Teologi

Sandro Magister skriver slik om dette møtet i Ghana for noen få dager siden:

They were five cardinals and forty-five bishops from as many African countries who met in Accra, the capital of Ghana, from June 8-11. All in the clear light of day, not almost in secret like some of their colleagues from Germany, France, and Switzerland, who had gathered a few days before at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome.

But while at the Gregorian the objective was changing the Church’s stance on divorce and homosexuality, in Accra the push was in the other direction.

The marching route was indicated from the very first remarks by Guinean cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the congregation for divine worship:

– “not to be afraid of reiterating the teaching of Christ on marriage”;
– “to speak at the synod with clarity and with just one voice, in filial love of the Church.”
– “to protect the family from all the ideologies that want to destroy it, and therefore also from the national and international policies that impede the promotion of positive values.”

On this marching route there has been complete consensus. Even the only bishop of black Africa who in recent months had spoken out in favor of «openness» to divorce, Gabriel Charles Palmer-Buckle of Accra, elected by the bishops of Ghana as their delegate to the synod, was found to be in agreement with all present in the defense of Catholic doctrine on the family.

In addition to Sarah, the other African cardinals present were Christian Tumi of Cameroon, John Njue of Kenya, Polycarp Pengo of Tanzania, and Berhaneyesus D. Souraphiel of Ethiopia, this last created by Pope Francis at the last consistory.

Organized by the symposium of episcopal conferences of Africa and Madagascar, the title of the meeting was “The family in Africa. What experiences and what contributions for the 14th ordinary assembly of the synod of bishops?» …

… …

Internasjonalt diskuteres det ganske intenst før oktobers bispesynode om ekteskapet, og noen syns å merke at de mest radikale forslagene nå mister støtte. Bl.a. Sandro Magister skriver mye om dette, og nylig dekket han en artikkel i “La Civiltà Cattolica”, der den dominikanske teologen Jean-Miguel Garrigues anbefalte at skilte og gjengifte katolikker skulle få lov til å motta sakramentene. Men Magister gir mest plass til et motsvar til dette forslaget fra en annen dominikaner, og skriver bl.a.:

Of the two exceptions to the ban on communion for the divorced and remarried proposed by “La Civiltà Cattolica,” the more instructive is the first, because it has been for some time the more frequently adopted in pastoral practice.

Fr. Garrigues formulated it as follows:

“I think of a couple in which one of the partners has been previously married, a couple that has children and an active and recognized Christian life. Let’s imagine that the previously married person has submitted the previous marriage to an ecclesiastical tribunal that has decided for the impossibility of pronouncing nullity in the absence of sufficient proof, while they themselves are convinced of the contrary, without having the means to prove it. On the basis of testimony to their good faith, to their Christian life and their sincere attachment to the Church and to the sacrament of marriage, in particular on the part of an expert spiritual father, the diocesan bishop could admit them with discretion to penance and the Eucharist without pronouncing the nullity of the marriage.”

And this is how his theologian confrere replied to him:

“It is like saying that experts in the matter, who dedicate a great deal of time to it, have not been able to find proof of the nullity of the bond, so the bishop, who is not a specialist in the field of marriage, in his soul and conscience could rely after one or two conversations on the good faith of the spouses and the attestation of their spiritual guide.

“One may respond: ‘But their marriage is null.’ In this case, if it really is so, why not marry them? And why act in secret, with confidentiality? Because there are doubts? And if they are not to be married, how will the fact that their first marriage is null change the fact that they are living together without being legitimately married with a sacramental bond? How does this open access to absolution and the Eucharist for them?

“When spouses ultimately apply to the ecclesiastical tribunals (when they do so…) it is because they think that there is some foundation for the nullity of their bond, it is because they are convinced in their soul and conscience that their marriage is null. And if the tribunal does not agree with them, will they be persuaded by this? So all those who apply to the ecclesiastical tribunals will be able to say in conscience that their marriage is null, and the bishop will be able to absolve all of them and authorize all of them to receive communion.

“At that point there would be nothing left to do but to close the tribunals, which would be replaced by the bishops, and even the churches, because a simple civil marriage would produce the effects of a sacramental marriage.”

What is interesting to note is that this same “particular case” now illustrated by “La Civiltà Cattolica” had already been the object of examination by the magisterium of the Church – with an outcome in the negative – in the «Letter on Eucharistic communion for the divorced and remarried faithful» published in 1994 by the congregation for the doctrine of the faith. …

Les hele denne artikkelen, som også referer til utviklingen i land som Frankrike, Tyskalnd og Argentina.

