Fr Geoffrey G Attard

 

 

According to an old tradition, on the 31st of October 1517, Augustinian friar Martin Luther attached to the main portal of Wurttemberg Cathedral his ninety-five theses and thus sent the ball rolling for the start of the Protestant Reformation. Even though many historians consider this anecdote as a legend, the date has struck into the collective mind and the last day of tenth month of the year is considered by one and all as the beginning of the entire Reformation movement.

 

Hundreds of books and scholarly essays have been written on the Protestant Reformation from both the Catholic and the Protestant side, all of them arguing their points either in favour of it or against it.  When the Reformation started, it seemed as if the main bone of contention was the argument in favour of justification by faith alone, upon which the Catholic Church and the Council of Trent expressed their reservations.  However, as one can deduce from the various studies that have been published, the Reformation was only the top of an iceberg which had been forming at least for over the previous couple of centuries. In fact it was no coincidence that the Renaissance, the invention of printing by Johann Gutenberg and the scientific finds of Copernicus, Galileo and the like all occurred simultaneously. 

 

A century like no other

Europe was passing through a period of self-examination and awareness that had not taken place before.  The hot issues surrounding the papacy, the Catholic priesthood, celibacy, the argument of sola fide and sola scriptura together with the suspension of the ecclesiastical-hierarchical system, the dissolution of the monasteries in England and the very idea of feudalism were all the product of a subtle movement was already showing its signs when Francis of Assisi and Dominic of Guzman founded their mendicant orders known today as the Friars Minor and the Order of Preachers.  It is not possible to analyse the Reformation in a few paragraphs; so I will limit myself to reflecting upon a small number of themes which affect our spiritual life in the Maltese islands even today.

 

Of statues and images; the controversy

My personal fear is that as Catholics living in the 21st century we may become aware that we have learnt next to nothing from the Reformation.  One of the hottest issues of the 16th century Reformation was about the making of statues and images.  The Iconoclastic Controversy, a dispute over the use of religious images (icons) in the Byzantine Empire in the 8th and 9th centuries. The Iconoclasts (those who rejected images) objected to icon veneration for several reasons, including the Old Testament prohibition against images in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:4) and the possibility of idolatry.   On the other hand, In 730 John of Damascus wrote that physical aids to worship were valid because God took on matter in the man Christ Jesus. In 787 the Church ruled exactly to what extent images could be used in worship in order to avoid idolatry.  Unfortunately, history seems to be bound to repeat itself since during the Reformation, the same ancient hate for statues and images came once again to the fore and this hatred characterized the Protestant Reformation.  Unto this day, if one were to enter into a Presbyterian (Calvinist) place of worship or into an Evangelical church, one would not see and statues of images of Christ or the saints and the bare Cross replaces the Catholic Crucifix. I want to say that I like Jurgen Moltmann's balanced view of the subject which he tackles in his book The Living God and the Fullness of Life ; writing about photos which are similar to statues, the German theologian states that 'a photo ties a movement down to a moment' . However further on he says also that 'we cannot make an image of the living God without destroying God's living presence with us'.  I sometimes wonder if in our islands, our Catholic community is aware of such a historical controversy which touched the heart of the Christian faith five centuries ago and continues to divide Catholicism and Protestantism unto this day. The continuation of the manufacturing of statues in papier-mâché or wood for our churches and places of worship seem to imply that in the south of Europe we Catholics have earned no lesson from such theological discussions.  I have no doubt that there are those who are in favour of such a continuation due to the fact that they either earn in living from the creation of religious statues or it is in their interest to promote such a culture. From a more pragmatic perspective, perhaps it would be a good idea if we were to transfer our Good Friday processions from Good Friday to Palm Sunday and reserve Good Friday for the recitation of the Via Crucis that would take place in the main squares of our towns and villages; in this way we would also be in unity with our Holy Father in Rome who presides over the Via Crucis in the Coliseum.  After all it is sobriety which should prevail on such a special day but how long will it take us to realise this?

 

The Sacrifice of the Mass: the bloodless Passion

Having lived in a Presbyterian environment for about four years (Scotland) and having studied with non-Catholic Christians, I sometimes stop and think about the theology of the Mass.  Protestants argue that due to the fact that Christ died once and for all - as we read in the Letter to the Hebrews - there is no need for the Mass.  On the other hand, Catholic theology, partly based on the writings of the Scholastic Doctors of the Church, build the theology of the Mass on the notion of the anamnesis and therefore argue that the Mass is not a repetition but merely a 'bringing back into time' of the Passion of Christ, with the difference that Mass is 'the bloodless sacrifice of Calvary'.  It seems to me that both sides have not moved an inch towards each other in their explanation of the Eucharistic Sacrifice which as Saint Pope John Paul II stated in his Ecclesia de Eucharistia stands at the very core of the Catholic faith.  However, what confuses me most is the rivalry that I sometimes notice among our fellow Catholics when they come to 'reserve' a Mass for their dear deceased emphasising that it should be said on the exact day of their anniversary.  Before this reality, the Protestant Reformation comes instantly to my mind and I feel perplexed to the point of feeling afraid 'that we have got it all long' and that perhaps we have learnt nothing from the Reformation.  It is only my trust in two-thousand institution founded by Christ that keeps me going amidst such confusion.  As to relics and indulgences I believe it would benefit one and all if were to focus less on them and reflect more on the salvation that the Christ brought us through the shedding of his blood.  Even here it is difficult to strike a balance since Catholicism has developed the theology of merit while Protestantism continues to emphasise the lack of need for good works and has abolished entirely the sacrament of confession as known in the Catholic world. 

 

The Pros and the Cons

In the English-speaking world, authentic Christians from all denominations will speak of the Reformation as the experience where 'the baby was thrown out with the bath water'.  This is where Luther comes in.  The Reformation was needed; even the old Latin proverb states that ecclesia semper reformanda -­ the Church lives through constant change and transformation.  There are pros and cons when it comes to the Reformation too.  Martin Luther is believed to have said: 'When I die, I want to be a ghost...So I can continue to pester the bishops, priests and godless monks until that they have more trouble with a dead Luther than they could have had before with a thousand living ones'.  Strong language indeed! Was Luther entirely pure in his intentions?  This may remain for many a rhetorical question. I would like to compare this quotation by Luther with St Theresa of the Child Jesus' saying:   "My mission - to make God loved - will begin after my death: I will spend my heaven doing good on earth. I will let fall a shower of roses." There is a certain contrast between the two quotations.  In another writing of his, Martin Luther emphasises "As to the common people... one has to be hard with them and see that they do their work and that under the threat of the sword and the law they comply with the observance of piety, just as you chain up wild beasts."  This is the same Luther whose statue appeared in the background when Pope Francis spoke of him as 'a witness to the Gospel' when the Holy Father received a group of 1,000 Lutherans and Catholics from Germany in the Vatican's Paul VI hall; Luther's statue provided a sight that came as a shock to many Catholics. What worries most is not the statue but the u-turns that Catholicism is being lately accused of and which I fear could erase the strong sense of trust that millions of faithful Catholics have always had in the Catholic Church.  Luther was excommunicated five centuries ago; today there are those who would like to see him canonized.  The word 'heretic' seems to have become politically incorrect; the softer term 'reformer' has almost substituted it.  This may be one of the lessons that we have learnt from the Reformation; being more tolerant within Christianity itself and accepting the fact that the Counter-Reformation was entirely a healthy response to the colossal changes that late medieval Europe was going through at the time.

 

Conclusion

Continuity is one of the words that have become difficult to grasp.  It seems that in our urge to be ecumenical and inclusive, we might be losing the spiritual weight that has characterized Catholicism for centuries.  There is here so much that is at stake; not merely continuity but also a hard-earned sense of trust and stability which have always been part of what makes us what we are.  To enter dialogue with the world and with other religions is what Vatican II has been about, but then is accommodation what Christ came to preach?  Is it not clarity in doctrine that helps benefit the movement of authentic ecumenism? As we commemorate this historic anniversary, we should delve deeper in our reflection on the main issues that divide us.  However this will be no easy task since even at the time of Jesus, his core teaching proved to be controversial. Was not his 'giving of his body' for food a bone of contention even during his own lifetime?  (Jn 6: 60). This could be the reason why the Eucharist - which should be a unifying force - remains to this day one of the main realities that keeps Christian divided.  We should all reflect harder on Christ's wish when he desired 'that they all may be one' (Jn 17: 21) The Holy Spirit only may have the satisfactory answer.