|
Published: July 23, 2008
Water words
Can we be as Catholic as the pope?
Notes from a Cultural Madhouse
By Christopher Zehnder
“You can’t be more Catholic than the pope,” I have heard people say over the years. It’s an adage none too clear, for certainly, on one level, there have been some faithful who have been more Catholic – more truly converted to and by the Faith – than some popes. But I don’t suppose that personal probity is what is meant by not being more Catholic than the pope. It is, rather, that the believer in his faith, actions, and spiritual discipline is measured by the Church (represented by the pope), not the Church by the believer. The Church sets the standard to which we conform. The Church does not conform to us.
But if one can’t be more Catholic than the pope, he shouldn’t be less Catholic, either. In our day we have egregious examples of Catholics failing to fulfill even the most fundamental demands of their religion. There are Catholics who dissent on the nature of the sacraments, reject the authority of the magisterium, promote moral practices opposed to Catholic morality, etc., ad nauseam. Such pick-and-choose Catholics we associate with the cultural left, and rightly so – they represent the Liberal mindset, the exaltation of individual freedom as the highest of goods.
Yet, those we call “orthodox” Catholics often prove themselves less Catholic than the pope. I shall use one example culled from politics – the pro-life issue. Now, essentially, “orthodox” Catholics -- by which I mean those Catholics who strive to remain faithful to the teaching authority of the Church, Scripture, and Sacred Tradition – are right about abortion. It is an intrinsic evil; it can never be tolerated; it is not only a grievous, but it is the most grievous violation of human dignity our world affords today. Abortion is not just the murder of the innocent, but it is the murder of a child by his own mother. One would be hard tasked to imagine a greater betrayal than that.
Yet, while abortion is as heinous as I have described it, it is not the only evil – not the only intrinsically moral evil – we face today. Some such evils readily come to the “orthodox” mind – same-sex marriage, euthanasia, sexual abuse of children, divorce. But there are others that have been identified by the Church – depriving a worker of a just wage, waging a war without just cause or using indiscriminate means, exploitation of the poor for profit, for example. While neither war nor wages are in themselves morally evil, the abuse of them always and everywhere is.
It is in regard to such “social” issues (often identified with the cultural and political “left”) that many “orthodox” Catholics are less Catholic than the pope. Though for well over a century now, the popes have spoken out strongly on economic justice, on war, and on all matters having to do with, especially, distributive justice, “orthodox” Catholics (at least in the U.S.) seem barely to pay attention to such matters. It is as if, because such issues seemingly have nothing to do with the fifth and sixth commandments, they are of little importance. They are at least, for so many “orthodox” Catholics, not matters of active and avid concern.
I find this strange; for, despite the cancerous spread of legalized abortion throughout the world, the popes still address themselves to the many issues of economic and social justice. If the popes think such matters worthy of their concern, why don’t we? An example of such papal concern is a message Pope Benedict XVI sent this month to an international exposition on “Water and Sustainable Development” in Saragossa, Spain.
Why is the pope concerned about water? Because, he said in his message, the use of water is not merely a “material good” but is seen as a “universal and inalienable right” of man.
“Regrettably,” said Benedict, “water -- an essential and indispensable good that the Lord has given us to maintain and develop life -- because of incursions and pressures from various social factors, is today considered a good that must be especially protected through clear national and international policies and used according to sensible criteria of solidarity and responsibility. The use of water -- which is seen as a universal and inalienable right -- is related to the growing and urgent needs of those living in poverty, keeping in mind that the 'limited access to drinkable water affects the wellbeing of an enormous number of people and is frequently the cause of illness, suffering, conflict, poverty, and also death.’”
The pope sent this message to the exposition for its dedication “to the complex themes tied to the importance of water for human life and the maintenance of equilibrium among the diverse elements of our world.” Such an acknowledgement implies a moral judgment that such “themes” need to and should be addressed. And to underline the importance of water and its use, Benedict addressed the importance of water from a theological standpoint.
"Those who consider water today to be a predominantly material good," Benedict concluded, "should not forget the religious meanings that believers, and Christianity above all, have developed from it, giving it great value as a precious immaterial good that always enriches human life on this earth. How can we not recall in this circumstance the suggestive message that comes to us from Sacred Scripture, which treats water as a symbol of purification and life? The full recovery of this spiritual dimension is ensured and presupposed for a proper approach to the ethical, political, and economic problems that affect the complex management of water on the part of all concerned, as well as in the national and international spheres".
