A Re-Post from Another Blog: Rethinking The New Evangelization

Supertradmum on The Guild of Blessed Titus Brandsma

    Sunday, 25 August 2013

Rethinking The New Evangelization

The call to new evangelization cannot be a static one. As Catholics, we have a duty to know our audience, 

our target groupings. And, I am convinced we are not addressing the youth of today in the mode which they need.

Too often, evangelization either is too banal, that is, watered down to the lowest common denominator; 

or it is an attempt to bring people out of serious sin by attacking the sins; or it is the speaking of Jesus as 

Saviour again outside of context of the larger perspective of what is means to be human and what it 

means to know a particular God.

I have been thinking about St. Augustine and his importance to our Catholic world today. He wrote in a similar 

time-the great destruction of a civilization which had endured for hundreds of years. He also bought a philosophical 

approach to all that chaos.

The Hebrews experienced much the same situation over and over and over. Either they were destroying old 

civilizations, or their own was being destroyed by whatever conqueror was the most powerful.

The reason for my ruminations is that we need, desperately, Catholic minds which can stop addressing the moral 

questions, stop addressing the ethical questions, and go back further to the basic questions of the existence of God 

and the nature of what it is to be human.

Now, obviously, we need the ethical discussion, so prominent among good Thomists, as Aquinas, like Aristotle, 

who dealt with vice, virtue, law and so on, but the world we are dealing with now is one of agnosticism and 

atheism. Those people deserve better discussions than what we have been able to give. Starting with morals 

is not the way to converse with atheists or agnostics, who lack a moral structure and may not even believe in one, 

except relativism. 

There are few great Catholic minds which can address the basic questions youth ask today. Here are a few of 

those questions. 

Is there a God?

What would be the meaning of being human?

What is the relationship between men and God?

Why are we here?

Do you ever doubt?

Why do you want to be a Catholic?

Augustine wrote his City of God in direct response to pagans, agnostics, and even atheists who were blaming 

Catholics for the fall of Rome. Hey, folks, this will happen again and I do not see the bright spark, a new Augustine, 

who can address the entire question of the nature of man, the City of God and the secular city in terms of basic 

principles. Phenomenology is too personalistic for this discussion. We need to revisit the Greeks, the Romans, 

all part of our heritage. We need to go back to the basics, or we shall continue to lose yet another generation.

Apologetics has been so slanted towards ethics, towards morality, that it has set aside the first principles. 

As humans and as Catholics, we must be able to discuss metaphysics at this level. Aristotle, Aquinas, 

the neo-Thomists, even educators, such as Montessori, all of whom are part of my mindset, my history, 

used the scientific method of rational discourse.

This is no longer accepted by many, and we cannot meet physicists, politicians, academics of any kind with 

language they no longer accept.

We must go back further. And, I do not mean Duns Scotus, who was more popular than Aquinas for a very long 

time. Nominalism is limited as well. We must go back and ask the basic questions of believing, of the 

supernatural, of God Himself. 

We must evangelize at this level, and not merely the moral or ethical one.

Those Millennials who ask the basic questions have no framework for morality because they have no philosophical 

framework. Benedict, the Pope Emeritus, was the man of the time, reminding us that Augustine was not only a 

theologian, but a philosopher. We need to look at him again in that light, and at those Doctors of the Church who 

helped the Church develop doctrine from the basic principles.

The reason we must think in different terms is that we are witnessing the chaos of the death of Western Civilization 

and to speak in any terms purely from moral or ethical viewpoints will not speak to the hearts of those completely 

at a loss, at sea in chaos.

That is what the Muslims do - speak only in ideological, so-called moral terms. This type of approach does not 

to the very essence of who a person is and who God is. Imposing law without the reasons for such begs the 

question of religion.

I read and hear too many high-ranking priests, bishops, theologians, especially moral theologians, who do not 

have the proper perspective of the problem of basic principles, because their own training was so limited. 

Try and find excellent philosophers in seminaries who are orthodox and can engage at this level of thinking.

When one answers the questions of who man is and Who God is, then the moral and ethical questions fall 

into place. 

I hope God raises up some great metaphysical minds in this era. I hope and pray that both clergy and laity can learn 

to evangelize from basic principles. 

Natural Law-Destroyed or Ignored?

Some Catholic moralists and ethicists have come up with an idea, in direct opposition to the teaching of the Church, that people in the world have moved so far away from The Golden Rule, written on their hearts, called natural law, that no one can expect people to react morally anymore.

Wrong!

Some thoughts to contradict this idea.

1. To be human is to be rational. To be sub-human is to be irrational and live entirely on the level of the sensual, the passions. All humans by definition can reason.
2. The soul is informed by the intellect even though one lacks proper catechesis through natural virtues, not only supernatural virtues. All people have access to natural goodness.
3. God Himself judged harshly those who went against natural law in the Old Testament, before the great revelation of Christ, the Incarnate One. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed not merely because those inhabitants did not listen to Revelation , that is, the Ten Commandments but because as men and women, they had natural law as part of their very beings. God did not excuse them for "ignorance" of the Jewish Law.
4. Cultures of all kinds have had the same rules for basic morality. Even the pagans understood that homosexual relations were not perfect or the basis of their societies. Some things were tolerated despite the fact that men and women knew these things were immoral.
5. Some cultures get power from Satan, who deceives people by giving them power through his evil, such as the Aztecs. But, even those people had access to the law deep within, but refused to listen to conscience because evil gave them power. Nations, cultures, like individuals, make bad choices.
6. To deny that natural law exists is to deny that men and women are made in the image and likeness of God. The fact that we keep the image (free will, eternal life), but lose the likeness (grace) does not deny the presence of natural law.
7. To deny natural law is to deny God as a Good Creature, making humans to be happy and peaceful in a created order. God created order in the universe and natural law is part of that order, which is good. To deny natural law is to deny that God made humans good from the very beginning. 
8. Those who state that natural law is hidden because of cultural norms which are now pagan forget that it is humans who created this pagan atmosphere, not God. The entire turning away of natural law is possible for a culture, an entire civilization, but this turning away is by choice, otherwise one is denying free will and the essence of what it is to be human. 
9. Which brings me to a great heresy in these days, the denial of free will. If we have free will, it is a normative consequence to believe that God gave us means to figure out what is good and what is evil. 
10. Natural law is reiterated in the Ten Commandments. Again, people choose to go against these, not out of ignorance, but out of sheer rebellion.

to be continued....

