Salvation History- Part One (CCC 50-73)

Catechism Class Six

Now God, who is Divine Mercy, knew this rupture between mankind and Himself would happen, and the Church was prefigured in many ways throughout history. God knew that His covenant of love with Adam would be broken, and He already had a plan for reconciliation. This process of God calling humanity back to Himself is called salvation history. As was stated before, God did not abandon His creation, but sustains it and has even physically entered into its history. The history of salvation, which recounts the words and marvels of God, what He has done, continues to do and will do in the future, is organized in reference to and converges upon Jesus Christ. The events in the Old Testament by which God progressively prepared mankind for the Gospel, the life of Jesus, who brings Revelation to completion, and the history of the Church provide the structure of all salvation history of which creation and eschatology are its beginning and its end.

In the Garden, in a passage known as the proto-evangelium, upon the Fall, God told the serpent who had tempted Eve that her offspring would strike at his head (Gen. 3:15), thereby foreshadowing the deliverance of mankind by Jesus Christ, who would demonstrate the serious nature of sin, and the high cost of redemption, by taking man’s sins upon Himself and dying on the Cross.

Later, during a time of great evil, the righteous Noah and his family were granted salvation by obeying God’s instruction to build an ark. Thus, through one man, the whole family of the faithful were saved from death and destruction at the end of the world.

Following the Fall and expulsion of man from the Garden, mankind began to lose knowledge of God. So, an initial stage for the plan of redemption was to establish a relationship with a specific people and develop them so that they could learn to know God and live according to his will of love and truth. In progressive fashion over time, God revealed Himself to a greater and greater degree while also forming covenants with certain people.

After forming a covenant with Noah, God established the great covenant with Abraham to set apart a people to be His own. To show that He was not merely the god of a particular place, as was believed to be the case by the polytheists of the time, but that He is the One God who is Lord everywhere, God told Abraham (then called Abram) to leave his home in Ur (present day southern Iraq) and go to a far land, Canaan (present day Israel), which would be given to him and his descendents. To demonstrate this covenant with Abraham and his descendents, the sign of the covenant, circumcision, was made on the instrument of procreation. Through these chosen people, God would bring salvation to all mankind. But Abraham (and we) needed to fully understand the gravity of the situation, and he needed prove (to himself) that he had total faith in the Lord, even to the point of being willing to sacrifice his son Isaac. But, as we shall see, it was not Abraham's son who was to be sacrificed.

The covenant was renewed with Jacob, also called Israel. When Jacob’s son Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers, and Joseph was then unjustly thrown into prison, God demonstrated His providence by bringing good out of evil. Joseph was later freed from prison and given a powerful position in Egypt, where he was able to save his family from famine. Thus, one innocent man suffered to bring life to God’s people.

In time, though, they fell into slavery, so God revealed Himself to Moses, who would lead them out of bondage in Egypt, and they were saved from death by the blood of the Passover lamb, just as we are led out of the bondage of sin and death by the Paschal Lamb, who is Jesus Christ. And to help them know what He had already written on their hearts, God gave them the Ten Commandments and the rest of the Law, reduced to physical written form and kept within the Ark of the Covenant. But still, the people chose to wander in the desert, and that has been the history of man throughout the ages. Nevertheless, God continued to protect His people, even providing them manna and water by which to survive.

Eventually, the people settled in Canaan, to be ruled for a period by military leaders known as “judges.” When they desired a king, God sent the prophet Samuel to anoint Saul, who was succeeded by David. God established a covenant with David, saying that his descendent (the Messiah) would reign as King forever. David’s son Solomon built the first Temple in Jerusalem, but the kingdom was soon thereafter divided in two.

Meanwhile, various enemies and invaders threatened Israel, just as the Canaanites and Philistines had done previously. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and Macedonians all imposed their military might upon Israel. The land was conquered, many people were carried off into slavery and exile, and outsiders moved in, resulting in intermarriage amongst those who stayed behind. Eventually, however, the people would be restored.

This cycle of events occurred over and over in the history of the people of Israel – The people would rebel by falling into sin and God would allow them to suffer the consequences, such as by being conquered by their enemies. The people then cry out to God for mercy and forgiveness, so the Lord has compassion and forgives. Despite their repeated infidelities, God did not abandon them, but remained ever faithful to His people, so as to continue to prepare them for salvation.

During the unfaithful times, prophets arose, and God in various ways called the people to return to Him. During exile in Babylon, the messianic prophecies of Isaiah told of a suffering servant who would endure pain, hardship, and even death for the sake of the people. The prophets Jeremiah and Joel also told of God establishing a New Covenant with Israel, which would fulfill and exceed the old covenant, and would include the outpouring of God’s Holy Spirit upon mankind.

Upon the return from the Babylonian exile, the people of Israel found their land heavily influenced by Greeks and other foreigners. In time, those foreigners included the Romans, who conquered the area they called Palestine and installed Herod to rule as king.

It was then that God chose to bring salvation history to its culmination. A simple and humble girl was conceived immaculately, without the stain of that Original Sin. This young girl, Mary, was like a new Eve, and said “yes, let it be done” to her as God willed, when it was announced to her that she would bear the Savior (Lk.1:26-45). And just as the first Eve was formed out of the first Adam, so Jesus, Son of God and the new Adam, was formed out of the new Eve, flesh of her flesh, bone of her bone.

God literally merged into mankind, becoming small, defenseless, and vulnerable while dwelling within Mary’s womb, in the most intimate of relationships. To be sure, to show that such an intimate relationship was not meant to be Mary's alone, to show that all the faithful are called to intimately receive Him into our own bodies, the newborn Jesus was placed in a manger. As with the straw that was food for the animals, so too Jesus is shown to be food for us.

And Mary, the handmaid of the Lord, by becoming His mother, became our mother too, and the Mother of the Church. As our Mother, like at Cana when the wine ran out, Mary is sensitive and attentive to our needs, and she intercedes and asks her Son to provide for us. (Jn. 2:1-5)

The preparation of mankind for the coming of the Redeemer was completed by John the Baptist, the last and greatest of the prophets. The long period of expectancy was over. The Christ was at hand.

.

The Fall of Man (Gen. 3:1-24) (CCC 385-421)

Catechism Class Five

Free will, an ability to choose, includes the ability to freely choose to return God’s love, or the freedom to reject Him and live our lives apart from Him. Thus, the man and the woman were free to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge even though God had warned them not to, "the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die."

However, the man and the woman thought that they could be like gods themselves, that they could then choose their own truth, their own reality, their own concepts of right and wrong. They thought that they could be self-fulfilling and self-sufficient, not needing the true God or other people. Even today, there are many people who still believe this. In doing so, in freely making this choice, Adam and Eve did not become gods, but instead fell from truth into error. And error necessarily leads to more error, until ultimately that you are so removed from Truth and Love, i.e. Life, that you are "doomed to die," and not merely bodily death, but eternal death, that is, Hell.

Before, man could see – truly see. He could see God, truth, and love, but after sin, man’s sight is impaired, his hearing is distorted. Thus, we see that, as with this first sin, one’s own individual sin, which is done by your own free choice of the will, carries its own intrinsic “punishment” -- error leads to more error, until, in your ignorance of the truth, you are in slavery to error and sin and death. By choosing to sin, choosing to set aside the Light and Truth of God, you are necessarily left to fend for yourself in ignorance and darkness, and you will find yourself inadequate to the challenge. And it is that first, original sin that is the root of every other sin.

By sin entering into the world, our entire human nature is corrupted and compromised, our souls are tainted. Our judgment is clouded, our ability to reason is impaired, and the influences and temptations of the world overwhelm us, plunging us into darkness and error and slavery to further sin.

The account of the Fall in Genesis also demonstrates how sin is intensely social. Indeed, this original sin did not affect merely Adam and Eve, but has affected and infected us all, it has left a stain on our being. All sin, both original and individual, affects and injures not only the sinner, but all of us. Sin severs and poisons all relations. After eating the fruit of the Tree, Adam not only tries to hide from God, but the first thing he does when confronted is to blame Eve. What directly follows is Cain’s murder of Abel.

Thus, proper relationships between mankind and God were and are severed by this sin of believing that you are equal to or above God, of believing that you can create your own truth, your own idea of right and wrong, good and evil. A wide gulf of separation between God and humanity was created, a separation between man and love, truth, and life. While hiding in the bushes, instead of being able to see God clearly, the man now saw only leaves and branches. His ability to see God, to know God, to know love and truth, was grievously impaired.

It is a gulf of separation that is so great that man is incapable of crossing it on his own. Moreover, proper relationships between human beings themselves were severed, and instead of living a life of love toward others, mankind has lived a life of selfish self-gratification and exploitation of others; instead of harmony, there is discord. This stain left on us by Original Sin cannot be washed away by human means. Only God can wash us clean, only He can redeem us, only He can reconcile us to Himself -- He who is Love and Truth and Life.

Next: Salvation History

Free Will vs. DeterminismBody and Soul vs. Pure Materialism

Catechism Class Four

Previously, we discussed the idea that human beings were created with a unified soul-infused body, which comprises one nature of spirit and matter, transcendent and temporal, and that we are possessed of free will. Let's consider the matter further.

The question of the existence of free will

Does freedom of choice really exist or is it an illusion? Does an individual have the true ability to determine the course of his thoughts and volitions, to decide which motives shall prevail within his mind, and to modify his own character, or are his thoughts and volitions, his character and external actions, all merely the inevitable outcome of his circumstances? Is everything, including our choices, pre-determined by some prior cause, either some physical cause, or by God controlling everything? Are choices and actions all inexorably predetermined in every detail along rigid lines by events of the past, over which the individual himself has had no sort of control?

