (the reor, ratum). Man intuits (from intus/eor, enter within) that the history of his being has its foundations in “prehistoric” thought, the idea of being even before the conception of man, leaves open the possibility of existing in some way also after death. All that man can do is out his faith in this mysterious path indicated by the unity of verum and bonum, a union that makes beings beautiful, pulchri. Beauty, which is a form of Love – wrote Cyprian Kamil Norwid, Polish poet of the last century – enthuses us to work and to work is to resurge. Philosophy takes place in the absolute confidence of man in being and in the consequences of being verum and being bonum, which manifest in his existential unity called pulchrum. This unity summons and involves man entirely. Intellect and free will of those who do not put their trust in this metaphysical unity weaken themselves. Once they have “gathered” their “things,” that is to say having taken “the part of their patrimony” that is “due” to them, they go “to a far away land” (cfr. Lc 15, 12 – 13), where, separated from reality and confined to the immanence of their functions, experience alienation. Intellect by ceasing to see the verum in being reduces him to ratio, which only knows how to calculate quantity. Calculating reason attacks the being because it does not see it, does not recognise it. The options of free will isolated from the bonum, confused by the calculations of reason throws man to the whims of desires and fashions. Confused, due to being mutually interchangeable, reason and free will build a world oblivious of reality, where man is transformed into a collection of reactions to the experimental efficiency of mathematical equations. It is an artificial world where volitum becomes cognitum and cognitum becomes volitum, a fact that provokes chaos. In chaos, “everything is licit” (Dostoyevsky). In chaos, beings are not protected by this pulchrum. Beauty in fact intimidates, in such a way that the onlooker starts thinking and choosing. Where contemplation does not unite men with the beauty

of things, the inconstant rationalism of men, in who the intimum is no longer sparkled by verum and bonum, consequently by the Other, encourages them to do whatsoever is feasible. In a world reduced to what is feasible, philosophy is lacking: the fruit of the dialogue between philosophy and faith. Such a world teems with a great number of philosophies produced by “monologuers,” consequently removed from human beings and embedded in the systems of ennuntiabilia. Evidently in such a world there is no room for faith. If faith is sometimes needed, it is also produced, bought and sold, and then used and thrown into the garbage. Amongst philosophies and manifestations of faith built from ennuntiabilia there is no inherent interaction with dialogue. At the most these fit into the political and economic mechanisms of society to make it function more effectively. To men, who abandoning their intimum, function within this mechanism without being sparkled by the Other, the encyclical Fides et ratio will be like an embedded thorn.

The wisdom of Abraham Abraham, who was a great friend of knowledge, reading the verum and bonum inscribed in things, looked afar in the direction indicated by these things. He felt the call of the Other. “Through faith” (HB 11, 8 y 17), then, he departed from where he had lived in tranquillity, to search for the promise written in things. Abraham himself chose “being called.” The Other descended unto him and revealed His presence calling him: “Abraham, Abraham.” In the presence of the Other, Abraham replied with his own presence: “Here I am!” Both were ready to dialogue. Philosophical dialogue always develops within faith. Faith leading to the truth of things liberates man from his own opinions. What may Abraham have thought of his only son! The presence of the Other, imprinted in Isaac’s being, calls and compels Abraham to leave the cave where he was chained to the doxa of his philosophies about the subject of his son. “Take your son, the only one, the one you love, Isaac, go to Moira and there offer in holocaust in one of the mounts, the one I tell you” (Gn 22, 1 – 2). Only through love it is right to speak in this manner to the other one. If not, it is just criminal cruelty. And Abraham left again, according to his love of knowledge. Left hopefully “through faith,” placing his confidence in Love, without whom the interaction between faith and philosophy will always be unsuccessful, impeded by finite things. Who upon reading the being, does not read it fully, halting before the horizon instead of following the verum and bonum of this being, hides himself behind the ideas that he has procured for himself, he

[…] HE WHO EXTINGUISHES THAT CONVICTION ALSO EFFACES PHILOSOPHY. THEN ROAMING IN HIS INTIMUM OBSCURED BY THE LACK OF DIALOGUE, HE NEVER BECOMES HIMSELF, BECAUSE BY LACKING IN HOPE HE IS NOT REACHED BY THAT OTHER TOWARDS WHOM TRUTH AND GOOD ARE GUIDED.

H 121

PHILOSOPHY TAKES PLACE IN THE ABSOLUTE CONFIDENCE OF MAN IN BEING AND IN THE CONSEQUENCES OF BEING VERUM AND BEING BONUM, WHICH MANIFEST IN HIS EXISTENTIAL UNITY CALLED PULCHRUM

2 Summa theologiae, I, I, 3, ad 2.

H 122

can construct philosophies but will never create philosophy. In order to be able to create it, it is necessary for man to encounter the dialogue where Love calls on him to love heroically the truth. Philosophy is a kenosis by means of which man enters into Truth. Truth is bestowed to free men. “Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Mt 5,3). When I speak of the interaction of faith and philosophy I think of this kenotic philosophy, which even yields to itself, and not in the philosophies that hide in owned ideas. “Sell what you have (…) then come and follow me!” (Lc 18, 22). Nevertheless, the rich young man was not a great philo-sopher. He was not prepared to die because he was not open to be reborn in the Other. Frightened by the kenosis, he did not allow the happiness of the meditatio mortis and the preparatio ad morten. He went away saddened. Philosophy is not that encounter of God and man in which God, communicating His own being, reveals to man who He is, and man, trying to comprehend the Divine Word, creates theology. No doubt theology is the science of the Word Revealed by God or – as Saint Thomas Aquinas writes – quedam impressio divinae scientiae.2 Philosophy, on the other hand, represents the desire to find the Other who is God, in an almost prophetic desire. Precisely in his own intimum, man finds God. God awaits him. Man, re-entering himself, discovers that his intimum is intimum because within him there is Someone who is even more intimate than this intimate (intimior intimo meo writes Saint Augustine). This presence of the Other makes man ungraspable even to himself. It is necessary for man to continue to penetrate more profoundly within himself. As soon as man pauses in any part of himself, he ceases to understand himself, even if he understands the function of that which has retained him for any cause whatsoever. It is as if the truth of being man transcends him or as if he himself tries to become totally Other in order to understand his own being. Penetrating this intimum, the Prophets cry our to the Other: Descend with dew!, and to men: Convert!, while the philosophers, inquire the meaning of being ungraspable in this way, await the answer that men can not give. In the innermost of the philosophically and prophetically oriented man takes place the encounter with Christ, who knows “what is inside every man” (Jn 2, 25). The “divinehumanity” of the Word Incarnate, enveloping man in itself, “imprints itself” in his philosophy understood as a friendship with knowledge and not as a system to explain the relationships that constitute the universe. By this contact with the Word Incarnate, Philosophy never ceases being Philosophy. On the contrary, in the light emanating from the

ÂŤAbraham, who was a great friend of knowledge, reading the verum and bonum inscribed in things, looked afar in the direction indicated by these things. He felt the call of the OtherÂť. (Abraham and Isaac on the way to the place of Sacrifice, Marc Chagall, 1931)

H 123

INTELLECT AND FREE WILL OF THOSE WHO DO NOT PUT THEIR TRUST IN THIS METAPHYSICAL UNITY WEAKEN THEMSELVES. ONCE THEY HAVE “GATHERED” THEIR “THINGS,” THAT IS TO SAY HAVING TAKEN “THE PART OF THEIR PATRIMONY” THAT IS “DUE” TO THEM, THEY GO “TO A FAR AWAY LAND” (CFR. LC 15, 12 – 13), WHERE, SEPARATED FROM REALITY AND CONFINED TO THE IMMANENCE OF THEIR FUNCTIONS, EXPERIENCE ALIENATION. INTELLECT BY CEASING TO SEE THE VERUM IN BEING REDUCES HIM TO RATIO, WHICH ONLY KNOWS HOW TO CALCULATE QUANTITY. CALCULATING REASON ATTACKS THE BEING BECAUSE IT DOES NOT SEE IT, DOES NOT RECOGNISE IT. […]

H 124

Person of Christ, this philosophy becomes more self-conscious. Thus his steps are safer. The magna questio of God, which is his Word, gives a divine magnitude to man’s magna questio. The theologian, interpreting the magna questio of God, querit intellectum, while the philosopher, interpreting man, querit fidem. Thanks to philosophy, theology can enunciate its thoughts on the Word that descends to man. Philosophy, thanks to theology, better understands man who ascends towards the Answer. In should not surprise us if the philosophies without the act of listening, estranged from philosophy, run away from the light freed by the Word. Sun always dissipates fog. The encounter with Christ liberates the philosopher of the mere thinking about God, avoiding in this way the risk of reducing God to any yearning contained in the systems constructed by reason.

Personal encounter God does not encounter man in those beings treated as objects, as if they were only matter with which anything one’s desires can be done. The man who erases the verum and bonum written by God in each being and imprints in him his own interests, will only find himself. Precisely because of this, only the philosophy imbued with the conviction that the being is a mysterious text, is a dialogue: to philosophise consists of knowing how to read (intellectus). Philosophies that consist only in writing have no dialogue, even when they interpret each other. Adding one monologue to another monologue will never become a true dialogue. Thus, the philosophies that only “monologate” do not transcend beyond themselves, so they remain closed to faith, without faith man does not arrive at the real things, and so does not get to what they mean or indicate… In interpersonal relations there is no appraisal of objects. However, they require a being to establish a relation; if not, they would only be textual ghost-encounters, that become more efficient by so doing. The philosophical co-production occurs outside from people, in specific objects, where they are not present, only their identities, alienated by the possession of these objects. Clearly, the encounter of two people takes place in their intimum, but it is revealed and develops in their bodies, and in so many little things, for example: offering flowers to one another. It is revealed and it is realised with the condition that their bodies, their flowers and so many other things be quaedam impressio et vestigium of the mutual presence of the people themselves. Then their bodies, their actions and their flowers exist as written texts from one to the other. Only

then each one feels called upon to read the other one that will not allow the treatment of the other ad libitum. Fascinated by the beauty (pulchrum) of the verum et bonum, confident in their intellect and will, a beautiful character not susceptible to calculations, both feel compelled not to possess the other, but philosophy, meaning that each one will enter the intimum of the other. They feel compelled to offer themselves mutually. The intellect, knowing the verum of the other, and the will, loving his bonum, assumes it, meaning that it introduces the other in the intimum of man. Thus people do not make their encounter in the objects or by means of them, but in their own agree that sequitur his esse, in their knowing and loving each other. This agere fills the intimum of each other. The one person reads the other one as an already written text and loves that person as a being already loved. In their dialogic agree they become friends with the knowledge reflected in their beings. They confide in each other through the pulchrum of their truthful and good being, in the hope that the consequences of their philosophy will not fail them. Precisely in this encounter of people, an encounter with the intervention of beauty and the unity of truth and the good of their beings, the interaction of faith and philosophy takes place. This beautiful character, summoning the intellect to know the truth and the will to love goodness, lead those who have found themselves in this work towards that Other that â&#x20AC;&#x153;omnes intelligent Deum.â&#x20AC;?3 Amongst men, the receiver is an instant giver; this would be impossible if there was not that Other that only gives. It is He who takes the initiative of making them dialogue, so that through the verum et bonum of their being leads them to their origin. From their friendship with knowledge, their philosophy realises that it is a friendship with the Gift that theology calls Grace.

THE OPTIONS OF FREE WILL ISOLATED FROM THE BONUM, CONFUSED BY THE CALCULATIONS OF REASON THROWS MAN TO THE WHIMS OF DESIRES AND FASHIONS. CONFUSED, DUE TO BEING MUTUALLY INTERCHANGEABLE, REASON AND FREE WILL BUILD A WORLD OBLIVIOUS OF REALITY, WHERE MAN IS TRANSFORMED INTO A COLLECTION OF REACTIONS TO THE EXPERIMENTAL EFFICIENCY OF MATHEMATICAL EQUATIONS.

Sterile philosophies and theologies The postmodern defeat of culture is a product of the careless production of philosophies, consequently the careless production of theologies. The lack of philosophy and theology has altered the vision that man has of himself and of the universe.4 The crisis of the dependence of man in truth and good is shown in this lack of philosophy and theology. Society has distanced itself from those beings that manifest themselves as truthful and good. Society tries to solve all its problems through the possession of objects including science. Having interest in the truth and good of the being, it is not encouraged by the beauty in work, which mean it does not nurture it, but only makes it do objects to use and discard. Such society does Continues in page 128

3 Saint Thomas Aquina, Summa Theologiae, 1, 2, 3, c. 4 Saint Thomas Aquina calling theology impressio divinae scientiae, addas: quae est una et simples omnium (ver nota 2).

H 125

IN THE EUCHARIST THERE ARE NO DEAD

As a disciple of Karol Wojtyla, a personal friend of his and holder of the John Paul II Chair of the Pontifical Lateran University, Professor Stanislav Grygiel was interviewed by Woldzimierz Redzioch for L’Osservatore Romano in a special number published on the occasion of the beatification of the former Pontiff. Reproduced here are three of his answers. —Q: You learned in Krakow the news of the election of “your” archbishop to the Chair of Peter and followed the first months of the pontificate from Poland. What impact did Karol Wojtyla’s election have on the life of Polish Catholics? —A: I must repeat things that are already known. The Poles’ first reaction was one of joy, but on being joyful they became conscious of the new possibilities which opened that night for their homeland, for their Church. They understood that, from then on, the Church need not carry out its pastoral work in semi-secrecy. Catholics became more courageous and audacious: an eloquent sign of this change were the popular manifestations on the streets of the country’s cities that, without anyone having asked for permission, lasted the whole night of October 16, 1978. I remember the discussions that night with my friends: we were convinced that Poland’s borders with the West would be opened and also that sooner or later, politically, Poland would come out of the Communist Bloc. Previously it was thought that Communism would last for generations, seeing how Western intellectuals and politicians allowed themselves to be seduced by the words and money of the Soviet Secret Police. How many times, in fact, had they tried to convince us that we should adapt ourselves to Communism! It was the Pope’s first pilgrimage to Poland in 1979 that awakened hope in Poles, somewhat somnolent because of forty years of Communism. In sum, during his first years of pontificate the dawn of new times began to be glimpsed, and not only for Poland. —Q: Those who had the good fortune to be guests of John Paul II observed that the air of family was breathed in the Pope’s apartment. The Pontiff did not just surround himself with secretaries, nuns and collaborators, but also with many old friends who frequented the papal apartment with their families. Your family was one of those the Pope received. What do you remember of those meetings? —A: The simplicity and kindness of the Pope. Conversations with him were an exchange of gifts: he gave us the presence of his person and we, on receiving it, had the sensation of having given him ours. He waited for others, he sought them. He was for others. And he was a faithful man. In fact, thanks to this fidelity to others, with their help he learned the truth of the covenant that two persons establish forever out of love. He offered his time with the same respect to adults and children. Once during a dinner with him, my son, who was then eight years old, was kicking me under the table to make me understand that he wanted to go home. The Holy Father realized this and asked him: “What’s wrong?” And my son answered him sincerely: “I’m bored. I’d like to go home.” And the Pope said: ”You’re right. I invited you to my home and I’m not paying attention to you. I’m sorry.” And from that moment until the end of the evening he began to play and joke with him. For me it was a lesson on what it means to live for others and to be a pastor.

H 126

â&#x20AC;&#x201D;Q: What do you miss most of John Paul II? â&#x20AC;&#x201D;A: Nothing, except now and then his physical presence. All that was essential and proper of his person continues to be present. His death did not destroy anything. Our dialogue continues. In the heart of the Church, that is, in the Eucharist, there are no dead. Translated by Virginia Forrester

H 127 127

SOCIETY HAS DISTANCED ITSELF FROM THOSE BEINGS THAT MANIFEST THEMSELVES AS TRUTHFUL AND GOOD. SOCIETY TRIES TO SOLVE ALL ITS PROBLEMS THROUGH THE POSSESSION OF OBJECTS INCLUDING SCIENCE. HAVING INTEREST IN THE TRUTH AND GOOD OF THE BEING, IT IS NOT ENCOURAGED BY THE BEAUTY IN WORK, WHICH MEAN IT DOES NOT NURTURE IT, BUT ONLY MAKES IT DO OBJECTS TO USE AND DISCARD.

H 128

not have far sightedness; it is weak and lazy. Weak and lazy people distance themselves from philosophy and theology. Philosophies and theologies that do not teach men to say fiat mihi! to the gift of truth and good are culturally sterile. Refusing to serve truth and good, inevitably they are used by the utopias and they degenerate into ideologies. Between utopias and ideologies there is no interaction. Once in a while they converge in the interests of their owners, interaction is only possible among magnanimous beings. Philosophical thought being dialoguistic, denies the vacuum in which, to say it like Dostoyevsky, anything is right and in which philosophies and theologies are done ad libitum. “Everything is licit” only to that thought which unmoved by the truth of the human being cannot be an answer to the Love there reflected. Such thought and such a will avoid death and leave man unprepared for it. They are not philosophic because they are not inquisitive about the meaning of life. He who does not become this question will never be dominus sui. It is natural then that in slavery philosophy and theology will not flourish. Slavery produces its own substitutes, which imitate science and depend servilely on them. Due to the lack of thought, which is a question awaiting an answer, the intellectus fidei grows deformed; it is deformed by the scientific ratio shut off to dialogue; amongst slaves there is no interaction. The fundament of philosophy (verum, bonum et pulchrum which constitute the being of man and the universe), is symbolic. It indicates far more than what it signifies; it indicates the Other without signifying Him. Guided by the being itself, man wishes to unite himself to the Fountain from which spring the trascendentals that overwhelm and form him. Philosophising he walks magnanimously towards the distant future, and at the same time always present in the path of the verum, bonum et pulchrum. A Greek would say that the philosopher tends to find and insert himself, sym-ballein, with the Other who, being the Beginning and the End is present in everything that comes between them. This means that the Other is present in all beings as they are extended in their “space.” When reason refuses this sym-ballein with truth and the will with good, they can only dia-ballein, they can only fall apart from the presence of the Other and of all that “extends” therein. The diabolical reason and will, subjected to the vacuum in which there is nothing to know or love, forces man to take seriously not his products, but only their mere functioning. When Saint Paul alerts us about this false seriousness, defends our reason and our will: “Time is pressing. So, those who have /…/ live as if they have not /…/ I say this for your own good, not to trap you, but to move you towards what is most worthy…” ( 1 Co, 7, 29 – 35). From page 125

The Pope reminding us that the auditus fidei understood as Revelation always present in Tradition, in the Scriptures and in the teachings of the Church, is always explained and to a certain extent formed by the intellectus fidei, defends not so much the faith but the reason and will of man. By defending them, he not only defends theology, which needs them, but philosophy itself.

Descent and ascent The fact that we do not say ratio fidei but intellectus fidei is quite meaningful. Faith, when guiding man towards the beings and not towards the ennuntiabilia, does not allow him to calculate the pulchrum, verum et bonum. Nor to calculate the words that express truth, good and beauty. He reads them, intellegit. On the other hand, he who calculates them, retur, at best will capture the linguistic and historic-cultural situation of man. He does not leave the text and does not follow the direction indicated by him. This is why that “furthermore” with which life is meaningless, eludes him. Historicism and relativism inherent to diabolical reasoning, reduce words to the resultant circumstances and force men to be inclined towards them. Man inclined towards circumstances, cannot manage to tend towards truth and good. In men, retained by their own cogitata et volita, the intelligibility of the text collapses, understood as an action of signifying and indicating. Evidently, with man thus retained, philosophy as well as theology collapse. It is true that for some time he will be able to live from his inheritance, but squanders it or wastes it in the “far away land” (Lc 15, 13) remote to the intelligibility of beings that transcend history and science. Where does it take us to or takes us again the road that begins in the intimum of our being? Abraham and Isaac fundament their dialogue in the mutual presence of each one in the presence of the other one, a presence that slaves ignore. In fact, they remain at the foot of the mount in the country of Moira. “Father,” says Isaac. Abraham answers: “Here I am, my son.” Trusting each other, each one present to the other one, they pose the essential questions because they are not afraid of each other. “Here is the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for the holocaust?” Abraham tells him the divine truth, not one constructed by man. Abraham conveys to his son the truth he believes and which both must search for: “God shall provide the lamb for the holocaust, my son” (Gn 22, 7 – 8). Abraham and Isaac called upon to search for the truth perceives it “as in a mirror” ( 1 Co 13, 12). However it becomes more and more distinct and in relation to their opinions,

PHILOSOPHIES AND THEOLOGIES THAT DO NOT TEACH MEN TO SAY FIAT MIHI! TO THE GIFT OF TRUTH AND GOOD ARE CULTURALLY STERILE. REFUSING TO SERVE TRUTH AND GOOD, INEVITABLY THEY ARE USED BY THE UTOPIAS AND THEY DEGENERATE INTO IDEOLOGIES. IT IS NATURAL THEN THAT IN SLAVERY PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY WILL NOT FLOURISH. SLAVERY PRODUCES ITS OWN SUBSTITUTES, WHICH IMITATE SCIENCE AND DEPEND SERVILELY ON THEM.

H 129

DUE TO THE LACK OF THOUGHT, WHICH IS A QUESTION AWAITING AN ANSWER, THE INTELLECTUS FIDEI GROWS DEFORMED; IT IS DEFORMED BY THE SCIENTIFIC RATIO SHUT OFF TO DIALOGUE; AMONGST SLAVES THERE IS NO INTERACTION.

5 Saint Thomas Aquinas, De caelo, 1, 22.

H 130

even more so to Abraham. It takes place precisely because of the interaction of philosophy and faith, interaction that takes place in their dialogue. I would call this interaction perceptio veritatis tendens in ipsum, perception of truth that has yet to tend to the perceived truth. With those words Saint Thomas Aquinas defined dogma. Dialoguing in that way, Abraham and Isaac ascend the mount. God, on the other hand, descends… The descent is akin to God; the ascent, to man. The mount in which the Other reveals his fatherly face is called Golgotha. He reveals it in his Word. Being the Face of God, the Word of Golgotha contains the causes for all theology: dogmatic, moral, fundamental (66, 67). Certainly, theology is based in Revelation but must always correspond to the magna question that is man. This is why to be able to express it, the gift of faith needs the intellect and the will of man, as well as his intellect and his will need faith so as to not wander in vain or stop in any given place of the universe and of man, even when this may be angelically beautiful (Fr 67). Both the philosopher and the theologian perceive, each in his own way, the truth and both tend towards it. The theologian tends to it descending with the Word to the philosopher, while the philosopher goes in the same direction, but ascending. The interaction, sometimes dramatic between the philosophy of the one and the theology of the other takes place in the intimum. The interaction between them depends on their transparency. Philosophy and theology through which it is not possible to see the being of the universe or of man, detains us in its ennuntiabilia, a sign that in its interaction faith is lacking. Consequentially, reality itself is lacking, without it philosophy dies. The cultural crisis originates precisely in the opaqueness of the theologies not done in aidutu, and in the opaqueness of the theologies not done in the intellectu. The lack of auditus obscures or confuses philosophy and the lack of intellectus confuses theology. Opaque and confused theologies and philosophies converge in vacuum. The Pope defends philosophy when he stresses “the universal character contained in faith” (Fr 69). Entrusted to everyone, faith resents the historical and cultural situations. With it philosophy transcends beyond the universe and history; in fact, it transcends itself. Precisely because of it philosophical thought is capable of discerning “not what men think, but which is the objective truth”5 (Fr 69).

ÂŤPrecisely in his own intimum, man finds God. God awaits him. Man, re-entering himself, discovers that his intimum is intimum because within him there is Someone who is even more intimate than this intimate (intimior intimo meo writes Saint Augustine).Âť (St. Agustine by Tintoretto. Detail of the oil painting in Museum Civici, Vincenza).

H 131

THE DIABOLICAL REASON AND WILL, SUBJECTED TO THE VACUUM IN WHICH THERE IS NOTHING TO KNOW OR LOVE, FORCES MAN TO TAKE SERIOUSLY NOT HIS PRODUCTS, BUT ONLY THEIR MERE FUNCTIONING.

H 132

The Pope defends philosophy calling on philosophers to purify it. Calling on them to create philosophy, calls them ad heroismus. He who purifies the river, in some way conducts its waters again to the purity of its own source, from where they spring. The source is the fountain of the being of the water and of its purityperfection. The waters of the river return perfect recuperating their “lost” purity. The philosopher purifies philosophy, returning to the origins of being and acting, consequently to the origins of knowing and loving. The intellect is purified when it is led again to truth and will, being led again to good. These constitute the source of philosophy. The philosopher struggles all his life to “say” properly the being, which is to announce him in consequence with his principles and his Source. He fights like Jacob fought all night with the Angel of God to obtain the “blessing” for himself. Every being wishes to be well “said.” When he is “ill-said,” he dissolves in “everything is licit.” Jacob and the philosopher convert. Converting they live differently in comparison with other men. They walk in accordance with another logic. According to the rest, they both limp. He who goes to the source always walks against the current of the river. John Paul II calls on the philosophers to go against the current in order to purify the intellect and the will of man; if not the cultures will not become the culture; they will not have the necessary strength to aim at the values that transcend them and turn them into culture. With these values man builds the house (ethos) in which he feels dominus sui. This means that where is no interaction between faith and philosophy, and between philosophy and theology, man wanders homeless. The Word that reveals the Paternal Face of God in mount Golgotha leads the cultures to their unity. Purifies them of the doxa of the slaves of the cave (Plato), revealing the dignity of man which elevates him beyond any price. The cultures that do not purify themselves in this way become corrupt and turn into political systems. Corrupt, they corrupt language, becoming formal, thus being understood only by those initiated in the said systems. Cultures that are reduced to mere politics function as if they were criterion of philosophy, faith and theology; they decide what is true and what is false, what is good and what is evil, what is life and what is death. Theologians no longer speak like the Apostles in Jerusalem on Pentecost; they were Galileans yet everyone understood them. (cfr Hch 2, 7 – 11). Not by chance the incarnate Word reached man “all over the world” through the Greek mode of agere it is a fact chosen by God that the first “enculturation” of

faith was that of Greece. Fulfilling the commandment: “Go around the world and proclaim the Good News to all Creation” (Mc 16, 15), we cannot pretend that we do not see it. All the successive “enculturation” were and will be marked by the Greek way of seeing reality, even though these cultures should ask Christ for the Gift. “If you knew the Gift of God and who is saying to you: “Give me to drink,” you would have asked Him and He would have given you living water” (Jn 4, 10). Christ directed these words to a person who lived in a different culture than His. Cultures that do not enter in the intimum of man where they are transformed into culture, will never ask for “living water.” It is the intimum of man that thirsts for the Gift. The philosophising understood as desire and love of knowledge, which is not philosophic, forms every culture. Hence in every culture, between the philosophy that shapes it and the theology that shows its fulfilment, the interaction that the encyclical calls “circularity” (Fr 73) is accomplished. Theology begins with the word of God revealed in history. Aided by the intellectus “in the succession of generations” theology attains an increasingly profound understanding of God’s truth. The invisible light of this truth in turn manifests the truth of man and the universe in full splendour. In this circularity, the depth of the quaestio – therefore philosophy – as well as the theological understanding of faith is achieved. In order to enter into interaction with theology, philosophy has to turn its back on the systems, as in them truth is reduced to the truth of the system, open only to the system of which it is part of. The truth (verum) reflected in the being represents the guiding star to think about them. Because of this, the friendship with knowledge, filosofia, will never be an adaequatio perfecta intellectus et voluntatis cum re. Nor will the intellectus fidei. Great theologians are also great thinkers when they are not ignorant of philosophy; also great philosophers are great thinkers when they do not shut off themselves of theology. In his relation with words that are beings, the philosopher wants to arrive at the Word, in which they, properly “summoned,” would find their fulfilment. The theologian already looks at beings through the Word, wishing to lead them again to It, Great philosophers and great theologians are found where desire and faith come in contact. John Paul II quotes some of them: Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, John Henry Newman, Antonio Rosmini, Jacques Maritain, Etienne Gilson, Edith Stein, Vladimir Soloviev, Pavel A. Florenskij, Petr J. Daadaev, Vladimir N. Losskihj. These names do not mean that we should their path. Far from imposing on ourselves a particular method, even if it

MAN INCLINED TOWARDS CIRCUMSTANCES, CANNOT MANAGE TO TEND TOWARDS TRUTH AND GOOD. IN MEN, RETAINED BY THEIR OWN COGITATA ET VOLITA, THE INTELLIGIBILITY OF THE TEXT COLLAPSES, UNDERSTOOD AS AN ACTION OF SIGNIFYING AND INDICATING. EVIDENTLY, WITH MAN THUS RETAINED, PHILOSOPHY AS WELL AS THEOLOGY COLLAPSE.

H 133

were the most beautiful, the Pope only wants to point out that the dialogue with these thinkers help us to view with all our being the truth and good towards which our being is directed.

The light of reason

JOHN PAUL II CALLS ON THE PHILOSOPHERS TO GO AGAINST THE CURRENT IN ORDER TO PURIFY THE INTELLECT AND THE WILL OF MAN; IF NOT THE CULTURES WILL NOT BECOME THE CULTURE; THEY WILL NOT HAVE THE NECESSARY STRENGTH TO AIM AT THE VALUES THAT TRANSCEND THEM AND TURN THEM INTO CULTURE.

H 134

We read in the encyclical Fides et ratio (75, 76, 77) that philosophy can be realised in three stages. 1. There have been and there are philosophers that not having found Christ, do philosophy independent from the historic Revelation and the Christian faith. Their aspiration towards autonomy – says the Pope – is “legitimate” within the scope of the limits imposed by the finite character of man, recognised by him. Moreover, it “sustains and reinforces itself “because” the philosophical persistence (…) as a search for truth in the natural milieu remains at least implicitly open to the supernatural” (Fr 75). Grace - stresses the Pope – does not destroy nature, it perfects it (Fr 75). It perfects it on condition that its natural autonomy be realised in accordance with the criterion that does not violate the intellect or the will of man, driving him away from the truth and good. Theology could “rely on concepts and arguments” developed solely by the philosophy carried out with the intellect and the will, not secularised, meaning, not closed in time of corruption. Theology needs the philosophy of transformation not one of impermanence. The autonomy of philosophy does not mean “the vindication of the self sufficiency of thought” (Fr 75), vindication that many philosophers propagate trying to construct the so-called separate philosophy. Deciding a priori where not to look for the truth, deciding in practice what philosophy is or should be. Truth and good oppose violence, they oppose it without violating their adversaries. They withdraw in silence, but silence is precisely the strongest word in language. In the presence of good and truth, the so-called separated philosophies are weak. Weak are the thoughts in which silence does not resound. Vacuum is certainly always weak. 2. There have existed and there exist philosophers whose intellect tends towards truth and whose will tends towards good in the faith in Christ. Their being magna quaestio ascends together with the Magna quaestio of Christ that which manifests itself in the Mount of Olives, in Golgotha, even in the garden where His body was buried. In His life on earth, Christ always ascends. “Do not touch me (Nolli me tangere) because I have not yet ascended to the Father” (Jn 20, 17), He said to Mary Magdalene after the Resurrection. The dialogue with Christ who ascends purifies and deepens the thinking of the philosopher. It helps him to be free of matter and beings.

«All the successive ‘enculturation’ were and will be marked by the Greek way of seeing reality, even though these cultures should ask Christ for the Gift.»

H 135

THE “CENTRE” OF THE UNIVERSE AND HISTORY IS NOT GRASPED BY A PHILOSOPHY THAT OMITS THE INCARNATION, A “CENTRE” WHICH IS GIVES MEANING TO BOTH (REDEMPTOR HOMINIS, 1). THE ASCENT OF THE WORD INCARNATE DOES NOT CEASE TO SURPRISE PHILOSOPHERS. IN FACT SOME ABANDON THE WORD INCARNATE, EVEN THOUGH THEY CONTINUE WEARING ITS ROBE (CHRISTIAN VALUES), BUT THIS TIME TEARING IT. THE DIALOGUES BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND FAITH, AND PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY CONTINUE TO DEVELOP IN THE AEROPAGI OF THE WORLD.

H 136

The truly Christian philosophy is far from being the official philosophy of the Church. The official philosophies are no longer the philosophy. Their strength does not come from truth, but from an attitude of protection. Christian is the philosophy metaphysically open to the Gift of faith and inspired by it, assisted anthropologically in the light of the Word incarnate. Then and only then, philosophy expounding in a more profound way can question: evil, that mortifies him, man and God Himself, God’s freedom and the liberation of man. The “centre” of the universe and history is not grasped by a philosophy that omits the Incarnation, a “centre” which is gives meaning to both (Redemptor hominis, 1). The ascent of the Word incarnate does not cease to surprise philosophers. In fact some abandon the Word incarnate, even though they continue wearing its robe (Christian values), but this time tearing it. The dialogues between philosophy and faith, and philosophy and theology continue to develop in the Aeropagi of the world. 3. In this drama theology plays its own role. Calls on philosophy to help explain the content of the Word historically revealed and to dispute in its favour, because it too has to “verify” the intelligibility and universal truths of its assertions (Fr 77). The Fathers of the Church and the theologians in the Middle Ages proceeded in this manner. The theologians who distanced themselves from philosophy and try to develop their theories away from it end up doing philosophies, which are only reactions to the tendencies and fashions in vogue. Few things are as ridiculous as pastoral work, which adheres to theologies converted in ancillae of philosophies, which resemble the spider webs torn by the winds of fashion. Theology, when it asks the help of philosophy, does not annul the autonomy of philosophical thought. On the contrary, it enhances it. God’s own Word which is absolutely Other, demands that the philosopher, proceeding in “accordance with his own rules” and based on “his own principles” (79), remain open to the truth in such a way that he never looses “the ability to interrogate himself and to question” (79). The word of God needs the magna quaestio of man, where it is lacking, the word of God does not give fruit. To lose the ability to question and to question oneself would be equivalent to a humiliating absolutism of reason, because reason turned absolute does not inquire it only constructs half questions and half answers. Nothing astonishes it, which is a sign that its agere (to know and to love) has been reduced to facere objects that function like truth and good. In a world constitute of truths produced by the humiliated reason there is no space

for faith, yet there is for theologies (not for theology!). However, these represent humiliations of theology itself: reason that does not know how to inquire nor does it know how to think. It produces only in conformity with the situations. Theology – writes the Pope – does not need a philosophical system, but an adequate way of philosophising. One of the most beautiful examples of the adequate way of philosophising is Saint Thomas Aquinas. He knew how to “defend the radical novelty contributed by Revelation without undervaluing the path inherent to reason” (78). I end this meditation with the words of Saint Augustine. They enlighten us to be able to understand the essence of the interaction between philosophy and faith, and philosophy and theology, helping us, at the same time, to perceive the causes of the spiritual vacuum in which postmodern society is suffocating itself: “The act of believing is nothing more than to think agreeing /…/ he who believes thinks and believing thinks, and thinking believes /…/ Faith, if it has not been thought about is nothing;”6 “If you take away the consent, you take away faith, because without consent nothing is believed”.7

Translated by Carmen Bullemore and Luis Vargas Saavedra

6 Saint Augustine, De praedestinatione sanctorum, 2, 5. 7 Saint Augustine, De fide, spe et caritate, 7.

H 137

A Culture of Life Versus an A nti-Culture of Death —Key Insights of Blessed Pope John Paul II— BY JOSEF SEIFERT

THE VALUE OF A CULTURE IS TO A LARGE EXTENT MEASURED BY THE DEGREE OF AWARENESS OF HUMAN DIGNITY INVESTED AND EXPRESSED IN IT BY THE IMAGE OF MAN IT HAS. WE MAY SAY THAT TO UNDERSTAND MAN AS A PERSON ENDOWED WITH INTRINSIC DIGNITY IS THE FOUNDATION OF A “CULTURE OF LIFE”, WHILE REDUCING MAN TO MATTER AND DENYING IS SPIRITUAL AND TRANSCENDENT NATURE AND DESTINY IS THE CAUSE OF A “CULTURE OF DEATH.”

lessed Pope John Paul II coined two quite original terms that had a tremendous impact by the way in which he interpreted and used them: “culture of life” and “culture of death.” He directed a vociferous appeal to all human persons of good will that they build a “culture of life” and he brought it uniquely home to us that this “culture of life” is gravely menaced today by a “culture of death.” Many human life movements and heroic commitments have drawn their inspiration from the perceptive and deep ways in which Pope John Paul II developed his profound insights into the importance of a “culture of life” and the danger of a “culture of death.” The contrast and dramatic battle between these two anti-thetical “cultures” and attitudes became, by being interpreted so deeply by Pope Wojtyla in the light of a philosophy of man and ethics and in the religious light of what the Pope called the “Gospel of Life,” the Evangelium vitae, a tremendous inspiration for millions. Directing to humanity the urgent call to build a “culture of life,” John Paul II also held out to us the desperate need for mankind to work towards overcoming the horror of a “culture of death.”1 But while almost all persons for whom the exhortation of the Pope to build a “culture of life” and uproot the “culture of death” became a true rallying force, understood the meaning of these words quite well in practical life, it may still be worth reflecting more in depth on what is meant by these terms.

What is Culture?

1 Pope John Paul II expressed his meaning of the “culture of death” forcefully in Evangelium vitae, 87.1.

H 138

Culture broadly understood encompasses all those aspects of human life that possess a form that is specifically human and are related to works and expressions of human persons which go beyond the mere manifestation of the general nature of man. Since, however, no human being can engage in agriculture, think, speak, order his private and public life, or even pray to God without doing so in a specific language

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 138 - 153

H 139

THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT POPE JOHN PAUL II WANTED TO INSIST ON AS CENTRAL ELEMENT OF THE OPPOSITION BETWEEN A “CULTURE OF LIFE” AND A “CULTURE OF DEATH” WAS THE MORAL, SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL REPERCUSSIONS OF WHETHER WE RECOGNIZE THE INHERENT PERSONHOOD AND DIGNITY OF EACH HUMAN BEING OR TREAT MANY HUMAN BEINGS AS IF THEY WERE DEPRIVED OF INHERENT DIGNITY AND OF THE FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS THAT SPRING FROM IT, PARTICULARLY THE RIGHT TO LIFE.

2 See Centesimus annus, 24.1. Cf. also Pope John Paul II, Via consecrata, 98, 1, where he speaks of the great contributions to the development and protection of culture through consecrated persons. 3 I am thinking here of the title of a late work of Max Scheler (published in the year of his death), Man’s Place in Nature, transl. and introd. by Hans Meyerhoff, 10th Printing (New York: The Noonday Press, 1979). In the last few years of his life (1923/241928) Scheler deviated more and more profoundly from the personalistic views expressed in many of his earlier writings. I disagree profoundly with Scheler’s views expressed in Die Stellung des Menschen (some of which coincide with the object of our critique in this paper).

H 140

or form, it belongs to the essence of man, specifically of any human person who lives in a human community, to have, or to partake in, some culture.2 And the higher the aesthetic or intellectual, the moral or religious value and purity of these things are, the higher and more developed is such a culture, and the more it frees the human being from a state of barbarism even though even people of the highest cultural achievements such as the Greeks and Romans could fall into abysmal barbarism as soon as they lacked the moral virtues without which all other elements of culture neither can prevent barbarism nor retain their own purity. The destruction of one of the highest cultures in history and the abysmal barbarism of Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia taught us in the last hundred years another awful lesson on this truth. Besides art and music, also science and philosophy are parts of culture, although, inasmuch as they reach true results and hence possess a value independent of time, their reality and content – not their historical roots – transcend any particular civilization and culture. In this they resemble objective moral values and religion which, inasmuch as they are true (instead of constituting mere culturally shaped substitutes for true morality and religion), entirely transcend a local and limited culture, whereas music and art, even when their beauty exceeds any limits of a given culture and thus ceases to be specifically “local” – Irish, Napolitan, Tyrolian or Viennese – at the same time may embody perfectly the spirit of the particular culture or nation from which works of art spring. This is much less the case with philosophy, except for the language, imagery, or the context in which it is expressed, and hardly at all with mathematics or natural science.

A “culture of life” versus a “culture of death” Philosophy and religion, through their vast influence on culture at large, have in particular a profound impact on the generally accepted vision of man and on a concrete society’s vision of the position of the human person in the cosmos which may be called the soil from which culture, particularly the “culture of life,” rises.3 Mainly through the conception of man implicit in, or provided by, them, philosophy and science have molded in a decisive way ancient and modern cultures as well as their moral standards. They have made many contributions towards what Pope John Paul II calls the “culture of life” as a culmination of all culture, especially of a culture formed by the grandiose and sublime vision of Christian revelation which, through its teachings on creation, redemption, resurrection and eternal life is in a special way the religion of life and inspiration of a “culture of life.”

But both philosophers and scientists also have had an awful responsibility for the reverse: the “culture of death,” or rather the ghastly “anti-culture of death” that surrounds us from all sides. Philosophically and scientifically inspired opposite visions of the world and of man’s place in the universe do not remain on a mere speculative plane: they lead to opposite political and legal systems and, still more dramatically, they save or destroy millions of human lives. As Hermann Lübbe, a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Zurich, stated not too long ago: In no century more millions of persons have been murdered than in the 20th century; and the victims of Auschwitz and the Gulag and countless other places, have to a large extent not been killed by a relapse to animal passions or on account of dark feelings of national pride or vengeance, but by a mere logical application of ideas about man which highly respected scientists and philosophers have taught for decades at the most prestigious Universities around the globe to politics and private life: these ideas about man, when carried out in practice, killed and are killing millions of human lives when they are translated and transposed into political ideologies (not to speak of the far more numerous unborn and elderly killed in abortion and euthanasia); and they killed and are killing a tremendous amount of what is good in Western civilization. We might recall Lenin’s words here: “There is no meanness or villainy for the defense of which no Professor could be found”. This applies also to the role philosophy and science played in the building of a “culture of death.” In contrast, a true philosophical and scientific understanding of the marvels of creation can serve a positive culture of life. While I fully respect the tremendous weight, significance, and influence which the Blessed John Paul II’s speaking of a culture of life and a culture of death possess, and while I believe that the expression “culture of life” and its being contrasted to what is understood through the Papal Encyclicals as “culture of death” is a most fortunate and important contribution, I experience some hesitation to use for the phenomenon the blessed Pope describes with the term “culture of death” this same expression. For it seems to me that the term “culture,” at least in English and German, has too positive a ring to it to be used to describe a society dominated by evil and places of mass-murder such as Auschwitz, the Gulag, Nazi and communist totalitarian States or the behavior of our society in abortion clinics and euthanasia, which defy all culture.4 Barbarous actions which are blatantly murderous and fail to show any respect for the fundamental value of human life do not seem to deserve the noble tone of the word “culture” but are, by the very same token by which they attack all that is noble about human persons also enemies of culture, “anti-cultures.”

THIS TERM THEN DESIGNATES, FOURTHLY, A UNIQUE VALUE WHICH NOT ONLY ENDOWS EACH PERSON WITH AN INTRINSIC AND OBJECTIVE PRECIOUSNESS – FOR THIS CAN ALSO BE SAID OF ANIMALS AND OF ALL LIVING BEINGS AS WELL AS OF DEAD MATERIAL THINGS – BUT WHICH ALSO RAISES THE PERSON TO AN INCOMMENSURABLY HIGHER LEVEL OF VALUE, TO AN AXIOLOGICAL LEVEL INCOMPARABLE WITH ANY OTHER VALUE WHICH DOES NOT MERIT THE LOFTY TITLE OF ‘DIGNITY’.

4 See Dietrich von Hildebrand, “Der Kampf um die Person”, Memoiren und Aufsätze gegen den Nationalsozialismus 1933-1938. Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Zeitgeschichte, mit Alice von Hildebrand und Rudolf Ebneth hrsg. v. Ernst Wenisch (Mainz: Matthias Gründewald Verlag, 1994), pp. 191197. Cf. also Josef Seifert, Dietrich von Hildebrands Kampf gegen den Nationalsozialismus (Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Carl Winter, 1998).

H 141

“Culture of life” and “culture of death” and human dignity

DIGNITY THEN SIGNIFIES AN EXCELLENCE OF VALUE WHICH IS SO CLOSELY LINKED TO THE NATURE OF A PERSON THAT IT CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD INDEPENDENTLY OF GRASPING THE ESSENCE OF THE PERSON IN WHOSE NATURE IT IS ROOTED. WHEN WE CONSIDER THE PERSON AS AN INDIVIDUAL, UNIQUE, UNREPEATABLE SUBJECT OF RATIONAL NATURE WE GRASP DIGNITY GROUNDED IN IT.

H 142

The opposition between the “culture of life” and anti-“culture of death” is largely the antagonism between a style and form of human life and society in which man is recognized as a person endowed with dignity and thus as an image of God, and a civilization built on an image of man according to which human beings are mere products of chance and matter, or higher developed apes. Does man possess a spiritual soul and hence does he exist to strive for spiritual values, for truth, beauty and the good, and is his purpose to know and serve God in all areas of life and culture? Or is he a product of life-less material forces, a higher developed animal which differs from other animals only by fulfilling its animal drives in a more systematic manner? Cultures are antithetical to each other mainly depending on their vision of man and of God and their attitude towards both. The dominant contemporary “culture of death” differs from great cultures of the past very much precisely in this respect. Certainly, right and wrong, good and evil, truth and error, always imbued different cultural atmospheres and antagonistic civilizations. There were societies in which slavery was practiced, there have always been, in widely different cultures, racism, nationalistic and religious fanaticism, human sacrifices, and countless other negative phenomena including big “cultures of death.” Nevertheless, if we compare the ways in which human persons, especially the unborn, unconscious or comatose, have been treated before the 20ieth century – their lives having been protected by laws until recently – with how they are, not without “legal blessing,” literally being slaughtered in today’s anti-culture of death, we are stunned by today’s societal and cultural presence of a nihilistic anti-culture of death, which finds a parallel expression in a glorification of evil and of ugliness. The highest object of all human knowledge and font of human culture is the relation to the supreme and absolute Good which to know and honor is the most important source of all authentic and positive culture; second to the importance of the recognition and honoring of God for human knowledge and culture, however, is the understanding and respect of each human being as a person endowed with a spiritual transcendent soul. The value of a culture is to a large extent measured by the degree of awareness of human dignity invested and expressed in it, by the image of man it has. We may say that to understand man as a person endowed with intrinsic dignity is the foundation of a “culture of life”, while reducing man to matter and denying is spiritual and transcendent nature and destiny is the cause of a “culture of death.”

Which of these two opposite visions of man and of the absolute ground of things then is true and should therefore shape human culture in the third millennium in which we just have started to live? And the rebirth of which horrid visions of man and God should we fear as a threat to mankind in the third millennium? The most important aspect Pope John Paul II wanted to insist on as central element of the opposition between a “culture of life” and a “culture of death” was the moral, social, and political repercussions of whether we recognize the inherent personhood and dignity of each human being or treat many human beings as if they were deprived of inherent dignity and of the fundamental human rights that spring from it, particularly the right to life. The fate of the world depends largely on how we think of the human person and of the nature and sources of his or her dignity! This topic is both theoretically and practically speaking terrifically important. It possesses extreme theoretical significance which becomes evident when we consider that knowing human persons requires necessarily knowing their value and dignity. We may know every empirical detail of the human body and psyche – without possessing any real understanding of man and woman, if we lack value-knowledge. Only if we understand the dignity of human persons and its roots, will we know the person and human nature at all. But the topic is, above and beyond its theoretical importance for understanding the human person, also of extreme practical significance: it is in the truest sense a life or death issue. Millions of human lives depend on convictions regarding human dignity, because – without understanding of their lofty dignity – parents will not bring children into the world. And, more sadly still, millions of humans have been killed and are being killed because one denies their human dignity. Therefore hardly a greater responsibility for politicians exists than that of searching for the truth about the dignity of persons. A lack of understanding human dignity or a lack of respecting it freely – or both – lead to many other attacks on human dignity besides killing human persons: In pornography, the dignity of the human person and of the human body in its femininity and masculinity is violated profoundly by reducing the body to a mere object of pleasure and by divorcing the sexual sphere wholly from the dignity of personal love and communion, thus depriving sexuality of its profound relation to persons and to becoming the vehicle of a mutual gift of oneself in spousal love, a mission of the human body and of human love the blessed Pope John Paul II has elaborated more than any preceding Pope, father or doctor of the Church, in his theology of the body.5

BUT ‘DIGNITY’ NOT ONLY MEANS AN EXCELLENCE OF VALUE AS SUCH BUT ALSO BEARS AN INTRINSIC RELATIONSHIP TO BEING THE OBJECT OF MORALITY AND OF MORAL IMPERATIVES, NAY EVEN MORE: TO BEING OBJECT OF A SPECIAL TYPE OF ‘ABSOLUTE’ AND UNCONDITIONAL MORAL IMPERATIVES. IT SIGNIFIES NOT ONLY A HIGH AND NOBLE VALUE SUCH AS THAT OF AN ANIMAL WHICH OUGHT TO BE RESPECTED BUT WHICH ALLOWS UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES TO SLAUGHTER OR KILL THE ANIMAL OR TO USE IT FOR FOOD OR FOR GETTING ITS FUR FOR AESTHETIC PURPOSES. THE INVIOLABLE NATURE OF PERSONAL DIGNITY FORBIDS ANY SUCH ACTS.

5 See his Uomo e donna lo creò (Vatican City: Città Nuova Editrice/ Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1987); Man and Woman He Created Them. A Theology of the Body, transl., introduction, and index by Michael Waldstein, (Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 2006).

H 143

A SECOND SOURCE OF THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON LIES IN THE CONSCIOUS ACTUALIZATION OF THE PERSON, IN THE AWAKENED PERSONAL CONSCIOUSNESS WHICH IS IN SOME SENSE THE ACTUS OF PERSONAL BEING. THIS HAS MANY DEGREES OF AWAKENING AND PERFECTION AND CAN BE ENTIRELY ABSENT OR REDUCED IN SERIOUSLY RETARDED PERSONS OR IN HUMAN BEINGS IN THE PERMANENT VEGETATIVE OR IN UNCONSCIOUS STATES. […]

6 Fortpflanzungsgesetz and other laws governing genetic engineering. 7 The Swiss law speaks of the ‚Würde der Kreatur’, thus expanding the meaning of dignity to all living beings.

H 144

The practical significance of our topic is seen also when we consider that any other progress without a firm value foundation is worth nothing. Even if medical progress saves thousands of human lives – millions will die or be experimented on and used, in spite of medical progress, if progress is linked to errors about human dignity. Even if a country has the most flourishing economy, crime, terrorism, or nihilistic governments or groups can make it collapse like the Twin Towers – if there is no firm grasp of the dignity of persons. We witness today a steadily intensifying and almost world-wide attack on the right to life and on the inviolable dignity of each and every human being. The practice of abortion, of discarding ‘superfluous’ embryos from IVF, the use and killing of embryos for stem-cell research, euthanasia and many other anti-life acts are spreading in overt and covert forms world-wide and constitute a practical and terribly real bloody war against the dignity of human life and the right to life, a war Blessed Teresa of Calcutta has called “the biggest war.” But also on the level of ideas, a world-wide war is being fought against the right to, and dignity of, each human life.

What is ‘Dignity’ – Dignity as a unique excellence of value In the first place, dignity designates an objective and intrinsic value. Qualities of the subjectively satisfying as they are the object of acts such as “I like chocolate,” while other persons dislike it, can never be the appropriate category for human dignity. If anyone would apply such an expression to human dignity and, torturing a child or raping a woman, retort to our expression of outrage: “You do not like that but I just like to do that; don’t meddle with my subjective preferences”, we would see immediately the category mistake involved in this: the value called ‘dignity’ is an intrinsic preciousness and goodness of a being that is in no way dependent on our subjective likes or dislikes. If it were just such a subjective preference, it would be no dignity at all. ‘Dignity’ does not only mean an objective intrinsic value of persons but a very high, sublime value. But also this is not enough to describe this value because we are faced in a work of art such as Leonardo’s Last Supper with a very high and sublime objective value of beauty without attributing dignity properly speaking to a work of art because it lacks the degree of reality necessary for a being to possess dignity properly speaking. The term ‘dignity’ then, thirdly, designates not all sublime values but only the value of a really existing being such as a person. The term ‘dignity’ has been applied recently by the Swiss law6 to all creatures including plants and animals and even life-less things.7 And even though this has some justification because all really existing beings of

which nature is made up have some special value meant by the term Würde der Kreatur, nevertheless non-personal entities do not properly speaking possess dignity. This term then designates, fourthly, a unique value which not only endows each person with an intrinsic and objective preciousness – for this can also be said of animals and of all living beings as well as of dead material things – but which also raises the person to an incommensurably higher level of value, to an axiological level incomparable with any other value which does not merit the lofty title of ‘dignity’.

Dignity is inseparable from personhood - personhood inseparable from dignity Dignity then signifies an excellence of value which is so closely linked to the nature of a person that it cannot be understood independently of grasping the essence of the person in whose nature it is rooted. When we consider the person as an individual, unique, unrepeatable subject of rational nature we grasp dignity grounded in it. Hence the definition of the person through Alexander of Hales in terms of this dignity: “the person is a substance which is distinguished through a property related to dignity“.8 ‘Dignity’ is also called ‘inalienable.’ This term does not really apply to all forms and dimensions of dignity as we shall see but it does apply to the ontological value of the person as such which is intelligibly rooted in the being and essence of the person.9 But ‘dignity’ not only means an excellence of value as such but also bears an intrinsic relationship to being the object of morality and of moral imperatives, nay even more: to being object of a special type of ‘absolute’ and unconditional moral imperatives.10 It signifies not only a high and noble value such as that of an animal which ought to be respected but which allows under circumstances to slaughter or kill the animal or to use it for food or for getting its fur for aesthetic purposes. The inviolable nature of personal dignity forbids any such acts. This can also be called the ‘sacredness’ of this value which prompted already the Romans to say homo homini res sacra est (man is for man sacred a sacred thing).11 And this sacredness includes also the human body and the sexual sphere so intimately connected with the spiritual human person. Furthermore, ‘dignity’ signifies such a morally relevant value that is able to ground an intrinsece malum. Actions which are essentially and seriously (gravely) directed against this dignity are also essentially directed against morality, i.e., they are essentially and intrinsically evil and cannot become good and permissible under certain circumstances or when they are performed for certain good purposes.12

8 Alexander Hal., Glossa 1, 23, 9. 9 Cf. also Josef Seifert, Sein und Wesen (Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter, 1996); Essence and Existence. A New Foundation of Classical Metaphysics on the Basis of ‘Phenomenological Realism,’ and a Critical Investigation of ‘Existentialist Thomism’,“ Aletheia I (1977), pp. 17-157; I,2 (1977), pp. 371-459. 10 It is morally relevant. For the fundamental distinction between morally relevant and moral values see Dietrich von Hildebrand, Ethics, 2nd ed. (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1978), ch. 19. 11 Of course, in the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faith this sacredness of dignity is explained by the character of the created person as an ‘image of God’ but —if we think back of Cicero— the dignity of a person as source of moral obligations was seen clearly by the Romans as well. Cicero, De leg bus, I. vii. 22. 12 The Encyclical Evangelium vitae makes this point clearly: procured abortion is the deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception (!) to birth. (Ibid., 58). The human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception. See Donum vitae I, 1: AAS 80 (1988), 78-79. Evangelium vitae adds: Human life is sacred and inviolable at every moment of its existence, including the initial phase which precedes birth. (Evangelium vitae, n. 61- 62).

H 145

[…] IN THIS CONSCIOUSLY AWAKENED BEING OF THE HUMAN PERSON WE FIND THE ROOT OF A NEW DIMENSION OF DIGNITY WHICH EXPRESSES ITSELF IN THE ACQUISITION OF THOSE HUMAN RIGHTS WHICH ARE NOT – AS THE RIGHT TO LIFE – GROUNDED IN THE VERY BEING OF A PERSON, IN THE SUBSTANTIAL CHARACTER OF PERSONHOOD, BUT IN THE DIFFERENT DEGREES OF CONSCIOUSNESS AND MATURITY. 13 Summa Theologiae, I, Q 29 A 3 Rp 1.

H 146

Dignity indicates a certain ‘sacrosanctness’ of the person13 which makes the person’s value inviolable forbidding to act against this dignity for any reason whatsoever. A being that possesses dignity in this strict sense must never be violated in this dignity for any pragmatic reasons, even for a quantitatively speaking higher good. Therefore to man is owed respect (Achtung) absolutely and in a way which does not allow ever to use a human being just as a means. Any form of purely teleological and consequentialist foundation of moral norms fails to recognize this aspect of dignity and must therefore be rejected.

«An important sphere of elements that form a culture of life, then, is cultural in the narrower sense of the term. A culture of life in this sense is largely built by works of art and of literature, such as Manzonis The Betrowthed or Dante’s Divine Comedy. Similarly, a culture of life can be greatly enhanced by great paintings that express a culture of life, or by music, movies, etc.» (Drawing by Sandro Boticelli for Dante’s Divine Comedy).

The highest and supreme dignity belongs precisely to that being which is of pure infinite perfection, to God as the only absolutely perfect being greater than which nothing can be conceived and which possesses supreme dignity.14 The four roots and sources of human dignity 1. What man is as person —his essence, being, and substance— as source of human dignity The first source of human dignity becomes apparent when we consider that no human conscious experiences and acts can exist in themselves. They require necessarily a subject. This subject must stand in itself in being. Never can functions, qualities of things, etc. be persons. It is evident that a property of something else, a function of the brain or of society cannot be the subject of conscious

14 See Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologica I, Q. 29, a. 3, Ra 2: He also speaks of a “Distinctio supereminentis dignitatis” (Thomas Aquinas, In Sent., pag. 133, 136, 137, 228-229). Cf. Urs von Balthasar, “Zum Begriff der Person,” cit., p. 98.

H 147

THIS SECOND DIMENSION OF THE DIGNITY OF A HUMAN PERSON AND THE RIGHTS GROUNDED IN IT ARE NOT AS INALIENABLE AS THE DIGNITY AND RIGHTS WHICH ARE GROUNDED SIMPLY IN THE SUBSTANCE, EXISTENCE AND ESSENCE OF THE PERSON, IN THE FIRST SOURCE OF HUMAN DIGNITY. NEVERTHELESS, ALSO THIS SECOND DIMENSION OF PERSONAL DIGNITY IS INALIENABLE AS LONG AS A PERSON LIVES OR ONCE WILL AGAIN LIVE CONSCIOUSLY.

15 Cf. Josef Seifert, Leib und Seele. Ein Beitrag zur philosophischen Anthropologie (Salzburg: A. Pustet, 1973); and the same author, Das Leib-Seele Problem und die gegenwärtige philosophische Diskussion. Eine kritischsystematische Analyse (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 21989). This very subject of consciousness must be a spiritual entity, wherefore man can only be a person in virtue if his rational soul; for the unity and singleness of the subject of trillions of experiences necessarily is a spiritual, non-material subject. And in this subject of rational nature we discover the first source of personal dignity. Boethius saw this clearly in Contra Eutychen et Nestorium, cap. 3. 16 Richard von St. Viktor, Trin. 4, 22; ebd. 4, 25. 17 Schwarz, ibid., pp. 100-113. The root of the dignity of the person thus lies in his substantial reality and this excludes that the person possesses his dignity only in terms of functioning as a person. 18 See Blaise Pascal, Thoughts, 5th ed., transl. and introd. by A.J. Krailsheimer, (London: Penguin, 1973), 146; 365; 346-348.

H 148

experiences and thus cannot be a person. Human experiences and acts always are of a subject which is not only more than these experiences and irreducible to them but performs them, lives them, does them or originates them in other ways. Moreover, this ultimate subject which stands in itself and is subject of rational acts cannot be just any subject such as a brain composed of millions of cells but must be a simple, spiritual subject. And this subject is a person only if it possesses a rational nature.15 Moreover, the being of the person, which is the first source of human dignity, requires both the rational and intellectual essence as well as the concrete individual existence of the subject which we designate as person. Richard of St. Viktor said that the person is “the incommunicable existence of an intellectual nature“ (persona est intellectualis naturae incommunicabilis existentia), and that “it exists in itself alone according to a singular mode of rational existence“.16 Thus the essence of a rational being and the real existence and life of an unsubstitutable individual of such a nature interpenetrate each other in the origin of personal dignity. A human being possesses inalienable dignity not only “when he functions as a person“ but he possesses this dignity in virtue of “being a person“.17 Also the embryo who cannot use his intellect yet – but possesses it as a condition of the possibility of ever using it – is endowed with this dignity of the person. We can call this the “purely ontological dignity of persons.” 2. The second source of human dignity: rational conscious life Blaise Pascal says that “our whole dignity consists in thought”.18 This beautiful word indicates that only in rational conscious life the person realizes his being qua person. One might equally well refer to awakened free action and loving, to language, conscious social relations, religious acts, etc. A person in an unconscious state is as it were sleeping and possesses only potentially the awakened being of a person. But if the person’s whole dignity consisted in thought, this would deny dignity of the unborn or unconscious wo cannot think. Thus the right to life would have to be restricted to some human beings only. Would then not also abortion have to be allowed if really man’s whole dignity consisted in thought and in conscious and free acts? While we totally reject, for the reasons expounded above, any negation of the first and most foundational level of human dignity, we do not deny that actual consciousness originates a second and new dimension of the dignity of persons. This second source of the dignity of the human person lies in the

conscious actualization of the person, in the awakened personal consciousness which is in some sense the actus of personal being. This has many degrees of awakening and perfection and can be entirely absent or reduced in seriously retarded persons or in human beings in the permanent vegetative or in unconscious states.19 Also in this consciously awakened being of the human person we find indeed the root of a new dimension of dignity which expresses itself in the acquisition of those human rights which are not —as the right to life— grounded in the very being of a person, in the substantial character of personhood, but in the different degrees of consciousness and maturity. For example the human right to freedom of speech and of movement, or to education, cannot be attributed to a small child, as little as the human right to marry, to educate children, etc. This second source of human dignity and of human rights can indeed be lost through so-called brain death, irreversible coma, etc.20 Thus this second dimension of the dignity of a human person and the rights grounded in it are not as inalienable as the dignity and rights which are grounded simply in the substance, existence and essence of the person, in the first source of human dignity. Nevertheless, also this second dimension of personal dignity is inalienable as long as a person lives or once will again live consciously. We can call it the dignity of awakened personhood or the dignity of actual rational consciousness. This dignity is deeply underrated when in terminal sedation and other acts directed against conscious life of persons one just puts human persons to sleep as if they were animals so that they cannot live and die in the awakened state and in form of conscious personal acts. The second source of dignity is immensely overrated, however, when persons with no or gravely diminished rational consciousness are denied the quality of life required to protect their lives from abortion and euthanasia and when the dignity of human life is regarded as being founded only on the level of personal consciousness. Most importantly, the second source of dignity of persons, however sublime, can never replace the first and most foundational level and source of personal dignity which remains the foundation of the right to life and of the dignity that forbids us to kill an innocent human being. The first and purely ontological dignity of the person remains the foundation of all human dignity and of the right to life. 3. The third source and moral dignity There is a human dignity which is the result only of the good actualizations of the person through knowledge of truth, and above all

THE SECOND SOURCE OF DIGNITY OF PERSONS, HOWEVER SUBLIME, CAN NEVER REPLACE THE FIRST AND MOST FOUNDATIONAL LEVEL AND SOURCE OF PERSONAL DIGNITY WHICH REMAINS THE FOUNDATION OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE AND OF THE DIGNITY THAT FORBIDS US TO KILL AN INNOCENT HUMAN BEING. THE FIRST AND PURELY ONTOLOGICAL DIGNITY OF THE PERSON REMAINS THE FOUNDATION OF ALL HUMAN DIGNITY AND OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE.

