cardinal-caffarra

Pastoral Solutions Can’t Cause Pastoral Problems

Fr. David D. Nerbun
By | September 15, 2014

In less than a month, the Extraordinary Synod on the Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelization will begin in Rome. Bishops, religious, and expert lay women and men from around the world will convene to talk about the issues surrounding marriage and families, upon which the future existence not only of states and civil societies but of the Church rests. For as St. John Paul II once said, “The future of humanity passes by way of the family.”

For the 6 months leading up to the Synod, the issue that has drawn the greatest attention (at least in the Western world and blogosphere) resulted from a pastoral comment made by Cardinal Walter Kasper a lecture before an extraordinary consistory of the College of Cardinals with Pope Francis in February 2014. His lecture has since been published in book and Kindle format under the title “The Gospel of the Family.” In it the Cardinal writes:

Many pastors are in fact convinced that many marriages, which were concluded in ecclesial form, are not validly contracted. For as a sacrament of faith, marriage presupposes faith and consent to the essential characteristics of marriage—unity and indissolubility. But can we, in the present situation, presuppose without further ado that the engaged couple shares the belief in the mystery that is signified by the sacrament?

In layman’s terms, Kasper re-articulated a question that was popular in the 70s following the conclusion of Vatican II, but that was then closed by John Paul II in the 1981 apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio, and that was recently reiterated by Pope Benedict XVI before he humbly resigned the papal office in early 2013.

The question was and is again today: When two baptized persons come to the Church because they “like the venue” or “want to please mom and dad in order not to cause familial tension” or “to just do it by the book” and yet lack in faith or have no personal relationship with or are even hostile toward Christ and his bride the Church, is that marriage still a valid sacramental marriage? That is to say, was it a real marriage in the eyes of Christ and his Church?

For some, this immediately seems an obscure and bizarre case, but it has been presented as a serious pastoral concern in many countries, especially for those now cohabiting or in a second civil marriage seeking a more intimate bond with the Church.

A paper given at the International Theological Commission in 1984 by Carlo Caffarra (now Cardinal Caffarra) articulates a deeper question on the pastoral nature of this “closed issue”—not only that of rehashing an old debate from the 70s, but of an entirely new precedent for a synod on the challenges of the family. Caffarra, who has publicly taken the traditional stance against Cardinal Kasper over the past several months, had this to say:

The pastoral concern [regarding these issues of marriage] seeks to avoid taking a course of action that might sever any link which these persons may have with the Church.

The real problem is of a different sort. The whole Christian community must shoulder the obligation of fostering in baptized persons an ever more intelligent, mature, and conscious realization of what was bestowed upon them when they were baptized.

[W]e reach an essential point of the debate: we must be aware of the obligation of the Church to evangelize much sooner than when baptized persons come in to request marriage. Otherwise, we put ourselves in the position of having to redress the fact that the Christian community has failed to discharge its basic obligation with another error.

What Cardinal Caffarra captured 30 years ago remains true today, and it is something held in common with Cardinal Kasper.

Pope Francis, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI, every cardinal, bishop, priest, deacon, religious, and lay woman and man wants to be the Merciful Father who runs out with open arms to the prodigal son or daughter (Luke 15) returning home after hitting bottom. We want those who have distanced themselves from the Church to come home. We know deep inside that the Church longs for them, that we are members of the wounded Body of Christ, and that our faith is the sort of “field hospital” that Pope Francis spoke about last fall.

We want them—people divorced and remarried, and in every other pastoral circumstance—to be washed clean in the Sacrament of Reconciliation by the words “I absolve you” and to be given a chance to start anew. We want them reclothed in the light of Christ and the grace of His Church. We want to put a ring on their fingers and shoes on their feet. We want to throw a big banquet and welcome them home. We want them to help us strengthen our parishes. We want to be able to say to our friends, “Look! This person was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found once again!”

But what Cardinal Caffarra correctly argues is that we can’t solve this or other problems by a pastoral solution that only creates additional pastoral problems. Instead, he reflects on how many of these situations could have been avoided had we fulfilled our “obligation” and privilege to catechize the faithful and introduce them to Jesus, as Lord and Savior.

At the end of the day, as the Synod begins, it will only be a waste of time and a perpetuation of the problem if we play ‘point the finger’ to determine who deserves the bulk of blame for not having lived, shared, and taught the Catholic faith in joy, truth, and charity. What will hopefully result, however, is the drafting by the synod fathers of concrete directives that will be pastorally undertaken in all the corners of the Church in order to remedy this crisis of the handing on of the Faith.

For the over 99.9 percent of us who will not be at the Synod in October, this is where our contribution begins. We can each pray for the success and implementation of these directives. And we can each be bridge builders, offering unique invitations to those we know who are “loose threads” on the fringes of the Church, in order that they might once again be interwoven into the fold.

Print Friendly
  • naturgesetz

    “But what Cardinal Caffarra correctly argues is that we can’t solve this or other problems by a pastoral solution that only creates additional pastoral problems. Instead, he reflects on how many of these situations could have been avoided had we fulfilled our “obligation” and privilege to catechize the faithful and introduce them to Jesus, as Lord and Savior.”

    Pointing out the reason the situations have arisen does nothing to resolve the specific situations. It’s no help to the persons involved to say, “Sorry, you’re in a mess because we failed you thirty years ago.” Recognizing our failure to catechize properly may move us to find ways to catechize better in future, but it’s no help to today’s people.

    Does Cardinal Kasper have the right idea for pastoring those whom we’ve failed? I don’t know. But at least he has an idea about how to help the people of today. As you present Cardinal Caffarra’s position, he has none.

    The Synod has its work cut out for it.

  • Johannes Cato

    Yes, Cardinal Caffara does not offer solutions. However, I think there are some theological problems, potentially, with Cardinal Kasper’s solution. To be honest, the solution sounds like Donatism. If, as the Catholic Church teaches but not other Apostolic Churches (I believe), the couple themselves confer the Sacrament, then his solution implies that the deficiency lies in the state of those who confer the Sacrament - namely, that someone not in a state of grace cannot provide valid sacraments. Yet we believe that a priest, no matter his personal sins and state, can confer valid sacraments.

    At the same time, maybe it should be seen as intent.

    This is a complicated question. The problem, it seems, is the idea of “living in sin” as associated with marriage. In other situations, one can go to Confession and be absolved. In this one, one could go to Confession but cannot really give up a relationship which possibly has a whole family involved. That would be cruelty to all parties involved obviously.

    It seems to me that we need to dredge up Church history. What I mean is Charlemagne and the earliest pagans-turned-Christian still practiced concubinage quite openly. Maybe the best guide would be to take St. Gregory the Great’s position and simply forgive the marriage. A similar line ought to be taken with first generation polygamists in Africa, which may also come up at the Synod.

    The tougher issue, I think, are those Catholics who are divorced and remarried - not necessarily those entering the Church. To simply say, as Card. Kasper does, that they must have been under duress (akin to the claims of the Schism’s papal elections) or didn’t “really” understand the Mystery of the Sacrament simply adds more red tape. Again, it seems to me that there needs to be a way that this can be absolved in Confession and the parties can follow a procedure of repentance prior to re-entry akin to the repentance practices of the very earliest Christians or the Irish Christians of old. This shores up the seriousness of the teaching.

    Yet there must be a path of re-entry.

  • KSchmugge

    And as the Synod begins, may we offer our prayers and continue to do our part to teach God’s plan for marriage, stressing the need for our love to image His love. We can do this “teaching” first as parents, living authentic self donation, as catechists through clear instruction, certainly as faithful couples who are involved in marriage preparation and with a priest discerning with the engaged couple. Few people go into marriage fully aware of the sacrament but with God’s grace, they learn through experiencing love and embracing the cross of sacrifice.

  • pdxcatholic

    “When two baptized persons come to the Church because they “like
    the venue” or “want to please mom and dad in order not to cause familial
    tension” or “to just do it by the book” and yet lack in faith or
    have no personal relationship with or are even hostile toward Christ
    and his bride the Church, is that marriage still a valid sacramental
    marriage? That is to say, was it a real marriage in the eyes of Christ
    and his Church?”

    This was how I entered my marriage. Although baptized Catholic, I was given no Catholic education. At the age of 19, I was very hostile toward religion in general, but agreed to a Catholic wedding to placate my in-laws. How these factors managed to escape the notice of those who were involved in our Pre-Cana class is a mystery. Not surprisingly, we divorced after 13 years of marriage.