Gaudium et Spes 65

Gaudium et Spes continues on the theme of economics …

Economic development must remain under (human) determination and must not be left to the judgment of a few (people) or groups possessing too much economic power or of the political community alone or of certain more powerful nations. It is necessary, on the contrary, that at every level the largest possible number of people and, when it is a question of international relations, all nations have an active share in directing that development.

A natural democratic principle is applied here. Too often, the political sphere is the limit at which American democracy ends. In the worst of the modern world’s situations, have we conceded an economic feudalism to the large corporations of our day?

There is need as well of the coordination and fitting and harmonious combination of the spontaneous efforts of individuals and of free groups with the undertakings of public authorities. Growth is not to be left solely to a kind of mechanical course of the economic activity of individuals, nor to the authority of government. For this reason, doctrines which obstruct the necessary reforms under the guise of a false liberty, and those which subordinate the basic rights of individual persons and groups to the collective organization of production must be shown to be erroneous. (4. Cf. Leo XIII, encyclical letter Libertas, in Acta Leonis XIII, t. VIII, p. 220 ff; Pius XI, encyclical letter Quadragesimo Anno: AAS 23 (1931), p. 191 ff; Pius XI, encyclical letter Divini Redemptoris: AAS 39 (1937), p. 65 ff; Pius XII, Nuntius natalicius 1941: AAS 34 (1942), p. 10 ff: John XXIII, encyclical letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), pp. 401-464.)

Reiterating again that economics serve society, not the other way around, and that economics must be guided by a wider sphere of influence than business and political leaders to be authentically moral and beneficial to society as a whole.

Citizens, on the other hand, should remember that it is their right and duty, which is also to be recognized by the civil authority, to contribute to the true progress of their own community according to their ability. Especially in underdeveloped areas, where all resources must urgently be employed, those who hold back their unproductive resources or who deprive their community of the material or spiritual aid that it needs-saving the personal right of migration-gravely endanger the common good.

Ceding easy control to authorities is wrong. Again, participation of citizens in the formation of the economy is not only a right, but also a responsibility.

Comments?

 

Gaudium et Spes 64

“Economic Development” comes under the scrutiny of the council bishops in this section of Gaudium et Spes. It’s a brief section, stating again what should be obvious: that the dignity of the human person is paramount. It remains above the considerations of profit or technological development for their own sake.

Today more than ever before attention is rightly given to the increase of the production of agricultural and industrial goods and of the rendering of services, for the purpose of making provision for the growth of population and of satisfying the increasing desires of the human race. Therefore, technical progress, an inventive spirit, an eagerness to create and to expand enterprises, the application of methods of production, and the strenuous efforts of all who engage in production–in a word, all the elements making for such development–must be promoted. The fundamental finality of this production is not the mere increase of products nor profit or control but rather the service of (people), and indeed of the whole (person) with regard for the full range of … material needs and the demands of (an) intellectual, moral, spiritual, and religious life; this applies to every (person) whatsoever and to every group of (people), of every race and of every part of the world. Consequently, economic activity is to be carried on according to its own methods and laws within the limits of the moral order, (Cf. Pius XI, encyclical letter Quadragesimo Anno: AAS 23 (1931), p. 190 ff; Pius XII, address of March 23, 1952: AAS 44 (1952), p. 276 ff; John XXIII, encyclical letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (19ffl), p. 450; Vatican Council II, Decree on the Media of Social Communication, Chapter I, n. 6 AAS 56 (1964), p. 147.) so that God’s plan for (humankind) may be realized. (Cf. Matt. 16:26, Luke 16:1-31, Col. 3:17)

 

Gaudium et Spes 63

Gaudium et Spes now begins a new chapter to treat “Economic and Social Life”

In the economic and social realms, too, the dignity and complete vocation of the human person and the welfare of society as a whole are to be respected and promoted. For (the human person) is the source, the center, and the purpose of all economic and social life.

Economics and society made for people, not the other way around.

Like other areas of social life, the economy of today is marked by (an) increasing domination over nature, by closer and more intense relationships between citizens, groups, and countries and their mutual dependence, and by the increased intervention of the state. At the same time progress in the methods of production and in the exchange of goods and services has made the economy an instrument capable of better meeting the intensified needs of the human family.

One might say this suggests a naive view of the modern world compatible with business interests: life is getting better; why complain that corporate CEO’s are raking in their profits? Clouds on the horizon, though:

Reasons for anxiety, however, are not lacking. Many people, especially in economically advanced areas, seem, as it were, to be ruled by economics, so that almost their entire personal and social life is pennated with a certain economic way of thinking. Such is true both of nations that favor a collective economy and of others. At the very time when the development of economic life could mitigate social inequalities (provided that it be guided and coordinated in a reasonable and human way), it is often made to embitter them; or, in some places, it even results in a decline of the social status of the underprivileged and in contempt for the poor. While an immense number of people still lack the absolute necessities of life, some, even in less advanced areas, live in luxury or squander wealth. Extravagance and wretchedness exist side by side. While a few enjoy very great power of choice, the majority are deprived of almost all possibility of acting on their own initiative and responsibility, and often subsist in living and working conditions unworthy of the human person.

