DCMission Statement


Showing posts with label Apologetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Apologetics. Show all posts

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Matt 16:13-19: Jesus Establishes the Papacy,
The Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul


Madonna and Child with Sts. Peter and Paul. (1608-1609)
by Giuseppe Cesari (c.1568–3 July 1640),

Today is the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul, apostles and martyrs. The Gospel for today's Mass is Jesus's institution of the Papacy in which He establishes Peter as the first pope of the Church. The audio clip below is a recording of this reading chanted by a deacon at a Mass in St. Peter's Basilica celebrated by Bl. Pope John Paul II on this solemnity. The text in Latin and English is given at the bottom of this post.



In the video below, Jimmy Akin at Catholic Answers gives responses to objections that Protestants make to reject that Jesus here is establishing Peter as the first pope. In the video, two documents are referenced: 1) Peter the Rock by Karl Keating, 2) Why Be Catholic? by Jimmy Akin. CatholicApologetics.info has given thorough responses to many Protestant objections in a document entitled 10 Answers on St. Peter the Rock by Mario Derksen.







In illo témpore: Venit Iesus in partes Cæsaréæ Philippi, et interrogábat discípulos suos, dicens: Quem dicunt hómines esse Fílium hóminis? At illi dixérunt: Alii Ioánnem Baptístam, alii autem Elíam, álii vero Ieremíam aut unum ex Prophétis. Dicit illis Iesus: Vos autem quem me esse dícitis? Respóndens Simon Petrus, dixit: Tu es Christus, Fílius Dei vivi. Respóndens autem Iesus, dixit ei: Beátus es, Simon Bar Iona: quia caro et sanguis non revelávit tibi, sed Pater meus, qui in coelis est.

Et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificábo Ecclésiam meam...

...et portæ ínferi non prævalébunt advérsus eam. Et tibi dabo claves regni coelórum. Et quodcúmque ligáveris super terram, erit ligátum et in coelis: et quodcúmque sólveris super terram, erit solútum et in coelis.


— Lectio ✝ sancti Evangélii secúndum Matthaeum (16:13-19).



At that time, Jesus having come into the district of Caesarea Philippi, began to ask His disciples, saying, Who do men say the Son of Man is? But they said, Some say, John the Baptist; and others, Elias; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. He said to them, But who do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Then Jesus answered and said, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father in heaven.

And I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church...

...and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.


— A Reading ☩ of the Holy Gospel according to Matthew (16:13-19).



Sancti Apostoli Petre et Paule, orate pro nobis.


Sunday, March 10, 2013

An Open Letter to Friends of the Dominicans:
On Aristotle and Induction

I was recently conversing with a friend who was telling me about her current enrollment in a class covering Aristotle. Given that it is all too easy to dismiss such course material as simply a dull and pedantic undertaking, I wanted to offer some thoughts that emphasize the importance of his role in the history of thought: particularly in the intellectual tradition of the Dominicans. As it turns out, I was visiting with this friend and others in the company of two Dominican sisters recently, and a conversation came up in which there arose a question regarding the distinction between deductive and inductive reasoning.

Well, I was listening to a lecture series by Prof. Daniel Robinson the other day, and by a seeming coincidence, he discussed both of these topics in a single lecture. Here is an open letter to friends of the Dominicans regarding what I learned -- and found quite interesting. I hope that you will, too.



Dear Friends of the Dominicans,

Regarding our recent conversations on various interesting topics -- particularly Aristotle, deduction versus induction, and those amidst ongoing discussions about the Dominicans -- I wanted to share with you my recent discoveries on these topics contained within some enlightening lectures by Prof. Daniel Robinson. Upon reading this letter, I hope that you will come to see the following:
  1. The significance of Aristotle, which cannot be overstated -- particularly within the intellectual tradition of the Dominican Order.
  2. Evidence to support the rejection of the Conflict Thesis, widely promoted by Andrew Dickson White (1832-1918).
  3. The emphasis placed on inductive reasoning by Christian thinkers in the High Middle Ages, in anticipation of the founding of modern science.

