In recent letters to Father Richard McBrien, Archbishop John R. Quinn, chairman of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Doctrine and Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk, acting chairman upon Archbishop Quinn's retirement, expressed disappointment that the new edition of Father McBrien's book Catholicism did not sufficiently correct several deficiencies that the committee had identified in its examination of the first two editions of the book undertaken in the early '80s. This examination culminated in a 1985 statement specifying a number of deficiencies that the committee hoped would be corrected in any future editions.'
In addition to bringing this matter to the author's attention, the Committee on Doctrine has also determined that a more general review of the book would now be helpful to the Catholic community at large. This review was prepared by the staff of the Committee on Doctrine and is published with the authorization of the committee.
This review provides an outline of the major difficulties that the book poses from the standpoint of those who are concerned to monitor the possible effects of the book, not on theological specialists, but on theological beginners, the vast majority of the people of God in every age. Insofar as Catholicism is a work of speculative theology, professional theologians may evaluate it; insofar as the book is an introductory textbook of Catholic theology, it has certain shortcomings from the pastoral point of view that will be examined in this review.
The problems which Catholicism poses as an introductory text fall into three categories. First, some statements are inaccurate or at least misleading. Second, there is in the book an overemphasis on the plurality of opinion within the Catholic theological tradition that makes it difficult at times for the reader to discern the normative core of that tradition. Third, Catholicism overstates the significance of recent developments within the Catholic tradition, implying that the past appears to be markedly inferior to the present and obscuring the continuity of the tradition. Falling within the latter two categories are difficulties that reappear throughout the work; they constitute a pattern that could be overlooked by an exclusive focus on particular passages.
Catholicism insists that it is possible to hold the faith of the church while maintaining that Jesus Christ could have sinned. "It is not that Jesus Christ was absolutely incapable of sin, but rather that he was able not to sin and, in fact, did not sin"( p. 547). The book argues that "both views-the one favoring impeccability and the one that does not-are within the range of Catholic orthodoxy" (p. 547). This position, however, cannot be reconciled with the Christology of the councils.2 In two natures, Jesus Christ is only one hypostasis (or person), the hypostasis of the Word. With Christ there is no possible subject of the verb to sin. There are indeed two wills in Christ, but only one person, one subject. The contention that Jesus could have sinned, if followed to its logical conclusion, inevitably implies a Nestorian or an adoptionist Christology, though it must be said that Catholicism does not draw such extreme conclusions.3
Catholicism presents the virgin birth of Jesus as being of uncertain and
perhaps even doubtful historicity.4 The book argues that belief in the
virgin birth should be considered a theologoumenon, "a nondoctrinal
theological interpretation that cannot be verified or refuted on the
basis of historical evidence, but that can be affirmed because of its
close connection with some defined doctrine about God" (p. 542). While
the adjective
It is confusing to say, as Catholicism does (p. 543), that the
cooperation of Joseph in the conception of Jesus was not excluded by
any explicit definition. That point has been implicitly taught in
the creeds, and the implication has been spelled out by constant and
repeated magisterial teaching since the fifth century.
The 1985 statement of the Committee on Doctrine pointed to (among
other matters) the treatment of the virginal conception of Jesus in
Catholicism as one of those that were found "confusing and ambiguous."
This description also applies to the treatment of this question in the
new edition, for it remains substantially the same. The book seems to
suggest that as a result of modern biblical scholarship the scales tip
against the factual historicity of the virginal conception. Interpreted
in this way, Catholicism comes very close to denying, if it does not
actually deny, an article of faith.
While Catholicism offers an examination of the virgin birth and
concludes that this belief is a theologoumenon, its treatment of the
belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary is purely descriptive and
never systematic. The matter is discussed in terms of a descriptive
history of the development of this belief, an account that itself
appears in the course of an overview of the development of veneration of
Mary in general (pp. 1078-1100). This overview has a decidedly skeptical
tone, emphasizing the lack of reference and the occasionally negative
references to Mary in the New Testament and in the early church, the
influence of apocryphal and particularly Docetic writings, and the
opposition of major saints and theologians (Bernard, Bonaventure,
Aquinas) to doctrines such as the immaculate conception.
