How sweet it would have been to introduce Radical Fidelity via a piece on a topic such as the healthy state of Catholicism in the world, the unity of Catholics, or even, dare I dream, my home country South Africa as the bastion of African Catholicism?
“…according to St. Thomas Aquinas (one of only 37 Doctor of the Catholic Church) there are at least 64 virtues and tolerance is not one of them. But what does he know after all?).”
It is true that Aquinas does not list tolerance among the virtues, but that does not mean he didn’t address matters that pertain to what we consider tolerance today. For example, Aquinas does discuss the related virtues of patience, meekness and charity. These virtues address the capacity to endure difficulties, including the imperfections or faults of others, which is closely aligned with modern understandings of tolerance.
• Patience (patientia): Aquinas describes patience as the virtue by which a person endures suffering or adversity without losing inner peace or becoming excessively angry. This can involve enduring the actions or words of others, a key aspect of what we often mean by tolerance today.
• Meekness (mansuetudo): This virtue moderates anger and promotes a gentle and forgiving attitude, which can contribute to a tolerant disposition when dealing with difficult people or situations.
• Charity (caritas): As one of the theological virtues, charity requires love of neighbour and respect for others, even when their behaviour is challenging. It motivates a kind of tolerance rooted in love and the desire for the good of the other person.
These virtues foster a mindset that allows for a form of tolerance grounded in patience, charity, and a controlled temper.
Lastly, it should be noted that for Aquinas, and the Medieval Church, tolerance would be bounded by the demands of justice and truth. These would play out in a particular context within a society. It is quite possible to have these applied in one way at one time and in another way at another time. An example can be seen in the fact that Aquinas favoured the tolerance of prostitution, not as a good, but for the greater good of society (so much more could be said about this point on prostitution but this is not the place). The point is that current context is an important determinant of how the Church and society might tolerate certain things at certain times. Even in terms of doctrinal development, or even just theological discussion and difference, Aquinas takes a position that would be vehemently opposed by St. John Chrysostom in the patristic age and by the Doctor or Reform, St. Peter Damian, just a century and a half before his own time.
“But hasn’t mental gymnastics, creative semantics and a fluid relationship with truth and reality become the way we practice our Catholicism in the age of Pope Francis?)”
Can’t speak for others here, but no, not as far as I am concerned. As a young Catholic, just 11 years this Easter, I’m still learning a lot about the Church, her life and teachings. Whenever I’ve encountered anything from the Pope or the Vatican that I’m struggling to square with my own sense of things, I embark on a new adventure of discovery, in which the normal thing that happens is that I learn something new about the history and Tradition of the Church that I didn’t know before.
These investigations and discoveries have left me feeling generally stable and secure in the knowledge that the Holy Spirit is still protecting and guiding Christ’s Church, even when I read startling headlines that, thus far, have usually turned out to be making a lot about nothing, or building mountains out of molehills.
Now, in saying that, I don’t want to leave anyone with the impression that Catholic world news doesn’t at times concern me and cause frustration and despair – it does. But that’s always because the Church really does house unrepented sinners and heretics (along with those righteous through grace and faith), and their false wares are frequently on show, seeking someone to buy into their fake goods.
When if comes to the Pope himself, the thing that frustrates and concerns me most frequently is not what he says, but rather with the company he keeps. The thing is, Jesus faced the same criticism. We could say, “yes, but with Jesus the context was different”, except we don’t actually have the full context of many of these meetings and meals. We get glimpses into a few of them, and snippets of conversations, but not enough to know for sure how Jesus handled every encounter with a sinner or groups of sinners.
I’m not saying here that concerned Catholics have nothing to worry about, as though I have some divine prophetic insight into whether, in the near future, a report out of the Vatican will actually turn out to be more than frustrating. But if that were the case it seems Catholicism, and thereby it’s adherents (whether conservative, traditional or anything else) would have bigger problems than those being discussed in the above article.
“I would rather prefer to briefly weigh what Pope Francis said against the unchanging and unchangeable Catholic Truth that has been taught over the past 2000 years.”
