Dominus Iesus seeks to sweep away the clutter
of secondary debates
that have marked the past thirty-five years.

The popes’ obsession

By Joseph Krastel

On the 6th of August, 2000, the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a declaration, Dominus Iesus, that has stirred bitter controversy among non-Catholics and Catholics alike.

The declaration argues that the salvation of every human—Christian, Moslem, Hindu or others—comes only through Jesus Christ. In addition, the declaration insists that the Church of Christ “continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church.” And, reactions to the document have reached almost nuclear levels at the declaration’s statement that “ecclesial communities” without valid episcopate or integral Eucharistic mystery “are not Churches in the proper sense.”

Cardinal Ratzinger and those involved in issuing the declaration insist (in the document and in subsequent comments) that Dominus Iesus does not seek to destroy ecumenism or to degrade other religions, Christian or non-Christian. The authors claim that the declaration is necessary to combat growing tendencies toward religious relativism that would claim, “One religion is as good as another,” or that state that the Church demeans non-Christian religions like Buddhism by trying to convert their members to Catholicism.

Here I do not attempt to defend the declaration or any section of it. Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger have responded to criticisms of the document.

I would try to make two points: first, the document is anchored in the theology of the Second Vatican Council and subsequent Church statements; second, the declaration seeks to re-enforce an obsession of Popes Paul VI and John Paul II, an obsession which, I think these pontiffs would trace to Jesus, himself.

Many older Catholics have impressions and memories of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965). They recall the consuming interest of the media in the debates and elan of the Council. They remember the exhilaration at the changes in the liturgy, the outstretched hand of ecumenism and the optimism of the Council’s decree, The Church in the Modern World.

But the Chapman edition of The Documents of Vatican II (with brief commentaries on each document) is almost 800 pages. Beyond those passages that the press loved or that pointed toward innovations, lie thorough and respectful statements of traditional Catholic theology, serving as the foundation for each document.

For example, in The Declaration on Religious Freedom, the most controversial document at the time of the Council itself, the bishops begin with the calm (almost off-hand) statement:

This Sacred Synod professes its belief that God himself has made known to mankind the way in which men are to serve him, and thus be saved in Christ and come to blessedness. We believe that this one true religion subsists in the catholic and apostolic church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among men.(#1)

Similar statements on the Catholic Church and its mission from Christ occur in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (e.g., #8 and #10), and in the Decree on the Missionary Activity of the Church (#5 to #8). In the Decree on Ecumenism (#3) we read:

For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the all-embracing means of salvation, that the fulness of the means of salvation can be obtained.

These and other statements of Vatican II stress the unique status of the Catholic Church under the successor of Peter, and they renew Christ’s call to bring the Gospel to all people and all lands.
Of course, as we glance back historically, we note that some commentators in those days hoped that such passages—mere political payoffs to ultaconservative bishops—would soon be ignored as the Church sailed into a bright modernity of tolerance, humility and more moderate views. Indeed, most of the media seldom reported these traditional ideas. Many ordinary Catholics in those days guessed that these views disappeared along with the Prayer to St. Michael.

Meanwhile younger Catholics seem to learn little about the Church’s conviction of its crucial role in God’s plan.

After about ten years of optimistic experiments, Catholic leaders began to examine how the Church was fulfilling its basic mandate from Christ. The largely forgotten 1974 Synod of Bishops proclaimed, “ We wish to confirm once more that the task of evangelizing all people constitutes the essential mission of the Church.”

Pope Paul VI built upon the work of this Synod in his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Nuntiandi. Although largely ignored by the media, “ecumenically alive” theologians and ordinary Catholics, the document states:

. . . not without sorrow, we can hear people—whom we wish to believe are well-intentioned, but are certainly misguided in their attitude—continually claiming to love Christ but without the Church, to listen to Christ but not the Church, to belong to Christ but outside the Church. The absurdity of this dichotomy is clearly evident in this phrase of the Gospel: “Anyone who rejects you, rejects me.” (#16)

In more recent years, Pope John Paul II, observing the drift of many Catholics to relativism, has looked back to the documents of Vatican II and the ideas of Pope Paul VI. In Encyclicals like Dominum et Vivificantem (1986), Redemptoris Missio (1990) and Fides et Ratio (1999), the present pope has boldly stated:

Dialogue should be conducted and implemented with the conviction that the Church is the ordinary means of salvation and that she alone possesses the fulness of the means of salvation. (Redemptoris Missio, #55)

The forthright stands of Pope John Paul II are well-known and some theologians and media representatives looking for a “more progressive” Catholic thrust are quick to brush aside his writings and policies. Many ordinary Catholics, therefore, hearing angry reactions to Dominus Iesus and noting the defensive posture of the Church from Humanae Vitae until today, seemed to wonder, “Why does Rome want to pick another fight?”

