On Wednesday, October 17, 2007, the day the announcement was made that Daniel N. DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston, was named to the College of Cardinals, DiNardo made a comment about his role as a cardinal in engaging the public square. A press conference was held at noon of that day. Speaking both in English and with a prepared statement in Spanish, he expressed his gratitude to the Holy Father for his being named, reflected on the meaning of this announcement for the Church in Texas, and thanked his predecessor, Archbishop emeritus Joseph A. Fiorenza, for the groundwork laid before him.
When asked if are there any issues he wanted to raise as a Cardinal, DiNardo responded:
Obviously the all issues we have dealt with here in the State of Texas on matters of faith and how faith intersects in the public square, I certainly will intend to do that. And I think, rightfully so, and because with the voice of a cardinal, people might stand up and take notice maybe a little more. … We’ll have to see how this plays out.
(cf. The official, edited, vetted article from the Houston Chronicle.)
After seeing Cardinal DiNardo at the TMO education session on the Church and the Public Square, I am extremely excited to see DiNardo’s interest in what he calls the “intersection” of faith and culture in the public square. Kudos to the TMO and their persistence. It is also obvious that DiNardo has taken time to internalize the necessity of the Church to speak in the public square, because his above comments were made spontaneously.
I believe that Cardinal DiNardo’s prominence in this part of the United States will definitely have a valuable impact on the discussions about the Church’s role in the public square. More and more pastors (curae animarum) should take his lead, doing what St. John Chrisostom and St. Leo the Great did in their day. These saints were great spiritual leaders, profound theologians, loving pastors, hard workers, liturgical priests, and advocates for the social needs of the most-vulnerable in their charge.
You don’t have to be pick just one of those characteristics, as many do today. You don’t have to pick just two. It is possible to be cura animarum and embrace both spiritual matters and social questions. It not only is possible, but it is, in fact, necessary in today’s world and in today’s church. By way of example, even the most-progressive of the periti of the Second Vatican Council were spiritually nourished by the older liturgical form. (Obviously, this is not a digression into matters liturgical, but it is meant to illuminate the issue.) A pastor who is spiritually grounded will have the ganas to face the social challenges that lie ahead for this generation.
With chief shepherds like DiNardo, the other shepherds of the diocese can see a model of leadership that is both theologically grounded as well as socially engaged.
Tags: Cardinal, DiNardo, Galveston-Houston, Public Square
October 22, 2007 at 2:23 pm |
On the theoretical level of this discussion, an authentic spirituality is always embodied. Some of the tendencies to immaterialize spirituality have followed from an unbalanced approach to rejecting the way of the “world.” However, what is wrong with the “world” is not that it is material, but the way it lives out its materiality. This is where the rubber hits the road, or rather, where the spirit hits the flesh; that is, how we live out that which subsists in the depth of our hearts, the center of our being. Here is where a new evangelization proves most relevant. We proclaim that we are incarnated spirits, or that we are animals with a capacity for God, capable of volitionally making God present by our very actions. These actions must be in every aspect of human life, in the private AND the public. In other words, a spirituality that does not embody publically, is a false spirituality. Christ exemplifies this by living out the response to the question: “why couldn’t God just declare that we are not guilty and free from sin?” Such a declaration would not be embodied, and therefore not truly spiritual, and therefore incomplete (setting aside the absolute freedom of God to act as he pleases. This is a lesson learned from the Incarnation and not a theological argument that necessitates the Incarnation).
October 27, 2007 at 4:32 pm |
One characteristic of our post-modern age is the deconstructionism that characterizes truth claims. Humpty-dumpty has been taken apart and each person has a piece of him but is unable to understand how his particular part relates to the objective whole that is divided among the various parts, persons, and institutions of our culture. I believe, however, that the Christian situation in this context is more congenial to “putting Humpty-Dumpty back together again”–or establishing a coherent relationship of various truth claims to objective Truth (the parts to the whole)–than, let’s say, the Christian situation during the Enlightenment, where a new “Humpty-Dumpty”–”Rational Man/Scientific Man/Reasonable Man” was the replacement for the “antiquated Christian man” created Imago Dei. Ironically, modern Christians should thank Nietzche for actually recognizing the wrong-headedness of the Modernist Humpty-Dumpty. Through his nihilism and contrarian stance to everything Modern and Christian (and any philosophy based on anything other than the “will to power”), Nietzche helped to launch the Molotov coctail that shattered Humpty Dumpty, dispersing his parts (elements of truth) throughout the persons, institutions, and ideas of the West. It is in this context that Christians find themselves. CHRISTIANS ARE CALLED TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC SQUARE AND INVEST ITS DISCOURSE WITH COHERENCE AND DIRECTION. I truly believe that Christian leaders, such as Cardinal-elect DiNardo, have the capacity to make the “parts” relatable to the “whole” that our society no longer recognizes. Precisely because subjectivism reigns and post-modernity is wrought with relativism and confusion, a fertile ground has been created for giving order–giving coherence and direction–to the orientation and content of the public square. I believe that it is the vocation of Christians to reintroduce to the public square a coherence and a trajectory that the Christian message, through the holy lives of Christians primarily, instrinsically possesses. Presenting the message of the Gospel in a manner that is intelligible and palatable to the post-modern public square, relating “individually possessed truths” to the “objective Truth”–among other tasks–is the task of Christians engaging the public square. “Putting Humpty-Dumpty back together again” requires architects that attract others to the project through their lived examples of holiness and their intellectual and spiritual integrity.
In Archbishop DiNardo’s press conference, I immediately noticed and appreciated the alacrity with which he addressed the press. He has also frequently emphasized the need for Christians to present the Gospel message clearly and intelligibly. I believe that it is leaders such as he who can lead and support the above-discussed project of suffusing the public square with a coherence and meaning that the Gospel message intrinsically possesses.