Friday 30 November 2007
Thought of the day
I was reading the latest Catholic Education Office newsletter and it had a story on St. Paul's College. The comment was that twigs were handed to attendees before a Eucharistic ceremony to identify with the theme, 'From small things come big things.' That is the thought of the day. From simple things come great things.
Sunday 25 November 2007
Women's Ordination in the Catholic tradition
The vision of the Catholic Church is encapsulated in the notion of the Kingdom- a scriptural metaphor for the almighty reign of God over creation; recognised through the qualities of equity (Gen 1:27), active faith (James 2:26), selfless service (John 13:14-15) and giving (Lk 10:30-38), peacefulness (Mt. 5:3-13), compassion and love (John 15:12)
The Church believes that the human person is made “in the image/likeness of God” (Gen. 1:27) and thus retains innate dignity, regardless of “sex, race, colour. Etc.” (Gaudium et Spes) Jesus demonstrates this by refusing to judge a person’s worthiness on the basis of sex. (Lk. 11:27-28)
Building towards the Kingdom occurs in the synthesis of ethical codes such the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1-17), and the Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-13) which espouse material detachment and zeal for justice and peace, as well as adhering to Jesus’ commission to assist the marginalized (Mt. 25:35-36) and free the oppressed. (Lk. 4:18)
Jesus actively, practically demonstrated his teaching in reaching-out to women who were marginalized in ancient Jewish society in the sense of unequal treatment. He defied socio-cultural norms by not only allowing himself to be touched by a woman, such the haemorrhaging woman in Mark’s gospel (it was taboo to be touched by a bleeding woman), but also instructed women in his teaching as seen in the story of his conversation with the Samaritan woman by the well, in John’s Gospel. This was unusual for a rabbi of that time to do and openly challenged societal perceptions of women.
The call to build towads the Kingdom exists as part of the greater challenge of the Church’s vision to “Love one another.” (John 15:12) To love as Jesus loved is to build toward the Kingdom; what Benedict XVI called a new ‘Civilization of Love.’
The Church envisions itself as “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed) This implies unity and following apostolic tradition as a significant part of the Church’s vision.
The Church views the laity as the “People of God” and not a mere flock as the pre-Vatican II era seemed to stipulate. The laity holds special significance in that it performs the Church’s saving mission practically.
The Church envisions its own hierarchy as a symbol of service. For example, the Pontiff is called the “Servant of the servants of God.” Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed this in referring to himself as a “humble servant in the Lord’s vineyard.”
The Church envisions women as having a renewing and humanizing role in society, particularly after Vatican II (1962-1965), Inter Insiginiores states on women, that their “role is of capital importance for the renewal and humanization of society and a rediscovery by the believer of the true face of the Church.”
The Church envisions no discrimination as part of an ideal human community. The Vatican document Gaudium et Spes reads that “all forms of discrimination, whether based on sex, race, colour. Etc … should be eradicated and overcome as contrary to God’s intent.”
The contemporary challenge calling for women’s ordination and gender equality is demonstrated by the Lay and Religious petition for Women’s Ordination, addressed to the Australian bishops. This challenge has arisen from an advancing conscience on the sinfulness of discrimination.
The move for gender equality has its societal origins in revolutionary social movements such Women’s Liberation, calling for equal rights, recognition and income for women.
The call for gender equality has challenged historical understandings that have underpinned background Church thought for centuries. The Aristotlean thought of women as “misbegotten males” has influenced prominent theological thinkers including Jerome, Tertullian, Augustine and Aquinas. They adapted the notion and blamed woman as the cause of Original Sin, therefore “the devil’s gateway.” Aquinas even thought of woman as “accidental and deficient” and John of Chrysodym compared woman to a savage beast. These ideas have existed in Church thought for centuries. Christianity arose from the ancient Jewish tradition, of which a certain prayer read, “Praise be to God that I was not born a woman.”
Recognizing these ideas as discriminatory and therefore contrary to Jesus’ teachings and the vision of the Church, certain lay and religious groups have called for greater female input in the Church and for women’s ordination in the Catholic tradition.
The Church’s response can be viewed on two levels – the generic and the specific.
The generic response of the Church relates to gender roles. The Church has opened itself more fully to female involvement, particularly on a Parish level. For example, there are female Readers, Altar Servers and women in other liturgical functions, having input to the life of the Parish. Another example that demonstrates the Church adapting to modern society is the upheaval of restriction placed on nuns. After Vatican II (1962-165), nuns were given greater power of choice to decide the direction of their ministry. These responses indicate the Church’s willingness to open itself more fully to society, particularly to female input through adjusting gender roles within the Catholic tradition.
The specific response of the Church to the contemporary challenge calling for women’s ordination is that, “the Church has no authority to confer priestly ordination on women.” (Pope John Paul II) The reasons for the Church’s stance on this social and moral issue are scripturally and traditionally valid.
The Church contends that is follows apostolic tradition, according to its vision of “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed) Women’s ordination is not a part of this tradition, be the early apostles chosen by Jesus were male and these became the leaders of Church communities. According to the official Church, priesthood is a continuation of the apostle’s work, who were male. The Church also states that priesthood is an icon of God who is called ‘Father’ and Jesus who is called ‘he’ (masculine imagery), therefore it is only fitting for a male to fit the role, which the Church maintains is not a right.
To finalize the argument, the Church concludes that a lack of consensus on the issue would cause disunity, which is contrary to the Church’s vision of “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed)
The response of the wider Church community, particularly those advocating women’s ordination, has been the development of valid counter-arguments, constituting reasons for women’s ordination.
These reasons include:
• Jesus did have female followers in the Gospel who are listed in name and held roles and responsibility. (Lk. 8:1-3)
• Neither Jesus nor the early apostles ordained anyone, nor did they leave any plans for priesthood. This arose as a later development in the Church as it became institutionalised. Therefore, ordination is not part of apostolic tradition.
• The Church is traditionally referred to as ‘she’- a female priesthood would represent this.
• In all canonical Gospel accounts, women are the first witnesses to the Resurrection, where they are commissioned by Jesus to go forth and ‘tell’ the Good News of the Risen Christ.
• The Risen Christ transcends gender. Theologian Pamela Foulkes remarks that the understanding of Jesus as ‘he’ “confuses the historical Jesus with the Christ, the man resurrected and glorified, transcending all earthly boundaries of race, social status and gender.” This is coupled with St. Paul’s statement that, “There is neither male nor female, for all are one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28)
• In relation to the Church’s vision of adhering to Christ’s teachings of justice (Mt. 5:3-13) and equality as illustrated by the equal creation of both genders (Gen. 1:26-27) and the vision of a society without discrimination by the Gaudium et Spes statement that discrimination “whether based on sex, race, colour. Etc … should be eradicated and overcome as contrary to God’s intent.”
Lay and religious groups supporting women’s ordination cite that a Church preaching the qualities of justice and equity cannot afford to contradict these principles in its formal institutional structure and sacramental functions.
The Church’s contention of having “no authority” to ordain women does in actuality fit within it’s vision of “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed) Due to the lack of consensus on the issue, women’s ordination could cause disunity that is contrary to such a vision.
Lay and religious groups supportive of women’s ordination also form a stance that fits into the Church’s vision of equality (Gen. 1:26-27), justice (Mt. 5:3-13) and standing against all forms of discrimination in contemporary society.
