̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - Pope

'Populism' revealed as 2017 Word of the Year by Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Press

sjr81 — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 14:02:21 +0000

Choosing a winner required looking at not only the most searched-for words but also spikes – occasions when a word is suddenly looked up many more times than usual on or around a particular date.

As Donald Trump, a polarizing candidate was being sworn in as the 45th president of the United States on January 22, 2017, searches for the word 'inauguration' on the online Cambridge Dictionary spiked. But so did searches for the word 'populism' because, on that same day, Pope Francis warned against a rising tide of populism in a widely reported interview with El Pais newspaper. In mid-March, after another high-profile interview with the pontiff – this time with the German newspaper Die Zeit – searches for populism spiked again.

Wendalyn Nichols, Publishing Manager at Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Press, said: 'Spikes can reveal what is on our users’ minds and, in what’s been another eventful year, plenty of spikes can be directly connected to news items about politics in the US (nepotism, recuse, bigotry, megalomania) and the UK (shambles, untenable, extradite). ̽��ֱ��much-anticipated Taylor Review of working practices in the UK caused the term 'gig economy' to spike in July, and of course the spectacular solar eclipse is reflected in the spike for eclipse on 21 August.

'What sets populism apart from all these other words is that it represents a phenomenon that’s both truly local and truly global, as populations and their leaders across the world wrestle with issues of immigration and trade, resurgent nationalism, and economic discontent.'

Populism is described by the Cambridge Dictionary as ‘political ideas and activities that are intended to get the support of ordinary people by giving them what they want’. It includes the usage label ‘mainly disapproving’.

Populism has a taint of disapproval because the -ism ending often indicates a philosophy or ideology that is being approached either uncritically (liberalism, conservatism, jingoism) or cynically (tokenism).

Evidence from the Cambridge English Corpus – a 1.5-billion-word database of language – reveals that people tend to use the term populism when they think it’s a political ploy instead of genuine. Both aspects of -ism are evident in the use of populism in 2017: the implied lack of critical thinking on the part of the populace, and the implied cynicism on the part of the leaders who exploit it.

̽��ֱ��word 'populism' has been announced as the Cambridge Dictionary 2017 Word of the Year.

What sets populism apart from all these other words is that it represents a phenomenon that’s both truly local and truly global, as populations and their leaders across the world wrestle with issues of immigration and trade, resurgent nationalism, and economic discontent.

Wendalyn Nichols

̽��ֱ��White House (official Flickr)

President Donald J. Trump delivers remarks at Yokota Air Base | November 5, 2017 (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Public Domain

Opinion: What will happen when the Pope meets the Patriarch?

Anonymous — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:18:54 +0000

̽��ֱ��latest diplomatic coup for Pope Francis I – whose papacy has been marked by an ever-more expansive foreign policy – is the announcement of an interesting development in relations between the Roman Catholic and the Russian Orthodox churches, relations that have been more-or-less non-existent for more than 1000 years.

On February 12, Pope Francis – who will be on his way to visit Mexico – will meet Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill at Havana Airport in Cuba. Kirill is not the formal head of the world’s estimated 200m Orthodox Christians – that is his All-Holiness Bartholomew, the Ecumenical Patriarch, whose seat is in Istanbul, not Moscow.

But the Orthodox churches are effectively independent, national units with Bartholomew enjoying only a sort of “primacy of honour” over them – rather like the archbishop of Canterbury over the world-wide Anglican Communion. ̽��ֱ��Russian Church is easily the largest of the Orthodox churches with more than 80-100m members. Consequently, the Russian Church and its Patriarch have enormous influence in the Orthodox world, arguably even more than Bartholomew himself.

̽��ֱ��Vatican’s relations with Russian Orthodoxy have historically been poor. ̽��ֱ��papacy was at loggerheads with the Tsars over their treatment of Polish Catholics when Poland was ruled by them. And during World War I, the Vatican feared a possible Russian victory over the Ottoman Empire, leading to a reinvigorated Orthodoxy and the creation of a sort of “Vatican on the Bosphorus”.

