January 1980 Print

 

PRESS conferences at the Vatican are, understandably, less than riotous affairs. Aside from the fact that they are generally called to present a solemn document, exhortation or encyclical and are generally offered by sedate prelates well along in years, they tend to demonstrate long-standing ecclesial reticence combined, since Cardinal Villot's decree in 1974, with a stringent rule of secrecy on a wide range of information. A young Associated Press reporter transferred to Rome from Moscow told me that extracting news from the Kremlin is hardly any tougher than extracting it from the Vatican.

The conferences take place in a comfortable 500-seat theater adjacent to the main press working room with the speaker or speakers seated at a table on the stage alongside the director, Fr. Romeo Panciroli., In the days when Professor Alessandrini was in charge a crucifix hung on the wall behind, but no more.

During the five years in which I have been admitted to the press building, the sala stampa, as we call it, I have been free to question a wide variety of speakers from World Council of Churches' Dr. Philip Potter to the Archbishop of Krakow, Karol Wojtyla . . . the latter having read in a near-monotone his lengthy dissertation on "evangelization" as official theologian to the 1974 World Episcopal Synod. It seems incredible now but my impression at the time—and even the question period did nothing to change that impression—was one of a rather cold, impersonal intelligence. I sensed that he was of great importance to the Conciliar Church but If anyone had told me that the Archbishop of Krakow, would some day emerge as one of the most vibrant personalities of our time I would not have believed him.

Nearly as unbelievable was the outcome of a press conference in that hall on October 25. No one could have guessed that it was intimately related with the forceful personality of John Paul II or that the protagonist was his longtime friend and fellow Polish bishop whom he had chosen to clarify a message particularly crucial to the faithful at this time. As far as I can remember Ladislao Cardinal Rubin did not refer to the Pope either during the presentation of Catechesi Tradendae or in the question period that followed. He insisted, correctly so, that apart from the personal address at the end, the 20,000 word document was a formulation requested of Pope Paul by the 200 bishops of the 1977 World Synod—a summing up with papal approval of the conclusions they had already arrived at in collegiate assembly. As it happened the final formulation of Catechesis in Our Time and the signature turned out to be those of Pope John Paul.

But journalists had come to the Rubin press conference with high hopes. They had expected another important Wojtyla story. Not many Europeans among them could know how much a strong pronouncement on teaching could mean to the great silent majority of Catholics who had welcomed the Pope in America. Mostly men in their 30's and 40's with families to feed, they came simply expecting confirmation of the going interpretation of the Pope's many words, namely, that he tended toward conservatism. For either conservative or progressive papers, that was the story editors and public looked for. The confirmation would mean that Pope John Paul would appear in the Leftist papers the next morning as a reactionary and in the others as a saviour in a time of trouble. Unbelievably, not only did Cardinal Rubin not confirm the preconceived story, it seemed to me he hardly knew what the journalists were talking about. If it appears I exaggerate, I give below all the questions and answers translated from Italian, abbreviated somewhat but with the content intact. Usually a major press encounter draws forth two or three dozen lively questions, but the attitude of the Cardinal was contagious. Sensing his strange detachment reporters gave up after a mere seven questions and even at about the fourth some were quietly walking out.

Knowing a little about the colorful background of the speaker—a young prisoner of war in Soviet Russia, escape and joining up with General Anders' resistance forces, then a late vocation and some years in Lebanon and Israel before becoming Auxiliary Bishop of Gniezno—I, for one had expected a vigorous, presentation. Important, too, was the fact that before being raised to the College of Cardinals last May, Archbishop Rubin had held the key post of Secretary of the permanent Vatican-based World Synod of Bishops all during the 1970's.

The questions and answers: Q. Eminence, on page 21 of the document, we read "this right [to catechize] is being violated by many States." What states? A. [after a considerable pause] ... I think we all know that. Q. [Same questioner, insisting] Eastern European states? A. There, too, sometimes. Many places in the world. Q. Section 34 mentions the problem of textbooks in the State schools. It says "Care will then be taken to insure that the presentation is truly objective and free from the distorting influence of ideological and political systems." What does that mean? Who is going to take care? A. I wouldn't know that. It all depends. Each case is different. You can't make any general rule. Q. The document calls some General Catechetical Directory "the point of reference". Is there anything new and stricter in this directory? A. That directory is not new. It was a collection made from inquiries to the Episcopal Conferences. This exhortation is newer; it comes from the 1977 Synod. It is much more up to date. The problems are so different now. Q. Would you say, Eminence, that this document indicates a trend away from just experiencing religion toward memorizing again? A. Well, I wouldn't call it that. Certainly we must not go back. Children used to recite their catechisms without knowing what it meant. But yes, a little memorizing can certainly find its place in the future—memorizing passages from the Bible, for instance, quotations from Scripture. Q. The document says that certain catechetical works bewilder the young by omitting elements essential to the faith; What catechetical works? Dutch Catechism? A. Oh, I wouldn't have any idea what it refers to. Probably the bishops know. Q. On this same theme, what are the essentials which are being omitted? A. I have no idea. As I said, probably the bishops know what these things refer to. For such a question you need an expert.

