Group Read - Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life by Cardinal Walter Kaspe
ConversazioniCatholic Tradition
Iscriviti a LibraryThing per pubblicare un messaggio.
Questa conversazione è attualmente segnalata come "addormentata"—l'ultimo messaggio è più vecchio di 90 giorni. Puoi rianimarla postando una risposta.
1LesMiserables
I have just finished part 1 which I found really interesting.
These are the highlights I marked so far.
The failure of theological reflection concerning the message of mercy, which is central to the Bible, has allowed this concept often to be downgraded, degenerating into a “soft” spirituality or a vapid pastoral concern, lacking clear definition and forced somehow to suit each individual. Such a soft praxis may be understandable to a certain degree as a reaction against a ruthlessly rigid, legalistic praxis. But mercy becomes pseudomercy when it no longer has a trace of trembling before God, who is holy, and trembling before his justice and his judgement.
-----
The wide divergence between the experience of reality and the proclamation of faith has catastrophic consequences. For the proclamation of a God who is insensitive to suffering is a reason that God has become alien and finally irrelevant to many human beings.
-----
Mercy must be understood as God’s own justice and as his holiness.
-----
Above all, in the wake of the globalization of the economy and the financial markets, unregulated, unchained neocapitalistic forces have become powerful. For such forces, human beings and entire peoples have become, often pitilessly, the playthings of the greed for money.
-----
One must understand the word compassion not only as compassionate behaviour. Rather, we must also hear in “compassion” the word “passion.” This means discerning the cry for justice as well as making a passionate response to the appalling unjust relationships existing in our world.
-----
Speech about empathy and compassion can be a starting point for theological reflection on this topic. For pain and suffering are as old as humanity; they are universal human experiences. All religions ask, in one way or another, where suffering comes from, why it exists, and what is its meaning. They ask for deliverance from pain and suffering; they ask how we can cope with pain and suffering and where we can find the strength to endure them.
There is so much here in only one section but more than anything so far, I am beginning to see how Mercy is at odds with the disease of competitive dog eat dog society.
Also I had not considered it before, but concerning the problem of evil, Kasper mentions I think that God being perfect cannot feel our pain or at least his perfection seriously points to that conclusion.
On the basis of its metaphysical starting point, dogmatic theology has difficulty speaking of a compassionate God.39 It has to exclude the possibility that God suffers (pati) with his creatures in a passive sense; it can only speak of pity Mitleid and mercy, in the active sense that God opposes the suffering of his creatures and provides them assistance.40 The question that remains is whether this satisfactorily corresponds to the biblical understanding of God, who suffers mitleidet with his creatures, who as misericors has a heart (cor) with the poor and for the poor (miseri).41 Can a God who is conceived so apathetically be really sympathetic?
I recall Peter Kreeft saying that atheists only have one argument against us and that is the Problem of Evil and that it is a strong argument.
These are the highlights I marked so far.
The failure of theological reflection concerning the message of mercy, which is central to the Bible, has allowed this concept often to be downgraded, degenerating into a “soft” spirituality or a vapid pastoral concern, lacking clear definition and forced somehow to suit each individual. Such a soft praxis may be understandable to a certain degree as a reaction against a ruthlessly rigid, legalistic praxis. But mercy becomes pseudomercy when it no longer has a trace of trembling before God, who is holy, and trembling before his justice and his judgement.
-----
The wide divergence between the experience of reality and the proclamation of faith has catastrophic consequences. For the proclamation of a God who is insensitive to suffering is a reason that God has become alien and finally irrelevant to many human beings.
-----
Mercy must be understood as God’s own justice and as his holiness.
-----
Above all, in the wake of the globalization of the economy and the financial markets, unregulated, unchained neocapitalistic forces have become powerful. For such forces, human beings and entire peoples have become, often pitilessly, the playthings of the greed for money.
-----
One must understand the word compassion not only as compassionate behaviour. Rather, we must also hear in “compassion” the word “passion.” This means discerning the cry for justice as well as making a passionate response to the appalling unjust relationships existing in our world.
-----
Speech about empathy and compassion can be a starting point for theological reflection on this topic. For pain and suffering are as old as humanity; they are universal human experiences. All religions ask, in one way or another, where suffering comes from, why it exists, and what is its meaning. They ask for deliverance from pain and suffering; they ask how we can cope with pain and suffering and where we can find the strength to endure them.
There is so much here in only one section but more than anything so far, I am beginning to see how Mercy is at odds with the disease of competitive dog eat dog society.
Also I had not considered it before, but concerning the problem of evil, Kasper mentions I think that God being perfect cannot feel our pain or at least his perfection seriously points to that conclusion.
On the basis of its metaphysical starting point, dogmatic theology has difficulty speaking of a compassionate God.39 It has to exclude the possibility that God suffers (pati) with his creatures in a passive sense; it can only speak of pity Mitleid and mercy, in the active sense that God opposes the suffering of his creatures and provides them assistance.40 The question that remains is whether this satisfactorily corresponds to the biblical understanding of God, who suffers mitleidet with his creatures, who as misericors has a heart (cor) with the poor and for the poor (miseri).41 Can a God who is conceived so apathetically be really sympathetic?
I recall Peter Kreeft saying that atheists only have one argument against us and that is the Problem of Evil and that it is a strong argument.
2John5918
A couple of random thoughts relating to Chapter 1.
In a sense Kasper is rediscovering a neglected part of the Christian tradition. One image of the tradition which I love is that of a vine with inter-tangled stems. Some of them are more apparent than others. Some get neglected completely. Some of them are strong for a period then diminish, while others are less apparent but suddenly re-emerge. Perhaps mercy is one of those vine stems which has been neglected by our tradition but now needs to re-emerge.
The apparent contradiction between justice and mercy is a false one. God's justice is perfect and does not contradict God's mercy. However all our attempts to understand and implement justice are imperfect and thus there is often an apparent contradiction with mercy.
In a sense Kasper is rediscovering a neglected part of the Christian tradition. One image of the tradition which I love is that of a vine with inter-tangled stems. Some of them are more apparent than others. Some get neglected completely. Some of them are strong for a period then diminish, while others are less apparent but suddenly re-emerge. Perhaps mercy is one of those vine stems which has been neglected by our tradition but now needs to re-emerge.
