Interview with Cardinal Kasper on communion to Lutheran spouse: the Council decree on ecumenism and the letters of John Paul II are fundamental.
It is a thorny topic, which has been under discussion for years, and has been addressed since the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. The recent majority-approved document of the German Bishops’ Conference - which systematically opened up the possibility for the Protestant spouse to access the Eucharist by attending mass with the Catholic spouse (after an interview with a priest and after adhering to what the Catholic Church believes about the sacrament) - provoked a letter from seven bishops who appealed to Rome. A meeting was held at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, presided over by the Prefect, Archbishop Luis Ladaria Ferrer, and finally Francis referred the matter to the German Bishops’ Conference, asking it to be formulated as unanimously as possible. A decision, that of Francis, which provoked indignant responses, and not only from the usual clerical-bloggers who appoint themselves as Master of Theology and submit everyone to their doctrinal exams even before knowing the decisions that will be taken. Striking reactions - to say the least – came also from eminent ecclesiastics, such as the cardinal archbishop of Utrecht, Willem Jacobus Eijk, who went to the extent of evoking apocalyptic visions of apostasy from the true faith. While the controversy was raging, Vatican Insider addressed some questions to the German theologian Walter Kasper, nominated bishop of Stuttgart and then called to Rome to lead the department for the promotion of Christian unity and who was created cardinal by Saint John Paul II.
Your Eminence, let us speak of intercommunion, a problem rebounded to the honours of the ecclesial chronicle after the approval of the document of the German bishops, the letter of seven of them who appealed to Rome and the Pope’s decision to postpone the discussion in the Episcopal Conference...
“I would like to make one premise first. Intercommunion is a topic and a concept that has been discussed for many years and in very different ecumenical spheres, not only in Germany. It is not only an explosive issue, but also an issue that is wrong in its formulation. Theologically it is a question of communion or admission to communion, which is always Eucharistic communion and at the same time ecclesial communion. The term “inter” suggests a state among different ecclesial communions, which through dialogue, cooperation, friendship is possible, indeed looked-for. But there can be no “inter” sacraments: the sacraments are always sacraments of a Church, or within a Church. The term intercommunion is therefore misleading and should be avoided. The document signed by the majority of the German Bishops’ Conference does not speak of intercommunion, as some of its opponents underline”.
Let us therefore leave aside the misleading term ““intercomunionˮ” and speak of the possibility that in some cases Protestant spouses may be able to make communion by participating in the Mass of their Catholic spouse. What are the documents of the Magisterium with which address this issue?
“The fundamental text to solve the problem is not canon 844 § 3 of the Code of Canon Law, which is a juridical text, and much discussed even among canonists, but the last paragraph of number 8 of the Council decree “Unitatis redintegratio”, which is a masterly text, which must be resumed and confirmed. The text of the Council makes three statements. The first: “Yet worship in common (communicatio in sacris) is not to be considered as a means to be used indiscriminately for the restoration of Christian unityˮ. The second: “ There are two main principles governing the practice of such common worship: first, the bearing witness to the unity of the Church, and second, the sharing in the means of grace”. The third: “ Witness to the unity of the Church very generally forbids common worship to Christians, but the grace to be had from it sometimes commends this practice. The course to be adopted, with due regard to all the circumstances of time, place, and persons, is to be decided by local episcopal authority”.
Therefore, there exists a competence of the local bishops in dealing with particular cases, established already by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council...
“Yes, there is a competence of the local authority for the so-called “Einzelfall” (special case). However, the theory of “Einzelfall” is not a clever invention, but is founded in a conciliar text, which ultimately goes back to a Thomist theory according to which the general rules are valid “ut in pluribus” and are to be applied according to the cardinal virtue of prudence inspired by charity. Obviously, this application is not arbitrary, but is governed by the supreme principle of salus animarum, the salvation of souls (CIC can. 1752). Unfortunately, in the controversial discussion this second principle is often neglected and the discussion focuses unilaterally on the first principle, that of the unity of the Church. This second principle is not to be reduced to a pastoral argument (in an often-superficial sense) but is grounded in sacramental theology itself and therefore there is no problem of a contrast between doctrine and pastoral, but of a levelling out between two doctrinal principles”.
What do you think of the German Bishops Conference’s drafted pastoral document that opened up the possibility, under certain conditions, of taking Communion to the Protestant spouse?
“The text is serious and essentially acceptable, even if I have some hesitations about some details, above all about the exegesis of canon 844 § 3, much discussed by canonists yet no longer theologically up to the theological-ecumenical discussion. In the meantime, two encyclicals by John Paul II, “Ut unum sint” (1995) and “Ecclesia de Eucharistiaˮ (2003) have formulated a more advanced position that can be the interpretative norm of the canon in full harmony with the Second Vatican Council. In the first of Pope Wojtyla’s two encyclicals at number 46 we read: “In this context, it is a source of joy to note that Catholic ministers are able, in certain particular cases, to administer the Sacraments of the Eucharist, Penance and Anointing of the Sick to Christians who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church but who greatly desire to receive these sacraments, freely request them and manifest the faith which the Catholic Church professes with regard to these sacramentsˮ. While in his second encyclical at number 45, we read: “ While it is never legitimate to concelebrate in the absence of full communion, the same is not true with respect to the administration of the Eucharist under special circumstances, to individual persons belonging to Churches or Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church. In this case, in fact, the intention is to meet a grave spiritual need for the eternal salvation of an individual believer”.
What is the meaning of these two statements of John Paul II?
“The two encyclicals insist very much on the Protestants’ adherence to the Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist, that is, on manifesting “the faith which the Catholic Church professes”, to quote John Paul II himself. This seems very important to me, because the sacraments are sacraments of faith. For a true Lutheran, based on confessional writings, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is obvious. The problem is the liberal and the reformed (Calvinists) Protestants. Especially with them the problem must be clarified in pastoral conversations. Certainly, one cannot ask a Protestant what is normally asked to a Catholic. It is enough to believe: “This is (est) the body of Christ, given for you”. Luther also insisted on this. Even a “normal” Catholic believer does not know the most developed doctrines on transubstantiation or consubstantiation.”
This has been a topic of discussion for many years, especially in the Church of Germany. Can you remember how and when people began to talk about it and how the German episcopate dealt with it?
“It is a theme of international ecumenism and not only German. In this context, it is not possible to go retrace its entire history. I would just like to say that in Germany we have a particular situation, which is very different from traditionally Catholic Countries such as Italy, Poland etc. ... In Germany the population of Catholic and Protestant faithful is half to half. The bi-confessional marriages are 40 percent, which is a very high percentage. Yet, many of these people are uninterested in the issue, while those concerned are a very small number: this context concerns them alone. If these people, in a rather secularized context, are true faithful who believe and are united in the same baptism and therefore belong to the one Church of Christ (even if not in full communion), and are also bound in the same sacrament of marriage and represent the mystery of the union between Christ and his Church, they are together with their children a domestic church. It is normal that they feel the intimate desire to share also the Eucharist. If they also share the Catholic Eucharistic faith, surely no one can stand in the way...? (cf. Acts 7:37; 10:47)”.
What do you think of the letter of the seven bishops opposing the document of the Episcopal Conference, who then appealed to Rome?
“I am not the school teacher of the other brother bishops, but I think that their problems can be resolved in the light of what I have said above”.
There was the meeting at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and it concluded with the Pope’s decision to send the discussion back to the episcopate so that a possibly unanimous position could be found. Francis’ gesture was harshly criticized by those who hoped for an immediate negative response of authority. What can you say?
“I think the Pope gave a very wise response. He remained in full harmony with the idea of the Church synodality. However, he also pointed out that on fundamental issues, a majority is not enough from the legal canonical point of view; unanimity is required. The press statement has made it clear that there are reasons on both sides to improve the text. No party has lost face. In my opinion, there is room for a continuation of the debate and for a reconciliation that would not be an unserious compromise. The most important thing in my opinion will be to deepen the pastoral problem”.
What do you mean when you say, “pastoral problem”?
“I think of the admonition of the Apostle Paul, to examine oneself to see if one can eat and drink from the altar (1 Cor 11:26): an indication that is not only for Protestants but also for Catholics. The initial questions are the same: do I really believe in the Eucharistic mystery and is my conduct of life in harmony with what is celebrated and what is present in the Eucharist? Gaps and problems of faith and moral behavior are found not only in Protestants but often in Catholics who today regularly go to receive Holy Communion. Indeed, I know many good Lutherans who have a Christian faith and life superior to that of many Catholics”.
In the years of your episcopate in Stuttgart, how did you deal with this particular problem?
“As bishop of a diocese in a region whose population is Catholic for a third, a third Protestant and the rest indifferent, I have never made an official statement. But I have learned (as all the other bishops know, even those who are now contrary to the document of the majority of the Episcopal Conference), that in the daily practice of parishes, a practice has developed - or at least is developing - according to which in a bi-confessional marriage, the Protestant partners who are truly interested, participate in communion. When asked about it by priests or individual Protestants, I normally answer as follows: if a Protestant participates in the Eucharistic celebration, they listen to what we say in the Eucharistic prayer. One needs to ask oneself: at the end of the doxology, can I really answer along with the whole assembly: “Amen, yes I believe”. And I would usually add: “you will also hear that we name the Pope and the bishop, which means that we celebrate in communion with him”. One must ask oneself: “Do I truly want this communion? But again: I have met many Protestants who have more esteem and often more love for the present Popes than some critical and sceptical Catholics have. The most important theological problems of universal jurisdiction, and of the fullness of jurisdiction etc. are not the problems of the normal laity and about the accusation that the Pope is the antichrist, the Protestants, who live in ecumenical friendship, gladly leave it today to the lay people and Freemasons. To conclude: when one descends into the field of concrete life and concrete pastoral work, situations are very different. Every situation is an “Einzelfall”, because every person is unique. Of course, theological principles always apply, but their concrete application is not made in a purely deductive and mechanical way. If we did so, it would be the heresy of Gnosticism, which is rightly denounced by the present Pope”.
