 |
| Germaine Grisez |
I came across this exceptionally interesting
letter, which the moral theologian Germain Grisez has written about the Pope
Francis interview published in the Jesuit publication. I found it on the Blog, Mirror
of Justice.
Germaine Grisez is the
author of the three-volume set of books entitled “The Way Of The Lord Jesus”, which deals
with the Catholic Church’s moral teachings. I can boast that this set fills my
bookshelf and is exceptionally useful. Anyway, I digress.
 |
| Grisez's - The way of the Lord Jesus |
It is well worth reading the introduction to the Grisez’s letter, which Patrick Brennan has written on the Blog "Mirror of Justice". Of course the Grisez letter is there too, or you can read it below. The underlined portions of Grisez’s letter are my emphases, not Grisez's.
Insofar as I understand what Pope Francis had to say, I can agree
with him, but he said some things that I do not understand, and that have
already been made bad use of by the secular media. Take the following
passage:
"The dogmatic and moral teachings of the Church are not all
equivalent. The Church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the
transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.
Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary
things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart
burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus. We have to find a new balance; otherwise
even the moral edifice of the Church is likely to fall like a house of cards,
losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel
must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the
moral consequences then flow."
The teachings of the Church certainly are not all equivalent. There
is a hierarchy.
But what is the point of saying that the Church’s pastoral ministry
cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a "disjointed multitude of
doctrines to be imposed insistently"? Making this assertion suggests,
unfortunately, a caricature of the teachings of recent pontificates. I
assume Pope Francis would reject that reading. But where, then, is the state of
affairs that needs to be overcome?
Proclamation in a missionary style does focus on essentials. But the
new evangelization cannot proceed as if the Gospel has not been already
preached, and either understood or not, but in either case, rejected. Still, I
agree that what is central needs to be presented more clearly and forcefully
than has generally been the case. Unless people believe that Christ has risen
and will come again and gather into his kingdom all who are ready to enter, and
unless they hope to be among those ready to enter, there is no use trying to
instruct them about what they need to do in order to be ready to enter.
But what is meant by “moral edifice of the Church”? Many people
mistakenly think that the moral truth the Church teaches is a code she has
constructed and could change. If that were so, it could collapse like a house
of cards. Perhaps Pope Francis means that the moral teachings, though they
are truths that pertain to revelation, will collapse for the individual who
lacks hope in the kingdom to come. But who knows what he means? The phrase is
impressive. It reverberates in one’s depths. But if it was suggested by a
spirit, it was not the Holy Spirit, for it is bound to confuse and mislead.
I’m afraid that Pope Francis has failed to consider carefully
enough the likely consequences of letting loose with his thoughts in a world
that will applaud being provided with such help in subverting the truth it
is his job to guard as inviolable and proclaim with fidelity. For a long time
he has been thinking these things. Now he can say them to the whole world — and
he is self-indulgent enough to take advantage of the opportunity with as
little care as he might unburden himself with friends after a good dinner and
plenty of wine.
Germain Grisez