The apparent contradiction between justice and mercy is a false one. God's justice is perfect and does not contradict God's mercy. However all our attempts to understand and implement justice are imperfect and thus there is often an apparent contradiction with mercy.
3John5918
A lovely quote in Chapter 2 (p 23 of my copy):
Therefore, mercy is not opposed to justice. Mercy does not suspend justice; rather, mercy transcends it; mercy is the fulfillment of justice.
4timspalding
I just ordered my copy. I'll read it when it arrives!
5LesMiserables
4
Tim, to kick start you, if you are inclined, on amazon there is a very healthy amount available on a preview. The first three chapters I think from recall.
Tim, to kick start you, if you are inclined, on amazon there is a very healthy amount available on a preview. The first three chapters I think from recall.
6LesMiserables
I feel already that the book is moving into some abstract concepts around the perfection of a God who cannot be anything less than our conception of the faultless and foolproof: that is to have never erred and incapable of ever erring. Relating this back to our creation, it logically follows that he has willed our lot on earth. My first reaction, indeed my previous atheistic reaction, would be to respond in three ways: Fiction, Malevolence or Deism.
Now I have to respond by appealing to mystery. I don't think this is a cop-out. Indeed I think man has become so stubbornly arrogant in its self assessment of what it can know, that it refuses to imagine that there is nothing that cannot be known. The problem here of course is creation and nothingness.
I have given up this ghost and have accepted that from nothing comes nothing ergo God.
Ok, so going a little off track here, but I suppose I'm thinking out loud that Kasper is prompting many thoughts around this area for me, making me think again about creation, man's imperfection, God's perfection etc
Now I have to respond by appealing to mystery. I don't think this is a cop-out. Indeed I think man has become so stubbornly arrogant in its self assessment of what it can know, that it refuses to imagine that there is nothing that cannot be known. The problem here of course is creation and nothingness.
I have given up this ghost and have accepted that from nothing comes nothing ergo God.
Ok, so going a little off track here, but I suppose I'm thinking out loud that Kasper is prompting many thoughts around this area for me, making me think again about creation, man's imperfection, God's perfection etc
7LesMiserables
3.
Yes that is a telling.
What does it mean for society, especially for criminal justice and political systems?
Within the Church it means love, I think.
Yes that is a telling.
What does it mean for society, especially for criminal justice and political systems?
Within the Church it means love, I think.
8John5918
>6 LesMiserables: The idea that God cannot be encapsulated in theoretical ontological philosophical jargon. God is love - or mercy.
9LesMiserables
8
And John, if you were to tie in The Word into those concepts of love and mercy, how would you formulate that? I know from reading many authors, especially Tolkien that this was fundamental.
And John, if you were to tie in The Word into those concepts of love and mercy, how would you formulate that? I know from reading many authors, especially Tolkien that this was fundamental.
10LesMiserables
Just wanted to comment on a couple of things.
#1 On Philosophy: Kasper mentions Stoicism, in which I have read a little about in this last year. He sees the Stoic treatment of emotion as a sickness of the soul. True. Not too many Stoics would have an issue with this. However it is not as straightforward as this. Stoics train themselves in Virtue as do Catholics hold the Virtues as benchmarks of our behaviour.
I think essentially what Kasper doesn't mention (for reasons of space or other) is that Stoics and Christians are both virtuous in their own ways but the main difference is how we deal with good and evil. We take a Theistic position obviously whereas Stoics attach no concepts of good or evil to external events. In effect they claim that good and evil are only internal responses to external events, or in other words they are perceptions.
Stoicism by John Sellars is a standard text for Stoics and is well worth a read. I cannot see though how, as many Stoics do, Stoicism and Christianity are compatible. Indeed the idea of a Christian Stoic is contradictory in my view as indeed is the idea of a Stoic Christian.
#2 I am really warming to Kasper's style. I'm especially grateful for his preamble on other religions to brush off a few cobwebs in my recollections.
#1 On Philosophy: Kasper mentions Stoicism, in which I have read a little about in this last year. He sees the Stoic treatment of emotion as a sickness of the soul. True. Not too many Stoics would have an issue with this. However it is not as straightforward as this. Stoics train themselves in Virtue as do Catholics hold the Virtues as benchmarks of our behaviour.
I think essentially what Kasper doesn't mention (for reasons of space or other) is that Stoics and Christians are both virtuous in their own ways but the main difference is how we deal with good and evil. We take a Theistic position obviously whereas Stoics attach no concepts of good or evil to external events. In effect they claim that good and evil are only internal responses to external events, or in other words they are perceptions.
Stoicism by John Sellars is a standard text for Stoics and is well worth a read. I cannot see though how, as many Stoics do, Stoicism and Christianity are compatible. Indeed the idea of a Christian Stoic is contradictory in my view as indeed is the idea of a Stoic Christian.
#2 I am really warming to Kasper's style. I'm especially grateful for his preamble on other religions to brush off a few cobwebs in my recollections.
11John5918
In Chapter 3, pp 41-42, Kasper speaks of the development of the faith community's understanding of God in the OT and into the NT, in response to those who over-simplistically present the God of the OT as angry and vengeful. While admitting that there are "texts in the Old Testament that can support this position", he continues:
This sense of the evolution of humanity's understanding of the divine is very important, and is apparently not understood by a number of our atheist detractors on LT, nor, perhaps, by some bible literalists.
On p 44,
He goes on to speak of the new beginning, a counterhistory, salvation history, a time of blessing. For me it calls to mind Matthew Fox's Original Blessing, although if I recall correctly for Fox it is truly "original" whereas for Kasper it is post-Abraham.
Nevertheless, this view does not do justice to the gradual process by which the Old Testament's view of God is gradually transformed...
This sense of the evolution of humanity's understanding of the divine is very important, and is apparently not understood by a number of our atheist detractors on LT, nor, perhaps, by some bible literalists.
On p 44,
Alienation from God led to human alienation from nature and from other human beings
He goes on to speak of the new beginning, a counterhistory, salvation history, a time of blessing. For me it calls to mind Matthew Fox's Original Blessing, although if I recall correctly for Fox it is truly "original" whereas for Kasper it is post-Abraham.
12LesMiserables
11
I'm probably around a quarter of the way through this book now. On the Old Testament section, I feel that Kasper has done a good job of pointing out the loving God in certain books, although I'm not convinced he ameliorates the sections where atheists delight in pointing to.