Perhaps Rome does not necessarily want another skirmish, but is increasingly looking at, almost obsessed with, the need to galvanize all Catholics for the Missio ad Gentes, to get every Catholic in the world involved in dealing with Christ’s command to bring the Gospel to all nations.

To Pope John Paul II this means an enormous effort, with great sacrifices, misunderstanding from many and even martyrdom. He seeks to involve every Catholic in the mission of bringing the Gospel and Baptism to those parts of the world that do not believe in Christ, especially Asia, which has a Catholic population of only 3%.

Catholics have always taken the command of Christ seriously. From the travels of St. Paul to the heroic work of St. Boniface, the English monk who in the 8th century converted Germanic tribes, to St. Francis Xavier, the stalwart Spanish Jesuit who brought Christianity to parts of India, Indonesia, Japan and the China coast, thousands of Catholic men and women have taken up Christ’s challenge.

The Second Vatican Council recognized the importance of this campaign. The Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, stressed:

This is the sole Church of Christ which in the creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic, which our Saviour, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it, and which he raised up for all ages as the ‘pillar and mainstay of truth.’ (#8)

The same council published an entire decree on this task of the church, the Decree on Missionary Activity, Ad Gentes, that clearly states:

Since this mission continues and, in the course of history, unfolds the mission of Christ, who was sent to evangelize the poor, then the Church, urged on by the Spirit of Christ, must walk the road Christ himself walked, a way of poverty and obedience, of service and self-sacrifice . . . (#5)
Yet, as the bishops at the Council were affirming the mandate of Christ, the actual missionary work of the church was beginning to slow down.

The Communist revolution in China in the late 1940s ended with the imprisonment of many bishops and priests and the expulsion of others; China remains basically closed to missionary work from abroad. Meanwhile, materialsim and relativism had begun to erode the missionary spirit of many Europeans. Countries like Holland and Ireland that had sent thousands of missionaries around the world were soon sending only a few.

In response to Ad Gentes and Evangelii Nuntiandi, Catholics in countries once considered “missionary” have begun to claim this work of Christ. Missionaries from India, Nigeria and the Phillipines can be found in other areas of the world, bringing the Gospel and the sacraments to places where Christ is unknown. (Mother Theresa’s Missionaries of Charity, which insists that every small group of sisters scattered throughout the world be international, has grown in 40 years to over 4000 members.)

Still, the final hindrance to a whole-hearted response to Christ’s mission to the entire world remains the relativism entrenched in “first world” countries but easily contagious in other areas through the world-wide media. If all religions are the same, why should Catholic missionaries try to get into China to pry people from their ancient heritage? Keep the priests at home; there are already too many parishes cutting back their Mass schedules.

At the same time, radical Moslem and Hindu attacks on Catholic missionaries in East Timor, northwestern India and the Sudan make religious superiors hesitant to send or keep their sisters or confreres in places like the Congo or Southeast Asia.

This combination of internal ennui among Catholics and attacks from radical non-Christians represents the greatest threat in centuries to the church’s mission ad gentes.

Although the pope complains to international organizations about intolerance and persecution toward the Church in some parts of the world, Church leaders have had little recourse for help against violent opponents of Christianity from Diocletian to Stalin to Indonesian Moslems. Rather, it has always seen the blood of martyrs as the seed for evangelization.

But, Catholic leaders can do something about the divisions and torpor in their own ranks. The clear appeal of Christ’s mission that, in the 1940s and 1950s, led hundreds of Belgian and Irish and American young men and women to risk all to bring Christ to far-off lands has deteriorated in the past thirty years amid rancorous debates about contraception and women priests. The spiritual energy of the church, already losing steam in the first world as these beautiful documents of Vatican II were debated and written, has been drowned in the growth of materialism and comfort, while two generations of young Catholics have barely heard of the values of self-sacrifice and doing God’s will. These values are the heart of the Missio ad Gentes.

Dominus Iesus seeks to sweep away the clutter of secondary debates that have marked the past thirty-five years. It affirms the call of Christ to generous young people today—not to get caught up in controversies about school-vouchers or biblical fundamentalism or altar girls—but to summon the grace-aided energy to carry out Christ’s plan.

Dominus Iesus asks Catholics, Protestants and non-Christians alike to step back from their debates and skepticism and to examine the claim of Jesus to be “the way, the truth and the life.” Dominus Iesus asks every bishop, every parish, every Catholic to pray and work to promote the Missio ad Gentes. After all, it is the most important task of the church.  

Reverend Joseph Krastel, C.SS.R ordained in 1964, worked in parishes and the preaching ministry in the eastern U.S. before going to Dominica in 1993. He has been involved in retreat work in Dominica and has preached missions and retreats in the Caribbean and in South America. At present he is the pastor of St. Patrick’s Parish in Grand Bay, Commonwealth of Dominica. This is first article in HPR.