UCA News
Contribute
william_grim
William Grimm, a native of New York City, is a missioner and presbyter who since 1973 has served in Japan, Hong Kong and Cambodia.
The last pope of the Second Church?
Published: January 09, 2023 11:28 AM
People pay respect at the tomb of late Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in St. Peter’s basilica at the Vatican on Jan. 8

People pay respect at the tomb of late Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in St. Peter’s basilica at the Vatican on Jan. 8. (Photo: AFP)

In the middle of the last century, theologians began speaking of a “Third Church.”

The First Church grew in the Mediterranean basin from its birthplace at the eastern end of that sea to include North Africa and southern Europe. It continues a somewhat tenuous existence in the Churches of the East.

The Second Church was the fruit of Christianity’s expansion into Western Europe and the Islamization of North Africa and the Middle East.

Its split into West (Catholic) and East (Orthodox) contributed to a focus on Western Europe that was not greatly disturbed by the further fracturing of unity from the sixteenth-century Reformation on.

Rome (Catholic), Canterbury (Anglican), and Geneva (Reformed), all of them Western European cities, are handy symbols of an internal breakup that still left the greater Second Church intact as basically a social, philosophical, and theological European entity. For some 1,500 years, it has been the face of Christianity for the world.

Now most Christians are living their faith at various points along a road to something so new it can be characterized as a Third Church. Like all major journeys into the unknown, reactions run the gamut from refusal to join the flow to excited heedless dancing down a not-always-clear road.

"It was clear that something was happening within the Church that might one day remake Christianity"

Perhaps the first large-scale sign of change came with Vatican II when pictures of the gathered bishops showed faces from Africa, Asia, Latin America and Oceania. Similar faces were increasing at gatherings of Anglican and Protestant parts of Western Christianity.

While forms of worship, thought, and administration remained almost totally European it was clear that something was happening within the Church that might one day remake Christianity.

One theologian who apparently saw what was coming and tried to slow or at least steer its momentum was Joseph Ratzinger. He was not a reactionary, but a true conservative who hoped to protect the only form of Christianity he knew, a Western one.

Ratzinger was a notable example of a Second-Church theologian, immersed in Western ways of faith and perceptively wary of trends in Europe and the world at large that threatened a 1,500-year legacy.

Apparently, he did not see the crumbling of the Second Church as a prelude to the building of a Third. So, he dedicated himself to the restoration and protection of what had been. When he became pope, he chose to serve under the name of the sixth-century patron saint of Europe, Benedict.

Much of what he did as theological advisor to Pope John Paul II and later as Pope Benedict XVI was aimed at holding back the tide of change that was, and is, lapping at Western Christianity.

The encouragement he gave to those who wished to use the pre-Vatican II liturgy and the Latinizing of vernacular liturgical translations despite the clumsiness and downright ugliness of the results were examples of this.

In Asia especially, Ratzinger used his power as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and later as pope to persecute local theologians who attempted to explore faith using intellectual and spiritual tools that did not arise from European roots.

However, as the American poet James Weldon Johnson wrote, “Your arm’s too short to box with God!” Ratzinger’s attempt to hold back the work of the Holy Spirit confirmed by an ecumenical council could not prevail.

"He was an apt figure to be the last pope of the Second Church as it begins its transition"

When he resigned, he was succeeded by Pope Francis who though ethnically and culturally a Westerner is a non-European. That is one more step along the road to a post-Second Church world.

What will the Third Church look like? My crystal ball is no less cloudy than anyone else’s, but it is possible to discern in the mist called the future a few characteristics that will be salient features of that Church, or the Church in that phase of its journey toward the Kingdom.

Already the typical Catholic Christian is no longer a white male. A visual portrayal of the Church today must be a woman “of color.” A poor woman. She does not live in Europe. Her personal connection to Christianity goes back only a generation or two. She probably lives in an area where Christians hold little or no economic or social power. It is likely she faces discrimination or even persecution for her faith. Her history, interests, and concerns do not involve Europe at all except, perhaps, as a holdover from a colonial past. She is one of the mothers of the Third Church.

