Nash Reicks

Fr. Douglas Wathier

Cluster
9 December 2019
Benedict XVI

From his time as a cardinal to being elected pope, Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger)

was a strong, Catholic, authentic man. Through his encyclical and homilies, we are able to see

his faith and how critical faith, hope, and love are. These ideas relate directly to James Keenan’s

Moral Wisdom, Jean-Paul Sartre’s No Exit, Albert Camus’s The Plague, and Samuel Beckett’s

Waiting for Godot. Benedict responds to some famous theorists such as Karl Marx and Friedrich

Nietzsche. Pope Benedict XVI calls us to faith, hope, and love to decide what is right and wrong,

to help us live authentic lives and work towards the good life.

Joseph Ratzinger was born on April 16, 1927, which happened to be Holy Saturday that

year. He is the youngest of three children. If being born on Holy Saturday wasn’t enough of a

sign that he should be a priest, his parents’ names are Mary and Joseph. Ratzinger wanted to be a

priest from the time he was a teenager, and was ordained to the priesthood on June 29, 1951. He

was invited to serve at the Second Vatican Council, and worked to uphold church teachings

throughout the council. He was made cardinal by Pope Paul VI in 1977 and was appointed Head

of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1981. Ratzinger was elected pope on April

24, 2005 on the fourth ballot after the death of JPII.

Throughout his time as cardinal and pope, Benedict XVI reaffirmed traditional church

teachings on hot button topics such as birth control, homosexuality, divorce, and priestly

celibacy. (Encyclopedia of World Biography). Benedict XVI wrote three encyclicals during his
time as pope, Deus Caritas Est (God is Love, 2006), Spe Salvi (In Hope We Are Saved, 2007),

and Caritas in Veritate (Charity in Truth, 2009).

When thinking about Benedict XVI’s community and identity, he was strongly rooted in

the Catholic faith. This may be somewhat of a given since he was clearly pope, but even

compared to other popes, Benedict XVI was known for being rooted in the ancient church

teachings more than a majority of the other popes. It is because of this that he earned nicknames

such as “The Enforcer” and “God’s Rottweiler” (due to his German heritage).

In a book titled Ratzinger’s Faith, a book about the theology of Joseph Ratzinger by

Tracey Rowland, a professor at the University of Notre Dame (Australia), there is a quote

explaining Benedict XVI’s thoughts on becoming a Christian. The books states, “Deus Caritas

Est, the first paragraph of which announces that being a Christian is not the result of an ethical

choice of a lofty idea but the encounter with an event, a person, who gives life a new horizon and

a decisive direction.” (Ratzinger’s Faith, 69). For Benedict, being a Christian is not the result of

an ethical choice, but a divine encounter with Christ. Christ, an event, Christ the person who

gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction. We cannot be truly authentic Christians without

having an experience, and once we do it is an incredible thing.

Benedict’s ideas on faith are outline in both Ratzinger’s Faith, as well as The Essential

Pope Benedict XVI: His Central Writing & Speeches. This book is a compilation of Benedict’s

encyclicals, homilies, famous speeches, and more. The book is edited by John F. Thornton and

Susan B. Varenne. One of the quotes found in this book states:

“Faith is an orientation of our existence as a whole. It is a fundamental option that affects every
domain of our existence. Nor can it be realized unless all the energies of our existence go into
maintaining it. Faith is not merely intellectual, or merely volitional, or merely emotional activity—
it is all of these things together. It is an act of the whole self, of the whole person in his
concentrated unity.” (Essential Writings, 212).
We learned about many different, yet well thought out and put-together arguments from famous

theorists on why we should not believe in Fr. Wathier’s section of the cluster. For Benedict,

regardless of what we believe in, we must have the powerful presence of faith. It affects every

domain of our existence, and takes our full dedication and energy in order to maintain it. It is not

solely emotional, volitional, nor intellectual—it requires a combination of all of these. It is an act

of our whole selves, and our entire selves. Faith is extremely powerful, and we must use it when

deciding what we believe in and what we do not believe in.

When thinking about possible connections between Benedict and James Keenan’s, Moral

Wisdom, I came up with two major ones. There is a quote from Ratzinger’s Faith that states,

“Ratzinger proposed that the antidote to moralism is the theology of the First Letter of St. John:

God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God and God abides in him. A theology focused

on divine love was his solution.” (Ratzinger’s Faith, 66). This directly makes me think of James

Keenan’s definition of sin being “the failure to bother to love.” For Keenan knew that we as

humans so often focus on sinning out of weakness instead of sinning out of strength. We all have

the capability and potential to love others, but how often do we fail to love others as much as

they deserve to be loved, how much we all called to love them, and/or how often we choose to

not love one another. How convenient that Ratzinger’s solution to deciding what’s right and

wrong to us is focused on divine love. Since God is love, if we abide in him, he will abide in us.