The Church believes that the human person is made “in the image/likeness of God” (Gen. 1:27) and thus retains innate dignity, regardless of “sex, race, colour. Etc.” (Gaudium et Spes) Jesus demonstrates this by refusing to judge a person’s worthiness on the basis of sex. (Lk. 11:27-28)
Building towards the Kingdom occurs in the synthesis of ethical codes such the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1-17), and the Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-13) which espouse material detachment and zeal for justice and peace, as well as adhering to Jesus’ commission to assist the marginalized (Mt. 25:35-36) and free the oppressed. (Lk. 4:18)
Jesus actively, practically demonstrated his teaching in reaching-out to women who were marginalized in ancient Jewish society in the sense of unequal treatment. He defied socio-cultural norms by not only allowing himself to be touched by a woman, such the haemorrhaging woman in Mark’s gospel (it was taboo to be touched by a bleeding woman), but also instructed women in his teaching as seen in the story of his conversation with the Samaritan woman by the well, in John’s Gospel. This was unusual for a rabbi of that time to do and openly challenged societal perceptions of women.
The call to build towads the Kingdom exists as part of the greater challenge of the Church’s vision to “Love one another.” (John 15:12) To love as Jesus loved is to build toward the Kingdom; what Benedict XVI called a new ‘Civilization of Love.’
The Church envisions itself as “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed) This implies unity and following apostolic tradition as a significant part of the Church’s vision.
The Church views the laity as the “People of God” and not a mere flock as the pre-Vatican II era seemed to stipulate. The laity holds special significance in that it performs the Church’s saving mission practically.
The Church envisions its own hierarchy as a symbol of service. For example, the Pontiff is called the “Servant of the servants of God.” Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed this in referring to himself as a “humble servant in the Lord’s vineyard.”
The Church envisions women as having a renewing and humanizing role in society, particularly after Vatican II (1962-1965), Inter Insiginiores states on women, that their “role is of capital importance for the renewal and humanization of society and a rediscovery by the believer of the true face of the Church.”
The Church envisions no discrimination as part of an ideal human community. The Vatican document Gaudium et Spes reads that “all forms of discrimination, whether based on sex, race, colour. Etc … should be eradicated and overcome as contrary to God’s intent.”
The contemporary challenge calling for women’s ordination and gender equality is demonstrated by the Lay and Religious petition for Women’s Ordination, addressed to the Australian bishops. This challenge has arisen from an advancing conscience on the sinfulness of discrimination.
The move for gender equality has its societal origins in revolutionary social movements such Women’s Liberation, calling for equal rights, recognition and income for women.
The call for gender equality has challenged historical understandings that have underpinned background Church thought for centuries. The Aristotlean thought of women as “misbegotten males” has influenced prominent theological thinkers including Jerome, Tertullian, Augustine and Aquinas. They adapted the notion and blamed woman as the cause of Original Sin, therefore “the devil’s gateway.” Aquinas even thought of woman as “accidental and deficient” and John of Chrysodym compared woman to a savage beast. These ideas have existed in Church thought for centuries. Christianity arose from the ancient Jewish tradition, of which a certain prayer read, “Praise be to God that I was not born a woman.”
Recognizing these ideas as discriminatory and therefore contrary to Jesus’ teachings and the vision of the Church, certain lay and religious groups have called for greater female input in the Church and for women’s ordination in the Catholic tradition.
The Church’s response can be viewed on two levels – the generic and the specific.
The generic response of the Church relates to gender roles. The Church has opened itself more fully to female involvement, particularly on a Parish level. For example, there are female Readers, Altar Servers and women in other liturgical functions, having input to the life of the Parish. Another example that demonstrates the Church adapting to modern society is the upheaval of restriction placed on nuns. After Vatican II (1962-165), nuns were given greater power of choice to decide the direction of their ministry. These responses indicate the Church’s willingness to open itself more fully to society, particularly to female input through adjusting gender roles within the Catholic tradition.
The specific response of the Church to the contemporary challenge calling for women’s ordination is that, “the Church has no authority to confer priestly ordination on women.” (Pope John Paul II) The reasons for the Church’s stance on this social and moral issue are scripturally and traditionally valid.
The Church contends that is follows apostolic tradition, according to its vision of “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed) Women’s ordination is not a part of this tradition, be the early apostles chosen by Jesus were male and these became the leaders of Church communities. According to the official Church, priesthood is a continuation of the apostle’s work, who were male. The Church also states that priesthood is an icon of God who is called ‘Father’ and Jesus who is called ‘he’ (masculine imagery), therefore it is only fitting for a male to fit the role, which the Church maintains is not a right.
To finalize the argument, the Church concludes that a lack of consensus on the issue would cause disunity, which is contrary to the Church’s vision of “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed)
The response of the wider Church community, particularly those advocating women’s ordination, has been the development of valid counter-arguments, constituting reasons for women’s ordination.
These reasons include:
• Jesus did have female followers in the Gospel who are listed in name and held roles and responsibility. (Lk. 8:1-3)
• Neither Jesus nor the early apostles ordained anyone, nor did they leave any plans for priesthood. This arose as a later development in the Church as it became institutionalised. Therefore, ordination is not part of apostolic tradition.
• The Church is traditionally referred to as ‘she’- a female priesthood would represent this.
• In all canonical Gospel accounts, women are the first witnesses to the Resurrection, where they are commissioned by Jesus to go forth and ‘tell’ the Good News of the Risen Christ.
• The Risen Christ transcends gender. Theologian Pamela Foulkes remarks that the understanding of Jesus as ‘he’ “confuses the historical Jesus with the Christ, the man resurrected and glorified, transcending all earthly boundaries of race, social status and gender.” This is coupled with St. Paul’s statement that, “There is neither male nor female, for all are one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28)
• In relation to the Church’s vision of adhering to Christ’s teachings of justice (Mt. 5:3-13) and equality as illustrated by the equal creation of both genders (Gen. 1:26-27) and the vision of a society without discrimination by the Gaudium et Spes statement that discrimination “whether based on sex, race, colour. Etc … should be eradicated and overcome as contrary to God’s intent.”
Lay and religious groups supporting women’s ordination cite that a Church preaching the qualities of justice and equity cannot afford to contradict these principles in its formal institutional structure and sacramental functions.
The Church’s contention of having “no authority” to ordain women does in actuality fit within it’s vision of “One, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.” (Nicene Creed) Due to the lack of consensus on the issue, women’s ordination could cause disunity that is contrary to such a vision.
Lay and religious groups supportive of women’s ordination also form a stance that fits into the Church’s vision of equality (Gen. 1:26-27), justice (Mt. 5:3-13) and standing against all forms of discrimination in contemporary society.
Evolutionary theory & the Catholic Church
The following is a copy of my R&S summary report for the first topic of unit four.
Evolution is a prominent scientific theory popularised by English naturalist Charles Darwin in his literary works, The Origin of the Species (1859) and The Descent of Man (1871).
The hypothesis proposes that all life has evolved from simpler initial forms to greater complexity and diversity, via the process of natural selection, which is, the process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce offspring, which inherit the characteristics of their ancestors. Eventually mutations arise and if positive to survival, are passed on to successive generations via inheritance. Natural selection results in the formation of adaptations, whether structural, physiological or behavioural, that assists the survival of the organism. As evolution progresses, natural selection facilitates the adaptation of species to different ecosystems, thereby resulting in a variation of species- biodiversity.