But look, I'm a bit of a dunce at all of this, and I accept that Kasper has spent a lifetime in deep thought and prayer and other people will get what he is saying in the OT section better than me.
On summary so far, I'm glad to be reading this.
I'm probably around a quarter of the way through this book now. On the Old Testament section, I feel that Kasper has done a good job of pointing out the loving God in certain books, although I'm not convinced he ameliorates the sections where atheists delight in pointing to.
But look, I'm a bit of a dunce at all of this, and I accept that Kasper has spent a lifetime in deep thought and prayer and other people will get what he is saying in the OT section better than me.
On summary so far, I'm glad to be reading this.
13LesMiserables
13
After a couple of days away from the book, I read a couple of chapter last night.
Ok, I'm going to be up front here and admit I'm becoming a little worried that by stating the obvious about love and mercy, he is preparing the ground for something else, perhaps something controversial, politically and theologically contentious. I might be wrong but I'm intrigued.
I might just point out that I have read no reviews of this book, so I'm not prejudiced and am trying to read this with an open mind.
My interest has certainly been piqued by the last chapter.
After a couple of days away from the book, I read a couple of chapter last night.
Ok, I'm going to be up front here and admit I'm becoming a little worried that by stating the obvious about love and mercy, he is preparing the ground for something else, perhaps something controversial, politically and theologically contentious. I might be wrong but I'm intrigued.
I might just point out that I have read no reviews of this book, so I'm not prejudiced and am trying to read this with an open mind.
My interest has certainly been piqued by the last chapter.
14vpfluke
I'm putting in links to the book and author: Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life by Cardinal Walter Kasper. Sort of key for this thread. Only 8 so far in LT.
*Later. The auhor Touchstone doesn't seem to work in the message, although it is shown in the upper right hand list.
*Even later, the author touchstone decided to work, by leaving out the word 'Cardinal'.
*Later. The auhor Touchstone doesn't seem to work in the message, although it is shown in the upper right hand list.
*Even later, the author touchstone decided to work, by leaving out the word 'Cardinal'.
15LesMiserables
14
Good idea!
For the record, who is currently reading or has read it already?
Good idea!
For the record, who is currently reading or has read it already?
16John5918
>15 LesMiserables: I'm reading it and have got nearly a quarter of the way through but have stopped for a couple of days as I am travelling. I can't read serious books on planes and at airports so I've swapped Kasper for a pulp spy thriller!
17LesMiserables
16
Thanks John. Hope the espionage is as intriguing as the theology!
Thanks John. Hope the espionage is as intriguing as the theology!
18LesMiserables
Tim have you started reading yet?
Anyone else?
Anyone else?
19John5918
One third of the way through now. While I find it interesting and enjoyable, I can't say I find it easy reading, and I have to read it a little at a time. Mind you I don't think I've ever come across any German theologian who is easy reading (except perhaps Dorothee Soelle).
A favourite quote from Chapter IV (p 69):
(On a lighter note it reminds me a little of supercalifragilisticexpialidotious)
I like Walter's take on the parable of the prodigal son.
Edited to add: A few pages later, I find his section 4 of Chapter IV entitled "Jesus' Existence for Others" to be very interesting. It seems to me that Kasper is describing a more communal approach to existence, which would have been instantly recognisable to the people of Jesus' own time and to people in many traditional societies in the world today, but which is difficult for ultra-individualistic westerners to understand.
A favourite quote from Chapter IV (p 69):
God's mercy is, so to speak, superproportional. It exceeds every measure.
(On a lighter note it reminds me a little of supercalifragilisticexpialidotious)
I like Walter's take on the parable of the prodigal son.
Edited to add: A few pages later, I find his section 4 of Chapter IV entitled "Jesus' Existence for Others" to be very interesting. It seems to me that Kasper is describing a more communal approach to existence, which would have been instantly recognisable to the people of Jesus' own time and to people in many traditional societies in the world today, but which is difficult for ultra-individualistic westerners to understand.
20LesMiserables
19
John, I'm glad you brought that up.
I would like to hear your thoughts on the use of language in the Church. Now I know this book is not a Papal Encyclical but in the world we live in, with enemies of the Church and Media sensationalists in every corner, I think we need to strive at all times for unequivocal language.
I accept that there are often technical terms in any disciplines, theology like anthropology etc.
One of the dangers I think, which leaves a crack open for the smoke of Satan(!), is language that is more open to reinterpretation than should be.
Anyway your thoughts....
---------------------------------------
Furthermore, I'll need to get back into this. I took a detour to read a Papal Encyclical and that led me on to another book.
John, I'm glad you brought that up.
I would like to hear your thoughts on the use of language in the Church. Now I know this book is not a Papal Encyclical but in the world we live in, with enemies of the Church and Media sensationalists in every corner, I think we need to strive at all times for unequivocal language.
I accept that there are often technical terms in any disciplines, theology like anthropology etc.
One of the dangers I think, which leaves a crack open for the smoke of Satan(!), is language that is more open to reinterpretation than should be.
Anyway your thoughts....
---------------------------------------
Furthermore, I'll need to get back into this. I took a detour to read a Papal Encyclical and that led me on to another book.
21LesMiserables
I have managed to read quite about of this today, going over a lot of sometimes abstract concepts and my interest continues. According to my kindle I'm 44% through.
Okay, so I know Our Lady is dealt with later towards the final chapters but I thought about something today after reading this section on Love.
Obviously, such human love is only a very weak image of God’s love. It is an analogy, in which the dissimilarity is far greater than the similarity.
Cardinal Walter Kasper ( ). Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life (Kindle Locations 1785-1786). . Kindle Edition.
So he is saying on the one hand that human love is an analogy of God's love. Okay, but how does he square that idea up with Our Lady, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven?
It will be interesting to see if he goes back to this again later in the book.
-----------
Much was a history lesson (much needed!) on the topic of predestination and Augustine and the line of thought up to and past Aquinas.
Augustine bequeathed the Western tradition a weighty legacy and a huge “mortgage.” For his teaching caused many people to have trepidation about salvation, conscience, and hell. The most prominent example is the young Augustinian monk Martin Luther, who in great anguish asked: “How do I get a gracious God?” The Reformation breakthrough for Luther consisted in the discovery of the original biblical sense of divine justice, which is not a punitive justice, but a free and justifying, redemptive justice
At times I think he is stating the obvious, but that might or probably is showing my theological ignorance.
