Benedict reflects on St. Maximus of Turin

From the Vatican news service:

VATICAN CITY, OCT 31, 2007 (VIS) - During his general audience, held this morning in a rainy St. Peter's Square in the presence of 30,000 faithful, Benedict XVI dedicated his catechesis to the figure of St. Maximus of Turin.

Maximus became bishop of that Italian city in the year 398 just as it was being threatened by various barbarian tribes which had entered Italy through the eastern passes and pushed as far as the western Alps. Turin was protected by a military garrison and served as a safe haven for people fleeing rural areas.

Faced with such a situation the activities of Maximus, author of around 90 sermons, "bear witness to his commitment to react to the degradation and break-up" of civil society, said the Pope. The bishop censured the faithful when they sought to turn another's disadvantage to their own benefit, thus highlighting "the profound relationship between a person's duties as a Christian and as a citizen." And Maximus was concerned "not only with people's traditional love for their hometown" but also proclaimed "the specific duty of paying taxes."

  A historical and literary analysis of the figure of St. Maximus, said the Pope, "demonstrates his growing awareness of the political responsibility of the ecclesiastical authorities at a time in which they were, in effect, substituting civil authority."

  "It is clear that today's historical, cultural and social context is completely different," the Holy Father went on, "but in any case, ... the duties of believers towards their city and their homeland remain the same. The link between the obligations of the 'honest citizen' and those of the 'good Christian' has not changed in the least."

  In this context, Pope Benedict then went on to refer to the Vatican Council II Pastoral Constitution "Gaudium et spes" which had the aim "of illuminating one of the most important aspects of the unity of Christian life: coherence between faith and life, between Gospel and culture."

  Vatican Council II, he concluded, "exhorts Christians, as citizens of two cities, to strive to discharge their earthly duties conscientiously and in response to the Gospel spirit. They are mistaken who, knowing that we have here no abiding city but seek one which is to come, think that they may therefore shirk their earthly responsibilities. For they are forgetting that by the faith itself they are more obliged than ever to measure up to these duties, each according to his proper vocation."

Comments

[LJ]

---Vatican Council II, he concluded, "exhorts Christians, as citizens of two cities, to strive to discharge their earthly duties conscientiously and in response to the Gospel spirit. They are mistaken who, knowing that we have here no abiding city but seek one which is to come, think that they may therefore shirk their earthly responsibilities. For they are forgetting that by the faith itself they are more obliged than ever to measure up to these duties, each according to his proper vocation."---

For me this is a hard teaching. I accept it first because I am bound to do so but I so often find so little on which to base any real level of patriotism other than the simple fact that this is the nation in which I was born. Certainly, were I to experience the political oppression and poverty of many parts of the world it would give new meaning to thanksgiving to God for where he has placed me, but that doesn't equate to love of country, to patriotism, for we would find that most of those who were born and raised in desperate circumstances have a fierce patriotism for those countries, and wish to see them liberated and prosperous. Witness the many Cuban Americans in Florida who long for the end of the Castro communist regime.

So where does this intense love of country come from? What is it's source? I confess I cannot find it. For many years I have felt a displaced person, but not unhappily so. I have no complaints and I do thank God for his great gifts, but I just have a blank space where patrioism should be. I can recognize and approve of it in others, but I cannot find it. In fact, I turned down the opportunity to become a 4th degree Knight of Columbus because I could not in conscience proceed, knowing that it would involve a higher patriotic commitment.

Still searching. I would not shirk my responsibilities if call by my country, but I would not understand why.

[Teresa Polk]

I don't think Benedict was talking about patriotism, but rather about seeking the kingdom of God, and God's will for holiness, justice and peace to be done on earth as it is in heaven. The Pope wrote about Jesus as bringing the kingdom of God on earth in his book Jesus of Nazareth, which has more to say about that. It is more about seeking to see God's will done in social and political issues than about patriotic support for country.

The pope mentioned that Maximus wrote homilies for wealthy parishioners, and that he wrote about the importance of supporting what the state could do to help the poor, and to provide security and stability, at a time when many in Turin had gone there to flee from barbarian invasions elsewhere in the Roman Empire.

The duty to the state that he would have had in mind was not quite the same as the concept of nationalism that developed in the Middle Ages, or the concept of patriotism as it exists in the present day U.S. However, the duty to support the stability of society, duty to the poor, and duty to seek justice and peace as well as to individual holiness, would have been part of their social and political philosophy that was consistent with Scripture. That could be drawn both from the Old Testament and New Testament concepts of justice (See Malachi 3 and Luke 18:1-8) and from Greek philosophy.

The four cardinal virtues of prudence, temperance, fortitude and justice came from Greek philosophy and was supported by St. Augustine. I'm not sure they were specifically mentioned by Bishop Maximus. The idea of justice as a virtue was later supported by St. Thomas, who drew from St. Augustine and Pope/St. Gregory the Great as well as from the Greek philosophers. The idea that, as Catholics, we should support what the state and society are able to do to promote social stability and to help the poor, exists separate and apart from a patriotic support of a particular country.

