Over the past ten years, Pope Francis has spent much of his time in office dealing with crisis situations ranging from fraudulent mismanagement of funds at the highest levels of the Vatican to widespread incidents of sexual abuse by clergy. He has also worked quietly to reform the Roman Curia by increasing opportunities for laypeople to head specific offices (dicasteries) within the Curia, by emphasizing services to the poor and those most in need, and by demonstrating a willingness to make changes in how the Church engages and serves laypeople. He continues to expand and support the use of synods as a means by which to open doors for communication and to broaden networks for participation in problem- solving through local assemblies of clergy and laypeople.
One of the most difficult challenges for the Catholic Church is dealing with issues which threaten to disrupt traditional practices and methods of operation. The main theme of this paper deals with one such issue, the impact that Church legislation has on laypeople by attaching harsh penalties for deliberate disobedience to many of its rules and directives. The possibility of separation from God for all eternity has been a punishment on “Church books” for centuries and is used as a means by which to enforce Church authority, encourage lay participation and achieve positive outcomes. But, in today’s world, the opposite seems to have happened. There is a quiet rebellion on part of the vast majority of laypeople to obeying church rules which appear to be overly rigorous, outdated or of questionable value because of, among other things, new information available through advanced technologies. Laypeople are less likely to believe in and accept punishments for deliberate disobedience that seem disproportionate to the offenses, excessively cruel, and increasingly difficult to justify. This paper uses the sacraments of the Eucharist and Marriage to illustrate specific examples and to highlight some of the disparities between Church rulings and lay practice. Pope Francis will have to decide whether the Church is willing to include as part of synod discussions the impact of “legislated sin” on its members and whether extreme punishments meet the interests of the Church and needs of those it serves. There is a strong base of empirical evidence supported by what Vatican II refers to as “the sense of the faithful” to indicate that something needs to be done if the Church is to fulfill its purpose on earth as a purveyor of God’s love and resource for salvation.
As a Catholic and retired chaplain, I hope my comments have relevance and meaning to those who seek from their Church a demonstration of compassion through ministry, a willingness to listen, and practices which give preference to God’s love and mercy over expressions of ecclesiastical authority. A window of opportunity has been opened by Pope Francis. Hopefully, he and his successors will be able to use God’s love as the guide for decision-making, advocacy and our hope for the future.
God’s Love: One of the greatest mysteries in life is comprehending the meaning of God’s love which is infinite (unlimited, supernatural and divine) in relation to our finite (limited, natural and human) understanding of love. By definition, the God of love is unfathomable and incomprehensible. As finite creatures, we barely scratch the surface of understanding the magnitude of God’s love. The words and example of Jesus provide a hint of its immensity. Similes such as a speck of sand in relation to the universe or a human cell in relation to all of humanity create a climate of proportionality and understanding in human terms, but limp by comparison with the incomprehensibility and vastness of God’s love as a divine reality. The challenge for any church on earth is to try the best it can as a human institution to communicate and honor that reality.
Ministers of the Word: From the beginning to the end of our life, part of being human is discovery, learning new things, experiencing insights, arriving at an earthly understanding and appreciation for life in general, and the mix of factors influencing our personal journeys including diverse circumstances, individual abilities and our own human weaknesses. We have the gifts of intellect, free will and reason to help us make choices along the way which may or may not include considerations of God’s love. Ministers of the word (priests, rabbis, imams) try to help us understand in human terms how the God of love has revealed God’s self to us, what God expects from us, and what we gain or lose based on our decisions. Within the Roman Catholic tradition, the main ministers of the word are ordained men: Pope, bishops and priests. Deacons are also ordained and along with laypeople also contribute as ministers in a variety of tasks not requiring priestly ordination.
