|
Question 195: What does canonisation mean? Is there a two-tier society in heaven? (TR)
Answer: The Catechism of the Catholic Church comments on the call to sainthood, which is linked with the call of a person to Baptism, and on the meaning of canonisation in the following paragraphs:
824 United with Christ, the Church is sanctified by him; through him and with him she becomes sanctifying. "All the activities of the Church are directed, as toward their end, to the sanctification of men in Christ and the glorification of God." (Sacrosanctum Concilium 10). It is in the Church that "the fullness of the means of salvation" has been deposited. (Unitatis reintegratio 3)It is in her that "by the grace of God we acquire holiness." (Lumen Gentium 48)
825 "The Church on earth is endowed already with a sanctity that is real though imperfect." (Lumen Gentium 48). In her members perfect holiness is something yet to be acquired: "Strengthened by so many and such great means of salvation, all the faithful, whatever their condition or state - though each in his own way - are called by the Lord to that perfection of sanctity by which the Father himself is perfect." (Lumen Gentium 11).
826 Charity is the soul of the holiness to which all are called: it "governs, shapes, and perfects all the means of sanctification." (Lumen Gentium 42). […]
827 'Christ, holy, innocent, and undefiled,' knew nothing of sin, but came only to expiate the sins of the people. The Church, however, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal." (Lumen Gentium 8). All members of the Church, including her ministers, must acknowledge that they are sinners. In everyone, the weeds of sin will still be mixed with the good wheat of the Gospel until the end of time. Hence the Church gathers sinners already caught up in Christ's salvation but still on the way to holiness: […]
828 By canonizing some of the faithful, i.e., by solemnly proclaiming that they practiced heroic virtue and lived in fidelity to God's grace, the Church recognizes the power of the Spirit of holiness within her and sustains the hope of believers by proposing the saints to them as models and intercessors. "The saints have always been the source and origin of renewal in the most difficult moments in the Church's history." (Christifideles Laici 16,3). Indeed, "holiness is the hidden source and infallible measure of her apostolic activity and missionary zeal. (Christifideles Laici 17,3)."
829 "But while in the most Blessed Virgin the Church has already reached that perfection whereby she exists without spot or wrinkle, the faithful still strive to conquer sin and increase in holiness. And so they turn their eyes to Mary" (Lumen Gentium 65): in her, the Church is already the "all-holy."
Question 196: What is the view of the Catholic Church about the theory of evolution? (TR)
Answer: Please read our answer to question No 85 in Question and Answer section 10.
Question 197: Scientists say that the earth is approx. 5 billion years old, and human traces on earth are no older than 1-2 million years at the most. But the bible states that God created the world in six days. Did God really work so slowly? (TR)
Answer: This question is based on an erroneous understanding of the biblical creation narrative. It is not the intention of the bible to inform about scientific data or research results with regard to the created reality. The biblical creation narrative concerns “the principles of human and Christian life, it offers the reply of biblical faith to the main questions human beings have been asking since time immemorial: ‘Where do we come from?’, ‘Where are we going?’, ‘What is our origin?’, ‘Why are we here?’, ‘Where does everything come from that is, and where is it going?’. The two questions of origin and goal cannot be separated. They are important for giving our lives meaning and direction.
The topic of the origin of the world and of mankind is subject to much scientific research, which has considerably enriched our knowledge with regard to the age and size of the universe, the development of life forms and the arrival of human beings. These discoveries should encourage us to admire the greatness of the creator even more, to thank him for all his works and for the insight and wisdom he grants scholars and scientists […].
The great interest in this research is motivated by a question of a different kind which goes beyond natural science. It is not merely about the question of when and how the material universe came into being and when human beings appeared, but it is the question about the purpose of becoming; whether it happened accidentally by mere chance, as a nameless necessity, or whether it originated with an intelligent, good and greater being we call God. And if the world comes from God’s wisdom and goodness, then why evil? Where does it come from? Who is responsible? And is there any liberation from it?“ (Cathechism of the Catholic Church, Vol 1, Nos. 282-284)
So what does the bible say about creation, what are the creation narratives about and how do we interpret them correctly?
The Old Testament does not only contain one but two creation narratives, i.e. Genesis 1: 1-4 and Genesis 2: 4b.7. They agree completely with regard to their faith in God the creator, but they express this faith with different images. This shows yet again that the bible is not interested in an empirically recognizable genesis of the world, but in the belief and faith that the world has its origin and its reason in God.
The first but younger creation account starts succinctly:
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness … (Gen 1: 1-4).
Then, this creation account describes how God brings forth the individual parts of creation within seven days. The pinnacle is the creation of man on the sixth day. At the end it is summarized: God saw all that he had created: it was very good “ (Genesis 1: 31) (Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, Band 1, p. 94f.)
“This (priestly) creation narrative intends to provide a logical and comprehensive list of those things that are created according to a well considered plan within the time scale of one week, concluding with the Sabbath day of rest. Called by God the creatures come into being, in the order of increasing dignity up to mankind created in the image of God and as the pinnacle of creation. The text applies a pre-scientific view of the world. One cannot look for congruence between this description and the discoveries of modern science; rather, the narrative in the form of a story bearing the hallmarks of its time is a revelation of lasting validity of the only transcendent God, who precedes the world and is superior to it; the world is his creation, i.e. it only exists in complete dependence upon him. “ (New Jerusalem Bible, p. 15, footnote on Genesis 1: 1-2, 4a).