The book stresses that the New Testament says nothing about the
perpetual virginity of Mary (rather, it speaks of brothers and sisters
of Jesus) and asserts that even in the second century there is no
evidence for this belief apart from the apocryphal Protoevangelium of
James (pp. 1081-83). According to Catholicism, the development of
belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary "coincided with a newly
positive assessment of virginity" (p. 1083). While the book does not
explicitly conclude that the cause for the acceptance of belief in the
perpetual virginity of Mary was the church's desire to promote virginity
as an ascetical state, the reader seems to be invited to draw this
inference. It was because the church sought to foster the "glorification
of the Virgin Mary for ascetical reasons" that the church ignored the
opposition of those like Tertullian who recognized that such a doctrine "introduced a new danger
of Docetic trends" (p. 1083). The acceptance of belief in the perpetual
virginity of Mary is presented as closely if not inextricably linked
with the fostering of asceticism, which supposedly arose only in the
third century. After pointing out the absence of evidence for this
belief in the New Testament and second-century fathers, including the
opposition of Tertullian, the text continues:
Although Catholicism does not arrive at any explicit conclusions as
to the status of the belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary, the
description of the history of the development of this belief gives the
impression that rather than a truth that the church only gradually
uncovered, the belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary was a creation
of the third-century church as part of its program to promote virginity
and asceticism. The book apparently favors the view that Mary had
"normal sexual relations after the birth of Jesus" and that Jesus had
blood brothers and sisters, while admitting, however, that the New
Testament evidence does not constitute an "insuperable" barrier to
the belief that Mary remained ever a virgin (p.1081).
Catholicism is committed to presenting a wide plurality of theological
positions, both Catholic and non-Catholic. This emphasis on description,
however, leaves the necessary task of synthesis relatively neglected.
The book gives an overview of the theological scene in all of its
variety and presents numerous brief summaries of many positions. It
confronts the reader with a broad range of opinions and requires the
reader to make judgments among them. The problem, however, is that the
reading of the text itself does not prepare the reader to do this. The
rapid succession of brief summaries does little to help a beginner to
understand, for often such summaries are only useful if one already has
knowledge of the subject. The book does not do enough to enable the
reader to grasp what is the main current of the Catholic teaching and
theological tradition.7
The central problem is the fact that the intended audience of the book
is those who are just beginning to study theology. The book requires
the reader to find his or her own way through what is sometimes a
bewildering number and variety of positions. There is a difference
between respecting the intelligence of the reader and making unrealistic
demands upon one's intended audience. While a trained theologian may
have little trouble negotiating through the various positions presented,
a beginner does not have a developed sense of what are really important
departures from Catholic tradition and what are not. The danger here
is that the reader could simply become confused about what the church
believes. It is a weakness of this book that, by devoting so much
attention to the presentation of the multiplicity of opinion, it
provides insufficient direction for those seeking to know what is
truly at the core of the faith.
Catholicism's emphasis on the plurality of theological positions on
various issues is that by including so many positions it leaves the
reader with the impression that all of these positions are part of the
mainstream theological conversation, when in fact a number of them are
decidedly on the fringes. The burden is on the reader to discern which
positions are in the mainstream and which are not.
For example, when the book places the Christology of Hans Kung between
that of Karl Rahner and Walter Kasper, it implies that all three are
equally representative of the Catholic theological tradition. Similarly,
the opinion of a radical feminist such as Rosemary Radford Ruether
appears among the Catholic positions on ecclesiology (p. 704) and
worship (pp. 1073-74). Matthew Fox is treated as one of the major
figures of post-Vatican II spirituality; the only hint that the text
gives as to Fox's position on the outer fringes of Catholic theology
is the understated caution that "the titles of his early trilogy of
spiritual books tended to veer somewhat from the conventional" (p.