Regarding free will, I get what he is saying.
Precisely in his mercy, God takes us seriously. He does not want to ambush us mortals or bypass our freedom. Our eternal destiny depends on our decision and our response to the offer of God’s love.
On the notion of God suffering I am uncomfortable.
God cannot be affected and overpowered, passively and involuntarily, by pain or harm. But in his mercy, God allows himself, in sovereign freedom, to be affected by pain and suffering. In his mercy, God is shown to be masterfully free. His mercy is not induced by human need or woe. God graciously chooses to be affected and moved by the pain and suffering of humankind. Thus, many theologians today in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant traditions speak of the possibility of God suffering vicariously with us.
I'm out of my theological depth here but I'll just talk out loud. Si I can appreciate that our faith in the Holy Trinity, one level Jesus actually suffered and sacrificed his human body, so what Kasper says fits.
But Kasper is saying much more here. He is talking about the problem of evil (I know this as he goes on to this later) and our eternal suffering. He proposes that God's mercy extends to allowing himself to suffer with us and feel our pain in a real way: that real sorrow and grief, horror and depth of despair that we might find ourselves in one day.
I can't tie this up though with a perfect God. If God is perfect and is beyond our most superlative definitions of perfection then how can he suffer?
Furthermore, God as our creator exists not in space and time but supernaturally beyond these, obviously due to him creating space and time. Human suffering is in the here and now, limited to spatio-temporal events. There is something adrift here. Probably me.
This reminds me though of a cornerstone of my apologetic reasoning, that being the act of creation and the whole discussion around ex nihilo nihil fit and how God is not bound to our universe but existed eternally and brought it into creation.
So hopefully you might see where I'm going with this if we peg back a little to God suffering vicariously with us.
Any clues?
Okay, so I know Our Lady is dealt with later towards the final chapters but I thought about something today after reading this section on Love.
Obviously, such human love is only a very weak image of God’s love. It is an analogy, in which the dissimilarity is far greater than the similarity.
Cardinal Walter Kasper ( ). Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life (Kindle Locations 1785-1786). . Kindle Edition.
So he is saying on the one hand that human love is an analogy of God's love. Okay, but how does he square that idea up with Our Lady, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven?
It will be interesting to see if he goes back to this again later in the book.
-----------
Much was a history lesson (much needed!) on the topic of predestination and Augustine and the line of thought up to and past Aquinas.
Augustine bequeathed the Western tradition a weighty legacy and a huge “mortgage.” For his teaching caused many people to have trepidation about salvation, conscience, and hell. The most prominent example is the young Augustinian monk Martin Luther, who in great anguish asked: “How do I get a gracious God?” The Reformation breakthrough for Luther consisted in the discovery of the original biblical sense of divine justice, which is not a punitive justice, but a free and justifying, redemptive justice
At times I think he is stating the obvious, but that might or probably is showing my theological ignorance.
Regarding free will, I get what he is saying.
Precisely in his mercy, God takes us seriously. He does not want to ambush us mortals or bypass our freedom. Our eternal destiny depends on our decision and our response to the offer of God’s love.
On the notion of God suffering I am uncomfortable.
God cannot be affected and overpowered, passively and involuntarily, by pain or harm. But in his mercy, God allows himself, in sovereign freedom, to be affected by pain and suffering. In his mercy, God is shown to be masterfully free. His mercy is not induced by human need or woe. God graciously chooses to be affected and moved by the pain and suffering of humankind. Thus, many theologians today in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant traditions speak of the possibility of God suffering vicariously with us.
I'm out of my theological depth here but I'll just talk out loud. Si I can appreciate that our faith in the Holy Trinity, one level Jesus actually suffered and sacrificed his human body, so what Kasper says fits.
But Kasper is saying much more here. He is talking about the problem of evil (I know this as he goes on to this later) and our eternal suffering. He proposes that God's mercy extends to allowing himself to suffer with us and feel our pain in a real way: that real sorrow and grief, horror and depth of despair that we might find ourselves in one day.
I can't tie this up though with a perfect God. If God is perfect and is beyond our most superlative definitions of perfection then how can he suffer?
Furthermore, God as our creator exists not in space and time but supernaturally beyond these, obviously due to him creating space and time. Human suffering is in the here and now, limited to spatio-temporal events. There is something adrift here. Probably me.
This reminds me though of a cornerstone of my apologetic reasoning, that being the act of creation and the whole discussion around ex nihilo nihil fit and how God is not bound to our universe but existed eternally and brought it into creation.
So hopefully you might see where I'm going with this if we peg back a little to God suffering vicariously with us.
Any clues?
22LesMiserables
Just finished this major chapter on the problem of evil. (Hope for Mercy in the Face of Innocent Suffering )
Now this has been wholly unconvincing from Kasper. From my reading he offers nothing on the topic. He finishes the chapter with a plea to hope. Other than that he discusses some other people's ideas on the subject like Leibniz, Kant etc. But there is nothing from him. I'm surprised at this.
I mean this guy is the Pope's theologian after all. The problem of evil must be, without compare, the most brilliant argument atheists have against theism. In fact Peter Kreeft calls it the only argument they have, but its an effective one.
I really expected more from Kasper on this, or at least something.
Now this has been wholly unconvincing from Kasper. From my reading he offers nothing on the topic. He finishes the chapter with a plea to hope. Other than that he discusses some other people's ideas on the subject like Leibniz, Kant etc. But there is nothing from him. I'm surprised at this.
I mean this guy is the Pope's theologian after all. The problem of evil must be, without compare, the most brilliant argument atheists have against theism. In fact Peter Kreeft calls it the only argument they have, but its an effective one.
I really expected more from Kasper on this, or at least something.
23LesMiserables
Moving into the next chapter, this is just so timely and beautiful only God could have willed me to read it just now. I have to share it...
The first letter of John takes up these statements:
Whoever loves a brother or sister lives in the light,… But whoever hates another believer is in the darkness, walks in the darkness, and does not know the way to go, because the darkness has brought on blindness.”… Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters , are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen. The commandment we have from him is this: those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also . (1 John 2: 10– 12; 4: 20– 21; cf. 5: 3; 2 John 5f.)
