Vatican City, Sep 23, 2019 / 10:18 am (CNA).- When it comes to spreading the Word of God through media, no investment is too big, Pope Francis told officials and consultors of the Dicastery for Communication Monday.
In a prepared text given to participants in the Vatican’s Sala Regia Sept. 23, the pope spoke about communication as a mission of the Church. “No investment is too high for the diffusion of the Word of God,” he said. “At the same time, every ‘talent’ should be well spent, taken advantage of.”
Pope Francis went on to say that “in reality, our strength alone is not enough,” and referenced an address of St. Paul VI in 1964, in which he told the Vatican’s then-social communications department that “a thought of faith must therefore support the smallness of our humble efforts.”
“The more we make ourselves instruments in the hands of God, that is, small and generous, and the more the probability of our efficiency will grow,” Paul VI said.
“We know,” Pope Francis said, “that since then [1964] the challenges in this area have grown exponentially and our forces are never enough. The challenge to which you are called, as Christians and communicators, is really high. And that is why it is beautiful.”
The pope addressed the group of bishops and media professionals at the start of the plenary assembly of the Dicastery for Communications, being held at the Vatican Sept. 23-25.
This is the first plenary assembly of the dicastery since its institution in 2015. In attendance are the officials of the dicastery together with consultors from the international media realm, among whom is EWTN Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Michael P. Warsaw. Catholic News Agency is a service of EWTN.
The pope commented, “I therefore rejoice that the theme chosen for this Assembly is ‘We are members of one another’. Your, our strength lies in unity, in being members of one another. Only so we can better respond to the needs of the Church’s mission.”
In addition to his prepared speech, which was dispersed in written form, Pope Francis gave lengthy impromptu remarks to the assembly, counseling them to have the “signature of testimony” in everything they do.
“If you want to communicate only the truth without goodness and beauty, stop yourselves, do not do it. If you want to communicate a kind of truth, but without involving yourselves, without giving witness to that truth with your very lives, with your very flesh, stop yourselves, do not do it,” the pope said.
He also warned them against falling into an attitude of resignation when confronted by the worldliness of society.
Worldliness is not new to this century, he said, “it was always a danger, it was always a temptation, it was always the enemy”
In this vein, the pope said he has heard people think the Church should close itself off a little, “be a tiny, but authentic Church.”
“That word that gives me an allergy,” he stated. “If something is, it is not necessary to say ‘authentic.’”
The Church should be small “like leaven, small like salt,” he urged. “This is the Christian vocation!”
To think the Church of the future will be a “Church of the elect” is to risk falling into “the heresy of the Essenes,” he said, which is how “Christian authenticity is lost.”
Francis added that “the resignation to cultural defeat… comes from the bad spirit, it does not come from God.”
“Do not be afraid,” he encouraged. “We are few? Yes, but with the desire to ‘missionize,’ to show others who we are. With witness.”
He said he also is a “little allergic” to when people say something is “truly Christian.” “We have fallen into the culture of adjectives and adverbs, and we have forgotten the strength of nouns,” he argued.
“This is the mission of communication: to communicate the reality, without sweetening it with adjectives or adverbs.”
Just say something is “a Christian thing,” he said. It is unnecessary to say something is “authentically Christian.”
The communicator must show the “true, the right, the good, and the beautiful,” he said, and he does this with “the soul and with the body; he communicates with the mind, with the heart, with the hands; you communicate with everything.”
“And it is true that the greatest communication is love: in love there is the fullness of communication: love for God and among us.”
Something those working in Catholic communications should not do is proselytism, the pope said, adding that as “Benedict XVI said with great clarity: ‘The Church does not grow because of proselytism, but because of attraction,’ that is, testimony.”
“And our communication should be testimony.”
Pope Francis concluded by thanking the members of the dicastery for their work, telling them to “communicate the joy of the Gospel: This is what the Lord asks of you today.”
