Ordo Praedicatorum

CAROUGE, Switzerland, OCT. 30, 2007 (Zenit.org).- If the young Georges Cottier was in contact with great thinkers of the 20th century, why did he end up becoming the theologian of the pontifical household, instead of a Marxist or a follower of Sartre or Nietzsche?

How can the Church continue to claim in the 20th century that God exists? And that Christianity is the path to happiness?

These are the questions that Patrice Favre found answered when he decided to write a book-interview with the man Pope John Paul II named theologian of the pontifical household.

In writing “Georges Cottier. Itinéraire d’un Croyant” (Georges Cottier. The Itinerary of a Believer), Favre says he got a look at the great questions of the 20th century, through the eyes of a Christian.

After presenting his book this month at the Cottier family’s parish in Carouge, Switzerland, the author spoke to ZENIT about his work.

Q: What was the origin of this book on Cardinal Georges-Marie Cottier, a Dominican, and theologian of the pontifical household from the days of John Paul II until last year?

Favre: This book arose from the momentum and the emotion that followed the death of John Paul II, this monumental Pope who left us a stirring testimony in his illness and death. Upon my return from Rome, a friend of mine, who had encouraged me to write my previous book on the monasteries of the Swisse Romande, said to me: “You must write a book on John Paul II!”

I pointed out that thousands of pages had already been written about John Paul II and that I failed to see what original contribution I could make. A few months later, after I don’t know what course of events contrived by Providence, he told me, “You must write a book about Cardinal Cottier!” and I accepted the proposal.

Q: Did you already know Cardinal Cottier, your compatriot, before thinking about the book?

Favre: Indeed, I accepted because I had known Father Cottier for more than 20 years; I had dealt with him in my work as a journalist, and I had always appreciated the clarity of his judgment. He is a man who goes to the essential, he is original — as he mentions in the book “I do not go with the times and I hope never to do so!” He attributes his rejection of theological or media fashions to his Genevan childhood: Being a minority Catholic in what, at the time, was a strongly Protestant canton forges the character. The other reason that led me to try [to write the book] was that Father Cottier had always been welcoming to me as a journalist, and there was already a friendship between us.

Q: You started off with the idea of a book about John Paul II, but the biography of Cardinal Cottier led you beyond, into the great challenges of the 20th century.

Favre: Indeed, I had no idea, at the time, that this book would range far beyond the “John Paul II Years.” When Father Cottier was summoned to Rome in 1989, he was 67 years old. The age for retirement. And these 67 years had proven unimaginably fruitful. Imagine that in 1943, he was already voicing his opinion publicly, in a crowded lecture hall of the University of Geneva, against Nazi Germany. Later, he became the friend and theological support of Father Jacques Loew, the first worker-priest in France, on the docks of Marseille. A whole chapter of the pre-conciliar history was opening before me, a glorious chapter — as in the famous novel by Gilbert Cesbron, “Les Saints Vont en Enfer” (Saints Go To Hell) — but also a painful one, since worker-priests were banned by Rome.

Then I discovered that Father Cottier had taken part in the Second Vatican Council as an expert with a great French bishop, Monsignor de Provenchères, and later, as an expert with Cardinal Journet. He thus experienced, from the front rank, that major event in the life of the Church in the 20th century, which made his judgment on the great crisis that followed the Council yet more interesting.

Q: If I may say so, your book is a bit of a theological “police novel,” considering Cardinal Cottier’s commitment to liberty beyond the Iron Curtain, always within a dialogue with those who do not share the Christian faith. How could you summarize this itinerary from Resistance — “Sous les Géraniums” [Under the Geraniums], in chapter 4 — to “Frigo Vide à Moscou” [Empty Fridge in Moscow], in chapter 7?

Favre: “L’athéisme du Jeune Marx” [The Atheism of Young Marx], was already the title of Father Cottier’s thesis on Karl Marx in 1959. Now, the arm wrestling between Christianity and Marxism is one of the major axes of the last century, and Father Cottier was very often in the first ranks of this arduous struggle.

There was a temptation toward Marxism within Catholicism and, particularly, in the intellectual sphere. As Father Cottier was one of the best prepared, he played a significant role in Catholic resistance, as you will see in the book. During the ’80s and ’90s, we find Father Cottier in a castle in Ljubljana, in a hotel riddled with bugs in Budapest, in the Stalin buildings in Moscow. He was involved in very high-level conversations in which Vatican delegates and Soviet Communist representatives tried to set up a dialogue, under the eye of the KGB. Also, on various occasions, he was in Latin America, taking part in the discussions stemming from Liberation Theology. There are also books and dozens of articles published in “Nova et Vetera,” the magazine Father Cottier directed after the death of Cardinal Journet in 1975.

Q: You highlight another aspect of “dialogue” in Cardinal Cottier’s life: the encounter with Judaism –”L’ami des Juifs” [The Friend of the Jews], in chapter 10 — and the struggle against anti-Semitism.

Favre: Yes, one could also mention his Jewish friendships and his fight against anti-Semitism, but also May ‘68, which he lived through as a professor and which brought him to issue what I consider enlightening reflections; However, I don’t want to tell you the whole book. What is interesting is that this biography of Cardinal Cottier enables us to go over decisive events of the past century, under the light, the judgment, of a Christian. This is a book which “refreshed my memory” and which, as I see it, allows us a better understanding of our time.

Q: You end the book on the subject of friendship. What place does friendship occupy in Cardinal Cottier’s itinerary?

Favre: In the course of this work, I was able to discover his friends, particularly those he calls his “elders.” Father Cottier would not be what he is now if he had not met and followed people who played a decisive role in his life. First of all, Abbot Journet, another Genevan whose role has not been duly reckoned in the Swisse Romande; Jacques Maritain, Father de Menasce, the aforementioned Jacques Loew, cardinals such as Lustiger, Etchegaray, Ratzinger, and, of course, John Paul II, who is discussed a lot in this book. As counterpoints to these great figures, in this book you will find the masters of modern culture, such as Rousseau, Marx, Sartre, Nietzsche, and yet others, who Father Cottier frequented a lot — at least intellectually — who made things difficult for the Church and for Christian faith.

Q: You deny having written a “history book,” and in fact, the book has a lot of philosophical reflections. What fundamental goal did you set yourself?

Favre: This book talks about history but it is not a history book, because it invariably returns to a current issue: How can one believe in this day and age? How can one be reasonably Catholic in the 21st century? The interviews you will find in the book, the discussions on happiness, sexuality, ecology, suffering, and even the devil — because he says one should talk about him more — are based on an essential question: How can the Church, that of John Paul II, of Benedict XVI, and of Cardinal Cottier, claim, in this day and age, that God exists, and that the Christian faith constitutes the happiness of humankind? Why did Father Cottier, who ever since his youth has been in close contact with the great thinkers of modernity, never become a Marxist, a follower of Sartre, Nietzsche, or merely indifferent, like so many people?

However, not being a philosopher, I did not write a philosophical treatise, of which I would be utterly incapable. In my own words, as a journalist, I transcribed Father Cottier’s answers. Fortunately, he accepted to go over our conversations and correct them. As, for 15 years, he had corrected the writings of John Paul II, I could not hope to find a better proofreader! These exchanges taught me a lot and, in a way, they also helped me to think and to live. There is a beauty in faith, a beauty in the Church, a beauty in Christ. I perceived this on more than one occasion in my contact with Father Cottier over the two years in which we worked together. It was a joy for me, which I hope not to have betrayed too much in trying to share it in these pages.

Trackback URI |