During the conference Krynica Forum, the erstwhile Head of Government debated with Deputy talker of Parliament Krzysztof Bosak whether Law and Justice would be able to find a common language with the Confederate. However, the discussion reached far beyond the native organization conflicts. Discuters besides talked about the importance of religion for contemporary right-wing movements. During the discussion, Mateusz Morawiecki confessed that he did not believe that the social doctrine of the Church remained a completely up-to-date signpost. The PiS politician besides amazed the audience, saying that he himself sees himself as a ‘heretics’, so along the way to him with the political currents condemned by the teaching office. The PCh24.pl editorial asked Mateusz Morawiecki's office to make this thought. Among the debates on the form of catechism in the country, the confession of the erstwhile Prime Minister to heterodoxical views speaks much of the state of the Teaching Church.
What precisely did Mateusz Morawiecki say during a discussion organized by the Jagiellonian Club? After a longer part of the conversation, the leader of the Constanta Pilawa gathering asked about the future of the right hand in secularization. In response, the erstwhile head of government pointed out that he did not see the request to face the political currents condemned by the conventional explanation of the Church.
– These modern large currents that we face are liberalism, socialism, conservatism. They are all children of Christendom – convinced the Prime Minister of the erstwhile government. – possibly socialism and liberalism are Christian heresies even, and I, as a follower of pelagianism to any extent, besides feel a heretic... – he added. – I would absolutely not effort to preserve these concepts of Catholicism in the 19th or 20th century frameworks, due to the fact that it seems to me that then it will be very hard to find a common language (...) with a wide scope of society – continued the politician.
Out of the abundance of the heart
Morawiecki's words have not received much attention, and they powerfully request longer reflection. There's more to it than the amazing character they have. To make certain precisely what the prominent politician of the Law and Justice had in mind, we asked the office of the erstwhile Prime Minister to make a reflection from the debate. Briefly recalling the foundation of the ancient heresy of “pelaganism”, we asked for a more comprehensive position.
"Pelagiarism we call the Catholic Church's condemned view that: a) Adam and Eve's sin was positive, due to the fact that he endowed people with free will, allowing them to attain moral perfection b) people are able to attain moral perfection without the aid of a working grace c) to attain moral perfection man does not request the aid of God, but the relationship of another man d) people did not request Redemption by the Savior's Passion of Christ," we outlined briefly a fistful of beliefs that can be understood as "Pelaginian." "We kindly ask you to make the Prime Minister's thoughts. Which of the principles of this ancient heresy are close to him, and what does the Prime Minister realize specifically, referring to himself as the “constitution” of this current?
"Moreover – Prime Minister admitted Pelagian views during discussions on the Church's attitude towards large political trends – specified as socialism and liberalism. In this context, views Pelagian It could be understood as a belief that in the public and political spheres grace and religion of societies are not of paramount importance in their development, and that the full excellence of the community is able to accomplish on their own strengths and without spiritual grounds," we pointed out.
The answer from the head of government truly came to us. Mateusz Morawiecki drew up a 5-page text in this case, which was sent in the answer of our editorial board. Although it contains a summary of the past of the improvement of the Church's teaching on the grace of God, it only touches the point in a vague way. In his work, the Prime Minister focused on criticism of the Protestant doctrine of predestination, explaining why it raises his opposition. Meanwhile, Pelagianism is not a logical consequence of rejecting specified a view... But see for yourselves what the erstwhile Prime Minister wrote:
Fr Jan Twardowski: “The Lord God has given man free will, so he cannot force anyone to love; he must be chosen. This is simply a paradox: the Almighty who cannot do everything. He comes and asks for love.”
FREE WILL AND FAVOUR
The essential part of the dispute over the relation between grace and free will comes into the question of God's goodness and love for man, to all men. If we accept the doctrine of predestination, at the same time we must answer the question of how it is possible that the good God, knowing everything (before and after), could only agree to the salvation of any people, chosen people. This would contradict the basic rule of God’s perfection and holiness. The full sphere of consideration of the theodycea besides tries to find an answer to the question of the existence of evil in the planet created by a good God.
The answer to this (damaged, like all our inquiries about God and eternity) is free will. Pelagius observed this very clearly at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. His reasoning emphasized the importance of free will in man's life and entered into the ethics of work for his actions. Pelagius then stood in dispute with St Augustine and was condemned. However, it is worth noting that St. Augustine was most powerfully referred to as Luther and Calvin and all subsequent Protestant sects. For they were closest to learning about grace and predestination. Predestination, however, assumes a hard (if not impossible) to explain the function of free will in man's life, and the prior condemnation of any people by the good God contradicts the simple knowing of God's love for men and our chances of a good life as a consequence of the exploitation of our freedom and the exploitation of all man's free will.
