RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY AND POPE FRANCIS

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

The Pope and religious diversity

 The landmark declaration, signed by Francis in Abu Dhabi, caused disquiet in some quarters for affirming religious pluralism, but it is both inspirational and true to Catholic teaching

The document jointly signed earlier this month by the Grand Imam of al-Azhar, Ahmed el-Tayeb, and Pope Francis has caused disquiet in some quarters. “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in his wisdom through which he created human beings,” it declares.

Some Catholic commentators were offended by this use of “pluralism” and claimed that the idea that God “willed” the diversity of religions was contrary to Catholic teaching.
On his flight home from Abu Dhabi, Pope Francis told reporters: “I want to restate this clearly. From the Catholic point of view, the document does not deviate one millimetre from the Second Vatican Council.”

He is dead right. Accepting that the diversity of religions is willed by God conforms to the council’s teaching found not only in the Declaration on the Relation of the Church to non-Christian religions (Nostra Aetate), but also in other documents (notably, but not exclusively, in Lumen Gentium, Ad Gentes, and Gaudium et Spes). And accepting religious diversity as willed by God also corresponds to the teaching of Pope St John Paul II, as well as authoritative Catholic theologians.

The Belgian Jesuit theologian Jacques Dupuis’ book, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism, sparked an animated debate over the status before God of other faiths when it was published in 1997. Is religious pluralism a situation in the history of salvation directly willed by God (pluralism de iure) or merely tolerated by God (pluralism de facto)? Although Dupuis never claimed fellow Jesuit Karl Rahner’s support, a pluralism de iure was expounded by Rahner, a leading expert at Vatican II and considered by many to be the greatest theologian of the twentieth century.

In Nostra Aetate the Fathers of the council declare that there are “things that are true and holy in these [other] religions”. The council goes on to make an extraordinarily positive declaration about other religions: their “ways of acting and living, precepts and doctrines often reflect a ray of the Truth that illumines all human beings’ (my italics). Speaking of what is “true and holy” evokes the two dimensions of God’s self-communication: revelation (truth) and salvation (holiness). By referring to the “Truth that illumines all human beings”, the council recalls the prologue of John’s Gospel (1:9) and the Word of God. If Christ the Word of God is the truth for everyone, he must also be life for everyone (John 1:4), and such life means real holiness.

Nostra Aetate recognises in general what is true and holy in other religions. It spells out the truth and holiness that it finds in Hinduism and Buddhism, and then moves on to comment on what Christians and Muslims share. The council preserves the core belief that God has communicated in Christ the fullness of revelation and salvation. But the availability of this fullness through Christian faith and the Church does not mean that elsewhere there is only emptiness and no gifts of God. The teaching of Nostra Aetate is irreconcilable with any such claim.

The Council’s Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity (Ad Gentes) refers to “the seeds of the Word hidden in the religious traditions” of various peoples. These are “the riches which the bountiful God has distributed to the nations”. The disciples of Christ should “try to illuminate these riches with the light of the Gospel”. But, for reasons that are not sinful and remain hidden in the mystery of divine providence, the Gospel may not reach and be accepted by Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and others. Nevertheless, the God-given seeds of the Word and riches (“distributed” by God through the religious traditions of peoples) remain present and effective. These others can be saved in and through their religions.

The teaching of Vatican II is incompatible with such assertions as: “the followers of other religions cannot be saved through their religions but only despite them”, or “God merely tolerates for a time the existence of other religions, and in no sense directly wills their existence”. God wills the salvation of all. For millions of people that can take place only through their inherited beliefs and practices.

At the Gregorian University in Rome where I taught for more than 30 years, a Polish student of mine, Aleksander Majur, had written as his doctoral thesis, The Teaching of John Paul II on the Other Religions. John Paul II never issued an encyclical on the world religions. But he repeatedly spoke and wrote about them; Majur had abundant material for his 350-page volume. In a 1990 encyclical Redemptoris Missio (the Mission of the Redeemer), he insisted that, while manifested “in a special way in the Church and her members”, the Holy Spirit’s “presence and activity” are “universal”. He added: “The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society, history, peoples, cultures and religions (my italics).”

John Paul II’s teaching reminds me of Rahner. Sadly, some critics never move beyond rejecting the term “anonymous Christians”, which Rahner originally suggested and then dropped as a secondary affair. What mattered far more were his reflections on the supernatural, grace-filled elements to be acknowledged in non-Christian religions. Significantly, Rahner added that for a religion to be “intended by God”, it does not have to be “pure and positively willed by God in all its elements” (my italics). Christianity is certainly intended by God. But is it pure and positively willed by God in all the elements that have shown up in its history?