Again, we have a description of the bishops’ view of the world. This is not church teaching per se, but a diagnosis of what the Church sees in the world.

A similar lack of economic and social balance is to be noticed between agriculture, industry, and the services, and also between different parts of one and the same country. The contrast between the economically more advanced countries and other countries is becoming more serious day by day, and the very peace of the world can be jeopardized thereby. Our contemporaries are coming to feel these inequalities with an ever sharper awareness, since they are thoroughly convinced that the ampler technical and economic possibilities which the world of today enjoys can and should correct this unhappy state of affairs.

I think we could say that confidence in technological progress has waned in some quarters since this was written in the 60′s. But again, the Church has never put its hopes in the affairs of economics, technology, or the like.

The final part simply states the obvious: the world itself is changing, and new social patterns are needed to avoid the potential human miseries of poverty and violence. The Church possesses principles of justice that the world would benefit from adopting. The purpose of Vatican II in dealing with this topic is to reinforce the Judeo-Christian notions of justice and equity.

Hence, many reforms in the socioeconomic realm and a change of mentality and attitude are required of all. For this reason the Church down through the centuries and in the light of the Gospel has worked out the principles of justice and equity demanded by right reason both for individual and social life and for international life, and she has proclaimed them especially in recent times. This sacred council intends to strengthen these principles according to the circumstances of this age and to set forth certain guidelines, especially with regard to the requirements of economic development. (Cf. Pius XII, address on March 23, 1952: AAS 44 (1953), p. 273; John XXIII, allocution to the Catholic Association of Italian Workers, May 1, 1959: AAS 51 (1959), p. 358.)

 

Gaudium et Spes 62

Gaudium et Spes 62 leads off with an admission that the relationship between Church and world will not always be an easy one, yet the over all tone for the believer is a spoitive one: use the conflicts encountered to solidify one’s faith.

Although the Church has contributed much to the development of culture, experience shows that, for circumstantial reasons, it is sometimes difficult to harmonize culture with Christian teaching. These difficulties do not necessarily harm the life of faith, rather they can stimulate the mind to a deeper and more accurate understanding of the faith. The recent studies and findings of science, history and philosophy raise new questions which effect life and which demand new theological investigations. Furthermore, theologians, within the requirements and methods proper to theology, are invited to seek continually for more suitable ways of communicating doctrine to the (people) of their times; for the deposit of Faith or the truths are one thing and the manner in which they are enunciated, in the same meaning and understanding, is another.(12. Cf. John XXIII, prayer delivered on Oct. 11, 1962, at the beginning of the council: AAS 54 (1962), p. 792.)

Note the advice to theologians not to see their discipline as beyond the need for “continual” reform. The message remains the same, but the means of communication might not be.

In pastoral care, sufficient use must be made not only of theological principles, but also of the findings of the secular sciences, especially of psychology and sociology, so that the faithful may be brought to a more adequate and mature life of faith.

Again, that regard for the use of the social sciences as a tool to achieve the end of a more mature and developed adult faith.

Literature and the arts are also, in their own way, of great importance to the life of the Church. They strive to make known the proper nature of (humankind), (its) problems and (its) experiences in trying to know and perfect both (itself) and the world. They have much to do with revealing (the human) place in history and in the world; with illustrating the miseries and joys, the needs and strengths of (humankind) and with foreshadowing a better life. That they are able to elevate human life, expressed in multifold forms according to various times and regions.

A good summary of the aim of the artistic sensibility. Too bad the Church doesn’t take it more seriously than window dressing.

Efforts must be made so that those who foster these arts feel that the Church recognizes their activity and so that, enjoying orderly liberty, they may initiate more friendly relations with the Christian community. The Church acknowledges also new forms of art which are adapted to our age and are in keeping with the characteristics of various nations and regions. They may be brought into the sanctuary since they raise the mind to God, once the manner of expression is adapted and they are conformed to liturgical requirements(13. Cf. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, n. 123: AAS 56 (1964), p. 131; Paul VI, discourse to the artists of Rome: AAS 56 (1964), pp. 439-442.)

That seems to be a rather liberal approach: new forms, once adapted to liturgical requirements, might “raise the mind to God.”

Thus the knowledge of God is better manifested and the preaching of the Gospel becomes clearer to human intelligence and shows itself to be relevant to (the) actual conditions of life.
May the faithful, therefore, live in very close union with the others of their time and may they strive to understand perfectly their way of thinking and judging, as expressed in their culture. Let them blend new sciences and theories and the understanding of the most recent discoveries with Christian morality and the teaching of Christian doctrine, so that their religious culture and morality may keep pace with scientific knowledge and with the constantly progressing technology. Thus they will be able to interpret and evaluate all things in a truly Christian spirit.

