Munich, Germany, Dec 28, 2017 / 02:39 pm (CNA).- German Cardinal Reinhard Marx has stated that decisions about sexual morality must be discerned according to a well-formed conscience, respecting “the interplay of freedom and responsibility.”
The chairman of the German Bishops’ Conference said in a new interview that a person “has to be guided into the full reality of the faith and heed the voice of the Church. It is not sufficient to say that one knows by oneself whether something is good for you, or not. That would not constitute a conscientious decision-making process in the context of the Gospel.”
Speaking to the German magazine “Herder Korrespondenz,” Cardinal Marx affirmed that this also applies to homosexuality.
A “truly comprehensive assessment of the severity of guilt” is not possible “without looking at the individual’s conscience, without looking at his reality, at the concrete circumstances.”
Cardinal Marx warned against interpreting this “interplay of freedom and responsibility” as “relativism,” saying that while “there must be respect for the decision that one freely takes,” it is always within the context of the Gospel.
“It would be quite terrible to consider this as relativism, like some indeed have repeatedly claimed, as though everyone could just go about doing whatever they please.”
Asked whether he sees a risk of a new schism in the Church, given the current debates and controversies in Catholicism, Cardinal Marx answered: “I don’t see this being the case. I’d rather say not to be afraid, the Lord guides the Church.” In fact, the Archbishop of Munich and Freising continued, “productive debates” are “particularly important in our time.”
With regard to the question of “synodality,” something Pope Francis has repeatedly underscored as an important part of his papal agenda, Cardinal Marx said that he considered synodality an expression and consequence of the responsibilities and autonomy of the local churches, for example in liturgical translations.
“We can’t just publish texts in Rome that are then simply translated around the world. Even under John Paul II there were synods for each continent in order to focus more on specific regions. We should continue on that path.”
On the question of ordaining women to the priesthood, which the German interviewers also raised, the Cardinal gave a short, definitive answer: “That really is not for discussion. The pope has spoken decisively on the matter.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, Archbishop of Bologna, Italy, in St. Peter’s Basilica on Oct. 5, 2019. / Daniel Ibáñez/CNA
Rome, Italy, Nov 25, 2021 / 11:00 am (CNA).
No, it does not seem as if Pope Francis is going to resign. Indeed, his dynamism and desire to do things, working to bring the Church closer to the people, should be appreciated.
That is how Cardinal Matteo Zuppi responded when asked if the Pope Francis era was about to come to an end.
The questions, however, were legitimate because they were asked at the launch of a book explicitly addressing the papacy’s future.
Zuppi was on a panel for the Nov. 18 presentation of the book “Cosa Resta del Papato? Il futuro della Chiesa dopo Bergoglio” (“What Remains of the Papacy? The future of the Church after Bergoglio”), by the Italian Vaticanist Francesco Antonio Grana.
The book examines what the institution of the papacy is and what it can become after the resignation of Benedict XVI and the pontificate of Pope Francis.
It reconstructs the last part of Benedict XVI’s pontificate, revealing that among the few people aware of the forthcoming resignation was Italy’s then president, Giorgio Napolitano. The book also offers a glimpse of what the next conclave might look like.
Returning from Slovakia in September, Pope Francis had complained about the prelates who were allegedly already seeking to identify his successor. For this reason, the presence of a cardinal at the launch of a book that also looks at the papal succession risked being viewed as part of a “hidden electoral campaign.”
This is especially the case as Zuppi, the archbishop of Bologna, northern Italy, is seen by many as one of the possible papabili in a future conclave.
A leading figure in the Community of Sant’Egidio, and known internationally also for his role as a peace mediator in Mozambique, Zuppi has nevertheless always maintained a low-key and ascetic profile. This approach made him a beloved parish priest, first at the Rome church of Santa Maria in Trastevere and then in a parish on the city’s outskirts.
His hierarchical ascent began with his appointment as an auxiliary bishop of Rome in 2012. He was then called by Pope Francis to be archbishop of Bologna, a major Italian see, in 2015, receiving the cardinal’s red hat in 2019.
Zuppi’s presence at the book launch was all the more striking because he is a cardinal loved by Pope Francis, who gives little indication of wanting to detach himself from the legacy of the reigning pope and always defends his pastoral activities. (The one exception might be his decision not to clamp down severely on the Traditional Latin Mass in his archdiocese following the motu proprioTraditionis custodes.)
The 66-year-old cardinal’s words at the book launch were cautious. He began by reflecting on the book’s title. He then focused on the Statio Orbis of March 27, 2020: the solitary prayer in St. Peter’s Square in which Pope Francis asked for an end to the pandemic. Zuppi said that on that occasion, “for the first time, Ecclesialese — the language spoken among us priests — became the common language.”
Speaking of the crisis in the Church, Zuppi said that “we can spend a lifetime arguing among ourselves, fueling an internal conflict. But the point is that it is a crisis, generative of something new.”
He stressed that John XXIII was considered “a simpleton, who seemed to impoverish the greatness of the Church,” and that Benedict XVI “defined himself as a humble worker in the Lord’s vineyard.”
In short, Francis is not, according to Zuppi, a pope who is diminishing the institution’s importance. Rather, he is giving it a new impetus. So much so, that there is “anything but an air of resignation,” Zuppi said. “In the many decisions he has made, and in the processes he has initiated, there is a great awareness and sense of the future.”
He added: “Pope Francis tells us that there is so much to do now, and he helps us not to have a renunciatory attitude, as a retreating minority. His significant reform is pastoral and missionary conversion.”
“He allows us to place ourselves in an evangelical, straightforward way, close to the people, and shows us some priorities for a Church that speaks to the heart. He helps us to be more Church, in a world that makes identity fade.”
There was also talk of the Zan bill, a proposed anti-homophobia law discussed in the Italian Senate. The Holy See presented a formal diplomatic note to the Italian state, highlighting that the bill violated the Concordat between the Holy See and Italy as part of the freedom of education.
It was not an opinion of the Holy See, but rather a diplomatic initiative to avoid the violation of a treaty. One of the panelists, Peter Gomez, director of IlFattoquotidiano.it, suggested erroneously that the Holy See expresses an opinion and the secular state is free to make its own decisions. But this was not the focus of the discussion.
Zuppi has repeatedly refused to address the controversy publicly. Many have interpreted this as a tactical move. The general assembly of the Italian bishops’ conference is currently discussing who should be its next president. Zuppi is one of the leading candidates to succeed Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti of Perugia-Città della Pieve.
Then there is the question of the next conclave that continues to hang over Zuppi. It was the author of the book himself, Francesco Grana, who sought to damp down any speculation. He explained that, despite its arresting title, the book was not presenting a manifesto.
He referred to a book recently published by Andrea Riccardi, founder of the community with which Zuppi is closely associated.
“Andrea Riccardi, the founder of the Community of Sant’Egidio, wrote the book ‘The Church burns.’ And if the Church burns, how can we not ask ourselves about the papacy of the future?” he asked.
Conscience means to act with knowledge. Cardinal Marx addresses the tension between reason and doctrine favoring doctrine with exceptions such as homosexuality. If reason is the rule of truth then revealed truth is not. “What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe ‘because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived’” (CCC 156). Man has the inherent capacity to identify truth that is the basis for forming conscience and responsibility for his actions. That is why Aquinas acknowledged that reason is the measure of truth not the rule.
I have ALWAYS believed that people making rules and judgemments must be a participant in the society in which they govern. Cardinals and Bishops and priests when they are MARRIED seem to have a better understanding and ability to govern on this subject! It is ludicrous to allow this. Much like a married couple should explain Marriage to Teens not a priest. Gosh this is quite a step in the wrong direction!
According to CNA German and the German language portal kath.net, what Cardinal Marx has said smacks more of situation ethics than what appears in this current article. Following kath.net (‘Conscience decision of homosexuals must be respected’) the Cardinal warned against ‘blind rigorism’ in sexual morals. ‘Of course there must be a responsibility with regard to the gospel and the teaching of the Church, but (finally) the conscience decision made in freedom must be respected.’ Depending on CNA German the Cardinal stated that ‘questions of sexual morals are decided by your personal – though formed by Christian principles – conscience.’ And again ‘there must be respect for one’s decision made in freedom.’ The Kardinals assertions go well together with the ‘Königsteiner Erklärung’ in which the German bishops after ‘Humanae vitae’ put the decision of the ‘personal conscience’ above the norm of the encyclical regarding contraception. One is reminded of the guidelines of the Maltese bishops on ‘Amoris laetitia’ saying that a divorced and remarried person should be admitted to Communion if, “with an informed and enlightened conscience”, they believe they are “at peace with God”. These guidelines were reportedly acknowledged with gratitude by Pope Francis (http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-thanks-maltese-bishops-for-amoris-laetitia-guidelines).
The post pedophilia era, if there is a post, places the church in a somewhat deleterious fall out. Promises made by Pope Francis to “clean house” of criminal hierarchy began with a tribunal that was short lived. Compounding that false start was a rare display of acknowledgement to two Cardinals that were criminally responsible for moving criminal priests in Boston and Los Angeles. How does a faithful lay person remain so in light of these atrocities against innocent young people? Then we hear all about how our conscience should be involved in sexual matters from clergy who are supposedly a-sexual.
When it comes to restricting the ordination of women, we are living in a netherworld of old manmade tales. Women would make better, less complicated priests. The church may not have spent $1.5 billion to lawyers and the injured children in retribution had there been female clergy.
One day as he was driven up Riverside Drive William Sloan Coffin was asked what he, a Protestant minister, though of the current Catholic Church? He quipped… “they are still trying to steer the car based on what they see in the rearview mirror”. That is a saying any Catholic should remember.
“The church may not have spent $1.5 billion to lawyers and the injured children in retribution had there been female clergy.” The recent (and ongoing) spate of stories about female teachers engaged in sexual relations with teenage boys would indicate otherwise. But perhaps I underestimate the moral propriety of the fairer sex.
You need to stop perpetuating the “pedophilia” myth. The overwhelming majority of abuse cases in the Church involved homosexual ephebophiles – aka chickenhawks; intrinsically disordered sexual deviants masquerading as Catholic Priests.
As for the proposal to ordain women is concerned, we’ve all seen what a disaster that has been for the Anglican denomination. You think you’ve got problems now just proceed on that tangent.
No, the solution is to enforce the longstanding ban on the ordination of homosexuals; reaffirmed in February of 1961 during the Pontificate of Pope St. John XXIII. Furthermore, rid the seminaries, Diaconate, Priesthood, Episcopacy, Curia, College of Cardinals and consecrated religious life of homosexuals and return to a culture where virtues of discipline, obedience, humility and chastity are no longer paid lip service. That is the solution.
You need a mystical understanding of the Mystical Body of Christ in order to understand the male priesthood. The relationship between Christ and His Church is said to be spousal. Christ is the Bridegroom and the Church is His Bride. When a husband and a wife enter into the one flesh union it is the man who enters into the woman. Likewise, in conception it is the male sperm that swims up to and enters into the female egg. It seems clear that the act of entering within is a male act. The male is the doer of intimacy. The female is the one who receives this intimacy. This explains why Christ came as a male, and why male terms like Father and Son are used to describe God, and why the Church is called Holy Mother Church.
*
Because of the Hypostatic Union, Christ is One Person in two natures, divine and human. The priest acts In Persona Christi, in the person of Christ. In Holy Orders during the ordination the priest is configured to Christ in a very special way. As such, Holy Orders is in the image and likeness of the Hypostatic Union. The priest is the living icon of Christ. Consecrated women religious are considered to be brides of Christ.
*
The priest acts In Persona Christi during the Consecration. In the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist during the Consecration the Real Presence of Christ enters into and becomes one with the bread and the wine. Transubstantiation at its core is a male act. The Body and Blood in a similar fashion enter into the communicant. The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament that is permeated with Christ’s maleness, and gives us a foreshadowing of the final nuptial union that is described in Revelation.
*
Women don’t have to be priests to have an impact on the Church. We can begin with the Blessed Virgin Mary and the women disciples. There are many important women saints: St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, St Thérèse of Lisieux, and St. Faustina for starters.
*
Any woman who thinks that she has a calling from the Holy Spirit needs to study the works of St. Teresa of Avila, who is a Doctor of the Church. She wrote extensively about prayer and mysticism. St. Teresa was also a reformer who sought to restore a spiritual focus to the Carmelite Order that had fallen into lax spiritual practices. St. John of the Cross joined her in this reform effort. They both met with considerable opposition to their reform efforts. St. John was taken prisoner, jailed, and flogged.
*
The arguments that are being made in an attempt to redefine the priesthood are very similar to the arguments being used in an attempt to redefine marriage.
“On the question of ordaining women to the priesthood, which the German interviewers also raised, the Cardinal gave a short, definitive answer: ‘That really is not for discussion. The pope has spoken decisively on the matter.'”…With all the talk we hear about the importance of dialogue and informed conscience, does it bother anyone else that this is the Cardinal’s quick response to a question burning on the minds of many Catholics, not at all aware or convinced this cannot be changed in the name of, “guidance of the Holy Spirit”? Does it reveal that he does not agree? Is he suggesting he yields in fidelity to the Church’s teaching? #JustAsking
Thus wrote Mahatma Gandhi: “The human voice can never reach the distance that is covered by the still small voice of conscience”.
Conscience means to act with knowledge. Cardinal Marx addresses the tension between reason and doctrine favoring doctrine with exceptions such as homosexuality. If reason is the rule of truth then revealed truth is not. “What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe ‘because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived’” (CCC 156). Man has the inherent capacity to identify truth that is the basis for forming conscience and responsibility for his actions. That is why Aquinas acknowledged that reason is the measure of truth not the rule.
I have ALWAYS believed that people making rules and judgemments must be a participant in the society in which they govern. Cardinals and Bishops and priests when they are MARRIED seem to have a better understanding and ability to govern on this subject! It is ludicrous to allow this. Much like a married couple should explain Marriage to Teens not a priest. Gosh this is quite a step in the wrong direction!
I suppose in your vision of Church governance Jesus need not apply.
According to CNA German and the German language portal kath.net, what Cardinal Marx has said smacks more of situation ethics than what appears in this current article. Following kath.net (‘Conscience decision of homosexuals must be respected’) the Cardinal warned against ‘blind rigorism’ in sexual morals. ‘Of course there must be a responsibility with regard to the gospel and the teaching of the Church, but (finally) the conscience decision made in freedom must be respected.’ Depending on CNA German the Cardinal stated that ‘questions of sexual morals are decided by your personal – though formed by Christian principles – conscience.’ And again ‘there must be respect for one’s decision made in freedom.’ The Kardinals assertions go well together with the ‘Königsteiner Erklärung’ in which the German bishops after ‘Humanae vitae’ put the decision of the ‘personal conscience’ above the norm of the encyclical regarding contraception. One is reminded of the guidelines of the Maltese bishops on ‘Amoris laetitia’ saying that a divorced and remarried person should be admitted to Communion if, “with an informed and enlightened conscience”, they believe they are “at peace with God”. These guidelines were reportedly acknowledged with gratitude by Pope Francis (http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-thanks-maltese-bishops-for-amoris-laetitia-guidelines).
The post pedophilia era, if there is a post, places the church in a somewhat deleterious fall out. Promises made by Pope Francis to “clean house” of criminal hierarchy began with a tribunal that was short lived. Compounding that false start was a rare display of acknowledgement to two Cardinals that were criminally responsible for moving criminal priests in Boston and Los Angeles. How does a faithful lay person remain so in light of these atrocities against innocent young people? Then we hear all about how our conscience should be involved in sexual matters from clergy who are supposedly a-sexual.
When it comes to restricting the ordination of women, we are living in a netherworld of old manmade tales. Women would make better, less complicated priests. The church may not have spent $1.5 billion to lawyers and the injured children in retribution had there been female clergy.
One day as he was driven up Riverside Drive William Sloan Coffin was asked what he, a Protestant minister, though of the current Catholic Church? He quipped… “they are still trying to steer the car based on what they see in the rearview mirror”. That is a saying any Catholic should remember.
“The church may not have spent $1.5 billion to lawyers and the injured children in retribution had there been female clergy.” The recent (and ongoing) spate of stories about female teachers engaged in sexual relations with teenage boys would indicate otherwise. But perhaps I underestimate the moral propriety of the fairer sex.
You need to stop perpetuating the “pedophilia” myth. The overwhelming majority of abuse cases in the Church involved homosexual ephebophiles – aka chickenhawks; intrinsically disordered sexual deviants masquerading as Catholic Priests.
As for the proposal to ordain women is concerned, we’ve all seen what a disaster that has been for the Anglican denomination. You think you’ve got problems now just proceed on that tangent.
No, the solution is to enforce the longstanding ban on the ordination of homosexuals; reaffirmed in February of 1961 during the Pontificate of Pope St. John XXIII. Furthermore, rid the seminaries, Diaconate, Priesthood, Episcopacy, Curia, College of Cardinals and consecrated religious life of homosexuals and return to a culture where virtues of discipline, obedience, humility and chastity are no longer paid lip service. That is the solution.
Exactly right could not agree w you more. Perfectly said. And to this I would add…religious should wear thier religious clothing Priest and Nuns…
You need a mystical understanding of the Mystical Body of Christ in order to understand the male priesthood. The relationship between Christ and His Church is said to be spousal. Christ is the Bridegroom and the Church is His Bride. When a husband and a wife enter into the one flesh union it is the man who enters into the woman. Likewise, in conception it is the male sperm that swims up to and enters into the female egg. It seems clear that the act of entering within is a male act. The male is the doer of intimacy. The female is the one who receives this intimacy. This explains why Christ came as a male, and why male terms like Father and Son are used to describe God, and why the Church is called Holy Mother Church.
*
Because of the Hypostatic Union, Christ is One Person in two natures, divine and human. The priest acts In Persona Christi, in the person of Christ. In Holy Orders during the ordination the priest is configured to Christ in a very special way. As such, Holy Orders is in the image and likeness of the Hypostatic Union. The priest is the living icon of Christ. Consecrated women religious are considered to be brides of Christ.
*
The priest acts In Persona Christi during the Consecration. In the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist during the Consecration the Real Presence of Christ enters into and becomes one with the bread and the wine. Transubstantiation at its core is a male act. The Body and Blood in a similar fashion enter into the communicant. The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament that is permeated with Christ’s maleness, and gives us a foreshadowing of the final nuptial union that is described in Revelation.
*
Women don’t have to be priests to have an impact on the Church. We can begin with the Blessed Virgin Mary and the women disciples. There are many important women saints: St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, St Thérèse of Lisieux, and St. Faustina for starters.
*
Any woman who thinks that she has a calling from the Holy Spirit needs to study the works of St. Teresa of Avila, who is a Doctor of the Church. She wrote extensively about prayer and mysticism. St. Teresa was also a reformer who sought to restore a spiritual focus to the Carmelite Order that had fallen into lax spiritual practices. St. John of the Cross joined her in this reform effort. They both met with considerable opposition to their reform efforts. St. John was taken prisoner, jailed, and flogged.
*
The arguments that are being made in an attempt to redefine the priesthood are very similar to the arguments being used in an attempt to redefine marriage.
“On the question of ordaining women to the priesthood, which the German interviewers also raised, the Cardinal gave a short, definitive answer: ‘That really is not for discussion. The pope has spoken decisively on the matter.'”…With all the talk we hear about the importance of dialogue and informed conscience, does it bother anyone else that this is the Cardinal’s quick response to a question burning on the minds of many Catholics, not at all aware or convinced this cannot be changed in the name of, “guidance of the Holy Spirit”? Does it reveal that he does not agree? Is he suggesting he yields in fidelity to the Church’s teaching? #JustAsking