Rome, Italy, Jun 20, 2016 / 12:13 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A Vatican conference dedicated to the up-and-coming 'theology of disability' aims not only to end common stigma surrounding persons with disabilities, but to show that their lives are a gift and to help integrate them more fully into the life of the Church and of society. “The disabled person’s life has never been more in danger as it is now, before life and after,” Cristina Gangemi told CNA in an interview. Co-director of The Kairos Forum and an expert in  intellectual and cognitive disability with a particular focus on spirituality, Gangemi and her organization are partnering with the Pontifical Council for Culture in putting on the “Living Fully 2016” conference later this week. Society, she said, “is seeking to develop the perfect human person,” and in doing so renders the life of the disabled “mechanistic.” Rather, “the disabled person calls you back to love, because they say: ‘I look differently, I think differently, I’m a creative learner, I do things in a way that’s not typical, but do you love me?’ And it calls society to answer to the question: ‘Do you love that human person?’” More importantly, persons with disabilities pose the same questions to the Church, she said, adding that the Church’s response must reflect Pope Francis’ call to love and mercy. Gangemi said this reflection doesn’t come from feeling sorry for disabled persons, “but that we feel sorry for the way we’ve treated them. We’ve created a community of ‘them and us,’ and we must remove that and get back to a community of ‘us,’ because within the body of Christ there is only us.” The Living Fully conference in Rome is being held June 23-26, beginning with a symposium on “Exploring Disability, Theology, Practice and Culture.” That will be followed by a three-day conference titled “Disability, Culture, Family and Faith – a Celebration,” hosted by LUMSA University. Topics that will be covered include how to see the disabled with God's eyes' the Church's attitude and practice in welcoming disabled persons; the gift of our bodies as they are in light of St. John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, and how to end and the problems of isolation and loneliness often experienced by persons with disabilities. Personal stories from people with one or more disabled family members will also be given throughout the conference. Gangemi explained that the 'theology of disability' is “a new, emerging discipline” and is born from the experience of both disabled persons and their families, as well as the desire to explore their place and value in the Christian community. The pioneer behind disability theology is John Vanier, a Catholic philosopher, theologian, and humanitarian from Canada. In 1964 Vanier founded L’Arche foundation, which has grown to become an international federation of communities for people with developmental disabilities, and is present in 35 countries around the world. According to Gangemi, the essence of disability theology can be defined as “a way of exploring the Christian Gospel and the very essence of God through the life experiences and expressions of people who’ve been disabled.” While Vanier is Catholic, the story of L’Arche and the study of disability theology have been taken up especially by members of the Anglican Communion, Gangemi said, explaining that because of this the conference will also feature ecumenical speakers. As someone who has been working in the field for more than 20 years, Gangemi said that while Catholic theologians are taking an increasing interest in disability theology, “it’s a missing bit of what we do as a Church.” “Disability isn’t a special occasion, it’s an everyday occurrence, it’s part of who we are as Church,” she said, voicing her hope that the fact that LUMSA University is hosting the conference will help to ensure that disability theology “is part and parcel of what universities and Catholic studies have in the future.” One concrete sign of the Church’s increasing interest in persons with disabilities is the recent Jubilee of the Disabled, held June 10-12 as part of Pope Francis’ wider Jubilee of Mercy. During the jubilee, Pope Francis said discriminating against the disabled is “ugly,” and insisted such persons ought to be loved, rather than hidden from society. Gangemi said that in her opinion, while the topic of disability theology has always been needed in the Church, the need is more dire today due to the “urgent drive to obtain the perfect human.” “The disabled person still lives in a very paradoxical place,” she said, noting how currently in the UK, the only factor allowing parents to get a full-term abortion at 40 weeks gestation is for reasons of fetal disability. “Even the day that you’re born, (right) before you’re born if you’re known to have a disability and it’s decided that you shouldn’t exist, you can be aborted.” The paradox, she said, is that if the disabled child survives pregnancy and is born, they are then protected by legislation which deems them “an equal and valued human being” and provides for their needs. With the Church “it’s the other way around,” she said. “Because of our stance on life as gift and our protection of the unborn child, the disabled person’s life is totally respected and valued.” But once the disabled child is born and baptized, “there’s almost nothing for them to do.” “So the theology of disability doesn’t say it’s about belonging, it says ‘what are you going to do in your parish, and how are they going to belong?’” Read more

Munich, Germany, Jun 20, 2016 / 10:00 am (CNA).- In April, Robert Spaemann, emeritus professor of philosophy at the University of Munich, attracted significant attention for an interview with Anian Christoph Wimmer, editor of CNA's German-language edition. Greatly valued as an advisor by Saint John Paul II, a friend of Benedict XVI, and widely held to be the most important German Catholic philosopher of recent decades, Spaemann expressed a distinctly critical interpretation of Amoris Laetitia. After widespread reaction to that interview, Spaemann responded with a follow-up column in “Tagespost.” That column is reprinted below with permission.  We Shouldn’t Talk About a “Breach”: The Debate on Pope Francis and His Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia By Robert Spaemann My critical remarks in a conversation with Catholic News Agency (CNA) on the Papal Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, have evoked lively reactions – partly in enthusiastic approval, partly in rejection. The rejection refers primarily to the sentence that expresses a “breach with the teaching tradition of the Catholic Church” in footnote 351. What I wanted to say was that several of the Holy Father’s expressions are contrary to the words of Jesus, to the words of the Apostles, as well as the traditional Doctrine of the Church. One should only speak of a breach when a Pope clearly and explicitly teaches something by formally invoking his apostolic authority – so not casually in a footnote – that contradicts the aforementioned doctrinal tradition. The case is not given here because Pope Francis does not love unambiguousness. When he recently said that Christianity knows no “either-or,” it shows he is clearly not bothered that Christ said, “Let your ‘yes’ mean ‘yes’ and your ‘no’ mean ‘no.’ Anything more is from the evil one” (Mt 5:37). The letters of St. Paul are full of “either-or’s.” And finally, “Whoever is not with me is against me” (Mt 12:30). Pope Francis, however, only wants to “make suggestions.” Contradicting suggestions cannot be disallowed. And one must, in my opinion, contradict him energetically when he claims in Amoris Laetitia that Jesus also had only “set forth a demanding ideal.” No, Jesus commanded, “for he taught as one having authority, and not as their scribes” (Mt. 7:29). He himself points to, in among others a conversation with the rich young man, the inner unity of discipleship with the observance of the Ten Commandments (Lk 18:18-24). Jesus preaches no ideal, rather institutes a new reality: the Kingdom of God on earth. Jesus does not suggest, he invites and commands, “I give you a new commandment.” This new reality and this commandment bear a close relation to human nature, which is perceptible by the means of reason. Even if what the Holy Father expressed does not fit well with what I read in the scriptures and what comes to me in the Gospels, then it is not a sufficient reason to speak of a breach and it is above all not a reason – as Alexander Kissler unfortunately does – to make the Pope an object of polemics and ridicule. When St. Paul stood before the Sanhedrin to defend himself and the high priest ordered that he be struck in the face, Paul reacted with the words, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall.” After it was made known to Paul that he was standing before the high priest, Paul said, “Brothers, I did not know that he was the high priest. For it is written, ‘You shall not curse a ruler of your people’” (Acts 23:3,5). Kissler should have been moderate in tone when he wrote about the Pope even if the content of his critique is, for the most part, justifiable. The Pope complained that some – incited by the media – go more or less out of the way of his countless discussions on the alarming state of the family in order to get tied up on a footnote on the topic of receiving Holy Communion. But the pre-synodal public discussion revolved only once around this topic because there is actually only a yes or no answer here. The debate was continued and indeed equally controversial as before because the Pope refused to quote his predecessors’ clear statements concerning this matter and because his answer is so obviously equivocal that everyone can interpret and does interpret his words in favor of one’s own opinion. “If the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will be ready for battle?” (1 Cor 14:8). If the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith sees himself by now forced to publicly accuse one of the closest episcopal advisors and papal ghostwriter of heresy, then things have already gone too far. Also, the Roman Catholic Church is not infinitely resilient. Pope Francis loves to compare the critics of his politics with those “sitting on the chair of Moses.” But here, the shot backfires. It was the teachers of the law who defended divorce and handed down a regulation for them. Jesus’ disciples were then ultimately appalled by the Master’s strict ban on divorce, “Who then can still marry?” (Mt 19:10). Just as the people, who ran away upon hearing the proclamation of the Lord to eat His body and drink His blood, said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it? (John 6:60). The Lord “was moved with pity for the crowd,” but He was not a populist. “Do you also want to leave?” (John 6:67). This question to the Apostles was His only reaction to the decline in disciples.   Read more