Feast of St. Thomas Aquinas
Porta Fidei #10:
“At this point I would like to sketch a path intended to
help us understand more profoundly not only the content of the faith, but also
the act by which we choose to entrust ourselves fully to God, in complete
freedom. In fact, there exists a profound unity between the act by which we
believe and the content to which we give our assent.”
This means that the act of going out of oneself to receive
Christ mimics the very act that Jesus Christ is with regard to the Father. And
if Jesus Himself as Person is the entire intelligible content of the faith, and
that content is the act of streaming toward and from the Father, then our
mimicking that act situates that intelligibility in us. Hence, the
believer will “know” Christ to the extent that he goes out of himself and
becomes “another Christ.”[1]
That is, by knowing himself experientially, he will know Christ – which is to
say that if he prays to the Father as Christ prays to the Father, he will know,
as Simon (Lk 9, 18), that Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Like Simon, his name will change from Simon to
Peter, because he is like “Rock” and “Cornerstone” ["Be yourselves as living stones, built thereon into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ, 1 Peter, 2, 5] Hence, in knowing himself
experientially as “another Christ,” he knows Christ. And in knowing Christ, he
knows the Father and begins to enter eternal life.[2]
All of
this is to say that the act of faith is pre-eminently anthropology as Vatican
II said in Dei Verbum #5: “By faith man freely commits his entire self to God.”
This living faith is the cure of the “modern malaise”[3]
(Walker Percy) since it activates the very being of the believer and produces
the joy that is hope. The modern malaise (sadness) is the contemporary translation
of the mediaeval Latin, acedia. Joseph
Pieper wrote: "acedia is a kind of sadness...
more specifically a sadness in view of the divine good in man. This
sadness because of the God-given ennobling of human nature causes
inactivity, depression, discouragement (thus the element of actual 'sloth'
is secondary).
"The opposite
of acedia is not industry and diligence but
magnanimity and that joy which is a fruit of the supernatural love of God. Not
only can acedia and ordinary diligence exist very well
together; it is even true that the senselessly exaggerated workaholism of our
age is directly traceable to acedia, which is a basic
characteristic of the spiritual countenance of precisely this age in
which we live... The indolence expressed by the term acedia is
so little the opposite of 'work' in the ordinary meaning of the term
that Saint Thomas says rather that acedia is a sin
against the third of the Ten Commandments, by which man is enjoined to 'rest
his spirit in God.' Genuine rest and leisure... are possible only under the
precondition that man accepts his own true meaning."[4]
Benedict XVI’s thesis: “`revelation’
is always a concept denoting an act. The word refers to the act in which God
shows himself, not to the objectified result [scripture] of
this act. And because this is so, the receiving subject is always also a part
of the concept of `revelation,’ no re-vel-ation has occurred,
because no veil has been
removed. By definition, revelation requires a someone who apprehends it. These
insights, gained through my reading of Bonaventure, were later on very
important for me at the time of the conciliar discussion on revelation,
Scripture, and tradition. Because, if Bonaventure is right, then revelation
precedes Scripture and becomes deposited in Scripture but is not simply
identical with it. This in turn means that revelation is always something
greater than what is merely written. And this again means that there can be no
such thing as pure sola scripture
(`by Scripture alone’), because an essential element of Scriptura is the Church
as understanding subject, and with this the fundamental sense of tradition
[my emphasis] is already given.[5]
Again: “You can have Scripture without having revelation. For revelation always and only becomes a reality where there is faith. The nonbeliever remains under the veil of which Paul speaks in the third chapter of his Second Letter to the Corinthians. He can read Scripture and know what is in it, can even understand at a purely intellectual level, what is meant and how what is said hangs together – and yet he has not shared in the revelation. Rather, revelation has only arrived where, in addition to the material assertions witnessing to it, its inner reality has itself become effective after the manner of faith. Consequently, the person who receives it also is a part of the revelation to a certain degree, for without him it does not exist. You cannot put revelation in your pocket like a book you carry around with you. It is a living reality that requires a living person as the locus of its presence.”[6]
This is not pantheism. This is
Christianity as received from the Apostles and elaborated by the Apostolic
Father. It is the consequence of being created in the image and likeness of God
and chosen “in him [Christ] before the foundation of the world… He predestined
us to be adopted through Jesus Christ as his sons, according to the purpose of
his will…” (Eph. 1, 4). Ireneus (2nd century): “The Word of God became man, the
Son of God became the Son of Man, in order to unite man with himself and make
him, by adoption, a son of God.”[7]
The necessity of
Scripture: Without Scripture we could not be led to the true experience of the
Person of Christ. Scripture is not Revelation, but it is the Word of God
written under the inspiration and
experience of the living Word leading us to enter in and receive it (Him) and
so become Revelation.
