|
Question 136: What is your opinion on the ordination of women in the Protestant Church? Is a female pope also possible in future? (TR)
Answer: The Catholic Church’s answer to the ordination of women is in the Apostolic Letter by John Paul II On Reserving Priestly Ordination To Men Alone from 22 May 1994. The pope writes here:
1. Priestly Ordination, which hands on the office entrusted by Christ to his Apostles of teaching, sanctifying, and governing the faithful, has in the Catholic Church from the beginning always been reserved to men alone. This tradition has also been faithfully maintained by the Oriental Churches….But since the question [of ordaining women] had also become the subject of debate among theologians and in certain Catholic circles, Paul VI directed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to set forth and expound the teaching of the Church on this matter….
2. The [resulting] Declaration Inter Insigniores [from 15 Oct. 1976] recalls and explains the fundamental reasons for this teaching, reasons expounded by Paul VI, and concludes that the Church “does not consider herself authorized to admit women to priestly ordination.” …. In the Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem, [from 15 August 1988] I myself, (says John Paul II), wrote in this regard: “In calling only men as his Apostles, Christ acted in a completely free and sovereign manner. In doing so, he exercised the same freedom with which, in all his behaviour, he emphasized the dignity and the vocation of women, without conforming to the prevailing customs and to the traditions sanctioned by the legislation of the time.”
In fact, the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles attest that this call was made in accordance with God’s eternal plan: Christ chose those whom he willed (cf. Mk 3:13-14; Jn 6:70), and he did so in union with the Father, “through the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:2), after having spent the night in prayer (cf. Lk 6:12)
. Therefore, in granting admission to the ministerial priesthood, the Church has always acknowledged as a perennial norm her Lord’s way of acting in choosing twelve men whom he made the foundation of his Church (cf. Rev 21:14). These men did not in fact receive only a function which could thereafter be exercised by any member of the Church; rather they were specifically and intimately associated in the mission of the Incarnate Word himself (cf. Mt 10:1, 7-8; 28:16-20; Mk 3:13- 16; 16:14-15). The Apostles did the same when they chose fellow workers who would succeed them in their ministry. Also included in this choice were those who, throughout the time of the Church, would carry on the Apostles’ mission of representing Christ the Lord and Redeemer.
3. Furthermore, the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Mother of the Church, received neither the mission proper to the Apostles nor the ministerial priesthood clearly shows that the non-admission of women to priestly ordination cannot mean that women are of lesser dignity, nor can it be construed as discrimination against them. Rather, it is to be seen as the faithful observance of a plan to be ascribed to the wisdom of the Lord of the universe.
The presence and the role of women in the life and mission of the Church, although not linked to the ministerial priesthood, remain absolutely necessary and irreplaceable. As the Declaration Inter Insigniores points out, “the Church desires that Christian women should become fully aware of the greatness of their mission; today their role is of capital importance both for the renewal and humanization of society and for the rediscovery by believers of the true face of the Church”. The New Testament and the whole history of the Church give ample evidence of the presence in the Church of women, true disciples, witnesses to Christ in the family and in society, as well as to total consecration to the service of God and of the Gospel….
Moreover, it is to the holiness of the faithful that the hierarchical structure of the Church is totally ordered. For this reason, the Declaration Inter Insigniores recalls: “the only better gift, which can and must be desired, is love (cf. 1 Cor 12 and 13). The greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven are not the ministers but the saints”.
Question 137: If Jesus is so powerful (i.e. can perform powerful miracles) and loves all people, then why did he not save all people through a miracle? (TR)
Answer: The formulation of the question betrays that the reader has apparently not taken into sufficient consideration that God created humans, above all, as creatures with a free will. This is the immeasurable distinction between human beings and other created beings. Only a creature with free will can really respond to God in love. God could enforce all manner of things by a powerful miracle but God created man in His wisdom – “created in His own image” – so that He cannot force humankind’s response of love truly and freely given. The drama of God’s history with humankind is that from the beginning God respects free will. Mary, the mother of Jesus the Messiah, was the first person, who, healed by Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit, responded to God the Father in completely free and total love through her unconditional Yes. Her sinless Yes was the fruit of her son’s obedience, obedience even to the cross.
Question 138. Did the Pope himself create limbo so that he can simply abrogate it? You believed in limbo until now. After the Pope abolished limbo, what happened to those who were there? (TR)
Answer: In the first part of our answer, we present Islamic and Christian teaching regarding the reality of the Turkish word Araf (= Arabic a’rāf) that the reader has used. In the second part, we ask to what extent it is correct to say that the Pope has “abrogated” limbo.
Islamic
The Arabic word a‘rāf means: the summit, elevation. Al-A’rāf is the title of Sura 7. Here it means: the mountain crest, the heights and here it alludes to that reference in Sura 7, which describes the peoples’ behaviour who dwell neither in hell nor in paradise: 7,46-49: Between them shall be a veil, and on the heights will be men who would know every one by his marks: they will call out to the Companions of the Garden, "peace on you": they will not have entered, but they will have an assurance (thereof). When their eyes shall be turned towards the Companions of the Fire, they will say: "Our Lord! send us not to the company of the wrong-doers". The men on the heights will call to certain men whom they will know from their marks, saying: “Of what profit to you were your hoards and your arrogant ways?” “ Behold! are these not the men whom you swore that Allah with His Mercy would never bless?”
In the exegesis of the classical Muslim Koran commentaries compiled in the Korankommentar (Gütersloh 1996), Vol. 7, p. 74, A. Th. Khoury writes:
“There are various opinions held by Muslim commentators regarding the place described as the mountain crest and the men who live there.
- The summit belongs to the heights of paradise and the men are the elect who have been particularly blessed.
- The place is the mountain crest on the border between paradise and hell, and the men are the distinguished amongst those who have abounded in obedience to God and who have received His special reward. Closer are angels or prophets or martyrs. From the hill they observe those who have been saved as they enter paradise and those who have been damned as they plunge into hell. They themselves must wait for the longed-for happiness in paradise until those who have been saved and those who have been condemned have taken their final places. Then they will enter paradise and will occupy the high ranks determined for them.
- Others (the majority according to Tafsir al-Manar) believe here that the men are in the lowest ranks of the saved, or are those whose good and evil deeds balance each other out, and who have to wait until God in His mercy and grace brings them into paradise. Or they are the evil-doers amongst the faithful whom God forgives once after a certain time has elapsed and allows them to enter paradise.”
The last of these three alternative interpretations led to the conception of a “stopover” between paradise and hell. For this reason al-A’raf came to mean limbo. This belief then coincides with certain exegeses of another Koranic term barzakh (see Sura 23,100). Barzakh means obstacle, barrier, and with some commentators it means a physical barrier between paradise and hell. In eschatological interpretations, the term is sometimes understood similarly to the Christian term limbo. Ibn Hazm (died 1064) teaches that sinners who are believers do not remain in hell for ever, but are let into paradise once they have served their temporal punishment. This conception of a temporal hell resembles the Christian conception of purgatory (cf. art. Al-A’raf in C. Glassé, The Concise Encyclopaedia of Islam (London, 1989)
Christian-Catholic
“Limbo” (Latin for border, fringe, edge) means the place or condition of the dead who are not in heaven, in hell or in purgatory. Limbus patrum (limbo of the fathers) is the place or condition of the righteous who died before Christ and who could not achieve heavenly beatitude from Christ’s descent into hell and His ascension. Limbus puerorum, which has gained significance only in the Christian tradition, is the place or condition of minors or those who were able to use their reason. These people, even after the Gospel had been sufficiently spread, never received the sacrament of baptism and thus were not integrated into the Church.[The following needs to be said concerning this teaching:]
(a) Holy Scripture offers no witness to Limbus puerorum. (b) While the earliest Christian tradition says nothing explicit regarding the fate of the unbaptised, Limbus puerorum gains great significance in the defence against Pelagianism (i.e. the teaching condemned by the Church that humans can make the first and decisive steps to gaining salvation through their own efforts without divine grace). In refuting the teaching that although baptism was necessary to gain supernatural beatitude (heaven) but not, on the other hand, to gain natural beatitude (eternal life), Augustine stresses, by calling upon the witness of Holy Scripture, that baptism is necessary for salvation and the resulting integration into the Church is the only path to salvation. Scripture and the faith of the Church say nothing about natural beatitude. Thus unbaptised children go to hell even though they suffer only the mildest punishment. Scholastic theologians attempt to soften Augustine’s rigour by postulating that for the unbaptised limbo is the final condition in the sense of natural beatitude, which is different to hell (excluded from seeing God but no sensory agonies). (c) The Magisterium has never explicitly acknowledged the teaching on Limbus puerorum, even though this belief may not be described at a Pelagian myth, according to a judgment by Pius VI (1794) (DS 2626). (d) Limbus puerorum has gained no significance in ecumenical dialogue. (e) There is disagreement in contemporary Catholic theology on the teaching regarding limbo. Some theologians regard the teaching as binding because in the Catholic tradition it appears above all in various catechisms. However, most contemporary theologians reject limbo, firstly, because it is hard to reconcile with God’s will for universal salvation and secondly, because both Holy Scripture as well as medieval judgements by the Magisterium only know heaven or hell as the final resting place for salvation or calamity following a possible catharsis in purgatory (Josef Finkenzeller, art. Limbus in: W. Beinert (ed.), Lexikon der katholischen Dogmatik (Freiburg, 1987), p. 349ff).
2. Has the Pope “abrogated” (abolished) limbo?
The answer to Question 1 reveals that a Pope neither created this doctrine nor did a Pope abolish it. It is important to remember the “hierarchy of truths” here. This states that the individual dogmas should be understood as a part of Christian doctrine and that this doctrine has structures and accents which give faith an objective unity, which is frequently discussed and which also justifies a legitimate plurality of theology. In the final analysis, all articles of faith show God’s revelation as effected through Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit to save humanity. Therefore, the core of Christian belief is the doctrine of the triune God together with the doctrine of God made man in Jesus Christ, and the associated doctrine of human salvation and the recreation of humankind. The principle of the hierarchy of truths teaches that a distinction needs to be made between content that is binding from the Gospel and traditions that are legitimate but are not generally binding. Moreover, the Christian doctrine of God’s will for universal salvation needs to be pointed out here. By this the Church understands God’s fundamental loving intention to offer salvation to all people. The opposite of this are theories of God’s limited or particular will for salvation where God has predestined only part of humankind for salvation. The Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Church, Lumen gentium (n. 16), teaches that people who search for God and live according to their conscience can gain salvation.
Question 139. I am deeply impressed with your homepage! Galileo Galilei has been rehabilitated. Why has Giordano Bruno not yet been rehabilitated? (DE)
Answer: Our answer is closely bound to the relevant passages in the highly regarded work Toleranz und Gewalt. Das Christentum zwischen Bibel und Schwert (Münster, 2007) by the Münster-based Church historian Arnold Angenendt.
The most prominent victims of the Roman Inquisition are truly Giordano Bruno (died 1600) and Galileo Galilei (died 1642). Both gained “an exceptional importance for science and the modern interpretation of the world” and became “precisely for that reason – because they were condemned by the Inquisition – examples of a Church opposed to progress. Giordano Bruno, a Dominican in Naples who subsequently tirelessly journeyed to France, England and Germany, represented the theology of an unlimited, infinite universe, and also the plurality of the worlds. The Roman Inquisition accused him of identifying the Holy Spirit with the soul of the world (Weltseele); denying the Holy Trinity, transubstantiation, the virginity of Mary, Jesus’ miracles; and particularly for asserting the infinity and plurality of the worlds… In reality his concept of the infinity of the cosmos in time and space made the Christian event of salvation ‘placeless’. On 17 January he was burned in the Roman square Campo die Fiori (cf. ebd p 285).
Most writers who, in recent years, have studied the history of the Inquisition have concluded that the trials carried out by the Roman Inquisition were less cruel than the secular trials and sentences of the period. William Monter states that the most important distinctions were between repentant and unrepentant sinners, between accidental and deliberate sinners, between the criminal and the insane. Unlike most pre-modern tribunals, the Inquisitors relied less on torture as a means to determine the truth, but on cross examination, often with considerable psychological finesse. “Although they were certainly capable of recommending the death sentence for worldly violence..., however, they mostly imposed only sentences of various lengths and intensity. In the final analysis, their concern was rather more for a culture of humiliation than force.”
We follow Arnold Angenendt’s critical recapitulation of the Galileo and Bruno cases, as well as the entire Inquisition problematic as a phenomenon of the Catholic Church:
“In the final analysis, however, such comparisons should not and cannot deflect from the necessary fundamental criticism of the Inquisition and, least of all, should not used to make it seem better than it was. For it is precisely here that the Catholic Church shamefully removed itself from the early Christian commitment to renounce force in religious matters. Nevertheless, the comparison with secular justice is essential. The Inquisition myth requires that justice be done by understanding the entire historical context and thus is is also necessary to understand the revisionists with their surprise at new developments: the Inquisition was not the horror scenario that it was, and often still is, portrayed. However, that is not the last word: how could Christianity that wanted to be a religion of love and declared humankind to be the image of God, allow such a thing to happen, or even bring it about? The answer must be two-fold, firstly historical and then theological. Historically speaking, established Christianity managed to remain faithful at least to a shade of the New Testament commandment “It will not be so among you (Mt 20:26): the Inquisition was not what it is generally held to be. In reality it had a greater sense of justice and was less cruel than other forms of justice. It would be a historical prejudice not to be willing to acknowledge this. However, the theological response must be different. How could such a thing happen in a Church that wanted to commit itself to non-violence and which regarded, and still regards, itself as led by the Holy Spirit, saw itself and still sees itself as governed by the Papal office? John Paul II.’s plea for forgiveness during the Holy Year 2000 does not go far enough to explain this [concerning this Papal plea see Question and Answer 41, here above as well as the Vatican II Declaration on Religious Freedom]. True, the Pope has characterised as inadequate an attempt to exonerate the Inquisition on the grounds that, compared with other tribunals of the time, it was more moderate and more correct in its work. However, is it not also the case that the historical fact of Inquisitorial executions needs to be reconciled with the papal-universal claim to leadership?” (A. Angenendt, Toleranz und Gewalt, pp. 293-94.)
Question 140. Some priests believe that the Incil (Gospel or the entire New Testament) is not entirely trustworthy. What do you think? (TR)
Answer: The Apostle Paul writes in the First Letter to the Thessalonians: “God’s word, which is also at work in you believers” (2:13). And the Second Vatican Councils states aptly: “For in the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven meets His children with great love and speaks with them; and the force and power in the word of God is so great that it stands as the support and energy of the Church, the strength of faith for her sons, the food of the soul, the pure and everlasting source of spiritual life. Consequently these words are perfectly applicable to Sacred Scripture: ‘For the word of God is living and active’” (Heb. 4:12) and “it has power to build you up and give you your heritage among all those who are sanctified” (Acts 20:32; see 1 Thess 2:13). (Dei Verbum, 21)
By reading these Scriptures as the heart of the living tradition of the community of faith, they provide direction in answering numerous contemporary questions: the rights and responsibilities of the human person, the value of human life from conception to death, the necessity of protecting and preserving creation, the search for lasting justice and enduring peace for all peoples. The Gospel teaches in a particular way the worth of every individual person, the love that every person should be treated with, and trust in God, whose “steadfast love endures forever” (Ps 136). In our day, Holy Scripture is often misunderstood as if it undermines or even suffocates human freedom and growth. In reality Scripture is the path to truth, the path that leads to true freedom (Jn 8:32). Scripture is often regarded as out-dated and irrelevant. However, in reality, it contains the words of life that have lasting relevance. They are always new and have the power to change and renew people (Heb 4:12). Above all, however, we do not find dead words in Holy Scripture but we find Christ Himself, the eternal word of the living God (Catechism of the Catholic Church – CCC - 108). In Holy Scripture Jesus, the Word made man, comes to meet us since the entire Holy Scripture talks to us about Christ (ebd. 134).
Question 141. What will the Last Day look like? (TR)
Answer: The essentials regarding Christian belief on the Last Day has already been dealt with in Question and Answer 125 (p. 14). To this, I would add the following:
How will the dead rise again?
Our language, our words relate to this world and its reality. We lack the words for the world of God and the reality of God. The early Christians already experienced this when they asked: How will the dead arise again? What will become of the body that is rotting in the grave? Are the disabled still disabled once they have arisen? Does a child that dies grow into an adult in heaven? What happens to all who have already died in the hope of God and in faith in Jesus Christ, and are yet to die?
To all these questions – and to many more – we have no better answer than to look to the risen Lord Jesus, who is transfigured in glory and at the same time still bears the wounds of His suffering as a sign of His great love for which He gave us His life. The empty grave, the marks of the nails and the new and mysterious epiphany of the risen Lord allow us to say that the dead will arise with their bodies, which will be transformed because they are glorified, just as the grain of wheat that falls into the ground, is transformed in death to bear much fruit (cf. Jn 12:24).
“What is ‘rising’? In death, the separation of the soul from the body, the human body decays and the soul goes to meet God, while awaiting its reunion with its glorified body. God, in his almighty power, will definitively grant incorruptible life to our bodies by reuniting them with our souls, through the power of Jesus’ Resurrection” (CCC, 997).
In view of this mystery surrounding life and love that rests “on the almighty power of God”, Saint Paul says to his community in Corinth: “…What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the human heart conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor 2:9).
When we partake in the Eucharist, we give our body the body of our Lord as food. “...our participation in the Eucharist already gives us a foretaste of Christ’s transfiguration of our bodies” (CCC 1000). “Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day” (Jn 6:54).
In anticipation of the resurrection, the body and soul of the faithful already have a part in the dignity of “belonging to Christ”. Hence the call to honour our own bodies but also the bodies of others, especially the suffering (cf. CCC 1004). “The body is meant .... for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Do you not know that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit within you?...You are not your own …therefore glorify God in your body” (1 Cor 6:13-15,19-20)!
Christianity and death
Death makes people afraid – even for those who trust in God death means parting and separation. Everything that makes up the life of a person - possessions and people - must be left behind. Everyone dies his or her own death and does so with empty hands.
No one who is dying has to be ashamed of their fear. Jesus also called out to His father on the cross. Everyone can call out to Christ when their hour approaches. Just like the criminal who was crucified with Jesus, everyone can put their whole trust in the saviour, who responds: “Amen, truly I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” (Lk 23:43). With Jesus every dying person can be sure that merciful God will transform all fear into joy and will fill empty hands. “For those who die in Christ’s grace it is a participation in the death of the Lord, so that they can also share in his Resurrection” (CCC 1006).
We Christians believe we will meet God when we die. Eyes that have been closed in death will open. We stand before God: each of us with our story, our love and our sins. With everything that they have done for good and for evil: out of love of our neighbour but also to their detriment. We believe that this encounter is decisive to life.
The prophets of Israel and Jesus Himself speak of this experience as a judgement. The eyes of God look down to the ground. Nothing can be hidden from Him, nothing can be glossed over. He, who is infinitely just, knows that we are weak, and considers this. He, who is infinitely merciful, sees whether we admit to all in our weakness and whether we await everything from His mercy. Here judgement will be given: reward or retribution, blessedness or perdition, in the bosom of Abraham or eternal fire, paeans of praise or weeping and gnashing of teeth (cf. Mt 8:12), dancing at the wedding banquet or knocking in vain on closed doors (Mt 25:1-13). These are images that hit a raw nerve. They are aimed at those who are on the path so that they may convert, change their life, and grow strong in Christ’s love: in faith, in hope and in love.
“For to your faithful people life is changed, not taken away,
and when our mortal flesh is laid aside,
an everlasting dwelling place
is made ready for us in heaven.”
(Preface to the Mass for the dead)
Death: marks the end of earthly life and beginning of eternal life. The soul separates itself from the perishable body. It encounters God in the particular judgement. On the Last Day when Jesus will come again in glory, all the dead will be raised up, their souls reunited with their bodies, the just with a transfigured and glorified body, and the damned with a body filled with pain and anguish.
Judgement: There is a distinction between the particular judgement (judgement of the individual) and the Last Judgement. The particular judgement occurs immediately after death. This decides on either entrance into the blessedness of heaven or immediate and everlasting damnation. Judgement depends on how much each person has tried to follow the will of God in their earthly life and to believe in Jesus Christ. This judgement is final. The Last Judgement (judgement of the nations) comes after that and is connected to the Last Day when Jesus will come again to fully reveal God’s kingdom, His kingdom. On this day all the dead will be resurrected. In the presence of all the nations, who will be gathered before Christ, each person will be judged with their soul and with their body (cf. Mt 25:32).
Sentence: Sentence will be measured against free will during a person’s life on earth. Whoever has consciously and freely separated themselves from God has no place amongst the elect; their lot is amongst the accursed “in eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Mt 25:41); that is “hell”. For those who acknowledge God and His Son Jesus Christ but who, at their death, are not yet fully prepared or worthy to meet God face a time of purification, of waiting and maturity. This is “purgatorium” (purgatory). There they wait in hope of entering full communion with God. The prayers of the faithful help them. Of the elect, those who let the love of Christ saturate them while they were on earth and who let His love convert them, Christ says: “Come, you that are blessed by my father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Mt 25:34). They see God as He is and they will be like Him (cf. 1 Jn 3:2); they live eternally in communion with Him. They are in “heaven”.
(This text, with some minor changes, is selected from: Ich glaube. Kleiner Katholischer Katechismus (Königstein im Taunus: Aid to the Church in Need, 2004), p. 107-110.
Question 142. What is the significance of the family in Christianity? (TR)
Answer: As a rule, a child is born into a family. The first faces a child looks into are those of his mother and father. Surrounded by his parent’s love and joy, the child matures into his being as a human. From his parents he learns to walk upright. He knows that he can count on their love. A person who does not experience this in their life will often have problems trusting others, and believing in love and in being loved.
Only by loving others, does a person become all that they are for God, who is love itself and who created each person in His image as man and woman (Gen 1:27). When a man and a woman meet and fall in love, they no longer want to live without each other. With the engagement they enter into a special time of preparation for marriage – a school for life and chastity, a time of grace during which the couple deepen in their marriage plans and the duties that come with marriage. In the sacrament of Matrimony the couple freely and mutually give their consent to life-long fidelity. Marriage comes about through this consent. The human love of the bridal couple is now transformed internally by the love of God so that they give each other God’s love and they sanctify each other (cf. CCC 1639-1642). However, since this love is not just about the love of two people but also includes the love of God, the bridal couple make this vow in public before the whole church community (represented by the witnesses) and before the priest or deacon. He represents the Church and seals the marriage by blessing the couple. Through the blessing, the couple receive the Holy Spirit as the communion of love of Christ and the Church (cf. CCC 1624).
Jesus Himself grew up in a family that was marked in a special way by the holiness of Mary and Joseph. He reveals Himself to His disciples at the beginning of His public life by performing His first miracle at a wedding feast (Jn 2:1-11). “The Church attaches great importance to Jesus’ presence at the wedding at Cana. She sees in it the confirmation of the goodness of marriage and the proclamation that thenceforth marriage will be an efficacious sign of Christ’s presence” (CCC 1613). “This is a great mystery, and I am applying it to Christ and the church” (Eph 5:32). The bond is sealed by the couple’s mutual dedication of self: They become “one body and one soul” and in doing so find their fulfilment and their happiness.
It is the nature of marital love go beyond physical unity and be open to fertility. New life can come out of the marital bond. The man and woman become father and mother. Their lives expand. Every child is a gift from God, but also a mission. That is why it is important that the spouses are clear before God and their conscience regarding the number of their children and the possibilities of raising them. Likewise every child has the right to be born into a family founded on marriage. Artificial contraception is not permitted. However, natural family planning may be used.
“Unity, indissolubility, and openness to fertility are essential to marriage. Polygamy is incompatible with the unity of marriage; divorce separates what God has joined together; the refusal of fertility turns married life away from its ‘supreme gift’, the child” (CCC 1664).
Marriage is a bond for life. Jesus said, “Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate” (Mk 10:9). Those are harsh words for many because there is no guarantee that a relationship will succeed: people can make mistakes; their love can dwindle in the face of illness or dire circumstances. It can happen that two people who loved each other have no more sympathy for one another and can no longer talk to one another and become estranged. Indeed, the sacrament of Matrimony must not be just a memory of happier times since, in truth, it is the ever-accessible source of grace that never runs dry and lasts until the end of life. From this the married couple can renew their mutual love, find the strength to forgive, find help in times of trial and find joy in fidelity.
Nevertheless, there are marriages that fail, and Christians rightly believe that even in such a case they are not required to relinquish God’s love or the church of Christ. However, they are not free to remarry (cf. CCC 1649-1651).
However, there is the possibility of verifying via an annulment process, whether the marriage was truly concluded according to the Christian understanding of marriage.
The marriage vows:
I take you to be my wife (my husband),
to have and to hold, from this day forward,
for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part.
Question 143. What is the Christian understanding of justice, human rights and freedom? Does Christianity want this for all people, that is, including non-Christians? (TR)
Answer: In the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church the Church has stated the eternal principles that constitute the intrinsic pivotal points of this doctrine. This deals with the principle of the dignity of the human person on which every other principle and content of social doctrine is based. The principles of social doctrine form in their entirety each initial formulation of truth regarding society that invokes and invites each and every conscience to act in freedom and in joint responsibility with others and for others. These principles have a profound moral significance in that they address the ultimate foundation for social life: the principle of the common good, the principle of the universal destination of goods (including the preferential option for the poor), as well as the principles of subsidiarity, participation and solidarity.
In addition to these principles, which must form the foundation of a society created to respect human dignity, the Church’s social doctrine also addresses basic values. All social values relate to the dignity of the human person and demand its authentic development. This primarily concerns truth, freedom, justice and love. Respect for the rightful autonomy of earthly realities hinders the Church from reserving for herself any specific technical and secular competencies. However, it does not prevent her from intervening and making clear to what extent these values are confirmed or abused in the various decisions that humans make (cf. n. 198).
Truth: “Men and women have the specific duty to move always towards the truth, to respect it and bear responsible witness to it. Living in the truth has special significance in social relationships. In fact, when the coexistence of human beings within a community is founded on truth, it is ordered and fruitful, and it corresponds to their dignity as persons. The more people and social groups strive to resolve social problems according to the truth, the more they distance themselves from abuses and act in accordance with the objective demands of morality …” (Compendium n. 198).
Freedom: “Freedom is the highest sign in man of his being made in the divine image and, consequently, is a sign of the sublime dignity of every human person. ‘Freedom is exercised in relationships between human beings. Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognised as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. The right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person.’ The meaning of freedom must not be restricted, considering it from a purely individualistic perspective and reducing it to the arbitrary and uncontrolled exercise of one’s own personal autonomy: ‘Far from being achieved in total self-sufficiency and the absence of relationships, freedom only truly exists where reciprocal bonds, governed by truth and justice, link people to one another’. The understanding of freedom becomes deeper and broader when it is defended, even at the social level, in all of its various dimensions” (ebd. 199).
“The value of freedom, as an expression of the singularity of each human person, is respected when every member of society is permitted to fulfil his personal vocation; to seek the truth and profess his religious, cultural and political ideas; to express his opinions; to choose his state of life and, as far as possible, his line of work; to pursue initiatives of an economic, social or political nature. This must take place within a ‘strong juridical framework’, within the limits imposed by the common good and public order, and, in every case, in a manner characterised by responsibility. On the other hand, freedom must also be expressed as the capacity to refuse what is morally negative, in whatever guise it may be presented, as the capacity to distance oneself effectively from everything that could hinder personal, family or social growth. The fullness of freedom consists in the capacity to be in possession of oneself in view of the genuine good, within the context of the universal common good” (ebd. 200).
Justice: “Justice is a value that accompanies the exercise of the corresponding cardinal moral virtue. According to its most classic formulation, it ‘consists in the constant and firm will to give their due to God and neighbour.’ From a subjective point of view, justice is translated into behaviour that is based on the will to recognise the other as a person, while, from an objective point of view, it constitutes the decisive criteria of morality in the intersubjective and social sphere. The Church’s social Magisterium constantly calls for the most classical forms of justice to be respected: commutative, distributive and legal justice. Ever greater importance has been given to social justice, which represents a real development in general justice, the justice that regulates social relationships according to the criterion of observance of the law. Social justice, a requirement related to the social question which today is worldwide in scope, concerns the social, political and economic aspects and, above all, the structural dimension of problems and their respective solutions” (ebd. 201).
The Way of Love: “It is from the inner wellspring of love that the values of truth, freedom and justice are born and grow” (ebd. 205). “Love presupposes and transcends justice, which ‘must find its fulfilment in charity’. If justice is ‘in itself suitable for “arbitration” between people concerning the reciprocal distribution of objective goods in an equitable manner, love and only love (including that kindly love that we call “mercy”) is capable of restoring man to himself.’ Human relationships cannot be governed solely by the measure of justice…” (ebd. 206).
“No legislation, no system of rules or negotiation will ever succeed in persuading men and peoples to live in unity, brotherhood and peace; no line of reasoning will ever be able to surpass the appeal of love. Only love, in its quality as ‘form of the virtues’ (forma virtutum), can animate and shape social interaction, moving it towards peace in the context of a world that is ever more complex. In order that all this may take place, however, it is necessary that care be taken to show love not only in its role of prompting individual deeds but also as a force capable of inspiring new ways of approaching the problems of today’s world, of profoundly renewing structures, social organisations, legal systems from within. In this perspective love takes on the characteristic style of social and political charity: ‘Social charity makes us love the common good’, it makes us effectively seek the good of all people, considered not only as individuals or private persons but also in the social dimension that unites them” (ebd. 207). In this respect we can say: “Social and political charity is not exhausted in relationships between individuals but spreads into the network formed by these relationships, which is precisely the social and political community; it intervenes in this context seeking the greatest good for the community in its entirety……It is undoubtedly an act of love, the work of mercy by which one responds here and now to a real and impelling need of one’s neighbour, but it is an equally indispensable act of love to strive to organise and structure society so that one’s neighbour will not find himself in poverty, above all when this becomes a situation within which an immense number of people and entire populations must struggle, and when it takes on the proportions of a true worldwide social issue” (ebd. 208).
Human Rights: “The movement towards the identification and proclamation of human rights is one of the most significant attempts to respond effectively to the inescapable demands of human dignity. The Church sees in these rights the extraordinary opportunity that our modern times offer, through the affirmation of these rights, for more effectively recognising human dignity and universally promoting it as a characteristic inscribed by God the Creator in his creature. The Church’s Magisterium has not failed to note the positive value of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations on 10 December 1948, which Pope John Paul II defined as ‘a true milestone on the path of humanity's moral progress’” (ebd. 152).
“The ultimate source of human rights is not found in the mere will of human beings, in the reality of the State, in public powers, but in man himself and in God his Creator. These rights are ‘universal, inviolable, inalienable.’ Universal because they are present in all human beings, without exception of time, place or subject. Inviolable insofar as ‘they are inherent in the human person and in human dignity’ and because ‘it would be vain to proclaim rights, if at the same time everything were not done to ensure the duty of respecting them by all people, everywhere, and for all people’. Inalienable insofar as ‘no one can legitimately deprive another person, whoever they may be, of these rights, since this would do violence to their nature’” (ebd. 153).
Question 144. What is your opinion on interreligious dialogue? (TR)
Answer: “Interreligious dialogue is an encounter between people of different faiths in an atmosphere of freedom and openness. It is the attempt to listen to others and to understand their religion – in the hope of finding possible cooperation. The dialogue is borne in the hope that the partner shares and reciprocates this concern. After all, genuine dialogue is no one-way street but is reciprocal and demands, above all, openness and listening as well as an active contribution.” Francis Arinze, Meeting Other Believers (1998), P. 10.
Listening is of capital importance for any dialogue. It is also the hardest. It can only succeed if I value the other person, if I respect his or her religious convictions, prayers, way of life and want to understand them on a deeper level – and when I am convinced that this is worth my time. The best “technique to create trust” is often simply the willingness to listen, the attempt to understand one another and to ask when something remains unclear. Attempting to understand one another in dialogue supersedes understanding texts since the person opposite me is alive and this allows for a spirited and unpredictable process of questions and answers to develop. This dialogue of questions and answers allows each side to critically question the other and to try to present his or her convictions and faith most clearly.
An important document by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue differentiates between the following methods and levels of dialogue:
- the dialogue of life
- the dialogue of action
- the dialogue of theological exchange
- the dialogue of spiritual experience.
Of course, interreligious dialogue as part of the Church’s mission does not absolve the Church from its commandment to proclaim the Gospel to all peoples. An attitude of respect and reverence towards non-Christian religions is the human prerequisite for a communication built on trust. Since formally declaring at the Second Vatican Council that she rejects “nothing that is true and holy in religions” the Church signalled not only her openness to dialogue but, at the same time, a faithful openness to experiencing the transcendent as a common basis for dialogue, which precedes every theological reflection on and articulation of faith. Both moments – dialogue and mission – are indispensable, mutually connected and mutually moulding elements of the Church’s mission.
Question 145. In the Gospel Jesus says that the Holy Spirit comes from the Father, as the Orthodox say. The Catholics say something else in this regard. Who knows best: Jesus or the Pope? (TR)
Answer: Refer to Question and Answer 26 (particularly the last three paragraphs of this answer) at the top of Page 2, which discusses this question.
Question 146. What are the Catholic orders? Which of them are the most important? (TR)
Answer: Since the time of early Christianity there have been Christians who want to live the Gospel as intensely as possible and devote themselves wholly to God. This gave rise to religious orders. A Catholic order is a religious community, the rules of which have been examined thoroughly and approved by the Church. It is made up of men (monks, fathers, brothers) or women (nuns, sisters), who commit themselves to the “evangelical counsels” to the legitimate superior of the order in the radical succession to Christ. In concrete terms these counsels are: poverty, that is renouncing personal property (community of property), celibacy, that is renouncing marriage and children (chastity), obedience to the religious superior. These people are known by the Latin term religiosi (French: religieux; English: religious; the corresponding German term Religiosen has not, however, firmly established itself). The post-conciliar Church prefers the term “consecrated life” (vita consacrata) and speaks of “institutes of consecrated life” or simply “religious institutes”. This enables the truly diverse religious forms (monasticism, mendicant orders, congregations, secular institutes and hermits) to be given one uniform name and to be treated as one. The fundamental statement by the Second Vatican Council in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen gentium 43-47) is: religious life is “consecrated life”. The consecration to God comes about by publicly taking vows, stated in the evangelical counsels given above, and by living in a recognised institute of consecrated life.
The dedication of one’s life is the result of a special calling. Thus, consecration is a divine act and responding to the calling received is a human act. The purpose is perfect love. The origin and constitutive structural element of the spirituality of every religious order is the search for God in spiritual communion marked by asceticism, the reading of sacred scripture and its exegesis, as well as the communal praise of God. In addition to the Gospels and the example of the founding community, the literature that has grown out of the religious order itself – rules, letters, tracts and so forth – provides spiritual orientation. The spirituality of the individual order is strongly shaped by the personality of its founder and the historical “right or opportune moment” (Greek: “kairos”) of its foundation.
The most important orders and groups of orders in the Catholic Church today include:
Contemplative orders:
Benedictines, Cistercians, Augustinians, Trappists, Charthusians, hospital orders.
Mendicant orders:
Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites, Hermits of St. Augustine.
Clerical congregations:
Jesuits, de La Salle Christian Brothers, Passionists, Redemptorists.
Priestly communities without public vows:
Lazarists, Sulpitians, White Fathers, Pallotians, Society of the Divine Word.
Secular institutes:
Many of the male religious orders named above have female religious orders and congregations, e.g. Benedictines, Trappistines, Dominican nuns, Franciscan nuns, Vincentian nuns, Maria Ward Sisters and so forth.
In the year 2000, 0.12% of the members of the Catholic Church, that is over one million believers, belonged to Catholic religious institutes in their distinct and diverse forms. Of these, 75% belonged to female religious orders.
The following text is an example of a religious vow:
“I, Sister XXX, praise almighty God before all the sisters and brothers assembled here today, to live forever in consecrated chastity, poverty and obedience, according to the Rule of the Daughters of Charity of Saint Vincent de Paul in Hildesheim …I put myself at the service of this religious order for its apostolic-charitable works in the service of God and of the Church with my whole heart. Holy Trinity, one God, accept my vows and make me able and willing to love you ever more fully.”
|
