The Cambridge historian Richard Rex has noted that the first great crisis in Christianity was over the nature of the Trinity, especially over the nature of Christ, hence the early Christological heresies. The second great crisis, associated with the Reformation, was over the nature of the Church. This entailed the Protestant attack on sacramentality and the sacred hierarchy. The third great crisis, Rex observes, the one we are enduring today, is over the nature of the human person. Here the concrete issues revolve around the fact of sexual difference. Does the difference between masculinity and femininity have any theological significance?
This overview of the history of ecclesial crises is very perceptive but one might add that within the Catholic Church today the crisis is not confined to matters of anthropology. Rather a perfect storm has been building across the various branches of theology. In some cases, the crisis has been created because elements of the Catholic intellectual tradition that should exist in a symbiotic relationship have been de-coupled from one another and left in a kind of free-floating state. For example, moral theology has been de-coupled from dogmatic theology. Quite simply, the field of fundamental theology that undergirds all other branches of Catholic theology has been an intellectual battle zone for the past half century. There is no common agreement within the Catholic theological academies over such “building blocks” as the relationship between nature and grace, faith and reason, history and ontology, scripture and tradition, and the principles that ought to govern scriptural exegesis. Not only are the relationships a subject of academic debate, but the individual concepts themselves are not understood in the same way across the world of Catholic scholarship. There is, for example, no common agreement about key concepts like “grace,” “sacrament,” “tradition,” and even “priesthood.” Notions like the understanding of a priest as “alter Christus” (another Christ) are accepted by some but rejected by others. Some scholars believe that priesthood entails an ontological change in the recipient of the sacrament while others believe this idea is medieval nonsense. Some scholars read the Scriptures through the lens of contemporary social theories such as Critical Theory or a wide variety of Feminist theories, while others accept the teaching in The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (1993), a publication of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, that is expressly critical of the employment of Marxist and Feminist social theories.
Amidst so much dissension Pope Francis has fostered a series of synods where proponents of alternative theological visions and fundamental principles can present their cases. While there have been many synods over the course of the centuries, in the past those invited to attend synods have been bishops and scholars with some academic authority in the field under discussion. The contemporary form of synods however includes members of the laity who are hostile to magisterial teachings. For some, simply being on the Church’s payroll is a sufficient criterion for inclusion in the meetings. This is unprecedented and it has occurred notwithstanding the fact that two documents of the International Theological Commission—Sensus Fidei in the Life of the Church (2014) and Synodality in the Life and Mission of the Church (2018)—have offered lists of criteria that need to be satisfied before any member of the laity could be thought to possess the sensus fidei (sense of the faith). In both lists fidelity to magisterial teaching is a necessary criterion. This is because the Church is something completely different from a debating society. In the words of Hans Maier there is an analogy between what constitutional lawyers call a bloc incontestables (a block of incontestable ideas or propositions), that set the boundaries for any debate about constitutional law, and what theologians call the deposit of the faith or teachings of Jesus Christ, that set the boundaries for theological discussions. Never before in ecclesial history have individuals been invited to offer their opinions based on nothing more reliable than their feelings and never before have mere feelings (marketed as the promptings of the Holy Spirit) been allowed to trump scripture and tradition.
A significant sociological development over the past half century has been the employment of lay Catholics in Church agencies, schools, universities, and hospitals. As vocations to religious life plummeted after the 1960s, a new generation of lay Catholics took the place of religious in the management of ecclesial institutions. At the same time many such institutions began to receive funding from secular governments. The country where this development is most pronounced is Germany. The statistics from 2022 show that the Catholic Church in Germany employs approximately 650,000 people. 150,000 work directly in the Church in pastoral work positions and administration, and this includes clergy. Some 500,000 work in other ecclesial institutions such as schools and hospitals. The Catholic Church in Germany has approximately 22 million believers, of which approximately 1.2 million attend services on Sundays (sometimes in the form of a prayer service when there is no priest). The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung recently reported a survey conducted among Catholics and Evangelical Protestants. In both denominations, the percentage of people who believe that “God revealed himself in the person of Jesus of Nazareth” is approximately 30%. However, in both denominations, the blessing of homosexual couples is accepted or supported by approximately 85%. Another fact is that in 2022 a record 522,821 Catholics formally left the Church in Germany.