De fleste vet at den tyske katolske bispekonferansen (i alle fall flertallet av biskopene) ønsker å åpne for kommunion for gjengifte, men i dokumentet de nå har offentliggjort (på flere språk) ønsker de å gå enda en hel del lenger – skriver Sandro Magister, først oppsummerende: The responses of the episcopal conference to the presynodal questionnaire describe what is already being done in Germany: communion for the divorced and remarried, tolerance for second marriages, approval of homosexual unions

Så skiver han litt mer utførlig:

When it comes to the question on “how to promote the determination of pastoral guidelines on the level of particular Churches,” the German bishops write: «Referring to social and cultural differences, some of the responses favour regional agreements on pastoral guidelines at local church level. The basis could also be formed by diocesan discussion processes on the topic of marriage and the family the outcome of which would be discussed with other local churches. This would be conditional on all concerned being willing to engage in a dialogue.»

The formulation is a bit contorted, but the facts speak for themselves. In almost all the dioceses of Germany, sacramental absolution and Eucharistic communion are given to the divorced and remarried, as already made clear by a previous document from the German episcopal conference, approved on June 24, 2014 and proudly exhibited in Rome at last October’s session of the synod on the family.

Og dette skrev de altså i 2014. Det skriver i år oppsummerer Magister slik:

Below is reproduced the section of the document with the responses to the most controversial points of the questionnaire: the divorced and remarried, mixed marriages, homosexuals.

Not only do the German bishops approve of giving absolution and communion to the divorced and remarried, but they also express the hope that civil second marriages be blessed in church, that Eucharistic communion also be given to non-Catholic spouses, that the goodness of homosexual relationships and same-sex unions be recognized.

They write that they do not intend in the least to bring into question the doctrine of the universal Church relative to marriage and family. But they do not explain how to reconcile this doctrine “cum Petro e sub Petro” with the pastoral practices that they have implemented in Germany.

In the judgment of Cardinal Gerhard Müller, in fact, such a reconciliation is impossible. On the contrary, “the idea that the episcopal conferences are a magisterium apart from the Magisterium, without the pope and without communion with all the bishops, is a profoundly anti-Catholic idea that does not respect the catholicity of the Church”.

Her er en lenke til dokumentet: The Vocation and Mission of the Family in the Church and Contemporary World
Response by the German Bishops’ Conference to the Questions Aimed at a Response to and an In-Depth Examination of the Relatio Synodi in the Preparatory Document for the XIV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops of 2015.

Her er dokumentet fra juni 2014: Theologically-responsible, pastorally-appropriate ways of assisting remarried divorcees

Fr Alexander Lucie-Smith skrev nylig et brev til The Catholic Herald der han forklarer hvorfor han undertegnet brevet der 500 engelske prester ba høstens bispesynode om å holde fast på Kirkens lære om ekteskapet. Der skriver han noe veldig interessant om hvordan folk flest oppfatter ekteskapet i vår til – også i katolske menigheter:

… First, I am a moral theologian. That’s my job, and it seems incredibly important to me that the underlying moral issue is not obscured here. Yes, there are pastoral issues, but there can be no pastoral solution without taking account of moral truth. Rather oddly there seem to be very few moral theologians taking part in the Synod. Pastoral theology is about the application of moral theology. Talking about pastoral provisions without reference to morals is a bit like having a discussion in a room from which the oxygen has been pumped out.

Secondly, I am, like almost all the signatories, a parish priest. As such I know that divorce is no longer really an issue in the way it was. There are, of course, people who are divorced and remarried in my parish. But there are many more who have never been married. Divorce is not the problem in developed societies like ours: the problem is that divorce has been so successful that it has undermined marriage. Marriage has become “a piece of paper”, a devalued currency. We need to rebuild the institution of marriage from the foundations up. …

Catholic Herald i England har et stort oppslag med følgende overskrift: «Nearly 500 priests in England and Wales urge synod to stand firm on Communion for the remarried» Avisa skriver nokså langt om dette brevet med nesten 500 underskrifter, men selve teksten i brevet er ganske kort:

Following the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in Rome in October 2014 much confusion has arisen concerning Catholic moral teaching. In this situation we wish, as Catholic priests, to re-state our unwavering fidelity to the traditional doctrines regarding marriage and the true meaning of human sexuality, founded on the Word of God and taught by the Church’s Magisterium for two millennia.

We commit ourselves anew to the task of presenting this teaching in all its fullness, while reaching out with the Lord’s compassion to those struggling to respond to the demands and challenges of the Gospel in an increasingly secular society. Furthermore we affirm the importance of upholding the Church’s traditional discipline regarding the reception of the sacraments, and that doctrine and practice remain firmly and inseparably in harmony.

