I fully endorse what it says:
«Ruini is very much Ruini.
Americo Mascarucci on the figure and role of Cardinal Camillo Ruini: «We are losing not only an eminent man of faith and of the Church, but above all a symbol, the symbol of a new Catholic role in society and in the world. It was not the resigned Catholic who for fifty years had delegated the representation of his interests to a political party, the Christian Democrats, practically signing a blank check. With the end of Catholic political unity, brought about on the one hand by the fall of communism—and therefore the only possible bond that held together the diverse universe of Italian Catholicism—and on the other by the introduction of the majoritarian electoral system that gave rise to bipolarism, it became necessary to rethink the role of Catholics in politics».
At that moment it was objectively impossible to unite conservative and progressive Catholics, liberal Catholics and social Christians, Catholic Action and Communion and Liberation, Rosy Bindi and Roberto Formigoni, and it became necessary to redefine the entire strategy of action so as not to be marginalized but rather effective. Ruini had the skill and wisdom to point to a new role for Catholics, no longer united under a single party or political umbrella, but united in shared values, following in the footsteps of John Paul II, identified in the defense of ethical issues. The defense of human life from conception to natural death, against abortion and euthanasia; the defense of the natural family founded on marriage against attempts to standardize civil unions; the defense of educational equality; the defense of Italy’s Christian and Catholic identity within a framework of integration compatible with our values, the fight against ethical relativism; the affirmation of an economic model capable of curbing ordoliberalism and the excesses of capitalism, moving away from a purely statist vision. While center-right Catholics welcomed Ruini’s agenda, on the other hand, among Catholics allied with the former communists, Prodi’s conception of the “adult Catholic” prevailed—that is, the conciliar Catholic, inspired by freedom of conscience and not by the dictates of the bishops.
He reaffirmed the duty of Catholics, in their full autonomy, to follow the Church’s doctrine in ethical and social decisions. He always sought to have politicians listen and pay attention to the issues important to the Church and to John Paul II in particular, and he did so with great diplomacy, engaging in constructive and open dialogue with Berlusconi and with D’Alema, while openly confronting Romano Prodi, a disciple of the Dossetti school, who never forgave Ruini for having favored the dissolution of Italian political Catholicism by declaring that the experience of the single Catholic party had come to an end.
After his death, the CEI completely lost the prominence that “Don Camillo” had secured for it, since those who succeeded him lacked both the charisma and the capacity to lead the Italian bishops and, above all, to exert concrete influence on Italian politics. A single speech by Ruini was enough to tip the balance of the Catholic vote and determine the outcome of elections. For this reason, he was “hated” by the secularist and anticlerical world, by the Repubblica club, but also by left-wing Catholics such as Famiglia Cristiana and Jesus, who often took positions openly contrary to the CEI’s orientation, with the blessing of cardinals and bishops such as Martini, Silvestrini and Bettazzi, openly hostile toward him.
A man of unwavering faith to the end, who remained steadfast and raised his voice against a pope like Bergoglio, whom he considered far from the doctrinal and pastoral clarity of Wojtyła, ambiguous in his statements and, above all, excessively conditioned by the applause and consensus of the world, beginning with those same radical and secularist circles that had been his bitterest enemies. He suffered, like many Catholics, to see a pope, the successor of Peter, consider other voices more worthy of being heard and receiving more attention than a cardinal like himself, who had given so much to the Church and to whom the Church owed so much».
