[MUSIC]
Stanford University.
>> [APPLAUSE]
It's a great pleasure to welcome you all
this evening to the 2015 Heyns Lecture,
hosted by the Office for Religious Life.
My name's Jane Shaw, and
I am the Dean for Religious Life.
The Roger W.
Heyns Lecture in Religion and
Society was established in 1994.
Roger Heyns was a Chancellor of
the University of California at Berkeley.
He very sensibly retired to
this area of the Bay Area, and
became a very active member of Memorial
Church from 1977 until his death in 1995.
This lecture is in his honor and we are
particularly delighted that Robert Gregg,
Dean for Religious Life,
Emeritus, my pre-predecessor,
is with us this evening because
it was his energy and committment
that were crucial to the establishment
of this important lecture series.
It's now my great privilege to introduce
this evening's distinguished Heyns
lecturer, Cardinal Reinhard Marx,
the Archbishop of Munich and Freising.
I should say that Cardinal Marx is
the very first Roman Catholic cardinal
to lecture in the Heyns series and
I'm delighted that after 20
years we managed to get a cardinal
to lecture to us and that it is you.
We're really thrilled.
[LAUGH] Cardinal Marx was,
was ordained priest in 1979,
Bishop in 1996, and
appointed a cardinal in 2010.
He has in recent years emerged as one of
the leading figures in the Roman Catholic
church, working closely with
Pope Francis on questions of reform,
particularly reform of the Curia.
When asked in a recent interview to
characterize Pope Francis' approach,
he said, Francis wants us to move.
His frequent use of the word avanti,
get moving, is ample proof of that.
Cardinal Marx currently serves as the head
of the German Bishop's Conference and
as President of the Commission
of the Bishop's Conferences in
the European Union.
He's a member of the Council of Cardinals,
which advises Pope Francis
on church governance.
And just last year was appointed
head of the new Council For
The Economy, designed to oversee
the Vatican's economic management.
Cardinal Marx has a Doctorate
in Theology and writes and
speaks widely about the relevance
of Roman-Catholic social teaching
especially with regard to economic issues.
In 2008 he published
Das Kapital: A Plea For Man.
And he has said that only an economic
system centered on the human person
can really generate societies that are
both prosperous and just in the long run.
In his work as an immensely distinguished
churchman and as a public intellectual,
Cardinal Marx speaks directly to that
concern for the relationship between
religion and society that is at
the heart of this Heyns lecture series.
And so it is most fitting that
this evening he will speak to us
on the contribution of Christian
values to the common good.
Ladies and gentlemen Cardinal Marx.
[APPLAUSE]
>> Thank you.
>> [APPLAUSE]
Thank you for
the invitation to come
to Stanford University.
It's a great honor for me to speak here.
This audience and
to meet other people on the campus
to see what is down here and
what you are, what you are doing.
I apologize, excuse for my poor English,
but I decided to speak freely.
We have a great text.
Perhaps we can publish it afterward,
but I think it's,
it's better to speak freely and
then we can discuss.
We can see what, what are your questions,
and I'm very happy
that I have the opportunity to speak with
you, to hear what are your interests.
I think it's very important
that the church is amongst
the great questions of the society.
And so
this lecture is in the great tradition of
being in relationship, church,
religion, and society.
Perhaps someone is asking how a priest,
a cardinal is
dealing with political questions or
with social ethical questions.
I introduce myself a little bit.
When I was young and, and,
and, and with failure and in,
in Germany I was born in a, in a,
I was born in a family of simple people.
But my father was very
engaged in the syndicates.
So I got not only from the name, Marx.
>> [LAUGH].
>> But, but
also from the discussions with my father,
the a little bit, the left position
of social justice and so on.
The question, how to deal with those,
how to work with those who are poor,
who are not in the great,
in the great society.
And that's that's the reason because
my bishop invited me also to to, to,
to, to, to lead, to direct an institution
of social doctrine of the church,
of formation, for
people formation for young people.
Formation for laypeople but
also for priests to be a little
bit better in the questions of social
ethics and social doctrine of the church.
Because in our tradition in Germany,
it's very important that the,
the church is in the great
questions of social
of social justice precedent, the great
tradition since the nineteenth century,
the social doctrine of the church.
So, that is perhaps
the personal remark and
then I became professor and
then bishop and so on and so on.
And that's the career that follows.
But the, the point from the repart is that
I'm very interested in the question of
social doctrine, social justice,
how modern societies are going together,
how can they function, how can we create
institutions which are protecting
the poor, which are protecting those
who are not participating, and so on.
Second point, we are speaking,
we will speak about the contribution
of Christian values to the common good.
I think, and the actual events
show us the great problem.
It is very important to think
about the future of freedom,
democracy, and the common good.
How to bring these issues together.
I will explain it later.
That is one of the great
problems also in the,
in the actual discussions about terrorism.