Joseph Ratzinger brought to his futile crusade on behalf of a fading style of Christianity commitment, rigorous scholarship, humble piety, and, perhaps, the honesty to admit defeat.

He was an apt figure to be the last pope of the Second Church as it begins its transition to a new era in the history of the People of God.

There may be other Second-Church popes in our future, but they will appear more and more as the residue of a passing era and will probably not measure up to Benedict, the last true pope of the Second Church.

*The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official editorial position of UCA News.

Help UCA News to be independent
Dear reader,
Lent is the season during which catechumens make their final preparations to be welcomed into the Church.
Each year during Lent, UCA News presents the stories of people who will join the Church in proclaiming that Jesus Christ is their Lord. The stories of how women and men who will be baptized came to believe in Christ are inspirations for all of us as we prepare to celebrate the Church's chief feast.
Help us with your donations to bring such stories of faith that make a difference in the Church and society.
A small contribution of US$5 will support us continue our mission…
William J. Grimm
Publisher
UCA News
5 Comments on this Story
NOEL ASIONES
Benedict and Francis: The Two Hands of the Church Noel G. Asiones There is a scene in the surprisingly well-received Netflix 2019 biographical drama, The Two Popes where Francis, the soon-to-be elected pope, and the aging soon-to-retire Benedict watched the 2014 FIFA World Cup Final between their national home teams, Argentina and Germany, together. It seems a fitting conclusion to the message the movie seeks to communicate: the two popes must face their disconcerting past and find common ground to forge a new path for the future of the Church that they both love and serve. Although only an imagined encounter between them against the background of the beautiful game of football, I am reminded of this scene in the wake of recent attempts by some individuals and groups to draw an understanding of the Church developed by Joseph Ratzinger as dialectically opposed to that which Francis is championing. The former is usually portrayed as the once progressive but eventually became the standard bearer for Catholic conservatives. At the same time, the latter is perceived as a progressive and liberal outsider, often accused of sowing confusion on doctrinal and moral issues. For the sake of theological clarity and in fairness to the two popes, we offer our three-fold response to make sense of the many differences between them that may have been conditioned, like we all do, by their personalities, by their life experiences, by socio-cultural situations, and by that to which they have been exposed. First. as the leading lay American ecclesiologist Richard Gaillardetz pointed out, each pope brings something of his person into the papal office. On the one hand, Joseph Ratzinger was a professional theologian who brought his profound theological acumen, baroque aesthetic sensibility, and personal shyness into his pontificate. Jorge Bergoglio, on the other hand, has brought his humility, Ignatian spirituality, and refreshing informality into his papacy. Given his long academic career and service as Prefect of the Vatican Office responsible for preserving Catholic doctrine, Ratzinger was particularly drawn to the doctrinal and moral issues facing a Church shaken by history and modernity. Given his exposure and experience as a bishop in Argentina and where he had been, Bergoglio was particularly drawn to the pastoral and practical needs of the marginalized members of the Church and society. Second, the papal office also shaped their unique exercise of ecclesiastical authority and power, which tend to define their outstanding legacies and personalities. This is also important to bear in mind if the perceived greater emphasis on the difference than their similarities is to be properly appreciated. In addition, the papal names they have chosen are closely tied to their understanding of whom they have become and what they believe about the rights and duties of the Chair of Peter. Ratzinger chose the name Benedict XVI to create a spiritual bond with Benedict XV, who steered the Church through the period of turmoil caused by the First World War and thus placed his ministry at the service of reconciliation and harmony between peoples and nations. Bergoglio chose to be called after St. Francis of Assisi, "the man of poverty, the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation," the same created world "with which we do not have such a good relationship." Only time will tell whether, like Peter, the first pope who was named “rock” by the Church’s founder, Benedict and Francis would have lived up to their chosen name. Third, and based on the Catholic principle of complementarity, this- as-well- as-that and not the dialectical either-or- approach to reality, it is safe to say that, guided by the Holy Spirit, the two popes have all their minds and hearts have tried to strike a happy balance between the many bipolar of the Catholic faith: human and divine, scripture and tradition, faith and reason, universal