In 1917 it thought Catholicism could profit from the collapse of Tsardom and the subsequent disestablishment of the Orthodox Church but those hopes were quickly dashed by the Soviets’ “Godless campaigns” which were aimed at all religious groups, not just the Orthodox. ̽��ֱ��end of the Soviet Union in 1991 did not improve relations between the Catholic and Orthodox churches – on the contrary, the Russian Orthodox Church has consistently accused the Vatican of proselytism, of trying to poach its own faithful, a not entirely unjustified accusation.

Bones of contention

So what will Francis and Kirill talk about? They will seek détente, a general improvement in their relations, but this will be difficult given the highly nationalistic mood of Russian Orthodoxy at the moment. As in previous centuries, many Russian Orthodox prelates are deeply suspicious of Western Europe – Catholic, Protestant and secular – which they see as an area of religious and moral decadence.

̽��ֱ��schism between eastern and western Christianity, which originated in the 7th and 8th centuries and centres around the dispute over the nature of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, but also in the Orthodox rejection of the Bishop of Rome’s claims to universal primacy over Christians, is still unresolved despite ecumenical gestures on the part of Rome.

Another issue between Rome and Moscow is the question of Ukraine. Rome is unhappy about Putin’s annexation of the Crimea and his assistance for the pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine which sections of the Orthodox Church have supported with jingoistic fervour. In the western Ukraine, the Greek Catholic Church, which – like the Orthodox – has a married clergy and shares similar liturgical practices, is nevertheless in communion with Rome. No love is lost between the Greek Catholics and the Ukrainian Orthodox.

Will Francis and Kirill talk about this thorny problem? One issue which they will certainly discuss and on which they may reach a measure of agreement is the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, though even here the situation is complicated by Putin’s foreign policy objectives in Syria.

“Old man in a hurry”

Pope Francis is 80 this December and has only one lung. He was elected on a reform ticket and so far has succeeded in sorting out the scandal-ridden Vatican Bank – and Vatican finances in general. He has started the process of reforming the Roman curia (the central government of the Catholic Church in the Vatican) and devolving power to local bishops.

He has other objectives, including re-establishing diplomatic relations with China and thereby achieving some sort of re-unification of the state-controlled Catholic Patriotic Association and those Chinese Catholics who lie outside the CPA and are therefore subject to occasional governmental repression. Vatican diplomacy also played an important role in bringing about the restoration of diplomatic relations between the USA and Cuba last year.

He probably also nurtures hopes of an historic compromise between the Catholic and the Orthodox churches – and his meeting with Kirill may prove to be a step in that direction. It is, however, unlikely to lead to any radical change in the relationship in Francis’ lifetime. This schism runs deep.

John Pollard, Fellow and Director of Studies in History at Trinity Hall, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article was originally published on ̽��ֱ��Conversation. Read the original article.

̽��ֱ��opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author(s) and do not represent the views of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

Inset image: Patriarch Kirill (Larry Koester).

John Pollard (Trinity Hall) discusses the relationship between the Roman Catholic and Russian Orthodox churches, and what the meeting between their two leaders may hold.

pml2008

Pope Visits Philadelphia

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-ShareAlike

Opinion: ‘Vati-leaks 2’ scandal hinders attempts by Pope Francis to reform Catholic HQ

Anonymous — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:10:17 +0000

For the second time in four years, the Vatican has been plunged into crisis by the publication of books exposing not only the battles for power within its hallowed walls, but also the misbehaviour of staff members of the Roman curia, the governing bureaucracy of the Roman Catholic Church.

In his latest book, Merchants in the Temple: Inside Pope Francis’ Secret Battle Against Corruption in the Vatican, investigative journalist Gianluigi Nuzzi lays bare the resistance which the Argentinian pope has encountered in his efforts to clean up not only the Vatican Bank (Istituto per le Opere di Religione) but also the wider financial mismanagement that has been endemic in the Vatican for years.

̽��ֱ��first claims about financial mismanagement, this time in the Vatican City of which the pope is head of state, came from Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganó who was head of its administration. After his claims were made public, Viganó was packed off to Washington as papal envoy to the US. But the “Vati-leaks” scandal really broke in January 2012 with programmes on Italian television that revealed the goings-on behind the scenes in the Vatican of Benedict XVI.

In May of the same year, Nuzzi published His Holiness: ̽��ֱ��Secret Papers of Benedict XVI, which further revealed the in-fighting around the ailing and ageing pope, including the existence of an alleged “gay lobby”. Eventually, the investigation by the Papal Gendarmerie, the Vatican police, identified the pope’s butler, Paolo Gabriele, as the person who had removed the papers from Benedict’s private apartment. After being tried and spending a few months in the Vatican jail, Gabriele was eventually pardoned by the pope.

But the scandalous stories swirling around the Vatican in 2012 and early 2013 undoubtedly contributed to Benedict’s decision in February 2013 to resign, the first pope to do so since Celestine V in 1294 (in his case, after only a few months in office). Though in his resignation speech Benedict attributed his decision to age and infirmity, by then he felt that the Vatican was out of control and he clearly had little confidence in his “chief minister”, cardinal secretary Tarcisio Bertone against whom allegations of cronyism and incompetence have been made.

New broom

̽��ֱ��subsequent election of cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, archbishop of Buenos Aires, less than a month after Benedict’s resignation, as the first non-European pope in hundreds of years, was the clearest indication that the cardinals of the worldwide Roman Catholic Church wanted change, a cleansing of the Augean Stables and a substantial reform of the Roman curia.

This is indeed the programme on which Francis I has embarked. So far, he has had notable success in making the Vatican Bank more accountable to both the Vatican and European financial authorities and ridding it of dubious accounts whose holders used them for the purposes of money-laundering and even, allegedly, sanctions busting.

But the latest Vati-leaks episode only confirms what has long been known, that resistance inside the Vatican to Francis’ reforms is strong and tenacious and that the bad habits long-established there die hard. Among his revelations are that a canonisation (the investigatory process leading to the declaration that someone is a saint) can cost over half a million pounds (US$755,000) and that costs remain out of control in some dicasteries (departments) of the Roman curia.

There has been unhappiness in Italy for years over the financial privileges and tax exemptions of the Roman curia and related organisations, not to mention the thousands of religious houses – some of which operate extremely profitable businesses throughout the peninsula. But these latest revelations once again cast the Vatican and its financial management in a bad light which, in the long term, will certainly affect the willingness of the Catholic faithful throughout the world to contribute to funding the headquarters of their church through the annual “Peter’s Pence” collections.

Feeling dog collars

̽��ֱ��Vatican of Francis I is no happier with the second Vati-leaks episode, than Benedict’s Vatican was with the first and so investigations have been carried out and arrests made. This time they involve a Spanish monsignor, Lucio Angel Vallejo Balda, and an Italian PR expert, Francesca Chaouqui, both recent appointments to Francis’ reform commissions. ̽��ֱ��Nuzzi revelations are regarded as being hostile to Francis, but it could equally well be argued that they support his cause inasmuch as they demonstrate the strength of opposition to his reforms in the curia and potentially isolate his chief opponents there.

It can also be argued that all this is simply a case of chickens coming home to roost. ̽��ֱ��fact that the curial bureaucracy is located in a sovereign state, the Vatican City, or in “extra-territorial” buildings scattered through Rome, that it is the servant of an infallible religious leader – the pope – and that the Vatican Bank, in particular, has been virtually immune from effective oversight has inevitably led to mismanagement, cronyism and corruption.

It must also remain a matter of scandal to many Catholics that the curia is largely staffed by priests (and a few nuns) whereas there are many Catholic dioceses throughout the world desperately short of priests to say mass and administer the other sacraments, ironically enough, especially in Latin America.

John Pollard, Fellow and Director of Studies in History at Trinity Hall, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article was originally published on ̽��ֱ��Conversation. Read the original article.

̽��ֱ��opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author(s) and do not represent the views of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

John Pollard (Faculty of History) discusses the latest book exposing battles for power and misbehaviour in the Vatican.

