Pope Ratzinger

The world wondered, when Cardinal Ratzinger became Pope Benedict, whether he would pursue repressive and regressive policies. As a Vatican official who operated the office that used to be known as the “Inquisition,” he had a well-deserved reputation for stifling the work of theologians, and appeared anxious to close doors that had been opened during the second Vatican Council. Some figured that, as Pope, he would be an uber-Cardinal Ratzinger, the same guy with a lot more power and influence. Others speculated that he might go back to the way of thinking that he displayed in earlier years, when he was much more sympathetic with the direction the Church went toward during and after Vatican II.

I think that recent developments have answered any remaining questions. He thoughtlessly (or, maybe not?) slammed Islam in a meeting in Germany; he hurt and angered Jews by lifting restrictions on the Latin Mass (see my previous postings about that decision, below); and, now, he has seen fit to insist that the Roman Catholic Church is in fact the only real “church.” This is only a very short step away from saying that, outside the Roman Catholic Church, there is no salvation. And that is precisely what many Roman Catholics have believed over the centuries. Most decidedly, they believed this about non-Christians; but this has also been vigorously professed as to Protestants and the Orthodox. And, most unfortunately, this belief sometimes gives rise not (or not only) to a sadness and pity toward those unsaved ones outside the “real” church, but also to hatred and savagery. Think of the Crusades, the Inquisition; and, more recently, the extreme hatred and brutality (even today) between Catholics and Protestants in Great Britain.

Think, also, of the Islamic fundamentalists who view Buddhists, Christians, and everyone other than themselves to be legitimate targets of destruction. No wonder all these prominent atheists have recently been publishing very popular books about the scourge of religion.

As a Catholic layperson, working in a Catholic university, I find that I ask myself daily why I remain Catholic (or even Christian), and how I can remain Catholic and Christian. After all, Buddhist insights and practices are very important to me. Why not leave it at that? Why stick with this beautiful, terrible Catholic Church?

The answers vary a bit, day by day. Usually, the biggest reason has to do with my friends (and others I admire) who are Catholic and who exemplify the fundamental values, hopes, and beliefs I most aspire to: that love conquers hate, and life conquers death, and that ultimate reality is friendly, and can be trusted. The dogmas and doctrines of the church are ways to express these convictions, they are ways to describe the indescribable, which can never be fully or precisely explained, but only approximated. I want to be in the close company of those friends, to walk with them and learn from them. I also remind myself regularly of the long, long history of the church; there have been many, many changes in doctrine and practice, and always there have been differences of opinion about the meaning of our dogmas and doctrines, so that the squabbles we are engaged in today seem mild in comparison to much of what went before. What is more important is the incredible depth in our history, especially the depth to which our mystics have gone; and what is more important is our teaching about social justice, and the work that we do to embody those teachings.