[Teresa Polk]

Please excuse the grammatical errors in the previous post. I was in too much of a hurry to post and get back to work.

[Carl Olson]

Good question and good answer. The Catechism states:

"It is the duty of citizens to contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom. The love and service of one's country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity. Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community." (CCC 2239).

There is not, of course, any perfect political society or perfect country. But, paradoxically, we are called as Christians to be perfect as our Father is perfect within a flawed political and national community. And this is accomplished through love—authentic, self-sacrificing love. I think this is one of the essential points of Deus Caritas Est, and is also what Benedict XVI is getting at in the remarks today.

[LJ]

Perhaps patriotism is the wrong word to describe what Gaudium et Spes and the Holy Father are getting at. But he does use the expression "citizens of two cities" and that to me implies more than simply a love of neighbor. Loving my neighbor is a tall enough order and I don't do that as well as I should by any stretch. But that is not where my difficulty arises. When Jesus was asked, "who is my neighbor?", he answered with the parable of the Good Samaritan that we all know so well. But it was precisely his point that loving our neighbor crosses political, social and religious boundaries, because the Samaritan was despised by the Jews of the day on all of those counts.
The word "citizen" carries the implication of civic responsibilities. That requires a certain understanding because there are many levels of civic duty and many levels of involvement. In a democratic country the first duty is to vote. We can be involved in the everyday operation of government from infrastructure to law enforcement to politics. Above and beyond that is military service.
If we are to go beyond voting, what is our motivation? Influence on the culture? That I readily understand, yet, depending upon where you are, you may find that same government shutting you up or forcing you to give tacit or even explicit approval to moral evil in order to maintain your position. Or, to become involved in politics seems to require selling your convictions for votes. It is one long moral compromise in order to be successful. Some forms of evil have become so entrenched that I sincerely doubt that simple influence will suffice to turn it about.

The reason is simple. This has not been imposed upon us. If you look at a military dictatorship for example, you can distinguish between the people and the government and recognize that they have little choice, and when they say they love their country but not the government, you can understand that the country is the people and it makes some sense.
But in our case it is government by the people for the people. So who then can we say is the country? We cannot separate it out and blame someone else for the approval of such barbarities as abortion. The majority have what they want, and the statistics bear that out. If the country is the people, how can someone love the country that allows such things? Or that sanctions in one way or another the general moral degradation that is everyday fare in media?
I can love the individual regardless of that person's moral state, but I cannot love the entity called the "people" as it signifies the country.

We each do what we must, and others are able to find rationale to carry them through. Sometimes it is simply that love of others that Jesus exhorts us to in the second of his two commandments, and the Holy father reminds us of in Deus Caritas Est. If you listen to what many combat heroes say when honored for their valor most, if not all, did not do it for their country. They did it for the guy next to them, or for the squad, or the company, or for their families back home. But it was always for someone real whom they loved.

Perhaps in this area I am a cynic or worse, but I believe that the foundations in Natural Law of the west have long since been eroded away. Can it be rebuilt before it is too late? I don't know. It will take a catalyst, a shock of huge proportions. 9/11 didn't have much long-term effect when some thought it might. I see politics at this point as squabbling over how many of the deck chairs on the Titanic to paint blue and how many red.

[Robin L. in TX]

LJ,

You comments resonate with me, because the strong patriotism of my youth has also been placed in jeopardy by legalized abortion, euthanasia, murder (the court-ordered, forced dehydration and starvation of an innocent handicapped woman was nothing less than murder), thought-policing as to accepting and encouraging the gay and trans-gendered lifestyles, and repression and reinterpretation of marriage and family and moral values.

However, in my meditations I happened upon the thought, that although Jesus experienced sadness in the Garden of Gethsemane, He had still longed earnestly to have the Last Supper with His Apostles. The Last Supper was deeply connected to His Passion and Death as the Eucharist that He instituted WAS His Passion and Death, sacramentally.

So whenever I feel the weight of the world, I try to look at Jesus' body upon a cross, reminding myself that no greater love has a man than to give His life for a friend, and that without the Passion and Death there would have been no possibility of Life after Death. This is when we have to cultivate our thoughts and will and symbolically go, like the early martyrs, to our deaths with the joy of the Lord and songs of praise on our lips as we dive back into the fray, doing what we can to help others, vote for life, and find the best of imperfect politicians to vote for, while always remaining securely in the Sacraments, and praying always.

No matter how sinful we are or our nation is, collectively, the war has been won, and we merely have to persevere in the battles in which we find ourselves. Jesus Christ is Emmanuel, God with Us, and each time we discuss the importance of the sanctity of life, how our public policies are undermining marriage and the family, how life is sacred, we may be the instruments through which the Holy Spirit can bring one more soul to Christ, and that is what the fight is all about.

In Christ's peace and joy amid the darkness that can never overshadow the Light,

Robin L. in TX