|
Question 114: Islam permits the marriage with Christians and Jews, but Christianity forbids the marriage with those of different faiths. Is that your idea of love and tolerance? (TR)
Answer: In today’s world, in which not only baptized persons, i.e. Christians of different confessions, live and work together in the same cities and regions, there are more and more marriages between Catholics and baptized non-catholic Christians, as well as between Catholics and non-baptized people, i.e. between different religions. While mixed marriages between Christians of different confessions require special care from both marriage partners as well as their pastors, even greater care is required in the case of marriages between different religions.
In its Arbeitshilfe Nr 172, „Christen und Muslime in Deutschland“ (Working material No 172, „Christians and Muslims in Germany“, (www.dbk.de/Schriften/Arbeitshilfen) the German General Synod considers the questions which arise when Catholics marry Muslims [Nos (370) – (401) (= p. 186 – 200)]. It is thereby important for the Christian partner to understand the particulars of Islamic-Christian marriages and families from the point of view of Islamic law.
1. Islamic law permits the marriage between a Muslim man and a Christian woman, not, however, between a Muslim woman and a Christian man. This rule is based on the premise that in marriage and family life, Islam is the ultimately valid and simply superior religion in the eyes of God, and that in the case of disagreement the husband has the final word. According to traditional Islamic views a Christian husband is not acceptable for Muslim wife, because his presumed dominance in the family would bring with it the certain dominance of the Christian element. Although the secular Turkish family law does permit the marriage between a Christian man and a Muslim woman, such a marriage generally meets with much more opposition among the general Turkish public than the opposite constellation.
2. According to the Islamic view the children of a Muslim man and a Christian woman are Muslims by birth, and their parents have the duty to bring them up as Muslims. This duty, the fulfillment of which is primarily the responsibility of the Muslim husband, is objectively incompatible with the Catholic wife’s duty to raise her children in her own faith. This can bring with it especially difficult problems for such a union and it is therefore urgently recommended that the question of which faith the children should be brought up in and their religious education are decided as bindingly as possible before the marriage takes place.
3. Prior to a Christian-Muslim marriage, the following questions have to be clarified: Is the Christian wife of a Muslim man allowed to attend worship in her faith, and can she maintain contact with her faith community? Will she be allowed to use Christian symbols and Christian writings for her own personal purpose in her marital home? Will she be allowed to diverge from Islamic rules concerning eating and drinking? Will she be expected to conform to Islamic requirements concerning ritual cleanliness, for example in connection with her monthly cycle and after giving birth? In the course of history, representatives of the different Islamic law schools have answered these and similar questions in many different ways. A Christian woman who plans to marry a Muslim should do everything she can to discover her partners views and those of his nearest relatives regarding those issues prior to getting married. She should also try and agree to ways of living together which allow her to live as a Christian and to live in a manner that is consistent with her understanding of her own dignity as a person.
4. It is important for a Christian woman who considers marrying a Muslim to know that according to Islamic law she cannot inherit after his death. Even more important can be the fact that Islamic law allows the man to conclude a second marriage, even if he has married a Christian woman.
5. A Christian woman who considers to marry a Muslim man must understand that there may be a great difference in terms of the development of her marriage and her personal development, as well as for her being able to live unhindered according to her religion, whether she and her partner remain in Germany or in another “Western“ country, or not. If she follows him to his Islamic land of origin she must be prepared for the possibility that even if he personally would be willing to allow her those freedoms, her social surroundings, especially his family, can exert an enormous pressure to conform, maybe even to convert. This could be much stronger than if they remained in Germany. This is all the more the case because in most countries with a Muslim majority the largely independent living together of a married couple with their children in the form of a nuclear family is still not the rule (with the exception of Turkish cities), on the contrary, that living in an extended family is the norm. The question of where the couple is to live has to be considered carefully prior to getting married, and if possible should be decided in such a way that the woman is likely to be able to expect a family life that does not demand an intolerable extent of adapting.
6. According to Sharia law, the rights and duties of both marriage partners are very different, and not always to the detriment of the woman. According to Sharia law and the traditional Muslim understanding the legal position of the wife in the marriage is markedly weaker than that of her husband. Sura 4:34 states clearly: “The men are made responsible for the women, ** and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the breadwinners.“ The woman owes the man obedience; the continuation of the above cited verse from the Qur’an permits a husband who believes that this obedience isn’t assured, to apply a graded scale of punishment which goes as far as physical violence. The cited verse (sura 4:34) continues: “If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then deserting them in bed, then you may beat them”. Despite this text, which is in danger of being used by violent husbands as a religious justification of their actions, the actual behavior in a Muslim marriage, like in a Christian one, does not depend on a single verse from Scripture. Whether it comes to such violence or not is, in reality, not primarily decided based on the right to physical punishment, which the Sharia traditionally grants the husband, but is dependent on the level of culture and harmony the partners have achieved.