We urge all those who will participate in the second Synod in October 2015 to make a clear and firm proclamation of the Church’s unchanging moral teaching, so that confusion may be removed, and faith confirmed.

Yours faithfully, ……

På First Things nettsider leste jeg nettopp en diskusjon om kardinal Kaspers bok «Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Existence». En prest i Boston, Fr. Daniel Patrick Moloney, hadde tidligere i vinter skrevet en anmeldelse av denne boka, som Kasper her svarer på og som Moloney igjen får svare på – bl.a. på denne måten:

… As a reader trying to be charitable, I face an unattractive choice: accept that His Eminence does hold the mistaken view that mercy is essential to God; or assume that when he emphatically made the multiple important statements at key points in his book that mercy is essential to God, that he didn’t mean them. I’d like to think my argument was logical and theological, not ideological. I just was trying to work out the problems that flow from his claims about mercy in relation to God’s essence, claims that imply unorthodox conclusions.

It’s not true, however, that others in the tradition think as he does. In his letter, Cardinal Kasper cites St. Thomas Aquinas, particularly in Summa Theologiae I.21.3–4, as his “main support” for his claims that mercy is “the greatest attribute of God,” that mercy takes “precedence over and against justice,” and that “mercy presupposes justice and is its plenitude.” He also refers to II-II.30.4 as concluding that mercy is the summit of the Christian life. I’m not sure that last article helps his cause—St. Thomas is talking there about mercy in humans, not divine mercy, and he says explicitly, following St. Paul, that charity, not mercy is the highest human virtue (caritas, per quam Deo unitur, est potior quam misericordia, per quam defectus proximorum supplet). But maybe he has a different reading.

In the other passage, St. Thomas does address divine mercy and justice, but he is talking about God’s work towards creation, so those passages aren’t directly relevant to the question of the divine essence considered in itself. I don’t see any claim that mercy is the greatest attribute or is essential to God, nor am I aware of any place where Aquinas asserted that mercy is of God’s essence. Aquinas actually says in I.21.3 that mercy is simply God’s goodness when directed toward creatures and considered from a certain perspective (ratio). That’s hardly an argument for its being central.

Aquinas does make a number of statements that sound like the view Cardinal Kasper wants to defend: he says in I.21.3–4 that “the work of divine justice always presupposes the work of mercy and is founded upon it,” and that in acting mercifully God is “doing something more than justice,” for mercy “is the fullness of justice.” In his book, Cardinal Kasper also quotes Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict, and others using similar language about mercy “surpassing” justice. There are many ways in which such language can be given an orthodox construction: If, for example, you take your definition of “justice” from a law textbook (Aquinas likes the Roman jurist Ulpian) or from ordinary political usage, then there’s no problem in saying God’s mercy surpasses that. But that sort of justice (imperfect, worldly, human) is not a divine perfection, and so can’t be what we mean when we say God is Justice itself. When John Paul II in Dives in Misericordia invokes the saying “summa ius, summa iniuria” (the greatest justice leads to the greatest injustice), which Cardinal Kasper cites twice in the book, he’s not referring to perfect divine justice, but the excesses of human justice absent love. …

Les gjerne hele diskusjonen her.

Tidligere i år brukte kardinal Kasper en artikkel av en 40-år gammel teolog i 1972 (p. Ratzinger), til å argumentere for at gjengifte katolikker likevel kan motta kommunion – det har vært mye skrevet om dette både under kardinalmøtet i februar og under bispesynoden i oktober. Nå viser det seg at Ratzinger/Benedikt har skrevet om hele konklusjonen på sin artikkel fra 1972. Slik leser vi hos Sandro Magister:

In the Opera Omnia, Ratzinger is republishing – with the help of the prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, Gerhard Ludwig Müller – all of his theological writings, grouped according to theme. In the latest of the nine volumes published so far in German by Herder, numbering almost 1,000 pages and entitled “Introduction to Christianity. Profession, baptism, discipleship,” there is a 1972 article on the question of the indissolubility of marriage, published that year in Germany in a multi-author book on marriage and divorce.

That 1972 article by Ratzinger was dusted off last February by Cardinal Walter Kasper in the talk with which he introduced the consistory of cardinals convened by Pope Francis to discuss the issue of the family, in view of the synod of bishops scheduled for October.

In cheering for the admission of the divorced and remarried to Eucharistic communion, Kasper said: “The early Church gives us a guideline that can serve as a means of escape from the dilemma, to which Professor Joseph Ratzinger referred in 1972. [. . .] Ratzinger suggested that Basil’s position should be taken up again in a new way. It would seem to be an appropriate solution, one that is also at the basis of these reflections of mine.”

… That 1972 article was the first and last time in which Ratzinger «opened up” to communion for the divorced and remarried. Afterward, in fact, he not only fully adhered to the rigorist position of the ban on communion, reaffirmed by the magisterium of the Church during the pontificate of John Paul II, but he also contributed in a decisive way to the argumentation on behalf of this ban as prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith. …

Ratzinger/Benedikt konkluderer den nye avslutningen av artikkelen fra 1972 slik:

From what has been said so far it emerges that the Western Church – the Catholic Church – under the leadership of the successor of Peter, on the one hand knows that it is strictly bound to the word of the Lord on the indissolubility of marriage, but on the other has also sought to recognize the limits of this guideline in order not to impose on persons more than is necessary.

So on the basis of the suggestion of the apostle Paul and basing itself at the same time on the authority of the Petrine ministry, for non-sacramental marriages it has further elaborated the possibility of divorce in favor of the faith. At the same time it has examined the nullity of a marriage under every aspect.

The 1981 apostolic exhortation “Familiaris Consortio” of John Paul II went one step further. At number 84 it states: “Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church […] Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.”

This gives pastoral care an important task, which perhaps has not yet been sufficiently incorporated into the Church’s everyday life. Some details are indicated in the exhortation itself. There it is said that these persons, insofar as they are baptized, may participate in the Church’s life, which in fact they must do. The Christian activities that are possible and necessary for them are listed. Perhaps, however, it should be emphasized with greater clarity what the pastors and brethren in the faith can do so that they may truly feel the love of the Church. I think that they should be granted the possibility of participating in ecclesial associations and even of becoming godfathers or godmothers, something that the law does not provide for as of now.

There is another point of view that imposes itself on me. The impossibility of receiving the holy Eucharist is perceived as so painful not last of all because, currently, almost all who participate in the Mass also approach the table of the Lord. In this way the persons affected also appear publicly disqualified as Christians.

I maintain that Saint Paul’s warning about examining oneself and reflecting on the fact that what is at issue is the Body of the Lord should be taken seriously once again: “A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor 11:28 f.). A serious self-examination, which might even lead to forgoing communion, would also help us to feel in a new way the greatness of the gift of the Eucharist and would furthermore represent a form of solidarity with divorced and remarried persons.

I would like to add another practical suggestion. In many countries it has become customary for persons who are not able to receive communion (for example, the members of other confessions) to approach the altar with their hands folded over their chests, making it clear that they are not receiving the sacrament but are asking for a blessing, which is given to them as a sign of the love of Christ and of the Church. This form could certainly be chosen also by persons who are living in a second marriage and therefore are not admitted to the Lord’s table. The fact that this would make possible an intense spiritual communion with the Lord, with his whole Body, with the Church, could be a spiritual experience that would strengthen and help them.

På liturgi-bloggen PrayTell kan man lese et intervju med en nytt medlem av Vatikanets Internasjonale teologiske kommisjon, Karl-Heinz Menke, professor i dogmatisk teologi ved universitetet i Bonn. Han sier bl.a.:

One must admit that the Church is polarized. That applies also to the Germans. There is tension between those who wish to adapt to modernity and those who have more conservative tendencies. It is found in the bishops’ conference. This internecine battle has made its way right into the Vatican.

On the question of the day, communion for the divorced and remarried, Menke spoke honestly about the state of affairs in Germany: I have the impression that there are only a few divorced and remarried people in our communities who wish to live a church life. And those who want this have found a path for themselves. I have never heard of a pastor who turns someone away at the communion rail.

And this: I’ll name another topic for you: we keep acting as if we’re still a church of the whole population [Volkskirche]. At Confirmation, for example, the bishop receives the promises of the youth that they will be models of faith. But certainly 90 percent of them have utterly no intention of keeping this promise – one sees that they do not observe the law to go to church on Sundays. The official teaching and reality have spun free of each other.

Menke hopes that the International Theological Commission will take up such issues. Speaking of topics such as sexual ethics he remarked: Long term, it can’t continue that we teach something that is ignored by 90% and more of the grass-roots.

He hopes for a middle path: It’s not an “either/or.” It is just as false to adapt to the zeitgeist as it is to work toward a ghetto Catholicism in which those remaining think of themselves as the elite believers. A healthy middle way would be important.

Forrige uke valgte den amerikanske bispekonferansen hvilke biskoper som skal delta i neste års bispesynode i Roma – og de valgte ikke biskoper som vil ønske å støtte den radikale linjen. Dette referatet har jeg hentet fra den nokså progressive nettstedet Catholic News Agency:

… More than a year and a half into the papacy of Pope Francis, the U.S. bishops still appear like deer in headlights, not knowing which way to jump. There are no leaders in the tradition of Joseph Bernardin, John Roach, John Quinn, or James Malone who can articulate a vision for the conference in light of the new papacy.

There are no liberals among the bishops, and the moderates are a minority. The conservative majority is divided into two groups: the ideologues and the pastors.

The ideological conservatives make up 10 to 20 percent of the conference, and they are convinced that Francis is sowing confusion in the church where certitude and stability should be the marks of the church. Francis’ statement that «facts are more important than ideas» is incomprehensible to them; they believe reality must bend to their theological ideas.

The pastoral conservatives, on the other hand, are simply confused. They were raised in conservative families, went to conservative seminaries, don’t pretend to be intellectuals but are loyal churchmen who never questioned anything under the last two papacies. They like Francis, but they are not sure what he is doing. They are in need of a leader who can reassure them and point them in the right direction.

The election of delegates to next year’s synod of bishops reflected the makeup of the USCCB.

Archbishops Joseph Kurtz and Daniel Dinardo, the USCCB president and vice president, were elected as expected. Also elected were Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia and Jose Gomez of Los Angeles. Chaput had been critical of the confusion surrounding the synod. He will also host next year’s international conference on the family. Elected alternates were Blaise Cupich, newly appointed by Pope Francis to Chicago, and Salvatore Cordilone of San Francisco, the bishops’ point man on gay marriage.

If the bishops were totally behind Pope Francis they would have elected as delegates his best friend in the American hierarchy, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, and Archbishop-designate Cupich, his first major appointee.

A big part of the trouble with the American hierarchy is that the bishops have no one to consult. The conservative theologians, who have been advising them during the last two papacies, are as upset as the ideologically conservative bishops. Since progressive theologians were labeled heretics, kicked out of seminaries, and shunned like Ebola patients, bishops have no one to explain to them how to thrive with the discussion and debate being encouraged by Francis.

Sadly, few bishops would feel comfortable inviting theologians from the local Catholic college over for dinner and conversation, yet that is exactly what is needed. …

Før bispesynoden om ekteskapet begynner, leser jeg en artikkel som tar opp forberedelsen til katolske ekteskap. Katolikker skal lære om ekteskapet gjennom hele sitt liv; i sin egen familie og i Kirkens katekese f.eks. før konfirmasjon, og så er det endelig et obligatorisk ekteskapskurs før man gifter seg. De kursene jeg har nå består av 5×2 timer om katolsk ekteskapsteologi og noen praktiske tips om hvordan man kan få et godt ekteskap. Dette kurset kort tid før vielsen skal visst tas opp på bispesynoden:

On the eve of the Synod of Bishops on the family, battle lines have been drawn on hot-button issues such as divorced and remarried Catholics and annulments. Yet little is being said about two reasons that often cause a marriage to fail in the first place: lack of preparation, and forced marriages.

An approved marriage preparation program is one of the four usual requirements to marry in the Church, the others being a six-month notification to the parish priest, Catholic baptism of at least one of the partners, and documentation certifying the freedom to marry of both partners.

Yet according to a preparatory document that will guide discussion for the synod, preparation is often more honored in the breach than the observance.

Programs come in different formats, such as intensive weekends, a series of weekly encounters, on-line formation, and “in-home” mentor couple programs.

They can be offered by priests, experts, and married couples, and the content of the programs varies from one country to another. The one thing they have in common is that they generally require less time than the hours spent by many brides choosing their wedding dresses.

Compared to the lead-in time for the other two sacraments that require mandatory preparation — confirmation and holy orders — eight hours preparing for a lifetime commitment seems a fairly modest requirement. Yet as the synod document notes, it’s often seen “more as an obligation than a freely undertaken opportunity for growth.”

Cardinal Raúl Eduardo Chiriboga of Ecuador certainly sees it that way. “Preparing for marriage shouldn’t be seen as part of the routine that couples have to go through to finally get married,” he said.

Speaking in March, Chiriboga said the Church “should carefully examine these ‘marriage prep classes,’ so that they give couples a deep formation and take all the time that is necessary.” …

The Rev. Héctor Franceschi, one of Rome’s leading church lawyers at the University of the Holy Cross, said the Church needs to rethink the preparation for marriage. “Many times, it’s reduced to two or three lessons on theoretical issues, with priests not even knowing what the future spouses are being taught,” he said.

Franceschi says the Church actually has rich teaching on family issues, with documents such as Familiaris Consortio, Mulieris Dignitatem, Gratissimam Sane, and Humanae Vitae. “The problem is that very few pastors and laymen have read them,” he said. …..