19 Fichte and Engelhardt assume that the state of actualized personhood is reached by normal children only after the second year of life; one could also put it at a much later or earlier date. For the consciously awakened being of the person undergoes an infinity of shades and degrees, from the first prenatal experiences in the embryonic state to the early childhood until adulthood. 20 Cf. H. Jonas, ‘Gehirntod und menschliche Organbank: Zur pragmatischen Umdefinierung des Todes’ (abbr. ‘Gehirntod’), in: Jonas, H.: Technik, Medizin und Ethik. Zur Praxis des Prinzips Verantwortung, (Frankfurt a.M.: Insel Verlag, 1985), pp. 219241. See also my critique of the notion that brain death in „Is ‘Brain Death’ actually Death?,” The Monist 76 (1993), 175-202.

H 149

THERE IS A HUMAN DIGNITY WHICH IS THE RESULT ONLY OF THE GOOD ACTUALIZATIONS OF THE PERSON THROUGH KNOWLEDGE OF TRUTH, AND ABOVE ALL THROUGH THE MORAL PERFECTIONS. ABOUT THIS LEVEL OF THE MORAL DIGNITY OF THE PERSON GABRIEL MARCEL SAYS THAT IT IS A CONQUEST AND NOT A POSSESSION. THIS DIGNITY IS NOT INALIENABLE NOR DOES IT AUTOMATICALLY BELONG TO US AS PERSONS. IT IS THE FRUIT OF MORALLY GOOD ACTS AND THUS RADICALLY DISTINCT FROM THE FIRST TYPE OF DIGNITY. 21 Many thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries have insisted on this: Feuerbach, Martin Buber, Gabriel Marcel, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and others. 22 With regard to these gifts fundamental inequalities exist so that a fraternal recognition of the value of each person seems to stand in contrast to the claim to total equality, as thinkers such as Gabriel Marcel or Erik Kühnelt-Leddin have pointed out. Cf. also Max Scheler, Das Ressentiment im Aufbau der Moralen. 23 And to claim an equality of dignity with respect to these inequalities can be the fruit of ressentiments and envy rather than of truth. This does not exclude that the fourth source of dignity through extrinsic gifts could in principle also be bestowed upon all men - as the religious person believes this to be true of such values as ‘being the object of divine mercy’ or ‘being redeemed by Christ’.

H 150

through the moral perfections. This self-transcending fulfilment of the person includes also the relation to a ‘thou,’ to another person, and ultimately the gift of self in love and in the formation of a communio personarum.21 About this level of the moral dignity of the person Gabriel Marcel says rightly that it is a conquest and not a possession. This dignity is not inalienable nor does it automatically belong to us as persons. It is the fruit of morally good acts and thus radically distinct from the first type of dignity. It also has a distinct and unique quality which, as Kant rightly points out, culminates in holiness: it constitutes the radical contrast to the moral indignity and wretchedness, or maliciousness of a Hitler who loses any moral dignity through his actions. Evilness thus can make a person lose temporarily or for ever this dignity. It constitutes the unum necessarium: that value that accounts for the distinction between good and evil and between “winning or losing one’s soul,” the value or disvalue that decides over the eternal fate of man. Without it the first and second dimensions of dignity, which also the demon possesses, are of no use to a man’s soul. In this purely axiological respect the third dimension of personal dignity is the most important one. 4. Dignity as gift – A fourth source of human dignity: Extrinsic relations and individual gifts of various kinds A fourth source of the value of a personality but also of the dignity of the person himself in his very being does not depend on the person himself, neither on his substantial being as a person nor on his consciousness, nor on the good use of his intellect and freedom. Rather, this dimension of the dignity of the person proceeds from gifts which go beyond anything purely situated within the person or his or her intellectual or moral acts and which neither each person possesses nor does each person possess in the same degree.22 We must therefore distinguish the being equally a human person of every man, who possesses the same fundamental human rights and is equal to all others, from other respects in which it simply is not true that all men are equal.23 These gifts which endow either all men or some men with a special dignity can be natural gifts, such as beauty or intelligence. Also social roles and functions can give a person new dimensions of dignity: for example the office of the judge bestowed upon a man or woman by society gives rise to a new dignity and to the human “right to the independence of the judge.” The gifts from which this new dignity derives can also be gifts received through relations with other persons, such as being loved by persons.

The human dignity which proceeds from gifts which go beyond the immanent rational nature of persons can also refer to a religioustheological and simultaneously ontological dimension of such gifts, the highest source of this dignity such as the dignity of the person loved and redeemed by God, endowed with sanctifying grace, etc. Gabriel Marcel’s ‘existentialist foundation’ of human dignity also refers to this fourth source of dignity. Marcel sees human dignity and brotherhood founded in the gift of a common fatherhood, which also those non-believers in God who defend human dignity unconsciously may accept in a faith deeper than their actual atheist beliefs and opinions. Marcel thinks that only such a reference to a common father renders intelligible the sense of brotherhood which also many atheists feel in relation to other men and which is conceived by Marcel as standing in some tension to equality. Thus both brotherhood and the ultimate human dignity presuppose the relationship of the bearer of human dignity to a Thou.24 One of the chief reasons for the negation of the right to life of the unborn consists in reducing the dignity of the embryo to this fourth level of human dignity, interpreted in a completely secularised way: only the value attached to an embryo by the acceptance or love of the parents or society would bestow value on the child.

A Culture of Life A culture of life is one that is inspired by a deep respect the dignity of human life, in which the dignity of each human person and in each of its sources is fully recognized, a culture that puts no obstacles to the respect of each human life. It embodies the conditions of, and leads to, a human society that is fully open towards the value of human life.

IT CONSTITUTES THE UNUM NECESSARIUM: THAT VALUE THAT ACCOUNTS FOR THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL AND BETWEEN “WINNING OR LOSING ONE’S SOUL,” THE VALUE OR DISVALUE THAT DECIDES OVER THE ETERNAL FATE OF MAN. WITHOUT IT THE FIRST AND SECOND DIMENSIONS OF DIGNITY, WHICH ALSO THE DEMON POSSESSES, ARE OF NO USE TO A MAN’S SOUL. IN THIS PURELY AXIOLOGICAL RESPECT THE THIRD DIMENSION OF PERSONAL DIGNITY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE.

1. A ‘culture of life’ as a properly personal and interpersonal phenomenon A “culture of life” rests on the unconditional respect for human life and dignity, justice, love, lack of enmity and hatred of life. It also requires that human dignity and fundamental human rights are not only respected by an individual person but on a social, communal, and interpersonal level that also entails laws that prevent that human dignity be attacked. A culture of life requires not only the presence of all these positive elements in laws, but also their conscious and full recognition, affirmation, and firm foundation in the education and consciousness of people.

24 Cf. Gabriel Marcel, The Existential Background of Human Dignity. Cf. also Gabriel Marcel, Die Menschenwürde und ihr existentieller Grund, pp. 139-162; 163 ff. Cf. also Erik Kühnelt-Leddin, Liberty or Equality. The Challenge of Our Time.

H 151

A “culture of life” in the richer sense requires not only the legal respect for life, but a full appreciation of the positive value of life, a love for human life, and concerted efforts of banishing the enemies of human life in laws, habits, attitudes, etc. as far as possible. 2. A “culture of life” in relation to its intellectual, moral and political conditions

A WELL-FOUNDED AND LASTING “CULTURE OF LIFE” EVIDENTLY REQUIRES NOT ONLY CONCRETE AND AS IT WERE ‘PHYSICAL’ POSITIVE FREE ACTIONS AND SIGNS OF RESPECT FOR LIFE BUT ALSO MORE FUNDAMENTAL AND SUPERACTUAL FREE ATTITUDES. THESE INCLUDE ABOVE ALL REVERENCE AND RESPECT FOR HUMAN DIGNITY AND LEGITIMATE HUMAN RIGHTS, MOST OF ALL THAT TO LIFE. ALSO SUCH MORAL ACTS AS LOVE, CHARITY, CARE FOR THE POOR, ETC. CONTRIBUTE IMMENSELY TO A “CULTURE OF LIFE”.

25 On the notion of superactual acts see Dietrich von Hildebrand, Ethics, 2nd edn (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1978), ch. 22-27.

H 152

A stable and lasting “culture of life” entails intellectual, moral, and social-political factors. A “culture of life” requires knowledge and education that discloses the value of life to children, adults, married couples, lawmakers and all layers of society. Prejudices that deny value and dignity to unborn or tribes or races or foreigners or members of other religions their equal ontological dignity are chief enemies of a “culture of life.” But knowledge and education are in no way enough to give rise to a culture of life. There are many free acts and attitudes, an inner respect in dealing with other persons, recognition of their rights in concrete situations, which do in no way automatically arise from knowledge and yet are indispensable conditions of a “culture of life”. Moreover, a well-founded and lasting “culture of life” evidently requires not only concrete and as it were ‘physical’ positive free actions and signs of respect for life but also more fundamental and superactual free attitudes.25 These include above all reverence and respect for human dignity and legitimate human rights, most of all that to life. Also such moral acts as love, charity, care for the poor, etc. contribute immensely to a “culture of life”. Just consider the ways in which the work of Mother Theresa of Calcutta, and of her Sisters of Mercy, has contributed to a “culture of life”. Quite the reverse, egocentric lust for possessions and material comfort that prefers a car to a new child or human person, or is even ready to kill the conceived or born children or adults when they stand in the way to our lust for material goods, are among the worst and most profound obstacles to a “culture of life”. Among the conditions of a lasting “culture of life” are also social and political factors such as just laws in which rights of every human being are respected. If these elements of the legal and political order are absent, a “culture of life,” at least in our imperfect world of human vices and passions, cannot be established. A “culture of life” includes also economic conditions that favor families having children and renders them able to afford the sustenance of

their life and education. If the economy is down and parts of the population are starving and deprived, a stable “culture of life” will hardly be possible. 3. A ‘culture of life’ and cultural life in the narrower sense (art, music, literature, science, philosophy) A “culture of life” also includes, besides scientific and philosophical works, just laws respectful of life, as well as bioethical standards in hospitals and medical practice, works of poetry, art and music that celebrate the value and dignity of human life and fosters moral attitudes of respect for human life and dignity. A nihilistic or pornographic trampling upon human dignity in poems, novels, movies, theater plays is an enemy of a “culture of life.” An important sphere of elements that form a culture of life, then, is cultural in the narrower sense of the term. A culture of life in this sense is largely built by works of art and of literature, such as Manzonis The Betrowthed or Dante’s Divine Comedy. Similarly, a culture of life can be greatly enhanced by great paintings that express a culture of life, or by music, movies, etc. Even computer games can promote a “culture of life” in contrast to others that stir up violence, hostility, brutality, and disrespect for life. Opposed to the artistic dimensions of a “culture of life” are all works of literature full of prejudices and hatred and all musical compositions or paintings and plastic arts filled with an anti-life-spirit.

EGOCENTRIC LUST FOR POSSESSIONS AND MATERIAL COMFORT THAT PREFERS A CAR TO A NEW CHILD OR HUMAN PERSON, OR IS EVEN READY TO KILL THE CONCEIVED OR BORN CHILDREN OR ADULTS WHEN THEY STAND IN THE WAY TO OUR LUST FOR MATERIAL GOODS, ARE AMONG THE WORST AND MOST PROFOUND OBSTACLES TO A “CULTURE OF LIFE”.

H 153

K arol Wojtyla, a Pope for Europe BY GIANFRANCO MORRA

IN ORDER TO AVOID STRESSING THE COMMUNIST PERSECUTION, KRAKOW’S ARCHBISHOP HAD TO USE MODERATION AND DIPLOMACY. STILL, WITHIN THE BELIEF THAT COMMUNISM HAD BROKEN UP EUROPE. EACH COMPROMISE WITH COMMUNISM WOULD BE A BETRAYAL OF EUROPE: IT WAS NECESSARY TO WAIT FOR IT TO FALL. PROVIDENCE RESERVED TO KAROL A LEADING ROLE CONCERNING THIS FALL: IN AUGUST 1978 HE ATTENDED THE CONCLAVE FROM WHICH HE CAME OUT AS POPE JOHN PAUL II. HE DIDN’T IMAGINE THAT SOME MONTHS AFTER HE WOULD COME BACK TO ROME FOR A NEW CONCLAVE WITHOUT USING ROMEKRAKOW RETURN TICKET.

H 154

«Geographically Europe is just a small annex to Asia, however it has an unmistakable identity based on Greek philosophy and art, Roman law and Christian religion. Speaking of Europe and speaking of Christianity is the same thing, “European” civilization is a “Christian” civilization and all Europeans, believer or not, “can’t say not to be Christian” (Croce). Wojtyla wrote: “Europe promotes universal values: the human dignity, the worth of reason, freedom, democracy, constitutional state and difference between politics and religion”.»

n 16th October 1978 Karol Wojtyla, a fifty-eight-old archbishop of Krakow, became 264th Bishop of Rome. In 455 years only Italians had pontificated in Saint Peter. The Church had never had a Slav pope in two-thousand years of history. The Pontificate of John Paul II lasted almost 27 years in which several times he referred to the matter of European identity both with words and actions. It may be useful, in the year of his beatification, to go back over his Europeanist path. Though, it will be done in an approximate and almost telegraphic way such a short article allows. Wojtyla was born European in Poland, a country that became catholic after St. Stanislaus evangelization. He was European even for his cultural education completed in the Jagiellonian University in Krakow, one of the oldest in Europe, founded in 1364, and the favorite place

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 154 - 161

for Christian Humanism. He completed his philosophical education in Rome at Dominican Angelicum University, a meeting place within Christian religion and Scholastic philosophy for students from all Europe. Besides, study years in Rome included some trips to Europe aimed at spreading the fertile ecclesiastical dialectic of unity and plurality. The philosophy he expressed was fully European, especially in his two works “Person and Act” (1969), defining a European theoretical Personalism, and “Love and Responsibility” (1960), which offers some answers to interpersonal life problems. These works fit in with the European philosophy, from St. Augustine’s Patristics to St. Thomas’ Scholastic system. After the European sciences crisis, this line will be recovered by a twentieth century philosophical trend which Wojtyla

H 155

DURING HIS LONG PONTIFICATE, THE EUROPEAN CHRISTIAN IDENTITY IS JUST NOT A SIMPLE MATTER TO DISCUSS. IT IS SOMETHING MORE, A SORT OF FRAME CONTAINING ALL THE OTHERS. FEW MENTIONS WILL BE ENOUGH. FIRST OF ALL, THE OPPOSITION TO COMMUNISM, A SYNTHESIS OF ALL WAS ANTI-EUROPEAN: DENIAL OF THE PERSON AND HIS (HER) NATURAL RIGHTS, VIOLENCE EXALTATION, INSTITUTIONALIZED FALSEHOOD AND UNDERDEVELOPMENT. […]

H 156

got close to, Husserl’s Phenomenology (introduced in Poland by Roman Ingarden), and, even more, Scheler’s, which aimed at taking back kósmos noetós from the Greeks and ordo amoris from the Christians, after modern Scientism. Both works seem to share the definition of the European man, who realizes his potential through consciousness and moral action. He is a man who, according to Plato’s and St. Augustine’s definition, makes a second navigation from the world of things to the world of consciousness. He doesn’t stop because he projects himself into a transcendent reality in order to find that lumen publicum which allows dialogue among people. Europe means moving from “outside” to “inside” and from “inside” to “above” in order to be able to open up to “with”. During the years spent in Poland, as a teacher in Lublin, as a Parish priest and bishop, Wojtyla suffered from his homeland invasion by two anti-European regimes, singularly united in 1939 to share out Poland. First it was Nazism, then Communism. He wrote about them: “I was part of the humiliation made by the evil”. Between 1939 and 1945, as a student or seminarian, he tried to help war victims; not only Christians, but also Jewish. During the German occupation, Karol tried to promote national culture through theatre: these are the years which belong to his commitment as an actor and director. When, in January of 1945, the Red Army entered Krakow, he realized that a no lesser anti-European occupation had started, inspired to the Asiatic collectivism and the human contempt. So, he tried to defend all the space the regime granted to Catholicism in the most religious country of the Soviet bloc. Consequently, the communist persecution of Polish Church found herself controlled and mitigated: more than hot, it was a cold war. The hard and silent work of the by then Cardinal Wojtyla had to conflict with ideological fanaticism and bureaucratic stupidity. Furthermore, it was interrupted by his frequent absences between 1962 and 1965 due to the role he played through his speeches and reports in the Second Vatican Council. The focal point of this defense of Poland’s Catholic and European tradition was in 1966 with the millennium celebrations from its conversion to Catholicism, but Pope Paul VI couldn’t participate because of the communist government’s prohibition. Meanwhile, Nowa Uta’s great church, an industrial suburb in Krakow, was being built thanks to the kind work of people who sacrificed their spare time. It was consecrated in 1977 as an astonishing example of a well-done synthesis between traditional symbology and modern architecture. In order to avoid stressing the communist persecution, Krakow’s archbishop had to use moderation and diplomacy. Still, within the

belief that Communism had broken up Europe and deleterious Yalta agreement had accepted that separation. There was no Ostpolitik able to reunite it. On the contrary, each compromise with Communism would be a betrayal of Europe: it was necessary to wait for it to fall. Providence reserved to Karol a leading role concerning this fall: in August 1978 he attended the conclave from which he came out as Pope John Paul I. He didn’t imagine that some months after he would come back to Rome for a new conclave without using Rome-Krakow return ticket. During his long pontificate, the European Christian identity is just not a simple matter to discuss. It is something more, a sort of frame containing all the others. Few mentions will be enough. First of all, the opposition to Communism, a synthesis of all was anti-European: denial of the person and his (her) natural rights, violence exaltation, institutionalized falsehood and underdevelopment. The method applied in this opposition was characterized by an extraordinary subtlety: he never attacked directly Marxism-Leninism, nor he condemned expressly ideological and practical crimes of Communism. Rather he exalted all the values Communism had oppressed and destroyed. Soviets, who had tried to use the opening plan made by Cardinal Casaroli for their aims, dreaded this method. Now, the new pope poses a severe threat to them that in October 1978 the central Committee of URSS Communist Party informed with a circular to “brother” parties that it was necessary to intensify the struggle against John Paul II with any mean. The theory of the communist joint responsibility in the attempt on Karol’s life in May 1981 seems to historians more and more credible. Yet, Karol not only survived, but also his strategy was successful: the rebellion against Communism was starting in his own Poland with Solidarnosc syndicate. Eleven years after his election, Communism dissolved. As it happens in all historical events, there is no doubt there was a variegated mix of causes, among which Pope Wojtyla’s action has to be highlighted. In the rediscovery of European Christian identity, some John Paul II’s documents acted mightily. They show how the claim for Europe Christianity didn’t develop by exclusion, but by inclusion, starting from European religions. In 1981 he went to the Lutheran Congregation in Rome and two years later he celebrated the 500 years form Luther’s birth. In 1986 he visited the Jewish Synagogue, too. Not only did he denounce the mistakes of anti-Semitism, which occurred in the Catholic Church as well, but he also recognized the leading role that Israelite tradition had in making Europe. Obviously, it is Athens’ and Rome’s daughter, but it has something belonging to Jerusalem, too. On 31st December 1980 in by this time united Germany inside Europe,

[…] THE METHOD APPLIED IN THIS OPPOSITION WAS CHARACTERIZED BY AN EXTRAORDINARY SUBTLETY: HE NEVER ATTACKED DIRECTLY MARXISM-LENINISM, NOR HE CONDEMNED EXPRESSLY IDEOLOGICAL AND PRACTICAL CRIMES OF COMMUNISM. RATHER HE EXALTED ALL THE VALUES COMMUNISM HAD OPPRESSED AND DESTROYED.

H 157

«As a creation entirely European, university was since the beginning the place of convergence between faith and reason, which the Pope will explain in one of his most elevated encyclicals, Fides et ratio (Para. 45): “With the raising of first universities St. Alberto Magno and St. Tommaso d’Aquino, even maintaining an organic bond between theology and philosophy, were the first to recognize the necessary independence which philosophy and sciences needed’»

H 158

the Pope declared Europe co-patrons, in addition to St. Benedict, the evangelizers of the Slav world Cyril and Methodius in his encyclical Egregiae virtutis. He wrote: “Their work is a relevant contribution to the formation of Europe common Christian roots. For their solidity, these roots are one of the firmest points of reference which every serious attempt to recompose newly and currently the continent unity can’t disregard”. It was another way to say that Europe extends “from the Atlantic to the Urals” and the Slav world was fully part of it. An important document on European identity was written from Karol Wojtyla in August 1978 when he still was Archbishop of Krakow. It will be published in “Life and thinking”, a review of the Sacro Cuore University in Milan, and entitled: “What border for Europe?”. The Pope regrets the fact that two Europes exist and they are separated by the Iron Curtain. But he also thinks there is no artificial division imposed by violence that will be able to delete the fundamental unity of the continent. Blocs, armies and ideologies are two, but Europe is one because it is Christian: “The respect of dignity and true human freedom can’t be stopped on any border which runs through the European continent. It is necessary to realize that Europe, with its culture and civilization heritage, can build its future only if it bases on strong ethical principles and only if the creative penetration of evangelic yeast will not succumb to it”. Three years later Wojtyla received in Vatican the participants of an international meeting about “Common Christian roots of European countries” facing the spread of temptations offered by atheism and scepticism and the danger of ideological conflicts. He reminds Europe spiritual basis as the only defense of its authentic tradition and as a fertile passport to future: “Europe (he concluded) needs Christ and Gospel because here stand the roots of all its peoples”. And on 6th November 1982, receiving European bishops, he summoned up the integration carried out by the Church in the first millennium of Greek-Roman heritage and Slav and Germanic peoples’ culture. It originated a Europe made up of many countries, all of them unified in a common spirit: Christian and, therefore, European. “Europe was baptized by Christianity; European countries, in their diversity, defined Christian existence; they got rich with values that don’t represent the soul of the European civilization, but the heritage of the whole humanity.” This complete awareness of Europe Christian identity will be come up again by Wojtyla in his visit to the European Parliament in Strasburg on 8th November 1988: without Christianity Europe can’t exist. It is a confession of faith that still corresponds to what the most longsighted historians have said, such as great Waldensian historian Federico Chabod. In his History of the idea of Europe he wrote: “We Europeans

are Christian and we can’t deny it, although we don’t follow the cult practices anymore. Christianity, the major fact of universal history, modeled our way of feeling and thinking with an indelible mark. Even the so-called “free thinkers”, even the “anticlerical” are Christian”. But Wojtyla doesn’t hide that this Christian identity is omitted or denied by many Europeans’ behavior. The present Europe crisis is not just economic or social or political, but also moral and religious. It is the lost of Christian values, the fall into relativism, indifferentism and nihilism. Anti-Christian speculative trends would get personal freedom person, but they made question the same idea of man and his dignity. The Pope knows that Christianity runs risks not only in communist Europe, but also, in a different way, in opulent countries of wellness and democracy. His call to need a new evangelization comes from that, in order to rediscover and incarnate Christian values in the European culture: “The Church, to answer its mission today in Europe, has to be aware of bringing in itself solutions to difficulties and hopes of Europe’s tomorrow, far from being stranger to the European man”. On the occasion of his presence in Bologna in 1988, John Paul II seized the opportunity to celebrate the most antique athenaeum of the world. He knew that university is a creation entirely European which it is not possible to find in any other cultural area: the temple for the pursuit of truth, indeed, of Veritatis splendor, using the title of an encyclical of him. In the academic study, intelligence, without disowning its dependence on the creator, still exercises an independent function through reason, refusing every pre-established certainty and recognizing truth everywhere, affirmed by anyone, such as the Holy Spirit dictates, according to St. Tommaso d’Aquino well-known imperative’s (“omne verum a quocumque dicatur a Spiritu Sancto est”). As a creation entirely European, university was since the beginning the place of convergence between faith and reason, which the Pope will explain in one of his most elevated encyclicals, Fides et ratio (Para. 45): “With the raising of first universities St. Alberto Magno and St. Tommaso d’Aquino, even maintaining an organic bond between theology and philosophy, were the first to recognize the necessary independence which philosophy and sciences needed”. From all several John Paul II’s speeches it clearly emerges which is the identity of Europe. Prepared by Greek paideia and Roman state organization, Europe was born with Catholic Church which gave it that common value system able to distinguish from every other civilization. Man’s identity is bound to his personal history, as well as peoples’ and continents’ heritage roots into historical memory. The last Pope’s essay, Memory and identity, was published in February 2005. It is an essay on the philosophy of culture, when a misunderstood

THE THEORY OF THE COMMUNIST JOINT RESPONSIBILITY IN THE ATTEMPT ON KAROL’S LIFE IN MAY 1981 SEEMS TO HISTORIANS MORE AND MORE CREDIBLE. YET, KAROL NOT ONLY SURVIVED, BUT ALSO HIS STRATEGY WAS SUCCESSFUL: THE REBELLION AGAINST COMMUNISM WAS STARTING IN HIS OWN POLAND WITH SOLIDARNOSC SYNDICATE. ELEVEN YEARS AFTER HIS ELECTION, COMMUNISM DISSOLVED. AS IT HAPPENS IN ALL HISTORICAL EVENTS, THERE IS NO DOUBT THERE WAS A VARIEGATED MIX OF CAUSES, AMONG WHICH POPE WOJTYLA’S ACTION HAS TO BE HIGHLIGHTED.

H 159

«Ecclesia in Europa intuitions were covered in one of the most dramatic writing of a great English poet, who was, just like Wojtyla, a man of theatre too. In his three conferences about The idea of a Christian society, held in 1939 on the eve of the most inhuman war in history, he wrote: ‘Generally, our civilization is negative, but, for the little of positive it has, it is still Christian. It can’t last for a long time, because a negative culture lasts every development skill in a world where economic and spiritual energies, still positive, show the efficiency of pagan cultures. I think that our choice is between creating a new Christian culture and accepting a pagan culture’. Just as Thomas Stearn Eliot told us, so Karol Wojtyla repeated it to us.»

WOJTYLA DOESN’T HIDE THAT THIS CHRISTIAN IDENTITY IS OMITTED OR DENIED BY MANY EUROPEANS’ BEHAVIOR. THE PRESENT EUROPE CRISIS IS NOT JUST ECONOMIC OR SOCIAL OR POLITICAL, BUT ALSO MORAL AND RELIGIOUS. IT IS THE LOST OF CHRISTIAN VALUES, THE FALL INTO RELATIVISM, INDIFFERENTISM AND NIHILISM.

H 160

tendency of opening to non-Christians induced the European Union Constitution redactors’ to keep silent about the Christian roots of the continent in its preamble. An opaque and squalid decision that obviously would have saddened the Pope who, more and more times, had argued the need to remember that Europe is a res publica Christiana such as it was called for so many centuries. And he did it in the most determined way in the apostolic letter Ecclesia in Europa in 28th June 2003. It was published for St. Peter’s and St. Paul’s celebration, since the two apostles summarized the three springs of the European spirit: Rome, where both of them came to testify their faith through martyrdom; Jerusalem, from where St. Peter left as a Jewish converted into a Christ; Athens, present in St. Paul’s spirit, an Hellenizing Judean using the Greek language. The worth of exhortation is to look back, to native roots of European spirit. Germans powerfully contributed to it, too; Catholic Church managed to “Europeanize” them in language, religion and culture when it made the evangelization of the entire continent. Later, it was Islamists’ turn. Geographically Europe is just a small annex to Asia, however it has an unmistakable identity based on Greek philosophy and art, Roman law and Christian religion. Speaking of Europe and speaking of Christianity is the same thing, “European” civilization is a “Christian” civilization and all Europeans, believer or not, “can’t say not to be Christian” (Croce). Wojtyla wrote: “Europe promotes universal values: the human dignity, the worth of reason, freedom, democracy, constitutional state and difference between politics and religion”. The Pope doesn’t dedicate many words to European Constitution project: “I would like to address to the redactors of the European future constitutional treaty one more time, in order to insert a reference to Europe’s religious heritage, especially Christian”. With a sincere realism, the Pope talks about Europe as it was and as it is now. He doesn’t hide that Christian values are based everywhere: the progressive abandonment of the Christian faith, hedonism as a lifestyle carrying the rise of new poverties, individualism, religion

disregard, family and education crisis, assumption of oriental religious techniques and military and ethnic conflicts. Today all the European countries are “post-Christian”, including his Poland, which under Communism was still religious, but now, under consumerism, adapts itself to European secularization. Church stands in Europe, says the letter title, but Europe doesn’t often go to Church. There is no European country that doesn’t have to turn to Third World priests due to vocation crisis. It seems that John Paul II has understood Europe’s paradox: it was a unitary cultural system when no one talked about it; while now, when everybody talks in the same time with economic cynicism and romantic rhetoric, there is not much left. The Pope knows that referring to Christian religion, which is historically necessary, doesn’t depict the present European situation, although Christians should commit themselves to re-establish it in the future. So, are we facing Europe’s sunset, such as Splenger professed in 1918 on the eve of that world conflict which began our continent’s decline? According to the Pope it is not possible. He glances forward to that third millennium which will attend the Christian spirit’s rebirth, without which Europe can’t be a “common house”, but just a riot block full of economic and geopolitical interests. In this millennium, the hope announced by the Gospel, will translate into a European spirit rebirth. That is Christian. Even in hardest moments, as Pope Wojtyla wrote, “Christ is always in its Church”. Even in an unchristianized Europe where Christians have to be “witnesses of the hope gospel”. The Pope doesn’t refuse Europe’s conquests: science, technology, wellness, democracy and women emancipation exist only in those countries inside or outside Europe, whose history is imbued with the Christian spirit. In case, it is this spirit’s lack or at least frailty that often doesn’t allow this continent to use its wonderful conquests with the purpose of human promotion. Ecclesia in Europa intuitions were covered in one of the most dramatic writing of a great English poet, who was, just like Wojtyla, a man of theatre too. In his three conferences about The idea of a Christian society, held in 1939 on the eve of the most inhuman war in history, he wrote: “Generally, our civilization is negative, but, for the little of positive it has, it is still Christian. It can’t last for a long time, because a negative culture lasts every development skill in a world where economic and spiritual energies, still positive, show the efficiency of pagan cultures. I think that our choice is between creating a new Christian culture and accepting a pagan culture”. Just as Thomas Stearn Eliot told us, so Karol Wojtyla repeated it to us.

FROM ALL SEVERAL JOHN PAUL II’S SPEECHES IT CLEARLY EMERGES WHICH IS THE IDENTITY OF EUROPE. PREPARED BY GREEK PAIDEIA AND ROMAN STATE ORGANIZATION, EUROPE WAS BORN WITH CATHOLIC CHURCH WHICH GAVE IT THAT COMMON VALUE SYSTEM ABLE TO DISTINGUISH FROM EVERY OTHER CIVILIZATION. MAN’S IDENTITY IS BOUND TO HIS PERSONAL HISTORY, AS WELL AS PEOPLES’ AND CONTINENTS’ HERITAGE ROOTS INTO HISTORICAL MEMORY.

Translated by Instituto Chileno-Italiano de Cultura

H 161

«The revelation of the plenitude of man in Christ, makes us understand that God is not an adversary of man, that the divinization of man does not imply his de-humanization, on the contrary, complete humanity is only accessible in the total communion with God. “The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly-and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being-he must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to Christ”» (RH 10).

