Within the ranks of the Church leadership, Robert Cardinal Sarah stands out as a rare example of outspoken zeal for the faith accompanying his conspicuous love of God. Born and raised in Guinea, he first became a priest and then archbishop of Conakry (covering all of Guinea). He was made Cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010, then Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship by Pope Francis in 2014.
Sub-Saharan Africa has been largely untouched by moral aberrations stemming from the abundant peace, prosperity, and freedom of thought of Europe and America. In many ways it shares the experience of the fledgling Church of the Fathers in a hostile world. Cardinal Sarah’s background and worldview brings a contrary but insightful perspective on the effects of the globalist effort on African development.
Cardinal Sarah has been strongly critical of the policies of Western nations to render aid to poor African nations contingent on their adherence to modern distortions of “human rights”. Referring to the promotion of evil in the name of good, he states:
The result is hostility to Christians, and, increasingly, religious persecution. Nowhere is this clearer than in the threat that societies are visiting on the family through a demonic “gender ideology,” a deadly impulse that is being experienced in a world increasingly cut off from God through ideological colonialism.
Address to the 2016 National Catholic Prayer Breakfast
This notion of “ideological colonialism” as an application of globalism is significant. He regards the intervention of the United States in the affairs of the Middle East as the primary cause of the diminution of Christianity in these areas. He differentiates between the “peaceful Islam” that pervades the majority of the population in West Africa and what he sees as “Islamic radicalism” enabled by the military actions of the West. In addition to speaking out for Africa on the international stage, he has also made bold statements against distortions in the liturgy, emphasizing that the Liturgy of the Eucharist should always be practiced as an address to God.
Cardinal Sarah has written two books so far in defense of the Catholic faith. The first is “The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise”. He makes a strong case that the noise of contemporary life is symptomatic of our loss of faith. One excerpt attests to the depth of his understanding and the profundity of his thoughts:
God’s silence can also be a reproach. We often pretend not to want to listen to this language. Conversely, if there is an earthquake or a major natural disaster, associated with immeasurable human tragedies, we accuse God of not speaking. God’s silence questions mankind on its ability to enter into the mystery of life and hope at the very heart of suffering and hardships. The more we refuse to understand this silence, the more we move away from him. I am convinced that the problem of contemporary atheism lies first of all in a wrong interpretation of God’s silence about catastrophes and human sufferings. If man sees in the divine silence only a form of God’s abandonment, indifference, or powerlessness, it will be difficult to enter into his ineffable and inaccessible mystery. The more man rejects the silence of God, the more he will rebel against him.
His other book is “God or Nothing: A Conversation on Faith”. Revisiting his defense of the liturgy, he explains his case in some depth:
If man claims to adapt the liturgy to his era, to transform it to suit the circumstances, divine worship dies. The development of some liturgical symbols is necessary sometimes; however, if man goes so far as to confuse the temporal and the eternal, he turns his back on the essential justification for the liturgy.
In highlighting the worldview taken for granted by the United States and Europe, Cardinal Sarah has challenged us to more closely consider the results of our international actions. And more significantly, he has provided keen insight into how the insidious marginalization of God in public affairs and, indeed, in the Church itself, have and will continue to work to our detriment. Anyone seeking to understand how God and the Catholic faith relate to the modern age would do well to become familiar with the works and public statements of Cardinal Sarah.
Interesting, insightful comments and analysis, Matt, thank you. I’d like to point your attention to another great man of God who stares death in the face on a daily basis in the fulfillment of his pastoral office: Bishop Silvio José Báez, O.C.D., the auxiliary bishop of Managua, Nicaragua. He has become the lightning rod for the anti-Catholic fury of the dictator Daniel Ortega, to the extent that the Organization of American States’ IACHR issued a Protective Measures order last May as a desperate attempt to keep the bishop and his family members alive and out of harm. He is active in social media, and Carmelites translate his tweets and other works into English. You can follow him at @silviojbaez
Thank you for the comment, Rosa. It is eye-opening to see these true examples of faith in situations outside our little American bubble, especially when confronted with their own words. I will definitely take a closer look at the example of Bishop Baez.
Nice thoughts. Cardinal Sarah, to me, is definitely a mixed bag. Some of his ideas are quite scary. To me. But some of your thoughts are scary to me, Matt. I do think it is important to hear his cultural perspective. I also think American Catholics need to not get his thoughts about things like gender identity mixed through their own biases that already exist. This conversation is tricky and I have heard too many quite frankly ignorant comments about it over here in the states.
Mark, thank you for the thoughtful comment. God, as manifested in nature and revelation, is more than a little scary to me. But woe to me if I knowingly mischaracterize him. Peace to you.
(this is a response from mark) I don’t think you are mischaracterizing God, Matt. Not at all. I do think you are, with the best of intentions, fighting in the trenches of the culture wars. It is not so much that I disagree or think you are wrong about your theological views but rather I disagree with some of the political conclusions you have arrived it. Our view as to what is at the core of the Christian message is quite different. That is okay. But with our own country’s drift towards the right using the culture wars as a means to an end (in my opinion) to further some draconian measures I strongly disagree with, I am afraid. As a protestant who grew up around the rise of the moral majority and other groups who firmly divided Protestantism even further than it was already, I see American Catholics in the last few years doing the same thing. I only suggest strongly that a good look be taken into what that did to divide so many Christians. And hurt so many Christians who dared have different political views. Not just theological ones.. I see the parallels that are happening within American Catholicism today. It didn’t have a good ending. Some thought it was worth it. That conclusion remains very arguable. That is what I am trying to at least ask you to consider, Matt. But it scares me. I lived through it. And I left the church as a result. Peace be with you as well.
“Our view as to what is at the core of the Christian message is quite different. That is okay.” I could not agree more. You make a very fair assessment of my role, though I’m not a ideal candidate for this (lack of time due to unfavorable work/life balance being one of my many inhibitions to effective dialogue).
Christian unity is certainly a high value, but what and how much can reasonably be sacrificed for the sake of it? Christ reminds us (Matthew 10:34) that He will be a source of division. While this may be debatable, the way I see it, politics is more the domain of e.g. how to achieve the “good of America”, while ideology is more the domain of what is the definition of the “good of America”. American politics used to be mostly just that – politics – while more recently it has centered more in ideology. I think God has little vested interest in how the good is achieved, but with God being the Author of Good, much is at stake in choosing the definition of “good”.
But I’m still trying to figure things out, as I imagine many people are. Much of what I write will be very divisive, but please know that no personal attack in intended in my messages. If there were more people like you who are willing to argue, rather than just fight, I don’t think our nation would be nearly as divided. Thanks again for your very thoughtful comment.
(mark) two quick things. i agree that Jesus’ message could be divisive, and that he himself said that. I think his message that was so divisive was his reaching out to the poor, the outcast, the stranger, the widow. it caused quite a ruckus to the in crowd. So i am not for unity at any cost. Not in the least. And I am not sure I agree that God is not concerned in the way we get to a certain ideal or value. I am not a utilitarian in that sense especially. What I am saying is that we are dividing ourselves when we see “mass must be this way”, or “you must vote Republican to be a good Christian”, or things that like that can sometimes make God look like a legalist. I have nothing against having preferences for worship or even having a passion for a certain political party. But beyond that, i hope that our “tent” as persons of faith can be open to welcoming. I think Jesus taught that. And yes, for every argument about what Jesus taught somebody can point out what seems to be the opposite. We all see that play out. Thanks Matt. Welcome back to writing.