„The second, older creation narrative is different. Here, man is not the pinnacle but the centre of creation. The creation of the world is therefore only hinted at briefly and succinctly, whereas the creation of man is told extensively and in a much more three dimensional way.
“When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens… the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Gen 2:4b-7).
Both creation accounts speak the language of their time and use the imagery of their culture. In the shape which is now strange to us, they speak of a content that does not result from the ancient world view, but which was the result of God’s path with his people Israel and which represents a revelation and a truth of faith […] From the beginning creation is ordered towards completeness and wholeness .The first creation narrative expresses this when it lets God rest on the seventh day after he has completed his work (cf. Genesis 2:2). This is not to say that God has become tired from his work; rather, it says: the goal of creation is the Sabbath, the glorification of God. Thus St Paul writes that the whole creation waits with yearning and in labour pains for the revelation of the sons of God, that is for the glory of the completed Kingdom of God (cf. Romans 8:19-24). The first creation aims at the new heaven and the new earth (cf. Isaiah 65:17, 66, 22); Revelation 21:1). It will be completed when God will be “all and in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). Creation is therefore not a rigid reality, but an ongoing process that is not complete but is open towards the future which for mankind is God himself.” (Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, Vol. 1, p. 95).
Question 198: Do you believe that our tiny earth is the centre of the immense universe, because according to the creation narrative it was only here that life began, and that all other celestial bodies were created almost as mere decorations? (TR)
Answer: According to the Second Vatican Council “believers and unbelievers agree almost unanimously that all things on earth should be ordained to humanity as to their center and summit” (Gaudium et Spes 12).
However, these days we know better than ever before that our earth is not the centre of the universe, and that according to most scientists, mankind is woven into the evolution of the universe and of life. The question then arises: What is man? From the beginning, this has been mankind’s original question. The bible too poses this question (cf. psalm 8,5; 144, 3; Job 7, 17)
The bible’s fundamental answer to the question “what is man” is: “man is created by God; he owes his existence and his being to God. His existence is wanted and maintained by God; he is, because God has called him by his name: I want that you exist (Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechimus, Vol. 1, p. 114).
The bible thus differentiates between the creation of human beings and the creation of the animals. For the bible, that which distinguishes human beings from the rest of reality is that they are in the image of God (cf. Genesis 1: 26-27).Of all living things, man is the only one who is created in God’s image, who can hear God and respond to him. Mankind is therefore created as God’s partner and called into communion with God.
Looked at from the point of view of the unique dignity of mankind, the tiny earth in the midst of the universe is therefore indeed “the centre of the infinite universe”. This view is expressed beautifully in the psalms:
„O LORD, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!
You have set your glory above the heavens....
what is man that you are mindful of him,
the son of man that you care for him?
You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings
and crowned him with glory and honor.
O LORD, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!“
(Ps 8, 2.5-7.10; cf. Sirach 17, 1-10)
(Ebd., p. 115-117)
Question 199: Why are women not allowed to be priest? Is it because of Eve? (TR)
Answer: This question has already been dealt with in answer to question 186 (section 15). A careful reading of our answer shows that the view of the Catholic Church regarding this issue has nothing to do with the biblical statements about Adam and Eve.
Question 200: Jesus said frequently „You have heard …, but I tell you …“ and he thus changes many of the statements of the Old Testament. Is this not a rejection of the Old Testament? (TR)
Answer: Jesus Christ was critical of the “traditions of the old” (Mark 7:3.5) because he saw that many Jews and Jewish teachers of his time had put the “traditions of men” in the place of God’s law. But Jesus was no iconoclast who wanted to overturn everything. With many of his teachings he adhered to the traditions of his people, indeed, he drew heavily from Holy Scriptures, the so called Old Testament. In place of the rabbinic interpretation, however, he supplied his own: “But I tell you” (Matthew 5:22 and others). He wants to say: „I tell you what the real and true tradition is”. Furthermore: “I am the tradition, the living and life giving passing on of tradition” (Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, p. 51).
It would, however, be a grave misunderstanding to assume that Jesus Christ’s claim to being the true explanation of the Old Testament, indeed, to be its goal and its centre, was a call to abandoning the Old Testament. The Catechism of the Catholic Church comments on this important area of teaching:
121 The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value, for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.
122 ‚Indeed, „the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men." "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional," the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way.“ (Dei Verbum 15)
123 Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. The Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism).“
„Already in the times of the apostles and then in the manner of their traditions, the unity of God’s plan in both Testaments was expressed by the church in the concept of typology. Thus “early forms” (typologies” of that which God in the fullness of time has brought to fulfilment in the person of the word made flesh are found in God’s works in the Old Covenant.“
Question 201: It is said that there are Thomas Christians in India. Are they supporters of the Gospel of Thomas? (TR)
Answer: The Thomas Christians, also called Malabar Christians, are a group of Christians who live in Kerala in South West India. They claim their church has been founded by the apostle St Thomas, who had died as a martyr in Madras. A shrine to St Thomas at Madras is marked by a cross bearing a 7th century Pahlavi inscription. Neither the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas, which was discovered in 1945-46 at Nag Hammadi in a Coptic language version, not the apocryphal childhood Gospel of Thomas have any connection with the Thomas Christians in Southern India.
Question 202: The USA finally has a black president. Is it possible for a black man to become Pope? (TR)
Answer: There is nothing in canon law to prevent a black Pope. Every baptised man can be elected Pope. If he is not yet a Bishop at the time of his election, he will only become Bishop of Rome, and therefore Pope, after he is consecrated Bishop.
Question 203: What are your thoughts on abortion? And on abortion after rape? (TR)
Answer: On the topic of abortion see question No. 159 in Question and Answer section 16. The church teaches that human life in all its stages, i.e. before and after birth, is a legal entity, which from the very beginning has a right to be preserved and to be protected from destruction (“abortion and the killing of a child are abominable crimes” (Gaudium at Spes 51).
As every other life, the unborn human life too can find itself in conflict with other goods. Sometimes both parents or the woman consider killing the unborn child as the last possible means of solving a conflict with goods that appear to them as more important or impossible to give up. How can one reach an ethically responsible decision in such circumstances?
To clarify these questions it is important that we are conversant with the facts as well as with the terminology used, and that we also note that we do not equate legal regulations with moral judgement.
In the context of the abortion debate we come across the term “indication“. Many erroneously believe this to mean “an indication in favour of abortion“, and believe that abortion is morally acceptable if an indication exists. In reality an indication is nothing more than a “sign” a “signal” that the conceived child can bring with it problems which for the mother or the parents imply a more or less major conflict.
Criminological indication (and in the legal sphere also ethical and humanitarian indication) means that a child has been illegally forced upon the mother through rape.
General (social) hardship indication means that the conceived child can force the mother or the family into severe social or economic hardship, which is experienced as so traumatic by the pregnant woman that it can result in considerable psychological distress.
Medical indication means that the unborn life endangers the mother’s life (vital indication) or her health (prophylactic indication) […]
All these indications show that the good of the unborn life can find itself in conflict with other goods. Are these other goods of such immense importance or urgency that they may be given preference over the fundamental good of the unborn life? This is the underlying ethical question.
If we assess the criminological indication in the light of this question, it becomes clear that an evaluation of the respective ethical goods cannot amount to an ethical justification of a termination of pregnancy. The child conceived through rape also has a fundamental right to life which is of higher importance than the mother’s right to self determination. Certainly, such an ethical evaluation does not solve the many problems arising for the pregnant woman from a forced pregnancy, but neither can these problems be solved by killing the conceived child.
In a different way this also applies to the psychological burdens on the mother which are the subject of the hardship indication. Emotional and social hardship are serious problems but they do not permit the killing of the conceived child; rather, they are to be removed by support the mother should receive from other sources. Unfortunately, those who are the most appropriate to accomplish the task to prevent the woman from a decision in favour of killing her unborn baby, the father of the child, the family and the closer social environment, often fail to do this. Sometimes they intensify the misery of the pregnant women with their pressure and push her towards a termination. This is also true for the general public, among which the criteria for assessing the value of the unborn life have shifted considerably. The general public mentality often pushes women into a situation where they can barely conceive a different solution.
Also fraught with difficulty is the evaluation of the correct ethical judgement in the case of a medical indication. On the other hand, medical progress means that most of the risks to the mother’s health (prophylactic indication) can be reduced to the extent that medically life threatening situations have become rare. For the evaluation of the various goods in the context of a medical-prophylactic indication the ethical problems are generally no longer as acute as they used to be. This is not the case in many countries in Africa, Asia and in South America, where medical progress has not been as effective and where it is beyond the means of the general population. The ethical evaluation of the morality of a medical indication therefore also has to take into account the concrete circumstances. Here in particular it is true to say: “The evaluation of concrete measures cannot […] be made solely according to the criteria of an agreement with conventional moral norms. These cannot adequately capture the concrete in its contingence and singularity, because over and above the criteria the particular shares with the general, it also has an added value because it is the result of the particularities of the respective circumstances. […] As a personal being capable of conscious living and called to freedom and responsibility, a person is not merely an instance of the general, an individual realisation of the idea “human being” as such, but this person hic et nunc, who has a unique, unrepeatable story, who through his actions is to come closer to its final goal, the communion with the everlasting God.” (Eberhard Schockenhoff, Grundlegung der Ethik. Ein theologischer Entwurf. Freiburg: Herder, 2007, p. 448f).
In rare but still sometimes occurring cases the life of the mother as well as that of the child are at risk (vital indication). The situation becomes highly dramatic and all participants are faced with a severe personal conflict. The ethical categories about the sanctity of human life barely seem to apply. The ethical demand to allow nature’s course and to accept the death of both, mother and child, is generally seen as inhuman. In this extreme and exceptional case one must also take into account the argument of those who believe it to be ethically justifiable to save at least one of two lives, in particular where the purpose of the action is the preservation of life. Such a consideration, however, is by no means on the same level as the killing of an unborn child that does not find itself in conflict with another good of equal value. The German bishops stress: “What is required here is the careful moral decision of the doctor involved in this particular situation. No-one will deny that such a decision is dishonourable” (On the amendment of § 218 dated 7. 5. 1976, 7). (Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, Vol. 2, p. 290-292).
Question 204: It says in the New Testament that women must cover their heads in church. Why is this command not being obeyed? (TR)
Answer: Our answer will be given in two parts:
Are all biblical directions and rules governing ethical conduct valid for ever?
The generally absolute validity of ethical norms poses the question whether instructions from an earlier age, including those laid down in biblical texts, can still be of binding character for people today, and if their wording is still applicable to every situation without exception. Norms always require interpretation and appropriate application. This occasionally results in the discovery that individual regulations from former times (for example those which regulate the status of slaves), can no longer have any validity today.
It also happens that in changed circumstances, norms no longer protect the good they were originally meant to protect. In this case, the change in circumstances can also lead to a change or even a complete repealing of the previously valid norm. So, for example, usury could lead to abuse and blackmail in certain natural-economic systems, while it is entirely just in other economic systems, whenever the borrowed money “bears fruit” and generates interest.