Pope Francis, like Paul before him, reminds his audience that, contrary to what many people over the course of history have believed, there are not many gods, but only one God. He takes up the mantle of St. Paul, on the Areopagus, in explaining that every nation on earth has, in reality, only one God, Creator and Father. “He is the one who formed them and allocated their boundaries, in the hope that they might feel after Him and find Him. Yet He is not far from each one of us for, In Him we live and move and have our being;…For we are indeed His offspring’” (Acts 17: 24-29 paraphrased).
The peoples of the world are made nations by God, with the specific intention that they should seek him as nations and the “hope that they might feel after Him and find Him”. The paths by which they have sought Him are the religious and philosophical ideas, myths and rites that come from these nations. Of course, although the passage doesn’t name him, Satan has also come and sown seeds of confusion and falsity amongst the nations. Not everything in their religious and spiritual traditions are good. Paul raises that point in the passage when he speaks of God overlooking the past ignorance of these nations (in thinking of God as something like the created order – gold, silver, stone, crafted in the imagination of man) and calling everyone to repentance, considering the coming Judgement by Jesus Christ.
It is in this context that the Catholic Church affirms the existence of “seeds of the Word” (semina Verbi) amongst the cultures and religions of the world. This is not an idea that originates with Pope Francis, but rather with St. Justin Martyr (c. AD150), and is explored by other figures throughout the tradition, not always using the same language as Justin, but exploring the same ideas – that God has sent the Logos into the world, the Logos that enlightens all men, both before and after the incarnation.
Consider the following from the documents Nostra Aetate and Ad Gentes of Vatican II:
“The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, though differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.” (Nostra Aetate 2: 1965)
“Whatever good is found to be sown in the hearts and minds of men or in the particular rites and cultures of peoples, far from being lost, is purified, raised up, and perfected for the glory of God, the confusion of the devil, and the happiness of man.” (Ad Gentes, 9: 1965)
Or this from Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI:
“The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures, and religions. Indeed, the Spirit is at the origin of the noble ideals and undertakings which benefit humanity on its journey through history. In a certain sense, the Spirit offers humanity a ‘preparation for the Gospel,’ these are the semina Verbi, present in human initiatives—including religious ones—and in mankind’s efforts to attain truth, goodness, and God himself.” (Redemptoris Missio, 28: 1990)
“The Fathers of the Church explained this by saying that God’s logos left traces in all of creation, which make it possible for human reason to attain truth. This has led to the idea of semina Verbi, the seeds of truth present in the religions and cultures of the human race, a part of God’s work in preparing humanity for the Gospel.” (Verbum Domini, 105: 2010)
It is in this sense that all religions are paths to God, and languages, that express the divine. Each of us speaks a different language and we travel the paths of our concepts and expressions, feeling along the contours of our spiritual souls for God – and perhaps finding Him there. When we realize that our languages, at points, contradict each other, we enter, not into aggression and violence, but, into dialogue, and seek to bring further enlightenment to those still feeling their way forward in the shadows.
“During his address, the Holy Father said… “Every religion is a way to arrive at God. There are different languages to arrive at God, but God is God for all. And how is God, God for all? We are all sons and daughters of God” and “There is only one God and each of us has a language to arrive at God. Sikh, Muslim, Hindu, Christian, they are different paths. […]”. In the parlance of popular culture: you can’t make this nonsense up…”
I think it would be helpful to frame this statement within the greater context of the Pope’s conversation. Three paragraphs earlier the pope stated, “young people are courageous and like to seek the truth but they have to be careful not to become what you referred to as “armchair critics” with endless words. A young person must be a critical thinker, and *it is not good never to be critical*. But you must be constructive in criticism, because there is a destructive criticism, which only makes a lot of complaints but does not offer a new way forward. I ask all young people, each of you: are you critical thinkers? Do you have the courage to criticize but also the courage to let others criticize you? Because, if you criticize, then someone else will criticize you. *This is sincere dialogue between young people*.” [*emphasis mine]
It is important to note the context because the pope is clearly telling his audience that dialogue does not mean that everybody’s ideas are equally true, nor that we shouldn’t criticize other people’s opinions. In fact, he specifically says that to never be critical is not good.
He does, however, go on in subsequent paragraphs to stress the importance of respect while dialoguing, indicating that a lack of respect about our differences leads to bullying. He is very clear that we should not fight about our religious differences because this leads to, as an audience member framed it, “destruction”. It is in this context that the pope encourages interfaith dialogue and sets a Catholic framework for that dialogue.
When speaking of a Catholic framework for dialogue it may be exceedingly helpful to consult the Encyclical ‘Ecclesiam Suam’, the first Encyclical of Pope St. Paul VI, written in 1964, before the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council. Setting forth the vision for his own papacy, and by extension, for the Church Universal, he gives three primary policy’s, 1) Deeper Self Knowledge, 2) Renewal, and 3) Dialogue.
Amongst much other helpful and beautiful counsel the following stands out:
“13. One part of this world, as everyone knows, has in recent years detached itself and broken away from the Christian foundations of its culture, although formerly it had been so imbued with Christianity and had drawn from it such strength and vigor that the people of these nations in many cases owe to Christianity all that is best in their own tradition-a fact that is not always fully appreciated. Another and larger part of the world covers the vast territories of the so-called emerging nations. Taken as a whole, it is a world which offers to the Church not one but a hundred forms of possible contacts, some of which are open and easy, others difficult and problematic, and many, unfortunately, wholly unfavorable to friendly dialogue.
14. It is at this point, therefore, that the problem of the Church's dialogue with the modern world arises. It will be for the Council to determine the extent and complexity of this problem and to do what it can to devise suitable methods for its solution. But the very need to solve it is felt by Us-and by you too, whose experience of the urgency of the problem is no less than Our own-as a responsibility, a stimulus, an inner urge about which We cannot remain silent. We have thought fit to put this important and complex matter before you in council, and we must do what we can to make ourselves better prepared for these discussions and deliberations.
65. The Church must enter into dialogue with the world in which it lives. It has something to say, a message to give, a communication to make.
66. We are fully aware that it is the intention of the Council to consider and investigate this special and important aspect of the Church's life, and We have no wish to steal its thunder. The Council Fathers must be free to discuss these subjects in detail. Our only concern, Venerable Brethren, is to propose certain points for your consideration before the beginning of the third session, so that we may all gain a clearer understanding of the compelling motives for the Church's dialogue, the methods to be followed and the end in view. Our purpose is to win souls, not to settle questions definitively.
Papal Precedents
67. In fact no other course is open to Us in view of Our conviction that it is this kind of dialogue that will characterize Our apostolic ministry. From Our predecessors of the past century We have inherited a pastoral outlook and a pastoral approach. Our first teacher is that great and wise pope Leo XIII, who, like the prudent scribe in the Gospel, resembled a householder "who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old." (44) With all the dignity of the magisterial authority of the Holy See, he devoted himself wholeheartedly to finding a Christian solution to the problems of this modern age. Our other teachers are his successors, who, as you know, followed closely in his footsteps.
68. How truly wonderful is the inheritance of doctrinal riches bequeathed to Us by Our predecessors, and especially by Pius XI and Pius XII! Providentially they strove to bridge, as it were, the gap between divine and human wisdom, using not the language of the textbook, but the ordinary language of contemporary speech. And what was this apostolic endeavor of theirs if not a dialogue?
As for Our immediate predecessor, John XXIII, he labored with masterly assurance to bring divine truths as far as may be within the reach of the experience and understanding of modern man. Was not the Council itself given a pastoral orientation, and does it not rightly strive to inject the Christian message into the stream of modern thought, and into the language, culture, customs, and sensibilities of man as he lives in the spiritual turmoil of this modern world? Before we can convert the world-as the very condition of converting the world-we must approach it and speak to it.
69. Reluctant as we are to speak of Ourself and to draw attention to Ourself, We feel compelled, in presenting Ourself to the college of bishops and to the Christian people, to speak of Our resolve to persevere in this endeavor. We will strive, so far as Our weakness permits and God gives Us the grace, to approach the world in which God has destined Us to live. We will approach it with reverence, persistence, and love, in an effort to get to know it and to offer it the gifts of truth and grace of which God has made Us custodian. We will strive to make the world share in the divine redemption and in the hope which inspires Us. Engraven on Our heart are those words of Christ which We would humbly but resolutely make Our own: "For God sent not his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him." (45)
“…according to St. Thomas Aquinas (one of only 37 Doctor of the Catholic Church) there are at least 64 virtues and tolerance is not one of them. But what does he know after all?).”