Knowledge of Divine Things Twenty-Three--Fides et Ratio Fifteen

I shall skip the rather long and winding section on the philosophical richness the Church can borrow from other Catholic traditions, specifically the Eastern Churches (go back and review the Catholic definition of "church" on this blog two weeks ago and previously).

For the sake of time, and because I want to finish the walk through Caritas in Veritate before Easter, I am moving down to a section in Fides et Ratio which is a critique of different stances of philosophies, an important part of our understanding of Catholic ways of thinking as opposed to other ways.

Here is the section, with my comment, as usual, not in italics. One of those St. John Paul II pithy set of sentences at the end of this selection reminds us all of our duty in religion. The saint refers to the Early Church Fathers here.

“To believe is nothing other than to think with assent... Believers are also thinkers: in believing, they think and in thinking, they believe... If faith does not think, it is nothing”.95 And again: “If there is no assent, there is no faith, for without assent one does not really believe”.96

Different stances of philosophy

75. As appears from this brief sketch of the history of the relationship between faith and philosophy, one can distinguish different stances of philosophy with regard to Christian faith. First, there is a philosophy completely independent of the Gospel's Revelation: this is the stance adopted by philosophy as it took shape in history before the birth of the Redeemer and later in regions as yet untouched by the Gospel. We see here philosophy's valid aspiration to be an autonomous enterprise, obeying its own rules and employing the powers of reason alone. Although seriously handicapped by the inherent weakness of human reason, this aspiration should be supported and strengthened. As a search for truth within the natural order, the enterprise of philosophy is always open—at least implicitly—to the supernatural.

As God created nature, nature can lead to God if one is using the natural order of thought. This is why Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman wrote that one cannot study history without converting..."To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

As our faith is true and rational, such study can lead, with grace, to God. Faith perfects free will with the use of the intellect and will. I have quoted this many times on the blog with reference to the perfection of our entire being.

Moreover, the demand for a valid autonomy of thought should be respected even when theological discourse makes use of philosophical concepts and arguments. Indeed, to argue according to rigorous rational criteria is to guarantee that the results attained are universally valid. This also confirms the principle that grace does not destroy nature but perfects it: the assent of faith, engaging the intellect and will, does not destroy but perfects the free will of each believer who deep within welcomes what has been revealed.

But, Revelation brings deeper knowledge.

It is clear that this legitimate approach is rejected by the theory of so-called “separate” philosophy, pursued by some modern philosophers. This theory claims for philosophy not only a valid autonomy, but a self-sufficiency of thought which is patently invalid. In refusing the truth offered by divine Revelation, philosophy only does itself damage, since this is to preclude access to a deeper knowledge of truth.

76. A second stance adopted by philosophy is often designated as Christian philosophy. In itself, the term is valid, but it should not be misunderstood: it in no way intends to suggest that there is an official philosophy of the Church, since the faith as such is not a philosophy. The term seeks rather to indicate a Christian way of philosophizing, a philosophical speculation conceived in dynamic union with faith. It does not therefore refer simply to a philosophy developed by Christian philosophers who have striven in their research not to contradict the faith. The term Christian philosophy includes those important developments of philosophical thinking which would not have happened without the direct or indirect contribution of Christian faith.

"...faith purifies reason....faith liberates reason from presumption..." The following section rings so true for today, again, when we need to address the basics in the new evangelism.

Christian philosophy therefore has two aspects. The first is subjective, in the sense that faith purifies reason. As a theological virtue, faith liberates reason from presumption, the typical temptation of the philosopher. Saint Paul, the Fathers of the Church and, closer to our own time, philosophers such as Pascal and Kierkegaard reproached such presumption. The philosopher who learns humility will also find courage to tackle questions which are difficult to resolve if the data of Revelation are ignored—for example, the problem of evil and suffering, the personal nature of God and the question of the meaning of life or, more directly, the radical metaphysical question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?”.

God gave us Revelation because not all trues are easily discernable merely by the intellect. Although all truths can be known through the intellect, it is difficult for most of us to come to these truths without Revelation. This paragraph should be read in the beginning of every first philosophy class a seminarian ever takes. So much was lost in formation because of the misunderstanding that the philosophy of history is necessary for clerics to know.

The second aspect of Christian philosophy is objective, in the sense that it concerns content. Revelation clearly proposes certain truths which might never have been discovered by reason unaided, although they are not of themselves inaccessible to reason. Among these truths is the notion of a free and personal God who is the Creator of the world, a truth which has been so crucial for the development of philosophical thinking, especially the philosophy of being. There is also the reality of sin, as it appears in the light of faith, which helps to shape an adequate philosophical formulation of the problem of evil. The notion of the person as a spiritual being is another of faith's specific contributions: the Christian proclamation of human dignity, equality and freedom has undoubtedly influenced modern philosophical thought. In more recent times, there has been the discovery that history as event—so central to Christian Revelation—is important for philosophy as well. It is no accident that this has become pivotal for a philosophy of history which stakes its claim as a new chapter in the human search for truth.

The emotions, the passions, have been emphasized too much.

Among the objective elements of Christian philosophy we might also place the need to explore the rationality of certain truths expressed in Sacred Scripture, such as the possibility of man's supernatural vocation and original sin itself. These are tasks which challenge reason to recognize that there is something true and rational lying far beyond the straits within which it would normally be confined. These questions in fact broaden reason's scope for action.

