Missionaries without Christ

MISSIONARIES WITHOUT CHRIST

SOURCE:  AFRICAN ECCLESIASTICAL REVIEW, OCT. 1990

“This paper is very well written.  It helps to correct the errors or exaggerations of those who did not appreciate the necessity of the proclamation of the Gospel”.

Francis Cardinal Arinze, the President of the Vatican Council of Interreligious Dialogue, in a letter to the author.  26 January 1990.

In the March 1989 edition of 30 Days Magazine, there was a disturbing report entitled “Missionaries without Christ.”  It claimed that there is a demissionization of the Catholic Church going on, and that this “suicide of the missions” began around the end of the 1960’s.  The theoretical basis, according to one assumption was Karl Rahner’s doctrine of the “anonymous Christians”, and some new theories about the salvific function of non-Christian religions.

On the practical level, the source was the abandonment of evangelization for the so-called “humanization”.  In a book entitled Gethsemane, Cardinal Siri laments the devastation that some ideas of Karl Rahner and others have caused in the vineyard. (1)  Hans von Balthasar criticized Karl Rahner’s notion of “anonymous Christianity”, and helped to found the periodical, Communio, as a counterblast to Concilium, which promoted these ideas. (2)

As a seminarian preparing for missionary work in Africa, I was intrigued by the ideas of Karl Rahner and other theologians on the concept of “anonymous” or “implicit Christianity” and the “latent church”. Schillebeeckx referred to the “anonymous church”, and the Dutch  Catechism, with which he was associated, talked of Christians being evangelized by non-Christians; like Hindus, Buddhists, Muslim, Humanists, and Marxists! (3)

Karl Rahner questioned the methods of St. Francis Xavier and mentioned that nowhere is it written that every human being must become a member of the (visible) Church, if he or she is to be saved. (4)  Some theologians I read were saying that the Church is the visible “extraordinary means of salvation”; and that other religions are the “ordinary means”. (5)  One theologian maintained that in the opinion of Karl Rahner, the source of our apostolate is not necessity, rather it is human fullness and love. (6)

Another theologian maintained that the notion of “anonymous Christianity” is not some dangerous novelty recently introduced into Catholic theology, but rather a contemporary reformulation in meaningful terms of what Christians have always believed and variously expressed! (7)  Boniface Willems talked of the “absurdity” of the assumption that the vast majority of humankind were not to share in (Christ’s) salvation!

To me, this did seem like a radical reinterpretation of Catholic theology.  What of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ, upheld by Scripture and Tradition?  why did the martyrs die, and the confessors travel over land and sea to make converts to Christianity?  I was greatly perplexed by all this, especially as it was emanating from well-respected theologians.

Fortunately, I had had a deep conversion experience a few years before I entered the seminary after reading the Word of God, which was totally unlike any of the other books in comparative religion that I had read.  A personal experience of Jesus Christ and a personal commitment to him is something that can sustain us when he or our faith is questioned.  So, while I could not grasp the new ideas of the theologians, I personally felt there was something wrong with such ideas.  If they were right, then there seemed to be no point in continuing the work of evangelization and in my going to Africa at all!

Finally, the year before embarking for South Africa, I studied at a Catholic college for missionaries in London.  One day it was my turn to lead a seminar for other prospective missionaries.  My subject was: “change of attitudes in the Catholic Church towards other religions”.  I decided that since that was a good opportunity to reconsider the problem of what I saw as revolutionary by some Catholic theologians, I would deliberately “fly a kite”, stating exactly what theologians were by then saying, and see what response I would provoke!

I expected my fellow students to ask me afterwards: “why be a missionary?” if what I said was true.  To my disappointment, I provoked not the least response. In fact, I was merely thanked for my contribution and my paper was given a good mark!  My paper seems to have been regarded as a model answer of its kind, because it was later duplicated and subsequently handed out to other students, as I discovered by chance in South Africa from a student who had attended the same college in London.  This was unfortunate, as I had not given permission for this to be done.  “Flying kites” or by “indirections finding directions out”, can sometimes be an unwise thing to do!

Last year, when on holiday in London, I returned to the Mission College to seek for permission to share with the students some insights I had gained from working in the mission field, as opposed to the speculation in my seminar paper, written from the ivory towers of academe!  Unfortunately the students were on holiday.