We had, we had the discussion with
the students some minutes before.
And, one question was, Cardinal,
is it true that the young,
the younger people are more traditional?
And, that's true.
But, not only traditional,
that is not dangerous.
That's clear, that's not so,
I have no problem with tradition.
But, we have also the tendencies that
the people want to be
clear in their positions,
black and white,
populism is growing in Europe.
And, that is the beginning, perhaps,
of, of populace and of terrorists,
that's clear.
But, the, the atmosphere,
the atmosphere of
reducing the complexity of the world.
To give simple answers, to give black and
white answers is growing.
And, I think that is very dangerous.
And, when we will think about
the future of democracy,
and freedom, and the common good,
that is one of the central discussions
we have to, we have to to organize.
In the motto of your
university is,
in German, [FOREIGN].
From Ulrich Von Hutten, from the 15th, and
from the 16th century in Germany,
freedom, the great vision.
In the 16th century,
with Ulrich Von Hutten,
began also the problem of the freedom.
No, not, not in the 16th century,
since the beginning of the world,
that's since, since the paradise
it's the problem of freedom.
But in the, in the, in the modern times,
there was in, in Europe one great problem,
because the organization of the society
became much more difficult
through the reformation.
The division of the church that was
the great problem of two, three centuries.
How to organize a society with difference,
with difference, different religions.
Impossible.
And, some philosophers say, and
some, some, theologians, they,
they, they can, they remark,
that one processes of the freedom
is the division of the churches.
So the wars after, Ulrich von Hutten and
Luther, the great war of 30 years in,
in, in Germany
was one of the points to create
a society which enables diversity.
For the first step, religious diversity,
but then the other diversities,
that was the follow up,
very, very difficult,
a long processes, until today.
When I was young, we had coherent,
homogenous societies in Germany,
confessional, very clear
in the confessions.
That finished.
Now, not only Christians in the United
States, you have another history, but
also the question how to organize, how to
organize a society which is pluralistic.
And, we want a free society, open society,
which is linked to the common good,
perhaps also with the common
good of the world,
the sustainable vision for
generations, and so on, and so on.
And, to accept free decisions, diversity.
And, how you can accept diversity,
and limit diversity.
Freedom, now the discussion
about the limits of freedom,
is it necessary to limit freedom?
Because otherwise, you will not organize
a society linked with the common good.
So, I think for, also I will speak
about the church, not, not yet
but then, I think for
a modern society, for an open society,
and that is I think our,
our great challenge for a modern society.
Is very important, the culture of freedom.
Culture will say you
have to handle with it.
You cannot only say freedom is there.
Freedom is not there.
Freedom is always the culture.
You need a framework for freedom.
You need limits for freedom.
But, you need especially a culture,
a civilization of freedom.
And that is also one of the points
to really cover, really cover on
the social doctrine of the church.
I was very astonished when I read
the last book of John Paul the second,
several months before his death.
A memory I think English memory and
identity perhaps, memory and
identity, five months before he died.
And they gathered some text
of the past of of the,
of the past ten years
before before he died.
And, there is this very interesting,
interesting phrase,
I was astonished as Professor of
Social Doctrine of the church, that
that he asked himself, what is the red
file of the social doctrine of the church?
And normally, we say, or we said
that is justice, and, and, and, and
solidarity, and subsidiary,
and he said freedom.
Freedom.
But, in the sense, freedom achieves,
or the achievement of freedom,
is the decision for the good,
also for the, for the common good.
Although, the freedom the cultural
freedom, civilization of freedom,
is very, very important also for
the Catholic church.
The word freedom is in, in,
in the Catholic horizon sometimes
you have the impression that,
that they feel it's dangerous.
[LAUGH]
But,
it's the key word of the New Testament,
one of the key words of the New Testament.
It's not dangerous.
It's, it's the sign the, the image of God.
The image of God is not our,
our nose and the, and
the legs, but to be free and responsible.
That is similar,
to be similar to, to, to God.
Good, but to how to, how can we find
the way to guarantee the common good.
So, that not only the private interests,
the many, many,
many, many freedoms and
decisions are there.
That we can also have a common
good in the great tradition or
the great philosopher,
philosophical tradition of of Europe.
That is clear.
That Aristotle, with his word,
the, the whole is more than,
than the parts [INAUDIBLE] and so on.
The great political discussion,
what it is?
But we are only in one lecture,
not in the several lectures.
>> [LAUGH].
>> And, how to guarantee the com,
the common good?
In a pluralistic, and
open society is the key problem,
of the future of the United States,
Europe.
When we think, that this is also a model.
I say it very openly a model for,
for the world.
They can accept it, or
not but I'm very open.
I, I think, that an open society,
which is characterized by freedom,
is much nearer to the gospel,
than a society where everyo,
body is, forced to do something.
That's clear.
So also from the gospel, also from
the social doctrine of the church.