The abandonment of Christian orthodoxy has been owning to, imho, the over-emphasis on the self and the falling into of nihilism by so many thinkers in the past 150 years.

In speculating on these questions, philosophers have not become theologians, since they have not sought to understand and expound the truths of faith on the basis of Revelation. They have continued working on their own terrain and with their own purely rational method, yet extending their research to new aspects of truth. It could be said that a good part of modern and contemporary philosophy would not exist without this stimulus of the word of God. This conclusion retains all its relevance, despite the disappointing fact that many thinkers in recent centuries have abandoned Christian orthodoxy.

Without an intellectual basis, how can clerics reach out to address the basic questions for the vast majority of confused adults, who have not taken the time to learn how to think?

77. Philosophy presents another stance worth noting when theology itself calls upon it. Theology in fact has always needed and still needs philosophy's contribution. As a work of critical reason in the light of faith, theology presupposes and requires in all its research a reason formed and educated to concept and argument. Moreover, theology needs philosophy as a partner in dialogue in order to confirm the intelligibility and universal truth of its claims. It was not by accident that the Fathers of the Church and the Medieval theologians adopted non-Christian philosophies. This historical fact confirms the value of philosophy's autonomy, which remains unimpaired when theology calls upon it; but it shows as well the profound transformations which philosophy itself must undergo.

Philosophy is the "handmaid of theology", aiding theologians in their approach to all aspects of human life.

It was because of its noble and indispensable contribution that, from the Patristic period onwards, philosophy was called the ancilla theologiae. The title was not intended to indicate philosophy's servile submission or purely functional role with regard to theology. Rather, it was used in the sense in which Aristotle had spoken of the experimental sciences as “ancillary” to “prima philosophia”. The term can scarcely be used today, given the principle of autonomy to which we have referred, but it has served throughout history to indicate the necessity of the link between the two sciences and the impossibility of their separation.

Yes, and those clerics who did not truly learn how to think, but merely to mimic, most easily fall prey to the false popular philosophies of the day--relativism, subjectivism--as well as the return of the oldest heresies of all. People continually ask me about discernment. Learn how to think, learn how to be objective and you will have discernment.

St John Paul II is stating that here.

Were theologians to refuse the help of philosophy, they would run the risk of doing philosophy unwittingly and locking themselves within thought-structures poorly adapted to the understanding of faith. Were philosophers, for their part, to shun theology completely, they would be forced to master on their own the contents of Christian faith, as has been the case with some modern philosophers. Either way, the grounding principles of autonomy which every science rightly wants guaranteed would be seriously threatened.

When it adopts this stance, philosophy, like theology, comes more directly under the authority of the Magisterium and its discernment, because of the implications it has for the understanding of Revelation, as I have already explained. The truths of faith make certain demands which philosophy must respect whenever it engages theology.

And, go back to Thomas....

78. It should be clear in the light of these reflections why the Magisterium has repeatedly acclaimed the merits of Saint Thomas' thought and made him the guide and model for theological studies. This has not been in order to take a position on properly philosophical questions nor to demand adherence to particular theses. The Magisterium's intention has always been to show how Saint Thomas is an authentic model for all who seek the truth. In his thinking, the demands of reason and the power of faith found the most elevated synthesis ever attained by human thought, for he could defend the radical newness introduced by Revelation without ever demeaning the venture proper to reason.

And, here below, we see why our anti-intellectual low-church protestants and the charismatics fail because of their continual disparagement of reason. I love it when John Paul II states, "in short", for he then is highlighting his thought, for us.  Authority is necessary for both disciplines of philosophy and theology. And, what a powerful last few lines in this section....I find this examination of reason and faith moving, showing all how to find Divine Knowledge.

79. Developing further what the Magisterium before me has taught, I intend in this final section to point out certain requirements which theology—and more fundamentally still, the word of God itself—makes today of philosophical thinking and contemporary philosophies. As I have already noted, philosophy must obey its own rules and be based upon its own principles; truth, however, can only be one. The content of Revelation can never debase the discoveries and legitimate autonomy of reason. Yet, conscious that it cannot set itself up as an absolute and exclusive value, reason on its part must never lose its capacity to question and to be questioned. By virtue of the splendour emanating from subsistent Being itself, revealed truth offers the fullness of light and will therefore illumine the path of philosophical enquiry. In short, Christian Revelation becomes the true point of encounter and engagement between philosophical and theological thinking in their reciprocal relationship. It is to be hoped therefore that theologians and philosophers will let themselves be guided by the authority of truth alone so that there will emerge a philosophy consonant with the word of God. Such a philosophy will be a place where Christian faith and human cultures may meet, a point of understanding between believer and non-believer. It will help lead believers to a stronger conviction that faith grows deeper and more authentic when it is wedded to thought and does not reject it. It is again the Fathers who teach us this: “To believe is nothing other than to think with assent... Believers are also thinkers: in believing, they think and in thinking, they believe... If faith does not think, it is nothing”.95 And again: “If there is no assent, there is no faith, for without assent one does not really believe”.96

to be continued....

Knowledge of Divine Things Twenty-Two--Fides et Ratio Fourteen

This post may help readers understand most succinctly the entire purpose of this series.

St. John Paul IL neatly explains the three types of theology he wants to emphasize.

In the last post, he referred to dogmatic theology as needing a basis of rational discourse. This is obvious.

In fundamental and moral theology, the same basis must be the basis of learning and application. This section of the encyclical must be some of the most beautiful words in the entire text.

Fundamental theology is that which examines God in Revelation to the Catholic Church, specifically as the keeper of the truth as set down by Christ. Fundamental theology deals with the very foundations of the faith, such as the call of Peter to be the first Pope, and so on.