This dispute appeared in the most mature form during the debate between Molinists and dominicans in the 16th century (the alleged De Auxilis dispute). Molinists with Luis de Molina and Franscisco Suarez at the head highlighted the function of free will in all man's life. Domingo Banez, Diego Alvarez and another Dominicans stood in a position much closer to St. Augustin. It is characteristic that in this dispute the Molinists called Dominicans ‘calvins’, and the second told of the Molinists that they were ‘pelagians’.
The Jesuits of Molina held that grace could not be returned with a vector to evil, but could be thwarted, and thus any man can misuse grace due to the fact that he has free will. In this claim they recalled the records of the Council of Trent. In many interpretations, the Vatican Council has further strengthened this knowing of the ability of the free will to "object" grace.
It can be seen, therefore, that regardless of the condemnation of pelagianism from 1,600 years ago, the Catholic Church is increasingly emphasizing the importance of free will, which Pelagius, Eriugen, Duns Szkot, Wilhelm Ockham, and all who set advanced moral requirements for man, believed that man could do good with his choices and directed consciously to usage free will for good works and search for truth.
The Molinists sought to answer Isaiah’s celebrated question, addressed to God, “why, O Lord, you let us to stray from your ways...”. Like Isaiah, I think that God’s love for man implies the anticipation of making bad decisions on the basis of free will. Rather, God wants us to be free and to make the best usage of this freedom. I am far from believing in predestination, which contradicts specified knowing of freedom and free will.
This full issue is crucial to the liable life of all human being. It is besides associated with an effort to make a common denominator between God's omnipotence, his holiness and boundless love for all people and each of us. The designation of man's free will as a mechanics dependent on the supernatural and omnipotent action of God in all nanosecond of our lives – easy pushes us into meanders of apore and blind streets of philosophical and theological discourses. The simple way of specified reasoning and specified belief in predestination is fatalism, both philosophical, logical and theological.
It is not a place to go into details of fatalism in various views, but it is worth noting that free will is an component understood by the vast majority of people. An additional area emerging from my reflections on free will and grace, is the problem of good and evil, guilt, punishment and work for their own actions, freedom, and specifically understood “slavery”, eternity and temporality of our lives, or yet determinism (necessity of events) and randomness.
The possible of free will implies the necessity of our human conflict for good, our effort to search good, fact and justice. Marcin Luther in a debate with Erasmus of Rotterdam and Jan Calvin in a dispute with Albert Pighius stressed that it was the closeness of their knowing of grace and predestination with the knowing of St Augustine that is the fundamental difference between the Catholic Church's position and the emerging Protestant theology. In these debates, I am definitely closer to Erasmus and Albert Pighius.
Believing in the meaning of human life, the meaning of life besides implies believing in the reasonableness and consequences of our decisions. Freedom of choice. Assuming, of course, that the final result and assessment of these decisions and our work for them belongs to God.
I do not want to enter into the discussion about first sin, but it is worth noting that while the mentioned Doctor of the Church of St Augustine thought that the dead without baptism children go to hell (Synod in Carthage, beginning of Vw. “De peccato originali”), in our time John Paul II and after him Benedict XVI clearly indicate that children who die without baptism can be saved. John Paul II besides beatified Duns Scots, whose belief in the importance of free will (with the discrimination of ‘affectio commodi’ and ‘affectio iustiae’) is far from the doctrine presented by Saint Augustine.
Today, man escapes responsibility. He's moving distant into different doctrines. The prevailing liberal doctrine in the Western planet present presupposes “freedom from.” So I think it is besides worth pointing out from this position that man is created not only to “freedom from” but, above all, to usage his free will for “making the planet a better place”.
Therefore, I consider all ideas, from the Jansenist to the libertarian and liberal, which actually remove from man the work for the community, for the common good and, in part, besides for their actions, their negligence or "lost talents."
And finally. The Council Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the modern planet of "Gaudium et spes" maintains that God wants to "leave man in his hand the counsel of his Creator to search out of his own will and to hold on to him, to come to full and blessed perfection."
We don't know what it's like. But we believe our lives make sense. So we believe our free elections make sense. That searching for good, love, solidarity and fact makes sense. That's my faith, and I'm trying to make it my actions.
Signed: M.M.
The Church That Failed
In fact, there is small to this answer. However, the Prime Minister's eager confession to "feel heresy" demands a comment. Here is the politician of the leading faction in Poland, speaking on the Jasna Góra pilgrimages and directing his campaigns to the stereotypical “Polish Catholic”, publically declares that he is following the view condemned by the Church. In consequence to a request for the meaning of his declaration and after a reminder of pelagianism, he does not step back from this position... It is simply a bitter evidence to the catechist condition of the Church in Poland. The trend that is evident is, indeed, global – the worse it is that the Vistula River is heard.
If a key figure of political life, regularly hosting in the churches and politically dependent on the support of the faithful, without a shadow of fear, announces that he "acknowledges" the Church's condemned doctrine and suits him with the company of another non-Catholic beliefs, then the transmission of doctrine failed. But not only him. The Church in Poland was incapable to explain to Mateusz Morawiec the importance of depositing faith, infallible character and divine origin of Catholic truth. In practice – surviving in close relationships with the Mystical Body of Christ – the erstwhile Prime Minister remains indifferent to the deposit of faith. He can't realize why a declaration of his own heresy is dangerous on the 1 hand, but besides why he could cross his position in the eyes of the faithful...
Today, however, it does not miss anything. That's the problem. Without controversy, as seen in today's Church, even widely known figures can deny Revelation... and nothing. It's not just a problem of not responding to the hierarchy or spreading itself among itself heterodoxic. Morawiecki is simply a politician, so he should be afraid of the reaction of Catholic “opinion”. Today, however, he does not should be afraid... due to the fact that many Polish believers are raised in the same ignorance as he is.
This is another part of the panorama of doctrinal chaos - which is present in the Church today. In addition to the expanding tendencies of the “change of teaching” the absolute neglect of doctrinal education reigns. possibly that's why there are incorrect theological views – that fewer people actually realize the risks they carry. The cognition that sacred truths about God and morality seem to hold fewer in the deposit of faith.
This is simply a crisis that must be taken into account now that there is simply a debate about the catechesis of young people in our country. For decades, the main violin has been focused on the "subjective aspect of faith" – focusing on building students' recognition with the Church and religion. A lecture on what the Church believes is painfully lacking.
The problem of losing awareness of the importance of Catholic discipline besides prevails in the political sense of the words of the erstwhile Prime Minister. The politician argued that in modern times politics cannot be based on orthodoxly Catholic foundations. This would mean the anticipation of inspiring ourselves with anti-Christian thought currents, which the large defenders of religion rejected – Leon XIII, Pius IX and another brave popes.
And after all, condemning liberalism, whether socialism the Church spoke first of all about their erroneous metapolitical assumptions – those concerning the nature of man or the obligations of society towards God. Rehabilitation of these views is not a political act – but a civilisational act – a sign of uncertainty that political life can be built on pure Christian foundations.
The coherence between this political “heresis” and mistrust is the failure of religion in the universality and completeness of Catholic science. Something like this is about “pelagianism”. The core of this heresy is the praise of the first sin, by which man would get noble consciousness and self-sterility. According to Pelagius, the condition before sin was much poorer – due to the fact that it meant “free” following God's instructions... Today, many Christians view themselves and the planet somewhat alike. spiritual truths are to yield to the secular intellect, to the improvement of science, to the cognition of experts... The course of Revelation would, however, be evidence of limitedness and obscurantism.
This trend besides changes the face of Catholic politics. inactive in “Quas Primas” Pius XI clearly stated that the best way to peace and the improvement of societies was the universal reign of Christ. Leon XIII in the Encyclical “Immortale Dei” besides wrote about the keyness of Christianity for the benefit of nations... Today, this logic has been completely replaced, since, in the name of universal brotherhood or another social reasons of the truthfulness of Catholic faith, it is required to stay silent or to inform against legislating on its basis (as in the case of condemning the deficiency of government on homosexual relationships), treating the secularization of society as a symptom of its progress.
I believe that specified “pelaganism” could be admitted by a full group of Catholics, practicing religion and maintaining close ties with the Church. But erstwhile we look at the original, ancient Pelagianism we see the terrible point of this attitude... This is the designation of the request for Christ's Passion, of God's grace--the word of a planet in which man is sufficient. This is the direction of the "open church" and modern Poland. God seems little and little needed, little and little present. Man will usurp His place.
Philip Adamus
