Of the 155 cardinals at the secret sessions, several called for reform of the Roman Curia, the Vatican bureaucracy, including two members of the Curia itself. For at least six years, John Paul has left the daily business of running the Holy See to Curia officials, who often ignore the bishops around the world. For example, the Vatican official in charge of overseeing the translation of liturgical texts has refused for two years to meet with a committee of English-speaking bishops. At a coffee break cardinals cornered him and demanded a date to air their differences.
Petty skirmishes such as this led at least eight important cardinals to call for mild “collegial” reforms in the way the church is governed. Under John Paul II, decision making has been centralized in Rome. But German Cardinal Walter Kasper, seconded by Cardinal Carlo Martini of Milan, urged the pope to grant more freedom and responsibility to local bishops and their national and regional conferences. Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Brussels suggested that the international synod of bishops, which meets every three years, become a “truly democratic process” rather than the timid advisory council it is today. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor of England went even further: he proposed that a representative of the world’s bishops be given a permanent position, second only to the Vatican’s secretary of State, to ensure that voices of the local churches and their leaders be heard and respected in Rome.
All this talk of reform was not for internal consumption alone. Cardinal Kasper, the Vatican’s new official in charge of promoting Christian unity, argued that “the only way we can make ecumenical progress” is by bringing a greater measure of democracy to the whole church. Indeed, in what may have been the most dramatic gesture at the consistory, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor called on the pope to summon a council of all the Christian traditions, and to preside “in love and not supremacy” over an agenda to be set by representatives of each.
In his homily ending the consistory, the pope said he hoped the synod of bishops this October would deal with some of these “precious contributions.” Whether it will remains to be seen. Past synods have been micromanaged by the Curia. Indeed last week the Curia muzzled the Vatican press office, allowing no mention of the cardinals’ call for reform. Nor were any of the cardinals’ speeches released to the 200 reporters trying to cover the meeting, the first the pope has held since 1994. Even so, the exchange gave the cardinals a welcome opportunity to size up each other. Those who spoke most candidly tended to be new to the College of Cardinals–and, therefore, to the papal court system. Everyone present was aware that one among them would someday be elected pope. Those who spoke well enhanced their chances and–if courage proves contagious–the possibility that a more visionary cardinal would prevail.
By that standard, Cardinal Danneels stood out with his moving appeal for greater evangelical emphasis on the beauty in Christian tradition, and less on truth and goodness. “Many of our contemporaries,” the cardinal said, “find the beautiful irresistible. Hung up on questions of dogma or morals, they fall silent on their knees when confronted, for example, by the ‘Passion According to Saint Matthew’ by Johann Sebastian Bach.” It was a reminder that faith is most persuasive when it breaks like fire from the heart.
