Theological Studies

Giuseppe Dossetti was an important figure not only in Italian politics, in the reform of historical studies, and in the history of new monasticism, but also at Vatican II. One topic in particular—poverty—was at the core of his contribution to the activity of Cardinal Giacomo Lercaro, archbishop of Bologna, at the council. The article analyzes these contributions based on the private papers of Lercaro and Dossetti. It highlights the meaning of poverty, which was scarcely received in the conciliar decrees and about which post-Vatican II magisterial teaching has been virtually silent, until the election of Pope Francis.

The author first explains that the pope and bishops exercise their teaching authority definitively and infallibly when they oblige the faithful to give their irrevocable adherence of faith to a revealed truth, or firmly to accept and hold a truth that is necessarily connected to revelation. He then discusses the replies that Joseph Ratzinger has given to the question whether John Paul II declared definitively and infallibly that the church has no authority to ordain women to the priesthood.

The author considers the ongoing significance of the grace–nature distinction for systematic theology, the role the distinction has made historically, and current debates on its validity. He proposes that two developments advanced by Bernard Lonergan, the scale of values and the four-point hypothesis, can reinvigorate the distinction and ground new developments in systematic theology for the future.

Lonergan makes unique, balanced contributions to the debates on the relationship between the natural and supernatural and on the grace–freedom dynamic (the de auxiliis controversy), particularly in his critique of Bañezianism. His understanding of the human intellect in relation to the supernatural order and his defense of the natural integrity of created freedom are remarkably cogent and compelling. His theorem of the supernatural, principle of vertical finality, and notion of obediential potency are keys to his treatment.

The concept of vicarious representation (Stellvertretung) is central to Joseph Ratzinger’s thought. He uses it, with its correlative concept of pro-existence, to develop a theology in which “the few” are the starting point from which God saves “the many.” This article examines the concept’s influence on Ratzinger’s soteriology, Christology, and ecclesiology. It concludes by exploring four areas in which his vicarious-representative theology makes a significant contribution: the soteriological role of human freedom, the pro multis controversy, the “smaller but purer” criticism of his ecclesiology, and the Church’s mission in a religiously plural world.

Monika Hellwig’s 1982 history and theology of the sacrament of penance, Sign of Reconciliation and Conversion, is representative of the expectations that theologians and pastoral ministers had for expanded forms of the sacrament. Pope John Paul II’s 1984 exhortation, “Reconciliation and Penance,” produced a contrasting history to assert private confession to a priest as the church’s continuous tradition. That this instruction found little traction is evident in subsequent directives combatting a “crisis” of confession and the proliferation of communal penance services. The article concludes with a theological analysis of the theoretical and practical state of the question today.

In his analysis of Monika Hellwig’s and John Paul II’s thought on penance, Bruce Morrill identifies a breakdown of shared meaning in the church. This response introduces Bernard Lonergan into the conversation. If Morrill has identified a collapse of consensus around sacramental reconciliation, Lonergan’s theological anthropology, especially regarding questions related to conversion and authenticity, may provide resources for a renewed ecclesial practice grounded in a restored common meaning.

In conversation with Bruce Morrill’s article, the author explores how the fundamental ecclesiologies of Monika Hellwig and John Paul II influence their theologies of the sacrament of penance. John Paul’s ahistorical ecclesiology leads to distress around the collapse of confession and to increased clericalism, and his millennial apologies for ecclesial sins raise further questions regarding collective confession of fault. The author concludes by arguing that the absence of forms of individual and communal reconciliation undermines the church’s mission.