Before we begin, a few words are in order about Prof. Daniel Robinson, whom I will be citing in this letter. He taught at Georgetown University for 30 years and is currently a philosophy professor at Oxford, where he has been on the faculty since 1991. Within the lectures I'll be referencing, he associates himself with no particular religion. At times, he gives comments that would likely be taken by the general public to be praiseworthy of various religious figures in history. At other times, he gives scathing criticisms of certain religious groups. With regard to the Catholic Church in particular, it is worth noting that he devotes an entire lecture to excoriating the Catholic Church for Her dealings with the Malleus Maleficarum in the fifteenth century. Hence, I consider him to be a neutral source when it comes to the area of religion.

Two of the lectures focus on some of the great thinkers of the Scholastic tradition during the High Middle Ages. Prof. Robinson begins with Peter Abelard (1079–21 April 1142) and continues on to cover to varying degrees Robert Grosseteste (1175–9 October 1253), Roger Bacon (ca.1214–1294), John Duns Scotus (ca.1266–8 November 1308), Albert the Great (1193/1206–November 15, 1280), and Thomas Aquinas (1225–7 March 1274). Over the course of the discussions of these figures, we can see the intellectual foundations being laid for the great achievements to come in the following centuries. And whom do we meet at each step along the way, playing a vital role in guiding each of these important thinkers? None other than our dear friend, Aristotle. We begin with Peter Abelard.


Peter Abelard (1079-1142)


Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Consider Peter Abelard whose life stretches from 1079 to 1142 and whose celebrated teaching earned him the title of ... Peripateticus Palatinus. A "palatine" here suggests a form of lordship, and the "peripatetics": that was a term historically assigned to the school of Aristotle. So here you have a "lordship" in the domain of Aristotelian thought. Abelard's own teacher was the philosophically acute Anselm whose instruction was a staple in Roman Catholic higher education...


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from The Reappearance of Experimental Science



Note that the Anselm mentioned above is not St. Anslem (ca.1033-21 April, 1109), the Benedictine monk and Doctor of the Church.

From Abelard, we move on to Robert Grosseteste, who served as Bishop of Lincoln and was influential as a scholar in the fields of philosophy and theology. In a DCMission video (available here), we have presented a brief consideration of his accomplishments in the field of natural philosophy. Grosseteste leads us then to his student Roger Bacon, a Franciscan whose Opus Majus covered a wide range of topics, including the Scriptures, moral philosophy, mathematics, optics, and others.

Robert Grosseteste (1175-1253)

Roger Bacon (1214-1294):
Statue at the
Oxford University Museum

Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Let me return to the thirteenth century when, again, thanks very much to Islamic commentaries on Hellenic texts, the West begins to recover Aristotle the natural scientist and sees in these Aristotelian works the possibility for genuinely progressive knowledge. Two figures of immense importance are found at the already thriving University of Oxford: both members of the Catholic clergy and both among the most instructed minds of their century. In Robert Grosseteste, the bishop of Lincoln, we find a scholar as much at home with optics as with theology. His dates are 1175 to 1253. His commentaries on Aristotle were authoritative well into the sixteenth century. Significantly, in addition to commentaries on the ethical treatises, he also studied and wrote on Aristotle's Physics. And by the time of his death, he had created at Oxford an interest in science in which his young student, Roger Bacon, would come to call experimental science. Now, Roger Bacon's great work, his Opus Majus, is one of the foundational works in the modern scientific movement.


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from The Reappearance of Experimental Science



Robinson's mention here of the Islamic philosophers' roles in the study of the ancient Greeks is worth highlighting, as such points in the history of philosophy indicate the importance of Islamic thinkers oppose popular trends among Christians that attempt to cast Islam as an intrinsically anti-intellectual religion. The works of such Islamic thinkers such as Avicenna and Averroes are discussed briefly by Fr. Frederick Copleston, S.J. in Volume 2 of his well-known series, A History of Philosophy. Note that these Islamic figures by themselves offer evidence against the Conflict Thesis, in that thinkers such as a Avicenna and Averroes, while not Christian, are reported to have conducted studies into the natural sciences, while at the same time being religious men.