The German Synodale Weg (Synodal Path) was an epiphenomenal manifestation of this state of affairs. While hundreds of thousands of people are employed by the Church in Germany because of government funding through the “Kirchensteuer” system of taxation, their employment is in no way synonymous with Catholic belief and practice. A significant proposition of Germans identifying as “Catholics” have trouble affirming a belief in the divinity of Christ, let alone the many other less-central elements in the Catholic intellectual tradition. It is difficult to understand how inviting such people to national talk-fests will do anything to resolve what is fundamentally a crisis in faith and belief.
One explanation for the spiritual disaster that is Catholic Germany is that the immediate post-World War II generation needed a narrative to explain how the Nazi regime could have survived for over a decade and how the Holocaust could have occurred at the hands of German officers. The narrative that many accepted, especially in the immediate post-war generation, was provided by the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School that was hostile to concepts like objective truth and social hierarchy. When Critical Theory is applied to an analysis of ecclesial governance, it fosters the deconstruction of the sacred hierarchy. It “de-mythologizes” the papacy, the priesthood, and the episcopacy and promotes a democratization of the Church in the direction of congregationalism. These ideas were not only popular in Germany, but in the Netherlands and Belgium as well. They have also spread to other countries through the channel of graduates of theology academies in Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium, especially Germany and Belgium. It is a historical fact that every single intellectual leader of the liberation theology movement (regarded as a quintessentially Latin American movement), obtained his doctorate from European (mostly German and Belgium) universities. Quite simply, liberation theology was “made in Germany”!
Another German phenomenon is the influence of Immanuel Kant. Kant wanted to separate theology from philosophy, marginalize the theology thus separated, and then defend the Christian moral tradition by reference to reason alone, uncontaminated by theological principles. This led to what German-speaking theologians call “moralism”—a presentation of the Christian faith as a moral code. While it is true that the Catholic faith includes a place for moral theology, moral theology is not the end or purpose of the Christian life. The end or purpose of Christian life is participation in the life and love of the Holy Trinity. The Catholic “moral code,” so to speak, is one element in the means to achieve this—it is a means, not an end.
The research of the sociologist Julie Pagis on the leaders of the student protest movements in 1968 concludes that many of these students who became Marxists were brought up in Christian families. Significantly, the hallmark of such families was that Christianity was presented to the children as a moral code. One might say that the student rebels were brought up on a Kantian kind of Christianity even if they were baptized Catholics. Once they arrived at university they retained the desire to be moral people, but preferred the morality of Marxism, with its emphasis on liberating “victims of social oppression” to the morality of the Church. The availability of the contraceptive pill lured the generation of 1968 away from Christian moral theology.
One result was that many middle-class Catholics absorbed elements of Marxist social theory into their intellectual frameworks while ignoring the teaching of the Church on matters pertaining to sexual morality. This development was a central theme of the works of the Italian philosopher Augusto del Noce. Del Noce understood that the Marxism of the “New Left,” typified by people like Antonio Gramsci and the social theorists of the Frankfurt School, “reaches a much deeper form of irreligiosity than [a simple] atheistic negation, and in this form it allies itself with the bourgeois-secular spirit pushed to its final conclusion.”1 In short, del Noce’s insight was that contemporary liberal Catholicism is built upon an alliance of the bourgeois-secular spirit, especially the interest in upward social mobility, with forms of New Left Marxism. It is logical, therefore, that attacks on the tradition of moral theology, and especially the moral theology of St. John Paul II, from scholars (predominately clerics) who identify themselves as “Catholic,” almost always take the form of an appeal to the social sciences and a corresponding diminution of the authority of Sacred Scripture.
