New outlook of the Catholic Church

by W. T. A. Leslie FERNANDO

The 1960s witnessed far-reaching changes in the Catholic Church. The Vatican Council II (1962-65) brought about significant changes in the Church doctrine, Church structure and its social and political aspects. These changes affected the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka as well.

The Catholic Church was always against Marxist orientated socialism. The communist Manifesto issued by Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels in 1848 called the workers who have nothing to lose but their chains to overthrow the capitalist system. On the latter half of the 19th century the Marxist philosophy was haunting Europe. In 1891 Pope Leo XIII issued 'Rerum Novarum' that addressed to the conditions of the working class to ameliorate them as a corollary. But it was never implemented. On the other hand in 1931 Pope Pius XI by Encyclical 'Quardesimo Anno' maintained not only Marxism but even moderated socialism cannot be brought into harmony with the dogmas of the Church.

The Catholic Church in Sri Lanka too allied itself with reactionary forces. In the 1940s the Catholic clearly who banded themselves under the banner of 'Social Justice' did everything possible to sabotage the Free Education Scheme and failed. Likewise they campaigned against the Paddy Lands Act that brought relief to the tenant farmer.

The Vatican Council II (1962-65) revolutionised the Catholic church. It acknowledged the truth and values found in other religions. It directed that Catholic rituals should be performed in national languages in accordance with the cultural background in each society. It relaxed its opposition to Marxism and even encouraged dialogue with Marxists. The disciplinary rules regarding the clergy too were liberalised to facilitate them to move with people so as to serve them.

The Vatican Council II has caused much confusion within the Catholic Church. There are various interpretations to Christianity and one is at a loss to understand the real doctrine. Attempts are being made to give a political dimension to religion and some suggest Christians should set up a kingdom of God in this world, when Christ has categorically explained that "My kingdom is not of this world."

The document of the Vatican Council II relating to other religions declared. 'The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in other religions. She looks with sincere respect those ways of conduct and of those rules and teachings, though differing from many particulars from what she holds and set forth, nevertheless often reflects the rays of that truth that enlightens all men.' Now the position of the Catholic Church is that other religions are seen as a preparation for the Gospel and playing a providential role in the divine economy of salvation.

The proposition that other religions are preparing ground for the Gospel may hold good in case of religions like Judaism and Islam that believes on an almighty God. It cannot be true of Buddhism and Hinduism which are based on the doctrine of Karma and cycle of re-births.

Christianity is a religion supposed to be directly revealed by God and Christians believe that Christ is an incarnation of almighty God. In Buddhism there is no place for an almighty God. The Buddha himself was an enlightened human being who expounded the four Noble Truths, the doctrine of Kamma and the way to Nirvana. Buddhism that nullifies an almighty God cannot play a providential role for Christianity.

Neither could Christianity and Buddhism be parallel religions. Christianity is based on belief and the Christians cannot doubt the mysteries of religion. The Buddha on the contrary instructed to follow the Dhamma on one's own volition after being convinced of its truth.

The only good thing effected by the Vatican Council II was to perform Catholic rituals in national languages with an indigenous background. This has made Catholic rituals meaningful to people and enabled them to actively participate in them. However under the present Pope there is a tendency to renew the Latin services. Recently it was reported in Catholic journals that they are going to examine haphazard change over. Is it a move to bring back Latin Services?

There are some Catholic priests who have formed NGO's who used to place the picture of Christ on one side and that of the Buddha on the other and preach Christianity and Buddhism which are poles apart as parallel religions. There are other Catholic priests who introduce Buddhist rituals to Catholic churches in festivals like Vesak.

Once Prince Siddhartha walking on Lotus flowers soon after the birth was depicted in the premises of a church for Vesak. In another year a Bhikku preached Bana for Vesak in a Catholic Church. In the following year a statue of the Buddha was placed in the same church premises and a pandal was erected. There had been Vesak Bhakthi Gee in church premises as well. In some Catholic churches Vesak lanterns are hung and illuminated.

The church is a place consecrated to God. There is Holy Eucharist in the church and we Catholics believe that God is present there. Lord Buddha according to Buddhism is not a God but an enlightened human being. Paying homage to a human being in a church is a sacrilege.

In an article titled 'The Saintliness of Buddha, written by a Catholic priest that appeared in the 'Catholic Messenger' it is emphasised that the Catholic Church at one time had considered Lord Buddha as a Saint called St. Johsapaht. He extols that the medieval Church treated Lord Buddha as a Saint because his renunciation of royal household was an exemplary Christian virtue.

The Buddha denied an omnipotent God, creation and soul. (anatta). It is strange how such a personality who nullified the basic Christian doctrine could have been considered a Saint by the Catholic Church and for that matter how a Catholic priest who has faith in an almighty God could endorse it by drawing a parallel between Buddhism and Christianity. It is not only an insult to God but also to the Buddha as it makes him subservient to a God!

Thus Vatican Council II has done more damage to the Church than good. There should be another Vatican Council to set right the damage by the Vatican Council II. Some interpret Vatican Council II as a device by the Catholic Church to meet modern thinking and perpetuate its existence.