The first letter of John takes up these statements:
Whoever loves a brother or sister lives in the light,… But whoever hates another believer is in the darkness, walks in the darkness, and does not know the way to go, because the darkness has brought on blindness.”… Those who say, “I love God,” and hate their brothers or sisters , are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen. The commandment we have from him is this: those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also . (1 John 2: 10– 12; 4: 20– 21; cf. 5: 3; 2 John 5f.)
24LesMiserables
So continuing on with Kasper. Probably around three quarters of the way through now.
I'm becoming less impressed as I go through this book. It's up to this point rather prosaic. I really can glean no great insights from it, indeed I think I expected so much more.
It continues to talk about Love and Mercy: well of course that's a given. But I could write a book on that.
What has lowered my estimation lately in my read is his take on economy. He talks about greed but doesn't point the finger at tiny minority who hold almost all the wealth in the world and the resulting power. He talks about globalization but fails to hold to account the same culprits who drive capital anywhere and everywhere to exploit the vulnerable. He talks about (in about 50 words) that we need to look after the environment as its God's creation, then fails to tie that back to the 1%, the Globalization and predatory capitalism.
If that isn't bad enough he then criticizes Marx for concerning himself too much with the social rather than the individual. Kasper is really quite dull here. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about Marx, knows he cared about experienced humanity deeply and abhorred industrialised dehumanising capitalism as it alienated the individual from his humanity and spirit.
I'm kind of struggling to gather the impetus to read any further, but I know the final chapters are on Our Lady and I really want Kasper to redeem himself concerning his earlier comments on our love as a poor analogy of God's love. I think he forgets that the saints experienced human love including our Blessed Virgin Mary.
Finally, I'm really getting irritated at his references to Paul VI in a manner suggesting the world of the Church started at Vatican II. This I suspect links in with my earlier suspicions that there is a tad of the political in this work.
I'm becoming less impressed as I go through this book. It's up to this point rather prosaic. I really can glean no great insights from it, indeed I think I expected so much more.
It continues to talk about Love and Mercy: well of course that's a given. But I could write a book on that.
What has lowered my estimation lately in my read is his take on economy. He talks about greed but doesn't point the finger at tiny minority who hold almost all the wealth in the world and the resulting power. He talks about globalization but fails to hold to account the same culprits who drive capital anywhere and everywhere to exploit the vulnerable. He talks about (in about 50 words) that we need to look after the environment as its God's creation, then fails to tie that back to the 1%, the Globalization and predatory capitalism.
If that isn't bad enough he then criticizes Marx for concerning himself too much with the social rather than the individual. Kasper is really quite dull here. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about Marx, knows he cared about experienced humanity deeply and abhorred industrialised dehumanising capitalism as it alienated the individual from his humanity and spirit.
I'm kind of struggling to gather the impetus to read any further, but I know the final chapters are on Our Lady and I really want Kasper to redeem himself concerning his earlier comments on our love as a poor analogy of God's love. I think he forgets that the saints experienced human love including our Blessed Virgin Mary.
Finally, I'm really getting irritated at his references to Paul VI in a manner suggesting the world of the Church started at Vatican II. This I suspect links in with my earlier suspicions that there is a tad of the political in this work.
25John5918
I'm conscious that I haven't posted here for a while. I'm past p 100 now, almost halfway, and am reading Chapter V. While I find it very interesting, I have to admit it is still heavy going.
Much of the first part of this chapter explores the difference between the God of the philosophers and the God of the bible. I think I've mentioned before that to a Christian, God is not just a set of intellectual assertions but is a relationship, an experience. The two are not mutually exclusive, of course, but Kasper emphasises the merciful God of love over the theoretical definitions.
The other comparison that he sets up is mercy and justice. The two are not contradictory, but deeply connected, but mercy has often perhaps not been downplayed exactly in Christian theology but not given its full place.
A favourite quote (p 86):
Our God is not a distant intellectually-defined entity but Emmanuel, God-with-us; "He took flesh and dwelt amongst us". (This last paragraph is me, not Kasper!)
Edited to add: Oh yes, and there is some beautiful stuff on the Trinity as relationship and as love. pp 92-93:
Much of the first part of this chapter explores the difference between the God of the philosophers and the God of the bible. I think I've mentioned before that to a Christian, God is not just a set of intellectual assertions but is a relationship, an experience. The two are not mutually exclusive, of course, but Kasper emphasises the merciful God of love over the theoretical definitions.
The other comparison that he sets up is mercy and justice. The two are not contradictory, but deeply connected, but mercy has often perhaps not been downplayed exactly in Christian theology but not given its full place.
A favourite quote (p 86):
On the basis of its authentic essence, faith in Yahweh was from the very beginning inculturated into whatever the respective living reality was, and then always in new ways.
Our God is not a distant intellectually-defined entity but Emmanuel, God-with-us; "He took flesh and dwelt amongst us". (This last paragraph is me, not Kasper!)
Edited to add: Oh yes, and there is some beautiful stuff on the Trinity as relationship and as love. pp 92-93:
God's being must be defined more precisely as Triune Being in love. Only if God himself is self-communicating love can he communicate himself externally as the one who he already is. Were God not intrinsically self-communication, then his external self-communication would constitute his self-becoming and his self-development... Only if God himself is love, is his self-revelation an irreducibly free, unmerited gift of his love. The triunity of God is, therefore, the inner presupposition of God's mercy, just as, conversely, his mercy is the revelation and mirror of his essence. In God's mercy, the eternal, self-communicating love of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is mirrored and revealed.
26John5918
>24 LesMiserables: I'm really getting irritated at his references to Paul VI in a manner suggesting the world of the Church started at Vatican II.
However Chapter V is full of references to scripture, Augustine, Bonaventure, Anselm of Canterbury, Origen, a number of the mystics, various pre-conciliar theologians...
Edited to add: And Irenaeus, Gregory of Nanzianus, Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus the Confessor, Thomas Aquinas, John Chrysostom, Sr Teresa of the Cross, Justinian, Catherine of Siena, Mechthild of Hackeborn, Angela of Foligno, Julian of Norwich, Therese of Lisieux, Maximilian Kolbe... But maybe Chapter V is particularly rich in these references and I'll discover what you mean when I get to the later chapters.