On a broader spectrum, the theory can be applied to the unfolding of the entire cosmic narrative, from the chemical evolution of simple hydrogen atoms to a vast variation of elements, or from the stellar evolution that gave birth to the stars to the planetary evolution that resulted in the formation of the Earth. Evolution has been attributed as the underlying process of formation in the geosphere, biosphere and universe.
The theory of evolution challenged certain aspects of Catholic theology and methodology. First and foremost, the theory challenged a literal interpretation of Scripture and the validity of sacred texts, particularly in a scientific or material context. It therefore also challenged the authority of the Church as teacher, for if Genesis and the Church could be proven incorrect, then perhaps other bibilical narratives of Church doctrine could be undermined.
The theory challenged the Catholic core belief in the existence of a Creator – Maker of heaven and earth (Nicene Creed), for evolution relied heavily on chance and therefore it appeared that a Creator’s intervention was unnecessary nor evident. More than mere challenging the existence of a Designer, the theory challenged the Catholic understanding of the nature of God as a loving and compassionate Creator, for evolution highly emphasised the requirement for suffering, death and chaos as a means to drive creative progression. This prompts the question of why a loving Creator would choose such a chaotic process to create?
Evolutionary theory further challenged initial Catholic understandings of the original state of the created world, which was believed to be a creation of harmony and equilibrium. However, evolution portrays suffering , death and chaos from the earliest origins of the geosphere and biosphere, as opposed to the Genesis accounts of an initially perfect creation.
The Catholic understanding of humanity as “made in the image/likeness of God.” (Gen. 1:27), and therefore retaining innate dignity, is challenged as evolution portrays humanity as having evolved from primates, thus prompting one to question when attained God’s likeness, how, and whether God is a human-like figure as Catholics initially thought.
The theory of evolution challenged the Catholic doctrine of Original Sin, that is, the inherit sin passed through generations, originally committed by Adam and Eve in Genesis 3, that wove discord into an initially perfect created world. Evolution contradicts this, portraying discord as pre-existent to the first humans, but also necessary for progress.
If the concept of Original Sin is challenged, so to is the Catholic belief in the mission of Jesus to redeem humanity from such sin. Catholics believe that Jesus came “For us and for our salvation.” (Nicene Creed) Without Original Sin, what need is there for redemption from such sin? Futhermore, one is prompted to ask, how can the world be returned to a state of grace, through Christ, if there was no initial state of grace to return to, as evolution suggests?
The initial response of the Church to Darwin’s theory was in actuality, silence. The reason for this response from the official Church is likely due to past experience in its condemnation of Galileo’s 17th century theories , findings and support for Copernicus’ heliocentric model. The result was an embarrassment for the Church when inevitably Galileo’s theories were proven correct. To avoid a similar incidence, the Church remained silent on the matter.
To illustrate the extent of this silence, consider the 1864 edition of the Vatican document entitled the Syllabus of Errors, which condemned concepts such as the seperation of Church and state and political ideas, did not at all mention the theory of evolution.
A significant response from the Vatican highlighted a conditional acceptance of evolutionary theory. In his Encyclical letter on Christian Marriage (1890), Pope Leo XIII stated that it would acceptable to suggest that man arose from the “slime of the earth” – a clear hint of evolution, referring to arising from simpler organic matter. However, no such process could be applied to the creation of woman who “was drawn forth wondrously from man’s side as he slept,” as a “female companion for the man.” In this response, Leo XIII clearly allows the accommodation of evolution to the creation of man, but defends a certain aspect of Genesis 2 in stating woman did no co-evolve with man. Leo XIII attempts to maintain some literal credibility in the Genesis account, without discounting evolution.
Leo XIII responds to the challenge posed by evolutionary theory to the literal interpretation of Scripture by encouraging a more flexible approach, stating that, “Since Holy Scripture can be explained in a number of ways, no one explanation should be so rigidly, that one would presume to maintain it if it could be prove with certainty to be false.” In this response, Leo XIII paves the way for more flexible interpretation of Scripture, without discounting the meaning of sacred texts.
The response of the Church in Pope Pius’ XII Encyclical Humani Generis (1950) demonstrates a conditional acceptance of evolutionary theory and promotes inter-disciplinary dialogue regarding the theory. The Encyclical reads, “… the Church does not forbid that discussion occur in the part of men experienced in both fields [religion and science] take place in regard to the doctrine of evolution.” Pius XII invites dialogue, appealing to reason. He goes on to say that, “in as far as it inquires in the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter.” Pius XII acknowledges the science of evolution regarding the origin of the human body, yet adds the condition that, “Our Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.” In stating this, Pius XII affirms the Catholic belief that the human soul is directly created by God, therefore humanity retains innate dignity. The response of Pius XII clearly communicates general acceptance of evolutionary theory, whilst not excluding God from the creative process.
In defence of the doctrine of Original Sin, Pius XII responds to rule-out the scientific theory of polygenism – the notion that humanity arose from parents. On this, Pius states that Original Sin “proceeds from the sin of an individual, Adam, and through generation, is passed on to all.” Seeing the significance of Original Sin in dogma, Pius XII responded in its defence.
During the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the Church responses to evolutionary theory in the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, stating that, “the human race has passed from a rather static view of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one.” The Church recognises and accepts this progression in human intellect and also the evolution of the human understanding of reality.
Influential in the absorption of evolutionary theory by the Vatican, is the work of French philosopher, palaeontologist and priest Piere Tielhard di Chardin, who sought to view Christianity from an evolutionary perspective. From this outlook, Tielhard di Chardin was able to view Christ as the center of higher consciousness, called the Kingdom in Catholic theology. He viewed Original Sin and evil as “the unavoidable by-product of a universe in course with unification in God.” This was in response to the challenge posed by evolution to the doctrine of Original Sin. Di Chardin also viewed evolution as the creative process, and spoke of the evolution of the geosphere (inanimate matter) to the biosphere of life, which St. Paul called our ‘seed stage’ (I Cor. 15:38) and onward, through evolution, toward the Omega Point (mentioned in Rev. 22:13: “I am Alpha and Omega.”), in the noosphere- a technical philosophical term for the Kingdom. The work of Di Chardin demonstrates an attempt in the Catholic tradition to reconcile evolutionary theory with theology.
In a 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope John Paul II stated that there was considerable “recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis.” The Pontiff does not discredit but rather reflects upon the substantial evidence in support of evolution as a valuable scientific theory.
In his inaugural mass as Pope, Benedict XVI stated that, “Only when we meet the living God in Christ do we know what life is. We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary.” Benedict XVI clearly highlights a general acceptance of evolution as a scientifically attained answer to the question of ‘how’, but maintains that Christ gives meaning and purpose to human life, and thus religion ultimately answers the question of ‘why?’
Evolution is a prominent scientific theory popularised by English naturalist Charles Darwin in his literary works, The Origin of the Species (1859) and The Descent of Man (1871).
The hypothesis proposes that all life has evolved from simpler initial forms to greater complexity and diversity, via the process of natural selection, which is, the process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce offspring, which inherit the characteristics of their ancestors. Eventually mutations arise and if positive to survival, are passed on to successive generations via inheritance. Natural selection results in the formation of adaptations, whether structural, physiological or behavioural, that assists the survival of the organism. As evolution progresses, natural selection facilitates the adaptation of species to different ecosystems, thereby resulting in a variation of species- biodiversity.