Basic Resources for Survival: Within the Roman Catholic tradition and hierarchical structure, the Church oversees and administers seven sacraments instituted by Christ to help us experience and express God’s love: marriage, baptism, confirmation, holy orders, eucharist, penance, and anointing of the sick. The sacraments are the brick and mortar of the Church. They support its primary mission of facilitating the salvation of souls on earth, and are indispensable resources to promote the spiritual well-being of its members. As basic resources for salvation, they are signs of God’s love and mercy. Four of the sacraments: holy orders, eucharist, penance and anointing of the sick, are reserved for ordained ministers and can only be administered by bishops and priests. Those who are ordained have special powers to say Mass, consecrate bread and wine, hear confessions and provide absolution of sins. Lay people must rely mainly upon bishops and priests for receipt of the basic resources necessary for salvation. The common referral to a priest as “father” is a sign of respect, and an example of deference given by many laypeople to acknowledge his position of authority within the Church family.
Leadership and Authority: Responsibility for the sacraments as basic resources for salvation gives the Church and its ministers extraordinary influence and control over the spiritual lives of laypeople and their relationships with God. From its simple origins and struggles to exist, the Church has grown to a point where it is able to self-identify as God’s representative on earth, fully authorized to speak (on occasion even infallibly) in the name of God. Through the centuries, the Church has incorporated what God has revealed through sacred scripture, oral tradition and the collective wisdom of Church Councils and gifted theologians into what is referred to as the deposit of faith. This basic resource serves as the seed-bed from which the Catholic church draws its strength in communicating God’s meaning, God’s will and God’s message to anyone willing to listen.
One of the ways the Church uses to support its dogmatic teachings and resolve disputes on matters of faith and morals has been through Church Councils. Over the centuries, there have been 21 ecumenical (world-wide) Church Councils, starting with Nicaea (325), and including Constantinople, Trent, Lateran and the most recent, Vatican II (1965). A common practice for most Councils up to the 20th century, has been to support its teachings and decisions in defense of the faith by use of the term “anathema sit” at the end of each major proclamation. Anyone deemed “anathema” was subject to disciplinary action by the Church ranging from being shunned to possible excommunication. The most severe warnings and punishments were leveled against heretics who argued in opposition to specific dogmatic canons. Extreme punishments meted out to those rejecting Church dogma, particularly during the time of the Inquisition, are matters of record. Many heretics were persecuted and put to death. The symbol of fire as punishment became a reality on earth and for those rejecting Church teaching an omen of the things to come. In today’s world, punishments by excommunication are rare and far removed from the drama and cruelty of the middle-ages.
In addition to infallible truths received through divine revelation, the Church also has a body of truth based on human decision-making which is fallible (subject to change and error) covering moral issues and earthly concerns. Such truths form the basis for moral theology and draw heavily upon sacred scripture, human reason and natural law theory for validation. Church teachings based on revealed truths and moral theology are found in the Code of Canon Law, the Catechism and papal encyclicals, basic resources intended to aid the Church in fulfilling its responsibilities on earth to God and humankind. Disciplinary punishments are long-standing practices to emphasize among other things the importance of major Church pronouncements.
Many advances in science can pose special difficulties for the Church and its members as new information becomes available which may negate or compromise traditional teachings. For example, the church has been slow to accept the concept of evolution as a reality in its interpretation of sacred scripture, in its application to humankind, and in spite of the weight of evidence gained from empirical studies. Equally important in the world of scientific discovery is the field of genetics, linking genes to specific human conditions, behaviors and bodily composition (DNA). Genetics builds on empirical methods not available in the past and provides new insights of much greater detail into the makeup and substance of human beings. Findings based on empirical science call into question Church assumptions and teachings derived from natural law theory or faith-based observations. The debates between faith and science are ongoing and occasionally contentious. From the Church’s vantage point, its commitment to the revealed Word of God, and reliance on traditional beliefs does not include concessions to modern science when anything related to its authority or the deposit of faith is put at risk. On occasion, the Church will concede that there are some benefits from the methods and discoveries of science in areas ranging from epistemology where empirical science helps to validate sacred writings and aid understanding of texts, to sampling techniques in support of surveys and opinion research. Just as science is unable to accept faith-based truths without empirical proof, the Church struggles to accept what it can on the basis of the word of scientists without compromising the foundation of truth based on the Word of God.
