• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • HOME
  • ABOUT CHINA
    • NEWS
    • TESTIMONIES
    • OP-EDS
    • FEATURED
    • GLOSSARY
    • CHINA PERSECUTION MAP
  • FROM THE WORLD
    • NEWS GLOBAL
    • TESTIMONIES GLOBAL
    • OP-EDS GLOBAL
    • FEATURED GLOBAL
  • INTERVIEWS
  • DOCUMENTS AND TRANSLATIONS
    • DOCUMENTS
    • THE TAI JI MEN CASE
    • TRANSLATIONS
    • EVENTS
  • ABOUT
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • TOPICS

Bitter Winter

A magazine on religious liberty and human rights

three friends of winter
Home / From the World / Featured Global

Benedict XVI and Religious Liberty. 4. Seeking a Theoretical Foundation for Freedom of Religion

01/10/2023Massimo Introvigne |

The German Pope’s argument for a theological and philosophical foundation of freedom of religion did not persuade everybody, but remains a crucial reference.

by Massimo Introvigne

Article 4 of 4. Read article 1, article 2, and article 3.

Benedict XVI meets with Ravi Gupta, a scholar of Hinduism, and an initiated brahmana priest of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), also known as the Hare Krishna movement, on April 17, 2008, in Washington DC. Courtesy of ISKCON.
Benedict XVI meets with Ravi Gupta, a scholar of Hinduism, and an initiated brahmana priest of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), also known as the Hare Krishna movement, on April 17, 2008, in Washington DC. Courtesy of ISKCON.

It is now time to conclude our analysis of Benedict XVI’s contribution to the Catholic theology of religious liberty. The German Pope has consistently reaffirmed that the Church cannot endorse relativism or the idea that “all religions are equal.” However, he has also clarified what meaning of the sentence “all religions are equal” is incompatible with Catholic theology (and indeed with the theology of most religions).

Religions for Benedict XVI are not “equal” theologically, philosophically, and in their relationship with the truth. To claim that all religions are equally true implies that all religions are also equally false. Each religion has a legitimate right to proclaim its belief that it teaches “the truth” and that its path is superior to others. Indeed, this is what most religions do, although in some countries today this is forbidden as “extremist.”

On the other hand, Benedict XVI also taught that religions are equal in their right to be left alone by the states. They are not philosophically or theologically equal. However, they are legally equal. All his theory of religious liberty is aimed at demonstrating that theological inequality, which allows each religion to argue that it is the only true one, and legal equality, which asks the State to grant freedom to all of them, are not incompatible.

Benedict XVI reminded those arguing, to hail or deprecate it, that Vatican II had embraced post-Enlightenment relativism, that “Dignitatis Humanae” also reaffirmed, in its own words, “the traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men [sic] and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ.”

During both his twenty-four years of service at the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith and his pontificate, Benedict XVI has been acutely aware of the controversies about the alleged contradiction between “Dignitatis Humanae” and the teachings on religious liberty by Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius XII. As we have seen in this series, he acknowledged that there was “some” discontinuity but denied there was a radical “rupture” between the old and the new teachings, not only because accepting the rupture would create difficult ecclesiological problems but also because, as evidenced by all his writings, he sincerely believed that such rupture did not exist.

Pope Pius IX, photographed by Adolphe Braun (1812–1877). Credits.
Pope Pius IX, photographed by Adolphe Braun (1812–1877). Credits.

However, depicting Benedict XVI as a naïve “continuist” (or perhaps one in bad faith) who ignored the deep changes in the Catholic Church’s approach to religious liberty between the 19th and the 20th century is a mere caricature. Benedict never claimed that a mere continuity existed between encyclicals such as Pius IX’s “Quanta cura” and Vatican II’s declaration “Dignitatis Humanae.” If this was his position, a cynical observer from outside might easily object that this was a simple case of sanitizing a contradiction through word games. But Benedict did acknowledge that there was “discontinuity.” What he claimed was something different: that there was “a combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels,” which needed a serious hermeneutical effort to be understood. Once this effort had been performed, the “hermeneutic of the reform in the continuity” of “Dignitatis Humanae” allowed Benedict to identify both the continuity—in the core theological principles—and the discontinuity, in their translation into legal applications.

In the end, Benedict was persuaded that in the Catholic position on religious liberty continuity was more crucial than discontinuity, and there was no rupture. Against both “anti-Council [Vatican II] sentiment and erroneous progressivism”—as he said in the mountain resort town of Auronzo di Cadore, Italy, where he liked to spend his holidays, on July 24, 2007, answering questions in a dialogue with the local clergy—Benedict insisted that in the crucial matter of religious liberty some discontinuity in the applications is in order, and indeed confirms that the Church is capable of discerning developments and differences in historical situations. But he also maintained that a fundamental continuity in the principles is both consistently present in the Church and more important than the elements of discontinuity. “Clarity, he said, is not served by certain abstract subdivisions of the Church’s social doctrine, which apply categories to Papal social teaching that are extraneous to it. It is not a case of two typologies of social doctrine, one pre-conciliar and one post-conciliar, differing from one another: on the contrary, there is a single teaching, consistent and at the same time ever new.”

Clearly, Benedict’s reconstruction of the history of the Catholic approach to religious liberty did not appear persuasive to all. The “traditionalist” heirs of Archbishop Lefebvre and other arch-conservatives continue to maintain that Vatican II simply embraced relativism and abandoned the traditional Catholic teachings that “false” religions can be granted tolerance but not full-fledged freedom. Arch-liberals used the same argument, only reversing the judgement, and arguing that abandoning the traditional teachings was a positive development rather than the catastrophe denounced by the traditionalists.

