(Portents for the
Future)
From
the time of his election about 4 months ago, I have been an unabashed fan of
Pope Francis. He has just published his first encyclical “Lumen Fidei” (The
Light of Faith) on 29th June, the feast of Sts Peter & Paul.
Through the good offices of a friend I was privileged to get a soft copy within
a week of its release. Reading a soft copy on a computer screen is far more
difficult than reading a printed text; especially for one who intends to study
the text and make notes.
That
being so, my first impression after reading the 80 pages, was one of
disappointment. It seemed a typical theological treatise, devoid of any
pastoral content. It came across as a traditional journey of faith from Abraham
to Mary, the apostles, saints and martyrs. To do justice to the encyclical, I
read it again, more carefully. I now share some of the insights or trends that
I picked up.
Lumen
Fidei is divided into 4 chapters, with 60 clauses. An important thread running
through the encyclical is the constant references to scripture. Franciscus goes
further to give the etymological meaning of certain words rooted in the Hebrew
language. He comes across as a scholar, not just the simpleton. He also uses
copious quotes from modern writers and even poets like T.S. Elliot.
Franciscus
(that is how he has signed the encyclical, devoid of any titles) begins by
saying that faith is not something illusory (2). Soon enough he refers to
Vatican II “as a council of faith … which clearly showed how faith enriches
life in all its dimensions” (6). I see this as echoing the opening lines of
Gaudium et Spes (GS) which says that the church shares the joys and sorrows of
the modern world (cf GS No 1). I also see this statement as an affirmation of
his commitment to Vat II ecclesiology, something that was missing in his
predecessor. It is also not a coincidence that his encyclical begins with the
word Lumen, the same Latin word with which the most important document of Vat
II, “Lumen Gentium”, begins.
After
dwelling on the faith of Abraham and the encounter of Moses with Yahweh, the
personal God (8 – 12) he refers to idolatry as being the opposite of faith
(13). If this is in the context of the golden calf and the living God, it is
fine. But there is some ambiguity here, with which I am not comfortable. He
states that idols exist “as a pretext for setting ourselves at the centre of
reality and worshipping the work of our hands” (13). Is he referring to
self-centeredness, aggrandizement, treasure or pleasure? If so I would
subscribe to his views that such things are not an end in themselves, but only
a means to an end, with higher aspirations.
However,
Franciscus’ next statement really disturbs me. He says that idolatry “is always
polytheism, an aimless passing from one lord to another” (13). It “does not
offer a journey but rather a plethora of paths leading nowhere and forming a
vast labyrinth” (ibid). Notice the choice of words – polytheism and lord; and
not words like ideology, Marxism or existentialism. He does not seem to be
targeting futile existence al la Jean Paul Sartre, or new age gurus with pseudo
spiritual fundas and solutions. Who then does he have in mind? Had he been
acquainted with India his remarks would have been construed as a jibe against
Hinduism, with its pantheon of deities and the endless cycle of rebirth. As far
as we know Franciscus has not been exposed to Hindu philosophy. So who is he
targeting? The answer seems to elude us for now.
At
another level Franciscus does try to portray divine truths in a very human way.
Talking of faith he says that “in many areas in our times we trust others who
know more than we do” (18), like architects, pharmacists and lawyers. Jesus
spoke in parables, and then gave the explanation. Likewise Franciscus explains
that “We also need someone trustworthy and knowledgeable where God is
concerned. Jesus, the Son of God, is the one who makes God known to us” (18).
This is like our guru-shishya relationship.
The
Pope then talks of the evangelical aspect of faith. I really like that. He says
that “faith is not a private matter, a completely individualistic notion or a
personal opinion: it comes from hearing, and it is meant to find expression in
words and to be proclaimed” (22). This is a timely reminder that proclamation
is integral to our faith. Like love, it must be shared, lest it grow stale and
redundant.
He
then tells us that faith is not an achievement or accomplishment, but an
ongoing process. He advocates adding knowledge to our faith (an enlightened
faith, not a blind one). He says, “Faith without truth does not save, it does
not provide a sure footing” (24).
From
objective truth he switches to subjective experience, saying that “Believing
can be compared to the experience of falling in love; it is something
subjective” (27). Can anybody give a reason for falling in love? Franciscus
comes across as very human here. He strikes a fine balance by stating “If love
needs truth, truth also needs love. Love and truth are inseparable … without
love truth becomes cold, impersonal and oppressive” (Ibid). Strong words. Would
that our Sunday preachers and catechism teachers hear what Franciscus has to
say!
He
now balances his strong words against idolatry with very accommodating ones
about “non-believers”. Of them he says, “To the extent that they are sincerely
open to love and set out with whatever light they can find, they are already,
even without knowing it, on the path leading to faith” (35). Here again the
encyclical is wholly compatible with Vat II ecclesiology, as expressed in Lumen
Gentium.
St
Francis of Assisi, in the 13th century, is better remembered for his
asceticism. It is only recently that Assisi was recognized as the fountainhead
of inter-religious dialogue. While the popes and the rest of Christendom were
leading crusades to liberate the Holy Land from the Muslims, Francis had
entered into dialogue with the Saracens (Muslims). Franciscus reflects this
dialoging spirit with reconciliation and conflict resolution. He says, “Unity
is superior to conflict; rather than avoiding conflict we need to confront it
in an effort to resolve and move beyond it” (55). Can we then expect this pope
to not shy away from conflict situations, be they moral or social? Will he bite
the bullet? This encyclical points in that direction.
The
pope also does not see faith as a mere set of beliefs. He sees faith expressed
in love and concern for others. It invites one to involvement. He says that it
does not “make us forget the sufferings of the world … so it was with St
Francis of Assisi and the leper, or with Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta and
her poor … To those who suffer, God does not provide arguments which explain
everything; rather, his response is that of an accompanying presence, a history
of goodness which touches every suffering and opens up a ray of light” (57). So
do we expect to see an action oriented leader, rather than one engaged in
theological hair-splitting?
Towards
the end of his encyclical Franciscus touches on another Franciscan virtue – joy.
He refers to the annunciation and resultant incarnation as not just an act of
faith (magnificat), but also one of joy (58). Catholics would do well to rush
back to their libraries and knock the dust of their books on St Francis of
Assisi, whether written by G.K. Chesterton or anybody else; for Franciscus’
papacy is going to have a distinctive Franciscan flavour.
When
Franciscus, a Jesuit, with the gift of Ignatian discernment, is welded to the
primary gospel values of Franciscan living, it makes for a combination more
powerful than the total of its individual parts. As one who has experienced
both, this writer continues to be very excited about Pope Franciscus. He will
be for Catholics, and for the entire world a “Lumen Fidei”, for he has a firm
grip on the “sensus fidei”, the pulse of the people.
JULY
2013
No comments:
Post a Comment