On a broader spectrum, the theory can be applied to the unfolding of the entire cosmic narrative, from the chemical evolution of simple hydrogen atoms to a vast variation of elements, or from the stellar evolution that gave birth to the stars to the planetary evolution that resulted in the formation of the Earth. Evolution has been attributed as the underlying process of formation in the geosphere, biosphere and universe.
The theory of evolution challenged certain aspects of Catholic theology and methodology. First and foremost, the theory challenged a literal interpretation of Scripture and the validity of sacred texts, particularly in a scientific or material context. It therefore also challenged the authority of the Church as teacher, for if Genesis and the Church could be proven incorrect, then perhaps other bibilical narratives of Church doctrine could be undermined.
The theory challenged the Catholic core belief in the existence of a Creator – Maker of heaven and earth (Nicene Creed), for evolution relied heavily on chance and therefore it appeared that a Creator’s intervention was unnecessary nor evident. More than mere challenging the existence of a Designer, the theory challenged the Catholic understanding of the nature of God as a loving and compassionate Creator, for evolution highly emphasised the requirement for suffering, death and chaos as a means to drive creative progression. This prompts the question of why a loving Creator would choose such a chaotic process to create?
Evolutionary theory further challenged initial Catholic understandings of the original state of the created world, which was believed to be a creation of harmony and equilibrium. However, evolution portrays suffering , death and chaos from the earliest origins of the geosphere and biosphere, as opposed to the Genesis accounts of an initially perfect creation.
The Catholic understanding of humanity as “made in the image/likeness of God.” (Gen. 1:27), and therefore retaining innate dignity, is challenged as evolution portrays humanity as having evolved from primates, thus prompting one to question when attained God’s likeness, how, and whether God is a human-like figure as Catholics initially thought.
The theory of evolution challenged the Catholic doctrine of Original Sin, that is, the inherit sin passed through generations, originally committed by Adam and Eve in Genesis 3, that wove discord into an initially perfect created world. Evolution contradicts this, portraying discord as pre-existent to the first humans, but also necessary for progress.
If the concept of Original Sin is challenged, so to is the Catholic belief in the mission of Jesus to redeem humanity from such sin. Catholics believe that Jesus came “For us and for our salvation.” (Nicene Creed) Without Original Sin, what need is there for redemption from such sin? Futhermore, one is prompted to ask, how can the world be returned to a state of grace, through Christ, if there was no initial state of grace to return to, as evolution suggests?
The initial response of the Church to Darwin’s theory was in actuality, silence. The reason for this response from the official Church is likely due to past experience in its condemnation of Galileo’s 17th century theories , findings and support for Copernicus’ heliocentric model. The result was an embarrassment for the Church when inevitably Galileo’s theories were proven correct. To avoid a similar incidence, the Church remained silent on the matter.
To illustrate the extent of this silence, consider the 1864 edition of the Vatican document entitled the Syllabus of Errors, which condemned concepts such as the seperation of Church and state and political ideas, did not at all mention the theory of evolution.
A significant response from the Vatican highlighted a conditional acceptance of evolutionary theory. In his Encyclical letter on Christian Marriage (1890), Pope Leo XIII stated that it would acceptable to suggest that man arose from the “slime of the earth” – a clear hint of evolution, referring to arising from simpler organic matter. However, no such process could be applied to the creation of woman who “was drawn forth wondrously from man’s side as he slept,” as a “female companion for the man.” In this response, Leo XIII clearly allows the accommodation of evolution to the creation of man, but defends a certain aspect of Genesis 2 in stating woman did no co-evolve with man. Leo XIII attempts to maintain some literal credibility in the Genesis account, without discounting evolution.
Leo XIII responds to the challenge posed by evolutionary theory to the literal interpretation of Scripture by encouraging a more flexible approach, stating that, “Since Holy Scripture can be explained in a number of ways, no one explanation should be so rigidly, that one would presume to maintain it if it could be prove with certainty to be false.” In this response, Leo XIII paves the way for more flexible interpretation of Scripture, without discounting the meaning of sacred texts.
The response of the Church in Pope Pius’ XII Encyclical Humani Generis (1950) demonstrates a conditional acceptance of evolutionary theory and promotes inter-disciplinary dialogue regarding the theory. The Encyclical reads, “… the Church does not forbid that discussion occur in the part of men experienced in both fields [religion and science] take place in regard to the doctrine of evolution.” Pius XII invites dialogue, appealing to reason. He goes on to say that, “in as far as it inquires in the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter.” Pius XII acknowledges the science of evolution regarding the origin of the human body, yet adds the condition that, “Our Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.” In stating this, Pius XII affirms the Catholic belief that the human soul is directly created by God, therefore humanity retains innate dignity. The response of Pius XII clearly communicates general acceptance of evolutionary theory, whilst not excluding God from the creative process.
In defence of the doctrine of Original Sin, Pius XII responds to rule-out the scientific theory of polygenism – the notion that humanity arose from parents. On this, Pius states that Original Sin “proceeds from the sin of an individual, Adam, and through generation, is passed on to all.” Seeing the significance of Original Sin in dogma, Pius XII responded in its defence.
During the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), the Church responses to evolutionary theory in the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, stating that, “the human race has passed from a rather static view of reality to a more dynamic, evolutionary one.” The Church recognises and accepts this progression in human intellect and also the evolution of the human understanding of reality.
Influential in the absorption of evolutionary theory by the Vatican, is the work of French philosopher, palaeontologist and priest Piere Tielhard di Chardin, who sought to view Christianity from an evolutionary perspective. From this outlook, Tielhard di Chardin was able to view Christ as the center of higher consciousness, called the Kingdom in Catholic theology. He viewed Original Sin and evil as “the unavoidable by-product of a universe in course with unification in God.” This was in response to the challenge posed by evolution to the doctrine of Original Sin. Di Chardin also viewed evolution as the creative process, and spoke of the evolution of the geosphere (inanimate matter) to the biosphere of life, which St. Paul called our ‘seed stage’ (I Cor. 15:38) and onward, through evolution, toward the Omega Point (mentioned in Rev. 22:13: “I am Alpha and Omega.”), in the noosphere- a technical philosophical term for the Kingdom. The work of Di Chardin demonstrates an attempt in the Catholic tradition to reconcile evolutionary theory with theology.
In a 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope John Paul II stated that there was considerable “recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis.” The Pontiff does not discredit but rather reflects upon the substantial evidence in support of evolution as a valuable scientific theory.
In his inaugural mass as Pope, Benedict XVI stated that, “Only when we meet the living God in Christ do we know what life is. We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary.” Benedict XVI clearly highlights a general acceptance of evolution as a scientifically attained answer to the question of ‘how’, but maintains that Christ gives meaning and purpose to human life, and thus religion ultimately answers the question of ‘why?’
Understanding of Resurrection
The following is a summary report of the last topic in unit two for R&S.
In the Catholic tradition, resurrection refers to the dynamic belief in the reunification of the entirety of the human person, body and soul, to completion, in a glorified spiritual body (I Cor. 15:45), in the New Life that is after death. The core belief in resurrection is expressed in the Nicene Creed, “We believe in the resurrection of the dead and life everlasting” and is based upon the belief in the Risen Christ who is called “the Resurrection and the Life” in John’s Gospel, and who, according to all canonical Gospel accounts, rose to New Life from death, therefore “he has conquered death, and so opened the possibility of salvation to all men.” (Catechism)
Catholic believe that “For those who die in Christ’s grace it is a participation in his death, so that they can also share his Resurrection.” (Catechism) The understanding is that each person is a member of Christ’s Mystical Body (I Cor. 12:12) and therefore shares in the death of Jesus to experience the victory of his resurrection. (Rom. 6:1-12) – “To rise with Christ, we must die with Christ.” (Catechism)Death is thus made sense of as merely “the end of earthly life” (Catechism), not constituting a complete end.
The core belief in resurrection is expressed throughout the Christian Writings, in all canonical gospel accounts and particularly in St. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. The Catholic ritual of Eucharist, involving the transformation of bread and wine to the Body and Blood of Christ, also recalls the Resurrection. Funeral liturgy is filled with symbolism, prayer and ritual that reflects human hope for resurrection.
Over the course of time, the core belief in resurrection has been subject to reformulation, renewal and changes in understanding and expression as a response to a range of internal and external stimuli, including the persecution and death of the early Christians’, Constantine’s conversion, the bubonic plague and the pivotal Second Vatican Council (1962-1965)
The death of the early Christians, particularly the first apostles, challenged initial understandings of resurrection. Initially, the early Christians believed that resurrection was a present reality and that the Kingdom was imminent. Such notions were supported by Jesus’ statement that “This generation will not disappear until all these things [the Kingdom] take place.” (Mt. 3:32) However, the first and second generation of Christian believers’ did gradually pass away without the Kingdom’s arrival or resurrection. The response to this challenge led to a reformulation of the belief and the understanding that “No one knows the day nor the hour” (Mt. 24:36) of resurrection, save that it is a future reality.
The persecution of the early Church by imperial Rome led to the understanding of resurrection as a reward for faithfulness in the face of adversity. Such notions may have had their origins in the Hebrew Scriptures, particularly 2 Macc. 12:45: “In his firm and devout conviction that all of God’s faithful people would receive a wonderful reward” and 2 Macc. 7:9: “The King of the Universe will raise us up to an everlasting renewal of life, for we have died for his laws.” In the Christian Writings also, Jesus states, “Your reward in heaven is great. For that is how they persecuted the prophets before you.” (Mt. 5:12) A clear connection is made between faithfulness and reward, coupled with the oppression of the times which led to the view of resurrection as a reward for remaining faithful.
The conversion of Roman Emperor Constantine to Christianity marks the point where the Church received imperial status and the belief in resurrection progressively became ‘Church-confined’, developing the doctrine of ‘no salvation beyond the Church.’ To illustrate, consider the words of Pope Innocent III: “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” Pope Boniface XVI elaborates, stating that, “It is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Resurrection, and in broader terms, salvation, became understood as exclusively available to members of the Catholic Church. By this view, all societies and cultures outside the jurisdiction of the Pope were quite simply damned- a view that seemed to permeate Church-thought until Vatican II (1962-1965) heralded a change.
The bubonic plague of the Middle-ages’ marks the point where resurrection is viewed with heavy pessimism and is thought of more in terms of judgment, as the prayers of the period suggest. For example, funeral liturgy prayers which read, “Enter not into judgment with your servant, O Lord” and “The day your wrath is let loose upon mankind.” The artwork also reflects this highly pessimistic view of judgment, portraying the vast majority of humanity as eternally damned; unworthy of resurrection. Prayers from the pre-Vatican II Roman Missal demonstrate this pessimistic view, some of which called the created world a “valley of tears” and considered humans as the “poor banished children of Eve.” This understanding of resurrection, riddled with fear would dominate until Vatican II heralded a change.
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) was called together to address a Church that was considered ‘out-of-touch’ with the people. It encouraged the Church to “open its doors to the world” and allow the “winds of the Spirit to blow through” and in the case of belief, renew a positive, open and confident understanding of resurrection, which emphasised confidence in God’s love and mercy. To illustrate, consider funeral rite prayers which reflected trust in God’s mercy “to gather us together again in the joy of his Kingdom” (OCF) as each person is “entrusted in God’s loving care.” (OCF)
Funeral rites illustrate this hopeful view of resurrection incorporating a vast variety of symbolism, prayer and ritual. For example, the Easter Candle is lit to represent the light of the Risen Christ and his conquest over darkness and death. The ritual of sprinkling the casket recalls that “In the waters of baptism [deceased] died with Christ and rose with him to New Life.” (OCF) The priest’s vestments (dependent on cultural context) is usually white to recall Easter and the hopeful joy of resurrection. The placing of the pall recalls the deceased’s Baptism and the understanding that “to rise with Christ, we must die with Christ.” (Catechism) The words of the Eucharistic liturgy mirror this hopeful view of resurrection, reading that, “Whoever eats my body and drinks my blood will have eternal life.”
The belief in resurrection has developed significantly in understanding and expression. It has been perceived as a present reality, a reward, exclusive and Church-confined, limited and finally the contemporary Catholic understanding of an all-inclusive and encompassing experience of reunification and transformation. The Catholic tradition has developed to understand resurrection in terms of the notion that, “God created each person for eternal life, and that Jesus, the Son of God, by his death and resurrection has broken the chains of sin and death that bound humanity.” (OCF)
In the Catholic tradition, resurrection refers to the dynamic belief in the reunification of the entirety of the human person, body and soul, to completion, in a glorified spiritual body (I Cor. 15:45), in the New Life that is after death. The core belief in resurrection is expressed in the Nicene Creed, “We believe in the resurrection of the dead and life everlasting” and is based upon the belief in the Risen Christ who is called “the Resurrection and the Life” in John’s Gospel, and who, according to all canonical Gospel accounts, rose to New Life from death, therefore “he has conquered death, and so opened the possibility of salvation to all men.” (Catechism)
Catholic believe that “For those who die in Christ’s grace it is a participation in his death, so that they can also share his Resurrection.” (Catechism) The understanding is that each person is a member of Christ’s Mystical Body (I Cor. 12:12) and therefore shares in the death of Jesus to experience the victory of his resurrection. (Rom. 6:1-12) – “To rise with Christ, we must die with Christ.” (Catechism)Death is thus made sense of as merely “the end of earthly life” (Catechism), not constituting a complete end.
The core belief in resurrection is expressed throughout the Christian Writings, in all canonical gospel accounts and particularly in St. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. The Catholic ritual of Eucharist, involving the transformation of bread and wine to the Body and Blood of Christ, also recalls the Resurrection. Funeral liturgy is filled with symbolism, prayer and ritual that reflects human hope for resurrection.
Over the course of time, the core belief in resurrection has been subject to reformulation, renewal and changes in understanding and expression as a response to a range of internal and external stimuli, including the persecution and death of the early Christians’, Constantine’s conversion, the bubonic plague and the pivotal Second Vatican Council (1962-1965)
The death of the early Christians, particularly the first apostles, challenged initial understandings of resurrection. Initially, the early Christians believed that resurrection was a present reality and that the Kingdom was imminent. Such notions were supported by Jesus’ statement that “This generation will not disappear until all these things [the Kingdom] take place.” (Mt. 3:32) However, the first and second generation of Christian believers’ did gradually pass away without the Kingdom’s arrival or resurrection. The response to this challenge led to a reformulation of the belief and the understanding that “No one knows the day nor the hour” (Mt. 24:36) of resurrection, save that it is a future reality.