It is true that Aquinas does not list tolerance among the virtues, but that does not mean he didn’t address matters that pertain to what we consider tolerance today. For example, Aquinas does discuss the related virtues of patience, meekness and charity. These virtues address the capacity to endure difficulties, including the imperfections or faults of others, which is closely aligned with modern understandings of tolerance.
• Patience (patientia): Aquinas describes patience as the virtue by which a person endures suffering or adversity without losing inner peace or becoming excessively angry. This can involve enduring the actions or words of others, a key aspect of what we often mean by tolerance today.
• Meekness (mansuetudo): This virtue moderates anger and promotes a gentle and forgiving attitude, which can contribute to a tolerant disposition when dealing with difficult people or situations.
• Charity (caritas): As one of the theological virtues, charity requires love of neighbour and respect for others, even when their behaviour is challenging. It motivates a kind of tolerance rooted in love and the desire for the good of the other person.
These virtues foster a mindset that allows for a form of tolerance grounded in patience, charity, and a controlled temper.
Lastly, it should be noted that for Aquinas, and the Medieval Church, tolerance would be bounded by the demands of justice and truth. These would play out in a particular context within a society. It is quite possible to have these applied in one way at one time and in another way at another time. An example can be seen in the fact that Aquinas favoured the tolerance of prostitution, not as a good, but for the greater good of society (so much more could be said about this point on prostitution but this is not the place). The point is that current context is an important determinant of how the Church and society might tolerate certain things at certain times. Even in terms of doctrinal development, or even just theological discussion and difference, Aquinas takes a position that would be vehemently opposed by St. John Chrysostom in the patristic age and by the Doctor or Reform, St. Peter Damian, just a century and a half before his own time.
“But hasn’t mental gymnastics, creative semantics and a fluid relationship with truth and reality become the way we practice our Catholicism in the age of Pope Francis?)”
Can’t speak for others here, but no, not as far as I am concerned. As a young Catholic, just 11 years this Easter, I’m still learning a lot about the Church, her life and teachings. Whenever I’ve encountered anything from the Pope or the Vatican that I’m struggling to square with my own sense of things, I embark on a new adventure of discovery, in which the normal thing that happens is that I learn something new about the history and Tradition of the Church that I didn’t know before.
These investigations and discoveries have left me feeling generally stable and secure in the knowledge that the Holy Spirit is still protecting and guiding Christ’s Church, even when I read startling headlines that, thus far, have usually turned out to be making a lot about nothing, or building mountains out of molehills.
Now, in saying that, I don’t want to leave anyone with the impression that Catholic world news doesn’t at times concern me and cause frustration and despair – it does. But that’s always because the Church really does house unrepented sinners and heretics (along with those righteous through grace and faith), and their false wares are frequently on show, seeking someone to buy into their fake goods.
When if comes to the Pope himself, the thing that frustrates and concerns me most frequently is not what he says, but rather with the company he keeps. The thing is, Jesus faced the same criticism. We could say, “yes, but with Jesus the context was different”, except we don’t actually have the full context of many of these meetings and meals. We get glimpses into a few of them, and snippets of conversations, but not enough to know for sure how Jesus handled every encounter with a sinner or groups of sinners.
I’m not saying here that concerned Catholics have nothing to worry about, as though I have some divine prophetic insight into whether, in the near future, a report out of the Vatican will actually turn out to be more than frustrating. But if that were the case it seems Catholicism, and thereby it’s adherents (whether conservative, traditional or anything else) would have bigger problems than those being discussed in the above article.
“I would rather prefer to briefly weigh what Pope Francis said against the unchanging and unchangeable Catholic Truth that has been taught over the past 2000 years.”
