Everyone else has had to make do with Cardinal Levada's summary. I expect the Vatican will have the text up soon so we can paste quotes from it.
The doctrinal note asserts the fundamental right and duty of the Church to evangelise. Its missionary activity is a work of love, to bring to others the truth and the person of Christ. This does not offend against the liberty of the individual but in fact brings that human freedom to its full potential, allowing others to know the beauty of friendship with Christ.
The doctrinal note is an answer to those who cannot contemplate any attempt to preach Christ without protesting that the presentation of the truth is a condemnation of "my lifestyle".
A couple of quotations that I have lovingly typed out for you... First, concerning the false opposition between evangelisation and freedom:
There is today, however, a growing confusion which leads many to leave the missionary command of the Lord unheard and ineffective (cf. Mt28.19). Often it is maintained that any attempt to convince others on religious matters is a limitation of their freedom. From this perspective, it would only be legitimate to present one's own ideas and to invite people to act according to their consciences, without aiming at their conversion to Christ and to the Catholic faith. (n.3)And secondly concerning an error that is quite common in England today:
In the various forms of agnosticism and relativism present in contemporary thought, "a legitimate plurality of positions has yielded to an undifferentiated pluralism, based upon the assumption that all positions are equally valid, which is one of today's most widespread symptoms of the lack of confidence in truth. [...] (n.4 - the quotation is from Fides et Ratio 9-10))
7 comments:
Or as Ronnie Knox once satirised the English approach to faith:
"When suave politeness tem'pring bigot zeal,
changed 'I believe' to 'one doth feel'!"
I'm just confused by this quotation from Fides et Ratio:
"a legitimate plurality of positions has yielded to an undifferentiated pluralism, based upon the assumption that all positions are equally valid".
If not all positions are equally valid, then what can be legitimate about a plurality of positions? Surely what is legitimate is not the plurality (for truth is one) but the fact that a person might mistakenly but in conscience hold to some position other than the true one.
'the assumption that all positions are equally valid, which is one of today's most widespread symptoms of the lack of confidence in truth'.
This is one of the most dangerous aspects of the typical RE Syllabus in Catholic Schools. The idiocy of teaching our children 'comparative religions' so that by Year 11 they end up believing in nothing, must be stopped. Why is our Glorious Catholic Faith relegated to a GCSE exam subject? So that kids believe it is on a par with or of equal value to Maths, Drama, Chemistry, Food Technology, IT etc... Also why is a large part of the RE programme devoted to teaching about other religious beliefs allowing the 'enemy' to muddle young minds and distort, cast aspertions on, or even deny the Truth altogether - they end up with the one world religion ideology that there are 'many paths to the top of the mountain, but when you get there the view is the same' - so why bother. Get back to teaching kids the Catholic Faith and dump this GCSE nonsense.
First and foremost the Truth of the Catholic Faith MUST be taught AND caught by/from the child's parents and family, regular contact with the Church through Mass, celebrations, Sacraments, inviting Priests home for family meals, birthdays etc...
Secondly the Catholic Schools with the help of the Priests and Bishops must back-up 100% the teaching of the Catholic Church with NO deviation from the Catechism so that those parents teaching their children are not undermined in any way. Where parental teaching in Faith & Morals is absent the School then becomes the 'primary educator'. If parents don't like it then their motives for sending their children to a Catholic School must be questioned.
Our children are missing out on Faith Formation in a massive way and I believe that Evangelisation MUST start first and foremost in the home in our own families. The schools then back this up. Once our own are well formed, then reach out to the wider world. Too many of us are caught up in the 'bigger world picture' and while we ponder on all the world's problems we have missed the 'chaff and weeds' cleverly sown and nurtured by the devil in our own back yard 'who prowls through the world seeking the destruction of souls'. And yes, with thousands of years of experience he's damned good at it!
Ches - I think that in the context, Pope John Paul could be taken to refer to a legitimate diversity in philosophical ideas. In the previous paragraph, he spoke of some positive results of modern philosophy and then of the retreat from "the investigation of being" to the investigation of ways of knowing with an emphasis on the limitation of our ability to know the truth.
So, he is saying that there is a legitimate plurality of views on some questions regarding the human person (the area he particularly studied) but that it has given way to the idea that all positions are equally valid.
http://orthfullycatholic.blogspot.com
Father, slightly off subject but why are these seminarians of the "new evangelisation", so anonymous?
A bit spooky, n'est-ce pas?
Fr Tim ~ This strikes me as a problematic proposition:
"there is a legitimate plurality of views on some questions"
Surely there is a less contentious way to express an interest in, admiration of and even an agreement with certain conclusions of modern science, philosophy, socoiolgy and psychology.
I instinctively sense however, that Hegelian dialectic is starting to look and sound exhausted. At its worst, it has lead the Church down a mind-numbingly boring cul-de-sac.
And there was me just beginning to get interested in Hegel...
Post a Comment