The persecution of the early Church by imperial Rome led to the understanding of resurrection as a reward for faithfulness in the face of adversity. Such notions may have had their origins in the Hebrew Scriptures, particularly 2 Macc. 12:45: “In his firm and devout conviction that all of God’s faithful people would receive a wonderful reward” and 2 Macc. 7:9: “The King of the Universe will raise us up to an everlasting renewal of life, for we have died for his laws.” In the Christian Writings also, Jesus states, “Your reward in heaven is great. For that is how they persecuted the prophets before you.” (Mt. 5:12) A clear connection is made between faithfulness and reward, coupled with the oppression of the times which led to the view of resurrection as a reward for remaining faithful.
The conversion of Roman Emperor Constantine to Christianity marks the point where the Church received imperial status and the belief in resurrection progressively became ‘Church-confined’, developing the doctrine of ‘no salvation beyond the Church.’ To illustrate, consider the words of Pope Innocent III: “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” Pope Boniface XVI elaborates, stating that, “It is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Resurrection, and in broader terms, salvation, became understood as exclusively available to members of the Catholic Church. By this view, all societies and cultures outside the jurisdiction of the Pope were quite simply damned- a view that seemed to permeate Church-thought until Vatican II (1962-1965) heralded a change.
The bubonic plague of the Middle-ages’ marks the point where resurrection is viewed with heavy pessimism and is thought of more in terms of judgment, as the prayers of the period suggest. For example, funeral liturgy prayers which read, “Enter not into judgment with your servant, O Lord” and “The day your wrath is let loose upon mankind.” The artwork also reflects this highly pessimistic view of judgment, portraying the vast majority of humanity as eternally damned; unworthy of resurrection. Prayers from the pre-Vatican II Roman Missal demonstrate this pessimistic view, some of which called the created world a “valley of tears” and considered humans as the “poor banished children of Eve.” This understanding of resurrection, riddled with fear would dominate until Vatican II heralded a change.
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) was called together to address a Church that was considered ‘out-of-touch’ with the people. It encouraged the Church to “open its doors to the world” and allow the “winds of the Spirit to blow through” and in the case of belief, renew a positive, open and confident understanding of resurrection, which emphasised confidence in God’s love and mercy. To illustrate, consider funeral rite prayers which reflected trust in God’s mercy “to gather us together again in the joy of his Kingdom” (OCF) as each person is “entrusted in God’s loving care.” (OCF)
Funeral rites illustrate this hopeful view of resurrection incorporating a vast variety of symbolism, prayer and ritual. For example, the Easter Candle is lit to represent the light of the Risen Christ and his conquest over darkness and death. The ritual of sprinkling the casket recalls that “In the waters of baptism [deceased] died with Christ and rose with him to New Life.” (OCF) The priest’s vestments (dependent on cultural context) is usually white to recall Easter and the hopeful joy of resurrection. The placing of the pall recalls the deceased’s Baptism and the understanding that “to rise with Christ, we must die with Christ.” (Catechism) The words of the Eucharistic liturgy mirror this hopeful view of resurrection, reading that, “Whoever eats my body and drinks my blood will have eternal life.”
The belief in resurrection has developed significantly in understanding and expression. It has been perceived as a present reality, a reward, exclusive and Church-confined, limited and finally the contemporary Catholic understanding of an all-inclusive and encompassing experience of reunification and transformation. The Catholic tradition has developed to understand resurrection in terms of the notion that, “God created each person for eternal life, and that Jesus, the Son of God, by his death and resurrection has broken the chains of sin and death that bound humanity.” (OCF)
Life experience and belief
The following is my essay on the interplay of life experience and belief in the life of Christian personalist and social activism Dorothy Day.
Life experience and belief are an interplay of events such as suffering, death, wonder, joy, love, significant life choices and human relationships, and the beliefs that make sense of these experiences and thereby contribute to an individual’s personal outlook and understanding of life.
To demonstrate the effect of life experiences on shaping individual beliefs consider the case of American Christian personalist and pacifist social activist Dorothy Day. Her experiences of suffering in poverty, pacifism and advocating social justice and the rights of the worker were made sense of in the light of the Catholic core belief in One Lord Jesus Christ (Nicene Creed) and his teachings of forgiveness (Mt. 6:14: “If you forgive others sins yours shall be forgiven also”), service (John 13:14-15) compassion, love (John 15:12: “Love one another”), peacefulness (Mt. 5:3-13: “Blessed are the peacemakers”) and social justice (Lk 4:18: “Set the captives free…”)
In her youth, Day accepted communism and the concepts of free love and birth control during the sexual revolution. However, Day’s personal belief in pacifism conflicted with the communist ideal of violent revolution as a means of enforcing social change. This incompatibility in views caused Day to search elsewhere for a belief system that would make sense of her pacifist stance. Day’s initial belief in the concept of free love and birth control was also challenged by her experience of pregnancy and abortion. The pain, suffering and regret of this experience leads Day to question her initial beliefs, particularly regarding unrestrained sexual freedom.
Paramount to Dorothy Day’s metanoia, is the joyous experience of her second pregnancy and the birth of her daughter Tamar. Feeling immense sorrow from the abortion of her first pregnancy, being able to have another child made Day feel a sense of forgiveness, which can attributed to the Catholic belief in “One Baptism for the forgiveness of sins” (Nicene Creed) and the Catholic understanding of a loving God who forgives. It has been remarked that “the stirring of life within her awakened the stirring of God in her own life,” illustrating that this experience of wonder was made sense of in the belief of a loving and forgiving God.
The life experience of pacifism and peaceful non-violent activism is affirmed and made sense of in the light of Jesus’ teaching that “Blessed are the peacemakers.” (Mt. 5:3-13) Day applies this belief to her actions and in the face of adversity opposes with non-violence, adhering to Jesus’ command to “Turn the other cheek” when struck by an adversary. (Mt. 5:39) In protesting against unfair employment Day stated that “We must forgive him [the employer] seventy-times-seven just as we forgive our fellow worker and keep trying to bring him to a sense of solidarity…” For Day, her pacifism is the active faith of Jesus’ words. She remarked that her “manifesto is the Sermon on the Mount” (Mt. 5-7), a passage of Scripture in which Jesus advocates peacefulness, humility, forgiveness and compassion.
A significant life choice that Day made in her lifetime was to co-found, with Fr. Peter Maurin, the Catholic Worker movement and the Houses of Hospitality and communal farms which assisted the homeless and unemployed. This action of social justice and compassion is an experience made sense of in Jesus’ teachings to “Love one another” (John 15:12), to serve (John 13:14-15) and to assist the marginalized in society (Mt. 25:36-37) Day explains that she “had found him [Christ] in his Poor” and that “in a moment of joy [she] turned to him.” Day’s encounter with the unemployed and marginalized is explained as encountering Christ in people, as in Catholic understanding, each person is a member of the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12) and therefore Jesus abides within each person. This understanding gave meaning to every acquaintance Day encountered, as in each encounter Day saw Christ. “What you do to the least of my brethren you do unto me.” (Mt. 25:37)
Dorothy Day lived her life in voluntary simplicity. This major life choice came through the synthesis of her belief in Jesus’ teaching to “Store riches for yourself in heaven” rather than earthly wealth and to “Seek the Kingdom first.” These teachings from the Gospels contributed and made sense of Day’s lifestyle experience of voluntary simplicity.