Pope Francis, like Paul before him, reminds his audience that, contrary to what many people over the course of history have believed, there are not many gods, but only one God. He takes up the mantle of St. Paul, on the Areopagus, in explaining that every nation on earth has, in reality, only one God, Creator and Father. “He is the one who formed them and allocated their boundaries, in the hope that they might feel after Him and find Him. Yet He is not far from each one of us for, In Him we live and move and have our being;…For we are indeed His offspring’” (Acts 17: 24-29 paraphrased).
The peoples of the world are made nations by God, with the specific intention that they should seek him as nations and the “hope that they might feel after Him and find Him”. The paths by which they have sought Him are the religious and philosophical ideas, myths and rites that come from these nations. Of course, although the passage doesn’t name him, Satan has also come and sown seeds of confusion and falsity amongst the nations. Not everything in their religious and spiritual traditions are good. Paul raises that point in the passage when he speaks of God overlooking the past ignorance of these nations (in thinking of God as something like the created order – gold, silver, stone, crafted in the imagination of man) and calling everyone to repentance, considering the coming Judgement by Jesus Christ.
It is in this context that the Catholic Church affirms the existence of “seeds of the Word” (semina Verbi) amongst the cultures and religions of the world. This is not an idea that originates with Pope Francis, but rather with St. Justin Martyr (c. AD150), and is explored by other figures throughout the tradition, not always using the same language as Justin, but exploring the same ideas – that God has sent the Logos into the world, the Logos that enlightens all men, both before and after the incarnation.
Consider the following from the documents Nostra Aetate and Ad Gentes of Vatican II:
“The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and doctrines which, though differing in many ways from her own teaching, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.” (Nostra Aetate 2: 1965)
“Whatever good is found to be sown in the hearts and minds of men or in the particular rites and cultures of peoples, far from being lost, is purified, raised up, and perfected for the glory of God, the confusion of the devil, and the happiness of man.” (Ad Gentes, 9: 1965)
Or this from Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI:
“The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures, and religions. Indeed, the Spirit is at the origin of the noble ideals and undertakings which benefit humanity on its journey through history. In a certain sense, the Spirit offers humanity a ‘preparation for the Gospel,’ these are the semina Verbi, present in human initiatives—including religious ones—and in mankind’s efforts to attain truth, goodness, and God himself.” (Redemptoris Missio, 28: 1990)
“The Fathers of the Church explained this by saying that God’s logos left traces in all of creation, which make it possible for human reason to attain truth. This has led to the idea of semina Verbi, the seeds of truth present in the religions and cultures of the human race, a part of God’s work in preparing humanity for the Gospel.” (Verbum Domini, 105: 2010)
It is in this sense that all religions are paths to God, and languages, that express the divine. Each of us speaks a different language and we travel the paths of our concepts and expressions, feeling along the contours of our spiritual souls for God – and perhaps finding Him there. When we realize that our languages, at points, contradict each other, we enter, not into aggression and violence, but, into dialogue, and seek to bring further enlightenment to those still feeling their way forward in the shadows.
“During his address, the Holy Father said… “Every religion is a way to arrive at God. There are different languages to arrive at God, but God is God for all. And how is God, God for all? We are all sons and daughters of God” and “There is only one God and each of us has a language to arrive at God. Sikh, Muslim, Hindu, Christian, they are different paths. […]”. In the parlance of popular culture: you can’t make this nonsense up…”
I think it would be helpful to frame this statement within the greater context of the Pope’s conversation. Three paragraphs earlier the pope stated, “young people are courageous and like to seek the truth but they have to be careful not to become what you referred to as “armchair critics” with endless words. A young person must be a critical thinker, and *it is not good never to be critical*. But you must be constructive in criticism, because there is a destructive criticism, which only makes a lot of complaints but does not offer a new way forward. I ask all young people, each of you: are you critical thinkers? Do you have the courage to criticize but also the courage to let others criticize you? Because, if you criticize, then someone else will criticize you. *This is sincere dialogue between young people*.” [*emphasis mine]
It is important to note the context because the pope is clearly telling his audience that dialogue does not mean that everybody’s ideas are equally true, nor that we shouldn’t criticize other people’s opinions. In fact, he specifically says that to never be critical is not good.
He does, however, go on in subsequent paragraphs to stress the importance of respect while dialoguing, indicating that a lack of respect about our differences leads to bullying. He is very clear that we should not fight about our religious differences because this leads to, as an audience member framed it, “destruction”. It is in this context that the pope encourages interfaith dialogue and sets a Catholic framework for that dialogue.