This influence of the alliance of the bourgeois-secular spirit with currents of New Left Marxism within Catholic academies and within Catholic families and Catholic agencies has led African Catholic leaders to lament the fact that first-world Catholics (Catholics in Western Europe and the Anglo-sphere) have become syncretist. In other words, legitimate elements of the Catholic faith have become entangled with a cocktail of intellectual ideas absorbed from hostile traditions. This syncretism, which represents a form of idolatry, is a significant cause of the dismally low rates of participation in the sacramental life of the Church and the equally dismally low numbers of youth entering the priesthood and religious life in the first-world countries. The general African attitude is “by their fruits you shall know them” and the crops, so to speak, in places like Germany and Belgium, are almost complete failures. There is something sterile about liberal German Catholicism.
Another way to look at the problem is to say that the archetypically German syncretism aligns itself, consciously or unconsciously, to a form of humanism described by Gottlieb Söhngen as a humanism contra crucem—a humanism that avoids asceticism and is wary of self-sacrificial love—a humanism that wants to steer clear of the cross. The essay in this collection that was delivered to celebrate the anniversary of the foundation of the Passionist Order addresses this issue.
Lest I stand accused of being unfair to the German Catholics, it should be clear that I regard Joseph Ratzinger and other Germans in his intellectual circle, such as the above-mentioned Gottlieb Söhngen, as Church doctors who offered an accurate diagnosis of the spiritual pathologies underlying the contemporary crisis. In so many ways Ratzinger found himself in the epicentre of the storm of contemporary fundamental theology. His occasional addresses, homilies, and essays can be pieced together to create both a pathology report on the implosion of the Catholic faith in Europe and a road map out of the labyrinth created by a couple of centuries of German attempts to improve human life without recourse to God.
In a homily delivered in 1959 a young Fr. Joseph Ratzinger described the first Christmas day as the “winter solstice of world history.” Christ is something more than another moral teacher or celebrity philanthropist and his Church—including the priesthood, the Petrine Office, and the episcopacy—is a sacred institution, not another multinational welfare agency. To quote from §766 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, itself an echo of Lumen Gentium §3:
The Church is born primarily of Christ’s total self-giving for our salvation, anticipated in the institution of the Eucharist and fulfilled on the Cross. “The origin and growth of the Church are symbolized by the blood and water which flowed from the open side of the crucified Jesus”. “For it was from the side of Christ as he slept the sleep of death upon the cross that there came forth the ‘wondrous sacrament of the whole Church’”. As Eve was formed from the sleeping Adam’s side, so the Church was born from the pierced heart of Christ hanging dead on the cross.
So, what do we need now?
Well first, we need to fight on sacramental ground. We need to put our faith in prayer and the sacraments.
Second, we need to be critical of the concept of the Church as primarily a philanthropic institution.
Third, we need to avoid the trap of thinking of the Catholic faith as merely a moral framework. Yes, it does have a moral framework, but this framework is an infrastructural support for our relationship to the Blessed Trinity, which is the primary thing about being a Christian.
Fourth, we need to start asking questions about whether synods are just like debating clubs where people can promote any idea that suits them or whether the faith itself is something that has already been given to us and can only be received and handed on, not constantly reconstructed. The question is, in other words, whether there are some teachings that are simply not able to be rejected because they are part of the very deposit of the faith.
Fifth, while new historical situations can raise new challenges for the practice of the faith and can give rise to the development of magisterial teaching, such as, for example, the arrival of the contraceptive pill gave rise to St. John Paul II’s catechesis on human love, the truth itself does not change. As Joseph Ratzinger said in his Principles of Catholic Theology:
The seat of all faith is, then, the memoria Ecclesiae, the memory of the Church, the Church as memory. It exists through all ages, waxing and waning but never ceasing to be the common situs of faith…there can be a waxing or waning, a forgetting or remembering, but no recasting of truth in time.
• Editor’s note: This essay is an extract from the preface to Tracey Rowland’s latest book: Unconformed to the Age: Essays on Ecclesiology (Steubenville: Emmaus Academic, 2024). It appeared first on the What We Need Now substack and is reprinted here with kind permission.