Dennis Jarvis

̽��ֱ��Obelisk, St Peter's Square

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-ShareAlike

Mitrokhin’s KGB archive opens to public

sjr81 — Sun, 06 Jul 2014 23:01:00 +0000

From 1972 to 1984, Major Vasiliy Mitrokhin was a senior archivist in the KGB’s foreign intelligence archive – with unlimited access to hundreds of thousands of files from a global network of spies and intelligence gathering operations.

At the same time, having grown disillusioned with the brutal oppression of the Soviet regime, he was taking secret handwritten notes of the material and smuggling them out of the building each evening. In 1992, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, he, his family and his archive were exfiltrated by the UK’s Secret Intelligence Service.

Now, more than twenty years after his defection to the UK, Mitrokhin’s files are being opened by the Churchill Archives Centre, where they sit alongside the personal papers of Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher.

Professor Christopher Andrew, the only historian to date allowed access to the archive, and author of two global bestsellers with Mitrokhin, said: “There are only two places in the world where you’ll find material like this. One is the KGB archive – which is not open and very difficult to get into – and the other is here at Churchill College where Mitrokhin’s own typescript notes are today being opened for all the world to see.

“Mitrokhin dreamed of making this material public from 1972 until his death; it’s now happening in 2014. ̽��ֱ��inner workings of the KGB, its foreign intelligence operations and the foreign policy of Soviet-era Russia all lie within this extraordinary collection; the scale and nature of which gives unprecedented insight into the KGB’s activities throughout much of the Cold War.”

Among the 19 boxes and thousands of papers being opened are KGB notes on Pope John Paul II, whose activities in Poland were closely monitored before his election to the Papacy; maps and details of secret Russian arms caches in Western Europe and the USA; and files on Melita Norwood, ‘the spy who came in from the Co-op’.

Norwood, codename Hola, was the KGB’s longest-serving UK agent, who for four decades passed on classified information from her office at the British Non Ferrous Metals Research Association in Euston, North London, where nuclear and other scientific research took place.

“ ̽��ֱ��Mitrokhin files range in time from the immediate aftermath of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution to the eve of the Gorbachev era,” said Andrew. “Initially he smuggled his daily notes out on small scraps of paper hidden in his shoes. After a few months, he began to take them out in his jacket pockets then buried them every weekend at the family dacha in the countryside near Moscow.

“ ̽��ֱ��enormous risks in compiling his secret archive might well have ended with a secret trial and a bullet in the back of the head in an execution cellar. He was a dissident willing to make the most extraordinary sacrifice.”

Vasiliy Mitrokhin was born in 1922. From 1948, he worked in foreign intelligence before being assigned to the foreign intelligence archives in the KGB First Chief Directorate. From 1972 until 1982 he was in charge of the transfer of these archives from the Lubyanka in central Moscow to a new foreign intelligence HQ at Yasenevo.

Following his retirement in 1984, Mitrokhin organised much of this material geographically and, in ten volumes, typed out systematic studies of KGB operations in different parts of the world.

After his exfiltration to London, Mitrokhin continued to work on transcribing and typing his manuscript notes, producing a further 26 typed volumes, which, together with his notes, provided the basis for his publications with Professor Christopher Andrew. Vasiliy Mitrokhin died in January 2004.

Allen Packwood, Director of the Churchill Archives Centre, said: “This collection is a wonderful illustration of the value of archives and the power of archivists. It was Mitrokhin's position as archivist that allowed him his unprecedented access and overview of the KGB files. It was his commitment to preserving and providing access to the truth that led him to make his copies, at huge personal risk. We are therefore proud to house his papers and to honour his wish that they should be made freely available for research."

In accordance with the deposit agreement, the Churchill Archives Centre is opening Mitrokhin’s edited Russian-language versions of his original notes. ̽��ֱ��original manuscript notes and notebooks will remain closed under the terms of the deposit agreement, subject to review.

KGB files from the famous Mitrokhin Archive – described by the FBI as ‘the most complete and extensive intelligence ever received from any source’ – will today open to the public for the first time.