As Cardinal,
Joseph Ratzinger wrote: “What does the Church believe? This question
includes the others: who believes and how should one believe? The Catechism has
dealt with both fundamental questions:
the question of ‘what’ to believe and of ‘who’ believes, as one question with
an interior unity. In other words, the catechism illustrates the act of the
faith and the content of the faith in their inseparability…
“What does
all this mean? The faith is an orientation of our existence as a whole, in its
completeness. It is a basic decision, one which has effects in every aspect of
our existence and one which is realized only if it is supported by all the
efforts of our existence. Faith is not solely an intellectual process,[8]
or solely one of will or emotions; it is all of these together. It is an act of
the entire self, of the whole person in the unity off all the elements of that
person gathered into one. In this sense it was described by the Bible as an act
of the ‘heart’ (Rom. 10, 9). It is a highly personal act. But precisely because
it is this, it surpasses the self, the ‘I,’ the limits of the individual.
Nothing belongs to us as little as our self,[9]
St. Augustine affirms in one passage.”[10]
What does
all this mean? That the content of faith is not reducible to ideas or concepts.
The content of the faith is not to be contained in a book. It is a Person. But
the Person is an action of relating to the Father. As incarnate, it is called
“prayer.” Therefore, the action of belief is to pray, and that prayer becomes
the content or “what” is believed.
Another
way of saying this: “Only God knows God.” In Brazil, on May 13, 2007, Benedict
XVI said: Yet here a further
question immediately arises: who knows God? How can we know him? (…) For a Christian,
the nucleus of the reply is simple: only God knows God, only his Son who is God
from God, true God, knows him. And he ‘who is nearest to the Father’s heart has
made him known’ (John 1:18).” This is a paraphrase of Mt. 11, 27: “No one knows the Son except the Father;
nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and him to whom the Son chooses
to reveal him.”
The point of “only God knows God” is
the fundamental truth that I can only know reality by becoming one with it. If
I am not the “other,” I must have a likeness of the other within me. In
Wojtyla’s thesis on “Faith in St. John of the Cross,” there were no “likenesses”
between God and man, so John’s
experience was “the dark night of the soul” in which the self-loving was the
likeness (= the mystical life of experience and consciousness).
Benedict’s
“Theological Epistemology”
“Thesis
3: Since the center of the person of Jesus is prayer, it is essential
to participate in his prayer if we are to know and understand him.
“Let us begin here
with a very general matter of epistemology. By nature, knowledge depends on a
certain similarity between the knower and the known. The old axiom is that lie
is known by like. In matters of the mind and where persons are concerned, this
means that knowledge calls for a certain degree of empathy, by which we enter,
so to speak, into the person or intellectual reality concerned, become one with
him or it, and thus become able to understand
(intellegere = ab intus legere).
“We can illustrate
this with a couple of examples. Philosophy can only be acquired if we
philosophize, if we carry through the process of philosophical thought;
mathematics can only be appropriated if we think mathematically; medicine can
only be learned in the practice of healing, never merely by means of books and
reflection. Similarly, religion can only be understood through religion… The
fundamental act of religion is prayer, which in the Christian religion acquires
a very specific character: it is the act of self-surrender by which we enter
the Body of Christ. Thus it is an act of love. As love, in and with the Body of
Christ, it is always both love of God and love of neighbor, knowing and
fulfilling itself as love for the members of this Body.