We have to be in a, in a,
in a, in a very intensive way,
together with those who are thinking
about the future of the op,
of the open society,
of the pluralistic society.
But, that is not so easy.
We have several ways to, to solve,
we had several ways to go,
to do it, or to solve this
problem in the philosophical, and
economical tradition of,
of Europe, and, and
then clear, the clear,
also the United States, and the world.
I, I will give only three examples,
three examples,
from the old European point of view,
that's clear.
Oh, the trick of reason, is it right,
the tradition, the, the translation?
The [FOREIGN] freak of reason.
So, the development of the world
is the development of the spirit.
I, very simple now.
And so, the, the,
the development will guide,
from itself, To the good.
And the, the, the,
the development of the spirit is.
Clear, and will guide to,
to the achievement of the spirit.
The second is Kant Clear, the follower.
The in a special sense.
And for him, for Kant, was very difficult
to, to clear, also, this question.
How can we create, in his essay, for the,
for the ada, above the eternal piece?
In, in ninety, 96 and 95, 1795.
Excuse me.
>> [LAUGH].
>> [COUGH] his essay
about the eternal peace,
how to create a peace between the peo,
between the nations?
And, he said, we have to create,
in our modern societies,
modern at the time,
we have to create institutions, we,
which respect see the,
the private interest of everybody.
But make the ins, institutions,
so, tricky that they regarding,
and respecting these personal,
personal, views.
That these personal rules didn't guide to,
to, to,
bring the people, in the opposite,
opposition to another.
[INAUDIBLE] [LAUGH] But
he saw the problem, but how,
how can you, how can you manage this?
He says, that might be possible.
>> [COUGH].
>> That might be possible.
And he, he was underlining,
that it's perhaps possible,
when we have a great, ethics of virtue,
[FOREIGN] that was not natura,
naturally, the fundament.
Christian ethics, for him is most clear,
no other ethics was for
him understandable.
And the third, example to, to,
solve this problem of personal freedom,
personal interests, and
common good, is Adam Smith.
With his, with his,
theory of moral sentiments, and to, and
to, and to create the markets,
to, to say when you are.
When we are going in your own way to,
to, to, to look on your profit,
the market is so tricky, he will change
your own profit, to the profit of all.
[LAUGH] That is true, and not true.
[LAUGH] You know, [LAUGH] for
Adam Smith, for as clear,
his book of, moral sentiments, he,
he thought that there was much
more on the wealth of nations.
So, who, unlike, Kant,
a very strong, ethical,
virtue, [FOREIGN] very,
very strong, to be, to be,
necessary to create, these, things.
These three per, persons,
and we can discuss it, long,
but you see in the modern society there,
they saw, they saw the problem.
They saw how to deal, in a,
in a modern society with freedom.
Not to, not to,
limit the freedom too much.
But to create institutions,
to create, models, so,
that the freedom is not
against each other.
That the freedom is, it's enabling,
establishing, also,
their opportunity for all to,
to, to live in, in, in their way,
to live a, a full life.
And that is, I think, the theory of
the common, of the common good, too.
Perhaps, some phrases only,
the social doctrine of the church,
the social ethics of the church,
has the concept of, the common good.
And, this concept is, underlines a two,
two fold meaning of the common good.
One point in the council,
in the, in the, in the, in,
in the text of the council is very clear.
But the second Vatican council,
very clear,
one point is the instrumental
point of view, of the common good.
So, we can say,
the common good is the framework,
the institution of framework,
which enables,
that everybody,
that every participant can,
can go, or can achieve his fulfillment,
his ideas.
>> [COUGH].
>> And, the other point is more,
the content of the common good.
And t,hat is two fold again.
One are the points,
society is deciding in parliament,
perhaps, What wh, the social state.
The social state is not so, and the other,
and that's much more difficult.
Is the natural law.
Human rights, human dignity.
How to, to bring reason for it?
How to, you cannot, you cannot,
you cannot abolish human rights from,
parliament.
>> [INAUDIBLE].
If the Parliament decides against it the,
the human rights are there.
They are not they are not
the property of a Parliament.
The property of a society.
That is what Benedict the 16th
said in our Parliament when he was
there in 2011 of the great
discussion about natural law.
He said, normally, normally it's
enough when you have the majority.
You can organize a modern society with
the, with the voting of majorities.
That is normally, but
you have some points you cannot decide and
that is a, a great,
great problem till today.
How to define these points which
cannot be decided by the Parliament?
Which are before the Parliament.
Without religious fundament,
you have great problems.
Great problems.
So the common good is not only
a model of the social doctrine of
the church, but the social doctrine of
the church, I think has,
explicated it in a, in a very good way.
So that I think it's very
important that when we create,
when we are in,
favor of modern pluralistic open
society of the common good and
to see this problem is very important,
the church has to underline it,
like the Pope did.