When speaking of a Catholic framework for dialogue it may be exceedingly helpful to consult the Encyclical ‘Ecclesiam Suam’, the first Encyclical of Pope St. Paul VI, written in 1964, before the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council. Setting forth the vision for his own papacy, and by extension, for the Church Universal, he gives three primary policy’s, 1) Deeper Self Knowledge, 2) Renewal, and 3) Dialogue.
Amongst much other helpful and beautiful counsel the following stands out:
“13. One part of this world, as everyone knows, has in recent years detached itself and broken away from the Christian foundations of its culture, although formerly it had been so imbued with Christianity and had drawn from it such strength and vigor that the people of these nations in many cases owe to Christianity all that is best in their own tradition-a fact that is not always fully appreciated. Another and larger part of the world covers the vast territories of the so-called emerging nations. Taken as a whole, it is a world which offers to the Church not one but a hundred forms of possible contacts, some of which are open and easy, others difficult and problematic, and many, unfortunately, wholly unfavorable to friendly dialogue.
14. It is at this point, therefore, that the problem of the Church's dialogue with the modern world arises. It will be for the Council to determine the extent and complexity of this problem and to do what it can to devise suitable methods for its solution. But the very need to solve it is felt by Us-and by you too, whose experience of the urgency of the problem is no less than Our own-as a responsibility, a stimulus, an inner urge about which We cannot remain silent. We have thought fit to put this important and complex matter before you in council, and we must do what we can to make ourselves better prepared for these discussions and deliberations.
65. The Church must enter into dialogue with the world in which it lives. It has something to say, a message to give, a communication to make.
66. We are fully aware that it is the intention of the Council to consider and investigate this special and important aspect of the Church's life, and We have no wish to steal its thunder. The Council Fathers must be free to discuss these subjects in detail. Our only concern, Venerable Brethren, is to propose certain points for your consideration before the beginning of the third session, so that we may all gain a clearer understanding of the compelling motives for the Church's dialogue, the methods to be followed and the end in view. Our purpose is to win souls, not to settle questions definitively.
Papal Precedents
67. In fact no other course is open to Us in view of Our conviction that it is this kind of dialogue that will characterize Our apostolic ministry. From Our predecessors of the past century We have inherited a pastoral outlook and a pastoral approach. Our first teacher is that great and wise pope Leo XIII, who, like the prudent scribe in the Gospel, resembled a householder "who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old." (44) With all the dignity of the magisterial authority of the Holy See, he devoted himself wholeheartedly to finding a Christian solution to the problems of this modern age. Our other teachers are his successors, who, as you know, followed closely in his footsteps.
68. How truly wonderful is the inheritance of doctrinal riches bequeathed to Us by Our predecessors, and especially by Pius XI and Pius XII! Providentially they strove to bridge, as it were, the gap between divine and human wisdom, using not the language of the textbook, but the ordinary language of contemporary speech. And what was this apostolic endeavor of theirs if not a dialogue?
As for Our immediate predecessor, John XXIII, he labored with masterly assurance to bring divine truths as far as may be within the reach of the experience and understanding of modern man. Was not the Council itself given a pastoral orientation, and does it not rightly strive to inject the Christian message into the stream of modern thought, and into the language, culture, customs, and sensibilities of man as he lives in the spiritual turmoil of this modern world? Before we can convert the world-as the very condition of converting the world-we must approach it and speak to it.
69. Reluctant as we are to speak of Ourself and to draw attention to Ourself, We feel compelled, in presenting Ourself to the college of bishops and to the Christian people, to speak of Our resolve to persevere in this endeavor. We will strive, so far as Our weakness permits and God gives Us the grace, to approach the world in which God has destined Us to live. We will approach it with reverence, persistence, and love, in an effort to get to know it and to offer it the gifts of truth and grace of which God has made Us custodian. We will strive to make the world share in the divine redemption and in the hope which inspires Us. Engraven on Our heart are those words of Christ which We would humbly but resolutely make Our own: "For God sent not his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him." (45)