H 162

ACCORDING TO THE ENCYCLICAL REDEMPTOR HOMINIS

M an according to Christ BY SAMUEL FERNÁNDEZ EYZAGUIRRE

Redemptor hominis, a programmatic encyclical Pope John Paul II at the Angelus expressed the programmatic character of his first encyclical on Sunday 11th August 1978. The text is very meaningful and prepares the interpretation of the text: “I have tried to convey in Redemptor hominis what has encouraged and encourages my thoughts and my heart from the beginning of my pontificate that, through an inscrutable plan of God, I had to assume the 16th of October last year.” Probably improvising, he goes further: ”The encyclical contains the thoughts that then, at the beginning of this new journey, strongly urged my soul, and that no doubt, were already maturing in me during my years of priesthood and episcopate. I believe that, if Christ has called me thus with such thoughts and sentiments, it is because this calling of mind and heart, this expression of faith, hope and charity, find resonance in my new universal ministry, from its beginning.” The Pope asserts that the main idea of the encyclical was already present in his heart during his priestly and Episcopal ministry, and recognises that these central ideas were destined to acquire a universal projection. At that Angelus he made it clear with simple words the central idea of his encyclical: “Therefore, how I see and feel the relationship between the mystery of Jesus Christ’s redemption and man’s dignity, thus I would like to unite the mission of the Church with the service to man, in this, its impenetrable mystery. I see it as the main work in my new ecclesiastical service.” These words are full of meaning: stating the central program of his pontificate consists in uniting the mission of the Church, with the service to man, precisely because of the relationship that exists between Christ and man. No wonder that Cardinal Scola, in an article published years ago in Humanitas, called this encyclical “The Programme of a Pontificate.”1 But, which is that particular relationship between Christ and man on which John Paul II centred his ministry as Bishop of Rome? Certainly, to answer this question we will not go back to the formative years of the Pope, as that would take us too far back,

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 162 - 169

THE FUNDAMENTAL INTUITION OF REDEMPTOR HOMINIS WAS IN KAROL WOJTYLA’S MIND LONG BEFORE HE WAS ELECTED POPE AND ILLUMINATED THE WRITING OF GAUDIUM ET SPES 22. IT CONSISTS IN UNDERSTANDING MAN STARTING FROM CHRIST. JESUS OF NAZARETH IS NOT ONLY THE REVEALER OF GOD IN FAVOUR OF MAN, BUT HE “REVEALS MAN TO MAN”(CF. RH 10). THE FACE OF GOD IS REFLECTED IN JESUS, AS WELL AS IN THE FACE OF THE TRUE MAN. BOTH ASPECTS ARE INSEPARABLE, BECAUSE THE TRUE FACE OF GOD IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE TO MAN THROUGH THE INCARNATION

1 Cf. A. SCOLA, “Redemptor hominis. El programa de un Pontificado,| Humanitas 31 (julio-septiembre 2003).

H 163

instead we will look upon a moment of extraordinary theological productivity in his life: his active participation in the writing of one of the key texts of Vatican Council II, number 22 of the constitution Gaudium et spes.

Participation of Karol Wojtyla in the writing of Gaudium et spes 22

THE INCARNATION IS NOT ONLY THE INSTANT IN WHICH GOD BECOMES MAN, BUT ALSO THE CULMINATION OF THE ASCENT OF MAN, IN WHICH HUMANITY REACHES, AT LAST, THE DEFINITE DIMENSION THAT GOD WANTED TO GIVE IT FROM THE START. IN THE ORIGINAL DIVINE PLAN, MAN WAS DESTINED TO A COMPLETE UNION WITH GOD, AND THIS PLENITUDE IS ATTAINED IN JESUS OF NAZARETH.

2 Cf. G. Alberigo, Historia del Concilio Vaticano II (Salamanca 2007) 475 – 486; D. Fernandez, Cristocentrismo de Juan Pablo II (Salamanca 2003) 41 – 46. 3 Y. Congar, “Mon Journal du Concile,” en Ut Unum sint, 575 (1994) 180 – 181.

H 164

Henry De Lubac, a very qualified witness, in his memoirs of Vatican Council II, Entretien autour de Vatican II, states: “Probably it is due to Wojtyla more than to no one else that the famous Schema XIII, after so many mishaps, would at last surface, when many were loosing hope of ever getting it through.” Cardinal De Lubac refers to the active and decisive participation of the archbishop of Cracow in writing Gaudium et spes, the origin of which is the so-called Schema XIII. Congar and Ch. Möller share this laudatory opinion of the decisive participation of Monsignor Karol Wojtyla on writing the constitution of the Council. In October 1964, at the Council chambers, Wojtyla had an important intervention, in which he had introduced an alternative text to the one being discussed.2 Because of it, he was called on to participate in the sub commission that would write the new text. The meetings took place during the month of February 1965, in Ariccia near Rome, by Lake Albano. Monsignor Woltjyla presided over the group in charge of Chapter Four of the first part of the constitution. Yves Congar in his diary, remembers those working days: “At the afternoon meeting, dedicated to the discussion of the second chapter, Bishop Wojtyla made some outstanding remarks […] he made a powerful impression. His personality stands out. In him there is a special liveliness, a magnetic power, a prophetic fortitude, perfectly peaceful, which is impossible to resist.”3 Pope John Paul II in November 1995, at the thirtieth celebration of the proclamation of the constitution Gaudium et spes, referred explicitly to his participation in writing the document: “I have to confess that I have a special appreciation for the Gaudium et spes not only for the themes it develops, but also for the direct participation I was granted in its elaboration. As a young Bishop from Cracow I was a member of a sub commission in charge of studying the signs of the times, and from November 1964, I was called upon to be a member of the central sub commission responsible with writing the text.” He then insists that his direct participation in writing the encyclical has had a profound influence in the orientation of his pontifical teachings, specially in the encyclical we are referring to: “Precisely, the profound knowledge of the Genesis of Gaudium

et spes has allowed me to appreciate in depth its prophetic value and assume its contexts in my teachings, since my first encyclical Redemptor hominis.” The continuation of the text reveals an important fact in order to understand which is the main point that John Paul II takes from Gaudium et spes: “In Redemptor hominis, taking into account the inheritance of the Constitution of the Council [Gaudium et Spes] I wanted to confirm that the nature and destiny of humanity and the world can only be definitively revealed in the light of the crucified and risen Christ.” For the Pope, then, the main heritage of Gaudium et spes resides in the certainty that the nature and destiny of the world can only be definitively revealed in the light of the crucified and risen Christ. “Jesus Christ – he insists – remains present as the light of the world that illuminates the mystery of man.” These statements evidently reflect the text of Gaudium et spes 22: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of Him Who was to come, (20) namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear.” Moreover, in a text of October 8, 1964, before the writing of the Gaudium et spes, we find a phrase that, in a certain way, already has the main lines of number 22: “Man, in any stage of his life, can count with the assistance of the Creator, acting in accordance to his will in as much as [man] he manifests himself in a clear and transparent way, specially through the Son incarnate.”4 Such a sentence shows the extent to which Karol Wojtyla actively participated in the writing of the text we are referring to, or at least that he was in perfect syntony with this important text of the Council. Finally, in the same speech, John Paul II states that Gaudium et spes is the apex in the itinerary of the Council. Thus, combining both statements, it could be inferred that according to Pope John Paul II, the heart of the Council centers in the mystery of man illuminated by the mystery of the son of God incarnate. In fact, according to scholars, it is one of the most quoted paragraphs of the Council during his pontificate, which strove to realize the Council’s teachings.

THE SON OF GOD, THEN, DID NOT BECOME MAN WITH CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS, AS IF THE FULLNESS OF HUMANITY WAS OURS AND CHRIST’S WAS ONLY PARTIALLY HUMAN, ON THE CONTRARY HE BECAME COMPLETELY HUMAN. MOREOVER IN HIM, HUMANITY REACHES ITS FULL STATURE, ITS REAL DIMENSION. SO, TRUE HUMANITY IS NOT FOUND IN ADAM BUT IN CHRIST, THE DEFINITE ADAM. THE ONLY EXCEPTION IN CHRIST, ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES, IS SIN (HEB 4,15). BUT PRECISELY IN THE LIGHT OF CHRIST WHO REVEALS TRUE HUMANITY, WE UNDERSTAND THAT SIN IS NOT A PART OF HUMAN NATURE: IT IS NOT PART OF THE ESSENCE OF MAN.

Christ, true man It is now clear, that the fundamental intuition of Redemptor hominis was in Karol Wojtyla’s mind long before he was elected Pope, and that this intuition illuminated the writing of Gaudium et spes 22. Which in turn helps to understand man starting from Christ. This

4 Acta synodalia, III, IV, 788.

H 165

HUMANITY AND SIN ARE NOT INTRINSIC. ON THE CONTRARY, SIN DEFORMS AND DEHUMANIZES MAN. THIS IS WHY THE SAINT IS MORE HUMAN THAN THE SINNER. THE ROAD TO SANCTITY, AS A CONFIGURATION WITH CHRIST, IS A ROAD TO HUMANIZATION AND NOT A REFUSAL OF HUMANITY. WHAT IS AUTHENTICALLY HUMAN IS NOT AN OBSTACLE TO BECOME UNITED WITH CHRIST, BUT THE ONLY CONTEXT IN WHICH THIS UNITY CAN TAKE PLACE. IN THIS WAY, MAN IS THE ROAD OF THE CHURCH (CF. RH 13).

«Yves Congar in his diary, remembers those working days: “At the afternoon meeting, dedicated to the discussion of the second chapter, Bishop Wojtyla made some outstanding remarks […] he made a powerful impression. His personality stands out. In him there is a special liveliness, a magnetic power, a prophetic fortitude, perfectly peaceful, which is impossible to resist.»

is based in a true appraisal of the humanity of the Son of God incarnate. This anthropological course implies that Jesus of Nazareth is not only the revealer of God in favour of man, but he “reveals man to man”(cf. RH 10). In this way, in face of God is reflected in Jesus, as well as in the face of the true man. Both aspects are inseparable, because the true face of God is only accessible to man through the Incarnation. The millenarian concern to defend the truth of the Incarnation, against the multiple forms of docetism, apolinarism and monophisism that dilute the integrity of the humanity of Christ, shows its salvific fruitfulness: salvation does not occur if the Son of God has not truly and completely assumed our own

H 166

human existence. Jesus Christ is not a divine being that travels through the world under the appearance of man; He is the Son of God that has truly and completely assumed our own humanity. Redemptor hominis shows the Incarnation as the end of a long road that starts with the Creation, develops in the Old Testament and ends with the glorification of the Son of God made man: “Through the Incarnation God gave human life the dimension that he intended man to have from his first beginning” (RH 1). Thus, the Incarnation is not only the instant in which God becomes man, but also the culmination of the ascent of man, in which humanity reaches, at last, the definite dimension that God wanted to give it from the start. In the original divine plan, man was destined to a complete union with God, and this plenitude is attained in Jesus of Nazareth. In this way, Jesus is the complete man, therefore, the model and goal of every man. Thus, the Incarnation is not only the revelation of the face of God, but also the manifestation and realization of the complete man. Humanity, the human family, reaches its fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God and son of Mary, “of the same nature of the Father, according to his divinity, and of the same nature of the mother, according to his humanity,” from a beautiful formula of Bishop Flavianus preparing the definition of Calcedonia. The Son of God, then, did not become man with certain exceptions, as if the fullness of humanity was ours and Christ’s was only partially human, on the contrary He became completely human. Moreover in Him, humanity reaches its full stature, its real dimension. So, true humanity is not found in Adam but in Christ, the definite Adam. The only exception in Christ, according to the scriptures, is sin (Heb 4,15). But precisely in the light of Christ who reveals true humanity, we understand that sin is not a part of human nature: it is not part of the essence of man. Humanity and sin are not intrinsic. On the contrary, sin deforms and dehumanizes man. This is why the saint is more human than the sinner. The road to sanctity, as a configuration with Christ, is a road to humanization and not a refusal of humanity. What is authentically human is not an obstacle to become united with Christ, but the only context in which this unity can take place. In this way, man is the road of the Church (cf. RH 13). To state of the truth of the Incarnation in its full implication, is equivalent to declaring that human nature, with all its limitations and historical character, is capax Dei, albeit, has a capacity for God. This is why, Jesus of Nazareth “reveals man to man himself,” because our own humanity – which is the same as Jesus’ – is capable of containing in himself the definitive self-communication of God.

TO STATE OF THE TRUTH OF THE INCARNATION IN ITS FULL IMPLICATION, IS EQUIVALENT TO DECLARING THAT HUMAN NATURE, WITH ALL ITS LIMITATIONS AND HISTORICAL CHARACTER, IS CAPAX DEI, ALBEIT, CAPABLE OF GOD. THIS IS WHY, JESUS OF NAZARETH “REVEALS MAN TO MAN HIMSELF,” BECAUSE OUR OWN HUMANITY – WHICH IS THE SAME AS JESUS’ – IS CAPABLE OF CONTAINING IN HIMSELF THE DEFINITIVE SELFCOMMUNICATION OF GOD.

H 167

TO STATE THAT GOD, AS MAN, HAS BECOME ACTOR OF OUR OWN HISTORY, IS LIKE SAYING THAT WHAT IS CULTURALLY CONDITIONING (THE HISTORIC HUMANITY OF THE SON OF GOD) IS CAPABLE OF BEARING AND EXPRESSING THE ETERNAL (THE DIVINITY OF THE SON OF GOD), AS BOTH REALITIES COINCIDE IN ONE ONLY SUBJECT, IN ONLY ONE UNIQUE PERSON.

H 168

The language of man is capable of expressing the self surrender of God, because in Jesus of Nazareth, in as much as man, God has become accessible to man: “He who sees me, sees the Father” (Jn 14,9, cf. RH 7). Then the human experience, always culturally situated, is capable of bearing in itself the authentically divine. If the “plenitude of the divine” is present in Jesus, then the concrete existence of man, of each man and woman, has at least the capacity of receiving God himself in his life. The Incarnation also has consequences in our way of understanding the historical reality in which we live: “God entered the history of humanity and, as a man, became an actor in that history (RH 1). To state that God, as man, has become actor of our own history, is like saying that what is culturally conditioning (the historic humanity of the Son of God) is capable of bearing and expressing the eternal (the divinity of the Son of God), as both realities coincide in one only subject, in only one unique person. These considerations about the relationship between Christ and humanity, between Christ and each man, have important consequences for the mission of the Church. On the one hand, the ecclesial mission can aspire to universality, because Christ is understood as the plenitude of man. The conviction that inspires the Church, in the light of Redemptor hominis is that all men and each man is called upon to reach his plenitude in Christ and therefore “revealing Christ to the world, helping each person to find himself in Christ” (RH 11). According to this view, Christ is not an option amongst others, but the realization of every man. On the other hand, it is understood that the encounter with Christ does not censure anything authentically human; man does not to opt between being fully human or fully Christian, because the plenitude of man, of every man and every woman, is found in Jesus Christ. In this way, the revelation of the plenitude of man in Christ, who is the Son of God, makes us understand that God is not an adversary of man, that the authentic mission of the Church humanizes man; that the divinization of man does not imply his de-humanization, on the contrary, complete humanity is only accessible in the total communion with God. “The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly-and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being-he must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to Christ” (RH 10). We can now better understand the words, maybe improvised, of Pope John Paul II in the Angelus in which he announced the meaning of Redemptor hominis: ”Therefore, as I perceive the relationship

between the mystery of redemption in Christ Jesus and the dignity of man, in that same way I would like to unite the mission of the Church with the service to man, in this his impenetrable mystery. I see in this the main work of my new ecclesial service.” The relationship between Christ and man implies that the mission of the Church is to serve man. True evangelization does not look to make the Church more powerful or numerous, but to serve man. This is why Pope John Paul II said at the Angelus in which he announced his first encyclical: “I would like to unite the mission of the Church with the service to man.” The Incarnation, thus understood, reveals God and reveals man. The fact of the Incarnation shows that our God is a God capable of uniting himself with man to the point of personally identifying with him: in the Incarnation of the Son of God who is true God of true God, God unites with man to coincide in one and only person. And the Incarnation shows a unique quality of humanity that had not been exposed: the capacity of human nature to unite and become one person with God. The Incarnation reveals that God is capable of becoming man and that man is susceptible of being totally assumed by God.

CHRIST IS NOT AN OPTION AMONGST OTHERS, BUT THE REALIZATION OF EVERY MAN. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE ENCOUNTER WITH CHRIST DOES NOT CENSURE ANYTHING AUTHENTICALLY HUMAN; MAN DOES NOT TO OPT BETWEEN BEING FULLY HUMAN OR FULLY CHRISTIAN, BECAUSE THE PLENITUDE OF MAN, OF EVERY MAN AND EVERY WOMAN, IS FOUND IN JESUS CHRIST.

Translated by Carmen Bullemore and Luis Vargas Saavedra

H 169

ÂŤOne of the elements of fascination of John Paul II is that he was not ashamed to speak of his homeland, of its history, of using its language, of identifying himself also with the popular religiosity of Poland, to speak of his fellow countrymen. However, that man who felt so strongly tied to his nation, was also able to be a gift for others; John Paul II was a gift for humanity.Âť (John Paul II embrace Cardinal Wyszynsky, Primate of Poland)

H 170

MONS. SLAWOMIR ODER, POSTULATOR OF JOHN PAUL’S SAINTHOOD CAUSE, SPEAKS

John Paul II’s beatification process had been canonically normal

arol Wojtyla’s canonization process had been carried out in full observance of the canonical norms required in any process of its kind. The only dispensation that differenced it, was not expecting five years for its introduction, because the necessary miracle for the beatifications occurred just a few months after the Pope died. The postulator of John Paul II’s beatification cause, Mons. Slawomir Oder, explains the details in an extensive dialogue with ZENIT, from which we extract some questions. —It seems as if the process of canonization for John Paul II is a fait accompli. Is the Pope being given preferential treatment, or is the canonization process following the normal route? —Yes, absolutely. The only dispensation that was obtained in this process was the dispensation from the [five-year] waiting period to begin. But the process itself was carried out, absolutely, in full observance of the canonical norms. Therefore, there was no real dispensation, or preferential treatment, in this sense. Instead, what we can say is that the practice of the [Congregation for Saints’ Causes] is to go ahead with cases that, in addition to the [declaration of] heroic virtue, already have a miracle, which are two different processes. Normally, the process takes place in this way: the diocesan investigation is carried out, the documentation is transmitted to the Congregation for Saints’ Causes, where the positio [the documentation that proves the HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 170 - 177

heroic exercise of virtue] is prepared, which is then subjected to the discussion of theologians and cardinals. The discussion of the positio must normally wait because a miracle is necessary [for the cause to advance]. [For John Paul II], the positio went ahead and was immediately subjected to the discussion of theologians and cardinals because the miracle [attributed to the Pope] happened very soon. In fact, the paperwork on the miracle was submitted to the Congregation for Saints’ Causes the day before the documentation on the virtues, and this made it possible for the cause to advance. —How much time passed from John Paul II’s death to the presentation of the miracle? —The miracle, recognized as such, happened in July [2005]. —And after how much time was it recognized? —We concluded the process in 2007. The miracle was presented the day before the closing of the diocesan investigation on the virtues, which ended in June 2007. —Were other miracles presented? —There were so many graces and also alleged miracles. Some were examined more in-depth, because this is the practice. Before carrying out a study on a miracle, a prior study is done which in some way guarantees the process itself. In some cases we did further studies and the preliminary statements were good, but we did not continue to study them because the

H 171

«To see this family is to see how the Lord worked. John Paul II always said that his father was his first teacher of spirituality, first guide in the spiritual life, the first seminary he attended. No doubt he had this image of his father, this military man, soldier, who knelt down and prayed at night before the icon of the Virgin. These are things that remain in the heart of a boy. A man who accompanied his child by the hand on pilgrimage to Czestochowa.»

study on the miracle that had been chose was already under way. —Is there an aspect that you didn’t know and that particularly struck you? —The aspect that amazed me, which also happens to be the most important aspect of his life, was the discovery that the source and origin of his extraordinary activity, of his generosity in acting, of the depth of his thought, was his relationship with Christ. What came to light was certainly a mystic. A mystic in the sense that he was a man who lived in the presence of God, who let himself be guided by the Holy Spirit, who was in constant dialogue with the Lord, who built his whole life around

H 172

the question [asked to Peter]: “Do you love me?” His life was the answer to this essential question posed by the Lord. I think this aspect is the greatest treasure of the process. —And because of being a mystic, he often found himself alone... —The encounter with the Lord is always a solitary path. We are, clearly, supported by the Church, by brothers in the faith, but then every one of us must travel on that path. Moreover, his relationship [with Christ] was truly personal and individual, and very profound. Those who worked with him would often recount that they would have a clear sense of being before a moment of what we could call

a raptus mistico, in which [John Paul II] was in such a profound dialogue with the Lord that the only thing one could do was to stand back and let him live this moment.

confrontation with hostility: the Church in Poland in confrontation with Communism. [He was] a Pope of great intellectual, cultural and scientific preparation, a Pope of great sensitivity, including aesthetic, and mindful —And in that dialogue, was there something that of so many values. for John Paul II was a cross? For example, he spoke And he was able to give back freshness to the often about the suffering of solidarity. Were there Church, always making reference to the fresthings on this point that troubled him at times? hness [the Church] was given by the Second —A man with as great a sensitivity as his could Vatican Council. He was the Pope who actuanot be indifferent in the face lized, who carried forward of the sufferings of the world. the thought of Vatican II. And HE WAS A POPE WHO BUILT And we were witnesses to in this regard he took ever so HIS PONTIFICATE IN A that; he was very vigilant, many steps, he undertook so VERY HUMANISTIC KEY, IN attentive to anything that hamany activities which were THE EVANGELICAL SENSE. ppened in the world. He was able, somewhat, to restore the HIS FIRST ENCYCLICAL, not afraid to raise his voice boat of the Church. REDEMPTOR HOMINIS, GIVES and say things that were not A CORRECT PERSPECTIVE in line with the common way —There were two moments in ON HOW TO UNDERSTAND of thinking. It is enough to rewhich I saw the Holy Father PRECISELY THE CENTRALITY call his heartbreaking appeal almost angry: during an address OF MAN WHO HAS, AT THE for peace on the eve of the in which he was defending the CENTER OF HIS EXISTENCE, Gulf conflict, when he said “I family and once when he was CHRIST HIMSELF. HIS WAS A belong to the generation that speaking out against the mafia in CHRISTIAN HUMANISM. knows war.” They were very Sicily. In both cases was it becaustrong words. Surely it was a se the value of life was at stake? thought that did not go down —Certainly, because of the well with the politically correct. value of life, but also because at stake was Undoubtedly, what he always had in his heart the truth about man. He was a Pope who as a great concern was the silent genocide that built his pontificate in a very humanistic key, goes on with abortion. The question about the in the evangelical sense. His first encyclical, richness of human life from conception was Redemptor hominis, gives a correct perspective certainly a constant cross and a suffering in on how to understand precisely the centrality his life. of man who has, at the center of his existence, Christ himself. His was a Christian huma—When John Paul II became Pope at the age of 58, nism. This concern of his for human life in all the Church was facing a series of grave challenges its dimensions stemmed from the Christian that seemed to have no solution, and by the end concept that he had about the value of life, for of the pontificate so many steps had been taken to which the Savior gave his life. unite the Church and to resolve these problems. —Yes, he was a Pope who providentially —It seems as if holiness ran in the family. Are brought to his Petrine ministry the energy there plans to begin the cause for the beatification of a young man; he was a young Pope. He of John Paul II’s father, who was an extraordinary was also a Pope used to living a situation of paternal figure who truly marked his son?

H 173

—Absolutely. But look, to see this family is to Paul II’s death. However, it must be recalled see how the Lord worked. John Paul II always that the investigations got under way dusaid that his father was his first teacher of ring his pontificate. Nevertheless, from the spirituality, first guide in the spiritual life, investigations carried out on the basis of the the first seminary he attended. No doubt he documentation, we can exclude any personal had this image of his father, this military involvement of the Holy Father in this affair, man, soldier, who knelt down and prayed at in the sense that his knowledge at the time night before the icon of the Virgin. These are that he died did not go beyond that which things that remain in the heart of a boy. A man was commonly known. who accompanied his child by the hand on pilgrimage —He was somewhat of a “scanto Czestochowa. He initiated dal” in the sense that in a world HE HAD A CHRISTIAN, him in prayer. However, thewhere everyone is afraid of THEOLOGICAL VISION OF re was also the figure of his growing old, of not being effiHISTORY IN WHICH NOT brother Edmund, who was cient, he carried his illness to the EVERYTHING CAN BE also an uncommon figure. He end, without hiding it in any way. REFERRED SOLELY TO dedicated himself completely —Precisely this capacity of MERE ECONOMIC OR to the service of charity and his to speak, when he was POLITICAL MATTERS, then paid the price. mute, when he could no lonWHERE THE ELEMENT OF ger say anything, but he simHUMANITY, COMPASSION, —How did John Paul II react to ply persevered, he stayed, he UNDERSTANDING, the sexual abuse crisis, which expressed his closeness, his REPENTANCE, FORGIVENESS, took place for the most part love, his “here I am” before ACCEPTANCE, SOLIDARITY, toward the end of his pontificate. the Lord, and perhaps he LOVE, BECOME THE —It is enough to think of his gave the greatest Spiritual ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS reaction when the problem Exercises without saying TO ENGAGE IN A TRUE surfaced, such as the convoanything, simply as witness. POLITICS OF GOD. cation of American bishops And then, yes, because it was here in Rome to address precisely a very serene way the problem. When these painful situations of going forward with this reality that is part came to his direct knowledge, one saw him of the human experience, we can say it is a overwhelmed and determined to give an prospect of Christian life, suffering and death appropriate answer. are also a part of life, naturally, as a passage. He was the one who promulgated the new However, with this testimony, with his “not rules in regard to this type of crime, as a ju- being embarrassed,” he gave back hope to so ridical instrument to resolve these situations. many persons, above all he also gave back dignity to persons who, so often, are mar—There was another painful case, that of the foun- ginalized, shut out and hidden, almost as a der of the Legionaries of Christ, Marcial Maciel. He disgrace because they are ill and old. knew about it at the end of his pontificate? We are in a civilization that wishes, in some —We have carried out all the investigations way, to charm death away. He went ahead that, of course, were geared to deepening the with these signs of suffering, of the death that knowledge of this most painful case for the was approaching, making one understand Church, which indeed exploded after John that it is a stage of life.

H 174

The postulator, Mons. Slawomir Oder, salutes Pope Benedict XVI during John Paul II’s beatification ceremony.

—There has been talk of the Holy Father’s spiritual legacy of mercy. What was John Paul II’s understanding of mercy? —There are so many interventions of his that relate precisely to this aspect of mercy, of magnanimity, of the capacity to imitate the greatness of the love of God who bends down before mankind, who is weak and fragile. He

himself said that forgiveness —and he said this in the letter he was thinking of publishing, the open letter to Ali Agca after the attack, and which then was not published— he said that forgiveness is the foundation of all true progress of human society. Essentially, mercy means the understanding of weakness, the capacity to forgive. It also

H 175

means the commitment not to receive in vain the grace that the Lord gives, but rather to produce in one’s own life the fruits worthy of one who has been graced and covered by the mercy of God. —He also saw forgiveness as a political tool, and that forgiveness was what moved history forward. —Yes, absolutely, because he had a Christian, theological vision of history in which not everything can be referred solely to mere economic or political matters, where the element of humanity, compassion, understanding, repentance, forgiveness, acceptance, solidarity, love, become the essential elements to engage in a true politics of God.

—What is the impact of John Paul II’s beatification on the Church in Poland? —Certainly for Poland, it goes without saying, this is a milestone in our history and a very intense, important moment, but John Paul II is not a Polish phenomenon. This is the extraordinary thing, which struck me very much, and which is one of the elements of fascination of John Paul II. He was not ashamed to speak of his homeland, of its history, of using its language, of identifying himself also with the popular religiosity of Poland, to speak of his fellow countrymen. However, that man who felt so strongly tied to his nation, was also able to be a gift for others; John Paul II was a gift for humanity.

Visit of Cardinal Wojtyla to the University of Lublin, 24th of August 1972.

H 176

Not only Poland wept [when John Paul II and charismatic personality, and at the same died], also Mexico, and the entire world! time was able to do justice to the office itself, He truly became a gift for humanity. This is vicar of Christ. precisely his greatness. Although remaining Look, he was no longer, but the Church was, firmly his own person, he was able to receive Peter was, the new Pope was, a German people from all parts of the world. And be- Pope, and the crowd cried out in Polish and cause [the Pope] was so genuine in his love in Italian “Long live the Pope!” This was for his own homeland, he was able to inspire something beautiful for me! others to recognize their own identity, history, and roots. In a certain way he brought about —Were there detractors who disagreed with the this new sentiment in the Church of feeling Pope’s desire to gather the youth together in Rome oneself a child of God, and a for the first World Youth Day brother to others. in 1985? HE HIMSELF SAID THAT THE There is a second aspect that —There was no disagreement GIFT IS A MYSTERY, THAT A relates precisely to Poland — on the part of the Pope nor on PRIEST MUST NOT SEEK TO and I must say that it inspired the part of the young people, BE IN FASHION BECAUSE HE me— was when Pope Benebut rather on the part of IS ALWAYS IN FASHION, HE IS dict XVI was elected. There those who thought in an oldALWAYS UP-TO-DATE, BECAUSE were so many Poles in St. fashioned way. [John Paul II] WHAT A PRIEST REPRESENTS Peter’s Square who came for thought in a very modern IS CHRIST, AND CHRIST IS the funeral and who stayed, way. He was a priest who ALWAYS THE SAME. THAT IS because Rome had become sensed things. He himself WHY THE REAL NOVELTY for them a second homeland, said that the gift is a mystery, THAT A PRIEST BEARS IS thanks in part to the Roman that a priest must not seek CHRIST. AND HE WAS ABLE spirit that is so hospitable, geto be in fashion because he TO CONVOKE THESE YOUNG nerous. At the moment of the is always in fashion, he is PEOPLE, BASED ON THE election in St. Peter’s Square, always up-to-date, because NOVELTY THAT IS CHRIST. you could hear shouts in Powhat a priest represents is lish, “Long Live the Pope!” Christ, and Christ is always This truly made me understand the faith of the same. That is why the real novelty that the people of Poland. It had really grown and a priest bears is Christ. And he was able to matured next to this great Pope who was convoke these young people, based on the able to live his ministry with such a strong novelty that is Christ.

H 177

NOTES THE FIRST APOSTOLIC VISIT TO POLAND:

A JOURNEY THAT CHANGED THE WORLD

Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, archbishop of Krakow, recalled details of that 10th of July 1979, when Pope John Paul II culminated his journey to Poland, unleashing an immense process of changes in Eastern Europe. He did so by means of an interview with journalists Marcin Przeciszewski and Tomasz Królak, of the Polish catholic agency Kai,

H 178

revealing the huge effort accomplished then by Karol Wojtyla, who actually slept 14 hours running once back in Rome. —When did John Paul II begin to think about the possibility of visiting his fatherland? —Already a Cardinal, Karol Wojtyla attributed great importance to the celebration of the ninth

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 178 - 182

centennial of the death of St. Stanislaw; he the secretary of the Polish Bishop’s Conference, actually had been preparing the celebrations Monsignor Bronislaw Dabrowki. Finally, Warfor a long time. He had sent invitations to all saw gave free way, although with a condition: the Cardinals who had participated in the con- The Pope’s visit should not coincide with the clave of August 1978, and he also immediately anniversary of St. Stanislaw, in May. The Holy invited John Paul I to Krakow. Therefore, from Father said: Well, that means I shall arrive the the first moment on since his election to the following month, in June. See of St. Peter it seemed obvious to him that he had to do everything what —And regarding the itinerary was possible in order to come of the journey, were there any FOR JOHN PAUL II, LATIN to Poland to celebrate this andifficulties? AMERICA WAS VERY niversary. He felt that being in —It was established the Pope IMPORTANT IN RELATION Krakow at that moment was wouldn’t travel further than TO THE THEOLOGY OF a moral duty, even though he the Vistula, that is, to the LIBERATION, THE ATTEMPT realized it would not be easy regions of eastern Poland. TO UNDERSTAND THE SOCIAL to accomplish. Silesia was also excluded. TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH Basically, the Polish authoriIN THE PERSPECTIVE OF —Did he think the Polish commuties wished that the Pope’s MARXIST IDEOLOGY. AND HE nist authorities would not easily visit would be as brief as SAID: IF I CAN GO TO MEXICO, accept such a bitter drink? possible and very limited as A COUNTRY WITH THE MOST —As soon as the Polish rulto his moving from one place ANTICLERICAL CONSTITUTION ers came to know about the to another. OF THE WORLD, THEN EVEN request, they reacted in a THE POLISH GOVERNMENT negative way. But, meanwhile —At the end, the difficulties were WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAY NO. John Paul II had been offisurmounted. Did John Paul II HE WELL REMEMBERED THAT cially invited to visit Mexico. think about the possible reperTHE COMMUNIST AUTHORITIES He accepted with pleasure. cussions of his journey? Did he HAD NOT ALLOWED THE VISIT For him, Latin America was realize that it would come to be OF PAUL VI. BUT HE PERCEIVED very important because of the so determining for the course of INTUITIVELY THAT THEY Theology of Liberation, that events in Poland? WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO trend of interpreting the Social —Nobody could foresee PREVENT HIS VISIT NOW. Teachings of the Church in that. He was convinced that perspective of Marxist ideolthe Polish nation, so deeply ogy. And he thought: If I can go to Mexico, a rooted in the Faith, deserved the visit of the country with the most anticlerical Constitution Pope. At present we can undoubtedly say that in the world, then even the Polish government his first pilgrimage to Poland was the most will not be able to say no. He well remembered important of all the papal voyages, because it that the communist authorities had not al- unleashed an incredible process of changes at lowed the visit of Paul VI. But he perceived world level. Everything began started during intuitively that they would not be able to pre- those days. vent his visit now. —How did the Pope get ready for this journey? —When did the negotiations begin? —He wrote himself all the texts of his —Quite soon. The negotiation was headed by speeches and homilies. The role of the Polish

H 179

Section of the Department of State was limited to examine the quotes. He did not require any notes, he just relied on his memory. The Pope was perfectly organized and he wrote very fast: A long speech did not demand more than an hour and a half of his time. For a short speech, he took just an hour. And he read very much. He was able to do things at a time. —The central subject of his peregrination was the effusion of the Holy Spirit. It was quoted in almost every one of the Pope’s speeches. Was that a decision consulted with his collaborators? —John Paul II was a visionary, as many artists are. He knew what to say and what the Polish nation expected of him. He was able to present these subjects in the light of the Faith and the teachings of the Church. In addition, that period coincided with Pentecost.

JOHN PAUL II ALWAYS TURNED DOWN THE DOCTRINE OF “HISTORICAL COMMITMENT”, IN RESPECT TO WHICH THE WEST –AND EVEN THE CHURCHSHOULD CONSIDER MARXISM AS A DECISIVE ELEMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF HISTORY. HE WAS CONVINCED THAT THE FUTURE WOULD NOT PERTAIN EITHER TO MARXISM OR TO CLASS STRUGGLE. IN THIS SENSE, HE CHANGED THE VATICAN’S POLICY IN A DECISIVE WAY.

—But did John Paul II realize that his speech at Gniezno —in which he stated that the Slavic Pope’s mission was to make Europe discover the oneness of West and East— questioned the Vatican’s Ostpolitik which actually accepted the prevailing situation? —John Paul II always turned down the doctrine of “historical commitment”, in respect to which the West —and even the Church— should consider Marxism as a decisive element in the development of history. He was convinced that the future would not pertain either to Marxism or to class struggle. In this sense, he changes the Vatican’s policy in a decisive way. The change in perspective took many social groups and milieus to question if Marxism really was so strong. With the same firmness, John Paul II opposed the attempt to include Marxist analysis in the social teachings of the Church in the context

H 180

of the Theology of Liberation. For him, Humanity’s development depended on the freedom to choose and human rights. He favoured private right and the untouchable dignity of the human being. The speech delivered at Gniezno marked the beginning of the iron curtain’s break down, which by then divided Europe. The break down of the wall began there, not in Berlin! —But, weren’t there worries, even in the Vatican, that John Paul II was going too far? —A statement so strong in favour of these rights in fact scared some people, including some members of the Church.

—Doesn’t it annoy you that at present everybody speaks about the Wall in Berlin and not about Gniezno or about Solidarnosc? —One has to speak about historical facts. The fall of the Wall was a consequence of the process initiated in Poland in 1979, and I must repeat: The act of dismantling the iron curtain began in Gniezno, on June 3rd, 1979. —In Krakow, during his first journey, the Pope leant out a window of the archbishop’s see in order to talk to the youth, a dialog later repeated during each of his visits to Poland. Was that something planned in advance? —No, it was an absolutely spontaneous initiative. Thousands of people were expecting beneath that window and calling the Pope. It was necessary to show up somehow. The Holy Father made the decision all by himself, against the will of some around him, who tried to dissuade him for security reasons. —In your opinion, what is the deeper meaning of the Pope’s first peregrination to Poland?

«Nobody could foresee it. John Paul II was convinced that the Polish nation, so deeply rooted in Faith, deserved the visit of the Pope. At present we can undoubtedly say that his first pilgrimage to Poland was the most important of all the papal voyages, because it unleashed an incredible process of changes at world level. Everything started during those days.»

—After that visit, Poland would never be the same again. The people straightened their backs; they lost their fear. —Did Solidarnosc come to exist as a natural consequence of that liberation? —John Paul II freed the inner energy of the Polish people. In that sense, he established the spiritual foundations for the coming into existence of Solidarnosc the year after. —Once back in the Vatican, did John Paul II make any comment on his journey? —He did not say anything because he had lost his voice. After returning, he was very tired; he slept fourteen hours running. —Let us talk about the martial law established by general Jaruzelski in December 1981. How did the Pope react?

—John Paul II rarely showed any worry. But he spoke up strongly at Saint Peters basilica, in the presence of the Polish delegation, headed by President Jablonki. That happened in October 1982, when father Kolbe was canonized. The Pope said: “The [Polish] nation does not deserve what you have done”. —But had John Paul II considered the possibility of a Soviet invasion of Poland? —No one considered it seriously, because the Soviets were already engaged in Afghanistan. We were aware that the Soviet Union could not allow it by itself. We had precise information on that directly from the White House; we got it from Zbigniew Brzezinski [by then head of the US National Security Council], and from President Reagan himself, who personally called the Pope.

H 181

THE 1989 AVALANCHE

“The 1989 avalanche, which lasted until 1991, left us somewhat hypnotized; however, if we wish to understand what happened we must refer to the first stone that gave way, and which determined, progressively, the collapse. This first stone was dislodged in Poland. It was a movement of workers that, from reflection on their human condition, found spontaneously the Social Doctrine of the Church and formulated in her language their claims to take away legitimacy from a political regime that presented itself as the theoretic expression of the practical conscience of the Labor Movement […]. In other words, affirmed was the definitive rupture between theory and praxis within Marxism, which was questioned precisely by people whose conscience wished to constitute, in a reflective way, the workers. “Evidenced from this premise was the irremediable crisis of Marxism, which first confronted the Polish oligarchy, and later also the Russian, with the following alternative: military dictatorship or reforms. The military dictatorship failed in Poland. Attempted in the Soviet Union was the way of reforms, but it turned out to be impracticable, and the result was the collapse of the regime. “It is difficult to deny that there is in this process an ideal accident, and that at the beginning is the great witness of the Polish Church, led by Cardinal Stephan Wysynski, witness that extends and assumes a worldwide dimension with John Paul II’s pontificate.” Rocco Buttiglione El pensamiento de Karol Wojtyla. Ediciones Encuentro, Madrid.

—What was the relationship between John Paul II and general Jaruzelski? He still says that martial law was the lesser evil when compared to a Soviet invasion. —The Pope never accepted such an interpretation. He respected Jaruzelski’s intellect and knowledge, but he did not agree with him in respect to anything. The general looked exclusively eastward. On the contrary, Edward Gierek, who, when saying goodbye to the Pope at the end of his journey, said: “Here, at Warsaw, blow winds from the west and from the east. Holy Father, keep alive those from the west”. —Have you ever felt the presence of the devil? —Yes, I have. The strongest was when the devil was driven out of a young woman. I was there and I know what it means. It is terrible to notice the presence of such an eminent and

uncontrollable force. I saw him physically abusing her; I heard the voice with which he yelled at her. It happened after the general audience. John Paul II recited the exorcisms, but nothing! The Pope then said he would celebrate Mass on the next day for the purposes of the young woman. And, after that Mass, she suddenly felt as though she was another person, everything had vanished. At the beginning, I could hardly believe it; I thought it was some kind of mental illness. But, Satan does exist! —Now, how can one identify his presence in the world? —Satan exists, even though the prevailing ideology considers everything as a tale. At present, the devil works so that human beings will not believe he does exist. It is a very treacherous method. Translated by Martín Bruggendieck

H 182

AN APPEAL FOR THE UNION OF ART AND ARTISTS By Mauro Card. Piacenza

Pope John Paul II, of venerable memory, will

The leitmotiv of the homily comes from cercertainly also be remembered for his special tain passages of Acts 17, 22 – 31, the speech talent in reaching out to people from all walks of Saint Paul before the Aeropagus, where of life, expressing with appropriate and con- the Apostle of the people spoke to the Greeks in the very centre of vincing language the invitaAthens, a city symbol of its tion to join with Christ. As yet THE BACKGROUND OF THE civilisation, establishing for there is no thorough study of SPEECH OF THE POPE IS the first time a confrontahis magistery for artists. AnyTHE “BREACH (DISCIDIUM) tion between the Gospel and how, such a study should take BETWEEN THE GOSPEL AND culture, religion and Greek into account the document in CULTURE,” TREATED ALSO philosophy. The theme —the which the venerable Pontiff BY PAUL VI IN EVANGELII confrontation between faith expressed systematically his NUNTIANDI WHICH ALSO and culture— of John Paul II, views in this matter, the LetOCCURS IN THE DIVORCE which he dealt with in difter to the artists published on OF THE CHURCH FROM ferent opportunities, up to April 4th 1999, on the day of THE ARTISTS. the Encyclical Fides et ratio, 3 the Feast of the Resurrection, in which he discusses the reduring the vigil of the Jubilee of the year 2000, which created great expecta- lationship between the Church and modern tions amongst the artists.1 In this brief essay culture, marked by painful dissociations, which in our case should be understood, more amongst which the separation of faith and than ever before, in its etiological meaning, reason comes first. The background of the I will try to identify some of the recurrent speech of the Pope is the “breach (discidium) themes of John Paul II in connection with between the Gospel and culture,” treated sacred art, through a comparison between also by Paul VI in Evangelii nuntiandi4 which the above mentioned letter and the homily also occurs in the divorce of the Church from delivered during the sacred mass for artists the artists, and the attempt to overcome this on the twentieth May 1985 in Brussels,2 two divorce, which the Vatican Council already, documents delivered during the first and last with the famous “final call,”5 and that Pope Montini with his famous speech to artists years of his Pontificate. 1 Lettera del Papa Giovanni Paolo II agli Artisti, Librería Editrice Vaticana, Ciudad del Vaticano, 1990. Mentioned in other Publications: Cento artisti rispondono al Papa. Commento in opere e parole alla “Lettera del Papa Giovanni Paolo II agli artisti,” C. Chenis, catalogue of the exhibition (San Gabriele, Terano, Museo Saturos de Arte Sacro Contemporaneo, fifth January to twenty first April 2001), San Gabriele, 2000. 2 http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/index.htm. The homily was delivered during the course of his twenty six Papal trip outside of Italy, from the eleventh to the twenty first of May 1985, in which the Holy Father visited the Low Countries, Luxembourg and Belgium. 3 John Paul II, Fides et ratio, September 14th 1998, in “Acta Apostolicae Sedis” 91, 1999, p. 5 – 88 (nn 45 – 48). 4 Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evengali Nuntiandi, eight December 1975, in”Acta Apostolicae Swedis 58, 1976, p. 5 – 76 (n.20). 5 Ecumenical Council Vatican II, Messagio Agli Artisti (eigth December 1965) in “Acta Apostolicae Sedis,” 58, 1966, p. 13.

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 183 - 187

H 183

in the Sistine Chapel,6 started sponsoring. art, within its differences and peculiarities, In the homily, John Paul II quotes three constitutes a deeper knowledge of reality times (nn. 8, 10 y 12) the Council’s message and of that, which goes beyond the surface to remind us that the Church wishes a re- of things. This is expressed further on in the newed “alliance” with artists, because their Letter: “In contact with works of art, humancontribution in the search for God is special ity in every age, and even today, looks to and necessary. The fact that this outlook works of art to shed light upon its path and is characteristic of John Paul II thought is its destiny.”8 clearly revealed on the Letter, which not only An important theological reference is imrefers to he pressing need for this dialogue, plied in such a vision —which will become but also illustrates in several paragraphs, the explicit in the Letter— the mystery of the way in which this alliance in times past had Incarnation of the Divine Word. If Creation extraordinary results in each of the artistic in its perfection has the ability to reveal its Creator (cfr. Rm 1, 20), thanks venues, figurative, musical 7 to the Incarnation, art has asand literary. FAITH, AS WELL AS ART, sumed the capability to repRegarding the structure of WITHIN ITS DIFFERENCES resent the splendour of the the homily, it is based on AND PECULIARITIES, divine glory revealed in the the three theological virtues, CONSTITUTES A DEEPER face of the Word Incarnate.9 in a different order to the KNOWLEDGE OF REALITY “[…] the Church needs art. usual one: Faith, Charity AND OF THAT, WHICH Art must make perceptible, and Hope. A meaningful GOES BEYOND THE and as far as possible attracparallel between the virtues SURFACE OF THINGS. tive, the world of the spirit, of and art is issued. It might the invisible, of God.”10 seem a speech directed to The second analogy tied to artists within the faith, yet in the Pope’s vision, which coincides with the former: between art and charity (n. 5 - 8). Saint Paul’s in the Aeropagus, its rationality Love is certainly another form of knowledge, and objectivity allows it to be understood this time of man, allowing the encounter of by non-believers and agnostics. Moreover, two people and the deepest level of the spirit. the Theological virtues and art have more Art also functions at this level of universal communication amongst people: “Through analogies tan differences. The first analogy comes from the confronta- the ages and the different cultures, authentic tion between art and faith (nn. 2 - 4). The lat- art addresses every man. It unites them in ter one is “a way of regarding life, history, in the same way as love unites” (n. 7). the light of he Spirit and […] looking beyond Attentively observing it can be said that this history” (n. 2). With its own song, art is the statement implies an important theoretical appropriate language to “evoke through the point: the understanding of “beauty” in the beauty of the tangible forms, the mystery scope of the transcendentalism of being or of the unfathomable (ibid). Faith, as well as preached by God as harmony of “oneness,” 6 Paul VI, Discorso agli artisti, 7 May 1964, in Acta Apostolicae Sedis” 56, 1964, p. 438 – 444. 7 Lettera agli artisti, nn. 110 – 11 and 6 – 9. 8 Ibid n. 14. 9 Counsil of Nicea II (787), Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, G. Alberigio et al, Edizioni Dehoniane, Bologna 2, 1991, p. 131 – 137. 10 Lettera agli artisti, n.12.

H 184

H 185

IF CREATION IN ITS PERFECTION HAS THE ABILITY TO REVEAL ITS CREATOR (CFR. RM 1, 20), THANKS TO THE INCARNATION, ART HAS ASSUMED THE CAPABILITY TO REPRESENT THE SPLENDOUR OF THE DIVINE GLORY REVEALED IN THE FACE OF THE WORD INCARNATE.

«The Letter not only refers to he pressing need for this dialogue between the Church and the artists, but also illustrates in several paragraphs, the way in which this alliance in times past had extraordinary results in each of the artistic venues, figurative, musical and literary.» (Detail of La Pietà, by Michelangelo. Basilica of St. Peter)

of “good” and of “truth.” The cultural background is described by von Balthasar in the introduction of his monumental work on “theological aesthetics: “If […] beauty is understood as transcendental, then its definition must be formulated from God, and what belongs to God in the first place, His Revelation in history and his Incarnation […] must be considered as supreme beauty and archetype of the world.”11

If “beauty” in its origin is God’s glory, meaning his ultimate expression in what has been created and in history, also “beauty” expressed by art has not only aesthetical value, but ethical value, becoming for the artist a true vocation to “translate beauty, truth, love, what is more profound in Nature, which is God’s work, and in the heart of man, marked by a transcendental destiny (n. 8). The celebrated formulation of Irineo, “the

11 H. U. von Balthasar, Gloria. Una estetica teologica. I. La percesione Della forma, Jaca Book, Milano, 1975, p 58.

H 186

glory of God is the living man and the vision In this sense, may be it is possible to underof God is the life of man,”12 acquires here all stand the famous saying of Dostoyevsky: its truth. At this point in the Letter, the Pontiff beauty shall save the world.15 Whilst the Pope will outline a moral and spiritual profile of writes: May the beauty which you pass on to the artist, accountable for the common good generations still to come be such that it will of Humanity: “There is therefore an ethic, stir them to wonder! [...] People of today and even a “spirituality” of artistic service, which tomorrow need this enthusiasm if they are to contributes in its way to the life and renewal meet and master the crucial challenges which of a people.”13 stand before us.”16 All of this comes under the The Pope has no intention “A WORLD DEVOID OF virtue of charity. Today it is of addressi ng t he a r t ists ART WILL HARDLY BE particularly important for with devout exhortations; OPEN TO FAITH” (N. 4), “A charity to inspire hope. This instead he wants to point WORLD WITHOUT ART is the way of the third virour dignity of the person RUNS THE RISK OF BEING A tue (n. 9 - 11). “Often, now a a nd h is art wit h i n God’s WORLD CLOSED TO LOVE” veil of sadness obscures our plans. Under the concept of ARE VERY IMPORTANT culture. The human heart “alliance” (n.12), to which he STATEMENTS, WHICH seems incapable of feeling will return several times in PLACE THE CHURCH IN hopeful.”(n.9). Art frequenthis Letter,17 he speaks to artCOMMUNION WITH THE ly interprets the tragic sense ists —within the guidelines ARTISTS AT THE SERVICE OF of life; but contemporary of Vatican Council II and CONTEMPORARY MAN FOR culture has added despair Paul VI— jointly, recognising THEIR EVANGELIZATION. due to its incapacity of makthe autonomy of art in the ing any sense of pain and context of worldly realities. death. The artist, according to the Pope, However, the proximity of the respective cannot and should not ignore the threats that fields induces the Pope to look for a converweigh down on Humanity, “but leaves them gence in the discovery of the spiritual reality. in the perspective of the Redemption carried “A world devoid of art will hardly be open out by Christ” (n. 11). to faith” (n. 4), “A world without art runs Today hope is maybe the most relevant vir- the risk of being a world closed to love” are tue, of which little is said, but the Pope quotes very important statements, which place the some writers —Bernanos, Graham Greene Church in communion with the artists at and specially Peguy— who have pondered the service of contemporary man for their about it, in regards to our present world.14 Evangelization.

12 “Gloria enim Dei vivens homo, vita autem hominis visio Dei:” Irineo de Lyon, Adversus haereses. IV, 20, 7. 13 Lettera agli artisti, n. 4. 14 Hope has been dealt with rather vaguely in the novels of Bernanos and G. Greene. In Peguy it is the theme of the entire book: Il portico del mistero Della seconda virtud (1911), en Id., I misteri, Jaca Book, Milan, 1984, p. 155 – 282. 15 F. Dostoievski, L’idiota, P. III, cap. V (Milan, 1998, p. 645. 16 Lettera agli artisti, n. 16. 17 Ibid., nn.6 (Alianza fecunda entre Evangelio y arte), 12 (La Iglesia tiene necesidad del arte) y 13 (El arte ¿tiene necesidad de la Iglesia?).

H 187

The Pope in his own words HE REMAINED EVER A «ROCK», AS CHRIST DESIRED

H 188

Homily addressed by H.H. Benedict XVI during the ceremony of beatification of John Paul II

ear brothers and sisters,

Six years ago we gathered in this Square to celebrate the funeral of Pope John Paul II. Our grief at his loss was deep, but even greater was our sense of an immense grace which embraced Rome and the whole world: a grace which was in some way the fruit of my beloved predecessor’s entire life, and especially of his witness in suffering. Even then we perceived the fragrance of his sanctity, and in any number of ways God’s People showed their veneration for him. For this reason, with all due respect for the Church’s canonical norms, I wanted his cause of beatification to move forward with reasonable haste. And now the longed-for day has come; it came quickly because this is what was pleasing to the Lord: John Paul II is blessed! (…) Today is the Second Sunday of Easter, which Blessed John Paul II entitled Divine Mercy Sunday. The date was chosen for today’s celebration because, in God’s providence, my predecessor died on the vigil of this feast. Today is also the first day of May, Mary’s month, and the liturgical memorial of Saint Joseph the Worker. All these elements serve to enrich our prayer, they help us in our pilgrimage through time and space; but in heaven HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 180 - 201

H 189

a very different celebration is taking place among the angels and saints! Even so, God is but one, and one too is Christ the Lord, who like a bridge joins earth to heaven. At this moment we feel closer than ever, sharing as it were in the liturgy of heaven. «Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe» (Jn 20:29). In today’s Gospel Jesus proclaims this beatitude: the beatitude of faith. For us, it is particularly striking because we are gathered to celebrate a beatification, but even more so because today the one proclaimed blessed is a Pope, a Successor of Peter, one who was called to confirm his brethren in the faith. John Paul II is blessed because of his faith, a strong, generous and apostolic faith. We think at once of another beatitude: «Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven» (Mt 16:17). What did our heavenly Father reveal to Simon? That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Because of this faith, Simon becomes Peter, the rock on which Jesus can build his Church. The eternal beatitude of John Paul II, which today the Church rejoices to proclaim, is wholly

«Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe” (Jn 20:29). In today’s Gospel Jesus proclaims this beatitude: the beatitude of faith. For us, it is particularly striking […] because today the one proclaimed blessed is a Pope, a Successor of Peter, one who was called to confirm his brethren in the faith. John Paul II is blessed because of his faith, a strong, generous and apostolic faith.

H 190

A vision […] was taken up in the episcopal and later the papal coat-of-arms of Karol Wojtyła: a golden cross with the letter “M” on the lower right and the motto Totus tuus, drawn from the well-known words of Saint Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort in which Karol Wojtyła found a guiding light for his life: “Totus tuus ego sum et omnia mea tua sunt […] I belong entirely to you, and all that I have is yours. I take you for my all. O Mary, give me your heart” contained in these sayings of Jesus: «Blessed are you, Simon» and «Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe!» It is the beatitude of faith, which John Paul II also received as a gift from God the Father for the building up of Christ’s Church. Our thoughts turn to yet another beatitude, one which appears in the Gospel before all others. It is the beatitude of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of the Redeemer. Mary, who had just conceived Jesus, was told by Saint Elizabeth: «Blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfilment of what was spoken to her by the Lord» (Lk 1:45). The beatitude of faith has its model in Mary, and all of us rejoice that the beatification of John Paul II takes place on this first day of the month of Mary, beneath the maternal gaze of the one who by her faith sustained the faith of the Apostles and constantly sustains the faith of their successors, especially those called to occupy the Chair of Peter. Mary does

not appear in the accounts of Christ’s resurrection, yet hers is, as it were, a continual, hidden presence: she is the Mother to whom Jesus entrusted each of his disciples and the entire community. In particular we can see how Saint John and Saint Luke record the powerful, maternal presence of Mary in the passages preceding those read in today’s Gospel and first reading. In the account of Jesus’ death, Mary appears at the foot of the cross (Jn 19:25), and at the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles she is seen in the midst of the disciples gathered in prayer in the Upper Room (Acts 1:14). Today’s second reading also speaks to us of faith. Saint Peter himself, filled with spiritual enthusiasm, points out to the newly-baptized the reason for their hope and their joy. I like to think how in this passage, at the beginning of his First Letter, Peter does not use language of exhortation; instead, he states a fact. He writes: «you rejoice», and he adds: «you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy, for you are receiving the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls» (1 Pet 1:6, 8-9). All these verbs are in the indicative, because a new reality has come about in Christ’s resurrection, a reality to which faith opens the door. «This is the Lord’s doing», says the Psalm (118:23), and «it is marvelous in our eyes», the eyes of faith. Dear brothers and sisters, today our eyes behold, in the full spiritual light of the risen Christ, the beloved and revered figure of John Paul II. Today his name is added to the host of those whom he proclaimed saints and blesseds during the almost twenty-seven years of his pontificate, thereby forcefully emphasizing the universal vocation to the heights of the Christian life, to holiness, taught by the conciliar Constitution on the Church Lumen gentium. All of us, as

members of the people of God - bishops, priests, deacons, laity, men and women religious - are making our pilgrim way to the heavenly homeland where the Virgin Mary has preceded us, associated as she was in a unique and perfect way to the mystery of Christ and the Church. Karol Wojtyła took part in the Second Vatican Council, first as an auxiliary Bishop and then as Archbishop of Kraków. He was fully aware that the Council’s decision to devote the last chapter of its Constitution on the Church to Mary meant that the Mother of the Redeemer is held up as an image and model of holiness for every Christian and for the entire Church. This was the theological vision which Blessed John Paul II discovered as a young man and subsequently maintained and deepened throughout his life. A vision which is expressed in the scriptural image of the crucified Christ with Mary, his Mother, at his side. This icon from the Gospel of John (19:25-27) was taken up in the episcopal and later the papal coat-of-arms of Karol Wojtyła: a golden cross with the letter «M» on the lower right and the motto Totus tuus,

“Do not be afraid! Open, open wide the doors to Christ!” What the newly-elected Pope asked of everyone, he was himself the first to do: society, culture, political and economic systems he opened up to Christ, turning back with the strength of a titan —a strength which came to him from God— a tide which appeared irreversible.

H 191

drawn from the well-known words of Saint Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort in which Karol Wojtyła found a guiding light for his life: «Totus tuus ego sum et omnia mea tua sunt. Accipio te in mea omnia. Praebe mihi cor tuum, Maria - I belong entirely to you, and all that I have is yours. I take you for my all. O Mary, give me your heart» (Treatise on True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, 266). In his Testament, the new Blessed wrote: «When, on 16 October 1978, the Conclave of Cardinals chose John Paul II, the Primate of Poland, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński, said to me: ‘The task of the new Pope will be to lead the Church into the Third Millennium’». And the Pope added: «I would like once again to express my gratitude to the Holy Spirit for the great gift of the Second Vatican Council,

Karol Wojtyła ascended to the throne of Peter, he brought with him a deep understanding of the difference between Marxism and Christianity, based on their respective visions of man. This was his message: man is the way of the Church, and Christ is the way of man. With this message, which is the great legacy of the Second Vatican Council and of its “helmsman”, the Servant of God Pope Paul VI, John Paul II led the People of God across the threshold of the Third Millennium, which thanks to Christ he was able to call “the threshold of hope”.

H 192

to which, together with the whole Church —and especially with the whole episcopate— I feel indebted. I am convinced that it will long be granted to the new generations to draw from the treasures that this Council of the twentieth century has lavished upon us. As a Bishop who took part in the Council from the first to the last day, I desire to entrust this great patrimony to all who are and will be called in the future to put it into practice. For my part, I thank the Eternal Shepherd, who has enabled me to serve this very great cause in the course of all the years of my Pontificate». And what is this «cause»? It is the same one that John Paul II presented during his first solemn Mass in Saint Peter’s Square in the unforgettable words: «Do not be afraid! Open, open wide the doors to Christ!» What the newly-elected Pope asked of everyone, he was himself the first to do: society, culture, political and economic systems he opened up to Christ, turning back with the strength of a titan —a strength which came to him from God— a tide which appeared irreversible. By his witness of faith, love and apostolic courage, accompanied by great human charisma, this exemplary son of Poland helped believers throughout the world not to be afraid to be called Christian, to belong to the Church, to speak of the Gospel. In a word: he helped us not to fear the truth, because truth is the guarantee of liberty. To put it even more succinctly: he gave us the strength to believe in Christ, because Christ is Redemptor hominis, the Redeemer of man. This was the theme of his first encyclical, and the thread which runs though all the others. When Karol Wojtyła ascended to the throne of Peter, he brought with him a deep understanding of the difference between Marxism and Christianity, based on their respective visions of man. This was his message: man is the way of the Church, and Christ is

the way of man. With this message, which is the great legacy of the Second Vatican Council and of its «helmsman», the Servant of God Pope Paul VI, John Paul II led the People of God across the threshold of the Third Millennium, which thanks to Christ he was able to call «the threshold of hope». Throughout the long journey of preparation for the great Jubilee he directed Christianity once again to the future, the future of God, which transcends history while nonetheless directly affecting it. He rightly reclaimed for Christianity that impulse of hope which had in some sense faltered before Marxism and the ideology of progress. He restored to Christianity its true face as a religion of hope, to be lived in history in an «Advent» spirit, in a personal and communitarian existence directed to Christ, the fullness of humanity

I had known him earlier and had esteemed him, but for twentythree years, beginning in 1982 after he called me to Rome to be Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I was at his side and came to revere him all the more. My own service was sustained by his spiritual depth and by the richness of his insights. His example of prayer continually impressed and edified me: he remained deeply united to God even amid the many demands of his ministry. Then too, there was his witness in suffering: the Lord gradually stripped him of everything, yet he remained ever a “rock”, as Christ desired.

and the fulfillment of all our longings for justice and peace. Finally, on a more personal note, I would like to thank God for the gift of having worked for many years with Blessed Pope John Paul II. I had known him earlier and had esteemed him, but for twenty-three years, beginning in 1982 after he called me to Rome to be Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I was at his side and came to revere him all the more. My own service was sustained by his spiritual depth and by the richness of his insights. His example of prayer continually impressed and edified me: he remained deeply united to God even amid the many demands of his ministry. Then too, there was his witness in suffering: the Lord gradually stripped him of everything, yet he remained ever a «rock», as Christ desired. His profound humility, grounded in close union with Christ, enabled him to continue to lead the Church and to give to the world a message which became all the more eloquent as his physical strength declined. In this way he lived out in an extraordinary way the vocation of every priest and bishop to become completely one with Jesus, whom he daily receives and offers in the Church. Blessed are you, beloved Pope John Paul II, because you believed! Continue, we implore you, to sustain from heaven the faith of God’s people. You often blessed us in this Square from the Apostolic Palace: Bless us, Holy Father! Amen. (Vatican, 1-V-2011)

H 193

Image of the solemn inauguration of John Paul II’s ministry as universal pastor of the Holy Church.

HE NEVER WANTED TO SAVE HIS OWN LIFE Homily addressed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Dean of the Sacred College of Cardinals, during the funeral mass of H.H. John Paul II

“

ollow me.” The Risen Lord says these words to Peter. They are his last words to this disciple, chosen to shepherd his flock. “Follow me” —this lapidary saying of Christ can be taken as the key to understanding the message which comes to us from the life of our late beloved Pope John Paul II. Today we bury his remains in the earth as a seed of immortality— our hearts are full of sadness, yet at the same time of joyful hope and profound gratitude These are the sentiments that inspire us, brothers and sisters in Christ, present here in St. Peter’s Square, in neighboring streets

H 194

and in various other locations within the city of Rome, where an immense crowd, silently praying, has gathered over the last few days. I greet all of you from my heart. In the name of the College of Cardinals, I also wish to express my respects to heads of state, heads of government and the delegations from various countries. I greet the authorities and official representatives of other Churches and Christian Communities, and likewise those of different religions. Next I greet the archbishops, bishops, priests, religious men and women and the faithful who have come here from

He really went everywhere, untiringly, in order to bear fruit, fruit that lasts. “Rise, Let Us Be on Our Way!” is the title of his next-to-last book. “Rise, let us be on our way!” —with these words he roused us from a lethargic faith, from the sleep of the disciples of both yesterday and today. “Rise, let us be on our way!” he continues to say to us even today. every continent; especially the young, whom John Paul II liked to call the future and the hope of the Church. My greeting is extended, moreover, to all those throughout the world who are united with us through radio and television in this solemn celebration of our beloved Holy Father’s funeral. Follow me — as a young student Karol Wojtyla was thrilled by literature, the theater and poetry. Working in a chemical plant, surrounded and threatened by the Nazi terror, he heard the voice of the Lord: Follow me! In this extraordinary setting he began to read books of philosophy and theology, and then entered the clandestine seminary established by Cardinal Sapieha. After the war he was able to complete his studies in the faculty of theology of the Jagiellonian University of Krakow. How often, in his letters to priests and in his autobiographical books, has he spoken to us about his priesthood, to which he was ordained on November 1, 1946. In these texts he interprets his priesthood with particular reference to three sayings of the Lord. First: “It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit that will remain” (John 15:16).