Robinson goes on to quote an excerpt from Roger Bacon's Opus Majus which highlights the fundamental importance of experience in the pursuit of Truth. We see here that the foundations for the experimental study of nature are being further developed. Note well that, although he lived 1600 years before, we see the influence of Aristotle at play here as Bacon is laying these foundations.


Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Aristotle had taught that "proof is reasoning that causes us to know," and Bacon understood that this required as a proviso that the proof is accompanied by its appropriate experience and is not to be understood as the bare proof of a syllogism. Thus he says, "He, therefore, who wishes to rejoice without doubt in regard to the truth's underlying phenomenon must know how to devote himself to experiment." What an incredible statement of purpose. What a pedagogically rich, instructive, guiding precept [from Roger Bacon's Opus Majus, ca. 1267]."


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from The Reappearance of Experimental Science



Following Roger Bacon, we encounter Duns Scotus (ca.1266-1308). Scotus was born around the time that Bacon's Opus Majus was authored, and we see that he picks up where Bacon left off in the emphasis of the role of experience in the acquisition of knowledge. As a component of Scotus's contributions, Robinson mentions his recognition of the use of inductive reasoning in the process of cultivating order within experience-based knowledge.


Bl. John Duns Scotus (1266-1308)

It is worth noting that, within Catholic contexts, I suspect that one is more likely to hear the name of Bl. John Duns Scotus, O.F.M. (beatified by Bl. John Paul II in 1993) mentioned not as a precursor to modern experimental inquiry, but rather for this Franciscan's indispensable contributions to Catholic Mariology. On this point, the Catholic Encyclopedia at NewAdvent.org states the following:

The famous Duns Scotus (d. 1308) at last (in III Sent., dist. iii, in both commentaries) laid the foundations of the true doctrine so solidly and dispelled the objections in a manner so satisfactory, that from that time onward the doctrine prevailed. He showed that the sanctification after animation — sanctificatio post animationem — demanded that it should follow in the order of nature (naturae) not of time (temporis); he removed the great difficulty of St. Thomas showing that, so far from being excluded from redemption, the Blessed Virgin obtained of her Divine Son the greatest of redemptions through the mystery of her preservation from all sin.


Catholic Encyclopedia, from the article "Immaculate Conception"



Returning to Robinson and his thoughts on Scotus:


Click Here to Play Audio Clip

The great medieval Christian philosopher Duns Scotus put the case in yet another way. "As for what is known by experience, I have this to say. Even though a person does not experience every single individual, but only a great many - nor does he experience them at all times, but only frequently - still, he knows infallibly that it is always this way and holds for all instances." Now, you know what he's getting at here, don't you? This is a forerunner of what is now called the "frequentest probability approach (probabilistic knowledge)," establishing an inductive inference as a permissible mode of knowledge. Once you've sampled a number of cases and you see that things work out - remember Aristotle's hôs epi to poly: "by and large," "for the most part," "in general" - well, you don't have to wait for an infinite time to consult every single instance. By inference - by logical inference - by a plausible, rational mode of thought - you can lay claim to understanding how this will be under all circumstances, no matter how many times it's sampled.


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from The Reappearance of Experimental Science



Robinson goes on to explicate how Scotus's emphasis on inductive reasoning played such an important role in the intellectual developments within the studies of nature in the following centuries. He goes so far as to say that we are seeing through Scotus an "actual philosophy of science" beginning to appear, along with a "justification for experimental science itself."


Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Put another way, in the words of Duns Scotus again, "Whatever occurs in a great many instances by a cause that is not free is the natural effect of that cause. This proposition is known to the intellect even if derived from erring senses." You see what's going on here. There is an actual philosophy of science being developed in these texts. Here's a justification for experimental science itself - a justification if I ever saw one. What the proposition is is this. You take a fairly large sample. You see what the general pattern of outcomes is. You have every right to conclude by inference that there is a general law controlling these things. You know that you can't observe every event for all time to come. Nonetheless, your knowledge is infallible when the pattern is so securely repeated a given number of times.