Dorothy Day attributes her metanoia to the experience of joy rather than sorrow. She states that, “it was in those few years when I was alone and most happy that I found him. I found him [Christ] at last through joy and thanksgiving, not through sorrow.” Day believed “that Christ-like self-sacrificing love was the only thing that made sense in a senseless world.” Living this belief through her work with the Houses of Hospitality, pacifism and social activism, Day’s experience is made sense in the belief in One Lord Jesus Christ (Nicene Creed) and his most challenging teaching of all- to love one another. (John 15:12)
Life experience and belief are an interplay of events such as suffering, death, wonder, joy, love, significant life choices and human relationships, and the beliefs that make sense of these experiences and thereby contribute to an individual’s personal outlook and understanding of life.
To demonstrate the effect of life experiences on shaping individual beliefs consider the case of American Christian personalist and pacifist social activist Dorothy Day. Her experiences of suffering in poverty, pacifism and advocating social justice and the rights of the worker were made sense of in the light of the Catholic core belief in One Lord Jesus Christ (Nicene Creed) and his teachings of forgiveness (Mt. 6:14: “If you forgive others sins yours shall be forgiven also”), service (John 13:14-15) compassion, love (John 15:12: “Love one another”), peacefulness (Mt. 5:3-13: “Blessed are the peacemakers”) and social justice (Lk 4:18: “Set the captives free…”)
In her youth, Day accepted communism and the concepts of free love and birth control during the sexual revolution. However, Day’s personal belief in pacifism conflicted with the communist ideal of violent revolution as a means of enforcing social change. This incompatibility in views caused Day to search elsewhere for a belief system that would make sense of her pacifist stance. Day’s initial belief in the concept of free love and birth control was also challenged by her experience of pregnancy and abortion. The pain, suffering and regret of this experience leads Day to question her initial beliefs, particularly regarding unrestrained sexual freedom.
Paramount to Dorothy Day’s metanoia, is the joyous experience of her second pregnancy and the birth of her daughter Tamar. Feeling immense sorrow from the abortion of her first pregnancy, being able to have another child made Day feel a sense of forgiveness, which can attributed to the Catholic belief in “One Baptism for the forgiveness of sins” (Nicene Creed) and the Catholic understanding of a loving God who forgives. It has been remarked that “the stirring of life within her awakened the stirring of God in her own life,” illustrating that this experience of wonder was made sense of in the belief of a loving and forgiving God.
The life experience of pacifism and peaceful non-violent activism is affirmed and made sense of in the light of Jesus’ teaching that “Blessed are the peacemakers.” (Mt. 5:3-13) Day applies this belief to her actions and in the face of adversity opposes with non-violence, adhering to Jesus’ command to “Turn the other cheek” when struck by an adversary. (Mt. 5:39) In protesting against unfair employment Day stated that “We must forgive him [the employer] seventy-times-seven just as we forgive our fellow worker and keep trying to bring him to a sense of solidarity…” For Day, her pacifism is the active faith of Jesus’ words. She remarked that her “manifesto is the Sermon on the Mount” (Mt. 5-7), a passage of Scripture in which Jesus advocates peacefulness, humility, forgiveness and compassion.
A significant life choice that Day made in her lifetime was to co-found, with Fr. Peter Maurin, the Catholic Worker movement and the Houses of Hospitality and communal farms which assisted the homeless and unemployed. This action of social justice and compassion is an experience made sense of in Jesus’ teachings to “Love one another” (John 15:12), to serve (John 13:14-15) and to assist the marginalized in society (Mt. 25:36-37) Day explains that she “had found him [Christ] in his Poor” and that “in a moment of joy [she] turned to him.” Day’s encounter with the unemployed and marginalized is explained as encountering Christ in people, as in Catholic understanding, each person is a member of the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12) and therefore Jesus abides within each person. This understanding gave meaning to every acquaintance Day encountered, as in each encounter Day saw Christ. “What you do to the least of my brethren you do unto me.” (Mt. 25:37)
Dorothy Day lived her life in voluntary simplicity. This major life choice came through the synthesis of her belief in Jesus’ teaching to “Store riches for yourself in heaven” rather than earthly wealth and to “Seek the Kingdom first.” These teachings from the Gospels contributed and made sense of Day’s lifestyle experience of voluntary simplicity.
Dorothy Day attributes her metanoia to the experience of joy rather than sorrow. She states that, “it was in those few years when I was alone and most happy that I found him. I found him [Christ] at last through joy and thanksgiving, not through sorrow.” Day believed “that Christ-like self-sacrificing love was the only thing that made sense in a senseless world.” Living this belief through her work with the Houses of Hospitality, pacifism and social activism, Day’s experience is made sense in the belief in One Lord Jesus Christ (Nicene Creed) and his most challenging teaching of all- to love one another. (John 15:12)
Core beliefs of the Catholic tradition
The following is my summary report on area of study one of unit one for my Religion & Society course. I'm not sure why I'm publishing it on here... but here it is anyway...
Through the person of Christ, Catholicism gains its understanding and conception of ultimate reality.
Catholics believe that God is the “Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth” (Nicene Creed) - the transcendent Creator (Gen. 1:1), immutable (James 1:17; Malachi 3:6), omniscient, omnipresent and a compassionate parental figure to humanity. (Mt. 6:9)
Catholics believe that God is specially revealed and incarnate in the “One Lord Jesus Christ” (Nicene Creed), who humbles himself to share in our humanity (John 1:14) and offers, in word and demonstration, the ultimate message of the New Covenant- the Law of Love. (John 15:12)
Catholics believe that God is “the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life.” (Nicene Creed), who descends upon the world and binds together each person in the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12) and gives perpetual life to all in the resurrection. (I Cor. 15)
From these core beliefs, Catholicism derives its understanding of an all-powerful, loving and compassionate God who creates and sustains the world in love, and in love, humbles himself to reach out to his children.
From this understanding of the nature of God, demonstrated through the person of Jesus, Catholics believe that the meaning and purpose of human life is quintessentially to build towards the Kingdom- a scriptural metaphor for the almighty reign of God over all creation, recognised through the qualities of peace, justice, forgiveness, service, equity, compassion and love (Mt. 5:3-13; Gen. 1:26-27; Jn. 13:14-15; Jn 15:12)
Catholics believe that God-Incarnate- Jesus demonstrates the qualities of the Kingdom, in word, through sacred stories such as the Good Samaritan (Lk 10. 30-38) and in action, through his Passion, death and Resurrection, which Catholics uphold is the atonement for sin., thereby “opening the possibility of salvation to all men.” (Catechism)
Catholics understand that to build towards the Kingdom is to follow the example of Jesus through the synthesis of ethical codes, such as the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1-17) and the Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-13) which call for justice, equity and peace, in a practical sense. Catholics believe that humanity is in a covenant relationship with God, and that to build toward the Kingdom through applying the Law of Love (“Love one another.” – John 15:12) is a fulfilment of this New Covenant, meditated by Christ. (Heb. 9:15)
In Catholic understanding, humanity is “made in the image/likeness of God” (Gen. 1:26-27) and thus retains innate dignity; each person is a member of the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12) and thus God abides in each person. This gives meaning to Jesus’ statement in Matthew’s gospel that, “Whatever you do to the least of my brethen, you do unto me.”
Catholic tradition believes that humanity is charged with stewardship over the natural world, as indicated by Gen. 2:15, in which, after creating humanity, represented by Adam, God places him into the Garden to ‘tend it.’ Humanity is part of the created order (Gen 1-2) and through sensory experience in the cosmos, and general revelation, gains an insight into the nature of God the Creator. As Wis. 3:15 states: “From the beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of the Creator.” In other terms, humanity can find insight into the nature of God through its experience of the created world, which humanity is ascribed to as steward.