1048). This descriptive approach, with its successive summaries of
various positions, does not provide the beginner with enough information
to assess the place of these positions within the Catholic theological
tradition as a whole.
One of the schools of thought presented is that of feminism. The label
Catholicism offers no explanation of the meaning of the terms
patriarchy and androcentrism, however, and fails to give the reader
a sense of the degree to which aspects of feminist methodology are in
tension with the tradition.
Particularly troubling are the discussions of the "fatherhood of God"
and "God language" (pp. 352-55) and the treatment of the maleness of
Jesus in a chapter on Christology (pp. 512- 13). It seems to be implied
that the practice of speaking of God as Father or Son and of Christ as
bridegroom is "patriarchal" and "androcentric." The reader is not
alerted, however, to the difficulty of reconciling these radical theses
with biblical usage and the Catholic tradition. The biblical and
traditional language, even in cases where it is figurative, cannot be
reduced to freely chosen metaphors for which we may substitute others
at will. Titles such as
While Catholicism is concerned to include a wide range of voices in
the theological conversation, the teaching of the pope and bishops is
often reduced to just another voice alongside those of private
theologians. By presenting the range of views, the text is obviously
intended to reflect the fact that there is serious debate over certain
questions in the contemporary church. The problem is not that the book
describes positions in opposition to those of the magisterium, but
rather that its presentation often lends them more weight than the
magisterium itself. The method in several controversial questions is to
present the official teaching and then to follow it with a rebuttal by
Catholics who disagree. The impression is thus given that the "official"
teaching is only one among a number of opinions, in no way binding on
the faithful.
For example, the presentations of the questions of contraception,
homosexuality and women's ordination all take for granted that these are
open questions; the official church teaching appears as merely one of
the options for the reader.8 Different positions are presented, and it
is left to the reader to make a choice, while the text implies that the
"official church position" is erroneous on all three points.9
In the treatment of contraception-one of those matters pointed to in the
Committee on Doctrine's 1985 statement as "confusing and ambiguous"-it
might have been appropriate to mention that five popes since 1930 have
consistently taught that contraception is intrinsically evil. For this
and other reasons, Catholics who reject this teaching would be invited
to reconsider their positions. The treatment of contraception in
Catholicism, however, does not encourage such Catholics to undertake
a reconsideration of their views on the matter, but rather confirms them
in their lack of acceptance of magisterial teaching.
Likewise, the question of women's ordination is another problematic
aspect of the book cited in the 1985 statement that has not been
corrected. Again, the issue is handled simply as a "disputed question"
in theology. The official teaching of the church is inserted in a
section headed "arguments against," thus giving the impression that
whatever doctrine the church may have on the question is not binding.
A further weakness is that the arguments on each side are presented so
succinctly that they are hardly intelligible unless one consults the
documents to which the book refers. In particular, Catholicism gives
an oversimplified summary of the 1976 report of the Pontifical Biblical
Commission. The book maintains that the commission "reported that it
could find no support for the exclusion of women from the ordained
priesthood on the basis of the biblical evidence alone" (p. 776,
emphasis added). It does not report the commission's statement that "the
masculine character of the hierarchical order which has structured the
church since its beginning thus seems attested to by Scripture in an
undeniable way." While acknowledging that the New Testament by itself
alone does not settle in a clear way and once and for all the problem
of the possible accession of women to the priesthood," the report did
say: Some think that in the Scriptures there are sufficient indications
to exclude this possibility, considering that the sacraments of
eucharist and reconciliation have a special link with the person of
Christ and therefore with the male hierarchy, as borne out by the New
Testament."
Finally, there are passages in the book that speak of popes having
"erred in matters of faith" (p. 781; cf. p. 762) and having come down on
the side of a heretical position" (p. 479) without explaining the scope
and significance of such errors. In the absence of further explanation,
such statements could serve to cast doubt on the reliability of church
teaching. Catholicism gives insufficient clarification on such
issues.