The absolute claim of validity of norms does not exclude the possibility that goods which are to be protected by a norm end up in conflict with each other. During the process of ethical evaluation one has to consider carefully which good is to be prioritised in any given case.
The way of understanding people and human relationships can also change. There are, for example, many agreements in the understanding of human sexuality in the times of St Augustine (354-430) or Thomas of Aquinas (1224-1274) and the view of the Second Vatican Council, but there are also marked differences. The latter reflect the expansion of medical and anthropological knowledge, but also cultural experiences, which have greatly influenced the view of sexuality and marriage. The kind of humanising of sexuality and of marriage as displayed in the Second Vatican Council would not have been understood by Augustine, Aquinas or even the church law of 1917. This shows that the ethos takes different shapes in different stages, and that the tried and tested is retained while the new proves itself. […]
We are living in a time of big changes in feeling, thinking and values. In the pluralism of opinions, views and convictions it is not always easy to discern that which is moral and right before God. Here we, i.e. Catholic Christians, have to remember the origins of our faith and the moral convictions of the whole people of God. Where an expanded understanding and a deeper exegesis of previously valid norms becomes necessary, we always have to consider the value that is to be protected (cf. the encyclical “Veritatis splendor“ by Pope John Paul II of 1993, no. 53). The Second Vatican Council gives an example regarding the question of freedom of religion and conscience. The previous understanding had not sufficiently taken those into account who subjectively err. In this instance, the new focus instance did not have the aim to soften moral principles, but rather to provide a new interpretation that shows more clearly the requirements of the gospels and that their binding character in norms concerning fundamental human rights. (Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, Vol. 2, 103f).
Under these aspects it becomes clear that many of the normative statements in Holy Scriptures, in particular those which are primarily of cultural origin, must repeatedly be reconsidered and interpreted. This is also true for the observations of the apostle Paul on the status of women within the family and the community.
What precisely does the biblical text say?
The text this question refers to is probably 1 Corinthians 11:3-16, where St Paul speaks of the veil of women. The renowned expert on exegesis of Paul’s epistles, Prof Dr Norbert Baumert, summarises his research into this text thus:
“How many battles have been fought with this text! Often women were being restricted because of it, or forced even to the extreme extent of having to place a piece of paper upon their heads when entering a church if they carried no piece of cloth […]
The background to the apostle’s exhortation is that occasionally, a women praying loudly or speaking prophetic words in a prayer meeting, would loosen her hair. This was distracting. Among the Greeks it was not unknown that male and female prophets occasionally loosened their hair and gesticulated wildly in order to stress the importance of their prophetic role, so that their hair flew around their face and necks in a more or less impressive manner. St Paul criticises this for men and women (!), but because at that time most men no longer wore their hair long, he worded it differently: Vanity and self importance in men can be expressed by his “being occupied with his head”. Women in those days always wore their hair long and, if they were married, this was tied back or pinned up. And so the woman usually “covered” her head with her hair (not her hair with a veil). This manner of speaking would not be appropriate for a man because he never wore his hair pinned up. At all times there were also men who no longer had hair that “covered” the “head”. Whether with long or short, much or little hair, a speaker can always pose or try to make a dramatic impression.
If gesticulating with the head during prayer and during prophecies is always inappropriate, then this also affects the social standing of women, even more so than of men, because the pinned up hair is also a sign that she is married. At the same time, the loosening of her hair represents to some extent a provocation to men, as can be deducted from the term “shorn woman” for adulteresses and prostitutes. Furthermore, the actual cause of the exhortation appears to have been the misconduct of women, because men are not being criticised here, although the same action would be a misconduct for men too.
What is interesting is the affective reaction of the apostle and how, in true rabbinic style, he gives biblical and theological reasons for a rebuke. Because the issue is the “head” of the woman, he seeks biblical and theological thoughts which include the word, and he then plays with the two meanings of the word, the physiological and organic meaning, and the interpersonal meaning of being head of something, being at the top of it, having priority. The Greek word for both is kephalē. The word does not have the interpersonal meaning of “having priority”, but it denotes an origin (thus the source is the “head” of the river”). St Paul is thinking of the second creation narrative (Genesis 2: 21f). He also assumes that the reader will judge the questions of conduct in a similar manner to himself and that he will therefore understand and accept his argument. He himself has been brought up in a Greek environment and knows what is generally considered to be acceptable and unacceptable in this cultural setting. Furthermore, the issue were not all women, but individual ones, who he believed had a lacking sense of tact.
The text ( 1 Cor 11: 3-16): (3) It is very important to me that you are aware that every man’s head is Christ, but that the head of a woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (4) As every man who dishonours his head (i.e. Christ) when he plays with his head during prayer or prophetic speaking, (5) so every woman who during (loud) prayer or prophetic speaking in a meeting loosens her hair dishonours her head (i.e. her husband); because it is just as if she was being shorn. (6) Because if a woman does not veil her head (with her hair), she should also have her hair cut off. But if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shorn, then she should veil her head (with her hair). (7) As you know, a man is not obliged to veil his head , because he is the image and the emanation (manifestation, visible glory) of God; but woman is the emanation (glory and splendour) of man. (8) Man is (exists) not owing to woman, but woman owing to man; (9) nor was man created owing to woman, but woman owing to man.(10) Therefore, it is a woman’s duty to keep her head chaste owing to (the absence) of the angels. (11) After all: Neither woman without man nor man without woman are in the Lord; (12) because as the woman (Eve) from the man (Adam), so also the man (Christ) through the woman – but the whole from God. (13) Judge for yourselves! Is it right that a women with loosened hair should pray (in public) to God? (14) Neither does nature teach you that it is a shame for a man if he tries to impress with his hair, (15) but on the other hand an honour for a woman if she tries to impress with her hair; because hair is (!) given as cover (for protection). (16) But if anyone wants to quarrel: We do not have such custom, nor do the communities of God.