The core beliefs of Catholicism are expressed through the sacred texts of the Christian Writings, including the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which recount and testify to the works of Jesus and contain numerous religious narratives and parables which use analogy and metaphor to convey meaning, such as the parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk. 10:30-38) which expresses the notion of faith in action and the ethic of compassion.
The ritual ceremony of the Eucharist, involving the consecration of bread, wine and water as the Body and Blood of Christ is “the source and summit of Christian life” (Catechism) and recalls the belief in “One Lord Jesus Christ.” (Nicene Creed) and his Passion, death and Resurrection.
The symbol of the commonly known ‘Jesus Fish’ highlights the Catholic understanding of the nature of Christ, as in Greek word for fish- Ichtus is a mnemonic device, which is interpreted to state: “Jesus Christ. God and man. Saviour.” The recognisable symbol of the cross and crucifix also highlights and the belief that Jesus came “For us and for our salvation” (Nicene Creed) and recalls the Passion, death and Resurrection of Christ, whilst reminding Christians’ of the meaning of life itself- to love unconditionally and without boundaries.
Through the person of Christ, Catholicism gains its understanding and conception of ultimate reality.
Catholics believe that God is the “Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth” (Nicene Creed) - the transcendent Creator (Gen. 1:1), immutable (James 1:17; Malachi 3:6), omniscient, omnipresent and a compassionate parental figure to humanity. (Mt. 6:9)
Catholics believe that God is specially revealed and incarnate in the “One Lord Jesus Christ” (Nicene Creed), who humbles himself to share in our humanity (John 1:14) and offers, in word and demonstration, the ultimate message of the New Covenant- the Law of Love. (John 15:12)
Catholics believe that God is “the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life.” (Nicene Creed), who descends upon the world and binds together each person in the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12) and gives perpetual life to all in the resurrection. (I Cor. 15)
From these core beliefs, Catholicism derives its understanding of an all-powerful, loving and compassionate God who creates and sustains the world in love, and in love, humbles himself to reach out to his children.
From this understanding of the nature of God, demonstrated through the person of Jesus, Catholics believe that the meaning and purpose of human life is quintessentially to build towards the Kingdom- a scriptural metaphor for the almighty reign of God over all creation, recognised through the qualities of peace, justice, forgiveness, service, equity, compassion and love (Mt. 5:3-13; Gen. 1:26-27; Jn. 13:14-15; Jn 15:12)
Catholics believe that God-Incarnate- Jesus demonstrates the qualities of the Kingdom, in word, through sacred stories such as the Good Samaritan (Lk 10. 30-38) and in action, through his Passion, death and Resurrection, which Catholics uphold is the atonement for sin., thereby “opening the possibility of salvation to all men.” (Catechism)
Catholics understand that to build towards the Kingdom is to follow the example of Jesus through the synthesis of ethical codes, such as the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1-17) and the Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-13) which call for justice, equity and peace, in a practical sense. Catholics believe that humanity is in a covenant relationship with God, and that to build toward the Kingdom through applying the Law of Love (“Love one another.” – John 15:12) is a fulfilment of this New Covenant, meditated by Christ. (Heb. 9:15)
In Catholic understanding, humanity is “made in the image/likeness of God” (Gen. 1:26-27) and thus retains innate dignity; each person is a member of the Mystical Body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12) and thus God abides in each person. This gives meaning to Jesus’ statement in Matthew’s gospel that, “Whatever you do to the least of my brethen, you do unto me.”
Catholic tradition believes that humanity is charged with stewardship over the natural world, as indicated by Gen. 2:15, in which, after creating humanity, represented by Adam, God places him into the Garden to ‘tend it.’ Humanity is part of the created order (Gen 1-2) and through sensory experience in the cosmos, and general revelation, gains an insight into the nature of God the Creator. As Wis. 3:15 states: “From the beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of the Creator.” In other terms, humanity can find insight into the nature of God through its experience of the created world, which humanity is ascribed to as steward.
The core beliefs of Catholicism are expressed through the sacred texts of the Christian Writings, including the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which recount and testify to the works of Jesus and contain numerous religious narratives and parables which use analogy and metaphor to convey meaning, such as the parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk. 10:30-38) which expresses the notion of faith in action and the ethic of compassion.
The ritual ceremony of the Eucharist, involving the consecration of bread, wine and water as the Body and Blood of Christ is “the source and summit of Christian life” (Catechism) and recalls the belief in “One Lord Jesus Christ.” (Nicene Creed) and his Passion, death and Resurrection.
The symbol of the commonly known ‘Jesus Fish’ highlights the Catholic understanding of the nature of Christ, as in Greek word for fish- Ichtus is a mnemonic device, which is interpreted to state: “Jesus Christ. God and man. Saviour.” The recognisable symbol of the cross and crucifix also highlights and the belief that Jesus came “For us and for our salvation” (Nicene Creed) and recalls the Passion, death and Resurrection of Christ, whilst reminding Christians’ of the meaning of life itself- to love unconditionally and without boundaries.
Thursday 22 November 2007
I was reading an article in the New Internationalist yesterday that focused on conspiracy theories and theorists. It was not too bad an article and didn't seem to be a smear-campaign. Towards the end though, I was left asking the question, why shouldn't they question it? Why shouldn't they exercise the faculty of a free-mind and ask valid questions? Why shouldn't they seek the truth and clarity in an age of misinformation? Since when did the government or the corporate media put a copyright on truth? The answer is never.
Tuesday 20 November 2007
Religion & Society
Well, at long last, after a year filled with interesting surprises, I've finished my Vce Religion & Society course.
Looking back, it's been an interesting year in R&S... I can't say that I haven't been exceptionably bored at times. But it was interesting none-the-less. It gave me greater insight into the beliefs and expression of Christianity, particularly regarding the understanding of God and the meaning and purpose of human life. It has contributed to the shaping and clarification of my outlook on life itself and has allowed me to look at the bigger picture. It has assisted me to look at life through a different lens, that of love and has allowed me to find meaning- an incredible sense of belonging and a place in the cosmos- the created order of things. Much of that I owe to my teacher Paul. He's made an interesting and enlightening ride.
O well, now to focus on the other exams... wish me luck.
Looking back, it's been an interesting year in R&S... I can't say that I haven't been exceptionably bored at times. But it was interesting none-the-less. It gave me greater insight into the beliefs and expression of Christianity, particularly regarding the understanding of God and the meaning and purpose of human life. It has contributed to the shaping and clarification of my outlook on life itself and has allowed me to look at the bigger picture. It has assisted me to look at life through a different lens, that of love and has allowed me to find meaning- an incredible sense of belonging and a place in the cosmos- the created order of things. Much of that I owe to my teacher Paul. He's made an interesting and enlightening ride.
O well, now to focus on the other exams... wish me luck.
Saturday 3 November 2007
Media
What happened to the once noble field of journalism? I am confident that remnants of it still exists and are still willing to seek truth and clarity. But really, what has happened? Since when did individuals hijack this powerful tool to fulfill their own devices? Since when did this once noble field become the corporate media establishment- a massive propaganda machine, aimed at manipulating public opinion, often showing the public only glimpses of reality, sometimes even distorted.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)