Intellectual and spiritual formation of Joseph Ratzinger - Pope Benedict XVI - requires talk about the process of his development. The article refers to the most overlooked phase of the young Ratzinger, who moves from the position of a progres-sive and sometimes irresponsible theorizing academic theologian to the position of a thinker grounded in the community of faith, becoming the guardian and teacher of Christian doctrine in line with the spirit and tradition of the Church. A lot of light on the change in the attitude of the German professor sheds the preparatory phase to the Second Vatican Council and its debates, as well as the unpleasant experience of the student revolt in 1968, which finds our professor in Tübingen. And in this way the liberal German theologian grows into to an outstanding Catholic theologian of the universal Church.
The question about theology is, indeed, the question about the cognitive role of faith, a mutual relationship between faith and mind, as well as cultural, social and existential consequences of accepting or eliminating faith in the cognitive (scientific) process. While developing in the space of thought, theology seeks rational arguments speaking in favour of God’s answers to existential questions. In his publications and teachings J. Ratzinger/Benedict XVI gives much attention to these issues, as they are particularly topical and important for the contemporary civilisation. He teaches that faith releases the mind (makes it independent, non-ideologized), opens it to the truth, the learning of which constitutes the key objective of all scientific research. Recogni-tion of the priority of gifts, God’s grace, who makes Himself known through his Word and actions is an important pre-requisite for theological cognition. Ultimately, it has a christological sense: Son knows His Father and wants to reveal the Mystery of God. As scientia fidei, theology has got potential to give relational and holistic character to cognitive actions, thus made them acquire sense transcending their temporary use-fulness. Theology, faithful to the Church, contributes to the development of the world and men in the deepest meaning of the word – it leads to salvation, finding fulfilment in God Himself.
Joseph Ratzinger warns about a multitude of trials to superficially undertake the subject of religion. In this diverse world of religion, he sees some common points. The first step in the history of religion was to transcend the primitive, moving into myth. Second, most important step, was to leave the myth behind. This leaving is threefold – which is represented by three irreducible shapes of religion: the identity mysticism, the monotheistic revolution and the enlightenment. An expression of the first two are, respectively: the identity mysticism and the personal love mysticism. The fact that religions are affecting each other must not be omitted, either. The place of Christianity in the history of religion – nota bene gained by both, the dialogue with other religions and standing against them – defines standing with the God of faith and the God of the philosophers, and the decisive choice of faith and mind together with the truth and the cult. In his thoughts concerning the dialogue of religions, J. Ratzinger points out two types: the mystical and theist, of the religion. Along them walks as a temptation the pragmatic type, in which the question about the truth is ignored. The result of the dialogue of the religions will not be a unification of all religions. In this dialogue, the truth cannot be ignored. At last, it cannot be forgotten that there is a religio vera, and that it is Christianity.
Lessing’s question about knowing God (the Absolute) in history has been a con-stant challenge for modern theology. The article collates views of Joseph Ratzinger and Walter Kasper on this subject. A clear difference was noticed: Kasper decidedly gives priority to history and revelation in it, whereas Ratzinger puts stress on the idea of the priority of God and in its light interprets revelation and history. Two different types of theology emerge here. They manifest themselves in different ways of present-ing Christology. The former originates from the historical witness to Jesus and on this basis strives to construct a coherent picture of the incarnated Son of God’s identity. The latter originates from – resulting from the Church’s faith – an assumption about the unity of the Scripture and presents in this light the witness of the Gospel to Jesus. A thesis is proposed that both types of theology need each other, although it is not possible to harmonize them.
During the second half of the past century the Catholic Christology suffered an anthioquian twist in order to overcome what the German theologian K. Rahner called «orthodox monophysitism» in his article about Chalcedon on the occasion of its 1500 th anniversary. For this, he proposed the recovery of a «strict chalcedonism» that opposed to the neochalcedonian interpretations of the 451’s Concillium. Maximus the Confessor has a decisive role in both Balthasar and Ratzinger’s Christology. With this, Ratzinger pretends to answer what he believed is the true danger in today’s theology. Contrary to J.A. Jungmann, K. Adam, K. Rahner, and F.X. Arnold’s thesis that denounced a factical monphysitism amongst the faithful, Ratzinger upholds that the reapparition of a new Nestorianism (and arianism) in today’s Christology is the true danger that must be fought against. In the first place, the article presents, synthetically, the post chalcedonian discussion, concentrating on the apparition of the theological trend of neochalcedonism and on Maximus the Confessor’s Christological contribution. From there on it approaches the neochalcedonian and maximillian interpretations that J. Ratzinger formulates in his sixth thesis of «Behold the Pierced One» and that will be later developed in the Gethsemani chapter of «Jesus of Nazareth».
For the Mariology of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI it is fundamental that the Mother of the Lord is not viewed in isolation, but is seen in the totality of the Christian faith. To the Marian texts of the New Testament he added the lines of the great feminine saviour figures of the Old Testament, which have drawn down the power of God by their faith and inspired salvific histories. In Mary these women are revisited, in her “Fiat” the people of Israel experience a concrete personification. Ratzinger traces Maria as a “church in the origin”, in her the church receives a personal centre with corresponding consequences. His Marian dogmatics is based on his own biblical theological approach, and especially gives the teachings of the recent church history its own well-comprehensible depth structure.
