SYNOD OF BISHOPS
from issue no. 10 - 2005
|
|
|
Interview with Cardinal George Pell
There was unanimity on the essential
There was the most complete unanimity among the synodal fathers on the essential doctrine concerning the Eucharist. Nobody put in doubt, for example, that, as the Council of Trent teaches us, Jesus is present in the Eucharist «truly, really and substantially». And it seems to me that no one challenged the fact that – as is found felicitously written in the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church - «Jesus Christ is present in the Eucharist in a unique and incomparable way». People might say that it was only to be expected, but for me it was not to be taken for granted.
Interview with Cardinal George Pell by Gianni Cardinale
The 64 year-old Cardinal
George Pell has been archbishop of Sydney since 2001. Before that he was
auxiliary bishop (1987-1996) and ordinary of Melbourne. The Australian
prelate was ordained in December 1966, and still remembers with pleasure
that as a student of the Urban Pontifical College “de Propaganda
Fide” in Rome he was invited to spend his first Holy Week as a priest
in the parish of Notaresco, a small town in Abruzzo near Teramo. Pell
happily remembers from his time in Rome the figure of Monsignor Felice
Cenci, the very cultured rector of the Urban College, who taught him to
love Dante’s Divina Commedia. The Australian cardinal belongs to the Congregation
for Divine Worship, the Pontifical Council for the Family and that of
Justice and Peace. Pell was elected to the post-synodal Council in 2001 and
was also chosen by the synodal fathers for this position this year.
Your Eminence, what aspects of the Synod struck you most?
GEORGE PELL: There were two. The first and most important is that there was the most complete unanimity among the synodal fathers on the essential doctrine concerning the Eucharist. Nobody put in doubt, for example, that, as the Council of Trent teaches us, Jesus is present in the Eucharist «truly, really and substantially». And it seems to me that no one challenged the fact that – as is found felicitously written in the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church - «Jesus Christ is present in the Eucharist in a unique and incomparable way». People might say that it was only to be expected, but for me it wasn’t to be taken for granted.
And the second aspect?
PELL: The fact that there were no voices raised against the adoration of the Most Holy Sacrament. This was a pleasant surprise for me. Perhaps in the Latin countries good Catholics have never abandoned the practice of eucharistic adoration, but in the Anglo-Saxon countries, in the post- Council period, the idea was very widespread that this was a medieval practice, by now surpassed, belonging to the past. As a young priest I would never have imagined that this could occur in this Synod in 2005, that is that an hour of solemn eucharistic adoration by all the Synod fathers in the presence of the Holy Father could have been held in Saint Peter’s. In the post-Council climate, at least in the Anglo-Saxon world, this was unimaginable.
Were voices raised in the Synod against abuses in liturgical celebrations?
PELL: Not much was said about specific abuses. However, stress was put on the clear difference between the true and proper eucharistic celebrations and the celebration of the word without a priest, and on the necessity of doing so in a way that, in order to avoid unpleasant confusions, this difference should be easily perceptible by the faithful. It was further emphasized that a place of importance inside the church be always reserved for the tabernacle, and that it not be relegated to some obscure place, as unfortunately happened in many buildings built in the last forty years.
Benedict XVI decided to let his voice be heard in this Synod on the subject of the Eucharist as sacrifice and as banquet. According to you why did he do so?
PELL: I had the impression that among some bishops the aspect of the mass as sacrifice was not clear and that the Pope wanted instead to remind and to stress an aspect that was present in the Last Supper itself, which was not a simple banquet, but a memorial of the sacrifice made by the chosen people after the flight into Egypt.
At the Synod not many speeches were made about the so called Lefebvrian question. Why not?
PELL: In fact Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos spoke about it at length, while others did mention it. Nothing more. This means that in a great many countries it is not considered a great problem and that it is a phenomenon that concerns France and Germany particularly.
Did anyone suggest the possibility of a generalized permission for the use of the so-called Tridentine mass?
PELL: It wasn’t talked about: neither for nor against.
On the other hand there was no shortage of speeches on the subject of the so-called viri probati.
PELL: The discussion was launched by a small group split amongst themselves. One part felt it must in conscience ask for a change in the ecclesiastical discipline on celibacy to grant the priesthood to the so-called viri probati. Another small group asked for at least a study of the topic. As I saw it the voices in favour were few, but they existed and opinions were expressed publicly.
In the media the question of the viri probati was treated as if it were one of the principal topics of the Synod.
PELL: That wasn’t the case, and personally I’m content that the question wasn’t even made the object of a study, because the only prospect of such a change would be as forerunner to further requests. If some viri probati are admitted, there will be pressures immediately afterwards to be allowed to admit all married men to the priesthood, and then there will be further pressures still to allow priests to marry. Because of that I consider it very grave to try to open cracks in the question.