 

SILENCE. Fr. Panciroli looked out at the dwindling audience. He seemed embarrassed. "Are there any more questions?" No one spoke so he thanked the Cardinal in the name of the press corps and everybody filed out. The veteran correspondent of France Presse who had sat next to me shrugged. Said Federico Mandillo of ANSA: "Here we are with one hour to read 20,000 words, form a valid impression, create and send an article about a document that took two popes and 200 bishops three years to think up!"

Correspondents of the big dailies and agencies are obliged to file immediately. What can they do? From an open telephone booth the Voice of America reporter was dictating,: "Quote—that right is being violated by many States—end quote." He was doing all he could do—picking out the bits and pieces of his born-of-the-Cold-War office was waiting for. Vatican reporters in a hurry have become experts in this kind of operation. Fortunately post-Conciliar documents are obliging. Nearly always a sentence affirming something is followed immediately by a "however," "on the other hand," or "but this must not be taken to mean that." In a flash an experienced writer can extract enough phrases, positive or negative as the case may be, to make his story. So it was in Puebla. As a result all the conservative papers said Pope John Paul had condemned liberation theology and all the progressive papers said he had not condemned it. Later, reflective articles would be written in which the positive statements and the "howevers" appear alongside each other to further confuse the public which has already become thoroughly polarized.

A tip-top press conference on October 25 could have avoided irresponsible polarization in the case of Catechesi Tradendae and clear emphasis on the document's more positive elements would have verified the words that had drawn so much applause in America. As hidden as the ways of the Kremlin, said the AP reporter, the ways of the Vatican.

Opening a letter from California the other day I found, not the usual order for From Rome Urgently but a terse question: "Since you are a follower of Archbishop Lefebvre why does the Vatican allow you to continue on the Vatican Press Corp, (sic)?" Scrawling across the envelope the word "Strojie-ite?" " I filed the missive under "Miscellaneous." But in view of the fact that even Dr. Coomeraswamy, in reviewing my book in For You and for Many delicately hinted at the same question it may be well to explain what Vatican accreditation means. 

Many major entities—the Vatican, the White House, national parliaments and so on, maintain press offices whose facilities are offered to periodicals, radio and television in the person of writers and cameramen who are or are expected to become specialists in the field. The press office serves the journalist and the journalist serves the entity in providing a channel for its news. He does not work for the White House or the Vatican but for his own publication or station.

Accreditation is not based on a reporter's opinions or even on the ideology of the publication but on whether or not the accreditation is requested by a recognized news outlet, be it the Soviet Tass or Religious News Service. Vatican accreditation permits a journalist access to press building outside Vatican City, on Via della Conciliazione, last door on the right as you face St. Peter's. Here he finds a spacious workroom with several dozen telephones, desks, typewriters, and all the Milan and Rome dailies (including the Communist Unita but not the right-wing Il Secolo).

Ostensibly all accredited journalists are on an equal footing but in reality, and quite rightly, there is a small elite—the representatives of major Italian and French dailies and news agencies. These men get personal calls to press conferences and their names go to the top of the list for papal tours and so on. Five or six of this group spend every morning at their own Vatican desks in an otherwise deserted workroom. The place only comes alive during the synods or such events as last year's two funerals, conclaves and "inaugurations." Then some thousand additional correspondents troop in from all over the world. To extend them temporary accreditation a bevy of auxiliary secretaries are called in along with simultaneous translation crews and international telephone operators. At those times the Vatican press building is a remarkably efficient and exciting place. I am grateful, as one of the least noticeable members of the corps, for the services the press office extends me.

---

Now in its second printing Mrs. Martinez's recent book on the crisis in the Church and the traditionalists, From Rome Urgently, is available only from her at Via Sommacampagna 47: Rome (zip 00185), Italy, enclosing cash or a personal check for $5.50 per copy plus $1.50 airmail postage or fifty cents surface mail. Air to Australia is one US dollar higher. Postal money orders and drafts on Italian banks whether in dollars or liras are difficult to negotiate. Cash is easy and arrives quite safely.