However, as I wandered around the empty building, I was intrigued by a notice on the wall, advertising the launching of a new book.  It was to be launched by a “Christian” publisher (SCM Press), and would be released at a press conference in the basement of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church, London.  It was entitled The Myth of the Uniqueness of Jesus, and its co-author was a Muslim.  I thought it ironic that such a book, undermining the uniqueness of the Founder of Christianity, would be launched in the basement of a Christian church!  With passionless tolerance touted today as the greatest of all virtues, I can imagine the look of dismay on the faces of the booksellers in this Christian temple, if Jesus suddenly appeared with his whip of cords overturning the booksellers’ tables in zealous fury, and exclaiming loudly: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no-one can come to the Father except by me”! 

As a missionary in South Africa, I was pastor for nearly eight years in a Zulu parish, and an assistant novice master.  I was living in Natal Province, which has a lot of Indians of Islamic and Hindu background.  I rubbed shoulders with many of them daily, and got to know some personally.  I discovered, as did other missionaries, that Hindus seem to have a great problem with demons; yet all the academic books on Hinduism hardly ever note this dark side.

So, it was strange to see priests and religious returning to Africa from overseas leave in Europe, with syncretist ideas, stemming from Eastern religions, and teaching African students about: yoga, Zen, transcendental meditation (T.M.), and so forth.  Some even took their sabbaticals in India, where they studied at the feet of non-Christian teachers.

Once, at a retreat centre, a provincial superior of a missionary religious congregation, whom I was talking to, suddenly snapped into the lotus position and remained this way for the rest of the recreation time!  All during our chat I irreverently pondered, to the point of distraction, if he would be able to undo the process at the end of the recreation!

In another place, some young Christian religious sisters had to do hours of silent Zen meditation, preceded by bowing to the Buddha!  Before going to South Africa, I met an Italian so-called Christian missionary in England, who seemed to travel all over the world, with a passion for telling people about Muhammad’s mission.  Years later, I met him again in South Africa, still singing Muhammad’s praises!

With all this syncretism spread by professed Christian European missionaries, and retreat centres dabbling in all sorts of non-Christian practices, like T.M., yoga, Jungian Gnosticism, sufi, enneagrams, and the whole “wacko world of new age theology” it was not surprising that missionaries who did claim that Christ was unique, found it was not very acceptable.  One novice disagreed with me, when I said Christ was unique, retorting that Muslims claimed Muhammad to be unique also.

Since Eastern philosophy and techniques were growing in popularity, it was not surprising that black Christians began to feel that they too should be allowed the same syncretistic rights, so to speak. Why should they have to surrender their ancient religious customs of ancestor veneration, if other Eastern religions were tolerated by the different churches?  A sympathetic, but misguided missionary anthropologist decided to “inculturate” b y using the flesh and blood of goats in a bizarre “communion” service!

Another one decided to install new catechists by anointing them with animal bile and gall!  In fact, with more and more missionaries of various churches getting involved in unauthorised and rather syncretist practices, there is danger of engendering voodoo.  Old traditional customs, like circumcision and ancestor veneration, once condemned as pagan practices, are now tolerated in some places and even encouraged, under the guise of “inculturation”.  But, as Cardinal Francis Arinze warned: “Inculturation requires that our faith evangelize culture; culture must not alter the faith”.

Sometime in 1985, I read an article in a Catholic paper, produced in South Africa, stating that a missionary in Morocco, when asked what he would do, if a Muslim came to him with a sincere desire to become a Christian, replied that he would turn him away, on the assumption that, if the enquirer searched hard enough he could find God in Islam. (9)   The missionary said he would do the same thing at home in France, if approached.

After reading the article, I decided to write a letter to Rome for clarification on this matter, and enclosed a copy of the newspaper article.  I asked if this was in line with official Catholic policy, and if so, whether it did apply also to Hindus, Buddhists and adherents to African traditional religions?  I mentioned that St. Francis of Assisi had gone to the Muslims, not to confirm them in their religion, but to convert them to Jesus Christ.  I asked, if such was no longer the Catholic position, since the Second Vatican Council?