The people of the Church are intended to be “close” to the people of the world. The burden of understanding is placed at least equally on us believers. Our task is to perceive and understand what the culture is doing and why.

Let those who teach theology in seminaries and universities strive to collaborate with (those) versed in the other sciences through a sharing of their resources and points of view. Theological inquiry should pursue a profound understanding of revealed truth; at the same time it should not neglect close contact with its own time that it may be able to help these (scholars) skilled in various disciplines to attain to a better understanding of the faith. This common effort will greatly aid the formation of priests, who will be able to present to our contemporaries the doctrine of the Church concerning God, (humankind) and the world, in a manner more adapted to them so that they may receive it more willingly.(14. Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree on Priestly Training and Declaration on Christian Education.)

A step a bit deeper than “dialogue,” GS now advocates collaboration. The close relationship is intended to have the aim of spreading the gospel more effectively.

Furthermore, it is to be hoped that many of the laity will receive a sufficient formation in the sacred sciences and that some will dedicate themselves professionally to these studies, developing and deepening them by their own labors. In order that they may fulfill their function, let it be recognized that all the faithful, whether clerics or laity, possess a lawful freedom of inquiry, freedom of thought and of expressing their mind with humility and fortitude in those matters on which they enjoy competence.(15. Cf. Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter IV, n. 37: AAS 57 (1965), pp. 42-43.)

The chapter closes out with an affirmation of the role of the laity:
- some of us should be trained in theology
- some of us will be theological professionals
- an affirmation of the conpetence of both lay people and clergy

Comments?

 

Gaudium et Spes 61

Gaudium et Spes 61 addresses the basic human values of intellect, will, conscience, and community–aspects which the Church insists must be the basis for the formation of new generations:

Today it is more difficult to form a synthesis of the various disciplines of knowledge and the arts than it was formerly. For while the mass and the diversity of cultural factors are increasing, there is a decrease in each (person’s) faculty of perceiving and unifying these things, so that the image of “universal (person)” is being lost sight of more and more. Nevertheless it remains each (person’s) duty to retain an understanding of the whole human person in which the values of intellect, will, conscience and (community) are preeminent. These values are all rooted in God the Creator and have been wonderfully restored and elevated in Christ.

The family is, as it were, the primary mother and nurse of this education. There, the children, in an atmosphere of love, more easily learn the correct order of things, while proper forms of human culture impress themselves in an almost unconscious manner upon the mind of the developing adolescent.

The recognition of the expansion of leisure and the purpose to which it should be put:

Opportunities for the same education are to be found also in the societies of today, due especially to the increased circulation of books and to the new means of cultural and social communication which can foster a universal culture. With the more or less generalized reduction of working hours, the leisure time of most (workers) has increased. May this leisure be used properly to relax, to fortify the health of soul and body through spontaneous study and activity, through tourism which refines … character and enriches (people) with understanding of others, through sports activity which helps to preserve equilibrium of spirit even in the community, and to establish fraternal relations among (those) of all conditions, nations and races. Let Christians cooperate so that the cultural manifestations and collective activity characteristic of our time may be imbued with a human and a Christian spirit.

And it’s more about keeping one’s leisure life full. Note that leisure is designed not only for the mind and body, but also for the soul.

All these leisure activities however are not able to bring (a person) to a full cultural development unless there is at the same time a profound inquiry into the meaning of culture and science for the human person.

Comments?

 

Gaudium et Spes 60

Just to keep it in perspective, we’re just starting Gaudium et Spes section 3 of chapter 2 of part II of the document. Remaining in the overall chapter which treats the “Proper Development of Culture”, this next section, “Some More Urgent Duties of Christians in Regard to Culture,” will take up the next three posts in this series.

Now that we’ve reestablished our bearings, let’s dive in:

It is now possible to free most of humanity from the misery of ignorance. Therefore the duty most consonant with our times, especially for Christians, is that of working diligently for fundamental decisions to be taken in economic and political affairs, both on the national and international level which will everywhere recognize and satisfy the right of all to a human and social culture in conformity with the dignity of the human person without any discrimination of race, sex, nation, religion or social condition. Therefore it is necessary to provide all with a sufficient quantity of cultural benefits, especially of those which constitute the so-called fundamental culture lest very many be prevented from cooperating in the promotion of the common good in a truly human manner because of illiteracy and a lack of responsible activity.

As we’ve seen before in GS, Christian activity in the world, especially in the establishment of justice, charity, peace, and good relations among groups of peoples, is not an “extra.” Working to better the life of human beings is part of the inspiration for the Christian life, and very much a part of the Gospel call.