In drawing us to the theological understanding of water, the pope unveils a new beginning point from which we can address the more work-a-day matters that have to do with the “complex management of water.” That he can call on theology to address such a seemingly mundane concern as water management indicates how, in speaking to the muddy realities of our world, the pope does not depart from his office as shepherd of the Church. Rather, in his concern for even man’s daily bread, the pope imitates his Lord, the God who provides for our every need, who “rains on the just and the unjust.”
In addressing the use of water, as well as when he speaks to economic justice, war, abortion, marriage, and politics, the pope is being no more Catholic than his Lord. Would that we all in our social concern and interest could be as Catholic as the pope.
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 7:51 AM By Maria C
Christopher Zehnder
I like what you wrote: "the pope is being no more Catholic than his Lord" Amen I say to that, we need to seek to be more like Jesus, more like our loving Lord, that is what being Catholic means, a true Christian. God bless our Pope!Amen to that!
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:31 AM By Maryanne Leonard
This article presumes that all abortions are performed with the consent of the mother. This is not always the case. I myself am the double victim of rape, which resulted in pregnancy, and of a forced abortion, which was procured by my mother, a Protestant, who did not want her 18-year-old daughter to be the unwed mother of an illegitimate child. At that time, an 18-year-old female was still considered a minor in California until age 21. I was willing to bear the burden rather than kill my own child. I was physically restrained and with the cooperation of a hospital, was forcibly aborted.
Forced abortion is rare but not unknown in the USA but is common in China and other parts of the world even today. I really think the author is wrong to condemn all mothers of aborted children. I consider my child to have been murdered, and I am completely innocent of this murder as I did everything humanly possible to protect this innocent child. I am sure that the Lord will find me innocent of this horrible crime on the day of judgment, and I look forward to being reunited with my loved and innocent child.
I realize that the truths revealed this e-mail may be difficult to read and truly horrifying, but so is carrying the burden of these memories and the pain of the loss of the child God sent to me to protect.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:33 AM By Cyrus Johnson
Mr. Zehnder - with respect there is an error in your premises. You describe something called the "orthodox Catholic" which is someone who in your words "strive[s] to remain faithful to the teaching authority of the Church, Scripture, and Sacred Tradition." The error is that this definition is not at all about orthodoxy, but rather faithfulness. Those who "strive to remain faithful to the teaching authority..." are faithful Catholics. Those who do not, are not. Sure we all fail. But we all, in order to be Catholic, must agree to strive. Too many times in our recent era do people wish to do as they please and (when it is contrary to Church teaching) still call themselves "Catholic." Your defining these people as "unorthodox but still Catholic" I believe gives cover to those who would benefit from the truth evident in a lack of cover, not to mention the benefits to the Church at large from upholding truth. The notion of "Catholic lite" is the fig leaf of our age.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 9:15 AM By ann
Good job Chris. The problem is that many people in the Church just can't see the difference between those intrinsic evils such as killing of the innocent, contraception, the sexual sins and so on and the "social justice issues" such as the justness of a war and how to use water justly which lend themselves to prudential judgments. People want to give them the same weight.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:16 AM By John F. Maguire
In reply to Christopher Zehnder: You make some astute observations. If I demur, it is because I do not think you follow through on your specific observation that the (assured) observation--we hear it all too often--that "You can't be more Catholic than the Pope" is "none too clear". You do not--it sems to me--disambiguate that observation. What's wrong with it, I submit, is its diction--specifically, the word "more". (1) Catholicity is not a continuous variable but a discrete mark of the Church. (2) To be a Catholic is to be a juridical member of the Church. (1) and (2) are discrete characterizations, not continuous variables. I do not mean to exclude normative uses of the terms *Catholic* other than (1) and (2), but captious talk, for example, to the effect that Cardinal X is "more Catholic" than Cardinal Y, or indeed (granting exceptions) that any one person is "more Catholic" than another, risks the spectacle of a mimetic rivalrous chit-chat under the dominion of a misframed question. No, at stake today is not the rivalrous question, Who is more Catholic than whom? At stake is the dogma of the Faith as such. Whence Our Lady of Akita's solemn warning to Sr. Agnes Sasagawa on October 13, 1973: "The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops." Obviously this crisis will not be resolved by a variable analysis of who is "more" Catholic than whom.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:36 AM By Christopher Zehnder
Ann,
No doubt, many Catholics react against the lack of distinctions made by many in our time. Yet, I think, too, others react against Catholics and others because they seem to give no weight to anything else than abortion, sexual issues, and euthanasia. Whether a war is just or not is indeed a prudential judgment; but too many "orthodox" Catholics seem to barely engage the question at all. Our current pontiff, when he was merely Cardinal Ratzinger, engaged the question, whether any war today can fulfill the requirements of just war teaching. But in many Catholic circles to even suggest such a question invites round condemnation. Even more, defense of the Church's teaching on just wage and other economic justice issues will earn one the epithet of "socialist." I have known Catholics who call themselves faithful to the Church who state that one can safely ignore Catholic social teaching. I would suggest that, perhaps, the world has fallen into error because, in part, Catholics have not embraced and actively promoted the fullness of truth.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 12:26 PM By Charles O'Connell
I've met a number of people who seem to be on a perpetual inquisition about who is authentically 'Catholic', including Pope John-Paul II! I put a laminated, magnetic sign on the side of my car: 5 pictures of the Holy Father during the assassination attempt, with the motto from Hebrews 12:4 "In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your own blood." Pope St. Pius X, whose virtue was manifested by heaven on earth, like Pope John-Paul II, by the power of healing, said "… when we love the Pope, we do not dispute whether he commands or requires a thing, or seek to know where the strict obligation of obedience lies, or in what matter we must obey; when we love the Pope we do not say that he has not yet spoken clearly -- as if he were required to speak his will in every man's ear, and to utter it not only by word of mouth but in letters and other public documents as well. Nor do we cast doubt on his orders, alleging the pretext which comes easily to the man who does not want to obey, that it is not the Pope who is commanding, but some one in his entourage. We do not limit the field in which he can and ought to exercise his authority; we do not oppose to the Pope's authority that of other persons -- no matter how learned -- who differ from the Pope. For whatever may be their learning, they are not holy, for where there is holiness there cannot be disagreement with the Pope." (Allocution to the members of the Apostolic Union, November 18, 1912)
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 1:46 PM By Tom Byrne
Charles: then I can agree with the Popes when they say (as they all have said since Leo XIII) that the Church does not declare specific political and economic remedies but proposes principles upon which those remedies are to be formulated in specific historical circumstances; and we can agree with the Pope, and not necessarily with every dippy theologian or bishops' conference that can't seem to tell Catholicism from socialism (a distinction Pius XI thought important).
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:43 PM By Angelo
Maryanne Leonard, the author of this article, is absolutely right in condemning the fact that there are mothers who murder their own children. But you do not fall into this category. You did not murder your child. Your child was murdered by others. Pray that God spare them for their act of evil. We must be as Catholic as the Pope. Condemning
the depravity of our age. And seeking to conform our lives to God's Will. There is too much suffering in the world, and
its one, and only cause is our own sins and the sins of others. Todays article should wake us up!
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:49 PM By Fredi D'Alessio
I have too much to say in response to the article and comments to post here. I encourage you to read "Being Catholic" at http://thoughts-and-faith-to-share.blogspot.com/2008/04/being-catholic.html
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 9:00 PM By ann
Chris, I certainly agree with you that there are many who discount authentic Church teaching in one direction or the opposite. However, some of that is the bishops and priests fault because so few of them teach or preach as obedient Catholics, but rather as Democrats or liberals, (rarely as Republicans or political consevatives.) It is the lay people who grab on to the extremes on either end. Solution? The Mandatum? Prayer? Driving the weak minded out of the seminaries and the chanceries with whips? How does one learn the whole of Catholic teaching? According to a priest friend of mine who survived a liberal seminary, on one's knees with self study and a conscious attempt to "think with the Church".
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 9:40 PM By John L. Sillasen
Maryanne Leonard, that was a relatively exceptional act of courage on your part, to rebel in the opposite sense of so much of the teenage world. Moreover, it was the courage God instills intrinsically in women for the purpose of childbearing. I'd put it into the category of a "sign of contradiction", as the late Pope John Paul II entitled one of his books. It is what nature and Christianity are all about.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 23, 2008 11:08 PM By Maria C
Maryanne Leonard I am so sorry for what your mother put you through. God bless you. Sweet sister in Christ, Maryanne Leonard, in no way were you at fault, being forced into something does not make you at fault, the person who committed that crime against you and your unborn is held accountable. Angelo took the words right out of my mouth, this was not geared at mothers who did not choose to kill their children, it is geared at the ones who do it so willingly. I am sorry that you took it personal and wrong, God bless you. My heart and prayers are with you tonight. Also I want to add one note, very important note, we value those young mothers who choose life for their child but in no way are we condoning pre-marital sex or child baring out of wed lock, we understand with today's society kids make bad choices and we hope that by them choosing life for their child, (and hopefully adopting them out to a loving two parent home) that our Lord will have mercy and bless them with more graces to make better choices for their children and themselves. They need to be given that opportunity, to learn to give life and turn away from selfishness. Not only do we need to help those who feel the guilt of abortion but also those who choose life for their children, we need to get them in the right track in regards to their salvation and relationship with Christ and His Church. Prayer and truth in Christ should be our weapon again a world so confusing and unruly to some.
|
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:14 AM By RMG
I think that part of the problem is many of us are having to learn what the Church does teach as doctrine about just about everything since we were taught all sorts of nonsense as "Catholic" teaching. Christopher, how about a column or two on recommended reading for those who want to know what the church teaches on social issues. I've tried reading
Rerum Novarum and the other papal encyclicals on social issues but it's hard for me to put them into a context where I understand how to apply the principles. At least with abortion, euthanasia, and marriage, the issues may require much fortitude but the practice of what the Church teaches seems easier to understand and state.
|
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 12:15 PM By Christopher Zehnder
RMG and Ann,
You're right about the difficulty of learning the Church's social teaching -- it is pursued (and often distorted) by thinkers the "left," and thinkers on the "right" barely pay attention to it at all -- when they are not overtly denying its validity. As for sources, the Holy See recently issued a Compendium of Catholic Social Doctrine, which can be found on the Vatican's web site, at http://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html. Another good treatment of it is Foundation of a Catholic Political Order by Thomas Storck, published by Four Faces Press. I'm not sure if the book is still in print, but you might be able to find it used at abe.com. You might also want to peruse the website, the Chesterbelloc mandate at http://www.distributist.blogspot.com/. It is written from the distributist perspective (the economic theory propounded by G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc and rooted, I think, in Rerum Novarum and Pius XI's Quadragesimo Anno), and there are other ways of approaching the social teaching. But I think it would give you a good beginning. I've touched on this matter before (see http://calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=cae4b467-f902-4297-8fb9-df62b533c8d7), where I provided short list of encyclicals. You are right that abortion, euthanasia, and marriage are easier issues to take a stand on. Dealing with economic questions requires more nuance and more work. But it is work well worth doing, if only for the fact that, in doing it, we show the world a truly Catholic concern for man.
|
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 12:35 PM By Fr. M.P.
The Pope and the Church are always concerned about life and the basic material needs for sustaining life in a reasonable way - water, food, proper families, just wages, etc. Christopher Z, you said "“orthodox” Catholics (at least in the U.S.) seem barely to pay attention to such matters." Please characterize the specific behavior which you have observed which leads you to that conclusion.
|
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 1:05 PM By Christopher Zehnder
Fr. M.P.,
The specific behavior? It's rather a lack of behavior or a lack of attention to matters of economic justice in orthodox Catholic journals, websites, other sorts of publications, and organizations. I have even encountered those who are classified as orthodox Catholics blatantly denying papal authority when it is addressed to matters economic. Orthodox Catholics, in the U.S., at least, generally take the "conservative" American stance in relation questions having to do with the economic order, war, immigration, etc., with basically no critique of these matters from the position of the social encyclicals. So, in sum, the behavior runs from disregard to open denial of the social teaching.
|
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 3:29 PM By Grisha
.Christopher - You write: " I have even encountered those who are classified as orthodox Catholics blatantly denying papal authority when it is addressed to matters economic"
Heck, there are a lot of folks in this forum who deny papal authority about EVERYTHING!
|
Posted Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:39 PM By John L. Sillasen
Well, I'm having a field day with one verse from Holy Scripture this evening; here goes #3: "The foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of men".
|
Posted Friday, July 25, 2008 5:15 AM By Fr. M.P.
Christopher Z, thanks for the clarification on your observations of omission of discussion. In general, Americans have been comparatively more generous with charitable causes outside their borders than any other country. To me it seems that the battles are fierce on the basic faith issues, so they have taken priority for many. But Pope B16 is spending more time on those issues, which would increase the focus of many. *** Grisha, you mean as opposed to many here who deny only parts of papal authority on such irreformable dogmatic topics as women priests and homosexual lifestyles?
|
Posted Friday, July 25, 2008 10:09 AM By Christopher Zehnder
Fr. M.P.,
The social encyclicals, though speaking on charity, are directed primarily to questions of justice. A good deal of money for causes comes from the U.S., to be sure. But economic justice, as envisioned by the popes, has not been realized here, nor has it been realized (far from it) in the U.S.'s trade policies. Such justice is an important issue for many individuals and families and directly impinges on the whole issue of human dignity. The popes have spoken to first world countries, including the U.S., calling on us to solidarity; it would seem, in the popes' judgment, we have not fulfilled that call yet. Even in charity giving, we Americans could a lot more than we do. And in disciplining our rampant consumerism, we have a long, long way to go.
