-255x257.jpg "Renewal Ministries")
One major criticism of the post-conciliar Church is that there was too much confusion after the Second Vatican Council, born both from misinterpretation and willful abuse. In an attempt to provide clarity in the areas where many Catholics continue to suffer from confusion, a new book has just been published: Will Many Be Saved? What Vatican II Actually Teaches and Its Implications for the New Evangelization.
The author is Ralph Martin, president of Renewal Ministries, an organization devoted to Catholic renewal and evangelization. Martin is also an associate professor of theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in the Archdiocese of Detroit, a consultor to the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization, and an expert at the Synod of Bishops on the New Evangelization now under way in Rome. He spoke with Rome correspondent Edward Pentin Oct. 8 about what he sees as some key steps that need to be taken if the New Evangelization is to bear fruit abundantly.
What are your hopes for this synod?
I hope that we don’t just repeat what’s been done in the previous [post-conciliar] documents like Evangelii Nuntiandi, Redemptoris Missio or Dominus Iesus. All those things are part of a real magisterial tradition that started to develop on evangelization, just like the Church’s social teaching. They’re very significant, but I hope we can take some additional steps that would be helpful for the New Evangelization.
What sort of steps are you thinking of?
I feel like there is a doctrinal confusion that hasn’t been paid sufficient attention to, that really is holding back evangelization. I would describe it like this: Many of our fellow Catholics look at the world this way — that broad and wide is the road that leads to heaven, and almost everyone is going that way, but narrow is the way that leads to hell, and hardly anybody is going that way.
Of course, this is hugely problematic, as it’s the exact opposite of what Jesus said in Matthew 7:13-14: “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”
So I feel like there’s actually some significant teaching in Vatican II that hasn’t been paid attention to, that would really clarify this amazing doctrinal confusion.
This being the case, what particular aspects of the Second Vatican Council would you like to see clarified?
This is what I did my doctoral dissertation on last year here in Rome, and this is the subject of my book that’s just been published by Eerdmans. In short, it relates to Lumen Gentium, the Constitution of the Church, Section 16. This states it’s possible under certain circumstances for people to be saved without hearing the Gospel if they’re inculpably ignorant, seeking God seriously, trying to live their life according to their conscience, assisted by grace — which is a very important point.
But then almost everyone ignores the next three sentences, which say that even though it’s theoretically possible for people to be saved without hearing the Gospel, as a matter of fact, “often men, deceived by the Evil One, have become vain in their reasonings and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, serving the creature rather than the Creator.”
Therefore, for the sake of their salvation, it’s urgent that the Church carry out its work of evangelization. Even though it’s possible for people to be saved without hearing the Gospel, it’s not so easy, because we’re not talking about a neutral environment. We’re talking about where the world of flesh and the devil are doing their best to put people on the broad way or keep them there.
So lots of people aren’t seeking God and really do need to hear the Gospel and be called to repentance, faith, baptism and conversion in order to be saved. Christianity isn’t just about enriching somebody’s life. For many people, it’s a matter of heaven or hell. This truth needs to be brought forward at this time because all our exhortations to be more enthusiastic about evangelization, more zealous, are going to fall on semi-deaf ears unless people really believe it will make a significant difference to people’s lives. Not just for this life, but for eternity.
Would you favor a radical change of emphasis?
What Vatican II tried to do was reset our relationship with the modern world and more positively commend what we could in modern culture, basically trying to get a hearing for the Gospel. So, in the course of the post-conciliar time, there had been a tendency to try to present how beautiful Christ is, how much he enriches our life, how he is the answer to every person’s existence. And some people say: “That’s all well and good, ho-hum; I’m not attracted to that, and it doesn’t make any difference to me.”
We need to restore the other aspect of things: that not to believe in the Gospel, not to accept the mercy of God, not to live according to the dictates of our conscience, really puts in jeopardy our salvation. We’re not just talking about enriching people’s lives who are already going to be saved no matter or almost no matter what they do. We’re really talking about people on their way to destruction, both in this life and the life to come, unless we kind of get them off the broad way and get them on the narrow way, which is Christ and the Church.
Do you have any other concerns and hopes for this synod?
I would hope we could clarify the mission of lay Catholics, because, after all, the people who are really called to do the New Evangelization are lay Catholics, and I think there’s fuzziness about what it means to be a lay Catholic.
Sometimes we talk about transforming the culture, being salt and light, but that’s too vague for many laypeople. What does that mean? How do I transform the culture? How do I be salt and light?
And so, the decree on the apostolate of laypeople of the Second Vatican Council spells out four specific ways in which Catholic laypeople should carry out their mission: the witness of our lives; the works of mercy and charity; renewing the temporal order; and, most importantly, that you don’t really have a lay mission unless people help people, unless they come to faith who don’t have faith or help people who have faith grow in faith.
We need to talk about Jesus with words as well as by the example of our life. Those are important specifications about the mission of laypeople which I hope can be clarified.
Would you like to see greater support from the institutional Church for this?
Yes, well, I give you the example around seminaries. For a good while, we were focusing on making sure our seminarians had a good idea of priestly identity, but we weren’t doing enough on making sure they had a really good sense of who they’re serving and what laypeople are called to in their baptism. They’re called to holiness and mission.
Now we’re trying to make sure the priests who are leaving seminary find out the other side of the story — that they’re supposed to be equipping the saints with the work of ministry. As it says in Ephesians 4, the risen Christ gave leaders to the Church, apostles, prophets, teachers and pastors and evangelists, to equip the saints, to equip the baptized for the work of ministry.
So the main role of leadership is to awaken lay Catholics so they can embrace their call to holiness and their call to mission. And yes, lay Catholics need support, encouragement, instruction — to be taught what it means to be a baptized Catholic.
Regarding the New Evangelization, some have argued that this is what we’re supposed to be doing anyway, and so, what's really "new" about the New Evangelization? What do you say to this?
You can really get this from Redemptoris Missio, No. 33, where John Paul II makes an important distinction: He says there’s primary evangelization addressed to peoples who have never been evangelized before — traditional missionary work. Then he says there’s pastoral care addressed to people already living as Catholics, helping them grow.
Then there’s something he calls "New Evangelization." He uses the sense of re-evangelization, directed to people who once had faith and aren’t living as disciples of Christ. We haven’t been used to thinking that our fellow Catholics need evangelizing.
Was he referring primarily to lapsed Catholics?
Yes, or even Catholics who are still going to church. But many people going to church are doing so with the mind of the world and the spirit of the age rather than the mind of Christ and the spirit of God.
So there needs to be a re-evangelization of many Catholics, drawing them into a clear commitment to the person of Christ and acceptance of his teachings in the Church.
One of the things new about the New Evangelization is who it’s directed to — our fellow Catholics.
The second thing about the New Evangelization is: Who does it? It isn’t just the priests and nuns — it’s us, and that’s new. The ordinary Catholic isn’t used to thinking about him or herself as being called to be an evangelists and to be a witness to Christ.
The other thing is John Paul’s methods: to be new in ardor and new in fervor. Basically, we need to rekindle the fire of the early Church, and this is what Pope Benedict talked about at the opening of the synod. We really need to recapture the grace of Pentecost, re-experience the power of the Holy Spirit that will give us new zeal for evangelization.
Regarding secularism entering the Church, what can be done to prevent this?
All the events happening this month are linked together. Before people are able to accept the teaching of the Church, they first have to be able to understand who Christ is, who founded the Church and whose Church it is. So the national and general directory of catechesis says that all catechesis now has to have a framework of evangelization.
We need to recognize that unconverted people are going to say: “Why should I do this? Why should a bunch of old men in Rome be making up rules for us?” But if they encounter the person of Christ and realize who he is and that he’s founded a Church and given it teaching authority, then the teachings take on a whole different meaning. They’re receiving the teachings because they have a whole divine authority behind them. I think evangelization needs to come first, then catechesis.
Here we have the Year of Faith — if people don’t have faith in who Jesus is and don’t have faith in the Church, then nothing else will happen. We have the Synod on the New Evangelization, and we have the Year of Faith. And then we have the 20th anniversary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. All of these things are related and form part of a whole renewal going on in the Church. The core renewal of the Second Vatican Council was also a renewal in holiness and a renewal in evangelization.
What do you say to the vocal critics of the Council?
I really feel like they’re mixing up the actual teachings of the Council and what some people did with them and what happened afterwards. For example, the decree on non-Christian religions: It’s actually very sound. It says there are seeds of the Gospel there; there are aspects of truth, but in no way did it say we shouldn’t be evangelizing non-Christian religions, even though afterwards people said that.
The Council doesn’t say that, and what you had afterwards was people not properly understanding the Council; they see the dialogue with non-Christian religions; they see ecumenism and get confused. They didn’t have a clear catechesis on the Council. There wasn’t a clear explanation.
And then you had theologians running around, like Hans Kung and Karl Rahner, saying, "This was a good start, but it’s just a start, and we need to keep evolving." So people didn’t even bother taking it seriously, because they’d say, "We’re starting this new era." That "we’re going to make up our new Church and new religion kind of thing."
And then you had the perfect storm of the '60s. You had the spirit of incredible cultural revolution and rebellion coming in, and that openness to the world came at a non-propitious time, or maybe it was propitious. But then the devil really took advantage of it and brought a cultural revolution that the Church wasn’t well equipped to resist and discern properly and defend.
So we’re digging out of that, but I’m really encouraged that we’re starting to get our act together. It’s late, but it’s better late than never.
Edward Pentin is the Register’s Rome correspondent. He blogs at NCRegister.com.
Edward Pentin: Pope Offers Plenary Indulgence During World Day of the Sick
Tim Drake: Register Radio: Putting Out into the Digital Deep & Advent
Comments
Post a Comment
Why was Rowan Williams invited to address the Vatican Synod when he denies God’s revelation on the Sanctity of Marriage and The Family? Our call to Holiness, is a call to authentic Love as defined by Christ, The Word of God. We cannot be His disciples if we do not abide in His Word.
but still USCCB does seem to want Evangelization. Why oh Why does USCCB prohibit LOGOS from selling me software for Catholic Bible Study and catholic Catechism study.
Actions speak louder than words.
For many years, now, I have tried to defend the Catholic Church. But the fact is the Church continually pushes faithful Catholics off the gangplank, while at the same time rolling out the red carpet for the likes of dissident theologians such as Hans Kung, dissident politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, and general heretics such as Rowan (Not so sure about that Divine Personage of Christ thing) Williams.
I have just about had enough. After all Didn’t Pope Kung say that a man can be a good Catholic and not give a dime to the Catholic Church? Just might be the most sensible thing he ever said!
Four points I think need to be addressed by the current Synod in Rome:
#1 There need to be opportunities for lay Catholics to become involved in the work of evangelization. Toward this end, I would propose setting up schools of evangelization to familarize Catholics in the ways of evangelizing - beginning first with catechetics.
#2. We must remember that the word “evangelize” is a verb. To evangelize is to go on mission - to pursue in all that we do the mission of the Church which is to proclaim the Gospel.
#3 All offices within the Church - at the USCCB, diocesan and parish levels - ought to be re-defined as ultimately working toward the end of evangelization. There should be nothing that the Church does that cannot be defined as promoting the Church’s mission - evangelization.
#4The Synod would do well to help us imagine what an evangelizing Church would look like. How would the world be different if Catholics took very seriously the call the evangelize? What would change? How would we know that our efforts toward evangelizing the world are bearing fruit?
We have to start at the beginning due to rampant secularism and relativism in the USA, along with the perfect storm of lousy catechesis for the average Catholic over the last 50 years.
The average US Catholic does NOT know their Faith well enough to accurately evangelize their own children yet alone those outside their own families. Faithful scholars and teachers must understand this.
This is evidenced by all the scandals and the lack of handling them properly so other souls will not be lost.
There are two simple ways to evangelize - - - -
1) Read the ” CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II ” in entirety (cover to cover).
and
2) Tell others (over age 16) to read the same CCC in entirety.
Thats it.
Go to ” What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE ” on internet for more info.
This is a good and timely article, but it raises an important question that’s left hanging. Why wasn’t the Church well equipped to discern and defend against the cultural revolution of the 1960s? Was it something to do with the nature of the rebellion itself? Was it the misinterpretation of the Council’s teachings? Was it a failure to implement the Council’s teachings? The answer seems vital to the new evangelization’s success.
If for any reason someone will not be able to understand the CCC - they should read from cover to cover the - “COMPENDIUM of the Catechism of the Catholic Church” (first printing March 2006).
and
Parents should require their 8th through 12 graders read “YOUCAT” (first printing 2011); and younger children to read the Baltimore catechism.
Discuss what you have read at the dinner table each day.
Evangelization start with yourself, then your family, then others.
Encourage others to read these as well.
All can be purchased through most Catholic Catalogue stores on the internet.
As a long time wannabe Catholic and recent convert since
Easter Vigil 2011 ( with a long period of struggle with
faith in between) I wish I could ask the Holy Father to
present a distillation of the 16 V2 documents which are
tailored to those who are not highly intelligent. Some of
us have limited ability to slog through Vatican textual
releases which are written more for the armchair theologians
rather than the average “Joe Catholic”.
Basically the V2 documents are more work then most folks
can handle in terms of reading and reflection.
I want the Magisterial authority of the Church to make a
plain statement of a Catholic’s duties and precepts which
no one can argue with; if anyone decides they don’t like it
then they are invited to leave the Church. I know that the
compendium of the catechism is nearly a “plain statement”
of doctrine/dogma, but I think something should be offered
to those who want a simple catechism which can be read
and agreed to within an hour of study.
Personally I am confident about what I need to do as a
Catholic male, but I think there are others who are
confused about such matters as “conscience”, and therefore
think they can do what their “inner voice” tells them,
even if it goes contrary to basic Magisterial teaching.
Blessings to all,
P.
@ Deacon Ed Peitler
As to point #1, I agree that it is very difficult to evangelize what has not been properly catechized. I am beginning to believe that a formal, systematic biblical formation program, along the line of the one started in the Diocese of Denver (but even more time intense), for those in the laity who are willing to commit to it, run by every diocese, is the beginning of both effective evangelization and catechetics.
This program would also integrate study of the Bible through the Catechism, thus strengthening the link between the Bible and what the Church teaches. But the Bible is the place to start.
Why weren’t a load of us “lay” people invited to the synod ? We can help. Many of us are experts in organizing , communicating, and, yes, leading. Many of us can even teach priests and bishops leadership skills they are sorely lacking. And what about youth? Why is there no discussion of the importance of galvanizing and mobilizing young adults in the new evangelization effort?
Hello? Knock knock. Lay person here. No criminal record. Don’t molest kids. I can help. Want my help ? Hello?
Deacon Ed - Bravo!!
This article has troubling doublespeak so characteristic of the language of Vatican II. Point #1: “We need to restore the other aspect of things: that not to believe in the Gospel, not to accept the mercy of God, not to live according to the dictates of our conscience…” Really? Not to live according to the dictates of our own conscience? And what if that personal conscience is wrong? This is exactly how Caroline Kennedy justifies her prochoice position. Point #2: He contradicts the narrow gate passage: “We’re not just talking about enriching people’s lives who are already going to be saved no matter or almost no matter what they do. We’re really talking about people on their way to destruction…” Oh really? Is there any such person who is going to be saved no matter what they do? I recall the apostles asked, Lord who can be saved? This author follows Calvin’s predestination theology. This is why the church is in trouble after VII.
In response to Deacon Peter, may I say that you may not be aware of (and may wish to research) a papal recognized movement within the Catholic Church called “Cursillo”. The re-evangelization which author Ralph Martin speaks of is the central purpose of the Cursillo Movement. It catechises, how individuals may evangelize the “far away from God and/or Church” may be brought into friendship with Christ through a specific, on-going meathod and mentality as one simply lives one’s everyday life while at the same time growing in their own formation. The “life-in-Grace” which is thus lived, nurtured, and supported as in this Movement,provides for much bearing of fruit and new joy-in-Christ and his Church. Lives have been changed and re directed toward Him in family and friends by the simple influence of who I am as layperson in the Church and child of God.
I was invited to this experience in 1997 and continue to become, within the Movement, the “me” that God created to be as some have been for over 40 years. It has been a life-enriching metanoia for many all over the world.
The days of hell and damnation have long since gone thanks to Vatican II through the primacy of the individual’s informed conscience.
To reinvent the intent of Vatican II by preying on people’s fear of hell and damnation ought to have been put to bed centuries ago. Religion is for people who fear hell – spirituality is for those who have been there. And to suggest that there is no salvation outside the church (CCCB 845) or that one’s salvation is at peril ignores the basic promise Jesus made to all humankind. ‘The thief [our ego] comes only to steal and kill and destroy. Jesus said “I came that they may have life and have it abundantly”. Creating doubt about the gift of God’s salvation has done more harm then anyone can imagine. God offers his salvation to ALL humankind and the ever expanding universe in which we are born. Have we forgotten Matthew’s lesson ‘He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous’? That is the ‘Good News’.
All doubt and fear comes from the ego i.e., the real enemy. With the assurance that God loves his creation unconditionally sets us free to become kingdom people and share his promise with all those who he places in our path. When we live like kingdom people we automatically become the new evangelizers.
Ralph Martin repeatedly suggests that the laity are deficient in one thing or another. Could it be that the institution has proven itself is far more deficient in many critical and controversial areas?. IS it not time they got their act together?
In the meantime here is what this lay person thinks about Vatican II: http://whenreligionfails.blogspot.ca/2012/10/the-impact-of-vatican-ii.html
Just to add a little more spice to the conversation, here follows an excerpt from Catholic priest and social psychologist Diarmuid O’Murchu from his book ‘Qantum Theology – Spiritual Implication of the New Physics’ which reveals a little more about how some Catholics have come to think the way they do.
“Unfortunately, the Reformation in the sixteenth century, and the reactions to it from Catholics and Protestants alike, greatly jeopardized the enlight¬ened vision of the high Middle Ages. Fear and suspicion drove both sides into theological enclaves. Protestants pursued an exclusive allegiance to the Word of God, paving the way for a rather cerebral, intellectualized, dehuman¬ized quality of religion, while Catholics developed a strong sacramental and canonical (legal) approach, which became a measuring stick for who was, and who was not, deemed to be in or out of the Catholic Church. Within these restrictive and artificial confines, theology became an ideological crite¬rion for allegiance to one or other camp. It was only a matter of time until theology assumed an idolatrous significance: “Our God, and not yours, is the real one,” adding sectarian bite to the slogan of early Christendom that claimed: “Outside the church there is no salvation.”
Hat Lady, agree with your comment about “conscience”. In voting, priests and bishops are always talking about the intrinsic evils and then at the end something about following your own conscience. Give me a break. What if you don’t have a well informed conscience? Maybe that’s why I’m cynical about this year of faith. Most Catholics don’t know it and don’t care to know it. It takes effort and doing a lot of reading. Reading the lives of the saints has helped me on my spiritualjourney and I’m still on the first step of self knowledge. See how many people know what “self knowledge” means in regards to faith? I also things Catholic Answers and EWTN do a great job of teaching the Catholic faith and evangelizing. I think Mother Angelica saved the Catholic Church.
Amen, Ralph Martin! I am a long time follower of yours. I just finished a weblink on the 4 Last Things (Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell) on THIS VERY TOPIC. We have too many in our faith that are walking around thinking that their salvation is guaranteed, simply on the sole premise that they are Catholic. We hear all the warm fuzzy discussions and homilies about how our God is kind and merciful, our BFF and everything else. While it may be true, we (in many circles- not all) aren’t proclaiming the ENTIRE message.
http://www.beholdthelambministry.com/the4lastthings.htm
Reviews and constructive comments are most welcome! Have a richly blessed day and keep fighting the good fight!
In Love and Peace,
A Frustrated Convert In Love with the Good News
there are some things about YOUCAT in the English translation that need to be clarified. for example it seems to suggest that there are errors in the Bible. This is not in conformity with Dei Verbum.
“Many people going to church are doing so with the mind of the world and the spirit of the age rather than the mind of Christ and the spirit of God.
I know exactly what you mean. A person I know, is Catholic in every way,going to Mass, saying the Rosary at home, etc., but when I told her abt. Obama’s abortion plan within his healthcare, she just said “oh, I don’t bother with things like that”. [she is democrat] Then, when I made a copy of what a Bishop said on the Register about “the Democrat platform being evil, the Republican platform is not evil” I gave a copy to her and she said “I thought they could not tell you how to vote” I reminded her that our priest on the Altar won’t tell anyone how to vote, but they can write about it”. I suggested she watch EWTN but she’d rather watch game shows and read fiction books. Some people just won’t change. She will vote for Obama because as she said “no one gives him a chance”. I shall still try to allow her to see the ‘light’.
You are right in that the previous two generations (I am 85) know little about respect for the church, especially when I sat next to a man recently, who had two grade school children with him , and he sat all through Mass playing games on his ipod or phone or whatever you call those new things they use. [even after he received Holy Communion} I almost poked him and said “pay attention”.....just as my grade school Nuns would have done.
I also must mention that when my children were in their late teens, we had folk Masses in our Church, which were beautiful. All the people participated in the Mass and in the Singing. I still remember the beautiful “Our Father” and the “Twenty-third Psalm”....so much better than what I am hearing today. Most organists in churches are unskilled and they just blast away on the organ, horrible!
I want to comment on the failure of our Bishops and priests to catechize properly or the lack of teaching adequtely from the pulpit. I think it fits in with the amazement we have for why over 50% of Catholics voted for a pro choice candidate the last election. I think we can connect it with Humanae Vitae, contraception etc etc. The Register had a article recently about the split in the Church when many priests and Bishops didn’t agree with Humanae Vitae and how that split the Church even to today. So we talk about how the laity have not been catechized properly but even out priests and Bishops have not embraced Church treaching in this area. So it’s high time the Bishops and priests in the US AND the world come together with our Pope and the “orthodox” Church and unite and then we can evangelize and in the end bring peace to this country and the world.
The post by Trebert hat “no salvation outside the church (CCCB 845) or that one’s salvation is at peril” is completely false. This is not the post-Vatican II Catholic belief and he misreads the Catechism 845.
The Council of Trent infallibly said in the VII session in canon IV, “If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema (excommunicated).” http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct07.html
Protestant’s faith won’t save them and lapsed Catholic’s faith won’t save them. They need the sacrament of confession.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.