Problems Associated with House Rules: Two Examples The purpose of the Catholic Church on earth is the salvation of souls. Vatican II (Gaudium et Spes) reaffirms this commitment and obligation: “While helping the world and receiving many benefits from it, the Church has a single intention: that God’s kingdom may come, and that the salvation of the whole human race may come to pass (2:45).” Many would ask today whether the Church is achieving its purpose with so many of its members disregarding its authority and failing to comply with its “house rules”. For all the good that it does and noble intent of its mission, the Church continues to have difficulty accepting the will of the people or utilizing their lack of interest and disavowal of Church leadership as starting points for progressive change. Traditionally input by laypeople as decision-makers has been peripheral at best. As architects of Church policy, laypeople are treated more as beneficiaries than builders, and lack effective means by which to earn a seat at the main table as decision makers able to influence positive changes from positions of strength and respectability.
As God’s representative on earth, the Church speaks out authoritatively on matters of right and wrong, good and evil, and the steps necessary for salvation. Ministers of the sacraments serve the laity in ways which are intended to be supportive of their spiritual and in some cases material needs. In return, the Church encourages contributions from laypeople to support its ministries through service and financial contributions, and to defer when necessary to Church leadership and authority.
There are some recurring problems rarely discussed by the Church that underlie its relationship with laypeople and will not go away. One of the major problems because of its impact on so many laity is the aforementioned use of harsh punishment for disobedience to its rules and the general application of the same punishment to any act classified as mortal sin. This means that deliberately missing Mass on Sunday or using artificial means of birth control to avoid pregnancy or for health reasons receive the same eternal punishment as for acts which are truly evil, mortal sins devoid of love or goodness on a much higher scale of infamy. The Church does not use its authority as might a loving father or mother who would never be willing to exile a child forever for deliberately breaking house rules. The concept of tough love attached to disciplinary actions by the Church permits eternal separation from God for a wide range of reasons codified in canon law, and applicable to all of its members.
An increasing amount of evidence based on research data covering the sacraments of the Eucharist and Marriage suggest that there may be “trouble in paradise” because of a disconnect between Church law, tough love and the responses from the vast majority of God’s children. Nowadays, the Church rarely discusses punishment for sin in an open forum, such as from the pulpit. In these times of uncertainty and need, and recognizing its own limitations brought on by clergy abuse and other scandals, the Church is permitting itself the luxury of unexpressed thoughts.
Sunday Obligation: For Christians, the main way that God reveals God’s self, and what God values, is through the gift of Jesus. Just as the Third Commandment in the Old Testament tells us to “Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day,” the New Testament narrative is equally compelling when Jesus at the Last Supper gives bread and wine which he identifies as his body and blood to his disciples and instructs them to “do this in memory of me.” While there have been many different ways of celebrating the Mass through the ages, the Liturgy of the Eucharist celebrated today has survived remarkably intact since the Latin Mass of the 16th century and remains the central form of Catholic worship. The Mass is the single most important way by which the laity as a community respond to the words of Jesus and give witness through faith by coming together to commemorate his earthly existence and resurrection.
Those who preside over the celebration of the Mass, bishops and priests, are empowered through ordination to administer the sacrament of the Eucharist in response to the command of Jesus. Each Catholic must decide whether or not to accept the invitation to celebration of the Mass. Because of a significant fall-off in attendance at Mass and overtly casual participation in observance of the sacrament, as early as the 17th century, the Church made clear that participation on the Christian sabbath was no longer optional. The doctor of moral theology and patron of confessors, St Alphonsus Liguori (1696), affirmed the decision of Pope Innocent XI that the precept of attending Mass on Sundays and Holy Days binds under pain of mortal sin and was obligatory. The same precept has not changed since that time.
