Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

t » a THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 1964 SUPPLEMENT force us to express our teaching with great fairness, and it will reward us for the work of having explained it in accordance with the objec tions of another or despite his slow assimila tion of our teaching. The dialogue will make us wise; it will make us teachers. And how is the dialogue to be carried on? Many, indeed, are the forms that the dialogue of salvation can take. It adapts itself to the needs of a concrete situation, it chooses the appro priate means, it does not bind itself to ineffec tual theories and does not cling to hard and fast forms when these have lost their power to speak to men and move them. The question is of great importance, for it concerns the relation of the Church's mission to the lives of men in a given time and place, in a given culture and social setting. To what extent should the Church adapt Itself to the historic and local circumstances in which its mission is exercised? How should it guard against the danger of a relativism which would falsify its moral and dogmatic truth? And yet, at the same time, how can it fit itself to ap proach all men so as to save all, according to the example of the Apostle: "I became all things to all men that I might save all" (I Cor. 9, 22)? The world cannot be saved from the outside. As the Word of God became man, so must a man to a certain degree Identify himself with the forms of life of those to whom he wished to bring the message of Christ. Without invoking privileges which would but widen the separa tion, without employing unintelligible terminology, he must share the common way of life-pro vided that it is human and honorable—especial ly of the most humble, if he wishes to be listened to and understood. And before speaking, it is necessary to listen, not only to a man's voice, but to his heart. A man must first be understood; and, where he merits it, agreed with. In the very act of trying to make ourselves pastors, fathers and teachers of men, we must make ourselves their brothers. The spirit of dialogue is friendship and, even more, practice according to the example and commandment that Christ left to us (cf, Jn, 13, 14-17). But the danger remains. The apostle's art is a risky one. The desire to come together as brothers must not lead to a watering-down or subtracting from the truth. Our dialogue must not weaken our attachment to our Faith. In our apostoiate we cannot make vague compromises about the principles of faith and action on which our profession of Christianity is based. An immoderate desire to make peace and sink differences at all costs is, fundamentally, a kind of skepticism about the power and content of the Word of God which we desire to preach. Only the man who is completely faithful to the teach ing of Christ can be an apostle. And only he who lives his Christian life to the full can remain uncontaminated by the errors with which he comes into contact. We believe that the council, when it comes to deal with questions on the Church's activity in the modern world, will indicate a number of theoretical and practical norms for the guid ance of our dialogue with men of the present- day, We believe, too, that in matters concern ing the apostolic mission of the Church, on the one hand, and, on the other, the diverse and chang ing circumstances in which that mission is ex ercized, it will be for the wise, attentive govern ment of the Church to determine, from time to time, the limits and forms and paths to be fol lowed in maintaining and furthering a living and fruitful dialogue. Accordingly, let us leave this aspect of the sub ject and confine ourselves to stressing once again the supreme importance which Christian preaching maintains, an importance which grows greater daily, for the Catholic apostoiate and spe cifically for the dialogue. No other form of com munication can take its place; not even the eno rmously powerful technical means of press, radio and television. In a sense, the apostoiate and preaching are the seme. Preaching is the primary apostoiate. Our apo stoiate, venerable brothers, is above all the minis try of the Word. We know this very well, but it seems good to remind ourselves of it now, so as to direct our pastoral activities a right. We must go back to the study, not of human eloquence or empty rhetoric, but of the genuine art of the sacred Word, We must search for the laws of its simplicity and clarity, for its power and authority, so as to overcome our natural lack of skill in the use of the great mysterious spiritual instrument of speech and to enable us worthily to compete with those who today exert so much influence through their words by having access to the or gans of public opinion. We must beg the Lord for the great and up lifting gift of speech (cf. Jer. I, 6), to be able to confer on faith its practical and efflciacious principle (cf. Rom, 10, 17), and to enable our words to reach out to the ends of the earth (cf. Pa, 18, 5 and Rom, 10, 18), May we carry out the prescriptions of the council's Constitution on Sacred Liturgy with zeal and ability. And may the catechetical teach ing of the Faith to the Christian people, and to as many other* as possible, be marked by the pat ness of its language, the wisdom of its method, the zeal of its exercise supported by the evi dence of real virtues, and may it strive ar dently to lead us hearers to the security of the Faith, to a realization of the intimate connec tion between the divine Word and life, and to the illumination of the living God. We