"The only thing we do is to love": a happy reflection on the new encylical

The first encyclical from Benedict XVI is out: Deus Caritas Est (God is Love).  Many progressives, as well as many familiar with the former Joseph Ratzinger's image as "God's Rottweiler", are a bit surprised that the topic for his first major theological statement as pope is such a winsome and unobjectionable subject.

But Benedict XVI is, at least so far, not turning out to be as reactionary as many on the religious left had feared, nor as tough as some of conservative supporters had hoped.  In the February First Things, the influential Catholic neo-con Richard John Neuhaus writes:

Among those who greatly admired Cardinal Ratzinger and were elated by his election as pope, there is a palpable uneasiness. As of this writing, he has not made what are perceived to be needed personnel changes at the top levels of the Curia. Benedict’s first major appointment, that of Archbishop William Levada to succeed him at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, occasioned widespread puzzlement. With particular pertinence to the present discussion, Levada, for all his considerable gifts, did not distinguish himself in his teaching, and his seeing to it that others taught, the Church’s moral doctrine during his ten years as archbishop of San Francisco, a city commonly called the gay capital of the world.

Troubling also to those who watch this pontificate with hopeful concern is Benedict’s appointment of George H. Niederauer as Levada’s successor in San Francisco. While in Salt Lake City, Bishop Niederauer had a reputation of being, as it is said, gay-friendly. He broke with other religious leaders in opposing a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. The announcement of his appointment to San Francisco was met with great public rejoicing by Dignity, New Ways Ministry, and other gay advocacy groups.

Hey, if Neuhaus is experiencing "palpable uneasiness" and describes some of B16's appointments as "troubling", then we on the religious left ought to be "genuinely heartened" and "cautiously encouraged."  I like Neuhaus very much, not least because when I read him, I can know reliably that I am called to believe the precise opposite of what it is that he is saying!

Anyhow, the encyclical.  I read through it all this morning, and loved this bit about avoiding mixing charity and proselytism:

Charity, furthermore, cannot be used as a means of engaging in what is nowadays considered proselytism. Love is free; it is not practised as a way of achieving other ends... Those who practise charity in the Church's name will never seek to impose the Church's faith upon others. They realize that a pure and generous love is the best witness to the God in whom we believe and by whom we are driven to love. A Christian knows when it is time to speak of God and when it is better to say nothing and to let love alone speak. He knows that God is love (cf. 1 Jn 4:8) and that God's presence is felt at the very time when the only thing we do is to love. He knows—to return to the questions raised earlier—that disdain for love is disdain for God and man alike; it is an attempt to do without God. Consequently, the best defence of God and man consists precisely in love. It is the responsibility of the Church's charitable organizations to reinforce this awareness in their members, so that by their activity—as well as their words, their silence, their example—they may be credible witnesses to Christ.

Bold emphases are mine.  Rock on, your Holiness!

This reminds me of a conversation I had with one of my youth group teens this past weekend during the thirty hour fast relief.  One of "my girls" said to me, "Hugo, what I like about you is you only talk about Jesus some of the time, not all the time.  I don't like to be preached to."   I thanked her, and said,

"Actually, in a strange way, I am trying to preach to you about Jesus all the time.  But I'm not nearly as interested in telling you about Jesus as I am in trying to show you how much He loves you.  And the best way I can do that is through action, by "loving on" you guys without judgment or conditions.  And if you ever ask yourself, 'Why is Hugo spending so much time with us?', consider the possibility that I am excited to share the love of Christ.  That sharing happens more through a listening ear and an enthusiastic hug than through anything else."

It sounds self-serving, I know.  But I'm a great believer that the Gospel is successfully preached in action.  As the pope says so beautifully, God's presence is felt at the very time when the only thing we do is to love.  As someone who tries very hard, in my own weak and insufficient way, to love and feed His lambs as best I can, this letter is a very real surprise and a real encouragement.

Comments

[westcoast2]

Many progressives, as well as many familiar with the former Joseph Ratzinger's image as "God's Rottweiler", are a bit surprised that the topic for his first major theological statement as pope is such a winsome and unobjectionable subject.

I am suprised they were suprised...

This encyclical letter clearly lays a foundation and it would seem pragmatic (another of his traits) to restate one of the corner stones of Christian belief at the start.

This would then provide the basis for further development and grounding. As you say it is an unobjectionable subject.

It does though leave great scope for development especially in the relationship of Men and Women (see pt I para 11), Church and State (most of part II) and Mary (pt 2 para 41)

(imho) In both his appointments and this letter Benedict XVI has recognised concerns and has begun to address them by initally reminding people of a common foundation.

be well
west

[A Christian Prophet]

Interesting... the holy spirit's direct message both on the Christian Prophet blog and on the Holy Inheritance blog started talking about "God is love," a few days ago, then the Pope issued his encyclical. It's as if the guidance is coming through in various places and we are all in cahoots.

[Mike]

I am becoming a bigger fan of "Papa Ratzi" the more I see of his Pontificate.

[jaime]

I just found this blog. I'm very interested in Christian values so I'll keep visiting your site.

[Blu]

Hey Hugo,

Liked your post, but don't agree with you on Neuhaus: He is not only brilliant and an outstanding writer, but also a very decent and Spirit-filled man.

Here is a link to something he wrote recently that is both amusing and depressingly accurate.

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=158

[Hugo]

I don't disagree, Blu, that Neuhaus is brilliant, decent, and spirit-filled. Years ago, a friend recommended his marvelous "Death on a Friday Afternoon", and I loved it -- a real spiritual classic. My great admiration for his faith and his talent as a writer, however, does not prevent me from seeing him as fundamentally mistaken about virtually every major social issue facing the church and contemporary society!

[biagra]

I know that is the best.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra
biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]biagra[/url]

[biagra]

For your information,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra
biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]biagra[/url]