The current rules concerning the Sunday Obligation can be found in the Code of Canon Law of 1983 (Canon 1247) and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (No. 2181). The response of laypeople today demonstrates that church rulings on mandatory attendance and disciplinary punishments may be doing more harm than good. According to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA), a Georgetown University affiliated social research center specializing in survey work, only about 25 % of Catholics in the United States meet their Sunday Obligation, and far fewer attend Mass on other holy days of obligation. Roughly three out of every four Catholics live under the cloud of possible eternal separation from God because of Church laws intended to foster participation. What started out in the early Church as a loving tribute to God in response to the words of Jesus, the Mass, evolved over time to become a strict moral obligation. The Church acknowledges that poor attendance and a slackening off of participation prompted the need for strong measures. The severe penalties for deliberate disobedience are intended to be motivational as well as compelling. (Cf. Dies Domini 45: encyclical letter of Pope John Paul II on the Sunday Obligation)
Marriage and Human Sexuality: Another example of “tough love” impacting the salvation of the People of God are the restrictions identified by the Church in its catechism, encyclicals, and canon law related to the sacrament of Marriage, and to human sexuality in general. The foundations for most teachings and moral judgements on sexual matters start with original sin (Adam and Eve) and the sinful nature of man, admonitions from sacred scripture related to sexual activity, and rely heavily on the Church’s interpretation of natural law theory, using reason and the forces of nature to explain and justify its moral judgements on human sexual behavior. Natural law theory applies general principles to every-day-living. It is based on the belief that there are universal truths that apply to everyone, everywhere, and in the same way. Much of church reasoning is based on natural law theory that draws its strength and support from noted theologians from Augustine to Aquinas to Pope John Paul II.
The Church’s decision to prioritize procreation and education of children ahead of any other considerations in marriage was strongly influenced by St. Augustine of Hippo who at one time believed that sexual acts other than for procreation were sinful. His prominence as a theologian along with support from brother clerics (mostly celibate males) aided adoption by the Church of strict moral standards and guidelines to ensure that procreation and education of children remained the primary obligation for married couples. Anything interfering with procreation such as choices made by couples favoring non-procreational sex remained targets of concern by the Church on moral grounds. Whether intended or not, Church intervention to ensure procreation imposed a discipline on married couples that turned the natural joy of a spontaneous sexual relationship into a formal process with potential for putting one’s relationship with God or one’s relationship with a partner at risk. One of the decisions of the Council of Trent (1650), besides expanding the number of seminaries, also included improving the education of seminarians in moral theology so that they would be better prepared as priests to deal with moral issues and matters of conscience in hearing confessions and ministering to laypeople. Their preparation helped them discern the sinful elements of procreational and non-procreational sexual acts and highlighted the sacredness of marriage. The sanctity of the bond of marriage tied closely to natural law theory became the benchmarks for Church oversight and remain so to this day. “Christian marriage should be not only sacramental, but also real images of Christ’s union with the Church, through the spouses manner of life.” (Casti Connubii 1930)
The Church continues to treat its role in Marriage sacramentally as giving witness to a holy act of commitment consistent with natural law. The sanctity of marriage is an expression of God’s love in fulfillment of the sacrament’s primary purpose. As a result, the Church continues to resist calls for change that challenge its directives even when science or logic and reason provide compelling evidence of a need for compromise. In 1965, Vatican II held out the possibility of compromise by highlighting the importance of the relationship between a couple and the stability of marriage as being co-equal with responsibilities for procreation. This was a first attempt to give equal weight to the relationship between the couple (cause), and the procreation and education of children (effect). By this simple transition, Vatican II was able to put both priorities on the same plain by modifying the problem of “putting the cart before the horse”, procreation ahead of relationship. Even so, in 1968 Pope Paul VI overruled his council of experts and in the encyclical “Humanae Vitae” disapproved any use of artificial birth control to avoid pregnancy. (A reported 80% of the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control recommended the Church expand its teaching to accept artificial contraception.) The Church also continued to use natural law theory to support its position against anything that interfered with the laws of nature. As a result, many Catholics expecting change, including priests, bishops and Cardinals, were disheartened by the Pope’s ruling and to this day remain troubled and in disbelief because of such overwhelming support for change from all quarters of Christendom.
The Church teaches that using artificial contraception is wrong because it is against natural law. It breaks the natural connection between the procreative and the unitive purposes of sex, and turns sex into a non-marital act. From a human standpoint, the vast majority of Catholics do not accept or obey Church laws governing procreation. Data from a Guttmacher Institute study (2012) indicate that among all women at risk of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 69% (including 68% of Catholics) use a highly effective contraceptive rather than take chances on becoming pregnant. A much larger survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (2015-2017) found that 99% of Catholic women used a contraceptive method other than natural planning. Even with possible data constraints, two reputable surveys show strong trends on part of Catholic women away from Church teaching.
Commentary: A church that speaks in the name of God can impose harsh penalties for deliberate disobedience to its laws, but such a practice is not the same thing as speaking for God. Speaking in the name of God acknowledges human limitations and is subject to error, speaking for God as in the case of dogmatic pronouncements implies a higher degree of Godlikeness not subject to error and therefore infallible. Laypeople do not perceive their church as infallible. A church that speaks for God would never permit an eternity of pain for practices such as missing mass on Sundays or using contraceptives.
“Tough love” policies directed at laypeople for failure to listen and obey disciplinary laws have proven to be ineffective and counterproductive as aids to salvation. In so many areas of human endeavor and struggle associated with disobedience, “tough love” policies have been criticized for their harshness and basic incompatibility with the meaning and concept of the God of love. Questions remain unanswered about whether the possibility of eternal separation from God as punishment for missing Mass or for engaging in non-procreational sex fits the crime. In regard to Marriage, there is strong evidence to suggest that most married Catholics use artificial contraception as a means by which to focus on strengthening their personal relationships and protecting the stability and needs of their family. Couples fail to concede to the Church the values they hold close to their hearts and which govern their personal intimacy.
The Church has difficulty accepting that God’s love takes many forms, embraces many different lifestyles, and is open and responsive to many different types of personal relationships unfettered by moral dictums or legal constraints. The evidence available through surveys and progress in medical and biological science would suggest a shift by Catholics away from the authoritarian rule and practices of the past in favor of new horizons. Most Catholics disavow, and in many cases can’t believe, that a Church which represents the God of love could permit such dire punishments for acts which are not evil or intended to be offensive. There are many explanations why so many Catholics fail to listen to their Church. As noted above, one of the signs that stands out in relation to disobedience is a willingness by many laypeople to take their chances of being wrong by putting their hope and trust in their relationships with God and with one another ahead of what are perceived as antiquated and restrictive practices of their Church. They seek fair, compassionate and responsive solutions from a Church open to change.
In his recent apostolic constitution on reform of the organization and structure of the Roman Curia, Praedicate evangelium (March 2022), Pope Francis has placed “listening and service” first over “authority and control” in the order of Curia priorities. Such a paradigm shift in Church leadership and style of management supports the inclusiveness intended by Vatican II. The extent to which the Curia is able to interpret and convey the love of God in its teachings and directives, eliminate legal pitfalls, and find effective ways by which to engage and listen to its members (the sense of the faithful) will determine its position in the modern world as a credible advocate for God’s love, mercy and forgiveness. This brief paper started with Pope Francis and concludes by reaffirming his importance as a historical figure, his humility in God’s service and strength of purpose. As head of the Catholic Church, he has the authority and power to do away with many of the harmful practices identified in this paper and demonstrate the meaning and magnificence of God’s love through consultations with the synods, suggestions from his advisors and the stroke of his pen.
###
Contact:
Gerald Gundersen
(301) 503-5226
[email protected]
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Religion News Service or Religion News Foundation.