By abiding in God, failing to bother to love will become less of an issue.

Another key idea from the cluster as a whole that came from Keenan is the idea of being

able to use “I” and “we” interchangeably. Benedict once said, “We find in the creeds two

formulas: ‘I believe’ and ‘we believe.’ We speak of the faith of the church, of the personal

character of faith, and finally of faith as a gift of God—as a ‘theological act,’ as contemporary
theology likes to put it.” (Essential Writings, 212) This directly relates to what Keenan was

calling us towards. As individuals, we are no longer responsible for only ourselves. This is

critical when dealing with moral agency.

One of my biggest takeaways from the cluster as whole is the idea of the human

condition and the interdependency that comes along with that. A quote from Ratzinger’s that

strongly correlates with this idea states, “…‘becoming a Christian is not taking out an insurance

policy, it is not the private booking of an entry ticket to heaven’. Rather, ‘in its simplest and

innermost form, faith is nothing but reaching that point in love at which we recognize that we,

too, need to be given something’.” (Ratzinger’s Faith, 69). We are not to sit around with our

arms out and wait for others to hand things to us. We as humans need to be given something, but

at the same time we are called to give as well. It is interesting when Benedict states that

becoming a Christian is not taking out an insurance policy nor the private booking of an entry

ticket to heaven. This makes me think of Marx’s idea of religion being a comfort blanket. The

argument can be made that some Christians use religion as a comfort blanket, and some honestly

do. It is important to note that simply becoming a Christian is not a guaranteed route to heaven.

We must work towards salvation, and an incredibly important point in the journey is recognizing

that we must be given something.

One of the main theorists from the cluster that Benedict wrote a response to is Friedrich

Nietzsche. Friedrich Nietzsche once claimed that Christianity killed eros and agape. Ratzinger’s

Faith, states in response to Nietzsche’s claim, “It is to this charge that Benedict XVI addresses

himself in the first part of Deus Caritas Est. Against Friedrich Nietzsche’s claim that Christianity

killed eros and agape are not two distinct realities: there is a symbiotic relationship between the
two; one cannot function properly separated from the other.” (Ratzinger’s Faith, 71).

Furthermore, Benedict states,

Unless agape fructifies eros it simply dies. Experiments with eros which deprive the person of his
or her dignity, which commodify of otherwise dehumanize the person, which treat a person as a
mere means to the achievement of some desire of another without any reciprocal self-giving, or
which denigrate the body to the status of a mechanical object, cut short the ascent to the divine
which is the work of agape. In these situations, eros ultimately becomes sterile and boring.
(Ratzinger’s Faith, 71).

Eros is that love that drives our physical desire. It can be thought of as animalistic and same may

come to believe that eros is what leads us into sin. It is the physical desire that takes over our

thoughts and controls our actions. Agape on the other hand, is the highest form of love, the love

of everything completely and entirely. The love of nature, the love of others, and hopefully in

return to love from others. Agape is known as self-gift, or the unconditional love that we would

give ourselves. To combat Nietzsche’s claim, Benedict said that eros and agape are not two

distinct realities. Instead, there is a symbiotic relationship that is developed between these two

types of love. This calls for balance. If there is no balance, one cannot function properly without

the other one and this is when we are likely to sin.

As somewhat foreshadowed earlier, Benedict XVI also had a lot to say about Karl Marx’s

theories. Labor was everything for Marx. He once stated that, “Christianity had a millennium and

a half to demonstrate its capacity to deal with poverty, inequality, and injustice, and had only

succeeded in proving its incapacity to do so.” (Essential Writings, 78). Since Christianity tried

and tried again to combat poverty, inequality, and injustice, but had not entirely succeeded, Marx

thought he had a better idea. Since work was everything for Marx, he believed that everyone

should submit to communism and the socialist system. This was, for Marx, the only way that

these issues could be taken care of and the only way that we could truly stand in solidarity. God
also become superfluous as a result of communism. If God can’t solve the problems that labor

can, then there certainly isn’t a need for God.

Benedict’s response to Marx’s claim was not that he was entirely wrong, minus the idea

of not needing a God. Benedict saw some potential and some truth play out from Marx’s

solution. Benedict simply wanted to add his Catholic to the issue in order for it to work. He

believed it would work in some places under the influence or Christian social ideas, but fail in

others. For example, the clashing power blocs and economic interests that had been at work

would not have resolved any of the issues. In additional response, Benedict said, “No, without

God things cannot go well. Because only in Christ has God shown us his face, spoken his name,

entered into communion with us; without Christ there is no ultimate hope.” (Essential Writings,

78). Once again we are able to see Benedict’s strong belief in God. Yes, Marx may have been on

to a possible solution, but it is only in Christ that God has shown us his face, spoken his name,

and entered into true and authentic communion with us. For if there is no Christ, there is no

hope. This need for hope completes a perfect triangle of the three theological virtues. Faith and

love (as mentioned earlier), along with hope are all critical for the good life for Benedict.

