Log in

No account? Create an account
Errantry: Novak's Journal
...Words to cast/My feelings into sculpted thoughts/To make some wisdom last
Theological Notebook: Benedict XVI Addresses Westminster Hall 
18th-Sep-2010 11:58 pm
Benedict XVI wind
As I was wrapping up some laundry earlier this evening, I turned on the television, suddenly thinking that maybe I might just catch the tail end of a Notre Dame football broadcast, if in fact there was one today (since I haven't consulted the schedule, I don't even know that for sure). It was a little later than NBC usually schedules such things, but I thought I might as well check, just in case I'd find a little entertainment while I folded clothes.

As I flipped through, I actually found that I was just in time to see C-SPAN re-broadcasting an uncut treatment of Benedict XVI's address to Parliament at Westminster Hall. I had read a few brief notes about it, but had figured I would just read it online later. I'm glad I caught it, as the mood itself was so genuinely upbeat in the opening and closing comments by the Speakers of the Commons and of the Lords, as well as Benedict's remarks themselves.

Actually, I think I'll end up using this in my Catholicism course. I generally get the impression from people who ask me questions about the current Pope that most people only know what the press has repeated over the years, that he's determinedly "conservative." Unfortunately, "conservative" is a word that has come to mean "not worth listening to," most particularly – in the irony of contemporary politics – by those who pride themselves on their "tolerance," which I fear has increasingly become just a euphemism for a political position, and not the virtue it claims to be. Ratzinger is so much more a complex contemporary thinker than is easily appreciated in today's binary political language. And, as is frequently noted elsewhere, the Catholic Church's politics is just as frequently farther to the political Left than most Americans are easily comfortable with.

Benedict's address is a model of moderation, and frames in an accessible way the need for public conversation about the relation of ethics and politics, about conversation regarding the basis of ethics, and about the freedom of religion and of conscience in a free state, particularly in a secular state, where secularity itself might become an effective "state religion." I suspect that using it in a classroom setting might provide a usefully concrete way to provoke student reflection and conversation on these issues as they are currently manifested.


Mr Speaker,

Thank you for your words of welcome on behalf of this distinguished gathering. As I address you, I am conscious of the privilege afforded me to speak to the British people and their representatives in Westminster Hall, a building of unique significance in the civil and political history of the people of these islands. Allow me also to express my esteem for the Parliament which has existed on this site for centuries and which has had such a profound influence on the development of participative government among the nations, especially in the Commonwealth and the English-speaking world at large. Your common law tradition serves as the basis of legal systems in many parts of the world, and your particular vision of the respective rights and duties of the state and the individual, and of the separation of powers, remains an inspiration to many across the globe.

As I speak to you in this historic setting, I think of the countless men and women down the centuries who have played their part in the momentous events that have taken place within these walls and have shaped the lives of many generations of Britons, and others besides. In particular, I recall the figure of Saint Thomas More, the great English scholar and statesman, who is admired by believers and non-believers alike for the integrity with which he followed his conscience, even at the cost of displeasing the sovereign whose "good servant" he was, because he chose to serve God first. The dilemma which faced More in those difficult times, the perennial question of the relationship between what is owed to Caesar and what is owed to God, allows me the opportunity to reflect with you briefly on the proper place of religious belief within the political process.

This country’s Parliamentary tradition owes much to the national instinct for moderation, to the desire to achieve a genuine balance between the legitimate claims of government and the rights of those subject to it. While decisive steps have been taken at several points in your history to place limits on the exercise of power, the nation’s political institutions have been able to evolve with a remarkable degree of stability. In the process, Britain has emerged as a pluralist democracy which places great value on freedom of speech, freedom of political affiliation and respect for the rule of law, with a strong sense of the individual’s rights and duties, and of the equality of all citizens before the law. While couched in different language, Catholic social teaching has much in common with this approach, in its overriding concern to safeguard the unique dignity of every human person, created in the image and likeness of God, and in its emphasis on the duty of civil authority to foster the common good.

And yet the fundamental questions at stake in Thomas More’s trial continue to present themselves in ever-changing terms as new social conditions emerge. Each generation, as it seeks to advance the common good, must ask anew: what are the requirements that governments may reasonably impose upon citizens, and how far do they extend? By appeal to what authority can moral dilemmas be resolved? These questions take us directly to the ethical foundations of civil discourse. If the moral principles underpinning the democratic process are themselves determined by nothing more solid than social consensus, then the fragility of the process becomes all too evident - herein lies the real challenge for democracy.