The second saying is: “A good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). And then: “As the Father loves me, so I also love you. Remain in my love” (John 15:9). In these three sayings we see the heart and soul of our Holy Father. He really went everywhere, untiringly, in order to bear fruit, fruit that lasts. “Rise, Let Us Be on Our Way!” is the title of his next-to-last book. “Rise, let us be on our way!” — with these words he roused us from a lethargic faith, from the sleep of the disciples of both yesterday and today. “Rise, let us be on our way!” he continues to say to us even today. The Holy Father was a priest to the last, for he offered his life to God for his flock and for the entire human family, in a daily self-oblation for the service of the Church, especially amid the sufferings of his final months. And in this way he became one with Christ, the Good Shepherd who loves his sheep. Finally, “abide in my love”: The Pope who tried to meet everyone, who had an ability to forgive and to open his heart to all, tells us once again today, with these words of the Lord, that by abiding in the love of Christ we learn, at the school of Christ, the art of true love. Follow me! In July 1958, the young priest Karol Wojtyla began a new stage in his journey with the Lord and in the footsteps of the Lord. Karol had gone to the Masuri lakes for his usual vacation, along with a group of young people who loved canoeing. But he brought with him a letter inviting him to call on the primate of Poland, Cardinal Wyszynski. He could guess the purpose of the meeting: He was to be appointed as the auxiliary bishop of Krakow. Leaving the academic world, leaving this challenging engagement with young people, leaving the great intellectual endeavor of striving to understand and interpret the mystery of that creature which is man and of communicating to today’s world the Chris-

H 195

And thus he came to experience how everything which he had given over into the Lord’s hands, came back to him in a new way. His love of words, of poetry, of literature, became an essential part of his pastoral mission and gave new vitality, new urgency, new attractiveness to the preaching of the Gospel, even when it is a sign of contradiction. tian interpretation of our being —all this must have seemed to him like losing his very self, losing what had become the very human identity of this young priest. Follow me— Karol Wojtyla accepted the appointment, for he heard in the Church’s call the voice of Christ. And then he realized how true are the Lord’s words: “Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses it will save it” (Luke 17:33). Our Pope —and we all know this— never wanted to make his own life secure, to keep it for himself; he wanted to give of himself unreservedly, to the very last moment, for Christ and thus also for us. And thus he came to experience how everything which he had given over into the Lord’s hands, came back to him in a new way. His love of words, of poetry, of literature, became an essential part of his pastoral mission and gave new vitality, new urgency, new attractiveness to the preaching of the Gospel, even when it is a sign of contradiction. Follow me! In October 1978, Cardinal Wojtyla once again heard the voice of the Lord. Once more there took place that dialogue with Peter reported in the Gospel of this Mass: “Simon, son of John, do you love me? Feed my sheep!” To the Lord’s question, “Karol, do you love me?” the archbishop of Krakow

H 196

answered from the depths of his heart: “Lord you know everything; you know that I love you.” The love of Christ was the dominant force in the life of our beloved Holy Father. Anyone who ever saw him pray, who ever heard him preach, knows that. Thanks to his being profoundly rooted in Christ, he was able to bear a burden which transcends merely human abilities: that of being the shepherd of Christ’s flock, his universal Church. This is not the time to speak of the specific content of this rich pontificate. I would like only to read two passages of today’s liturgy which reflect central elements of his message. In the first reading, St. Peter says -—and with St. Peter, the Pope himself— “In truth, I see that God shows no partiality. Rather, in every nation whoever fears him and acts uprightly is acceptable to him. You know the word (that) he sent to the Israelites as he proclaimed peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all” (Acts 10:34-36). And in the second reading, St. Paul —and with St. Paul, our late Pope— exhorts us, crying out: “Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, in this way stand firm in the Lord, beloved” (Philippians 4:1). Follow me! Together with the command to feed his flock, Christ proclaimed to Peter that he would die a martyr’s death. With those

The love of Christ was the dominant force in the life of our beloved Holy Father. Anyone who ever saw him pray, who ever heard him preach, knows that. Thanks to his being profoundly rooted in Christ, he was able to bear a burden which transcends merely human abilities: that of being the shepherd of Christ’s flock, his universal Church.

words, which conclude and sum up the dialogue on love and on the mandate of the universal shepherd, the Lord recalls another dialogue, which took place during the Last Supper. There Jesus had said: “Where I am going, you cannot come.” Peter said to him, “Lord, where are you going?” Jesus replied: “Where I am going, you cannot follow me now; but you will follow me afterward” (John 13:33,36). Jesus from the Supper went toward the Cross, went toward his resurrection — he entered into the paschal mystery; and Peter could not yet follow him. Now — after the resurrection — comes the time, comes this “afterward.” By shepherding the flock of Christ, Peter enters into the paschal mystery, he goes toward the cross and the resurrection. The Lord says this in these words: “when you were younger, you used to dress yourself and go where you wanted; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go” (John 21:18). In the first years of his pontificate, still young and full of energy, the Holy Father went to the very ends of the earth, guided by Christ. But afterward, he increasingly entered into the communion of Christ’s sufferings; increasingly he understood the truth of the words: “someone else will dress you.” And in this very communion with the suffering Lord, tirelessly and with renewed intensity, he proclaimed the Gospel, the mystery of that love which goes to the end (cf. John 13:1). He interpreted for us the paschal mystery as a mystery of divine mercy. In his last book, he wrote: The limit imposed upon evil “is ultimately Divine Mercy” (Memory and Identity, pp. 60- 61). And reflecting on the assassination attempt, he said: “In sacrificing himself for us all, Christ gave a new meaning to suffering, opening up a new dimension, a new order: the order of love. [...] It is this suffering which burns and consumes evil with

The Holy Father found the purest reflection of God’s mercy in the Mother of God. He, who at an early age had lost his own mother, loved his divine mother all the more. He heard the words of the crucified Lord as addressed personally to him: “Behold your Mother.” the flame of love and draws forth even from sin a great flowering of good” (pp. 189-190). Impelled by this vision, the Pope suffered and loved in communion with Christ, and that is why the message of his suffering and his silence proved so eloquent and so fruitful. Divine Mercy: the Holy Father found the purest reflection of God’s mercy in the Mother of God. He, who at an early age had lost his own mother, loved his divine mother all the more. He heard the words of the crucified Lord as addressed personally to him: “Behold your Mother.” And so he did as the beloved disciple did: “he took her into his own home” (John 19:27) — Totus tuus. And from the mother he learned to conform himself to Christ. None of us can ever forget how in that last Easter Sunday of his life, the Holy Father, marked by suffering, came once more to the window of the Apostolic Palace and one last time gave his blessing urbi et orbi. We can be sure that our beloved Pope is standing today at the window of the Father’s house, that he sees us and blesses us. Yes, bless us, Holy Father. We entrust your dear soul to the Mother of God, your Mother, who guided you each day and who will guide you now to the eternal glory of her Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. (Vatican 8-IV-2005)

H 197

OPEN WIDE THE DOORS FOR CHRIST!

H 198

Paragraphs of the homily addressed by John Paul II in the inauguration of his pontificate The full text is published in www.humanitas.cl

rothers and sisters, do not be afraid to welcome Christ and accept his power. Help the Pope and all those who wish to serve Christ and with Christ’s power to serve the human person and the whole of mankind. Do not be afraid. Open wide the doors for Christ. To his saving power open the boundaries of States, economic and political systems, the vast fields of culture, civilization and development. Do not be afraid. Christ knows “what is in man”. He alone knows it. So often today man does not know what is within him, in the depths of his mind and heart. So often he is uncertain about the meaning of his life on this earth. He is assailed by doubt, a doubt which turns into despair. We ask you therefore, we beg you with humility and trust, let Christ speak to man. He alone has words of life, yes, of eternal life. (Vatican, 22-X-1978)

H 199

THE FIRST TIME JOHN PAUL II ADDRESSED TO LATINAMERICA The first time H.H. John Paul II visited our continent, in the beginnings of his pontificate, was to attend to the III Conference of the Latin American Episcopate. On 28th January 1979, he delivered the inaugural speech of this Conference in the Seminar Palafoxiano of Puebla de los Ángeles, México. Illuminated by what was already proposed as the program of his pontificate, ideas that would be developed in his first encyclical Redemptor hominis, he drew the lines of his pastoral for Latin America. This memorable document was known as the Speech of Puebla. We publish in our pages some excerpts of the speech and invite our readers to find the integral text in our webpage: www.humanitas.cl

he truth we owe to human beings is, first and foremost, a truth about themselves. As witnesses to Jesus Christ, we are heralds, spokesmen, and servants of this truth. We cannot reduce it to the principles of some philosophical system, or to mere political activity. We cannot forget it or betray it. Perhaps one of the most glaring weaknesses of present-day civilization lies in an inadequate view of the human being. Undoubtedly our age is the age that has written and spoken the most about the human being; it is the age of

H 200

various humanisms, the age of anthropocentrism. But paradoxically it is also the age of people’s deepest anxieties about their identity and destiny; it is the age when human beings have been debased to previously unsuspected levels, when human values have been trodden underfoot as never before. How do we explain this paradox? We can say that it is the inexorable paradox of atheistic humanism. It is the drama of people severed from an essential dimension of their being — the Absolute —and thus confronted with

the worst possible diminution of their being. Gaudium et spes goes to the heart of the problem when it says: «Only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light» (GS:22). Thanks to the Gospel, the Church possesses the truth about the human being. It is found in an anthropology that the Church never ceases to explore more deeply and to share. The primordial assertion of this anthropology is that the human being is the image of God and cannot be reduced to a mere fragment of nature or to an anonymous element in the human city (GS:12,14). This is the sense intended by St. Irenaeus when he wrote: «The glory of the human being is God; but the receptacle of all God’s activity, wisdom, and power is the human being» (St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, III— 20, 2-3). I made especially pointed reference to this irreplaceable foundation of the Christian conception of the human being in my Christmas Message: «Christmas is the feast of the human being. [...] Viewed in quantitative terms, the human being is an object of calculation. [...] But at the same time the human being is single, unique, and unrepeatable, someone thought of and chosen from eternity, someone called and identified by name» (John Paul II— Christmas Message, 25 December 1978).

Faced with many other forms of humanism, which frequently are locked into a strictly economic, biological, or psychological view of the human being, the Church has the right and the duty to proclaim the truth about the human being that it received from its teacher, Jesus Christ. God grant that no external coercion will prevent the Church from doing so. But above all, God grant that the Church itself will not fail to do so out of fear or doubt, or because it has left itself to be contaminated by other brands of humanism, or for the lack of confidence in its original message. So when a pastor of the Church clearly and unambiguously announces the truth about the human being, which was revealed by him who knew «what was in man’s heart» (John 2:25), he should be encouraged by the certainty that he is rendering the best service to human beings. This complete truth about human beings is the basis of the Church’s social teaching, even as it is the basis of authentic liberation. In the light of this truth we see that human beings are not the pawns of economic or political processes, that instead these processes are geared towards human beings and subject to them. I have no doubt that this truth about human beings, as taught by the Church, will emerge strengthened from this pastoral meeting. (Puebla de los Ángeles, México, 28-I-1979)

H 201

H 202

BEATIFICATION OF JOHN PAUL II ST. PETERâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S SQUARE, MAY 1ST, 2011

H 203

H 204

H 205

H 206

H 207

H 209

H 210

H 211

H 212

H 213

H 214

Reliquary which contains John Paul IIâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s blood. It was presented for veneration during the ceremony of beatification.

H 215

H 216

H 217

THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD IMAGES AND GESTURES OF KAROL WOJTYLA

The years have passed swiftly since the death of John Paul II. Now, in the analyses continually proposed on his extensive Magisterium, articles have given way to studies, reports to books of history, theology and thought. Interest in his historic figure and his human personality has increased with the passing of time. John Paul II’s great communicative strength was, in reality, the value of his message, the whole truth given to the peoples of the world. As I have already had the opportunity to say at other times, in his case we are faced with a communication that encloses within it all the power proper of Christianity, all its temporal atemporality, all its unavoidable modernity. In this connection, John Paul II’s Pontificate was, undoubtedly, the first dominated by the absolute centrality of the communicative phenomenon, transformed inevitably to be worldwide and globalized. Although John Paul II was not the first to realize the importance of this fact, he was, certainly, the first Pope in history to transfer, without losing anything of its original meaning, all the explosive and provocative weight of the Christian message into the world of the media. It could be said that John Paul II understood the value of the media long before the latter was transformed into the most powerful communicative weapon of our time, and that it took note of him. In reality, he learned this from the Apostles and, in particular, from Saint Paul, bringing to our world the same wave of novelty and rupture with the past that the Apostles had taken to the communities of Asia Minor in the 1st century. World public opinion was astonished by him, almost appalled by the irreverence and spontaneity of his gestures, as the community of Ephesus was stupefied by Saint Paul. In fact, if it is true, as Saint Thomas Aquinas said, that the Mystery of the Incarnation is first of all a sign, here is the possibility for a Christian to make of his life, above all in the apostolic dimension, an equally great image, an equally great communicative event. John Paul II did so with his gestures and images. He personified the truth of the man-Pope, expressing it with clear gestures, in comprehensible presentations, in indelible images, that more than revealing the man-Wojtyla, expressed in a plastic way the content of the faith and of its implementation in the moment of history, as when he embraced the feet of the Crucifix on the Day of Forgiveness during the Great Jubilee of 2000. “”I believe in the value of signs,” John Paul II once said. “Because signs can transmit better” the ineffable, because signs make eloquent what words alone cannot express. Moreover, this very acute communicative ability was an instinct in him, an almost natural predisposition of openness to others, of which he was aware early on, and to which he remained faithful to the end. John Paul II, however, was not a technician of communication. Rather, it was the richness of what he said and his authenticity and sincerity that made him communicative. Long before being Pope, he already had that instantaneous capacity to turn life into visible signs, expressing it in its totality, in all its singularity, in all its dramatic universality. This is the meaning, for example, of the depth of his selflessness —his near embrace—of Ali Agca in the prison after the attack. Finally, gestures and images are ennobled and make sense according to the quality of the truth that one transmits. It is as a garment which adapts itself to the one who wears it, remaining always the same, always equally fruitful, always gifted with the same quality.

H 218

HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 218 - 240

BLESSED JOHN PAUL II John Paul II had, in short, full awareness of the mysterious poetic value of the word, of the incomparable ability of linguistic signs, of gestures, of situations. It was possible for him with his simple and profound language not only to speak of objects, but to express the meaning of reality, the final mystery, ineffable and mysterious, of the human truth. We cannot fail to recall the severity of his cry to the Mafia in Sicily after the killings in 1992. It was an exceptional case, but very significant. From the beginning, this existential witness has been the ultimate meaning of the pastoral mission of the Church. In fact, a Pontiff is not called to lose himself in images or to avail himself of them through the techniques of a specialist. When a Pope is guided interiorly by the truth – rather, by the mystery – which he bears in him, it is the latter that enables him to penetrate all the areas of communication, making a new light shine before the world, introducing into history the original truth that he represents, inserting in this time the everlasting eternity of his message. Some American scholars have noted this singular attitude of the bodylanguage of John Paul II, acknowledging that “he dominated television simply by ignoring it.” Finally, television not only did not ignore the Pope, but gave him the possibility to change the nature of the communications themselves, opening new horizons. The signs, as Saint Augustine said, are “real and visible things, which only signify others that are more profound and invisible,” and also the Church today, thanks to John Paul II, has learnt not to be afraid to use them, even when they do not seem to be very relevant. JOAQUÍN NAVARRO VALLS

H 219

MARIE-SIMON PIERRE

MARIE SIMON-PIERRE, THE MIRACLE OF JOHN PAUL II Testimony given by Marie Simon-Pierre (baptized Marie-Pierre), a nun pertaining to the Sisters of Catholic Maternities, born in Rumily-en-Cambrésis in 1961 and cured of Parkinson’s disease for reasons scientifically inexplicable, as confirmed by a committee of scientists. This phenomenon was acknowledged as a miracle through the intercession of Pope John Paul II in the process of his beatification, concluded on May.1, 2011.

In June 2001, I was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease. The disease had affected the whole left side of my body, creating great difficulties for me, as I am left-handed. After three years, the initial phase of the disease, slow but progressive, was followed by an aggravation of the symptoms: accentuation of the trembling, rigidity, pain, insomnia. From April 2, 2005, I began to worsen week after week, I grew worse day after day, I was unable to write (I repeat that I am left-handed), and although I attempted it, what I wrote was unintelligible. I could drive only short distances because my left leg would stiffen sometimes, and my rigidity impeded my driving. Moreover, to do my work in a hospital took more time than usual. I was exhausted. After learning my diagnosis, it was difficult for me to watch John Paul II on television. However, I felt very close to him in prayer and I knew he would understand what I was going through. I also admired his strength and courage, which motivated me not to give in and to love this suffering, because without love none of this made sense. I can say that it was a daily struggle, but my only wish was to live it with faith and in loving adherence to the will of the Father. At Easter (2005) I wanted to watch our Holy Father on television, because I knew, in my deepest self, that it would be the last time. I prepared myself the whole morning for this “meeting”, knowing that it would be very difficult for me, as it would make me see how I would look like in a few years. It was even harder for me being relatively young. However, an unexpected service prevented me to watch the Pope on TV. On the afternoon of April 2, the whole community gathered to take part in the Vigil of Prayer at St. Peter’s Square, broadcasted live by the French television of the Diocese of Paris (KTO) [...] All of us together heard the announcement of John Paul II’s death. At that moment, the world caved in on me. I had lost the friend who understood me and who gave me the strength to keep going. In the following days, I had the sensation of an enormous void, but also the certainty of his living presence. On May 13, feast of Our Lady of Fatima, Benedict XVI announced the special dispensation to initiate the cause of beatification of John Paul II. Beginning the following day, the sisters of all the French and African communities began to pray for my cure through the intercession of John Paul II. They prayed incessantly until the news of my cure arrived. At that time I was on vacation. On May 26, my time of rest being at an end, I returned totally exhausted by the disease. “If you believe, you will see the glory of God”: this phrase of St. John’s Gospel accompanied me from May 14 onward. On June 1st, I was finished; I struggled to keep on my feet and to walk. On June 2nd in the afternoon, I went to find my superior to ask her if I could leave my work. She encouraged me to endure a bit longer until my return from Lourdes in August, and she added: “John Paul II has not yet said his last word” (John Paul II was surely there, in that meeting which elapsed in serenity and peace). Then, Mother Superior gave me a pen and told me to write: “John Paul II.” It was 5 o’clock in the afternoon. With effort, I wrote: “John Paul II.” We remained in silence before the illegible letters; later, the day continued as usual. At the end of the evening prayer, at 9 o’clock at night, I went to my office before going to my room. I felt the need to pick up the pen and to write, just as if someone within me was saying: “Pick up the pen and write.” It was between 9:30 and 9:40 at night. To my great surprise I saw that the writing was clearly legible. Not understanding anything, I went to bed. Exactly two months had gone by since John Paul II’s departure to the House of the Father. I woke up at 4:30 a.m., surprised that I was able to sleep and I jumped out of bed: my body was no longer insensitive, rigid, and interiorly I was not the same.

H 220

Then, I felt an innermost call and the strong impulse to go to pray before the Blessed Sacrament. I went down to the Oratory and prayed before the Blessed Sacrament. I felt a profound peace and a sensation of well-being; too great an experience, a mystery difficult to explain in words. Later, before the Blessed Sacrament, I meditated on John Paul II’s Mysteries of Light. At 6 o’clock in the morning, I went out to meet with the sisters in the chapel for a time of prayer, which was followed by the Eucharistic celebration. I had to walk some 50 meters and at that very moment I realized that, as I walked, my left arm was moving, it was not immobile close to my body. I also felt a physical lightness and agility that I had not felt for a long time. During the Eucharistic celebration I was full of joy and peace; it was June 3, feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Coming from Holy Mass, I was convinced of my cure; my hand did not shake any more. I went to write again and at midday I stopped taking my medicines. On June 7, as planned, I went to my neurologist, who had been my doctor for the past four years. He was also surprised to see the disappearance of all the symptoms of the disease, despite me having interrupted the treatment five days earlier. The next day the Superior General entrusted an act of thanksgiving to all our communities, and the entire congregation began a thanksgiving novena to John Paul II. Ten months have passed now since I interrupted all kinds of treatment. I am working normally again, I have no difficulty in writing and I also drive long distances. It feels as if I had been reborn: a new life, because nothing is as it was before. Today I can say that my friend has left our earth, but that now he is much closer to my heart. He has made to grow my need of adoration of the Blessed Sacrament and my love of the Eucharist, which have a priority place in my daily life. What the Lord has granted me through the intercession of John Paul II is a great mystery, difficult to explain with words — something very great and profound -- but nothing is impossible for God. Yes. “If you believe, you will see the glory of God.”

H 221

THE CHURCH OF JOHN PAUL II

A well-known French writer, who represented the Elisee government on October 22, 1978, when the ceremony of John Paul II’s investiture took place in Saint Peter’s Square, described the event thus: “the crowd, tightly packed in the enclosure of Saint Peter’s Square, in a multi-colored wave that almost reached the Tiber, awaited a Pope and, all of a sudden, a fisher of men appeared, similar in everything to those called by Christ on the shores of lake Tiberias. The new arrival did not seem to come from Poland, but from Galilee, with a net over his shoulder and the Gospel under his arm, as if time had been erased between him and the tomb of Peter present under the basilica. The man dressed in white who was before us had the stature of the Apostles, and his first words -- “Do not be afraid!” --, cried out with a voice that seemed to make all the bells of Rome resonate, called us to witness. They seemed to be spoken at the entrance of the Coliseum, on a day of persecution, by a Pope of the catacombs, inviting the faithful to follow him under the lion’s fang.” In these times when there is so much talk about the Church we may well ask ourselves: what was the Church for that bishop from Eastern Europe who appeared that day under the threshold of Saint Peter, whose totally unknown name, Karol Wojtyla, sparked questions marks throughout the world? The mentioned description already suggests it: someone who understood profoundly that the Church is configured essentially by Jesus and the community of his Apostles, as well as by all those who wish to live with them, not in an archaeological sense certainly, but really and actually. A pastor whose motto Totus tuus indicates that he lived the Church earlier as one who orders and gives, as one who obeys and receives, understanding her first of all as being the Church of Mary, the Mystical Body of Christ, which is conformed in the common priesthood of all the baptized in as much as “royal people,” the Bride that will endure beyond time.

H 222

This essentially mystical vision did not impede, as was altogether evident, that at the same time he lived the Church as a reality totally incarnated in history, given that his profound love for the Polish fatherland and for his local Church of Krakow – with all the historic impact that his appointment would have there and from there – not for an instant was able to cloud his higher love for the universal Church governed by Peter throughout the world, but, on the contrary, strengthened it. In profound consonance with the foregoing, it was the lively expression of a Church understood radically by the primacy of charity. There is no need to wonder – as it suffices to recall his figure and gestures when newly appointed or when having grown old – how much John Paul II would have recalled daily Jesus’ question to Peter: “Do you love me more than these?” He demonstrated to the point of the impossible that the Church is service of charity or is otherwise invaded by deterioration. His prophetic gesture of forgiveness in the Jubilee of the Year 2000 is closely linked to this. The Church, more holy than sinful – because her light, her nourishment and her means are holy – has often been disfigured and afflicted by the cooling of our charity. His tireless concern to put that holiness of the Church on the lampstand was demonstrated in the 1,341 Blessed and 482 Saints raised by him to the altars as universal models of perfection. Perhaps five features summarize essentially the ecclesial testimony of Pope John Paul II. First, strength, death to himself, which Baptism implies for the Christian, was certified in a bloody way on May 13, 1981 (he suffered martyrdom and came out of it unharmed), but he lived it in a bloodless way always, up to his last breath. Second, the primacy of God and of eternal life with the consequent hope of resurrection, without which there is no Christianity that is worthwhile and the Church is no different from an NGO. Third, in a world where the people of God are lost in a mass, the visibility of the Church, through countless apostolic journeys, the proclamation of the Word that illumines, discovers and cauterizes all, and of Eucharistic assemblies – ceremonies where Christians see themselves as Christians and where the world sees them as such – celebrated before millions of people in all the continents. Fourth, the unity of the doctrine, inviting permanently those who boast about living “on the frontier of the faith” to live in the heart of the Church and in the truth of the Christian message: it was from here that he dialogued with the world, in Assisi with the other religions and at the UN with the powers of the earth. Fifth, his unshakeable eschatological sense, which made him proclaim from the first day “Do not be afraid!”, as no matter what happens, we will always be awaiting here, with Mary and the whole Church, the coming of Jesus Christ. JAIME ANTÚNEZ ALDUNATE

Article published originally in “El Mercurio” (30.IV.11)

Cardinal Angelo Amato An extraordinary and universal event

Cardinal Angelo Amato, prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, speaks about the beatification of John Paul II in an interview given to L’Osservatore Romano. Here we publish and excerpt of it. –Why the beatification of John Paul II could be considered as an extraordinary event? –It is an extraordinary event which not only interests and moves

the Church, but the whole world. It is the glorification of a Pope who filled with his presence the second half of the past century and the beginning of the new millennium. –In your opinion: Which is the leading thread that runs through and characterizes Karol Wojtyla’s pontificate? –It’s the impetus, the spiritual enthusiasm of giving testimony of the presence of God in history and in humanity, as well as revealing Jesus Christ to the world. Think about the encyclical Redemptoris missio, still very actual, with his courageous proclamation of Christ as universal saviour. The innumerable apostolic voyages of the

H 223

Pope Wojtyla were nothing more but true mission ad gentes to announce Christ and his Gospel of truth and goodness to all the people, even to those who did not yet knew him. –Is it possible to identify a “centre” in his pontifical teaching? –The centre is Jesus Christ, Lord of the universe and of history. It is around this solid Christocentric reality that all the other elements of his pontifical teaching surround. More than anything else, his devotion for the Virgin Mary, arising from the great enthusiasm he felt for Christ. It is not by chance that in the encyclical Redemptoris Mater, the Blessed Virgin appears as efficacious mediator for the believers and as collaborator with the Son in favour of humanity. And around Christ, like branches from a tree, are grafted the other realities of the Christian faith, as the Trinitarian doctrine, moral theology, the teachings of Catechism, spirituality, eschatology, law and liturgy.

TESTAMENT OF JOHN PAUL II The TESTAMENT of Blessed John Paul II, from the 6th of March 1979 (and its successive additions) can be read in HUMANITAS Nr. 38 (April-June 2005) and in www.humanitas. cl (Beatification of John Paul II)

The Pope’s helicopter pilot John Paul II was the ideal passenger

According to the pilot of the papal helicopter, Pope John Paul II was “the ideal passenger,” never showing “concrete worries or fears.” For some 20 years, Colonel Antonio Berardo had the task of flying the Polish Pontiff around Italy. He spoke with ZENIT about his memories as the Pope’s pilot, recounting: “I remember in an occasion we went to the airport of Orio al Serio [southeast of Bergamo]. There was a very strong storm. The Pope was seated peacefully and serenely. We carried out our operations and everything went well. “When there was any turbulence, which happens frequently with a helicopter, we never saw the Pope tense or worried. He was the ideal passenger, tranquil.” —What did John Paul II do during the flights? —Berardo: During a trip, the Pope usually read or looked attentively and with curiosity out the window, especially when we flew

H 224

over mountainous areas and he could admire the snow-covered landscapes. —Did the Pope like to make excursions outside the program? —Berardo: Yes, that’s true, during transports, especially the one on Wednesday from the Vatican to Castel Gandolfo, he liked to go on outings that weren’t programmed. Between our team and the Pope there was perfect understanding. It wasn’t necessary for him to ask: It was enough for him to make a gesture with his hand to be understood as saying, “Let’s take a little spin.” We would ask his secretary, [Monsignor] Dziwisz where he wanted us to take him and how far we could go. The Pope loved to go to the snow and in the summer we made excursions through the mountains, arriving even at the Gran Sasso. Once we took him to the sea, to the Pontine Islands. After asking him several times, that time he said to us: “It’s OK, today we are going to Ponza.” He observed the pastures and the landscape. He seemed very entertained. —What was it like to travel with the Pope? After all, you were his pilot. —Berardo: The first time I had the occasion to fly with the Pope, I was very overwhelmed. I knew I was taking a personage of enormous importance. So I was tense. Then, as time went on, it became little by little more calmed and routine. It became something automatic, almost familiar. The tension and emotion passed quickly. —What was the Pope’s relationship with the team? —Berardo: Every now and then John Paul II would say a phrase to us. But what we liked most about him were his gestures, the military greeting he gave us when he saw us, his smile, a pat on the back, an embrace. Once he embraced me because I saved a situation at the last minute. He was a very easygoing Pope. A couple of times he came to the cabin, looked at all the equipment, observed, put on the headset and then returned to his place. —What is the Pope’s place like in your helicopter? —Berardo: The easy chair where the Pope sits is very inviting. It is a comfortable chair, which is in front of a window that allows one to see the scenery, almost like a balcony on the world. Then there is a small table in front, often adorned with flowers. Many ask me if they can be photographed in that chair. —Tell us some special memory. —Berardo: It became such a routine for us to take the Pope that at times we forgot who it was. One Wednesday, I remember there was a solar eclipse. We had prepared to have the Pope see the eclipse. We stopped on the platform of the heliport of Castel Gandolfo. We were not equipped for the eclipse, however the prefecture had

given the Pope a welder’s glass. John Paul II was with us and he gave it to us. At a certain moment, one of the crew had it for such a long time that he said to the Pope, as if he were a friend of his, “one moment, I’m going to look a bit more.” A characteristic of John Paul II was that with him the weather was always fine, including when the forecast was the contrary, or when we went directly toward the storms. When we completed 10,000 hours of flying, for example, we organized a little ceremony in Castel Gandolfo with the Pope. However, it was raining terribly, a fantastic amount of water was falling. We didn’t know what to do. However, no sooner we got to the heliport, it stopped raining. A miracle. The Pope brought with him “fine weather.” Clandestine seminar Interview with the last companion of John Paul II

Cardinal Adam Stefan Sapieha, who ordained Karol Wojtyla priest in november, 1946.

“It was August of 1944. When the uprising in Warsaw against the Nazis began, Cardinal Sapieha decided to gather the students in the archbishop’s residence. That was the first time that I met Karol Wojtyła.” Monsignor Kazimierz Suder reads the memories recorded in tiny script on the white pages before him with a calm voice. On the other side of the table, like students awaiting an exam, were the journalists who had come to Krakow to meet the sole surviving member of the group of eight young men who made up the clandestine seminary organized during the German occupation of Poland by the indomitable archbishop of Krakow, Adamo Sapieha, the city’s last prince-archbishop. “During the Nazi occupation,” Monsignor Suder explained, “when a man expressed to the cardinal an intention to become a priest, the cardinal told him what to study at home in secret. None of us knew the others.”

This was a necessary measure after the Nazis found five young men staying in the seminary that they had closed; they arrested and shot them, while others were deported to Auschwitz. After this Cardinal Sapieha took the seminary underground. Listening On the wall behind the elderly priest hung a portrait of Karol Wojtyła in a thoughtful mood, with his chin resting on his hand. From the windows of the room there is a view of the Mariacka Basilica where 50 years ago he carried out his work as a spiritual director. “The image of Karol on that August day is still much impressed on my memory,” Monsignor Suder said. “He had a white shirt and pants made of thick material with wooden clogs on his feet. A scar was evident on his forehead. Afterward, I found out that he had been hit by a truck.” “He was a good companion,” he recalled. “He didn’t have problems with communication.” Wojtyła was “modest in speaking insofar as he preferred to listen; he gave his opinion on issues but he didn’t impose it, he tried to understand the other person; he never lied.” The young Wojtyła lent out his notes —each page of his notebooks marked with the initials of Jesus and Mary— and he gladly helped friends with their studies, but not with exams. In response to one companion who asked for the answers during a test he said: “Focus for a moment, ask the Holy Spirit and then try to give the answers yourself.” “He had a serene gaze,” Monsignor Suder continued, “and a sense of humor; he liked listening to jokes.” “After the failure of the Warsaw uprising, the priests who had to flee the city came to the archbishop’s residence and we gave them our rooms and all slept together in the cardinal’s audience room, where we also had classes.” This period of very close common life that continued until the Russians arrived in 1945 brought many of the young men close together. “I knew that he was born in Wadovice, that he had come to Krakow with his father after all of his family died and that after his father, too, died in 1941, he decided that the purpose of his life was the priesthood.” Suffering Another characteristic of the young Wojtyła that remained alive in the memory of his classmate was “sensitivity to human suffering. He gave the poor everything he received but with great discretion so as not to make a show of his generosity.” “Above all,” Suder added, “he had the gift of knowing how to pray.” He almost always prayed on his knees with the rosary in his hands and the Carmelite scapular about his neck. “He didn’t separate the study of theology from prayer; for him it was all one. After night prayer he would remain in the chapel with the theology manual or

H 225

the notebook. Connecting study with prayer and vice versa was one of his characteristics.” The monsignor also spoke of how the young men would see Cardinal Sapieha -- a proud opponent of the Nazis and support of the Polish resistance -- prone on the floor in prayer with his arms extended in the form of a cross. Turning again to the photo of his old classmate, whose smiling face now has hung from the loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica, he admitted with humility: “I never succeeded in achieving the concentration that he had in prayer.” On to Rome Wojtyła was ordained a priest on Nov. 1, 1946. On the following day he celebrated his first Mass in the Chapel of St. Leonard in the Wawel Cathedral and on Nov. 10 in the parish of Wadowice. “In the same week,” Monsignor Suder noted, “Karol left for Rome for the doctorate, after only two years of study in the seminary.” The great adventure that would contribute to changing the history of his country and the world had begun. Cuba Thanksgiving for the first pope who visited the island

The Cardinal Archbishop of La Habana, Jaime Ortega, invited the believers to participate in a Holy Mass celebrated by the papal ambassador for Cuba, Angelo Becciu, to honour the beatification of John Paul II. The Mass was done at the cathedral of La Habana, on Sunday at six o’clock in the afternoon. The mass was attended by officials from the government of Raúl Castro short before the Cuban state television broadcasted the pre-recorded ceremony emitted by the Vatican television. The Secretary of the State Council, Homero Acosta, the Undersecretary of State, Dagoberto Rodríguez, as well as Carlos Samper, from the Office for Religious Affairs of the Cuban Communist Party, participated in the liturgical celebration, too. Before half a thousand of believers that crowded the cathedral, the papal ambassador, Angelo Becciu, assured that John Paul II had been “a friend of Cuba; we know with what an interest and love he felt the life of this country”. John Paul II, the only Pope to visit this island in the Caribbean throughout its history, set a milestone with his apostolic visit to Cuba from the 21st to the 25th of January 1998, when he shook hands with Fidel Castro and publicly rebuked the minister, priest and poet Ernesto Cardenal for having accepted political office without the corresponding permit from the Vatican. These images made their way around the world, somehow establishing a before and an after for the relations of the communist country with the rest of the world. The Pope’s visit managed to distend half a century of tensions

H 226

between the communist government of Fidel Castro and the local Church, as well as to establish closer relations between the Holy See and La Habana. The phrase most insistently repeated by John Paul II during his visit –officially qualified as “messenger of truth and hope”- was that “Cuba must open to the world and the world must open to Cuba”. This phrase tore down years of isolation and opened the door to a progressive melting of the last bastion of the Cold War. In a book recently published, the Secretary of State of the Holy See, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, writes that John Paul II “estimated it had been a very positive visit, particularly because of the enthusiasm shown by the people, who achieve to live moments of freedom thanks to it”. The Pope “confessed to me that probably no head of state had prepared himself so profoundly for such a visit” like Fidel Castro did, who “had read the Pope’s encyclicals and his most important speeches, as well as some of his poems”, asserted Bertone. “We can say without any doubt that his visit constituted a transcendental event in the history of that nation as well as for the Church”, said, on the other hand, the pontifical ambassador for Cuba. Monsignor Becciu thanked the Cuban government for having sent an official delegation to the celebration, expressing in this way its “satisfaction with the event and the good relations with the Holy See”. The Cuban state broadcasted the complete pre-recorded ceremony of John Paul’s II beatification at the Vatican (at 20:30, Cuban time). The Catholics of the island celebrated enthusiastically the beatification of John Paul II, whilst at the same time all the churches of La Habana tolled their bells, as was arranged by Cardinal Archbishop Jaime Ortega, who had been designated Cardinal by John Paul II on the 26th of November 1994. Cardinal Ortega requested that all priests, nuns and laic believers participated in the Holy Mass at the cathedral and that on Sunday all the bells of the Cuban churches parishes and chapels should toll at four o’clock in the afternoon, as a message sent to the believers of his archdiocese. The Cuban Cardinal, who in 2010 began an unexpected dialogue with President Raúl Castro, assisted to the beatification ceremony at Saint Peter’s Square. A delegation from the Cuban government also attended to it. This delegation was headed by Caridad Diego, chief of the office for religious affairs of the Cuban communist party. These days, the Cuban and international media remember the transcendence John Paul’s II visit to Cuba had for international relations, as well as for the Church and the Cuban state themselves, whose diplomatic relations had reached their lowest level during the 1960s. At present, the dialogue established after the freeing of hundreds of political prisoners and their departure from the island with their families, marks the best moment of the relationship between the Church and the State in Cuba.

with a moral greatness able to enter into the most varied worlds.” In regard to devotion to Our Lady, Father Antunes said that “it was one of the most profound characteristics of his way of being Christian, after the manner of Mary, to whom he gave the totality of his being, as expressed in his motto ‘totus tuus.’” “The message of Fatima acquired an ecclesial and universal dimension [through him], which passed through the person of the Pope, bishop dressed in white,” the rector reflected. He added: “The publication of the third part of the Secret of Fatima has helped to understand very much what happened in the Church in the 20th century, and has guaranteed once again the connection between the prophecy and the designs of God for our time. [...] “The Church and the world have many reasons to thank God for the gift of John Paul II, a man faithful to his faith and totally dedicated to humanity. “Fatima has many reasons to sing the Magnificat of gratitude for the fact that Our Lady received him as a favorite son and that she gave him to us as a brother.” Polish bishops John Paul II, the friend of God

At Fatima, Portugal Thanksgiving magnificat for the polish pope

Pope John Paul II visited Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal three times: in 1982 (to thank her for saving him from near assassination on her feast day the year before), in 1991 and 2000. Thus, the shrine was the ideal place for Portugal to remember the Polish Pontiff, and the Portuguese Episcopal Conference invited the faithful there to a thanksgiving celebration for his beatification. The celebration will be held on her feast day, May 13, less than two weeks after the May 1 beatification. Father Virgílio Antunes, the rector of the Fatima Shrine, spoke about the Holy Father in the March 13 edition of Voz da Fatima [Voice of Fatima]. He observed that reading John Paul II’s biography resulting from the beatification process shows a “man characterized above all by the depth of his Christian spirituality, based on an immovable faith and his constant attitude of prayer.” “Never before was a Pope so well-known and loved,” wrote the rector. “In the ecclesial ambit, in the relationship with other Churches and other religions, in the social and political world, in culture, everyone ended up appreciating different aspects of this multi-faceted figure,

“Pope John Paul II guided the universal Church and strengthened our Faith during more than 26 years. We have a friend of God in heaven”, asserted the Bishops of Poland in a letter published on the occasion of the beatification of the Servant of God John Paul II, realized the 1st of May at Saint Peter’s Square in Rome. The bishops underlined the sanctity of John Paul II. “The gift of the life and the ministry of the Pope enriched the life of the contemporary Church and the world. From the beginning of his pontificate, the Holy Father established Christ, the Redeemer of humanity, in the centre”. The Pope, wrote the Polish Bishops, called to open “the national boundaries, the economic and political regimes, great areas of culture, civilization and development” to Christ (22 X 1978). The letter of the Polish Bishops assembly stresses that “John Paul II defended the dignity of a mankind, created as the very image and resemblance of God. He was a defender of life at every stage of its development”. “In his social encyclicals he demanded that those responsible for the life of society should always guide society and politics according to the principles of justice and solidarity. He asked to consider particularly the case of the poor and marginal”, follows the same letter. The Polish bishops remember to the believers that John Paul II was a witness of mercy. “The Servant of God John Paul II, who directly witnessed the inhuman totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century, preached the truth of Divine Mercy”. This truth “accompanies our generation and is an answer regarding our fears and all threats, giving us courage and hope”, add the prelates. As the bishops said, the preparation for the beatification of John

H 227

Paul II “cannot be restricted to questions of personal or familial life”. “We share the worries about the quality and the style of the political life of our country. In this political life come to manifest themselves scandalous divisions amongst people from different parties. There is hostility and antagonism. The liberty and democracy of our days are not what we dreamt of during the dark years of communism”, they asserted.

“As pastors of the Church we are aware that in order to invite others to change their hearts it is necessary to give an example. Therefore, imitating John Paul II, who often had the courage to ask forgiveness for the sins committed by the sons of the Church, we wish to confess that we have often failed to battle enough against evil, which opposes to concord and unity”, they concluded.

May 1st, 2011 The most attended beatification in history

More than 1 million pilgrims participated in the most crowded beatification in history today in Rome. A huge round of applause rose up from St. Peter’s Square, passing along the Via della Conciliazione and side streets to the Circus Maximus —where thousands of people followed the celebration on video screens— when Benedict XVI read the formula of beatification. “We grant that the venerable Servant of God John Paul II, Pope, henceforth be called Blessed and that his feast may be celebrated in the places and according to the regulations established by law, every year on Oct. 22,” he read in Latin. A smiling portrait of Karol Wojtyla, from a 1995 photograph, was

H 228

uncovered at that moment on a large banner that hung from the main loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica. The pilgrims, many from Poland, were unable to hold back their tears. The French nun Marie Simon-Pierre, whose inexplicable healing from Parkinson’s disease made it possible to conclude the beatification process, along with Sister Tobiana, the Polish nun who assisted John Paul II’s physician, carried in procession a relic of Karol Wojtyla, a cruet of his blood. Security opened St. Peter’s Square at 2 A.M., a few hours before the scheduled time of 5:30, in anticipation of the overwhelming numbers. The “powerful” of the world were also present: 62 delegations

led by heads of state and government as well as royal families, besides the other countries officially represented. Representing Italy were President Giorgio Napolitano and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi; representing Poland was President Bronislaw Komorowski; José Manuel Durão represented the European Commission. Representing Israel was Yossi Peled, a member of the Knesset, who was saved during the Holocaust by a Belgian Catholic family. Prior to the celebration Peled remarked that the event was “especially significant.” John Paul II, he said, “was born in a period in which one breathed an atmosphere of publicly approved anti-Semitism” but “he rebelled and

challenged those who wanted to enslave the human race.” Mexico was represented by President Felipe Calderón and Honduras by Porfirio Lobo. Five royal houses were present: those of Spain, Belgium, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein and the United Kingdom. The United States was represented by its ambassador to the Holy See, Miguel Díaz; Cuba by Caridad Diego Bello, head of the Office for Religious Questions of the Central Committee of the Party; and France by Prime Minister François Fillon. Some 2,300 journalists were present and 1,300 televisions stations.

DECREE FOR THE BEATIFICATION OF JOHN PAUL II It was on the 14th of January 2011 that the Vatican Congregation for the Causes of the Saints made public the Beatification Decree for Pope John Paul II, to be celebrated on the Second Sunday of Easter, feast of the Divine Mercy. We offer part of this decree. The complete text can be read in www.humanitas.cl (beatification of John Paul II) 8. An essential aspect of the new blessed: “God is the foundation of all our efforts” This is again an essential aspect, if one wishes to understand more deeply the personality of the Church’s new Blessed, Karol Wojtyla – John Paul II. The foundation of all the efforts of our life is in God. We are covered by divine love, by the results of Redemption and Salvation. But we must help people to become deeply rooted in God himself; we must do everything possible to create personal and social attitudes rooted in the reality of God. This requires patience, time and the ability to see everything through the eyes of God. The last, brief pilgrimage of Pope John Paul II in Poland, more specifically in his “small country”, in Cracow, Wadovice and the Way of the Cross (of Kalwaria Zebrzydowska), showed a determination, but also a spiritual acuity “in the process of maturation in time” so that all humankind, especially the ecclesial and Christian community, can understand more fully some of the fundamental aspects of faith. Since the beginning of his pontificate, in 1978, John Paul II often spoke in his homilies of the mercy of God. This became the theme of his second encyclical, Dives in misericordia, in 1980. He was aware that modern culture and its language do not have a place for mercy, treating it as something strange; they try to inscribe everything in the categories of justice and law. But this does not suffice, for it is not what the reality of God is about.

9. Entrusting the world to Divine Mercy Later on, the Pope took some steps to finalise the process of Beatification of Sr. Faustina Kowalska, and the canonisation (2000). The whole ecclesial community was brought to feel the closeness of the person so intimately linked to the message of Mercy; this facilitated the development of the topic for John Paul II, showing the reality of Divine Mercy in the many contexts around the world, in various continents, of humanity today. Finally, in August 2002, in Lagiewniki, where Sr. Faustina lived and died, John Paul II entrusted the world to Divine Mercy, to the unlimited trust in God the Merciful, to the One who has been a source

H 229

of inspiration, but also of strength for his service as Successor of Peter. “It is the Holy Spirit, the Comforter and Spirit of Truth, who leads us on the ways of Divine Mercy. By convicting the world “concerning sin, righteousness and condemnation” (John 16:8), he reveals at the same time the fullness of salvation in Christ. This convicting concerning sin is doubly related to the Cross of Christ. On the one hand, the Holy Spirit enables us, through the Cross of Christ, to recognize sin, any sin, in the dimension of evil which it contains and hides. On the other hand, the Holy Spirit enables us, again through the Cross of Christ, to see sin in the light of the mysterium pietatis, i.e. of the forgiving and merciful love of God (cf. Dominum et vivificantem, No. 32). Thus, the “convicting concerning sin” also becomes a conviction that sin can be forgiven, and that man can recover the dignity of a beloved son of God. The Cross is in fact the most profound humbling of God before man. The Cross is like a touch of eternal love on the most painful wounds of man’s earthly existence” (Dives in misericordia, No. 8). This truth will always be brought to mind by the cornerstone of this Sanctuary, extracted from Mount Calvary, in a certain way under the Cross on which Jesus Christ conquered sin and death.

(…) How much the world is in need of the mercy of God today! In every continent, from the depths of human suffering, a cry for mercy seems to rise. In those places where hatred and the thirst for revenge are overwhelming, where war brings suffering and the death of innocents, one needs the grace of mercy to pacify the minds and the hearts and make peace spring forth. In those places where there is less respect for life and human dignity, one needs the merciful love of God, in whose light we see the ineffable value of every single human being. Mercy is needed to ensure that every injustice may find its solution in the splendour of truth. So today, in this Sanctuary, I solemnly wish to entrust the world to Divine Mercy. I do so with the burning desire that the message of God’s merciful love, proclaimed here through Saint Faustina, may reach all the inhabitants of the earth and fill their hearts with hope. May this message spread from this place to our beloved homeland and throughout the world. May the binding promise of the Lord Jesus be fulfilled: from here has to come out “the spark that will prepare the world for his final coming” (Homily in Lagiewniki, 17th August 2002). Thus did the last months in the life of Pope John Paul II, marked by suffering, bring his Pontificate to its fulfillment.

At Saint Peter’s Basilica John Paul II rests in peace at Saint Sebastian Chapel

The mortal remains of John Paul II already rest under the altar of the Chapel of Saint Sebastian, located at Saint Peter’s Basilica, as is recorded in a statement published by the director of the Vatican’s press room, Federico Lombardi. Consequently, from now on the believers will be able to venerate the Blessed Pope at the chapel of the basilica and not longer at the Vatican grottos, as before. The coffin with the remains of Blessed John Paul II was moved from the Altar of the Confession, where they had been venerated by hundreds of thousands of believers after the beatification ceremony. Afterwards, it began a procession presided by Cardinal Angelo Comastri, the basilica’s archpriest, formed by the College of Penitentiaries, the Chapter of the Basilica and other nine Cardinals, various bishops and archbishops. Amongst them were the Cardinals Sodano, Dean of the College of Cardinals, Bertone, Secretary of State, Amato, Coppa, Lajolo, Re, Sandri, Macharski and Dziwisz, the archbishops Filoni, Mamberti and Mokrzycki, the postulator, monsignor Oder, and the nun Tobiana, together with other nuns from the pontifical apartment in times of John Paul II. After a first stop for prayer before the Altar of the Confession,

H 230

the procession, singing the litanies of the holy popes, arrived at the altar of the Chapel, where the coffin was already in the grave but still could be seen. After the litanies and the three times repeated invocation of Beate Ioanne Paule, the prayer of the Blessed Pope was recited and then the coffin was incensed. After, the workers from the Factory of Saint Peter installed a huge gravestone made out of white marble, with the words Beatus Ioannes Paulus PP. II. As the Vatican communiqué says, many of those present proceeded with the gesture of devotion of kissing the gravestone, whilst the assembly “dissolved joyfully touched”.

H 231

OREMUS

NOVENA Novena for the Blessed John Paul II (For beginning every day) In the name of the Father, of the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen. Veni Sancte Spiritus, veni per Mariam Come, Holy Spirit, come to us through Mary. Reflection for the first day Man cannot live without love. He remains a being that is incomprehensible for himself, his life is senseless, if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it. (John Paul II, Redemptor hominis, 10) Reflection for the second day Yes, dear friends, Christ loves us and he loves us for ever! He loves us even when we disappoint him, when we fail to meet his expectations for us. He never fails to embrace us in his mercy. How can we not be grateful to this God who has redeemed us, going so far as to accept the foolishness of the Cross? (Homily, August 20th, 2000). Reflection for the third day Especially through His lifestyle and through His actions, Jesus revealed that love is present in the world in which we live - an effective love, a love that addresses itself to man and embraces everything that makes up his humanity. This love makes itself particularly noticed in contact with suffering, injustice and poverty - in contact with the whole historical “human condition,” which in various ways manifests man’s limitation and frailty, both physical and moral. It is precisely the mode and sphere in which love manifests itself that in biblical language is called “mercy.” (John Paul II, Dives in misericordia, II) Reflection for the fourth day In recalling this evening the Easter Vigil, we are touching upon fundamental questions: life and death, mortality and immortality. In the history of humanity Jesus Christ has reversed the meaning of human existence. If everyday experience shows us this existence as a passage towards death, the Paschal Mystery opens to us the perspective of a new life beyond death. That is why the Church, which professes her belief in Jesus’ death and resurrection, has every reason to speak these words: “We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come”. (John Paul II, speech, August 23rd, 1997)

H 232

Reflection for the fifth day This is the Church’s miracle, that constitutes the youth of God for the world: a new people, that, by the mysterious action of the Holy Spirit, the always new values of evangelical poverty, fraternity, peace, mercy, unselfish service for those who are the last ones, love for the truth, prevails every day over the ancient mundane logic, announcing and anticipating the future of God. (John Paul II, Regina Coeli, May 26th 1996)

Reflection for the eighth day I would like to meet each of you, in every place on earth, to bless you in the name of Jesus Christ, who went about “doing good and healing” the sick (Acts 10:38). I would like to be at your side to console you in your afflictions, sustain your courage, nourish your hope, that all of you may be able to make yourselves a gift of love to Christ for the good of the Church and the world. (John Paul II, Message for the II World Day of the Sick, 1)

Reflection for the sixth day The Truth is Jesus Christ. Love the truth! Live the truth! Bring the truth to the world! Be witnesses to the truth! Jesus is the truth that saves; he is the Truth to which the Spirit of Truth shall lead us. (John Paul II, speech, August 19th, 1989)

Reflection for the ninth day Keep with love, Oh Virgin Mary, the poor, those who suffer, the young, hope for tomorrow, be maternally close to all people, families and nations. Aid the Christian people in its battle against evil. Oh clement, oh loving, oh sweet Virgin Mary! (John Paul II, July 16th, 1988)

Reflection for the seventh day Be joyful with Mary, who believed the fulfilment of the words of the Lord. Be joyful! Let us hope that the sign of the woman clothed with the sun will walk together with you, with every man and every woman, along all the paths of life. Let us hope she guides you to the fulfilment in God of your adoption as sons in Christ. “The Lord really has done wonders in you! (John Paul II, homily, August 15th, 1991)

Prayer for every day Blessed be thou, good Father, Lord of time and of history! We thank Thou because in your kindness Thou have given us the blessed John Paul II, as a good shepherd, courageous guide, passionate herald of the Gospel. Through his intercession bestow on us the grace we are asking for and strengthen us in our battle against evil. Welcome our plea in the name of Jesus, Thy Son and our Lord. Amen.

Beatification hymn Rit. Aprite le porte a Cristo!

Non abbiate paura: spalancate il vostro cuore all’Amore di Dio.

Rit. Open the doors to Christ,

courage! Be not afraid! Enlarge yours hearts to the love of God, to the charity of Christ.

1. Testimone di speranza

3. Testimone della fede

5. Portatore della pace

7. Nella Madre del Signore

per chi attende la salvezza, pellegrino per amore sulle strade del mondo.

che annunciasti con la vita, saldo e forte nella prova confermasti i tuoi fratelli.

ed araldo di giustizia, ti sei fatto tra le genti nunzio di misericordia.

ci indicasti una guida, nella sua intercessione la potenza della grazia.

2. Vero padre per i giovani

4. Insegnasti ad ogni uomo

6. Nel dolore rivelasti

8. Padre di misericordia,

che inviasti per il mondo, sentinelle del mattino, segno vivo di speranza.

la bellezza della vita indicando la famiglia come segno dell’amore.

la potenza della Croce. Guida sempre i tuoi fratelli sulle strade dell’amore.

Figlio nostro Redentore, Santo Spirito d’Amore, a te, Trinità, sia gloria. Amen.

H 233

OREMUS

Text of the Collect Prayer for the Mass of the Blessed John Paul II (October 22)

For the Holy Mass in honour of the new Blessed the special collect prayer that we publish below in Latin and English language will be used. The other prayers, the Preface, the antiphons and the readings from the Bible will be taken from the Common of Pastors: For a Pope. The first reading will be from Isaiah (52, 7-10); the Psalm for the Dead is 96/95 (1-2a. 2b-3. 7-8a. 10); the Halleluja will be from John (10, 14); and the Gospel from John (21, 15-17). Common of Pastors: For a Pope. —COLLECT—

De Communi pastorum: pro papa. —COLLECTA—

O God, who thou are rich in mercy and who willed that the blessed John Paul the Second should preside as Pope over your universal Church, grant, we pray, that instructed by his teaching, we may open our hearts to the saving grace of Christ, the sole Redeemer of mankind. Who lives and reigns.

Deus, dives in misericórdia, qui beátum Ioánnem Paulum, papam, univérsae Ecclésiae tuae praeésse voluísti, praesta, quaésumus, ut, eius institútis edócti, corda nostra salutíferae grátiae Christi, uníus redemptóris hóminis, fidénter aperiámus. Qui tecum.

Prayer to implore favors through the intercession of blessed John Paul II, Pope O Blessed Trinity, we thank You for having graced the Church with Blessed John Paul II and for allowing the tenderness of Your Fatherly care, the glory of the Cross of Christ, and the splendor of the Spirit of love, to shine through him. Trusting fully in Your infinite mercy and in the maternal intercession of Mary, he has given us a living image of Jesus the Good Shepherd, and has shown us that holiness is the necessary measure of ordinary Christian life and is the way of achieving eternal communion with You. Grant us, by his intercession, and according to Your will, the graces we implore, hoping that he will soon be numbered among Your saints. Amen.

H 234

LETTERS FROM THE BISHOPS “… I consider HUMANITAS review as one of the most useful sources in my review library, informing my deliberations on the great features of the noble battle of charity”. Daniel E. Flores S.T.D. (Assistant Bishop of Detroit, Michigan, U.S.A. Appointed Bishop of Brownsville, Texas, U.S.A.)

“… With great gratitude I have received HUMANITAS, which I appreciate and value for its content”. Juan Francisco Sarasti J. (Archbishop of Cali, Colombia)

H 235

“… I appreciate very much (…) the review’s excellent graphic quality and the high value of its intellectual contents”. José G. Martín Rábago (Archbishop of León, Mexico)

“… This is an opportunity to wish success to all the works and projects of your university, always relying on the blessing of God and the Holy Virgin”. Raymundo Card. Damasceno Assis (Archbishop of Aparecida, SP, Brazil)

“… HUMANITAS really presents Christian thought in an updated and dynamic way and undoubtedly helps to be aware of present day motion of the Kingdom. […] It is an important contribution to the Church and to humanity. I thank you very much for your gesture of solidarity with this Church”. Jesús Pérez Rodríguez O.F.M. (Archbishop of Sucre, Primate of Bolivia)

“… Be assured of my prayers for the results of this important initiative in favour of the Evangelization of Culture, as well as for your benefactors”. José Antonio Eguren Anselmi S.C.V. (Metropolitan Archbishop of Piura, Peru)

“… By way of this words I wish to express my sincere gratitude for sending me HUMANITAS review, an exemplary work that shows the Christian Culture of the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile; at the same time I congratulate all those who made that this unmatched piece could be successfully realized”. Luis Antonio Sánchez S.D.B. (Bishop of the Diocese of Tulcán, Ecuador)

“… The task performed by HUMANITAS is an open horizon that permits all of us who wish to bring the Gospel to our people, being able to move in the environment of culture and do it with sheer clarity, in order we may be able to give reason of our hope”. Fabio Luescún Mutis (Bishop of the Armed Forces of Colombia)

“ … I am very glad and congratulate you for the work you are carrying through your review in favour of the wellbeing of the Christians”. Rubén Salazar Gómez (Archbishop of Barranquilla, Colombia)

H 236

Paray-Le-Monial Mother Teresa speaks to the priests During the visit of Mother Teresa of Calcutta in 1968 to

a group of priests at the Sanctuary of Paray-Le-Monial, France, this beloved Blessed woman, so dear to John Paul II, remembered them about the importance of their priesthood. With the allowance of the Mother Teresa Centre we print her words, which can also be read in: www.motherteresa.orgÂ

Priest:Â Â I will not introduce you to them, but them to you. The group of priests who came for this session, most of their ministerial work is to hear confession to help people, and part of them as - part of that group of priests who are in thirty days of intercession for their brother priests and bishop with the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament and a long time for the intercession. Mother Teresa: Yes, tell them about the adoption. Priest: Yes. [In French he explains that when he talked to Mother Teresa about the month of intercession for priests, that

H 237

every day there is a monastery of contemplative Carmelites praying for them, she added that she has asked people who are ill to pray and intercede for them also.] Mother Teresa: We’ll ask Our Lady to give us her heart, so beautiful, so pure, so immaculate, so full of love and humility, that we may love Jesus as She loved Him. Some years back, the President of Yemen asked me to give him the sisters. This place had been without priests and nuns for 600 years — no tabernacle there, no Church, no parish. Completely Muslim. I told the President: “I am ready to give you the sisters if you give permission for a priest to come with us, because without Jesus we don’t go.” And then the President decided: yes. And I have before never realized the greatness of a priest as I saw it in Yemen. The moment the priest came, there was altar, there was tabernacle, there was Jesus. All these years there was no altar, no tabernacle, no Jesus. And now we have 3 houses there and we have 3 tabernacles and the people that come to work there, they are using our place as a centre of prayer. This is the greatness of the priest. During the Synod, I asked Holy Father: give us holy priests and we sisters and our families will be holy; because without priests we have no Jesus, without priests we have no absolution, without priests we cannot receive Holy Communion. And so the greatness of the priest is something wonderful. I had this same experience in Ethiopia; in some places the missionaries are being sent away and the Churches have been closed. I asked the government, “What happens to the poor people — I am ready to give you the sisters.” Then they said, “Yes, you can go.” Then I said, “But you know we can’t go without priests.” And so the priests came and again the Church was opened. See the greatness and the need for holiness, for the priest to be present to give Jesus to our people. We need the

H 238

priest to teach us how to pray, how to live a life of holiness and give only Jesus to the people. In our congregation, now we have sisters, brothers, and priests. And I‘ve seen that in New York, we have a home for homeless people where about 200 people come to eat from the street. And there a priest comes and talks to them a little, and we have a tabernacle in a little Chapel for them and many, many of these street people who have not been so close to the priest have made confession after 20, 30, 40 years. And I see now again in that home for this AIDS, for these sick people — SIDA, there is a priest who is visiting — our priest who is visiting them — and these people have been in jail, and now they are so bitter, so anxious, but nine of them have died in our hands a most beautiful death. Who taught them to die beautifully? The priest, the priest. How pure your heart must be to be able to say: “This is My Body,” how pure your hand must be to be raised in absolution, for we go to confession a sinner full of sin and we come back from confession a sinner without sin. How great is that being chosen by Christ to heal His people. I pray much for the priests, because I feel that — we are in 75 countries and I see everywhere the hunger of the people for God and in many of these places there are no priests. So we pray much for priests, that we may receive really holy priests, for people are hungry for God. And also I am very grateful to the priests because they have done much for our congregation, in training our sisters to live the life of a true religious. And every first Friday, the eve of first Friday, we prepare in a special way and specially we pray for priests — we have adoration at night and we pray specially for priests. You also pray for us — God has blessed us with many, many, many vocations — and that we may not spoil God’s work, that we may grow and be humble like Mary and holy like Jesus.

Blessed John Paul receives by hands of the editor of HUMANITAS, Jaime Antúnez Aldunate, a copy of Edition Nr. 31 (JulySeptember 2003), completely dedicated to the jubilee of his pontificate.

Attending the request of the HUMANITAS review users, the review’s website offers the complete version for free of the 3 Numbers dedicated to the Blessed John Paul II.

Click “Digital Review”

www.humanitas.cl

H 239

new

addresses

U.S.A. on the legacy of John Paul II On the occasion of the beatification of Pope John Paul II, the bishops from the U.S.A. created a web-page to honour the Holy Father’s memory. This web-page, created by the U.S. Bishop’s Assembly, includes a video on key moments of the Pope’s visits to the U.S.A. Biographical details and writings of the Pope may be found, too, as well as essays on his legacy about the relationships between East and West, the media, the ethical use of technology and to the social mission of the Church. www.usccb.org/popejohnpaulii

H 240

“L’Osservatore Romano” presents its new web site On the occasion of the beginning of the seventh year of the pontificate of Benedict XVI, celebrated on April 19th, 2011, L’Osservatore Romano inaugurated its new web site. Duly assisted by the Vatican’s Internet Service and by the programming agency Everett, the daily of the Holy See will be accessible in its diverse editions (besides the daily, the weeklies in Italian, English, German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and a monthly in Polish). For the weekly and the monthly editions it is “possible to immediately activate electronic subscription, whilst “the access to the daily in the web during the afternoon (Rome’s time), that is, immediately after its publication and before reaching the kiosks, for free since August 31 (2011). (Suscriptions were activated on September 1). The texts will be available in Italian and progressively in other languages, starting with English. The first number of L’Osservatore Romano appeared in Rome on July 1, 1861, a few months after the proclamation of the Kingdom of Italy (on the 17th of March of that same year). The publication took its name from a former private publication, printed from September 5, 1849, to September 2, 1852; it was edited by Abbot Francesco Battelli, with financing from a French catholic legitimist group. The first editions had only four pages. By the end of 1961, the subtitle “political-moral newspaper” was dropped and beneath the heading appeared the mottos “unicuique sum” and “non praevalebunt”, still present. At its beginnings, L’Osservatore Romano had no offices of its own and the first editors worked at the paper’s printing shop. In 1862, the editorial room was moved to the Palazzo Petri, at the Piazza di Cruziferi, where soon after also was set up the printing shop. The

internet first number of this new era was printed on March 31, appearing the phrase “Giornale quotidiano”, (daily) under the heading. During the pontificate of Leo XIII the palazzo was bought by the Church and from 1885 on, L’Osservatore Romano became the Holy See’s official newspaper. www.osservatoreromano.va.