Thus we see that the section is complete in itself and has a clear thread.“ (Frau und Mann bei Paulus. (Überwindung eines Missverständnisses. Würzburg: Echter, 1992. p. 166-168.).
In a letter to C.W. Troll of 14.10.2009 N. Baumert, cited above, adds the following:
“A further example can be found in 1 Cor 14:33-36, where we usually read: ‘Women should remain silent in the church’. But in 1 Cor 11.5 St Paul assumes that they pray loudly and speak prophetic words in church. However, 14:33 does not refer to a prayer meeting or church, but the word “gathering” is used here in its original meaning: ekklēsía = decision-making gathering. This is the word for the official gathering of citizens of a town; in this case now in a house church. And there, not women were allowed to be present. Furthermore: Paul does not request them to remain silent, he merely states what is generally applicable: The municipal code does not permit women to speak. And the reason is: Not because it is God’s unchangeable order, but because neither in Jewish nor in Hellenistic tradition it is usual for women to be present at such gatherings, never mind speak. The principle behind it is: “Do that which is appropriate and fitting according to your circumstances”. Because the circumstances have changed, Paul would apply the same principles today and say that women should speak in a decision making gathering!”
Question 205: The church often uses candles: do candles have a particular meaning for Christians? (TR)
Answer: The quick and wide-spread use of wax candles in Christian liturgy from the early centuries of Christianity onward is largely due to the symbolism inherent in the burning candle. In his booklet Of Holy Signs [ von heiligen Zeichen] The theologian Romano Guardini writes (München: Kösel: “The deepest meaning of life is to be consumed by Truth and the love for God, as the candle is consumed by light and glow.” In the seventh century AD Isidore of Seville wrote: “The candles at Mass are lit as a sign of joy, so that beneath the sign of the visible light that light becomes apparent, of which the first chapter of the gospel of St John says: “in him [i.e. Jesus Christ, the Word of God] was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it [...] The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.” (Jn 1: 4,5,9)
In Christian churches candles have always had a special place. At each Service the slim altar candles are lit. We also come across them time and time again during the liturgical year (the church year): the four candles on the Advent wreath, the Easter candle and the candle for the first Holy Communion are only a few examples. Burning candles in front of pictures of Mary or the Saints are a sign of prayer and adoration. And many know the deeply rooted custom of lighting memorial candles in memory of the dead.
Already in the pagan cults in the ancient world “tamed fire” was lit in honour of the gods, which led to arguments among the first Christians: Because of the pagan symbolism some only wanted to use candles for lighting purposes during their Services. The others saw the light as a symbol for worshipping the Lord. After all, Christ had referred to himself as being the “Light of the world”.
These days the symbolic character of candles reaches well beyond Christianity. Don’t all people see the burning candle as a symbol for peace, hope and warning? In the dark times in our world we put candles in the windows as a sign of fraternity. We carry them into the streets and use them to commemorate the victims of violence. (With minor changes taken from the website: www.kerze-online.de)
Question 206: If Adam and Eve had not eaten the fruit, would Jesus have been unnecessary? (TR)
Answer: The theological version of this question is: Would God still have become man in Jesus Christ if the “Fall” as described in the book of Genesis (Gen 3) had not occurred? In the light of the revelation we have been given by and through Jesus of Nazareth, the Anointed one (Christ), the answer is: Yes.
The mystery of the incarnation of God and the resulting Salvation can be sketched in five steps.
“That which mankind has always yearned for and which each human being consciously or unconsciously hoped for has become true in Jesus Christ [...] in a unique way that exceeds all expectations. The heart of mankind is so that only God is large enough to fill it. “This occurred once and for all through the Incarnation of the Son of God in Jesus Christ. In Jesus Christ the fullness of God was revealed (cf. Col 1:19) to fulfil and unite everything (cf. Eph 1:10)”
“The New Testament uses a variety of images and concepts to announce Jesus Christ as the fulfilment of time. In him the life and the light that always shone in the world is fully ablaze (cf Jn 1:4,9). In him the manifold wisdom and the everlasting mystery of God have been revealed (cf. Eph 3:9-10), so that in him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden (Col. 2:3) In him God has brought everything together in the fullness of time and united everything in heaven and on earth. (cf. Eph 1:10) The New Testament takes this a step further: In him and through him all has been made. (cf. 1 Cor 8:6; Hebr 1:2; Jn 1:3). He is the first and the last (cf.) Rev. 1:17; 22:13
“He is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn over all creation.
For by him all things were created:
things in heaven and on earth,
visible and invisible,
whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities;
all things were created by him and for him.
He is before all things,
and in him all things hold together.” (Col 1:15-17)
[...] The early church fathers frequently said that in all of reality, in nature as well as in culture, in the religions and in philosophy there are found traces, small seeds, fragments of the logos (reason, intellect, wisdom), that came to us in all its fullness in Jesus Christ. Therefore, Christ is the head and the fulfilment of all of reality (Irenaeus of Lyon). The Second Vatican Council says: Jesus Christ is “the key, the centre and the goal of the whole human history” (Gaudium et spes 45). In another place the Council says: “The Lord is the goal of human history, the focal point of the longings of history and of civilization, the centre of the human race, the joy of every heart and the answer to all its yearnings (ibid 45). In particular, “ does the mystery of man take on light.” (ibid) 22).
[...] So Christ becomes for the Christian the key to understanding the world and for the reality of living in the world [...] In Christ alone the deepest meaning of all reality is lit up” ((Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, Vol. I, p. 164-165)
This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.” (1 Jn 4:9). For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (Jn 3:16)” (KKK 459)
“For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God." (Irenaeus, Haer. 3,19,1) [...] “"The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods." (Thomas v. A., opusc. 57 in festo Corp. Chr. 1).“ (CCC 460)
IV. This world, into which Christ has come, is marked by sin and by death
397 Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart (Gen 3,1-11) and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God's command. This is what man's first sin consisted of (cf. Rom 5:19). All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.”
399 Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness (cf. Rom 3:3). They become afraid of the God (cf. Gen 3:9-10), of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives (cf. Gen 3:5).”
401 After that first sin, the world is virtually inundated by sin: There is Cain's murder of his brother Abel (cf. Gen 4:3-15), and the universal corruption which follows in the wake of sin. (cf. Gen 6:5; Rom 1:18-32); Likewise, sin frequently manifests itself in the history of Israel, especially as infidelity to the God of the Covenant and as transgression of the Law of Moses. And even after Christ's atonement, sin raises its head in countless ways among Christians (cf. 1 Cor 1:6; Acts 2:3) Scripture and the Church's Tradition continually recall the presence and universality of sin in man's history:” (CCC)
Thus he reconciled the people with God and saved them, through renewing them and giving them “a share in his own nature.”
619 "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures" (1 Cor 15:3).”
620 Our salvation flows from God's initiative of love for us, because "he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins" (1 Jn 4:10). "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Cor 5:19).
621 Jesus freely offered himself for our salvation. Beforehand, during the Last Supper, he both symbolized this offering and made it really present: "This is my body which is given for you" (Lk 22:19).”
622 The redemption won by Christ consists in this, that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mt 20:28), that is, he "loved his own to the end" (Jn 13:1), so that they might be "ransomed from the futile ways inherited from their fathers" (1 Pt 1:18).”
623 By his loving obedience to the Father, "unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil 2:8). Jesus fulfils the atoning mission (cf. Is 53:10) of the suffering Servant, who will "make many righteous; and he shall bear their iniquities" (Is 53:11; cf. Rom 5:19).” (CCC 619-633). (cf. Chapter 3 of this website: “Cross, Sin, Salvation”)”
Question 207: What is the Vatican’s opinion on laicism (secularism)? (TR)
Answer: Laicism describes the political concept (esp. in France), which demands freedom from religious links in public life and the separation of church and state. Secularism, on the other hand, is the transfer of church property into secular hands, as has happened in a systematic way, for example, under the reign of Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821). The same term also has a second meaning, i.e. the secularisation of life. In German, the term secularism is now often used in the English sense of the word, meaning indifference to, rejection of or exclusion of religion and religious considerations. It therefore follows that in languages shaped by Islam (Arabic, Persian, Turkish, Urdu, Indonesian) the term secularism is translated with words meaning “without religion” or even godlessness.
Basing our answer on the word laicism we will show what the Catholic church teaches about the relationship between church and state. In chapter 9 (Spiritual and Secular), III, 2 on this website the basics of this question have already been answered. Here, we will also add from chapter 8 of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church:
A) RELIGIOUS FREEDOM; A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT
421 The Second Vatican Council committed the Catholic Church to the promotion of religious freedom. The Declaration Dignitatis Humanae explains in its subtitle that it intends to proclaim “the right of the person and of communities to social and civil freedom in religious matters”. In order that this freedom, willed by God and inscribed in human nature, may be exercised, no obstacle should be placed in its way, since “the truth cannot be imposed except by virtue of its own truth”. (II. Vatican Council, explanation. Dignitatis humanae 1) The dignity of the person and the very nature of the quest for God require that all men and women should be free from every constraint in the area of religion. (cf. CCC, 2106). Society and the State must not force a person to act against his conscience or prevent him from acting in conformity with it. (cf. DH, 3 and CCC 2108) Religious freedom is not a moral licence to adhere to error, nor as an implicit right to error.(cf. CCC, 2108)
423 Because of its historical and cultural ties to a nation, a religious community might be given special recognition on the part of the State. Such recognition must in no way create discrimination within the civil or social order for other religious groups. (II.Vatic. Council, DH, 6, CCC, 2107) The vision of the relations between States and religious organizations promoted by the Second Vatican Council corresponds to the requirements of a State ruled by law and to the norms of international law. The Church is well aware that this vision is not shared by all; the right to religious freedom, unfortunately, “is being violated by many States, even to the point that imparting catechesis, having it imparted, and receiving it becomes punishable offences”.
B) THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE POLITICAL COMMUNITY
a) Autonomy and independence
424 Although the Church and the political community both manifest themselves in visible organizational structures, they are by nature different because of their configuration and because of the ends they pursue. The Second Vatican Council solemnly reaffirmed that, “in their proper spheres, the political community and the Church are mutually independent and self-governing”. The Church is organized in ways that are suitable to meet the spiritual needs of the faithful, while the different political communities give rise to relationships and institutions that are at the service of everything that is part of the temporal common good. The autonomy and independence of these two realities is particularly evident with regards to their ends.
The duty to respect religious freedom requires that the political community guarantee the Church the space needed to carry out her mission. For her part, the Church has no particular area of competence concerning the structures of the political community: “The Church respects the legitimate autonomy of the democratic order and is not entitled to express preferences for this or that institutional or constitutional solution”, (John Paul II, Encyclica Centesiumus Annus, 4) nor does it belong to her to enter into questions of the merit of political programmes, except as concerns their religious or moral implications.
b) Cooperation
425 The mutual autonomy of the Church and the political community does not entail a separation that excludes cooperation. Both of them, although by different titles, serve the personal and social vocation of the same human beings. The Church and the political community, in fact, express themselves in organized structures that are not ends in themselves but are intended for the service of man, to help him to exercise his rights fully, those inherent in his reality as a citizen and a Christian, and to fulfil correctly his corresponding duties. The Church and the political community can more effectively render this service “for the good of all if each works better for wholesome mutual cooperation in a way suitable to the circumstances of time and place”. (Gaudium et spes 76).
426 The Church has the right to the legal recognition of her proper identity. Precisely because her mission embraces all of human reality, the Church, sensing that she is “truly and intimately linked with mankind and its history”,[870] claims the freedom to express her moral judgment on this reality, whenever it may be required to defend the fundamental rights of the person or for the salvation of souls. (cf. CIC, can.747, § 2).
The Church therefore seeks: freedom of expression, teaching and evangelization; freedom of public worship; freedom of organization and of her own internal government; freedom of selecting, educating, naming and transferring her ministers; freedom for constructing religious buildings; freedom to acquire and possess sufficient goods for her activity; and freedom to form associations not only for religious purposes but also for educational, cultural, health care and charitable purposes.
427 In order to prevent or attenuate possible conflicts between the Church and the political community, the juridical experience of the Church and the State have variously defined stable forms of contact and suitable instruments for guaranteeing harmonious relations. This experience is an essential reference point for all cases in which the State has the presumption to invade the Church's area of action, impairing the freedom of her activity to the point of openly persecuting her or, vice versa, for cases in which church organizations do not act properly with respect to the State.” (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Roman Church: Libreria Editrice Vaticana/Freiburg: Herder, 2004).
Question 208: Are there also fundamentalists among Christians who want to set up a theocracy? (TR)
Answer: Yes, there are Christian fundamentalists, but not really any who would want to set up a theocracy.
Even if these days it often seems as if fundamentalism was a specific problem for Islam, the term and the phenomenon arose in a Christian context in the 19th and 20th centuries. [...] The fundamentalist problem had its origin first and foremost in the Christian communities of North America which, appealing to the creation narratives in the Bible and who, in radical opposition to Darwin’s theory of evolution, isolated themselves to a large extent from the world around them and from the modern world as such. Fundamentalism is, however, a temptation for all religions and ideologies in as far as they claim to be in possession of the absolute truth. It is quasi the original temptation of the religious person per se who is searching for the final answers. This can be seen from two typical and therefore inevitably generalised forms of Christian fundamentalism.
The typical Protestant variant of a fundamentalist understanding of Christianity says: Something is true because it literally says so in the Bible. The Catholic version of this is that something is true because the Pope said so. The first version is generally called biblicism. The latter can, accordingly, be understood as institutionalism or “church positivism”. Religious truth and truth per se are then ascribed to a certain tradition, or more precisely, a particular authority. Critical questioning is not possible. This means that criticism and the ability to ask critical questions, i.e. human reason, are not allowed to play a part in the religious and ideological realms. This faith, which in the final analysis is faith in a definite authority, is blind to the influence of reason. It usually occurs in a clearly separated and closed community led by a charismatic leader. Religion thus becomes the separation from the rest of the world and from society. Karsten Kreutzer, art. „Fundamentalismus“ in: A. Franz/W. Baum/K. Kreutzer (Ed.) Lexikon philosophischer Grundbegriffe der Theologie. 2. Edited Edition Freiburg: Herder, 2007.
Question 209: Are marriages not concluded in church valid in the eyes of the Vatican? Will the resulting children be baptised? (TR)
Answer: If only one of the two partners is Catholic, the marriage has to be solemnised in a Catholic church, otherwise it is not valid (cf. Can. 1117).
If the marriage is not valid, the children can not at first be baptised. There will be a postponement of baptism (cf. can 868 § 1 n. 2), until it has been ascertained that someone (relatives, godparents etc) can take on the Catholic education of the child.
Question 210: Who are the Quakers? A religious order or a confession? (TR)
Answer: The English shoemaker George Fox (1624-1691) founded a religious community which initially called itself “Children of light”, and “Friends of truth”, or simply “Friends”. Since approx. 1665 the movement has had the name the “Society of Friends”. The term Quaker, which the Friends have been using for themselves for a long time and which was originally used to mock them, comes from the word “to quake” meaning “shake”, “shiver”, and was given to them because in their meetings the Friends “shivered” with religious emotion.
The Quaker have their spiritual and religious roots in the various Western intellectual movements (e.g. the medieval mystics, the mystical philosophy by Jakob Böhme (1575-1624) and Angelus Silesius (1624-1677), the left wing of the reformation with its spiritualistic representatives. This “spiritual Christianity” with its indispensable contribution to the history of tolerance, had the central theme of the “Inner light”.
Because the Quakers rejected the established church, supported radical moral positions (rejection of oaths and of military service), but also because the piety of some of their members became more and more ecstatic and lyrical, and because they opened up to chiliastic ideas, the “Friends” were often cruelly persecuted. Under the leadership of Quaker William Penn (1644-1718) they sought protection in the USA (and founded the state of Pennsylvania). The third most important person of Quakerism, Robert Barclay (1648-1690) is considered to be the “movement’s theologian”.
Quakerism is a religion without sacraments (no Baptism, no Eucharist). All of life is to be a Sacrament and worship is to have the form of “communion” without priests (exception: USA, Kenya), without formal creeds or doctrines (“religion without dogma”). The doctrines of Jesus Christ’s divine-human nature and the Trinity are rejected, although some Quakers affirm them. If there is any binding doctrine at all, it is the belief in the “Inner light” (Jn 1.9), in the “Christ within us” and in the “Inner Light of Christ”. The main characteristics of Quaker worship are the comprehensive lack of rites and of structure. The core of worship is the “Waiting silence” (Gustav Mensching), the search for an inner connection with God. God can reveal himself directly to anyone who seeks him honestly. “If a thought or a prayer or the experience of a bible verse come to a Friend from out of the silence and move him to express them, he will speak during worship. (...) In the simple silent worship marriage couples make their promises, parents dedicate their newborn into the care of the community and the dead are remembered.
In accordance with the old Quaker watchword “Let your lives speak!” the Friends consider their whole lives to be worship. From the message of the “Inner light” follow practical individual and social principles and requirements such as truthfulness, honesty and an undemanding nature. Quakers are very active in the community. As one of the “historic peace churches” they reject all violence, supported the abolition of slavery, the equality of women, the equality of races (referring also to Gal 3:28), have called for the reformation of penal law and refuse military service for conscientious reasons.
After the two World Wars the Quaker effectively called for the abolishing of hunger and misery among the conquered countries (Quakers fed five million German children). Today, the Quakers are active in many places, among them the Middle East (children and youth work in Palestine refuge camps, work with old people in Jerusalem, in Kenya (agricultural projects), Northern Ireland, Somalia (refugees programs) and in many other Asian and Latin American countries. Worldwide there are approx. 200,000 Quakers (mainly in the USA, in Kenya and in Great Britain). They come together under the umbrella organisation of the Friends World Committee for Consultation.” (Abbreviated copy from Udo Tworuschka, Lexikon. Die Religionen der Welt. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1999, S. 254-255, art. ‚Religiöse Gesellschaft der Freunde‘.
Question 211: What does rebirth through the Holy Spirit mean? (TR)
Answer: According to the doctrine of the Catholic Church “rebirth through the Holy Spirit” happens during the sacrament of Baptism.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua), and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word.” (Cathechismus Romanus 2,2,5)
What is this Sacrament called?
1214 This sacrament is called Baptism, after the central rite by which it is carried out: to baptize (Greek baptizein) means to "plunge" or "immerse"; the "plunge" into the water symbolizes the catechumen's burial into Christ's death, from which he rises up by resurrection with him, as "a new creature.” (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15)
1215 This sacrament is also called "the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit,” (Tit 3:5) for it signifies and actually brings about the birth of water and the Spirit without which no one "can enter the kingdom of God." (jn 3:5)
1216 "This bath is called enlightenment, because those who receive this [catechetical] instruction are enlightened in their understanding . . . ." (Justin, apol. 1,61,12 9). Having received in Baptism the Word, "the true light that enlightens every man," (Jn 1.9) the person baptized has been "enlightened,” (Heb. 10:32) he becomes a "son of light," (Thes 5:5) indeed, he becomes "light" himself: (Eph 5:8).
Question 212: Why do Christians require a Godparent for Baptism? Is it in case the parents die and the child needs a new home? (TR)
Answer: Men and women take on the role of godparents at a Baptism. It is a commitment to ensure and to deepen the Christian upbringing of a child, together with the parents or guardians until the young person can declare their own faith. In the case of adult baptism, another aspect is more important: the godparents represent the community of the church, which has the task to encourage and to challenge the recipient of the sacrament in their own faith journey.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says this about the role of godparents:
1255 For the grace of Baptism to unfold, the parents' help is important. So too is the role of the godfather and godmother, who must be firm believers, able and ready to help the newly baptized - child or adult on the road of Christian life. Their task is a truly ecclesial function (officium). The whole ecclesial community bears some responsibility for the development and safeguarding of the grace given at Baptism.
Question 213: Are Popes elected until their death? Can a Pope resign? (TR)
Answer: The Pope is elected for life. But he can voluntarily resign from office (cf. can. 332 § 2). This waiver of office does not have to be accepted by anyone.
Question 214: What are the apocrypha? (TR)
Answer: In the discourse of Catholic theologians the apocrypha are the “secret” writings which did not become part of the biblical canon, but who (can) claim to belong there because of their title or alleged origin (an Old Testament or New Testament person). [...] According to the understanding of the early church (apocryphal means) the same as heretical (Gnostic); furthermore [it is] the term for books in the Septuagint [the Greek translation of the Hebrew bible which was written during the second century by Christ at Alexandria, and which includes a number of additional books not included in the Canon of the Hebrew bible] that were not included in the Jewish canon (Deuterocanonical). Protestant theology still calls them the apocrypha, whereas it calls all other Scriptures Pseudepigrapha)” (Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, Band 1 (1993), Spalten 824-825). Further information: Ph. Vielhauer, Geschichte der urchristlichen Literatur. Berlin, 1975, 485-718.
|