7. According to Islamic law, the husband has the right to determine the whereabouts of his wife. In today’s society this also means that he can forbid her to work outside the home and that he can prevent her from traveling to her European home country. The question of whether a husband can prevent his wife from having contact with her own immediate family has been answered in various different ways by individual Islamic schools of law.
8. We should also have to consider the Islamic divorce law with view to the male and female marriage partner, and the question of custody of the children after a divorce. According to Islamic law, the custody of the children is always granted to the Muslim husband. Islamic law does not even grant the mother visiting rights. Where this rule is applied, the mother literally loses her children after a divorce, even under conditions where German courts would clearly grant her custody. In any case it can be said that: if a German woman marries a Muslim with foreign nationality, she should urgently acquaint herself the current laws governing marriage in her future husband’s home country. She should always insist to solemnize the marriage at a German registry office.
Regarding the Catholic view of marriage and marital law the following points should be mentioned:
1. The Catholic church considers marriage as a lifelong loving union between man and wife, which is aimed at the well-being of the marriage partners and the conception and upbringing of children. The main characteristics of marriage are faithfulness to the marriage partner and its insolubility. The valid marriage among Christians is a sacrament, the marriage of a Catholic with a non-Christian (inter-religious marriage) is a non-sacramental marriage.
2. In order to conclude a marriage that is valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church both partners have to enter the married state freely and without hindrance according to the understanding described above (marriage consensus).
3. With regard to their own faith and the faith of their future children, Catholic believers may find it difficult to conclude and live a marriage with a partner who does not share their Christian faith and belongs to another religion. Out of a sense of responsibility for the faithful life of its members, the Catholic church has therefore postulated that different religions constitute an "impediment to marriage”. A marriage with different religions can only be considered valid if the impediment is removed prior to solemnization of the marriage (dispensation).
4. For the dispensation from the impediment to marriage, two conditions have to be fulfilled: the Catholic partner promises to retain his or her faith and to do everything possible to ensure that any children will be baptized into the Catholic faith and brought up in the Catholic Church. The Muslim partner must have been informed of this promise and have knowledge of the content of the Church’s teaching on marriage. The Catholic priest must be aware that the Muslim partner, too, has the duty to pass on his faith. This can contain the seeds of conflict and enormous difficulties for the relationship of the marriage partners.
5. Conversations with the Catholic and the Muslim marriage partner should begin as soon as possible before the marriage takes place, so that these decisions are not made under time pressure, but after careful thought. The specific problems inherent in a Catholic marriage and the differing views of Catholics and Muslims with regard to the understanding of marriage (monogamy, insolubility) and marital daily life (role of the wife, bringing up of children) will have to be raised no later than during the necessary marriage preparation talk.
6. The marriage to a non-Christian partner who believes in God can take place in a Service of the Word. The prayers, readings and hymns can be chosen to reflect the particular situation to enable to Muslim partner to understand then and to participate in them within what is possible from within his own faith.
7. If a dispensation from the canonical marriage ceremony has been granted and if therefore the marriage does not take place according to Catholic norms, the marriage between a Catholic and non-Muslim partner can also be concluded in another form of public marriage, for example in a registry office. If, following a dispensation from the canonical marriage ceremony, the couple has opted for this form of marriage ceremony it has to be borne in mind that the Catholic Church law excludes any other form of marriage ceremony, including a public marriage according to Islamic tradition.
Notes on the conclusion of a marriage contract
1. Despite the insolubility of marriage according to Catholic understanding and the intention of the female partner to conclude her multi-faith marriage as insoluble, it can be sensible for her to consider a marriage contract. This obtains especially with view to the Islamic position on marriage and the softening of possible consequences of a divorce.
2. The main item of an Islamic marriage contract is traditionally the kind and amount of the dowry, or the property the husband has to give his wife on the morning after the wedding night. Christian European women, who are not familiar with this custom, often feel like rejecting such a contractually agreed present, often because of the spontaneous emotional belief that the only thing that truly matters is the love between the marriage partners. They believe it is superfluous and even reject it with the argument that they cannot be “bought”. In reality, the dowry represents a necessary insurance against the financial consequences of a divorce, especially in view to the relative ease with which Islamic law allows for a woman to be divorced even against her own wishes, and the subsequent tight time-limited period of maintenance payments.
3. In this context we advise in favor of setting the dowry at a very high level, a custom often practiced in Islamic countries, and at the same time to agree that the larger part will only be paid out in case the husband pronounces a divorce. In the interest of the wife, this is an effective means of reducing the possibility that the husband light-heartedly initiates a divorce. To protect the Christian wife from a later polygamous union, it can also be agreed that the husband desists from exerting this right which is his according to Sharia law.
4. We also strongly recommend the inclusion of further points into the marriage contract: agreement on the wife’s right to attend worship, to receive pastoral care, to participate in parish events and to live a personal life within her family that corresponds to her religion. Depending on the country of origin and social sphere of her husband, it can also be appropriate to contractually lay down his general consent to possible paid employment for his wife, that she may travel to her home country and to contact with her relatives.
5. An important point in every marriage contract with a Muslim man who comes from an Islamic country other than Turkey, is the regulation of custody of children in the case of a divorce, which is acceptable to the Christian mother.
6. We stress in particular that the conclusion of a marriage contract which is valid according to the criteria of Islamic law is an additional safety device for Christian women who marry Muslim men from Islamic countries other than Turkey, is strongly recommended even if the couple marries at a German registry office after a dispensation from the canonical marriage ceremony, or if the Muslim partner accepts a Catholic wedding and both partners are not currently considering to move their marital home to the husband’s country of origin. It is possible that later unexpected circumstances arise which make it seem advisable for the husband or both partners, to move to his country of origin.
Furthermore, it does happen not too rarely that following the divorce of a Muslim-Christian marriage in Germany the husband kidnaps the children with the support of his relatives and against his wife’s wishes, and hides them in his country of origin, claiming that their Islamic upbringing cannot be ensured in any other way. In such cases the wife has virtually no chance of success to be granted custody from the courts in the country of the husband’s origin, if she cannot show a valid Islamic marriage contract which lays down that the husband has agreed to the custody regulations of the German courts, should the case arise.
7. According to Islamic law a Christian wife cannot inherit from her Muslim husband after his death. She should therefore at least try to include a clause in her marriage contract stipulating that this law does not apply. Alternatively, it is also possible to soften the situation through a clause in the husband’s will in favor of his wife. This could possibly also be agreed upon in advance in the marriage contract.
8. In any case, one point has to be taken into account: even if the Christian wife has a marriage contract and if this contract strengthens her position, there is still no guarantee that the courts in her husband’s country of origin support her in a legal case she begins, either regarding issues of custody or inheritance. Especially in custody disputes the public courts of law would have to rule against the pressure of public opinion, which in most Muslim countries supports the view that fort he sake of their Islamic upbringing the children of a Muslim should remain with their Muslim father or his relatives, and not their Christian mother. A Christian woman wishing to marry a Muslim man from one of those countries should be aware of this remaining risk from the outset.
Question 115: The Gospels say: "But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face" (Matthew 6:17). What does this mean and how do Christians fast? (TR)
Answer: The verse quoted in the question is part of a section of the Gospel according to St Matthew (6:1-18) in which Jesus speaks of the big Trinity of Alms, Prayer and Fasting, as they have developed through the Old Testament as the expression of true piety. According to Jesus these three dimensions are to be practiced “in private“, i.e. they are not to become subject of demonstrative self-righteousness and piety, a danger which cannot be ignored. Jesus, too, preaches about Fasting “in private” (Matthew 6:16-18):
"When you are fasting, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites! They neglect their appearance so that they may appear to others to be fasting. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, so that you may not appear to be fasting, except to your Father who is hidden. And your Father who sees what is hidden will repay you."
The details of this sermon from Jesus are not important, as long as the main point is not lost: fasting is aimed towards God and not towards other people. It demands faith and the will to an inner turning or returning towards God. Furthermore, fasting is not to be seen as a mere ascetic exercise: "This, rather, is the fasting that I wish: releasing those bounded unjustly, untying the thongs of the yoke; setting free the oppressed, breaking every yoke; Sharing your bread with the hungry, sheltering the oppressed and the homeless; Clothing the naked when you see them, and not turning your back on your own." (Isaiah 58,6f.) It is all about God, who is life and creates life, who leads the way out of all kinds of slavery into the promised land, the Kingdom of God, where all people are brothers and sisters.
At issue is therefore not primarily the outer exercise of fasting, but the conversion of the heart, the inner repentance. Without this, all actions external expression of repentance remain barren and dishonest. The inner conversion, however, demands to be expressed through visible signs, actions and acts of repentance. (Joel 2:12-13; Isaiah 1:16-17; Matthew 6:1-6;16-18). Inner repentance is a radical new direction given to every aspect of life, conversion, a wholehearted returning to God, desisting from sin, a renouncing of evil, as well as an aversion against the sins we have committed. At the same time it brings with it the desire and the decision to change ones life, as well as the hope for God’s mercy and the trust in his mercy.
Christian inner repentance can find many different kinds of expression. The Bible and the patriarchs speak in the main of the three above mentioned expressions: fasting, prayer and the giving of alms, as expressions of repentance before oneself, before God and before fellow humans. Next to the deep catharsis effected through Baptism and martyrdom, forgiveness of sin can also be achieved through efforts for reconciliation with one’s neighbor, the tears of repentance, the care for the wellbeing of one’s neighbor, the intercessions from the Saints and active charity – "because love covers a multitude of sins" (1 Peter 4:8).
The periods of repentance in the course of the church year (i.e. the days of fasting, each Friday in memory of the death of our Lord) are formative periods in the church’s life of repentance. These times are particularly suited to retreats, liturgies of repentance, pilgrimages, voluntary denial for example through fasting or charitable giving, and sharing with others (charitable and missionary).
The Church’s rules for fasting
The period of fasting before Easter, Lent, is aimed at the spiritual preparation for the celebration of the saving death and the resurrection of Jesus. Desisting from loud music and entertainment shall create the space for the necessary peace and quiet for this preparation.
Days of abstinence and/or repentance are all Fridays in a year. During Lent Catholic Christians should abstain from meat. On all other Fridays in the year Christians can either abstain from meat or perform another act of spiritual or physical charity. The deliberate choice of simple foods or abstention from luxury foods and entertainment both fulfill the abstinence requirement. Abstinence becomes compulsory from 14 years of age until the end of life.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church No 2447, acts of charity are: The works of mercy are charitable actions by which we come to the aid of our neighbor in his spiritual and bodily necessities. (cf. Isaiah 58:6-7)
. Days of fasting are Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. On those strict days of fasting Catholic Christians should refrain from eating any meat at all, should eat as simply as possible and be satisfied with one main meal (and at the most two small snacks). Those days should as far as possible be spent in silence, in increased prayer and include attending Worship. Fasting includes a noticeable abstention from food. A major part of the requirements for those two days are the abstention from loud music, dancing and entertainment. Fasting becomes compulsory from 18 years of age until the beginning of the 60th year.
Question 116: We can understand that you are hostile to Muslims. But why did you also kill Orthodox Christians during the Crusades? What was your hatred of the Orthodox? (TR)
Answer: 1. It cannot be denied that in the past, the relationship between Christians and Muslims was often marked by hostile actions and thoughts. In it’s publication „Declaration On The Relation Of The Church To Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate, 3, the Catholic Church declared publicly and bindingly for all Catholic believers that: “The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men.“
2. In response to the second part of the question we should remember the following:
In 1204, Constantinople was conquered by Catholic crusaders and was plundered. In those days, the city was the shining centre of the Greek-Orthodox world. The capital of the Byzantine Empire never recovered from this blow and in 1453 was conquered by the Ottomans.
On Good Friday, 2000, the Pope made a public Confession of Sins against the Unity of the Body of Christ.
A representative of the Roman Curia, Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, president of the Central Committee for the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, led the introduction:
Let us pray that our recognition of the sins which have ruined the unity of the Body of Christ and wounded fraternal charity will facilitate the way to reconciliation and communion among all Christians.
Silent prayer
The Holy Father
Merciful Father,
on the night before his Passion
your Son prayed for the unity of those
who believe in him:
in disobedience to his will, however,
believers have opposed one another,
becoming divided,
and have mutually condemned one another
and fought against one another.
We urgently implore your forgiveness
and we beseech the gift of a repentant heart,
so that all Christians, reconciled with you
and with one another,
will be able, in one body and in one spirit,
to experience anew the joy of full communion.
We ask this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.
Later, during his visit to Athens on May 4th and 5th 2001, the Pope spoke in his confession about misguided “sons and daughters of the church” who had sinned.
There follows a short review of the events in 1204 and the role of Pope Innocent III and the Catholic Church as a whole, to which the question alludes: Soon after his election in 1298 Pope Innocent III (1198 – 1216) proclaimed what is known as the fourth crusade, whereby he addressed mainly the clergy and the gentry of France as well as the Italian costal towns. In 1202 the Margrave Boniface of Monferrat, Baldwin VII of Flanders, Count Ludwig von Blois and others sailed from Venice to Egypt. As a price for a debt cancellation against the Pope’s will they conquered the Dalmatian costal town of Zara (the modern day Zadar), which had seceded in 1186. Following a request of his brother Isaak II, who had been banished by his brother, Emperor Alexios III, and his son Alexios IV, a brother-in-law of the German king Philipp of Swabia, the crusaders then turned against Constantinople which they conquered and plundered in the spring of 1204.
On April13th, 1204 and in accordance with a contract that had already been concluded in March, Baldwin was elected by the Venetians and Franconians to be the Latin Emperor, and a formal unified church was created. This, however, was rejected by the Greek population. The setting up of a Latin rule occupied the crusaders so much that they abandoned their original goal.
According to eyewitnesses: "the clergy and those given papal authorization" told the crusaders prior to the final and decisive attack, that he who died during the attack would be absolved of all his sins. After a third of the town was burnt, thousands of inhabitants sold into slavery, raped and murdered, after the city was completely robbed, the churches plundered and desecrated, and King Baldwin, newly consecrated by “the Latins“, reported enthusiastically about the “miracles“ of conquest and that “the hand of the Lord had accomplished all this“, the Pope wrote back: "We rejoice in our Lord and in the power of his strength, that He…..condescended to do such wonderful miracles through you…. to the glory and the magnification of the Holy See and for the purpose and rejoicing of Christendom....“
The Greek-Orthodox theologian Anastasios Kallis describes what it is that still moves and troubles the Orthodox community to this day: "The initiator of this unholy Crusade, Pope Innocent III, was horrified about the cruelty of the crusaders, who for three days plundered palaces, churches, monasteries and houses, who murdered without distinction, raped mothers and nuns – and yet he sent the crusaders his best wishes and interpreted the dissolution of the Byzantine Empire and the ecumenical patriarchy by the Latins as a deed of godly predestination, which had thus created a church unity in accordance with his wishes. The issue is that the Pope imposed a Latin patriarch in Constantinople, who then presided in place of the Orthodox patriarch for over half a century, while the Orthodox patriarch, together with the Emperor, had to flee to Nikaia in Asia Minor. This is the sore point that still burdens the relationship of the two churches.”
Now, on May 4th, 2001 in Athens, Pope John Paul II admitted: "Some memories are especially painful, and some events of the distant past have left deep wounds in the minds and hearts of people to this day. I am thinking of the disastrous taking of the imperial city of Constantinople, which was for so long the bastion of Christianity in the East. It is tragic that the assailants, who had set out to secure free access for Christians to the Holy Land, turned against their own brothers in the faith." The Pope continued: "For the occasions past and present, when sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have sinned by action or omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us the forgiveness we beg of him." The Orthodox Archbishop of Athens, Christodoulos, spontaneously applauded; the other present Bishops joined him.
These were the words of the Pope:
“I wish first of all to express to you the affection and regard of the Church of Rome. Together we share the apostolic faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior; we have in common the apostolic heritage and the sacramental bond of Baptism; and therefore we are all members of God’s family, called to serve the one Lord and to proclaim his Gospel to the world. The Second Vatican Council called on Catholics to regard the members of the other Churches "as brothers and sisters in the Lord" (Unitatis Redintegratio, 3), and this supernatural bond of brotherhood between the Church of Rome and the Church of Greece is strong and abiding.
Certainly, we are burdened by past and present controversies and by enduring misunderstandings. But in a spirit of mutual charity these can and must be overcome, for that is what the Lord asks of us. Clearly there is a need for a liberating process of purification of memory. For the occasions past and present, when sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have sinned by action or omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us the forgiveness we beg of him.
Some memories are especially painful, and some events of the distant past have left deep wounds in the minds and hearts of people to this day. I am thinking of the disastrous taking of the imperial city of Constantinople, which was for so long the bastion of Christianity in the East. It is tragic that the assailants, who had set out to secure free access for Christians to the Holy Land, turned against their own brothers in the faith. The fact that they were Latin Christians fills Catholics with deep regret. How can we fail to see here the mysterium iniquitatis (i.e., the mystery of evil) at work in the human heart? To God alone belongs judgment, and therefore we entrust the heavy burden of the past to his endless mercy, imploring him to heal the wounds which still cause suffering to the spirit of the Greek people. Together we must work for this healing if the Europe now emerging is to be true to its identity, which is inseparable from the Christian humanism shared by East and West“
Question 117: You accuse Allah [The God of the Qur’an and of the Islamic faith] to be without mercy. How can you explain Noah’s flood in the Christian faith? Did your loving God kill the people with loving rain? (TR)
Answer: In the beginning of the answer to the previous question we quoted the official statements of the Second Vatican Council, in which the Catholic Church solemnly expresses its respect of the faith of Muslims in a merciful God. It is therefore not true to say that the Catholic Church accuses the God of the Qur’an and of Islam to be without mercy.
According to the author of the book of Genesis, the deluge as described there (Genesis 6:5 – 9:17) was not simply a natural disaster. He employs the ancient, and at that time common mode of narrative as a vehicle to express a fundamental issue of faith of the peoples of Israel: God’s judgment in and through the events of history. If we compare the description of events in the book of Genesis with the epic of Gilgamesh or with other old versions of the story of a legendary flood, we immediately notice important differences between those stories and the biblical narrative. Certainly, there are naïve anthropomorphic details, such as the statement that Yahweh closed the door of the arc (7:16b), or that He smelt the pleasant smells of Noah’s sacrifice (9:21). But these details – which were taken over from the popular tradition which the author employed, do not darken the central view that Yahweh, the One God (in contrast to the many Gods of Babylon), acted on the stage of human history and eventually realized His purpose (in contrast to the capriciousness of the Babylonian gods).
Furthermore, God’s judgment is influenced by his concern for humankind. The story of the garden of Eden already showed this, when following Yahweh’s curse there is the clothing of Adam and Eve with coats made of fur (3:21), und where the telling of the judgment of Cain is softened by the protective sign placed on Cain’s forehead. (4:15). In the same vein, in the story of the deluge, Noah finds mercy before God. The boat, into which he takes his family and the animal pairs, was a sign from Yahweh’s intention of rescuing “the remainder”, which He will use to make a new beginning in history. The story ends with the comment that, although "the desires of man's heart are evil from the start", Yahweh will never again curse the world with such a tough judgment. The laws of nature – "seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, and day and night" – become signs of the faithfulness of His covenant. (8:20-22).
Question 118: What do you think about the so-called Thomas Gospel? (TR)
Answer: There are several apocryphal writings under the name of Thomas: the Acts of Thomas; the Apocalypse of Thomas; an Infancy Gospel of Thomas; further: the Gospel of Thomas.
In Christian theology these writings are known as apocryphal or as apocrypha which were not included in the Bible canon, but way of their title or alleged origin – Old Testament or New Testament person – (can) lay claim to inclusion. The New Testament apocrypha – usually Greek, later Latin and in other languages – follow the composition of the New Testament: Gospels (frequently only fragments remain), Acts of the Apostles, letters and apocalypses. The universal Church never allowed these writings a place in the canon. A comparison with the canonical books reveals clear differences: with a few exceptions, the apocrypha owe more to fantasy and imagination than to reflection on historical tradition. Their significance lies not in a possible contribution to expanding our knowledge of the life of Jesus or the times of the apostles, but in the possibility of discovering Christianity in a later era and on a very different level than that of the great theologians.
“The Infancy Gospel of Thomas”
The “Gospel of Thomas”, whereby the reader is probably referring here to the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, bears no relation to the “Coptic Gospel of Thomas”, which we refer to later. It is the primary exponent of the so-called “infancy gospels” that relate Jesus’ childhood.
The popularity of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is evident from the numerous translations and their variety: Greek, Latin and Syrian, Ethiopian, Arabic and Georgian and ancient Slav. Then there are also Arabic and Armenian infancy gospels that have taken material from them. The different versions diverge substantially and reveal how the material was partly expanded, partly abbreviated, and sometimes changed in content. The contents of these writings consist of loosely connected stories of Jesus’ childhood and conclude with the story of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple taken from Luke. Despite the reference to Jesus’ age in some of the events recorded and the citation from Luke 2:52 at the end, there is no genuine attempt to describe Jesus’ growth or development. The author’s intention is to present the boy Jesus as a child genius. The Jesus presented here is often quite simply not the Jesus of the canonical Gospels: While there are some direct healing miracles, other stories belong to the realm of folklore. Stories that tell of Jesus moulding clay birds on the Sabbath may be harmless; others portray him as “quick to anger, invective and malicious”. It must be said, however, that all the victims of his malice regain their health and all their limbs before the story ends. The legend was not primarily interested in Jesus’ adolescence and early adulthood between the age of twelve and the thirty-year-old who presents himself for baptism in the Jordan, but the earlier years of the twelve-year-old boy reported in Luke’s stories (Luke 2:41-52). For it is precisely the young boy who is to be presented as a childhood genius. All the miracles that Jesus later performs are anticipated here in a particularly obvious way. However, there is a considerable difference between these miracles and those reported in the canonical Gospels. Here the external material is simply entered into Jesus’ story without even a minimal attempt to adapt this to the image of Christ. Were it not for Jesus’ name next to the term “child” or “boy”, it would never occur that these tales of the high-spirited boy-God are supposed to supplement the oral tradition of Jesus. A particularly large number of parallels with Krishna and Buddha legends, as well as with all sorts of fairy tales, can be made here. The more crude and amazing the miracle, the more this finds favour with the compiler who does not even begin to question its authenticity. The child is to herald not only Jesus the miracle performer, but also Jesus the teacher. What Luke reports relatively soberly regarding the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple now escalates into the grotesque to the extent that the boy not only possesses all the wisdom of the age, but also embarrasses all human teachers with his profound and often dark words of wisdom. Despite the lack of good taste, moderation and discretion, it must be said that the compiler of these legends, who created the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, possesses a talent for telling stories with a naive world view. This is particularly true of the scenes of everyday childhood life.
(For the German translation of the text, see: Wilhelm Schneemelcher, Neutestmentliche Apokryphen, 5th Edition, Vol. 1. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1987, pp. 353-361; the English translation in Schneemelcher, Engl. tr., Vol. 1 (1963), pp. 388-401.)
The “Coptic Gospel of Thomas”
The Gospel of Thomas, originally written in Greek, was discovered as a Coptic translation amongst the papyri excavated in Nag Hammadi in Upper Egypt in 1945-6. It is now preserved in the Coptic Museum in Old Cairo. The Greek original dates from maybe 150, the Coptic version, which contains some additions, dates from around 400. In the title, “Didymus Judas Thomas” claims to have written the text. Unlike the canonical Gospels, which are historical, this text consists of a series of concise sentences and allegorical speeches attributed to Jesus. Some believe it is possible that this “Coptic Gospel of Thomas” includes some words of the Lord that are not included in the canonical Gospels and that trace back to an authentic tradition. Overall the content does not justify the exaggerated assertions made in its favour when it was first made public in 1959. The Greek Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Nos. 1, 654 and 655, preserved fragments of a Greek text that coincide – albeit not precisely − the Coptic version of the Gospel of Thomas found in Nag Hammadi. However, this work appears to be of Gnostic origin.
(German Text and Introduction in Schneemelcher, I (1959), pp. 199-223; Eng. tr. Schneemelcher I (1963), pp. 278-307. More recent German translation and introduction: G. Lüdemann & M. Janssen, Bibel der Häretiker. The Greek writings from Nag Hammadi. Stuttgart, 1997, pp. 129-148.)
Question 119: If Catholics are forbidden to use contraceptives, then why are population numbers in Catholic countries declining? (TR)
Answer: Firstly, here is the official position of the Church regarding the question of birth control. The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (Rome, 2006) deals with this question under the title: “The Family is the Sanctuary of Life” (Nos. 230-237).
“232. The family contributes to the social good in an eminent fashion through responsible motherhood and fatherhood, the spouses’ special participation in God’s work of creation. The weight of this responsibility must not be used as a justification for being selfishly closed but must guide the decisions of the spouses in a generous acceptance of life. “In relation to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised both in the duly pondered and generous decision to have a large family, and in the decision, made for serious reasons and in respect of the moral law, to avoid for a time or even indeterminately a new birth”. The motivations that should guide the couple in exercising responsible motherhood and fatherhood originate in the full recognition of their duties towards God, towards themselves, towards the family and towards society in a proper hierarchy of values.
233. Concerning the “methods” for practising responsible procreation, the first to be rejected as morally illicit are sterilization and abortion. The latter in particular is a horrendous crime and constitutes a particularly serious moral disorder; far from being a right, it is a sad phenomenon that contributes seriously to spreading a mentality against life, representing a dangerous threat to a just and democratic social coexistence.
Also to be rejected is recourse to contraceptive methods in their different forms: this rejection is based on a correct and integral understanding of the person and human sexuality and represents a moral call to defend the true development of peoples. On the other hand, the same reasons of an anthropological order justify recourse to periodic abstinence during times of the woman’s fertility. Rejecting contraception and using natural methods for regulating births means choosing to base interpersonal relations between the spouses on mutual respect and total acceptance, with positive consequences also for bringing about a more human order in society.”
It is entirely possible that also Catholics in some parts of the world only follow some of the Church’s teaching in this regard. As a basic principle, the Church does not make its doctrines dependent on whether the majority approve or follow them. As far as the population numbers for those countries with Catholic majorities are concerned, looking at Latin America, the Philippines and Africa, for example, one cannot generalise that the population in Catholic countries is declining.
Question 120: Is it logical to forgive sins every 25 years? Would anyone then fear sinning? (TR)
Question 121: Do you still forgive sins in return for alms or financial donations as was the custom during the building of Saint Peter’s Cathedral? (TR)
Answer to both questions: Both questions are marked by a grave misapprehension: the fundamental difference that the Church’s teaching makes between sin and punishment is ignored.
We need to remind ourselves briefly of the basic elements of the Church’s doctrine on sin, penance and reconciliation:The Catechism of the Catholic Church (for its full text see: www.vatican.va) summarises the relevant doctrine as follows:
“1485 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, Jesus showed himself to his apostles. He breathed on them, and said to them: 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained' (Jn 20:19, 22-23).
1486 The forgiveness of sins committed after Baptism is conferred by a particular sacrament called the sacrament of conversion, confession, penance, or reconciliation.
1487 The sinner wounds God’s honour and love, his own human dignity as a man called to be a son of God, and the spiritual well-being of the Church, of which each Christian ought to be a living stone.
1488 To the eyes of faith no evil is graver than sin and nothing has worse consequences for sinners themselves, for the Church, and for the whole world.
1489 To return to communion with God after having lost it through sin is a process born of the grace of God who is rich in mercy and solicitous for the salvation of men. One must ask for this precious gift for oneself and for others.
1490 The movement of return to God, called conversion and repentance, entails sorrow for and abhorrence of sins committed, and the firm purpose of sinning no more in the future. Conversion touches the past and the future and is nourished by hope in God’s mercy.
1491 The sacrament of Penance is a whole consisting in three actions of the penitent and the priest’s absolution. The penitent’s acts are repentance, confession or disclosure of sins to the priest, and the intention to make reparation and do works of reparation.
1494 The confessor proposes the performance of certain acts of "satisfaction" or "penance" to be performed by the penitent in order to repair the harm caused by sin and to re-establish habits befitting a disciple of Christ.
1496 The spiritual effects of the sacrament of Penance are:
- reconciliation with God by which the penitent recovers grace;
- reconciliation with the Church;
- remission of the eternal punishment incurred by mortal sins;
- remission, at least in part, of temporal punishments resulting from sin;
- peace and serenity of conscience, and spiritual consolation;
- an increase of spiritual strength for the Christian battle.
Closely connected to the Sacrament of Penance is the Church doctrine and practice of indulgence. The adult Catholic Catechism (1985, (Ed.) German Bishops’ Conference) states:
“An indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment of sins whose guilt has already been forgiven. Indulgence thus presupposes personal conversion, the reception of the sacrament of Penance for grave sins and, in the case of plenary indulgence, the reception of communion. Those who perform certain works (particularly prayer, visits to a pilgrimage church are granted an indulgence by the Church on the authority of the treasury of the satisfactions of Jesus Christ and the saints.”
The doctrine and practise of indulgence are hard to understand today. To understand the doctrine more fully, one must understand it within the context of its historical roots and factual background.
In general, indulgence has existed in one form or another since the beginning of the Church. Of course, the individual aspects of indulgence have a long history. In the ancient Church, it was particularly the petitions of the faithful, who had undergone much suffering from persecutions, which played a major role. Since temporal punishment in the early Church was “indulged” through prescribed punishments by the Church, for a long time there was talk of indulgences that lasted for around 100 or 500 days. Indulgence in its present form originated in the 11th century. Since the early Middle Ages, indulgence was often linked to certain acts of piety: joining a Crusade, a pilgrimage to sanctuaries, particular prayers or good works. These include the Portiuncula indulgence, the Jubilees indulgence on the occasion of the Holy Year and the All Souls indulgence.
Indulgence was often also linked to financial donations for Church purposes. Particularly in the late Middle Ages this led to major grievances, which were partly responsible for the beginning of the Reformation. As a result, the Council of Trent (1545-1563) fundamentally reformed the practice of indulgence and remedied the grievances. However, the Council fundamentally maintained that indulgence is a great blessing for Christians and therefore it condemned those who declare indulgence to be useless, or who deny the Church the right to grant indulgences. Nevertheless, the Council of Trent requested that the Church act with moderation when granting indulgences, according to the long-standing, approved tradition, and that particularly every attempt for gain be excluded. The doctrine of indulgence was explored more deeply and a renewal for the present was promulgated in the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul VI in 1967 on the revision of sacred indulgences.
For a deeper understanding of the doctrine of indulgence, which forms the foundation for the practise of indulgence, one must first understand that sin has a double consequence . Firstly, sin leads to a revocation of our communion with God and thus leads to the loss of eternal life (which is called the eternal punishment); however, it also injures and poisons the relationship between the human being and God and the life of the human being and the human community (temporal punishment). These two punishments are not “dictated” by God from without but follow from within from the very nature of sin. Forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trial of all kinds, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. The Christian should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely “the old person” and to put on the “new person” (Eph 4:22-24).
The Church offers the Christian another path which he may take in the community of the Church which is community of believers that shares the gifts of grace made to here through Jesus Christ. The Christian who seeks to purify himself of sin and to become holy with the help of God’s grace is not alone. He is a link in the body of Christ. In Christ all Christians form a large community of solidarity: “If one member suffers, all suffer together with it (1 Cor 12:26). This wonderful exchange of the goods of salvation, which Jesus Christ and, with the help of Christ’s mercy, the saints gained for us, is the “Church’s treasury”. “An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favour of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins. Thus the Church does not want simply to come to the aid of these Christians, but also to spur them to works of devotion, penance and charity. Since also the faithful departed now being purified are also members of the same communion of saints, we can help them by obtaining indulgence for them, so that the temporal punishments due for their sins may be remitted.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church).
A further excerpt from the Catechism of the Catholic Church in this regard :
“In the Communion of Saints
1474 The Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and to become holy with the help of God’s grace is not alone. “The life of each of God’s children is joined in Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single mystical person.” (Paul VI)
1475 In the communion of saints, “a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth. Between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things.” In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin.
1476 We also call these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the Church’s treasury, which is “not the sum total of the material goods which have accumulated during the course of the centuries. On the contrary the 'treasury of the Church' is the infinite value, which can never be exhausted, which Christ’s merits have before God. They were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and merits of his Redemption exist and find their efficacy” (Paul VI).
This means that the grievance of granting indulgences in return for alms or financial donations for good causes is abolished under canon law since at least the Council of Trent (1545-63).
As far as the theology and practise of indulgence by the Church during the Jubilee Year 2000 is concerned, the Bull of Indiction of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000 “Incarnationis mysterium” of 29 November 1998 (German Bishops’ Conference: Bull of the Holy See 136) gives detailed information. A paragraph from this text must suffice here:
“This doctrine on indulgences therefore 'teaches firstly how sad and bitter it is to have abandoned the Lord God (cf. Jer 2:19). When they gain indulgences, the faithful understand that by their own strength they would not be able to make good the evil which by sinning they have done to themselves and to the entire community, and therefore they are stirred to saving deeds of humility'. Furthermore, the truth about the communion of saints which unites believers to Christ and to one another, reveals how much each of us can help others — living or dead — to become ever more intimately united with the Father in heaven.
Drawing on these doctrinal reasons and interpreting the motherly intuition of the Church, I decree that throughout the entire Jubilee all the faithful, properly prepared, be able to make abundant use of the gift of the indulgence, according to the directives which accompany this Bull (cf. attached decree)”.
|