Also in keeping with the emphasis on the plurality of opinion within the
Catholic tradition, the overall direction of the text of Catholicism
is toward reducing to an absolute minimum the church teachings and
beliefs that are to be considered essential to the Catholic faith and to
which one must adhere in order to consider oneself Catholic. In part,
this is the result of the aforementioned inclusion of a range of widely
divergent and sometimes contradictory positions in the theological
discussion, an inclusion that implies that there is very little that
these positions hold in common.
At the same time, a tendency toward minimalism also arises from what
appears to be the book's concern to accommodate those who may have
difficulty accepting some part of the Catholic faith as it has
traditionally been understood. At times, the text seems to make every
effort to provide Catholics a way out of accepting church teachings or
beliefs that are controversial or difficult to understand in terms of
contemporary ways of thinking. For example, the book seems to go out of
its way to allow someone to remove the doctrine of the virgin birth from
any connection with history by asserting that "whether the Holy Spirit's
involvement positively excluded the cooperation of Joseph is not
It is against this backdrop that the brief section on the binding force"
of the Marian dogmas (pp. 1102-4) appears somewhat troubling and
ill-advised, even if the conclusions, drawn from the Lutheran-Catholic
dialogue, are in themselves quite nuanced. It seems to fit into a
pattern of setting minimum requirements for belief.
Catholicism's clear affirmation of the superiority of modern theology
and modern anthropology -based upon the advances made by modern science
and philosophy- provides a crucial background for its presentations of
various positions. The problem is that this embrace of modernity is so
enthusiastic as to imply a certain naive denigration of premodern
thought (and thus of all forms of thought that do not embrace
modernity). The text is at times quite harsh in its criticism of
patristic and medieval thought (pp. 163-65). From the perspective of
Catholicism, modern thought has definitively superseded ancient and
medieval thought.
Significant scientific, philosophical and theological advances in our
understanding of human existence did not occur until the 18th and
especially the 19th centuries, with the discoveries of Darwin and Freud,
the new social analysis of Marx and the new focus on the human person as
subject in the philosophy of Kant, in idealism and in modern psychology.
The medieval view of human existence could not, and did not, do justice
to the special character of the person" (p. 164).
In this view, only with the Enlightenment do we have the basis for an
adequate anthropology and thus for an adequate theology. "In the final
accounting, the Enlightenment marks the division between an often
precritical, authority-oriented theology and a critical, historically
sophisticated and philosophically mature theology" (p. 641)
Thus the contemporary theologian who has absorbed all the advances of
modern thought is in a superior position with regard to the tradition
as a whole (and also to ecclesiastical authorities who may be still
operating from a premodern or preconciliar point of view). For
Catholicism, modern thought becomes the prism through which the
tradition must be viewed and judged. This is the basis for the book's
emphasis on change in the tradition. After the Enlightenment, everything
is now subject to revision because of the attainment of this higher
vantage point. "Because of the scientific, philosophical and theological
developments outlined in Chapter 4, the time for an anthropological
recasting of all the traditional doctrines is at hand" (p. 166). The
book often does not explicitly say that some traditional teaching must
be discarded, but it points the reader in this direction by noting that
history seems to be moving in a certain direction, thus implying that
the traditional doctrines are soon to be superseded. Examples would be
belief in the virgin birth and the intrinsic evil of homosexual acts."
Catholicism interprets Vatican II as the justification for this
approach to theology. In this view, Vatican II marked a great change in
direction because the church ceased to oppose and instead welcomed the
modern world and sought to incorporate the advances of modern thought
(pp. 77-80; 92; 95; 166-67; 910-11; 1214). Preconciliar and
premodern are here effectively convertible. Left unmentioned are the
ressourcement movement leading up to the council and the council's own
calls for renewal through a further ressourcement by a return to the
sources of the tradition. In Catholicism, the council appears simply
as an aggiornamento, a one-sided embrace of modernity.