Addressing the problem of the existence of free will requires understanding the relation between freedom and causation, and determining whether or not the laws of nature are causally deterministic. The issue of free will is especially important with respect to ethics and morality. Unless man is really free, he cannot be justly held responsible for his actions, any more than for the date of his birth or the color of his eyes.

For those who believe in God, the idea of the existence of free will is rather simple to believe in. We have the evidence of its existence in our daily experiences of making choices in thought and action. But the person who does not believe in God, or who rejects the idea of God altogether -- along with the idea that human persons possess a soul, a spirit from God -- both the agnostic and atheist have a dilemma to overcome with respect to the supposed existence of free will.

Determinism, not free will

Determinism is the philosophical proposition that every event, including human cognition, decision and action, is causally determined by an unbroken chain of prior occurrences. Determinism may also be defined as the thesis that there is, at any instant, exactly one physically possible future.

If the agnostic or atheist persist in their unbelief, then many necessarily must logically conclude that "free will" and "self-determination" do not really exist, indeed, "thought" does not really exist, they are simply illusions that we think that we are experiencing. That is because the physical world is governed by certain fixed and uniform physical laws, as well as the law of cause and effect, and if God does not exist, that is, if a cause beyond and independent of the physical universe does not exist, then all future events or effects are necessarily caused, or determined, by some prior pre-existing physical event or condition operating under the laws of nature.

If there is no God, then the universe is purely materialistic, and the human being does not have a soul, but is merely a body, a biological entity whose apparent "independent thoughts" are nothing more than electro-chemical impulses interacting with chemical markers that have been laid down in brain tissue, and which we know as memory, with both those impulses and markers being themselves pre-determined by other purely physical causes. Thus, “free will” is merely an illusion, a mere feeling of independent agency. And if our thoughts and actions are all pre-determined and we have no personal power to think and do otherwise, then they are not really our own thoughts and actions, and we cannot justly be held morally responsible for them.

Free choice of the will

“Free will” is the metaphysical truth of independent agency and elective power, including the ability to exercise autonomous and rational control over one’s decisions, thoughts, and actions. The existence of free will means that the actions of the body, including the brain and the mind, are not wholly determined by physical causality, that one’s thoughts somehow go beyond and transcend the physical body, suggesting the existence of an extra-corporeal aspect to the person, which we call the spirit or soul. It is because we are both body and spirit that we are able to transcend and overcome the mere biological electro-chemical reactions in the brain.

The human brain is like a computer. A computer operates strictly according to its software programming and the efficacy of its hardware. So long as there is no physical damage or defect, the computer will only do what its program dictates, without any deviation whatsoever. The actions of the computer are totally pre-determined by its programming. Likewise, the human brain operates according to its own hardware and software, by electro-chemical impulses along synapses, which interact with memory that has been created by certain chemical markers on the brain tissue. However, human persons are possessed with more than a body and computer-like brain.

Faith -- revelation and reason -- informs us that we are also possessed with a soul, and this spiritual component of our being is able to rise above and go beyond the merely physical, including the physical laws of cause and effect. As a result, we are able to make independent decisions with respect to actions taken. We lift our hand and move our fingers because we consciously choose to do so of our own volition, not because of some pre-programmed biological memory and electro-chemical reactions in the brain. We are made in the image of God, and therefore possess to a certain degree that same power of the Logos, that is, we have a certain power of creative reason, which transcends and overrides the physical brain and permits independent thought and agency.

Now, because humans do have free will, and their thoughts and actions are the result of their own willful choices, they can justly be held morally responsible for them.

Christ Our Hope -- the Apostolic Journey of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI

Message of the Holy Father Benedict XVI
to Catholics and People of the United States of America
on the Occasion of the Upcoming Apostolic Journey

Dear Brothers and Sisters in the United States of America,

The grace and peace of God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ be with all of you! In just a few days from now, I shall begin my apostolic visit to your beloved country. Before setting off, I would like to offer you a heartfelt greeting and an invitation to prayer. As you know, I shall only be able to visit two cities: Washington and New York. The intention behind my visit, though, is to reach out spiritually to all Catholics in the United States. At the same time, I earnestly hope that my presence among you will be seen as a fraternal gesture towards every ecclesial community, and a sign of friendship for members of other religious traditions and all men and women of good will. The risen Lord entrusted the Apostles and the Church with his Gospel of love and peace, and his intention in doing so was that the message should be passed on to all peoples.

At this point I should like to add some words of thanks, because I am conscious that many people have been working hard for a long time, both in Church circles and in the public services, to prepare for my journey. I am especially grateful to all who have been praying for the success of the visit, since prayer is the most important element of all. Dear friends, I say this because I am convinced that without the power of prayer, without that intimate union with the Lord, our human endeavours would achieve very little. Indeed this is what our faith teaches us. It is God who saves us, he saves the world, and all of history. He is the Shepherd of his people. I am coming, sent by Jesus Christ, to bring you his word of life.

Together with your Bishops, I have chosen as the theme of my journey three simple but essential words: "Christ our hope". Following in the footsteps of my venerable predecessors, Paul VI and John Paul II, I shall come to United States of America as Pope for the first time, to proclaim this great truth: Jesus Christ is hope for men and women of every language, race, culture and social condition. Yes, Christ is the face of God present among us. Through him, our lives reach fullness, and together, both as individuals and peoples, we can become a family united by fraternal love, according to the eternal plan of God the Father. I know how deeply rooted this Gospel message is in your country. I am coming to share it with you, in a series of celebrations and gatherings. I shall also bring the message of Christian hope to the great Assembly of the United Nations, to the representatives of all the peoples of the world. Indeed, the world has greater need of hope than ever: hope for peace, for justice, and for freedom, but this hope can never be fulfilled without obedience to the law of God, which Christ brought to fulfilment in the commandment to love one another. Do to others as you would have them do to you, and avoid doing what you would not want them to do. This "golden rule" is given in the Bible, but it is valid for all people, including non-believers. It is the law written on the human heart; on this we can all agree, so that when we come to address other matters we can do so in a positive and constructive manner for the entire human community.

Dirijo un cordial saludo a los católicos de lengua española y les manifiesto mi cercanía espiritual, en particular a los jóvenes, a los enfermos, a los ancianos y a los que pasan por dificultades o se sienten más necesitados. Les expreso mi vivo deseo de poder estar pronto con Ustedes en esa querida Nación. Mientras tanto, les aliento a orar intensamente por los frutos pastorales de mi inminente Viaje Apostólico y a mantener en alto la llama de la esperanza en Cristo Resucitado.

Dear brothers and sisters, dear friends in the United States, I am very much looking forward to being with you. I want you to know that, even if my itinerary is short, with just a few engagements, my heart is close to all of you, especially to the sick, the weak, and the lonely. I thank you once again for your prayerful support of my mission. I reach out to every one of you with affection, and I invoke upon you the maternal protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Que la Virgen María les acompañe y proteja. Que Dios les bendiga.

May God bless you all.

Vatican webpage for the Apostolic Journey to the United States of America (April 15-21, 2008)

Welcome video from the Diocese of Arlington

.

The Creation of Man (CCC 355-384)

Catechism Class Three

Not only do observation and reason allow us to come to the conclusion that the universe was made by a Creator, so also do observation and reason allow us to conclude that life on earth, especially human beings, were also the fruits of a Creator's thoughts and actions. But, as with the universe generally, written revelation and faith enlightens our reason to an even greater degree, so that we can know not only where man came from, but why he exists in the first place. For those who have no use for God, the meaning of man's existence has only confounded and confused, leaving them all too often in existential angst and nihilistic despair. For those who accept revelation and faith -- the truth has set them free.

In Love and in Truth, God created man. Man is a created being; he is not self-actualizing, he did not create himself. He is not accidental, and he is not the product of spontaneous animation of matter. Man exists, man lives, only because God the Ultimate Life has breathed His own life into man. We were and are created by a thought of God; each of us is willed by Him as an act of love.

Man is naturally drawn toward God -- even if he does not realize it or argues against it -- because man is naturally drawn toward love and truth, and this love and truth that man seeks has a name, they are a person -- God. Now, God did not have to create the universe or human beings. Rather, He chose to create the universe and humanity. God is complete in and of Himself. As the “I am,” the Logos, God is the only necessary being – we humans are entirely contingent upon Him.

Because we were and are created in truth and love, which is necessarily relational, God created human beings as social creatures, male and female, complementing and needing each other. We are in need of an “other” to complete and fulfill us. Genesis (1:26-28) informs us that “God created Man in his image; in the divine image He created him; male and female He created them.” Thus, we see that there was an original unity of male and female, man and woman; they are designed to be complementary and intended for each other in equal dignity.

In another account of the same truth, Genesis (2:18-25) describes how God said "It is not good for the man to be alone.” God then took a rib from the side of Adam and, from that rib, made Eve, leading Adam to exclaim, "This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.” This describes how, as individuals, there is something missing in our very being. For both men and women, there is a gaping hole in our side, and we desperately need an “other” to fill that hole. Without that other, there is a void, an emptiness. We need to have that rib returned to our side to be whole again, to be fulfilled.