Dogmatic theology, referred to in the last post, has to do with the formal teachings of the Church, the dogmas, It is a science of the interpretation of dogma.

Moral theology, (and we have a dire lack of superb moral theologians at this time), deals with ethics of all types: sexual, social, medical and so on.

67. With its specific character as a discipline charged with giving an account of faith (cf. 1 Pet 3:15), the concern of fundamental theology will be to justify and expound the relationship between faith and philosophical thought. Recalling the teaching of Saint Paul (cf.Rom 1:19-20), the First Vatican Council pointed to the existence of truths which are naturally, and thus philosophically, knowable; and an acceptance of God's Revelation necessarily presupposes knowledge of these truths. In studying Revelation and its credibility, as well as the corresponding act of faith, fundamental theology should show how, in the light of the knowledge conferred by faith, there emerge certain truths which reason, from its own independent enquiry, already perceives. Revelation endows these truths with their fullest meaning, directing them towards the richness of the revealed mystery in which they find their ultimate purpose. Consider, for example, the natural knowledge of God, the possibility of distinguishing divine Revelation from other phenomena or the recognition of its credibility, the capacity of human language to speak in a true and meaningful way even of things which transcend all human experience. From all these truths, the mind is led to acknowledge the existence of a truly propaedeutic path to faith, one which can lead to the acceptance of Revelation without in any way compromising the principles and autonomy of the mind itself.⁹⁰

Similarly, fundamental theology should demonstrate the profound compatibility that exists between faith and its need to find expression by way of human reason fully free to give its assent. Faith will thus be able “to show fully the path to reason in a sincere search for the truth. Although faith, a gift of God, is not based on reason, it can certainly not dispense with it. At the same time, it becomes apparent that reason needs to be reinforced by faith, in order to discover horizons it cannot reach on its own”.⁹¹

Moral theology has perhaps an even greater need of philosophy's contribution. 

Hence the problems in the synod....

In the New Testament, human life is much less governed by prescriptions than in the Old Testament. Life in the Spirit leads believers to a freedom and responsibility which surpass the Law. Yet the Gospel and the Apostolic writings still set forth both general principles of Christian conduct and specific teachings and precepts. In order to apply these to the particular circumstances of individual and communal life, Christians must be able fully to engage their conscience and the power of their reason. In other words, moral theology requires a sound philosophical vision of human nature and society, as well as of the general principles of ethical decision-making.

I state that all the misconceptions of the relationship between men and women in marriage and the lack of understanding regarding sin in homosexual relations which was expressed last October in Rome stem from this very problem of the lack of a sound philosophical vison of human nature and society, as well as of the general principles of ethical decision-making.

to be continued...

Knowledge of Divine Things Part Sixteen Fides et Ratio Part Eight

Many people do not realize how, in this encyclical, and in other writings, St. John Paul II restored the eminence of St. Thomas Aquinas as the philosopher in the Catholic tradition. Beginning with the first scholastic, St. Anselm, John Paul II outlines the basic approaches to truth. I am quoting a long part of the encyclical as this is key to understanding how a Catholic thinks. Faith asks to be understood by reason.  Reason needs faith to be grounded in reality. 


In Scholastic theology, the role of philosophically trained reason becomes even more conspicuous under the impulse of Saint Anselm's interpretation of the intellectus fidei. For the saintly Archbishop of Canterbury the priority of faith is not in competition with the search which is proper to reason. Reason in fact is not asked to pass judgement on the contents of faith, something of which it would be incapable, since this is not its function. Its function is rather to find meaning, to discover explanations which might allow everyone to come to a certain understanding of the contents of faith. Saint Anselm underscores the fact that the intellect must seek that which it loves: the more it loves, the more it desires to know. Whoever lives for the truth is reaching for a form of knowledge which is fired more and more with love for what it knows, while having to admit that it has not yet attained what it desires: “To see you was I conceived; and I have yet to conceive that for which I was conceived (Ad te videndum factus sum; et nondum feci propter quod factus sum)”.⁴² The desire for truth, therefore, spurs reason always to go further; indeed, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always go beyond what it has already achieved.

Love leads to work, We know this. We work at what we love. I love philosophy and theology, the mystic writers and heroes of the Church, and therefore work on these subjects. I love Christ, therefore I pray and read the Scriptures. I love the Church, therefore, I try to obey Her laws.

If we love Christ and His Church, we shall work to learn as much as possible about the basics. We start with asking who we are, what is our ultimate destiny, what does it mean to be human, and so on.

 It is at this point, though, that reason can learn where its path will lead in the end: “I think that whoever investigates something incomprehensible should be satisfied if, by way of reasoning, he reaches a quite certain perception of its reality, even if his intellect cannot penetrate its mode of being... But is there anything so incomprehensible and ineffable as that which is above all things? Therefore, if that which until now has been a matter of debate concerning the highest essence has been established on the basis of due reasoning, then the foundation of one's certainty is not shaken in the least if the intellect cannot penetrate it in a way that allows clear formulation. If prior thought has concluded rationally that one cannot comprehend (rationabiliter comprehendit incomprehensibile esse) how supernal wisdom knows its own accomplishments..., who then will explain how this same wisdom, of which the human being can know nothing or next to nothing, is to be known and expressed?”.⁴³

If we cannot understand something, we wait, we pray, and we obey without understanding.

The fundamental harmony between the knowledge of faith and the knowledge of philosophy is once again confirmed. Faith asks that its object be understood with the help of reason; and at the summit of its searching reason acknowledges that it cannot do without what faith presents.

