• 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
    • OP-EDS
    • FEATURED
    • TESTIMONIES
  • 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 / International / 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

  • Innocents Abroad: The World Muslim Communities Council Hails Xinjiang as a Religious Liberty Paradise

    Innocents Abroad: The World Muslim Communities Council Hails Xinjiang as a Religious Liberty Paradise

  • Japan’s Religious Donations Law. 3. An American Precedent

    Japan’s Religious Donations Law. 3. An American Precedent

  • Japans Religionsspenden-Gesetz. 1. Ein mehrdeutiger Text

    Japans Religionsspenden-Gesetz. 1. Ein mehrdeutiger Text

  • USCIRF Charges China’s Authorized Religious Bodies as Communist Party Accomplices

    USCIRF Charges China’s Authorized Religious Bodies as Communist Party Accomplices

Keep Reading

  • Japans Religionsspenden-Gesetz. 3. Ein amerikanischer Präzedenzfall
    Japans Religionsspenden-Gesetz. 3. Ein amerikanischer Präzedenzfall

    Im Jahr 1931 stellte der Oberste Gerichtshof von Kalifornien in dem bahnbrechenden Fall „People vs. Blackburn“ fest, dass die Behauptung eines inspirierten religiösen Wissens und das Sammeln von Spenden selbst für eine marginale religiöse Bewegung Teil der Religionsfreiheit ist.

  • Benedict XVI’s “Non-Negotiable Principles” for a Dialogue with China
    Benedict XVI’s “Non-Negotiable Principles” for a Dialogue with China

    Did Pope Francis radically change his predecessor’s position on how to deal with the Chinese Communist Party?

  • Spanish Supreme Court: Political Parties Cannot Exclude “Cult” Devotees as Candidates
    Spanish Supreme Court: Political Parties Cannot Exclude “Cult” Devotees as Candidates

    The judges sanctioned the Podemos party for its discrimination of members based on the sole reason that they belonged to the Prometheus Initiatory School.

  • La loi japonaise sur les dons religieux. 1. Un texte ambigu
    La loi japonaise sur les dons religieux. 1. Un texte ambigu

    Le Parlement japonais a adopté des lois considérant comme frauduleuses les donations motivées par la « peur » et pour lesquelles le « libre arbitre » des donateurs aurait été inhibé.

Primary Sidebar

Support Bitter Winter

Learn More

Follow us

Newsletter

Most Read

  • Pro-Chinese Propaganda by The World Muslim Communities Council: Uyghurs Strike Back by Gulfiye Y
  • Zhanargul Zhumatai: “Help Me, I Just Want to Leave China” by Ruth Ingram
  • L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, and the Visual Arts. 1. The Aesthetic Mind by Massimo Introvigne
  • Stricter Rules on Private Tutoring Protect Ideology Rather than Parents by Wang Zhipeng
  • Japan Religious Donations Law. 4. The Return of Brainwashing by Massimo Introvigne
  • Hong Kong: Christian Scholar Peng Manyuan Released but Not Rehabilitated by Gladys Kwok
  • The Weaponization of the CCP’s “Zero COVID” Against Tibet by Marco Respinti
  • L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, and the Visual Arts. 3. Art as Communication by Massimo Introvigne
  • L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, and the Visual Arts. 4. Art and Illustration by Massimo Introvigne
  • L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology, and the Visual Arts. 5. Professionals vs. Amateurs by Massimo Introvigne

CHINA PERSECUTION MAP -SEARCH NEWS BY REGION

clickable geographical map of china, with regions

Footer

Instant Exclusive News
Instant Exclusive News

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

Follow us

LINKS

orlir-logo hrwf-logo cesnur-logo

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