and local, unity in diversity and so on. Benedict calls this the hermeneutics of continuity and reform. The two popes must have believed in both given that they are both Catholics! On the one hand, while the latter Benedict seemed to have leaned more on the aspect of constancy and continuity with tradition as that which has been received, it must not be misconstrued that he is opposed to change or progress. In his book, Principles of Catholic Theology, Benedict succinctly said: Salvation comes only through change or metanoia. On the other hand, while Francis seemed to have tended more on the reform side of tradition as the process of handing on the faith, it must not be misconstrued either that he, as his detractors accused him of heresy and schism, wants to abolish the old to make the essentials of faith marketable to a secular and relativistic world. As a pastor, his overarching rule is mercy over principles in a Church that embraces rather than excludes. In his encyclical, The Joy of the Gospel, Francis said what could have defined his approach to the papacy and the two extremes of the Scylla of continuity and Charybdis of change in the Church, “I dream of a 'missionary option, that is, a missionary impulse capable of transforming everything, so that the Church's customs, ways of doing things, times and schedules, language and structures can be suitably channeled for the evangelization of today's world rather than for her self-preservation.” Thus, though the two Popes may have significantly differed in style and approach to leading and serving the Church, they have received and executed a similar mission, which is to reshape the Church, through their actions and words, to stay relevant and effective in its evangelizing task in the contemporary world. Like our two hands, the two popes are allies, not foes. Please make no mistake about it. Noel Asiones is an academic researcher from a leading university in Manila. He is a practitioner of public theology, which is the engagement and dialogue between institutional religion and society in the marketplace of ideas. Benedict and Francis: The Two Hands of the Church Noel G. Asiones There is a scene in the surprisingly well-received Netflix 2019 biographical drama, The Two Popes where Francis, the soon-to-be elected pope, and the aging soon-to-retire Benedict watched the 2014 FIFA World Cup Final between their national home teams, Argentina and Germany, together. It seems a fitting conclusion to the message the movie seeks to communicate: the two popes must face their disconcerting past and find common ground to forge a new path for the future of the Church that they both love and serve. Although only an imagined encounter between them against the background of the beautiful game of football, I am reminded of this scene in the wake of recent attempts by some individuals and groups to draw an understanding of the Church developed by Joseph Ratzinger as dialectically opposed to that which Francis is championing. The former is usually portrayed as the once progressive but eventually became the standard bearer for Catholic conservatives. At the same time, the latter is perceived as a progressive and liberal outsider, often accused of sowing confusion on doctrinal and moral issues. For the sake of theological clarity and in fairness to the two popes, we offer our three-fold response to make sense of the many differences between them that may have been conditioned, like we all do, by their personalities, by their life experiences, by socio-cultural situations, and by that to which they have been exposed. First. as the leading lay American ecclesiologist Richard Gaillardetz pointed out, each pope brings something of his person into the papal office. On the one hand, Joseph Ratzinger was a professional theologian who brought his profound theological acumen, baroque aesthetic sensibility, and personal shyness into his pontificate. Jorge Bergoglio, on the other hand, has brought his humility, Ignatian spirituality, and refreshing informality into his papacy. Given his long academic career and service as Prefect of the Vatican Office responsible for preserving Catholic doctrine, Ratzinger was particularly drawn to the doctrinal and moral issues facing a Church shaken by history and modernity. Given his exposure and experience as a bishop in Argentina and where he had been, Bergoglio was particularly drawn to the pastoral and practical needs of the marginalized members of the Church and society. Second, the papal office also shaped their unique exercise of ecclesiastical authority and power, which tend to define their outstanding legacies and personalities. This is also important to bear in mind if the perceived greater emphasis on the difference than their similarities is to be properly appreciated. In addition, the papal names they have chosen are closely tied to their understanding of whom they have become and what they believe about the rights and duties of the Chair of Peter. Ratzinger chose the name Benedict XVI to create a spiritual bond with Benedict XV, who steered the Church through the period of turmoil caused by the First World War and thus placed his ministry at the service of reconciliation and harmony between peoples and