Rorate Caeli

Pope formally announces new Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization

Pope Benedict announced the creation of a New Pontifical Council dedicated to the New Evangelization on Monday evening, during the Vespers service marking the vigil of the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul.

Pope Benedict chose the Church the first great Christian missionary – St. Paul – to announce a new Pontifical Council dedicated to the evangelization of secularized Christian nations.

The Pope was celebrating the Vespers of the Vigil of the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul in the Papal Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls. During his homily, he spoke of how his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, had urgently proclaimed a new evangelization, aimed at countries which had long before received the Gospel.

Pope Benedict said he received this legacy upon his own election to the Chair of Peter, and noted the challenges of the present time are mostly spiritual.

He said he wanted to give the new Pontifical Council the task of promoting a renewed evangelization in countries with deep Christian roots which are now experiencing a sense of the “eclipse of God”, and becoming increasingly secularized.

He said this situation presents a challenge in finding the appropriate means in which to revive the perennial truth of the Gospel of Christ.
The initial job of the new Council should be a crash course for some Bishops, who need to be "re-evangelized" first...

41 comments:

Rick DeLano said...

And the name of the prelate to head this new dicastery is...........?

Br. Anthony, T.O.S.F. said...

Pope Benedict XVI can be very confusing. On the one hand, he celebrates the separation of Church and State and on the other hand he creates this pontifical council to renew the Faith in those countries where the separation of Church and State is a done deal.

Mark said...

Brother Anthony:

Why is it confusing? Just because Church and State are separated in countries doesn't mean the whole country cannot benefit from Christian evangelisation.

Anonymous said...

bbishop Fisichella

Anonymous said...

Pro Christo et Ecclesia!

www.corpuschristianum.org

Fr. Steve said...

Well, Br. Anthony, on the one hand you have the reality of having to work diplomatically in this world with secular states, and on the other hand, you want to guide them to accept the full reign of Jesus Christ. The fact is, the Pope cannot move them by his authority, which they don't accept, as he once did in times past by mere decree. But, he will propose Christ as their only hope. Thus, our Holy Father is very pragmatic and faithful to the deposit that was once and for all delivered to the saints. Faith and Reason intertwined.

Mundabor said...

I think he is acting in a somewhat contradictory way.

If he wants to re-evangelise Europe and the West, he should remove the likes of Schonborn and not even think of promoting the likes of Nichols and Smith.

To continue with mediocre appointments to appease the local trendies and then create new structures to re-evangelise does not make sense to me.

New Catholic said...

And if Fisichella, widely reported to head this Council, is really confirmed (until his name is published, it is not certain), it begins as a bad joke. Or is promoting abortion in "emotional circumstances" one of the keys for "re-evangelizing" the formerly Christian world?...

More comments on this in a future post.

NC

Br. Anthony, T.O.S.F. said...

I don't disagree of course with evangelization, but if you accept the separation of Church and State on principle, then in essence you are rejecting the Social Kingship of Christ. You are working for evangelization on one hand and against it on the other.

Anonymous said...

The idea itself is appropriate but what will be the actual missions of this dicastery ?

- to purge seminaries and Catholic (so-called) universities ?
- revise all nominations signed by cardinal Re in Europe ?
- open a special Education center for dissenting clerics ?
- dissolve the Jesuits and similar orders then rebuild them with Christians ?

OR more likely
- convene symposiums
- print vague statements
- suggest more or less lunatic advertising campaigns
- reshape the moral Catholic doctrine into a trendy, empty but compassionate mish-mash

We'll see where this is aiming : at a real evangelization or at more wind in the Vatican hill mills.

Anonymous said...

He might want to start with the Vatican...

Anonymous said...

Now all we need is a Pontifical Council for the Traditional Latin Mass to assure the implementation of "Summorum Pontificum" by force of law.

P.K.T.P.

Anonymous said...

Cormac Cardinal Murphy O'Connor is the obvious choice. The Pope has made him one of the Visitors charged with reviving the life of the Church in Ireland,so the Holy Father must have great faith in him.

Father G said...

"convene symposiums
- print vague statements
- suggest more or less lunatic advertising campaigns
- reshape the moral Catholic doctrine into a trendy, empty but compassionate mish-mash"

Wait...that looks familiar...hasn't this been the program for the past forty years?

I agree with anonymous at 21:08...start with re-evangelizing the Vatican.

Anonymous said...

It is going to be Fellay. This is the Pope's plan for the reunion of the SSPX and establishing a traditional arm of the Church -- one that actually cares about missionary activity.

Actually, I think [Anon. 21:05] presents the more likely scenario in the second part of his analysis. The show must go on. We need MORE and FLASHIER slogans and catchphrases. We need more dialogue and discussion.

It is like we are taking a never ending trip on JPII's peace train.

Hieronymus

Anonymous said...

yes the bishops need to become catholics first

Anonymous said...

Now, now, Hieronymous, look at the bright side. The Holy Father just needs a few more dud positions to which he can promote troublesome liberal prelates. There are councils for culture and for the Vatican City State and for Interrelgious talkathons, and for earth preservation. We need to have some more high-profile places to which we can kick liberals upstairs to get them out of the way.

P.K.T.P.

Fr. Steve said...

Brother Anthony said, "I don't disagree of course with evangelization, but if you accept the separation of Church and State on principle, then in essence you are rejecting the Social Kingship of Christ. You are working for evangelization on one hand and against it on the other."

I don't think that your position must necessarily be true. You could accept the seperation of Church and state as a given reality that we must deal with guided by the light of faith. You can have the same goal, of bringing the entire world under the social reign of Jesus Christ, but the means by which you do this can be manifold. Once council can engage in diologue and the other in Evangelization. They are not mutially exclusive. But they can be complementary ways of ariving at the same goal, who is Christ.

Mark said...

Brother Anthony:

Yes, but it's not as if the Holy See made that separation happen. We have to work with the cloth we've got!

Anonymous said...

Why not give Cardinal Danneels the job? He's a senior churchman "in good standing" with the Holy See, and he's been very thorough in implementing the spirit of our beloved Vatican II? I'd have thought he was just the man for the moment

Anonymous said...

This new Council was escogitated by Card. Scola who is no fan of the endlessly self-promoting Fisichella. Need more be said?

LeonG said...

Another New Evangelisation! The last one was a total failure - alongside the decade for evangelisation (1990s); New Dawn; Novus Ordo and a number of other pathetic attempts to impose the neo-philosophies throughout the church.

How about The Evangelisation of The Traditional Roman Catholic Faith - that would most certainly have much more mileage in it than another "New" that is worn out and obsolete by the following year. We have had to suffer enough of those.

Br. Anthony, T.O.S.F. said...

Fr. Steve,

Pope Benedict XVI has accepted the separation of Church and State as something to be applauded. Working within the reality of a separation and tolerating the evil involved is one thing, but to praise the separation is quite another.

Mark,

After Vatican II, the Holy See did work to rid national constitutions of Catholicism being the state religion - take the case of Colombia, for instance.

Hestor said...

Brother Anthony:

Yes, but it's not as if the Holy See made that separation happen. We have to work with the cloth we've got!


Mark - please read up on a little history. Take Spain for example. In 1976, King Juan Carlos signed a concordat with the Vatican that set the process for financial separation of church and state. In 1987, after listening to the protests of anti-Catholic groups, tax laws were changed and the 10% deductible from income tax that traditionally went to the church was axed. Thus, Catholicism was finally thrown off as the official religion of Spain.

Anonymous said...

The one of the separation is a delicate issue.

In Italy, Craxi at the beginning of the Eighties obtained a revision of the Concordato. Among other things, the Church was not the "Religione di Stato" anymore. The Church hierarchy cowardly accepted this, timorous of a fight in the country which they had no authority and prestige - let alone guts - to sustain. In exchange, the Church got (less) money in form of voluntary contribution of the taxpayers of part of their income tax bill and the acknowledgment of the "significance" of the Church in Italian society.
Thirty years later, it is clear that it has been a foul and cowardly compromise. The role of the Church is more and more questioned and Crucifixes may be removed from schools and tribunals.

With their naive desire to "embrace change", the Church hierarchies embrace and make herself accomplices of their own marginalisation.

They must get into the forma mentis that when the time comes you fight, and fight well. Too many Chamberlains, too few Churchills.

Mundabor

LeonG said...

Brother Anthony also alludes to the deconstructionist approaches of the post-conciliar pastoral paradigm which is tantamount to a complete dismantling of any existing infrastructure of Roman Catholic norms, values & mores in the political culture of any country - even when it is Catholic. This has been implemented under the supervision of bishops & priests who have lauded human rights and secular humanitarian programmes over and above the Social Kingship of Christ & the rights of the church.

No wonder what used to be Catholic countries even up to the 1960s are now little more than neo-paganised atheistic states which seek to prohibit any public vestiges of The Roman Catholic Faith. In other words, the separation of church & state has completed a full circle yielding progressive secular state encroachment on the rights of the church. This process in its initial stages is going to worsen. The fact that the church is corrupt & incapable of self-reform at present is accelerating state interference.

Bernadette said...

With people leaving the Catholic Church in droves, this New Evangelization is needed to shore up confidence in the laity while calling them back.

Anonymous said...

Benedict XVI needs to call the clergy to conversion first.

Anonymous said...

"dissolve the Jesuits and similar orders then rebuild them with Christians ?"

Acutally, this isn't too bad an idea....but the Jesuits have done a good job to dissolve themselves over the last 40 years (down close to 20,000 in 40 years) AVERAGE AGE OF PRIESTS IS 64. The Jesuit "brothers" are nearly extinct as a distinct group. And, there are less than 60 Jesuit novices/seminarians for all of Europe (compared to 5,000+ before Vatican II)

Anonymous said...

"On the one hand, he celebrates the separation of Church and State and on the other hand he creates this pontifical council to renew the Faith in those countries where the separation of Church and State is a done deal."

This is the schizophrenic tendency of the conciliar papacy: out-maneuver the church in the states than lamenting with absurd cant the fatal consequences... And the roman solution for now: "positive laicity" - another post- conciliar barrel burst

Pascendi said...

Brother Anthony is correct.

States are bound, as social entities, for the common good. They are to promote truth, goodness and to suppress falsehood etc. The state is to accept into its laws the morality of Christ... falsehood etc. has no rights etc. A person has rights (as a being) but may or may not have rights (as an acting being). What one is, and what one does are two totally different things. That Stalin and Hitler as human beings was a good; their evil actions however debased their humanity to the degree that they were soaked in sin.


The Kingship of Christ over states may or may not be achievable. However, the principle cannot be diluted. Jesus Christ is not only King of individual persons, but also governments. It would be absurd to argue otherwise. I believe Quas Primas made this very clear.

Anonymous said...

PKTP:

Perhaps you are right. We need more meaningless bureaucratic positions. Maybe we should build a new "Little Vatican" where they can live and head up their various committees. But land is at such a premium in Rome, I am thinking that in order to build a complex on a grand enough scale to be worthy of their dignity, we will have to find a setting where the land is cheaper . . .
Siberia comes to mind. Then again, Tehran has more symbolic significance. Decisions, decisions.
Hieronymus

K Gurries said...

There is a traditional sense in which Church and State are "separate". On the other hand, there is an erroneous sense of "separation of Church and state". The Pope affirms only the former. I go into it more here:

http://opuscula.blogspot.com/2009/06/faqs-on-church-and-state.html

Anonymous said...

The meaning of the term "New evangelization", bandied about for the last 45 years, certainly appears to be, "Do not go into the whole world and teach everyone everything whatsoever I have taught you." Rather, it seems to be, "All religions are effacious unto salvation" and "Your sincerity will save you." This Pontifical Council will muddy the waters still further.

Anonymous said...

Is this the new New Evangelization?

What happened to the old New Envangelization?

By the way, what happened to the Novus Ordo liturgical "renewal" that was launched decades ago?

Tim

Anonymous said...

Is the following sinful on my part?

I am numb to "new evangelization" and supposed "brick-by-brick" liturgical "reforms" and such things.

I don't believe for a second that the "Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization" will reverse the decomposition of Catholicism.

The same applies to the Novus Ordo "reform of the reform."

Tim

Anonymous said...

If Fisichella is the head of the Council well the question has to be asked to what we are Evangelising? Doesn't he Pope grasp that I like others want to abandon the Faith and all of this because of what we have had for the last 40 years? There IS a contradiction when the Church fails to accept the very changes brought about by Bugnini are 1/ Not what the Vat II bishops intended 2/ Were a deception of Paul VI to whom Bugnini lied.
Liturgy and doctrine go hand in hand.
Cannot the Pope ask the question. Why has the Church been rejected? It is because it has changed and so has proven itself False!
What the hell is wrong with the Catholic Church?

LeonG said...

Does that mean RENEW failed, too?

Jordanes said...

Why has the Church been rejected? It is because it has changed and so has proven itself False!

Oh well, so much for Christ's promises . . . .

What the hell is wrong with the Catholic Church?

It won't give up its mistake of allowing human beings to be members.

It allows me to be a member.

LeonG said...

"Benedict XVI needs to call the clergy to conversion first."

Perhaps their superiors could set them an example worthy of imitation.

Hestor said...

Silence of Mark: hopefully he has learnt that the "cloth" was made shorter by the Vatican itself.