However Chapter V is full of references to scripture, Augustine, Bonaventure, Anselm of Canterbury, Origen, a number of the mystics, various pre-conciliar theologians...
Edited to add: And Irenaeus, Gregory of Nanzianus, Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus the Confessor, Thomas Aquinas, John Chrysostom, Sr Teresa of the Cross, Justinian, Catherine of Siena, Mechthild of Hackeborn, Angela of Foligno, Julian of Norwich, Therese of Lisieux, Maximilian Kolbe... But maybe Chapter V is particularly rich in these references and I'll discover what you mean when I get to the later chapters.
27LesMiserables
26
Yes the book does go through the Fathers and dallies a while on the link between Augustine and Luther.
Yes the book does go through the Fathers and dallies a while on the link between Augustine and Luther.
28LesMiserables
Having now completed this book, I consider it to be one that I wouldn't recommend.
I expected more at the end, but really it just finished off with some points about Mary being the new Eve and telling us not to worship Mary but to revere her. I'm inclined to think that Kasper is trying to downplay the role of Mary in the Catholic Church and he has an agenda behind this: ecumenicism.
He pays scant regard to the accessibility of Mary to the faithful as an intercessory Saint, closest to Our Lord Jesus Christ, who humanity can relate to and revere and pray to through the rosary and other Marian devotions.
So what is this book? It's certainly not a history book. If it's a theological work, then I missed it.
Is it about Mercy? Well yes, in part. I think Kasper forgets it sometimes though and rambles along not really sure where he is going.
I think there is something else afoot here. I wouldn't be surprised that this was meant to be a theological platform for more reform in the Church.
Her are couple of points that might open up a discussion once anyone else finishes it.
#1. It is a further shift towards ecumenism away from Catholic dogma towards reconciliation with Protestants through watering down our faith.
#2. It continues a shift away from Mary as a central peg in our devotions for the same reasons above.
#3. It is clearing a path for divorced Catholics to receive communion.
Only once you have read the whole book might you get a feel why you might think along these lines. Not that you might agree, but perhaps sense where I might get these notions from.
Other than that, and I'll qualify this sentence by saying that I have read solely this work by Kasper, I regard the book as rather weak and pointless. It really doesn't offer anything meaty other than I think to other religions who might want to see Catholicism watered down again.
I expected more at the end, but really it just finished off with some points about Mary being the new Eve and telling us not to worship Mary but to revere her. I'm inclined to think that Kasper is trying to downplay the role of Mary in the Catholic Church and he has an agenda behind this: ecumenicism.
He pays scant regard to the accessibility of Mary to the faithful as an intercessory Saint, closest to Our Lord Jesus Christ, who humanity can relate to and revere and pray to through the rosary and other Marian devotions.
So what is this book? It's certainly not a history book. If it's a theological work, then I missed it.
Is it about Mercy? Well yes, in part. I think Kasper forgets it sometimes though and rambles along not really sure where he is going.
I think there is something else afoot here. I wouldn't be surprised that this was meant to be a theological platform for more reform in the Church.
Her are couple of points that might open up a discussion once anyone else finishes it.
#1. It is a further shift towards ecumenism away from Catholic dogma towards reconciliation with Protestants through watering down our faith.
#2. It continues a shift away from Mary as a central peg in our devotions for the same reasons above.
#3. It is clearing a path for divorced Catholics to receive communion.
Only once you have read the whole book might you get a feel why you might think along these lines. Not that you might agree, but perhaps sense where I might get these notions from.
Other than that, and I'll qualify this sentence by saying that I have read solely this work by Kasper, I regard the book as rather weak and pointless. It really doesn't offer anything meaty other than I think to other religions who might want to see Catholicism watered down again.
29John5918
Having now finished Chapter V, I find Kasper's treatment of theodicy at the end of the chapter to be - what's the word? - weak? unsatisfactory? incomplete?
30LesMiserables
29
Prosaic?
Prosaic?
31John5918
I've just finished Chapter VI, which puts me more than two thirds of the way through the book. Titled "Blessed are they who show mercy", it's a good reflection on love and mercy, including the corporal and spiritual works of mercy, and the concept of loving enemies.
In warning of "pseudomercy", he refers fairly obviously to the clergy sex abuse scandal, but goes further in advancing the preferential option for the poor:
He also warns against using pseudomercy to assist in abortion or euthanasia.
the message of divine mercy has consequences for the life of every Christian, for the pastoral praxis of the church, and for the contributions that Christians should render to the humane, just and merciful structuring of civil society. (p 131)
In warning of "pseudomercy", he refers fairly obviously to the clergy sex abuse scandal, but goes further in advancing the preferential option for the poor:
A much-discussed form of pseudomercy nowadays consists in protecting the wrongdoer more than the victim. Such indulgence can occur because of misguided friendship or collegiality. It can also happen because one wants to protect an institution - whether it be the church, the state, a religious order, or club - from the adverse consequences of uncovering and prosecuting wrongdoing. Such a mindset goes against the spirit of the gospel, which advances the preferential option for the poor and advocates for whoever is the weaker. Protection of the victim, therefore, must precede protection of the wrongdoer. (p 146)
He also warns against using pseudomercy to assist in abortion or euthanasia.
32John5918
Chapter VII, "The Church measured by mercy", feels like a key chapter.
On the new evangelisation, Kasper emphasises the importance of reform being in continuity with tradition.
However he also notes that faith in God's mercy is part of our dealing with the modern world.
Kasper then presents an impassioned defence of the traditional Sacrament of Reconciliation.
The precept of mercy applies not only to individual Christians, but also to the church as a whole... the church is the sacrament of mercy... a church without charity and without mercy would no longer be the church of Jesus Christ... the message of mercy, therefore, has consequences not only for the life of the individual Christians, but it also has far-reaching consequences for the teaching, life, and mission of the church... The church's first task is to proclaim the message of mercy...(pp 157-9)
On the new evangelisation, Kasper emphasises the importance of reform being in continuity with tradition.