Knowledge of Divine Things Part Nine Fides et Ratio Two

....the whole universe of knowledge has been involved in one way or another. Yet the positive results achieved must not obscure the fact that reason, in its one-sided concern to investigate human subjectivity, seems to have forgotten that men and women are always called to direct their steps towards a truth which transcends them. Sundered from that truth, individuals are at the mercy of caprice, and their state as person ends up being judged by pragmatic criteria based essentially upon experimental data, in the mistaken belief that technology must dominate all. It has happened therefore that reason, rather than voicing the human orientation towards truth, has wilted under the weight of so much knowledge and little by little has lost the capacity to lift its gaze to the heights, not daring to rise to the truth of being. Abandoning the investigation of being, modern philosophical research has concentrated instead upon human knowing. Rather than make use of the human capacity to know the truth, modern philosophy has preferred to accentuate the ways in which this capacity is limited and conditioned.

Obviously, the neglect of seeing philosophy and reason as bringing us to understand what it means to be a human and a human in relationship to God, interferes with many other aspects of one's life. Again, St. John Paul II's words are in italics.

The saint points out that relativism, agnosticism and the distrust of reason have led people to set aside the asking of the really important questions of life, The denial of objective truth leads to this lack of thinking.

It is the duty of bishops to call all to the truth through study: here is an eloquent plea.

Sure of her competence as the bearer of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, the Church reaffirms the need to reflect upon truth. This is why I have decided to address you, my venerable Brother Bishops, with whom I share the mission of “proclaiming the truth openly” (2 Cor 4:2), as also theologians and philosophers whose duty it is to explore the different aspects of truth, and all those who are searching; and I do so in order to offer some reflections on the path which leads to true wisdom, so that those who love truth may take the sure path leading to it and so find rest from their labours and joy for their spirit.

The love of truth leads to God.

I feel impelled to undertake this task above all because of the Second Vatican Council's insistence that the Bishops are “witnesses of divine and catholic truth”.³ To bear witness to the truth is therefore a task entrusted to us Bishops; we cannot renounce this task without failing in the ministry which we have received. In reaffirming the truth of faith, we can both restore to our contemporaries a genuine trust in their capacity to know and challenge philosophy to recover and develop its own full dignity.

That truth lies in the deposit of faith has been forgotten by so many bishops, and cardinals, as we have seen in recent days, indeed, in this week.

Here is the crunch statement, which I have called the missing framework of the two generations below me. Sadly not only the young, but some of those in authority in the Church, including moral theologians and canon lawyers have lost this persepective.

For it is undeniable that this time of rapid and complex change can leave especially the younger generation, to whom the future belongs and on whom it depends, with a sense that they have no valid points of reference.

Today, a friend told me that people do not want to take time to study or reflect, especially in America. They want "quick fixes" and want to DO things, like sign petitions and put out brush fires rather than get to the meaning behind the fires.

I said in this discussion that nothing will change in the Church unless the basics are re-discovered.

Here is John Paul II:  At times, this happens because those whose vocation it is to give cultural expression to their thinking no longer look to truth, preferring quick success to the toil of patient enquiry into what makes life worth living. With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation. This is why I have felt both the need and the duty to address this theme so that, on the threshold of the third millennium of the Christian era, humanity may come to a clearer sense of the great resources with which it has been endowed and may commit itself with renewed courage to implement the plan of salvation of which its history is part.

So, this was written in 1998, a long time ago in the life of generations. What did people do to change this lack of enquiry? Nothng, except for the few involved in renewing classical education.

The seminaries where forced by Benedict to increase philosophical studies, but I still see priests under forty with great darkness in the area of rational discourse. Not all have learned how to think, how to reflect. how to study.

to be continued...and postscript..this is not going to be a mini-series but a maxi-series!

Knowledge of Divine Things Four

Interesting, I just got into my email box the text of the sermon of Cardinal Burke at Ramsgate last week. The link is here.

However, I did not read the text until now and find that the Cardinal, also, refers to Satan trying to destroy the Church as I wrote yesterday. I am encouraged by his references, as I can say I am on the right track with my assessment of the problem.

Here is part of his talk:

Surely, too, we are conscious of the great challenges in living the apostolic faith in our time. Truly, Satan, “a murderer from the beginning” and “the father of lies”(7), cannot stand the truth and love of Christ shining forth in His holy Church. He never takes repose from his deceitful and hateful labors. He is always trying to corrupt the truth, the beauty and the goodness which Christ never ceases to pour forth into our Christian souls from His glorious pierced Heart. The pervasive confusion and grave error about the most fundamental truths, the most beautiful realities, and the lasting goods of human life and its cradle, the human family, as they come to us from the hand of God, are the tragic signs of Satan’s presence in our midst. When we see how he has succeeded in corrupting a culture which was once Christian and in sowing the seeds of confusion and error even within the Church herself, we can easily become frightened and discouraged.

The corruption in the Church is of the intellect, which is why I am writing this series. We have handed Satan our schools and parishes on a platter by ignoring how he is attacking us-in the very basic truths of the Church which must be explained through reason.

An emotional church would not be a Catholic Church, but something much less.

I watched a video of a supposed discussion with Muslims concerning the death of apostates. Some of the Muslims involved began accusing people of racism and attack because they did not want to answer the questions rationally, because they did not want to reveal the truths of their faith. Truth must prevail in all discussions, not purposeful obfuscation.

We cannot fall into this position of avoiding the tough questions. That is how Satan wins the battle-by undermining the creed, code and cult--beliefs, laws and liturgy. Unless we understand the whys, the whats, the whos, the whens and the wheres, we are living like prostestants, and falling into anti-intellectual ideologies.

Reason will always lead to truth and truth leads one to Christ and the Catholic Church.

Knowledge of Divine Things Part Seventeen Fides et Ratio Part Nine

The main reason why Aquinas is so important to us even today, is that Aquinas demonstrates the reasonableness of faith. Both reason and faith are gifts. And through these gifts, all man can find freedom from sin and eternal death.

One of my favorite phrases is this one below, "..faith builds upon and perfects reason." One can say the opposite, that if that reason is not perfected, it is because one's faith is faulty, incomplete.

