Editor’s note: The following essay is by Bishop Marian Eleganti, auxiliary bishop in the diocese of Chur, Switzerland. It was originally posted on kath.net on February 12, 2020, and is re-posted here, in English translation, by kind permission of kath.net. This is the first of a series of CWR pieces on the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia.
In the following pages my purpose is not to comment on the papal statements concerning ecological and economic issues or the questions of social and business ethics that are relevant to Amazonia. Nor do I focus on the suggestions concerning culture and the inculturation of peoples. With reference to these topics, Francis offers a text that to a large extent is balanced, beautifully written and inspiring. I quote: “In the Amazon region, one better understands the words of Benedict XVI when he said that, ‘alongside the ecology of nature, there exists what can be called a “human” ecology which in turn demands a “social” ecology. All this means that humanity… must be increasingly conscious of the links between natural ecology, or respect for nature, and human ecology.’” (QA, n. 41).
Incidentally, I was struck by the statements: “For those of them [i.e. the indigenous peoples] who are baptized, these roots include the history of the people of Israel and the Church up to our own day. Knowledge of them can bring joy and, above all, a hope capable of inspiring noble and courageous actions.” (n. 33). This means that the roots of these peoples are to be sought not only in their own traditions of nature religion, but also in the universal salvation history of Israel and of the Church. Francis also states surprisingly: “Identity and dialogue are not enemies.” (n. 37).
As for his critique with reference to the exploitation of Amazonia, it can be summarized as follows: “The interest of a few powerful industries should not be considered more important than the good of the Amazon region and of humanity as a whole.” (n. 48). Finally Francis is still concerned also about an “educational dimension”, about the “development of new habits” (n. 58). “The Church, with her broad spiritual experience, her renewed appreciation of the value of creation, her concern for justice, her option for the poor, her educational tradition and her history of becoming incarnate in so many different cultures throughout the world, also desires to contribute to the protection and growth of the Amazon region.” (n. 60).
This preferential option for the least privileged, however, must not be detached from the explicit proclamation of the Gospel: “An authentic option for the poor and the abandoned” means for Francis not only “liberat[ing] them from material poverty and … defend[ing] their rights,” but also and simultaneously “inviting them to a friendship with the Lord that can elevate and dignify them.” (n. 63). Therefore we cannot be content with a social message, without pointing out that Christ inspires it and challenges us to action (n. 63). The indigenous peoples, like all peoples, have a right to the proclamation of the Gospel (n. 64): “It proclaims a God who infinitely loves every man and woman and has revealed this love fully in Jesus Christ, crucified for us and risen in our lives.” (n. 64). For “without that impassioned proclamation, every ecclesial structure would become just another nongovernmental organization (NGO) and we would not follow the command given us by Christ: ‘Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to the whole creation’ (Mk 16:15).” (n. 64). In this regard Francis recommends a unique holiness (sui generis) that is characteristic for the Amazon region (n. 77).
With that I turn now to the topics which have occupied the Church intensely in recent weeks, making big waves: celibacy and priesthood. It was feared—and I had joined in this apprehension—that the Amazon region would become a laboratory experiment of the Universal Church on new ecclesial ministries for women, married priests and new liturgical forms with an Amazonian face (cf. nn. 85 ff: “Inculturation of forms of ministry”).
Probably in reference to the excitement surrounding the Pachamama figures in the Vatican Gardens and Roman basilicas, Francis says: “It is possible to take up an indigenous symbol in some way, without necessarily considering it as idolatry. A myth charged with spiritual meaning can be used to advantage and not always considered a pagan error.” (n. 79). That is true, but then we should not fall down before this symbol or carry it around in procession like monstrance, as was done in the presence of the Pope and of other high-ranking ecclesiastical dignitaries during the Amazon Synod in Rome.
Based on the incarnational character of the Holy Eucharist, according to Francis, “many elements proper to the experience of indigenous peoples in their contact with nature” can be taken up into the liturgy and “native forms of expression in song, dance, rituals, gestures and symbols” can stimulate devotion. (n. 82). In Number 87 Francis recapitulates with desirable clarity important theological elements and essential characteristics of the ordained priesthood, which belong to the priest exclusively on the basis of his ordination and cannot be delegated: “The first conclusion, then, is that the exclusive character received in Holy Orders qualifies the priest alone to preside at the Eucharist.” The most substantial statements of the Pope in this regard deserved to be quoted here in their entirety, for they also give an answer to the burning question about ordination and authority that has been the subject of heated debate:
That is [the priest’s] particular, principal and non-delegable function. There are those who think that what distinguishes the priest is power, the fact that he is the highest authority in the community. Yet Saint John Paul II explained that, although the priesthood is considered “hierarchical”, this function is not meant to be superior to the others, but rather is “totally ordered to the holiness of Christ’s members” (Mulieris dignitatem, 27). When the priest is said to be a sign of “Christ the head” [of the Mystical Body], this refers principally to the fact that Christ is the source of all grace: he is the head of the Church because “he has the power of pouring out grace upon all the members of the Church”. (Summa theologiae III, q. 8, art. 1, resp.)