Endnote:
1Augusto del Noce, The Age of Secularization (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2017), 242.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
We read: “Fifth, while new historical situations can raise new challenges for the practice of the faith and can give rise to the development of magisterial teaching […] the truth itself does not change.”
Cardinal Jon Henry Cardinal Newman, the “Father of the Second Vatican Council” and who is ideologically misquoted on the meaning of “change,” said it this way:
“[About a great idea] In time it enters upon strange territory; points of controversy alter their bearing; parties rise and fall around it; dangers and hopes appear in new relations; and old principles reappear under new forms. It CHANGES with them IN ORDER TO REMAIN THE SAME [!]. In a higher world it is otherwise, but here below to live is to [‘] change [’], and to be perfect is to have changed often.” (“The Development of Christian Doctrine,” Ch. 1, Sec. 1, caps added).
This, too, from St. Augustine: “We can say things differently, but we can’t say different things.”
AND, about Der Synodal Weg and the bloated Church in Germany as an extravagant employer of last resort, maybe this….Newman observed that the effect of the definition of papal infallibility is “not to enfeeble the freedom or vigour of human thought in religious speculation, but to resist and control its extravagance” (“Apologia Pro Vita Sua,” Image, 1962).
It is possible to arrange a parish library in chronological categories, so that their organic nature and relationships are evident.
“For the Faith, evolution means death. They talk about an evolving Church, they want an evolving faith. “You must submit to the living Church, to today’s Church”, someone wrote to me from Rome in 1976, as if today’s Church should not be identical to yesterday’s Church. I replied: “Under these conditions, what you say today will no longer be true tomorrow.”
Mgr Marcel Lefebvre 1987
“Quite simply, the field of fundamental theology that undergirds all other branches of Catholic theology has been an intellectual battle zone for the past half century.”
Thank you for that perfect description of Post-Conciliarism’s Marxist Deconstructivism which is but part of the Freemasonic War on Catholic Tradition. It is designed to leave nothing but an empty shell.
God has not abandonned Catholics in the fallout of World War three 1962-1965, for the continuity of Catholicism was assured by just one great and holy Archbishop: Mgr Marcel Lefebvre.
1 Corinthians 3: 1-23
On Divisions in the Corinthian Church
“But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not solid food; for you were not ready for it; and even yet you are not ready, 3 for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving like ordinary men? 4 For when one says, “I belong to Paul,” and another, “I belong to Apol′los,” are you not merely men?
5 What then is Apol′los? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. 6 I planted, Apol′los watered, but God gave the growth. 7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. 8 He who plants and he who waters are equal, and each shall receive his wages according to his labor. 9 For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.
10 According to the commission of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man take care how he builds upon it. 11 For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble— 13 each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? 17 If any one destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and that temple you are.
18 Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their craftiness,” 20 and again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile.” 21 So let no one boast of men. For all things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apol′los or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future, all are yours; 23 and you are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s.“
You were doing OK until you cited Lefebvre. You do not prove yourself a Catholic stalwart by thumbing your nose at the Pope.
Please explain how citing Lefebvre proves that one is “not a Catholic stalwart” and also that one is nose-thumbing-up at the Holy Father.
There is no common agreement within Catholic theological academies over the relationship between nature and grace, faith and reason, history and ontology, scripture and tradition, and the principles that govern scriptural exegesis (precis of T Rowland).
After ordination a fellow priest asked, Did you feel an ontological change? It took time to realize the question’s significance because it became realized under duress in circumstances priests will inevitably be challenged with. Certainly as Rowland suggests. Aquinas taught grace doesn’t change our nature. It perfects it. Although, the sacrament is lasting, so that in effect we may say something has been attached to me. All is a grace can be drawn from the Apostle’s constant reference. Whereas faith finds its measure in reason.
Faith, again a gift of grace. Our apprehension of the good entails certitude of its truth, a deep, intuitive understanding when subject and predicate are apprehended in one act of knowing. As such truth is the rule that is measured by reason [St Gregory Nazianzen calls the reflective reasoning of the singular truth scrutinized by reason Synderesis]. These unchangeable principles apprehended by the intellect and measured by reason are the ‘building blocks’ that render coherence within and to the respective theologies.