In an age when Christian thinkers were rediscovering the treasures of ancient philosophy, and more particularly of Aristotle, Thomas had the great merit of giving pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and reason. Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them.⁴⁴

More radically, Thomas recognized that nature, philosophy's proper concern, could contribute to the understanding of divine Revelation. Faith therefore has no fear of reason, but seeks it out and has trust in it. Just as grace builds on nature and brings it to fulfilment,⁴⁵ so faith builds upon and perfects reason. Illumined by faith, reason is set free from the fragility and limitations deriving from the disobedience of sin and finds the strength required to rise to the knowledge of the Triune God. Although he made much of the supernatural character of faith, the Angelic Doctor did not overlook the importance of its reasonableness; indeed he was able to plumb the depths and explain the meaning of this reasonableness. Faith is in a sense an “exercise of thought”; and human reason is neither annulled nor debased in assenting to the contents of faith, which are in any case attained by way of free and informed choice.⁴⁶

Aquinas "reconciled" the secularity of the world, specifically the world of philosophy and the radical Gospel.

This is why the Church has been justified in consistently proposing Saint Thomas as a master of thought and a model of the right way to do theology. In this connection, I would recall what my Predecessor, the Servant of God Paul VI, wrote on the occasion of the seventh centenary of the death of the Angelic Doctor: “Without doubt, Thomas possessed supremely the courage of the truth, a freedom of spirit in confronting new problems, the intellectual honesty of those who allow Christianity to be contaminated neither by secular philosophy nor by a prejudiced rejection of it. He passed therefore into the history of Christian thought as a pioneer of the new path of philosophy and universal culture. The key point and almost the kernel of the solution which, with all the brilliance of his prophetic intuition, he gave to the new encounter of faith and reason was a reconciliation between the secularity of the world and the radicality of the Gospel, thus avoiding the unnatural tendency to negate the world and its values while at the same time keeping faith with the supreme and inexorable demands of the supernatural order”.⁴⁷

Wisdom is the gift of the Holy Spirit. This gift, which is given in to Catholics in Confirmation, opens the door to more and more knowledge, as well as piety. Prudence, temperance, justice and courage flow from the soul of wisdom. But, as noted below, wisdom is also acquired, and thus, is missing in so many prelates. This other wisdom comes from study and reflection, as well as meditation and contemplation.

Other "wisdoms" follow-philosophical wisdom coming out of Reality, and theological wisdom, coming from Revelation and earned through grace and work. So many of our leaders in the Church lack these "wisdoms".

44. Another of the great insights of Saint Thomas was his perception of the role of the Holy Spirit in the process by which knowledge matures into wisdom. From the first pages of his Summa Theologiae,⁴⁸ Aquinas was keen to show the primacy of the wisdom which is the gift of the Holy Spirit and which opens the way to a knowledge of divine realities. His theology allows us to understand what is distinctive of wisdom in its close link with faith and knowledge of the divine. This wisdom comes to know by way of connaturality; it presupposes faith and eventually formulates its right judgement on the basis of the truth of faith itself: “The wisdom named among the gifts of the Holy Spirit is distinct from the wisdom found among the intellectual virtues. This second wisdom is acquired through study, but the first 'comes from on high', as Saint James puts it. This also distinguishes it from faith, since faith accepts divine truth as it is. But the gift of wisdom enables judgement according to divine truth”.⁴⁹

Yet the priority accorded this wisdom does not lead the Angelic Doctor to overlook the presence of two other complementary forms of wisdom—philosophical wisdom, which is based upon the capacity of the intellect, for all its natural limitations, to explore reality, and theological wisdom, which is based upon Revelation and which explores the contents of faith, entering the very mystery of God.

To ignore the intellectual virtues is to stop the process of purgation and perfection. A Catholic adult must pursue the intellectual virtues. (See my posts on the virtues). Too many Catholics stay in the realm of the emotions, and never earn merit or grow in holiness.

to be continued...

The Pestilence in The Church

The great individualism which demolished Christendom during the Protestant Revolt, with sola fide, sola Scriptura, sola gratia, solus Christus and soli Deo Gloriam, reached the pinnacle of usage for individuals of faith in the 20th century.

Authority and guidance from both the Teaching Magisterium and Tradition were replaced by radical theories involving the sole authority for truth as resting with each individual. Sadly, some Catholics misunderstood the entire debate about conscience and fell into the trap of disregarding Rome entirely. Such were those who rejected Humanae Vitae, for example.

The energy for the five solaes comes from anti-intellectualism. Subjective religion needs no laws, no teaching, no guidelines, only one's own good will.  Sincerity replaces scholarship, personal belief replaces the heritage of 2,000 years, and a pestilence of anti-intellectualism spreads into prayer groups, publishing houses, chancery offices and seminaries. The fact that a course on Aquinas can be, for example, like Latin, an elective, indicates the depth of the illness in priestly formation in some seminaries.

I call anti-intellectualism an illness because it sickens the soul, which will then shrivel up and die from starvation owing to a lack objectivity. The fact that so many Catholics think, truly believe, that most of the saints did not have an intellectual faith is a delirium of this illness. No one can be holy without objectivity.

Good people forget that St. John of the Cross studied Aquinas, that the great Teresa had scholars to help her in her spiritual life, or that Ignatius insisted that discernment rested on the solid basis of Scriptural studies and exegesis.

To be anti-intellectual indicates that the pestilence has infected the brain as well as the soul. Rationality has, until the last century, been the mark of a good, solid Catholic upbringing, even among those who never went to college. What had been heard from the pulpit carried over to daily life, decision-making, prayer.

The details of whether one favors Augustine and Plato over Aquinas and Aristotle do not matter, But, what matters is that every Catholic adult can reason out the great questions and answers of the Faith and of the life of perfection. Holiness must include a redeemed and trained intellect.

Without a foundation of thought, religion becomes pure sentiment, the emotional response to experience only, and not the great combination of the intellect, will, soul and heart.

God gave us the Greeks to form our rationality, the Romans to form our laws, and the Jews to purify our hearts. How easily it is forgotten that it was the monks who preserved classical education and invented both the primary and university school systems, improved by the Dominicans later, as well as the Jesuits, all returning to classical education.

It was St. Anselm who reintroduced the Trivium and the Quadrivium into the seminaries, for the formation of priests, which led to these curricula moving into the secular universities centuries later.

That there are Catholics who fall into anti-intellectualism indicates a denial of their own heritage and faith formation.

This pestilence seems to be growing instead of abating, and the recent lack of intellectual discipline at the Synod indicates how prevalent this sickness has become. I hear Catholics decrying the Synod as the result of too many intellectuals, when the problem is exactly the opposite-not enough Catholic intellectuals-cardinals who have not learned how to think through problems and are reacting in knee-jerk fashion emotionally took over the discussion because of the lack of intellectual Catholicism.

Until lay people and priests stop pushing the need for emotional conversion instead of real conversion, which begins with metanoia, the changing of the mind, this pestilence will grow.

The dying of the light of the intellect in the Church must be remedied, healed, by new light sparked from the embers of Thomism, Augustinianism, and other disciplines of the mind.

I hope it is not too late for such a Renaissance, no matter how small.

Some Sound Advice from St. Francis de Sales

I am not going to write more on this great saint for a while, but I wanted to share with you

these past few days some of the excellence of his thought. Those of you

who have read the perfection series, and who also know that one

of the themes of this blog is reason--how to think like a Catholic, will

recognize the importance here of a clear, Catholic mind.

Follow the tags for more posts connected to this theme. 

CHAPTER XXXVI. Of a Well-Balanced, Reasonable Mind.

   REASON is the special characteristic of man, and yet it is a rare thing
   to find really reasonable men, all the more that self-love hinders
   reason, and beguiles us insensibly into all manner of trifling, but yet
   dangerous acts of injustice and untruth, which, like the little foxes
   in the Canticles, [158] spoil our vines, while, just because they are
   trifling, people pay no attention to them, and because they are
   numerous, they do infinite harm. Let me give some instances of what I
   mean.

   We find fault with our neighbour very readily for a small matter, while
   we pass over great things in ourselves. We strive to sell dear and buy
   cheap. We are eager to deal out strict justice to others, but to obtain
   indulgence for ourselves. We expect a good construction to be put on
   all we say, but we are sensitive and critical as to our neighbour's
   words. We expect him to let us have whatever we want for money, when it
   would be more reasonable to let him keep that which is his, if he
   desires to do so, and leave us to keep our gold. We are vexed with him
   because he will not accommodate us, while perhaps he has better reason
   to be vexed with us for wanting to disturb him. If we have a liking for
   any one particular thing, we despise all else, and reject whatever does
   not precisely suit our taste. If some inferior is unacceptable to us,
   or we have once caught him in error, he is sure to be wrong in our eyes
   whatever he may do, and we are for ever thwarting, or looking coldly on
   him, while, on the other hand, some one who happens to please us is
   sure to be right. Sometimes even parents show unfair preference for a
   child endowed with personal gifts over one afflicted with some physical
   imperfection. We put the rich before the poor, although they may have
   less claim, and be less worthy; we even give preference to well-dressed
   people. We are strict in exacting our own rights, but expect others to
   be yielding as to theirs;--we complain freely of our neighbours, but we
   do not like them to make any complaints of us. Whatever we do for them
   appears very great in our sight, but what they do for us counts as
   nothing. In a word, we are like the Paphlagonian partridge, which has
   two hearts; for we have a very tender, pitiful, easy heart towards
   ourselves, and one which is hard, harsh and strict towards our
   neighbour. We have two scales, one wherein to measure our own goods to
   the best advantage, and the other to weigh our neighbours' to the
   worst. Holy Scripture tells us that lying lips are an abomination unto
   the Lord, [159] and the double heart, with one measure whereby to
   receive, and another to give, is also abominable in His Sight.

   Be just and fair in all you do. Always put yourself in your neighbour's
   place, and put him into yours, and then you will judge fairly. Sell as
   you would buy, and buy as you would sell, and your buying and selling
   will alike be honest. These little dishonesties seem unimportant,
   because we are not obliged to make restitution, and we have, after all,
   only taken that which we might demand according to the strict letter of
   the law; but, nevertheless, they are sins against right and charity,
   and are mere trickery, greatly needing correction--nor does any one
   ever lose by being generous, noble-hearted and courteous. Be sure then
   often to examine your dealings with your neighbour, whether your heart
   is right towards him, as you would have his towards you, were things
   reversed--this is the true test of reason. When Trajan was blamed by
   his confidential friends for making the Imperial presence too
   accessible, he replied, "Does it not behove me to strive to be such an
   emperor towards my subjects as I should wish to meet with were I a
   subject?"
     __________________________________________________________________

   [158] Cant. ii. 15.

   [159] Prov. xii. 22.
 

Back to Aquinas and Natural Law

It would be nice is the Net did not interrupt my work by not saving things...but here goes...St. Thomas Aquinas clearly states that natural law is connected to rectitude of the will and to knowledge.

Passion or evil habits or an evil disposition,(see next posts on temperaments and predominant faults), can corrupt or block natural law.

Consequently we must say that the natural law, as to general principles, is the same for all, both as to rectitude and as to knowledge. But as to certain matters of detail, which are conclusions, as it were, of those general principles, it is the same for all in the majority of cases, both as to rectitude and as to knowledge; and yet in some few cases it may fail, both as to rectitude, by reason of certain obstacles (just as natures subject to generation and corruption fail in some few cases on account of some obstacle), and as to knowledge, since in some the reason is perverted by passion, or evil habit, or an evil disposition of nature; thus formerly, theft, although it is expressly contrary to the natural law, was not considered wrong among the Germans, as Julius Caesar relates (De Bello Gall. vi).
Reply to Objection 1. The meaning of the sentence quoted is not that whatever is contained in the Law and the Gospel belongs to the natural law, since they contain many things that are above nature; but that whatever belongs to the natural law is fully contained in them. Wherefore Gratian, after saying that "the natural law is what is contained in the Law and the Gospel," adds at once, by way of example, "by which everyone is commanded to do to others as he would be done by."
Reply to Objection 2. The saying of the Philosopher is to be understood of things that are naturally just, not as general principles, but as conclusions drawn from them, having rectitude in the majority of cases, but failing in a few.
Reply to Objection 3. As, in man, reason rules and commands the other powers, so all the natural inclinations belonging to the other powers must needs be directed according to reason. Wherefore it is universally right for all men, that all their inclinations should be directed according to reason. 

To summarize so far: all men by the fact that they are human have natural law as part of their being.

All men are given reason, the rational ability to be human, to chose God and to chose grace.

No one is not given grace. 

All inclinations come from reason. If reason is following its true end, that is God, men will choose God

Supernatural law, such as the Beatitudes, is based on natural law and informed by grace.

The Church dispenses grace through the sacraments.

But, what if one meets people who not only deny natural law, or do not think of it, but are living against reason?

to be continued...

Re-post on ignorance and culpability

Friday, 27 July 2012

Types of sins and culpability mark two--perfection

Posted by Supertradmum

Readers have asked me to look at Garrigou-Lagrange more directly with his definitions of sins. I did a few this past week and here are some more. He divides sins into classifications. After all this negativity, I shall go back to the virtues, which are much more interesting and fun for me.

These categories are connected to Thursday's response as well. The Dominican writes: The sin of ignorance is that which springs from voluntary and culpable ignorance, called vincible ignorance. The sin of frailty is that which arises from a strong passion which diminishes liberty and impels the will to give its consent. As for the sin of malice, it is committed with full liberty, quasi de industria, intentionally and often with premeditation, even without passion or ignorance. We shall recall what St. Thomas teaches about each of them.


This first demarcation reveals that frailty or weakness is culpable, which is hard for modern men and women to understand. We make psychological excuses for many things.


I am not going into all the categories of ignorance, but I want to highlight one. Here is Garrigou-Lagrange again: Voluntary or vincible ignorance cannot completely excuse sin, for there was negligence; it only diminishes culpability. Absolutely involuntary or invincible ignorance completely exculpates from sin; it does away with culpability. As for concomitant ignorance, it does not excuse from sin, for, even if it did not exist, one would still sin.
Invincible ignorance is called "good faith." That ignorance be truly invincible or involuntary, it is necessary that the person cannot morally free himself from it by a serious effort to know his duties. It is impossible to be invincibly ignorant of the first precepts of the natural law: Do good and avoid evil; do not do to others what you would not wish them to do to you; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; one God alone you shall adore. At least by the order of the world, the starry sky, and the whole creation, man can easily obtain a knowledge of the probability of the existence of God, supreme Ordainer and Legislator. When he has this probability, he must seek to become more enlightened and must ask for light; otherwise he is not in genuine good faith or in absolutely involuntary and invincible ignorance. As much must be said of a Protestant for whom it becomes seriously probable that Catholicism is the true religion. He must clarify his idea by study and ask God for light. Unless he does this, as St. Alphonsus says, he already sins against faith by not wishing to take the means necessary to obtain it.


If one does not desire to be free of sin, that in itself is a problem. As the author states, issues involving the human capacity of knowing natural law never excuse a person. I hope this is not confusing. In other words, as I have stated before, all people must learn what they need to know to be free of a vice and pray for help. Counseling and the sacramental life are necessities, not luxuries.


Fraility also involve choice: A sin of frailty is one which springs from a strong passion, which impels the will to give its consent. With this meaning, the Psalmist says: "Have mercy on me, a Lord, for I am weak." (17) The spiritual soul is weak when its will yields to the violence of the movements of the sensible appetites. It thus loses rectitude of practical judgment and of voluntary election or choice, by reason of fear, anger, or concupiscence. Thus, during the Passion, Peter yielded through fear and denied our Lord three times. When, by reason of a lively emotion or of a passion, we are inclined toward an object, the intellect is induced to judge that it is suitable for us, and the will to give its consent contrary to the divine law.(18)
But we must distinguish here the so-called antecedent passion, which precedes the consent of the will, and that called consequent, which follows it. Antecedent passion diminishes culpability, for it diminishes the liberty of judgment and of voluntary choice; it is particularly apparent in very impressionable people. On the contrary, consequent or voluntary passion does not lessen the gravity of sin, but augments it; or rather it is a sign that the sin is more voluntary, since the will itself arouses this inordinate movement of passion, as happens in a man who wishes to become angry the better to manifest his ill will.(19) Just as a good consequent passion, such as Christ's holy anger when He was driving the merchants from the Temple, increases the merit, so an evil consequent passion augments the demerit.


I repeat that there is always culpability, but sometimes this is lessened. Before I get to sins of malice, which we mostly understand, let us look at this warning from the text. It would be a gross error to think that only the sin of malice can be mortal because it alone implies the sufficient advertence, the full consent, together with the serious matter, necessary for the sin which gives death to the soul and renders it worthy of eternal death. Such an error would result from a badly formed conscience, and would contribute to increase this deformity. Let us remember that we can easily resist the beginning of the inordinate movement of passion, and that it is a duty for us to do so and also to pray for help, according to the words of St. Augustine, quoted by the Council of Trent: "God never commands the impossible, but, in commanding, He warns us to do what we are able and to ask Him for help to do that which we cannot." (22)


This is the rub...we must not cover over our own tendencies and weaknesses. As one of my readers noted remembering Barney in The Andy Griffith Show, "Nip it. Nip it in the bud!"

to be continued...