You all should check out today’s Monday Vatican by Andrea Gagliarducci.
This week Andrea drills into the circumstances and implications of the recently election of Card. Tagle of Manila as head of Caritas International.
Here is one section:
The progressive wing likes Cardinal Tagle very much, and appreciates the fact that he is part of the editorial committee of the so-called “School of Bologna” that is committed to writing a history of the Second Vatican Council, interpreting it as a rupture with the past – and not according to the hermeneutic of continuity promoted by Benedict XVI.
Cardinal Tagle’s election is thus interpreted as a break with the institutional efforts promoted by Benedict XVI. But saying that Cardinal Tagle is the “Asian Pope Francis”would also represent a contrived interpretation of facts.
There is some examination of the state of the ongoing reform of the Roman Curia… what’s happening and what isn’t. Pope Francis may be figuring out that the Roman Curia isn’t such a useless structure after all. It had to happen.
There is also some focus on Archbp. Fernandez, whose star seems to be sputtering out.
Loading ...
I have read reports of His Eminence being referred to as the frontrunning Papabile. I can only take solace in the old adage, “Enter a Pope, leave a Cardinal.”
As always, an interesting read from Mr. Gagliarducci. He has consistently written that the media vision of the Pope differs from the reality, but I think he’s being a bit too generous to the view the media has distorted who Francis is. In terms of governance and reform, Francis may not have proven to be “revolutionary”, but his words (Who am I to judge?) have set a tone that is much different and most are running with that.
He also suggests the progressives fear they may be losing this pontificate since Curial reform is stalled. Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t, but the real administrative power of a papacy comes not from reorganizing flow charts or duties of a department. Rather, it comes from appointments to the College of Cardinals. In that respect, it’s hard to see the papacy as anything other than a progressive gain. And with the rise of Cardinal Tagle, that seems to be confirmed.
However it is all happening, the rise of Tagle – and don’t forget Radcliffe – all in one week, is far more than disheartening. Can one imagine what is going on under the radar when what is publicized is nothing less than frightening?
Mr. Gagliarducci produces a fine work each week. He is concise, coherent and even illuminating. But I often leave him with the impression that he is too prone to seeing the bright side. I cannot share his optimism, but I profit much from his contribution.
I wonder whether he really espouses the hermeneutic of rupture. Yeah, he was on that editorial board, but still.
Talking with our favorite Fr. Roscia in 2012, he seemed to espouse the hermeneutic of continuity and bash “this rupture theory”. See YouTube entitled “Archbishop Luis Antonio Tagle – Witness”, starting from 25:10-28ish. He says, “If I just look at the documents of Vatican II you see just the footnotes how much of this council is in continuity with the whole life of the Church…So, I don’t subscribe to people saying the Church that came out of Vatican II is totally disconnected with the Church that came before…and I think that’s the pitfall of both those who claim that nothing good happened before Vatican II and the Church just started with Vatican II and those who also claim that the Church happened before Vatican II and that with Vatican II we don’t find the true Church anymore. Both espouse this rupture theory and you see Vatican II as floating and not connected with the rest. I think that’s not true…”
If he were trying to be sneaky, he’d introduce a dose of doubt there about the continuity of the council, suggesting that a rupture happened without actually saying outright that it happened. But he didn’t do that, and instead said positive things connected to “continuity” and negative things connected to “rupture”.
I’ll take that article with a grain of salt, as I do with any Italian media outlet. Anyone who knows Cardinal Tagle also knows that he does not espouse the hermeneutic of rupture, as well as his close friendship with Benedict XVI when they served together on the International Theological Commission. It is said Pope Benedict XVI personally chose Bishop Tagle to become the Archbishop of Manila, bypassing the suggestions from the Congregation for Bishops. Pope Benedict XVI’s favor was also seen when he chose Archbishop Tagle as one of six to become cardinals at his last consistory.
Cardinal Tagle in his own words, from CNS: ‘Archbishop Tagle on Vatican II’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd91J4qiYdo
Supplemental on Cardinal Tagle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu4ooS5H8sA
Cardinal Tagle has always presented a visage of “let me please.” It has been quite pronounced in the few media expositions I’ve seen of/with him. My trust in him is nonexistent. Could this be a cultural characteristic? He seems quite in his element in the age of Francis.
Dear Father Z.,
You said “There is also some focus on Archbp. Fernandez, whose star seems to be sputtering out.”
Let us pray that Fernandez is not the only star sputtering out in Rome and that Mary, The Star of the Morning, will soon be ascendant.
“School of Bologna” that is committed to writing a history of the Second Vatican Council, interpreting it as a rupture with the past – and not according to the hermeneutic of continuity promoted by Benedict XVI.
By “School of Bologna”, I assume it is name for the “city” and not the “sausage” as I am apt to believe.