And I think that is one of the,
of, of the main points.
Also to see and that is, that is a step
forward, that the common good now,
the common good instrumental in the,
instrumental accent but
also in the, in the accent of
the content of the common good,
common property,
is now discussed on a global level.
And how to define this?
How to achieve this?
Global level that will be one of the,
perhaps the most important discussion of
the 21st century, if this is possible to
organize, organize a common
good on the global level.
How to do this?
How to create institutions for it?
How to bring through perhaps,
a declaration of human rights for
all pe, for, for, for everybody
it's one of the main questions.
And, oh, I have to look on the time,
but, but the,
the point, what can the church and
the Christian, well, what,
what can the church do, and what,
are the Christian values in all this?
What is the significance of
the Christian values in this world?
I think, the main point is to,
to bring this image of,
of, of, of mankind in, in the discussion.
I say my guideline, my guideline for
the social doctrine of the church and for
the modern societies,
the guideline of responsible freedom.
We have to, to help that people in
a modern society are able to decide and
to live together in responsible freedom.
Not to reduce the complexity
of the world but
to enable the people to be
active with responsible freedom.
That is our, our challenge.
Also as church.
Not as church, and
from the social doctrine of the church,
reduce the complexity.
Perhaps it's necessary sometimes but,
but when you do it in a way so that the,
the the,
the people say, you have not understood
the problem, that's not possible.
And, and that is now I think a danger.
Not in the church only,
but all in the society.
No, we have this great political
discussion to, to make the things
easier and the political di, discu,
of the United States, also in Europe.
The political discussion to, to make the,
the, the things simple,
but that's not the case.
You have to look very good on the,
on the on the, on the truth of the things.
So that is I think,
also a contribution of the, of the church.
Because our, our concept of man,
of mankind is responsible freedom.
And to create institutions.
In Germany, we have a great tradition
of contribution of texts and, and
to, to make to, to, to, to,
to, to, to be in the public,
in our texts that is,
is very important I think, but
I will let it, now I will not
quote all the German texts here.
I will finish with a point which is
perhaps a little bit astonishing for you.
I ask myself, since several years,
is there a special relationship
between Christianity and
the West, and what is it?
I said it's in the beginning,
that is not we, we as, as,
as Europeans or Americans, or whatever.
We might not be proud about us.
That is not the point.
But to look what is, what can,
can we I will say it another way.
Can we understand in Europe our,
our history, our sense of living,
without a Christian faith,
without Christianity?
No, I think no.
And can the Christian, Christianity
understand itself without this
history?There's a, there's not only
the Christian, Christianity, and,
and, and the culture, that's always linked
together, it's always in a dialogue.
And to look what is,
what is their importance,
what is the importance of this,
of this special relationship.
When you, read some books now,
perhaps, in, in the great
history of the west, three tomes, great
tomes from the Henig August Weinkler,
from the German historian,
the History of the West.
And that begins with one phrase,
first Tom.
The beginning,
on the beginning was a faith.
The faith in one God.
And, then it begins the history of,
of Egypt, and so, and so, and so on.
Well, that, that's a long history.
Or when we have other,
other authors like Naya Ferguson,
with the title,
Civilization the West and the Rest.
When we remember
the discussion in the 90s,
Francis Fukayama now again
with Samuel Huntington.
The discussions about
the future of the world, and
looking what is
the contribution of the west.
No, we don't want a renewal of imperialism
that is, we have made a lot of mistakes.
But I think there's
a special challenge for
the western world, for
the west, for the others, too.
Not to force them to do this,
or this, or this,
but to be a contribution for
a better world.
And, so I ask myself, is it now
the time that the Christian faith is.
Has to be more, more active.
Also in the political scene of the west.
And that the west Europe and
the United States are working
closer together to be
part of a development
of the world who gives
all of the poor a chance.
And France's poor,
France is looking, looking on this.
I will give perhaps two two examples for
the challenge of the western world.
When, when we will be open for for
the contribution of the church
of the Christian faith.
But I cannot imagine what,
what is the West without the,
the gospel without the Christian faith?
Only, only economical wealth.
That's all.
Where are the other points?
What have we to give?
So I think it's also for
the identity of the west,
it's very important if the Christian
faith is strong or not.
It's not only aggression of the,
of the Christianity, but
also of the future of of the,
of the whole world, no?
For example, I give two examples.
With the Hoover institute,
we have discussed about economy.
I provoke it a little bit.
We must think beyond the capitalism,
beyond the capitalism.
I think we have to create a model nearer,
I say from Germany is clear,
nearer to the social market economy.
I'm very strong in the position that
capitalism is not market economy,
it's not the same.
But perhaps it's we, we can discuss it is
it's too too late to bring this in detail.
But when we have only only the, the,
the issue of economical dates.
Where we see the common good is also,
only defined in economical numbers,
figures.
That's not, that's not the case,
that's not our vision.