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from The Reappearance of Experimental Science



To conclude his thoughts on these men, Robinson ends with a point that, to many today, could very well come as a bit shocking. This work by the Christian Scholastics -- which prefigured the experimental sciences -- at this time in history did not occur in spite of their faith, but because of it. The reasons for this takes us all the way back to beginning of Genesis itself. The creation gives insight into the creator. The depths of the mysteries within the natural world are seemingly impenetrable, but the intelligibility of these mysteries tell man something about himself and his own rationality. Through an increase in his knowledge about the natural world and the resulting increase in knowledge of his own nature, man - being made in God's image - discovers something about God Himself.

Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Duns Scotus, Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon: they're defending a mode of thought in the Scholastic period that is characteristic of that period, though also original and groundbreaking. There's something quite commonsensical about it all, even amidst the analytical rigor and the formal arguments. This comes about, in a very considerable measure, as a result of Christian teaching itself: the requirement that we know God through His creation; an inquiry into our own nature, because by way of imago dei, to know oneself is to know something of God. So, again, this is not an age hostile to the senses, indifferent to experimental modes of inquiry.


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from The Reappearance of Experimental Science



Now, lest Christians become too proud of this heritage, it is important to note that the aforementioned Islamic thinker Averroes in the 12th century is reported to have held an interest in the sciences, such as astronomy, for example. And of Avicenna before him, even in the first millennium, it has been said that "before he was sixteen he had mastered what was to be learned of physics, mathematics, logic, and metaphysics; at the age of sixteen he began the study and practice of medicine..." (from the Catholic Encyclopedia article "Avicenna"). Having been men with interests also in theology, it would seem to make sense to speculate that they understood this connection between inquiry into the natural world and knowledge of the Creator. Here we have further evidence which works contrary to the anti-religious sentiments expressed by those subscribing to the Conflict Thesis.

Avicenna (980-1037)

Averroes (1126-1198): Pictured reading over the shoulder of Pythagoras (ca.570 - ca.495 B.C.) in Raphael's The School of Athens (1511)
Born around the same time as Roger Bacon was a man who was to become one of the greatest minds in history, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), a Dominican and Doctor of the Church. His teacher, St. Albert the Great (ca.1206-1280) - also a Dominican Doctor of the Church - was a great thinker in his own right. His Opera Omnia (available online here), which is a compilation of his written works, consists, in one translation, of thirty-eight volumes and covers a multitude of topics including theology, philosophy, the physical sciences, psychology, anthropology, and many others. In Prof. Robinson's lecture, Scholasticism and the Theory of Natural Law, he offers us an eloquent introduction to Thomas and Albert.

Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Thomas Aquinas, Tommaso d'Aquino, the famous and great Doctor of the Church. The great thirteenth-century Dominican figure whose Scholastic philosophy continues to dominate thought within the overall religious philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church. He was a prolific writer. He was not, however, the most promising of students. At least legend has it that he was a large and rather lumbering chap called by his classmates, "the Dumb Ox," and his celebrated teacher, Albertus Magnus, was persuaded that when that ox started making sounds, the entire world would quake. And in this, Albertus Magnus was correct - in this and in many other things.


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from Scholasticism and the Theory of Natural Law



St. Albertus Magnus (1193/1206–1280)

It is worth noting that when one looks a bit deeper into Albert's works, he might come to see an influence from none other than Avicenna, the Islamic polymath mentioned earlier. The Catholic Encyclopedia tells us:

A favourite principle of Avicenna, which is quoted not only by Averroes but also by the Schoolmen [i.e. the Scholastics], and especially by St. Albert the Great, was intellectus in formis agit universalitatem, that is, the universality of our ideas is the result of the activity of the mind itself.


