Rorate Caeli

A message to the Conclave by Pope Benedict XVI:
Do not let yourselves be pushed around by the media

Giuseppe Alberigo, founder of the "Bologna School"
and founding figure of the "Council of the Media" and of
the hermeneutic of rupture, in a television appearance
The Holy See has made available the full translation of the address of Pope Benedict XVI, days after his resignation declaration, to the clergy of Rome on the Second Vatican Council (first reported by us here).

In the past few days, the pressure in the media, specialmente i mass media italiani, but also the secular and "progressive Catholic" media around the world, to create the papabili they want, to create a buzz that does not exist, has become deafening. The message of Pope Benedict to the Eminent Cardinals is clear: do not let yourselves be cornered by those same media.

We said it then, and we repeat it: those who almost seemed to destroy the Church in the 1960s-1970s, they are "the same mainstream media that is this very day trying to influence the choice of the next Pontiff by hyping the names of their favorites, those candidates who represent the Church of the Media, the Church of Politics, the hypocritical 'Church of the Poor', the 'Church of New Ideas', those who have spent the past 50 years, in academia (such as the Alberigo 'School of Bologna' and its hermeneutic of politics and rupture), and in news organizations, and as careerist clergymen, distorting, polluting, and destroying everything that was sacred while smiling.

"The malignant Alberigo-Melloni 'School of Bologna' Church and its disciples, the hermeneutic of rupture Church, the Calamitous Church, the Church of the Media must end and disappear so the real Church may reappear: an entire roadmap for the future conclave."

The full address, with a very personal view of the Council (and delivered with no prepared text, revealing the amazing intellectual stamina and strong memory of the nearly 86-year-old pontiff who had just come from announcing his resignation), is available here. And we will repeat the portion that is most significant for the upcoming Conclave below:


______________________________

Your Eminence,
Dear Brother Bishops and Priests,



For me it is a particular gift of Providence that, before leaving the Petrine ministry, I can once more see my clergy, the clergy of Rome. It is always a great joy to see the living Church, to see how the Church in Rome is alive; there are shepherds here who guide the Lord’s flock in the spirit of the supreme Shepherd. It is a body of clergy that is truly Catholic, universal, in accordance with the essence of the Church of Rome: to bear within itself the universality, the catholicity of all nations, all races, all cultures. At the same time, I am very grateful to the Cardinal Vicar who helps to reawaken, to rediscover vocations in Rome itself, because if Rome, on the one hand, has to be the city of universality, it must also be a city with a strong and robust faith of its own, from which vocations are also born. And I am convinced that, with the Lord’s help, we can find the vocations that he himself gives us, we can guide them, help them to mature, so as to be of service for work in the Lord’s vineyard.


Today you have professed the Creed before the tomb of Saint Peter: in theYear of Faith, this seems to me to be a most appropriate act, a necessary one, perhaps, that the clergy of Rome should gather around the tomb of the Apostle to whom the Lord said: "To you I entrust my Church. Upon you I will build my Church" (cf. Mt 16:18-19). Before the Lord, together with Peter, you have professed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Mt 16:16). Thus the Church grows: together with Peter, professing Christ, following Christ. And we do this always. I am very grateful for your prayers, which I have sensed, as I said on Wednesday – almost palpably. And although I am about to withdraw, I remain close to all of you in prayer, and I am sure that you too will be close to me, even if I am hidden from the world.
[...]



I would now like to add yet a third point: there was the Council of the Fathers – the real Council – but there was also the Council of the media. It was almost a Council apart, and the world perceived the Council through the latter, through the media. Thus, the Council that reached the people with immediate effect was that of the media, not that of the Fathers. And while the Council of the Fathers was conducted within the faith – it was a Council of faith seeking intellectus, seeking to understand itself and seeking to understand the signs of God at that time, seeking to respond to the challenge of God at that time and to find in the word of God a word for today and tomorrow – while all the Council, as I said, moved within the faith, as fides quaerens intellectum, the Council of the journalists, naturally, was not conducted within the faith, but within the categories of today's media, namely apart from faith, with a different hermeneutic. It was a political hermeneutic: for the media, the Council was a political struggle, a power struggle between different trends in the Church. It was obvious that the media would take the side of those who seemed to them more closely allied with their world. There were those who sought the decentralization of the Church, power for the bishops and then, through the expression "People of God", power for the people, the laity. There was this threefold question: the power of the Pope, which was then transferred to the power of the bishops and the power of all – popular sovereignty. Naturally, for them, this was the part to be approved, to be promulgated, to be favoured. So too with the liturgy: there was no interest in liturgy as an act of faith, but as something where comprehensible things are done, a matter of community activity, something profane. And we know that there was a tendency, not without a certain historical basis, to say: sacrality is a pagan thing, perhaps also a thing of the Old Testament. In the New Testament it matters only that Christ died outside: that is, outside the gates, in the profane world. Sacrality must therefore be abolished, and profanity now spreads to worship: worship is no longer worship, but a community act, with communal participation: participation understood as activity. These translations, trivializations of the idea of the Council, were virulent in the process of putting the liturgical reform into practice; they were born from a vision of the Council detached from its proper key, that of faith. And the same applies to the question of Scripture: Scripture is a book, it is historical, to be treated historically and only historically, and so on.


We know that this Council of the media was accessible to everyone. Therefore, this was the dominant one, the more effective one, and it created so many disasters, so many problems, so much suffering: seminaries closed, convents closed, banal liturgy … and the real Council had difficulty establishing itself and taking shape; the virtual Council was stronger than the real Council. But the real force of the Council was present and, slowly but surely, established itself more and more and became the true force which is also the true reform, the true renewal of the Church. It seems to me that, 50 years after the Council, we see that this virtual Council is broken, is lost, and there now appears the true Council with all its spiritual force. And it is our task, especially in this Year of Faith, on the basis of this Year of Faith, to work so that the true Council, with its power of the Holy Spirit, be accomplished and the Church be truly renewed. Let us hope that that the Lord will assist us. I myself, secluded in prayer, will always be with you and together let us go forward with the Lord in the certainty that the Lord will conquer. Thank you!

17 comments:

Ted said...

Look at how the media has been trying to bully the electors. Cardinal Wuerl was bombarded on ABC News' coverage of the pope's resignation four times about women's ordination by Ms. Cokie Roberts. Of course, in typical Wuerl fashion, he doesn't once rebut Roberts and defend the Church's teaching lest he offend someone's ears.

Sadly too many cardinals are cowering wimps at the pressure of the media. May they develop episcopal stones come the conclave or we're going to get a pope least likely to draw the criticism of the media (read: most liberal, dissident one available).

Benedict Carter said...

I hope the next Pope puts in place very stringent controls on the clergy speaking to the media at all. If the Hierarchy especially cannot defend the Church's teaching, then withdraw the right from them to appear publicly.

And while you are doing that, Your Holiness, please appoint Cardinals and Bishops who CAN and WILL defend the Faith without compromise both in the public sphere and from the pulpit.

Withdrawing the right to speak to the media may seem a heresy in itself to the American Catholic, so dominated by TV is the culture now, but to me its obvious.

JB said...


Speaking of the Church of the Media, I just heard the most laughable interview of Cokie Roberts by George Stephanopolous from the Via della Conciliazione looking toward St. Peters. Roberts actually said with a straight face that Ratzinger was the favored candidate at the last conclave. Hilarious. Everyone knows he was thought to have no chance. Compounding that nonsense was her comment "there was Ratzinger and then all the other non-Ratzingers."

Just completely, entirely wrong. And she's on national TV spouting this nonsense as if she's some qualified expert on the Catholic Church. Good laugh for the day.

Alan Aversa said...

"Ratzinger was the favored candidate at the last conclave", JB; they elected him, after all…

Uncle Claibourne said...

Every time you post something from our Papa Emeritus, New Catholic, I miss him even more.

Gregory said...

NC, can you tell me where the Holy See has made this text available (I've checked news.va etc. and the other feed-in, feed-out sites and I can't find it)?

I'm asking because I'm trying to pin down the reason for the seemingly precise usage of the ellipsis (here presented in the last para) between "seminaries closed, convents closed, banal liturgy"...(and)..."and the real Council had difficulty establishing itself and taking shape".

In your earlier publishing of the text, the ellipsis was between "seminaries closed, convents closed, the liturgy was trivialised"...(and)... "and the true Council has struggled to materialise, to be realised".

So the presence of the ellipsis certainly seems consistent at that juncture of the speech.

I'm assuming, then, that it's probably there to indicate that the His Holiness was just consciously streaming towards the end of a speech list (and perhaps employed body language to emphasise the end of the phase). He was clearly listing items, so that seems to fit.

However, I'm curious as to whether the ellipsis might actually be there to indicate that a portion of the text is missing? Or maybe it was indecipherable? Frustratingly it would have to be just at the point where His Holiness was talking about "the liturgy".

Did he pull back from saying something more powerful, I wonder? Did he stop and check himself? Or was the next portion of the speech (presumably translated from audio) indecipherable? Or did he actually go on to say something with a little more bite that has conveniently (cynical, I know - but "them's the days" we live in) not appeared in any of the translations so far published?

It does seem a very consistent use of the ellipsis. So it's obviously there for a reason.

Pedantic, I know - but I have my reasons for being so forensic.

Are you able to shed any light?

Thanks.

LeonG said...

You see, the liberal modernists have perpetrated a myth since the SWW that the church should be open to the world. This is what has received - an ignorant or misinformed secular society prying into affairs about which it knows almost nothing and fascinates itself in macabre fashion with ecclesiastical scandals; alleged conspiracies and suggests even more ruinous revolutionary ideologies.

Openness to the world is what the NO has encourgaed. It is now judged by that yardstick.

New Catholic said...

The link is right there, just click on it.

That is exactly what the Pope said, it is not the ommission of any word, but a quasi-aposiopesis, and the thought is completed immediately thereafter.

Gregory said...

Apologies. Yes, my oversight.

Jack Tollers said...

But, wait, hold on, hold on!

He never, ever, said that before (or anything like it).

Jack Tollers.

Bill Phelan said...

We must not overlook the 300 page dossier allegedly handed to the Pope just recently which warned that many cardinals (electors?) could be blackmailed because of crimes of a sexual and/or financial nature in their pasts. We are looking at what results when most Catholics in the West are contracepting and many in the clergy are active homosexuals. Only God will ever be able to bring any good out of this sordid mess.

Picard said...

Again this "no, the empereror is not naked" - it is just the bad media, that show him naked.

Like some days ago, the same story.

Oh, yes, the virtual Council - I forgot: it is only virutal reality that we have no vocations, no priests, no nuns, - and the few old nuns of the time of the Council - sorry: virtual Council - are hyper modernist, but that is all also virtual. And that almost 90% of the German theoligy-profs at German Universities are heretics is also only virtual reality.

And ... and....

Only the virtual Council is to blame, only the media.
No, the emperor is not naked.

Kenneth J. Wolfe said...

The next step is to go from "Vatican II was wonderful but it sadly destroyed the Church" to "perhaps there were some serious problems with the 16 documents of Vatican II."

Hopefully the next pope addresses the substance, and not just the interpretation. He could start with Sacrosanctum Concilium, Gaudium et Spes and Dignitatis humanae and take it from there.

Anonymous said...

Maybe rather than banning the clergy from speaking to the media, they should be told to espouse and defend the true teachings of our faith no matter what the consequences, and no matter what the forum. Even as I write this it seems ridiculous that this is a point that needs to be made. If only all our Church leaders would speak out and defend our beautiful faith without fear !

Mike said...


I think the prudent thing to do would be what B16 did: read the docs of V2 in the light of Tradition, and move on.

The Magisterium will not repudiate itself...nor should a Faithful Catholic want that. Sure, the docs weren't perfect...just.move.on!

Brian said...

Outstanding comment Mr. Wolfe

Daniel Rosaupan said...

I have listened to Bishop Fellay and he said that where the SSPX was regularized, Italy will severe its diplomatic relations with Vatican and some Bishop Conferences will launch their counter attack against the Pope particularly the German Bishops. The enemies of the Church particularly the Masons, Jews, and Modernists pressured the Pope that if it wants to regularize the SSPX, the latter must be obliged to accept Vatican II. So I suspect that these enemies of the Church will also try their best to influence the outcome of the conclave. Criste Eleison!