88. The priest is a sign of that head and wellspring of grace above all when he celebrates the Eucharist, the source and summit of the entire Christian life. (Vatican Council II, Presbyterorum ordinis, 5). That is his great power, a power that can only be received in the sacrament of Holy Orders. For this reason, only the priest can say: “This is my body.” There are other words too, that he alone can speak: “I absolve you from your sins.” Because sacramental forgiveness is at the service of a worthy celebration of the Eucharist. These two sacraments lie at the heart of the priest’s exclusive identity. (Cf. the Anointing of the Sick and James 5:15.)
In Number 89 the Pope then speaks about the priest shortage and the proposal to find a way to ensure the priestly ministry even in the remotest places of the Amazon region. For despite the manifold charisms of the laity and the ministries that they can perform, the priest remains indispensable for the administration of the sacraments. Francis, however, does not conclude from this that married viri probati (tested, mature men) should be ordained, but rather challenges the bishops to send out suitably qualified and prepared priest missionaries (cf. nn. 18-19 on missionaries). “This urgent need leads me to urge all bishops, especially those in Latin America, not only to promote prayer for priestly vocations, but also to be more generous in encouraging those who display a missionary vocation to opt for the Amazon region.” (n. 90). Furthermore he is concerned about awakening new life in the Christian communities of Amazonia (n. 93). Here Francis is thinking about expanding the competencies of the laity, and he speaks in n. 94 about lay community leaders endowed with authority. Francis does not appear to be thinking here about the already established conflicts between ordained and non-ordained male or female holders of an ecclesial “ministry” or “office”, which remains a major weakness of his suggestion. For German-speaking countries have had more than enough experience and conflicts in this regard, which to this day cannot be resolved, and they have their origin in the creation of full-time, non-ordained community leaders—male or female—authorized or empowered by the bishops.
As far as women are concerned, Francis warns against a functional reductionism, which assumes “that women would be granted a greater status and participation in the Church only if they were admitted to Holy Orders.” (n. 100). This, according to Francis, would in reality “lead us to clericalize women” and “diminish the great value of what they have already accomplished, and subtly make their indispensable contribution less effective” (n. 100).
Jesus Christ appears as the Spouse [i.e. Bridegroom] of the community that celebrates the Eucharist through the figure of a man who presides as a sign of the one Priest. This dialogue between the Spouse and his Bride, which arises in adoration and sanctifies the community, should not trap us in partial conceptions of power in the Church. The Lord chose to reveal his power and his love through two human faces: the face of his divine Son made man and the face of a creature, a woman, Mary. Women make their contribution to the Church in a way that is properly theirs, by making present the tender strength of Mary, the Mother. As a result, we do not limit ourselves to a functional approach, but enter instead into the inmost structure of the Church. In this way, we will fundamentally realize why, without women, the Church breaks down, and how many communities in the Amazon would have collapsed, had women not been there to sustain them, keep them together and care for them. This shows the kind of power that is typically theirs. (n. 101).
We can only be grateful to Francis for this unusual and unexpected clarity. It signifies once again a repudiation of priesthood for women. Francis sees the place of women in services or ministries (effective influence on organization and leadership, too) which do not have ordination as a prerequisite (n. 103).
Conflicts should be resolved on a higher plane which “preserves what is valid and useful on both sides” (n. 104; cf. 105-110). These paragraphs about the Holy Spirit in situations of conflict are very beautifully written.
In n. 111 Francis introduces Mary as the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of life and Mother of all creatures, as Queen of Creation. I see here the decisive counterpoint to the recent altercation about the Pachamama, a sort of pagan-indigenous divinization and personification of so-called Mother Earth and the cultic veneration thereof. Mary is implicitly introduced and presented here at the end of the Post-Synodal document—this is my impression—as overcoming this pagan notion and veneration. The Apostolic Exhortation ends with a moving prayer to Mary.
In concluding it may be said that the Post-Synodal document did not turn out as many had feared, its writers were probably different, too, from the ones who drew up the preparatory document of the Amazon Synod, and with reference to the hot-button issues in the preceding discussion about celibacy, married viri probati, and a diaconate or priesthood for women, it is unusually clear. Moreover on every page the document has a loving, conciliatory, calm, pleasant and humble tone.
(Translated from German by Michael J. Miller.)
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
“We can only be grateful to Francis for this unusual and unexpected clarity. It signifies once again a repudiation of priesthood for women. Francis sees the place of women in services or ministries (effective influence on organization and leadership, too) which do not have ordination as a prerequisite (n. 103).”
I.e.
Women don’t need to be clericalized because they already run so much within the Latin churches.
Just a confirmation of the status quo. Radical changes aren’t necessary. The status quo is sufficient to run the institution into the ground.
Yeah, pretty much.
Right you are. Spot on!
I dislike deflating the euphoria. I too began to hope with the growing elation especially with staunch defenders of the faith Bishop Marion Eleganti, Cardinal Müller, a good gentle soul praising Pope Francis. My premonition had differed. With all the effort to discuss Amazonia, its special needs, the structural change to the Curia demoting the CDF to a virtual showcase, admonishment to priests for ecological conversion, the excoriation of a poor woman for her “trophyism” child convert are we to believe that this is all passe? That Pope Francis has had a sudden Epiphany? The clarion call for priest volunteers to Amazonia the purpose of all this effort? That Pachamama veneration at the Vatican is simply cultural appreciation. We perceive not reality in this latest bromide. Sorry though I wish it were true. Now my doubt is supported. Cardinal Czerny, a Jesuit who serves as the Pope’s main representative on issues relating to migrants and refugees, appeared to give considerable weight to the final document during his press conference presentation, saying it has a “certain moral authority and that to ignore it would be a lack of obedience to the Holy Father’s legitimate authority. The best way to understand this is part of a process and part of a journey” (in Pentin NCR). Scanning the years since 2013 a continued Journey into Darkness (title of FBI profiler John Douglas book).
Generally speaking, there can be no definitive interpretation of a chess game until it is over.
Charles,
I appreciate your prudence. This whole thing reminds me of the Cold War where we always hoped that offers of peace were genuine but always worried that we were being fed another lie.
I also fear another Soviet tactic from this period — taking two steps forward and one step backward.
God bless you Father Morello, your comments are always insightful and deeply appreciated. I listened to this exorcist talking about demons can only proceed to a point where God permits it, even the Evil one is stopped by the will of God. Dare we hope that Jesus Christ is woke and is drawing a red line; dare we hope he will come to the rescue of his mystical bride the church?
Edith I always held the view that God would not permit Pope Francis or any pontiff to deviate from Apostolic Tradition and the Deposit of the Faith through the official Magisterium, which requires propositional definition and consistency as explained in the Doctrinal Commentary to Ad Tuendam Fidem [written by Cardinal Ratzinger under John Paul II]. Celibacy as you may know is not a dogma of the Church although it is component to Apostolic Tradition as a required priest discipline within the Latin Rite and with variation in the Eastern. Nonetheless it’s a vital spiritual discipline as held by prev pontiff’s, Cardinals Sarah, Muller and many others. Technically it could be changed if the pontiff were to agree with the Amazonia Document. Although many of us instead agree with Benedict XVI and Cardinal Sarah among others that the discipline represents a Christ like commitment of love to the Father that we believe not essential, rather a needed perfection of the priesthood. What belongs to dogma is the indissolubility of marriage which has been abrogated by this Pontiff via suggestion within Amoris Laetitia and the exchange of letters with Argentine hierarchy and entered into the Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Nonetheless that does not make those letters universal or binding because they as well as Amoris do not comply with the official Magisterium when it teaches universal doctrine. The gist of my response is that what lies ahead is in question regarding same sex unions now reconsidered by the German hierarchy due to the Amazonia synodal review of all doctrine, idolatry regarding Pachamama at the Vatican and propagated to the Universal Church, the practice of ritual infanticide that seems glossed over virtually recognized by the Amazonia Document. These are the dogmatic issues that cannot be changed by the Magisterium but appear in danger of change similar to communion for D&R with the attachment of that Document to Querida. In Christ Fr Peter.
A crisis of faith tears at the heart, here wanting to believe with Laity like Edith Wohldmann who have suffered in anticipation of a real commitment to the faith in Querida Amazonia. In conscience skeptical because of what my intellect discerns. Robert Royal noted for his cautionary assessments always seeking reason to give benefit of the doubt – for the first time that I’m aware disagreed with close compatriot Msgr Gerald Murray on Querida. Royal pointed out Footnote 351 Amoris as indicative of the circumventive method of avoiding direct Magisterial pronouncement that Pope Francis employs in passing through an agenda, in that case communion for D&R. Similarly here is the Final Amazonia Document given “moral and legitimate authority” attached as an addendum to Querida. Ambiguity? In spades. Charles Flynn of course is right. The best we can do is hope for the best. At the same time vigilant and aware of perhaps being again drawn into a conscience numbing process of moral complacency believing all is by nature intercomplimentary that has infected the Church.
Ditto. This on “clarity,” from Fr. Raymond de Souza: https://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/with-querida-amazonia-its-deja-amoris-all-over-again.
Excerpt: “[….]The discussion yesterday turned on the status of the ‘final document’ of the synod itself, which approved the proposal for married priests. Querida Amazonia begins by ‘officially presenting’ that final document. When Pope Francis changed the rules of the synod in 2018, he included a provision that, if ‘expressly approved’ by the pope, the final document of a synod could be considered part of the papal magisterium.
“Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, general secretary of the Synod of Bishops, ruled that out in this case. The final document was not ‘expressly approved.’
“Cardinal Michael Czerny, who served as special secretary of the Amazon synod, was sitting right beside Cardinal Baldisseri. He said that while the final document was not magisterial, it had a ‘moral authority,’ and to ignore it would be a ‘lack of obedience’ to the Pope. All the proposals in the final document remain ‘on the table.’
“The final document thus has authority but is not necessarily authoritative.”
The real enemy is hidden in all the false narratives that spread suspicion, confusion and division among the flock; sensational headlines with the worst possible spin that have everyone and their great grandmothers spreading a cacophony of false assumptions about the Vicar of Christ on earth. The same infernal noise that led countless catholics into rebellion against the pope in the great protest of the 16th century, one way or another driving millions right out of the Church. I heard a catholic YouTuber channel channeling the lie that the pope wants Catholics to worship indigenous idols!!
Thank you, Lord Jesus, you drew a red line. N.63. “How said it would be if they were to receive from us a body of teachings or a moral code, but not the great message of salvation.” ? Once upon a time, Europe was vast forest and valleys and indigenous tribes adored nature god and goddesses. Then came the Christian evangelization, the moral code and the commandments and Europe evolved and progressed to great cultures.
SOL,
I don’t think I agree with your comments in total but I do wish we could get the troops of women readers, cantors, “Eucharistic ministers “, etc. off the altar.
That goes for lay people in general. We have priests and deacons capable of reading scripture at Mass and knowing how to pronounce the tricky words. And at a sparsely attended daily Mass there’s no real
practical need for three or four women to distribute Communion.
The whole thing is distracting and as a Catholic woman, it’s always seemed to me like the Church is throwing me a bone that I’m not begging for.
For those situations I wish we might follow the Eastern Rite churches also.
Mrscracker:
To take one but a very important example: of what effectiveness are female DREs, teachers, youth ministers, and young adult Minister’s for teenaged males and young men? Very little.
In general women should not have positions of authority, regardless of what the pope thinks.
I agree with you, MrsCracker.
I see no reason why we need laymen of any kind distributing Communion.
(Also, it drives me mad when *everything* has to be described as a ministry. Arrange the flowers at church? A ministry. Run the library? A ministry. Distribute the bulletin? A ministry. If I do something, I don’t want my self-importance boosted and catered to.)
For more on the abuse and misuse of the term “ministry”, see my essay “The Role of the Laity: An Examination of Vatican II and Christifideles Laici“.
Right you are. Spot on!
Thank you to CWR , for publishing this , as an act of justice in charity too 🙂
The blessing imparted through the words of the Holy Father, to see our common roots in the history of Israel and of The Church , to help serve the cause of unity , in the exercise of our baptismal priestly roles, to bring all to Him, that all get to take in His will , at ever more deeper levels , thus protecting the dignity of life , life wherein every cell is too mostly bathed and nourished in that will ; that , in turn , to be for all of creation , in the wisdom to be had , when the hearts of the children are turned to The Father .
May the blessings of our Mother , invoked in the loving and humble model by the Holy Father as is often the case , be thus received to valiantly strengthen our will, to be freed from all that stands against holiness and its blessings for all.
Yes, his clarity was unmistakable in sending the reader back to the original synod complete document as the key to reading his exhortation.
His clarity unmistakable in providing another Rorschach test to the world’s Catholics.
I am well past being fooled into being grateful for the occasional orthodox statement thrown to us like a bone to dogs by PF. The litany of offenses is just way too long at this point for him to regain credibility with me that easily. Perhaps I will express my gratitude to God for staying PF’s hand on celibacy and women’s ordination instead. Getting past those two issues, there’s still a lot of really bad or just plain hokey / embarrassing stuff in this exhortation.
The title of this article says it all: “We can ONLY be grateful to Francis for this UNUSUAL and UNEXPECTED clarity”. Is it “grateful” really ALL we can be toward him? Given that his clarity is SO unusual and SO unexpected, is it REAL, LEGITIMATE clarity at all? This sounds so much like the well-worn-out hopeful expectations of abused families toward their abuser. One day the abuser brings a toy/treat and the next day a beating for no reason, then repeat. Fly-then-crash-and-burn false hopes are used again and again by the abuser to slowly demoralize, crush and then transform the family into copies of himself/herself.
We are to be TRUE FAITHFUL CATHOLICS, not be a copy of our leaders, whether good or bad. Our individuality is sacred and we must be ONLY and exclusively copies of Jesus Christ as that alone guarantees our God-given individuality and the genuineness, faithfulness and godly uniqueness of the Catholic Church (Galatians 2:20). Bad corrupt paternalism is seeking to destroy all that, as we see in the demonic paternalism of the Homosexual “Culture” and the Political Party Of Abortion, where their followers are just sentimental, aggressive clones, imitating the violence of their abusive “fathers”. To counteract this with Holy Spiritual Fatherhood, buy and implement in your life the book: “Consecration To St. Joseph” by Father Donald Calloway. Check the video where he explains it, interviewed by Matthew Leonard on YouTube: “Consecration to St. Joseph – Crazy Or Crucial”. Pope Francis’ bad paternalism must be addressed and removed with St. Joseph’s Holy Fatherhood which leads directly to God.
As other great helps from out of the savage spiritual abuse, punch-drunk confusion and spiritual PTSD we suffer today, I also highly recommend you buy the “Issue 1, 2020” of “The Traditionalist” magazine (CXPeditor@gmail.com), which is not crazy Rad-Trad but very mature, balanced and invaluable. Also a life saver in this crisis is the book: “Love for the Papacy & Filial Resistance to the Pope In the History of the Church” by Roberto De Mattei. It is a level-headed guide, a healing balm and a “lights on again” for your soul and all the Church. We are to be copies of ONLY JESUS and no one else!!
The title of this article says it all: “We can ONLY be grateful to Francis for this UNUSUAL and UNEXPECTED clarity”. Is it “grateful” really ALL we can be toward him? Given that his clarity is SO unusual and SO unexpected, is it REAL, LEGITIMATE clarity at all? This sounds so much like the well-worn-out hopeful expectations of abused families toward their abuser. One day the abuser brings a toy/treat and the next day a beating for no reason, then repeat. Fly-then-crash-and-burn false hopes are used again and again by the abuser to slowly demoralize, crush and then transform the family into copies of himself/herself.
We are to be TRUE FAITHFUL CATHOLICS, not be a copy of our leaders, whether good or bad. Our individuality is sacred and we must be ONLY and exclusively copies of Jesus Christ as that alone guarantees our God-given individuality and the genuineness, faithfulness and godly uniqueness of the Catholic Church (Galatians 2:20). Bad corrupt paternalism is seeking to destroy all that, as we see in the demonic paternalism of the Homosexual “Culture” and the Political Party Of Abortion, where their followers are just sentimental, aggressive clones, imitating the violence of their abusive “fathers”. To counteract this with Holy Spiritual Fatherhood, buy and implement in your life the book: “Consecration To St. Joseph” by Father Donald Calloway. Check the video where he explains it, interviewed by Matthew Leonard on YouTube: “Consecration to St. Joseph – Crazy Or Crucial”. Pope Francis’ faulty paternalism must be addressed with St. Joseph’s Holy Fatherhood which leads directly to God.
As other great helps from out of the savage spiritual abuse, punch-drunk confusion and spiritual PTSD we suffer today, I also highly recommend you buy the “Issue 1, 2020” of “The Traditionalist” magazine, which is not crazy Rad-Trad but very mature, balanced and invaluable. Also a life saver in this crisis is the book: “Love for the Papacy & Filial Resistance to the Pope In the History of the Church” by Roberto De Mattei. It is a level-headed guide, a healing balm and a “lights on again” for your soul and all the Church. We are to be copies of ONLY JESUS and no one else!!