Franciscan at Home

Jason Gale draws some important lessons for catechesis from the Church’s understanding of Creation.

God’s work of Creation is both once and for all and at the same time continuing. When we speak of Creation, we sometimes speak of it as a past act from which everything else flows. But the truth is that God continues to create. His act of creation continues both in the creation of new things and persons and also in the continuing existence of those persons and things already in existence.

Pope John Paul II stated, “Having created the cosmos, God continues to create it, by maintaining it in existence. Conservation is a continuous creation.”[i] We can draw many implications from this truth, and we can draw two conclusions which are particularly important for our work as catechists.

There is surely no more important time in the history of the Church when catechesis on the family needs to be carried out. In this article, Dr William Newton takes us back to the classic catechesis of John Paul II on the family.

Unfortunately, not a little of what Aldous Huxley predicted in his 1931 novel, Brave New World, has come to pass, especially in regard to the break down of sexual morality and family life. In Huxley’s brave new world, circa 2540 A.D., there is universal promiscuity as a result of social conditioning from an early age, according to the adage: “everyone belongs to everyone.” In order to prevent pregnancy – a phenomenon long since defunct and considered a subject of conversation too crude for polite society – women are encouraged to carry contraception on them at all times. This is done by promoting as fashionable the wearing of contraceptive belts, adorned with pouches containing the requisite devices. Marriage is a thing of the past; as is normal procreation. All human beings are conceived and raised in “Hatchery and Conditioning Centres.”

A Catholic living in 2012 can easily sympathize with the main character of the book – John the Savage. He is the only character in the story that is shocked and bewildered by the moral degradation. Circumstances have been such that John was raised outside the new world order and only introduced at as a young adult. For him, this brave new world is a world gone mad. For us, something like a share in John’s bewilderment comes from the fact that in 2012 (let alone 2540) we experience a similar moral vacuum. In my own country, the United Kingdom (quite typical of Europe), nearly 85% of couples who eventually marry (and an increasing number never do) cohabit before their wedding, 44% of children are born outside marriage, and 66% of the population think there is no difference between marriage and cohabitation.

Of course, it would be an exaggeration to say that things in modern day Britain or Europe are quite as bad as in Huxley’s Britain of 2540. Certainly, we have IVF and we have State imposed amoral sex education, but this is not quite as bad or extensive as Huxely’s vision of the ubiquitous Hatchery and Conditioning Centres.

One might ask why things are not as bad. I am confident that fallen human nature is certainly capable of going all the way with Huxley’s vision. So, is it just a matter of time? After all we have another five hundred years to go before we arrive at 2540.

Vemos las maneras en las que tanto los documentos del magisterio universal como los documentos de enseñanza de los obispos locales pueden sustentan nuestra catequesis.

Durante su largo pontificado, el Papa Juan Pablo II reafirmaba consistentemente la perenne enseñanza cristiana sobre la vocación al matrimonio. En Familiaris consorcio, proclamó que la ‘familia es la célula primera y vital de la sociedad’ i y el Catecismo, que él promulgó, declara que ‘[l]a vocación al matrimonio se inscribe en la naturaleza misma del hombre y de la mujer’ (CIC 1603).

Mientras que la vocación al matrimonio es claramente definida dentro de la enseñanza católica, existe un esfuerzo omnipresente para intentar redefinir esta vocación al matrimonio como la unión entre dos personas, sin distinción de sexo. Este debate sobre el matrimonio ‘entre personas del mismo sexo’ está vivo y pataleando y no demuestra ningún signo de disminuir.

El debate empezó a ganar terreno durante el siglo XXI, y en 2001, los Países Bajos se convirtieron en el primer país que legalizara el matrimonio entre personas del mismo género – con todos los derechos y privilegios del matrimonio tradicional. Desde entonces, por lo menos seis otros países han seguido el ejemplo y vienen más en camino.

Este artículo destaca algunos de los principios fundamentales que ayudarán a explicar por qué el matrimonio no puede ser entre dos personas del mismo género. Aunque la fe cristiana sea enraizada en la Divina Revelación, gran parte de este artículo se enfocará en el entendimiento del matrimonio dentro del orden moral natural. ‘La gracia supone la naturaleza’ ii; por lo tanto, comprender los orígenes naturales del matrimonio ayudará a los cristianos a defender el matrimonio tradicional tanto delante de los cristianos como los no cristianos. Debemos de tomar en serio la exhortación de San Pedro a estar ‘siempre dispuestos a dar respuesta a todo el que os pida razón de vuestra esperanza’ (1 Pe 3, 15). Es importante que entremos en este debate cultural con claridad y con caridad.

We see the ways in which both documents of the universal magisterium and the teaching documents from local bishops can underpin our catechesis.

During his lengthy pontificate, Pope John Paul II consistently reaffirmed the perennial Christian teaching on the vocation of marriage. In Familiaris Constortio he proclaimed that ‘the family is the first and vital cell of society’[i] and the Catechism, which he promulgated, states that the ‘vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman’ (CCC 1603).

While the vocation of marriage is clearly defined within Catholic teaching, there exists a pervasive effort to redefine the vocation of marriage as any union between two people, regardless of gender. This debate on so-called ‘same-sex’ marriage is alive and well and shows no signs of diminishing.

The debate began gaining ground during the 20th century and in 2001, the Netherlands became the first country to legalize same-sex marriage—with all the rights and privileges of traditional marriage. Since then, at least six other countries have followed suit and more are on the way.

The following article will highlight some fundamental principles to help explain why marriage cannot be between two people of the same gender. While the Christian faith is rooted in Divine Revelation, much of this article will focus on understanding marriage within the natural moral order. Grace builds on nature;[ii] therefore, understanding the natural origins of marriage will help Christians defend traditional marriage to both Christians and non-Christians alike. We must take seriously St. Peter’s exhortation to, ‘always be prepared to make a defense…for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence’ (Pet 3:15). It is important that we engage this cultural debate with clarity and charity.

Marlon De La Torre gives pointers from the Church for parents, for catechesis in the family.

Have you ever agreed to take care of something valuable for someone only to realize afterwards that taking care of it is requires significantly more than was expected? Imagine what St. Peter thought when Jesus asked him to cast his nets into the sea, and then told him he would be given a new responsibility – fishing for men (Lk 5:1-11). He received a double responsibility: to care for Christ’s mission and message, and to care for the ‘fish’ he was to catch.

When we teach, we echo the teachings of Jesus Christ. As a teacher in Christ’s Church I agree to hand on only what Christ has entrusted to his Bride, the Church. I agree to ‘guard what has been entrusted to you’ (1 Tim 6:20). I also agree to echo these teachings so that each person can catch the echo. Every audience Christ encountered received a differently crafted instruction. It was the same message – but presented for this particular person. He told the story of God’s love for his children. It is the same story, for each unique person.

Since its beginnings in Australia in the mid 1990s more than 1000 couples have attended a Celebrate Love seminar in Australia, New Zealand or England. Sydney coauthors Byron and Francine Pirola are the founders and principal developers of the seminar. ‘The content and exercises’, says Byron, ‘are designed for couples in stable, loving marriages.’ ‘We all hit periods of disillusionment in our marriage,’ adds Francine. ‘At these times, some couples just knuckle down and wait it out, and eventually, things usually do improve. Others unfortunately start to come unstuck.’

Celebrate Love is a remarkably effective way to help couples start afresh. The seminar offers couples the opportunity to get to core issues that are dividing them, deal with them and then start afresh. Feedback from these couples typically tells the same story: they had no sense of anything lacking in their marriage; they just didn’t realize how much more it could be. When people saw colour television for the first time they wondered how they could ever have been satisfied with black and white. Couples say that Celebrate Love is like seeing their marriage and their future together in full, living colour.

One of the key insights in the seminar is an appreciation of male and female differences. Recent studies in brain science have shown that even from before birth, there are structural differences in the brains of men and women. As adults, these differences are initially one of the things that attract men and women to each other. However, for many couples, they become a source of frustration and hurt because they are not well understood. The seminar teaches couples about ‘Smart Loving’. ‘Most people give love the way they like to receive it’ explains Francine. ‘We assume that if we feel loved when some one sits down and listens to us, for example, then that is what the other likes too. In fact, a lot of people don’t feel loved this way.’

A continuación de la serie de artículos que tratan de la Catequesis sobre la Sexualidad por Sor Jane Dominic Laurel, O.P., The Sower se dedicará a señalar varias iniciativas en diferentes partes del mundo que atienden ésta área de la transmisión de la Buena Nueva acerca del matrimonio, la familia y la sexualidad. En este número, hemos pedido al Dr. Gerard O’Shea que nos hable acerca de un programa y material que él ha ayudado a desarrollar para los padres de familia.

Como yo les he amado [As I Have Loved You en su versión original en inglés] empezó como proyecto en el John Paul II Institute of Marriage and Family [Instituto Juan Pablo II para el Matrimonio y la Familia] en Melbourne, Australia. La Arquidiócesis de Melbourne había producido un conjunto de directrices que tratan sobre la educación en la sexualidad. Estas directrices se basan en el Documento del Pontificio Consejo para la Familia, Sexualidad humana: verdad y significado. Considerados juntos, ninguno de los documentos proporciona un apoyo práctico para la implementación de lo que sabiamente se propone en ellos. Dejan claro que la Iglesia entiende genuinamente lo que se necesita en el área de la sexualidad. La Teología del Cuerpo de Juan Pablo II ofrece una comprensión profunda del lugar de la sexualidad en la vida humana. Sin embargo, ésta permanecería como letra muerta si no se explicara a la gente ordinaria y se pusiera en práctica en sus vidas. Esta necesidad de una explicación práctica constituyó la misión para desarrollar el programa.

Following the series on Catechesis on Sexuality by Sr Jane Dominic Laurel, O.P., The Sower will be drawing attention to various initiatives around the world in this area of the handing on of the good news of marriage, family and sexuality. In this issue we have asked Dr Gerard O’Shea to tell us about a programme and resource for parents which he has assisted in developing.

As I Have Loved You began as a project at the John Paul II Institute of Marriage and Family in Melbourne, Australia. The Archdiocese of Melbourne had produced a set of ‘Directives’ concerning sexuality education. These directives were based on the document of the Pontifical Council for the Family The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality. Taken together, neither document provided practical assistance for implementing what was wisely proposed. It was clear that the Church genuinely understood what was needed in the area of sexuality. Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body offered a profound understanding of the place sexuality in human life. Nevertheless, this would remain a dead letter if it was not explained to ordinary people and put into practice in their lives. This need for a simple, practical explanation constituted the development brief for the programme.

In this year, when we are focusing on the Father, Mary Killeen invites us to consider the significance of ‘fatherhood’ and ‘motherhood’ in our catechesis.

In our catechesis we seek to offer an education in the faith that will initiate others into the fullness of Christian life. In light of such a wondrous endeavor, it is proper that we reflect more deeply on the significance of ‘fatherhood’ and ‘motherhood’ in our catechesis. These realities offer a living framework for the whole of our catechetical work.

Jesus called God his ‘Father’, and has enabled his disciples to do the same. The whole Church can now pray to ‘our Father’ (Matt.7:9). This also puts many catechists or teachers, however, on the spot: how do we provide Catholic teaching on human fatherhood and on God the Father without appearing judgmental of the various individual instances of inadequate fatherhood which many children experience?