Fulfillment requires that we go beyond ourselves. Indeed, the very word suggests that we are not already "filled." We cannot be fulfilled if we are left to ourselves. We can fill part of that hole with a spouse, as with the first spouses, Adam and Eve, but even then God needs to be part of the relationship to bind them together and to fill the remaining void. For those who are single, God is the only one who can fill the entirety of that void because He is the One who is Love, the One who is Completeness. Unless and until the heart is thusly filled, there is a restlessness and a hunger.

Not only were human beings created as social beings, but Genesis (2:7) informs us that God breathed into man, giving him life by His own Holy Spirit, and we were made in the “image of God.” That means that mankind was not created as merely a physical entity, like a stone, and He did not create us as merely spiritual beings, like the angels; rather, He created us with a unified soul-infused body, which comprises one nature of spirit and matter, transcendent and temporal, a bridge between earth and heaven. Moreover, we have the ability to share and participate in God’s procreative power of creating new life and have been explicitly commanded by Him to “be fruitful and multiply.” To be made in the image of God also means that we are persons with an inherent dignity, not things, and that we are possessed with sentience and free will, as well as the capacity for reason and for love.

Indeed, we exist to love and to be loved in truth. That was, and is, God’s plan for humanity; that is the meaning of life -- to live in the truth and love and be loved. And after creating mankind, God did not simply withdraw into heaven, sit back, and do nothing. Rather, He continued and continues to interact with His creation, sustaining and caring for it by His Love and Truth. And the fact that we humans are possessed of a soul means that we are not bounded to the earth ourselves, but are able to transcend it and reach to God.

At the same time, love is not truly love if it is not freely given, and love does not force itself or impose itself upon the other. As such, God does not force Himself or His Love or Truth upon anyone. God is not a puppet master. Thus, He gave us free will, which is the metaphysical truth of independent agency and elective power, including the ability to exercise autonomous and rational control over one’s decisions, thoughts, and actions. The existence of free will means that the actions of the body, including the brain and the mind, are not wholly determined by physical causality -- one does not lift his hand or type these words because they are merely a part of a chain of physical cause and effect that was begun billions of years ago -- rather, one’s thoughts somehow go beyond and transcend the physical body, suggesting the existence of an extra-corporeal aspect to the person, which we call the spirit or soul.

It is because we are both body and spirit that we are able to transcend and overcome the mere biological electro-chemical reactions in the brain. Free will, an ability to choose, includes the ability to freely choose to return God’s love, or the freedom to reject Him and live our lives apart from Him.

Power to do the Impossible

Whether it is easier to forgive the big things or the little things, this much is clear, sometimes it is fairly easy for us to forgive -- but sometimes it is, for all practical purposes, impossible for us to forgive. Some hurts are just too large, some injuries are just too great (or sometimes we allow ourselves to get so self-centered that even little injuries seem great) that it is impossible for us to forgive.

Or, perhaps I should say that it is impossible for us to forgive.

But, as we shall soon see at Pentecost, the Holy Spirit allows us to do the impossible. And that is why the otherwise mystifying Sacrament of Confirmation is so vitally important. Not only did the descent of the Holy Spirit allow the weak and terrified Apostles to come out of hiding and bravely and loudly proclaim the Gospel, not only does it allow the persecuted, such as Perpetua and Felicity, to gladly endure the suffering of martyrdom -- something that otherwise would be unthinkable and not humanly possible -- the grace of the Holy Spirit allows us to what we otherwise could not humanly do, including that which is perhaps the most impossible thing to do at times -- forgive the unforgiveable, forgive the debt that can never be paid.

One of the best examples of this is described in "Left to Tell," by Immaculee Ilibagiza, who survived the Rwandan genocide while the rest of her family was hacked to death, along with hundreds of thousands of others. Eventually, the man who had led the group that killed members of her family was caught, and the jailer who held him allowed Immaculee to confront him (and take her revenge).

But, as the murderer knelt before her, she "wept at the sight of his suffering. Felicien had let the devil enter his heart, and the evil had ruined his life like cancer in his soul. He was now the victim of his victims, destined to live in torment and regret. I was overwhelmed with pity for the man." And when the jailer shouted at the killer and hauled him to his feet, Immaculee touched his hands lightly and quietly said, "I forgive you."



The jailer was stunned and furious. After the killer was dragged out, he said, "What was that all about, Immaculee? That was the man who murdered your family. I brought him to you to question . . . to spit on if you wanted to. But you forgave him! How could you do that? Why did you forgive him?" In her book she says that she "answered him with the truth: 'Forgiveness is all I have to offer.'"

But the forgiveness she gave did not come entirely from Immaculee. As she says in the Introduction, her book "is the story of how I discovered God during one of history's bloodiest holocausts." And this discovery, this lesson, forever changed her. "It is a lesson that, in the midst of mass murder, taught me how to love those who hated and hunted me -- and how to forgive those who slaughtered my family."

Forgiveness is sometimes easy for us, but sometimes it is impossible for us. Some crimes are simply too great. But God gives us the power to do the impossible.

I've got a golden ticket!

I never dreamed that I would climb
Over the moon in ecstasy
But nevertheless, it's there that I'm
Shortly about to be
'Cause I've got a golden ticket

I've got a golden chance to make my way
And with a golden ticket, it's a golden day

The Origin of the Universe -- A Historical View

Whereas cosmology is the study of the universe, cosmogony answers the question as to how the universe first came to be, and that word is derived from the Greek cosmos (universe) and gonia (come about). Historically, theories based on reason and observation, but leading to the conclusion that the universe was made by a Creator, have included the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the anthropic principle.

The cosmological argument is a metaphysical argument for the existence of God as a first cause or first mover of the universe. The teleological argument, or argument from design, is an argument for the existence of God or a creator based on order or perceived purpose. The more modern anthropic principle is a variation of the teleological argument, and it examines the extreme complexity of the human organism and the highly delicate balance of conditions necessary for human life, and posits that it is infinitely unlikely that such conditions could have happened randomly.

Variations of the cosmological argument were advanced by the Greeks Plato and Aristotle. Plato argued that motion in the world and in the cosmos was "imparted motion" that would have required some kind of "self-originated motion" to set it in motion and to maintain the motion. Aristotle also put forth the idea of a first cause, often referred to as the "Prime Mover" or "Unmoved Mover" in his work Metaphysics. Meanwhile, variations of the teleological argument were advanced by the Roman Cicero, who utilized the familiar "clock in the wilderness" scenario. "When you see a sundial or a water-clock, you see that it tells the time by design and not by chance. How then can you imagine that the universe as a whole is devoid of purpose and intelligence, when it embraces everything, including these artifacts themselves and their artificers?" (Cicero, De Natura Deorum, ii. 34)

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that, with respect to the universe and its origin, the existence of God can be proved in five ways. The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion -- whatever is in motion is put in motion by another. The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. The third way is taken from possibility and necessity. The fourth way is taken from the gradation of perfection to be found in things. The fifth way is taken from the governance and design of the world. (Summa Theologica, I, q. 2, art. 3)

God and Creation (CCC 279-354)

Catechism Class Two

If the question of God is unavoidable, so too is a related question, which is often asked with respect to proofs of the existence of God: Where did the universe and where did we come from?

In Love and in Truth, God created the universe. By His Word, He created it ex nihilo and ab initio temporis (out of nothing and at the beginning of time). We know this from divine (written) revelation, but even without written revelation, God reveals Himself in nature, such that knowledge that the universe was created by God can be attained by reason and observation of the orderly universe. Indeed, the very word "cosmology," meaning the study of the universe, is derived from the Greek cosmos (order) and logos (reason), and non-religious ancient scholars, such as Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero long ago posited reason-based theories for a God-Creator.

But are not faith and science necessarily in conflict with each other? How can reason and observation alone lead to the conclusion that the universe was created by God? Well, the very first premise of science is that truth exists, and that reason exists. It is a premise of science that the universe is ordered, and that it strictly operates according to rational laws, including cause and effect, Newton’s first law of motion (inertia), conservation of energy/matter, and the second law of thermodynamics (entropy).

One cannot get something out of nothing. A thing cannot have itself as its own cause, a thing at rest stays at rest unless moved by another thing, and entropy (disorder) in a closed system tends increase over time. The physical reality that is the universe did not and could not have created itself. It did not and could not have set itself “in motion.” Indeed, a universe of chance and arbitrary randomness – a universe detached from reason -- could not have created the ordered and reasonable universe that exists today. Chance and arbitrary randomness cannot account for matter that exists in a stable, ordered form, or for the fact that some of that matter is alive. Chance and arbitrary randomness cannot account for the infinite complexity of the human organism, much less the capacity for thought, free will, and autonomous action. The universe, order in the universe, and mankind had a cause independent of themselves, and that cause was the First Cause and First Mover of all things – God. (See also, St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, q. 2, art. 3)

And yet, some insist that the universe and reality itself sprung into existence by an arbitrary and accidental act. Not only did the universe just spring into existence all by itself, it was and is just coincidental that certain sub-atomic particles react with other particles in particular fashion, and that they are thus bound together, so as to permit the existence of atoms, molecules, and compounds, not to mention galaxies, stars, and planets. But the existence of these things, and the fact that they follow rational laws, would dictate as a matter of science that they were caused by something rational and true.

The fact that one of those planets just happened to be so lucky so as to be just the right distance away from the sun, which radiated just the right kind and intensity of light and heat, and the temperature of the planet was just right and that planet had just the right kind of elements in the right proportions so as to be able to form oxygen and water, shows that we are either extra-ordinarily lucky, like hitting the Lotto every single day for 100 years, or we are here because of some rational creative act of reason.

Moreover, some of this matter became animated, that is, alive, which also points to a rational cause; it points to the conclusion that life is not simply the result of haphazard events. Life is not the result of the random collision of molecules and electro-magnetic pulses. And the fact that some of that life actually has the capacity for sentience and thought, an ability to form and create ideas and to exercise independent agency, i.e. free will, which actually transcends the physical, points to the possibility that reality is not limited to the physical universe, but there is a reality beyond it. Indeed, science has repeatedly postulated the existence of realities beyond the known universe, or even the existence of non-corporeal life.

There was a cause to all of these things. That cause was necessarily "Creative Reason," i.e. Logos (God). As we can see, the basis for believing in the existence of God merely from simple observation of the world around us, experience, and reason, is compelling. To be sure, the Big Bang Theory only confirms what revealed scripture has said all along. But as far as reason takes us, it does not take us all the way. Revealed faith, on the other hand, does allow man to reach for and attain the transcendent.

A Short Catechism

The word "catechesis" is a Greek word which means "to make resound like an echo." The word was adopted by the early Church as part of implementing its duty to make disciples of all nations. In transmitting the Good News, the Church has a constant "memory" of the events of salvation history and makes them known, so as to provoke an "echo" of the faith in the mind and in the heart of the listeners, and thereby transform all their life. This echoing of the faith includes narration of the wonderful deeds of God and the awaiting of the coming of Christ, who is the culmination and center of salvation history, and of His return have always accompanied the exposition of the mysteries of faith.

The word "education" comes from the Latin "educare", meaning to draw out. Catholic education, then, seeks to draw out the student from his or her self and toward God, the source of all truth.

Class One --

On the Existence of God (CCC 26-50; 198-278)

The unavoidable question of life is whether or not God exists. To arrive at a correct answer to that mystifying question, one must, of course, have a proper conception of whom or what God is. It is quite easy to reject any belief in God if all you know is a caricature of Him, rather than the reality. Moreover, while the existence of God is knowable by reason, reason is limited by what is already known or can be imagined, thus, revelation assists reason by helping to have that proper concept of God.

Revelation enlightens our reason and helps us to know who and what it is that we seek, at least to the extent that we can comprehend. Also, when one simply "takes it on faith" that He exists, then it all starts making sense. As St. Augustine discovered, belief leads to understanding, which in turn leads to greater belief. Once we simply flip the switch of faith, the light comes on, and we can see, thereby confirming that we were right to trust.

So, who is God? What is God? God told Moses that He is the “I am.” (Ex. 3:13-15) What does this reveal about God? It means that God, as the “I am,” is the Ultimate Reality; He is Being itself and is therefore Truth itself. Indeed, if something lacks truth, it lacks reality and existence. This Truth is the first principle, from which all else follows. He is not merely philosophical truth, not merely a cosmic force, but a personal being. God, that is to say, Jesus Christ, is also the Word, that is, Logos (Creative Reason), and as such, is again Truth itself from which everything that exists proceeds. (Jn. 1:1-5) And yet again, He is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and end of all things. In Him, all things are made new. (Rev. 21:1-7)

Truth exists independently of man and is merely discovered by him by reason and/or revelation; man cannot create truth himself. And when the Lord commanded us to have no other gods, that means there is only one God, and thus, One Truth, which is eternal and transcendent, not bounded by time or space. That is, He exists beyond and outside of space - the physical universe – and because time is a measurement of changes in space, He exists outside of time. He is pure, infinite, unbounded spirit. For God, time is not linear, as for humans, but is a singularity and a totality – all moments exist simultaneously and each moment exists in perpetuity. As a result, He transcends the universe and is eternal.

However, God is not merely Truth, He is also Love. (1 Jn. 4:8) This is demonstrated again and again in salvation history. Now, love is by its very nature relational. Love does not exist in a vacuum. Accordingly, God is not one-dimensional, but exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – a Holy Trinity, three distinct persons in one undivided divine nature, substance, and essence. Each possesses the fullness of the other, and each has always existed. In God, there is an everlasting exchange of love between the persons of the Father and Son, and this love is not merely a sentiment, but is a person as well, namely, the Holy Spirit.

"If they hate you, remember they hated me first"

Known Catholics Killed While on Mission in 2007

Fr. Mario Bianco, a ninety year old Italian Consolata missionary, died in Manizales, Colombia, on 15 February after being attacked by thieves ten days earlier on 4 February. The bandits broke into what was formerly a Consolata Seminary building where the priest lived with another Italian missionary and a couple of local housekeepers. Some time ago the Consolata seminarians moved to other premises in Manizales, where the Consolata Missionaries have two communities. In the early evening on 4 February a gang of bandits broke into the house, beat and tied up Fr. Mario and one of the housekeepers and attacked the other priest who arrived home soon afterwards. The criminals searched for money and valuables for several hours and in the end made away with the community car, found two days later, taking with them objects for a value of a few thousand Euro. Fr. Mario was taken immediately to hospital as soon as the attackers had gone, however despite treatment he died of heart failure ten days later on 15 February.
see Agenzia Fides 17/2/2007

Fr. Martin Addai, Ghanaian age 46, a member of the Missionaries of Africa, (or White Fathers) was killed on Saturday 10 March 2007 in a Nairobi Kenya. He was on his way to visit friends not far from the local seminary of which he was rector, when he was attacked by a gang of criminals who shot him dead and stole the car. His body was found abandoned on the edge of the road. At the seminary, his confreres and the seminarians were not worried knowing he was with friends. The search for the missionary was started only late the next evening. Fr. Martin Addai was born at Adamsi, diocese of Kumasi, in Ghana, on 12 November 1960. He entered the Missionaries of Africa novitiate in Kasama (Zambia) on 19 September 1984 and was ordained a priest on 1990. He then served in Mozambique in the diocese of Chimoio. Between 1993 and 1996 he continued his studies in Rome for a Licentiate in moral theology and then went to Canada for a year in spirituality. On returning to Mozambique he taught at the major seminary of Maputo, before being appointed at the end of 2004 rector of Ejisu philosophy seminary in Ghana. Elected a member of the general chapter in 2004, he was sent to Nairobi as Rector of the Missionaries of Africa theology seminary a Nairobi.
see Agenzia Fides 13/3/2007

Fr. José Luis Camacho Cepeda, aged 54, Peruvian, was stabbed to death during the night of 11 March 2007 in his home in Bogota (Colombia). He had lived in Colombia for about 20 years. When he failed to appear to say Mass for two consecutive days at the church of St Charles Borromeo in Bogota the concerned parish priest went to look for him at his home. The priest was found dead in his apartment.

Fr. Fransiskus Madhu, aged 30, Divine Word Missionary (SVD) born in Flores (Indonesia), was killed on Palm Sunday 1 April 2007, in the village of Mabungtot, diocese of Tabuk, in the north of the Philippines (Luzon Island ), while on his way to say the evening mass at the chapel of the village where he was parish priest. He was shot by a group of men carrying army weapons. Hit in vital body organs by five bullets, the priest was dead by the time local people got him to hospital. For the local people Fr Madhu, who had been a missionary in that area since 2005, will be remembered as a “very caring person, active and straightforward”.
See Agenzia Fides 3/4/2007

Sr Anne Thole, aged 35, born in Swaziland and raised in South Africa, a member of the Franciscan Sisters of the Holy Family (known as the Nardini Sisters). Sr Anne Thole died on 1 April Palm Sunday trying to save patients from a fire at Duduza Hospice for people with AIDS at the Santa Maria Ratschitz Catholic mission near Wasbank in the north of KwaZulu-Natal, 30 km from Dundee, South Africa. The straw roof of the hospice caught fire, perhaps because of a cigarette lit by one of the patients, and the flames spread immediately. The nursing staff saved five of the eight patients at the hospice and then Sr Anne returned to fetch the remaining three but the ceiling collapsed and she and the three patients died. Sr Anne had been working for two years at the hospice as well as being in charge of the novitiate of her Order.
see Agenzia Fides 4/4/2007

Rev. Richard Bimeriki, Congolese, from the parish of Jomba, north Kivu (D. R. Congo) died of his injuries in a Rwandan hospital on 7 April 2007, following an attack in his parish in Congo on 12 March. Eyewitnesses say the aggressors wearing military uniforms broke into the parish demanding a drink, and then opened fire on the priest.

Rev. Wolfgang Hermann (aged 46), from the Germany diocese of Trier, was murdered by a young man who broke into his home probably to commit a robbery on 10 April at Belém in the north of Brazil. Fr Herrmann was born in Bad Kreuznach (Germany) he was ordained a priest in 1985 for the diocese of Trier. In 1995 he as sent as a Fidei donum missionary to work in the diocese of Parnaiba in Brazil. He returned in 2000 to the diocese of Trier, where he served as parish priest in a number of parishes until September 2006 when he returned to Brazil.
see Agenzia Fides 12/4/2007

Rev Salvador Herandez Seller, aged 75, found dead in his home in Murcia, Spain on 11 April 2007, reportedly died of blows to the head. A happy, generous and peace-loving and tolerant person the priest came from Cehegin. Ordained a priest in 1959, he went in 1962 on mission to Ecuador, as a member of the Organisation of Hispanic-American Priestly Cooperation OCSHA. He returned to Spain 19 years ago to serve as parish priest and chaplain for immigrants.

Rev. Humberto Macias Rosales, from Mexico, aged 52, was shot three times on 1 May 2007 at Aguascalientes (Mexico) not far from his home by an unidentified gunman. Immediately rushed to hospital, he died shortly afterwards. Parish priest of Our Lady of the Light at Aguascalientes, the priest was admired and respected by the local community and by his brother priests for his spirit of service and intense work of evangelisation.

Just after noon on Sunday 3 June 2007, in front of the Chaldean Catholic church of the Holy Spirit in a Mosul (Iraq), following the celebration of Mass, the parish priest, Rev. Raghiid Ganni and three deacons: Basman Yousef Daoud, Ghasan Bidawid and Wahid Hanna were attacked by a gunman. The four were about get into a car when a man drew near and opened fire killing all four of the clerics. Fr. Ganni was the first Catholic priest to be killed in Iraq. The Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans Mar Emmanuel III Delly and the Bishops of the Patriarchal Synod affirmed in a statement after the tragedy: “This was a shameful crime which must be rejected by every person of conscience. The perpetrators committed a horrible action against God and against humanity, against their brothers who were faithful and peace loving citizens as well as being men of religion who faithfully offered prayers to Almighty God to restore peace, security and stability to all Iraq”.
see Agenzia Fides 4/6/2007

Justin Daniel Bataclan, aged 20, Philippines, a seminarian of the Society of St Paul, was murdered in the evening of 7 June 2007 by a robber who broke into the family home where the student was on vacation, a Cubao, Quezon City (Metro Manila). Hearing noises, Justin went to find out what was happening, in the kitchen he was attacked by a thief and died of numerous injuries received. He was due to end his holidays the next day and return St Paul's Vocation Centre at Silang to start his fourth year of formation. Justin was a quiet, diligent, trustworthy person who applied himself to his studies. An expert in computers, Justine had been put in charge of the College computer-study section. His passion was photography.

Brother Enrique Alberto Olano Merino, from San Salvador, aged 29, of the Little Brothers of Mary, was killed during the night of 9 June in Guatemala City, probably by criminals. While returning to his residence with a few confreres, Brother Enrique was attacked by two thieves. At the same time two men in a car drove up and shot at the group from a close range killing the Brother. In Guatemala for seven years, besides teaching at a local high school, Brother Enrique was involved in pastoral care for young people.

The dead body of Rev. Tomas Perez, aged 75, parish priest at Villafranca de Cordoba (Spain), was found with evident signs of violence in the priest's apartment in the morning of 16 July 2007 by a housekeeper. The local community of about 4,000 people is very peaceful and the priest had ministered here for over 30 years. A statement issued by the Bishop of Cordoba's Office said the priest was “of an open and affable character, a person well known and loved by the local people among whom he exercised his priestly ministry ”.

Rev. Fernando Sanchez Duran, parish priest at Santiago Tlaltepoxco parish, at Tepeji del Rio, a northern district of Mexico City, was taken hostage and killed on 22 July 2007. His brother reported his disappearance a few hours earlier, adding that the parish car, television set and computer were also missing. The police found the priest's body in a pond, the death was said to be caused by suffocation. For the parishioners Fr. Fernando was an exemplary priest, known for his tireless efforts to help young people caught in the trap of drug abuse.

Rev. Ricardo Junious, OMI, aged 70, born in the United States, was found dead on 29 July in the priests' house of the parish of Our Lady of Guadalupe in the San Rafael district of Mexico City. A confrere found the body of the priest on the dormitory floor with hands and feet tied, the priest had been strangled and there were evident signs of torture. Highly esteemed for his missionary work and pastoral zeal and assistance for the poor, in recent times Fr. Ricardo had been fighting drug trafficking and selling of alcohol to minors which was happening around his parish.

Rev. Florante Rigonan, aged 48, from the Philippines, parish priest at St Isidore parish in Pinili (Llocos Norte Province, in the northern Philippines), was attacked and shot dead just before midnight on 27 August as he returned home after saying evening Mass and having supper with some friends. The police said as the priest got into his van he was shot in the back several times. The van was founded completely empty of all its contents. Fr Rigonan entered the seminary after studying medicine, ordained in 1997, since 2000 he had been parish priest at Pinili.

Rev. Nicholaspillai Packiyaranjith, diocesan priest and coordinator of the Jesuit Refugee Service in the Mannar district of Sri Lanka, was killed when a bomb exploded on the road he was travelling to offer assistance at a camp for refugees and an orphanage at Vidathalvu. The local Catholic community, which held Fr. Nicholas in high esteem, was deeply shocked by the news of the deadly explosion on the Poonery Road, near Kalvi’laan, in the evening of 26 September. In a message of condolence Archbishop Oswald Gomis of Colombo, said: “ We are all deeply shocked by the tragic death of Fr. Nicholas. We condemn these acts of violence which inflict suffering and grief on innocent civilians. We express sincere sympathy to Bishop Rayappu Joseph of Mannar diocese, the clergy, the faithful and to Fr. Packiyaranjith's family”. “With gratitude for his work as a priest committed to assisting the people we offer fervent prayers to God the Father of Mercies that he may grant eternal rest to Fr. Packiyaranjith and spiritual consolation to those who mourn for him” the Archbishop concluded.
see Agenzia Fides 27/9/2007

Fr. Allard Msheyene, 'Mako', a South African Oblate Missionary of Mary Immaculate (OMI), Sudafricano, died on 6 October 2007 after being attacked an shot and killed by roadside carjackers on October 5. OMI sources reported that, Associate Novice Master, Fr. Allard had gone to lend weekend help at St. Peter’s parish in Nelspruit 330 km east of Johannesburg. After celebrating a Friday evening liturgy at 18:00 in Ka Nyamazane, he took a young man home and then was returning to the parish. A short time later, he was found lying by the road at Msogwaba township, and was taken at 19:30 by ambulance to Themba Hospital, Kabokweni. He was soon transferred to a larger hospital in Nelspruit, where he underwent emergency surgery but died in the early hours of the morning of October 6. Car-jacking in South Africa is widespread with more than 12,000 cases every year, although in recent years since a peak 16,000 in 1998 they have diminished slightly in number.
see Agenzia Fides 10/10/2007

“Are you a Christian?” I replied, “I am a Christian.”

The Passion of the Holy Martyrs Perpetua and Felicity (A.D. 202)
Tertullian
Feast Day, March 7

1.1. The young catechumens, Revocatus and his fellow-servant Felicitas, Saturninus and Secundulus, were apprehended. And among them also was Vivia Perpetua, respectably born, liberally educated, a married matron, having a father and mother and two brothers, one of whom, like herself, was a catechumen, and a son an infant at the breast. She herself was about twenty-two years of age. From this point onward she shall herself narrate the whole course of her martyrdom, as she left it described by her own hand and with her own mind.

1.2. While we were still with the persecutors, and my father, for the sake of his affection for me, was persisting in seeking to turn me away, and to cast me down from the faith — “Father,” said I, “do you see, let us say, this vessel lying here to be a little pitcher, or something else?” And he said, “I see it to be so.” And I replied to him, “Can it be called by any other name than what it is?” And he said, “No.” “Neither can I call myself anything else than what I am, a Christian.” Then my father, provoked at this saying, threw himself upon me, as if he would tear my eyes out. But he only distressed me, and went away overcome by the devil's arguments. . . . After a few days we are taken into the dungeon, and I was very much afraid, because I had never felt such darkness. O terrible day! O the fierce heat of the shock of the soldiery, because of the crowds! I was very unusually distressed by my anxiety for my infant. . . . I suckled my child, which was now enfeebled with hunger. In my anxiety for it, I addressed my mother and comforted my brother, and commended to their care my son. I was languishing because I had seen them languishing on my account. Such solicitude I suffered for many days, and I obtained for my infant to remain in the dungeon with me; and forthwith I grew strong and was relieved from distress and anxiety about my infant; and the dungeon became to me as it were a palace, so that I preferred being there to being elsewhere.
2.1. After a few days there prevailed a report that we should be heard. And then my father came to me from the city, worn out with anxiety. He came up to me, that he might cast me down, saying, “Have pity my daughter, on my grey hairs. Have pity on your father, if I am worthy to be called a father by you. . . . Lay aside your courage, and do not bring us all to destruction; for none of us will speak in freedom if you should suffer anything.” These things said my father in his affection, kissing my hands, and throwing himself at my feet; and with tears he called me not Daughter, but Lady. And I grieved over the grey hairs of my father, that he alone of all my family would not rejoice over my passion. And I comforted him, saying, “On that scaffold whatever God wills shall happen. For know that we are not placed in our own power, but in that of God.” And he departed from me in sorrow.
2.2. Another day, while we were at dinner, we were suddenly taken away to be heard, and we arrived at the town-hall. . . . We mount the platform. The rest were interrogated, and confessed. Then they came to me, and [Hilarianus the procurator], said, “Spare the grey hairs of your father, spare the infancy of your boy, offer sacrifice for the well-being of the emperors.” And I replied, “I will not do so.” Hilarianus said, “Are you a Christian?” And I replied, “I am a Christian.”
And as my father stood there to cast me down from the faith, he was ordered by Hilarianus to be thrown down, and was beaten with rods. And my father's misfortune grieved me as if I myself had been beaten, I so grieved for his wretched old age. The procurator then delivers judgment on all of us, and condemns us to the wild beasts, and we went down cheerfully to the dungeon. . . . .

5.2. But respecting Felicitas (for to her also the Lord's favor approached in the same way), when she had already gone eight months with child (for she had been pregnant when she was apprehended), as the day of the exhibition was drawing near, she was in great grief lest on account of her pregnancy she should be delayed — because pregnant women are not allowed to be publicly punished — and lest she should shed her sacred and guiltless blood among some who had been wicked subsequently. . . . Soon thereafter, she brought forth a little girl, which a certain sister brought up as her daughter. . . .

6.1. The day of their victory shone forth, and they proceeded from the prison into the amphitheatre, as if to an assembly, joyous and of brilliant countenances; if perchance shrinking, it was with joy, and not with fear. Perpetua followed with placid look, and with step and gait as a matron of Christ, beloved of God; casting down the luster of her eyes from the gaze of all. Moreover, Felicitas, rejoicing that she had safely brought forth, so that she might fight with the wild beasts; from the blood and from the midwife to the gladiator, to wash after childbirth with a second baptism. . . . And they indeed rejoiced that they should have incurred any one of their Lord's passions. . . .

6.3. Moreover, for the young women the devil prepared a very fierce cow, provided especially for that purpose contrary to custom, rivaling their sex also in that of the beasts. And so, stripped and clothed with nets, they were led forth. The populace shuddered as they saw one young woman of delicate frame, and another with breasts still dropping from her recent childbirth. So, being recalled, they are unbound. Perpetua is first led in. She was tossed, and fell on her loins; and when she saw her tunic torn from her side, she drew it over her as a veil for her middle, rather mindful of her modesty than her suffering. Then she was called for again, and bound up her disheveled hair; for it was not becoming for a martyr to suffer with disheveled hair, lest she should appear to be mourning in her glory. So she rose up; and when she saw Felicitas crushed, she approached and gave her her hand, and lifted her up. And both of them stood together; and the brutality of the populace being appeased, they were recalled to the Sanavivarian gate. Then Perpetua was received by a certain one who was still a catechumen, Rusticus by name, who kept close to her. . . . After¬wards causing that catechumen and the brother to approach, she addressed them, saying, "Stand fast in the faith, and love one another, all of you, and be not offended at my sufferings." . . .

6.4 immediately at the conclusion of the exhibition [Saturus] was thrown to the leopard; and with one bite of his he was bathed with such a quantity of blood, that the people shouted out to him as he was returning, the testimony of his second baptism, "Saved and washed, saved and washed." Manifestly he was assuredly saved who had been glorified in such a spectacle. . . . And then lifeless he is cast down with the rest, to be slaughtered in the usual place.

And when the populace called for them into the midst, that as the sword penetrated into their body they might make their eyes partners in the murder, they rose up of their own accord, and transferred themselves whither the people wished; but they first kissed one another, that they might consummate their martyrdom with the kiss of peace. The rest indeed, immoveable and in silence, received the sword-thrust; much more Saturus, who also had first ascended the ladder, and first gave up his spirit, for he also was waiting for Perpetua. But Perpetua, that she might taste some pain, being pierced between the ribs, cried out loudly, and she herself placed the wavering right hand of the youthful gladiator to her throat. Possibly such a woman could not have been slain unless she herself had willed it, because she was feared by the impure spirit.

O most brave and blessed martyrs! O truly called and chosen unto the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ! whom whoever magnifies, and honors, and adores, assuredly ought to read these examples for the edification of the Church, not less than the ancient ones, so that new virtues also may testify that one and the same Holy Spirit is always operating even until now, and God the Father Omnipotent, and His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, whose is the glory and infinite power for ever and ever. Amen.

The Science of Man is the Most Necessary of All Sciences

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI
Address to Participants of the Inter-academic Conference
"The changeable identity of the individual"
Promoted by the "Academie des Sciences de Paris"
and the Pontifical Academy of Science
January 28, 2008
The address was delivered in French.

Honorable Chancellors,
Excellencies,
My fellow academicians,
Ladies and gentlemen,

It is with pleasure that I welcome you at the end of your colloquium here in Rome, which started at the Institut de France in Paris, on the theme "The changing identity of the individual." * * *

Since the exact sciences - natural as well as human - have achieved prodigious advances in knowledge about man and his universe, there is a great temptation to want to totally circumscribe the identity of the human being and enclose it within the knowledge that one can have about him. In order not to be committed to such a way, it is important to give the same importance to anthropological, philosophical and theological studies which allow man's mystery to emerge and be maintained, because no science can say what man is, where he comes from, and where he is going.

Thus the science of man becomes the most necessary of all sciences. * * * Man is always something beyond what we can see or what we can perceive through experience. Not to question the essence of man leads inevitably to a refusal to study the objective truth of the human being in his integralness, and because of this, no longer to be capable of recognizing the foundation on which human dignity rests, from the embryonic stage to his natural death.

In the course of your colloquium, you experienced how the sciences, philosophy and theology can aid each other to perceive the identity of man, which is always in the process of becoming.

Starting from an investigation into the new being borne out of the union between two cells, which carries a new and specific genetic patrimony of its own, you have shown the essential elements of the human mystery, which is distinguished by otherness - a being created by God, a being in the image of God, a being who is loved and made to be loved. As a human being, man is never closed in on himself; he is always the bearer of otherness, and finds himself from the start in interaction with other human beings, as the human sciences more and more reveal to us.

How can we not evoke that wonderful meditation of the psalmist on the human being 'knit in the secret of his mother's womb' but known, in his identity and his mystery, by God alone who loves and protects him" (cf. Ps 138(139), 1-16)!

Man is not the result of chance, nor of convergences, determinisms, or physico-chemical interactions. He is a being who enjoys a freedom which, while taking human nature into account, transcends it and is the sign of that mystery of otherness that he inhabits. Through this freedom, man can know there is a sense to his existence. In exercising authentic freedom, a person realizes his calling; he fulfills himself; he gives shape to his deepest identity.

It is also through the exercise of freedom that he can take responsibility for his actions. In this sense, the dignity that is particular to the human being is both a gift of God and the promise of a future. Man carries in himself a specific ability to discern what is good. Placed in him by the Creator like a stamp, synderesis (the principle of moral consciousness which pushes an agent to good) impels him to do what is good. Thus impelled, man is called on to develop his conscience by training and by exercise to guide himself freely during his existence, based on the essential laws which are natural law and moral law.

In our time, when scientific progress attracts and seduces through the possibilities it offers, it is more important than ever to educate the consciences of our contemporaries so that science does not become the criterion for what is good, and so man may be respected as the center of creation who should not be the object of ideological manipulations, arbitrary decisions, nor of abuses by the strong over the weak. All these dangers we have known in various manifestations throughout human history, but most especially during the twentieth century.

Every scientific initiative should also be an initiative of love, to be carried out in the service of man and humanity, and to make its contribution to the construction of personal identity. In effect, as I underscored in the encyclical Deus Caritas Est, "love embraces the whole of existence in each of its dimensions, including the dimension of time...Love is indeed 'ecstasy'.. in the sense of a journey, an ongoing exodus from the closed inward-looking self towards its liberation through self-giving, and thus towards authentic self-discovery..."(No. 6).

Love makes a man come out of himself to discover and know the other - in opening to the other, he also affirms the identity of that other, because the other reveals me to myself. Throughout the Bible, it is the experience which, beginning with Abraham, numberless believers have had. The model par excellence of love is Christ. In the act of giving his life for his brothers, of giving himself totally, he manifests his profound identity and gives us the key to reading the unfathomable mystery of his being and his mission.

In entrusting your studies to the intercession of St. Thomas Aquinas, whom the Church honors today and who remains 'an authentic model for you who search for the truth' (Fides et Ratio, No. 78), I assure you of my prayers, as well as for your families and co-workers, and I impart to all with affection the Apostolic Blessing.

From the Vatican, 28 January 2008

BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

Educate in Love and Truth, Freedom and Discipline

Letter from the Holy Father, as Bishop of Rome,
to the Diocese and City of Rome,
to discuss his concerns about education for young people

Dear faithful of Rome,

I thought of addressing you with this letter to speak to you about a problem that your yourselves feel and which is the concern of various elements of our church: the problem of education.

We all have at heart the good of the persons we love, particularly our children, adolescents and young people. We know that the future of our city depends on them. We cannot be not solicitous about the formation of the new generations, about their capacity to orient themselves in life and to discern good from bad, about their health, both physical and moral.

But education was never easy, and today it seems to be even more difficult. Parents, teachers, priests and all those who have direct responsibilities for education know this well. That is why one speaks of an “educative emergency,” confirmed by the lack of success that very often our efforts meet in trying to form persons who are solid, capable of collaborating with others and of giving a sense to their own life. And often, the new generations are blamed, as though the babies born today are different from those born in the past.

Then there is the so-called generation gap, which certainly exists and weighs in, but which is the effect, rather than the cause, of the failure to transmit certainties and values.

So must today's adults be to blame for no longer being able to educate? Certainly, the temptation is strong - among parents, teachers, and educators in general - to give up, or even before that, to risk not even to understand their own role. Or better still, the mission that is entrusted to them.

In fact, what is in question is not only the personal responsibilities of adults and young people - though these exist and should not be hidden - but also a widespread climate, a mentality and a form of culture which lead to doubting the value of the human being, of the meaning itself of truth and goodness, and ultimately, of the very goodness of life itself. Thus, it becomes difficult to transmit from one generation to the next something valid and certain, rules of behavior, credible objectives around which to construct one's life.

Dear brothers and sisters of Rome, at this point, I wish to say something very simple: Do not fear! All these difficulties are not insurmountable. They are, so to speak, the other side of the coin of that great and precious gift which is our freedom, with the responsibility that rightly accompanies it.

Unlike what takes place in the technical or economic fields, where progress today can be added up to the progress of yesterday, there is no similar possibility of accumulation in the field of formation and moral growth of persons, because human freedom is always new, and so, every person and every generation must make their own decisions anew, and on their own. Even the greatest values of the past cannot simply be inherited, they must be made ours, and renewed through personal choice, often difficult and tormented.

But when the foundations are shaken and essential certainties are lacking, the need for such values becomes felt in compelling manner: that is why, the demand for an education that is truly an education is increasing in our day. It is demanded by parents, concerned and often anguished for the future of their own children; by so many teachers, who experience the sad degradation of their schools; by society as a whole, which sees the bases for coexistence placed in doubt; and in their intimate selves, by the children and youth themselves, who do not want to be left alone facing the challenges of life.

Whoever believes in Jesus Christ has other and stronger reasons not to fear: he knows that God does not abandon us, that his love reaches us where wee are and as we are, with our miseries and weaknesses, to offer us a new possibility of the good.

Dear brothers and sisters, to make these reflections of mine more concrete, it could be useful to identify some common requirements for an authentic education.

An authentic education needs, above all, that nearness and trust which come from love: I think of the first and fundamental experience of love that babies have - or at least should have - with their parents. But every true educator knows that to educate, one must give something of oneself, and only that way can one help pupils and students to overcome selfishness and become, in turn, capable of authentic love.

Already in every small baby there is a great desire to know and to understand, which is shown in his continuous questions and requests for explanation. But it would be a poor education which limits itself to just teaching ideas and providing information, but leaves aside the great questions about truth, above all, the truth that can be a guide for life.

Suffering, too, is part of the truth about life. Therefore, if we seek to keep young people sheltered from every difficulty and from experiencing pain, we risk raising - despite our good intentions - fragile and not very generous persons. The capacity to love corresponds to a capacity to suffer and to suffer together.

And so we arrive, dear friends of Rome, at the point that is perhaps most delicate in educative work: to find the right equilibrium between freedom and discipline. Without rules of behavior and life, valid everyday even in the little things, character cannot be formed and children cannot be prepared to face the trials which will not be lacking in the future. But the educative relationship is above all the encounter between two freedoms, and successful education is formation in the right use of freedom. The child grows, becomes an adolescent, and then a youth. We must therefore accept the risk of freedom, remaining always attentive to help him to correct wrong ideas and choices. What we must never do is to allow mistakes, pretend not to see them or worse, to share them, as if these were new frontiers in human progress.

Education therefore cannot do without that authoritativeness which makes the exercise of authority credible. It is a fruit of experience and competence, but it is acquired above all through consistency in one's own life and with personal involvement, expression of true love. The educator is therefore a witness of truth and goodness: of course, even he is fragile and could be deficient, but he will always try to be in tune with his mission.

Dearest faithful of Rome, from these simple considerations what emerges is how education is decisive for the sense of responsibility: the responsibility of an educator, certainly, but - in the measure that the child grows - the responsibility of the child, the schoolboy, and the youth who enters the workplace. Responsibility is knowing how to respond to himself and to others. The believer also seeks beyond, and above all, responds to God who loved him first.

Responsibility is personal above all, but there is also a responsibility that we share as citizens in a city and a nation, as members of the human family, and, if we are believers, as children of the one God and members of the Church. In fact, ideas, lifestyles, laws, the overall orientations of the society in which we live, is the image it gives of itself through the media, exercising great influence on the formation of new generations, for the good, but often also for the bad.

But society is not an abstraction. In the end, we are ourselves all together, each of us with orientations, rules and responsibilities, although our roles and responsibilities may be different. There is a need for each of us to contribute - every person, family or social group - so that society, starting with our city of Rome, may become an environment more favorable to education.

Finally, I wish to propose to you a thought in the recent encyclical Spe salvi on Christian hope: only a trustworthy hope can animate education and all of life. Today our hope is undermined in many ways and we risk becoming like the ancient pagans, men "without hope and without God in this world", as the apostle Paul wrote to the Christians of Ephesus (Eph 2,12). It is from this that perhaps the most profound difficulty in education arises: at the root of the crisis in education is, in fact, a crisis of confidence in life.

I cannot therefore end this letter without a warm invitation to place our hope in God. Only He is the hope which resists all delusions; only his love cannot be destroyed by death; only his justice and his mercy can heal injustices and compensate for the sufferings we undergo. The hope we place in God is never just hope only for oneself, it is always also hope for others: it doesn't isolate us, but makes us fraternal in goodness, and stimulates us to educate each other in truth and love.

I greet you with affection and assure you of a special memory in my prayers, while I impart my blessing to everyone.

From the Vatican, 21 January 2008

BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

The Search for Truth Requires the Light of the Logos and Christian Faith

Discourse of the Holy Father Benedict XVI
for his visit to La Sapienza - Università di Roma
January 17, 2008
(presented in writing after protestors prompted cancellation of the address in person)

. . . I am moved, on this occasion, to express my gratitude for the invitation extended to me to come to your university to deliver an address to you. In this perspective, I first of all asked myself the question: What can a pope say on an occasion like this? In my lecture in Regensburg, I indeed spoke as pope, but I spoke above all in the guise of a former professor of the university, seeking to connect memory and the present. But at the university "La Sapienza," the ancient university of Rome, I have been invited as "Bishop of Rome," and so I must speak in this capacity. Of course, "La Sapienza" was once the pope's university, but today it is a secular university with that autonomy which, on the basis of its founding principles, has always been part of the nature of the university, which must always be exclusively bound to the authority of the truth. In its freedom from political and ecclesiastical authorities, the university finds its special role, and in modern society as well, which needs institutions of this nature.

I return to my starting question: What can and should the pope say in meeting with his city's university? Reflecting on this question, it has seemed to me that it includes two more questions, the clarification of which should by itself lead to the answer. It is necessary, in fact, to ask: What is the nature and mission of the papacy? And again: What is the nature and mission of the university?

It is not my intention here to belabor either you or myself with lengthy examinations of the nature of the papacy. A brief summary should be enough. The pope is, first of all, the bishop of Rome, and as such, in virtue of apostolic succession from the Apostle Peter, he has Episcopal authority in regard to the entire Catholic Church. The word "bishop" —- episkopos -— which in its immediate meaning refers to "supervision," already in the New Testament was fused together with the biblical concept of the shepherd: he is the one who, from an elevated point of observation, surveys the whole landscape, making sure to keep the flock together and on the right path.

This description of the bishop's role directs the view first of all to within the community of believers. The bishop — the shepherd — is the man who takes care of this community, the one who keeps it united by keeping it on the path toward God, which Jesus points out through the Christian faith, and He does not only point this out: He Himself is the way for us. But this community that the bishop cares for, as large or small as it may be, lives in the world; its conditions, its journey, its example, and its words inevitably influence the rest of the human community in its entirety. The larger it is, the more its good condition or eventual decline will impact all of humanity. Today we see very clearly how the situation of the religions and the situation of the Church — its crises and renewals — act upon the whole of humanity. Thus the pope, precisely as the shepherd of his community, has increasingly become a voice of the ethical reasoning of humanity.

But, here, there immediately comes the objection, according to which, the pope does not in fact truly speak on the basis of ethical reasoning, but instead draws his judgments from the faith and, therefore, he cannot claim that these have validity for those who do not share this faith.

We must return to this argument later, because it poses the absolutely fundamental question: What is reason? How can an assertion, and above all a moral norm, demonstrate that it is "reasonable"? At this point, I would like to note briefly that John Rawls, while he denies that religious doctrines overall have the character of "public" reasoning, he nonetheless sees in their "non-public" reasoning at least a reasoning that cannot simply be dismissed by those who support a hard-line secularist rationality. He sees a criterion of this reasonableness in, among other things, the fact that such doctrines are derived from a responsible and well grounded tradition, in which, over a long span of time, sufficiently strong arguments have been developed in support of the respective doctrines.

It seems important to me that this statement recognizes that experience and demonstration over the course of generations, the historical backdrop of human wisdom, are also a sign of their reasonableness and their lasting significance. In the face of an a-historical form of reason that seeks to construct itself in an exclusively a-historical rationality, the wisdom of humanity as such — the wisdom of the great religious traditions — should be viewed as a reality that cannot be cast with impunity into the trash bin of the history of ideas.

Let's return to the opening question. The pope speaks as the representative of a believing community, in which, throughout the centuries of its existence, a specific life wisdom has matured; he speaks as the representative of a community that holds within itself a treasury of ethical understanding and experience, which is important for all of humanity. In this sense, he speaks as the representative of a form of ethical reasoning.

But now we must ask ourselves: What is the university? What is its purpose? It is a huge question which I can only answer once again in almost telegraphic style by making just a few observations. I believe that it can be said that the true intimate origin of the university lies in man’s craving for knowledge. He wants to know what everything around him is.

In this sense, the Socratic questioning is the impulse that gave birth to the Western university. I am thinking here, just to mention one text, the dispute that sets Euthyphro, who defends mythical religion and his devotion to it, against Socrates. In contrast Socrates asks: “And do you believe there is really a war amongst the gods, with terrible feuds, even, and battles . . . Are we to say that these things are true, Euthyphro?" (Euthyphro, 6: b and c). In this apparently not very devout question — but which drew in Socrates from a deeper and purer sense of religiosity, one that sought a truly divine god — the Christians of the first centuries recognized their path and themselves.

These early Christians accepted their faith, not in a positivist manner or as a way of getting away from unfulfilled desires, but rather as a way of dissolving the cloud that was mythological religion so as to discover the God that is Creative Reason as well as Reason-as-Love. For this reason, asking themselves about the reason for the greater God, as well as the real nature and sense of being human, did not represent for them any problematic lack of religiosity, but was part of the essence of their way of being religious. They therefore did not need to solve or put aside the Socratic dilemma but could, indeed, had to accept it. They also had to recognize, as part of their identity, the demanding search for reason in order to learn about the entire truth. The university could, indeed, had to be born within the Christian world and the Christian faith.

We must take another step. Man wants to know; he wants the truth. Truth pertains first and foremost to seeing and understanding theoria, as it is called in the Greek tradition. But truth is not only theoretic. In correlating the Beatitudes from the Sermon on the Mountain and the gifts of the Holy Spirit mentioned in Isaiah 11, Augustine asserted the reciprocity of scientia (knowledge) and tristitia (sorrow). For him, merely knowing is source of sadness. In fact, those who only see and learn all that happens in the world end up becoming sad.

But the truth means more than knowledge. The purpose of knowing the truth is to know what is good. This is also the sense of Socrates’ way of questioning: What good thing makes us true? Truth makes us good and goodness is true. This optimism dwells in the Christian faith because it was allowed to see the Logos, the Creative Reason that, in God’s incarnation, reveals itself as that which is Good, as Goodness itself.

In medieval theology, there was a great dispute over the relationship between theory and praxis, over the proper relationship between knowledge and action, a dispute that we must not go into further here. In fact, with their four faculties, medieval universities embodied this correlation.

Let us begin with medicine, which was the fourth faculty according to the understanding of that time. Although it was seen more as an “art” than as a science, its inclusion in the realm of the universitas meant that it was seen as belonging to the domain of rationality. The art of healing was seen as something guided by reason and was thus beyond the domain of magic. Healing is a task that always requires more than simple reason, but exactly for this reason, it needs the connection between knowledge and power and must belong to the realm of ratio.

Inevitably, in law faculties, the relationship between praxis and theory, between knowing and doing, takes front seat for it is about giving human freedom its right shape, which is always freedom in reciprocal communion. The law is the premise upon which freedom is built; it is not its adversary.

But this raises another question: How can we identify what the standards of justice are, that is, those that make freedom as part of a whole possible and serve mankind’s goodness? Let us come back to the present. It is a question that is related to how we can find legal rules that can govern freedom, human dignity and man’s rights. It is an issue that concerns us insofar as it relates to the democratic processes that shape opinions, but also one that can distress us insofar as it relates to humanity’s future.

Jürgen Habermas articulates a view, widely accepted in today’s world of ideas, in which the legitimacy of a constitution as the basis for what is legal stems from two sources: the equal participation of all citizens in the political process and reasonable conflict-resolution mechanisms in politics. Insofar as the reasonable mechanisms are concerned, he notes that the issue cannot be reduced to a mere struggle for who gets more votes, but must include a “process of argumentation that is responsive to truth” (wahrheitssensibles Argumentationsverfahren). This is well said, but it is something difficult to turn into political praxis. We know that the representatives of this public “process of argumentation” are, for the most part, political parties which shape the formation of the public will. In fact, they invariably will seek a majority and will almost always take care of the interests they pledge to protect, which are very often partisan and not collective interests; responsiveness to the truth always takes the back seat to partisan interests. To me, it is significant that Habermas should say that responsiveness to truth is a necessary component of political argumentation, since it reintroduces the concept of truth in philosophical and political debates.

Pilate’s question then becomes inevitable: What is truth? How do we recognize it? If we turn to “public reason” as Rawls does, another question necessarily follows: What is reasonable? How does a given reason prove to be the true reason? Whatever the case may be, it is obvious that, in the quest for freedom and for living together equitably, groups other than parties and interest groups must be heard; although that does not mean that the latter are any less important.

Let us go back to medieval universities and the way they were set up. Along with law, philosophy and theology had their own faculty with the task of studying mankind in his totality and thus keeping alive responsiveness to truth. One might even say that this is the real and enduring meaning of both faculties — philosophy and theology maintain responsiveness to truth and prevent man from being distracted in his quest for the truth. But how can they do this? This is a question which we must always work at and which can never be raised and answered once and for all. Hence, at this point, not even I can properly give you an answer. I can, though, invite you to keep asking this question, one that has involved all the great thinkers who, throughout history, have fought for and sought out the truth, coming up with their own answers and enduring their own fears, always going beyond any one answer.

Theology and philosophy are an odd couple; neither can be totally separated from the other and, yet, each must keep its own purpose and identity. Compared to the answers Church Fathers formulated in their day and age, St. Thomas Aquinas deserves a special place in history for highlighting the autonomy of philosophy, as well as that of the law. He equally has the merit of pointing out the responsibilities that fall on reason when it questions itself on the basis of its own strengths.

Unlike neo-platonic ideas that saw religion and philosophy inseparably intertwined, the Church Fathers had presented the Christian faith as real philosophy, insisting that this faith corresponds to the needs of Reason in its quest for the truth, that is, a faith that was a “Yes” to truth when compared to mythical religions that had ended up turning into mere custom.

However, when universities were founded in the West, those religions were no more, only Christianity existed. This meant highlighting, in a new way, reason’s own responsibility, one that was not absorbed by the faith. Thomas lived at a special time. For the first time, all of Aristotle’s philosophical writings were available, as were the Hebrew and Arabic text that embodied and extended Greek philosophy. Thus, as Christianity interacted with others and engaged their reason in a new dialogue, it had to fight for its own reasonableness.

The Faculty of Philosophy, i.e. the so-called artists’ faculty, was until then only a preparatory stage before moving on to theology. Afterwards, it became a faculty in its own right, an autonomous partner to theology and the faith which the latter reflected. We cannot dwell on the gripping confrontation that followed. I would say that St. Thomas’ idea about the relationship between philosophy and theology can be expressed by the formula handed down by the Council of Chalcedon on Christology, namely, that philosophy and theology must relate to each other “without confusion and without separation.”

“Without confusion” is understood in the sense that each will maintain its own identity, so that philosophy is truly a free and responsible search for reason and aware of its own limits and, thus, of its own greatness and vastness. Theology must instead continue to draw from a source of knowledge that it has not invented and that is always greater than itself, and which always renews the process of thinking since it is never totally exhausted by reflection.

“Without confusion” does not stand alone for there is “without separation,” that is, the idea that philosophy never starts from scratch in isolation, but is part of great dialogue found in the accumulated knowledge that history has bequeathed and which it always critically, but meekly, accepts and develops. Yet, it should not shut itself off from what religions, especially the Christian faith, have received and given to humanity as a sign for the path to follow.

Indeed, history has shown that many of the things that theologians have said in the course of time, or that Church authorities have put in practice, have been proven false and today they confuse us. But it is equally true that the history of the saints, and the history of the humanism that has developed on the basis of the Christian faith, are proof of the truth of this faith in its essential core, making it something that public reason needs. Of course, much of what theology and faith say can only be appropriated from within the faith and thus cannot be seen as a need for those to whom this faith remains inaccessible.

It is true, however, that the message of the Christian faith is never only a "comprehensive religious doctrine" in Rawls’ terms, but that it is, instead, a force that purifies reason itself, further helping the latter to be itself. On the basis of its origins, the Christian message should always encourage the search of the truth and thus be a force against the pressures exerted by power and interests.

Well, so far I have only talked about the university in the Middle Ages, trying, however, to show to what extent its nature and purpose have remained the same all along. In modern times, knowledge has become more multi-faceted, especially in the two broad fields that now prevail in universities. First of all, there are the natural sciences which have developed on the basis of experimentation and the supposed rationality of the subject matters. Secondly, there are the social sciences and the humanities, in which man has tried to understand himself by looking at his own history and uncovering his own nature.

From this development, humanity not only acquired a great deal of knowledge and power, but also an understanding and recognition of the rights and dignity of mankind. And for this we can be grateful. But man’s journey can never be said to be over, and the danger of falling into inhumanity is never just warded off as we can see in today’s history.

The danger faced by the Western world, just to mention the latter, is that mankind, given its great knowledge and power, might give up on the question of the truth. At the same time, this means that reason in the end may bow to the pressures of partisan interests and instrumental value, forced to acknowledge the latter as the ultimate standard.

From the point of view of the academic world, this means that there is a danger that philosophy, feeling incapable of fulfilling its task, might degenerate into positivism, a danger that theology, and the message it has for reason, might be confined to the private sphere of a group more or less big. If, however, reason, concerned about its supposed purity, fails to hear the great message that comes from the Christian faith and the understanding it brings, it will dry up like a tree with roots cut off from the water that gives it life. It will lose the courage needed to find the truth and thus become small rather than great. Applied to our European culture, this means that, if it wants to constitute itself on the basis of its arguments and whatever appears to it to be convincing, with concerns about its own secular nature, it will cut itself off from its life-sustaining roots and, in doing so, will not become more reasonable and pure, but will instead become undone and fragmented.

And so let me go back to the initial point. What does the Pope have to do or say in a university? He certainly should not try to impose in an authoritarian manner his faith on others, which can only be freely offered. Beyond his ministry as Pastor of the Church and on the basis of the intrinsic nature of this pastoral ministry, it is his task to keep alive man’s responsiveness to the truth. Similarly he must again and always invite reason to seek out truth, goodness and God, and on this path urge it to see the useful lights that emerged during the history of the Christian faith and perceive Jesus Christ as the light that illuminates history and helps find the way towards the future.

From the Vatican, 17 January 2008

BENEDICTUS XVI