Catholic Wiki-Format Encyclopaedia Thanks to the intense work of a group of translators, researchers and experts during the last three years, directed by José Gálvez Kruger, ACI Press is able to present a renewed and enlarged Catholic Encyclopaedia in WikiFormat. Under the motto “The best source for fortifying faith”, this Catholic Encyclopaedia, promoted by the catholic agency since the year 2000, is now offering a special issue on the Fathers of the Church, the life of the Popes since Benedict XV up to Benedict XVI, and on the Second Vatican Council. Other topics to be found in the CE are: The apostolic succession, eschatology, liturgy –with the aim of informing about this subject and banishing liturgical abuses- apologetics, and coming soon a special article on the Orthodox Church, of which a trailer at is offered present. It also features works of the French Jesuit theologian Bertrand de Margerie S.J., author of “Introduction to the History of Exegesis: the Greek and Eastern Fathers”, “The Fathers of the Church comment the Credo”, “The Heart of Mary is the Heart of the Church”, “The Complete Surrender to God”, amongst other works. The new format of the CE –“Closed Wiki”means that from now on only the registered editors will be allowed to modify, amplify and/ or edit the thousands of entries offered, which shall be approved by the CE’s editor in chief. http://ec.aciprensa.com/wiki

BOOKS Red Hot Stone

—THE POETRY OF KAROL WOJTYLA —

o read t he poetr y of “The priesthood is a sacraIN MARCH OF 1958, HE Karol Wojtyla is to go on a ment and a vocation, while PUBLISHED THE POEM journey that demands one’s to write poetry is a function “PROFILES OF A CYRENEAN.” whole self, at an aesthetic of one’s skills; but it is also IT FEATURES THE FIGURE and emotional level, and one’s skills that determine his OF SIMON OF CYRENE, finally to touch the deepest vocation,” he wrote in 1971. TAKEN AS A POWERFUL meaning of human expeWojtyla’s interest in poetry IMAGE OF CONTEMPORARY rience. I tried to show this began when he was ver y MAN. IN FACT, HE OFFERS in my essay In the Melody of young. It was developed by FOURTEEN CONTEMPORARY the Earth: The Poetry of Karol M. Kot larczyk, professor “CYRENEANS”: THE Wojtyla (Jaca Book, 2006). of Polish language at the MELANCHOLIC, THE Wojtyla is joined by his date Wadowice high school, with SCHIZOID, THE BLIND, of birth to poets such as whom he later established THE ACTOR, THE GIRL Czeslaw Milosz, Wislawa the Rhapsodic Theater. In the DISAPPOINTED IN LOVE, Szmborska, and Tadeusz poetry of his youth, the theCHILDREN, TWO WORKERS, Rozewicz: poets born at the mes of homeland, the resisAN INTELLECTUAL, A MAN OF beginning of the 1920’s, who tance, and Polish history are EMOTION, A MAN OF WILL. had to come to terms first interlaced with more intimate with the German invasion ideas, romantic sentiments and then with the Soviet about nature that suggest occupation. Unlike them, however, Wojtyla harmony and peace, but which contrast with produced his poetry almost in silence, always the dark clouds of war on the horizon. The more absorbed by his call to priesthood and, young Wojtyla lives in a world of conflicting later, by his growing pastoral responsibili- emotional forces. Their encounter comes at ties. He published his work with reluctance the level of faith, where they find a meaning. and under pseudonyms that were secret until Poetry becomes a burnt offering: The soul of his election as pope in 1978. But poetry and the artist – a burning coal, / a red-hot stone. / First vocation are for him bound together in ways it needs to wrap the Words in a rope / and then to that are sometimes hidden, but very real: beat them with the rhythm of absolute Love / — HUMANITAS Nº 1 pp. 241 - 249

H 241

and to create a poem set afire / from the heart. To unable to see what is most important and so carry on in the tradition of the troubadors, / who must struggle along the way, looking for sigannounce to all people / the Truth and Freedom ns, groping in the dark. He therefore doesn’t of words and visions. understand the meaning of everything, of This work, though intense, is often imma- himself, of the world, of life. ture. Wojtyla often admits this in writing A second theme regards the work of man in to his friend and teacher Kotlarczyk. Yet he history and in life, taken in all its concrealso speaks of a “flame that is lit within me” teness. An example is constituted by the that he perceives as the “action of Grace” to little poem “The Quarry,” composed in 1957. which “one must respond with humility.” Wojtyla knows what it means to do heavy Therefore, he continues, “in this sense, the labor. From 1939 to 1944, to avoid deportastruggle for Poetry will be the struggle for tion, he worked first in a quarry, and then at Humility.” In 1942, Wojtyla the Solvay chemical factory told Kotlarczyk that he had near Krakow. The experience asked Cardinal Sapieha to marked the young Woytyla, WOJTYLA DEVELOPS A begin the journey toward who in these verses relives POETIC PHENOMENOLOGY priestly ordination. In 1946, that work as hard reality, but OF CONTEMPORARY MAN IN the year of his ordination, also as rich metaphor for the SMALL BUT DENSE IMAGES. he published his first work greatness of work and human EACH PROFILE IS THAT OF of maturity, “Song of the dignit y: Listen: an electric A PERSON WHO MUST BEAR Hidden God,” written ducurrent cuts through a river of HIS OWN BURDEN ON HIS ring his years in the clanrock, / and a thought grows in SHOULDERS AND, HE WRITES, destine seminary. Reading me, day by day: / the greatness WANDER AROUND NEAR THE from this 1946 work to the of work is within man. The FRONTIER OF GOD. Roman Tryptic [published relationship between man in 2003], some fundamental and matter is sublime and and ever-present themes become clear. dangerous: man carries within himself the inner The first regards the poet’s vision. He writes structure of the world. Even the rocks know it, in “Song”: You must stop and look always deeper because they know the violence that rips at / until nothing diverts the soul from the depths their solid perfection. All strength, even that / No greenery will satisfy your sight. Even which is more untamable, can be energy to squinting his eyes does not help the poet to fuel a deeper realization of man. see any better: The more I strain my eyes, the A third fundamental theme regards one’s less I see. The search is always for a threshold relationship with Christ. Four months that is found only by looking openly, with before Wojtyla become bishop of Krakow, marvel and intensity, reaching the depths in March of 1958, he published the poem and involving the soul in an inexhaustible “Profiles of a Cyrenean.” It features the way: nothing satisfies until the very bottom. figure of Simon of Cyrene, taken as a powerIt is this look of astonishment that will be the ful image of contemporary man. In fact, he essence of eternity. The meaning of contem- offers fourteen contemporary “cyreneans”: plation is to leave oneself and become part the melancholic, the schizoid, the blind, of the mystery that one contemplates. Wo- the actor, the girl disappointed in love, jtyla believes that man suffers above all from children, two workers, an intellectual, a lack of “vision” (as we read in his 1952 work, man of emotion, a man of will… Wojtyla “Thought: Strange Space”), because he is develops a poetic phenomenology of con-

H 242

My face burnt by the desert of souls... Why don't you unburden me of your crosses, as I have done with yours? KAROL WOJTYLA, POETIC WORK

temporary man in small but dense images. Each profile is that of a person who must bear his own burden on his shoulders and, he writes, wander around near the frontier of God. Later, in 1978, in “Redemption Seeking Your Form to Enter Man’s Anxiety,” which was published under a pseudonym after the poet was elected Pope, the figure of Veronica replaces that of the Cyrenean: I wait here for your hands / carrying their everyday loads, / I wait here for your hands / holding a simple cloth. Here the face of Christ becomes the face of

every man, of those to whom Veronica is sister: her cloth draws to itself all the anxiety of the world. Man is a restless form that no look is able to completely penetrate, but the face of Christ on Veronica’s veil penetrates those who contemplate it, bringing peace amidst the anxiety. A fourth theme relates to the cosmic dimension of the relationship between God, man, and the entire world: The world is full of hidden energies, boldly I call them by name. As a bishop administering the sacrament of confirmation,

H 243

he sees himself as a giver. I touch forces that overflow within man. And seeing the faithful receiving the sacrament, so many people, they seem full of energy. In their faces, marked by the interplay of wrinkles, above all in their eyes, an electric field vibrates … / Here the electricity is real – and it is at the same time a symbol. It is, in fact, a symbol of the thought, the spirit, the strength that are in man, who feels the push of the invisible pressures trapped in the atmosphere. In the Roman Tryptic, Wojtyla’s final poetic composition, these same themes are present from beginning to end. The poet stands at the entrance to the Sistine Chapel, looking at the Last Judgment: the Beginning is joined to the End. In Michaelangelo’s vision, the generations come flowing in (nude they come to the world and nude they return to the earth, from which they are molded) until the End, the apogee of transparency, […]/ Transparency of the events — / Transparency of consciences. Every man is called to reacquire this vision anew.

Writing perceptively, then Cardinal Ratzinger commented on the Tryptic: “The journey that leads to the source is a journey of seeing: to learn from God to see. Then the beginning and the end are joined.” In the midst of this Sistine polychrome, Wojtyla recalls his two conclaves and imagines the moment of his own death. The metaphorical architecture of Wojtyla’s poetry is not exactly “to be read.” In it, restless questions and answers of great spiritual intensity are interlaced. By sensibility, they join the body of so-called “metaphysical poetry” (from Dante to John Donne to T.S. Eliot), characterized by a metaphorical imagination according to which abstract truths are represented in forms of sensible images. This is, in fact, one of the characteristics of wojtylan poetry: to begin with an object, a fact, a person, and from there to draw out the infinite web of connections with the mystery of human existence, which makes up the inner structure of the world. ANTONIO SPADARO S.J.

Mousiké Karol Wojtyla Translation and critical study by Bogdan Piotrowski Universidad de La Sabana Bogotá, 2008 148 pages

It is not easy to comment on the poetry of a Pope, especially in the case of John Paul II. The horizon of the readers’ expectations is not only very high, but is also charged - or I would almost say conditioned – by the personage, his life, and works. Yet, his love for art and artists helps in overcoming this difficulty. Mousiké are really two poems, and even though they have the same title and share common elements, they are different. The first one was written in 1938, and the second one in the following year, a few months after the German invasion

H 244

of Poland. At that time Karol Wojtyla was a young student, although the poems hint at a profound vision of man, creation, and God himself. Although the Greek word Mousiké designates the group of arts

which were under the protection of the muses in Greece, here it refers to the central genre which is also the theme, topic, and reason of the poems: music. Or rather: Music, in capital letters. –Oh Music! Melody! Music! You, almighty! Harmony of nature! –You engulf me with the power of a vibrating harp, With your strings you take me away, soaring above the earth, The song of my soul resonates with the sound of the lute.

As warned, this is not about human creation. Nor is it only about “harmony of nature.” The music sung here is that of God, which immerses all of creation in its chords, rhythms, and melodies: Oh Lord! You are the Highest Harmony! Your music is the everlasting child –and from the heights of Thy spheres You send to earth the blissful melody.

The first poem starts with the image of a shepherd and his flute. The pagan evocation is evident, but the poet, with generous gentleness, leads us to the essence of what he wants his song to be. So all of a sudden it seems we are surrounded by the music of the heavenly spheres, but there is even something that goes beyond this… something deeper and higher... The music we see –forgive the metaphor– is, then, the grace, the Spirit that brings life to everything, without metaphoric concessions or common places. In the land of the poem another melody lurks, however, “that kills people”. It is –it couldn’t be anything else given what he has expressed– despair, something dissonant (a “roar”, “not a melody”) that falls to earth like a “cursed vulture”. It is evil, the “cursed breath”. However: Quietly, somewhere, the melody unfolds Along the mountain’ slopes. In a small church in the country, The choir sings every day.

The music of man (prayers and supplications) rises to mingle with the angelical music as a reflection of the music of God, and it is God who is counteracting the roar of evil. “It is the holy cloud, the cloud of the alliance”, increasingly vast and pure, ever more encompassing, to inundate earth with the same Spirit:

Oh, once again you exist, holy union! Music! Melody! Music! Take these valley breezes, Along the paths of Love, Music!

The first poem is a song to hope, to harmony of creation, to power and vitality of the Spirit. The second poem, longer than the first (almost double), also begins with a pagan image: “It was hot. The half naked ephebes / poured the melted bronze into the forging molds.” However, this is preceded by a quotation from Scripture: “And Stephen said: / Behold, I see the heavens opened ...” With more complex images, the first stanzas show a desolate world, the earth in fierce desolation: everything is falling down, burned, and darkened. The land lies exhausted and burning [...] And I “fell headlong into the ditch” and only can be heard the sound of the blacksmiths who “pour the bronze into the molds”. There are storms and insipid days that follow, measures that fail to be built. The earth cries for a reason, for an explanation. After deep and serious descriptions of what is seen and heard, the lyric poet seems to want to rebel: The laughter of the scarecrow will not frighten me. I am lying in the ditch. I will rise when they give the order. The echo of thunder will not deafen me. I will rise up. I must build the CITY.

He will invoke the Music, the brilliant power of the harp. However, he will deeply understand that the struggle, in spite of all of its horror, is not only here but also “continues in the hereafter”. Moreover: it is not only from here, but cosmic; lasting until the end of time… God must remove “the curse that weighs upon the sculpture,” He must exhale the saving Melody. The lyric poet, becoming one with all men, says: I want to listen to you, drink you to the depths. From the foundation of the earth to the crown of heavens, Get to know you on each path, Hold you beside the pine trees, See you in every rainbow… I want to hear you from the treetop to the roots, I want to run like a weevil along the tree with love. (I fell, headlong into the ditch.) I want to see you, God, Face to face!

H 245

The poem continues in a sort of summary of the history of man, of the history of his improvement and salvation. He speaks of his “perfectibility”, as mentioned by Bogdan Piotrowski in his substantial and prescient introductory essay (compared to which this review is only a slight glimpse...). We notice that the second poem is subtitled “Symphony”, so that the variety of its components and the diversity of its images correspond to a structural issue: everything is polyphony here. But it is polyphony with common features -power, clarity, volume, and depth- in which everything could be summarized in this way: the Music will save man and, thereby, the world. If we also take into account the context of its composition –and everything that came after– his final verses are even prophetic: My heart is going to pound my chest. Listen, Poland! (Oh, Lord, I am the servant of your servants –says Stephen. Oh, Lord, I am the bronze bell, make my heart swing. Let the bell ring, let it ring over man’s destiny. May Your hands swing him.) Israel stoned the prophet. The bell became more solid. It learned the music itself. It was dawn.

I think Mousiké is an amazing book. For that reason it is too vast to describe in just a few lines. However, it is pleasing to learn how the young John Paul II understood that art is another form of knowledge. Here, with Piotrowski, his search for the highest truth becomes clear; since, in effect, “the poetry of Karol Wojtyla is the poetry of faith”. And he was only eighteen years old at the time... Braulio Fernández Biggs Why He Is a Saint: The Life and Faith of Pope John Paul II and the Postulator of the Cause for his Beatification [Por qué es Santo] By Slawomir Oder and Saverio Gaeta Ediciones B Barcelona, 2010 186 pages

The last poem written by John Paul II expresses the effort it takes to climb up a creek against the current to reach the spring, at the time that God created man. It’s like an illustration of his life,

H 246

so clear and consistent since childhood, always oriented towards the same end. There are many good books about John Paul II, some with the autobiographical charm with which Karol Wojtyla recalls part of his life. However this book, “Why He Is a Saint”, is especially interesting. It is written by the Polish priest, Slawomir Oder, with the collaboration of the Italian journalist, Saverio Gaeta. Oder was the postulator for the cause of John Paul II beatification. He saw, from the beginning, how statements made by 114 people filled thousands of pages in Rome and Krakow on the life of the Pontiff. In addition there were many letters telling unknown anecdotes or favors received through his intercession. The positio —the presentation of the personage— was done in four volumes. Oder also recalled a time when Karol Wojtyla accumulated testimonies about himself. It was in 1978, when he was elected as Pope. The Polish secret police sent 18 boxes of documents with his name on the label to the Ministry of Interior. They had been watching him since he was a clandestine seminarian. But the book is not only a synthesis of testimonies, which would have been somewhat cumbersome. It also includes undisclosed statements, memories, and observations of the authors. Oder reveals that at some point in his life the Pope invited him for dinner at the Vatican without any other guests. He never knew why. He thinks perhaps that the Pontiff had a premonition… and wanted to know who was going to represent him in the debate on whether he merits sainthood. Marked by suffering in his childhood and adolescence, the book stresses the importance of his father in his education. His father taught him deep piety, but also the seriousness, responsibility, and patriotism of a former soldier. From his mother he inherited a sensitivity that led to his love for theater and poetry and to the Marian aspect of his faith. It is said that when he was about to be born, his mother asked the midwife to open the window so that the newborn could hear the Marian singing from the neighboring parish.

“Future saint” read a sign that friends of his youth hung on the door of his room. This joke was recalled by Cardinal Deskur, his lifelong companion, on the day of his beatification. Regarding his priestly vocation, the Pope once expressed that was a mystery even to himself. “How can we explain the ways of God? And yet, I know that at certain times in my life I understood clearly that Christ was telling me what he had already told thousands of people before me: “Come, follow me.” Deciding on the priesthood signified a rupture, not with his family, however, since by that time he was alone in the world, but rather with his strong inclination and talent for theater, an art in which he had progressed a great deal. A friend of his wrote to him that even he could identify the “moment” when the priestly vocation took precedence over the stage. “It was when you were reciting the monologue of King Boleslaw, the Brave…” “Nothing is more important to me”, he said, “or brings me greater joy than celebrating daily Mass and serving the people of God in the Church. And this has been so since the day I was ordained as a priest. Nothing could ever change that, not even being Pope now.” Those who saw him celebrate Mass in his chapel were impressed, but the Pope explained: “I am not moved during Mass. I make it happen. I am moved before and after”. He was the youngest Bishop in Poland at age 38. Later he became Archbishop and Cardinal. There are thousands of stories of those years, forming a golden legend, with unusual episodes as well. The book contains several of those anecdotes. His motto Totus tuus was the summary of a prayer that his mentor, the tailor, Ian Tyranovski, had taught him: “I am all yours, Jesus, and all that is mine belongs to you, my gentle Jesus, through Mary, your holy Mother. He was a very influential man in his country during those years and he participated in the Second Vatican Council. The theologian, Congar, who later became a Cardinal, wrote: “Wojtyla makes a great impression. His personality is charismatic. He emanates an attraction, certain prophetic strength, and an indisputable serenity”. And Cardinal Wysyzynsky said: “He is a mystic, a poet, a pastor, a philosopher, a saint. […] but a terrible administrator”. The day of his election as Pope, the Polish Television newscast was delayed for the first time in its history and finally the broadcaster appeared, explaining the news in a confusing manner. People took to the streets to ring the neighbors’ doorbells and hug perfect strangers. Church bells rang throughout the country. The book attempts to capture the atmosphere that arose since his famous “Do not be afraid” speech. It analyzes his influence on the fall of European communism, precisely which he had suffered, because in the Vatican Council’s documents nothing was registered on communism. Much has been written about his career as Pope, his writings,

travels, and suffering in his last years. Oder and Gaeta show new angles. They even mentioned how the Pope said he had received a letter from Pinochet in which he confessed his decision to call a plebiscite election and leave the presidency. He showed great freedom of thought and action. Very concerned, his Roman assistants reported to him that a clandestine journalist had taken a picture of him in the swimming pool at Castelgandolfo. He responded, “Oh yeah? In what newspaper should they print the pictures”? The last chapter —The Mystic— seeks to portray Karol Wojtyla, as a man, in continuous ascent towards God, with a very rich inner life that unfolded in his creative and dedicated role as Pastor. Elena Vial Purchase on Internet at http://www.edicionesb.cl/

John Paul II. In the Heart of the World. [Juan Pablo II en el corazón del mundo] Cardinal Angelo Comastri Editorial San Pablo Bogotá, 2011 81 pages

“But what does he want: bloodshed? Or does he want to bring the government down?” That was the concern of the Secretary of State, Agostino Casaroli, with some Cardinals in Rome, while Pope Wojtyla visited Poland for the first time in June 1979, spontaneously convoking the Polish people, especially the youth, far beyond any diplomatic protocol. Cardinal Angelo Comastri puts this anecdote from another source [cfr. G. Svidercoschi, Un Papa che non muore, Milano 2009] in his latest book on John Paul II, which was aptly titled «In the Heart of the World».

H 247

The author begins by reminding us of the words spoken at the beginning of his pontificate because they reveal the essence of the latter: John Paul II was in the heart of the world because he was in the Heart of Christ! He himself, in his encyclical letter, Redemptor hominis, confided his thoughts and feelings to all at the time of accepting to be the successor of San Pedro: «It was to Christ the Redeemer that my feelings and thoughts were directed on 16 October 16 of last year, when, after the canonical election, I was asked: “Do you accept?” I then replied: “With obedience in faith to Christ, my Lord, and with trust in the Mother of Christ and the Church, in spite of great difficulties, I accept.” I wish to make that reply known publicly to all without exception, thus showing that there is a link between the first fundamental truth of the Incarnation, already mentioned, and the ministry that, with my acceptance of my election as Bishop of Rome and Successor of the Apostle Peter, has become my specific duty in his See» (RH 2). And how can we forget the Homily of his holiness for the inauguration of his pontificate. He began by saying: «You are the Christ, the Son of the living God». And he concluded with: «Do not be afraid! Open wide the doors for Christ! To his saving power open the boundaries of States, economic and political systems, the vast fields of culture, civilization and development. Do not be afraid. Christ knows “what is inside of man”. Only Christ knows this! » John Paul II knew what it was to assume his ministry in a century of mass atheism: but he had the certainty that it is precisely in this century that a great need for God emerges. He was sure that «By his incarnation, he, the Son of God has in a certain way united himself with each man» (GS 22). He still remembered that Russian soldier, who, in spite of being immersed in all the antireligious propaganda, had arrived in 1945 to the Krakow seminar, saying: «I knew that God exists, and now I want to learn something about Him». And this is why he was convinced that if you let Christ speak to the heart of man, every man has the ability to recognize that “only He knows” what is in his heart. «This man is the primary route that the Church must travel in fulfilling its mission» (RH 14). And this was the path he trod. He was so in the heart of the world from the heart of the mystery of the Incarnation, hence his being in the heart of the world was primarily directed to the heart of every man, speaking to him, not only about Christ, but rather in persona Christi. This is why he travelled so many miles, equivalent to going around the world twenty nine times, precisely to speak to the heart of every

man. This was why he was a pilgrim even to Islamic lands, and he would have liked to make a pilgrimage to Russia and to China as well, but painfully he could not do so. Since the heart has to respond freely and personally, in the Great Jubilee of the year 2000, he asked the youth: “Whom do you seek? “ One of them left this message on his tomb: «… You asked us: “Whom do you seek?” With just a few words you helped us to clarify our doubts and uncertainties». However, the heart of the world also involves the circumstances of the present moment. With his first two trips he shifted the barycenter of the Church towards the East and the South of the world. The anecdote with which we began this review is rather indicative of this shift: with that trip John Paul II broke down the Iron Curtain: the events of the following years made it evident. Likewise, in the first trip to México, in January 1979, especially in his speech made on January 29 in Oaxaca, rewritten overnight, after a frightening encounter with the Indians and peasant farmers, he concluded: «On your side, leaders of the peoples, powerful classes which sometimes keep unproductive lands that hide the bread that so many families lack, human conscience, the conscience of peoples, the cry of the destitute, and above all the voice of God, the voice of the Church, repeat to you with me: It is not just, it is not human, it is not Christian to continue with certain situations that are clearly unjust.» In this way he demonstrated his attention to the southern world. In the heart of the world also means in the heart of human frailty. For this reason the word forgiveness ran through his pontificate: from the beginning, with the gesture with which he forgave, Ali Agca, until the end, when in the Great Jubilee of the year 2000 he asked forgiveness for all sins of the Church, of the Christian people, committed throughout the history, truly in the heart of the world, in the heart of our frailty of men that only Christ can heal. Finally, we can agree with Cardinal Comastri that, precisely for being in the heart of Christ, John Paul II could be in the heart of the world even more so with the ordeal of his illness and with his death, drawing everyone more deeply towards Christ. The author, who witnessed all of this closely, describes the Pope experience he saw with this prayer of Saint Therese of Lisieux: «I beg of Jesus to draw me into the flames of His Love…. I feel that the more the fire of love inflames my heart, the more I shall say: “Draw me,” the more also with the souls who draw near to mine run swiftly in the fragrant odors of the Well-Beloved». The occurrence of his funeral and his Beatification attest to this. Yes, in the heart of the world because it is in the Heart of Christ! Antonio Giacona Purchase on Internet at http://www.sanpablo.com.co/

H 248

Books related to John Paul II reviewed through the pages of HUMANITAS • Queridísimos Jóvenes, Juan Pablo II, Plaza & Janés, Barcelona, 1995. Published in Humanitas 2 • Don y Misterio, Juan Pablo II, Librería Editrice Vaticana, Roma, 1996. Published in Humanitas 5 • Biografía de Juan Pablo II, George Weigel, Ediciones Plaza & Janés, Barcelona 1999. Published in Humanitas 19 • El Taller del orfebre. Meditación sobre el sacramento del matrimonio expresada a veces en forma de drama, Karol Wojtyla, BAC, Madrid, 1980. Published in Humanitas 20

• Juan Pablo II y los grandes de la Tierra, Tommaso Stenico, Edibesa, Madrid 2001. Published in Humanitas 29 • Tríptico Romano. Poemas, Juan Pablo II, Universidad Católica San Antonio, Murcia, 2003. Published in Humanitas 31 • El Papa de la Luz. Juan Pablo II, Magdalena Ossandón, Imprenta Salesianos, Santiago, 2003. Published in Humanitas 33 • Fe y Cultura. Antología de textos del Magisterio Pontificio de León XIII a Juan Pablo II, Pontificio Consejo de Cultura, Librería Editrice Vaticana, Roma, 2003. Published in Humanitas 34

• Juan Pablo II. 25 años de Pontificado, André Hubert, Ediciones Universitarias, Universidad Católica del Norte, Antofagasta 2003. Published in Humanitas 34

• ¡Levantáos, vamos!, Juan Pablo II, Plaza & Janés, Barcelona, 2003. Published in Humanitas 35 • Historia de Karol, Gian Fanco Svidercoschi, Ediciones Internacionales Universitarias, Madrid, 2001. Published in Humanitas 35 • Memoria e Identidad, Juan Pablo II, Ediciones Planeta, Madrid, 2005. Published in Humanitas 38 • Juan Pablo II. El Magno, Cardenal Zenón Grocholewski, Universidad Sergio Arboleda, Bogotá, 2005. Published in Humanitas 42 • El Papa de Fátima. Vita di Karol Wojtyla, Renzo Allegri, Mondadori, 2006. Published in Humanitas 43 • Dejadme ir a la casa del Padre, Stanislaw Dziwisz, Czeslaw Drazek, Renato Buzzonetti, Angelo Comastri, Editorial San Pablo, Madrid, 2006. Published in Humanitas 45

• Amor y Responsabilidad, Karol Wojtyla, Ediciones Palabra, Madrid, 2009. Published in Humanitas 57 • Juan Pablo II habla a Chile, Ediciones Universidad San Sebastián, Santiago de Chile, 2011. Published in Humanitas 63

• Jean Paul II et les artistes. De Pie XII à Benoit XVI les Papes esquissent una thèologie de l’Art, Pascal Fagniez, Editions de l’Emmanuel, Paris, 2007. Published in Humanitas 63

• El Santo que todos conocimos, Ediciones Palabra, Madrid, 2011. Published in Humanitas 63

H 249

About the Authors LIVIO MELINA. President of the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for the Studies about Marriage and the Family. Director of Anthropotes Magazine, Lateranense University. Member of the Council of Consultants and Collaborators of Humanitas Review.

CARDINAL AVERY DULLES S.J. American Theologian. Died December 12, 2008. Full Professor at Fordham University, New York and member of the International Theological Commission, dependant of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, between l99l and l997. John Paul II made him Cardinal, without having been a bishop, on February 21, 2001.

JUAN DE DIOS VIAL CORREA. Medical doctor, surgeon. President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Life. Former President of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Member of the Academy of Sciences of the Institute of Chile. Member of the Editorial Committee of Humanitas Review.

CARDINAL ANGELO SCOLA. Patriarch of Venice 20022011, at present Archbishop of Milan. Former President of the Lateranense Pontifical University. Member of the Council of Consultants and Collaborators of Humanitas Review.

CARDINAL MAURO PIACENZA. Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy.

CARDINAL F R ANCISCO JAVIER ER R A ZUR I Z OSSA. Archbishop Emeritus of Santiago, Honorary President of the Council of Consultants and Collaborators of Humanitas Review.

CARDINAL ANGELO AMATO. Prefect for the Congregation of Saints.

STANISLAW GRYGIEL. Full Professor Chair Juan Pablo II Pontifical Lateranense University, Rome. Member of the Consultants and Collaborators of Humanitas Review.

CARL A. ANDERSON. Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus. Member of the Consultants and Collaborators of Humanitas Review.

JAIME ANTÚNEZ ALDUNATE. Director of Humanitas. Member of the Social, Political and Moral Academy of the Institute of Chile JOSEF SEIFERT. President of the Liechtenstein International Academy of Philosophy, Granada, Spain

GIANFRANCO MORRA. Italian sociologist. Professor emeritus of Cultural Sociology at the Università di Bologna.

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

H 250

Jaime Antúnez. Director of Humanitas review. PhD in Philosophy. Member of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences of the Institute of Chile Hernán Corral. PhD in Law. Former Dean and Professor of the Faculty of Law, Universidad de Los Andes Samuel Fernández. PhD in Theology. Former Dean and Professor of the Faculty of Theology of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Director of the Padre Alberto Hurtado Study Center Gabriel Guarda O.S.B. Abott Emeritus of the Benedictine Monastery of St. Trinity of Las Condes. National Prize for History, l984. Member of the History Academy of the Institute of Chile René Millar. PhD in History. Former Dean of the Faculty of History, Geography and Political Sciences of the Universidad Católica de Chile. Full Professor of the History Institute. Member of the History Academy of the Institute of Chile Pedro Morandé. PhD in Sociology. Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences of the Universidad Católica de Chile. Member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences and Member of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences of the Institute of Chile Ricardo Riesco. PhD in Geography. President of the Universidad San Sebastián. Francisco Rosende. Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences of the Universidad Católica de Chile. Master of Arts in Economics, Chicago Juan de Dios Vial Correa. Former President of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Former President of the Pontifical Academy for Life. Member of the Academy of Sciences of the Institute of Chile Juan de Dios Vial Larraín. Former President of the Universidad de Chile. National Prize for Humanities and Social Sciences l997. Member of the Academy of Social Political and Moral Sciences of the Institute of Chile Arturo Yrarrazával. PhD in Law. Former Dean of the Faculty of Law of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

C H R I S T I A N A N T H R OP OL O GIC A L A N D C U LT U R A L R E V I E W/ N º 1 / Y E A R I

JOHN PAUL II

GIFT OF THE DIVINE MERCY