Mini-catechism for non-conformists
The standard (catholic) catechism (from 1992) has as its outline the core of revealed truths (the credo), followed by the sacraments or Gods operating power in the Church, after which it has the (daily) life of faith (of catholics that is) and it finishes with prayer (how to direct ourselves to God). The thick book resulting from the extensive amount of treated topics, has its disadvantage as well: all the trees make it difficult to see the forest (Dutch expression); in other words the essence, that is the interdependence and motivation of the whole, gets snowed over. This, together with quite some sub-optimal frasing (to put it mildly), makes that the book in its entirety convinces not so much [NB classically power of conviction has three aspects: ethos (the authority of the one claiming something), logos (the inner interdependence of the claims) and pathos (its attractiveness)] and so after all confirms once again the general image of the catholic Faith as a large collection of rules, in other words a big burden instead of something that sets free and makes happy. In short, an alternative explanation of the universal [NB catholic after all means universal] christian Faith is greatly desired!
St Thomas Aquinas already stated that man, by reasoning, is capable to arrive at (certain) truths of Faith which then become rationally convincing besides through the authority of the Church that proclaims them.
Jesus, the Word of God, after all is called Logos for a reason [John 1:1], He namely speaks and does nothing without reason. Let's therefore have a look at how far the Faith can be reasoned out. It also seems insightful to indicate how her essence is shown in Revelation, in other words what the main storyline of the Bible is.
In detail, from broadly accepted starting points we'll reason for the starting points of the Faith after which we'll also consider the reasonability of the rest.
This will not only get us the essence of the Faith but also the interconnectedness of it all and what it is good for. A better understanding namely can help us grow further in faith; and hopefully in this way be a grace for both the oecumenical striving as for non-christians as well. So quite the ambition, and it's meant for anyone wanting to know how it really sticks together. {:-)
A separate blogpost has argued for the existence of God and ends with God being (infinite) Love [NB just as (infinite) Goodness and Beauty, but those can be seen as specific expressions of Love].
Yet, what does that mean exactly? What actually IS Love? Yes more than a feeling, it's a sort of invisible bond with something or someone for which we also like to give up something of ourselves (including time and energy) and which then elevates ourself as well, right? There is Love with respect to things (like your car), towards what we do (for example dancing), yet the greatest Love is always towards persons (friends / children / partner); and the greater the Love, the more She likes to give herself and bond to the other (physically ánd spiritually). It is then quite obvious to attribute to God the desire to give Himself completely to and bind with Someone else, which requires an equality of that Other; in other words we get a strong hunch that God is a Community existing out of two Persons (at least) [NB convincing arguments can be given why God specifically is a Trinity, namely because of a Love that together comes to full fecundity; even more Persons wouldn't add anything significant].
At the same time we can suspect in the limiteless of His Love, of desiring to give Himself, an important motivation to create the world and us in it [NB even though the great theologian John Duns Scotus argues that creation actually took place because of the Incarnation and not the other way around cf. Col 1:16]. In other words, we humans are created free and out of Love (we are no rabbits after all that can't do otherwise than follow their primal instincts, although circumstances indeed can strongly limit our choices).
Love namely rejoices in love-returned which strengthens the common bond also from the other side and so places both parties on the same footing; and without freedom this cannot be…
Cosmic Dilemma
True freedom, however, also entails the real possibility to choose against this Love, in other words to choose evil: those things that diminish the Good, Beautiful and Love as mentioned in the starting points of the argument. And indeed, we do experience a real brokenness in the world (like we can also call the evil), it is a given fact, a continuing reality and not a collection of separate incidents.
This gets us to the conviction that at some point in history something must have gone horribly wrong which made that the world now is not anymore as it was originally meant. Man has chosen against the Love that created him, and God apparently has taken us seriously and so he pulled away (to a certain extend, we couldn't survive if He left completely that's called creatio continua) and keeps respecting our choice [NB ‘the world clearly shows a God that hides himself’ cf. Blaise Pascal & Isa 45:15]. This usually is called “Original Sin” and it has brought this brokenness or lack into the world; the Biblebook of Genesis uses the frase "man ate from the tree of knowledge of good ánd evil” [Gen 2:17], which also brought death into the world, the unnatural separation of our objective (material) and subjective (spiritual) aspects, a very grieveous given that makes many a person doubt the Goodness of God, especially when suffering hits the most vulnerable and innocent.
