Walter Kasper: "A lot of the doctrine is very far from reality, there is a practical schism"

  • Thread starter Thread starter matutemats
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

matutemats

Guest
I’m roughly translating an interview to Walter Kasper, theologician near to Pope Francis, to an argentine newspaper “La Nación”. Hope to see your comments!

*With the recent announcement that the priests have the power to forgive women who had abortions, Pope Francis has taken new wounded to the field hospital, the image he likes to define the reality of the Church.

That’s how Cardinal Walter Kasper understands it, renowned German theologian who is fully in tune with the Argentine pope. He warned of the “practical schism” that affects the Church when the uncompromising defense of principles and doctrines pushes many faithful away. “To many, the doctrine of the Church it is very far from reality. There is a kind of practical schism. It is a problem to think about, but which today do not talk,” he said in an interview with LA NACIÓN leading theologian, 82, and president emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

With a month to go for the synod of bishops in Rome he analyzes key challenges on the family and marriage, as the situation of divorced and remarried. The tension arises between the weight of the doctrine, supported by the most conservative positions and the pastoral needs of the Church, promoted by most progressive sectors. “The road is pointed Cardinal German- mercy, reach out to the actual man who’s hurt everywhere.”

Kasper came to Buenos Aires for two days, to expose the challenges of the Church, 50 years after the Second Vatican Council, in an International Conference for the centenary of the Faculty of Theology at the Universidad Católica Argentina (UCA). He stayed in a single room Seminar Villa Devoto and lived with a local atmosphere, probably the Pope surprised. “One of the things that impressed me is that Bergoglio was always loved by their priests,” he slipped.

What does Francis’ decision to promote forgiveness repentant women who confess their abortion imply?

Francis is the pope of surprises. Forgiveness relates to the profound suffering of women who abort. Thus the Church goes to meet not only from sin, but a suffering that continues in women beyond that traumatic time.

Could it generate reactions among conservatives?

There you understand that it is not a cheap grace that is given lightly. Metanoia implies that there is a sincere conversion. Along the suffering it causes in women that have had an abortion, it requires a real desire to change lives. It is easy to recognize the fault. In my experience in Stuttgart, where I attended as bishop, I met extreme realities of prison life. People who had committed three murders with a deep repentance demanded sacramental forgiveness, and I gave it to them. People had to stay in prison, but their attitudes changed much in prison.

-¿Do you perceive and abyss in the doctrine of the Church on marriage and the family and the conviction with which many Christians live?

To many the doctrine appears far from reality. There is a kind of practical schism. Very committed Christian couples to the Church, for example, do not live the teachings of the encyclical Humanae Vitae about contraception. It is a problem to think about.

How does the Church face this reality?

Silently. There is no talk in general about this problem. Maybe because we do not want to lose many Catholics. The next synod will surely have to discuss these issues. In a recent paper, the International Theological Commission stressed the importance of listening to the voice of the faithful before starting to talk about a subject.

** Is there a tension between church doctrine and pastoral action?**

The Pastoral cannot go against the doctrine, but doctrine cannot be an abstract statement. The doctrine’s interpratation should be linked to real life. Jesus always spoke of the reality of the person, knowing that we are all sinners. There may be some tension between doctrine and pastoral. But that tension is normal, other than the practical schism, which causes division.

** Will the practical schism be addressed at the Synod on the family on October?**

I do not know, I hope so. In the last special synod on the family of last year, it hasn’t been addressed enough. I have no solutions; I can speak as an expert in dogmatic theology, which teaches what God does. But I’m not, thankfully, a specialist in moral theology, which teaches what men have to do (laughs).

** Can one expect developments, for example, in the situation of divorced and remarried?**

It’s a complex problem. Positions were discussed last year, in favor of openness. There are different situations, and not neccesarily there should be a single solution. A fundamental consensus that can diversify to local realities is necessary.

¿Mercy, which is central to Francis, was forgotten in the Church?

Not in the faithful and in popular piety. There it was always present. But perhaps theological reflection had relegated a little mercy as a central attribute of God. Mercy does not deny justice, it exceeds it.

-¿Is Francis a pope of transition? Or will he mark a turning point in the Church?
  • Francis sees himself as the initiator of a process that goes beyond his pontificate. I hope it is an irreversible process.*
lanacion.com.ar/1825534-walter-kasper-a-muchos-la-doctrina-les-resulta-muy-alejada-de-la-realidad-hay-un-cisma-practico
 
I’m roughly translating an interview to Walter Kasper, theologician near to Pope Francis, to an argentine newspaper “La Nación”. Hope to see your comments!

*With the recent announcement that the priests have the power to forgive women who had abortions, Pope Francis has taken new wounded to the field hospital, the image he likes to define the reality of the Church.

That’s how Cardinal Walter Kasper understands it, renowned German theologian who is fully in tune with the Argentine pope. He warned of the “practical schism” that affects the Church when the uncompromising defense of principles and doctrines pushes many faithful away. “To many, the doctrine of the Church it is very far from reality. There is a kind of practical schism. It is a problem to think about, but which today do not talk,” he said in an interview with LA NACIÓN leading theologian, 82, and president emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

With a month to go for the synod of bishops in Rome he analyzes key challenges on the family and marriage, as the situation of divorced and remarried. The tension arises between the weight of the doctrine, supported by the most conservative positions and the pastoral needs of the Church, promoted by most progressive sectors. “The road is pointed Cardinal German- mercy, reach out to the actual man who’s hurt everywhere.”

Kasper came to Buenos Aires for two days, to expose the challenges of the Church, 50 years after the Second Vatican Council, in an International Conference for the centenary of the Faculty of Theology at the Universidad Católica Argentina (UCA). He stayed in a single room Seminar Villa Devoto and lived with a local atmosphere, probably the Pope surprised. “One of the things that impressed me is that Bergoglio was always loved by their priests,” he slipped.

What does Francis’ decision to promote forgiveness repentant women who confess their abortion imply?*

Francis is the pope of surprises. Forgiveness relates to the profound suffering of women who abort. Thus the Church goes to meet not only from sin, but a suffering that continues in women beyond that traumatic time.

Could it generate reactions among conservatives?

There you understand that it is not a cheap grace that is given lightly. Metanoia implies that there is a sincere conversion. Along the suffering it causes in women that have had an abortion, it requires a real desire to change lives. It is easy to recognize the fault. In my experience in Stuttgart, where I attended as bishop, I met extreme realities of prison life. People who had committed three murders with a deep repentance demanded sacramental forgiveness, and I gave it to them. People had to stay in prison, but their attitudes changed much in prison.

-¿Do you perceive and abyss in the doctrine of the Church on marriage and the family and the conviction with which many Christians live?

To many the doctrine appears far from reality. There is a kind of practical schism. Very committed Christian couples to the Church, for example, do not live the teachings of the encyclical Humanae Vitae about contraception. It is a problem to think about.

How does the Church face this reality?

Silently. There is no talk in general about this problem. Maybe because we do not want to lose many Catholics. The next synod will surely have to discuss these issues. In a recent paper, the International Theological Commission stressed the importance of listening to the voice of the faithful before starting to talk about a subject.

** Is there a tension between church doctrine and pastoral action?**

The Pastoral cannot go against the doctrine, but doctrine cannot be an abstract statement. The doctrine’s interpratation should be linked to real life. Jesus always spoke of the reality of the person, knowing that we are all sinners. There may be some tension between doctrine and pastoral. But that tension is normal, other than the practical schism, which causes division.

** Will the practical schism be addressed at the Synod on the family on October?**

I do not know, I hope so. In the last special synod on the family of last year, it hasn’t been addressed enough. I have no solutions; I can speak as an expert in dogmatic theology, which teaches what God does. But I’m not, thankfully, a specialist in moral theology, which teaches what men have to do (laughs).

** Can one expect developments, for example, in the situation of divorced and remarried?**

It’s a complex problem. Positions were discussed last year, in favor of openness. There are different situations, and not neccesarily there should be a single solution. A fundamental consensus that can diversify to local realities is necessary.

¿Mercy, which is central to Francis, was forgotten in the Church?

Not in the faithful and in popular piety. There it was always present. But perhaps theological reflection had relegated a little mercy as a central attribute of God. Mercy does not deny justice, it exceeds it.

-¿Is Francis a pope of transition? Or will he mark a turning point in the Church?
  • Francis sees himself as the initiator of a process that goes beyond his pontificate. I hope it is an irreversible process.
lanacion.com.ar/1825534-walter-kasper-a-muchos-la-doctrina-les-resulta-muy-alejada-de-la-realidad-hay-un-cisma-practico
He now sounds much more careful than before. Thanks to God!. :cool:
 
“The Pastoral cannot go against the doctrine, but doctrine cannot be an abstract statement. The doctrine’s interpretation should be linked to real life.” --Cardinal Kaspar

I can agree at least mostly with this. Doctrine, as a statement of the truths of the Faith, actually must be an abstract statement, universally applicable. At the same time, doctrine must be applied pastorally in real life.

Whether there is a de facto schism I do not know. Does the fact that substantial numbers of Catholics do not fully practice their Faith make them schismatic? I doubt it. And is the solution to “de facto schism” simply changing the Faith to match the practice? That way lies disaster.
 
“The Pastoral cannot go against the doctrine, but doctrine cannot be an abstract statement. The doctrine’s interpretation should be linked to real life.” --Cardinal Kaspar

I can agree at least mostly with this. Doctrine, as a statement of the truths of the Faith, actually must be an abstract statement, universally applicable. At the same time, doctrine must be applied pastorally in real life.

Whether there is a de facto schism I do not know. Does the fact that substantial numbers of Catholics do not fully practice their Faith make them schismatic? I doubt it. And is the solution to “de facto schism” simply changing the Faith to match the practice? That way lies disaster.
I think the Cardinal was meaning de facto schism of the mind - that is, trapped in doublethink. One part of their mind believes that ABC is immoral (the Church’s teaching), but the other part of their mind thinks that ABC is the only moral/responsible option (the world’s teaching). So they can spout off what the Church teaches in Church contexts, spout off what the world teaches in worldly contexts, and go back and forth which one they practice at home.
 
I think the Cardinal was meaning de facto schism of the mind - that is, trapped in doublethink. One part of their mind believes that ABC is immoral (the Church’s teaching), but the other part of their mind thinks that ABC is the only moral/responsible option (the world’s teaching). So they can spout off what the Church teaches in Church contexts, spout off what the world teaches in worldly contexts, and go back and forth which one they practice at home.
So, it seems to me that changing the doctrine would result in even greater doublethink. “Now, the Church is in agreement with ME, so everything is okay! But… if the Church can change its doctrine to agree with me, um, should I even be in this Church??”
 
I think part of the mistake being made here is to view the layperson as a group only in need of instruction rather than as a part of the mystical body of Christ through whom instruction and teaching arise.

Being open to life could have been defined and illuminated in many ways that did allow for birth control for married couples but it wasn’t. When very faithful Catholics who are deeply devoted to Christ find the Church teachings on birth control unrealistic I think the hierarchy should listen to Christ speaking through the masses.

Its not as if the only options are that the hierarchy is always right and if they sway to public opinion they are going down a slippery slope-- that is lazy thinking. Sometimes Christ is speaking through the masses and the hierarchy ought to be humble enough to listen.

I am a non Catholic but deeply devoted Christian who also has a deep permanent respect for the Catholic Church. However the idea that my 43 year old wife and I can only have sexual connection (something we have found to be deeply sacred) without birth control is preposterous and completely disconnected from our lived reality and even Gods will in my opinion.
 
However the idea that my 43 year old wife and I can only have sexual connection (something we have found to be deeply sacred) without birth control is preposterous and completely disconnected from our lived reality and even Gods will in my opinion.
My 31 year old wife and I do that all the time. It’s not a big deal.

Also, it’s way better than the drastic personality changes she suffered when she did try the pill. Also better than the two near fatal blood clots suffered by friends.

You can also tell morals by their fruits and everything that was said in HV came true. High divorce rates (and the child victims of it), lack of respect for women, a hypersexualized culture that’s moving to a “rape culture”. Add that to the environmental problems and the medical problems and I don’t see how that’s better than having to abstain for a few days out of the month.
 
I am glad that the stance of the Church is working out for you-- I believe you. Nothing you have just said negates my experience though. There are cons to any approach. My point still stands-- our sexual relationship is sacred and is no longer open to new life for lots of good reasons that we are certain are supported by God. Our spiritual connection with God has not diminished due to birth control *even during sexual intercourse. * If we are going to go by fruits then the fruits within my marriage have to also count. The sacred nature of our marriage only grows over time- we are deeply blessed.

If the policy of the Church is to keep people who*** are not ***trying diligently to follow Christ from going crazy with sexual sin then I think that is also a mistake. The teachings ought to be geared towards those who are, people who wont have extramarital affairs because of birth control, people who wont even necessarily have more sex due to it. Broad policies aimed at the lowest and worst acts don’t really help lots of other people.

Lots of good married Catholics, members of the body of Christ who are very devout and who happen to have first hand experience on the subject of the sacred nature of sexuality are finding themselves at odds with the stance of the Church on this subject. The hierarchy ought to listen-- it sounds like they are.
 
I regret the term lowest-- just couldn’t come up with another term at the moment.

There is no institution that can competently regulate every single instance within the human experience. Only God can do that-- through us.
 
Lots of good married Catholics, members of the body of Christ who are very devout and who happen to have first hand experience on the subject of the sacred nature of sexuality are finding themselves at odds with the stance of the Church on this subject. The hierarchy ought to listen-- it sounds like they are.
If you go by polls lots of good and devout Catholics fund themselves at odds with the church over the true presence in the Eucharist.

Shall we change that for them too? Have a vote?
 
If you go by polls lots of good and devout Catholics fund themselves at odds with the church over the true presence in the Eucharist.

Shall we change that for them too? Have a vote?
Id have to hear from the people who are saying that the teaching of the real presence is causing them harm and who want a vote- have you got a link? There are no easy answers for every problem within the Church and some tensions will always be there. Each case has to be weighed on its own merits. I strongly believe that the hierarchy would do well to listen to the laity on many religious subjects. Devout Christians are part of the mystical body of Christ-- we have the mind of Christ. The hierarchy should listen with special care to subjects pertaining to marriage and sexuality as we are the only part of the body of Christ with direct lived experience in those areas.

The point I am making is a larger one-- Christ speaks through the whole body of Christ and not only through the hierarchy. I think Pope Francis is listening to that and I am deeply grateful for it.
 
As is well recounted in Mary Ebersatdt’s recent book, “Adam and Eve After the Pill,” the results of the sexual revolution, enabled by the widespread acceptance of artificial contraception, have been socially disastrous.

Contraception broke the connection between marriage and procreation, between marriage and children. It enabled fornication, adultery, serial monogamy, resulted in divorce, abortion, abandoned and fatherless children, and he destruction of the family. Now it leads to same sex marriage.

The Christian teaching against contraception has been constant from the beginning, from Christ until the present. Up till 1930, every protestant denomination had the same teaching as the Catholic Church on the matter. In that year, the Lambeth Conference made a small concession which turned into a flood, which brought on the sexual revolution. I’m glad the Catholic Church wasn’t responsible for that.

To disregard good doctrine for good feelings is lazy thinking.
 
Id have to hear from the people who are saying that the teaching of the real presence is causing them harm and who want a vote- have you got a link? There are no easy answers for every problem within the Church and some tensions will always be there.

The point I am making is a larger one-- Christ speaks through the whole body of Christ and not only through the hierarchy. I think Pope Francis is listening to that and I am deeply grateful for it.
Of course God "speaks through the whole Church. But if you think that God is speaking through the conttaceptive mindsets of a whole lot of Christians, you are only right insofar as he is using broken marriages, social disorder, the degradation of the social institution of marriage, infertility, etc., to say, STOP.

In other words, the voice of the laity cannot contradict Scripture, the Magisterium, and the doctrines of the Church. When it does that, I assure that it definitely isn’t God speaking.
 
Ultimately I agree that the laity cannot win an argument with the hierarchy of the Church. That is where humility on the part of the hierarchy needs to come in and really listen to the lived experience of many married and devout couples. Ultimately it is up to the hierarchy to decide but even more reason for them to have the humility to listen. I think Francis is doing this.

You keep pointing out the worst possible outcomes of contraception but what about examples such as mine? A healthy devout Christian marriage with children who have prayerfully made the decision not to have more children but who still enjoy the sacred and bonding sexual experience within marriage? Is there no room for contraceptives here?

My answer to that is definitively yes.
 
As is well recounted in Mary Ebersatdt’s recent book, “Adam and Eve After the Pill,” the results of the sexual revolution, enabled by the widespread acceptance of artificial contraception, have been socially disastrous.

Contraception broke the connection between marriage and procreation, between marriage and children. It enabled fornication, adultery, serial monogamy, resulted in divorce, abortion, abandoned and fatherless children, and he destruction of the family. Now it leads to same sex marriage.

The Christian teaching against contraception has been constant from the beginning, from Christ until the present. Up till 1930, every protestant denomination had the same teaching as the Catholic Church on the matter. In that year, the Lambeth Conference made a small concession which turned into a flood, which brought on the sexual revolution. I’m glad the Catholic Church wasn’t responsible for that.

To disregard good doctrine for good feelings is lazy thinking.
The sexual revolution was going to happen regardless of what Christianity did or did not do about it as was the secularization of America. Contraception did not sever the link between marriage and sexuality, and sexuality and children in my marriage-- how many other marriages like mine could say the same?
 
Ultimately I agree that the laity cannot win an argument with the hierarchy of the Church. That is where humility on the part of the hierarchy needs to come in and really listen to the lived experience of many married and devout couples. Ultimately it is up to the hierarchy to decide but even more reason for them to have the humility to listen. I think Francis is doing this.

You keep pointing out the worst possible outcomes of contraception but what about examples such as mine? A healthy devout Christian marriage with children who have prayerfully made the decision not to have more children but who still enjoy the sacred and bonding sexual experience within marriage? Is there no room for contraceptives here?

My answer to that is definitively yes.
Answer it however you want, Franklin. But the Church’s–not “the hierarchy’s”–answer is definitively no. The sociological and biological and demographic evidence clearly supports what Paul VI prophesied in Humanae Vitae. But you are obviously free to reject that teaching, as you, as a Protestant, reject plenty of other teachings of the Church. But I hope you understand that I much prefer to follow the wisdom of the Church’s seamless tradition, which goes back 2000 years, rather than the prayerful “discernment” of you or any other Christian who believes that they are right and that 2000 year teaching tradition is wrong.
 
The sexual revolution was going to happen regardless of what Christianity did or did not do about it as was the secularization of America. Contraception did not sever the link between marriage and sexuality, and sexuality and children in my marriage-- how many other marriages like mine could say the same?
Which is why premarital sex, buoyed by contraception, is so rare today? Or why birthrates are so high in the West? Or why pornography, an obvious child of the contraceptive revolution that holds sex to be about pleasure rather than procreation, is minimally present in the country? Which is why nobody cohabitates, again, aided by the “safety” of contraceptive sex that promises the good vibes of sex without the very natural consequence of children?

Right.
 
Ultimately I agree that the laity cannot win an argument with the hierarchy of the Church. That is where humility on the part of the hierarchy needs to come in and really listen to the lived experience of many married and devout couples. Ultimately it is up to the hierarchy to decide but even more reason for them to have the humility to listen. I think Francis is doing this.

You keep pointing out the worst possible outcomes of contraception but what about examples such as mine? A healthy devout Christian marriage with children who have prayerfully made the decision not to have more children but who still enjoy the sacred and bonding sexual experience within marriage? Is there no room for contraceptives here?

My answer to that is definitively yes.
You could do the same, not have kids, without contraception. But I guess that’s hard and our culture loves laziness.

And, of course, I know people that say similar things, about how good it was doe them and their family and such, about their abortion.

And, you’re right, the holy spirit can speak through both the clergy and the laity. But so can other things.
 
Answer it however you want, Franklin. But the Church’s–not “the hierarchy’s”–answer is definitively no. The sociological and biological and demographic evidence clearly supports what Paul VI prophesied in Humanae Vitae. But you are obviously free to reject that teaching, as you, as a Protestant, reject plenty of other teachings of the Church. But I hope you understand that I much prefer to follow the wisdom of the Church’s seamless tradition, which goes back 2000 years, rather than the prayerful “discernment” of you or any other Christian who believes that they are right and that 2000 year teaching tradition is wrong.
I do understand your preference to follow the Church’s teaching on this subject which is why it is so heartening to hear that the Pope and others may be listening with humility to the body of Christ and making better and more refined distinctions as a result of humility. I am very, very, curious to see what comes of all of this.

The 2000 years of tradition regarding contraception is an exaggeration in my mind. Reliable and safe contraception is a relatively new phenomenon.
 
You could do the same, not have kids, without contraception. But I guess that’s hard and our culture loves laziness.

And, of course, I know people that say similar things, about how good it was doe them and their family and such, about their abortion.

And, you’re right, the holy spirit can speak through both the clergy and the laity. But so can other things.
Assuming laziness as the only possible motive just shows that you have not really understood many peoples position. A better reason would be to ensure that another pregnancy did not come about, a pregnancy that goes against the wishes of the parents and God.

I agree that the Holy Spirit can speak through the laity which is why it is so very refreshing to hear the Pope listening to us. At the same time I trust him to weed out the errors also. It is just very very good to be heard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top