Catholic Encyclopedia, from the article "Avicenna"



This brings us, then, to St. Thomas Aquinas himself. Allow me to illustrate the supreme dignity of St. Thomas anecdotally. I was visiting a Dominican convent recently, and I noticed a painting of a Dominican standing at the foot of the Cross. I asked one of the sisters, "Is that St. Thomas?" She responded, "No, it is St. Dominic [i.e. the founder of the Dominican Order] -- but he would have no problem with you mistaking him for St. Thomas." Hence, one cannot overestimate the rank of St. Thomas within the Dominican tradition. What Robinson will illustrate to us now is that neither can one overestimate the rank of Aristotle within the works of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Click Here to Play Audio Clip

Now, Thomas Aquinas's deep and enduring respect for Aristotle has him invariably referring to Aristotle not by name, but simply as "the philosopher": Aristotle as a philosophical guide and often, but not always, a philosophical authority. Recall that Thomas Aquinas is going to become Saint Thomas Aquinas. He's a Dominican priest. His mission in life is service to the Church. What he's attempting to get right is the spiritual dimension of human life; the obligations we have to God: conducting our lives in such way as to be worthy of the salvation secured through the death of Jesus Christ. So this is not someone seeking tenure in a philosophy department, and he certainly isn't going to settle, once and for all, for the philosophical musings - no matter how deep and penetrating they might be - of a pagan philosopher who died in the fourth century BC. To make the point briefly, then, I should say, we don't want to read Thomistic philosophy as a gloss on Aristotelianism. The stakes are different, and the stakes - at least for Thomas Aquinas - are much higher.


— Prof. Daniel Robinson, from Scholasticism and the Theory of Natural Law


St. Thomas Aquinas
(1225-1274)
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.):
As depicted in Raphael's The School of Athens
And this brings us to the end of our journey through the High Middle Ages. We've met several monumental minds from Christianity and Islam who were forerunners to the great founders of modern science. All along the way, we've seen the influence of a man who, although he lived about 1500 years earlier, played an undeniable role in the intellectual lives of each of these men. The spirit of each is, in a real sense, present with us today in a world enriched with scientific inquiry. But the question for us remains: how will Aristotle, the great "philosophical guide," affect each of our lives?

Pax Christi Vobiscum,
Patrick
Laetare Sunday
Dominica IV in Quadragesima
Feast of the Forty Holy Martyrs of Sebaste
On the Date of the Dedication of Our Lady, Help of Christians Parish in Huntsville, Alabama, by Most Rev. Robert Baker, Bishop of Birmingham



My Meeting with Dominican Sisters at the
2012 March for Life, Washington, D.C.




Forty Holy Martyrs of Sebaste († 320).

According to St. Basil [ca.329-379], forty soldiers who had openly confessed themselves Christians were condemned by the prefect to be exposed naked upon a frozen pond near Sebaste on a bitterly cold night, that they might freeze to death.



Domina Nostra, Auxilium Christianorum
et Quadrāgintā Sānctī Martyrēs, orate pro nobis.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

A Secular Interpretation of Thomas's "Palea"


Nov. 15 will be the feast of St. Albert the Great: Bishop, Doctor of the Church, and patron of scientists. Of all the monumental achievements of Albertus Magnus, arguably one of the greatest was his mentorship of St. Thomas Aquinas, another Dominican Doctor who has been described as one of the greatest minds in the history of the Church.

It is perhaps worth the time of every individual interested in the pursuit of the examined life to reflect on one oft-told story of Thomas regarding an event near the end of his life. It is said that, following a profound interior experience, he stepped away from his authorship of the Summa Theologica. When asked to continue his work, he refused, replying to his comrade, "I cannot, because all that I have written seems like straw to me" ("mihi videtur ut palea"). His life on Earth would expire without his ever completing the Summa.

In my experience, two interpretations of Thomas's statement seem most prominent. The first might be called the skeptic's interpretation. This interpretation suggests that through his experience, Thomas somehow came to the realization of the truth that the god on which all of his writings were founded was, in fact, non-existent. Hence, his statement that his writings were "straw" is taken by the skeptic to mean that all of his efforts had been completely in vain.

The next interpretation might be called the interpretation of the faithful Catholic. This interpretation states that in his experience, Thomas caught for just a brief instant the image of God with whom he was destined to dwell upon passing to eternal life. Just this brief glimpse of God was enough to reveal to him that his works - monumental as they were - were, in comparison to this glimpse, nothing more than "straw."