A person’s giftedness is intended for the good of all, not for self-importance:

We must strive to provide for those (persons) who are gifted the possibility of pursuing higher studies; and in such a way that, as far as possible, they may occupy in society those duties, offices and services which are in harmony with their natural aptitude and the competence they have acquired.(11. John XXIII, encyclical letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), p. 260.) Thus each (person) and the social groups of every people will be able to attain the full development of their culture in conformity with their qualities and traditions.

Everything must be done to make everyone conscious of the right to culture and the duty (one) has of developing (one)self culturally and of helping others. Sometimes there exist conditions of life and of work which impede the cultural striving of (people) and destroy in them the eagerness for culture. This is especially true of farmers and workers. It is necessary to provide for them those working conditions which will not impede their human culture but rather favor it. Women now work in almost all spheres. It is fitting that they are able to assume their proper role in accordance with their own nature. It will belong to all to acknowledge and favor the proper and necessary participation of women in the cultural life.

Comments?

 

Gaudium et Spes 59

Continuing our look at Gaudium et Spes, this last part of the section treating the development of culture starts off by saying, in essence, that culture is a tool for human beings, and not elevated to its own level:

 

 

For the above reasons, the Church recalls to the mind of all that culture is to be subordinated to the integral perfection of the human person, to the good of the community and of the whole society.

 

We have another list:

 

Therefore it is necessary to develop the human faculties in such a way that there results a growth of the faculty

- of admiration,

- of intuition,

- of contemplation,

- of making personal judgment,

- of developing a religious, moral and social sense.

 

Culture is identified as a natural result of human interaction as social beings. As such, it serves the common good; it doesn’t set itself up as an unlimited good unto itself.

 

Culture, because it flows immediately from the spiritual and social character of (people), has constant need of a just liberty in order to develop; it needs also the legitimate possibility of exercising its autonomy according to its own principles. It therefore rightly demands respect and enjoys a certain inviolability within the limits of the common good, as long, of course, as it preserves the rights of the individual and the community, whether particular or universal.

 

Look! Vatican I is quoted:

 

This Sacred Synod, therefore, recalling the teaching of the first Vatican Council, declares that there are “two orders of knowledge” which are distinct, namely faith and reason; and that the Church does not forbid that “the human arts and disciplines use their own principles and their proper method, each in its own domain”; therefore “acknowledging this just liberty,” this Sacred Synod affirms the legitimate autonomy of human culture and especially of the sciences. (First Vatican Council, Constitution on the Catholic Faith: Denzinger 1795, 1799 (3015, 3019). Cf. Pius XI, encyclical letter Quadragesimo Anno: AAS 23 (1931), p. 190.)

 

The boundaries of human freedom of expression are set liberally:

 

All this supposes that, within the limits of morality and the common utility, (humankind) can freely search for the truth, express its opinion and publish it; that it can practice any art it chooses: that finally, it can avail himself of true information concerning events of a public nature. (Cf. John XXIII, encyclical letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), p. 260.)

 

Just as the Church is content to permit the expression of human culture a liberal breadth, so too, it is not keen on the abuse or corruption of culture by other human entities, such as government or business:

 

As for public authority, it is not its function to determine the character of the civilization, but rather to establish the conditions and to use the means which are capable of fostering the life of culture among an even within the minorities of a nation. (Cf. John XXIII, encyclical letter Pacem in Terris: AAS 55 (1963), p. 283; Pius XII, radio address, Dec. 24, 1941: AAS 34 (1942), pp. 16-17.) It is necessary to do everything possible to prevent culture from being turned away from its proper end and made to serve as an instrument of political or economic power.

I realize this isn’t as sexy as women’s clothing, but this is also an open thread, ready for commentary.

 

 

Gaudium et Spes 58

Gaudium et Spes continues a discussion of the relationship between culture and the Gospel. First the importance of perceiving the needs of particular cultures, and two reasons are given: the effectiveness of kerygma, but also the enrichment of the church’s leitourgia:

There are many ties between the message of salvation and human culture. For God, revealing Himself to His people to the extent of a full manifestation of Himself in His Incarnate Son, has spoken according to the culture proper to each epoch. Likewise the Church, living in various circumstances in the course of time, has used the discoveries of different cultures so that in her preaching she might spread and explain the message of Christ to all nations, that she might examine it and more deeply understand it, that she might give it better expression in liturgical celebration and in the varied life of the community of the faithful.

The Church’s interface with human cultures is essentially a pragmatic one:

But at the same time, the Church, sent to all peoples of every time and place, is not bound exclusively and indissolubly to any race or nation, any particular way of life or any customary way of life recent or ancient. Faithful to her own tradition and at the same time conscious of her universal mission, she can enter into communion with the various civilizations, to their enrichment and the enrichment of the Church herself.