A few weeks later, I got the following reply: “The teaching of the Church is constant: we have to witness to our faith, to evangelize in order to make Christ known and to make disciples – to dialogue.  So, there is no shift from the Church’s traditional missionary policy.  Vatican II is a clear guide. When we encourage interreligious dialogue, we are aware of our duty to evangelize (cf. Dialogue and Mission, nn. 11 and 13)”.  A copy of the latter document was enclosed, and the letter was signed by the Nigerian Head of the Secretariat for Interreligious Dialogue – Francis Cardinal Arinze.

After reading this document and re-reading other relevant Vatican documents, it was quite clear that the teaching of the Catholic Church was constant and unchanging, and that conversion to Christianity was still essential.  For example, I came across the following statement by the Second Vatican Council, in Lumen Gentium, 14:

Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it (the Synod) teaches that the Church ... is necessary for salvation.  For Christ is ... the unique way of salvation ... he (Christ) affirmed the necessity of the Church ... Whosoever, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her, could not be saved. (The emphases are mine).

The Vatican II Decree on Ecumenism was also explicitly clear: “For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained” (Unitatis Redintegration, n. 3).

In pointing out the errors of the dissident theologian, Leonardo Boff’s work, the Congregation for the Doctrine and Faith said that the Vatican Council stated, that outside the one true and visible Church there are only elements of the Church, and that these inevitably tend towards the Catholic Church.

Nevertheless, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside its visible confines.  Since these are gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, they are forces impelling towards Catholic unity (Lumen Gentium, 8). (10)

Since the teaching of the Church remains constant and unchanging throughout history, then what has happened to create all the appalling confusion in the minds of so many missionaries?  The official teaching of the Magisterium of the Church was quite clear and unambiguous.  So, what had caused the havoc and the “suicide of the missions” mentioned above?

The answer is very simple!  When I look back over my seminar paper, given at the Missionary College, I discovered that I had quoted from works by various theologians, the Vatican II documents and papal encyclicals.  Many of us have done that with emphasis upon the opinions of theologians, and not upon official Church teaching.  But, as Catholics, we cannot put theologians (no matter how great their personality-cult!) on the same level as papal or magisterial teaching.  We should respect only the theologians who duly respect church leadership.

Theologians are entitled to their opinions, as indeed you and I are, and there has always been a legitimate science – that of speculative theology.  Sometimes there seems to be more emphasis on the speculative than on the theology, especially in the realm of comparative religion!  But, theologians are not (the formal teaching authority, i.e.) the Magisterium, and we are not under any obligation to follow their views.

Since Vatican II, theologians seem to have assumed a status they never had before.  This is probably what Cardinal Heenan was referring to during that Council, when he stated, as regards theologians:  ”I fear periti, (specialists), when they are left to explain what the bishops meant!” (11)

According to Lumen Gentium (n. 25), only infallible teaching exacts the total submission of faith; while the teaching of popes or bishops, that is not declared as infallible, should be accepted with religious assent, submission of mind and will, due in a special way to the successor of Peter.

What reflects the mind of the pope, can be known from the content of the documents he issues, from the manner of his speaking, and from his frequent repetition of the same teaching.  The International Theological Commission’s  Theses on the Relationship Between the Ecclesiastical Magisterium and Theologians (1976) states that theological work by the theologians “is to lend its aid to the Magisterium which, in its turn, is the enduring light and norm of the Church”.

As Catholics, it is good to briefly recall what the assent of faith entails.  When we are converted and acknowledge our utter dependence on God, and commit our lives totally to Christ, and to following the Gospel, we come under the obedience of faith (Rom. 16:26), and assent to all that Jesus taught, including his setting up the Church, as “the pillar and the ground of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15), and his appointment of Peter (and his legitimate successors, the popes), as his vicar on earth.

If we reject Peter and his legitimate successors, then, in a sense, we reject Jesus (Lk. 10:16) – such is the charism and power Jesus has entrusted to the Petrine leadership.  We cannot accept Jesus and reject the Church (Acts 9:4), for without the Church, Christ is not perceptively manifested.  Without the authority of the Church, we would be like a rudderless ship – adrift in a sea of relativity.  We must always obey the Church and the legitimate successors of the Apostles, unless it goes against the Gospel.

As Cardinal Newman said, we need to trust the Church of God, at least implicitly, even when our natural judgement would prefer to take a different course.  The same gamble we take in entrusting our whole lives to Jesus, the Head, applies also to his Body, the Church.

This is not a blind leap of faith, as the Catholic Church’s teaching is the most consistent body of doctrine in Christendom and has led countless people to the heights of holiness.  The vicars of Christ have been some of the most remarkable men in history, including the present Pope, John Paul II.  His life of courage and integrity under Nazism and then Communism, shows up the shallowness, petulance and vexatiousness of so many heterodox theologians.

The New Testament warns of wolves appearing as sheep.  Any Christian literature that ignores the Scripture and constant teaching of the Church, should also be ignored.  Reading such could endanger our faith.

Will Herberg, the Jewish philosopher, once remarked that no reform movement in the Catholic Church through 2000 years has had lasting success, if it was opposed to, or unsupported by the Holy See.  In other words, as Thomas Dubay maintains, “dissent may arrive flashily on the scene, but it eventually withers away, or is splintered into pieces against the Petrine rock”. (12)

The Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ, on Peter the “rock”, has seen incredible storms in her history, and still has survived.  This fact surely indicates the guidance of the Holy Spirit, as lesser institutions would have collapsed ages ago.  No wonder that the great Protestant historian, J.A. Froude, was led to concede: “The Roman Church, after all, is something: it will survive all other forms of Christianity; and without Christianity, what is to become of us?” (13)

Another great Protestant historian, who had no great liking for the Catholic Church, but who could make an objective statement – Lord Macaulay – said, there was never an institution on earth, like the Roman Catholic Church, which has seen the demise of so many historical institutions and may still exist when London is a heap of ruins! (14)

In many theological circles there is a crave to speculate about everything, including the salvation of non-Christians. But, as Ralph Martin says, “Scripture and the tradition of THE Church do not tell us everything we would like to know about how God will deal with human beings.  His ways are not our ways.  Our curiosity about everything does not need to be (fully) satisfied”. (15)

Endless speculation about the possibility of salvation for the non-baptized is something best left to God – fulfilling the great commission: “Go and make disciples of all nations”, is something Christ left up to us.  We need to hear and obey, not to quibble, question and dispute over everything.  Faith seeks understanding, and not vice versa.

Of course, some maverick theologians bent on changing everything want to replace the Catholic Magisterium with a theologians’, - an absurd idea, as none of the personality-cult figures  seem able to agree about anything!  To be an authentic theologian demands humility, but this is so often lacking in some people who are always contentious.  As Thomas Dubay maintains:

One of the reasons the idea of a “parallel magisterium” completely failed a few years ago, is that it simply would not be possible to create a dual magisterium (one official, one unofficial).  Dissent is so divided that five magisterial would not be enough to represent all the shades of thought, all the manners of rejecting Catholic teaching! (16)

Dubay says that even in biblical scholarship, theologians cannot agree, and that Edward Schillebeeckx, who is so open to historical criticism, has confessed his frustration with New Testament commentators, in finding not a single text in the New Testament on which all theologians completely agreed! (17)

Gerald O’Collins, in a critique of biblical theologians who use the historical critical method says:

The methods of critical history have their role, but a subordinate rather than a dominant one.  Sheer historical research can, in fact, turn out to be a way of avoiding the real drama and the essential issue raised by the Gospels: am I willing to put my whole life – with all its fears and hopes – into the crucified hands of Jesus?  Any biblical research that finally prevents this challenge from being heard, is both playing false to the nature of the Gospels, and substituting scholarly idols for the questions: “What do you seek?  Do you love me?” (Jn. 1:38; 21:15)

Collins states that the “gospel narrative will come alive for us, if we allow ourselves to come alive in the face of the texts.  It may seem ‘safer’ to stick to a quest for historical details.  But, in that way we will not truly find anything out – neither about Jesus nor about ourselves”. (18)

The purpose of the Word of God is not to impart information, but to effect transformation – holiness in fact, and this is what true theologians seek and teach.  Saints Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure were canonized by the Church, as models of what true theologians should be like.  Their lives can help us to discern the true from the false theologian, who, like a wolf, comes only to steal, kill and destroy” (Jn. 10:10)

St. Bonaventure’s advice about growth in theological understanding is perennial advice.  He says that we should “consult grace, not doctrine; desire, not understanding; prayerful groaning, not studious reading; the Spouse, not the teacher; God, not man; darkness, not clarity.  Consult not light, but the fire that completely inflames the mind and carries it over to God in transports of fervour and blazes of love”. (19)

The theologian, Anton Grabner-Haider, a laicized priest, in his moving book Letters to a Young Priest From a Laicized Priest, says: “it seems to me that we need to maintain the tension between ‘sitting’ and ‘kneeling’ theology; that is the only way to avoid serious mistakes in our thinking”.  He points out that some theologians in their quest for a theology, meaningful to their contemporaries, have looked far afield among writers and philosophers, regarded as modern, but in the process, had unfortunately forgotten the lives of the saints, who had translated Christ’s way of life into the life of their own times. (20)

Some theologians contemptuously refer to the traditions of the Church, as “so much baggage”, which has accumulated over 2000 years.  But, this “baggage” can be a real blessing, for if a new theological theory develops, that does not have a precedent (or if precedented, does not constitute a consensus) in our Tradition, it may not be a valuable insight, so much as a dangerous deviation – we need to be discerning.

The New Testament gives us clear norms for the discernment of spirits, for “it is not every spirit we can trust, and so we are to test them, to see if they come from God, since there are so many false prophets now in the world” (1 Jn. 4:1).  False prophets will arise and produce great signs and wonders, enough to deceive even the chosen (Mt. 24:23).

Jesus warns us not to follow the majority, nor to run after every specious teacher (Mt. 7:13f.).  Our Church is not like a political democracy, and never was.  For example, Pope Paul VI went against the majority and was virtually an isolated voice, when he produced his encyclical Humanae Vitae, on safeguarding un-born life, but events have more than justified his courageous stand for truth, for life.

The New Testament states that anyone who tries to live in loyalty to Christ is certain to be attacked (2 Tim. 3:12). If we are not attacked, but feted by the world, are we really being faithful to the Spirit of Christ or the spirit of the world?  Where are our wounds?  Moreover, as it warns “certain people have infiltrated among you and they are the ones you had a warning about, in writing long ago, when they were condemned for ... rejecting our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ”. (Jude v.4)

Finally, the New Testament’s strongest warning about testing the Spirits comes from St. John:

There are many deceivers about in the world, refusing to admit that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh.  They are the Deceiver; they are the Antichrist.  Watch yourselves, or all our work will be lost, and not get the reward it deserves.  If anyone does not keep within the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it, he cannot have God with him; only those who keep to what he taught can have the Father and the Son with them.  If anyone comes to you bringing a different doctrine, you must not receive him in your house or even give him a greeting.  To greet him would make you a partner in his wicked work (2 Jn. 7-10).

Theologians are partly correct when they say that there are good elements in non-Christian religions.  But, as a Nigerian bishop has rightly said, even a broken clock that is no longer functioning, is accurate twice a day!   But, to go on to say, as some maintain that Christians are evangelized by Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Humanists and Marxists, is absurd, and this is clearly “bringing a different doctrine”.

As Karl Adam, in his beautiful work. The Spirit of Catholicism, says, if we do not fight for the truth, “then we lose all moral and spiritual power, we become characterless, we disown God”.  He says to fight for the truth “is, therefore, a moral duty, a duty to the infinite truth and to truthfulness”. (21)  Obviously, our weapons are those of the Gospel, and not those of the world!

Some years ago, I came across a very valuable book in South Africa, entitled The Catholic Encounter with world Religions, authored by a missionary and professor of philosophy and comparative religion at a Japanese University – Fr. H. Van Straelen, S.V.D.  It was published in 1965, before the end of the Second Vatican Council, but it was to prove prophetic.  He said that never has there been in the history of the Church, so many urgent statements, issued by the official Church on the urgency of missionary work, countered b y so many forces, at the same time working in the opposite direction and emanating from theologians, who have an alternative agenda! (22)

Francis Xavier Durrwell, in 1967, also noticed these forces working in the opposite direction to the true spirit of the Second Vatican Council.  In the light of Scripture and Patristic Tradition, he is very critical of Karl Rahner and other “theologians of the concept of anonymous Christianity”, in their interpretation of the Vatican II texts.  For example, when the Council says that non-Christians are ordered to salvation (Lumen Gentium, n. 16), those theologians say this means that they therein attain salvation.  When the Council says that God, in ways known in God alone, can lead people to faith, even though they have not been able to hear the Gospel (Ad Gentes), F.X. Durrwel states that the theologians say this means that God gives such people the faith, or that they have the faith”.

Because Karl Rahner was a peritus at the Council, his teaching is given about the same status by some theologians, as Vatican II texts themselves.  Subsequent popularist theologians, using Rahner’s interpretation as a starting point, go on to speculate further from untenable premises, and the present world-wide confusion in missions is the result.

One such theologian, who takes Rahner’s ideas a little too far, is Adrian Smith.  He has been a director of the World Catholic Federation for the Biblical Apostolate (Africa Service), a consultor of the Vatican’s Secretariat for Christian Unity, and currently the Director of the British-based promotion group of the Movement for a Better World!  He is also a leading exponent of transcendental meditation, having taken an advanced T.M. Sidhi course – the end result of which is psychic powers, such as levitation or the ability to “fly”, as well as the power to become invisible! (24)

Having studied “wider ecumenism” at the Dublin School of Ecumenics, Smith’s most recent book is entitled, ironically enough, A Reason for Hope. (25)  The questionable terminology of T.M., which is derived from Hindu cult, banned from U.S. Christian religious education programmes, is found everywhere in his book.  He says, we are entering a “new age of consciousness” with a “new awareness of our unity in cosmic consciousness, of our oneness in the cosmic mind”.  Move over Shirley MacLaine!  Anonymous Christians, or rather, “anonymous Kingdom of God participants” are agents for bringing in the Kingdom of God.

We must be God’s Kingdom-orientated not Church orientated.  The greatest Kingdom-promoting events the world has ever known have happened very recently, says Smith, inspired not by Christian churches, but by the leader of a rock music group – Bob Geldof of the Boom Town Rats, with his “Live Aid” and “Sport Aid”!  Adrian Smith quotes from astrology, T.M. hierarchs and New Agers to substantiate his views.

Bishop Albert De Monleon of Pamiers has warned of the danger of trying to Christianize according the Eastern techniques. (26)  They can so easily lead to syncretism and divert people away from the true faith.

I began this article with a reference to the serious crisis that faces the missionary world, due to a concerted attack on the whole idea of mission by disloyal theologians.  Drastic problems need drastic solutions.  If we love the Lord and his Body, the Church, we need to make some positive and radical resolutions, especially if we are missionaries.

First, we need to get rid of all the heterodox material on our bookshelves – the rebellious theologians, the questionable eastern religious stuff, the missionary magazines that apologize for christianity, and are full of adulation for the “noble savage” or non Christian religions, to the neglect of the unfathomable riches of Catholicism.

Then, we need to show the door to the naive liberation theology that still regards Marxist analysis as “scientific”, and ignores the whole debacle in the Soviet Union, where people are finally being liberated from their bondage to “socialist opium”, and where Marxism is “withering away”!

We need to check feminist liberation material that advocates in the name of the struggle, feminist forays into the sanctuary to brow beat some poor old priest into dropping his cruets!  As Thomas Howard so well puts it, they want “to drain out your nouns, to accommodate a drab and punctilious androgyny” (27), and create a gender-neutral society and destroy any sex-rooted distinctions between men and women.

Secondly, we need to buy a good edition of the Vatican II documents, and stop merely reading commentaries on the documents with their hidden agenda.  Taking out a subscription to The Pope Speaks, would be a good idea too.  I think it is important to note, that theologians get only one mention in the Index to the Vatican documents.  So getting back to the “spirit of Vatican II”, that theologians are always talking about, demands that we occasionally remind the most outspoken among them of their subservient role!  Probably, we need to put a moratorium to any further theological speculation, and just stick to trying to implement the Vatican II documents (sine glossa!).  That would include other documents, especially those on the liturgy, such as the Introduction to The Roman Missal, and other official liturgical publications.

If we stand up for Christ and our faith in the world, we will be attacked and we should gravitate to the sacraments, like deers thirsting for the power that comes from living waters.  There is nothing like a bit of tribulation in our lives to make every word in the liturgy come alive without the aid of clowns and other gimmicks!  If we are “fools” for Christ’s sake in the world, we will not need fools clowning in the sanctuary!

Thirdly, we need to repent of any cowardice on our part in fighting for the truth or for compromising on the Gospel.  The source of our apostolate is not human fullness, but necessity.  Two thousand years of Christian tradition cannot be ignored.  As Cardinal Newman once so aptly said: “so great a price (Christ’s death on the cross), as was paid for the remission of sin, presupposes an enormous debt.  If the need was not immense, would such a sacrifice have been called for?  Does not that sacrifice throw a fearful light upon the need of it?  And if the need of it be denied, will not the sacrifice be unintelligible?”

The early Christian martyrs give us an understanding of the meaning and effect of sacrifice: they considered their torments as a form of deliverance, and felt that non-commitment would have been at the risk of their eternal welfare.  In his writings, St. Paul is full of gratitude towards God’s power, which “has delivered us from the wrath to come”.  It is the foundation of the whole spiritual fabric on which our spiritual life is built.  Paul wonders what would remain of Christianity, if he is no longer to be penetrated by the thought of that second death, from which he had now been delivered?  Further, what would become of the doctrine  of the Incarnation?”, Newman asks. (28)

A gospel of compromise and expediency produces compromisers and expedient Christians.  A gospel with no backbone would produce spineless and insipid Christians.  Christianity must, Newman says, “impress on the serious mind, very distressing views of the guilt and consequences of sin, setting upon the minute acts of the day, one by one, their definite value for praise or blame”.

Fourthly, we need to recommit our whole lives to Christ, “the only name by which we can be saved” (Acts 4:12), and be filled again by his Spirit and power, coming under the obedience of faith and being faithful to the leadership and Magisterium of the Church.  Sir Thomas More suffered in witness to these truths, and we need to be prepared to suffer likewise or lose all moral and spiritual power, become characterless and disown God, as Karl Adam says above.  Obviously, this would not make us popular, but Jesus did warn us to count the cost before following him (Lk. 14:28)

References

1.             Cardinal Siri, J. Gethsemane: Reflections on the Contemporary Theological Movement,

                Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago, 1981.

2.             The Tablet, 2 July 1988, p.766.

3.             Higher Catechetical Institute, Nijmegen, New Dutch Catechism, Search Pr., 1970, p.286.

4.             Rahner K., The Christian of the Future, Herder, 1967, p.92.

5.             Willems B., “Who Belongs to the Church?” in Concilium I (1965) p.68.

6.             Allen P.J., Christ Beyond Christianity, Pflaum, Ohio, 1970, p.30.

7.             Hillman E., The Wider Ecumenism, Sheed & Ward, p.44.

8.             Willems B., The Reality of Redemption, Herder, 1967, p.106.

9.             The Southern Cross, June 23, 1985.

10.          O’Grady D., in Catholic Herald, 29 March, 1985, p.3.

11.          Straelen van H., The Catholic Encounter with World Religion, Newman Pr., Westminister, p.88.

12.          Dubay S.M.T., “No longer groovy: Catholic Dissent ...” Crises, Oct. 1989, p.12.

13.          Geffin M., Objections to Roman Catholicism, Constable, Louvain, 1967.

14.          MaCaulay, in his review of Von Rankie’s Political History of the Popes, 1840.

15.          Martin R., A Crisis of Truth, Servant Books, Ann Arbor, 1982, p.85.

16.          Dubay, loc. cit. p.12.

17.          Dubay, idem, p.13.

18.          O’Collins S.J.G., “Theological Trends”, The Way 17 (1977), p.63.

19.          Bonaventure St., The Journey of the Mind to God.

20.          Grabner-Halder A., Letters to a Young Priest From a Laicised Priest, Veritas, Dublin, 1975.

21.          Adam K., The Spirit of Catholicism, Sheed & Ward, 1929.

22.          Straclen van H., op. cit. p.9.

23.          Durrwell F.X. “The Need for Evangelization”, in The Mystery of Christ ad the Apostolate,

Sheed & Ward, 1970, p.143.

24.          cf. Flanagan F., “T.M: Disquieting Aspects”, Doctrine & Life, June, 1979, p.346.

25.          Smith B.A., A Reason for Hope, McCrimmons, Essex, 1986.

26.          30 Days, Sept. 1989.

27.          Howard T., Commencement Address, 1989, Franciscan University of Steubenville.

28.          A Newman Treasury, Catholic Society, London.