The inadequacy of pragmatic, short-term solutions to complex social and ethical problems has been illustrated all too clearly by the recent global financial crisis. There is widespread agreement that the lack of a solid ethical foundation for economic activity has contributed to the grave difficulties now being experienced by millions of people throughout the world. Just as "every economic decision has a moral consequence" (Caritas in Veritate, 37), so too in the political field, the ethical dimension of policy has far-reaching consequences that no government can afford to ignore. A positive illustration of this is found in one of the British Parliament’s particularly notable achievements – the abolition of the slave trade. The campaign that led to this landmark legislation was built upon firm ethical principles, rooted in the natural law, and it has made a contribution to civilization of which this nation may be justly proud.

The central question at issue, then, is this: where is the ethical foundation for political choices to be found? The Catholic tradition maintains that the objective norms governing right action are accessible to reason, prescinding from the content of revelation. According to this understanding, the role of religion in political debate is not so much to supply these norms, as if they could not be known by non-believers – still less to propose concrete political solutions, which would lie altogether outside the competence of religion – but rather to help purify and shed light upon the application of reason to the discovery of objective moral principles. This "corrective" role of religion vis-à-vis reason is not always welcomed, though, partly because distorted forms of religion, such as sectarianism and fundamentalism, can be seen to create serious social problems themselves. And in their turn, these distortions of religion arise when insufficient attention is given to the purifying and structuring role of reason within religion. It is a two-way process. Without the corrective supplied by religion, though, reason too can fall prey to distortions, as when it is manipulated by ideology, or applied in a partial way that fails to take full account of the dignity of the human person. Such misuse of reason, after all, was what gave rise to the slave trade in the first place and to many other social evils, not least the totalitarian ideologies of the twentieth century. This is why I would suggest that the world of reason and the world of faith – the world of secular rationality and the world of religious belief – need one another and should not be afraid to enter into a profound and ongoing dialogue, for the good of our civilization.

Religion, in other words, is not a problem for legislators to solve, but a vital contributor to the national conversation. In this light, I cannot but voice my concern at the increasing marginalization of religion, particularly of Christianity, that is taking place in some quarters, even in nations which place a great emphasis on tolerance. There are those who would advocate that the voice of religion be silenced, or at least relegated to the purely private sphere. There are those who argue that the public celebration of festivals such as Christmas should be discouraged, in the questionable belief that it might somehow offend those of other religions or none. And there are those who argue – paradoxically with the intention of eliminating discrimination – that Christians in public roles should be required at times to act against their conscience. These are worrying signs of a failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square. I would invite all of you, therefore, within your respective spheres of influence, to seek ways of promoting and encouraging dialogue between faith and reason at every level of national life.

Your readiness to do so is already implied in the unprecedented invitation extended to me today. And it finds expression in the fields of concern in which your Government has been engaged with the Holy See. In the area of peace, there have been exchanges regarding the elaboration of an international arms trade treaty; regarding human rights, the Holy See and the United Kingdom have welcomed the spread of democracy, especially in the last sixty-five years; in the field of development, there has been collaboration on debt relief, fair trade and financing for development, particularly through the International Finance Facility, the International Immunization Bond, and the Advanced Market Commitment. The Holy See also looks forward to exploring with the United Kingdom new ways to promote environmental responsibility, to the benefit of all.

I also note that the present Government has committed the United Kingdom to devoting 0.7% of national income to development aid by 2013. In recent years it has been encouraging to witness the positive signs of a worldwide growth in solidarity towards the poor. But to turn this solidarity into effective action calls for fresh thinking that will improve life conditions in many important areas, such as food production, clean water, job creation, education, support to families, especially migrants, and basic healthcare. Where human lives are concerned, time is always short: yet the world has witnessed the vast resources that governments can draw upon to rescue financial institutions deemed "too big to fail". Surely the integral human development of the world’s peoples is no less important: here is an enterprise, worthy of the world’s attention, that is truly "too big to fail".

This overview of recent cooperation between the United Kingdom and the Holy See illustrates well how much progress has been made, in the years that have passed since the establishment of bilateral diplomatic relations, in promoting throughout the world the many core values that we share. I hope and pray that this relationship will continue to bear fruit, and that it will be mirrored in a growing acceptance of the need for dialogue and respect at every level of society between the world of reason and the world of faith. I am convinced that, within this country too, there are many areas in which the Church and the public authorities can work together for the good of citizens, in harmony with Britain’s long-standing tradition. For such cooperation to be possible, religious bodies – including institutions linked to the Catholic Church – need to be free to act in accordance with their own principles and specific convictions based upon the faith and the official teaching of the Church. In this way, such basic rights as religious freedom, freedom of conscience and freedom of association are guaranteed. The angels looking down on us from the magnificent ceiling of this ancient Hall remind us of the long tradition from which British Parliamentary democracy has evolved. They remind us that God is constantly watching over us to guide and protect us. And they summon us to acknowledge the vital contribution that religious belief has made and can continue to make to the life of the nation.