The overall effect of this exaltation of the modern over the traditional
is to provide a justification for those theological positions that call
for a much greater accommodation of church teaching to contemporary
culture and at the same time a distancing from traditional beliefs that
are considered outmoded or incompatible with modern thought. The book
often implies that the ..progressive" theologians are pointing to the
future of the church and that the pope and the bishops have not yet
caught up. In this sense, the theologians -and by implication the
readers-have a superior vantage point from which to look upon church
teaching and tradition. Church teaching can be effectively dismissed
simply by being classified as reflecting "preconciliar thought."12
Catholicism poses pastoral problems particularly as a textbook in
undergraduate college courses and in parish education programs. The
principal difficulties with the book lie not only in the particular
positions adopted, but perhaps even more in the cumulative effect of
the book as a whole. The method is to offer a broad range of opinions
on every topic with the apparent intention of allowing or stimulating
the reader to make a choice. This places a heavy burden on the reader,
especially since some of the opinions described do not stand within the
central Catholic tradition. The reader who is a theological beginner
could easily assume that all the authors cited are equally a part of
the mainstream Catholic conversation, whereas some of the authors are
closer to the margins. While the book could be a helpful resource to
theologians looking for a survey of opinions on some question, it might
well be bewildering and unsettling for Catholics taking undergraduate
courses in theology. For some readers it will give encouragement to
dissent.
The problem is further aggravated because Catholicism gives very
little weight to the teaching of the magisterium, at least where there
has been no explicit dogmatic definition. At many points the book treats
magisterial statements on the same level as free theological opinions.
On a number of important issues, most notably in the field of moral
theology, the reader will see without difficulty that the book regards
the "official church position" as simply in error.
This review has focused exclusively on the problematic aspects of
Catholicism. Certainly, as the 1985 statement of the Committee on
Doctrine affirmed, there are many positive features to be found in the
book. Nevertheless, this review concludes that, particularly as a book
for people who are not specialists in theological reasoning and
argumentation, Catholicism poses serious difficulties and in several
important respects does not live up to its ambitious title.
ENDNOTES
1 Origins, vol. 15, no. 9 (Aug. 1, 1985): 130-32. The Preface to the new
edition of Catholicism is somewhat misleading when it characterizes the
Committee on Doctrine review as "careful and essentially sympathetic,"
thereby implying that the bishops had no serious concerns with the book.
In fact, in the way that the Preface refers to the committee
investigation and statement, they appear almost as a subtle endorsement
of the book or as a guarantee of its reliability as a guide to Catholic
teaching in the sense that the book has withstood the careful scrutiny
of the Committee on Doctrine of the National Conference of Catholic
Bishops.
2 In the anathemas against the Three Chapters, the Second Council of
Constantinople (553) condemned the opinion attributed to Theodore of
Mopsuestia that Jesus attained impeccability only with the resurrection
(Denzinger-Schonmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum 434).
3 It is not that Catholicism is openly Nestorian or adoptionist. The
book does uphold the divinity of the Son and the doctrine of the Trinity
in general (p. 318). It explicitly affirms that the Word of God became
human for our salvation (p. 480) and that "Jesus Christ was, in his very
being and from the beginning, the Word made flesh" (p. 556). Yet
although the book at some points talks about maintaining both the
divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ, at other points it seems unclear
about the singleness of the hypostasis or the identity of the person.
For example, the book speaks of the question of Jesus' sinlessness as
being a question of "the intimate communion of Jesus with God" (pp.
548-49). Jesus Christ "was so completely in union with the Father that
he was in fact absolutely without sin" (p. 547). Because of the
hypostatic union Jesus was "aware of himself as a subject in whom God
was fully present and as one who was fully present in God" (p. 556).
Such statements certainly admit of an orthodox interpretation, yet there
is a somewhat confusing tendency to juxtapose Jesus and God, as if they
were somehow separate.
4 The book identifies two factors that have brought to an end the
"virtual unanimity of belief" in the virgin birth and led many to deny
the virginal conception of Jesus--"a newly critical way of reading the
New Testament, and a newly evolutionary way of perceiving human
existence and human history" (p. 543). Throughout the book, both of
these are presented as unambiguous advances of modern thought and modern
theology. Indeed, the book points out that the two factors that have led
many to deny the virgin birth are "two of the same factors which
generated a change in our understanding of Jesus Christ and of Christian
faith itself" (p. 543). The implication is that those who embrace the
new theology (supposedly vindicated at Vatican 11) are those who deny or
at least call into question the virgin birth.
5 The book itself refers to the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, the
Fourth Lateran Council and the Second Council of Lyons.
6 See Lumen Gentium, 52 and 57; Denz.-Schon. 291, 294, 427, 442, 503,
571, 1880.
7 In the chapter on Christology, the book itself reveals an awareness of
the problem of making one's way through the wide range of Christological
positions briefly summarized in the text: "How does one even begin to
evaluate such a wide array of theological positions?" (p. 530). The book
does speak of "an objective and objectifiable Christian and Catholic
tradition- (p. 530) and offers six "Christological criteria" to help the
reader discern this tradition. This attempt at synthesis, however, is
extremely brief (three pages) compared with the 35 pages of summaries of
various Christologies. (The fact that these three pages are followed by
another 30 treating "special questions in Christology" that either cast
doubt on church teaching or at least reflect unfavorably on it does not
help with this problem of discerning the core of the Catholic
tradition.)
8 On birth control: "There are two sides to the birth control question
in Catholic moral theology" (p. 982). With regard to homosexuality, the
book summarizes the current state of theology by presenting three
positions, the "official magisterium" view standing at one of the
extremes and the position of Charles Curran and Richard McCormick
representing a "mediating" position (pp. 996-1000). At the end of the
discussion of the ordination of women, the book begins its conclusion
with: "Whatever position one takes on the ordination question ..." (p.
779).
9 The presentations of the conflicting positions often fail to be
evenhanded, for the expositions of the dissident opinions are usually
more fully developed than those of the "official" position, particularly
since the expositions of the dissident opinions include the
counterarguments that respond directly to the arguments used in support
of the "official" position, whose counterarguments are not presented
(e.g., pp. 983-89; pp. 777- 78).
10 The book also at points presents a superficial understanding of
patristic and medieval theology as when it asserts: "We are not
composite beings, made of body and soul as two separate parts (as
the medieval Scholastic philosophers had it)" (p. 159).
11 As pointed out above (Footnote 4), the book asserts that the factors
that have led many now to deny the virgin birth are clear advances on
the part of modern thought and modern theology (p. 543). Likewise, with
regard to homosexuality, it is because "new questions are arising in
light of new developments and scientific research in medicine,
psychiatry and psychology" that the traditional teaching must be
re-examined (p. 996).
12 For example, with regard to the question of natural law and the new
approach proposed by some contemporary moral theologians, the book
argues that "the hierarchical magisterium ... has continued to employ
the philosophical approach of the preconciliar manuals of moral
theology," as in Veritatis Splendor (p. 962).
3) The Perpetual Virginity of Mary
"Mary's perpetual virginity, however, came to be almost universally
accepted from the third century on. By now consecrated virgins had been
established as a special state in the church, and Mary was presented to
them as their model" (p. 1083).
B. Overemphasis on Plurality Within the Catholic Theological Tradition
1) The Focus on Description
2) The Mainstream and the Fringes
"Christological explanations which interpret the maleness of Christ in
an androcentric way or the headship of Christ in a patriarchal way
effectively deny the proclamation and praxis of Jesus regarding the
universality of God's love and the openness of the kingdom to all,
women and men alike" (p. 533).
3) Insufficient Weight Given to Magisterial Teaching
4) Doctrinal Minimalism
C. Overemphasis on Change and Development
Summary and Conclusion