In the proclamation, the church must demonstrate that the history of the proofs of God's mercy will be true for us and other hearers today (cf. Luke 4:21). The story of salvation from back then becomes, in a certain sense, the story of salvation today and thus becomes our story of life today... The new evangelization cannot proclaim a new gospel, but it can make the one and the same gospel contemporary to the situation... In this respect, a new tone and a new dialogical style is necessary... This has nothing to do with relativizing the truth... (pp 159-62)
However he also notes that faith in God's mercy is part of our dealing with the modern world.
it does no good only to be critical of the modern world and contemporary human beings (which we are too). We must attend to the present situation with mercy and say that, above all the fog and frequent gloominess of our world, the merciful countenance of a Father prevails... (pp 160-1
Kasper then presents an impassioned defence of the traditional Sacrament of Reconciliation.
33John5918
Argh, my internet connection dropped just as I clicked "Post message" with my comments on the rest of Chapter VII and they disappeared! I can't retrieve them and I can't be bothered to try to remember and retype them. On to Chapter VIII...
Tim, can't you design something for LT that when I click "Post message" my text doesn't disappear completely until it is properly posted? Some other sites can do that, eg it disappears but if I hit the back arrow at the top of my browser it goes back to the page with the unsent text.
Tim, can't you design something for LT that when I click "Post message" my text doesn't disappear completely until it is properly posted? Some other sites can do that, eg it disappears but if I hit the back arrow at the top of my browser it goes back to the page with the unsent text.
34John5918
Well, I've finished this book much quicker than I expected, perhaps due to the impetus of group reading (first time I've ever done that), or perhaps simply because I'm trying to put off starting two papers on the current crisis in South Sudan and on the national reconciliation process which I have to write.
Chapter VIII is basically about Catholic Social Teaching. Mercy is not just an individual thing, but has to be done at a structural, societal and cultural level too. Hence Kasper is a proponent of the welfare state, although that does not remove the need for individuals to exercise charity and mercy. He also reflects on just (or "justified") wars. While he acknowledges that it can be right to fight for peace and mercy, he suggests that it is almost impossible for modern warfare to fulfil the necessary conditions to be considered just. In this chapter he tends to raise issues, questions and concerns rather than give detailed and definitive answers.
Chapter IX is a nice little exposition on Marian devotion within the church.
All in all I found it a very good book, albeit heavy going in places. Mercy has obviously always been important to the church, but Kasper fills a gap in bringing it back to the centre and reflecting more deeply on it in today's situation, but always in continuity with the tradition of the church.
That's one area where I am a little puzzled by Stephen's comment in 24> that it seems to refer overmuch to Paul VI. I actually found very little reference to Paul VI, but plenty to a range of other sources from the Old and New Testaments, the early church fathers, the msytics, well-known theologians from different eras, and a wide variety of popes.
I suppose I would also have to disagree with Stephen's three points in 28>.
#1. It is a further shift towards ecumenism away from Catholic dogma towards reconciliation with Protestants through watering down our faith.
I'm not sure how you read as such. That's not how I understood it.
#2. It continues a shift away from Mary as a central peg in our devotions for the same reasons above.
I thought the final chapter on Mary was a good exposition of Marian devotions in the church and anything but a shift away.
#3. It is clearing a path for divorced Catholics to receive communion.
Divorced and remarried individuals are mentioned only once, as far as I can see, in passing, in a long list of people who are often marginalised, in Chapter VII. That chapter contains warnings against a shallow and laissez-faire relaxation in church discipline, but at the same time reminds us that the purpose of discipline is healing. It does not draw any concrete conclusions, and certainly not about divorced and remarried people.
Chapter VIII is basically about Catholic Social Teaching. Mercy is not just an individual thing, but has to be done at a structural, societal and cultural level too. Hence Kasper is a proponent of the welfare state, although that does not remove the need for individuals to exercise charity and mercy. He also reflects on just (or "justified") wars. While he acknowledges that it can be right to fight for peace and mercy, he suggests that it is almost impossible for modern warfare to fulfil the necessary conditions to be considered just. In this chapter he tends to raise issues, questions and concerns rather than give detailed and definitive answers.
Chapter IX is a nice little exposition on Marian devotion within the church.
All in all I found it a very good book, albeit heavy going in places. Mercy has obviously always been important to the church, but Kasper fills a gap in bringing it back to the centre and reflecting more deeply on it in today's situation, but always in continuity with the tradition of the church.
That's one area where I am a little puzzled by Stephen's comment in 24> that it seems to refer overmuch to Paul VI. I actually found very little reference to Paul VI, but plenty to a range of other sources from the Old and New Testaments, the early church fathers, the msytics, well-known theologians from different eras, and a wide variety of popes.
I suppose I would also have to disagree with Stephen's three points in 28>.
#1. It is a further shift towards ecumenism away from Catholic dogma towards reconciliation with Protestants through watering down our faith.
I'm not sure how you read as such. That's not how I understood it.
#2. It continues a shift away from Mary as a central peg in our devotions for the same reasons above.
I thought the final chapter on Mary was a good exposition of Marian devotions in the church and anything but a shift away.
#3. It is clearing a path for divorced Catholics to receive communion.
Divorced and remarried individuals are mentioned only once, as far as I can see, in passing, in a long list of people who are often marginalised, in Chapter VII. That chapter contains warnings against a shallow and laissez-faire relaxation in church discipline, but at the same time reminds us that the purpose of discipline is healing. It does not draw any concrete conclusions, and certainly not about divorced and remarried people.
35LesMiserables
34
John
Typing on the run here. Regarding #3 please see my post here on other thread regarding 'Mercy'
http://www.librarything.com/topic/173442#4729908
...and my comments in bold lifted from the interview.
John
Typing on the run here. Regarding #3 please see my post here on other thread regarding 'Mercy'
http://www.librarything.com/topic/173442#4729908
...and my comments in bold lifted from the interview.
36LesMiserables
And in #2
From Kasper's Mercy
...One may and, indeed, must certainly criticize many of the attempts to exaggerate Mary’s status...
He goes on an says she is 'important', and 'the few times she is mentioned in the scriptures'...
There is no doubt in my mind that he is trying to knock Mary down a peg or two for ecumenical negotiations but at the same time hold her up so as not to scandalise himself in front of Catholics.
I'll just remind Kasper that Mary is the Blessed Virgin, is The Queen of Heaven, Mother of Christ.
From Kasper's Mercy
...One may and, indeed, must certainly criticize many of the attempts to exaggerate Mary’s status...
He goes on an says she is 'important', and 'the few times she is mentioned in the scriptures'...