There are only two places in the world where you’ll find material like this. One is the KGB archive – which is not open and very difficult to get into – and the other is here at Churchill College.

Chrisopher Andrew

Churchill Archives Centre

Mitrokhin's handwritten copy of the KGB First Chief Directorate Lexicon

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page. For image rights, please see the credits associated with each individual image.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike

No Curia for old age: the radical act of papal resignation

fpjl2 — Fri, 15 Feb 2013 14:49:15 +0000

On a first level of analysis, Benedict’s shocking announcement would seem to contradict the image of the papacy as left by his predecessor. John Paul II kept heading the global Catholic Church despite old age and the major illnesses that characterised the last few years of his pontificate. This begs the question as to whether the two popes held different views of the institution they represented.

Intrinsically, the two are not as divergent as they might appear. Each gesture, in its own ways, sent an important message about the recognition of the frailty and limits of the human condition while simultaneously recognising the huge responsibility and immense tasks that come with taking on the role of head of the Catholic Church.

Both popes have answered in a responsible and humble manner to their own experience of old age – showing deep appreciation for the role of leadership they were tasked with. They have both acted by doing what they thought was best for the universal church rather than for themselves.

John Paul clearly wanted to highlight the respect for old age and even when he could no longer speak allowed his own infirm body to criticise euthanasia. Benedict has demonstrated his respect for the Petrine ministry (the mission of the successor of Saint Peter, who was entrusted by Jesus with leading the Christian community) by deciding to withdraw because he recognised that his body was no longer up to fulfilling as necessary – for the good of the Church – the important tasks and difficulties that lie ahead.

For many, both popes have reinforced the symbolic meaning of the papacy, to reiterate that in the Catholic doctrine, this role of authority is not based on human assurances but on Christ.

It could be said that, for Benedict, the divine gift of human freedom has been in a way celebrated by his very decision to abdicate after a long reflection.

A similar message both highlighting the limits of human nature but also the gift of free will came only a few months ago from another key figure of the Catholic Church, who was also widely appreciated beyond Catholic and Christian circles – Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. This progressive Cardinal was known for his critical views of the bureaucracy of the Church, and for being miles away from Benedict in orientation.

Yet the two figures seem to reconnect in the radical gestures they both made at the end of their lives (the physical life of Martini and the institutional life of Benedict). At the last stages of his life, gravely affected by Parkinson’s disease, the Italian Cardinal asked the doctors to turn off the machine that was keeping him alive as he wanted to meet God through a natural death.

This decision raised lots of controversy and criticism within the church, as it was understood as almost an endorsement of euthanasia. For me, this is not what Martini intended. Rather, in the opposite way to John Paul II, and in a similar way to the decision Benedict has just taken, he also insisted on accepting the limited quality of human life compared to the eternal love, justice and perfection of God.

Benedict and Martini have both made an independent and free radical decision that could be interpreted as the celebration of the gift of free will. ̽��ֱ��two decisions could be read as practical indications that it is possible to witness one’s Christian faith and to serve the Church by stepping beyond its conventions and structures and by stepping down from power.

One figure has been identified with traditionalism and conservatism, the other with progressive thinking. Yet, through their radical actions, the two prelates might have come to the same conclusion about the need to shake the structures of the Church, and may have contributed to the first steps towards reforming and renewing the Catholic Church.

More information on Dr Silvestri’s research can be found on the Von Hugel Institute website here.

Dr Sara Silvestri, a specialist in religion and politics and a Research Associate with the Von Hügel Institute, St Edmund’s College, examines the implications of the resignation of Benedict XVI for the institutional role of the pope and the future of the Catholic Church.

It could be said that, for Benedict, the divine gift of human freedom has been in a way celebrated by his very decision to abdicate after a long reflection

Sara Silvestri

Catholic Church (England and Wales) from Flickr

Pope Benedict XVI prays in front of the image of Our Lady of Fatima after arriving to catholic Fatima shrine in central Portugal, May 12, 2010

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike