|
Question 147: Are Christians allowed to pray in mosques, as the Pope did in Istanbul? Or was that just a polite gesture? (TR)
Answer: We do not know what thoughts and words – quiet and unheard - were with the Pope as he prayed during his visit to the Blue Mosque in Istanbul on 30 November 2006. In any case, Christians like Muslims distinguish between liturgical prayer from other informal forms of prayer, whether made individually or in community. Such informal prayers can be prayers of thanksgiving, praise or intercessions. I believe that on this particular occasion in Istanbul the Pope praised God from the heart of God, given the so awe-inspiring architecture of this mosque and the faith that it expresses. I believe that the Pope also gave thanks to God for the goodwill of his hosts and the devotion to God shown by so many Muslims and that, finally, he prayed to God, the creator, to strengthen goodwill between Muslims and Christians in their search for mutual understanding, and to awaken in the hearts of believers of both religions the purpose for their mutual responsibility for creating this world according to God’s holy will.
Every Christian should follow the Pope’s example and pray in this spirit, especially when visiting a mosque or visiting Muslims at prayer. On special occasions, the Christian can also stand or sit silently in the background as a witness to Muslim liturgical prayer. And, by the same token, Muslims can be present at the Christian liturgy – and join in with the prayers of their hosts praising and thanking God and asking for His intercession from the depths of their hearts. Christians and Muslims both pray to the same God. However, their faith does not say the same thing in every respect regarding this one God. Whereas Christians and Muslims are united in their belief in this one God, the different declarations about God made by the Muslim and Christian faiths give expression to the differences in Muslim and Christian teaching.
Question 148: Under Christianity, are the dead also washed and wrapped in linen cloth? (TR)
Answer: For the Christian the day of death inaugurates ….the fulfilment of his new birth began at Baptism, the definitive “conformity” to the “image of the Son” conferred by the anointment of the Holy Spirit, and the participation in the feat of the Kingdom which was anticipated in the Eucharist – even if final purifications are still necessary for him in order to be clothed with the nuptial garment. [CCC 1682]
The Church, who as Mother, has borne the Christian sacramentally in her womb during his earthly pilgrimage, accompanies him at his journey’s end, in order to surrender him “into the Father’s hands”. She offers to the Father, in Christ, the child of his grace, and she commits to the earth, in hope, the seed of the body that will rise in glory (1 Cor 15:42-44). This offering is fully celebrated in the Eucharistic sacrifice; the blessings before and after the Mass are sacramentals. (CCC 1683]
The bodies of the dead must be treated with respect and charity, in faith and hope of the Resurrection. The burial of the dead is a corporal work of mercy (cf. Tob 1:16-18); it honours the children of God, who are temples of the Holy Spirit. [CCC 2300)
Autopsies can be morally permitted for legal inquests or scientific research. The free gift of organs after death is legitimate and can be meritorious. The Church permits cremation, provided that is does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body. [CCC 2301]
“Until 1964 cremation was prohibited for Catholics according to canon law. The prohibition was founded less on dogmatic grounds and was more a counter reaction to certain groups in which cremation was propagated as a denial of faith and the resurrection. Today cremation is allowed for Catholics, if this is not intended to expressly deny the Christian faith.
Christians decorate the graves of their dead as sign of remembrance and love. By blessing the graves on the feast days All Saints and All Souls communities show their attachment to the dead in a particular way. Death and grief are seen in the light of Jesus’ message of resurrection; together the Christian communities acknowledge their hope in the resurrection.
Christians also deeply honour the graveyard. It is “God’s field” where the bodies of the faithful, who in this life were the temple of the Holy Spirit, are buried. The layout and the environment of the graveyard should testify to the Christian belief in the Resurrection.”(Catholic Adult Catechism, Vol. II: Living in Faith, p. 313f.)
Question 149: Is it a sin if one is attacked (e.g. by robbers and murderers) and if one unintentionally kills one’s attacker? (TR)
Answer: The action described in this question is called self-defence.
The legitimate defence of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. “The act of self-defence can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor... The one is intended, the other not.” (Thomas A., s. th. 2-2,64,7). [CCC 2263]
Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defence uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defence will be lawful.... Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defence to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s. (Thomas A., s. th. 2-2,64.7) [CCC 2264]
Legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's life. Preserving the common good requires rendering the unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. To this end, those holding legitimate authority have the right to repel by armed force aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their charge. [CCC 2265]
The State’s effort to contain the spread of behaviours injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. The primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offence. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender. [CCC 2266)
The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor. [CCC 2267]
Question 150: Is it possible and it is allowed for priests, who after all by virtue of their office forgive the sins of others in the name of God, to pronounce forgiveness for their own sins? (TR)
Answer: Only God forgives sins. Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, “The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10) and exercises this divine power: “Your sins are forgiven.” (Mk 2:5; Lk 7:48). Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name. [CCC 1441]
Christ has willed that in her prayer and life and action his whole Church should be the sign and instrument of the forgiveness and reconciliation that he acquired for us at the price of his blood. But he entrusted the exercise of the power of absolution to the apostolic ministry which he charged with the “ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor 5:18). The apostle is sent out “on behalf of Christ” with “God making his appeal” through him and pleading: “Be reconciled to God.” (2 Cor 5:20). [CCC 1442]
“302. What are the essential elements of the sacrament of Reconciliation? The essential elements are two: the acts of the penitent who comes to repentance through the action of the Holy Spirit, and the absolution of the priest who in the name of Christ grants forgiveness and determines the ways of making satisfaction.”
“307. Who is the minister of this sacrament? Christ has entrusted the ministry of Reconciliation to his apostles, to the bishops who are their successors and to the priests who are the collaborators of the bishops, all of whom become thereby instruments of the mercy and justice of God. They exercise their power of forgiving sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
“309. Is a confessor bound to secrecy? Given the delicacy and greatness of this ministry and the respect due to people every confessor, without any exception and under very severe penalties, is bound to maintain “the sacramental seal” which means absolute secrecy about the sins revealed to him in confession.” [Numbers 302, 307 and 309 are an extract from the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.]
From this is it evident that all the faithful, including also the pope, bishops and priests, are called to confess their mortal, and preferably also their venial sins, to a priest, in order to receive forgiveness.
Question 151: Why did Jesus cry out on the cross: “My God, why have you forsaken me?” if he himself is God? (TR)
Answer: The question refers to the description of Jesus’ death on the cross according to Matthew’s Gospel, Mt 27:46: “At about three o’clock Jesus cried with a loud voice: ‘Eli, Eli, lema sabachtani?’, that is: ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’
That is a cry of complete want since Jesus is both fully God and man. In Jesus God came down to us in our mortal anguish out of love for us sinners and became one of us, except without sin (Phil 2:6-11). Jesus’ cry on the cross is not a cry of desperation. The lament taken from Psalm 22 is a prayer to God. In this Psalm, where Jesus prays, the lament is followed by the good news of the final victory.
“My God, my God, what have you forsaken me?
Why are so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning?
O my God, I cry by day, but you do not answer; and by night, but find no rest.
Yet you are holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel.
In you our ancestors trusted; they trusted, and were not put to shame.” (Ps 22:2-6)
Question 152: What is Armageddon? (TR)
Answer: According to the Revelation to John in the New Testament, where the author has a vision in Chap 16:13-16: (13) “And I saw three foul spirits like frogs coming from the mouth of the dragon, from the mouth of the beast, and from the mouth of the false prophet.” (14) “These are demonic spirits, performing signs, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty.” (15) “See, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and is clothed, not going about naked and exposed to shame.” (16) “And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Harmagedon (=Armageddon)” (Rev 16:13-16).
Harmagedon, i.e. Mount Megido. This city on the plain, which borders on the Carmel mountain range, was the site of the defeat of King Josiah, 2 Kings 23:29f; it remained as a symbol of the army’s downfall that assembled here, cf. Zach 12:11. The “gathering” of the kings in Verse 14 refers to the assembling of all the heathen tribes in the face of their destruction by Christ.
Question 153: After the conflict of 1054, Catholics and Orthodox are said to have excommunicated each other. Have these verdicts since been revoked so that Catholics and Orthodox can pray and celebrate Holy Mass together? (TR)
Answer: The act of excommunication of 1054 did not affect the whole of the Orthodox and Catholic faiths, but only the individual people involved. Nevertheless, there had been serious implications for the relationship between Catholics and Orthodox. On 7. December 1965, therefore, two simultaneous acts in Rome and in Phanar, the official seat of the ecumenical patriarchs of the events of 1054, and to eradicate them from the “memory of the Church“.
Since then Catholics and Orthodox have been able to share liturgical prayer, however, the Orthodox will generally not permit Catholics to receive Holy Communion in Orthodox liturgy. According to can. 844, section 3 of the CIC, a Catholic priest may give Communion to Orthodox if they request it of their own accord, and if they are appropriately disposed (Dr. Theresia Hainthaler).
Question 154: Why does the Church in Latin America support the land owners and punish priests who champion the landless, poverty stricken population? (TR)
Answer: In many countries in the world people are no longer willing to accept their conditions as unchangeable fate, especially because the unjust structures that cause oppression, illiteracy, dereliction, hopelessness and despair are the responsibility of man and can be changed by him.
Liberation theology starts with the question of how it is possible to speak of the love of God and His care of the poor in the face of the immeasurable suffering of the poor in Latin American countries, and how this suffering can be overcome through united help. These are the basic motives of liberation theology.
With its “preferential option for the poor” the Latin American Bishops’ Conference adopted a principal commitment to Liberation Theology at their general Synod in Medelin in 1968. Pope Paul VI pointed out that the vocabulary of liberation and salvation can, at some level, be understood to be the same: “The word liberation deserves its place in the Christian vocabulary, not only because of its expressiveness, but because of its underlying content”. (Address of 31.7.1974). Pope John Paul II speaks especially of the Latin American Theology, which raises liberation to a basic category and guiding principle for the solution of the problems of suffering and underdevelopment.
The motivating power of the message that the aim of salvation is liberating practice, has lead to a new beginning, which attempts to bring about a change in inhuman conditions.
According to Catholic teaching it is “entirely justified that those who suffer from oppression at the hands of the overlords of riches or political power apply morally acceptable means to achieve those structures and institutions in which their rights are truly respected“ (Instruction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on Christian freedom and liberation, dated 22.3.1986, 75 ff).
The moral judgment as to which means of concrete actions are be allowed in such dire situations, has to be based on focusing on human dignity and freedom. Because if the rights of freedom are not respected from the very beginning, there can be no true liberation.
Furthermore, it has to be taken into account that the command to love one’s neighbor cannot be reconciled with hatred against other people, be they individuals or a community. Liberation in the spirit of the gospels allows the conclusion that someone may believe that the only legitimate resistance against unjust violence is peaceful resistance. Peaceful resistance makes it possible to show that only love leads to true freedom, while violence always leads to further violence.
It may be possible to think of peaceful resistance as a strategy, the kind of which has been lived in modern history in exemplary fashion by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. Whether this path leads to success depends largely on whether those in power are able and willing to change the unjust circumstances.
Any kind of reform of structures and institutions has to be preferred to an (armed) revolution as a path towards the liberation from unjust violence, especially as in modern times, revolutions are generally linked with ideologies and result in renewed oppression and disregard for human rights within just a short period of time.
If a people is so oppressed that peaceful resistance does not bring about any changes, the right to violent resistance can be exerted as a last option, but only if there is no further alternative of (for example passive) resistance.
In his Encyclical “Populorum Progressio” (“The Progress of Peoples”)(nr. 31) Pope Paul VI speaks of this last option and says that armed battle could be justified as a last resort to end a “clearly established and long lasting reign of violence, which strongly violates basic human rights and severely damages the common good of the country“. However, a “systematic use of violence as a supposedly necessary way to liberation” is considered by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as a “damaging illusion…. which opens up the way to new oppression“(Instruction on Christian freedom and liberation, nr. 76).
Today, all countries and the church are called to do their share to ensure that in no country on earth situations arise in which unbearably violent oppression forces people to liberate themselves with means they deeply abhor.” (see Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus. 2. Bd. Leben aus dem Glauben [Freiburg: Herder , 1995],p. 260-262).
Question 155: Is it still possible to buy one’s way into paradise, as was practised in earlier times? (TR)
Answer: This immediately calls to mind the request of the two sons of Zebedee (Mk 10:35-40).
“James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came forward to him and said to him, ‘Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.’ And he said to them, ‘What is it you want me to do for you?’ And they said to him, ‘Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.’ But Jesus said to them, ‘You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised with?’ They replied, ‘We are able.’ Then Jesus said to them, ‘The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptised, you will be baptised; but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.’
“In your kingdom”, literally “in your glory”, means: “When you triumph as the messianic King.” “Baptism” is here the image of Jesus’ imminent passion. Jesus will be quasi “immersed” in an abyss of suffering. “Is not mine to grant”: Jesus’ mission on earth is not to distribute rewards to people but to suffer in order to save them, cf. Jn 3:17 and 12:47.
The Christian “earns” salvation by being as faithful as possible in imitating Christ and in trying to follow the path of selfless love, with the help and grace of Jesus, which he himself gave by his example.
Question 156: What is the bell’s significance in church and why do Christians ring bells? (EN)
Answer: Please refer to the answer given to a similar question earlier, Question 61, in Section 7.
Question 157: Do many Christians in authorized ministry recognize Mohammed as the true prophet? And what is your view about this? (TR)
Answer: Regarding the question of Mohammed’s recognition as the true prophet, there is no difference between Christians in authorized ministry and other Christians. Please first read chapter 4 of our book on this website: Mohammed: a prophet also for Christians? Please read in particular part IV, 3-5 and the excursus at the end of the same chapter. Chapter 11 of the same book (also on this website): The center of Christianity, furthermore shows what Christians consider to be the core of their faith. It is the absolute, self revealing love of God which has been shown to the believer in the teachings, the life, suffering, dying and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah.
The question about recognizing Mohammed as the true prophet focuses not only on the word or title "prophet“ in a merely historically descriptive sense, but concerns the affirmation and the acceptance of the truth implied in the title "prophet“, and which, when applied to Mohammed, comprises the second part of the Muslim creed. For Christians, Mohammed cannot therefore be a prophet in the sense in which the word is used in the Qur’an and therefore in the Islamic faith. To accept Mohammed as Prophet in the Islamic sense and in sense of the Qur’an means nothing less that to acknowledge and accept the Qur’ans teachings about Mohammed, his claim to be the last prophet, and to accept his life as a true and “good example” (sura 33:21) for one’s own life and the life of all people.
Having said this, Christians will firmly distance themselves from any slander or persecution of Mohammed. They will furthermore try to recognize and value his exceptional historic personality, his role as the founder of Islam, as well as his elevated status in the faith, piety and religious thinking of Muslims. They will then assess whether believing Christians have to reject Mohammed’s life and teachings outright, or whether these do show essential elements of God’s truth in an impressive way, which Christians themselves recognize as being accessible to human reason and recognizable in the Christian faith through the person and the teachings of Jesus Christ.
In summary, we can say that Mohammed is an outstanding religious and political founder, who has brought many to God. However, he has not recognized the love of God and the extent of humanity’s calling which has been made apparent in the life, suffering, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.
Question 158: How can people say Jesus is the son of God, is there any proof of this in the Bible? (EN)
Answer: In answer to this please read chapter 2 of the book on this website, especially part III, 2. The answer, together with numerous quotations from the Bible, can also be found in answer to question 50, above, page 6 of “Questions and Answers”.
Question 159: What are your views on abortion? (TR)
Answer: The less a person can protect his own life, the more he requires the protection from other people and from society. Arising from the recognition that each human life has dignity and value, the church supports all weak and helpless human life.
This YES to the sanctity and inviolableness of life vis-à-vis the unborn human life is not as clear in today’s society as it is vis-à-vis the born child. Infanticide is widely seen as a crime, something that is not as widely the case regarding the killing of unborn children. Countless of unborn children are killed daily through the act of abortion, and there are many reasons for the alleged justification. [...] Many believe that the unborn child does not have the same inviolable dignity as the born child; that it therefore does not have the same absolute right to life; that morally and legally it does not come under the same prohibition of infanticide as the born child. […]
The scientific discussion about the unborn takes into account theories which assume certain stages and partial steps in the development of the embryo towards ultimate personal life. The insights of modern genetics and embryology, however, leave no doubt that human life begins at the point of conception. It is, therefore, neither “a pre-human something”, nor “a part of the mother”, nor “a mere product for implantation”, or “life becoming”. From the moment of conception we are looking at the life of a human being in its first stages of life, which already includes the beginnings of all later stages.
"This human life is a good that from its beginnings has a claim to protection from destruction…. « abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes » (2. Vatican Council, Gaudium et Spes [=GS] 51)."
(From http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html)
Thus, there is a clear moral focus for the responsible treatment of the unborn. Because it has the same dignity as the born child, it also has to be treated the same. According to Canon Law those who perform an abortion [i.e. the parents having an abortion and also the practitioners inducing it”] will be excommunicated (Codex Iuris Canonici, can. 1398).
A consequence of the fact that human life begins at conception is: those who use means to prevent the implantation of the fertilized egg in the womb destroy human life. Such means cannot morally be considered equal to means which prevent conception. Ethically, the prevention of implantation of the fertilized egg is the intentional killing of an unborn child. This intention is also given if, in individual cases, no fertilization would have occurred, or if the implantation of the egg in the womb was not prevented because of a failure of the medicines which normally have this effect.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states this: “The knowledge that human life is to be protected from conception onward is reflected in the conviction that the parents participate in the continuation of life together with the love of God the creator, and pass his love on in the world. (see Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes 50). God creates the child, which is a fruit of the love between man and woman, and gives it his eternal love. He says Yes to the life the parents have conceived. This is what we mean when we say that the child is fully the child of his parents and the child of the creator God“ (CCC, 2. Bd., S. 288-289).
Question 160: If Jesus has prohibited divorce, how can there be divorced and remarried priests? (TR)
Answer: In the Catholic Church of the Latin Rite married priests are the exception. In the eastern Churches of the Byzantine and oriental rites, which are linked to Rome, however, it is common for diocesan priests to be married. Nowhere in the universal Catholic Church, i.e. the church linked to the Pope, is it possible for divorced and remarried priests to remain in office.
Question 161: What are your views on women priests? (TR)
Answer: The German Catechism of the Catholic Church says on page 299f about The admission of women to priesthood: “In their human and Christian dignity women are equal to men. Women shall therefore have an equal place in the lay apostolate. In the new ministries women already make an invaluable contribution. However, in1976 the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith confirmed again [in its declaration “Inter insigniores” On The Question of Admission of Women To The Ministerial Priesthood, 15. October 1976, Denzinger-Hünermann, nr. 4590-4606, also http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6interi.htm] that the Catholic Church does not believe the admission of women to the priesthood to be possible because of the example given by Jesus and the whole of the Church’s tradition. This is not a finally binding dogmatic decision. However, the arguments from Scriptures and tradition carry considerable weight and must clearly be considered as more important to the Church than arguments arising from the call for the equal standing or men and women in society. A different question is the admission of women to the sacramental diaconate. It requires further discussion, especially a consensus of the whole Church.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church reads under No 1577: "Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination." The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.“
Question 162: Do you believe in the apparition of Mary to certain people (in Fatima etc.)? Is this possible? (TR)
Answer: Neither the Catechism of the Catholic Church nor the German Adult Catechism of the German Bishops Conference says anything about the belief in apparitions of Mary. They are not part of the official, salvation teachings of the church. They are an expression of the charismatic-mystical gifts of the church. They occur within the person’s own conscious and are imagination or are based on imaginative visions. Unlike physical appearances, where the senses experience an external stimulus, apparitions of Mary are better described as an intense expression of faith which is combined with extraordinary sensations and experiences. In the history of the Church, there are many stories of highly impressive religious experiences of this kind, which frequently resulted in conversion. […]
The phenomenon of apparitions of Mary occurs mostly among simple believers and lay people, who thus represent a positive challenge to the church. The conflict between the two arises largely from the fact that the supernatural character of such events cannot be proven simply by stating that it is so. Rather, a number of criteria have to be taken into account when looking at private revelations.
Criteria: 1. health and moral integrity of the visionary. To aid discernment mystical theology refers to the classic virtues: truthfulness, sobriety, humility, peacefulness, love and modesty. Modern ways of assessment which have been augmented by psychology, also consider the moral life of the visionary. 2. it has to be ascertained whether the alleged vision corresponds with the teachings of Holy Scriptures and the faith of the church. Not only do possible contradictions have to be noted, but also whether the traditional emphases have been maintained, and the biblical faith has not been converted into, for example, a threatening message. Because, the Christian revelation has at its absolute core the person of Jesus Christ, all subsequently given graces can only make sense, if they bring this fact to life. Apparitions of Mary are thus not to be seen as additions to the biblical word, but as an impulse, to clarify and to live the original revelation of Jesus Christ within a specific time in history. […]
An evaluation according to these criteria can result in the rejection of the alleged apparition by a local bishop or the Holy See. […] Even where a positive evaluation has been made, believers retain a high degree of freedom whether to accept the verdict. It can be accepted with a human faith, which follows the rules of judiciousness, while theological faith which refers to holy truths is not necessary. Respectful rejection and critical distance remain possible. …“ (Franz Courth, art. Marienerscheinungen, in: Praktisches Lexikon der Spiritualität, hg. Christian Schütz. Freiburg, 1988.)
Question 163: Is it true that the Vatican [we assume what is meant here is the St Peter’s Basilica in Rome] was founded on the grave of the apostle Peter? Was the location of his grave known? (TR)
Answer: At the foot of the hilly area known as the vaticanum beyond the northwestern shores of the river Tiber, and outside the antique city of Rome, the Caesars Caligula and Nero owned gardens and possibly a villa which boasted a circus. Two cross country roads, the Via Cornelia and the Via Triumphalis led away from Rome across the pons Neronis (Nero’s bridge) through this area to southern Etruria. As was common outside the town, these roads were lined with cemeteries, several parts of which were uncovered in what today is Vatican City. And inscription on a burial ground of the 2nd century of the necropolis, which was partly excavated in 1940-49 beneath St Peter’s, states that this grave was erected iuxta circum Neronis (next to Nero’s circus). The location of this circus is known due to excavations over the last decades, and also because of the original site of the obelisk immediately south of today’s Basilica, which was moved from there to St Peter’s Square in 1587: The circus was located at the foot of the Vatican hill, approx. 600 m long, stretching from West to East, and almost parallel to today’s St Peter’s Basilica, which covers its northernmost end. According to the Roman historian Tacitus, it appears that numerous persecuted Christians were executed here between the years 64-67. The mention of Peter as the Roman martyr in Clemens’ letter to the Corinthians (1 Clem. 1, 5-6) and in other sources, provide evidence for the oral tradition of Peter’s death as a martyr in Rome before the end of the first century. This therefore has a high degree of historical probability.
During the renovation of the grave of Pius XI in the grotto of St Peter’s in 1939, some antique walls were discovered. Comprehensive archeological research and discussions showed that the site that is venerated today as containing St Peter’s grave, has been venerated for this reason since the middle of the 2nd century with a Peter’s shrine (aedicula). Shortly after 320 this caused King Constantine to turn this memorial site into the cultic center of the Basilica constructed in the name of the apostle. In the tradition of the Christian community in Rome the constantly maintained and revered memorial site for Peter, the petrus memoria, has existed from the middle of the 2nd century until the era of Constantine.
In his comprehensive scientific enquiry "St Peter’s grave“ in the Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, vol. 8, Col 149-153, Hugo Brandenburg, however, concludes that doubts remain whether the original grave of the disciple had been precisely at this location underneath the memorial, and not only for archaeological reasons. In any case, the Memoria Petri, the St. Peter’s memorial, which has continuously been an effective site for veneration since the 2nd century, and Jesus’ tomb in the church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem are the most important memorials of Christendom. From a historic point of view, it is the most important archaeological memorial ever.
Question 164: What is the St Andrew’s cross? (TR)
Answer: Historical evidence for the shape of the St Andrew’s cross, i.e. a cross in the shape of the Greek letter X, does not exist prior to the 13th century. The “martyrdom”, i.e. the story of the martyrdom of St Andrew, as described in one of the books of the apocrypha dating back to the 3rd century, describes the death of St Andrew through crucifixion without mentioning the St. Andrew’s cross.
Question 165: What is the meaning of intercessions in the Christian faith? Who can intercede with God? (TR)
Answer: The Catechism of the Catholic Church answers this question as follows:
2634 Intercession is a prayer of petition which leads us to pray as Jesus did. He is the one intercessor with the Father on behalf of all men, especially sinners. He is "able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them." (Hebrews 7:25). The Holy "Spirit himself intercedes for us… and intercedes for the saints according to the will of God." (Romans 8:26-27)
2635 Since Abraham, intercession - asking on behalf of another has been characteristic of a heart attuned to God's mercy. In the age of the Church, Christian intercession participates in Christ's, as an expression of the communion of saints. In intercession, he who prays looks "not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others," (Philemon 2:4) even to the point of praying for those who do him harm.
2636 The first Christian communities lived this form of fellowship intensely. Thus the Apostle Paul gives them a share in his ministry of preaching the Gospel, but also intercedes for them. The intercession of Christians recognizes no boundaries: "for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions," (1 Timothy 2:1-2) for persecutors, for the salvation of those who reject the Gospel.
Question 166: What is the Christian view of the separation of state and religion (secularism)? (TR)
Answer: When Christians and Muslims meet, for example in Germany, it is not only their different faiths that determines and shapes their meeting. Whether they are aware of it or not, a third major element is always the constitutional state which is neutral to religion, i.e. a society structured according to more secular principles. While Germany is thus, on the one hand a part of the occidental civilization, i.e. shaped by Christianity and its Jewish roots, in which for centuries Muslims were only able to be guests welcomed in friendship, today’s organization of state and society in Germany ensure that Muslims have no fewer or lesser legal rights than Christians, and that Muslims and Christians can meet as free and equal people. In other words, it is not the faith, but the legal system founded on secular principles, which determines the legal status of a person. It is the secularity of the legal system which ensures the legal equality of citizens of different faiths, contrary to the Christian ordo in medieval times, and contrary to parts of the Islamic world, in which even today the lesser legal status of Jews and Christians as “citizens requiring protection” (dhimmi-s) has its impact.
The fundamental emphasis in modern western constitutions and the German basic constitutional law on religious freedom also corresponds with the Christian, Catholic conviction. In the Second Vatican Council, and especially in the declaration on religious freedom "Dignitatis Humanae“ in 1965, the Catholic church recognized religious freedom as a human right derived from the principle of human dignity. On the one hand, it is therefore understandable and, if understood correctly, also necessary that Christians call for Christians to have the same level of religious freedom in Muslim countries that Muslims enjoy in ours. On the other hand, it would be contrary to our constitution, as well as to our Christian understanding of religious freedom, if Germany tried to restrict Muslim’s rights to practice their religion because of a lack of religious freedom in other parts of the world.
In pluralistic German society, the basic right to religious freedom is increasingly applicable in the context of different religions and people with no religion. Society has to decide how to draw the boundaries between the freedom of religion for individual people. Christians and Muslims are required to talk together about their respective faiths. In their conversations they find much that separates them. In their relation to people without faith, however, they also find much more that unites them. The result is a growing interest in a conversation with each other and as members of the same society with a view to everyone living peacefully side by side across all boundaries.
Historically speaking our modern constitution, which is based on strong values, but is neutral with regard to religions, originates from the experience of the religious wars. As a consequence of these wars the State abandoned its monopoly of truth and learned that religious convictions cannot be forced using state power and violence. The opposing parties during those wars, however, had been Christians of other confessions. And so for a long time the secular structure remained "Christian“ and is still informed by the Christian tradition. In our relationship with Muslims, we Christians have to be more aware that the secular structure, which ensures our peaceful living together, is partly seen by Muslims as “Christian”, but partly also as no longer Christian and godless.
Through their engagement with their state and society, as well as in their relationships with Muslims, Christians have to work towards ensuring and making it understood that secularity does not mean godlessness. It is important that Muslims, too, recognize secularity to be the basis of their own religious freedom, as well as for the peaceful side by side of different religions. In a value based legal state that is neutral on religion, both Christians and Muslims are expected to determine their identity in the category of citizens and in the category of religious believers.
In this respect, Christianity has learned about secularization the hard way in the course of the last two centuries. We are helped by Jesus’ word: "give to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar, and to God, that which belongs to God". For us Christians, Jesus has been the perfect living example that religion cannot be the same as the governing system. The political thinking of many Muslims, however, is still largely focused on a close connection between religion, state and law. The Christian experience of the secularization process has been partly painful, but because it has resulted in freeing the church from political tasks, it has also been very affirming. Could the Christian experience therefore help Muslims recognize the secular state as providing the appropriate framework for a living together in diversity?
|