That's not the common good.
That is a pure utilitaristic vision,
and that is not an ethical vision.
So, it's a little bit strong but
to bring one example.
And another, another point is we have now
the danger I think and
the and in the west.
And then in our countries
in industrialized countries
we have we have the great progress
of technology, tech, technology.
And, and, and I think I will I say
it now in a little simple way.
Perhaps too simple, perhaps too simple?
But we have not the vision of
a good life but we say sometimes or
it is said in all societies
the technological imperative.
What technical is possible,
you will do it.
Why not we, the others, so we will do it.
That's, that's we combined with
the economical imperative.
What what makes profit you have to try it.
Do it.
Why not read, the others will do it.
Yeah, combined with
the morality of minus malum.
And then we on the way,
phhht, on the ground.
And I think that is very important that
we in our countries have a special
responsibility to correct this
ideologies also an ideology.
The poor markets we are discussing
with the students, that is,
that is also ideology.
And then we have a special relation,
with special responsibility,
I think in our countries.
And the, the contribution of
the church is to remember to, to, to,
to bring these subjects in our societies.
In our modern societies,
to say yes to our modern societies.
Not to, to, to be a church complaining
all the bad things and, and are,
and not, but to be engaged in the, in the,
in the positive future of our societies.
That is the question of law,
that is the question of climate and
human rights and so on.
At the end now I, I am dreaming
of a real new evangelization.
Not in the sense,
how a student ask this, in another way.
How can we bring the people
back to the church?
How can we fill our churches?
That the question might be,
how can we, with the gospel.
Be an enlightenment.
The gospel is the most
important enlightenment of the,
of the history of mankind.
Not the other philosophers.
The, the gospel.
That's my, my opinion.
And we're and you can,
you can show that sometimes the,
the history of freedom was fight,
they were fighting against the church,
the real, that is clear, but
they were inspired by the Gospel.
You can look on the European history,
very, very often.
And this Gospel is also for
the future, not only for us.
It's not our Gospel.
But perhaps that, that gospel that
to bring in the in the society
to be an enlightenment.
And not to, to think about
the great history of the church.
That's clear I'm traditional, every
cardinal is traditional that's clear.
But sometimes I have the impression.
People in our church they are looking
back and, and, and, and have the have
the impression we had
great times in the past.
But in the future oh, no.
We will have the great future,
we will have the good times in the future.
That might be our vision.
So I, I, I repeat very often the sentence
of Cardinal Lustiger of, of Paris.
He said once the Christianity in
Europe is in, only in the infancy,
in-, infancy, the great future is,
is, is ahead.
It's a little bit strong in France
but there's
>> [LAUGH].
>> But, but for the mentality.
To think, to think the long run,
the long run.
And, and that is very important
not only for the church.
To think this is also
the vision of Francis.
He says the church is not narcissistic,
looking on it, on herself.
What is good for the church.
The church's instrument that
the gospel is, is heard.
That, that the people find the Christ.
That is, that is important.
Also in their in their different lives so
I think it must be a real new
evangelization with dialogue.
The modern society dialogue and
mission is not opposite the duty.
Two things, we need both.
Real dialogue,
understanding of modern world.
And, and, and, and, and
the people in this world and
the mission is has to be to, to, to
give the testimony of the of the gospel.
That is the two things
which are important.
I think that the potentials of
the gospel are far from being used up.
In Europe and also in the United States.
So I think it is not the question for
me, what is the future of the church?
That is in God's hand.
But what can we do to bring the Gospel.
Which is our, the, the great,
the great gift the Lord gave to us.
How can we live it in our, give it in our
modern and very, very open societies?
Thank you.
>> [APPLAUSE]
[APPLAUSE].
>> So, we now have a period of questions.
And the thing simply is to go up to one of
the microphones, and address your question
to Cardinal Marks, and he will answer it,
and engage in a dialogue with you.
So I think we've already got
the first questioner just there.
>> Hello Cardinal Marx.
Welcome to Stanford.
My name is Patrick Sorenza I'm
an undergraduate here.
I'm also a congregant of Memorial Church.
And so
I wanted to ask you a particular question.
I am young and inexperienced but
from what I understand of the world there
are multiple views of
what is the common good.
And sometimes those views clash.
For example NGO's in Africa that promote
contraception as a way of combating
the spread of HIV and AIDS often clash
with Catholic clergy clergy men that's
discourage its use as a way to protect
the sanctity of sexual intercourse.
My question is, do you believe that there
are multiple visions of the common good?
And if so, how should those,
from the west, who promote
Christian values elsewhere account for
friction between these visions?
>> Oh, oh, I can answer.
>> I'm not answering you are.
>> Oh yeah, I can,
I can answer yeah I can answer yes.
I hope I have understood
in a in a good way the,
the problem is I,
I said it the common good is not.
The first the first point
of the common good is to,
to have institutional framework so
that the participants of the community
can achieve their, their goals.
They are free in,
in searching their full life.
In the, in the, in the framework of the,
of the ethical order of the world.
And of the gospel, and
the Christians, that is clear.
That is, that is very important.
So, no,
not the state defines the common good.
The state has to enable the framework,
the institutions.
And the second point of the common
good I said it in the two fold sense.
For example, human rights, human
rights and, and what are human rights?
That's the devil you can develop it
we have sometimes, they exaggerate.
Oh we have a great discussion, Germany
also, about human rights when you're the,
the, the, the, the, the speech about
human rights is sometimes exaggerated.
Every, every,
every week a new human right.
No?
That's also a question.
But and the other points that is in
a democratic society you have to decide
what is what is good.
For example social, social state.
Justice between the generations.
In Europe we have we have
different traditions.
In Sweden the,
the great elaborated social state and
they take more taxes from the people.
In United States we have
not this tradition.
In England is another tradition.
Germany is in the middle, and so on.
That is, that is,
that is a discussion in the countries.
And our problem now is that we have
some problems, like the climate,
we cannot decide these
problems in the national area.
Or the financial crisis.
All the enterprises like Google and
others.
That they are acting over the whole world.
So you have to, to,
to create rules and and institutions.
That is, I have not the solution I
cannot I cannot answer how to make it.
But you, you, you see that step
by step we are creating this.
Then we have failures then
we have crises then we
begin to make other rules
to find other frameworks.
Institutions no?
And that is also the case in
the in the questions there.
Another thing is sometimes they,
they don't see the difference.
They say common good and
they mean they, they see that charity.
That's another thing also that,
that charity is important in a society and
that is clear no?
But the common good is not
identified with charity.
That is a new accent.
>> Thank you.
>> There's one in the balcony?
>> Hello thank you very
much your eminence for
coming here and
I guess it means a lot for you.
I'm over here.
>> Oh yeah.
>> Yes.
It means a lot for you to come over
here and I think it means a lot for
us to be able to invite you here.
So it's both ways.
My question is a little bit about
freedom you mentioned it a bit.
And I was wondering if you could talk
a little bit about what you think
about another aspect of freedom, which
is the, the idea of a national freedom?
You know there's an idea where you can
have multiple nations cooperating,
you know, international
cooperation towards a common good.
And then there's another aspect which you
could say is actually opposite to that or,
or you know, is different from that.
Which is idea of different peoples
operating by themselves and
trying to achieve the common
good as a smaller society.
And you know we see, both of those
movements I can think of Europe you know.
On the one hand only a decade ago we
had this movement towards you know,
a treaty establishing
the European Constitution.
You know,
that would be an international movement.
And on the other hand today you're a,
the last year and this year we have
movements in the United Kingdom and
in Spain where different
communities actually would like to form
even smaller political communities.
So I wonder if you can offer an opinion or
you know,
some thoughts about where
the church can put the, you know,
be most useful towards the common
good in both of those aspects?
>> Yeah, when you see the for
example Spain the church
was sometimes also with
the Basque people no?
And the church in Spain was against it.
[LAUGH] And so,
we are sometimes in the, in the,
in the middle of of the theater, no?
So the church is part of the society, and
I think it's very important,
as the Catholic church, I say, for
us now, that we regain,
or that we, that we think
about our universal challenge,
our universal task.
And that the church is instrument,
like the council said,
therefore the unity between all people,
before of the, of the, of the world,
and between God and the, and, and, and ,h,
and, and, and mankind, the family of man.
That's one part, but in the history,
sometimes the church was part of
nationalist parties of Europe.
I was very shocked when
I read the past letters
of the German and French bishops at the
beginning of the world, first world war.
Terrible, terrible.
You cannot imagine France and,
and, and German not only,
very convinced that it's a just war and
that's God on, on, on their side.
All baptized,
nearly 95% baptized, Catholics or
Protestants convinced that
God is fighting with them.
It's incredible.
I'd, I'd, I'd, I have not the right to,
to criticize 100 years later.
But I, I've, I, I've, I've, sure,
I was shocked to, to read these sentences.
And, and, and so, we have a great history,
also to be, to be with the,
in the positive way, you can say
the church was very close to the people.
[LAUGH] But, you know, that is the,
the positive thing in when you
think Poland, the, the liberation,
the liberation of the from
the Communist from the Communist area,
that was, was, was the church
was very close to the people.
But the danger is that that they
are enclosing, enclosing the,
I think the, the,
the Catholic church must be universal.
And in a world which is now globalizing,
we have perhaps it's the only religion.
Islam is very divided.
They're killing each other now.
Most victims are Muslims, not Christians.
Think of the, of the pupils in Pakistan.
The, oh, that's very, very difficult.
And the Catholic church is
present all over the world, and
you speak with people of all religions.
They know the pope.
So, we have the challenge
to open the people.
The future is not the small.
We, we want to live in the family, and
in our tradition, and that is good.
And the more the, the, the world is
globalizing, the more you will also
have the tendency to be together, to, to
be connected, to have your neighborhood.
That's, that's not not, I think,
that's also the, the challenge of the,
the task of the church,
to help the people to, to come together,
but we will not have cohere,
coherent societies.
We have to enable the people to,
to live with differences,
to live with the others,
to think from the other.
That is, that is the, the point,
the point Jesus made in loving,
loving you neighbor, and, and, and
thinking from, not only as an option
to convert, but to learn to,
to see what is his life, and so on.
I the answer was too long, but
I think that both you, you are right.
You have felt that is the right
position to be present in
the both tendencies,
to help in the globalization, and
to be also with the people in
their daily life together.
>> One from this side now.
>> Thank you.
Good even Cardinal Marks.
Thank you so very much for
your words of inspiration, and wisdom,
and my name is Daniel.
I am a student studying Theology,
attempting to study theology and-.
>> [COUGH].
>> My question is,
if you could please summarize
your understanding of the primary gospel
message to which you were referring.
And then once you have explained that or
shared that,
if you can help paint a vision for how
that message would be potentially applied
in the future toward individuals within or
without the Catholic church that are not
currently recognized, such as transgender
individuals, or others that are currently
not formally considered within the ethical
frameworks that are currently in place.
>> I think the main point in
the gospel is not the ethical point.
It's very clear, and
Benedict said it very often.
Benedict the 16th, and also,
also Francis in Evangeli Gallium.
The charigma, we say in the theology,
the charigma,
the center of the message
is the heaven is open.
Look, the heaven is open.
Your free entrance.
Come.
That is the first summon of Jesus
in Mark in the first chapter, no?
The time is full full fulfilled.
Look.
Convert yourself, and, and be confident
to the gospel, no, to the good news.
That's, and, and from this, from this,
and that's, we are celebrating.
That's the, the, the main topic.
We are celebrating this in eucharist.
We are celebrating this in,
in our, in our gatherings, no?
And the consequences,
that is also ethical points, no?
When do you, when you, but, but
the very special point in the,
in the New Testament is
that Jesus is not saying,
when you are good to God,
God is good to you, no?
But this misunderstanding you
have until today, and then they
are wondering why the, why the, why
the people are no longer coming to church.
No, when they say.
You have to bring,
you have to bring you must be holy, or
life stone, you have to,
to bring what's, yeah,
we have to bring work to the,
they have to, you have, we have- No.
The first message is God
is giving his love to you.
Come.
Let, be embraced by the lord, and
then you will live in another way.
When you accept that, I, and when,
when I celebrate
the confirmations in our diocese.
So, I make very often, the comparison with
the, with the, with the love, you know.
When someone says to his friend,
I love you.
And the, the friend answers,
but I not you.
Nothing, nothing is there.
But when one person says to the other,
I love you, and the other, I, too.
The whole world changed
from this one word.
And when we have imagined once that God
has given us this word, I love you.
And we answer, and I too.
That changes all.
That's the point.
And, and as church we have to,
to help the people to find this meeting.
To come in this meeting.
>> Thank you.
>> Hey,
we're beginning to run out of time, but
let's have two brief questions and
two brief answers.
>> [LAUGH].
>> [LAUGH] Brief question and-.
>> So briefly, impossible.
>> Thank you very much.
Marcello Palazzi, I'm a fellow here.
I'm also founder of a group of companies
called the Benefit Corporation.
We have 1,200 companies in 37 countries.
And Benefit stands for
benefit, what these companies do for,
for, for the common good.
So I have two quick questions.
One is, we welcome someone like you,
who actually,
you have a belief of,
the economy is part of your belief.
For some years, it had not been so
easy to get the Vatican and
the church included in this discussion.
We find it easier to talk about this
with the Buddhists, and the Bahais, and
the Jews.
>> [LAUGH]
>> So I would welcome further connections.
We have about I live in Amsterdam,
we have about 15 countries in
Europe with these companies.
The second question is,
I think that, the world would
like to see the Catholic Church also
involved with other religions-.
>> Yeah.
>> In this discussion about the economy.
>> Yeah.
>> So not just the Catholic Church and
the economy, but the Catholic Church
with the other world religions.
So maybe there's something that
you could take a lead in and organize-
>> Yeah.
>> A discussion, a conversation,
because there are many people in
the business world with values too.
It's not just, you know, the capitalists.
There's also people-
>> Yeah, yeah, yeah.
>> With values.
So how do you connect these two?
>> Yeah.
I agree with the two points.
First I think it's necessary to, to,
to keep in con, to come in contact.
I'm now president of the Council
of the Economy you said.
And we have many experts and for the first
time we have a council in the Vatican,
in the Curia, half cardinals.