Masculine and feminine have great theological significance since the mystery of marriage points to the beatific vision. Both are biological as well as spiritual, the latter misunderstood as a learned trait that is learned and subject to change, as in transgender. We remain feminine or masculine in heaven, the key to the virtual opposites that attract eachother as Christ is attracted to his bride the Church. Christ is the center from which all truth regarding Mankind flows. And particularly as noted by Rowland within the Trinity as understood by Catholicism. Man does not possess within himself the perfection to which he’s called, rather the potential. That perfection is found in Christ.
Concerning Dr. Rowland’s third remedy, perhaps the “moral framework” needs to be emphasized anew, supported by “ressourcement” as an integral contributor, rather than given minor status…
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2023/11/thomists-in-the-wilderness
You write: “The contemporary form of synods however includes members of the laity who are hostile to magisterial teachings”.
This is an interpretation. I could easily be labeled as one who is “hostile” to magisterial teachings, but I and others may not see it that way. So what exactly do you include in this category of those “hostile” to Church teaching? Those who believe that women should be admitted to Holy Orders, i.e., the diaconate? Or those who think celibacy should not be mandatory?
You also write: “Never before in ecclesial history have individuals been invited to offer their opinions based on nothing more reliable than their feelings…”
Really? How is it that you know that their opinions are based on nothing more reliable than their feelings, and not their own life experience, their prayer life, perhaps their intuition, which is more than “feeling”?
Sheeeesh! Ya think you are reading a scholarly article, and then this kind of nonsense suddenly appears.
Maybe you got off too easy thus far Thomas James. If you turn out to be a heretic and the angels in St. Michael’s cohort take a turn at you, you will not be able to say pick on somebody your own size -with any effect; you’ll get what’s a-coming.
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2024/10/23/the-conciliar-circularity-of-synodality/
I can’t help but wonder if theologians don’t spend way too much time thinking, and not nearly enough time doing the hard work of working the garden God has created for them to tend.
Where does the ecclesiological come from?
“When the Mass is overthrown, I think we’ll have overthrown the whole papacy. For it is on the Mass, as on a rock, that the entire Papacy rests, with its monasteries, its bishoprics, its colleges and its altars. All that will crumble when their sacrilegious and abominable Mass crumbles.”
Martin Luther quoted by Mgr Marcel Lefebvre in “La messe de Luther” 1975.
When James Martin posted blasphemous images of the blessed virgin mary was it his opinion, feeling, life experience, prayer life, or intuition?
How does scandalous behavior of Fr. Martin justify the scandalous schism of Archbishop Lefebvre?
“According to the commission of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man take care how he builds upon it. 11 For no other foundation can any one lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”
Mgr Lefebvre refused New Foundations, A New Religion more acceptable to the World and its Prince but in contradiction with 2000 years of perenial Catholic Truth.
Time will prove Mgr Lefebvre to have been God’s loyal servant during the Modernist Apostasy, the Great Persecution of Sacred Tradition. And that persecution is still underway, God’s Fool. Against ALL Catholic Tradition – even that which has hitherto escaped is now under attack from Ecumenical New Church’s next stage: Synodal Superlodge.
Test all, God’s Fool, and hold on to what is true. Read Lefebvre, find the fault. (I avoided reading him for 30 years… more’s the pity. I could have saved myself years of heart-ache. The only reasonable answer to the present crisis and all its wickedness is the eclipsed Church).
God bless,
“Mr Cracked Nut”
Am praying for your full reconciliation with the Catholic Church.
Am praying for the reconciliation of the freemasonic Apostasy with Catholic Truth.
https://angeluspress.org/collections/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre
https://angeluspress.org/collections/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre
Read some God’s Fool.
The Synod as a debating society! Thank you, Dr. Rowland, for putting it so clearly. “My feelings tell me I am right, therefore change your doctrine to be modern!” And if we keep meeting and meeting and meeting some more, then in another year or so you will bend to my feelings! May the Lord have mercy on His church. May the Lord have great mercy on His church.