Note the mention again of liturgy at the end:

The Gospel of Christ constantly renews the life and culture of fallen (humanity), it combats and removes the errors and evils resulting from the permanent allurement of sin. It never ceases to purify and elevate the morality of peoples. By riches coming from above, it makes fruitful, as it were from within, the spiritual qualities and traditions of every people and of every age. It strengthens, perfects and restores (6. Cf. Eph. 1:10.) them in Christ. Thus the Church, in the very fulfillment of her own function, (cf. the words of Pius XI to Father M. D. Roland-Gosselin “It is necessary never to lose sight of the fact that the objective of the Church is to evangelize, not to civilize. If it civilizes, it is for the sake of evangelization.” (Semaines sociales de France, Versailles, 1936, pp. 461-462).) ) stimulates and advances human and civic culture; by her action, also by her liturgy, she leads them toward interior liberty.

My eyes can’t help but perk up at the mention of liturgy in any of the conciliar documents. Here’s a somewhat surprising insight: liturgy as an agent for interior liberty.

 

Gaudium et Spes 57

Gaudium et Spes 57 deals with section 2 (Some Principles for the Proper Development of Culture) of chapter 2 of part II (if you can follow that at home). First, setting one’s sights on heaven is seen as a motivating factor, not one for withdrawal from the world:

Christians, on pilgrimage toward the heavenly city, should seek and think of these things which are above (Cf. Col. 3:2) This duty in no way decreases, rather it increases, the importance of their obligation to work with all … in the building of a more human world. Indeed, the mystery of the Christian faith furnishes them with an excellent stimulant and aid to fulfill this duty more courageously and especially to uncover the full meaning of this activity, one which gives to human culture its eminent place in the integral (human) vocation.

A twofold notion in the next paragraph: beings stewards of creation, and being caretakers of one’s brothers and sisters:

When (humankind) develops the earth by the work of (their) hands or with the aid of technology, in order that it might bear fruit and become a dwelling worthy of the whole human family and when (they) consciously take part in the life of social groups, (they carry) out the design of God manifested at the beginning of time, that (they) should subdue the earth, perfect creation and develop (themselves). (Cf. Gen. 1:28) At the same time (they obey) the commandment of Christ that (they) place (themselves) at the service of (others).

Outside of the sacred sphere, there are human endeavors which contribute to the “elevation” of humanity on their own merits (namely the qualities of truth, goodness, and beauty):

Furthermore, when (humankind) gives … to the various disciplines of philosophy, history and of mathematical and natural science, and when (they) cultivate the arts, (they) can do very much to elevate the human family to a more sublime understanding of truth, goodness, and beauty, and to the formation of considered opinions which have universal value. Thus (hu)mankind may be more clearly enlightened by that marvelous Wisdom which was with God from all eternity, composing all things with him, rejoicing in the earth, delighting in the (children of earth).( Cf. Prov. 8:30-31.)

These values do indeed lead people to the spiritual:

In this way, the human spirit, being less subjected to material things, can be more easily drawn to the worship and contemplation of the Creator. Moreover, by the impulse of grace, (they are) disposed to acknowledge the Word of God, Who before He became flesh in order to save all and to sum up all in Himself was already “in the world” as “the true light which enlightens every man” (John 1:9-10).(Cf. St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses. III, 11, 8 (ed. Sagnard p. 200; cf. ibid., 16, 6: pp. 290-292; 21, 10-22: pp. 370-372; 22 3: p. 378; etc.))

Yet, the bishops provide an appropriate caution, namely that the material realm is not the ultimate expression of creation, that there is more than what meets the eye in nature, and that scientific advances are not cause for divorcing human dependence on God:

Indeed today’s progress in science and technology can foster a certain exclusive emphasis on observable data, and an agnosticism about everything else. For the methods of investigation which these sciences use can be wrongly considered as the supreme rule of seeking the whole truth. By virtue of their methods these sciences cannot penetrate to the intimate notion of things. Indeed the danger is present that (people), confiding too much in the discoveries of today, may think that (they are) sufficient unto (themselves) and no longer seek the higher things.

And a caution against those who would more or less reject cultural progress outright:

Those unfortunate results, however, do not necessarily follow from the culture of today, nor should they lead us into the temptation of not acknowledging its positive values.

And a helpful five-point listing of modern values:

Among these values are included:
- scientific study and fidelity toward truth in scientific inquiries,
- the necessity of working together with others in technical groups,
- a sense of international solidarity,
- a clearer awareness of the responsibility of experts to aid and even to protect (people),
- the desire to make the conditions of life more favorable for all, especially for those who are poor in culture or who are deprived of the opportunity to exercise responsibility.

Section 57 concludes with the candid admission that these human values often lay the groundwork for the acceptance of Christ.

All of these provide some preparation for the acceptance of the message of the Gospel a preparation which can be animated by divine charity through Him Who has come to save the world.