I surmise that many men of much greater erudition than I have supported one or the other of these interpretations, so I will not try to make a case here for either. However, recently, I came across a third interpretation by Prof. Daniel Robinson that is worth considering. I've listened to many lectures by Prof. Robinson, and in none of them does he affiliate himself with any religion. He has, in fact, directed harsh criticisms toward Catholicism in particular: perhaps the most stern criticism being that of Her dealings with the Malleus Maleficarum in the fifteenth century. Anyhow, in what might be called the secular interpretation, Robinson asks us to "step out of the context of religion itself and just consider the man Thomas Aquinas." This perspective affords Robinson the opportunity to provide a reflection that will likely be edifying for proponents of either of the previous interpretations.


"Well, never before or since would there be so complete a faith in an age hosting such extraordinary intellects. It is quite remarkable, I mean, if you step back, and, in fact, step out of the context of religion itself and just consider the man Thomas Aquinas. This is a towering intellect: the author of still-to-be-translated hundreds of thousands of words of rich philosophy, logic, ethics, etc. An instructed mind, a mind fashioned by the best productions of the classical world, and a mind that, at the end of the day, turns itself away from scholarship, from writing - comes out of a chapel toward the end of his life, reflecting on everything he had put in print or put to paper, saying that, 'It was pointless - it was just like sand, do you see?' That is, one who thinks so deeply and so persistently on the meaning of life: a life - an examined life, and examined at such depth and with such sincerety and purpose and gratitude as to find words incapable of expressing truths that somehow and otherwise are known by the grace of God. This is a tradition put in place where the intellectual foundations of the faith are thick and firm and, I should say, even into the twenty-first century, durable. A great figure in a great age: Thomas Aquinas.

...not a bad lawyer, either." ~Daniel Robinson.

Sancte Alberte Magne (c.1206-1280) et Sancte Thoma de Aquino (c.1227-1274), orate pro nobis.

Thursday, August 9, 2012

Catholics and Contraception: Blind Acceptance of Authority?

I recently was speaking with a protestant who intimated an understanding of Catholics' opposition to contraception as being just another instance of our blind acceptance of an authoritarian rule established by the Catholic Church that has been added to the Bible arbitrarily. Here, I present four perspectives - in brief form, conveniently tailored for our ADHD culture - in response to this claim to illustrate that it is unsubstantiated and unequivocally false.

A Brief Historical Note: For Centuries, Protestants Rejected Contraception
The first important point is that although protestants depict the Catholic opposition to contraception as a teaching through which the Church exercises its supposedly totalitarian control over those subscribing to the Catholic Faith, the truth of the matter is that the founding members of the protestant movement - including Luther and Calvin - also openly opposed contraception. In fact, Christianity was unified in its opposition to contraception for centuries, until the early 20th century when the Anglican bishops convened at the Lambeth conference in 1930 to establish some exceptions to their opposition to the use of contraception. Hence, if the Catholic Church is in this case, as many protestants say, simply adding arbitrary rules to those established in the Bible, then so were the protestants for all those centuries.

To this conclusion, the pro-contraceptive protestant may respond, "Fine - the protestants were wrong all those years. It took this long for us to realize that contraception is indeed morally permissible." Ignoring the unabashed brazenness of this claim for the time being, I will respond by saying, "OK, but the evidence above still eradicates the grounds for holding the position that the Catholic teaching on contraception is just another instance of Catholic authority flexing its muscles of totalitarian control over its people through the establishment of principles that were (it is alleged) without good reason added to those principles found in the Bible, when in fact all of Christianity, including protestants, taught and abided by a principled opposition to contraception for centuries."

For more on the history of the Christian opposition to contraception, which dates back to the infancy of Christianity (about two millennia ago), see Fr. Mitch Pacwa's article on the subject: link.

A Response to the Claim that the Catholic Teaching on Contraception is an Authoritarian Rule Created by the Pope that is Blindly Accepted by Catholics
One of the many works by Christian figures giving a reasoned opposition to the use of contraception is the great book Love and Responsibility by Karol Wojtyla (who later was to be elected Pope John Paul II). Upon mentioning that such works exist, the protestant whom I mentioned earlier made it clear that she understood that such works are simply instances of Catholics blindly accepting the authoritative teachings of Church leaders.

Such an understanding is, to be frank, a gross distortion of the truth of the situation. In fact, in Wojtyla's introduction to Love and Responsibility, he establishes clearly that the book was not written to be taken as doctrine - that is, as an authoritative teaching of the Church. It was, in fact, written 18 years before he was even elected pope. (Note that there are many other books by people who aren't even priests that establish through reason the immorality of contraception. I mention Love and Responsibility here only because it is the best one I have read.) If it helps the protestant reader, you may think of Love and Responsibility as similar to a sermon written by the pastor of your own church, in which he (or she) discusses his (or her) understanding of how one is to rightly live out the Gospel. You as a member of that church may accept or reject that understanding based on your own reasoning. I could say more on this, but I will leave it to the reader to study for himself the introduction to Love and Responsibility, which is available in its entirety in the preview of the book on Google Books (link).

(The reader will note that the above analogy between the teachings on contraception contained in Love and Responsibility and a protestant pastor's sermon is somewhat inaccurate, in that the faithful Catholic cannot in good conscience refuse to accept the Church's teaching on contraception, since this teaching has elsewhere been stated authoritatively (for example, in Pope Paul VI's 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae). However, this point is tangential to the current discussion, as my objective here is to establish that non-authoritative works, such as Love and Responsibility, do indeed exist and establish the immorality of contraception based on reason alone, without relying upon authority.)

A Note from a Prominent Protestant Leader of Today on the Catholic Opposition to Contraception
Although many protestants have since 1930 rejected the centuries-held Christian opposition to contraception, there are still prominent protestant leaders who are not vehemently opposed to the Catholic teaching on the matter and who actually see great value in it. This fact by itself is further evidence that this teaching is based on reason, and is not accepted solely because it is taught authoritatively. Consider the thoughts of the Protestant pastor Russell E. Saltzman on this topic: link.

A Note from the Perspective of a Young Lady
A video was produced recently by a young lady (in her teenage years, I would guess) that offers her case for opposing contraception. Although less intellectually rigorous than the above references, it is more lighthearted and was received well by priests I know, so it may be helpful for some.





On the General Calendar, August 9th is the feast day of St. Edith Stein (1891-1942), Carmelite nun, prominent Catholic intellectual, convert from Judaism, and martyr of Auschwitz. On the Traditional Calendar, it is the feast of St. John Marie Vianney (1786-1859), patron of parish priests. Orate pro nobis.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Fr. Pacwa, S.J. on Verbum Domini #38:
On the "Spirit" of Sacred Scripture



One of the many features of the Catholic Church that I cherish is that the greatest biblical scholars are Catholic. It is a popular misconception that it is protestants who best know Scripture and that their extensive knowledge of it is something that Catholics should learn from them. But the evidence of the unrivaled excellence of Catholic biblical scholarship is readily available, now that we have in recent decades broken ground upon the Digital Continent and have access to the great writings and commentaries on Scripture by popes, bishops, and priests over the centuries. Although it may be true, in general, that the average protestant has more Bible passages memorized than the average Catholic (although even this fact may be debatable), rote memorization of the letter of Scripture is limited in usefulness if one has not begun to attain a spiritual comprehension of Scripture. But what exactly does the "Spiritual" comprehension of Scripture entail? Fr. Pacwa here has given us a discussion which addresses this very question.

I found this discussion to be particularly important today, as the idea of the "spirit" of the law - both in the context of Scripture and elsewhere - has been greatly misconstrued. We often hear of people referring to the "spirit" of the law as a means to relax the strictness embodied by a written rule when interpreted literally.

For example, let's consider a situation in which a police officer finds his friend's car parked illegally over the lines in a parking lot with no other cars in it. In such a situation, one might not be surprised if the officer were to pardon the offense on the grounds that, although the letter of the law has been broken, the "spirit of the law" allows him to excuse it. Although this may be permissible on the grounds of common courtesy, the truth of the matter is that such a pardon opposes both the letter and the spirit of the law, in their true senses.

To consider an ecclesial example, we hear frequently of certain questionable activities in the Liturgy being justified on the grounds that they are being done in the "spirit of Vatican II" (a talk by Bishop Athanasius Schneider in January on this topic can be found here). For one who has an apprehension of what the "spirit of the law" really means, this is quite confusing when it is used to permit actions that are not supported by the Council's texts themselves. Even more perplexing are cases in which the actions permitted by the "spirit" of the Council go so far as to contradict what is written in the conciliar documents. A particularly noteworthy example of this is the common practice of the complete elimination of the use of the Latin language from the Mass, a practice which is allegedly justified by the following of the so-called "spirit of Vatican II," while being expressly forbidden within the documents themselves (see Sancrosanctum Concilium, #36).

The truth regarding the "spirit" of the law - as presented by Pope Benedict in Verbum Domini, Fr. Pacwa here, and Eric Moore elsewhere - is that it builds upon and even transcends the letter - rather than working in opposition to it - and it is vital that we grasp this point.

Toward this end, in this episode of Threshold of Hope, Fr. Pacwa gives a discussion of paragraph 38: The Need to Transcend the "Letter," from Pope Benedict's apostolic exhortation Verbum Domini. You can follow along with Fr. Pacwa by reading the document online here.

Fr. Pacwa begins by emphasizing what is needed to gain a "Spiritual" comprehension of Sacred Scripture, which requires that one understands the text in four senses:
  1. The Literal Sense: To understand the "meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture" (CCC 117) - "All other senses ... are based on the literal" (St. Thomas Aquinas).
  2. The Allegorical Sense: To understand what we believe, the doctrines.
  3. The Moral Sense: To understand right from wrong.
  4. The Anagogical Sense: To understand life and the after-life, or what happens when we die.
As Fr. Pacwa mentions in the previous episode of Threshold of Hope, these four senses are presented in greater detail in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, #118.

Two important points Fr. Pacwa goes on to make are that:
  1. The "interplay between the different senses of Scripture is essential in order to grasp the passage from letter to spirit" (4:38).
  2. "...this is not an automatic passage, and it is not spontaneous - it takes some work." (4:55)
Fr. Pacwa then begins a discussion of what such an understanding of these senses entails. He emphasizes that we must look at the passages of Scripture in context: that is, "not only the context of the other words around it, but also to see various elements of the Bible in the context of the whole of Scripture and the whole development of the history of the people of Israel from Abraham forward..." (12:39). Hence, we see here the importance of not only the Scripture itself, but also of Sacred Tradition, which is rejected by many heretical teachings today. In this paragraph of Verbum Domini, Pope Benedict explicitly highlights the importance of Scripture through a reference to Pope Paul VI's 1965 dogmatic consitution Dei Verbum, and through making this reference, implicitly highlights the importance of Sacred Tradition. In opposition to this fact regarding the emphasis that the Church has placed on the study of Scripture, some protestants have propagated the falsehood that a distinguishing feature of Catholic Church history is that the Magisterium has discouraged or even forbade people from reading Sacred Scripture. To counter this, Fr. Pacwa mentions Pope Leo XIII's (R. 1878-1903) order to print in every Catholic Bible that Catholics would receive indulgences for reading Scripture (19:55). Although there may have been Catholic individuals who were discouraging laypeople from reading the Bible, this has not been the official teaching of the Church.

So we see here that the interplay of these two contexts illustrates the timelessness - manifesting itself through temporal universality - of the Truth embodied within Christianity. The Tradition of the Faith was an inextricable component of the Councils of the early Church at which the Bible was compiled, as it continues to be an inextricable component today, and will continue to be in the future life of the Church. However, this vitality of Scripture within the Church does not sustain itself automatically, but rather requires a volitional participation of learning and living the Scriptures from each of its members. Fr. Pacwa, quoting Verbum Domini, states, "There is an inner drama in this process, since the passage that takes place in the power of the Spirit inevitably engages each person’s freedom" (13:23). This deep level of understanding of Scripture will necessarily involve an act of one's will and will affect his daily decisions as he lives, "demanding full engagement in the life of the Church" (9:48, quoting Verbum Domini).

July 3 is the feast of St. Thomas the Apostle († 72) (General Calendar) and Pope St. Leo II (R. 682-683) (Traditional Calendar). Orate pro nobis.