Mr Speaker, I thank you once again for this opportunity briefly to address this distinguished audience. Let me assure you and the Lord Speaker of my continued good wishes and prayers for you and for the fruitful work of both Houses of this ancient Parliament. Thank you and God bless you all!
19th-Sep-2010 10:01 am (UTC)
It's been interesting that he's meeting Protestant church leaders, and the Queen (the monarchy being, legally speaking, anti-Catholic) and talking in places like the now-Protestant Westminster Abbey.

Although, the two-deep parked buses for miles along the M77 was the most interesting thing for a lot of people I know!
23rd-Sep-2010 06:55 am (UTC)
Hey J: that's interesting to hear. I hadn't thought about your (or your friends) being anywhere around all that.

Northern Ireland aside, Protestant-Catholic conflict in any political way is a thing now long past. (Even Northern Ireland, of course, is hardly a debate about theology. I don't know if your media describes it as much as "Catholics vs. Protestants" over there, but here in the States, that's the common shorthand, mostly because no one in the United States (according to our news media) could possibly be expected to learn the difference between "Republicans and Unionists." Certainly there's theological differences, as well as cultural ones that remain, but dialogue and co-operation is far more the norm. When I was in the North in 1997, I found it rather moving to be approached by teens who asked me what American teens thought of them. (I had to confess that lots of American teens never thought of the world beyond our borders, if even beyond the local mall.) It was interesting to see as many teens, Protestants and Catholics alike (those who were serious about their faith), stress to me (and want me to make sure to explain to kids and adults back in America) that it was neither real Protestants or Catholics who were provoking the conflict, but "the hotheads." "We," I kept hearing from these young people of faith, "join clubs to get to know and work with one another." These kids seemed painfully sensitive to the idea that their faith – whatever version of Christianity they followed – was being blamed for the conflict.

I know, of course, that you have some flamboyant clerics of both sides who've aggravated these situations, but I was also struck by conversations I had with Irish bishops while I was there who were deeply dismayed that Catholicism had come to be so politically identified with Irish nationalism, which they felt ended up as a sort of political subversion of the faith.

By the way, I definitely will be traveling the weekend of the 16th (drat!), so we'll have to try to get together before Friday when you're hear, if that works as well for you two. What's the name of the BnB you're staying at?
23rd-Sep-2010 08:59 pm (UTC)
Yeah, it caused no end of disruption. He arrived in Edinburgh in the morning, then travelled to Glasgow and celebrated mass at Bellahouston Park, which is just south of the river from here - a few miles as the crow flies from my flat. I can't believe they closed the motorway to park buses! (I'd link you to a picture my friend took, but Facebook seems to be broken at the moment.) I took the day off work to avoid the traffic carnage.

Regarding Northern Ireland, you sometimes hear Catholics v. Protestants, but usually it's Republicans and Unionists. Which I always have to think about for a moment to figure out which are which, for some reason!

I haven't had much experience of the troubles, and we went there several times every year until I was in my mid-teens (my Dad is from there, not too far from Londonderry). But we were on a farm, and were young, so it's not surprising it didn't affect us. Mum has more pronounced memories of it all though, since it was worst when she started dating Dad. They always had to check for car bombs when they went anywhere, particularly since Granda was in the RUC reserve. Uncle Jim has a mad story about some RUC offers sleeping over in the kitchen and one of them turning the AGA off because they were too hot, but not actually turning the gas off, and he goes down to the bathroom in the middle of the night and finds the two of them semi-conscious! He always said it would have caused a right stooshie if there had been two dead RUC officers in the kitchen in the morning. I don't know if that story is true - he did once tell us that my cousin fell in the pig sty when he was little and the pigs ate his wellie and there were little bits of rubber in the bacon sold in the shops the next week... I also a heard a family story that my Great Aunt Evelyn's son was the first policeman to be killed in the troubles. That one might be true I think. Our family are all Protestant, although my cousin married a Catholic girl (in Dublin though). Apparently Gran might have been not too pleased about that once, but she had mellowed out by then!

Anyway, about the trip to New Orleans! We should definitely meet up then on the Wed or Thu. We will be at the Astor Crowne Plaza on the French Quarter Tue - Fri nights inclusive, but it's no problem to meet somewhere out your way, or near the uni. The guesthouse we are staying in after that is called Annabelle's House. I guess evenings are best for you if you're at uni during the day?
This page was loaded Apr 25th 2019, 2:36 pm GMT.