Pope Francis and Benedict XVI. From Twitter.
Pope Francis and Benedict XVI. From Twitter.

Presumably, the debate will have no end, although Benedict XVI was succeeded by Pope Francis, whose background and approach are largely different. Francis has reaffirmed the importance of religious liberty as taught by Vatican II and by Benedict XVI, but seems less interested in identifying the theological and philosophical foundation of a principle of freedom of religion he takes for granted.

On the other hand, both relativism—which sometimes slanders as “extremist” any religion that claims its teachings are uniquely “true” —and forms of fundamentalism that ask the States to deny religious freedom to the competitors of the local majority religion have not disappeared in the third decade of the 21st century. Benedict XVI’s thought on religious liberty remains, thus, an important reference, one even those who disagree with him can fruitfully engage with.

Tagged With: Catholic Church, Religious Liberty

Massimo Introvigne
Massimo Introvigne

Massimo Introvigne (born June 14, 1955 in Rome) is an Italian sociologist of religions. He is the founder and managing director of the Center for Studies on New Religions (CESNUR), an international network of scholars who study new religious movements. Introvigne is the author of some 70 books and more than 100 articles in the field of sociology of religion. He was the main author of the Enciclopedia delle religioni in Italia (Encyclopedia of Religions in Italy). He is a member of the editorial board for the Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion and of the executive board of University of California Press’ Nova Religio.  From January 5 to December 31, 2011, he has served as the “Representative on combating racism, xenophobia and discrimination, with a special focus on discrimination against Christians and members of other religions” of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). From 2012 to 2015 he served as chairperson of the Observatory of Religious Liberty, instituted by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to monitor problems of religious liberty on a worldwide scale.

www.cesnur.org/

Related articles

  • 「宗教に関係する児童虐待」: 日本における信教の自由に対する新たな攻撃 2.“心理的虐待”

    「宗教に関係する児童虐待」: 日本における信教の自由に対する新たな攻撃 2.“心理的虐待”

  • After the China Fiasco: Macron’s Strange Relationship with Human Rights and Religious Liberty

    After the China Fiasco: Macron’s Strange Relationship with Human Rights and Religious Liberty

  • Religious Liberty in the World in 2023: Worse Than Ever

    Religious Liberty in the World in 2023: Worse Than Ever

  • Pakistan: Bishops’ Patience Exhausted After Killings at Catholic School

    Pakistan: Bishops’ Patience Exhausted After Killings at Catholic School

Keep Reading

  • Is Netflix a Threat to Religious Liberty?
    Is Netflix a Threat to Religious Liberty?

    Sensational TV series about religious leaders sentenced for sexual abuse are broadcast without considering that they wreak havoc in the lives of their innocent followers.

  • A Shanghaied Holy See: What Is Left of the Vatican-China Deal?
    A Shanghaied Holy See: What Is Left of the Vatican-China Deal?

    Rome acknowledges that the new bishop of Shanghai has been appointed by the CCP without its approval. Why did Beijing spectacularly violate the 2018 agreement?

  • Freedom of the Press and Religious Liberty: Two Sides of The Same Coin
    Freedom of the Press and Religious Liberty: Two Sides of The Same Coin

    How Article 19 and Article 18 (UDHR) are connected, and why journalists and faith communities need each other

  • Bitter Winter Goes to Taiwan: Witnessing for Freedom of Religion or Belief
    Bitter Winter Goes to Taiwan: Witnessing for Freedom of Religion or Belief

    A week of initiatives allowed human rights scholars from different countries and continents to discuss religious liberty throughout the world and in Taiwan.

Primary Sidebar

Support Bitter Winter

Learn More

Follow us

Newsletter

Most Read

  • There Are Christian Uyghurs, Too: New Organization Launched in London by Ruth Ingram
  • Hui Muslims Clash with Police Over Mosque’s “Sinicization” by Ma Guangyao
  • Xi Jinping: Beijing’ National Art Museum Is Not Socialist Enough by Hu Zimo
  • Russia: Lunatic Theory that Yellowstone Volcano Caused the War in Ukraine Gains Momentum by Massimo Introvigne
  • Occupied Ukraine: Anti-Cult “Experts” Target Moscow Patriarchate Dissident Priest by Massimo Introvigne
  • Chinese Agents Tried to Bribe U.S. Tax Officer in Anti-Falun-Gong Plot by Massimo Introvigne
  • Vandalism Against Catholic Churches on the Rise in Bavaria by PierLuigi Zoccatelli

CHINA PERSECUTION MAP -SEARCH NEWS BY REGION

clickable geographical map of china, with regions

Footer

EDITORIAL BOARD

Editor-in-Chief

MASSIMO INTROVIGNE

Director-in-Charge

MARCO RESPINTI

ADDRESS

CESNUR

Via Confienza 19,

10121 Turin, Italy,

Phone: 39-011-541950

E-MAIL

We welcome submission of unpublished contributions, news, and photographs. Each submission implies the authorization for us to edit and publish texts and photographs. We reserve the right to decide which submissions are suitable for publication. Please, write to INFO@BITTERWINTER.ORG Thank you.

Newsletter

LINKS

orlir-logo hrwf-logo cesnur-logo

Copyright © 2023 · Bitter Winter · PRIVACY POLICY· COOKIE POLICY