“In Thesis 1 we saw
that prayer was the central act of the person of Jesus and, indeed, that this
person is constituted by the act of prayer, of unbroken communication with one
he calls 1Father.’ If this is the case, it is only possible really to
understand this person by entering into this act of prayer, by participating in
it. This is suggested by Jesus’ saying that o one can come to him unless the
Father draws him (Jn. 6, 44). Where there is no Father, there is no Son. Where
there is no relationship with God, there can be no understanding of him who, in
his innermost self, is nothing but relationship with God, the Father… Therefore
a participation in the mind of Jesus, i.e., in his prayer, which… is an act of
love, of self-giving and self-expropriation to men, is not some kind of pious
supplement to reading the Gospels, adding nothing to knowledge of him or even
being an obstacle to the rigorous purity of critical knowing. On the contrary,
it is the basic precondition if real understanding, in the sense of modern
hermeneutics – i.e., the entering-in to the same time and same meaning – is to
take place… All real progress in theological understanding has its origin in
the eye of love and in its faculty of beholding.”[11]
Application: Simon entered into this prayer of Christ (“as he was praying in private,
that his disciples also were with him,” Lk. 9, 18), became “like”
Him, and was able to say: “You are
the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt. 16, 16) The likeness to Christ
becomes evident in the name-change from Simon to Peter (as “rock”) since Jesus is the “Cornerstone.”[12] One
knows Christ only by becoming like
Him, and in so doing reaches salvation.[13]
Consciousness That Undergirds Societal Health (Maggie
Gallagher): “Every life is precious. It is
better to care for your children than to kill them. Divorce hurts children; it
also breaks apart life's most precious commitment -- a family. Men and women
are different. A society that pretends otherwise is not going to raise boys to
be loving, reliable family men. Marriage is not about settling for less but
raising up an ideal much bigger and more important even than the most urgent
whispered promises of romantic love. Sex makes babies. Society needs babies.
Babies need their mother and their father. Men and women need each other. We
all need a strong marriage culture, whether we choose to marry or not. If it is
true that sex makes babies, then that is clearly the most important thing about
sex, the thing around which a decent person or society will organize sexual
values, behavior and norms. If they saw clearly. If they were only told the
truth. For of all the ways adult society can abandon the young, one of the
worst is to ignore the key adult task of creating and sustaining a larger
meaning for sex and sexual desire for young people.”[15]
The Malaise and the Challenge (Maggie Gallagher): On
every key measure, marriage is weaker. The consequences are more obviously
unsustainable, yet culturally powerful voices are less willing to engage, and
the power of porn and Hollywood to create our norms for family life is more
triumphant than ever. Since 1993, the proportion of children born out of
wedlock has jumped from 31 percent to 41 percent -- mostly since about 2003.
For women with only a high school degree or
less, non marital childbearing is the new normal. Divorce has declined for the
privileged; for everyone else, stable marriage has gotten to be even further
out of reach. Without a powerful ideal of masculinity that points men toward
marriage and fatherhood, more and more young men are deciding the hard work of
becoming marriageable is not worth it: Porn, beer, video games with the guys, freedom and fleeting sexual
encounters are good enough. The most urgent overlooked need is the deep need of
boys for masculine ideals. If civilization refuses to provide any, porn and
video-game makers will step in
to fill the gap. Why should young men work hard to become protectors and
defenders of women and children when American culture -- and women -- tells
them they are not needed in either role? So in this, my final column, I say my
farewell to optimism and my hello to hope. What is the difference? Optimism is
a prediction; hope is a virtue. My hope rests on this: The truths to which I've
dedicated my life, both professionally and personally, are too important to
ignore, too foundational to be abandoned, too much a part of reality to be lost
forever.”
Do not abandon politics. It is one
important means to create culture -- to name our shared reality. But we need,
as well, a next generation of culture creators, of storytellers, with the
credentials to name reality: empirical social scientists, novelists, poets,
preachers and filmmakers. We need donors to invest in building the networks and
communities through which such voices are born, flourish and give meaning to
the lives of millions. The future belongs to those of us with enough hope to
rebuild on the ashes of optimism, a new American civilization -- uniting sex,
love, babies, mothers and fathers in this thing called marriage. [16]
Continued statement of #10: Saint Paul helps us to enter into this reality when he
writes: “Man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with
his lips and so is saved” (Rom
10:10). The heart indicates that the first act by which one comes to faith is
God’s gift and the action of grace which acts and transforms the person deep
within.
The example of Lydia is particularly eloquent in this
regard. Saint Luke recounts that, while he was at Philippi, Paul went on the
Sabbath to proclaim the Gospel to some women; among them was Lydia and “the
Lord opened her heart to give heed to what was said by Paul” (Acts 16:14). There is an important
meaning contained within this expression. Saint Luke teaches that knowing the
content to be believed is not sufficient unless the heart, the authentic sacred
space within the person, is opened by grace that allows the eyes to see below
the surface and to understand that what has been proclaimed is the word of God.
Confessing with the lips indicates in turn that faith
implies public testimony and commitment. A Christian may never think of belief
as a private act. Faith is choosing to stand with the Lord so as to live with
him. This “standing with him” points towards an understanding of the reasons
for believing. Faith, precisely because it is a free act, also demands social
responsibility for what one believes. The Church on the day of Pentecost
demonstrates with utter clarity this public dimension of believing and
proclaiming one’s faith fearlessly to every person. It is the gift of the Holy
Spirit that makes us fit for mission and strengthens our witness, making it
frank and courageous.
[1] The
ascetical core of Opus Dei is the experience and consciousness of St. Josemaria
Escriva as “Ipse Christus, alter Christus:” Antonio Aranda “The Christian, “alter Christus, ipse Christus, in the
thought of St. Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer,” Holiness and the World,
Scepter, (1997) 127-189.
[2] Jn. 17,
3: “Now this is everlasting life that they may know thee, the only true God,
and him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.”
[3] Walker
Percy, “Diagnosing the Modern Malaise,” Signposts in a Strange Land,
Noonday Press,(1991) p. 21`0: “The consciousness of Western man, the layman in
particular, has been transformed by a curious misapprehension of the scientific
method. One is tempted to use the theological term ‘idolatry.’’ This
misapprehension, which is not the fault of science, but rather the inevitable
consequence of the victory of the scientific worldview accompanied as it is by all
the dazzling credentials of scientific progress. It, the misapprehension, takes
the form, I believe, of a radical and paradoxical loss of sovereignty by the
layman and of a radical impoverishment of human relations – paradoxical, I say,
because it occurs in the very fact of
his technological mastery of the world and his richness as a consumer of the
world’s goods” (210).
[4] J.
Pieper, “On Hope” Ignatius (1986) 56.
[5] J. Ratzinger, “Milestones – Memoirs
1927-1977” Ignatius (1997). 108-109.
[6] J.
Ratzinger, “God’s Word” Ignatius (2008) 52.
[7] Against
Heresies, Book 3, 19.
[8]Andre
Frossard asked John Paul II: “Is it possible to give a definition of this faith
which is described by some people as a gift of God, by others as a commitment,
again as ‘that which gives substance to our hopes’?” Answer: “Personally
I would not discount the old catechism definition which I learnt at primary
school: faith is “to admit as truth what God has revealed and what the Church
gives us to believe.” However, I will not send you back to the catechism,
for this definition, as it stands, can incur the criticism that it does not
attach sufficient importance to the person, the subject that experiences faith,
even though the very phrase ‘admit as truth’ clearly implies the existence of
the subject. It also indicates the
cognitive character of faith in its reference to the truth that motivates it” (my
bold).
[9] Now, what does this mean?: “The Son as Son, and in so far as
he is Son, does not proceed in any way from himself and so is completely one
with the Father; since he is nothing beside him, claims no special position of
hi9s own, confronts the Father with nothing belonging only to him, retains no
room for his own individuality, therefore he is completely equal to the Father.
The logic is compelling: if there is nothing in which he is just he, no kind of
fenced-off private ground, then he coincides with the Father, is ‘one’ with
him. It is precisely this totality of interplay that the word ‘Son’ aims at
expressing. To John, ‘Son’ means being-from another and for others, as a being
that is completely open on both sides, knows no reserved area of the mere ‘I.’
When it thus becomes clear that the being of Jesus as Christ is a completely
open being, a being ‘from’ and ‘towards,’ that nowhere clings to itself and
nowhere stands on its own, then it is also clear at the same time that this
being is pure relation (not substantiality) and, as pure relation, pure unity.
This fundamental statement about Christ becomes, as we have seen, at the same
time the explanation of Christian existence. To John, being a Christian means
being like the Son, becoming a son; that is, not standing on one’s own and in
oneself, but living completely open in the ‘from’ and ‘towards.’ In so far as
the Christian is a ‘Christian,’ this is true of him. And certainly such
utterances will make him aware to how small an extent he is a Christian.” (J.
Ratzinger, Introduction to Christianity, Ignatius [1990] 133) Now add to that the God-Man [Christ] is the
prototype of the human person. Christology becomes the form and meaning of
anthropology and man can find himself only by becoming relational: finding self
by sincere gift of self [Gaudium et spes #24].
[10] J.
Ratzinger, “What Does the Church Believe?” Catholic World Report , March 1993,
27.
[11]
J. Ratzinger, “Behold the Pierced One,” Ignatius (1986) 25-27.
[12]
Acts, 4, 11: “This is The Stone that was
rejected by you, the builders, which has become the corner stone.”
[13]
“Now this is everlasting life, that they may know thee, the only true God, and
him whom thou hast sent, Jesus Christ.’ (Jn. 17, 3).
[14] J. Ratzinger, “Milestones – Memoirs
1927-1977” Ignatius (1997). 108-109.
[16] Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment