Catholic Catechism in context
Submitted by Forgiven on March 29 2000 17:34:27
In reply to And yet... submitted by Ford Prefect on March 26 2000 21:54:50
|
The same principle applies to the proper interpretation of quotes from the Catholic Catechism as to the interpretation of scripture - i.e. a quote without a context is a pretext. In this case it is important to understand that this does not mean that the church is denying that it has the right to speak authoritatively in certain areas - what it is saying is that the individual may sometimes need to hold to his conscience over against the view of the church and the church should not use physical FORCE to make him act against it. But the church has a duty, which in recent years it has sometimes failed to exercise, to act in a disciplinary matter against the person clinging to a pattern of behaviour or doctrine that is contary to the teaching of the church. If a person chooses to live or teach that way, then as an act of love to emphasis to the person that they are denying something that the church holds as crucial, that person should be expelled from the church. This has two specific applications. In the case of an authorised teacher of the church, then they should remain within the bounds of the teaching of the church. Hans Kung is perhaps the most obvious recent example of such an act of discipline. In the case of a specific sin which the person is clinging to despite it endangering his salvation, again, as an act of love, the church is called to exclude that person from membership until they repent of the behaviour. Note that both patterns of discipline date clearly from the New Testament -2 John instructs us to restrict our fellowship with those who deny the incarnation (c.f. Unitarians) whilst I Corinthians 5 speaks of excluding the sinner. It should be only out of love, and as a result of the most clear cut circumstances. The danger is that it is applied too easily as a means of control - but the other danger, which is far more common in recent years is that the church hiding behind a single verse 'Judge not that you be not judged' declines to exercise the proper discernment that is the proper duty of all believers (see Philipians 1 v9 and I Thess 5 v21). For us of course it is a crucial issue. As putative offender the natural reaction of the church is to act as the world and reject us - THIS WILL NOT DO. However those of us who choose to form and continue in sexual relationships with boys should, in my opinion, be excluded from the fellowship of the church because such behaviour is endangering ones' salvation; this state should be marked by the church's statement of its dissatisfaction. However once the relationship has ended and person has expressed his repentance, he should of course be restored to the fellowship. This is not a purely hypothetical argument for me. The divorced mother of my 19 year old non sexual YF is in a relationship with a married man. The response of my church has been unclear - excluding from active ministry but not from partaking in communion. As a result my YF is unclear at times of the reality of the requirement to live as God requires - the church says one thing but does another. That my YF has so far missed the call of God in his life is something that hurts a lot. So I hope that makes for a consistent and helpful explanation. I'm not 100% sure of my exposition of the Roman Catholic position - I don't take the authority of the Pope myself - but I believe it a fair summary. |
Follow ups: