|
Avery Dulles
In a January 2001 New York Times article, Reverend Joseph A. O'Hare, president of Fordham university, spoke of the newly appointed Cardinal Avery Dulles, saying that “Faith seeking understanding defines the mission of the theologian, even as it has consistently defined the life of Avery Dulles, whose intellectual integrity, fairness of judgment and lucidity of style set a high standard for all theologians” (McFadden). This appointment to the cardinalship was a far progression from Dulles' youth growing up in a family of statesmen and government intelligence officials. He was sent to various boarding schools throughout England and the United States, and religion was a rare occurrence in his upbringing. Dulles even goes so far as to say, “I had a relativistic, materialistic view of things. Everything resulted by chance and collision with molecules that accidentally resulted in the production of life. So there we were, strangers in a meaningless universe....The only thing that made sense was to get some pleasure and advantage out of it, for as long as you lived. And it was all over when you died” (Bole) He eventually came to the conclusion, however, that these hedonistic ideals would not result in a fulfilling life, and by the time he graduated college, he had decided to become Catholic. His conversion to Catholicism was what Dulles described as a “gradual, rational process that began in his undergraduate studies of medieval art, philosophy and theology, including Plato and the New Testament” (McFadden). This conversion, however was genuine, and would influence the rest of his life. George Weigel, a Catholic commentator and scholar said that Dulles “became Catholic not because this was more comfortable or more aesthetically pleasing or more adventuresome. He became Catholic because he thought it was true – that this is the way the world is. That commitment to truth and to the exploration of that truth has been the touchstone of his life and career as a theologian” (Bole). This commitment to truth would guide his theological studies, and through these studies, Dulles gained a reputation as a respected scholar and theologian whose influences can be most felt after the Second Vatican Council..Krista Stevens After being ordained a priest in 1956, Dulles spent the years leading up to Vatican II teaching and studying at Fordham and at Woodstock. He identified himself as a Thomist, but he was at the same time drawn to “the more personalist approaches of what became known as nouvelle theologie practiced by...leading theologians of the era before the Second Vatican Council” (Royal). This “New Theology” focused on reading biblical and patristic materials in light of new forms of scholarship emerging as a result of the Enlightenment. These new forms of scholarship had two main implications. First, these forms led to a growing realization of the historical nature of Catholicism, and this realization gave a prominent place to scripture and tradition. An idea of positive history developed in which tradition was seen as an unfolding process that was passed down gradually and not all at once. Also within New Theology, there developed a new awareness of the importance of patristic writers. Previously, knowledge of these works had come filtered through other scholastic writers. Once people began to read the works of the patristic writers on their own, they found a plethora of information that had been left out by other writers. All of this created a broadening of theological resources. While all of these ideas were at first considered to be radical, Vatican II would encompass some of the ideas developed by New Theology (Wilson). In the final years before the Council, Dulles, while working for his doctorate in theology from the Gregorian University in Rome, would begin his work on ecclesiology, and this work would also be important in the postconiliar years (Royal). Although Dulles was making a name for himself as a theologian and a scholar in the preconciliar years and during the Council itself, much more of his influence can be seen after Vatican II. In his book The Catholic Tradition The Church in the Twentieth Century, Timothy McCarthy lays out Dulles' post Vatican II influences. McCarthy says that after “Vatican II considerable reflection and discussion was given to the models of the church” (p. 92). In 1974 Dulles published Models of the Church, his most prominent work. In this book Dulles divided the church into five models of mystical communion, herald, sacrament, servant, and institution. Dulles explained the models by emphasizing that “the church is irreducible to any single model; no model should be absolutized; and the five models are sufficiently flexible to be mutually open and complementary. He went on to show that the five models can conflict with one another and so ecclesiologists should incorporate the major affirmations of each model without carrying over their distinctive liabilities. An ecclesiology would be truly adequate to the extent that it took into account the insights contained in each of the five models” (McCarthy 92-93). While many deemed this work controversial at the time, 30 years later it is clear that the book was written in support of evangelization and in support of the institution of the church, two things which the Second Vatican Council also supported. Some years later, Dulles added another model to his concept of church – the church as a community of disciples. Dulles said that “since we live in a world where atheism is pervasive, the world religions are attractive, and the lure of wealth, military power, and status are corrupting, then anyone coming to the church (or persevering in it) will be 'obliged to hear a personal call and respond in a free, self-conscious manner, somewhat as the first disciples responded to the summons of Christ. The call, if it is to be efficacious, must be heard as coming not simply from the church but from the Lord of the church, so that Jesus himself is seen as the focal point of the Christian's life'” (McCarthy 93-94). McCarthy suggests that this model of a church of disciples is important in the postconciliar church. He says that “this model of the church's identity and mission captures the direction and spirituality of many in the postconciliar church. The church, the sacrament of the kingdom of God, is a world church of communities of disciples with a threefold mission, especially service to and with the poor” (McCarthy 94). Finally, throughout his life, Dulles and his works have been held in good regard by many of his peers. Although he has at times been labeled as more conservative and at times as more liberal, he has for the most part, tended to walk a middle ground. While he is at once a supporter of the papacy and of church teaching and doctrine, he is at the same time open to dialogue and discussion around ideas that conflict with traditional church thought. Because of this characteristic, Dulles is known for being open to new ideas and situations as well for often serving as a communication line between the Vatican and dissenters. All of his work and all of his personal attributes did not go unnoticed by the Vatican, and Dulles's appointment as an American Jesuit priest to the cardinalship is a testament to his value as a scholar and a theologian. Works Cited Avery Dulles, “John Paul II and The Mystery of The Human Person” America. 190, no. 3 (2004): 10-22 Abstract by Krista Stevens Dulles seeks to identify what lies at the heart of John Paul's message. He asks the question, “Is there some once concept that could serve as a key to unlock what is distinctive to this pope as a thinker?” (10) Dulles proposes that the answer to this question is the mystery of the human person. Dulles goes on to say that while the pope is “bound to the whole dogmatic heritage of the church,” his emphasis on the mystery of the human person allows him to present this dogmatic heritage “in a distinctive way, with his own emphases, which are in line with his philosophical personalism” (10). Throughout the remainder of the article, Dulles will lay out John Paul's thoughts on personalism in the years leading up to his papacy, identify personalist themes running throughout his papacy, and then finally show how this personalist emphasis often creates tension with previous Catholic tradition. Dulles says that in his early years as a professor and bishop, Karol Wojtyla, the future John Paul II, identified himself as a Thomist. Wojtyla, however, noted what he felt to be one particular weakness in Aquinas' thought. He believed that “St. Thomas paid too little attention to the human person as experienced from within” (11). Wojtyla believed that while Aquinas did give a good objective view of the existence and activity of the person, that he did little in regard to the lived experiences of the person. Wojtyla, therefore, “wished to enrich Thomas's doctrine of the person by reference to our experience of ourselves as unique ineffable subjects” (11). Out of this wish to enrich Aquinas' doctrine came a firm belief in the dignity of the human person and the idea that “men should act of their own judgment, enjoying and making use of a responsible freedom, not driven by coercion but motivated by sense of duty” (11; Dulles is drawing from Dignitatis Humanae, no. 1). Dulles points out that despite this emphasis on personal freedom, throughout his papacy, John Paul has recognized the limits of freedom. He insists that freedom “is not an end in itself but a means of personally adhering to the true good, as perceived by a judgment of conscience” (11). Dulles ends the section describing the pope's adherence to personalism by briefly referring to a 1969 work entitled The Acting Person that Wojtyla wrote as a cardinal. In this work, “Wojtyla expounded a theory of the person as a self-determining agent that realized itself through free and responsible action. Activity is not something strictly other than the person; it is the person coming to expression and constituting itself. Persons, moreover, are essentially social and oriented to life in community. They achieve themselves as persons by interaction, giving to others and receiving from them in turn” (12). This understanding or personalism is important in regard to the following sections of the article. In the second section of the article, Dulles looks at themes of John Paul's papacy, saying that the pope “has used personalism as a lens through which to reinterpret much of the Catholic tradition. He unhesitatingly embraces all the dogmas of the church, but he expounds them with a personalist slant” (13). In regard to his concept of the Christian life, the pope says that the church is more than just doctrine or concepts but a person with the face and name of Christ. The church, therefore, must work to ensure that Christ's face is made visible to all (13). In light of ecumenism, John Paul's personalism is reflected in the document Ut Unum Sint. In this document the pope says that “If prayer is the soul of the ecumenical movement and of its yearning for unity...it is the basis and support for everything the counsel defines as 'dialogue.' This definition is certainly not unrelated to today's personalist way of thinking. The capacity for dialogue is rooted in the nature of the person and his dignity....” (14; Dulles is quoting from Number 28 of Ut Unum Sint). In the third section of the article, Dulles identifies some tensions between John Paul's personalist perspective and previous church tradition, including tensions within natural theology, capital punishment, and just war. Dulles first looks at natural theology, and he says that traditional Catholic teaching has held that God's existence can be established through human reason. While John Paul does not deny this idea, he seems to look at the “longings of the human heart for personal communion with others and with the divine” as the means by which God's existence can be established (16). In regard to the death penalty. Although the pope has not declared capital punishment to be intrinsically evil, his respect for human life that flows from his personalist emphasis on human dignity “inclines him to reject capital punishment in practice” (18). This rejection stands in stark contrast to traditional Catholic teaching which consistently supported capital punishment through the pontificate of Pius XII. In regard to just war, Dulles says that while the pope denies that “he is a pacifist, deplore military action as a failure for humanity” (18). Dulles goes on to say that personalism “undoubtedly favors the use of persuasion rather than force. It makes for a reluctance to admit that negotiation can at certain points become futile” (19). Some critics believe that John Paul is pushing for new doctrine that would more greatly limit the conditions of just war and almost even discard just war tradition. Dulles concludes his article by summing up John Paul's personalism and the importance of this personalism in his papacy, saying that personalism “has its clearest applications in the realm of privacy and one-to-one relations. It is crucial in individual self-realization and in marriage and family life – themes on which John Paul II has written luminously” (22). The pope has also been able to extend personalism to the realms of economics and politics, business, jurisprudence, political science, and international relations. The pope also brings personalism to his theology by emphasizing the relation between Christ, the Scriptures, the sacraments, and the church as well as God's mercy and love. He advocates joy, hope, and love as ways to follow God in contrast to threatening images which portray God as a demanding judge because he believes that fear limits human freedom (22). An Avery Dulles Bibliography
|