must, finally, refer to those to whom our Dimensions dialogue is directed. But, even on this point, we do not intend to forestall the council, which, please God, will soon make its voice heard. Speaking in general on the role of partner in dialogue, a role which the Catholic Church must take up with renewed fervor today, we should like merely to observe that the Church must be ever ready to carry on the dialogue with all men of good will, within and without its own sphere. There is no one who is a strang er to its heart, no one in whom its ministry has no interest. It has no enemies, except those who wish to be such. Its name of catholic is not an idle title. Not in vain has it received the commission to foster in the world unity, love and peace. The Church is, not unaware of the formidable dimensions of such a mission; it knows the dis proportion in numbers between those who are its members and those who are not; it knows the limitations of its power. It knows, likewise, its own human weaknesses and failings. It recog nizes, too, that the acceptance of the Gospel de pends, ultimately not upon any apostolic efforts of its own nor upon any favorable temporal con ditions, for faith is a gift of God and God alone defines in the world the times and limits of sal vation. But the Church knows that it is the seed, the leaven, the salt and light of the world. It sees- clearly enough the astounding newness of modern times, but with frank confidence it stands upon the path of history and says to men; *'I have that for which you search, that which you lack." It does not thereby promise earthly felicity, but it does offer something—its light and its grace—which makes the attainment as easy as possible; and then it speaks to men of their trans cendent destiny. In doing this it speaks to them of truth, justice, freedom, progress, concord, peace and civilization. These are words whose secret is known to the Church, for Christ has entrusted the secret to its keeping. And so the Church has a message for every category of humanity; for children, for youth, for men of science and learning, for the world of labor and for every social class, for artists, for statesmen and for rulers. Most of all, the Church has words for the poor, the out casts, the suffering and the dying; for all men. In speaking in this w»y, we may seem to be allowing ourselves to be carried away in the con templation of our mission and to be out of touch with reality as regards the actual relations of mankind with situation quite clearly. To give a brief idea of it, we think it can be described as consisting of a series of concentric circles around the central point in which God has plac ed us. The first of these circles is immense. Its limits stretch beyond our sight and merge with the horizon. It Is that of mankind as such, the world. We gauge the distance that lies between us and the world; yet we do not consider the world a stranger. All things human are our con cern. We share with the whole of mankinds common nature; human life with all its gifts and prob lems. In this primary universal reality we are ready to play our part, to acknowledge the deep- seated claims of its fundamental needs, to applaud the new, and sometimes sublime, expressions of its genius. We possess , too, vital moral truths, to be brought to men's notice and to be corrobora ted by their conscience, to the benefit of all. Wherever men are trying to understand them selves and the world, we can communicate with them. Whereever the councils of nations come together to establish the rights and duties man, we are honored when they allow us to take our seat among them. If there exists in men "a soul which is naturally Christian," we desire to show it our respect and to enter into conver sation with it. Our attitude in this, as we remaind ourselves and everyone else, is, on the one hand, entirely disinterested. We have no temporal or political aim whatever. On the other hand, its purpose is to raise up and elevate to a supernatural and Christian level every good human value in the world. We are not civiliza tion, but we promote it. We realize, however, that in this limitless circle there are many-very many, unfortunate ly- who profess no religion. We are aware also that there are many who profess themselves, in var ious ways, to be atheists. We know that some of these proclaim their godlessness openly and up hold it as a program of human education and political conduct, in the ingenuous but fatal belief that they are setting men free from false and out worn notions about life and the world and are, they claim, putting in their place a scientific conception that is in conformity with the needs of modern progress. This is the most serious problem of our time. We are firmly convinced that the theory on which the denial of God is based is utterly erron eous. This theory is not in keeping with the basic, undeniable requirements of thought. It deprives the reasonable order of the world of its genuine foundation. This theory does not provide human life with a liberating formula but with a blind dogma which degrades and saddens it. This theory destroys, at the root, any social system which sttempts to base itself upon it. It does not bring freedom. It is a sham, attempting to quench the light of the living God. We shall, therefore, resist with all our strength the assaults on this denial. This we do in the su preme cause of truth and in virtue of our sacred duty to profess Christ and His Gospel, moved by deep, unshakable love for men and in the invincible hope that modern man will come again to dis cover, in the religious Ideals that Catholicism sets before him, his vocation to the civilization that does not die, but ever tends to the natural and supernatural perfection of the human spirit, and In which the grace of God enables man to possess his temporal goods in peace and honor, - Seed, The and to live in hope of attaining eternal goods. These are the reasons which compel us, as they compelled our predecessors and, with them, everyone who has religious values at heart, to condemn the ideological systems which deny God and oppress the Church-systems which are often identified with ;economic, social and political regimes, amongst which atheistic communism is the chief. It could be said that it is not so much that we condemn these systems and regimes as that they express their radical opposition to us in thought and deed. Our regret is, in reality, more sorrow for a victim than the sentence of a judge. Dialogue in such conditions is very difficult, not to say impossible, although, even today, we have no preconceived intention of excluding the persons who profess these systems and belong to these regimes. For the lover of truth discuss ion is always possible. The difficulties are enormously increased by obstacles of the moral order: the absence of sufficient freedom of thought and action, and the perversion of discussion so that the latter is not made use of to seek and express objective truth but to serve predetermined utilitarian ends. This is what puts an end to dialogue. The Church of Silence, for example, speaks only by sufferings, and with her speaks also the suffering of an oppressed degraded society, in which the rights of the spirit are crushed by those who control its fate. If we begin to speak in such a state of affairs, how can we of fer dialogue, when we cannot be anything more than a "voice crying in the wilderness" (Mark 1, 3)? Silence, groaning, patience and always love, in such conditions, are the witness that the Church can still offer and not even death can silence it. But though we must speak firmly and clearly In declaring and defending religion and the human values which it proclaims and upholds, we are moved by our pastoral office to seek in the heart of the modern atheist the motives of his turmoil and denial. His motives are many and complex, so that we must examine them with care if we are to answer them effectively. Some of them arise from the demand that divine things be present ed in a worthier and purer way than is, per haps, the case in certain imperfect forms of language and worship, which we ought to try to purify so that they express as perfectly and clear ly as possible the sacred reality of which they are the sign. We see these men full of yearning, prompted sometimes by passion and desire for the unat tainable, but often also by great-hearted dreams of justice and progress. In such dreams noble social aims are set up in the place of the Ab solute and Necessary God, testifying thereby to the ineradicable need for the Divine Source and End of all things, whose transcendence and immanence it is the task of our teaching office to reveal with patience and wisdom. Again, we see them, sometimes with ingen uous enthusiasm, having recourse to human re ason, with the intention of arriving at a scien tific explanation of the universe. This procedure is all the less reprehensible in that it is often based upon laws of logical thought not unlike those of our classical school. It is a procedure which leads in a direction quite contrary to the will of those who use it, thinking to find in it an unanswerable proof of their atheism and its own Intrinsic validity, for it leads them on ward towards the new and final metaphysical and logical assertion of the existence of the strp reme God. In this congent process of reasoning the athe istic politico-scientist stops short wilfully at a certain point and so extinguishes the sover eign light of the intelligibility of the universe. Is there no one among us who ^could help him to reason on to a realization of the objective reality of the cosmic universe, a realization which restores to man the sense of the divine Presence, and bring to his lips the humble, halting words of a consoling prayer? Sometimes, too, the atheist is spurred on by noble sentiments and by Impatience with the piediocrity and self-seeking of so many contem porary social settings. He knows well how to borrow from our Gospel modes and expres sions of solidarity and human compassion. Shall we not be able to lead him back one day to the Christian source of such manifestations of moral worth? Accordingly, bearing in mind the words of our predecessor of venerable memory, Pope John XXIII, in his encyclical Pacem in Terris to the effect that the doctrines of such movements, once elaborated and defined, remain always the same, whereas the movements themselves cannot help but evolve and undergo changes, even of a profound nature (cf. n. 54), we do not des pair that they may one day be able to enter Into a more positive dialogue with the Church than the present one which we now of necessity deplore and lament. But we cannot turn our gaze away from the contemporary world without expressing a cheri- ished desire, namely that our Intention of de veloping and perfecting our dialogue in the var ied and changing facets which it presents, may assist the cause of peace between men, by prov iding a method which seeks to order human relationships in the sublime light of the langu age of reason and sincerity, and by making a contribution of experience and wisdom which can stir up all men to the consideration of the sup reme values. The opening of a dialogue, such as ours would be, disinterested, objective and sincere, is in itself a decision in favor of a free and honor able peace. It excludes pretence, rivalry, deceit and betrayal. It cannot do other than condemn, as a crime and destruction, wars of aggres sion, congression, conquest or domination. It cannot confine Itself to relationships with the heads of nations, but must set them up also with the body of the nation and with its founda tions, whether social, family or individual, so Leaven, The Salt as to diffuse in every institution and in every soul the understanding, the relish and the duty of peace. Then we see another circle around us. This, too, is vast in its extent, yet it is not so far away from us. It is made up of the men who above all adore the one, supreme God whom we to adore. We refer to the children, worthy of our affec tion and respect, of the Hebrew people, faith ful to the religoon which we call that of the Old Testament. Then to the adorers of God accord ing to the conception of monotheism, the Moslem religion especially, deserving of our admira tion for all that is true and good in their wor ship of God. And also to the followers of the great Afro-Asiatic religions. Obviously we cannot share in these various forms of religion nor can we remain indiffer ent to the fact that each of them, in its own way, should regard itself as being the equal of any other and should authorise its followers not to seek to discover whether God has revealed the perfect and definitive form, free from all error, in which he wishes to be known, loved and serv ed. Indeed, honesty compels us to declare open ly our conviction that there is but one true religion, the religion of Christianity. It is our hope that all who seek God and adore Him may come to acknowledge its truth. But we do, nevertheless, recognize and respect the moral and spiritual values of the various non-Christian religions, and we deisre to join with them in promoting and defending common ideals of religious liberty, human brother hood, good culture, social welfare and civil order. For our part, we are ready to enter into discussion on these common ideals, and will not fail to take the initiative where our offer of dis cussion in genuine, mutual respect, would be well received. And so we come to the circle which is near est to us, the circle of Christianity. We want to give our assurance, once again, that we have an attentive, reverent interest in the spiritual movements connected with atten tive, reverent interest in the spiritual move ments connected with the problem of unity, which are stirring up vital and noble religious sentiments in various invidivuals, groups and communities. With love and reverence we greet all these Christians, in hope that we may pro mote together, even more effectively, the cause of Christ and the unity which He desired for His Church, in the dialogue of sincerity and love. And lastly we turn to sepak with the children of the House of God, the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, of which this Roman Church is "mother and head." It Is our ardent desire that this conversation with our own children should be full of faith, of charity, of good works, should be intimate and familiar. We would have it responsive to all truth and virtue and to all the realities of our doctrinal and spiritual Inheritance. Sincere and sensitive in genuine spirituality, ever ready to give ear to the manifold voice of the contemporary world, ever more capable of making Catholics truly good men, men wise, free, serene and strong; that is what we earnestly desire our family conversation to be. This desire to impress upon the internal re lationships of the Church the character of a dialo gue between members of a body, whose const itutive principle is charity, does not do away with the exercise of the virtue of obedience where the right order necessary in all well constructed societies. Above all, the hierarchic constitution of the Church requires that, on the one side, authority should be exercised accord ing to its proper function and that, on the other side, there should be submission. In this field the dialogue, which has come to be called ecumenclal, has already begun, and in some areas is making real headway. There is much to be said on this complex and delicate subject, but our discourse does not end here. For the moment we limit ourself to a few remarks— none of them new. The principle that we are happy to make our own is this: Let us stress what we have in com mon rather than what divides us. This provides a good and fruitful subject for our dialogue. We are ready to carry it out wholeheartedly. We will say more: on many points of differ ence regarding tradition, spirituality, canon, law, and worship, we are ready to study how we can satisfy the legitimate desires of our Chris tian brothers, still separated from us. It is our dearest wish to embrace them in a perfect un ion of faith and charity-. But we must add that it is not in our power to compromise with the integrity of the faith or the requirements of charity. We foresee that this will cause misgiving and opposition, but now that the Catholic Church has taken the ini tiative in restoring the unity of Christ’s fold, it will not cease to go forward with all patience and considration. It will not cease to show that the preroga tives, which keep the separated brothers at a distance, are not the fruits of historic ambi tion or of fanciful theological speculation, but de rive from the will of Christ and that, rightly understood, they are for the good of all and make for common unity, freedom and Christian per fection. The Catholic Church will not cease, by prayer and penance, to prepare herself worth ily for the longed-for reconciliation. In reflecting on this subject, it distresses us to see how we, the promoter of such re conciliation, are regarded by many of the sep arated bretheren as being its stumbling-block, because of the primacy of honor and juris diction which Christ bestowed upon the Apostle Peter, and which we have inherited from him. Do not some of them say that if it were not for the primacy of the pope, the reunion of the separated churches with the Catholic Church would be easy? We beg the separated brethren to consider the inconsistency of this position, not only in that, without the pope the Catholic Church would no longer be Catholic, but also because, without the supreme, efficacious and decisive pastoral of fice of Peter the unity of the Church of Christ would utterly collapse. It would be vain to look for other principles of unity in- place of the one established by Christ himself. As St, Jerome Justly wrote: "There would arise in the Church as many sects as there are priests" (Dial, contra Lucl- ferianos, n. 9). We should also like to observe that this fundamental principle of Holy Church has not as its objective a aupremacy of spiri tual pride and human domination. It is a pri macy of service, of ministration, of love. It is not empty rhetoric which confers upon the Vicar of Christ the title of "servant of the servants of God." It is along these lines that our dialogue is alert, and even before entering into fraternal conver sation, it speaks in prayer and hope with the heavenly Father. The Church's authority is instituted by Christ; it is, indeed, representative of Him; it is the authorized channel of His word; it is the ex pression of His pastoral charity. Obedience, therefore, is motivated by faith, develops into a school of evangelical humility, and links the obedient man to the wisdom, unity, construc tiveness and charity by which the body of the Church is sustained. It confers upon him who imposes it and upon his who conforms himself to it the merit of being like Christ who was "made obedient unto death" (Phil. 2, 8). By obedience, therefore, in the context of dia logue, we mean the exercise of authority in the full awareness of its being a service and minis try of truth and charity, and we mean the obser vance of canonical regulations and respect for the government of legitimate superiors in the spirit of untroubled readiness as becomes free and loving children. The spirit* of independence, of criticism, of re bellion ill accords with the charity which gives life to the Church’s solidarity, concord and peace, and easily transforms the dialogue into argument, dispute and disagreement. This most regret table attitude, so easy, also, to produce, is con demned by the Apostle Paul in his warning words; "Let there be no divisions among you" (I Cor. K ! 0) It is, therefore, our ardent desire that the dial ogue within the Church should take on new fervor, new- themes and speakers, so that the holiness and vitality of the Mystical Body of Chris ton earth may be increased. Anything that makes known the teachings of which the Church is both custodian and dispenser receives our approbation. We have already men tioned the liturgy, the interior life and preaching. We could add also; schools, the press, the social apostoiate, the missions, the exercise of char ity. All these are themes to which the council will direct our attention. And we bless and en courage all those who, under the guidance of competent authority, take part in the life-giving dialogue of the Church, priests especially and Religious, and our well-loved laity, dedicated to Christ in Catholic Action and in so many other associations and activities. It is a cause of Joy and comfort for us to see that such a dialogue is already in existence in the Church and in the areas which surround it. The Church today is more than ever alive. But it seems good to consider that everything still remains to be done; the work begins today and never comes to an end. This is the law of our temporal, earthly pilgrimage. This is the ordin ary task, venerable brothers, of our ministry, which everything today stimulates ui to renew and to make more devoted and Intense. As for ourself In speaking to you of these things, we are pleased to trust In your coopera tion and offer you our own in return. This union of aims and labor we ask for and offer not long after our elevation to the Chair of the Apostle Peter, bearing the name and sharing, please God, something of the spirit of the Apostle of the Gentiles. And so celebrating the unity of Christ among us, we send to you with this, our first letter, in the name of the Lord, our blessing as brother and father, a blessing which we gladly extend to the whole Church and to all mankind. We must observe, venerable bretheren, with joy andconfidence.that the vast and varied circle of separated Christians is pervaded by spiritual activities which seem to promise consoling de velopments in regard to their reunion in the one Church of Christ. We beg that the Holy Spirit will breathe upon the "ecumenclal movement," and we recall the emotion and joy we felt at Jerusalem in our meeting, full of charity and hope, with the Patriarch Athenagorss. We wish to greet w ith gratitude and respect the participation of so many representatives of sep arated churches in the Second Vatican Ecumeni cal Council. From the Vatican, 6 August 1964. On the Feast of the Transfiguration of Our Lord Jesus Christ.