Comments?

 

Gaudium et Spes 56

In these conditions, it is no cause of wonder that (humankind), who senses (a) responsibility for the progress of culture, nourishes a high hope but also looks with anxiety upon many contradictory things which (it) must resolve:

This short section of Gaudium et Spes concludes with these five significant challenges. Are they more or less relevant for the world of the early 21st century?

What is to be done to prevent the increased exchanges between cultures, which should lead to a true and fruitful dialogue between groups and nations, from disturbing the life of communities, from destroying the wisdom received from ancestors, or from placing in danger the character proper to each people?

More true today, especially where Western culture has strongarmed itself into a position of prominence in non-Western societies.

How is the dynamism and expansion of a new culture to be fostered without losing a living fidelity to the heritage of tradition. This question is of particular urgency when a culture which arises from the enormous progress of science and technology must be harmonized with a culture nourished by classical studies according to various traditions.

Still significant today, though I think fewer people at large are concerned with being nourished by classical studies.

How can we quickly and progressively harmonize the proliferation of particular branches of study with the necessity of forming a synthesis of them, and of preserving among men the faculties of contemplation and observation which lead to wisdom?

Probably even more of a concern, especially in that in many disciplines, it is impossible to keep current on all relevant developments in the field. I’d like to think that among the sciences, there’s more of an openness to cross-fertilization amongst partners who formerly had no interface.

What can be done to make all (people) partakers of cultural values in the world, when the human culture of those who are more competent is constantly becoming more refined and more complex?

Maybe. What appears to be more competence and more complexity may not necessarily be of lasting value.

Finally how is the autonomy which culture claims for itself to be recognized as legitimate without generating a notion of humanism which is merely terrestrial, and even contrary to religion itself.

Yes, this too is still with us.

In the midst of these conflicting requirements, human culture must evolve today in such a way that it can both develop the whole human person and aid man in those duties to whose fulfillment all are called, especially Christians … united in one human family.

On these issues of culture, I find it hard to swallow the conventional wisdom that Gaudium et Spes has somehow been eclipsed by Dei Verbum, regardless of the personal tastes of bishops. These cultural issues remain with us, and GS carries the torch for the issues of the Church-culture interface. The notion that Vatican II’s reflection on divine revelation alone tells us what we need to know seems naive to me. What about for you?

 

Gaudium et Spes 55

Let’s have a double-shot of Gaudium et Spes today, shall we? We complain a good bit about secular humanism. The bishops seem to forward the notion that a Christian humanism has a place in our efforts:

From day to day, in every group or nation, there is an increase in the number of men and women who are conscious that they themselves are the authors and the artisans of the culture of their community. Throughout the whole world there is a mounting increase in the sense of autonomy as well as of responsibility. This is of paramount importance for the spiritual and moral maturity of the human race. This becomes more clear if we consider the unification of the world and the duty which is imposed upon us, that we build a better world based upon truth and justice. Thus we are witnesses of the birth of a new humanism, one in which (human beings are) defined first of all by this responsibility to (their sisters and) brothers and to history.

A few comments:

- I think the optimism of the statement, “I can make a difference,” has faded somewhat from the West. If anything extremist martyrs seem to have a stronger sense that by suicide terrorism, they can make a bigger difference. When evil coopts one of your best philosophies, you have a problem.

- The GS bishops can hardly be considered reckless: they insist on the balance of personal expression and individualism with a sense of a greater responsibility to the human family.

- As much as I would like to say that a post-WWII sense of “truth and justice” has taken root in the world, I have to confess my cynicism on the point, not because I don’t wish it were true, but because I don’t think we’ve achieved any significant advances. And the advances that have been made in some areas, seem to be dwarfed at times by a worldwide culture of inhumanity.

But maybe you’re more optimistic about it? If so, comment, by all means.

 

Gaudium et Spes 54

In a heading, Gaudium et Spes 54 describes “The Circumstances of Culture in the World Today,” starting with:

The circumstances of the life of modern (humankind) have been so profoundly changed in their social and cultural aspects, that we can speak of a new age of human history.(1. Cf. Introductory statement of this constitution, n. 4 ff.) New ways are open, therefore, for the perfection and the further extension of culture.

Ways of “perfection” and “extension” are not necessarily Christian, but keep in mind that culture, in order to achieve lasting and authentic (See? I can use the word!) progress, must integrate the principles of the Gospel.

These ways have been prepared by the enormous growth of natural, human and social sciences, by technical progress, and advances in developing and organizing means whereby (people) can communicate with one another. Hence the culture of today possesses particular characteristics: sciences which are called exact greatly develop critical judgment; the more recent psychological studies more profoundly explain human activity; historical studies make it much easier to see things in their mutable and evolutionary aspects, customs and usages are becoming more and more uniform; industrialization, urbanization, and other causes which promote community living create a mass-culture from which are born new ways of thinking, acting and making use of leisure. The increase of commerce between the various nations and human groups opens more widely to all the treasures of different civilizations and thus little by little, there develops a more universal form of human culture, which better promotes and expresses the unity of the human race to the degree that it preserves the particular aspects of the different civilizations.

The bishops, through GS, communicate a hopefulness about the non-sacred sciences that can be applied to the improvement of human life. Doubtless there would be somewhat more detractors today. How would you see the proper balance for the Catholic Church and the world of 2006? Is there still stuff off the barque to get excited about? Or are we better off circling the wagons?

 

Gaudium et Spes 53

Gaudium et Spes 53 begins a new chapter in Part II, entitled, “The Proper Development of Culture”

Not sure what that means? The council bishops give you a definition:

(People come) to a true and full humanity only through culture, that is through the cultivation of the goods and values of nature. Wherever human life is involved, therefore, nature and culture are quite intimately connected one with the other.

The word “culture” in its general sense indicates everything whereby (humankind) develops and perfects (their) many bodily and spiritual qualities; (humankind) strives by … knowledge and … labor, to bring the world itself under (its) control. (People render) social life more human both in the family and the civic community, through improvement of customs and institutions. Throughout the course of time (people) express, communicate and conserve in (their) works, great spiritual experiences and desires, that they might be of advantage to the progress of many, even of the whole human family.

The definitions are important to keep in mind. One misunderstood example is “active participation.” People spend a lot of breath, ink, and keyboard time with their own opinion of what that is. Maybe a waste of time: Sacrosanctum Concilium defines it. Ditto a principle like dialogue. If you’ve been keeping up with the documents, you know that dialogue is carefully defined.

The council bishops assume everyone’s on board with their definition of “culture.” They elaborate a bit with some general examples:

Thence it follows that human culture has necessarily a historical and social aspect and the word “culture” also often assumes a sociological and ethnological sense. According to this sense we speak of a plurality of cultures. Different styles of life and multiple scales of values arise from the diverse manner of using things, of laboring, of expressing oneself, of practicing religion, of forming customs, of establishing laws and juridic institutions of cultivating the sciences, the arts and beauty. Thus the customs handed down to it form the (heritage) proper to each human community. It is also in this way that there is formed the definite, historical milieu which enfolds the (people) of every nation and age and from which (they draw) the values which permit (them) to promote civilization.

 

Gaudium et Spes 52

Gaudium et Spes concludes its look at marriage and family with this section, beginning with a portrait of domestic tranquility:

The family is a kind of school of deeper humanity. But if it is to achieve the full flowering of its life and mission, it needs the kindly communion of minds and the joint deliberation of spouses, as well as the painstaking cooperation of parents in the education of their children. The active presence of the father is highly beneficial to their formation. The children, especially the younger among them, need the care of their mother at home. This domestic role of hers must be safely preserved, though the legitimate social progress of women should not be underrated on that account.

In other words, both parents parent and parent actively.

Children should be so educated that as adults they can follow their vocation, including a religious one, with a mature sense of responsibility and can choose their state of life; if they marry, they can thereby establish their family in favorable moral, social and economic conditions. Parents or guardians should by prudent advice provide guidance to their young with respect to founding a family, and the young ought to listen gladly. At the same time no pressure, direct or indirect, should be put on the young to make them enter marriage or choose a specific partner.

Extended families are lauded:

Thus the family, in which the various generations come together and help one another grow wiser and harmonize personal rights with the other requirements of social life, is the foundation of society.

Working for the welfare of the family is not just imagined defense against perceived adversaries. Work implies real effort to institute support for single-parent families–a “modern” development ignored in GS. Even “public authority” has a role to play (libertarians, take note).

All those, therefore, who exercise influence over communities and social groups should work efficiently for the welfare of marriage and the family. Public authority should regard it as a sacred duty to recognize, protect and promote their authentic nature, to shield public morality and to favor the prosperity of home life. The right of parents to beget and educate their children in the bosom of the family must be safeguarded.

A vastly inadequate notion:

Children too who unhappily lack the blessing of a family should be protected by prudent legislation and various undertakings and assisted by the help they need.

Two interesting notions ahead, namely the witness of the Christian family by the simple life example of its members. “Cooperation” with others, often referred to as “dialogue” is also praised here.

Christians, redeeming the present time(Cf. Eph. 5:16; Col. 4:5) and distinguishing eternal realities from their changing expressions, should actively promote the values of marriage and the family, both by the examples of their own lives and by cooperation with other men of good will. Thus when difficulties arise, Christians will provide, on behalf of family life, those necessities and helps which are suitably modern. To this end, the Christian instincts of the faithful, the upright moral consciences of (human beings), and the wisdom and experience of persons versed in the sacred sciences will have much to contribute.

The sciences are still in the good graces of the writers of GS:

Those too who are skilled in other sciences, notably the medical, biological, social and psychological, can considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family along with peace of conscience if by pooling their efforts they labor to explain more thoroughly the various conditions favoring a proper regulation of births.

The clergy have a role to play, but only those trained in “family matters”:

It devolves on priests duly trained about family matters to nurture the vocation of spouses by a variety of pastoral means, by preaching God’s word, by liturgical worship, and by other spiritual aids to conjugal and family life; to sustain them sympathetically and patiently in difficulties, and to make them courageous through love, so that families which are truly illustrious can be formed.

Lay organizations, too, have a vital role to play. Note the “particular” ahead: those recently wed. Training for the family apostolate belongs properly to lay people.

Various organizations, especially family associations, should try by their programs of instruction and action to strengthen young people and spouses themselves, particularly those recently wed, and to train them for family, social and apostolic life.

Wrapping it up, GS returns to the sacramental heart of the family:

Finally, let the spouses themselves, made to the image of the living God and enjoying the authentic dignity of persons, be joined to one another(Cf. Sacramentarium Gregorianum: PL 78, 262) in equal affection, harmony of mind and the work of mutual sanctification. Thus, following Christ who is the principle of life,(Cf. Rom. 5:15 and 18; 6:5-11; Gal. 2:20) by the sacrifices and joys of their vocation and through their faithful love, married people can become witnesses of the mystery of love which the Lord revealed to the world by His dying and His rising up to life again.(Cf. Eph. 5:25-27)

Comments?

 

Gaudium et Spes 51

Gaudium et Spes 51 explores the “but” part of “This is the ideal, but …”

This council realizes that certain modern conditions often keep couples from arranging their married lives harmoniously, and that they find themselves in circumstances where at least temporarily the size of their families should not be increased. As a result, the faithful exercise of love and the full intimacy of their lives is hard to maintain. But where the intimacy of married life is broken off, its faithfulness can sometimes be imperiled and its quality of fruitfulness ruined, for then the upbringing of the children and the courage to accept new ones are both endangered.

The council bishops seem aware they are treading on sensitive ground here. One challenge is that the intersection of marriage and theology have not been well-explored territory. The quality of individual marriages seems the focus here, not marital practices that others have found helpful in other circumstances. It’s easy to see how GS 51 was providing hope from what many pre-conciliar Catholics saw as harsh moral treatments.

To these problems there are those who presume to offer dishonorable solutions indeed; they do not recoil even from the taking of life. But the Church issues the reminder that a true contradiction cannot exist between the divine laws pertaining to the transmission of life and those pertaining to authentic conjugal love.

From our “disadvantaged” view, we indeed have a contradiction in the practice of many marriages regarding the official position on contraception. I don’t have any golden answers for those caught in the contradiction. My own experience was to be open always to procreation, but then again, we were a much older couple. Some unanswered questions persist, including:
- If Catholic couples are to be open to procreation, are married couples beyond childbearing age (especially those who wed later in life) then morally obliged to have a public expression of generativity in some way?
- Is generativity a quality for the entire life of a marriage, or must it be applied in a fundamentalist way at each opportunity for procreation?
- Given the large numbers of children awaiting adoption, can this be interpreted as a generative opportunity for Catholic married couples? In other words, do these homeless children place a moral obligation on Church couples as a whole? If not, why not?

For God, the Lord of life, has conferred on (people) the surpassing ministry of safeguarding life in a manner which is worthy of (humankind). Therefore from the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes. The sexual characteristics of (human beings) and the human faculty of reproduction wonderfully exceed the dispositions of lower forms of life. Hence the acts themselves which are proper to conjugal love and which are exercised in accord with genuine human dignity must be honored with great reverence. Hence when there is question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspects of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives, but must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his acts, preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love. Such a goal cannot be achieved unless the virtue of conjugal chastity is sincerely practiced. Relying on these principles, (sons and daughters) of the Church may not undertake methods of birth control which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law.(14. Cf. Pius XI, encyclical letter Casti Connubii: AAS 22 (1930): Denz.-Schoen. 3716-3718, Pius XII, Allocutio Conventui Unionis Italicae inter Obstetrices, Oct. 29, 1951: AAS 43 (1951), pp. 835-854, Paul VI, address to a group of cardinals, June 23 1964: AAS 56 (1964), pp. 581-589. Certain questions which need further and more careful investigation have been handed over, at the command of the Supreme Pontiff, to a commission for the study of population, family, and births, in order that, after it fulfills its function, the Supreme Pontiff may pass judgment. With the doctrine of the magisterium in this state, this holy synod does not intend to propose immediately concrete solutions.)

All should be persuaded that human life and the task of transmitting it are not realities bound up with this world alone. Hence they cannot be measured or perceived only in terms of it, but always have a bearing on the eternal destiny of (human beings).

Comments?