An official name for this doubt is the "Problem of Suffering." But as we have considered it here, the question is not so much: how can it be that this problem exists? but rather: how in the world could there be a solution at all? Because if God respects our freedom, He can't do anything for us; and if He solves the problem for us, He abolishes our choice to separate us from Him.
However, Infinite Love couldn't simply leave it at that, and in His Wisdom even had already foreseen our separation...
Redemption
Almighty Goodness has, as a sort of meta-solution, done the inconceivable: the Second Person of the Trinity (Creator) has Himself become a man (creature) among us and so carries the consequences of our dramatic choices together with us until the utter end of Suffering & Death, in other words the ultimate compassion (Solidarity) [NB this seems the only essential point of the Faith that can't be reasoned out; only from the consequences we can conclude that it "was very good" (Gen 1:31, the Creator, also of time, after all oversaw already then the whole world-history)]. As the saying goes: shared suffering is only half the suffering. And which suffering is greater than as Son of God being abandoned by your Father who is Everything to you (eloï, eloï, lema sabachthani?) [Mark 15:34, my God, my God why have You abandoned me?]?
Moreover, as (God-)man He can indeed take over or take away from us any suffering (or even death) without abolishing our earlier choices; He is our ultimate scapegoat (Substitution) [John 1:29 Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world], at least if we desire it.
Yet, this brings back the problem of suffering, now as a meta-version: why doesn't He take away from us all the suffering that we ask of Him? In that case, however, there would be little left over from human solidarity and the possibility to follow Him in His sacrifice (and with that a stronger connection both with God and with our fellow men); and all the suffering that would be left would be nothing but your own fault [NB as indeed Job's friends accuse him of e.g. Job 4:7]. In other words, the meta-version of the problem is connected to a meta-valuation of us humans.
By looking at it in this way, death and suffering cease to be punishment [NB as we often experience it, additionally the image that the Old Testament mainly sketches of it], are even turned into grace and part of the (meta-)solution. Felix Culpa! [NB "Happy Guilt!" Spoken at the blessing of the Easter candle; it expresses how God in a paradoxical way brings forth Good from evil cf. Rom 5:10 and also Gen 45:5]. And because in God all times and places are present (He is after all truly Infinite), this meta-solution of (mutual) Substitution and Solidarity also works backwards in time and stretches itself out even until the moment that the problem started in the first place. And regarding death, that liberates us after a completed life from this "valley of tears" [Ps 83:7]. After all it remains 'only' a meta-solution [NB although suffering out of love can also be sweet ánd many witness about the great joys of Redemption, see e.g. the book Surprised by Joy by C.S. Lewis (surprisingly Lewis doesn't seem to see any link here with his wife Joy who he got to know at a later age and certainly also was a surprise for him; a wink from God?)] and it wouldn't be in the nature of Love to let the misery (how ever graceful it was made to be) continue forever, neither for an individual nor for humankind as a whole.
And so for mankind we can suspect, just as for any individual human, a beginning, a self-development and an end [NB respectively creation, salvation history and the apokalypse; note that Redemption and Salvation are strictly speaking notions to be distinguished]; and then Paradise (the City of God) [Rev 3:12, NB also the name of the crowning work of St Augustine], God being ‘all in all’ [1 Cor 15:28], becomes a reality.
Salvation history
Salvation can therefore be seen as well as a process that God goes with man during the whole of history. This constitutes the common thread of the Bible.
Preparation
In Genesis the first people receive the first announcement of salvation [Gen 3:15] right after it went wrong (in which the distrust against God was the main problem); Noah in his ark also points ahead to the saving of mankind from all misery [Gen 5:18 & 1 Pet 3:20-21]; Abraham receives the prophecy that in him the whole world will be blessed (plus in Isaac a prefiguration of the Cross is manifested) [Gen 12:3 & 22:12]; to Moses the Name of God (JHWH) is revealed [Ex 3:14] and that is also an implicit promise of salvation ('I Am here for you') [NB can even be seen to already prophecy the sacrifice on the Cross by means of the old Hebrew meaning of letters: Hand (Yod) Behold! (He) Nail (Vav) Behold! (He)]; Moses subsequently leads the people of God out of Egyptian slavery and then they receive guidelines from God on what constitutes a good life and so prevents unnecessary pain and problems [NB those are usually called "Ten Commandment," see Ex 20:2-17]; further, king David who is taken as a small boy from between his sheep, receives the prophecy that God's Son, as his descendant, will take place on his throne for ever [1 Sam 16:11, 2 Sam 7:12-16]; and during many many years God keeps remembering his people through the prophets (sometimes severely and with a strong hand, sometimes less so, but always out of Fatherly love) of how they are to become happy and that a saviour will come [NB e.g. the twig that will sprout from the stem of Jesse (David's father), see Isa 11:1].
Incarnation
And then the focal point of history arrives at which the angel Gabriël appears to Maria and announces her [Luke 1:31-33 ] that the Divine Son becomes the man Jesus, that He will fulfill all the promises and truly is Emmanuel, God-with-us [Isa 7:14 & Mat 1:23]. The Fiat of Mary really gets the plan going: God does not impose Himself onto man, He accomplishes Redemption only with her permission.
During his earthly life Jesus announces the arrival of the Kingdom of Heaven by word [NB e.g. the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5-7)] and by deed [NB e.g. the ressurection of Lazarus (John 11:43)]; He also teaches the right understanding of the commandments from the Old Testament, especially when he summarizes them in the double ‘commandment’ of love [NB love of course cannot be commanded, only replaces what before was known as commandment]: an unlimited love to God (in whatever way) and a limited love to fellow man [Mark 12:30-31 NB the part “as yourself” is often forgotten which opens the door to a negative self-image] is what makes man truly happy.
Jesus finally accomplishes Redemption on the Cross [John 19:30], a by the Romans perfected torture device; the Ressurection on the third day then almost obviously flows forth and confirms His Divinity once and for all [cf. Acts 2:24]; also it points forward to the completion of human history [NB on the "third day" of creation the first life appeared on the earth, now the new life; also the umptieth reference to the Trinity, specifically in the Old Testament as well; there the expression “third day” is present even 34 times, contrast this with “second day” and “fourth day” that only appear 13, respectively, 8 times in the whole of the Bible. B.t.w. ‘third day’ doesn't have to be the same as ‘after three days’; still, this is what Jesus claimed in Mat 12:40, yet He didn't ressurect after 3x24 hours, but already after about 39 hours; can this be related to prayers of Mary (like those of Niniveh and of Abraham for Sodom)?] .
Church
After Jesus' return to the Father and his sending of the Holy Spirit Jesus' disciples go forth to carry the good news of Redemption to the whole world and so collaborate towards completing history. To keep the unity amongst the disciples (resolve disputes), Jesus as the Good Sheperd [John 10:14] had appointed apostles and those in their turn again successors; and within the apostles Jesus indicated Simon Peter as the rock for the unity amongst them [Mat 16:18, NB history has showed how much they have failed that with as consequences the three main schisms: the Eastern (1054), the Western (1378) and the Reformation (1517); apparently Peter is followed also in his treason... Fortunately Jesus had already remarked that the healthy don't need a doctor and that He has come for the sinners [Mark 2:17]; so no-one is elevated above the others, the child abuse scandal made that clear once again. Dare we, through our trust in God, say also of this failure: Felix Culpa? (without in any way wanting to soften the irreparable damage)]. This unity is the actual task of the Pope, all the rest that has accumulated in the course of the centuries [NB such as the organisation of the Holy See / the Vatican] is at most secondary. But still, if necessary, he must, as a beacon of Truth, be able to “bind and loosen” [Mat 16:19] (in a clearly formulated way); that's all that the dogma of papal infallibility intends.
Sacraments
Besides the Gospel of Redemption, the Church has also been given concrete means with which certain (by her recognised) persons can 'administer' the gracious fruits of Redemption. Of these sacraments there are seven now as a sign that those are gifts of the Holy Spirit:
1) Baptism with water “in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” [Mat 28:19] which makes the baptised a permanent participant of the gifts of Redemption; in case of emergency it can even be administered by an unbaptised person.
2) Confirmation with oil and the imposition of hands [Act 8:17], an explicit gift of the Spirit that completes baptism and (in principle) is administered by the local bishop.
3) Eucharist with bread and wine by which you physically receive Jesus Himself [Luke 22:19] and which sanctifies your life on a daily basis; it is consacrated by priests.
4) Confession with words and possibly imposition of hands [John 20:23] in order to heal severe wounds of the soul; administered by priests.
5) Marriage with verbal affirmation and rings [NB however... (see next section)] which makes the bond of the couple into a special image of God and brings their mutual help to special fruitfulness [Gen 2:18]; administered by the couple themselves with a church representative as a witness [John 2:11, NB Jesus does not accomplish the marriage himself, does bless it with his first miracle].
6) Orders (of deacon, priest and/or bishop) with imposition of hands [Act 1:25] are a special surrender to God that yield graces for special tasks that do or do not go together with a marriage; administered by bishops.
7) Anointing of the sick with oil [Jam 5:14] is comparable to confession but then for serious bodily ailments for healing, but also spiritual strengthening in suffering or even for passing away; administered by priests.
PostScriptum
The vision of the Church on sex and marriage is experienced by many as a stumbling block and so it seems good to mention it here separately although it in no way is unconnected to all the foregoing. Because man is God's image and similaritude specifically in its being male ánd female [Gen 1:26-27], the spousal love is the strongest expression on earth of the Father who gives Himself fully to the Son, the Son who receives Himself fully from and gives back to the Father, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds from the exchange between the Father and the Son. So ‘wanting to be like God’ [Gen 3:5] by itself does indeed correspond to the deepest longing of man; but can also become the most profound wound if fulfillment is being sought where it cannot be found. Complete fulfillment needs the gift of my whole person to the one who is “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” [Gen 2:23], so including my future, fertility and other consequences, and forges also a very powerful spiritual bond. It is for a reason after all that the sacrament of marriage is made definite (consumed) by means of the spouses “becoming one flesh” [Gen 2:24].
Other forms of sex irrevocably lead to a greater or lesser extend to pain and problems: disappointments, diseases, unwanted fruits, broken bonds [NB yet even sacramental marriages can be broken; the unresolvability that the Church gives to it, however always offers a possibility for recovery and healing] and worries about all this as well; yet that actually not really differs too much from other imperfections in our life although it's more severe because it touches our deepest being; still, the pain and the problems do not make that sex 'bad', but indeed a lacking Good...
Ethics and Prayer
These may not be missing from this mini-catechism either, yet we can be very short about them: everything that stimulates the Good, Beautiful and True, that is in accordance with the Love as expressed by Jesus in the 'Golden Rule' [Mat 7:12] can be said to be ‘ethically responsible’. For discernment the apostle Paul writes: “test everything and hold fast to what is good” [1 Tess 5:21]. Besides, a certain ‘holy indifference’ regarding our deeds is certainly also not a bad idea [NB originally this notion only referred to God's calling for our life, later this has been extended to the general circumstances of our life (that after all may be considered to come out of God's hands), but why not also apply it to the cross of our own sinfulness? Felix Culpa!].
Prayer, to conclude, is everything with which we direct ourselves to God and which connects us with Him to receive His grace; don't hesitate to do this in any way that is helpful to you. St Paul calls us even to "pray without ceasing,” [1 Tess 5:17] in other words to make everything we do into a prayer.
Some means for this are: strive to do everything Well, out of Love, in connection with God and offer the results to Him; good luck!
Conclusion
There's no need to doubt that the Loving God created us for no other reason than to make us truly free and happy; it's just that because man once turned away from Him, the world is not anymore as it was meant to be and so we don't always recognise this goal of our creation from our experience. Hopefully this treatise was convincing and perhaps it even inspires to love in return, thankfulness and/or praise {:-)
Comments
Post a Comment