|
Posted Friday, July 25, 2008 1:51 PM By Grisha
Fr. MP - I mean the people who tell us that the pope isn't the pope and that his predecessor wasn't the pope and his predecessor's, predecessor wasn't etc. etc. One can discuss whether God might ever reverse dogma or the proper way to live out the call in CCC 2358, however it's hard to find common ground with a guy who says Benedict XVI is just some guy off the street (or for that matter the Anti-Christ, devil incarnate or worse.)
|
Posted Friday, July 25, 2008 10:49 PM By John L. Sillasen
Not convinced here: Without the U.S. economic history, the world would likely have far less economic goods and more poor people with less than they have now. This nation has created an immense volume of wealth over the past couple centuries and spread it around the globe. I tend to sometimes look at it this way: the guy with the 20 billion dollars does not keep it in cash in a bank, but that money is in operation in various ways ... facilitating the existence of goods and services. I see the important argument on the nature of the goods and services ... this, it seems to me, is where the Church needs to be more assertive: end bad use of economic activity and initiate better use and innovate good use of time, talent and wealth ... create good wealth.
|
Posted Sunday, July 27, 2008 4:58 PM By Fredi D'Alessio
Precisely correct Cyrus. Folks need to give up talking about "orthodox" Catholics as opposed to any other kind. If you're not a disciple of Christ Jesus, you're not even Christian. I think the issue has to do with authenticity and integrity.
"To believe in Christ is to become his disciple, with all that entails on a daily basis. Otherwise, our 'faith' is an empty word, even a lie, and it will not gain us access to the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus made it clear that those who enter his Kingdom are those who do the will of God, who put their faith into practice." [Abbot Joseph (http://wordincarnate.wordpress.com)]
For a compilation of excerpts selected from various essays written by Deacon Keith Fournier, which I believe present truths that each and every Christian who aspires to be an authentic disciple of Christ Jesus must accept and embrace, see http://thoughts-and-faith-to-share.blogspot.com/2008/03/authentic-christian-discipleship.html. I think Mr. Zehnder will find them to be in full accord with his own position.
|
Posted Monday, July 28, 2008 5:51 AM By Fr. M.P.
Christopher Z, no country has "fulfilled the call", nor has any individual since conversion to the Faith is an ongoing process until the end. It is true that the materialism of today is greatly against virtue. A catechesis of living on less - that is only what is necessary versus wanted - would address the root of the problem first and foremost. As Jesus said, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man enter Heaven. *** Grisha, dogma can never be reversed because of its very definition - a revealed truth - and Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. "Reversing a dogma" is heresy, so a Catholic cannot believe that concept. Even a Pope cannot reverse a dogma. So if you heard some pope say that women can be priests or that homosexual lifestyles are OK, you will know with absolute certainty that he is a heretic. There is nothing to "discuss" for reversing dogmas.The proper way to live out CCC2358 is also bound by all the Truths of the Church - and one never condones mortal sin nor promotes it. One fights against the spread of said sin's evil, as we see here almost everyday in the news. One doesn't promote giving adopted children to so-called homosexual "couples" and the like. We know that you don't accept those things and plead the 5th by a lack of response to direct questions. But that is wide road behavior.
|
Posted Wednesday, July 30, 2008 7:13 AM By Grisha
Fr. MP: Clearly a Pope can’t reverse dogma. My question was "Can God, all powerful and all knowing, change His mind?" I suppose a subset to that is "If He did, how would He tell us?" I would imagine if He ever did it would be about something more substantial than women's ordination. I do believe, however, that we as the Church are not making better use of the gifts of half the faithful, including executive positions. See my post in the “News in Brief” thread. Also, does dogma prevent the Church from ever ordaining women to the permanent diaconate? Where does the teaching that homogenital; acts are sinful rise to the level of dogma. Surely you aren’t arguing that dogma requires opposing, say, allowing domestic partners to file joint state income tax returns. Finally, my position on gay adoption is well known here. I believe a bigger issue, however, is how the Catholic community will relate to the thousands upon thousands of children of lesbians who (in violation of Church teachings of course) are conceived through artificial insemination. Will we baptize them? How about admitting them to our Catholic schools? Etc. etc.
|
Posted Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:35 PM By Richard
It's not a matter of being as "Catholic as" the Pope; it's a matter of being "faithful to" the Pope. What part of "whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" don't we understand? It's that simple.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2008. All Rights Reserved.
|