Martini Passes

Rest in Peace

Cardinal Martini of Milan has died.

His death has gotten a lot of play in the secular media, in which he is invariably cited as the leader of the “liberal” faction in the college of cardinals. They also commonly refer to him as papabile, though we really have no idea whether he ever came close to being selected pope.

On Catholic websites, on the other hand, his death seems to have passed with very little notice. At most, a link to some news story reporting his death.

In an interview published posthumously, Martini lamented the emptiness of European churches, and said the Church is too pompous, too bureaucratic, and “200 years behind the times.”

I would lament the same things. But what is the solution, and did Martini have it?

As for the emptiness of churches: Martini seemed to think that being more relaxed on the morality of contraception and divorce would make those who are not now interested in Catholicism, the authors of the secular reports, flood into the church. But surely we know from the experiments of mainstream Protestantism that this would not be so. Religions live not by broad appeal, but by deep appeal. Nobody, certainly including the lukewarm, is impressed by a lukewarm faith; while the devout would probably leave for something more intense. The prime beneficiary would be the Society of Pius IX; just as the evangelicals and the Pentecostals have been the prime beneficiaries of such “liberalization” in mainstream Protestantism.

In any case, this is not an option. No pope or council has the authority to change church teaching on either faith or morals. To do so would be to kill Catholicism itself. Truth does not change over time, or because people want it to.

And a Church that simply tells you that whatever you are currently doing or want to do is what you should do is worthless. It would be like a doctor who simply tells all his patients, regardless of their symptoms, that they are perfectly well. Of course, nobody wants to hear that they are sick; but you cannot make a thing so by saying it is so.

As for the church being too bureaucratic, this has also been publicly lamented by such worthies as Pope John XXIII and Pope Benedict XVI. It probably bothers everybody in such a big organization. But Martini’s solution seems to be to make it more collegial, perhaps hold a third Vatican Council. This is, in effect, handing the church over to the bureaucracy, to the committees. The special privileges of the papacy are there precisely to cut through the bureaucratic tangle.

As for the church being “behind the times,” this cannot be said of church doctrine, of its teachings on faith or morals. Otherwise, one is guilty of the heresy of Modernism; again, truth does not change over time. No doubt this is what journalists thought Martini meant, and perhaps it is what he meant.

But it can fairly be said of liturgy and of making full use of the new media for evangelization. The Vatican itself is pushing for more use of new technology. Why shouldn’t sermons, for example, be multimedia? There is no reason to hold back on this score: the Catholic Mass was the original multimedia experience, in 4D complete with bells and smells. The Catholic cathedral was the original “megachurch.” We ought to blow a few more minds of a Sunday.

As for the church being “pompous,” this is an eternal problem for any elite professional group like the priesthood. It is, however, a problem the Catholic Church understands and defends against better than any other organization. It is a central issue, after all, in the New Testament—the issue of hypocrisy and “Pharisaism.” It is countered by the Christian teaching of humility, following the example of Jesus--something broadly lacking in other religions, let alone secular organizations. It is countered by the discipline of obedience within the priesthood. And it is countered by the discipline of priestly celibacy, as a test of sincerity.

Unfortunately, Martini himself, by more or less talking out of turn, himself betrays a certain self-importance, a certain violation of priestly obedience to the Vatican. This, if he had his way, would probably spread through the priesthood—priests would become less answerable to anyone. He was also not a strong supporter of the discipline of celibacy.

But we should speak no ill of the dead—no doubt why other Catholic commentators have had the wisdom to simply maintain silence. Martini had his own struggle, no doubt, with the angels, as we all do. If he was right, he knows now.