Nominalist Thought is the Greatest Challenge

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Reported by John Allen of NCR:

Whenever a top official of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith identifies what he considers the “greatest challenge facing the church today in its new evangelization,” it’s worth paying attention. It could be an insight into the thinking shaping policy choices in the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdog agency.

In an address Dec. 4 at the Regina Apostolorum, the Rome university of the Legionaries of Christ, Dominican Fr. Augustine Di Noia identified that challenge as “the lingering influence of nominalist patterns of thought in moral theology,” coupled with a “variety of secular humanisms and anti-humanisms.”

Di Noia, an American, is the under-secretary of the doctrinal congregation.

Nominalism, Di Noia argued, “let loose a catastrophe on the human race” by separating morality from anthropology. To explain his point, he offered the students a rather homespun analogy. Imagine, he said, a mother cooking dinner who spots her child eating cookies. The mother could say, “eating cookies is forbidden in this house,” appealing to her authority. Or she could say, “if you eat those cookies, you’ll spoil your appetite,” appealing to a truth about human nature. Nominalism proposes the first kind of morality, Di Noia said, while Thomism proposes the second.

Speaking of nominalism, Di Noia said: “The prevalence of this kind of moral theology gave rise to the intolerable tensions experienced by many Catholics in the face of the moral teaching of Humanae Vitae – and eventually the entirety of Christian teaching about human sexuality – which seemed to impose an outdated moral obligation whose connection with the human good was either denied or dismissed, or more commonly, simply not apparent.”

Di Noia was equally critical of secular humanism, which he said severs the good of human life from the good of eternal life, as if to suggest that focus on the after-life is in tension with human welfare here and now. He cited as one example a recent op/ed piece by Nicholas Kristoff in the New York Times attacking the Vatican’s opposition to condoms in the context of HIV/AIDS.

Di Noia said the aim of John Paul II’s 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor was to resuscitate a natural law approach to morality, one that sees obedience of moral commands “not as the suppression of the human person, but its perfection.” For this reason, Di Noia said, Veritatis Splendor may turn out to be the most important of John Paul’s 14 encyclicals.

Finally, Di Noia argued that Aquinas’ theology of the imago Dei can make a significant contribution to the pope’s project. He said a recovery of Aquinas is underway in the work of several younger theologians, many in their 30s, both Catholic and Protestant.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 06, 2003

Answers

Oof! It's VERY dangerous to read the National (non-)Catholic Reporter. This forum does not benefit from its articles, which are peppered with anti-Vatican sentiment, support for the worst kind of dissent, etc. -- while its ads promote homosexual "retreats" and other garbage. The "NCR" is NOT a Catholic Church publication, but a rag published by dissenters who are not practicing, orthodox Catholics.

On the other hand, the real, original "NCR" (National Catholic REGISTER) is an outstanding weekly Catholic newspaper.

-- CAUTIONER (CAUTION@CAUTION.CAUTION), December 07, 2003.


Thanks for the caution, I understand the slant of the magazine. John Allen does give some news not found anywhere else though, and this was one piece of news I did not see anywhere else. He was reporting on what a very important cardinal said. It was the only reference to the speech I have seen (would like to see more if anyone has them). It was a good speech as far as I can tell.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 07, 2003.


He is not a "very important cardinal."

He is not even a cardinal.

He is not even a bishop.

More importantly, the underlying (unstated) purpose of the article was not to speak admiringly of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, but to luxuriate in any little "scrap" of a Vatican statement that the NCR could "spin" into an approval of its position in favor of moral laxness. Allen seems to think he has an ally in Fr. DiNoia, someone who would join with dissenters in blasting a supposedly unhealthy pre-Vatican-II moral strictness. This is not helpful to the forum.

-- CAUTIONER (CAUTION@CAUTION.CAUTION), December 08, 2003.


Thanks for the correction.

He is a very important figure in the Vatican. Father Augustine Di Noia is currently the undersecretary for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, and member of the International Theological Council. Father Di Noia taught theology in Washington, D.C., for 20 years, and served for seven years as the theologian for the U.S. bishops' conference before coming to work directly for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger at the doctrinal congregation a little over a year ago.

Although one always should have caution with the NCR, I think Fr. Di Noia made a good point about nominalism and I did not see it reported anywhere else. Speaking of nominalism, Di Noia said: "The prevalence of this kind of moral theology gave rise to the intolerable tensions experienced by many Catholics in the face of the moral teaching of Humanae Vitae -- and eventually the entirety of Christian teaching about human sexuality -- which seemed to impose an outdated moral obligation whose connection with the human good was either denied or dismissed, or more commonly, simply not apparent." ...

Di Noia said the aim of John Paul II's 1993 encyclical Veritatis Splendor was to resuscitate a natural law approach to morality, one that sees obedience of moral commands "not as the suppression of the human person, but its perfection."

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 09, 2003.


Although one always should have caution with the NCR, I think Fr. Di Noia made a good point about nominalism and I did not see it reported anywhere else.

You have misunderstood my position in two ways.

1. I already knew about Fr. Di Noia. I saw him interviewed on EWTN a few years ago. I was not trying to impugn his integrity, and I did not object to anything he was reported to have said. I did want to set the record straight about his rank, so that all would realize that he does not have a magisterium (not being a bishop).

2. My purpose was not really to talk about Fr. Di Noia, but to speak as strongly as possible against the "NCRep." I disagree with your statement that "one always should have caution with the NCR." Rather, one should totally avoid it, unless one has a mission from the Church to read it (e.g., a USCCB official who has the duty to keep the bishops informed of what the enemy is up to). I believe that it is wrong for any other orthodox Catholic to look at the "NCRep," for at least two reasons:
===== The fact that it enriches those heretics financially -- even if one looks at the Internet version.
===== The fact that its errors can endanger a person's soul.

My opinion is that one cannot give, as an excuse, "I did not see it reported anywhere else." God will provide "it" to you in a different (orthodox) publication if he wants you to see it.

The fact that a famous researcher (or author) writes an article (or short story) that is published in "Playboy" does not give us the right to buy or read that trash and offer, as an excuse, "I could not read it anywhere else."

It is arguable that "NCRep" can do as much harm to souls as "Playboy." An orthodox Catholic should show his disapproval of "NCRep" by not looking at, and denouncing, it -- just as he does by not looking at, and denouncing, "Playboy."

-- CAUTIONER (CAUTION@CAUTION.CAUTION), December 09, 2003.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