Turning to some connections from some of the literary works we read in the other section

of the cluster, I was able to come up with connections to three different literary works. First of

all, in Albert Camus’s The Plague, the citizens of Oran all need to be given something while the

plague is in full outbreak. This is part of the human condition, and if anything can prove the

necessity of interdependency, the plague definitely can. Benedict XVI would appreciate the

community and the charity that Rieux and Tarrou provide for the citizens of Oran. These two

men are a couple of the very few people who took on the plague as one of their own personal

problems. While it affected everyone in the city in some way, shape, or form, many people did
not actively work to combat it and instead stood by and watch the plague take control of their

own lives as well as the others surrounding them. We know that Rieux does not believe in God

and says that if God were here, he would cure all these people. Rieux instead believes in

humanity. While I believe that Benedict would applaud Rieux for his determination to help those

in need, I feel that he would disagree with the statement about God curing everyone.

Additionally, Benedict would add a Catholic influence to the situation if at all possible.

Along with the sense of interdependency, we were able to experience interdependency in

a negative light in No Exit, by John-Paul Sartre. The main characters Garcin, Estelle, and Inez

are all heavily reliant on each other, but in arguably the worst way possible, torture. They

sabotage each other throughout the entire play, and when given the chance to leave, none of them

do. They may be so incredibly miserable at times while being forced to be in the same room as

each other, but the uncertainty of what lies on the other side of the door is enough for all three of

them to remain content in their current situation. Benedict would want us to recognize the

necessity of interdependence, but to use that recognition to work for love instead of torture. As

he stated in the quote listed above, and one of the main messages from his first encyclical, God is

love and divine love is the solution to all situations.

Additionally, Waiting for Godot, by Samuel Beckett screams the opposite of Benedict

XVI. Some may interpret the play to be a promoter of nihilism, or the rejection of all religious

and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless. Vladimir and Estragon have moments

where they believe that life is no longer meaningful and they contemplate hanging themselves.

They do not act on these thoughts, but that does not take away from the fact that the two men

still have the conscious thoughts at times. As the reader, we do not know the entire reasoning as

to why these men are waiting for Godot. As the play goes on, a boy shows up as a messenger for
Godot and says he will not be coming, but that he will surely come tomorrow. After hearing this

news, Vladimir and Estragon decide to leave, but do not move while the curtain falls on Act I.

Imagining Benedict XVI in the situation that Vladimir and Estragon are in, I feel like he

would have an entirely different outlook on waiting for Godot in the first place as well as a

different reaction to the boy coming. Benedict told us that faith is an orientation of our existence

as a whole and a fundamental option that affects every domain of our existence. It is an act of the

whole self and by no means should it be considered easy. Faith takes a lot, but we are to have

faith. Benedict was such a faithful, Catholic man that I imagine him happily waiting for Godot

day after day. He is human, nonetheless, so some days would obviously be more enjoyable than

others and frustration may slowly wear on his mind and his heart. When this possible difficulty

or any other face Benedict, I see him using his faith, hope, and desire to love to persevere

through any hard ship and reap the benefits having waited so long.

What a relief it must be to have a sign that waiting for so long will not be for no good

use. Anyone who is waiting for something or someone is likely to be given a rejuvenated sense

of hope after hearing good news from a messenger. We don’t know how long Vladimir and

Estragon have been waiting for Godot, but context tells us that is has been quite some time. After

the boy tells the men that Godot will come tomorrow, they still decide to leave. That decision, of

course, is not met with actually leaving. Once again imagining Benedict in the situation, I

imagine a rejuvenated sense of hope after hearing this message, a prayer of thanksgiving offered

up to God, and a desire to remain in the same spot until tomorrow. While Benedict may have

been a faithful servant during his time as cardinal and pope, I believe that he would want all of us

to stand true in faith, hope, and love if we were to find ourselves in any situation similar to

Vladimir and Estragon’s.

 In conclusion, the good life for Benedict XVI is a Catholic-based, authentic life. From the

moment we recognize that interdependence is a necessity, we must use faith, hope, and love to

fully love one another. By doing this, we will no longer fail to bother to love, instead we will

bother to love each any every individual that we come into contact with. For that is what

Benedict XVI and Christ himself would want us to do. To love one another, serve one another,

and ultimately work towards the good life.

 Works Cited:

Benedict XVI. Encyclopedia of World Biography¸vol. 26, Gale, 2006. Biography In Context,
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/K1631008758/BIC?u=lorascoll&sid=BIC&xid=46d0a203.
Accessed 26 Nov. 2019.

Benedict XVI, et al. The Essential Pope Benedict XVI: His Central Writings and Speeches.
HarperOne, 2009.

Rowland, Tracey. Ratzinger's Faith: The Theology of Pope Benedict XVI. Oxford U.P., 2009.