Too much, but half.
[LAUGH]
>> [LAUGH]
>> We, step by step we go forward,
you know.
>> [LAUGH]
>> As half cardinals and half lay experts.
And they, they are on the,
on the same level, no?
That was not the case.
But the, the experts were outside, and
then the cardinals
discussed the questions.
This is a terrible.
So, we, [LAUGH] and I said, we were,
for the first meeting I had the,
the places, of the cardinal, lay,
cardinal, lay, cardinal, lay.
And, so not, cardinals, lay persons.
And it's very small things now, but
very important for the Vatican for
the first it's clear and they,
they can make the decisions and so on.
I forgot I have it in the,
in the te, in, in my,
my paper there the dialog with
the other religions is very important.
And I, I feel that Pope Francis
is very open for it and, and he's
he sees that also for these questions of
the common good, common good, universal,
universal common good, the discussion
of the context to the other religions.
Just in, in this situation also with
the Islam is very, very important.
Very important.
And also about the economical theories,
economical questions.
I underlined this.
>> Perfect.
Last quick question.
>> Good evening.
[COUGH] I just have a, a quick question
about something that you just said now
and, and something that Pope Francis
has been speaking of, and
the topic that you spoke of this evening.
In responding to the previous
question you talked about
the church as the possibility of
making this meeting happening.
And Pope Francis has been speaking
about culture of encounter,
of establishing a culture of
encounter within the church.
And I was wondering how
you see that culture
linked to issues of proclaiming
the common good in a pluralistic society.
How do you understand
the relationship between the two?
>> That's not easy.
>> [LAUGH].
>> Yeah, yeah, so [LAUGH]
>> But you're the pope.
>> Yeah, the, the problem also for
the, for the church is to accept that we,
in a pluralistic society, we have laws,
perhaps, which we cannot accept.
And that the public in
a pluralistic society accepts that
the religions have communities,
and they follow or
they, or they underline points
the majority did, don't like.
And that a progressive society
doesn't mean we have no truth.
There is no truth,
there are only meanings.
I think that, that is very important.
So also when we say as church
perhaps I that's a great
discussion about about the priesthood for
women.
No?
Some say that is human rights.
Human, against the human rights and so on.
But we must underline.
Not we cannot discuss with everybody,
all non-Catholics, and
the Parliament will, will say,
you have to do this like in,
in England where the Parliament is
discussing about this question.
It's not, that is, that is not our our,
our, our, our problem.
But that, that the public
also in modern society says,
that is autonomy of the church.
But we must have also points or,
the, the, the church has to follow
in the, in the wider sense, the, the,
the, the, the, the, the human rights, no?
So, that is tension.
For example,
the abortion was a great discussion.
And I think, we have not,
in a religious way, the argument was
not in the religious point, and on,
in the point of natural law, no?
And in the point of natural law,
we said that is not a question only for
Catholics, but
that is the question
which touches all people.
And we have to bring arguments and
we have then in an open society to accept
what the law is, is,
well we can fight, we can fight.
We can, we, we make influence, we can
regain the territory, we can, and so on.
But we accept in the state of law that
there are, the problem is and, and
Pope Benedict was very clear in it,
that in this pluralistic society
the sense of truth is is very difficult.
Because when, when someone says we are we,
we believe in this truth,
it sounds fundamentalistic, no?
Truth is never know, never know, no?
You don't know.
So I think this was what for the future,
also, when we will have Muslims
in our society, and we have Muslims
in our society, or in Germany.
How to accept that we have
religions which, who, which not a,
who not agree with some positions
the law in Germany makes.
And they accept that they are not
fighting against it with violence, but
in the political way, perhaps.
And creating a Muslim Party and,
and so on and so on.
So the modern society is not so easy.
Precarious, sometimes I say it's
a precarious society, democracy.
And it's not sad that the democracy
will have the future for all times.
I hope.
And I, I said that I think it's
also nearer to the gospel.
But it's very, it needs,
needs a lot, a lot of things before.
Formation, acceptance of the other,
of the differences.
I said it, no?
To accept differences without without,
keeping outside the concept of truth.
Very difficult.
I pray that we will have a good future.
And so, the church has to
give a good contribution for
this discussion.
>> [APPLAUSE].
>> Most people in the audience know that
the word cardinal has a very special
meaning at Stanford.
So, we felt you needed a souvenir as a
token of our appreciation for your coming. Which-
>> [LAUGH]
>> Which is,
is a Stanford cardinal hat for
the athletics teams.
>> [LAUGH].
>> Oh, okay.
>> But you can pretend in Germany,
here we go.
>> [APPLAUSE].
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you very much.
>> Thanks.
>> Thank you, thank you.
>> [APPLAUSE].
>> That's, that's very good.
Thank you.
And God bless you.
God bless you.
>> [APPLAUSE].
>> For more,
please visit us at stanford.edu
