This coming November 24, Pope Benedict XVI will be appointing six new members to the Catholic Church’s College of Cardinals. What brought on mass exultation among the Filipino faithful is the inclusion of beloved Manila Archbishop and Primate of the Philippines, Luis Antonio “Chito” Tagle, in the list.
Tagle’s cardinalhood has once again stirred Vatican political analysts to excited discussion of whether he may very well become the next Pope, a Pope representative of a changing Church. Where the secularized world might see the obsolescence of a Church that maintains the infallibility of doctrines 2,000 years old and counting, the Church has never balked from asserting the timeless message of salvation in the age of Instagram.
Key to this assertion is the example of the former Bishop of Imus, whose popularity is a factor of his simplicity. Where he holds a title that inspires eminent treatment, Tagle only inspires love and connection, wearing but a shirt, jeans, and sandals as he chats with workers and stall-watchers in the wet market of Imus.
This humility is further exemplified by his quiet intelligence that has never imposed itself, never been abstruse. Tagle’s mastery of the Church’s doctrine saw him appointed to the International Theological Commission in 1997, directly advising the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, under Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
One would think that such a position responsible for the development of contemporary Catholic theology would elevate a person’s perception of his role in the world, but instead Tagle has been all the more adamant in trying to make such beautiful doctrine more accessible to all, especially the youth.
He is very active in his Facebook and Twitter accounts, and has his own program on Youtube, “The Word Exposed,” consisting of very short clips, explaining key tenets of the Catholic faith with explanations that rarely use the high language of the Curia. He continues to use the easy language that even non-English speakers find comforting to listen to; if not for the message, then for Tagle’s gentle diction.
This combination of influence, simplicity, and doctrinal mastery makes the Asian Archbishop Tagle a favorite among the forecasted successors to the line of Peter, a sign of a changing, more diverse, yet eternal Church. More importantly, Tagle, unlike many of his contemporaries in the CBCP, is not an Uriel with a flaming sword, hurling judgments from the pulpit, condemning enemies of the Church and supporters of certain legislation to the flames of Gehenna, making equations of contraception to corruption.
Tagle is ever smiling, never judging. He is always ready to listen to the arguments of a ‘free-thinking’ world that hates him and his Church, a world that wants ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom,’ a world that fights for the legalization of abortion, the death penalty, and euthanasia. And this is what has earned him his respect: the capacity to listen.
We are blessed to have Tagle as the herald of the Catholic faithful in our country. Not all clergymen have his restraint in expressing their fervor for the Church. The Church’s struggle to ‘reclaim’ its relevance in the 21st century has led some of the world’s most influential bishoprics to take to desperate measures. In Filipino, kapit sa patalim. Makalawang na patalim.
The Church in the Philippines’ current behavior is like that of any institution that is fighting for its life. Where governments are enacting legislation that directly contradicts the Church’s stances, longstanding institutions such as the CBCP are unafraid to brand and smite and serve as the scourge of Christendom.
This is what has made it unpopular in a country whose stereotype for this type of churchman is iconized by a lascivious Franciscan friar, an epitome of hypocrisy that only Rizal could devise, to the point that one of the Church in the Philippines’ staunchest critics impersonated this character, waving a placard during a Mass attended by respectable bishops. The way that the Church reacts to such criticism further aggravates the conflict, lashing out at corrupt times and using draconian labels to fight off enemies.
Such ways do not inspire conversion but rather hate, and suffering. And they fail to note criticisms, which may be taken as a sign of insecurity. It is precisely by this that Tagle has exhorted the Church to be humbler, and not be afraid of admitting its mistakes; again, like John Paul the Great who apologized for the sins of weak, broken clergy in history. The Church is not made holy by its messengers, but by its body.
It is sad that sins are not admitted and that the people are not reconciled with their spiritual directors; this in consideration of the progress of the other voices of the Church in the Philippines, those who seek redress for a people wronged, those like Fausto Tentorio and Wilhelm Geertman who died as martyrs doing God’s work of living, practical apostolate. A confused and hurting world about to hurtle into hell is not told to contemplate the abyss it is about to fall into, but told to hold fast, and look to heaven for salvation.
Tagle advocates precisely this – a quieter, humbler Church. He says that even if the ministers of God’s people might be saying the right things, they will not listen if the manner by which they communicate smacks of a triumphalistic, know-it-all institution. He calls for silence but not retreat; he calls for gentleness but not dispassion.
For this is the Annus Fidei, the Year of Faith – we are called to reconnect with our faith, question it, examine it, and continue to find ways of living the teachings of our embattled mother Church, instead of outright rejecting it without understanding. Credo ut intelligam – I believe in order that I may understand.
What makes it so difficult is the obstinacy of messengers and modes of communication, the Church’s PR crisis. What makes it easier is the fact that leaders like Tagle remain to keep us confident that within the Church remains humility and reason, modernity and message in equilibrium.