Joseph Ratzinger, both as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and, above all, as Pope, contributed greatly to the legislative development and the implementation of Canon Law. His invitation has been especially important, as Supreme Pontiff, to the seminarians to love Canon Law. In this article we study his contribution to the canonical doctrine with the subjects developed in the speeches before the Ro-man Rota, in which He offers certain criteria to advance in the knowledge and praxis of Canon Law and rejects the errors that can create deviations. Particularly notewor-thy is the insistence on showing the pastoral value of Canon Law and the need to hold its close link both to charity and to truth. On the other hand, the Pope also pays attention to marriage, both in preparation for it and in the defence of its essential properties
The author puts forward a hypothesis related to the interpretation of the thought of Joseph Ratzinger – Benedict XVI on the interrelation of time and eternity. Different religions offer different ways of departing temporality - the way of being within the confines of time - towards some extratemporal existence, commonly referred to as eternity or immortality. This perspective evokes a fundamental question: if time wants to reach beyond itself towards eternity, is it that eternity - in its turn - stays in a kind of interrelation to time, or is it a kind of negative atemporality? In its view of the matter, Christianity makes a clear statement that God has power over time, which implies that God participates in the temporal reality. This participation manifests itself overtly through the Incarnation of the Son of God. Consequently, this participation shows that man takes part in the eternity of God. In this sense, a Christian reaches eternity through his/her existence in the Person of the Resurrected Jesus. This ability to eternally remain in Jesus rests on the immortal element of the human being - that is his/her spiritual soul. The soul opens a path towards salvation and the relational eternity, that is a relationship of a Christian person with the Son of God and through Him with God as Trinitary Love. This is how Christianity – while respecting the linear nature of time – promotes a positive cyclical (yet not a reiterative) concept of time, which manifests itself in the exitus - reditus relationship. Exitus is an autonomous act of God’s creation, while reditus - is a human self-sacrifice as exemplified by the Son of God. Jesus’ self-sacrifice to God the Father is a model of how time can be projected onto a new way of existence: eternity. Therefore, Christ brings time to its fullness. His Event marks the beginning of eternity for the faithful
The death of a person, particularly my own death, is the most momentous occasion that happens in a lifetime. It seems to be an inevitable end of any possible experience, ceasing any relationship, the end of memories and hopes. It evokes various reactions in the living, just to mention some as: fascination, fear, stress, consent, willingness to familiarization. Each of them may be analysed, while each one shows also the death in a different aspect. In the proposed article, the author indicates another reaction - that is experiencing anxiety. It appears that this is the key experience, both when I am thinking about it as something that may afflict me at any moment, as well as when I become aware that there is a possibility of exit of the loved ones or just a popular person. Some texts by Joseph Ratzinger have inspired me to carry out such analyses.
The Christian vision of love, so deeply personalistic and clearly emphasizing that the love of God and the love of neighbour cannot be opposed, has to take the social na-ture of man into account. If love is the centre of the Christian life and also points to the specificity of its vocation and mission, then it is impossible to imagine that this funda-mental life perspective does not find the right expression in relation to social life. This love should be expressed in a number of social attitudes, especially in those which are considered fundamental principles of social life. The ability to enact the principles of love is important in everyday social life. It involves multiple specific attitudes. This paper discusses – in the light of the encyclical Deus Caritas Est and Caritas in veritate by Pope Benedict XVI - the issue of love in three aspects: love in micro-relations, love and justice in macro-relations and love as a common good in macro-relations.
German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, is one of the great-est Catholic theologians of the 20th and 21st century. The main field of his theological activity is fundamental theology, which is perceived by him as the area of a broadly understood dialogue on the credibility of Christianity in the modern world. This article attempts to analyze the views of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on the Christian identity of Europe. The various issues of this study are as follows: Europe as a phenomenon of cultural interaction; Right to the place of Christianity in the Europe of tomorrow; European crisis of values; European Homo oeconomicus and the Gospel; Dismissing former Eurocentrism; Courage in the struggles of the new face of Chris-tian Europe. In the conclusion the author emphasizes validity of Joseph Ratzinger’s/Benedict XVI’s thoughts on the future of Europe in the context of the ongoing changes in the European Union and the migration crisis.
This article discusses Benedict the XVI’s charting of the formation and history of Europe around a mission to reign as a sacred duty for the sake of Human Dignity in the light of Edith Stein’s insights into the relationship between community formation and objective values. First, an account of Ratzinger’s understanding of Europe as a concept of political geography is given. Secondly is discussed the mission at the heart of the formation of Europe according to Ratzinger, and how such a mission would, according to Stein, be particularly suited for shaping a people and a continent. The third section discusses Ratzinger’s understanding of Human Dignity in the light of Stein’s understanding of values.
Edith Stein is a person who was born in the Jewish traditionally religious family. In her youth she lost her faith in God. However in her life she was seeking the truth. In this search she was very honest. The article first shows different definitions of truth. Then he takes the presentation of Edith Stein’s, the ways of phenomenological discov-ery of the truth about a human person. Finally, it shows her coming to the discovery of the God of Love, who has drawn her to mystical union in the spirituality of Carmel. Edith Stein died in the concentration camp in Auschwitz, experiencing the mystery of the Cross of Christ and sacrificing herself for her people.
The paragraphs 300-305 belong to the most controversially discussed quotations of the Pope’s Francis Exhortation Amoris laetitia. A suggestion appears in them, that people living a non-sacramental unions can find themselves subjectively unable to act differently without causing a new harm, though at the same time they are fully aware that their present living conditions are objectively a grave sin. Such people – so the Pope says – are not deprived of the divine grace and could under some circum-stances received the sacraments. These statements are interpreted in different ways. According to the first interpretation the particular circumstances can change the moral character of the person’s act so far that the life in a non-sacramental union can no more be assessed as an adultery i.e. a grave sin. The supporters of the second inter-pretation claim that the particular circumstances could cause a grave moral constraint which – like other forms of constraint too - can diminish one’s moral responsibility, though his/her act remain objectively a grave sin. Eventually according to the third interpretation the statements of Pope Francis are in the present article related to the particular category of people living in non-sacramental unions namely those ones who are subjectively convinced that their first marriage was never valid.
en
pl