[…]
Peter Seewald has developed an intimacy with Benedict apparent in his interviews, and book. His judgment should be trusted. If our blessed loved Benedict XVI departs he’ll remain an advocate. Of course his final testament will be interesting. A true and faithful witness I’m confident he will be rewarded with beatific knowledge of his beloved Jesus of Nazareth. It will end the moot controversy of who is pope. The contrast with Francis is remarkable. Nowhere do we find in Benedict since his spiritual maturity any ambiguity, any preposterous suggestion, any abrogation as pontiff in witnessing to and defending the faith as revealed. Unlike our present experience. I refuse to judge Pope Francis because I am not equipped to do so. God is the judge of his conscience. No one is equipped to accompany and discern the truth of a person’s soul. Nonetheless I can and must pass judgment on a person’s works. There I address with full confidence that there are deceptive features, said in passive tense not active as one intending to deceive. For example Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia 303 quotes Saint Thomas Aquinas in ST 1a2ae 94 4, Although there is necessity in the general principles, the more we descend to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects. Aquinas addresses Justice in this passage to emphasize the need to deliberate the conditions on the ground so to speak in determining what is just. He’s posing a hypothetical to demonstrate a point, not that we can never determine what is just – if for example we take it literally that we will always find exceptions. Instead Francis proposes that we will always find exceptions to an intrinsically evil act like Adultery [or abortion, homosexuality, cohabitation] which demolishes the reality of intrinsic evil. Aquinas holds there is no virtuous mean between excess and defect for such an evil. Murder, abortion, homosexuality are always evil. Consequently Francis underscores a doctrine of mitigation that affects all morality leaving culpability indeterminate and subject to discernment and resolution. He references in 302 the Catechism that mitigation may reduce to a minimum moral culpability (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2352). Mitigation cannot become a theological category that eliminates mortal sin as warned by John Paul II. Especially if we remain in a continuous state of repeated intrinsically evil acts, as if the serial fornicator, adulterer, sexual deviant diminishes culpability, is even freed from mortal sin. Insofar as abortion the overwhelming majority are convenience decisions, rarely under extreme conditions of duress. Mitigation as employed by the Pope Francis places personal conscience as the determinant of what is a moral good or evil. Indeterminate moral standards due to exceptions, mitigation, and conscience are the three levers that overturn traditional Apostolic morality, a first in Church history and a deceptive doctrine he commends to all clergy to employ by accompaniment and discernment. Thereby placing the onus on the priest to grant the benefit of the doubt. As in Malta tacitly approved by this Vatican that anyone may now approach the sacraments at will regardless of manifest sin, with the proviso they follow the guidelines, the three levers of deliberation and dissolution of culpability provided in Amoris Laetitia. I submit this commentary in conscience as priest and my obligatory witness to the truth.
Does possibly mitigated subjective culpability ever elevate conscience as the determinant of what is moral good or evil, or eliminate objective morality? Pope Benedict wrote directly and unambiguously to this point, and to the widespread deadening of conscience in the West:
“I have been absolutely certain that there is something wrong with the theory of the justifying force of the subjective conscience . . . Hitler may have had none (guilt feelings); nor may Himmler or Stalin. Mafia bosses may have none, but it is more likely that they have merely suppressed their awareness of the skeletons in their closets. And the aborted guilt feelings . . . Everyone needs guilt feelings. The loss of the ability to see one’s guilt, the falling silent of conscience in so many areas, is a more dangerous illness of the soul than guilt that is recognized as guilt (see Psalm 19:12). [‘But who can discern their own errors? Forgive my hidden faults.’]
“To identify conscience with a superficial state of conviction is to equate it with a certainty that merely seems rational, a certainty woven from self-righteousness, conformism, and intellectual laziness. Conscience is degraded to a mechanism that produces excuses for one’s conduct, although in reality conscience is meant to make the subject transparent to the divine, thereby revealing man’s authentic dignity and greatness” (Values in a Time of Upheaval, 2006).