In the course of the discussion among the synodal fathers it appeared that the reasons for not denting the celibate character of the priesthood in the Latin Church are predominantly of an economic-social order…
PELL: I don’t agree, the principal objections, in my opinion, are not of a practical order, though they are also many and serious, but predominantly of a symbolic and spiritual order. To choose celibacy signifies following the example of Christ himself.
The Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes mentioned in his speech that his country is increasingly less Catholic also because of the lack of priests. And he emphasized that for every priest there are at least two Protestant pastors.
PELL: His speech also struck me. The challenge of the sects is very serious, but there are also catechists, nuns and male religious. Evangelization doesn’t only have to do with priests.
But if the trend feared by Hummes were to continue like this, is it not to be conjectured that – that since the decisive criterion is salus animarum – in future the way of the viri probati might be tried?
PELL: Who knows…? This time however the synodal fathers decided that the question was not on the day’s agenda. And then it seems to me that the number of seminarians has noticeably increased over the last twenty-five years, especially in Africa and Asia, and this is encouraging. I believe that the crisis of the Church in the West but also in America will not find an adequate answer in the ordination of viri probati. The crisis is more radical, it concerns the faith. And then, excuse me, if the Church were to change on this point, what would the journalists talk about?
Another topic that found ample space in the media is that of remarried divorcees. In this regard nothing new was decided on except perhaps a greater openness of the ecclesiastical courts in assessing cases of matrimonial annulment…
PELL: No, the problem is that there are dioceses where the ecclesiastical courts simply don’t exist. Now, if canon law provides for cases in which marriages are to be considered null, then it is the obligation of the bishops to see to it that the faithful are allowed to have access to this possibility. It seems to me however that no synodal father put in question the doctrine of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage.
So following the very “broad” modalities used by the American courts in dealing with cases of matrimonial annulment was not spoken of?
PELL: Nobody did so publicly. Whereas there were groups of synodal fathers who asked for the formulation of a particular recognition of the sacrifice and suffering of those faithful who are divorced and do not remarry in obedience to the law of God. Because one needs to recognize that the indissolubility of marriage is not simply an ecclesiastical norm, but is bound up with the words of Jesus himself. And we don’t have the power to change these words.
There was no opening either on so-called intercommunion with the members of other Churches and Christian communities …
PELL: On that topic also the voices raised against the present discipline were few indeed. And those who did speak spoke in a whisper.
How do you judge the hour of free discussion introduced with this Synod?
PELL: According to me it was not well structured. Some bishops divagated a little instead of sticking to the topic of the day.
Your Eminence, your diocese will host the next World Day of Youth. How do you expect it to be?
PELL: We certainly expect many pilgrims from Italy: it’s interesting that many bishops told me that many young people are already saving up to pay for the trip to Australia. We pray and hope that this day will reinforce the faith of our Catholic youth. I pray and hope also that young Australians who are not believers, and there are many, will be interested and made curious by this day and may be infected by the joyous and happy faith of their peers who will come from all over the world.
Will Benedict XVI come to Sydney?
PELL: If Providence and health assist him, he will come. I’m certain of it.
Cardinal George Pell archbishop of Sydney
Your Eminence, what aspects of the Synod struck you most?
GEORGE PELL: There were two. The first and most important is that there was the most complete unanimity among the synodal fathers on the essential doctrine concerning the Eucharist. Nobody put in doubt, for example, that, as the Council of Trent teaches us, Jesus is present in the Eucharist «truly, really and substantially». And it seems to me that no one challenged the fact that – as is found felicitously written in the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church - «Jesus Christ is present in the Eucharist in a unique and incomparable way». People might say that it was only to be expected, but for me it wasn’t to be taken for granted.
And the second aspect?
PELL: The fact that there were no voices raised against the adoration of the Most Holy Sacrament. This was a pleasant surprise for me. Perhaps in the Latin countries good Catholics have never abandoned the practice of eucharistic adoration, but in the Anglo-Saxon countries, in the post- Council period, the idea was very widespread that this was a medieval practice, by now surpassed, belonging to the past. As a young priest I would never have imagined that this could occur in this Synod in 2005, that is that an hour of solemn eucharistic adoration by all the Synod fathers in the presence of the Holy Father could have been held in Saint Peter’s. In the post-Council climate, at least in the Anglo-Saxon world, this was unimaginable.
Were voices raised in the Synod against abuses in liturgical celebrations?
PELL: Not much was said about specific abuses. However, stress was put on the clear difference between the true and proper eucharistic celebrations and the celebration of the word without a priest, and on the necessity of doing so in a way that, in order to avoid unpleasant confusions, this difference should be easily perceptible by the faithful. It was further emphasized that a place of importance inside the church be always reserved for the tabernacle, and that it not be relegated to some obscure place, as unfortunately happened in many buildings built in the last forty years.
Benedict XVI decided to let his voice be heard in this Synod on the subject of the Eucharist as sacrifice and as banquet. According to you why did he do so?
PELL: I had the impression that among some bishops the aspect of the mass as sacrifice was not clear and that the Pope wanted instead to remind and to stress an aspect that was present in the Last Supper itself, which was not a simple banquet, but a memorial of the sacrifice made by the chosen people after the flight into Egypt.
At the Synod not many speeches were made about the so called Lefebvrian question. Why not?
PELL: In fact Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos spoke about it at length, while others did mention it. Nothing more. This means that in a great many countries it is not considered a great problem and that it is a phenomenon that concerns France and Germany particularly.
Did anyone suggest the possibility of a generalized permission for the use of the so-called Tridentine mass?
PELL: It wasn’t talked about: neither for nor against.
On the other hand there was no shortage of speeches on the subject of the so-called viri probati.
PELL: The discussion was launched by a small group split amongst themselves. One part felt it must in conscience ask for a change in the ecclesiastical discipline on celibacy to grant the priesthood to the so-called viri probati. Another small group asked for at least a study of the topic. As I saw it the voices in favour were few, but they existed and opinions were expressed publicly.
In the media the question of the viri probati was treated as if it were one of the principal topics of the Synod.
PELL: That wasn’t the case, and personally I’m content that the question wasn’t even made the object of a study, because the only prospect of such a change would be as forerunner to further requests. If some viri probati are admitted, there will be pressures immediately afterwards to be allowed to admit all married men to the priesthood, and then there will be further pressures still to allow priests to marry. Because of that I consider it very grave to try to open cracks in the question.
In the course of the discussion among the synodal fathers it appeared that the reasons for not denting the celibate character of the priesthood in the Latin Church are predominantly of an economic-social order…
PELL: I don’t agree, the principal objections, in my opinion, are not of a practical order, though they are also many and serious, but predominantly of a symbolic and spiritual order. To choose celibacy signifies following the example of Christ himself.
The Brazilian Cardinal Claudio Hummes mentioned in his speech that his country is increasingly less Catholic also because of the lack of priests. And he emphasized that for every priest there are at least two Protestant pastors.
PELL: His speech also struck me. The challenge of the sects is very serious, but there are also catechists, nuns and male religious. Evangelization doesn’t only have to do with priests.
But if the trend feared by Hummes were to continue like this, is it not to be conjectured that – that since the decisive criterion is salus animarum – in future the way of the viri probati might be tried?
PELL: Who knows…? This time however the synodal fathers decided that the question was not on the day’s agenda. And then it seems to me that the number of seminarians has noticeably increased over the last twenty-five years, especially in Africa and Asia, and this is encouraging. I believe that the crisis of the Church in the West but also in America will not find an adequate answer in the ordination of viri probati. The crisis is more radical, it concerns the faith. And then, excuse me, if the Church were to change on this point, what would the journalists talk about?
Another topic that found ample space in the media is that of remarried divorcees. In this regard nothing new was decided on except perhaps a greater openness of the ecclesiastical courts in assessing cases of matrimonial annulment…
PELL: No, the problem is that there are dioceses where the ecclesiastical courts simply don’t exist. Now, if canon law provides for cases in which marriages are to be considered null, then it is the obligation of the bishops to see to it that the faithful are allowed to have access to this possibility. It seems to me however that no synodal father put in question the doctrine of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage.
So following the very “broad” modalities used by the American courts in dealing with cases of matrimonial annulment was not spoken of?
PELL: Nobody did so publicly. Whereas there were groups of synodal fathers who asked for the formulation of a particular recognition of the sacrifice and suffering of those faithful who are divorced and do not remarry in obedience to the law of God. Because one needs to recognize that the indissolubility of marriage is not simply an ecclesiastical norm, but is bound up with the words of Jesus himself. And we don’t have the power to change these words.
There was no opening either on so-called intercommunion with the members of other Churches and Christian communities …
PELL: On that topic also the voices raised against the present discipline were few indeed. And those who did speak spoke in a whisper.
How do you judge the hour of free discussion introduced with this Synod?
PELL: According to me it was not well structured. Some bishops divagated a little instead of sticking to the topic of the day.
Your Eminence, your diocese will host the next World Day of Youth. How do you expect it to be?
PELL: We certainly expect many pilgrims from Italy: it’s interesting that many bishops told me that many young people are already saving up to pay for the trip to Australia. We pray and hope that this day will reinforce the faith of our Catholic youth. I pray and hope also that young Australians who are not believers, and there are many, will be interested and made curious by this day and may be infected by the joyous and happy faith of their peers who will come from all over the world.
Will Benedict XVI come to Sydney?
PELL: If Providence and health assist him, he will come. I’m certain of it.