nations. Bergoglio chose to be called after St. Francis of Assisi, "the man of poverty, the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation," the same created world "with which we do not have such a good relationship." Only time will tell whether, like Peter, the first pope who was named “rock” by the Church’s founder, Benedict and Francis would have lived up to their chosen name. Third, and based on the Catholic principle of complementarity, this- as-well- as-that and not the dialectical either-or- approach to reality, it is safe to say that, guided by the Holy Spirit, the two popes have all their minds and hearts have tried to strike a happy balance between the many bipolar of the Catholic faith: human and divine, scripture and tradition, faith and reason, universal and local, unity in diversity and so on. Benedict calls this the hermeneutics of continuity and reform. The two popes must have believed in both given that they are both Catholics! On the one hand, while the latter Benedict seemed to have leaned more on the aspect of constancy and continuity with tradition as that which has been received, it must not be misconstrued that he is opposed to change or progress. In his book, Principles of Catholic Theology, Benedict succinctly said: Salvation comes only through change or metanoia. On the other hand, while Francis seemed to have tended more on the reform side of tradition as the process of handing on the faith, it must not be misconstrued either that he, as his detractors accused him of heresy and schism, wants to abolish the old to make the essentials of faith marketable to a secular and relativistic world. As a pastor, his overarching rule is mercy over principles in a Church that embraces rather than excludes. In his encyclical, The Joy of the Gospel, Francis said what could have defined his approach to the papacy and the two extremes of the Scylla of continuity and Charybdis of change in the Church, “I dream of a 'missionary option, that is, a missionary impulse capable of transforming everything, so that the Church's customs, ways of doing things, times and schedules, language and structures can be suitably channeled for the evangelization of today's world rather than for her self-preservation.” Thus, though the two Popes may have significantly differed in style and approach to leading and serving the Church, they have received and executed a similar mission, which is to reshape the Church, through their actions and words, to stay relevant and effective in its evangelizing task in the contemporary world. Like our two hands, the two popes are allies, not foes. Please make no mistake about it. Noel Asiones is an academic researcher from a leading university in Manila. He is a practitioner of public theology, which is the engagement and dialogue between institutional religion and society in the marketplace of ideas.
LINDA
Ethnic or national diversity have nothing to do with the Catholic Faith. They just are. They are neither good nor bad. They just are. This article is racist at worst, idiotic at best. Any statement that is less clear than this would not be charitable. The author is hopelessly confused about Catholicism.
GEORGE
Father has a very good grasp of Catholicism, plus the experience of living and working in very different cultural contexts. In an excellent essay decades ago, Jesuit theologian Karl Rahner had spoken of Vatican II as the beginning of a truly world Church. We are seeing it come a reality.
TAD TAD
Father what you are describing about the Church, is the parable of the wheat sown by the Holy Spirit, and weeds sown by the Evil One only with the permitting will of God. One day they will be harvested and the so called second or third church will cut, bound, and cast in the fire. Christ only has His Church. The second or third church or weeds, however you wish, has now played it's hand. It has and is going to far. The weeds no longer hard to see. They have come out into the open and Harvester will chop them down. We all know who you are now. We know the cardinals, bishops, priests, and theologians who are scattering the flock. He came to testify to the Truth. The Truth is not up to opinions. Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He didn't ask people what they thought other than "Who do people say that I am?" And he didn't change his teachings based upon that poll.
TEREZIE ERHARTOVá
Contrary to what this disrespectful article suggests, there is only one Church; not first, not second, not third. Similarly, the speech about a “white man” of yesterday and a “woman of color” of tomorrow might be obligatory in a world of wokeism, but why cannot one be spared from it in a source that calls itself Catholic? Joseph Ratzinger´s actions have not been futile at all. Many believers all over the world, including myself, have been, and surely many to come will be, significantly inspired, enriched and strengthened in their faith by this great theologian´s and Pope´s work. Benedict XVI. was a wonderful, bright Church leader who helped to correct some of the errors brought about by Vatican II, a true defender of the Church´s teaching against modern heretics.
UCA News Catholic Dioceses in Asia
UCA News Catholic Dioceses in Asia
UCA News Catholic Dioceses in Asia