Before rushing to judgment on the statement of the Pope and the Grand Imam, critics might reread some relevant texts from Vatican II and Pope John II. The teaching of John Paul II includes the remarkable speech he made in Morocco in 1985 to more than 80,000 young Muslims. (“We believe in the same God, the one God, the living God, the God who created the world and brings his creatures to their perfection … Christians and Muslims, we have badly understood each other, and sometimes, in the past, we have opposed and even exhausted each other in polemics and in wars. I believe that, today, God invites us to change our old practices.”) The document just signed by Francis and the Grand Imam of al-Azhar also ranks as momentous teaching, which has come from a Pope visiting the Arabian peninsula itself, the birthplace of Islam.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

The Tablet

   

CATHOLIC PRIESTS - MEN ONLY

Why Catholic Priests Must Be Men

“Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination.” (CCC 1577)

The Catholic Church is one of the last major holdouts among Christians to insist that their clergy be exclusively men. This has been a source of much questioning and, at times, great controversy even among practicing Catholics. The argument usually focuses on Jesus having picked only men to be his Apostles, in spite of the fact that he clearly felt free to defy contemporary customs in a whole range of other areas of his ministry.

However, at a conference several years ago, something I heard on the subject of male priests really struck a chord with me. And, it convinced me that not only is this issue settled doctrine (per Pope St. John Paul II), but the deep, theological and physiological meaning behind this teaching is badly needed in our culture today.

What many might find odd, at first, is how closely this issue ties in with marriage. (Stay with me on this.) Catholics take John 6 literally:

I am the living bread which has come down from heaven. Anyone who eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is my flesh, for the life of the world.' Then the Jews started arguing among themselves, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

(And the murmuring continues today among Christians and non-Christians, alike.)

After hearing it, many of his followers said, 'This is intolerable language. How could anyone accept it? Jesus was aware that his followers were complaining about it and said, 'Does this disturb you?

We know this was intended to be literal, because even when most were recoiling at this statement, Jesus didn’t back off. He doubled down, reiterating the point four times.

So, Jesus is the giver of life. We receive life from him. He is the “bridegroom” and we are the “bride of Christ – the Church” (in a collective sense). When we receive Jesus – in the flesh – in the Eucharist at Mass, “the two become one flesh” in a literal sense. What a beautiful thing!

In marriage, something very similar happens. The bridegroom/husband gives of himself to his bride. He gives. She is made to receive that gift. The two become one flesh and new life comes from that act – life-giving to the relationship and sometimes in the form of a new image of God being created. Marriage and the Eucharist are woven together in meaning. Both sacraments tell us a great deal about each other.

So, if the Eucharist is what we are doing to reflect Jesus’ words, “Do this in memory of Me,” then how the “this” is carried out is critical. From these words of Christ at the altar, the “gift of life” is prepared and presented to the bride.

Therefore, the priest – the only one who can perform this action – must be male. He (in the person of Christ) gives life to the faithful – to the bride. And we receive that gift. (And if your church doesn't take John 6 literally, it really doesn't matter what sex your clergy is, and it makes marriage much more malleable to suit whatever definition pleases you.)

This unique role for a select few men offers a profound lesson for our society today. Men have a vital role in the Church and in marriage. There are some things only men have the ability to do. Women, also, play a vital role in the Church and in marriage. They receive the seed of life and carry it. They are (very literally) “tabernacles.” It is for this reason a man “genuflects” when proposing to his bride to be. He is honouring this reality by bowing to her and offering deference to her womb — the carrier of images of God — of Life.

While our society continues to wallow in confusion about the sexes, about the meaning of human sexuality, and insisting that men and women aren’t really different, thank God Almighty that He has preserved this incredible meaning within His Church. May it be a light to the world and may we appreciate it all the more in how we view the reality of marriage and in the gift of the Eucharist.

SUFFERING - 1

The Meaning of Suffering - 1

For sure, when reading the words of Christ on calling us to take up our cross, the first thought that comes to mind is enduring persecution. This persecution can take on many forms – as seemingly trivial as being teased about being a Christian to as grievous as becoming a martyr.

But, taking up one’s cross, i.e. embracing suffering, is not just about accepting persecution. To understand exactly what is meant here, we must go back to the beginning of understanding what is meant by suffering.

To suffer means to undergo pain and hardship. This brief definition is adequate for explaining the experience or situation of one who suffers. Yet, it lacks an explanation of the essence of suffering and what it means to suffer.

What Pope St. John Paul the Great Says

Pope St. John Paul the Great writes about the meaning of suffering in his apostolic letter, Salvifici Doloris (SD) or Redemptive Suffering, On the Christian Meaning of Human Suffering. He teaches that suffering cannot be separated from understanding evil as when we suffer we experience a kind of evil. Indeed, we suffer because of evil. And, regardless of the evil, it can trace its way back to Original Sin. So, because suffering is so linked to evil, we must seek to understand the essence of evil. Says St. John Paul II:

Man suffers on account of evil, which is a certain lack, limitation or distortion of good. We could say that man suffers because of a good in which he does not share, from which in a certain sense he is cut off, or of which he has deprived himself. He particularly suffers when he ought”—in the normal order of things—to have a share in this good and does not have it. (SD, #7)

He goes on to teach that suffering can come in many forms, but it can be understood under three categories: physical suffering (pain of the body), moral suffering (pain of the soul), and finally definitive suffering, or eternal damnation (SD, #5, #14). It is the pain of the soul, our moral suffering, from which we ultimately find salvation from in the Cross of Christ. And, sometimes, that moral suffering also manifests itself in physical suffering.