There is no doubt in my mind that he is trying to knock Mary down a peg or two for ecumenical negotiations but at the same time hold her up so as not to scandalise himself in front of Catholics.
I'll just remind Kasper that Mary is the Blessed Virgin, is The Queen of Heaven, Mother of Christ.
37LesMiserables
#1
And quickly on #1
This needs much fuller attention but his references to Luther, around two dozen(?) are for what purpose in a book on Mercy. His numerous references to Protestant Theology also is questionable. Why?
Anyway.
And quickly on #1
This needs much fuller attention but his references to Luther, around two dozen(?) are for what purpose in a book on Mercy. His numerous references to Protestant Theology also is questionable. Why?
Anyway.
38John5918
>35 LesMiserables: Yes, I'm not denying that you may have general concerns about the issue. All I'm saying is that in Kasper's book which we are discussing here, it is mentioned in passing on only one page as part of a long list of marginalised people. These also include (p 169): people whose lives are breaking down or have failed, people who have left the church, those who could not pay church tax, people who object to criticism of those who don't conform, the little people, the poor, the sick, the disabled, street people, immigrants, those who are marginalised and discriminated against, the homeless, alcoholics, drug addicts, those with HIV/AIDS, criminals, prostitutes. He doesn't reflect directly on divorce and remarriage in any way whatsoever in the book.
>36 LesMiserables: There is no doubt in my mind
You are second-guessing his motives, methinks, and maybe bringing your own pre-conceived assumptions to his book.
Mary is the Blessed Virgin, is The Queen of Heaven, Mother of Christ
She is also the type of the church, the type of Christian mercy, an archetype of sola gratia, the Christ-bearer, the ark of the new covenant, the temple of the Holy Spirit, in her the church has become reality, Mother of God, Star of the Sea, mother of divine mercy, health of the sick, refuge of sinners, comforter of the afflicted, help of Christians, the Madonna of the scoundrels, the Tender One, Mother of Perpetual Help, Sorrowful Mother, Sheltering Cloak, the All Holy; all traditional terms which Kasper uses in this chapter, most of which will be familiar to us cradle Catholics. Where is he trying to knock her down a peg or two? Seems to me he's building her up.
>37 LesMiserables: his references to Luther
Perhaps because he is German and Luther would seem rather important there?
>36 LesMiserables: There is no doubt in my mind
You are second-guessing his motives, methinks, and maybe bringing your own pre-conceived assumptions to his book.
Mary is the Blessed Virgin, is The Queen of Heaven, Mother of Christ
She is also the type of the church, the type of Christian mercy, an archetype of sola gratia, the Christ-bearer, the ark of the new covenant, the temple of the Holy Spirit, in her the church has become reality, Mother of God, Star of the Sea, mother of divine mercy, health of the sick, refuge of sinners, comforter of the afflicted, help of Christians, the Madonna of the scoundrels, the Tender One, Mother of Perpetual Help, Sorrowful Mother, Sheltering Cloak, the All Holy; all traditional terms which Kasper uses in this chapter, most of which will be familiar to us cradle Catholics. Where is he trying to knock her down a peg or two? Seems to me he's building her up.
>37 LesMiserables: his references to Luther
Perhaps because he is German and Luther would seem rather important there?
39LesMiserables
38
Well John that's what reviews are for after all. People interpret things in many ways.
For a book about Mercy, I would certainly question why he talks so much about Luther and Protestant theology in glowing terms. (I assume he was not writing exclusively for a German audience)
I would also question why he would have to benchmark how we should approach Mary as far as prayer and devotion goes. Again I would be suspicious of his motives here.
We shall await the synod John and all shall be revealed. Will communion be granted either through the front or back door to those living in a state of adultery, divorced etc using Mercy as the platform?
My guess is Kasper has only one final purpose in office and that is exactly that. His 'speech', now widely quoted, raised more than a few eyebrows amongst the top dogs in the Church, even those of a more liberal nature.
Anyway I forgot to give it a rating out of 5.
Well John that's what reviews are for after all. People interpret things in many ways.
For a book about Mercy, I would certainly question why he talks so much about Luther and Protestant theology in glowing terms. (I assume he was not writing exclusively for a German audience)
I would also question why he would have to benchmark how we should approach Mary as far as prayer and devotion goes. Again I would be suspicious of his motives here.
We shall await the synod John and all shall be revealed. Will communion be granted either through the front or back door to those living in a state of adultery, divorced etc using Mercy as the platform?
My guess is Kasper has only one final purpose in office and that is exactly that. His 'speech', now widely quoted, raised more than a few eyebrows amongst the top dogs in the Church, even those of a more liberal nature.
Anyway I forgot to give it a rating out of 5.
40vpfluke
#39 No one at this point has actually rated the book per se, despite your giving it two stars in this thread. Only 10 people own it.
41LesMiserables
40
Oh you mean rated it on LT?
No, I haven't done that. Merely on this thread. I don't, as a rule, rate too much on LT of what I have read. (or anywhere else for that matter)
Oh you mean rated it on LT?
No, I haven't done that. Merely on this thread. I don't, as a rule, rate too much on LT of what I have read. (or anywhere else for that matter)
42John5918
I thought of Kasper's point that for God, judgement is mercy at Mass this morning. The introduction in my missal reads:
The first reading (Wisdom 12: 13, 16-19) says, "You who are sovereign in strength judge with mildness, and with great forbearance you govern us; for you have power to act whenever you choose", while the second reading (Romans 8: 26-27) reminds us that it the Spirit himself who intercedes for us.
I think this is very much in line with Kasper's understanding of mercy.
Some ask God to intervene and judge and punish others. The readings today tell us that God does not do things like that. The first reading teaches us that he uses his power not to punish us, but to save us; he wants all of us to do likewise.
The first reading (Wisdom 12: 13, 16-19) says, "You who are sovereign in strength judge with mildness, and with great forbearance you govern us; for you have power to act whenever you choose", while the second reading (Romans 8: 26-27) reminds us that it the Spirit himself who intercedes for us.
I think this is very much in line with Kasper's understanding of mercy.
43John5918
And again this morning, Ezekiel 18:25:
'Now, you say, "What the Lord does is unjust." Now listen, House of Israel: is what I do unjust? Is it not what you do that is unjust?'
Iscriviti per commentare