Suffering & Our Salvation

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

And in this we find the very meaning of suffering: our redemption. The only way for us to be saved from the ultimate suffering – that of separation from God – was through the suffering of His Son, Jesus Christ. To be saved from the stain of the first sin – disobedience to the Will of God – we must be saved by the complete emptying of One who is perfectly obedient to the Father. As St. John Paul says,

In his suffering, sins are cancelled out precisely because he alone as the only-begotten Son could take them upon himself, accept them with that love for the Father which overcomes the evil of every sin; in a certain sense he annihilates this evil in the spiritual space of the relationship between God and humanity, and fills this space with good. (SD, #17)

Even in understanding the essence and meaning of suffering, we can’t learn to approach it without also understanding its purpose.

Why Do We Suffer?

As with many Truths, ultimately we must come to the conclusion that any explanation of why something must be is a mystery because of the limits of our human understanding. Yet, St. John Paul the Great attempts to explain the “why” of suffering:

[In] order to perceive the true answer to the “why” of suffering, we must look to the revelation of divine love, the ultimate source of the meaning of everything that exists. Love is also the richest source of the meaning of suffering, which always remains a mystery: we are conscious of the insufficiency and inadequacy of our explanations. (SD, #13)

Essentially, the “why we must suffer” circles back to our role in our redemption and taking part in the suffering of Christ. The infinite and divine love of both the Father and the Son is a salvific love, says St. John Paul. Further, because “man exists on earth with the hope of eternal life and holiness” (SD, #15), our suffering is given a new meaning by this salvific love.

Original Sin

So, why do we suffer? We suffer because of Original Sin. Yet, our suffering is not just in response to Original Sin, but rather takes on the new meaning of redemption through Christ’s suffering. And, God “allows” suffering not because He is vindictive or relishes wreaking pain on His creation, but rather because suffering is so linked to our free will and, in turn, linked to divine love.

While we might ask God out of protest why we must suffer, the answer He gives is not ever what we expect, but rather one that wishes to call us to partake in the suffering of Christ. As St. John Paul says,

[In] general it can be said that almost always the individual enters suffering with a typically human protest and with the question “why“. He asks the meaning of his suffering and seeks an answer to this question on the human level…Nevertheless, it often takes time, even a long time, for this answer to begin to be interiorly perceived. For Christ does not answer directly and he does not answer in the abstract this human questioning about the meaning of suffering. Man hears Christ’s saving answer as he himself gradually becomes a sharer in the sufferings of Christ. (SD, #26)

The Purpose of Suffering

In his Letter to the Friends of the Cross, St. Louis de Montfort tells us that the purpose of suffering is to prepare us for the glory of Heaven. He likens the suffering of the cross to the chisel and hammer that shapes and cuts stones into “beautiful works of art”:

[Y]ou must expect to be shaped, cut and chiselled under the hammer of the cross; otherwise, you would remain rough stones, good for nothing but to be cast aside…respect the chisel that is carving you and the hand that is shaping you. It may be that this skillful and loving craftsman wants you to have an important place in his eternal edifice…(#28)

Suffering is how we continue down the path of conversion, grow in faith, and, as St. John Paul the Great said, rebuild and strengthen the goodness that we lost through Original Sin (SD, 12). Suffering, therefore, is how we achieve salvation because it enables us to participate in the Passion of Christ. As St. Paul states in his Letter to the Philippians, the only way to obtain salvation is to take part in Christ’s Passion (Phil 3:8-11). Suffering is a way to be sanctified (2 Cor 12:7-10, 1:9-11).

Suffering constantly points us to God. It is the very real reminder that we are weak and imperfect humans needing salvation. Suffering can and often does lead us to God.

In The Problem of Pain, C.S. Lewis says:

We can even ignore pleasure. But pain insists on being attended to. God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains. It is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.

Embrace Your Cross

Suffering reminds us we cannot go it alone nor do we need to go it alone. When God gave us His only Son, He gave us a way to achieve salvific suffering. He gave us the Church, which is Him still remaining with us in our suffering on earth. Through the Sacraments, He gives us the grace and strength to continue on in our suffering and use it to rebuild the good we lost due to Original Sin – to achieve eternal life.

To be clear, suffering in and of itself doesn’t procure salvation but rather the embracing of one’s cross leads to our redemption. This is because Christ already suffered for our salvation, and so made our suffering redemptive in nature. Yet, we can take part in that salvation by embracing our own cross as He embraces His. This is our role in redemption.