IOANNES PAULUS PP.

II
 
DIVES IN MISERICORDIA
 

Blessing

Venerable Brothers and dear sons and daughters,

greetings and the apostolic blessing.

I. HE WHO SEES ME SEES THE FATHER (cf. John 14:9)

1. The Revelation of Mercy

It is "God, who is rich in mercy" 1 whom Jesus Christ has revealed to us as Father: it is His very Son who, in
Himself, has manifested Him and made Him known to us.2 Memorable in this regard is the moment when
Philip, one of the twelve Apostles, turned to Christ and said: "Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be
satisfied"; and Jesus replied: "Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me...? He who has seen
me has seen the Father."3 These words were spoken during the farewell discourse at the end of the paschal
supper, which was followed by the events of those holy days during which confirmation was to be given once
and for all of the fact that "God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us, even when
we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ."4

Following the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and paying close attention to the special needs of our
times, I devoted the encyclical Redemptor hominis to the truth about man, a truth that is revealed to us in its
fullness and depth in Christ. A no less important need in these critical and difficult times impels me to draw
attention once again in Christ to the countenance of the "Father of mercies and God of all comfort."5 We read in
the Constitution Gaudium et spes: "Christ the new Adam...fully reveals man to himself and brings to light his
lofty calling," and does it "in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love."6 The words that I
have quoted are clear testimony to the fact that man cannot be manifested in the full dignity of his nature
without reference - not only on the level of concepts but also in an integrally existential way - to God. Man and
man's lofty calling are revealed in Christ through the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love.

For this reason it is now fitting to reflect on this mystery. It is called for by the varied experiences of the Church
and of contemporary man. It is also demanded by the pleas of many human hearts, their sufferings and hopes,
their anxieties and expectations. While it is true that every individual human being is, as I said in my encyclical
Redemptor hominis, the way for the Church, at the same time the Gospel and the whole of Tradition constantly
show us that we must travel this day with every individual just as Christ traced it out by revealing in Himself
the Father and His love.7 In Jesus Christ, every path to man, as it has been assigned once and for all to the
Church in the changing context of the times, is simultaneously an approach to the Father and His love. The
Second Vatican Council has confirmed this truth for our time.

The more the Church's mission is centered upon man-the more it is, so to speak, anthropocentric-the more it
must be confirmed and actualized theocentrically, that is to say, be directed in Jesus Christ to the Father. While
the various currents of human thought both in the past and at the present have tended and still tend to separate
theocentrism and anthropocentrism, and even to set them in opposition to each other, the Church, following
Christ, seeks to link them up in human history, in a deep and organic way. And this is also one of the basic
principles, perhaps the most important one, of the teaching of the last Council. Since, therefore, in the present
phase of the Church's history we put before ourselves as our primary task the implementation of the doctrine of
the great Council, we must act upon this principle with faith, with an open mind and with all our heart. In the
encyclical already referred to, I have tried to show that the deepening and the many-faceted enrichment of the
Church's consciousness resulting from the Council must open our minds and our hearts more widely to Christ.
Today I wish to say that openness to Christ, who as the Redeemer of the world fully reveals man himself," can
only be achieved through an ever more mature reference to the Father and His love.

2. The Incarnation of Mercy

Although God "dwells in unapproachable light,"8 He speaks to man he means of the whole of the universe:
"ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly
perceived in the things that have been made."9 This indirect and imperfect knowledge, achieved by the intellect
seeking God by means of creatures through the visible world, falls short of "vision of the Father." "No one has
ever seen God," writes St. John, in order to stress the truth that "the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father,
he has made him known."10 This "making known" reveals God in the most profound mystery of His being, one
and three, surrounded by "unapproachable light."11 Nevertheless, through this "making known" by Christ we
know God above all in His relationship of love for man: in His "philanthropy."12 It is precisely here that "His
invisible nature" becomes in a special way "visible," incomparably more visible than through all the other
"things that have been made": it becomes visible in Christ and through Christ, through His actions and His
words, and finally through His death on the cross and His resurrection.

In this way, in Christ and through Christ, God also becomes especially visible in His mercy; that is to say, there
is emphasized that attribute of the divinity which the Old Testament, using various concepts and terms, already
defined as "mercy." Christ confers on the whole of the Old Testament tradition about God's mercy a definitive
meaning. Not only does He speak of it and explain it by the use of comparisons and parables, but above all He
Himself makes it incarnate and personifies it. He Himself, in a certain sense, is mercy. To the person who sees it
in Him - and finds it in Him - God becomes "visible" in a particular way as the Father who is rich in mercy."13

The present-day mentality, more perhaps than that of people in the past, seems opposed to a God of mercy, and
in fact tends to exclude from life and to remove from the human heart the very idea of mercy. The word and the
concept of "mercy" seem to cause uneasiness in man, who, thanks to the enormous development of science and
technology, never before known in history, has become the master of the earth and has subdued and dominated
it.14 This dominion over the earth, sometimes understood in a one - sided and superficial way, seems to have no
room for mercy. However, in this regard we can profitably refer to the picture of "man's situation in the world
today" as described at the beginning of the Constitution Gaudium et spes. Here we read the following sentences:
"In the light of the foregoing factors there appears the dichotomy of a world that is at once powerful and weak,
capable of doing what is noble and what is base, disposed to freedom and slavery, progress and decline,
brotherhood and hatred. Man is growing conscious that the forces he has unleashed are in his own hands and
that it is up to him to control them or be enslaved by them."15

The situation of the world today not only displays transformations that give grounds for hope in a better future
for man on earth, but also reveals a multitude of threats, far surpassing those known up till now. Without
ceasing to point out these threats on various occasions (as in addresses at UNO, to UNESCO, to FAO and
elsewhere), the Church must at the same time examine them in the light of the truth received from God.

The truth, revealed in Christ, about God the "Father of mercies,"16 enables us to "see" Him as particularly close
to man especially when man is suffering, when he is under threat at the very heart of his existence and dignity.
And this is why, in the situation of the Church and the world today, many individuals and groups guided by a
lively sense of faith are turning, I would say almost spontaneously, to the mercy of God. They are certainly
being moved to do this by Christ Himself, who through His Spirit works within human hearts. For the mystery
of God the "Father of mercies" revealed by Christ becomes, in the context of today's threats to man, as it were a
unique appeal addressed to the Church.
In the present encyclical wish to accept this appeal; I wish to draw from the eternal and at the same time-for its
simplicity and depth- incomparable language of revelation and faith, in order through this same language to
express once more before God and before humanity the major anxieties of our time.

In fact, revelation and faith teach us not only to meditate in the abstract upon the mystery of God as "Father of
mercies," but also to have recourse to that mercy in the name of Christ and in union with Him. Did not Christ
say that our Father, who "sees in secret,"17 is always waiting for us to have recourse to Him in every need and
always waiting for us to study His mystery: the mystery of the Father and His love?18

I therefore wish these considerations to bring this mystery closer to everyone. At the same time I wish them to
be a heartfelt appeal by the Church to mercy, which humanity and the modern world need so much. And they
need mercy even though they often do not realize it.

II. THE MESSIANIC MESSAGE  

3. When Christ Began To Do and To Teach

Before His own townspeople, in Nazareth, Christ refers to the words of the prophet Isaiah: "The Spirit of the
Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim
release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim
the acceptable year of the Lord."19 These phrases, according to Luke, are His first messianic declaration. They
are followed by the actions and words known through the Gospel. By these actions and words Christ makes the
Father present among men. It is very significant that the people in question are especially the poor, those
without means of subsistence, those deprived of their freedom, the blind who cannot see the beauty of creation,
those living with broken hearts, or suffering from social injustice, and finally sinners. It is especially for these
last that the Messiah becomes a particularly clear sign of God who is love, a sign of the Father. In this visible
sign the people of our own time, just like the people then, can see the Father.

It is significant that, when the messengers sent by John the Baptist came to Jesus to ask Him: "Are you he who
is to come, or shall we look for another?",20 He answered by referring to the same testimony with which He had
begun His teaching at Nazareth: "Go and tell John what it is that you have seen and heard: the blind receive
their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good
news preached to them." He then ended with the words: "And blessed is he who takes no offense at me".21

Especially through His lifestyle and through His actions, Jesus revealed that love is present in the world in
which we live - an effective love, a love that addresses itself to man and embraces everything that makes up his
humanity. This love makes itself particularly noticed in contact with suffering, injustice and poverty - in contact
with the whole historical "human condition," which in various ways manifests man's limitation and frailty, both
physical and moral. It is precisely the mode and sphere in which love manifests itself that in biblical language is
called "mercy."

Christ, then, reveals God who is Father, who is "love," as St. John will express it in his first letter22; Christ
reveals God as "rich in mercy," as we read in St. Paul.23 This truth is not just the subject of a teaching; it is a
reality made present to us by Christ. Making the Father present as love and mercy is, in Christ's own
consciousness, the fundamental touchstone of His mission as the Messiah; this is confirmed by the words that
He uttered first in the synagogue at Nazareth and later in the presence of His disciples and of John the Baptist's
messengers.

On the basis of this way of manifesting the presence of God who is Father, love and mercy, Jesus makes mercy
one of the principal themes of His preaching. As is His custom, He first teaches "in parables," since these
express better the very essence of things. It is sufficient to recall the parable of the prodigal son,24 or the parable
of the Good Samaritan,25 but also - by contrast - the parable of the merciless servant.26 There are many passages
in the teaching of Christ that manifest love-mercy under some ever-fresh aspect. We need only consider the
Good Shepherd who goes in search of the lost sheep, 27 or the woman who sweeps the house in search of the
lost coin.28 The Gospel writer who particularly treats of these themes in Christ's teaching is Luke, whose Gospel
has earned the title of "the Gospel of mercy."

When one speaks of preaching, one encounters a problem of major importance with reference to the meaning of
terms and the content of concepts, especially the content of the concept of "mercy" (in relationship to the
concept of "love"). A grasp of the content of these concepts is the key to understanding the very reality of
mercy. And this is what is most important for us. However, before devoting a further part of our considerations
to this subject, that is to say, to establishing the meaning of the vocabulary and the content proper to the concept
of mercy," we must note that Christ, in revealing the love - mercy of God, at the same time demanded from
people that they also should be guided in their lives by love and mercy. This requirement forms part of the very
essence of the messianic message, and constitutes the heart of the Gospel ethos. The Teacher expresses this both
through the medium of the commandment which He describes as "the greatest,"29 and also in the form of a
blessing, when in the Sermon on the Mount He proclaims: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain
mercy."30

In this way, the messianic message about mercy preserves a particular divine-human dimension. Christ - the
very fulfillment of the messianic prophecy - by becoming the incarnation of the love that is manifested with
particular force with regard to the suffering, the unfortunate and sinners, makes present and thus more fully
reveals the Father, who is God "rich in mercy." At the same time, by becoming for people a model of merciful
love for others, Christ proclaims by His actions even more than by His words that call to mercy which is one of
the essential elements of the Gospel ethos. In this instance it is not just a case of fulfilling a commandment or an
obligation of an ethical nature; it is also a case of satisfying a condition of major importance for God to reveal
Himself in His mercy to man: "The merciful...shall obtain mercy."

III.  THE OLD TESTAMENT  

4. The Concept of "Mercy" in the Old Testament

The concept of "mercy" in the Old Testament has a long and rich history. We have to refer back to it in order
that the mercy revealed by Christ may shine forth more clearly. By revealing that mercy both through His
actions and through His teaching, Christ addressed Himself to people who not only knew the concept of mercy,
but who also, as the People of God of the Old Covenant, had drawn from their age - long history a special
experience of the mercy of God. This experience was social and communal, as well as individual and interior.

Israel was, in fact, the people of the covenant with God, a covenant that it broke many times. Whenever it
became aware of its infidelity - and in the history of Israel there was no lack of prophets and others who
awakened this awareness-it appealed to mercy. In this regard, the books of the Old Testament give us very
many examples. Among the events and texts of greater importance one may recall: the beginning of the history
of the Judges,31 the prayer of Solomon at the inauguration of the Temple,32 part of the prophetic work of
Micah,33 the consoling assurances given by Isaiah,34 the cry of the Jews in exile,35 and the renewal of the
covenant after the return from exile.36

It is significant that in their preaching the prophets link mercy, which they often refer to because of the people's
sins, with the incisive image of love on God's part. The Lord loves Israel with the love of a special choosing,
much like the love of a spouse,37 and for this reason He pardons its sins and even its infidelities and betrayals.
When He finds repentance and true conversion, He brings His people back to grace.38 In the preaching of the
prophets, mercy signifies a special power of love, which prevails over the sin and infidelity of the chosen
people.

In this broad "social" context, mercy appears as a correlative to the interior experience of individuals
languishing in a state of guilt or enduring every kind of suffering and misfortune. Both physical evil and moral
evil, namely sin, cause the sons and daughters of Israel to turn to the Lord and beseech His mercy. In this way
David turns to Him, conscious of the seriousness of his guilt39; Job too, after his rebellion, turns to Him in his
tremendous misfortune40; so also does Esther, knowing the mortal threat to her own people.41 And we find still
other examples in the books of the Old Testament.42

At the root of this many-sided conviction, which is both communal and personal, and which is demonstrated by
the whole of the Old Testament down the centuries, is the basic experience of the chosen people at the Exodus:
the Lord saw the affliction of His people reduced to slavery, heard their cry, knew their sufferings and decided
to deliver them.43 In this act of salvation by the Lord, the prophet perceived his love and compassion.44 This is
precisely the grounds upon which the people and each of its members based their certainty of the mercy of God,
which can be invoked whenever tragedy strikes.

Added to this is the fact that sin too constitutes man's misery. The people of the Old Covenant experienced this
misery from the time of the Exodus, when they set up the golden calf. The Lord Himself triumphed over this act
of breaking the covenant when He solemnly declared to Moses that He was a "God merciful and gracious, slow
to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness."45 It is in this central revelation that the chosen
people, and each of its members, will find, every time that they have sinned, the strength and the motive for
turning to the Lord to remind Him of what He had exactly revealed about Himself46 and to beseech His
forgiveness.

Thus, in deeds and in words, the Lord revealed His mercy from the very beginnings of the people which He
chose for Himself; and, in the course of its history, this people continually entrusted itself, both when stricken
with misfortune and when it became aware of its sin, to the God of mercies. All the subtleties of love become
manifest in the Lord's mercy towards those who are His own: He is their Father,47 for Israel is His firstborn
son48; the Lord is also the bridegroom of her whose new name the prophet proclaims: Ruhamah, "Beloved" or
"she has obtained pity."49

Even when the Lord is exasperated by the infidelity of His people and thinks of finishing with it, it is still His
tenderness and generous love for those who are His own which overcomes His anger.50 Thus it is easy to
understand why the psalmists, when they desire to sing the highest praises of the Lord, break forth into hymns
to the God of love, tenderness, mercy and fidelity.51

From all this it follows that mercy does not pertain only to the notion of God, but it is something that
characterizes the life of the whole people of Israel and each of its sons and daughters: mercy is the content of
intimacy with their Lord, the content of their dialogue with Him. Under precisely this aspect, mercy is presented
in the individual books of the Old Testament with a great richness of expression. It may be difficult to find in
these books a purely theoretical answer to the question of what mercy is in itself. Nevertheless, the terminology
that is used is in itself able to tell us much about this subject.52

The Old Testament proclaims the mercy of the Lord by the use of many terms with related meanings; they are
differentiated by their particular content, but it could be said that they all converge from different directions on
one single fundamental content, to express its surpassing richness and at the same time to bring it close to man
under different aspects. The Old Testament encourages people suffering from misfortune, especially those
weighed down by sin - as also the whole of Israel, which had entered into the covenant with God - to appeal for
mercy, and enables them to count upon it: it reminds them of His mercy in times of failure and loss of trust.
Subsequently, the Old Testament gives thanks and glory for mercy every time that mercy is made manifest in
the life of the people or in the lives of individuals.
In this way, mercy is in a certain sense contrasted with God's justice, and in many cases is shown to be not only
more powerful than that justice but also more profound. Even the Old Testament teaches that, although justice
is an authentic virtue in man, and in God signifies transcendent perfection nevertheless love is "greater" than
justice: greater in the sense that it is primary and fundamental. Love, so to speak, conditions justice and, in the
final analysis, justice serves love. The primacy and superiority of love vis-a-vis justice - this is a mark of the
whole of revelation - are revealed precisely through mercy. This seemed so obvious to the psalmists and
prophets that the very term justice ended up by meaning the salvation accomplished by the Lord and His
mercy.53 Mercy differs from justice, but is not in opposition to it, if we admit in the history of man - as the Old
Testament precisely does-the presence of God, who already as Creator has linked Himself to His creature with a
particular love. Love, by its very nature, excludes hatred and ill - will towards the one to whom He once gave
the gift of Himself: Nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti, "you hold nothing of what you have made in abhorrence."54
These words indicate the profound basis of the relationship between justice and mercy in God, in His relations
with man and the world. They tell us that we must seek the life-giving roots and intimate reasons for this
relationship by going back to "the beginning," in the very mystery of creation. They foreshadow in the context
of the Old Covenant the full revelation of God, who is "love."55

Connected with the mystery of creation is the mystery of the election, which in a special way shaped the history
of the people whose spiritual father is Abraham by virtue of his faith. Nevertheless, through this people which
journeys forward through the history both of the Old Covenant and of the New, that mystery of election refers
to every man and woman, to the whole great human family. "I have loved you with an everlasting love,
therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you."56 "For the mountains may depart...my steadfast love shall
not depart from you, and my covenant of peace shall not be removed."57 This truth, once proclaimed to Israel,
involves a perspective of the whole history of man, a perspective both temporal and eschatological.58 Christ
reveals the Father within the framework of the same perspective and on ground already prepared, as many pages
of the Old Testament writings demonstrate. At the end of this revelation, on the night before He dies, He says to
the apostle Philip these memorable words: "Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me...? He
who has seen me has seen the Father."59

IV.  THE PARABLE OF THE PRODIGAL SON  

5. An Analogy

At the very beginning of the New Testament, two voices resound in St. Luke's Gospel in unique harmony
concerning the mercy of God, a harmony which forcefully echoes the whole Old Testament tradition. They
express the semantic elements linked to the differentiated terminology of the ancient books. Mary, entering the
house of Zechariah, magnifies the Lord with all her soul for "his mercy," which "from generation to generation"
is bestowed on those who fear Him. A little later, as she recalls the election of Israel, she proclaims the mercy
which He who has chosen her holds "in remembrance" from all time.60 Afterwards, in the same house, when
John the Baptist is born, his father Zechariah blesses the God of Israel and glorifies Him for performing the
mercy promised to our fathers and for remembering His holy covenant.61

In the teaching of Christ Himself, this image inherited from the Old Testament becomes at the same time
simpler and more profound. This is perhaps most evident in the parable of the prodigal son.62 Although the word
"mercy" does not appear, it nevertheless expresses the essence of the divine mercy in a particularly clear way.
This is due not so much to the terminology, as in the Old Testament books, as to the analogy that enables us to
understand more fully the very mystery of mercy, as a profound drama played out between the father's love and
the prodigality and sin of the son.

That son, who receives from the father the portion of the inheritance that is due to him and leaves home to
squander it in a far country "in loose living," in a certain sense is the man of every period, beginning with the
one who was the first to lose the inheritance of grace and original justice. The analogy at this point is very wide-
ranging. The parable indirectly touches upon every breach of the covenant of love, every loss of grace, every
sin. In this analogy there is less emphasis than in the prophetic tradition on the unfaithfulness of the whole
people of Israel, although the analogy of the prodigal son may extend to this also. "When he had spent
everything," the son "began to be in need," especially as "a great famine arose in that country" to which he had
gone after leaving his father's house. And in this situation "he would gladly have fed on" anything, even "the
pods that the swine ate," the swine that he herded for "one of the citizens of that country." But even this was
refused him.

The analogy turns clearly towards man's interior. The inheritance that the son had received from his father was a
quantity of material goods, but more important than these goods was his dignity as a son in his father's house.
The situation in which he found himself when he lost the material goods should have made him aware of the
loss of that dignity. He had not thought about it previously, when he had asked his father to give him the part of
the inheritance that was due to him, in order to go away. He seems not to be conscious of it even now, when he
says to himself: "How many of my father's hired servants have bread enough and to spare, but I perish here with
hunger." He measures himself by the standard of the goods that he has lost, that he no longer "possesses," while
the hired servants of his father's house "possess" them. These words express above all his attitude to material
goods; nevertheless under their surface is concealed the tragedy of lost dignity, the awareness of squandered
sonship.

It is at this point that he makes the decision: "I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, 'Father, I
have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Treat me as one of
your hired servants.'"63 These are words that reveal more deeply the essential problem. Through the complex
material situation in which the prodigal son found himself because of his folly, because of sin, the sense of lost
dignity had matured. When he decides to return to his father's house, to ask his father to be received-no longer
by virtue of his right as a son, but as an employee-at first sight he seems to be acting by reason of the hunger
and poverty that he had fallen into; this motive, however, is permeated by an awareness of a deeper loss: to be a
hired servant in his own father's house is certainly a great humiliation and source of shame. Nevertheless, the
prodigal son is ready to undergo that humiliation and shame. He realizes that he no longer has any right except
to be an employee in his father's house. His decision is taken in full consciousness of what he has deserved and
of what he can still have a right to in accordance with the norms of justice. Precisely this reasoning
demonstrates that, at the center of the prodigal son's consciousness, the sense of lost dignity is emerging, the
sense of that dignity that springs from the relationship of the son with the father. And it is with this decision that
he sets out.

In the parable of the prodigal son, the term "justice" is not used even once; just as in the original text the term
"mercy" is not used either. Nevertheless, the relationship between justice and love, that is manifested as mercy,
is inscribed with great exactness in the content of the Gospel parable. It becomes more evident that love is
transformed into mercy when it is necessary to go beyond the precise norm of justice-precise and often too
narrow. The prodigal son, having wasted the property he received from his father, deserves - after his return - to
earn his living by working in his father's house as a hired servant and possibly, little by little, to build up a
certain provision of material goods, though perhaps never as much as the amount he had squandered. This
would be demanded by the order of justice, especially as the son had not only squandered the part of the
inheritance belonging to him but had also hurt and offended his father by his whole conduct. Since this conduct
had in his own eyes deprived him of his dignity as a son, it could not be a matter of indifference to his father. It
was bound to make him suffer. It was also bound to implicate him in some way. And yet, after all, it was his
own son who was involved, and such a relationship could never be altered or destroyed by any sort of behavior.
The prodigal son is aware of this and it is precisely this awareness that shows him clearly the dignity which he
has lost and which makes him honestly evaluate the position that he could still expect in his father's house.

6. Particular Concentration on Human Dignity

This exact picture of the prodigal son's state of mind enables us to understand exactly what the mercy of God
consists in. There is no doubt that in this simple but penetrating analogy the figure of the father reveals to us
God as Father. The conduct of the father in the parable and his whole behavior, which manifests his internal
attitude, enables us to rediscover the individual threads of the Old Testament vision of mercy in a synthesis
which is totally new, full of simplicity and depth. The father of the prodigal son is faithful to his fatherhood,
faithful to the love that he had always lavished on his son. This fidelity is expressed in the parable not only by
his immediate readiness to welcome him home when he returns after having squandered his inheritance; it is
expressed even more fully by that joy, that merrymaking for the squanderer after his return, merrymaking which
is so generous that it provokes the opposition and hatred of the elder brother, who had never gone far away from
his father and had never abandoned the home.

The father's fidelity to himself - a trait already known by the Old Testament term hesed - is at the same time
expressed in a manner particularly charged with affection. We read, in fact, that when the father saw the
prodigal son returning home "he had compassion, ran to meet him, threw his arms around his neck and kissed
him."64 He certainly does this under the influence of a deep affection, and this also explains his generosity
towards his son, that generosity which so angers the elder son. Nevertheless, the causes of this emotion are to be
sought at a deeper level. Notice, the father is aware that a fundamental good has been saved: the good of his
son's humanity. Although the son has squandered the inheritance, nevertheless his humanity is saved. Indeed, it
has been, in a way, found again. The father's words to the elder son reveal this: "It was fitting to make merry
and be glad, for this your brother was dead and is alive; he was lost and is found."65 In the same chapter fifteen
of Luke's Gospel, we read the parable of the sheep that was found66 and then the parable of the coin that was
found.67 Each time there is an emphasis on the same joy that is present in the case of the prodigal son. The
father's fidelity to himself is totally concentrated upon the humanity of the lost son, upon his dignity. This
explains above all his joyous emotion at the moment of the son's return home.

Going on, one can therefore say that the love for the son the love that springs from the very essence of
fatherhood, in a way obliges the father to be concerned about his son's dignity. This concern is the measure of
his love, the love of which Saint Paul was to write: "Love is patient and kind.. .love does not insist on its own
way; it is not irritable or resentful...but rejoices in the right...hopes all things, endures all things" and "love never
ends."68 Mercy - as Christ has presented it in the parable of the prodigal son - has the interior form of the love
that in the New Testament is called agape. This love is able to reach down to every prodigal son, to every
human misery, and above all to every form of moral misery, to sin. When this happens, the person who is the
object of mercy does not feel humiliated, but rather found again and "restored to value." The father first and
foremost expresses to him his joy that he has been "found again" and that he has "returned to life. This joy
indicates a good that has remained intact: even if he is a prodigal, a son does not cease to be truly his father's
son; it also indicates a good that has been found again, which in the case of the prodigal son was his return to
the truth about himself.

What took place in the relationship between the father and the son in Christ's parable is not to be evaluated
"from the outside." Our prejudices about mercy are mostly the result of appraising them only from the outside.
At times it happens that by following this method of evaluation we see in mercy above all a relationship of
inequality between the one offering it and the one receiving it. And, in consequence, we are quick to deduce that
mercy belittles the receiver, that it offends the dignity of man. The parable of the prodigal son shows that the
reality is different: the relationship of mercy is based on the common experience of that good which is man, on
the common experience of the dignity that is proper to him. This common experience makes the prodigal son
begin to see himself and his actions in their full truth (this vision in truth is a genuine form of humility); on the
other hand, for this very reason he becomes a particular good for his father: the father sees so clearly the good
which has been achieved thanks to a mysterious radiation of truth and love, that he seems to forget all the evil
which the son had committed.

The parable of the prodigal son expresses in a simple but profound way the reality of conversion. Conversion is
the most concrete expression of the working of love and of the presence of mercy in the human world. The true
and proper meaning of mercy does not consist only in looking, however penetratingly and compassionately, at
moral, physical or material evil: mercy is manifested in its true and proper aspect when it restores to value,
promotes and draws good from all the forms of evil existing in the world and in man. Understood in this way,
mercy constitutes the fundamental content of the messianic message of Christ and the constitutive power of His
mission. His disciples and followers understood and practiced mercy in the same way. Mercy never ceased to
reveal itself, in their hearts and in their actions, as an especially creative proof of the love which does not allow
itself to be "conquered by evil," but overcomes "evil with good."69 The genuine face of mercy has to be ever
revealed anew. In spite of many prejudices, mercy seems particularly necessary for our times.

V.  THE PASCHAL MYSTERY  

7. Mercy Revealed in the Cross and Resurrection

The messianic message of Christ and His activity among people end with the cross and resurrection. We have to
penetrate deeply into this final event-which especially in the language of the Council is defined as the
Mysterium Paschale - if we wish to express in depth the truth about mercy, as it has been revealed in depth in
the history of our salvation. At this point of our considerations, we shall have to draw closer still to the content
of the encyclical Redemptor hominis. If, in fact, the reality of the Redemption, in its human dimension, reveals
the unheard - of greatness of man, qui talem ac tantum meruit habere Redemptorem,70 at the same time the
divine dimension of the redemption enables us, I would say, in the most empirical and "historical" way, to
uncover the depth of that love which does not recoil before the extraordinary sacrifice of the Son, in order to
satisfy the fidelity of the Creator and Father towards human beings, created in His image and chosen from "the
beginning," in this Son, for grace and glory.

The events of Good Friday and, even before that, in prayer in Gethsemane, introduce a fundamental change into
the whole course of the revelation of love and mercy in the messianic mission of Christ. The one who "went
about doing good and healing"71 and "curing every sickness and disease"72 now Himself seems to merit the
greatest mercy and to appeal for mercy, when He is arrested, abused, condemned, scourged, crowned with
thorns, when He is nailed to the cross and dies amidst agonizing torments.73 It is then that He particularly
deserves mercy from the people to whom He has done good, and He does not receive it. Even those who are
closest to Him cannot protect Him and snatch Him from the hands of His oppressors. At this final stage of His
messianic activity the words which the prophets, especially Isaiah, uttered concerning the Servant of Yahweh
are fulfilled in Christ: "Through his stripes we are healed."74

Christ, as the man who suffers really and in a terrible way in the Garden of Olives and on Calvary, addresses
Himself to the Father- that Father whose love He has preached to people, to whose mercy He has borne witness
through all of His activity. But He is not spared - not even He-the terrible suffering of death on the cross: For
our sake God made him to be sin who knew no sin,"75 St. Paul will write, summing up in a few words the whole
depth of the cross and at the same time the divine dimension of the reality of the Redemption. Indeed this
Redemption is the ultimate and definitive revelation of the holiness of God, who is the absolute fullness of
perfection: fullness of justice and of love, since justice is based on love, flows from it and tends towards it. In
the passion and death of Christ-in the fact that the Father did not spare His own Son, but "for our sake made him
sin"76 - absolute justice is expressed, for Christ undergoes the passion and cross because of the sins of humanity.
This constitutes even a "superabundance" of justice, for the sins of man are "compensated for" by the sacrifice
of the Man-God. Nevertheless, this justice, which is properly justice "to God's measure," springs completely
from love: from the love of the Father and of the Son, and completely bears fruit in love. Precisely for this
reason the divine justice revealed in the cross of Christ is "to God's measure," because it springs from love and
is accomplished in love, producing fruits of salvation. The divine dimension of redemption is put into effect not
only by bringing justice to bear upon sin, but also by restoring to love that creative power in man thanks also
which he once more has access to the fullness of life and holiness that come from God. In this way, redemption
involves the revelation of mercy in its fullness.

The Paschal Mystery is the culmination of this revealing and effecting of mercy, which is able to justify man, to
restore justice in the sense of that salvific order which God willed from the beginning in man and, through man,
in the world. The suffering Christ speaks in a special way to man, and not only to the believer. The non-believer
also will be able to discover in Him the eloquence of solidarity with the human lot, as also the harmonious
fullness of a disinterested dedication to the cause of man, to truth and to love. And yet the divine dimension of
the Paschal Mystery goes still deeper. The cross on Calvary, the cross upon which Christ conducts His final
dialogue with the Father, emerges from the very heart of the love that man, created in the image and likeness of
God, has been given as a gift, according to God's eternal plan. God, as Christ has revealed Him, does not merely
remain closely linked with the world as the Creator and the ultimate source of existence. He is also Father: He is
linked to man, whom He called to existence in the visible world, by a bond still more intimate than that of
creation. It is love which not only creates the good but also grants participation in the very life of God: Father,
Son and Holy Spirit. For he who loves desires to give himself.

The cross of Christ on Calvary stands beside the path of that admirable commercium, of that wonderful self-
communication of God to man, which also includes the call to man to share in the divine life by giving himself,
and with himself the whole visible world, to God, and like an adopted son to become a sharer in the truth and
love which is in God and proceeds from God. It is precisely beside the path of man's eternal election to the
dignity of being an adopted child of God that there stands in history the cross of Christ, the only - begotten Son,
who, as "light from light, true God from true God,"77 came to give the final witness to the wonderful covenant
of God with humanity, of God with man - every human being This covenant, as old as man - it goes back to the
very mystery of creation - and afterwards many times renewed with one single chosen people, is equally the
new and definitive covenant, which was established there on Calvary, and is not limited to a single people, to
Israel, but is open to each and every individual.

What else, then, does the cross of Christ say to us, the cross that in a sense is the final word of His messianic
message and mission? And yet this is not yet the word of the God of the covenant: that will be pronounced at
the dawn when first the women and then the Apostles come to the tomb of the crucified Christ, see the tomb
empty and for the first time hear the message: "He is risen." They will repeat this message to the others and will
be witnesses to the risen Christ. Yet, even in this glorification of the Son of God, the cross remains, that cross
which-through all the messianic testimony of the Man the Son, who suffered death upon it - speaks and never
ceases to speak of God the Father, who is absolutely faithful to His eternal love for man, since He "so loved the
world" - therefore man in the world-that "he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish
but have eternal life."78 Believing in the crucified Son means "seeing the Father,"79 means believing that love is
present in the world and that this love is more powerful than any kind of evil in which individuals, humanity, or
the world are involved. Believing in this love means believing in mercy. For mercy is an indispensable
dimension of love; it is as it were love's second name and, at the same time, the specific manner in which love is
revealed and effected vis-a-vis the reality of the evil that is in the world, affecting and besieging man,
insinuating itself even into his heart and capable of causing him to "perish in Gehenna."80

8. Love More Powerful Than Death, More Powerful Than Sin

The cross of Christ on Calvary is also a witness to the strength of evil against the very Son of God, against the
one who, alone among all the sons of men, was by His nature absolutely innocent and free from sin, and whose
coming into the world was untainted by the disobedience of Adam and the inheritance of original sin. And here,
precisely in Him, in Christ, justice is done to sin at the price of His sacrifice, of His obedience "even to death."81
He who was without sin, "God made him sin for our sake."82 Justice is also brought to bear upon death, which
from the beginning of man's history had been allied to sin. Death has justice done to it at the price of the death
of the one who was without sin and who alone was able-by means of his own death-to inflict death upon
death.83 In this way the cross of Christ, on which the Son, consubstantial with the Father, renders full justice to
God, is also a radical revelation of mercy, or rather of the love that goes against what constitutes the very root
of evil in the history of man: against sin and death.

The cross is the most profound condescension of God to man and to what man-especially in difficult and painful
moments-looks on as his unhappy destiny. The cross is like a touch of eternal love upon the most painful
wounds of man's earthly existence; it is the total fulfillment of the messianic program that Christ once
formulated in the synagogue at Nazareth 84 and then repeated to the messengers sent by John the Baptist.85
According to the words once written in the prophecy of Isaiah,86 this program consisted in the revelation of
merciful love for the poor, the suffering and prisoners, for the blind, the oppressed and sinners. In the paschal
mystery the limits of the many sided evil in which man becomes a sharer during his earthly existence are
surpassed: the cross of Christ, in fact, makes us understand the deepest roots of evil, which are fixed in sin and
death; thus the cross becomes an eschatological sign. Only in the eschatological fulfillment and definitive
renewal of the world will love conquer, in all the elect, the deepest sources of evil, bringing as its fully mature
fruit the kingdom of life and holiness and glorious immortality. The foundation of this eschatological fulfillment
is already contained in the cross of Christ and in His death. The fact that Christ "was raised the third day"87
constitutes the final sign of the messianic mission, a sign that perfects the entire revelation of merciful love in a
world that is subject to evil. At the same time it constitutes the sign that foretells "a new heaven and a new
earth,"88 when God "will wipe away every tear from their eyes, there will be no more death, or mourning no
crying, nor pain, for the former things have passed away."89

In the eschatological fulfillment mercy will be revealed as love, while in the temporal phase, in human history,
which is at the same time the history of sin and death, love must be revealed above all as mercy and must also
be actualized as mercy. Christ's messianic program, the program of mercy, becomes the program of His people,
the program of the Church. At its very center there is always the cross, for it is in the cross that the revelation of
merciful love attains its culmination. Until "the former things pass away,"90 the cross will remain the point of
reference for other words too of the Revelation of John: "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears
my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him and he with me."91 In a special way, God also
reveals His mercy when He invites man to have "mercy" on His only Son, the crucified one.

Christ, precisely as the crucified one, is the Word that does not pass away,92 and He is the one who stands at the
door and knocks at the heart of every man,93 without restricting his freedom, but instead seeking to draw from
this very freedom love, which is not only an act of solidarity with the suffering Son of man, but also a kind of
"mercy" shown by each one of us to the Son of the eternal Father. In the whole of this messianic program of
Christ, in the whole revelation of mercy through the cross, could man's dignity be more highly respected and
ennobled, for, in obtaining mercy, He is in a sense the one who at the same time "shows mercy"? In a word, is
not this the position of Christ with regard to man when He says: "As you did it to one of the least of these...you
did it to me"?94 Do not the words of the Sermon on the Mount: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain
mercy,"95 constitute, in a certain sense, a synthesis of the whole of the Good News, of the whole of the
"wonderful exchange" (admirable commercium) contained therein? This exchange is a law of the very plan of
salvation, a law which is simple, strong and at the same time "easy." Demonstrating from the very start what the
"human heart" is capable of ("to be merciful"), do not these words from the Sermon on the Mount reveal in the
same perspective the deep mystery of God: that inscrutable unity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in which love,
containing justice, sets in motion mercy, which in its turn reveals the perfection of justice?

The Paschal Mystery is Christ at the summit of the revelation of the inscrutable mystery of God. It is precisely
then that the words pronounced in the Upper Room are completely fulfilled: "He who has seen me has seen the
Father."96 In fact, Christ, whom the Father "did not spare"97 for the sake of man and who in His passion and in
the torment of the cross did not obtain human mercy, has revealed in His resurrection the fullness of the love
that the Father has for Him and, in Him, for all people. "He is not God of the dead, but of the living."98 In His
resurrection Christ has revealed the God of merciful love, precisely because He accepted the cross as the way to
the resurrection. And it is for this reason that-when we recall the cross of Christ, His passion and death-our faith
and hope are centered on the Risen One: on that Christ who "on the evening of that day, the first day of the
week, . . .stood among them" in the upper Room, "where the disciples were, ...breathed on them, and said to
them: 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any,
they are retained.'"99

Here is the Son of God, who in His resurrection experienced in a radical way mercy shown to Himself, that is to
say the love of the Father which is more powerful than death. And it is also the same Christ, the Son of God,
who at the end of His messianic mission - and, in a certain sense, even beyond the end - reveals Himself as the
inexhaustible source of mercy, of the same love that, in a subsequent perspective of the history of salvation in
the Church, is to be everlastingly confirmed as more powerful than sin. The paschal Christ is the definitive
incarnation of mercy, its living sign in salvation history and in eschatology. In the same spirit, the liturgy of
Eastertide places on our lips the words of the Psalm: Misericordias Domini in aeternum cantabo.100

9. Mother of Mercy

These words of the Church at Easter re-echo in the fullness of their prophetic content the words that Mary
uttered during her visit to Elizabeth, the wife of Zechariah: "His mercy is...from generation to generation."101 At
the very moment of the Incarnation, these words open up a new perspective of salvation history. After the
resurrection of Christ, this perspective is new on both the historical and the eschatological level. From that time
onwards there is a succession of new generations of individuals in the immense human family, in ever-
increasing dimensions; there is also a succession of new generations of the People of God, marked with the Sign
of the Cross and of the resurrection and "sealed"102 with the sign of the Paschal Mystery of Christ, the absolute
revelation of the mercy that Mary proclaimed on the threshold of her kinswoman's house: "His mercy is...from
generation to generation."103

Mary is also the one who obtained mercy in a particular and exceptional way, as no other person has. At the
same time, still in an exceptional way, she made possible with the sacrifice of her heart her own sharing in
revealing God's mercy. This sacrifice is intimately linked with the cross of her Son, at the foot of which she was
to stand on Calvary. Her sacrifice is a unique sharing in the revelation of mercy, that is, a sharing in the absolute
fidelity of God to His own love, to the covenant that He willed from eternity and that He entered into in time
with man, with the people, with humanity; it is a sharing in that revelation that was definitively fulfilled through
the cross. No one has experienced, to the same degree as the Mother of the crucified One, the mystery of the
cross, the overwhelming encounter of divine transcendent justice with love: that "kiss" given by mercy to
justice.104 No one has received into his heart, as much as Mary did, that mystery, that truly divine dimension of
the redemption effected on Calvary by means of the death of the Son, together with the sacrifice of her maternal
heart, together with her definitive "fiat."

Mary, then, is the one who has the deepest knowledge of the mystery of God's mercy. She knows its price, she
knows how great it is. In this sense, we call her the Mother of mercy: our Lady of mercy, or Mother of divine
mercy; in each one of these titles there is a deep theological meaning, for they express the special preparation of
her soul, of her whole personality, so that she was able to perceive, through the complex events, first of Israel,
then of every individual and of the whole of humanity, that mercy of which "from generation to generation"105
people become sharers according to the eternal design of the most Holy Trinity.

The above titles which we attribute to the Mother of God speak of her principally, however, as the Mother of
the crucified and risen One; as the One who, having obtained mercy in an exceptional way, in an equally
exceptional way "merits" that mercy throughout her earthly life and, particularly, at the foot of the cross of her
Son; and finally as the one who, through her hidden and at the same time incomparable sharing in the messianic
mission of her Son, was called in a special way to bring close to people that love which He had come to reveal:
the love that finds its most concrete expression vis-a-vis the suffering, the poor, those deprived of their own
freedom, the blind, the oppressed and sinners, just as Christ spoke of them in the words of the prophecy of
Isaiah, first in the synagogue at Nazareth106 and then in response to the question of the messengers of John the
Baptist.107
It was precisely this "merciful" love, which is manifested above all in contact with moral and physical evil, that
the heart of her who was the Mother of the crucified and risen One shared in singularly and exceptionally - that
Mary shared in. In her and through her, this love continues to be revealed in the history of the Church and of
humanity. This revelation is especially fruitful because in the Mother of God it is based upon the unique tact of
her maternal heart, on her particular sensitivity, on her particular fitness to reach all those who most easily
accept the merciful love of a mother. This is one of the great life-giving mysteries of Christianity, a mystery
intimately connected with the mystery of the Incarnation.

"The motherhood of Mary in the order of grace," as the Second Vatican Council explains, "lasts without
interruption from the consent which she faithfully gave at the annunciation and which she sustained without
hesitation under the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. In fact, being assumed into heaven she has
not laid aside this office of salvation but by her manifold intercession she continues to obtain for us the graces
of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she takes care of the brethren of her Son who still journey on earth
surrounded by dangers and difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home."108

VI.  "MERCY...FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION"

10. An Image of Our Generation

We have every right to believe that our generation too was included in the words of the Mother of God when
she glorified that mercy shared in "from generation to generation" by those who allow themselves to be guided
by the fear of God. The words of Mary's Magnificat have a prophetic content that concerns not only the past of
Israel but also the whole future of the People of God on earth. In fact, all of us now living on earth are the
generation that is aware of the approach of the third millennium and that profoundly feels the change that is
occurring in history.

The present generation knows that it is in a privileged position: progress provides it with countless possibilities
that only a few decades ago were undreamed of. Man's creative activity, his intelligence and his work, have
brought about profound changes both in the field of science and technology and in that of social and cultural
life. Man has extended his power over nature and has acquired deeper knowledge of the laws of social behavior.
He has seen the obstacles and distances between individuals and nations dissolve or shrink through an increased
sense of what is universal, through a clearer awareness of the unity of the human race, through the acceptance
of mutual dependence in authentic solidarity, and through the desire and possibility of making contact with
one's brothers and sisters beyond artificial geographical divisions and national or racial limits. Today's young
people, especially, know that the progress of science and technology can produce not only new material goods
but also a wider sharing in knowledge. The extraordinary progress made in the field of information and data
processing, for instance, will increase man's creative capacity and provide access to the intellectual and cultural
riches of other peoples. New communications techniques will encourage greater participation in events and a
wider exchange of ideas. The achievements of biological, psychological and social science will help man to
understand better the riches of his own being. It is true that too often this progress is still the privilege of the
industrialized countries, but it cannot be denied that the prospect of enabling every people and every country to
benefit from it has long ceased to be a mere utopia when there is a real political desire for it.

But side by side with all this, or rather as part of it, there are also the difficulties that appear whenever there is
growth. There is unease and a sense of powerlessness regarding the profound response that man knows that he
must give. The picture of the world today also contains shadows and imbalances that are not always merely
superficial. The Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes of the Second Vatican Council is certainly not the only
document that deals with the life of this generation, but it is a document of particular importance. "The
dichotomy affecting the modern world," we read in it, "is,,in fact, a symptom of a deeper dichotomy that is in
man himself. He is the meeting point of many conflicting forces. In his condition as a created being he is subject
to a thousand shortcomings, but feels untrammelled in his inclinations and destined for a higher form of life.
Torn by a welter of anxieties he is compelled to choose between them and repudiate some among them. Worse
still, feeble and sinful as he is, he often does the very thing he hates and does not do what he wants. And so he
feels himself divided, and the result is a host of discords in social life."109

Towards the end of the introductory exposition we read: ". . .in the face of modern developments there is a
growing body of men who are asking the most fundamental of all questions or are glimpsing them with a keener
insight: What is man? What is the meaning of suffering, evil, death, which have not been eliminated by all this
progress? What is the purpose of these achievements, purchased at so high a price?"110

In the span of the fifteen years since the end of the Second Vatican Council, has this picture of tensions and
threats that mark our epoch become less disquieting? It seems not. On the contrary, the tensions and threats that
in the Council document seem only to be outlined and not to manifest in depth all the dangers hidden within
them have revealed themselves more clearly in the space of these years; they have in a different way confirmed
that danger, and do not permit us to cherish the illusions of the past.

11. Sources of Uneasiness

Thus, in our world the feeling of being under threat is increasing. There is an increase of that existential fear
connected especially, as I said in the encyclical Redemptor hominis, with the prospect of a conflict that in view
of today's atomic stockpiles could mean the partial self-destruction of humanity. But the threat does not merely
concern what human beings can do to human beings through the means provided by military technology; it also
concerns many other dangers produced by a materialistic society which-in spite of "humanistic" declarations-
accepts the primacy of things over persons. Contemporary man, therefore, fears that by the use of the means
invented by this type of society, individuals and the environment, communities, societies and nations can fall
victim to the abuse of power by other individuals, environments and societies. The history of our century offers
many examples of this. In spite of all the declarations on the rights of man in his integral dimension, that is to
say in his bodily and spiritual existence, we cannot say that these examples belong only to the past.

Man rightly fears falling victim to an oppression that will deprive him of his interior freedom, of the possibility
of expressing the truth of which he is convinced, of the faith that he professes, of the ability to obey the voice of
conscience that tells him the right path to follow. The technical means at the disposal of modern society conceal
within themselves not only the possibility of self-destruction through military conflict, but also the possibility of
a "peaceful" subjugation of individuals, of environments, of entire societies and of nations, that for one reason
or another might prove inconvenient for those who possess the necessary means and are ready to use them
without scruple. An instance is the continued existence of torture, systematically used by authority as a means
of domination and political oppression and practiced by subordinates with impunity.

Together with awareness of the biological threat, therefore, there is a growing awareness of yet another threat,
even more destructive of what is essentially human, what is intimately bound up with the dignity of the person
and his or her right to truth and freedom.

All this is happening against the background of the gigantic remorse caused by the fact that, side by side with
wealthy and surfeited people and societies, living in plenty and ruled by consumerism and pleasure, the same
human family contains individuals and groups that are suffering from hunger. There are babies dying of hunger
under their mothers' eyes. In various parts of the world, in various socio-economic systems, there exist entire
areas of poverty, shortage and underdevelopment. This fact is universally known. The state of inequality
between individuals and between nations not only still exists; it is increasing. It still happens that side by side
with those who are wealthy and living in plenty there exist those who are living in want, suffering misery and
often actually dying of hunger; and their number reaches tens, even hundreds of millions. This is why moral
uneasiness is destined to become even more acute. It is obvious that a fundamental defect, or rather a series of
defects, indeed a defective machinery is at the root of contemporary economics and materialistic civilization,
which does not allow the human family to break free from such radically unjust situations.

This picture of today's world in which there is so much evil both physical and moral, so as to make of it a world
entangled in contradictions and tensions, and at the same time full of threats to human freedom, conscience and
religion-this picture explains the uneasiness felt by contemporary man. This uneasiness is experienced not only
by those who are disadvantaged or oppressed, but also by those who possess the privileges of wealth, progress
and power. And, although there is no lack of people trying to understand the causes of this uneasiness, or trying
to react against it with the temporary means offered by technology, wealth or power, still in the very depth of
the human spirit this uneasiness is stronger than all temporary means. This uneasiness concerns-as the analyses
of the Second Vatican Council rightly pointed out-the fundamental problems of all human existence. It is linked
with the very sense of man's existence in the world, and is an uneasiness for the future of man and all humanity;
it demands decisive solutions, which now seem to be forcing themselves upon the human race.

12. Is Justice Enough?

It is not difficult to see that in the modern world the sense of justice has been reawakening on a vast scale; and
without doubt this emphasizes that which goes against justice in relationships between individuals, social
groups and "classes," between individual peoples and states, and finally between whole political systems,
indeed between what are called "worlds." This deep and varied trend, at the basis of which the contemporary
human conscience has placed justice, gives proof of the ethical character of the tensions and struggles pervading
the world.

The Church shares with the people of our time this profound and ardent desire for a life which is just in every
aspect, nor does she fail to examine the various aspects of the sort of justice that the life of people and society
demands. This is confirmed by the field of Catholic social doctrine, greatly developed in the course of the last
century. On the lines of this teaching proceed the education and formation of human consciences in the spirit of
justice, and also individual undertakings, especially in the sphere of the apostolate of the laity, which are
developing in precisely this spirit.

And yet, it would be difficult not to notice that very often programs which start from the idea of justice and
which ought to assist its fulfillment among individuals, groups and human societies, in practice suffer from
distortions. Although they continue to appeal to the idea of justice, nevertheless experience shows that other
negative forces have gained the upper hand over justice, such as spite, hatred and even cruelty. In such cases,
the desire to annihilate the enemy, limit his freedom, or even force him into total dependence, becomes the
fundamental motive for action; and this contrasts with the essence of justice, which by its nature tends to
establish equality and harmony between the parties in conflict. This kind of abuse of the idea of justice and the
practical distortion of it show how far human action can deviate from justice itself, even when it is being
undertaken in the name of justice. Not in vain did Christ challenge His listeners, faithful to the doctrine of the
Old Testament, for their attitude which was manifested in the words: An eye for an eye and a tooth for a
tooth."111 This was the form of distortion of justice at that time; and today's forms continue to be modeled on it.
It is obvious, in fact, that in the name of an alleged justice (for example, historical justice or class justice) the
neighbor is sometimes destroyed, killed, deprived of liberty or stripped of fundamental human rights. The
experience of the past and of our own time demonstrates that justice alone is not enough, that it can even lead to
the negation and destruction of itself, if that deeper power, which is love, is not allowed to shape human life in
its various dimensions. It has been precisely historical experience that, among other things, has led to the
formulation of the saying: summum ius, summa iniuria. This statement does not detract from the value of
justice and does not minimize the significance of the order that is based upon it; it only indicates, under another
aspect, the need to draw from the powers of the spirit which condition the very order of justice, powers which
are still more profound.
The Church, having before her eyes the picture of the generation to which we belong, shares the uneasiness of
so many of the people of our time. Moreover, one cannot fail to be worried by the decline of many fundamental
values, which constitute an unquestionable good not only for Christian morality but simply for human morality,
for moral culture: these values include respect for human life from the moment of conception, respect for
marriage in its indissoluble unity, and respect for the stability of the family. Moral permissiveness strikes
especially at this most sensitive sphere of life and society. Hand in hand with this go the crisis of truth in human
relationships, lack of responsibility for what one says, the purely utilitarian relationship between individual and
individual, the loss of a sense of the authentic common good and the ease with which this good is alienated.
Finally, there is the "desacralization" that often turns into "dehumanization": the individual and the society for
whom nothing is "sacred" suffer moral decay, in spite of appearances.

VII.  THE MERCY OF GOD IN THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH

In connection with this picture of our generation, a picture which cannot fail to cause profound anxiety, there
come to mind once more those words which, by reason of the Incarnation of the Son of God, resounded in
Mary's Magnificat, and which sing of "mercy from generation to generation." The Church of our time,
constantly pondering the eloquence of these inspired words, and applying them to the sufferings of the great
human family, must become more particularly and profoundly conscious of the need to bear witness in her
whole mission to God's mercy, following in the footsteps of the tradition of the Old and the New Covenant, and
above all of Jesus Christ Himself and His Apostles. The Church must bear witness to the mercy of God revealed
in Christ, in the whole of His mission as Messiah, professing it in the first place as a salvific truth of faith and as
necessary for a life in harmony with faith, and then seeking to introduce it and to make it incarnate in the lives
both of her faithful and as far as possible in the lives of all people of good will. Finally, the Church-professing
mercy and remaining always faithful to it-has the right and the duty to call upon the mercy of God, imploring it
in the face of all the manifestations of physical and moral evil, before all the threats that cloud the whole
horizon of the life of humanity today.

13. The Church Professes the Mercy of God and Proclaims It

The Church must profess and proclaim God's mercy in all its truth, as it has been handed down to us by
revelation. We have sought, in the foregoing pages of the present document, to give at least an outline of this
truth, which finds such rich expression in the whole of Sacred Scripture and in Sacred Tradition. In the daily life
of the Church the truth about the mercy of God, expressed in the Bible, resounds as a perennial echo through the
many readings of the Sacred Liturgy. The authentic sense of faith of the People of God perceives this truth, as is
shown by various expressions of personal and community piety. It would of course be difficult to give a list or
summary of them all, since most of them are vividly inscribed in the depths of people's hearts and minds. Some
theologians affirm that mercy is the greatest of the attributes and perfections of God, and the Bible, Tradition
and the whole faith life of the People of God provide particular proofs of this. It is not a question here of the
perfection of the inscrutable essence of God in the mystery of the divinity itself, but of the perfection and
attribute whereby man, in the intimate truth of his existence, encounters the living God particularly closely and
particularly often. In harmony with Christ's words to Philip,112 the "vision of the Father"-a vision of God
through faith finds precisely in the encounter with His mercy a unique moment of interior simplicity and truth,
similar to that which we discover in the parable of the prodigal son.

"He who has seen me has seen the Father."113 The Church professes the mercy of God, the Church lives by it in
her wide experience of faith and also in her teaching, constantly contemplating Christ, concentrating on Him, on
His life and on His Gospel, on His cross and resurrection, on His whole mystery. Everything that forms the
"vision" of Christ in the Church's living faith and teaching brings us nearer to the "vision of the Father" in the
holiness of His mercy. The Church seems in a particular way to profess the mercy of God and to venerate it
when she directs herself to the Heart of Christ. In fact, it is precisely this drawing close to Christ in the mystery
of His Heart which enables us to dwell on this point-a point in a sense central and also most accessible on the
human level-of the revelation of the merciful love of the Father, a revelation which constituted the central
content of the messianic mission of the Son of Man.

The Church lives an authentic life when she professes and proclaims mercy-the most stupendous attribute of the
Creator and of the Redeemer-and when she brings people close to the sources of the Savior's mercy, of which
she is the trustee and dispenser. Of great significance in this area is constant meditation on the Word of God,
and above all conscious and mature participation in the Eucharist and in the sacrament of Penance or
Reconciliation. The Eucharist brings us ever nearer to that love which is more powerful than death: "For as
often as we eat this bread and drink this cup," we proclaim not only the death of the Redeemer but also His
resurrection, "until he comes" in glory.114 The same Eucharistic rite, celebrated in memory of Him who in His
messianic mission revealed the Father to us by means of His words and His cross, attests to the inexhaustible
love by virtue of which He desires always to be united with us and present in our midst, coming to meet every
human heart. It is the sacrament of Penance or Reconciliation that prepares the way for each individual, even
those weighed down with great faults. In this sacrament each person can experience mercy in a unique way, that
is, the love which is more powerful than sin. This has already been spoken of in the encyclical Redemptor
hominis; but it will be fitting to return once more to this fundamental theme.

It is precisely because sin exists in the world, which "God so loved...that he gave his only Son,"115 that God,
who "is love,"116 cannot reveal Himself otherwise than as mercy. This corresponds not only to the most
profound truth of that love which God is, but also to the whole interior truth of man and of the world which is
man's temporary homeland.

Mercy in itself, as a perfection of the infinite God, is also infinite. Also infinite therefore and inexhaustible is
the Father's readiness to receive the prodigal children who return to His home. Infinite are the readiness and
power of forgiveness which flow continually from the marvelous value of the sacrifice of the Son. No human
sin can prevail over this power or even limit it. On the part of man only a lack of good will can limit it, a lack of
readiness to be converted and to repent, in other words persistence in obstinacy, opposing grace and truth,
especially in the face of the witness of the cross and resurrection of Christ.

Therefore, the Church professes and proclaims conversion. Conversion to God always consists in discovering
His mercy, that is, in discovering that love which is patient and kind117 as only the Creator and Father can be;
the love to which the "God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"118 is faithful to the uttermost consequences in
the history of His covenant with man; even to the cross and to the death and resurrection of the Son. Conversion
to God is always the fruit of the"rediscovery of this Father, who is rich in mercy.

Authentic knowledge of the God of mercy, the God of tender love, is a constant and inexhaustible source of
conversion, not only as a momentary interior act but also as a permanent attitude, as a state of mind. Those who
come to know God in this way, who "see" Him in this way, can live only in a state of being continually
converted to Him. They live, therefore, in statu conversionis; and it is this state of conversion which marks out
the most profound element of the pilgrimage of every man and woman on earth in statu viatoris. It is obvious
that the Church professes the mercy of God, revealed in the crucified and risen Christ, not only by the word of
her teaching but above all through the deepest pulsation of the life of the whole People of God. By means of this
testimony of life, the Church fulfills the mission proper to the People of God, the mission which is a sharing in
and, in a sense, a continuation of the messianic mission of Christ Himself.

The contemporary Church is profoundly conscious that only on the basis of the mercy of God will she be able to
carry out the tasks that derive from the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, and, in the first place, the
ecumenical task which aims at uniting all those who confess Christ. As she makes many efforts in this direction,
the Church confesses with humility that only that love which is more powerful than the weakness of human
divisions can definitively bring about that unity which Christ implored from the Father and which the Spirit
never ceases to beseech for us "with sighs too deep for words."119
14. The Church Seeks To Put Mercy into Practice

Jesus Christ taught that man not only receives and experiences the mercy of God, but that he is also called "to
practice mercy" towards others: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."120 The Church sees in
these words a call to action, and she tries to practice mercy. All the beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount
indicate the way of conversion and of reform of life, but the one referring to those who are merciful is
particularly eloquent in this regard. Man attains to the merciful love of God, His mercy, to the extent that he
himself is interiorly transformed in the spirit of that love towards his neighbor.

This authentically evangelical process is not just a spiritual transformation realized once and for all: it is a
whole lifestyle, an essential and continuous characteristic of the Christian vocation. It consists in the constant
discovery and persevering practice of love as a unifying and also elevating power despite all difficulties of a
psychological or social nature: it is a question, in fact, of a merciful love which, by its essence, is a creative
love. In reciprocal relationships between persons merciful love is never a unilateral act or process. Even in the
cases in which everything would seem to indicate that only one party is giving and offering, and the other only
receiving and taking (for example, in the case of a physician giving treatment, a teacher teaching, parents
supporting and bringing up their children, a benefactor helping the needy), in reality the one who gives is
always also a beneficiary. In any case, he too can easily find himself in the position of the one who receives,
who obtains a benefit, who experiences merciful love; he too can find himself the object of mercy.

In this sense Christ crucified is for us the loftiest model, inspiration and encouragement. When we base
ourselves on this disquieting model, we are able with all humility to show mercy to others, knowing that Christ
accepts it as if it were shown to Himself.121 On the basis of this model, we must also continually purify all our
actions and all our intentions in which mercy is understood and practiced in a unilateral way, as a good done to
others. An act of merciful love is only really such when we are deeply convinced at the moment that we
perform it that we are at the same time receiving mercy from the people who are accepting it from us. If this
bilateral and reciprocal quality is absent, our actions are not yet true acts of mercy, nor has there yet been fully
completed in us that conversion to which Christ has shown us the way by His words and example, even to the
cross, nor are we yet sharing fully in the magnificent source of merciful love that has been revealed to us by
Him.

Thus, the way which Christ showed to us in the Sermon on the Mount with the beatitude regarding those who
are merciful is much richer than what we sometimes find in ordinary human opinions about mercy. These
opinions see mercy as a unilateral act or process, presupposing and maintaining a certain distance between the
one practicing mercy and the one benefitting from it, between the one who does good and the one who receives
it. Hence the attempt to free interpersonal and social relationships from mercy and to base them solely on
justice. However, such opinions about mercy fail to see the fundamental link between mercy and justice spoken
of by the whole biblical tradition, and above all by the messianic mission of Jesus Christ. True mercy is, so to
speak, the most profound source of justice. If justice is in itself suitable for "arbitration" between people
concerning the reciprocal distribution of objective goods in an equitable manner, love and only love (including
that kindly love that we call "mercy") is capable of restoring man to Himself.

Mercy that is truly Christian is also, in a certain sense, the most perfect incarnation of "equality" between
people, and therefore also the most perfect incarnation of justice as well, insofar as justice aims at the same
result in its own sphere. However, the equality brought by justice is limited to the realm of objective and
extrinsic goods, while love and mercy bring it about that people meet one another in that value which is man
himself, with the dignity that is proper to him. At the same time, "equality" of people through "patient and kind"
love122 does not take away differences: the person who gives becomes more generous when he feels at the same
time benefitted by the person accepting his gift; and vice versa, the person who accepts the gift with the
awareness that, in accepting it, he too is doing good is in his own way serving the great cause of the dignity of
the person; and this contributes to uniting people in a more profound manner.
Thus, mercy becomes an indispensable element for shaping mutual relationships between people, in a spirit of
deepest respect for what is human, and in a spirit of mutual brotherhood. It is impossible to establish this bond
between people, if they wish to regulate their mutual relationships solely according to the measure of justice. In
every sphere of interpersonal relationships justice must, so to speak, be "corrected " to a considerable extent by
that love which, as St. Paul proclaims, "is patient and kind" or, in other words, possesses the characteristics of
that merciful love which is so much of the essence of the Gospel and Christianity. Let us remember,
furthermore, that merciful love also means the cordial tenderness and sensitivity so eloquently spoken of in the
parable of the prodigal son,123 and also in the parables of the lost sheep and the lost coin.124 Consequently,
merciful love is supremely indispensable between those who are closest to one another: between husbands and
wives, between parents and children, between friends; and it is indispensable in education and in pastoral work.

Its sphere of action, however, is not limited to this. If Paul VI more than once indicated the civilization of
love"125 as the goal towards which all efforts in the cultural and social fields as well as in the economic and
political fields should tend. it must be added that this good will never be reached if in our thinking and acting
concerning the vast and complex spheres of human society we stop at the criterion of "an eye for an eye, a tooth
for a tooth"126 and do not try to transform it in its essence, by complementing it with another spirit. Certainly,
the Second Vatican Council also leads us in this direction, when it speaks repeatedly of the need to make the
world more human,127 and says that the realization of this task is precisely the mission of the Church in the
modern world. Society can become ever more human only if we introduce into the many-sided setting of
interpersonal and social relationships, not merely justice, but also that "merciful love" which constitutes the
messianic message of the Gospel.

Society can become "ever more human" only when we introduce into all the mutual relationships which form its
moral aspect the moment of forgiveness, which is so much of the essence of the Gospel. Forgiveness
demonstrates the presence in the world of the love which is more powerful than sin. Forgiveness is also the
fundamental condition for reconciliation, not only in the relationship of God with man, but also in relationships
between people. A world from which forgiveness was eliminated would be nothing but a world of cold and
unfeeling justice, in the name of which each person would claim his or her own rights vis-a- vis others; the
various kinds of selfishness latent in man would transform life and human society into a system of oppression of
the weak by the strong, or into an arena of permanent strife between one group and another.

For this reason, the Church must consider it one of her principal duties-at every stage of history and especially
in our modern age-to proclaim and to introduce into life the mystery of mercy, supremely revealed in Jesus
Christ. Not only for the Church herself as the community of believers but also in a certain sense for all
humanity, this mystery is the source of a life different from the life which can be built by man, who is exposed
to the oppressive forces of the threefold concupiscence active within him.128 It is precisely in the name of this
mystery that Christ teaches us to forgive always. How often we repeat the words of the prayer which He
Himself taught us, asking "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us," which means
those who are guilty of something in our regard129 It is indeed difficult to express the profound value of the
attitude which these words describe and inculcate. How many things these words say to every individual about
others and also about himself. The consciousness of being trespassers against each other goes hand in hand with
the call to fraternal solidarity, which St. Paul expressed in his concise exhortation to "forbear one another in
love."130 What a lesson of humility is to be found here with regard to man, with regard both to one's neighbor
and to oneself What a school of good will for daily living, in the various conditions of our existence If we were
to ignore this lesson, what would remain of any "humanist" program of life and education?

Christ emphasizes so insistently the need to forgive others that when Peter asked Him how many times he
should forgive his neighbor He answered with the symbolic number of "seventy times seven,"131 meaning that
he must be able to forgive everyone every time. It is obvious that such a generous requirement of forgiveness
does not cancel out the objective requirements of justice. Properly understood, justice constitutes, so to speak,
the goal of forgiveness. In no passage of the Gospel message does forgiveness, or mercy as its source, mean
indulgence towards evil, towards scandals, towards injury or insult. In any case, reparation for evil and scandal,
compensation for injury, and satisfaction for insult are conditions for forgiveness.

Thus the fundamental structure of justice always enters into the sphere of mercy. Mercy, however, has the
power to confer on justice a new content, which is expressed most simply and fully in forgiveness. Forgiveness,
in fact, shows that, over and above the process of "compensation" and "truce" which is specific to justice, love
is necessary, so that man may affirm himself as man. Fulfillment of the conditions of justice is especially
indispensable in order that love may reveal its own nature. In analyzing the parable of the prodigal son, we have
already called attention to the fact that he who forgives and he who is forgiven encounter one another at an
essential point, namely the dignity or essential value of the person, a point which cannot be lost and the
affirmation of which, or its rediscovery, is a source of the greatest joy.132

The Church rightly considers it her duty and the purpose of her mission to guard the authenticity of forgiveness,
both in life and behavior and in educational and pastoral work. She protects it simply by guarding its source,
which is the mystery of the mercy of God Himself as revealed in Jesus Christ.

The basis of the Church's mission, in all the spheres spoken of in the numerous pronouncements of the most
recent Council and in the centuries-old experience of the apostolate, is none other than "drawing from the wells
of the Savior"133 this is what provides many guidelines for the mission of the Church in the lives of individual
Christians, of individual communities, and also of the whole People of God. This "drawing from the wells of the
Savior" can be done only in the spirit of that poverty to which we are called by the words and example of the
Lord: "You received without pay, give without pay."134 Thus, in all the ways of the Church's life and ministry-
through the evangelical poverty of her-ministers and stewards and of the whole people which bears witness to
"the mighty works" of its Lord-the God who is "rich in mercy" has been made still more clearly manifest.

VIII.  THE PRAYER OF THE CHURCH IN OUR TIMES  

15. The Church Appeals to the Mercy of God

The Church proclaims the truth of God's mercy revealed in the crucified and risen Christ, and she professes it in
various ways. Furthermore, she seeks to practice mercy towards people through people, and she sees in this an
indispensable condition for solicitude for a better and "more human" world, today and tomorrow. However, at
no time and in no historical period-especially at a moment as critical as our own-can the Church forget the
prayer that is a cry for the mercy of God amid the many forms of evil which weigh upon humanity and threaten
it. Precisely this is the fundamental right and duty of the Church in Christ Jesus, her right and duty towards God
and towards humanity. The more the human conscience succumbs to secularization, loses its sense of the very
meaning of the word "mercy," moves away from God and distances itself from the mystery of mercy, the more
the Church has the right and the duty to appeal to the God of mercy "with loud cries."135 These "loud cries"
should be the mark of the Church of our times, cries uttered to God to implore His mercy, the certain
manifestation of which she professes and proclaims as having already come in Jesus crucified and risen, that is,
in the Paschal Mystery. It is this mystery which bears within itself the most complete revelation of mercy, that
is, of that love which is more powerful than death, more powerful than sin and every evil, the love which lifts
man up when he falls into the abyss and frees him from the greatest threats.

Modern man feels these threats. What has been said above in this regard is only a rough outline. Modern man
often anxiously wonders about the solution to the terrible tensions which have built up in the world and which
entangle humanity. And if at times he lacks the courage to utter the word "mercy," or if in his conscience empty
of religious content he does not find the equivalent, so much greater is the need for the Church to utter his word,
not only in her own name but also in the name of all the men and women of our time.
Everything that I have said in the present document on mercy should therefore be continually transformed into
an ardent prayer: into a cry that implores mercy according to the needs of man in the modern world. May this
cry be full of that truth about mercy which has found such rich expression in Sacred Scripture and in Tradition,
as also in the authentic life of faith of countless generations of the People of God. With this cry let us, like the
sacred writers, call upon the God who cannot despise anything that He has made,136 the God who is faithful to
Himself, to His fatherhood and His love. And, like the prophets, let us appeal to that love which has maternal
characteristics and which, like a mother, follows each of her children, each lost sheep, even if they should
number millions, even if in the world evil should prevail over goodness, even if contemporary humanity should
deserve a new "flood" on account of its sins, as once the generation of Noah did. Let us have recourse to that
fatherly love revealed to us by Christ in His messianic mission, a love which reached its culmination in His
cross, in His death and resurrection. Let us have recourse to God through Christ, mindful of the words of Mary's
Magnificat, which proclaim mercy "from generation to generation." Let us implore God's mercy for the present
generation. May the Church which, following the example of Mary, also seeks to be the spiritual mother of
mankind, express in this prayer her maternal solicitude and at the same time her confident love, that love from
which is born the most burning need for prayer.

Let us offer up our petitions, directed by the faith, by the hope, and by the charity which Christ has planted in
our hearts. This attitude is likewise love of God, whom modern man has sometimes separated far from himself,
made extraneous to himself, proclaiming in various ways that God is "superfluous." This is, therefore, love of
God, the insulting rejection of whom by modern man we feel profoundly, and we are ready to cry out with
Christ on the cross: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."137 At the same time it is love of
people, of all men and women without any exception or division: without difference of race, culture, language,
or world outlook, without distinction between friends and enemies. This is love for people-it desires every true
good for each individual and for every human community, every family, every nation, every social group, for
young people, adults, parents, the elderly-a love for everyone, without exception. This is love, or rather an
anxious solicitude to ensure for each individual every true good and to remove and drive away every sort of
evil.

And, if any of our contemporaries do not share the faith and hope which lead me, as a servant of Christ and
steward of the mysteries of God,138 to implore God's mercy for humanity in this hour of history, let them at least
try to understand the reason for my concern. It is dictated by love for man, for all that is human and which,
according to the intuitions of many of our contemporaries, is threatened by an immense danger. The mystery of
Christ, which reveals to us the great vocation of man and which led me to emphasize in the encyclical
Redemptor hominis his incomparable dignity, also obliges me to proclaim mercy as God's merciful love,
revealed in that same mystery of Christ. It likewise obliges me to have recourse to that mercy and to beg for it at
this difficult, critical phase of the history of the Church and of the world, as we approach the end of the second
millennium.

In the name of Jesus Christ crucified and risen, in the spirit of His messianic mission, enduring in the history of
humanity, we raise our voices and pray that the Love which is in the Father may once again be revealed at this
stage of history, and that, through the work of the Son and Holy Spirit, it may be shown to be present in our
modern world and to be more powerful than evil: more powerful than sin and death. We pray for this through
the intercession of her who does not cease to proclaim "mercy...from generation to generation," and also
through the intercession of those for whom there have been completely fulfilled the words of the Sermon on the
Mount: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."139

In continuing the great task of implementing the Second Vatican Council, in which we can rightly see a new
phase of the self- realization of the Church-in keeping with the epoch in which it has been our destiny to live-
the Church herself must be constantly guided by the full consciousness that in this work it is not permissible for
her, for any reason, to withdraw into herself. The reason for her existence is, in fact, to reveal God, that Father
who allows us to "see" Him in Christ.140 No matter how strong the resistance of human history may be, no
matter how marked the diversity of contemporary civilization, no matter how great the denial of God in the
human world, so much the greater must be the Church's closeness to that mystery which, hidden for centuries in
God, was then truly shared with man, in time, through Jesus Christ.

With my apostolic blessing.

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, on the thirtieth day of November, the First Sunday of Advent, in the year 1980,
the third of the pontificate.

Ioannes Paulus PP. II

DOMINUM ET VIVIFICANTEM

On the Holy Spirit in the Life of the Church

and the World

INTRODUCTION

Venerable Brothers, Beloved Sons and Daughters,

Health and the Apostolic Blessing! 

1. The Church professes her faith in the Holy Spirit as "the Lord, the giver of life." She professes this in the
Creed which is called Nicene- Constantinopolitan from the name of the two Councils-of Nicaea (A.D. 325) and
Constantinople (A.D. 381)-at which it was formulated or promulgated. It also contains the statement that the
Holy Spirit "has spoken through the Prophets."

These are words which the Church receives from the very source of her faith, Jesus Christ. In fact, according to
the Gospel of John, the Holy Spirit is given to us with the new life, as Jesus foretells and promises on the great
day of the Feast of Tabernacles: "If any one thirst let him come to me and drink. He who believeth in me as the
scripture has said, 'Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.'"1 And the Evangelist explains: "This he
said about the Spirit, which those who believed in him were to receive."2 It is the same simile of water which
Jesus uses in his conversation with the Samaritan woman, when he speaks of "a spring of water welling up to
eternal life,"3 and in his conversation with Nicodemus when he speaks of the need for a new birth "of water and
the Holy Spirit" in order to "enter the kingdom of God."4

The Church, therefore, instructed by the words of Christ, and drawing on the experience of Pentecost and her
own apostolic history, has proclaimed since the earliest centuries her faith in the Holy Spirit, as the giver of life,
the one in whom the inscrutable Triune God communicates himself to human beings, constituting in them the
source of eternal life.  

2. This faith, uninterruptedly professed by the Church, needs to be constantly reawakened and deepened in the
consciousness of the People of God. In the course of the last hundred years this has been done several times: by
Leo XIII, who published the Encyclical Epistle Divinum Illud Munus (1897) entirely devoted to the Holy Spirit;
by Pius XII, who in the Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis (1943) spoke of the Holy Spirit as the vital principle
of the Church, in which he works in union with the Head of the Mystical Body, Christ5; at the Second Vatican
Ecumenical Council which brought out the need for a new study of the doctrine on the Holy Spirit, as Paul VI
emphasized: "The Christology and particularly the ecclesiology of the Council must be succeeded by a new
study of and devotion to the Holy Spirit, precisely as the indispensable complement to the teaching of the
Council."6

In our own age, then, we are called anew by the ever ancient and ever new faith of the Church, to draw near to
the Holy Spirit as the giver of life. In this we are helped and stimulated also by the heritage we share with the
Oriental Churches, which have jealously guarded the extraordinary riches of the teachings of the Fathers on the
Holy Spirit. For this reason too we can say that one of the most important ecclesial events of recent years has
been the Sixteenth Centenary of the First Council of Constantinople, celebrated simultaneously in
Constantinople and Rome on the Solemnity of Pentecost in 1981. The Holy Spirit was then better seen, through
a meditation on the mystery of the Church, as the one who points out the ways leading to the union of
Christians, indeed as the supreme source of this unity, which comes from God himself and to which St. Paul
gave a particular expression in the words which are frequently used to begin the Eucharistic liturgy: "The grace
of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."7

In a certain sense, my previous Encyclicals Redemptor Hominis and Dives in Misericordia took their origin and
inspiration from this exhortation, celebrating as they do the event of our salvation accomplished in the Son, sent
by the Father into the world "that the world might be saved through him"8 and "every tongue confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."9 From this exhortation now comes the present Encyclical on the
Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son; with the Father and the Son he is adored and glorified: a
divine Person, he is at the center of the Christian faith and is the source and dynamic power of the Church's
renewal.10 The Encyclical has been drawn from the heart of the heritage of the Council. For the Conciliar texts,
thanks to their teaching on the Church in herself and the Church in the world, move us to penetrate ever deeper
into the Trinitarian mystery of God himself, through the Gospels, the Fathers and the liturgy: to the Father,
through Christ, in the Holy Spirit.

In this way the Church is also responding to certain deep desires which she believes she can discern in people's
hearts today: a fresh discovery of God in his transcendent reality as the infinite Spirit, just as Jesus presents him
to the Samaritan woman; the need to adore him "in spirit and truth"11; the hope of finding in him the secret of
love and the power of a "new creation"12: yes, precisely the giver of life.

The Church feels herself called to this mission of proclaiming the Spirit, while together with the human family
she approaches the end of the second Millennium after Christ. Against the background of a heaven and earth
which will "pass away," she knows well that "the words which will not pass away"13 acquire a particular
eloquence. They are the words of Christ about the Holy Spirit, the inexhaustible source of the "water welling up
to eternal life,"14 as truth and saving grace. Upon these words she wishes to reflect, to these words she wishes to
call the attention of believers and of all people, as she prepares to celebrate- as will be said later on-the great
Jubilee which will mark the passage from the second to the third Christian Millennium.

Naturally, the considerations that follow do not aim to explore exhaustively the extremely rich doctrine on the
Holy Spirit, nor to favor any particular solution of questions which are still open. Their main purpose is to
develop in the Church the awareness that "she is compelled by the Holy Spirit to do her part towards the full
realization of the will of God, who has established Christ as the source of salvation for the whole world."15

PART I - THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON, GIVEN TO THE CHURCH

1. Jesus' Promise and Revelation at the Last Supper

 
3. When the time for Jesus to leave this world had almost come, he told the Apostles of "another Counselor."16
The evangelist John, who was present, writes that, during the Last Supper before the day of his Passion and
Death, Jesus addressed the Apostles with these words: "Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the
Father may be glorified in the Son.... I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with
you forever, even the Spirit of truth."17

It is precisely this Spirit of truth whom Jesus calls the Paraclete-and parakletos means "counselor," and also
"intercessor," or "advocate." And he says that the Paraclete is "another" Counselor, the second one, since he,
Jesus himself, is the first Counselor,18 being the first bearer and giver of the Good News. The Holy Spirit comes
after him and because of him, in order to continue in the world, through the Church, the work of the Good News
of salvation. Concerning this continuation of his own work by the Holy Spirit Jesus speaks more than once
during the same farewell discourse, preparing the Apostles gathered in the Upper Room for his departure,
namely for his Passion and Death on the Cross.

The words to which we will make reference here are found in the Gospel of John. Each one adds a new element
to that prediction and promise. And at the same time they are intimately interwoven, not only from the
viewpoint of the events themselves but also from the viewpoint of the mystery of the Father, Son and Holy
Spirit, which perhaps in no passage of Sacred Scripture finds so emphatic an expression as here.  

4. A little while after the prediction just mentioned Jesus adds: "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the
Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to
you."19 The Holy Spirit will be the Counselor of the Apostles and the Church, always present in their midst-
even though invisible-as the teacher of the same Good News that Christ proclaimed. The words "he will teach"
and "bring to remembrance" mean not only that he, in his own particular way, will continue to inspire the
spreading of the Gospel of salvation but also that he will help people to understand the correct meaning of the
content of Christ's message; they mean that he will ensure continuity and identity of understanding in the midst
of changing conditions and circumstances. The Holy Spirit, then, will ensure that in the Church there will
always continue the same truth which the Apostles heard from their Master.  

5. In transmitting the Good News, the Apostles will be in a special way associated with the Holy Spirit. This is
how Jesus goes on: "When the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of
truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have
been with me from the beginning."20

Apostles were the direct eyewitnesses. They "have heard" and "have seen with their own eyes," "have looked
upon" and even "touched with their hands" Christ, as the evangelist John says in another passage.21 This human,
first-hand and "historical" witness to Christ is linked to the witness of the Holy Spirit: "He will bear witness to
me." In the witness of the Spirit of truth, the human testimony of the Apostles will find its strongest support.
And subsequently it will also find therein the hidden foundation of its continuation among the generations of
Christ's disciples and believers who succeed one another down through the ages.

The supreme and most complete revelation of God to humanity is Jesus Christ himself, and the witness of the
Spirit inspires, guarantees and convalidates the faithful transmission of this revelation in the preaching and
writing of the Apostles,22 while the witness of the Apostles ensures its human expression in the Church and in
the history of humanity.  

6. This is also seen from the strict correlation of content and intention with the just-mentioned prediction and
promise, a correlation found in the next words of the text of John: "I have yet many things to say to you, but you
cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak
on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to
come."23
In his previous words Jesus presents the; Counselor, the Spirit of truth, as the one who "will teach" and "bring to
remembrance," as the one who "will bear witness" to him. Now he says: "He will guide you into all the truth."
This "guiding into all the truth," referring to what the Apostles "cannot bear now," is necessarily connected with
Christ's self-emptying through his Passion and Death on the Cross, which, when he spoke these words, was just
about to happen.

Later however it becomes clear that this "guiding into all the truth" is connected not only with the scandal of the
Cross, but also with everything that Christ "did and taught."24 For the mystery of Christ taken as a whole
demands faith, since it is faith that adequately introduces man into the reality of the revealed mystery. The
guiding into all the truth" is therefore achieved in faith and through faith: and this is the work of the Spirit of
truth and the result of his action in man. Here the Holy Spirit is to be man's supreme guide and the light of the
human spirit. This holds true for the Apostles, the eyewitnesses, who must now bring to all people the
proclamation of what Christ did and taught, and especially the proclamation of his Cross and Resurrection.
Taking a longer view, this also holds true for all the generations of disciples and confessors of the Master. Since
they will have to accept with faith and confess with candor the mystery of God at work in human history, the
revealed mystery which explains the definitive meaning of that history.  

7. Between the Holy Spirit and Christ there thus subsists, in the economy of salvation, an intimate bond,
whereby the Spirit works in human history as "another Counselor," permanently ensuring the transmission and
spreading of the Good News revealed by Jesus of Nazareth. Thus, in the Holy Spirit-Paraclete, who in the
mystery and action of the Church unceasingly continues the historical presence on earth of the Redeemer and
his saving work, the glory of Christ shines forth, as the following words of John attest: "He [the Spirit of truth]
will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you."25 By these words all the preceding
statements are once again confirmed: "He will teach..., will bring to your remembrance..., will bear witness."
The supreme and complete self-revelation of God, accomplished in Christ and witnessed to by the preaching of
the Apostles, continues to be manifested in the Church through the mission of the invisible Counselor, the Spirit
of truth. How intimately this mission is linked with the mission of Christ, how fully it draws from this mission
of Christ, consolidating and developing in history its salvific results, is expressed by the verb "take": "He will
take what is mine and declare it to you." As if to explain the words "he will take" by clearly expressing the
divine and Trinitarian unity of the source, Jesus adds: "All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he
will take what is mine and declare it to you."26 By the very fact of taking what is "mine," he will draw from
"what is the Father's."

In the light of these words "he will take," one can therefore also explain the other significant words about the
Holy Spirit spoken by Jesus in the Upper Room before the Passover: "It is to your advantage that I go away, for
if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes,
he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment."27 It will be necessary to return to
these words in a separate reflection.

2. Father, Son and Holy Spirit

8. It is a characteristic of the text of John that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are clearly called Persons,
the first distinct from the second and the third, and each of them from one another. Jesus speaks of the Spirit-
Counselor, using several times the personal pronoun "he"; and at the same time, throughout the farewell
discourse, he reveals the bonds which unite the Father, the Son and the Paraclete to one another. Thus "the Holy
Spirit . . .proceeds from the Father"28 and the Father "gives" the Spirit.29 The Father "sends" the Spirit in the
name of the Son,30 the Spirit "bears witness" to the Son.31 The Son asks the Father to send the Spirit-
Counselor,32 but likewise affirms and promises, in relation to his own "departure" through the Cross: "If I go, I
will send him to you,"33 Thus, the Father sends the Holy Spirit in the power of his Fatherhood, as he has sent the
Son34; but at the same time he sends him in the power of the Redemption accomplished by Christ-and in this
sense Holy Spirit is sent also by the Son: "I will send him to you."

Here it should be noted that, while all the other promises made in the Upper Room foretold the coming of the
Holy Spirit after Christ's departure, the one contained in the text of John 16:7f. also includes and clearly
emphasizes the relationship of interdependence which could be called causal between the manifestation of each:
"If I go, I will send him to you." The Holy Spirit will come insofar as Christ will depart through the Cross: he
will come not only afterwards, but because of the Redemption accomplished by Christ, through the will and
action of the Father.  

9. Thus in the farewell discourse at the Last Supper, we can say that the highest point of the revelation of the
Trinity is reached At the same time, we are on the threshold of definitive events and final words which in the
end will be translated into the great missionary mandate addressed to the Apostles and through them to the
Church: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations," a mandate which contains, in a certain sense, the
Trinitarian formula of baptism: "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit."35 The formula reflects the intimate mystery of God, of the divine life, which is the Father, the Son and
the Holy Spirit, the divine unity of the Trinity. The farewell discourse can be read as a special preparation for
this Trinitarian formula, in which is expressed the life-giving power of the Sacrament which brings about
sharing in the life of the Triune God, for it gives sanctifying grace as a supernatural gift to man. Through grace,
man is called and made "capable" of sharing in the inscrutable life of God.  

10. In his intimate life, God "is love,"36 the essential love shared by the three divine Persons: personal love is
the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of the Father and the Son. Therefore he "searches even the depths of God,"37 as
uncreated Love-Gift. It can be said that in the Holy Spirit the intimate life of the Triune God becomes totally
gift, an exchange of mutual love between the divine Persons and that through the Holy Spirit God exists in the
mode of gift. It is the Holy Spirit who is the personal expression of this self-giving, of this being-love.38 He is
Person- Love. He is Person-Gift Here we have an inexhaustible treasure of the reality and an inexpressible
deepening of the concept of person in God, which only divine Revelation makes known to us.

At the same time, the Holy Spirit, being consubstantial with the Father and the Son in divinity, is love and
uncreated gift from which derives as from its source (fons vivus) all giving of gifts vis-a-vis creatures (created
gift): the gift of existence to all things through creation; the gift of grace to human beings through the whole
economy of salvation. As the Apostle Paul writes: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy
Spirit which has been given to US."39

3. The Salvific Self-Giving of God in the Holy Spirit

11. Christ's farewell discourse at the Last Supper stands in particular reference to this "giving" and "self-giving"
of the Holy Spirit. In John's Gospel we have as it were the revelation of the most profound "logic" of the saving
mystery contained in God's eternal plan, as an extension of the ineffable communion of the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit. This is the divine "logic" which from the mystery of the Trinity leads to the mystery of the
Redemption of the world in Jesus Christ. The Redemption accomplished by the Son in the dimensions of the
earthly history of humanity- accomplished in his "departure" through the Cross and Resurrection-is at the same
time, in its entire salvific power, transmitted to the Holy Spirit: the one who "will take what is mine."40 The
words of the text of John indicate that, according to the divine plan, Christ's "departure" is an indispensable
condition for the "sending" and the coming of the Holy Spirit, but these words also say that what begins now is
the new salvific self-giving of God, in the Holy Spirit.  

12. It is a new beginning in relation to the first, original beginning of God's salvific self-giving, which is
identified with the mystery of creation itself. Here is what we read in the very first words of the Book of
Genesis: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..., and the Spirit of God (ruah Elohim) was
moving over the face of the waters."41 This biblical concept of creation includes not only the call to existence of
the very being of the cosmos, that is to say the giving of existence, but also the presence of the Spirit of God in
creation, that is to say the beginning of God's salvific self-communication to the things he creates. This is true
first of all concerning man, who has been created in the image and likeness of God: "Let us make man in our
image, after our likeness."42 "Let us make": can one hold that the plural which the Creator uses here in speaking
of himself already in some way suggests the Trinitarian mystery, the presence of the Trinity in the work of the
creation of man? The Christian reader, who already knows the revelation of this mystery, can discern a
reflection of it also in these words. At any rate, the context of the Book of Genesis enables us to see in the
creation of man the first beginning of God's salvific self-giving commensurate with the "image and likeness" of
himself which he has granted to man.  

13. It seems then that even the words spoken by Jesus in the farewell discourse should be read again in the light
of that "beginning," so long ago yet fundamental, which we know from Genesis. "If I do not go away, the
Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you." Describing his "departure" as a condition
for the "coming" of the Counselor, Christ links the new beginning of God's salvific self-communication in the
Holy Spirit with the mystery of the Redemption. It is a new beginning, first of all because between the first
beginning and the whole of human history-from the original fall onwards-sin has intervened, sin which is in
contradiction to the presence of the Spirit of God in creation, and which is above all in contradiction to God's
salvific self- communication to man. St. Paul writes that, precisely because of sin, "creation...was subjected to
futility..., has been groaning in travail together until now" and "waits with eager longing for the revealing of the
sons of God."43

14. Therefore Jesus Christ says in the Upper Room "It is to your advantage I go away; ...if I go, I will send him
to you."44 The "departure" of Christ through the Cross has the power of the Redemption-and this also means a
new presence of the Spirit of God in creation: the new beginning of God's self-communication to man in the
Holy Spirit. "And that you are children is proven by the fact that God has sent into our hearts the Spirit of his
Son who cries: Abba, Father!" As the Apostle Paul writes in the Letter to the Galatians.45 The Holy Spirit is the
Spirit of the Father, as the words of the farewell discourse in the Upper Room bear witness. At the same time he
is the Spirit of the Son: he is the Spirit of Jesus Christ, as the Apostles and particularly Paul of Tarsus will
testify.46 With the sending of this Spirit "into our hearts," there begins the fulfillment of that for which "creation
waits with eager longing," as we read in the Letter to the Romans.

The Holy Spirit comes at the price of Christ's "departure." While this "departure" caused the Apostles to be
sorrowful,47 and this sorrow was to reach its culmination in the Passion and Death on Good Friday, "this sorrow
will turn into joy."48 For Christ will add to this redemptive "departure" the glory of his Resurrection and
Ascension to the Father. Thus the sorrow with its underlying joy is, for the Apostles in the context of their
Master's "departure," an "advantageous" departure, for thanks to it another "Counselor" will come.49 At the
price of the Cross which brings about the Redemption, in the power of the whole Paschal Mystery of Jesus
Christ, the Holy Spirit comes in order to remain from the day of Pentecost onwards with the Apostles, to remain
with the Church and in the Church, and through her in the world.

In this way there is definitively brought about that new beginning of the self-communication of the Triune God
in the Holy Spirit through the work of Jesus Christ, the Redeemer of man and of the world.

4. The Messiah, Anointed with the Holy Spirit

15. There is also accomplished in its entirety the mission of the Messiah, that is to say of the One who has
received the fullness of the Holy Spirit for the Chosen People of God and for the whole of humanity. "Messiah"
literally means "Christ," that is, "Anointed One," and in the history of salvation it means "the one anointed with
the Holy Spirit." This was the prophetic tradition of the Old Testament. Following this tradition, Simon Peter
will say in the house of Cornelius: "You must have heard about the recent happenings in Judea...after the
baptism which John preached: how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power."50

From these words of Peter and from many similar ones,51 one must first go back to the prophecy of Isaiah,
sometimes called "the Fifth Gospel" or "the Gospel of the Old Testament." Alluding to the coming of a
mysterious personage, which the New Testament revelation will identify with Jesus, Isaiah connects his person
and mission with a particular action of the Spirit of God-the Spirit of the Lord. These are the words of the
Prophet: "There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. And
the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and
might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. And his delight shall be the fear of the Lord."52

This text is important for the whole pneumatology of the Old Testament, because it constitutes a kind of bridge
between the ancient biblical concept of "spirit," understood primarily as a "charismatic breath of wind," and the
"Spirit" as a person and as a gift, a gift for the person. The Messiah of the lineage of David ("from the stump of
Jesse") is precisely that person upon whom the Spirit of the Lord "shall rest." It is obvious that in this case one
cannot yet speak of a revelation of the Paraclete. However, with this veiled reference to the figure of the future
Messiah there begins, so to speak, the path towards the full revelation of the Holy Spirit in the unity of the
Trinitarian mystery, a mystery which will finally be manifested in the New Covenant.

16. It is precisely the Messiah himself who is this path. In the Old Covenant, anointing had become the external
symbol of the gift of the Spirit. The Messiah (more than any other anointed personage in the Old Covenant) is
that single great personage anointed by God himself He is the Anointed One in the sense that he possesses the
fullness of the Spirit of God. He himself will also be the mediator in granting this Spirit to the whole People.
Here in fact are other words of the Prophet: "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has
anointed me to bring good tidings to the afflicted; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted to proclaim
liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; to proclaim the year of the Lord's
favor."53

The Anointed One is also sent "with the Spirit of the Lord ": "Now the Lord God has sent me and his Spirit."54

According to the Book of Isaiah, the Anointed One and the One sent together with the Spirit of the Lord is also
the chosen Servant of the Lord upon whom the Spirit of God comes down: "Behold my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him."55

We know that the Servant of the Lord is revealed in the Book of Isaiah as the true Man of Sorrows: the Messiah
who suffers for the sins of the world.56 And at the same time it is precisely he whose mission will bear for all
humanity the true fruits of salvation:

"He will bring forth justice to the nations..."57; and he will become "a covenant to the people, a light to the
nations..."58; "that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth."59

For: "My spirit which is upon you, and my words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your
mouth, or out of the mouth of your children's children, says the Lord, from this time forth and for evermore."60

The prophetic texts quoted here are to be read in the light of the Gospel- just as, in its turn, the New Testament
draws a particular clarification from the marvelous light contained in these Old Testament texts. The Prophet
presents the Messiah as the one who comes in the Holy Spirit, the one who possesses the fullness of this Spirit
in himself and at the same time for others, for Israel, for all the nations, for all humanity. The fullness of the
Spirit of God is accompanied by many different gifts, the treasures of salvation, destined in a particular way for
the poor and suffering, for all those who open their hearts to these gifts-sometimes through the painful
experience of their own existence-but first of all through that interior availability which comes from faith. The
aged Simeon, the "righteous and devout man" upon whom "rested the Holy Spirit," sensed this at the moment of
Jesus' presentation in the Temple, when he perceived in him the "salvation...prepared in the presence of all
peoples" at the price of the great suffering-the Cross- which he would have to embrace together with his
Mother.61 The Virgin Mary, who "had conceived by the Holy Spirit,"62 sensed this even more clearly, when she
pondered in her heart the "mysteries" of the Messiah, with whom she was associated.63

17. Here it must be emphasized that clearly the "spirit of the Lord" who rests upon the future Messiah is above
all a gift of God for the person of that Servant of the Lord. But the latter is not an isolated and independent
person, because he acts in accordance with the will of the Lord, by virtue of the Lord's decision or choice. Even
though in the light of the texts of Isaiah the salvific work of the Messiah, the Servant of the Lord, includes the
action of the Spirit which is carried out through himself, nevertheless in the Old Testament context there is no
suggestion of a distinction of subjects, or of the Divine Persons as they subsist in the mystery of the Trinity, and
as they are later revealed in the New Testament. Both in Isaiah and in the whole of the Old Testament the
personality of the Holy Spirit is completely hidden: in the revelation of the one God, as also in the foretelling of
the future Messiah.

18. Jesus Christ will make reference to this prediction contained in the words of Isaiah at the beginning of his
messianic activity. This will happen in the same Nazareth where he had lived for thirty years in the house of
Joseph the carpenter, with Mary, his Virgin Mother. When he had occasion to speak in the Synagogue, he
opened the Book of Isaiah and found the passage where it was written: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me"; and having read this passage he said to those present: "Today this scripture has
been fulfilled in your hearing."64 In this way he confessed and proclaimed that he was the Messiah, the one in
whom the Holy Spirit dwells as the gift of God himself, the one who possesses the fullness of this Spirit, the
one who marks the "new beginning" of the gift which God makes to humanity in the Spirit.

5. Jesus of Nazareth, "Exalted" in the Holy Spirit

19. Even though in his hometown of Nazareth Jesus is not accepted as the Messiah, nonetheless, at the
beginning of his public activity, his messianic mission in the Holy Spirit is revealed to the people by John the
Baptist. The latter, the son of Zechariah and Elizabeth, foretells at the Jordan the coming of the Messiah and
administers the baptism of repentance. He says: "I baptize you with water; he who is mightier than I is coming,
the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."65
John the Baptist foretells the Messiah-Christ not only as the one who "is coming" in the Holy Spirit but also as
the one who "brings" the Holy Spirit, as Jesus will reveal more clearly in the Upper Room. Here John faithfully
echoes the words of Isaiah, words which in the ancient Prophet concerned the future, while in John's teaching
on the banks of the Jordan they are the immediate introduction to the new messianic reality. John is not only a
prophet but also a messenger: he is the precursor of Christ. What he foretells is accomplished before the eyes of
all. Jesus of Nazareth too comes to the Jordan to receive the baptism of repentance. At the sight of him arriving,
John proclaims: "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world."66 He says this through the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit,67 bearing witness to the fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah. At the same time he
confesses his faith in the redeeming mission of Jesus of Nazareth. On the lips of John the Baptist, "Lamb of
God" is an expression of truth about the Redeemer no less significant than the one used by Isaiah: "Servant of
the Lord."

Thus, by the testimony of John at the Jordan, Jesus of Nazareth, rejected by his own fellow-citizens, is exalted
before the eyes of Israel as the Messiah, that is to say the "One Anointed" with the Holy Spirit. And this
testimony is corroborated by another testimony of a higher order, mentioned by the three Synoptics. For when
all the people were baptized and as Jesus, having received baptism, was praying, "the heaven was opened, and
the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form, as a dove"68 and at the same time "a voice from heaven said
'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.'"69
This is a Trinitarian theophany which bears witness to the exaltation of Christ on the occasion of his baptism in
the Jordan. It not only confirms the testimony of John the Baptist but also reveals another more profound
dimension of the truth about Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah. It is this: the Messiah is the beloved Son of the
Father. His solemn exaltation cannot be reduced to the messianic mission of the "Servant of the Lord." In the
light of the theophany at the Jordan, this exaltation touches the mystery of the very person of the Messiah. He
has been raised up because he is the beloved Son in whom God is well pleased. The voice from on high says:
"my Son."

20. The theophany at the Jordan clarifies only in a fleeting way the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth, whose entire
activity will be carried out in the active presence of the Holy Spirit.70 This mystery would be gradually revealed
and confirmed by Jesus himself by means of everything that he "did and taught."71 In the course of this teaching
and of the messianic signs which Jesus performed before he came to the farewell discourse in the Upper Room,
we find events and words which constitute particularly important stages of this progressive revelation. Thus the
evangelist Luke, who has already presented Jesus as "full of the Holy Spirit" and "led by the Spirit...in the
wilderness,"72 tells us that, after the return of the seventy-two disciples from the mission entrusted to them by
the Master,73 while they were joyfully recounting the fruits of their labors, "in that same hour [Jesus rejoiced in
the Holy Spirit and said: 'I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from
the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for such was your gracious will.'"74 Jesus
rejoices at the fatherhood of God: he rejoices because it has been given to him to reveal this fatherhood; he
rejoices, finally, as at a particular outpouring of this divine fatherhood on the "little ones." And the evangelist
describes all this as "rejoicing in the Holy Spirit."

This "rejoicing" in a certain sense prompts Jesus to say still more. We hear: "All things have been delivered to
me by my Father; and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and
any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."75

21. That which during the theophany at the Jordan came so to speak "from outside," from on high, here comes
"from within," that is to say from the depths of who Jesus is. It is another revelation of the Father and the Son,
united in the Holy Spirit. Jesus speaks only of the fatherhood of God and of his own sonship-he does not speak
directly of the Spirit, who is Love and thereby the union of the Father and the Son. Nonetheless what he says of
the Father and of himself-the Son-flows from that fullness of the Spirit which is in him, which fills his heart,
pervades his own "I," inspires and enlivens his action from the depths. Hence that "rejoicing in the Holy Spirit."
The union of Christ with the Holy Spirit, a union of which he is perfectly aware, is expressed in that "rejoicing,"
which in a certain way renders "perceptible" its hidden source. Thus there is a particular manifestation and
rejoicing which is proper to the Son of Man, the Christ-Messiah, whose humanity belongs to the person of the
Son of God, substantially one with the Holy Spirit in divinity.

In the magnificent confession of the fatherhood of God, Jesus of Nazareth also manifests himself, his divine "I"-
for he is the Son "of the same substance," and therefore "no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who
the Father is except the Son," that Son who "for us and for our salvation" became man by the power of the Holy
Spirit and was born of a virgin whose name was Mary.

6. The Risen Christ Says: "Receive the Holy Spirit"

22. It is thanks to Luke's narrative that we are brought closest to the truth contained in the discourse in the
Upper Room. Jesus of Nazareth, "raised up" in the Holy Spirit, during this discourse and conversation presents
himself as the one who brings the Spirit, as the one who is to bring him and "give" him to the Apostles and to
the Church at the price of his own "departure" through the Cross.
The verb "bring" is here used to mean first of all "reveal." In the Old Testament, from the Book of Genesis
onwards, the Spirit of God was in some way made known, in the first place as a "breath" of God which gives
life, as a supernatural "living breath." In the Book of Isaiah, he is presented as a "gift" for the person of the
Messiah, as the one who comes down and rests upon him, in order to guide from within all the salvific activity
of the "Anointed One." At the Jordan, Isaiah's proclamation is given a concrete form: Jesus of Nazareth is the
one who comes in the Holy Spirit and who brings the Spirit as the gift proper to his own Person, in order to
distribute that gift by means of this humanity: "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."76 In the Gospel of
Luke, this revelation of the Holy Spirit is confirmed and added to, as the intimate source of the life and
messianic activity of Jesus Christ. In the light of what Jesus says in the farewell discourse in the Upper Room,
the Holy Spirit is revealed in a new and fuller way. He is not only the gift to the person (the person of the
Messiah), but is a Person-gift. Jesus foretells his coming as that of "another Counselor" who, being the Spirit of
truth, will lead the Apostles and the Church "into all the truth."77 This will be accomplished by reason of the
particular communion between the Holy Spirit and Christ: "He will take what is mine and declare it to you."78
This communion has its original source in the Father: "All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he
will take what is mine and declare it to you."79 Coming from the Father the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father.80
The Holy Spirit is first sent as a gift for the Son who was made man, in order to fulfill the messianic prophecies.
After the "departure" of Christ the Son, the Johannine text says that the Holy Spirit "will come" directly (it is his
new mission), to complete the work of the Son. Thus it will be he who brings to fulfillment the new era of the
history of salvation.

23. We find ourselves on the threshold of the Paschal events. The new, definitive revelation of the Holy Spirit
as a Person who is the gift is accomplished at this precise moment. The Paschal events-the Passion, Death and
Resurrection- of Christ-are also the time of the new coming of the Holy Spirit, as the Paraclete and the Spirit of
truth. They are the time of the "new beginning" of the self- communication of the Triune God to humanity in the
Holy Spirit through the work of Christ the Redeemer. This new beginning is the Redemption of the world: "God
so loved the world that he gave his only Son."81 Already the "giving" of the Son, the gift of the Son, expresses
the most profound essence of God who, as Love, is the inexhaustible source of the giving of gifts. The gift made
by the Son completes the revelation and giving of the eternal love: the Holy Spirit, who in the inscrutable depths
of the divinity is a Person-Gift, through the work of the Son, that is to say by means of the Paschal Mystery, is
given to the Apostles and to the Church in a new way, and through them is given to humanity and the whole
world.

24. The definitive expression of this mystery is had on the day of the Resurrection. On this day Jesus of
Nazareth "descended from David according to the flesh," as the Apostle Paul writes, is "designated Son of God
in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his Resurrection from the dead."82 It can be said therefore that
the messianic "raising up" of Christ in the Holy Spirit reaches its zenith in the Resurrection, in which he reveals
himself also as the Son of God, "full of power." And this power, the sources of which gush forth in the
inscrutable Trinitarian communion, is manifested, first of all, in the fact that the Risen Christ does two things:
on the one hand he fulfills God's promise already expressed through the Prophet's words: "A new heart I will
give you, and a new spirit I will put within you,...my spirit"83; and on the other hand he fulfills his own promise
made to the Apostles with the words: "If I go, I will send him to you."84 It is he: the Spirit of truth, the Paraclete
sent by the Risen Christ to transform us into his own risen image.85

"On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of
the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, 'Peace be with you.' When he had said this, he
showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them
again, 'Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.' And when he had said this, he
breathed on them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit.'"86

All the details of this key-text of John's Gospel have their own eloquence, especially if we read them in
reference to the words spoken in the same Upper Room at the beginning of the Paschal event. And now these
events-the Triduum Sacrum of Jesus whom the Father consecrated with the anointing and sent into the world-
reach their fulfillment. Christ, who "gave up his spirit" on the Cross87 as the Son of Man and the Lamb of God,
once risen goes to the Apostles 'to breathe on them" with that power spoken of in the Letter to the Romans.88
The Lord's coming fills those present with joy: "Your sorrow will turn into joy,"89 as he had already promised
them before his Passion. And above all there is fulfilled the principal prediction of the farewell discourse: the
Risen Christ, as it were beginning a new creation, "brings" to the Apostles the Holy Spirit. He brings him at the
price of his own "departure": he gives them this Spirit as it were through the wounds of his crucifixion: "He
showed them his hands and his side." It is in the power of this crucifixion that he says to them: "Receive the
Holy Spirit."

Thus there is established a close link between the sending of the Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit. There is
no sending of the Holy Spirit (after original sin) without the Cross and the Resurrection: "If I do not go away,
the Counselor will not come to you."90 There is also established a close link between the mission of the Holy
Spirit and that of the Son in the Redemption. The mission of the Son, in a certain sense, finds its "fulfillment" in
the Redemption. The mission of the Holy Spirit "draws from" the Redemption: "He will take what is mine and
declare it to you."91 The Redemption is totally carried out by the Son as the Anointed One, who came and acted
in the power of the Holy Spirit, offering himself finally in sacrifice on the wood of the Cross. And this
Redemption is, at the same time, constantly carried out in human hearts and minds-in the history of the world-
by the Holy Spirit, who is the "other Counselor. "

7. The Holy Spirit and the Era of the Church

25. "Having accomplished the work that the Father had entrusted to the Son on earth (cf. Jn 17:4), on the day of
Pentecost the Holy Spirit was sent to sanctify the Church forever, so that believers might have access to the
Father through Christ in one Spirit (cf. Eph 2:18). He is the Spirit of life, the fountain of water springing up to
eternal life (cf. Jn 4:14; 7:38ff.), the One through whom the Father restores life to those who are dead through
sin, until one day he will raise in Christ their mortal bodies" (cf. Rom 8:10f.).92

In this way the Second Vatican Council speaks of the Church's birth on the day of Pentecost. This event
constitutes the definitive manifestation of what had already been accomplished in the same Upper Room on
Easter Sunday. The Risen Christ came and "brought" to the Apostles the Holy Spirit. He gave him to them,
saying "Receive the Holy Spirit." What had then taken place inside the Upper Room, "the doors being shut,"
later, on the day of Pentecost is manifested also outside, in public. The doors of the Upper Room are opened
and the Apostles go to the inhabitants and the pilgrims who had gathered in Jerusalem on the occasion of the
feast, in order to bear witness to Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. In this way the prediction is fulfilled:
"He will bear witness to me: and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning."93

We read in another document of the Second Vatican Council: "Doubtless, the Holy Spirit was already at work
in the world before Christ was glorified. Yet on the day of Pentecost, he came down upon the disciples to
remain with them for ever. On that day the Church was publicly revealed to the multitude, and the Gospel began
to spread among the nations by means of preaching."94

The era of the Church began with the "coming," that is to say with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles
gathered in the Upper Room in Jerusalem, together with Mary, the Lord's Mother.95 The time of the Church
began at the moment when the promises and predictions that so explicitly referred to the Counselor, the Spirit of
truth, began to be fulfilled in complete power and clarity upon the Apostles, thus determining the birth of the
Church. The Acts of the Apostles speak of this at length and in many passages, which state that in the mind of
the first community, whose convictions Luke expresses, the Holy Spirit assumed the invisible-but in a certain
way "perceptible"-guidance of those who after the departure of the Lord Jesus felt profoundly that they had
been left orphans. With the coming of the Spirit they felt capable of fulfilling the mission entrusted to them.
They felt full of strength. It is precisely this that the Holy Spirit worked in them and this is continually at work
in the Church, through their successors. For the grace of the Holy Spirit which the Apostles gave to their
collaborators through the imposition of hands continues to be transmitted in Episcopal Ordination. The bishops
in turn by the Sacrament of Orders render the sacred ministers sharers in this spiritual gift and, through the
Sacrament of Confirmation, ensure that all who are reborn of water and the Holy Spirit are strengthened by this
gift. And thus, in a certain way, the grace of Pentecost is perpetuated in the Church.

As the Council writes, "the Spirit dwells in the Church and in the hearts of the faithful as in a temple (cf. 1 Cor
3:16; 6:19). In them he prays and bears witness to the fact that they are adopted sons (cf. Gal 4:6; Rom 8:15-
16:26). The Spirit guides the Church into the fullness of truth (cf. Jn 16:13) and gives her a unity of fellowship
and service. He furnishes and directs her with various gifts, both hierarchical and charismatic, and adorns her
with the fruits of his grace (cf Eph 4:11-12; 1 Cor 12:4; Gal 5:22). By the power of the Gospel he makes the
Church grow, perpetually renews her and leads her to perfect union with her Spouse."96

26. These passages quoted from the Conciliar Constitution Lumen Gentium tell us that the era of the Church
began with the coming of the Holy Spirit. They also tell us that this era, the era of the Church, continues. It
continues down the centuries and generations. In our own century, when humanity is already close to the end of
the second Millennium after Christ, this era of the Church expressed itself in a special way through the Second
Vatican Council, as the Council of our century. For we know that it was in a special way an "ecclesiological"
Council: a Council on the theme of the Church. At the same time, the teaching of this Council is essentially
"pneumatological": it is permeated by the truth about the Holy Spirit, as the soul of the Church. We can say that
in its rich variety of teaching the Second Vatican Council contains precisely all that "the Spirit says to the
Churches"97 with regard to the present phase of the history of salvation.

Following the guidance of the Spirit of truth and bearing witness together with him, the Council has given a
special confirmation of the presence of the Holy Spirit-the Counselor. In a certain sense, the Council has made
the Spirit newly "present" in our difficult age. In the light of this conviction one grasps more clearly the great
importance of all the initiatives aimed at implementing the Second Vatican Council, its teaching and its pastoral
and ecumenical thrust. In this sense also the subsequent Assemblies of the Synod of Bishops are to be carefully
studied and evaluated, aiming as they do to ensure that the fruits of truth and love-the authentic fruits of the
Holy Spirit-become a lasting treasure for the People of God in its earthly pilgrimage down the centuries. This
work being done by the Church for the testing and bringing together of the salvific fruits of the Spirit bestowed
in the Council is something indispensable. For this purpose one must learn how to "discern" them carefully
from everything that may instead come originally from the "prince of this world."98 This discernment in
implementing the Council's work is especially necessary in view of the fact that the Council opened itself
widely to the contemporary world, as is clearly seen from the important Conciliar Constitutions Gaudium et
Spes and Lumen Gentium.

We read in the Pastoral Constitution: "For theirs (i.e., of the disciples of Christ) is a community composed of
men. United in Christ, they are led by the Holy Spirit in their journey to the kingdom of their Father and they
have welcomed the news of salvation which is meant for every man. That is why this community realizes that it
is truly and intimately linked with mankind and its history."99 "The Church truly knows that only God, whom
she serves, meets the deepest longings of the human heart, which is never fully satisfied by what the world has
to offer."100 "God 's Spirit. . . with a marvelous providence directs the unfolding of time and renews the face of
the earth."101

PART II - THE SPIRIT WHO CONVINCES THE WORLD CONCERNING SIN

1. Sin, Righteousness and Judgment

 
27. When Jesus during the discourse in the Upper Room foretells the coming of the Holy Spirit "at the price of"
his own departure, and promises "I will send him to you," in the very same context he adds: "And when he
comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment."102 The same Counselor and
Spirit of truth who has been promised as the one who "will teach" and "bring to remembrance, " who "will bear
witness," and "guide into all the truth," in the words just quoted is foretold as the one who "will convince the
world concerning sin and righteousness and judgement."

The context too seems significant. Jesus links this foretelling of the Holy Spirit to the words indicating his
"departure" through the Cross, and indeed emphasizes the need for this departure: "It is to your advantage that I
go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you."103

But what counts more is the explanation that Jesus himself adds to these three words: sin, righteousness,
judgment. For he says this: "He Will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and
you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of the world is judged."104 In the mind of
Jesus, sin, righteousness and judgment have a very precise meaning, different from the meaning that one might
be inclined to attribute to these words independently of the speaker's explanation. This explanation also
indicates how one is to understand the "convincing the world" which is proper to the action of the Holy Spirit.
Both the meaning of the individual words and the fact that Jesus linked them together in the same phrase are
important here.

"Sin," in this passage, means the incredulity that Jesus encountered among "his own," beginning with the people
of his own town of Nazareth. Sin means the rejection of his mission, a rejection that will cause people to
condemn him to death. When he speaks next of "righteousness," Jesus seems to have in mind that definitive
justice, which the Father will restore to him when he grants him the glory of the Resurrection and Ascension
into heaven: "I go to the Father." In its turn, and in the context of "sin" and "righteousness" thus understood,
"judgment" means that the Spirit of truth will show the guilt cf the "world" in condemning Jesus to death on the
Cross. Nevertheless, Christ did not come into the world only to judge it and condemn it: he came to save it.105
Convincing about sin and righteousness has as its purpose the salvation of the world, the salvation of men.
Precisely this truth seems to be emphasized by the assertion that "judgment" concerns only the prince of this
world," Satan, the one who from the beginning has been exploiting the work of creation against salvation,
against the covenant and the union of man with God: he is "already judged" from the start. If the Spirit-
Counselor is to convince the world precisely concerning judgment, it is in order to continue in the world the
salvific work of Christ.

28. Here we wish to concentrate our attention principally on this mission of the Holy Spirit, which is "to
convince the world concerning sin," but at the same time respecting the general context of Jesus' words in the
Upper Room. The Holy Spirit, who takes from the Son the work of the Redemption of the world, by this very
fact takes the task of the salvific "convincing of sin." This convincing is in permanent reference to
"righteousness": that is to say to definitive salvation in God, to the fulfillment of the economy that has as its
center the crucified and glorified Christ. And this salvific economy of God in a certain sense removes man from
"judgment," that is from the damnation which has been inflicted on the Sill or Satan, "the prince of this world,"
the one who because of his sin has become "the ruler of this world of darkness."106 And here we see that,
through this reference to "judgment," vast horizons open up for understanding "sin" and also "righteousness."
The Holy Spirit, by showing sin against the background of Christ's Cross in the economy of salvation (one
could say "sin saved"), enables us to understand how his mission is also "to convince" of the sin that has already
been definitively judged ("sin condemned").

29. All the words uttered by the Redeemer in the Upper Room on the eve of his Passion become part of the era
of the Church: first of all, the words about the Holy Spirit as the Paraclete and Spirit of truth. The words
become part of it in an ever new way, in every generation, in every age. This is confirmed, as far as our own age
is concerned, by the teaching of the Second Vatican Council as a whole, and especially in the Pastoral
Constitution Gaudium et Spes. Many passages of this document indicate clearly that the Council, by opening
itself to the light of the Spirit of truth, is seen to be the authentic depositary of the predictions and promises
made by Christ to the Apostles and to the Church in the farewell discourse: in a particular way as the depositary
of the predictions that the Holy Spirit would "convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and
judgment."

This is already indicated by the text in which the Council explains how it understands the "world": "The
Council focuses its attention on the world of men, the whole human family along with the sum of those realities
in the midst of which that family lives. It gazes upon the world which is the theater of man's history, and carries
the marks of his energies, his tragedies, and his triumphs; that world which the Christian sees as created and
sustained by its Maker's love, fallen indeed into the bondage of sin, yet emancipated now by Christ. He was
crucified and rose again to break the stranglehold of personified Evil, so that this world might be fashioned
anew according to God's design and reach its fulfillment."107 This very rich text needs to be read in conjunction
with the other passages in the Constitution that seek to show with all the realism of faith the situation of sin in
the contemporary world and that also seek to explain its essence, beginning from different points of view.108

When on the eve of the Passover Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit as the one who "will convince the world
concerning sin," on the one hand this statement must be given the widest possible meaning, insofar as it
includes all the sin in the history of humanity. But on the other hand, when Jesus explains that this sin consists
in the fact that "they do not believe in him," this meaning seems to apply only to those who rejected the
messianic mission of the Son of Man and condemned him to death on the Cross. But one can hardly fail to
notice that this more "limited" and historically specified meaning of sin expands, until it assumes a universal
dimension by reason of the universality of the Redemption, accomplished through the Cross. The revelation of
the mystery of the Redemption opens the way to an understanding in which every sin wherever and whenever
committed has a reference to the Cross of Christ-and therefore indirectly also to the sin of those who "have not
believed in him," and who condemned Jesus Christ to death on the Cross.

From this point of view we must return to the event of Pentecost.

2. The Testimony of the Day of Pentecost

30. Christ's prophecies in the farewell discourse found their most exact and direct confirmation on the day of
Pentecost, in particular the prediction which we are dealing with: "The Counselor...will convince the world
concerning sin." On that day, the promised Holy Spirit came down upon the Apostles gathered in prayer
together with Mary the Mother of Jesus, in the same Upper Room, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles: "And
they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them
utterance,"109 "thus bringing back to unity the scattered races and offering to the Father the first-fruits of all the
nations."110

The connection between Christ's prediction and this event is clear. We perceive here the first and fundamental
fulfillment of the promise of the Paraclete. He comes, sent by the Father, "after" the departure of Christ, "at the
price of" that departure. This is first a departure through the Cross, and later, forty days after the Resurrection,
through his Ascension into heaven. Once more, at the moment of the Ascension, Jesus orders the Apostles "not
to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father"; "but before many days you shall be
baptized with the Holy Spirit"; "but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you
shall be witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth."111

These last words contain an echo or reminder of the prediction made in the Upper Room. And on the day of
Pentecost this prediction is fulfilled with total accuracy. Acting under the influence of the Holy Spirit, who had
been received by the Apostles while they were praying in the Upper Room, Peter comes forward and speaks
before a multitude of people of different languages, gathered for the feast. He proclaims what he certainly
would not have had the courage to say before: Men of Israel,...Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God
with mighty works and wonders and signs which God did through him in your midst...this Jesus, delivered up
according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.
But God raised him up, having loosed the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by
it."112

Jesus had foretold and promised: "He will bear witness to me,...and you also are my witnesses." In the first
discourse of Peter in Jerusalem this "witness" finds its clear beginning: it is the witness to Christ crucified and
risen. The witness of the Spirit- Paraclete and of the Apostles. And in the very content of that first witness, the
Spirit of truth, through the lips of Peter, "convinces the world concerning sin": first of all, concerning the sin
which is the rejection of Christ even to his condemnation to death, to death on the Cross on Golgotha. Similar
proclamations will be repeated, according to the text of the Acts of the Apostles, on other occasions and in
various places.113

31. Beginning from this initial witness at Pentecost and for all future time the action of the Spirit of truth who
"convinces the world concerning the sin" of the rejection of Christ is linked inseparably with the witness to be
borne to the Paschal Mystery: the mystery of the Crucified and Risen One. And in this link the same
"convincing concerning sin" reveals its own salvific dimension. For it is a "convincing" that has as its purpose
not merely the accusation of the world and still less its condemnation. Jesus Christ did not come into the world
to judge it and condemn it but to save it.114 This is emphasized in this first discourse, when Peter exclaims: "Let
all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom
you crucified."115 And then, when those present ask Peter and the Apostles: "Brethren, what shall we do?" this is
Peter's answer: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of
your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."116

In this way "convincing concerning sin" becomes at the same time a convincing concerning the remission of
sins, in the power of the Holy Spirit. Peter in his discourse in Jerusalem calls people to conversion, as Jesus
called his listeners to conversion at the beginning of his messianic activity.117 Conversion requires convincing of
sin; it includes the interior judgment of the conscience, and this, being a proof of the action of the Spirit of truth
in man's inmost being, becomes at the same time a new beginning of the bestowal of grace and love: "Receive
the Holy Spirit."118 Thus in this "convincing concerning sin" we discover a double gift: the gift of the truth of
conscience and the gift of the certainty of redemption. The Spirit of truth is the Counselor.

The convincing concerning sin, through the ministry of the apostolic kerygma in the early Church, is referred-
under the impulse of the Spirit poured out at Pentecost-to the redemptive power of Christ crucified and risen.
Thus the promise concerning the Holy Spirit made before Easter is fulfilled: "He will take what is mine and
declare it to you." When therefore, during the Pentecost event, Peter speaks of the sin of those who "have not
believed"119 and have sent Jesus of Nazareth to an ignominious death, he bears witness to victory over sin: a
victory achieved, in a certain sense, through the greatest sin that man could commit: the killing of Jesus, the Son
of God, consubstantial with the Father! Similarly, the death of the Son of God conquers human death: "I will be
your death, O death,"120 as the sin of having crucified the Son of God "conquers" human sin! That sin which
was committed in Jerusalem on Good Friday-and also every human sin. For the greatest sin on man's part is
matched, in the heart of the Redeemer, by the oblation of supreme love that conquers the evil of all the sins of
man. On the basis of this certainty the Church in the Roman liturgy does not hesitate to repeat every year, at the
Easter Vigil, "O happy fault!" in the deacon's proclamation of the Resurrection when he sings the "Exsultet. "

32. However, no one but he himself, the Spirit of truth, can "convince the world," man or the human conscience
of this ineffable truth. He is the Spirit who "searches even the depths of God."121 Faced with the mystery of sin,
we have to search "the depths of God" to their very depth. It is not enough to search the human conscience, the
intimate mystery of man, but we have to penetrate the inner mystery of God, those "depths of God" that are
summarized thus: to the Father-in the Son- through the Holy Spirit. It is precisely the Holy Spirit who
"searches" the "depths of God," and from them draws God's response to man's sin. With this response there
closes the process of "convincing concerning sin," as the event of Pentecost shows.

By convincing the "world" concerning the sin of Golgotha, concerning the death of the innocent Lamb, as
happens on the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit also convinces of every sin, committed in any place and at any
moment in human history: for he demonstrates its relationship with the Cross of Christ. The "convincing" is the
demonstration of the evil of sin, of every sin, in relation to the Cross of Christ. Sin, shown in this relationship, is
recognized in the entire dimension of evil proper to it, through the "mysterium iniquitatis"122 which is hidden
within it. Man does not know this dimension-he is absolutely ignorant of it apart from the Cross of Christ. So he
cannot be "convinced" of it except by the Holy Spirit: the Spirit of truth but who is also the Counselor.

For sin, shown in relation to the cross of Christ, is at the same time identified in the full dimension of the
"mysterium pietatis,"123 as indicated by the Post- Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia.124
Man is also absolutely ignorant of this dimension of sin apart from the Cross Christ. And he cannot be
"convinced" of this dimension either, except by the Holy Spirit: the one who "searches the depths of God."

3. The Witness Concerning the Beginning: the Original Reality of Sin

33. This is the dimension of sin that we find in the witness concerning the beginning, commented on in the
Book of Genesis.125 It is the sin that according to the revealed Word of God constitutes the principle and root of
all the others. We find ourselves faced with the original reality of sin in human history and at the same time in
the whole of the economy of salvation. It can be said that in this sin the "mysterium iniquitatis" has its
beginning, but it can also be said that this is the sin concerning which the redemptive power of the "mysterium
pietatis" becomes particularly clear and efficacious. This is expressed by St. Paul, when he contrasts the
"disobedience" of the first Adam with the "obedience" of Christ, the second Adam: "Obedience unto death."126

According to the witness concerning the beginning, sin in its original reality takes place in man's will-and
conscience-first of all as "disobedience," that is, as opposition of the will of man to the will of God. This
original disobedience presupposes a rejection, or at least a turning away from the truth contained in the Word of
God, who creates the world. This Word is the same Word who was "in the beginning with God," who "was
God," and without whom "nothing has been made of all that is," since "the world was made through him."127 He
is the Word who is also the eternal law, the source of every law which regulates the world and especially human
acts. When therefore on the eve of his Passion Jesus Christ speaks of the sin of those who "do not believe in
him," in these words of his, full of sorrow, there is as it were a distant echo of that sin which in its original form
is obscurely inscribed in the mystery of creation. For the one who is speaking is not only the Son of Man but the
one who is also "the first-born of all creation," "for in him all things were created ...through him and for him."128
In the light of this truth we can understand that the "disobedience" in the mystery of the beginning presupposes
in a certain sense the same "non-faith," that same "they have not believed" which will be repeated in the Paschal
Mystery. As we have said, it is a matter of a rejection or at least a turning away from the truth contained in the
Word of the Father. The rejection expresses itself in practice as "disobedience," in an act committed as an effect
of the temptation which comes from the "father of lies."129 Therefore, at the root of human sin is the lie which is
a radical rejection of the truth contained in the Word of the Father, through whom is expressed the loving
omnipotence of the Creator: the omnipotence and also the love "of God the Father, Creator of heaven and
earth."

34. "The Spirit of God," who according to the biblical description of creation "was moving over the face of the
water,"130 signifies the same "Spirit who searches the depths of God": "searches the depths of the Father and of
the Word-Son in the mystery of creation. Not only is he the direct witness of their mutual love from which
creation derives, but he himself is this love. He himself, as love, is the eternal uncreated gift. In him is the
source and the beginning of every giving of gifts to creatures. The witness concerning the beginning, which we
find in the whole of Revelation, beginning with the Book of Genesis, is unanimous on this point. To create
means to call into existence from nothing: therefore, to create means to give existence. And if the visible world
is created for man, therefore the world is given to man.131 And at the same time that same man in his own
humanity receives as a gift a special "image and likeness" to God. This means not only rationality and freedom
as constitutive properties of human nature, but also, from the very beginning, the capacity of having a personal
relationship with God, as "I" and "you," and therefore the capacity of having a covenant, which will take place
in God's salvific communication with man. Against the background of the "image and likeness" of God, "the
gift of the Spirit" ultimately means a call to friendship, in which the transcendent "depths of God" become in
some way opened to participation on the part of man. The Second Vatican Council teaches; "The invisible God
out of the abundance of his love speaks to men as friends and lives among them, so that he may invite and take
them into fellowship with himself."132

35. The Spirit, therefore, who "searches everything, even the depths of God," knows from the beginning "the
secrets of man."133 For this reason he alone can fully "convince concerning the sin" that happened at the
beginning, that sin which is the root of all other sins and the source of man's sinfulness on earth, a source which
never ceases to be active. The Spirit of truth knows the original reality of the sin caused in the will of man by
the "father of lies," he who already "has been judged."134 The Holy Spirit therefore convinces the world of sin in
connection with this "judgment," but by constantly guiding toward the "righteousness" that has been revealed to
man together with the Cross of Christ: through "obedience unto death."135

Only the Holy Spirit can convince concerning the sin of the human beginning, precisely he who is the love of
the Father and of the Son, he who is gift, whereas the sin of the human beginning consists in untruthfulness and
in the rejection of the gift and the love which determine the beginning of the world and of man.

36. According to the witness concerning the beginning which we find in the Scriptures and in Tradition, after
the first (and also more complete) description in the Book of Genesis, sin in its original form is understood as
"disobedience," and this means simply and directly transgression of a prohibition laid down by God.136 But in
the light of the whole context it is also obvious that the ultimate roots of this disobedience are to be sought in
the whole real situation of man. Having been called into existence, the human being-man and woman-is a
creature. The "image of God," consisting in rationality and freedom, expresses the greatness and dignity of the
human subject, who is a person. But this personal subject is also always a creature: in his existence and essence
he depends on the Creator. According to the Book of Genesis, "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" was
to express and constantly remind man of the "limit" impassable for a created being. God's prohibition is to be
understood in this sense: the Creator forbids man and woman to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil. The words of the enticement, that is to say the temptation, as formulated in the sacred text, are an
inducement to transgress this prohibition-that is to say, to go beyond that "limit": "When you eat of it your eyes
will be opened, and you will be like God ["like gods"], knowing good and evil."137

"Disobedience" means precisely going beyond that limit, which remains impassable to the will and the freedom
of man as a created being. For God the Creator is the one definitive source of the moral order in the world
created by him. Man cannot decide by himself what is good and what is evil-cannot "know good and evil, like
God." In the created world God indeed remains the first and sovereign source for deciding about good and evil,
through the intimate truth of being, which is the reflection of the Word, the eternal Son, consubstantial with the
Father. To man, created to the image of God, the Holy Spirit gives the gift of conscience, so that in this
conscience the image may faithfully reflect its model, which is both Wisdom and eternal Law, the source of the
moral order in man and in the world. "Disobedience," as the original dimension of sin, means the rejection of
this source, through man's claim to become an independent and exclusive source for deciding about good and
evil The Spirit who "searches the depths of God," and who at the same time is for man the light of conscience
and the source of the moral order, knows in all its fullness this dimension of the sin inscribed in the mystery of
man's beginning. And the Spirit does not cease "convincing the world of it" in connection with the Cross of
Christ on Golgotha.
37. According to the witness of the beginning, God in creation has revealed himself as omnipotence, which is
love. At the same time he has revealed to man that, as the "image and likeness" of his Creator, he is called to
participate in truth and love. This participation means a life in union with God, who is "eternal life."138 But man,
under the influence of the "father of lies," has separated himself from this participation. To what degree?
Certainly not to the degree of the sin of a pure spirit, to the degree of the sin of Satan. The human spirit is
incapable of reaching such a degree.139 In the very description given in Genesis it is easy to see the difference of
degree between the "breath of evil" on the part of the one who "has sinned (or remains in sin) from the
beginning"140 and already "has been judged,"141 and the evil of disobedience on the part of man.

Man's disobedience, nevertheless, always means a turning away from God, and in a certain sense the closing up
of human freedom in his regard. It also means a certain opening of this freedom-of the human mind and will-to
the one who is the "father of lies." This act of conscious choice is not only "disobedience" but also involves a
certain consent to the motivation which was contained in the first temptation to sin and which is unceasingly
renewed during the whole history of man on earth: "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be
opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

Here we find ourselves at the very center of what could be called the "anti-Word," that is to say the '"anti-truth:"
For the truth about man becomes falsified: who man is and what are the impassable limits of his being and
freedom. This "anti-truth" is possible because at the same time there is a complete falsification of the truth about
who God is. God the Creator is placed in a state of suspicion, indeed of accusation, in the mind of the creature.
For the first time in human history there appears the perverse "genius of suspicion." He seeks to "falsify'' Good
itself; the absolute Good, which precisely in the work of creation has manifested itself as the Good which gives
in an inexpressible way: as bonum diffusivum sui, as creative love. Who can completely "convince concerning
sin," or concerning this motivation of man's original disobedience, except the one who alone is the gift and the
source of all giving of gifts, except the Spirit, who "searches the depths of God" and is the love of the Father
and the Son?

38. For in spite of all the witness of creation and of the salvific economy inherent in it, the spirit of darkness142
is capable of showing God as an enemy of his own creature, and in the first place as an enemy of man, as a
source of danger and threat to man. In this way Satan manages to sow in man's soul the seed of opposition to the
one who "from the beginning" would be considered as man's enemy-and not as Father. Man is challenged to
become the adversary of God!

The analysis of sin in its original dimension indicates that, through the influence of the "father of lies,"
throughout the history of humanity there will be a constant pressure on man to reject God, even to the point of
hating him: "Love of self to the point of contempt for God," as St. Augustine puts it.143 Man will be inclined to
see in God primarily a limitation of himself, and not the source of his own freedom and the fullness of good.
We see this confirmed in the modern age, when the atheistic ideologies seek to root out religion on the grounds
that religion causes the radical "alienation" of man, as if man were dispossessed of his own humanity when,
accepting the idea of God, he attributes to God what belongs to man, and exclusively to man! Hence a process
of thought and historico-sociological practice in which the rejection of God has reached the point of declaring
his "death." An absurdity, both in concept and expression! But the ideology of the "death of God" is more a
threat to man, as the Second Vatican Council indicates when it analyzes the question of the "independence of
earthly affairs" and writes: "For without the Creator the creature would disappear...when God is forgotten the
creature itself grows unintelligible."144 The ideology of the "death of God" easily demonstrates in its effects that
on the "theoretical and practical" levels it is the ideology of the "death of man."

4. The Spirit Who Transforms Suffering into Salvific Love

 
39. The Spirit who searches the depths of God was called by Jesus in his discourse in the Upper Room the
Paraclete. For from the beginning the Spirit "is invoked"145 in order to "convince the world concerning sin." He
is invoked in a definitive way through the Cross of Christ. Convincing concerning sin means showing the evil
that sin contains, and this is equivalent to revealing the mystery of iniquity. It is not possible to grasp the evil of
sin in all its sad reality without "searching the depths of God." From the very beginning, the obscure mystery of
sin has appeared in the world against the background of a reference to the Creator of human freedom. Sin has
appeared as an act of the will of the creature-man contrary to the will of God, to the salvific will of God; indeed,
sin has appeared in opposition to the truth, on the basis of the lie which has now been definitively "judged": the
lie that has placed in a state of accusation, a state of permanent suspicion, creative and salvific love itself. Man
has followed the "father of lies," setting himself up in opposition to the Father of life and the Spirit of truth.

Therefore, will not "convincing concerning sin" also have to mean revealing suffering? Revealing the pain,
unimaginable and inexpressible, which on account of sin the Book of Genesis in its anthropomorphic vision
seems to glimpse in the "depths of God" and in a certain sense in the very heart of the ineffable Trinity? The
Church, taking her inspiration from Revelation, believes and professes that sin is an offense against God. What
corresponds, in the inscrutable intimacy of the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, to this "offense," this
rejection of the Spirit who is love and gift? The concept of God as the necessarily most perfect being certainly
excludes from God any pain deriving from deficiencies or wounds; but in the "depths of God" there is a Father's
love that, faced with man's sin, in the language of the Bible reacts so deeply as to say: "I am sorry that I have
made him."146 "The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth.... And the Lord was sorry that
he had made man on the earth.... The Lord said: 'I am sorry that I have made them.'"147 But more often the
Sacred Book speaks to us of a Father who feels compassion for man, as though sharing his pain. In a word, this
inscrutable and indescribable fatherly "pain" will bring about above all the wonderful economy of redemptive
love in Jesus Christ, so that through the mysterium pietatis love can reveal itself in the history of man as
stronger than sin. So that the "gift" may prevail!

The Holy Spirit, who in the words of Jesus "convinces concerning sin," is the love of the Father and the Son,
and as such is the Trinitarian gift, and at the same time the eternal source of every divine giving of gifts to
creatures. Precisely in him we can picture as personified and actualized in a transcendent way that mercy which
the patristic and theological tradition following the line of the Old and New Testaments, attributes to God. In
man, mercy includes sorrow and compassion for the misfortunes of one's neighbor. In God, the Spirit- Love
expresses the consideration of human sin in a fresh outpouring of salvific love. From God, in the unity of the
Father with the Son, the economy of salvation is born, the economy which fills the history of man with the gifts
of the Redemption. Whereas sin, by rejecting love, has caused the "suffering" of man which in some way has
affected the whole of creation,148 the Holy Spirit will enter into human and cosmic suffering with a new
outpouring of love, which will redeem the world. And on the lips of Jesus the Redeemer, in whose humanity the
"suffering" of God is concretized, there will be heard a word which manifests the eternal love full of mercy:
"Misereor." 149 Thus, on the part of the Holy Spirit, "convincing of sin" becomes a manifestation before
creation, which is "subjected to futility," and above all in the depth of human consciences, that sin is conquered
through the sacrifice of the Lamb of God who has become even "unto death" the obedient servant who, by
making up for man's disobedience, accomplishes the redemption of the world. In this way the spirit of truth, the
Paraclete, "convinces concerning sin."

40. The redemptive value of Christ's sacrifice is expressed in very significant words by the author of the Letter
to the Hebrews, who after recalling the sacrifices of the Old Covenant in which "the blood of goats and bulls..."
purifies in "the flesh," adds: "How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal spirit offered
himself without blemish to God, purify your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?"150 Though
we are aware of other possible interpretations, our considerations on the presence of the Holy Spirit in the
whole of Christ's life lead us to see this text as an invitation to reflect on the presence of the same Spirit also in
the redemptive sacrifice of the Incarnate Word.
To begin with we reflect on the first words dealing with this sacrifice, and then separately on the "purification
of conscience" which it accomplishes. For it is a sacrifice offered "through the eternal Spirit," that "derives"
from it the power to "convince concerning sin." It is the same Holy Spirit, whom, according to the promise
made in the Upper Room, Jesus Christ "will bring" to the Apostles on the day of his Resurrection, when he
presents himself to them with the wounds of the crucifixion, and whom "he will give" them "for the remission
of sins": "Receive the Holy Spirit; if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven."151

We know that "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power," as Simon Peter said in the
house of the centurion Cornelius.152 We know of the Paschal Mystery of his "departure," from the Gospel of
John. The words of the Letter to the Hebrews now explain to us how Christ "offered himself without blemish to
God," and how he did this "with an eternal Spirit." In the sacrifice of the Son of Man the Holy Spirit is present
and active just as he acted in Jesus' conception, in his coming into the world, in his hidden life and in his public
ministry. According to the Letter to the Hebrews, on the way to his "departure" through Gethsemani and
Golgotha, the same Christ Jesus in his own humanity opened himself totally to this action of the Spirit-
Paraclete, who from suffering enables eternal salvific love to spring forth. Therefore he "was heard for his godly
fear. Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered."153 In this way this Letter shows
how humanity, subjected to sin, in the descendants of the first Adam, in Jesus Christ became perfectly subjected
to God and united to him, and at the same time full of compassion towards men. Thus there is a new humanity,
which in Jesus Christ through the suffering of the Cross has returned to the love which was betrayed by Adam
through sin. This new humanity is discovered precisely in the divine source of the original outpouring of gifts:
in the Spirit, who "searches...the depths of God" and is himself love and gift.

The Son of God Jesus Christ, as man, in the ardent prayer of his Passion, enabled the Holy Spirit, who had
already penetrated the inmost depths of his humanity, to transform that humanity into a perfect sacrifice through
the act of his death as the victim of love on the Cross. He made this offering by himself. As the one priest, "he
offered himself without blemish to God:154 In his humanity he was worthy to become this sacrifice, for he alone
was "without blemish." But he offered it "through the eternal Spirit," which means that the Holy Spirit acted in
a special way in this absolute self-giving of the Son of Man, in order to transform this suffering into redemptive
love.

41. The Old Testament on several occasions speaks of "fire from heaven" which burnt the oblations presented
by men.155 By analogy one can say that the Holy Spirit is the "fire from heaven" which works in the depth of the
mystery of the Cross. Proceeding from the Father, he directs toward the Father the sacrifice of the Son, bringing
it into the divine reality of the Trinitarian communion. if sin caused suffering, now the pain of God in Christ
crucified acquires through the Holy Spirit its full human expression. Thus there is a paradoxical mystery of
love: in Christ there suffers a God who has been rejected by his own creature: "They do not believe in me!"; but
at the same time, from the depth of this suffering-and indirectly from the depth of the very sin "of not having
believed"-the Spirit draws a new measure of the gift made to man and to creation from the beginning. In the
depth of the mystery of the Cross, love is at work, that love which brings man back again to share in the life that
is in God himself.

The Holy Spirit as Love and Gift comes down, in a certain sense, into the very heart of the sacrifice which is
offered on the Cross. Referring here to the biblical tradition, we can say: He consumes this sacrifice with the
fire of the love which unites the Son with the Father in the Trinitarian communion. And since the sacrifice of
the Cross is an act proper to Christ, also in this sacrifice he "receives" the Holy Spirit. He receives the Holy
Spirit in such a way that afterwards-and he alone with God the Father- can "give him" to the Apostles, to the
Church, to humanity. He alone "sends" the Spirit from the Father.156 He alone presents himself before the
Apostles in the Upper Room, "breathes upon them" and says: "Receive the Holy Spirit; if you forgive the sins of
any, they are forgiven,"157 as John the Baptist had foretold: "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with
fire."158 With those words of Jesus, the holy Spirit is revealed and at the same time made present as the Love
that works in the depths of the Paschal Mystery, as the source of the salvific power of the Cross of Christ, and
as the gift of new and eternal life.
This truth about the Holy Spirit finds daily expression in the Roman liturgy, when before Communion the priest
pronounces those significant words; "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, by the will of the Father and the
work of the Holy Spirit your death brought life to the world...." And in the Third Eucharistic Prayer, referring to
the same salvific plan, the priest asks God that the Holy Spirit may "make us an everlasting gift to you."

5. The Blood that Purifies the Conscience

42. We have said that, at the climax of the Paschal Mystery, the Holy Spirit is definitively revealed and made
present in a new way. The Risen Christ says to the Apostles: "Receive the Holy Spirit." Thus the Holy Spirit is
revealed, for the words of Christ constitute the confirmation of what he had promised and foretold during the
discourse in the Upper Room. And with this the Paraclete is also made present in a new way. In fact, he was
already at work from the beginning in the mystery of creation and throughout the history of the Old Covenant of
God with man. His action was fully confirmed by the sending of the Son of Man as the Messiah, who came in
the power of the Holy Spirit. At the climax of Jesus' messianic mission, the Holy Spirit becomes present in the
Paschal Mystery in all his divine subjectivity: as the one who is now to continue the salvific work rooted in the
sacrifice of the Cross. Of course Jesus entrusts this work to humanity: to the Apostles, to the Church.
Nevertheless, in these men and through them the Holy Spirit remains the transcendent principal agent of the
accomplishment of this work in the human spirit and in the history of the world: the invisible and at the same
time omnipresent Paraclete! The Spirit who "blows where he wills."159

The words of the Risen Christ on the "first day of the week" give particular emphasis to the presence of the
Paraclete-Counselor as the one who "convinces the world concerning sin, righteousness and judgment." For it is
only in this relationship that it is possible to explain the words which Jesus directly relates to the "gift" of the
Holy Spirit to the Apostles. He says: "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven;
if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." 160 Jesus confers on the Apostles the power to forgive sins, so
that they may pass it on to their successors in the Church But this power granted to men presupposes and
includes the saving action of the Holy Spirit. By becoming "the light of hearts,"161 that is to say the light of
consciences, the Holy Spirit "convinces concerning sin," which is to say, he makes man realize his own evil and
at the same time directs him toward what is good. Thanks to the multiplicity of the Spirit's gifts, by reason of
which he is invoked as the "sevenfold one," every kind of human sin can be reached by God's saving power. In
reality-as St. Bonaventure says-"by virtue of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit all evils are destroyed and all
good things are produced.162

Thus the conversion of the human heart, which is an indispensable condition for the forgiveness of sins, is
brought about by the influence of the Counselor. Without a true conversion, which implies inner contrition, and
without a sincere and firm purpose of amendment, sins remain "unforgiven," in the words of Jesus, and with
him in the Tradition of the Old and New Covenants. For the first words uttered by Jesus at the beginning of his
ministry, according to the Gospel of Mark, are these: "Repent, and believe in the Gospel. "163 A confirmation of
this exhortation is the "convincing concerning sin" that the Holy Spirit undertakes in a new way by virtue of the
Redemption accomplished by the Blood of the Son of Man. Hence the Letter to the Hebrews says that this
"blood purifies the conscience."164 It therefore, so to speak, opens to the Holy Spirit the door into man's inmost
being, namely into the sanctuary of human consciences.

43. The Second Vatican Council mentioned the Catholic teaching on conscience when it spoke about man's
vocation and in particular about the dignity of the human person. It is precisely the conscience in particular
which determines this dignity. For the conscience is "the most secret core and sanctuary of a man, where he is
alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths." It "can ...speak to his heart more specifically: do this, shun
that." This capacity to command what is good and to forbid evil, placed in man by the Creator, is the main
characteristic of the personal subject. But at the same time, "in the depths of his conscience, man detects a law
which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience."165 The conscience therefore is not
an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what is good and what is evil. Rather there is profoundly
imprinted upon it a principle of obedience vis-a-vis the objective norm which establishes and conditions the
correspondence of its decisions with the commands and prohibitions which are at the basis of human behavior,
as from the passage of the Book of Genesis which we have already considered. 166 Precisely in this sense the
conscience is the "secret sanctuary" in which "God's voice echoes." The conscience is "the voice of God," even
when man recognizes in it nothing more than the principle of the moral order which it is not humanly possible
to doubt, even without any direct reference to the Creator. It is precisely in reference to this that the conscience
always finds its foundation and justification.

The Gospel's "convincing concerning sin" under the influence of the Spirit of truth can be accomplished in man
in no other way except through the conscience. If the conscience is upright, it serves "to resolve according to
truth the moral problems which arise both in the life of individuals and from social relationships"; then "persons
and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by the objective standards of moral conduct."167

A result of an upright conscience is, first of all, to call good and evil by their proper name, as we read in the
same Pastoral Constitution: "whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion,
euthanasia, or willful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation,
torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as
subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women
and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where people are treated as mere tools for profit, rather
than as free and responsible persons"; and having called by name the many different sins that are so frequent
and widespread in our time, the Constitution adds: "All these things and others of their kind are infamies
indeed. They poison human society, but they do more harm to those who practice them than to those who suffer
from the injury. Moreover, they are a supreme dishonor to the Creator"168

By calling by their proper name the sins that most dishonor man, and by showing that they are a moral evil that
weighs negatively on any balance- sheet of human progress, the Council also describes all this as a stage in "a
dramatic struggle between good and evil, between light and darkness," which characterizes "all of human life,
whether individual or collective."169 The 1983 Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on reconciliation and penance
specified even more clearly the personal and social significance of human sin.170

44. In the Upper Room, on the eve of his Passion and again on the evening of Easter Day, Jesus Christ spoke of
the Holy Spirit as the one who bears witness that in human history sin continues to exist. Yet sin has been
subjected to the saving power of the Redemption. "Convincing the world concerning sin" does not end with the
fact that sin is called by its right name and identified for what it is throughout its entire range. In convincing the
world concerning sin the Spirit of truth comes into contact with the voice of human consciences. By following
this path we come to a demonstration of the roots of sin, which are to be found in man's inmost being, as
described by the same Pastoral Constitution: "The truth is that the imbalances under which the modern world
labors are linked with that more basic imbalance rooted in the heart of man. For in man himself many elements
wrestle with one another. Thus, on the one hand, as a creature he experiences his limitations in a multitude of
ways. On the other, he feels himself to be boundless in his desires and summoned to a higher life. Pulled by
manifold attractions, he is constantly forced to choose among them and to renounce some. Indeed, as a weak
and sinful being, he often does what he would not, and fails to do what he would."171 The Conciliar text is here
referring to the well-known words of St. Paul.172 The "convincing concerning sin" which accompanies the
human conscience in every careful reflection upon itself thus leads to the discovery of sin's roots in man, as also
to the discovery of the way in which the conscience has been conditioned in the course of history. In this way
we discover that original reality of sin of which we have already spoken. The Holy Spirit "convinces concerning
sin" in relation to the mystery of man's origins, showing the fact that man is a created being, and therefore in
complete ontological and ethical dependence upon the Creator. The Holy Spirit reminds us, at the same time, of
the hereditary sinfulness of human nature. But the Holy Spirit the Counselor "convinces concerning sin" always
in relation to the Cross of Christ. In the context of this relationship Christianity rejects any "fatalism" regarding
sin. As the Council teaches: "A monumental struggle against the powers of darkness pervades the whole history
of man. The battle was joined from the very origins of the world and will continue until the last day, as the Lord
has attested."173 "But the Lord himself came to free and strengthen man."174 Man, therefore, far from allowing
himself to be "ensnared" in his sinful condition, by relying upon the voice of his own conscience "is obliged to
wrestle constantly if he is to cling to what is good. Nor can he achieve his own interior integrity without valiant
efforts and the help of God s grace."175 The Council rightly sees sin as a factor of alienation which weighs
heavily on man's personal and social life. But at the same time it never tires of reminding us of the possibility of
victory.

45. The Spirit of truth, who "convinces the world concerning sin," comes into contact with that laborious effort
on the part of the human conscience which the Conciliar texts speak of so graphically. This laborious effort of
conscience also determines the paths of human conversion: turning one's back on sin, in order to restore truth
and love in man's very heart. We know that recognizing evil in ourselves sometimes demands a great effort. We
know that conscience not only commands and forbids but also Judges in the light of interior dictates and
prohibitions. It is also the source of remorse: man suffers interiorly because f the evil he has committed. Is not
this suffering, as it were, a distant echo of that "repentance at having created man" which in anthropomorphic
language the Sacred Book attributes to God? Is it not an echo of that "reprobation" which is interiorized in the
"heart" of the Trinity and by virtue of the eternal love is translated into the suffering of the Cross, into Christ's
obedience unto death? When the Spirit of truth permits the human conscience to share in that suffering, the
suffering of the conscience becomes particularly profound, but also particularly salvific. Then, by means of an
act of perfect contrition, the authentic conversion of the heart is accomplished: this is the evangelical
"metanoia."

The laborious effort of the human heart, the laborious effort of the conscience in which this "metanoia," or
conversion, takes place, is a reflection of that process whereby reprobation is transformed into salvific love, a
love which is capable of suffering. The hidden giver of this saving power is the Holy Spirit: he whom the
Church calls "the light of consciences" penetrates and fills "the depths of the human heart."176 Through just such
a conversion in the Holy Spirit a person becomes open to forgiveness, to the remission of sins. And in all this
wonderful dynamism of conversion-forgiveness there is confirmed the truth of what St. Augustine writes
concerning the mystery of man, when he comments on the words of the Psalm: "The abyss calls to the abyss."177
Precisely with regard to these "unfathomable depths" of man, of the human conscience, the mission of the Son
and the Holy Spirit is accomplished. The Holy Spirit "comes" by virtue of Christ's "departure" in the Paschal
Mystery: he comes in each concrete case of conversion- forgiveness, by virtue of the sacrifice of the Cross. For
in this sacrifice "the blood of Christ...purifies your conscience from dead works to serve the living God."178
Thus there are continuously fulfilled the words about the Holy Spirit as "another Counselor," the words spoken
in the Upper Room to the Apostles and indirectly spoken to everyone: "You know him, for he dwells with you
and will be in you."179

6. The Sin Against the Holy Spirit

46. Against the background of what has been said so far, certain other words of Jesus, shocking and disturbing
ones, become easier to understand. We might call them the words of "unforgiveness." They are reported for us
by the Synoptics in connection with a particular sin which is called "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." This is
how they are reported in their three versions:

Matthew: "Whoever says a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven but whoever speaks against the Holy
Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."180

Mark: "All sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes
against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin."181
Luke: "Every one who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but he who blasphemes against
the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven."182

Why is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit unforgivable? How should this blasphemy be understood ? St.
Thomas Aquinas replies that it is a question of a sin that is "unforgivable by its very nature, insofar as it
excludes the elements through which the forgiveness of sin takes place."183

According to such an exegesis, "blasphemy" does not properly consist in offending against the Holy Spirit in
words; it consists rather in the refusal to accept the salvation which God offers to man through the Holy Spirit,
working through the power of the Cross. If man rejects the "convincing concerning sin" which comes from the
Holy Spirit and which has the power to save, he also rejects the "coming" of the Counselor-that "coming" which
was accomplished in the Paschal Mystery, in union with the redemptive power of Christ's Blood: the Blood
which "purifies the conscience from dead works."

We know that the result of such a purification is the forgiveness of sins. Therefore, whoever rejects the Spirit
and the Blood remains in "dead works," in sin. And the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit consists precisely in
the radical refusal to accept this forgiveness, of which he is the intimate giver and which presupposes the
genuine conversion which he brings about in the conscience. If Jesus says that blasphemy against the Holy
Spirit cannot be forgiven either in this life or in the next, it is because this "non-forgiveness" is linked, as to its
cause, to "non-repentance," in other words to the radical refusal to be converted. This means the refusal to come
to the sources of Redemption, which nevertheless remain "always" open in the economy of salvation in which
the mission of the Holy Spirit is accomplished. The Spirit has infinite power to draw from these sources: "he
will take what is mine," Jesus said. In this way he brings to completion in human souls the work of the
Redemption accomplished by Christ, and distributes its fruits. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, then, is the
sin committed by the person who claims to have a "right" to persist in evil-in any sin at all-and who thus rejects
Redemption. One closes oneself up in sin, thus making impossible one's conversion, and consequently the
remission of sins, which one considers not essential or not important for one's life. This is a state of spiritual
ruin, because blasphemy against the Holy Spirit does not allow one to escape from one's self-imposed
imprisonment and open oneself to the divine sources of the purification of consciences and of the remission of
sins.

47. The action of the Spirit of truth, which works toward salvific "convincing concerning sin," encounters in a
person in this condition an interior resistance, as it were an impenetrability of conscience, a state of mind which
could be described as fixed by reason of a free choice. This is what Sacred Scripture usually calls "hardness of
heart."184 In our own time this attitude of mind and heart is perhaps reflected in the loss of the sense of sin, to
which the Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia devotes many pages.185 Pope Pius XII had already
declared that "the sin of the century is the loss of the sense of sin,"186 and this loss goes hand in hand with the
"loss of the sense of God." In the Exhortation just mentioned we read: "In fact, God is the origin and the
supreme end of man, and man carries in himself a divine seed. Hence it is the reality of God that reveals and
illustrates the mystery of man. It is therefore vain to hope that there will take root a sense of sin against man and
against human values, if there is no sense of offense against God, namely the true sense of sin."187

Hence the Church constantly implores from God the grace that integrity of human consciences will not be lost,
that their healthy sensitivity with regard to good and evil will not be blunted. This integrity and sensitivity are
profoundly linked to the intimate action of the Spirit of truth. In this light the exhortations of St. Paul assume
particular eloquence: "Do not quench the Spirit"; "Do not grieve the Holy Spirit."188 But above all the Church
constantly implores with the greatest fervor that there will be no increase in the world of the sin that the Gospel
calls "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." Rather, she prays that it will decrease in human souls-and
consequently in the forms and structures of society itself-and that it will make room for that openness of
conscience necessary for the saving action of the Holy Spirit. The Church prays that the dangerous sin against
the Spirit will give way to a holy readiness to accept his mission as the Counselor, when he comes to "convince
the world concerning sin, and righteousness and judgment."
48. In his farewell discourse Jesus linked these three areas of "convincing" as elements of the mission of the
Paraclete: sin, righteousness and judgment. They mark out the area of that mysterium pietatis that in human
history is opposed to sin, to the mystery of iniquity.189 On the one hand, as St. Augustine says, there is "love of
self to the point of contempt of God"; on the other, "love-of God to the point of contempt of self."190 The
Church constantly lifts up her prayer and renders her service in order that the history of consciences and the
history of societies in the great human family will not descend toward the pole of sin, by the rejection of God's
commandments "to the point of contempt of God," but rather will rise toward the love in which the Spirit that
gives life is revealed.

Those who let themselves be "convinced concerning sin" by the Holy Spirit, also allow themselves to be
convinced "concerning righteousness and judgment." The Spirit of truth who helps human beings, human
consciences, to know the truth concerning sin, at the same time enables them to know the truth about that
righteousness which entered human history in Jesus Christ. In this way, those who are "convinced concerning
sin" and who are converted through the action of the Counselor are, in a sense, led out of the range of the
"judgment" that "judgment" by which "the ruler of this world is judged."191 In the depths of its divine-human
mystery, conversion means the breaking of every fetter by which sin binds man to the whole of the mystery of
iniquity.

Those who are converted, therefore, are led by the Holy Spirit out of the range of the "judgment," and
introduced into that righteousness which is in Christ Jesus, and is in him precisely because he receives it from
the Father,192 as a reflection of the holiness of the Trinity. This is the righteousness of the Gospel and of the
Redemption, the righteousness of the Sermon on the Mount and of the Cross, which effects the purifying of the
conscience through the Blood of the Lamb. It is the righteousness which the Father gives to the Son and to all
those united with him in truth and in love.

In this righteousness the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the Father and the Son, who "convinces the world concerning
sin," reveals himself and makes himself present in man as the Spirit of eternal life.

PART III - THE SPIRIT WHO GIVES LIFE

1. Reason for the Jubilee of the Year 2000: Christ Who Was Conceived of the Holy Spirit

49. The Church's mind and heart turn to the Holy Spirit as this twentieth century draws to a close and the third
Millennium since the coming of Jesus Christ into the world approaches, and as we look toward the great Jubilee
with which the Church will celebrate the event. For according to the computation of time this coming is
measured as an event belonging to the history of man on earth. The measurement of time in common use
defines years, centuries and millennia according to whether they come before or after the birth of Christ. But it
must also be remembered that for us Christians this event indicates, as St. Paul says, the "fullness of time," 193
because in it human history has been wholly permeated by the "measurement" of God himself: a transcendent
presence of the "eternal now." He "who is, who was, and who is to come"; he who is "the Alpha and the Omega,
the first and the last, the beginning and the end."194 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that
whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."195 "When the time had finally come, God sent
forth his Son, born of a woman...so that we might receive adoption as sons."196 And this Incarnation of the Son-
Word came about "by the power of the Holy Spirit."

The two Evangelists to whom we owe the narrative of the birth and infancy of Jesus of Nazareth express
themselves on this matter in an identical way. According to Luke, at the Annunciation of the birth of Jesus,
Mary asks: "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" and she receives this answer: "The Holy Spirit will
come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you: therefore the child to be born will be
called holy, the Son of God."197

Matthew narrates directly: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had
been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit."198
Disturbed by this turn of events, Joseph receives the following explanation in a dream: "Do not fear to take
Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit; she will bear a son, and you shall call
his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."199

Thus from the beginning the Church confesses the mystery of the Incarnation, this key-mystery of the faith, by
making reference to the Holy Spirit. The Apostles' Creed says: "He was conceived by the power of the Holy
Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary." Similarly, the Nicene- Constantinopolitan Creed professed: "By the power
of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man."

"By the power of the Holy Spirit" there became man he whom the Church, in the words of the same Creed,
professes to be the Son, of the same substance as the Father: "God from God, Light from Light, true God from
true God; begotten, not made." He was made man by becoming "incarnate from the Virgin Mary." This is what
happened when "the fullness of time had come."

50. The great Jubilee at the close of the second Millennium, for which the Church is already preparing, has a
directly Christological aspect: for it is a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. At the same time it has a
pneumatological aspect, since the mystery of the Incarnation was accomplished "by the power of the Holy
Spirit." It was "brought about" by that Spirit-consubstantial with the Father and the Son-who, in the absolute
mystery of the Triune God, is the Person-love, the uncreated gift, who is the eternal source of every gift that
comes from God in the order of creation, the direct principle and, in a certain sense, the subject of God's self-
communication in the order of grace. The mystery of the Incarnation constitutes the climax of this giving, this
divine self-communication.

The conception and birth of Jesus Christ are in fact the greatest work accomplished by the Holy Spirit in the
history of creation and salvation: the supreme grace "the grace of union," source of every other grace, as St.
Thomas explains.200 The great Jubilee refer to this work and also-if we penetrate its depths-to the author of this
work, to the person of the Holy Spirit.

For the "fullness of time" is matched by a particular fullness of the self- communication of the Triune God in
the Holy Spirit. "By the power of the Holy Spirit" the mystery of the "hypostatic union" is brought about-that is,
the union of the divine nature and the human nature, of the divinity and the humanity in the one Person of the
Word-Son. When at the moment of the Annunciation Mary utters her "fiat": "Be it done unto me according to
your word,"201 she conceives in a virginal way a man, the Son of Man, who is the Son of God. By means of this
"humanization" of the Word-Son the self-communication of God reaches its definitive fullness in the history of
creation and salvation. This fullness acquires a special wealth and expressiveness in the text of John's Gospel:
''The Word became flesh."202 The Incarnation of God the Son signifies the taking up into unity with God not
only of human nature, but in this human nature, in a sense, of everything that is "flesh": the whole of humanity,
the entire visible and material world. The Incarnation, then, also has a cosmic significance, a cosmic dimension.
The "first-born of all creation,"203 becoming incarnate in the individual humanity of Christ, unites himself in
some way with the entire reality of man, which is also "flesh" 204-and in this reality with all "flesh," with the
whole of creation.

51. All this is accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit, and so is part of the great Jubilee to come. The
Church cannot prepare for the Jubilee in any other way than in the Holy Spirit. What was accomplished by the
power of the Holy Spirit "in the fullness of time" can only through the Spirit's power now emerge from the
memory of the Church. By his power it can be made present in the new phase of man's history on earth: the year
2000 from the birth of Christ.
The Holy Spirit, who with his power overshadowed the virginal body of Mary, bringing about in her the
beginning of her divine Motherhood, at the same time made her heart perfectly obedient to that self-
communication of God which surpassed every human idea and faculty. "Blessed is she who believed!"205: thus
Mary is greeted by her cousin Elizabeth, herself "full of the Holy Spirit."206 In the words of greeting addressed
to her "who believed" we seem to detect a distant (but in fact very close) contrast with all those about whom
Christ will say that "they do not believe."207 Mary entered the history of the salvation of the world through the
obedience of faith. And faith, in its deepest essence, is the openness of the human heart to the gift: to God's self-
communication in the Holy Spirit. St. Paul write: "The Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is,
there is freedom."208 When the Triune; God opens himself to man in the Holy Spirit, this opening of God reveals
and also gives to the human creature the fullness of freedom. This fullness was manifested in a sublime way
precisely through the faith of Mary, through the "obedience of faith"209: truly, "Blessed is she who believed!"

2. Reason for the Jubilee: Grace Has Been Made Manifest

52. In the mystery of the Incarnation the work of the Spirit "who gives life" reaches its highest point. It is not
possible to give life, which in its fullest form is in God, except by making it the life of a Man, as Christ is in his
humanity endowed with personhood by the Word in the hypostatic union. And at the same time, with the
mystery of the Incarnation there opens in a new way the source of this divine life in the history of mankind: the
Holy Spirit. The Word, "the first-born of all creation," becomes "the first-born of many brethren."210 And thus
he also becomes the head of the Body which is the Church, which will be born on the Cross and revealed on the
day of Pentecost-and in the Church, he becomes the head of humanity: of the people of every nation, every race,
every country and culture, every language and continent, all called to salvation. "The Word became flesh, (that
Word in whom) was life and the life was the light of men...to all who received him he gave the power to
become the children of God."211 But all this was accomplished and is unceasingly accomplished "by the power
of the Holy Spirit."

For as St. Paul teaches, "all who are led by the Spirit of God" are "children of God."212 The filiation of divine
adoption is born in man on the basis of the mystery of the Incarnation, therefore through Christ the eternal Son.
But the birth, or rebirth. happens when God the Father "sends the Spirit of his Son into our hearts."213 Then "we
receive a spirit of adopted sons by which we cry 'Abba, Father!'"214 Hence the divine filiation planted in the
human soul through sanctifying grace is the work of the Holy Spirit. "It is the Spirit himself bearing witness
with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with
Christ."215 Sanctifying grace is the principle and source of man's new life: divine, supernatural life

The giving of this new life is as it were God's definitive answer to the Psalmist's words, which in a way echo the
voice of all creatures: "When you send forth your Spirit, they shall be created; and you shall renew the face of
the earth."216 He who in the mystery of creation gives life to man and the cosmos in its many different forms,
visible and invisible, again renews this life through the mystery of the Incarnation. Creation is thus completed
by the Incarnation and since that moment is permeated by the powers of the Redemption, powers which fill
humanity and all creation. This is what we are told by St. Paul, whose cosmic and theological vision seems to
repeat the words of the ancient Psalm: creation "waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of
God,"217 that is, those whom God has "foreknown" and whom he "has predestined to be conformed to the image
of his Son."218 Thus there is a supernatural "adoption," of which the source is the Holy Spirit, love and gift. As
such he is given to man. And in the superabundance of the uncreated gift there begins in the heart of all human
beings that particular created gift whereby they "become partakers of the divine nature."219 Thus human life
becomes permeated, through participation, by the divine life, and itself acquires a divine, supernatural
dimension. There is granted the new life, in which as a sharer in the mystery of Incarnation "man has access to
the Father in the Holy Spirit."220 Thus there is a close relationship between the Spirit who gives life and
sanctifying grace and the manifold supernatural vitality which derives from it in man: between the uncreated
Spirit and the created human spirit.
53. All this may be said to fall within the scope of the great Jubilee mentioned above. For we must go beyond
the historical dimension of the event considered in its surface value. Through the Christological content of the
event we have to reach the pneumatological dimension, seeing with the eyes of faith the two thousand years of
the action of the Spirit of truth, who down the centuries has drawn from the treasures of the Redemption
achieved by Christ and given new life to human beings, bringing about in them adoption in the only-begotten
Son, sanctifying them, so that they can repeat with St. Paul: "We have received ...the Spirit which is from
God."221

But as we follow this reason for the Jubilee, we cannot limit ourselves to the two thousand years which have
passed since the birth of Christ. We need to go further back, to embrace the whole of the action of the Holy
Spirit even before Christ-from the beginning, throughout the world, and especially in the economy of the Old
Covenant. For this action has been exercised, in every place and at every time, indeed in every individual,
according to the eternal plan of salvation, whereby this action was to be closely linked with the mystery of the
Incarnation and Redemption, which in its turn exercised its influence on those who believed in the future
coming of Christ. This is attested to especially in the Letter to the Ephesians.222 Grace, therefore, bears within
iitself both a Christological aspect and a pneumatological one, which becomes evident above all in those who
expressly accept Christ: "In him [in Christ] you...were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, which is the
guarantee of our inheritance, until we acquire possession of it."223

But, still within the perspective of the great Jubilee, we need to look further and go further afield, knowing that
"the wind blows where it wills," according to the image used by Jesus in his conversation with Nicodemus.224
The Second Vatican Council, centered primarily on the theme of the Church, reminds us of the Holy Spirit's
activity also "outside the visible body of the Church." The council speaks precisely of "all people of good will
in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all, and since the ultimate vocation of
man is in fact one, and divine, we ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to
every man the possibility of being associated with this Paschal Mystery."225

54. "God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."226 These words were spoken by
Jesus in another conversation, the one with the Samaritan woman. The great Jubilee to be celebrated at the end
of this Millennium and at the beginning of the next ought to constitute a powerful call to all those who "worship
God in spirit and truth." It should be for everyone a special occasion for meditating on the mystery of the Triune
God, who in himself is wholly transcendent with regard to the world, especially the visible world. For he is
absolute Spirit, "God is spirit"227; and also, in such a marvelous way, he is not only close to this world but
present in it, and in a sense immanent, penetrating it and giving it life from within. This is especially true in
relation to man: God is present in the intimacy of man's being, in his mind, conscience and heart: an ontological
and psychological reality, in considering which St. Augustine said of God that he was "closer than my inmost
being."228 These words help us to understand better the words of Jesus to the Samaritan woman: "God is spirit."
Only the Spirit can be "closer than my spiritual experience. Only the spirit can be so permanent in man and in
the world, while remaining inviolable and immutable in his absolute transcendence.

But in Jesus Christ the divine presence in the world and in man has been made manifest in a new way and in
visible form. In him "the grace of God has appeared indeed."229 The love of God the Father, as a gift, infinite
grace, source of life, has been made visible in Christ, and in his humanity that love has become "part" of the
universe, the human family and history. This appearing of grace in human history, through Jesus Christ, has
been accomplished through the power of the Holy Spirit, who is the source of all God's salvific activity in the
world: he, the "hidden God,"230 who as love and gift "fills the universe."231 The Church's entire life, as will
appear in the great Jubilee, means going to meet the invisible God, the hidden God: a meeting with the Spirit
"who gives life."

3. The Holy Spirit in Man's Inner Conflict: "For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the
desires of the Spirit are against the flesh"
 

55. Unfortunately, the history of salvation shows that God's coming close and making himself present to man
and the world, that marvelous "condescension" of the Spirit, meets with resistance and opposition in our human
reality. How eloquent from this point of view are the prophetic words of the old man Simeon who, inspired by
the Spirit, came to the Temple in Jerusalem, in order to foretell in the presence of the new-born Babe of
Bethlehem that he "is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, for a sign of contradiction."232 Opposition to
God, who is an invisible Spirit, to a certain degree originates in the very fact of the radical difference of the
world from God, that is to say in the world's "visibility" and "materiality" in contrast to him who is "invisible"
and "absolute Spirit"; from the world's essential and inevitable imperfection in contrast to him, the perfect
being. But this opposition becomes conflict and rebellion on the ethical plane by reason of that sin which takes
possession of the human heart, wherein "the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit and the desires of the
Spirit are against the flesh."233 Concerning this sin, the Holy Spirit must "convince the world," as we have
already said.

It is St. Paul who describes in a particularly eloquent way the tension and struggle that trouble the human heart.
We read in the Letter to the Galatians: "But I say, walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh.
For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; for these are
opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you would."234 There already exists in man, as a being
made up of body and spirit, a certain tension, a certain struggle of tendencies between the "spirit" and the
"flesh." But this struggle in fact belongs to the heritage of sin, is a consequence of sin and at the same time a
confirmation of it. This is part of everyday experience. As the Apostle writes: "Now the works of the flesh are
plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness... drunkenness, carousing and the like." These are the sins that could
be called "carnal." But he also adds others: "enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit,
envy."235 All of this constitutes the "works of the flesh."

But with these works, which are undoubtedly evil, Paul contrasts "the fruit of the Spirit," such as "love, joy,
peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control."236 From the context it is clear that
for the Apostle it is not a question of discriminating against and condemning the body, which with the spiritual
soul constitutes man's nature and personal subjectivity. Rather, he is concerned with the morally good or bad
works, or better the permanent dispositions-virtues and vices-which are the fruit of submission to (in the first
case) or of resistance to (in the second case) the saving action of the Holy Spirit. Consequently the Apostle
writes: "If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit."237 And in other passages: "For those who live
according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set
their minds on the things of the Spirit"; "You are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you."238 The
contrast that St. Paul makes between life "according to the Spirit" and life "according to the flesh" gives rise to a
further contrast: that between "life" and "death." "To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on
the Spirit is life and peace"; hence the warning: "For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the
Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live."239

Properly understood, this is an exhortation to live in the truth, that is, according to the dictates of an upright
conscience, and at the same time it is a profession of faith in the Spirit of truth as the one who gives life. For the
body is "dead because of sin, but your spirits are alive because of righteousness." "So then, brethren, we are
debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh."240 Rather we are debtors to Christ, who in the Paschal
Mystery has effected our justification, obtaining for us the Holy Spirit: "Indeed, we have been bought at a great
price."241

In the texts of St. Paul there is a superimposing- and a mutual compenetration-of the ontological dimension (the
flesh and the spirit), the ethical (moral good and evil), and the pneumatological (the action of the Holy Spirit in
the order of grace). His words (especially in the Letters to the Romans and Galatians) enable us to know and
feel vividly the strength of the tension and struggle going on in man between openness to the action of the Holy
Spirit and resistance and opposition to him, to his saving gift. The terms or poles of contrast are, on man's part,
his limitation and sinfulness, which are essential elements of his psychological and ethical reality; and on God's
part, the mystery of the gift, that unceasing self-giving of divine life in the Holy Spirit.- Who will win? The one
who welcomes the gift.

56. Unfortunately, the resistance to the Holy Spirit which St. Paul emphasizes in the interior and subjective
dimension as tension, struggle and rebellion taking place in the human heart, finds in every period of history
and especially in the modern era its external dimension, which takes concrete form as the content of culture and
civilization, as a philosophical system, an ideology, a program for action and for the shaping of human
behavior. It reaches its clearest expression in materialism, both in its theoretical form: as a system of thought,
and in its practical form: as a method of interpreting and evaluating facts, and likewise as a program of
corresponding conduct. The system which has developed most and carried to its extreme practical consequences
this form of thought, ideology and praxis is dialectical and historical materialism, which is still recognized as
the essential core of Marxism.

In principle and in fact, materialism radically excludes the presence and action of God, who is spirit, in the
world and above all in man. Fundamentally this is because it does not accept God's existence, being a system
that is essentially and systematically atheistic. This is the striking phenomenon of our time: atheism, to which
the Second Vatican Council devoted some significant pages.242 Even though it is not possible to speak of
atheism in a univocal way or to limit it exclusively to the philosophy of materialism, since there exist numerous
forms of atheism and the word is perhaps often used in a wrong sense, nevertheless it is certain that a true and
proper materialism, understood as a theory which explains reality and accepted as the key-principle of personal
and social action, is characteristically atheistic. The order of values and the aims of action which it describes are
strictly bound to a reading of the whole of reality as "matter." Though it sometimes also speaks of the "spirit"
and of "questions of the spirit," as for example in the fields of culture or morality, it does so only insofar as it
considers certain facts as derived from matter (epiphenomena), since according to this system matter is the one
and only form of being. It follows, according to this interpretation, that religion can only be understood as a
kind of "idealistic illusion," to be fought with the most suitable means and methods according to circumstances
of time and place, in order to eliminate it from society and from man's very heart.

It can be said therefore that materialism is the systematic and logical development of that resistance" and
opposition condemned by St. Paul with the words: "The desires of the flesh are against the Spirit." But, as St.
Paul emphasizes in the second part of his aphorism, this antagonism is mutual: "The desires of the Spirit are
against the flesh." Those who wish to live by the Spirit, accepting and corresponding to his salvific activity,
cannot but reject the internal and external tendencies and claims of the "flesh," also in its ideological and
historical expression as anti-religious "materialism." Against this background so characteristic of our time, in
preparing for the great Jubilee we must emphasize the "desires of the spirit," as exhortations echoing in the
night of a new time of advent. at the end of which, like two thousand years ago, "every man will see the
salvation of God."243 This is a possibility and a hope that the Church entrusts to the men and women of today.
She knows that the meeting or collision between the "desires against the spirit" which mark so many aspects of
contemporary civilization, especially in some of its spheres, and "the desires against the flesh," with God's
approach to us, his Incarnation, his constantly renewed communication of the Holy Spirit-this meeting or
collision may in many cases be of a tragic nature and may perhaps lead to fresh defeats for humanity. But the
Church firmly believes that on God's part there is always a salvific self-giving, a salvific coming and, in some
way or other, a salvific "convincing concerning sin" by the power of the Spirit.

57. The Pauline contrast between the "Spirit" and the "flesh" also includes the contrast between "life" and
"death." This is a serious problem, and concerning it one must say at once that materialism, as a system of
thought, in all its forms, means the acceptance of death as the definitive end of human existence. Everything
that is material is corruptible, and therefore the human body (insofar as it is "animal") is mortal. If man in his
essence is only "flesh," death remains for him an impassable frontier and limit. Hence one can understand how
it can be said that human life is nothing but an "existence in order to die."
It must be added that on the horizon of contemporary civilization-especially in the form that is most developed
in the technical and scientific sense-the signs and symptoms of death have become particularly present and
frequent. One has only to think of the arms race and of its inherent danger of nuclear self-destruction.
Moreover, everyone has become more and more aware of the grave situation of vast areas of our planet marked
by death-dealing poverty and famine. It is a question of problems that are not only economic but also and above
all ethical. But on the horizon of our era there are gathering ever darker "signs of death": a custom has become
widely established- in some places it threatens to become almost an institution-of taking the lives of human
beings even before they are born, or before they reach the natural point of death. Furthermore, despite many
noble efforts for peace, new wars have broken out and are taking place, wars which destroy the lives or the
health of hundreds of thousands of people. And how can one fail to mention the attacks against human life by
terrorism, organized even on an international scale?

Unfortunately, this is only a partial and in complete sketch of the picture of death being composed in our age as
we come ever closer to the end of the second Millennium of the Christian era. Does there not rise up a new and
more or less conscious plea to the life-giving Spirit from the dark shades of materialistic civilization, and
especially from those increasing signs of death in the sociological and historical picture in which that
civilization has been constructed? At any rate, even independently of the measure of human hopes or despairs,
and of the illusions or deceptions deriving from the development of materialistic systems of thought and life,
there remains the Christian certainty that the Spirit blows where he wills and that we possess "the first fruits of
the Spirit," and that therefore even though we may be subjected to the sufferings of time that passes away, "we
groan inwardly as we wait for...the redemption of our bodies,"244 or of all our human essence, which is bodily
and spiritual. Yes, we groan, but in an expectation filled with unflagging hope, because it is precisely this
human being that God has drawn near to, God who is Spirit. God the Father, "sending his own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh."245 At the culmination of the Paschal Mystery,
the Son of God, made man and crucified for the sins of the world, appeared in the midst of his Apostles after the
Resurrection, breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit." This "breath" continues forever, for "the
Spirit helps us in our weakness."246

4. The Holy Spirit Strengthens the "Inner Man"

58. The mystery of the resurrection and of Pentecost is proclaimed and lived by the Church, which has inherited
and which carries on the witness of the Apostles about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. She is the perennial
witness to this victory over death which revealed the power of the Holy Spirit and determined his new coming,
his new presence in people and in the world. For in Christ's Resurrection the Holy Spirit-Paraclete revealed
himself especially as he who gives life: "He who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies
also through his Spirit which dwells in you."247 In the name of the Resurrection of Christ the Church proclaims
life, which manifested itself beyond the limits of death, the life which is stronger than death. At the same time,
she proclaims him who gives this life: the Spirit, the Giver of Life; she proclaims him and cooperates with him
in giving life. For "although your bodies are dead because of sin, your spirits are alive because of
righteousness,"248 the righteousness accomplished by the Crucified and Risen Christ. And in the name of
Christ's Resurrection the Church serves the life that comes from God himself, in close union with and humble
service to the Spirit.

Precisely through this service man becomes in an ever new manner the "way of the Church," as I said in the
Encyclical on Christ the Redeemer249 and as I now repeat in this present one on the Holy Spirit. United with the
Spirit, the Church is supremely aware of the reality of the inner man, of what is deepest and most essential in
man, because it is spiritual and incorruptible. At this level the Spirit grafts the "root of immortality,"250 from
which the new life springs. This is man's life in God, which, as a fruit of God's salvific self- communication in
the Holy Spirit, can develop and flourish only by the Spirit's action. Therefore St. Paul speaks to God on behalf
of believers, to whom he declares "I bow my knees before the Father..., that he may grant you...to be
strengthened with might through his Spirit in the inner man."251

Under the influence of the Holy Spirit this inner, "spiritual," man matures and grows strong. Thanks to the
divine self- communication, the human spirit which "knows the secrets of man" meets the "Spirit who searches
everything, even the depths of God."252 In this Spirit, who is the eternal gift, the Triune God opens himself to
man, to the human spirit. The hidden breath of the divine Spirit enables the human spirit to open in its turn
before the saving and sanctifying self-opening of God. Through the gift of grace, which comes from the Holy
Spirit, man enters a "new life," is brought into the supernatural reality of the divine life itself and becomes a
"dwelling-place of the Holy Spirit," a living temple of God.253 For through the Holy Spirit, the Father and the
Son come to him and take up their abode with him.254 In the communion of grace with the Trinity, man's "living
area" is broadened and raised up to the supernatural level of divine life. Man lives in God and by God: he lives
"according to the Spirit," and "sets his mind on the things of the Spirit."

59. Man's intimate relationship with God in the Holy Spirit also enables him to understand himself, his own
humanity, in a new way. Thus that image and likeness of God which man is from his very beginning is fully
realized.255 This intimate truth of the human being has to be continually rediscovered in the light of Christ who
is the prototype of the relationship with God. There also has to be rediscovered in Christ the reason for "full
self-discovery through a sincere gift of himself" to others, as the Second Vatican Council writes: precisely by
reason of this divine likeness which "shows that on earth man...is the only creature that God wishes for himself"
in his dignity as a person, but as one open to integration and social communion.256 The effective knowledge and
full implementation of this truth of his being come about only by the power of the Holy Spirit. Man learns this
truth from Jesus Christ and puts it into practice in his own life by the power of the Spirit, whom Jesus himself
has given to us.

Along this path-the path of such an inner maturity, which includes the full discovery of the meaning of
humanity-God comes close to man, and permeates more and more completely the whole human world. The
Triune God, who "exists" in himself as a transcendent reality of interpersonal gift, giving himself in the Holy
Spirit as gift to man, transforms the human world from within, from inside hearts and minds. Along this path the
world, made to share in the divine gift, becomes-as the Council teaches-"ever more human, ever more
profoundly human," 257 while within the world, through people's hearts and minds, the Kingdom develops in
which God will be definitively "all in all"258: as gift and love. Gift and love: this is the eternal power of the
opening of the Triune God to an and the world, in the Holy Spirit.

As the year 2000 since the birth of Christ draws near, it is a question of ensuring that an ever greater number of
people "may fully find themselves...through a sincere gift of self," according to the expression of the Council
already quoted. Through the action of the Spirit-Paraclete, may there be accomplished in our world a process of
true growth in humanity, in both individual and community life. In this regard Jesus himself "when he prayed to
the Father, 'that all may be one...as we are one' (Jn 17:21-22)...implied a certain likeness between the union of
the divine persons and the union of the children of God in truth and charity."259 The Council repeats this truth
about man, and the Church sees in it a particularly strong and conclusive indication of her own apostolic tasks.
For if man is the way of the Church, this way passes through the whole mystery of Christ, as man's divine
model. Along this way the Holy Spirit, strengthening in each of us "the inner man," enables man ever more
"fully to find himself through a sincere gift of self." These words of the Pastoral Constitution of the Council can
be said to sum up the whole of Christian anthropology: that theory and practice, based on the Gospel, in which
man discovers himself as belonging to Christ and discovers that in Christ he is raised to the status of a child of
God, and so understands better his own dignity as man, precisely because he is the subject of God's approach
and presence, the subject of the divine condescension, which contains the prospect and the very root of
definitive glorification. Thus it can truly be said that "the glory of God is the living man, yet man's life is the
vision of God" 260: man, living a divine life, is the glory of God, and the Holy Spirit is the hidden dispenser of
this life and this glory. The Holy Spirit-says the great Basil- "while simple in essence and manifold in his
virtues...extends himself without undergoing any diminishing, is present in each subject capable of receiving
him as if he were the only one, and gives grace which is sufficient for all."261

60. When, under the influence of the Paraclete, people discover this divine dimension of their being and life,
both as individuals and as a community, they are able to free themselves from the various determinisms which
derive mainly from the materialistic bases of thought, practice and related modes of action. In our age these
factors have succeeded in penetrating into man's inmost being, into that sanctuary of the conscience where the
Holy Spirit continuously radiates the light and strength of new life in the "freedom of the children of God."
Man's growth in this life is hindered by the conditionings and pressures exerted upon him by dominating
structures and mechanisms in the various spheres of society. It can be said that in many cases social factors,
instead of fostering the development and expansion of the human spirit, ultimately deprive the human spirit of
the genuine truth of its being and life-over which the Holy Spirit keeps vigil-in order to subject it to the "prince
of this world."

The great Jubilee of the year 2000 thus contains a message of liberation by the power of the Spirit, who alone
can help individuals and communities to free themselves from the old and new determinisms, by guiding them
with the "law of the Spirit, which gives life in Christ Jesus,"262 and thereby discovering and accomplishing the
full measure of man's true freedom. For, as St. Paul writes, "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is
freedom."263 This revelation of freedom and hence of man's true dignity acquires a particular eloquence for
Christians and for the Church in a state of persecution-both in ancient times and in the present-because the
witnesses to divine Truth then become a living proof of the action of the Spirit of truth present in the hearts and
minds of the faithful, and they often mark with their own death by martyrdom the supreme glorification of
human dignity.

Also in the ordinary conditions of society, Christians, as witnesses to man's authentic dignity, by their
obedience to the Holy Spirit contribute to the manifold "renewal of the face of the earth," working together with
their brothers and sisters in order to achieve and put to good use everything that is good, noble and beautiful in
the modern progress of civilization, culture, science, technology and the other areas of thought and human
activity.264 They do this as disciples of Christ who-as the Council writes-"appointed Lord by his
Resurrection...is now at work in the hearts of men through the power of his Spirit. He arouses not only a desire
for the age to come but by that very fact, he animates, purifies and strengthens those noble longings too by
which the human family strives to make its life more humane and to render the earth submissive to this goal."265
Thus they affirm still more strongly the greatness of man, made in the image and likeness of God, a greatness
shown by the mystery of the Incarnation of the Son of God, who "in the fullness of time," by the power of the
Holy Spirit, entered into history and manifested himself as true man, he who was begotten before every
creature, "through whom are all things and through whom we exist"266

5. The Church as the Sacrament of Intimate Union with God

61. As the end of the second Millennium approaches, an event which should recall to everyone and as it were
make present anew the coming of the Word in the fullness of time, the Church once more means to ponder the
very essence of her divine-human constitution and of that mission which enables her to share in the messianic
mission of Christ, according to the teaching and the ever valid plan of the Second Vatican Council. Following
this line, we can go back to the Upper Room, where Jesus Christ reveals the Holy Spirit as the Paraclete, the
Spirit of truth, and where he speaks of his own "departure" through the Cross as the necessary condition for the
Spirit's "coming": "It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come
to you; but if I go, I will send him to you."267 We have seen that this prediction first came true the evening of
Easter day and then during the celebration of Pentecost in Jerusalem, and we have seen that ever since then it is
being fulfilled in human history through the Church.
In the light of that prediction, we also grasp the full meaning of what Jesus says, also at the Last Supper, about
his new "coming." For it is significant that in the same farewell discourse Jesus foretells not only his
"departure" but also his new "coming." His exact words are: "I will not leave you desolate; I will come to
you."268 And at the moment of his final farewell before he ascends into heaven, he will repeat even more
explicitly: "Lo, I am with you," and this "always, to the close of the age."269 This new "coming" of Christ, this
continuous coming of his, in order to be with his Apostles, with the Church, this "I am with you always, to the
close of the age," does not of course change the fact of his "departure." It follows that departure, after the close
of Christ's messianic activity on earth, and it occurs in the context of the predicted sending of the Holy Spirit
and in a certain sense forms part of his own mission. And yet it occurs by the power of the Holy Spirit, who
makes it possible for Christ, who has gone away, to come now and for ever in a new way. This new coming of
Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, and his constant presence and action in the spiritual life are
accomplished in the sacramental reality. In this reality, Christ, who has gone away in his visible humanity,
comes, is present and acts in the Church in such an intimate way as to make it his own Body. As such, the
Church lives, works and grows "to the close of the age." All this happens through the power of the Holy Spirit.

62. The most complete sacramental expression of the "departure" of Christ through the mystery of the Cross and
Resurrection is the Eucharist. In every celebration of the Eucharist his coming, his salvific presence, is
sacramentally realized: in the Sacrifice and in Communion. It is accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit,
as part of his own mission.270 Through the Eucharist the Holy Spirit accomplishes that "strengthening of the
inner man" spoken of in the Letter to the Ephesians.271 Through the Eucharist, individuals and communities, by
the action of the Paraclete- Counselor, learn to discover the divine sense of human life, as spoken of by the
Council: that sense whereby Jesus Christ "fully reveals man to man himself," suggesting "a certain likeness
between the union of the divine persons, and the union of God's children in truth and charity."272 This union is
expressed and made real especially through the Eucharist, in which man shares in the sacrifice of Christ which
this celebration actualizes, and he also learns to "find himself...through a...gift of himself,"273 through
communion with God and with others, his brothers and sisters.

For this reason the early Christians, right from the days immediately following the coming down of the Holy
Spirit, "devoted themselves to the breaking of bread and the prayers," and in this way they formed a community
united by the teaching of the Apostles.274 Thus "they recognized" that their Risen Lord, who had ascended into
heaven, came into their midst anew in that Eucharisticcommunity of the Church and by means of it. Guided by
the Holy Spirit, the Church from the beginning expressed and confirmed her identity through the Eucharist. And
so it has always been, in every Christian generation, down to our own time, down to this present period when
we await the end of the second Christian Millennium. Of course, we unfortunately have to acknowledge the fact
that the Millennium which is about to end is the one in which there have occurred the great separations between
Christians. All believers in Christ, therefore, following the example of the Apostles, must fervently strive to
conform their thinking and action to the will of the Holy Spirit, "the principle of the Church's unity,"275 so that
all who have been baptized in the one Spirit in order to make up one body may be brethren joined in the
celebration of the same Eucharist, "a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity!"276

63. Christ's Eucharistic presence, his sacramental "I am with you," enables the Church to discover ever more
deeply her own mystery, as shown by the whole ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, whereby "the
Church is in Christ as a sacrament or sign and instrument of the intimate union with God and of the unity of the
whole human race."277 As a sacrament, the Church is a development from the Paschal Mystery of Christ's
"departure," living by his ever new "coming" by the power of the Holy Spirit, within the same mission of the
Paraclete- Spirit of truth. Precisely this is the essential mystery of the Church, as the Council professes.

While it is through creation that God is he in whom we all "live and move and have our being, "278 in its turn the
power of the Redemption endures and develops in the history of man and the world in a double "rhythm" as it
were, the source of which is found in the Eternal Father. On the one hand there is the rhythm of the mission of
the Son, who came into the world and was born of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit; and on the
other hand there is also the rhythm of the mission of the Holy Spirit, as he was revealed definitively by Christ.
Through the "departure" of the Son, the Holy Spirit came and continues to come as Counselor and Spirit of
truth. And in the context of his mission, as it were within the indivisible presence of the Holy Spirit, the Son,
who "had gone away" in the Paschal Mystery, "comes" and is continuously present in the mystery of the
Church, at times concealing himself and at times revealing himself in her history, and always directing her
steps. All of this happens in a sacramental way, through the power of the Holy Spirit, who, "drawing from the
wealth of Christ's Redemption," constantly gives life. As the Church becomes ever more aware of this mystery,
she sees herself more clearly, above all as a sacrament.

This also happens because, by the will of her Lord, through the individual sacraments the Church fulfills her
salvific ministry to man. This sacramental ministry, every time it is accomplished, brings with it the mystery of
the "departure" of Christ through the Cross and the Resurrection, by virtue of which the Holy Spirit comes. He
comes and works: "He gives life." For the sacraments signify grace and confer grace: they signify life and give
life. The Church is the visible dispenser of the sacred signs, while the Holy Spirit acts in them as the invisible
dispenser of the life which they signify. Together with the Spirit, Christ Jesus is present and acting.

64. If the Church is the sacrament of intimate union with God, she is such in Jesus Christ, in whom this same
union is accomplished as a salvific reality. She is such in Jesus Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit. The
fullness of the salvific reality, which is Christ in history, extends in a sacramental way in the power of the Spirit
Paraclete. In this way the Holy Spirit is "another Counselor," or new Counselor, because through his action the
Good News takes shape in human minds and hearts and extends through history. In all this it is the Holy Spirit
who gives life.

When we use the word "sacrament" in reference to the Church, we must bear in mind that in the texts of the
Council the sacramentality of the Church appears as distinct from the sacramentality that is proper, in the strict
sense, to the Sacraments. Thus we read: "The Church is...in the nature of a sacrament-a sign and instrument of
communion with God." But what matters and what emerges from the analogical sense in which the word is used
in the two cases is the relationship which the Church has with the power of the Holy Spirit, who alone gives
life: the Church is the sign and instrument of the presence and action of the life-giving Spirit.

Vatican II adds that the Church is "a sacrament. . . of the unity of all mankind. "Obviously it is a question of the
unity which the human race which in itself is differentiated in various ways-has from God and in God. This
unity has its roots in the mystery of creation and acquires a new dimension in the mystery of the Redemption,
which is ordered to universal salvation. Since God "wishes all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of
the truth,"279 the Redemption includes all humanity and in a certain way all of creation. In the same universal
dimension of Redemption the Holy Spirit is acting, by virtue of the "departure of Christ." Therefore the Church,
rooted through her own mystery in the Trinitarian plan of salvation with good reason regards herself as the
"sacrament of the unity of the whole human race." She knows that she is such through the power of the Holy
Spirit, of which power she is a sign and instrument in the fulfillment of God's salvific plan.

In this way the "condescension" of the infinite Trinitarian Love is brought about: God, who is infinite Spirit,
comes close to the visible world. The Triune God communicates himself to man in the Holy Spirit from the
beginning through his "image and likeness." Under the action of the same Spirit, man, and through him the
created world, which has been redeemed by Christ, draw near to their ultimate destinies in God. The Church is
"a sacrament, that is sign and instrument" of this coming together of the two poles of creation and redemption,
God and man. She strives to restore and strengthen the unity at the very roots of the human race: in the
relationship of communion that man has with God as his Creator, Lord and Redeemer. This is a truth which on
the basis of the Council's teaching we can meditate on, explain and apply in all the fullness of its meaning in
this phase of transition from the second to the third Christian Millennium. And we rejoice to realize ever more
clearly that within the work carried out by the Church in the history of salvation. which is part of the history of
humanity, the Holy Spirit is present and at work-he who with the breath of divine life permeates man's earthly
pilgrimage and causes all creation, all history, to flow together to its ultimate end, in the infinite ocean of God.
6. The Spirit and the Bride Say: "Come!''

65. The breath of the divine life, the Holy Spirit, in its simplest and most common manner, expresses itself and
makes itself felt in prayer. It is a beautiful and salutary thought that, wherever people are praying in the world,
there the Holy Spirit is, the living breath of prayer. It is a beautiful and salutary thought to recognize that, if
prayer is offered throughout the world, in the past, in the present and in the future, equally widespread is the
presence and action of the Holy Spirit, who "breathes" prayer in the heart of man in all the endless range of the
most varied situations and conditions, sometimes favorable and sometimes unfavorable to the spiritual and
religious life. Many times, through the influence of the Spirit, prayer rises from the human heart in spite of
prohibitions and persecutions and even official proclamations regarding the non-religious or even atheistic
character of public life. Prayer always remains the voice of all those who apparently have no voice-and in this
voice there always echoes that "loud cry" attributed to Christ by the Letter to the Hebrews.280 Prayer is also the
revelation of that abyss which is the heart of man: a depth which comes from God and which only God can fill,
precisely with the Holy Spirit. We read in Luke: "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your
children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him."281

The Holy Spirit is the gift that comes into man's heart together with prayer. In prayer he manifests himself first
of all and above all as the gift that "helps us in our weakness." This is the magnificent thought developed by St.
Paul in the Letter to the Romans, when he writes: "For we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit
himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words."282 Therefore, the Holy Spirit not only enables us to
pray, but guides us "from within" in prayer: he is present in our prayer and gives it a divine dimension.283 Thus
"he who searches the hearts of men knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the
saints according to the will of God." 284 Prayer through the power of the Holy Spirit becomes the ever more
mature expression of the new man, who by means of this prayer participates in the divine life.

Our difficult age has a special need of prayer. In the course of history-both in the past and in the present-many
men and women have borne witness to the importance of prayer by consecrating themselves to the praise of
God and to the life of prayer, especially in monasteries and convents. So, too, recent years have been seeing a
growth in the number of people who, in ever more widespread movements and groups, are giving first place to
prayer and seeking in prayer a renewal of their spiritual life. This is a significant and comforting sign, for from
this experience there is coming a real contribution to the revival of prayer among the faithful, who have been
helped to gain a clearer idea of the Holy Spirit as he who inspires in hearts a profound yearning for holiness. In
many individuals and many communities there is a growing awareness that, even with all the rapid progress of
technological and scientific civilization, and despite the real conquests and goals attained, man is threatened,
humanity is threatened. In the face of this danger, and indeed already experiencing the frightful reality of man's
spiritual decadence, individuals and whole communities, guided as it were by an inner sense of faith, are
seeking the strength to raise man up again, to save him from himself, from his own errors and mistakes that
often make harmful his very conquests. And thus they are discovering prayer, in which the "Spirit who helps us
in our weakness"manifests himself. In this way the times in which we are living are bringing the Holy Spirit
closer to the many who are returning to prayer. And I trust that all will find in the teaching of this Encyclical
nourishment for their interior life, and that they will succeed in strengthening, under the action of the Spirit,
their commitment to prayer in harmony with the Church and her Magisterium.

66. In the midst of the problems, disappointments and hopes, desertions and returns of these times of ours, the
Church remains faithful to the mystery of her birth. While it is an historical fact that the Church came forth
from the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost, in a certain sense one can say that she has never left it.
Spiritually the event of Pentecost does not belong only to the past: the Church is always in the Upper Room that
she bears in her heart. The Church perseveres in preserves, like the Apostles together with Mary, the Mother of
Christ, and with those who in Jerusalem were the first seed of the Christian community and who awaited in
prayer the coming of the Holy Spirit.
The Church perseveres in prayer with Mary. This union of the praying Church with the Mother of Christ has
been part of the mystery of the Church from the beginning: we see her present in this mystery as she is present
in the mystery of her Son. It is the Council that says to us: "The Blessed Virgin...overshadowed by the Holy
Spirit... brought forth...the Son..., he whom God placed as the first-born among many brethren (cf. Rom 8:29),
namely the faithful. In their birth and development she cooperates with a maternal love"; she is through "his
singular graces and offices...intimately united with the Church.... [She] is a model of the Church."285 "The
Church, moreover, contemplating Mary's mysterious sanctity, imitating her charity,...becomes herself a mother"
and "herself is a virgin, who keeps...the fidelity she has pledged to her Spouse. Imitating the Mother of The
Lord, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, she preserves with virginal purity an integral faith, a firm hope, and a
sincere charity."286

Thus one can understand the profound reason why the Church, united with the Virgin Mother, prays
unceasingly as the Bride to her divine Spouse, as the words of the Book of Revelation, quoted by the Council,
attest: "The Spirit and the bride say to the Lord Jesus Christ: Come!"287 The Church's prayer is this unceasing
invocation, in which "the Spirit himself intercedes for us": in a certain sense, the Spirit himself utters it with the
Church and in the Church. For the Spirit is given to the Church in order that through his power the whole
community of the People of God, however widely scattered and diverse, may persevere in hope: that hope in
which "we have been saved."288 It is the eschatological hope, the hope of definitive fulfillment in God, the hope
of the eternal Kingdom, that is brought about by participation in the life of the Trinity. The Holy Spirit, given to
the Apostles as the Counselor, is the guardian and animator of this hope in the heart of the Church.

In the time leading up to the third Millennium after Christ, while "the Spirit and the bride say to the Lord Jesus:
Come!" this prayer of theirs is filled, as always, with an eschatological significance, which is also destined to
give fullness of meaning to the celebration of the great Jubilee. It is a prayer concerned with the salvific
destinies toward which the Holy Spirit by his action opens hearts throughout the history of man on earth. But at
the same time this prayer is directed toward a precise moment of history which highlights the "fullness of time"
marked by the year 2000. The Church wishes to prepare for this Jubilee in the Holy Spirit, just as the Virgin of
Nazareth in whom the Word was made flesh was prepared by the Holy Spirit.

CONCLUSION

67. We wish to bring to a close these considerations in the heart of the Church and in the heart of man. The way
of the Church passes through the heart of man, because here is the hidden place of the salvific encounter with
the Holy Spirit, with the hidden God, and precisely here the Holy Spirit becomes "a spring of water welling up
to eternal life."289 He comes here as the Spirit of truth and as the Paraclete, as he was promised by Christ. From
here he acts as Counselor, Intercessor, Advocate, especially when man, when humanity find themselves before
the judgment of condemnation by that "accuser" about whom the Book of Revelation says that "he accuses them
day and night before our God."290 "The Holy Spirit does not cease to be the guardian of hope in the human
heart: the hope of all human creatures, and especially of those who "have the first fruits of the Spirit'' and "wait
for the redemption of their bodies."291

The Holy Spirit, in his mysterious bond of divine communion with the Redeemer of man, is the one who brings
about the continuity of his work: he takes from Christ and transmits to all, unceasingly entering into the history
of the world through the heart of man. Here he becomes-as the liturgical Sequence of the Solemnity of
Pentecost proclaims-the true "father of the poor, giver of gifts, light of hearts"; he becomes the "sweet guest of
the soul," whom the Church unceasingly greets on the threshold of the inmost sanctuary of every human being.
For he brings "rest and relief" in the midst of toil, in the midst of the work of human hands and minds; he brings
"rest" and "ease" in the midst of the heat of the day, in the midst of the anxieties, struggles and perils of every
age; he brings "consolation," when the human heart grieves and is tempted to despair.
And therefore the same Sequence exclaims: "without your aid nothing is in man, nothing is without fault." For
only the Holy Spirit "convinces concerning sin," concerning evil, in order to restore what is good in man and in
the world: in order to "renew the face of the earth." Therefore, he purifies from everything that "disfigures"
man, from "what is unclean"; he heals even the deepest wounds of human existence; he changes the interior
dryness of souls, transforming them into the fertile fields of grace and holiness. What is "hard he softens," what
is "frozen he warms," what is "wayward he sets anew" on the paths of salvation.292

Praying thus, the Church unceasingly professes her faith that there exists in our created world a Spirit who is an
uncreated gift. He is the Spirit of the Father and of the Son: like the Father and the Son he is uncreated, without
limit, eternal, omnipotent, God, Lord.293 This Spirit of God "fills the universe," and all that is created recognizes
in him the source of its own identity, finds in him its own transcendent expression, turns to him and awaits him,
invokes him with its own being. Man turns to him, as to the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth and of love, man who
lives by truth and by love, and who without the source of truth and of love cannot live. To him turns the Church,
which is the heart of humanity, to implore for all and dispense to all those gifts of the love which through him
"has been poured into our hearts."294 To him turns the Church, along the intricate paths of man's pilgrimage on
earth: she implores, she unceasingly implores uprightness of human acts, as the Spirit's work; she implores the
joy and consolation that only he, the true Counselor, can bring by coming down into people's inmost hearts295;
the Church implores the grace of the virtues that merit heavenly glory, implores eternal salvation, in the full
communication of the divine life, to which the Father has eternally "predestined" human beings, created through
love in the image and likeness of the Most Holy Trinity.

The Church with her heart which embraces all human hearts implores from the Holy Spirit that happiness which
only in God has its complete realization: the joy "that no one will be able to take away,"296 the joy which is the
fruit of love, and therefore of God who is love; she implores "the righteousness, the peace and the joy of the
Holy Spirit" in which, in the words of St. Paul, consists the Kingdom of God.297

Peace too is the fruit of love: that interior peace, which weary man seeks in his inmost being; that peace
besought by humanity, the human family, peoples, nations, continents, anxiously hoping to obtain it in the
prospect of the transition from the second to the third Christian Millennium. Since the way of peace passes in
the last analysis through love and seeks to create the civilization of love, the Church fixes her eyes on him who
is the love of the Father and the Son, and in spite of increasing dangers she does not cease to trust, she does not
cease to invoke and to serve the peace of man on earth. Her trust is based on him who, being the Spirit-love, is
also the Spirit of peace and does not cease to be present in our human world, on the horizon of minds and
hearts, in order to "fill the universe" with love and peace.

Before him I kneel at the end of these considerations, and implore him, as the Spirit of the Father and the Son,
to grant to all of us the blessing and grace which I desire to pass on, in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, to the
sons and daughters of the Church and to the whole human family.

Given in Rome, at St. Peter's, on May 18, the Solemnity of Pentecost, in the year 1986, the eighth of my
Pontificate.

IOANNES PAULUS PP. II

EVANGELIUM VITAE
To the Bishops
Priests and Deacons
Men and Women religious
lay Faithful
 and all People of Good Will
on the Value and Inviolability
of Human Life

INTRODUCTION

1. The Gospel of life is at the heart of Jesus' message. Lovingly received day after day by the Church, it is to be
preached with dauntless fidelity as "good news" to the people of every age and culture.

At the dawn of salvation, it is the Birth of a Child which is proclaimed as joyful news: "I bring you good news
of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is
Christ the Lord" (Lk 2:10-11). The source of this "great joy" is the Birth of the Saviour; but Christmas also
reveals the full meaning of every human birth, and the joy which accompanies the Birth of the Messiah is thus
seen to be the foundation and fulfilment of joy at every child born into the world (cf. Jn 16:21).

When he presents the heart of his redemptive mission, Jesus says: "I came that they may have life, and have it
abundantly" (Jn 10:10). In truth, he is referring to that "new" and "eternal" life which consists in communion
with the Father, to which every person is freely called in the Son by the power of the Sanctifying Spirit. It is
precisely in this "life" that all the aspects and stages of human life achieve their full significance.

The incomparable worth of the human person 

2. Man is called to a fullness of life which far exceeds the dimensions of his earthly existence, because it
consists in sharing the very life of God. The loftiness of this supernatural vocation reveals the greatness and the
inestimable value of human life even in its temporal phase. Life in time, in fact, is the fundamental condition,
the initial stage and an integral part of the entire unified process of human existence. It is a process which,
unexpectedly and undeservedly, is enlightened by the promise and renewed by the gift of divine life, which will
reach its full realization in eternity (cf. 1 Jn 3:1-2). At the same time, it is precisely this supernatural calling
which highlights the relative character of each individual's earthly life. After all, life on earth is not an
"ultimate" but a "penultimate" reality; even so, it remains a sacred reality entrusted to us, to be preserved with a
sense of responsibility and brought to perfection in love and in the gift of ourselves to God and to our brothers
and sisters.

The Church knows that this Gospel of life, which she has received from her Lord, 1 has a profound and
persuasive echo in the heart of every person-believer and non-believer alike-because it marvellously fulfils all
the heart's expectations while infinitely surpassing them. Even in the midst of difficulties and uncertainties,
every person sincerely open to truth and goodness can, by the light of reason and the hidden action of grace,
come to recognize in the natural law written in the heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15) the sacred value of human life from
its very beginning until its end, and can affirm the right of every human being to have this primary good
respected to the highest degree. Upon the recognition of this right, every human community and the political
community itself are founded.

In a special way, believers in Christ must defend and promote this right, aware as they are of the wonderful
truth recalled by the Second Vatican Council: "By his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some
fashion with every human being".2 This saving event reveals to humanity not only the boundless love of God
who "so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16), but also the incomparable value of every human
person.

The Church, faithfully contemplating the mystery of the Redemption, acknowledges this value with ever new
wonder.3 She feels called to proclaim to the people of all times this "Gospel", the source of invincible hope and
true joy for every period of history. The Gospel of God's love for man, the Gospel of the dignity of the person
and the Gospel of life are a single and indivisible Gospel.

For this reason, man-living man-represents the primary and fundamental way for the Church. 4

New threats to human life 

3. Every individual, precisely by reason of the mystery of the Word of God who was made flesh (cf. Jn 1:14), is
entrusted to the maternal care of the Church. Therefore every threat to human dignity and life must necessarily
be felt in the Church's very heart; it cannot but affect her at the core of her faith in the Redemptive Incarnation
of the Son of God, and engage her in her mission of proclaiming the Gospel of life in all the world and to every
creature (cf. Mk 16:15).

Today this proclamation is especially pressing because of the extraordinary increase and gravity of threats to the
life of individuals and peoples, especially where life is weak and defenceless. In addition to the ancient scourges
of poverty, hunger, endemic diseases, violence and war, new threats are emerging on an alarmingly vast scale.

The Second Vatican Council, in a passage which retains all its relevance today, forcefully condemned a number
of crimes and attacks against human life. Thirty years later, taking up the words of the Council and with the
same forcefulness I repeat that condemnation in the name of the whole Church, certain that I am interpreting the
genuine sentiment of every upright conscience: "Whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder,
genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or wilful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person,
such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults
human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution,
the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where people are treated as mere
instruments of gain rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others like them are
infamies indeed. They poison human society, and they do more harm to those who practise them than to those
who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are a supreme dishonour to the Creator".5 

4. Unfortunately, this disturbing state of affairs, far from decreasing, is expanding: with the new prospects
opened up by scientific and technological progress there arise new forms of attacks on the dignity of the human
being. At the same time a new cultural climate is developing and taking hold, which gives crimes against life a
new and-if possible-even more sinister character, giving rise to further grave concern: broad sectors of public
opinion justify certain crimes against life in the name of the rights of individual freedom, and on this basis they
claim not only exemption from punishment but even authorization by the State, so that these things can be done
with total freedom and indeed with the free assistance of health-care systems.

All this is causing a profound change in the way in which life and relationships between people are considered.
The fact that legislation in many countries, perhaps even departing from basic principles of their Constitutions,
has determined not to punish these practices against life, and even to make them altogether legal, is both a
disturbing symptom and a significant cause of grave moral decline. Choices once unanimously considered
criminal and rejected by the common moral sense are gradually becoming socially acceptable. Even certain
sectors of the medical profession, which by its calling is directed to the defence and care of human life, are
increasingly willing to carry out these acts against the person. In this way the very nature of the medical
profession is distorted and contradicted, and the dignity of those who practise it is degraded. In such a cultural
and legislative situation, the serious demographic, social and family problems which weigh upon many of the
world's peoples and which require responsible and effective attention from national and international bodies, are
left open to false and deceptive solutions, opposed to the truth and the good of persons and nations.

The end result of this is tragic: not only is the fact of the destruction of so many human lives still to be born or
in their final stage extremely grave and disturbing, but no less grave and disturbing is the fact that conscience
itself, darkened as it were by such widespread conditioning, is finding it increasingly difficult to distinguish
between good and evil in what concerns the basic value of human life.

In communion with all the Bishops of the world 

5. The Extraordinary Consistory of Cardinals held in Rome on 4-7 April 1991 was devoted to the problem of
the threats to human life in our day. After a thorough and detailed discussion of the problem and of the
challenges it poses to the entire human family and in particular to the Christian community, the Cardinals
unanimously asked me to reaffirm with the authority of the Successor of Peter the value of human life and its
inviolability, in the light of present circumstances and attacks threatening it today.

In response to this request, at Pentecost in 1991 I wrote a personal letter to each of my Brother Bishops asking
them, in the spirit of episcopal collegiality, to offer me their cooperation in drawing up a specific document. 6 I
am deeply grateful to all the Bishops who replied and provided me with valuable facts, suggestions and
proposals. In so doing they bore witness to their unanimous desire to share in the doctrinal and pastoral mission
of the Church with regard to the Gospel of life.

In that same letter, written shortly after the celebration of the centenary of the Encyclical Rerum Novarum, I
drew everyone's attention to this striking analogy: "Just as a century ago it was the working classes which were
oppressed in their fundamental rights, and the Church very courageously came to their defence by proclaiming
the sacrosanct rights of the worker as a person, so now, when another category of persons is being oppressed in
the fundamental right to life, the Church feels in duty bound to speak out with the same courage on behalf of
those who have no voice. Hers is always the evangelical cry in defence of the world's poor, those who are
threatened and despised and whose human rights are violated".7

Today there exists a great multitude of weak and defenceless human beings, unborn children in particular,
whose fundamental right to life is being trampled upon. If, at the end of the last century, the Church could not
be silent about the injustices of those times, still less can she be silent today, when the social injustices of the
past, unfortunately not yet overcome, are being compounded in many regions of the world by still more
grievous forms of injustice and oppression, even if these are being presented as elements of progress in view of
a new world order.

The present Encyclical, the fruit of the cooperation of the Episcopate of every country of the world, is therefore
meant to be a precise and vigorous reaffirmation of the value of human life and its inviolability, and at the same
time a pressing appeal addressed to each and every person, in the name of God: respect, protect, love and serve
life, every human life! Only in this direction will you find justice, development, true freedom, peace and
happiness!

May these words reach all the sons and daughters of the Church! May they reach all people of good will who
are concerned for the good of every man and woman and for the destiny of the whole of society!  

6. In profound communion with all my brothers and sisters in the faith, and inspired by genuine friendship
towards all, I wish to meditate upon once more and proclaim the Gospel of life, the splendour of truth which
enlightens consciences, the clear light which corrects the darkened gaze, and the unfailing source of faithfulness
and steadfastness in facing the ever new challenges which we meet along our path.
As I recall the powerful experience of the Year of the Family, as if to complete the Letter which I wrote "to
every particular family in every part of the world",8 I look with renewed confidence to every household and I
pray that at every level a general commitment to support the family will reappear and be strengthened, so that
today too-even amid so many difficulties and serious threats-the family will always remain, in accordance with
God's plan, the "sanctuary of life".9

To all the members of the Church, the people of life and for life, I make this most urgent appeal, that together
we may offer this world of ours new signs of hope, and work to ensure that justice and solidarity will increase
and that a new culture of human life will be affirmed, for the building of an authentic civilization of truth and
love.

CHAPTER I - THE VOICE OF YOUR BROTHER'S BLOOD CRIES TO ME FROM THE GROUND 

PRESENT-DAY THREATS TO HUMAN LIFE

"Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and killed him" (Gen 4:8): the roots of violence against life 

7. "God did not make death, and he does not delight in the death of the living. For he has created all things that
they might exist ... God created man for incorruption, and made him in the image of his own eternity, but
through the devil's envy death entered the world, and those who belong to his party experience it" (Wis 1:13-14;
2:23-24).

The Gospel of life, proclaimed in the beginning when man was created in the image of God for a destiny of full
and perfect life (cf. Gen 2:7; Wis 9:2-3), is contradicted by the painful experience of death which enters the
world and casts its shadow of meaninglessness over man's entire existence. Death came into the world as a
result of the devil's envy (cf. Gen 3:1,4-5) and the sin of our first parents (cf. Gen 2:17, 3:17-19). And death
entered it in a violent way, through the killing of Abel by his brother Cain: "And when they were in the field,
Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and killed him" (Gen 4:8).

This first murder is presented with singular eloquence in a page of the Book of Genesis which has universal
significance: it is a page rewritten daily, with inexorable and degrading frequency, in the book of human
history.

Let us re-read together this biblical account which, despite its archaic structure and its extreme simplicity, has
much to teach us.

"Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a tiller of the ground. In the course of time Cain brought to the
Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground, and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat
portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had not regard. So
Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. The Lord said to Cain, ?Why are you angry and why has your
countenance fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the
door; its desire is for you, but you must master it'.

"Cain said to Abel his brother, ?Let us go out to the field'. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against
his brother Abel, and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, ?Where is Abel your brother?' He said, ?I do not
know; am I my brother's keeper?' And the Lord said, ?What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is
crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive
your brother's blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield to you its strength; you
shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth'. Cain said to the Lord, ?My punishment is greater than I can
bear. Behold, you have driven me this day away from the ground; and from your face I shall be hidden; and I
shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will slay me'. Then the Lord said to him, ?
Not so! If any one slays Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold'. And the Lord put a mark on Cain,
lest any who came upon him should kill him. Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in
the land of Nod, east of Eden" (Gen 4:2-16). 

8. Cain was "very angry" and his countenance "fell" because "the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering"
(Gen 4:4-5). The biblical text does not reveal the reason why God prefers Abel's sacrifice to Cain's. It clearly
shows however that God, although preferring Abel's gift, does not interrupt his dialogue with Cain. He
admonishes him, reminding him of his freedom in the face of evil: man is in no way predestined to evil.
Certainly, like Adam, he is tempted by the malevolent force of sin which, like a wild beast, lies in wait at the
door of his heart, ready to leap on its prey. But Cain remains free in the face of sin. He can and must overcome
it: "Its desire is for you, but you must master it" (Gen 4:7).

Envy and anger have the upper hand over the Lord's warning, and so Cain attacks his own brother and kills him.
As we read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "In the account of Abel's murder by his brother Cain,
Scripture reveals the presence of anger and envy in man, consequences of original sin, from the beginning of
human history. Man has become the enemy of his fellow man".10

Brother kills brother. Like the first fratricide, every murder is a violation of the "spiritual" kinship uniting
mankind in one great family, 11 in which all share the same fundamental good: equal personal dignity. Not
infrequently the kinship "of flesh and blood" is also violated; for example when threats to life arise within the
relationship between parents and children, such as happens in abortion or when, in the wider context of family
or kinship, euthanasia is encouraged or practised.

At the root of every act of violence against one's neighbour there is a concession to the "thinking" of the evil
one, the one who "was a murderer from the beginning" (Jn 8:44). As the Apostle John reminds us: "For this is
the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another, and not be like Cain
who was of the evil one and murdered his brother" (1 Jn 3:11-12). Cain's killing of his brother at the very dawn
of history is thus a sad witness of how evil spreads with amazing speed: man's revolt against God in the earthly
paradise is followed by the deadly combat of man against man.

After the crime, God intervenes to avenge the one killed. Before God, who asks him about the fate of Abel,
Cain, instead of showing remorse and apologizing, arrogantly eludes the question: "I do not know; am I my
brother's keeper?" (Gen 4:9). "I do not know": Cain tries to cover up his crime with a lie. This was and still is
the case, when all kinds of ideologies try to justify and disguise the most atrocious crimes against human
beings. "Am I my brother's keeper?": Cain does not wish to think about his brother and refuses to accept the
responsibility which every person has towards others. We cannot but think of today's tendency for people to
refuse to accept responsibility for their brothers and sisters. Symptoms of this trend include the lack of solidarity
towards society's weakest members-such as the elderly, the infirm, immigrants, children- and the indifference
frequently found in relations between the world's peoples even when basic values such as survival, freedom and
peace are involved. 

9. But God cannot leave the crime unpunished: from the ground on which it has been spilt, the blood of the one
murdered demands that God should render justice (cf. Gen 37:26; Is 26:21; Ez 24:7-8). From this text the
Church has taken the name of the "sins which cry to God for justice", and, first among them, she has included
wilful murder. 12 For the Jewish people, as for many peoples of antiquity, blood is the source of life. Indeed "the
blood is the life" (Dt 12:23), and life, especially human life, belongs only to God: for this reason whoever
attacks human life, in some way attacks God himself.
Cain is cursed by God and also by the earth, which will deny him its fruit (cf. Gen 4:11-12). He is punished: he
will live in the wilderness and the desert. Murderous violence profoundly changes man's environment. From
being the "garden of Eden" (Gen 2:15), a place of plenty, of harmonious interpersonal relationships and of
friendship with God, the earth becomes "the land of Nod" (Gen 4:16), a place of scarcity, loneliness and
separation from God. Cain will be "a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth" (Gen 4:14): uncertainty and
restlessness will follow him forever.

And yet God, who is always merciful even when he punishes, "put a mark on Cain, lest any who came upon
him should kill him" (Gen 4:15). He thus gave him a distinctive sign, not to condemn him to the hatred of
others, but to protect and defend him from those wishing to kill him, even out of a desire to avenge Abel's
death. Not even a murderer loses his personal dignity, and God himself pledges to guarantee this. And it is pre-
cisely here that the paradoxical mystery of the merciful justice of God is shown forth. As Saint Ambrose writes:
"Once the crime is admitted at the very inception of this sinful act of parricide, then the divine law of God's
mercy should be immediately extended. If punishment is forthwith inflicted on the accused, then men in the
exercise of justice would in no way observe patience and moderation, but would straightaway condemn the
defendant to punishment. ... God drove Cain out of his presence and sent him into exile far away from his native
land, so that he passed from a life of human kindness to one which was more akin to the rude existence of a
wild beast. God, who preferred the correction rather than the death of a sinner, did not desire that a homicide be
punished by the exaction of another act of homicide".13

"What have you done?" (Gen 4:10): the eclipse of the value of life 

10. The Lord said to Cain: "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the
ground" (Gen 4:10).The voice of the blood shed by men continues to cry out, from generation to generation, in
ever new and different ways.

The Lord's question: "What have you done?", which Cain cannot escape, is addressed also to the people of
today, to make them realize the extent and gravity of the attacks against life which continue to mark human
history; to make them discover what causes these attacks and feeds them; and to make them ponder seriously
the consequences which derive from these attacks for the existence of individuals and peoples.

Some threats come from nature itself, but they are made worse by the culpable indifference and negligence of
those who could in some cases remedy them. Others are the result of situations of violence, hatred and
conflicting interests, which lead people to attack others through murder, war, slaughter and genocide.

And how can we fail to consider the violence against life done to millions of human beings, especially children,
who are forced into poverty, malnutrition and hunger because of an unjust distribution of resources between
peoples and between social classes? And what of the violence inherent not only in wars as such but in the
scandalous arms trade, which spawns the many armed conflicts which stain our world with blood? What of the
spreading of death caused by reckless tampering with the world's ecological balance, by the criminal spread of
drugs, or by the promotion of certain kinds of sexual activity which, besides being morally unacceptable, also
involve grave risks to life? It is impossible to catalogue completely the vast array of threats to human life, so
many are the forms, whether explicit or hidden, in which they appear today! 

11. Here though we shall concentrate particular attention on another category of attacks, affecting life in its
earliest and in its final stages, attacks which present new characteristics with respect to the past and which raise
questions of extraordinary seriousness. It is not only that in generalized opinion these attacks tend no longer to
be considered as "crimes"; paradoxically they assume the nature of "rights", to the point that the State is called
upon to give them legal recognition and to make them available through the free services of health-care
personnel. Such attacks strike human life at the time of its greatest frailty, when it lacks any means of self-
defence. Even more serious is the fact that, most often, those attacks are carried out in the very heart of and with
the complicity of the family-the family which by its nature is called to be the "sanctuary of life".
How did such a situation come about? Many different factors have to be taken into account. In the background
there is the profound crisis of culture, which generates scepticism in relation to the very foundations of
knowledge and ethics, and which makes it increasingly difficult to grasp clearly the meaning of what man is, the
meaning of his rights and his duties. Then there are all kinds of existential and interpersonal difficulties, made
worse by the complexity of a society in which individuals, couples and families are often left alone with their
problems. There are situations of acute poverty, anxiety or frustration in which the struggle to make ends meet,
the presence of unbearable pain, or instances of violence, especially against women, make the choice to defend
and promote life so demanding as sometimes to reach the point of heroism.

All this explains, at least in part, how the value of life can today undergo a kind of "eclipse", even though
conscience does not cease to point to it as a sacred and inviolable value, as is evident in the tendency to disguise
certain crimes against life in its early or final stages by using innocuous medical terms which distract attention
from the fact that what is involved is the right to life of an actual human person. 

12. In fact, while the climate of widespread moral uncertainty can in some way be explained by the multiplicity
and gravity of today's social problems, and these can sometimes mitigate the subjective responsibility of
individuals, it is no less true that we are confronted by an even larger reality, which can be described as a
veritable structure of sin. This reality is characterized by the emergence of a culture which denies solidarity and
in many cases takes the form of a veritable "culture of death". This culture is actively fostered by powerful
cultural, economic and political currents which encourage an idea of society excessively concerned with
efficiency. Looking at the situation from this point of view, it is possible to speak in a certain sense of a war of
the powerful against the weak: a life which would require greater acceptance, love and care is considered
useless, or held to be an intolerable burden, and is therefore rejected in one way or another. A person who,
because of illness, handicap or, more simply, just by existing, compromises the well-being or life-style of those
who are more favoured tends to be looked upon as an enemy to be resisted or eliminated. In this way a kind of
"conspiracy against life" is unleashed. This conspiracy involves not only individuals in their personal, family or
group relationships, but goes far beyond, to the point of damaging and distorting, at the international level,
relations between peoples and States. 

13. In order to facilitate the spread of abortion, enormous sums of money have been invested and continue to be
invested in the production of pharmaceutical products which make it possible to kill the fetus in the mother's
womb without recourse to medical assistance. On this point, scientific research itself seems to be almost
exclusively preoccupied with developing products which are ever more simple and effective in suppressing life
and which at the same time are capable of removing abortion from any kind of control or social responsibility.

It is frequently asserted that contraception, if made safe and available to all, is the most effective remedy against
abortion. The Catholic Church is then accused of actually promoting abortion, because she obstinately continues
to teach the moral unlawfulness of contraception. When looked at carefully, this objection is clearly unfounded.
It may be that many people use contraception with a view to excluding the subsequent temptation of abortion.
But the negative values inherent in the "contraceptive mentality"-which is very different from responsible
parenthood, lived in respect for the full truth of the conjugal act-are such that they in fact strengthen this
temptation when an unwanted life is conceived. Indeed, the pro- abortion culture is especially strong precisely
where the Church's teaching on contraception is rejected. Certainly, from the moral point of view contraception
and abortion arespecifically different evils: the former contradicts the full truth of the sexual act as the proper
expression of conjugal love, while the latter destroys the life of a human being; the former is opposed to the
virtue of chastity in marriage, the latter is opposed to the virtue of justice and directly violates the divine
commandment "You shall not kill".

But despite their differences of nature and moral gravity, contraception and abortion are often closely
connected, as fruits of the same tree. It is true that in many cases contraception and even abortion are practised
under the pressure of real- life difficulties, which nonetheless can never exonerate from striving to observe
God's law fully. Still, in very many other instances such practices are rooted in a hedonistic mentality unwilling
to accept responsibility in matters of sexuality, and they imply a self-centered concept of freedom, which
regards procreation as an obstacle to personal fulfilment. The life which could result from a sexual encounter
thus becomes an enemy to be avoided at all costs, and abortion becomes the only possible decisive response to
failed contraception.

The close connection which exists, in mentality, between the practice of contraception and that of abortion is
becoming increasingly obvious. It is being demonstrated in an alarming way by the development of chemical
products, intrauterine devices and vaccines which, distributed with the same ease as contraceptives, really act as
abortifacients in the very early stages of the development of the life of the new human being. 

14. The various techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which
are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life. Apart from the fact
that they are morally unacceptable, since they separate procreation from the fully human context of the conjugal
act, 14 these techniques have a high rate of failure: not just failure in relation to fertilization but with regard to
the subsequent development of the embryo, which is exposed to the risk of death, generally within a very short
space of time. Furthermore, the number of embryos produced is often greater than that needed for implantation
in the woman's womb, and these so-called "spare embryos" are then destroyed or used for research which, under
the pretext of scientific or medical progress, in fact reduces human life to the level of simple "biological
material" to be freely disposed of.

Prenatal diagnosis, which presents no moral objections if carried out in order to identify the medical treatment
which may be needed by the child in the womb, all too often becomes an opportunity for proposing and
procuring an abortion. This is eugenic abortion, justified in public opinion on the basis of a mentality-
mistakenly held to be consistent with the demands of "therapeutic interventions"-which accepts life only under
certain conditions and rejects it when it is affected by any limitation, handicap or illness.

Following this same logic, the point has been reached where the most basic care, even nourishment, is denied to
babies born with serious handicaps or illnesses. The contemporary scene, moreover, is becoming even more
alarming by reason of the proposals, advanced here and there, to justify even infanticide, following the same
arguments used to justify the right to abortion. In this way, we revert to a state of barbarism which one hoped
had been left behind forever. 

15. Threats which are no less serious hang over the incurably ill and the dying. In a social and cultural context
which makes it more difficult to face and accept suffering, the temptation becomes all the greater to resolve the
problem of suffering by eliminating it at the root, by hastening death so that it occurs at the moment considered
most suitable.

Various considerations usually contribute to such a decision, all of which converge in the same terrible
outcome. In the sick person the sense of anguish, of severe discomfort, and even of desperation brought on by
intense and prolonged suffering can be a decisive factor. Such a situation can threaten the already fragile
equilibrium of an individual's personal and family life, with the result that, on the one hand, the sick person,
despite the help of increasingly effective medical and social assistance, risks feeling overwhelmed by his or her
own frailty; and on the other hand, those close to the sick person can be moved by an understandable even if
misplaced compassion. All this is aggravated by a cultural climate which fails to perceive any meaning or value
in suffering, but rather considers suffering the epitome of evil, to be eliminated at all costs. This is especially the
case in the absence of a religious outlook which could help to provide a positive understanding of the mystery
of suffering.

On a more general level, there exists in contemporary culture a certain Promethean attitude which leads people
to think that they can control life and death by taking the decisions about them into their own hands. What
really happens in this case is that the individual is overcome and crushed by a death deprived of any prospect of
meaning or hope. We see a tragic expression of all this in the spread of euthanasia-disguised and surreptitious,
or practised openly and even legally. As well as for reasons of a misguided pity at the sight of the patient's
suffering, euthanasia is sometimes justified by the utilitarian motive of avoiding costs which bring no return and
which weigh heavily on society. Thus it is proposed to eliminate malformed babies, the severely handicapped,
the disabled, the elderly, especially when they are not self-sufficient, and the terminally ill. Nor can we remain
silent in the face of other more furtive, but no less serious and real, forms of euthanasia. These could occur for
example when, in order to increase the availability of organs for transplants, organs are removed without
respecting objective and adequate criteria which verify the death of the donor. 

16. Another present-day phenomenon, frequently used to justify threats and attacks against life, is the
demographic question. This question arises in different ways in different parts of the world. In the rich and
developed countries there is a disturbing decline or collapse of the birthrate. The poorer countries, on the other
hand, generally have a high rate of population growth, difficult to sustain in the context of low economic and
social development, and especially where there is extreme underdevelopment. In the face of over- population in
the poorer countries, instead of forms of global intervention at the international level-serious family and social
policies, programmes of cultural development and of fair production and distribution of resources-anti-birth
policies continue to be enacted.

Contraception, sterilization and abortion are certainly part of the reason why in some cases there is a sharp
decline in the birthrate. It is not difficult to be tempted to use the same methods and attacks against life also
where there is a situation of "demographic explosion".

The Pharaoh of old, haunted by the presence and increase of the children of Israel, submitted them to every kind
of oppression and ordered that every male child born of the Hebrew women was to be killed (cf. Ex 1:7-22).
Today not a few of the powerful of the earth act in the same way. They too are haunted by the current
demographic growth, and fear that the most prolific and poorest peoples represent a threat for the well-being
and peace of their own countries. Consequently, rather than wishing to face and solve these serious problems
with respect for the dignity of individuals and families and for every person's inviolable right to life, they prefer
to promote and impose by whatever means a massive programme of birth control. Even the economic help
which they would be ready to give is unjustly made conditional on the acceptance of an anti-birth policy. 

17. Humanity today offers us a truly alarming spectacle, if we consider not only how extensively attacks on life
are spreading but also their unheard-of numerical proportion, and the fact that they receive widespread and
powerful support from a broad consensus on the part of society, from widespread legal approval and the
involvement of certain sectors of health-care personnel.

As I emphatically stated at Denver, on the occasion of the Eighth World Youth Day, "with time the threats
against life have not grown weaker. They are taking on vast proportions. They are not only threats coming from
the outside, from the forces of nature or the ?Cains' who kill the ?Abels'; no, they are scientifically and
systematically programmed threats. The twentieth century will have been an era of massive attacks on life, an
endless series of wars and a continual taking of innocent human life. False prophets and false teachers have had
the greatest success".15 Aside from intentions, which can be varied and perhaps can seem convincing at times,
especially if presented in the name of solidarity, we are in fact faced by an objective "conspiracy against life",
involving even international Institutions, engaged in encouraging and carrying out actual campaigns to make
contraception, sterilization and abortion widely available. Nor can it be denied that the mass media are often
implicated in this conspiracy, by lending credit to that culture which presents recourse to contraception,
sterilization, abortion and even euthanasia as a mark of progress and a victory of freedom, while depicting as
enemies of freedom and progress those positions which are unreservedly pro-life.

"Am I my brother's keeper?" (Gen 4:9): a perverse idea of freedom  

18. The panorama described needs to be understood not only in terms of the phenomena of death which
characterize it but also in the variety of causes which determine it. The Lord's question: "What have you done?"
(Gen 4:10), seems almost like an invitation addressed to Cain to go beyond the material dimension of his
murderous gesture, in order to recognize in it all the gravity of the motives which occasioned it and the
consequences which result from it.

Decisions that go against life sometimes arise from difficult or even tragic situations of profound suffering,
loneliness, a total lack of economic pros- pects, depression and anxiety about the future. Such circumstances
can mitigate even to a notable degree subjective responsibility and the consequent culpability of those who
make these choices which in themselves are evil. But today the prob- lem goes far beyond the necessary
recognition of these personal situations. It is a problem which exists at the cultural, social and political level,
where it reveals its more sinister and disturbing aspect in the tendency, ever more widely shared, to interpret the
above crimes against life as legitimate expressions of individual freedom, to be acknowledged and protected as
actual rights.

In this way, and with tragic consequences, a long historical process is reaching a turning-point. The process
which once led to discovering the idea of "human rights"-rights inherent in every person and prior to any
Constitution and State legislation-is today marked by a surprising contradiction. Precisely in an age when the
inviolable rights of the person are solemnly proclaimed and the value of life is publicly affirmed, the very right
to life is being denied or trampled upon, especially at the more significant moments of existence: the moment of
birth and the moment of death.

On the one hand, the various declarations of human rights and the many initiatives inspired by these
declarations show that at the global level there is a growing moral sensitivity, more alert to acknowledging the
value and dignity of every individual as a human being, without any distinction of race, nationality, religion,
political opinion or social class.

On the other hand, these noble proclamations are unfortunately contradicted by a tragic repudiation of them in
practice. This denial is still more distressing, indeed more scandalous, precisely because it is occurring in a
society which makes the affirmation and protection of human rights its primary objective and its boast. How can
these repeated affirmations of principle be reconciled with the continual increase and widespread justification of
attacks on human life? How can we reconcile these declarations with the refusal to accept those who are weak
and needy, or elderly, or those who have just been conceived? These attacks go directly against respect for life
and they represent a direct threat to the entire culture of human rights. It is a threat capable, in the end, of
jeopardizing the very meaning of democratic coexistence: rather than societies of "people living together", our
cities risk becoming societies of people who are rejected, marginalized, uprooted and oppressed. If we then look
at the wider worldwide perspective, how can we fail to think that the very affirmation of the rights of
individuals and peoples made in distinguished international assemblies is a merely futile exercise of rhetoric, if
we fail to unmask the selfishness of the rich countries which exclude poorer countries from access to
development or make such access dependent on arbitrary prohibitions against procreation, setting up an
opposition between development and man himself? Should we not question the very economic models often
adopted by States which, also as a result of international pressures and forms of conditioning, cause and
aggravate situations of injustice and violence in which the life of whole peoples is degraded and trampled
upon? 

19. What are the roots of this remarkable contradiction?

We can find them in an overall assessment of a cultural and moral nature, beginning with the mentality which
carries the concept of subjectivity to an extreme and even distorts it, and recognizes as a subject of rights only
the person who enjoys full or at least incipient autonomy and who emerges from a state of total dependence on
others. But how can we reconcile this approach with the exaltation of man as a being who is "not to be used"?
The theory of human rights is based precisely on the affirmation that the human person, unlike animals and
things, cannot be subjected to domination by others. We must also mention the mentality which tends to equate
personal dignity with the capacity for verbal and explicit, or at least perceptible, communication. It is clear that
on the basis of these presuppositions there is no place in the world for anyone who, like the unborn or the dying,
is a weak element in the social structure, or for anyone who appears completely at the mercy of others and
radically dependent on them, and can only communicate through the silent language of a profound sharing of
affection. In this case it is force which becomes the criterion for choice and action in interpersonal relations and
in social life. But this is the exact opposite of what a State ruled by law, as a community in which the "reasons
of force" are replaced by the "force of reason", historically intended to affirm.

At another level, the roots of the contradiction between the solemn affirmation of human rights and their tragic
denial in practice lies in a notion of freedom which exalts the isolated individual in an absolute way, and gives
no place to solidarity, to openness to others and service of them. While it is true that the taking of life not yet
born or in its final stages is sometimes marked by a mistaken sense of altruism and human compassion, it
cannot be denied that such a culture of death, taken as a whole, betrays a completely individualistic concept of
freedom, which ends up by becoming the freedom of "the strong" against the weak who have no choice but to
submit.

It is precisely in this sense that Cain's answer to the Lord's question: "Where is Abel your brother?" can be
interpreted: "I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?" (Gen 4:9). Yes, every man is his "brother's keeper",
because God entrusts us to one another. And it is also in view of this entrusting that God gives everyone
freedom, a freedom which possesses an inherently relational dimension. This is a great gift of the Creator,
placed as it is at the service of the person and of his fulfilment through the gift of self and openness to others;
but when freedom is made absolute in an individualistic way, it is emptied of its original content, and its very
meaning and dignity are contradicted.

There is an even more profound aspect which needs to be emphasized: freedom negates and destroys itself, and
becomes a factor leading to the destruction of others, when it no longer recognizes and respects its essential link
with the truth. When freedom, out of a desire to emancipate itself from all forms of tradition and authority, shuts
out even the most obvious evidence of an objective and universal truth, which is the foundation of personal and
social life, then the person ends up by no longer taking as the sole and indisputable point of reference for his
own choices the truth about good and evil, but only his subjective and changeable opinion or, indeed, his selfish
interest and whim. 

20. This view of freedom leads to a serious distortion of life in society. If the promotion of the self is
understood in terms of absolute autonomy, people inevitably reach the point of rejecting one another. Everyone
else is considered an enemy from whom one has to defend oneself. Thus soci- ety becomes a mass of
individuals placed side by side, but without any mutual bonds. Each one wishes to assert himself independently
of the other and in fact intends to make his own interests prevail. Still, in the face of other people's analogous
interests, some kind of compromise must be found, if one wants a society in which the maximum possible
freedom is guaranteed to each individual. In this way, any reference to common values and to a truth absolutely
binding on everyone is lost, and social life ventures on to the shifting sands of complete relativism. At that
point, everything is negotiable, everything is open to bargaining: even the first of the fundamental rights, the
right to life.

This is what is happening also at the level of politics and government: the original and inalienable right to life is
questioned or denied on the basis of a parliamentary vote or the will of one part of the people-even if it is the
majority. This is the sinister result of a relativism which reigns unopposed: the "right" ceases to be such,
because it is no longer firmly founded on the inviolable dignity of the person, but is made subject to the will of
the stronger part. In this way democracy, contradicting its own principles, effectively moves towards a form of
totalitarianism. The State is no longer the "common home" where all can live together on the basis of principles
of fundamental equality, but is transformed into a tyrant State, which arrogates to itself the right to dispose of
the life of the weakest and most defenceless members, from the unborn child to the elderly, in the name of a
public interest which is really nothing but the interest of one part. The appearance of the strictest respect for
legality is maintained, at least when the laws permitting abortion and euthanasia are the result of a ballot in
accordance with what are generally seen as the rules of democracy. Really, what we have here is only the tragic
caricature of legality; the democratic ideal, which is only truly such when it acknowledges and safeguards the
dignity of every human person, is betrayed in its very foundations: "How is it still possible to speak of the
dignity of every human person when the killing of the weakest and most innocent is permitted? In the name of
what justice is the most unjust of discriminations practised: some individuals are held to be deserving of
defence and others are denied that dignity?" 16 When this happens, the process leading to the breakdown of a
genuinely human co-existence and the disintegration of the State itself has already begun.

To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute
to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others.
This is the death of true freedom: "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn
8:34).

"And from your face I shall be hidden" (Gen 4:14): the eclipse of the sense of God and of man 

21. In seeking the deepest roots of the struggle between the "culture of life" and the "culture of death", we
cannot restrict ourselves to the perverse idea of freedom mentioned above. We have to go to the heart of the
tragedy being experienced by modern man: the eclipse of the sense of God and of man, typical of a social and
cultural climate dominated by secularism, which, with its ubiquitous tentacles, succeeds at times in putting
Christian communities themselves to the test. Those who allow themselves to be influenced by this climate
easily fall into a sad vicious circle: when the sense of God is lost, there is also a tendency to lose the sense of
man, of his dignity and his life; in turn, the systematic violation of the moral law, especially in the serious
matter of respect for human life and its dignity, produces a kind of progressive darkening of the capacity to
discern God's living and saving presence.

Once again we can gain insight from the story of Abel's murder by his brother. After the curse imposed on him
by God, Cain thus addresses the Lord: "My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, you have driven me
this day away from the ground; and from your face I shall be hidden; and I shall be a fugitive and wanderer on
the earth, and whoever finds me will slay me" (Gen 4:13-14). Cain is convinced that his sin will not obtain
pardon from the Lord and that his inescapable destiny will be to have to "hide his face" from him. If Cain is
capable of confessing that his fault is "greater than he can bear", it is because he is conscious of being in the
presence of God and before God's just judgment. It is really only before the Lord that man can admit his sin and
recognize its full seriousness. Such was the experience of David who, after "having committed evil in the sight
of the Lord", and being rebuked by the Prophet Nathan, exclaimed: "My offences truly I know them; my sin is
always before me. Against you, you alone, have I sinned; what is evil in your sight I have done" (Ps 51:5-6). 

22. Consequently, when the sense of God is lost, the sense of man is also threatened and poisoned, as the
Second Vatican Council concisely states: "Without the Creator the creature would disappear ... But when God is
forgotten the creature itself grows unintelligible".17 Man is no longer able to see himself as "mysteriously
different" from other earthly creatures; he regards himself merely as one more living being, as an organism
which, at most, has reached a very high stage of perfection. Enclosed in the narrow horizon of his physical
nature, he is somehow reduced to being "a thing", and no longer grasps the "transcendent" character of his
"existence as man". He no longer considers life as a splendid gift of God, something "sacred" entrusted to his
responsibility and thus also to his loving care and "veneration". Life itself becomes a mere "thing", which man
claims as his exclusive property, completely subject to his control and manipulation.

Thus, in relation to life at birth or at death, man is no longer capable of posing the question of the truest
meaning of his own existence, nor can he assimilate with genuine freedom these crucial moments of his own
history. He is concerned only with "doing", and, using all kinds of technology, he busies himself with
programming, controlling and dominating birth and death. Birth and death, instead of being primary
experiences demanding to be "lived", become things to be merely "possessed" or "rejected".
Moreover, once all reference to God has been removed, it is not surprising that the meaning of everything else
becomes profoundly distorted. Nature itself, from being "mater" (mother), is now reduced to being "matter",
and is subjected to every kind of manipulation. This is the direction in which a certain technical and scientific
way of thinking, prevalent in present-day culture, appears to be leading when it rejects the very idea that there is
a truth of creation which must be ac- knowledged, or a plan of God for life which must be respected. Something
similar happens when concern about the consequences of such a "freedom without law" leads some people to
the opposite position of a "law without freedom", as for example in ideologies which consider it unlawful to
interfere in any way with nature, practically "divinizing" it. Again, this is a misunderstanding of nature's
dependence on the plan of the Creator. Thus it is clear that the loss of contact with God's wise design is the
deepest root of modern man's confusion, both when this loss leads to a freedom without rules and when it leaves
man in "fear" of his freedom.

By living "as if God did not exist", man not only loses sight of the mystery of God, but also of the mystery of
the world and the mystery of his own being. 

23. The eclipse of the sense of God and of man inevitably leads to a practical materialism, which breeds
individualism, utilitarianism and hedonism. Here too we see the permanent validity of the words of the Apostle:
"And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper
conduct" (Rom 1:28). The values of being are replaced by those of having. The only goal which counts is the
pursuit of one's own material well-being. The so-called "quality of life" is interpreted primarily or exclusively
as economic efficiency, inordinate consumerism, physical beauty and pleasure, to the neglect of the more
profound dimensions-interpersonal, spiritual and religious-of existence.

In such a context suffering, an inescapable burden of human existence but also a factor of possible personal
growth, is "censored", rejected as useless, indeed opposed as an evil, always and in every way to be avoided.
When it cannot be avoided and the prospect of even some future well-being vanishes, then life appears to have
lost all meaning and the temptation grows in man to claim the right to suppress it.

Within this same cultural climate, the body is no longer perceived as a properly personal reality, a sign and
place of relations with others, with God and with the world. It is reduced to pure materiality: it is simply a
complex of organs, functions and energies to be used according to the sole criteria of pleasure and efficiency.
Consequently, sexuality too is depersonalized and exploited: from being the sign, place and language of love,
that is, of the gift of self and acceptance of another, in all the other's richness as a person, it increasingly
becomes the occasion and instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction of personal desires and
instincts. Thus the original import of human sexuality is distorted and falsified, and the two meanings, unitive
and procreative, inherent in the very nature of the conjugal act, are artificially separated: in this way the
marriage union is betrayed and its fruitfulness is subjected to the caprice of the couple. Procreation then
becomes the "enemy" to be avoided in sexual activity: if it is welcomed, this is only because it expresses a
desire, or indeed the intention, to have a child "at all costs", and not because it signifies the complete acceptance
of the other and therefore an openness to the richness of life which the child represents.

In the materialistic perspective described so far, interpersonal relations are seriously impoverished. The first to
be harmed are women, children, the sick or suffering, and the elderly. The criterion of personal dignity-which
demands respect, generosity and service-is replaced by the criterion of efficiency, functionality and usefulness:
others are considered not for what they "are", but for what they "have, do and produce". This is the supremacy
of the strong over the weak. 

24. It is at the heart of the moral conscience that the eclipse of the sense of God and of man, with all its various
and deadly consequences for life, is taking place. It is a question, above all, of the individual conscience, as it
stands before God in its singleness and uniqueness. 18 But it is also a question, in a certain sense, of the "moral
conscience" of society: in a way it too is responsible, not only because it tolerates or fosters behaviour contrary
to life, but also because it encourages the "culture of death", creating and consolidating actual "structures of sin"
which go against life. The moral conscience, both individual and social, is today subjected, also as a result of
the penetrating influence of the media, to an extremely serious and mortal danger: that of confusion between
good and evil, precisely in relation to the fundamental right to life. A large part of contemporary society looks
sadly like that humanity which Paul describes in his Letter to the Romans. It is composed "of men who by their
wickedness suppress the truth" (1:18): having denied God and believing that they can build the earthly city
without him, "they became futile in their thinking" so that "their senseless minds were darkened" (1:21);
"claiming to be wise, they became fools" (1:22), carrying out works deserving of death, and "they not only do
them but approve those who practise them" (1:32). When conscience, this bright lamp of the soul (cf. Mt 6:22-
23), calls "evil good and good evil" (Is 5:20), it is already on the path to the most alarming corruption and the
darkest moral blindness.

And yet all the conditioning and efforts to enforce silence fail to stifle the voice of the Lord echoing in the
conscience of every individual: it is always from this intimate sanctuary of the conscience that a new journey of
love, openness and service to human life can begin.

"You have come to the sprinkled blood" (cf. Heb 12: 22, 24): signs of hope and invitation to commitment 

25. "The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground" (Gen 4:10). It is not only the voice of
the blood of Abel, the first innocent man to be murdered, which cries to God, the source and defender of life.
The blood of every other human being who has been killed since Abel is also a voice raised to the Lord. In an
absolutely singular way, as the author of the Letter to the Hebrews reminds us, the voice of the blood of Christ,
of whom Abel in his innocence is a prophetic figure, cries out to God: "You have come to Mount Zion and to
the city of the living God ... to the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks more
graciously than the blood of Abel" (12:22, 24).

It is the sprinkled blood. A symbol and prophetic sign of it had been the blood of the sacrifices of the Old
Covenant, whereby God expressed his will to communicate his own life to men, purifying and consecrating
them (cf. Ex 24:8; Lev 17:11). Now all of this is fulfilled and comes true in Christ: his is the sprinkled blood
which redeems, purifies and saves; it is the blood of the Mediator of the New Covenant "poured out for many
for the forgiveness of sins" (Mt 26:28). This blood, which flows from the pierced side of Christ on the Cross (cf.
Jn 19:34), "speaks more graciously" than the blood of Abel; indeed, it expresses and requires a more radical
"justice", and above all it implores mercy, 19 it makes intercession for the brethren before the Father (cf. Heb
7:25), and it is the source of perfect redemption and the gift of new life.

The blood of Christ, while it reveals the grandeur of the Father's love, shows how precious man is in God's eyes
and how priceless the value of his life. The Apostle Peter reminds us of this: "You know that you were
ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but
with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot" (1 Pt 1:18-19). Precisely by
contemplating the precious blood of Christ, the sign of his self-giving love (cf. Jn 13:1), the believer learns to
recognize and appreciate the almost divine dignity of every human being and can exclaim with ever renewed
and grateful wonder: "How precious must man be in the eyes of the Creator, if he ?gained so great a Redeemer'
(Exsultet of the Easter Vigil), and if God ?gave his only Son' in order that man ?should not perish but have
eternal life' (cf. Jn 3:16)!". 20

Furthermore, Christ's blood reveals to man that his greatness, and therefore his vocation, consists in the sincere
gift of self. Precisely because it is poured out as the gift of life, the blood of Christ is no longer a sign of death,
of definitive separation from the brethren, but the instrument of a communion which is richness of life for all.
Whoever in the Sacrament of the Eucharist drinks this blood and abides in Jesus (cf. Jn 6:56) is drawn into the
dynamism of his love and gift of life, in order to bring to its fullness the original vocation to love which belongs
to everyone (cf. Gen 1:27; 2:18-24).
It is from the blood of Christ that all draw the strength to commit themselves to promoting life. It is precisely
this blood that is the most powerful source of hope, indeed it is the foundation of the absolute certitude that in
God's plan life will be victorious. "And death shall be no more", exclaims the powerful voice which comes from
the throne of God in the Heavenly Jerusalem (Rev 21:4). And Saint Paul assures us that the present victory over
sin is a sign and anticipation of the definitive victory over death, when there "shall come to pass the saying that
is written: ?Death is swallowed up in victory'. ?O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?' "
(1 Cor 15:54-55). 

26. In effect, signs which point to this victory are not lacking in our societies and cultures, strongly marked
though they are by the "culture of death". It would therefore be to give a one-sided picture, which could lead to
sterile discouragement, if the condemnation of the threats to life were not accompanied by the presentation of
the positive signs at work in humanity's present situation.

Unfortunately it is often hard to see and recognize these positive signs, perhaps also because they do not receive
sufficient attention in the communications media. Yet, how many initiatives of help and support for people who
are weak and defenceless have sprung up and continue to spring up in the Christian community and in civil
society, at the local, national and international level, through the efforts of individuals, groups, movements and
organizations of various kinds!

There are still many married couples who, with a generous sense of responsibility, are ready to accept children
as "the supreme gift of marriage".21 Nor is there a lack of families which, over and above their everyday service
to life, are willing to accept abandoned children, boys and girls and teenagers in difficulty, handicapped
persons, elderly men and women who have been left alone. Many centres in support of life, or similar
institutions, are sponsored by individuals and groups which, with admirable dedication and sacrifice, offer
moral and material support to mothers who are in difficulty and are tempted to have recourse to abortion.
Increasingly, there are appearing in many places groups of volunteers prepared to offer hospitality to persons
without a family, who find themselves in conditions of particular distress or who need a supportive environment
to help them to overcome destructive habits and discover anew the meaning of life.

Medical science, thanks to the committed efforts of researchers and practitioners, continues in its efforts to
discover ever more effective remedies: treatments which were once inconceivable but which now offer much
promise for the future are today being developed for the unborn, the suffering and those in an acute or terminal
stage of sickness. Various agencies and organizations are mobilizing their efforts to bring the benefits of the
most advanced medicine to countries most afflicted by poverty and endemic diseases. In a similar way national
and international associations of physicians are being organized to bring quick relief to peoples affected by
natural disasters, epidemics or wars. Even if a just international distribution of medical resources is still far from
being a reality, how can we not recognize in the steps taken so far the sign of a growing solidarity among
peoples, a praiseworthy human and moral sensitivity and a greater respect for life? 

27. In view of laws which permit abortion and in view of efforts, which here and there have been successful, to
legalize euthanasia, movements and initiatives to raise social awareness in defence of life have sprung up in
many parts of the world. When, in accordance with their principles, such movements act resolutely, but without
resorting to violence, they promote a wider and more profound consciousness of the value of life, and evoke and
bring about a more determined commitment to its defence.

Furthermore, how can we fail to mention all those daily gestures of openness, sacrifice and unselfish care which
countless people lovingly make in families, hospitals, orphanages, homes for the elderly and other centres or
communities which defend life? Allowing herself to be guided by the example of Jesus the "Good Samaritan"
(cf. Lk 10:29-37) and upheld by his strength, the Church has always been in the front line in providing
charitable help: so many of her sons and daughters, especially men and women Religious, in traditional and
ever new forms, have consecrated and continue to consecrate their lives to God, freely giving of themselves out
of love for their neighbour, especially for the weak and needy. These deeds strengthen the bases of the
"civilization of love and life", without which the life of individuals and of society itself loses its most genuinely
human quality. Even if they go unnoticed and remain hidden to most people, faith assures us that the Father
"who sees in secret" (Mt 6:6) not only will reward these actions but already here and now makes them produce
lasting fruit for the good of all.

Among the signs of hope we should also count the spread, at many levels of public opinion, of a new sensitivity
ever more opposed to war as an instrument for the resolution of conflicts between peoples, and increasingly
oriented to finding effective but "non-violent" means to counter the armed aggressor. In the same perspective
there is evidence of a growing public opposition to the death penalty, even when such a penalty is seen as a kind
of "legitimate defence" on the part of society. Modern society in fact has the means of effectively suppressing
crime by rendering criminals harmless without definitively denying them the chance to reform.

Another welcome sign is the growing attention being paid to the quality of life and to ecology, especially in
more developed societies, where people's expectations are no longer concentrated so much on problems of
survival as on the search for an overall improvement of living conditions. Especially significant is the
reawakening of an ethical reflection on issues affecting life. The emergence and ever more widespread
development of bioethics is promoting more reflection and dialogue-between believers and non-believers, as
well as between followers of different religions- on ethical problems, including fundamental issues pertaining to
human life. 

28. This situation, with its lights and shadows, ought to make us all fully aware that we are facing an enormous
and dramatic clash between good and evil, death and life, the "culture of death" and the "culture of life". We
find ourselves not only "faced with" but necessarily "in the midst of" this conflict: we are all involved and we
all share in it, with the inescapable responsibility of choosing to be unconditionally pro-life.

For us too Moses' invitation rings out loud and clear: "See, I have set before you this day life and good, death
and evil. ... I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your
descendants may live" (Dt 30:15, 19). This invitation is very appropriate for us who are called day by day to the
duty of choosing between the "culture of life" and the "culture of death". But the call of Deuteronomy goes even
deeper, for it urges us to make a choice which is properly religious and moral. It is a question of giving our own
existence a basic orientation and living the law of the Lord faithfully and consistently: "If you obey the
commandments of the Lord your God which I command you this day, by loving the Lord your God, by walking
in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, then you shall live ...
therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live, loving the Lord your God, obeying his voice, and
cleaving to him; for that means life to you and length of days" (30:16,19-20).

The unconditional choice for life reaches its full religious and moral meaning when it flows from, is formed by
and nourished by faith in Christ. Nothing helps us so much to face positively the conflict between death and life
in which we are engaged as faith in the Son of God who became man and dwelt among men so "that they may
have life, and have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10). It is a matter of faith in the Risen Lord, who has conquered death;
faith in the blood of Christ "that speaks more graciously than the blood of Abel" (Heb 12:24).

With the light and strength of this faith, therefore, in facing the challenges of the present situation, the Church is
becoming more aware of the grace and responsibility which come to her from her Lord of proclaiming,
celebrating and serving the Gospel of life.

CHAPTER II - I CAME THAT THEY MAY HAVE LIFE 

THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE CONCERNING LIFE

  

"The life was made manifest, and we saw it" (1 Jn 1:2): with our gaze fixed on Christ, "the Word of life" 

29. Faced with the countless grave threats to life present in the modern world, one could feel overwhelmed by
sheer powerlessness: good can never be powerful enough to triumph over evil!

At such times the People of God, and this includes every believer, is called to profess with humility and courage
its faith in Jesus Christ, "the Word of life" (1 Jn 1:1). The Gospel of life is not simply a reflection, however new
and profound, on human life. Nor is it merely a commandment aimed at raising awareness and bringing about
significant changes in society. Still less is it an illusory promise of a better future. The Gospel of life is
something concrete and personal, for it consists in the proclamation of the very person of Jesus. Jesus made
himself known to the Apostle Thomas, and in him to every person, with the words: "I am the way, and the truth,
and the life" (Jn 14:6). This is also how he spoke of himself to Martha, the sister of Lazarus: "I am the
resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and whoever lives and believes
in me shall never die" (Jn 11:25-26). Jesus is the Son who from all eternity receives life from the Father (cf. Jn
5:26), and who has come among men to make them sharers in this gift: "I came that they may have life, and
have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10).

Through the words, the actions and the very person of Jesus, man is given the possibility of "knowing" the
complete truth concerning the value of human life. From this "source" he receives, in particular, the capacity to
"accomplish" this truth perfectly (cf. Jn 3:21), that is, to accept and fulfil completely the responsibility of loving
and serving, of defending and promoting human life. In Christ, the Gospel of life is definitively proclaimed and
fully given. This is the Gospel which, already present in the Revelation of the Old Testament, and indeed
written in the heart of every man and woman, has echoed in every conscience "from the beginning", from the
time of creation itself, in such a way that, despite the negative consequences of sin, it can also be known in its
essential traits by human reason. As the Second Vatican Council teaches, Christ "perfected revelation by
fulfilling it through his whole work of making himself present and manifesting himself; through his words and
deeds, his signs and wonders, but especially through his death and glorious Resurrection from the dead and final
sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover, he confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed: that
God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal".22 

30. Hence, with our attention fixed on the Lord Jesus, we wish to hear from him once again "the words of God"
(Jn 3:34) and meditate anew on the Gospel of life. The deepest and most original meaning of this meditation on
what revelation tells us about human life was taken up by the Apostle John in the opening words of his First
Letter: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which
we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life-the life was made manifest, and
we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made
manifest to us-that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship
with us" (1:1-3).

In Jesus, the "Word of life", God's eternal life is thus proclaimed and given. Thanks to this proclamation and
gift, our physical and spiritual life, also in its earthly phase, acquires its full value and meaning, for God's
eternal life is in fact the end to which our living in this world is directed and called. In this way the Gospel of
life includes everything that human experience and reason tell us about the value of human life, accepting it,
purifying it, exalting it and bringing it to fulfilment.

"The Lord is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation" (Ex 15:2): life is always a good 

31. The fullness of the Gospel message about life was prepared for in the Old Testament. Especially in the
events of the Exodus, the centre of the Old Testament faith experience, Israel discovered the preciousness of its
life in the eyes of God. When it seemed doomed to extermination because of the threat of death hanging over all
its newborn males (cf. Ex 1:15-22), the Lord revealed himself to Israel as its Saviour, with the power to ensure a
future to those without hope. Israel thus comes to know clearly that its existence is not at the mercy of a
Pharaoh who can exploit it at his despotic whim. On the contrary, Israel's life is the object of God's gentle and
intense love.

Freedom from slavery meant the gift of an identity, the recognition of an indestructible dignity and the
beginning of a new history, in which the discovery of God and discovery of self go hand in hand. The Exodus
was a foundational experience and a model for the future. Through it, Israel comes to learn that whenever its
existence is threatened it need only turn to God with renewed trust in order to find in him effective help: "I
formed you, you are my servant; O Israel, you will not be forgotten by me" (Is 44:21).

Thus, in coming to know the value of its own existence as a people, Israel also grows in its perception of the
meaning and value of life itself. This reflection is developed more specifically in the Wisdom Literature, on the
basis of daily experience of the precariousness of life and awareness of the threats which assail it. Faced with
the contradictions of life, faith is challenged to respond.

More than anything else, it is the problem of suffering which challenges faith and puts it to the test. How can we
fail to appreciate the universal anguish of man when we meditate on the Book of Job? The innocent man
overwhelmed by suffering is understandably led to wonder: "Why is light given to him that is in misery, and life
to the bitter in soul, who long for death, but it comes not, and dig for it more than for hid treasures?" (3:20-21).
But even when the darkness is deepest, faith points to a trusting and adoring acknowledgment of the "mystery":
"I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted" (Job 42:2).

Revelation progressively allows the first notion of immortal life planted by the Creator in the human heart to be
grasped with ever greater clarity: "He has made everything beautiful in its time; also he has put eternity into
man's mind" (Ec 3:11). This first notion of totality and fullness is waiting to be manifested in love and brought
to perfection, by God's free gift, through sharing in his eternal life.

"The name of Jesus ... has made this man strong" (Acts 3:16): in the uncertainties of human life, Jesus
brings life's meaning to fulfilment  

32. The experience of the people of the Covenant is renewed in the experience of all the "poor" who meet Jesus
of Nazareth. Just as God who "loves the living" (cf. Wis 11:26) had reassured Israel in the midst of danger, so
now the Son of God proclaims to all who feel threatened and hindered that their lives too are a good to which
the Father's love gives meaning and value.

"The blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the
poor have good news preached to them" (Lk 7:22). With these words of the Prophet Isaiah (35:5-6, 61:1), Jesus
sets forth the meaning of his own mission: all who suffer because their lives are in some way "diminished" thus
hear from him the "good news" of God's concern for them, and they know for certain that their lives too are a
gift carefully guarded in the hands of the Father (cf. Mt 6:25-34).

It is above all the "poor" to whom Jesus speaks in his preaching and actions. The crowds of the sick and the
outcasts who follow him and seek him out (cf. Mt 4:23-25) find in his words and actions a revelation of the
great value of their lives and of how their hope of salvation is well-founded.

The same thing has taken place in the Church's mission from the beginning. When the Church proclaims Christ
as the one who "went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him"
(Acts 10:38), she is conscious of being the bearer of a message of salvation which resounds in all its newness
precisely amid the hardships and poverty of human life. Peter cured the cripple who daily sought alms at the
"Beautiful Gate" of the Temple in Jerusalem, saying: "I have no silver and gold, but I give you what I have; in
the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk" (Acts 3:6). By faith in Jesus, "the Author of life" (Acts 3:15), life
which lies abandoned and cries out for help regains self-esteem and full dignity.

The words and deeds of Jesus and those of his Church are not meant only for those who are sick or suffering or
in some way neglected by society. On a deeper level they affect the very meaning of every person's life in its
moral and spiritual dimensions. Only those who recognize that their life is marked by the evil of sin can
discover in an encounter with Jesus the Saviour the truth and the authenticity of their own existence. Jesus
himself says as much: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I have not
come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance" (Lk 5:31-32).

But the person who, like the rich land-owner in the Gospel parable, thinks that he can make his life secure by
the possession of material goods alone, is deluding himself. Life is slipping away from him, and very soon he
will find himself bereft of it without ever having appreciated its real meaning: "Fool! This night your soul is
required of you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?" (Lk 12:20). 

33. In Jesus' own life, from beginning to end, we find a singular "dialectic" between the experience of the
uncertainty of human life and the affirmation of its value. Jesus' life is marked by uncertainty from the very
moment of his birth. He is certainly accepted by the righteous, who echo Mary's immediate and joyful "yes" (cf.
Lk 1:38). But there is also, from the start, rejection on the part of a world which grows hostile and looks for the
child in order "to destroy him" (Mt 2:13); a world which remains indifferent and unconcerned about the
fulfilment of the mystery of this life entering the world: "there was no place for them in the inn" (Lk 2:7). In
this contrast between threats and insecurity on the one hand and the power of God's gift on the other, there
shines forth all the more clearly the glory which radiates from the house at Nazareth and from the manger at
Bethlehem: this life which is born is salvation for all humanity (cf. Lk 2:11).

Life's contradictions and risks were fully accepted by Jesus: "though he was rich, yet for your sake he became
poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich" (2 Cor 8:9). The poverty of which Paul speaks is not only a
stripping of divine privileges, but also a sharing in the lowliest and most vulnerable conditions of human life
(cf. Phil 2:6-7). Jesus lived this poverty throughout his life, until the culminating moment of the Cross: "he
humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him
and bestowed on him the name which is above every name" (Phil 2:8-9). It is precisely by his death that Jesus
reveals all the splendour and value of life, inasmuch as his self-oblation on the Cross becomes the source of new
life for all people (cf. Jn 12:32). In his journeying amid contradictions and in the very loss of his life, Jesus is
guided by the certainty that his life is in the hands of the Father. Consequently, on the Cross, he can say to him:
"Father, into your hands I commend my spirit!" (Lk 23:46), that is, my life. Truly great must be the value of
human life if the Son of God has taken it up and made it the instrument of the salvation of all humanity!

"Called ... to be conformed to the image of his Son" (Rom 8:28-29): God's glory shines on the face of man

 34. Life is always a good. This is an instinctive perception and a fact of experience, and man is called to grasp
the profound reason why this is so.

Why is life a good? This question is found everywhere in the Bible, and from the very first pages it receives a
powerful and amazing answer. The life which God gives man is quite different from the life of all other living
creatures, inasmuch as man, although formed from the dust of the earth (cf. Gen 2:7, 3:19; Job 34:15; Ps
103:14; 104:29), is a manifestation of God in the world, a sign of his presence, a trace of his glory (cf. Gen
1:26-27; Ps 8:6). This is what Saint Irenaeus of Lyons wanted to emphasize in his celebrated definition: "Man,
living man, is the glory of God".23 Man has been given a sublime dignity, based on the intimate bond which
unites him to his Creator: in man there shines forth a reflection of God himself.

The Book of Genesis affirms this when, in the first account of creation, it places man at the summit of God's
creative activity, as its crown, at the culmination of a process which leads from indistinct chaos to the most
perfect of creatures. Everything in creation is ordered to man and everything is made subject to him: "Fill the
earth and subdue it; and have dominion over ... every living thing" (1:28); this is God's command to the man
and the woman. A similar message is found also in the other account of creation: "The Lord God took the man
and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it" (Gen 2:15). We see here a clear affirmation of the
primacy of man over things; these are made subject to him and entrusted to his responsible care, whereas for no
reason can he be made subject to other men and almost reduced to the level of a thing.

In the biblical narrative, the difference between man and other creatures is shown above all by the fact that only
the creation of man is presented as the result of a special decision on the part of God, a deliberation to establish
a particular and specific bond with the Creator: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen 1:26).
The life which God offers to man is a gift by which God shares something of himself with his creature.

Israel would ponder at length the meaning of this particular bond between man and God. The Book of Sirach
too recognizes that God, in creating human beings, "endowed them with strength like his own, and made them
in his own image" (17:3). The biblical author sees as part of this image not only man's dominion over the world
but also those spiritual faculties which are distinctively human, such as reason, discernment between good and
evil, and free will: "He filled them with knowledge and understanding, and showed them good and evil" (Sir
17:7). The ability to attain truth and freedom are human prerogatives inasmuch as man is created in the image of
his Creator, God who is true and just (cf. Dt 32:4). Man alone, among all visible creatures, is "capable of
knowing and loving his Creator".24 The life which God bestows upon man is much more than mere existence in
time. It is a drive towards fullness of life; it is the seed of an existence which transcends the very limits of time:
"For God created man for incorruption, and made him in the image of his own eternity" (Wis 2:23). 

35. The Yahwist account of creation expresses the same conviction. This ancient narrative speaks of a divine
breath which is breathed into man so that he may come to life: "The Lord God formed man of dust from the
ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being" (Gen 2:7).

The divine origin of this spirit of life explains the perennial dissatisfaction which man feels throughout his days
on earth. Because he is made by God and bears within himself an indelible imprint of God, man is naturally
drawn to God. When he heeds the deepest yearnings of the heart, every man must make his own the words of
truth expressed by Saint Augustine: "You have made us for yourself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until
they rest in you".25

How very significant is the dissatisfaction which marks man's life in Eden as long as his sole point of reference
is the world of plants and animals (cf. Gen 2:20). Only the appearance of the woman, a being who is flesh of his
flesh and bone of his bones (cf. Gen 2:23), and in whom the spirit of God the Creator is also alive, can satisfy
the need for interpersonal dialogue, so vital for human existence. In the other, whether man or woman, there is a
reflection of God himself, the definitive goal and fulfilment of every person.

"What is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?", the Psalmist wonders (Ps
8:4). Compared to the immensity of the universe, man is very small, and yet this very contrast reveals his
greatness: "You have made him little less than a god, and crown him with glory and honour" (Ps 8:5). The glory
of God shines on the face of man. In man the Creator finds his rest, as Saint Ambrose comments with a sense of
awe: "The sixth day is finished and the creation of the world ends with the formation of that masterpiece which
is man, who exercises dominion over all living creatures and is as it were the crown of the universe and the
supreme beauty of every created being. Truly we should maintain a reverential silence, since the Lord rested
from every work he had undertaken in the world. He rested then in the depths of man, he rested in man's mind
and in his thought; after all, he had created man endowed with reason, capable of imitating him, of emulating
his virtue, of hungering for heavenly graces. In these his gifts God reposes, who has said: ?Upon whom shall I
rest, if not upon the one who is humble, contrite in spirit and trembles at my word?' (Is 66:1-2). I thank the Lord
our God who has created so wonderful a work in which to take his rest".26 
36. Unfortunately, God's marvellous plan was marred by the appearance of sin in history. Through sin, man
rebels against his Creator and ends up by worshipping creatures: "They exchanged the truth about God for a lie
and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator" (Rom 1:25). As a result man not only deforms
the image of God in his own person, but is tempted to offences against it in others as well, replacing
relationships of communion by attitudes of distrust, indifference, hostility and even murderous hatred. When
God is not acknowledged as God, the profound meaning of man is betrayed and communion between people is
compromised.

In the life of man, God's image shines forth anew and is again revealed in all its fullness at the coming of the
Son of God in human flesh. "Christ is the image of the invisible God" (Col 1:15), he "reflects the glory of God
and bears the very stamp of his nature" (Heb 1:3). He is the perfect image of the Father.

The plan of life given to the first Adam finds at last its fulfilment in Christ. Whereas the disobedience of Adam
had ruined and marred God's plan for human life and introduced death into the world, the redemptive obedience
of Christ is the source of grace poured out upon the human race, opening wide to everyone the gates of the
kingdom of life (cf. Rom 5:12-21). As the Apostle Paul states: "The first man Adam became a living being; the
last Adam became a life-giving spirit" (1 Cor 15:45).

All who commit themselves to following Christ are given the fullness of life: the divine image is restored,
renewed and brought to perfection in them. God's plan for human beings is this, that they should "be conformed
to the image of his Son" (Rom 8:29). Only thus, in the splendour of this image, can man be freed from the
slavery of idolatry, rebuild lost fellowship and rediscover his true identity. 

"Whoever lives and believes in me shall never die" (Jn 11:26): the gift of eternal life 

37. The life which the Son of God came to give to human beings cannot be reduced to mere existence in time.
The life which was always "in him" and which is the "light of men" (Jn 1:4) consists in being begotten of God
and sharing in the fullness of his love: "To all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to
become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of
God" (Jn 1:12-13).

Sometimes Jesus refers to this life which he came to give simply as "life", and he presents being born of God as
a necessary condition if man is to attain the end for which God has created him: "Unless one is born anew, he
cannot see the kingdom of God" (Jn 3:3). To give this life is the real object of Jesus' mission: he is the one who
"comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world" (Jn 6:33). Thus can he truly say: "He who follows me ...
will have the light of life" (Jn 8:12).

At other times, Jesus speaks of "eternal life". Here the adjective does more than merely evoke a perspective
which is beyond time. The life which Jesus promises and gives is "eternal" because it is a full participation in
the life of the "Eternal One". Whoever believes in Jesus and enters into communion with him has eternal life
(cf. Jn 3:15; 6:40) because he hears from Jesus the only words which reveal and communicate to his existence
the fullness of life. These are the "words of eternal life" which Peter acknowledges in his confession of faith:
"Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; and we have believed, and have come to know,
that you are the Holy One of God" (Jn 6:68-69). Jesus himself, addressing the Father in the great priestly prayer,
declares what eternal life consists in: "This is eternal life, that they may know you the only true God, and Jesus
Christ whom you have sent" (Jn 17:3). To know God and his Son is to accept the mystery of the loving
communion of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit into one's own life, which even now is open to eternal life
because it shares in the life of God. 

38. Eternal life is therefore the life of God himself and at the same time the life of the children of God. As they
ponder this unexpected and inexpressible truth which comes to us from God in Christ, believers cannot fail to
be filled with ever new wonder and unbounded gratitude. They can say in the words of the Apostle John: "See
what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. ... Beloved, we are
God's children now; it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he appears we shall be like
him, for we shall see him as he is" (1 Jn 3:1-2).

Here the Christian truth about life becomes most sublime. The dignity of this life is linked not only to its
beginning, to the fact that it comes from God, but also to its final end, to its destiny of fellowship with God in
knowledge and love of him. In the light of this truth Saint Irenaeus qualifies and completes his praise of man:
"the glory of God" is indeed, "man, living man", but "the life of man consists in the vision of God".27

Immediate consequences arise from this for human life in its earthly state, in which, for that matter, eternal life
already springs forth and begins to grow. Although man instinctively loves life because it is a good, this love
will find further inspiration and strength, and new breadth and depth, in the divine dimensions of this good.
Similarly, the love which every human being has for life cannot be reduced simply to a desire to have sufficient
space for self-expression and for entering into relationships with others; rather, it devel- ops in a joyous
awareness that life can become the "place" where God manifests himself, where we meet him and enter into
communion with him. The life which Jesus gives in no way lessens the value of our existence in time; it takes it
and directs it to its final destiny: "I am the resurrection and the life ... whoever lives and believes in me shall
never die" (Jn 11:25-26).

"From man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting" (Gen 9:5): reverence and love for
every human life 

39. Man's life comes from God; it is his gift, his image and imprint, a sharing in his breath of life. God therefore
is the sole Lord of this life: man cannot do with it as he wills. God himself makes this clear to Noah after the
Flood: "For your own lifeblood, too, I will demand an accounting ... and from man in regard to his fellow man I
will demand an accounting for human life" (Gen 9:5). The biblical text is concerned to emphasize how the
sacredness of life has its foundation in God and in his creative activity: "For God made man in his own image"
(Gen 9:6).

Human life and death are thus in the hands of God, in his power: "In his hand is the life of every living thing
and the breath of all mankind", exclaims Job (12:10). "The Lord brings to death and brings to life; he brings
down to Sheol and raises up" (1 Sam 2:6). He alone can say: "It is I who bring both death and life" (Dt 32:39).

But God does not exercise this power in an arbitrary and threatening way, but rather as part of his care and
loving concern for his creatures. If it is true that human life is in the hands of God, it is no less true that these
are loving hands, like those of a mother who accepts, nurtures and takes care of her child: "I have calmed and
quieted my soul, like a child quieted at its mother's breast; like a child that is quieted is my soul" (Ps 131:2; cf.
Is 49:15; 66:12-13; Hos 11:4). Thus Israel does not see in the history of peoples and in the destiny of
individuals the outcome of mere chance or of blind fate, but rather the results of a loving plan by which God
brings together all the possibilities of life and opposes the powers of death arising from sin: "God did not make
death, and he does not delight in the death of the living. For he created all things that they might exist" (Wis
1:13-14). 

40. The sacredness of life gives rise to its inviolability, written from the beginning in man's heart, in his
conscience. The question: "What have you done?" (Gen 4:10), which God addresses to Cain after he has killed
his brother Abel, interprets the experience of every person: in the depths of his conscience, man is always
reminded of the inviolability of life-his own life and that of others-as something which does not belong to him,
because it is the property and gift of God the Creator and Father.

The commandment regarding the inviolability of human life reverberates at the heart of the "ten words" in the
covenant of Sinai (cf. Ex 34:28). In the first place that commandment prohibits murder: "You shall not kill" (Ex
20:13); "do not slay the innocent and righteous" (Ex 23:7). But, as is brought out in Israel's later legislation, it
also prohibits all personal injury inflicted on another (cf. Ex 21:12-27). Of course we must recognize that in the
Old Testament this sense of the value of life, though already quite marked, does not yet reach the refinement
found in the Sermon on the Mount. This is apparent in some aspects of the current penal legislation, which
provided for severe forms of corporal punishment and even the death penalty. But the overall message, which
the New Testament will bring to perfection, is a forceful appeal for respect for the inviolability of physical life
and the integrity of the person. It culminates in the positive commandment which obliges us to be responsible
for our neighbour as for ourselves: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself" (Lev 19:18). 

41. The commandment "You shall not kill", included and more fully expressed in the positive command of love
for one's neighbour, is reaffirmed in all its force by the Lord Jesus. To the rich young man who asks him:
"Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?", Jesus replies: "If you would enter life, keep the
commandments" (Mt 19:16,17). And he quotes, as the first of these: "You shall not kill" (Mt 19:18). In the
Sermon on the Mount, Jesus demands from his disciples a righteousness which surpasses that of the Scribes and
Pharisees, also with regard to respect for life: "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ?You shall not
kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment'. But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother
shall be liable to judgment" (Mt 5:21-22).

By his words and actions Jesus further unveils the positive requirements of the commandment regarding the
inviolability of life. These requirements were already present in the Old Testament, where legislation dealt with
protecting and defending life when it was weak and threatened: in the case of foreigners, widows, orphans, the
sick and the poor in general, including children in the womb (cf. Ex 21:22; 22:20-26). With Jesus these positive
requirements assume new force and urgency, and are revealed in all their breadth and depth: they range from
caring for the life of one's brother (whether a blood brother, someone belonging to the same people, or a
foreigner living in the land of Israel) to showing concern for the stranger, even to the point of loving one's
enemy.

A stranger is no longer a stranger for the person who mustbecome a neighbour to someone in need, to the point
of accepting responsibility for his life, as the parable of the Good Samaritan shows so clearly (cf. Lk 10:25-37).
Even an enemy ceases to be an enemy for the person who is obliged to love him (cf. Mt 5:38-48; Lk 6:27-35),
to "do good" to him (cf. Lk 6:27, 33, 35) and to respond to his immediate needs promptly and with no
expectation of repayment (cf. Lk 6:34-35). The height of this love is to pray for one's enemy. By so doing we
achieve harmony with the providential love of God: "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those
who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on
the evil and on the good and sends rain on the just and on the unjust" (Mt 5:44-45; cf. Lk 6:28, 35).

Thus the deepest element of God's commandment to protect human life is the requirement to show reverence
and love for every person and the life of every person. This is the teaching which the Apostle Paul, echoing the
words of Jesus, address- es to the Christians in Rome: "The commandments, ?You shall not commit adultery,
You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet', and any other commandment, are summed up in this
sentence, ?You shall love your neighbour as yourself'. Love does no wrong to a neighbour; therefore love is the
fulfilling of the law" (Rom 13:9-10).

"Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it" (Gen 1:28): man's responsibility for life 

42. To defend and promote life, to show reverence and love for it, is a task which God entrusts to every man,
calling him as his living image to share in his own lordship over the world: "God blessed them, and God said to
them, ?Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and
over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth' " (Gen 1:28).

The biblical text clearly shows the breadth and depth of the lordship which God bestows on man. It is a matter
first of all of dominion over the earth and over every living creature, as the Book of Wisdom makes clear: "O
God of my fathers and Lord of mercy ... by your wisdom you have formed man, to have dominion over the
creatures you have made, and rule the world in holiness and righteousness" (Wis 9:1, 2-3). The Psalmist too
extols the dominion given to man as a sign of glory and honour from his Creator: "You have given him
dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet, all sheep and oxen, and also the
beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, whatever passes along the paths of the sea" (Ps
8:6-8).

As one called to till and look after the garden of the world (cf. Gen 2:15), man has a specific responsibility
towards the environment in which he lives, towards the creation which God has put at the service of his
personal dignity, of his life, not only for the present but also for future generations. It is the ecological question-
ranging from the preservation of the natural habitats of the different species of animals and of other forms of
life to "human ecology" properly speaking 28 - which finds in the Bible clear and strong ethical direction,
leading to a solution which respects the great good of life, of every life. In fact, "the do- minion granted to man
by the Creator is not an absolute power, nor can one speak of a freedom to ?use and misuse', or to dispose of
things as one pleases. The limitation imposed from the beginning by the Creator himself and expressed
symbolically by the prohibition not to ?eat of the fruit of the tree' (cf. Gen 2:16-17) shows clearly enough that,
when it comes to the natural world, we are subject not only to biological laws but also to moral ones, which
cannot be violated with impunity".29 

43. A certain sharing by man in God's lordship is also evident in the specific responsibility which he is given for
human life as such. It is a responsibility which reaches its highest point in the giving of life through procreation
by man and woman in marriage. As the Second Vatican Council teaches: "God himself who said, ?It is not good
for man to be alone' (Gen 2:18) and ?who made man from the beginning male and female' (Mt 19:4), wished to
share with man a certain special participation in his own creative work. Thus he blessed male and female
saying: ?Increase and multiply' (Gen 1:28). 30

By speaking of "a certain special participation" of man and woman in the "creative work" of God, the Council
wishes to point out that having a child is an event which is deeply human and full of religious meaning, insofar
as it involves both the spouses, who form "one flesh" (Gen 2:24), and God who makes himself present. As I
wrote in my Letter to Families: "When a new person is born of the conjugal union of the two, he brings with
him into the world a particular image and likeness of God himself: the genealogy of the person is inscribed in
the very biology of generation. In affirming that the spouses, as parents, cooperate with God the Creator in
conceiving and giving birth to a new human being, we are not speaking merely with reference to the laws of
biology. Instead, we wish to emphasize that God himself is present in human fatherhood and motherhood quite
differently than he is present in all other instances of begetting ?on earth'. Indeed, God alone is the source of
that ?image and likeness' which is proper to the human being, as it was received at Creation. Begetting is the
continuation of Creation".31

This is what the Bible teaches in direct and eloquent language when it reports the joyful cry of the first woman,
"the mother of all the living" (Gen 3:20). Aware that God has intervened, Eve exclaims: "I have begotten a man
with the help of the Lord" (Gen 4:1). In procreation therefore, through the communication of life from parents
to child, God's own image and likeness is transmitted, thanks to the creation of the immortal soul. 32 The
beginning of the "book of the genealogy of Adam" expresses it in this way: "When God created man, he made
him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and called them man when
they were created. When Adam had lived a hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his own
likeness, after his image, and named him Seth" (Gen 5:1-3). It is precisely in their role as co-workers with God
who transmits his image to the new creature that we see the greatness of couples who are ready "to cooperate
with the love of the Creator and the Saviour, who through them will enlarge and enrich his own family day by
day".33 This is why the Bishop Amphilochius extolled "holy matrimony, chosen and elevated above all other
earthly gifts" as "the begetter of humanity, the creator of images of God".34

Thus, a man and woman joined in matrimony become partners in a divine undertaking: through the act of
procreation, God's gift is accepted and a new life opens to the future.
But over and above the specific mission of parents, the task of accepting and serving life involves everyone; and
this task must be fulfilled above all towards life when it is at its weakest. It is Christ himself who reminds us of
this when he asks to be loved and served in his brothers and sisters who are suffering in any way: the hungry,
the thirsty, the foreigner, the naked, the sick, the impris- oned ... Whatever is done to each of them is done to
Christ himself (cf. Mt 25:31-46). 

"For you formed my inmost being" (Ps 139:13): the dignity of the unborn child  

44. Human life finds itself most vulnerable when it enters the world and when it leaves the realm of time to
embark upon eternity. The word of God frequently repeats the call to show care and respect, above all where
life is undermined by sickness and old age. Although there are no direct and explicit calls to protect human life
at its very beginning, specifically life not yet born, and life nearing its end, this can easily be explained by the
fact that the mere possibility of harming, attacking, or actually denying life in these circumstances is completely
foreign to the religious and cultural way of thinking of the People of God.

In the Old Testament, sterility is dreaded as a curse, while numerous offspring are viewed as a blessing: "Sons
are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward" (Ps 127:3; cf. Ps 128:3-4). This belief is also based
on Israel's awareness of being the people of the Covenant, called to increase in accordance with the promise
made to Abraham: "Look towards heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them ... so shall your
descendants be" (Gen 15:5). But more than anything else, at work here is the certainty that the life which
parents transmit has its origins in God. We see this attested in the many biblical passages which respectfully and
lovingly speak of conception, of the forming of life in the mother's womb, of giving birth and of the intimate
connection between the initial moment of life and the action of God the Creator.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you" (Jer 1:5): the life
of every individual, from its very beginning, is part of God's plan. Job, from the depth of his pain, stops to
contemplate the work of God who miraculously formed his body in his mother's womb. Here he finds reason for
trust, and he expresses his belief that there is a divine plan for his life: "You have fashioned and made me; will
you then turn and destroy me? Remember that you have made me of clay; and will you turn me to dust again?
Did you not pour me out like milk and curdle me like cheese? You clothed me with skin and flesh, and knit me
together with bones and sinews. You have granted me life and steadfast love; and your care has preserved my
spirit" (Job 10:8-12). Expressions of awe and wonder at God's intervention in the life of a child in its mother's
womb occur again and again in the Psalms. 35

How can anyone think that even a single moment of this marvellous process of the unfolding of life could be
separated from the wise and loving work of the Creator, and left prey to human caprice? Certainly the mother of
the seven brothers did not think so; she professes her faith in God, both the source and guarantee of life from its
very conception, and the foundation of the hope of new life beyond death: "I do not know how you came into
being in my womb. It was not I who gave you life and breath, nor I who set in order the elements within each of
you. Therefore the Creator of the world, who shaped the beginning of man and devised the origin of all things,
will in his mercy give life and breath back to you again, since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his
laws" (2 Mac 7:22-23). 

45. The New Testament revelation confirms the indisputable recognition of the value of life from its very
beginning. The exaltation of fruitfulness and the eager expectation of life resound in the words with which
Elizabeth rejoices in her pregnancy: "The Lord has looked on me ... to take away my reproach among men" (Lk
1:25). And even more so, the value of the person from the moment of conception is celebrated in the meeting
between the Virgin Mary and Elizabeth, and between the two children whom they are carrying in the womb. It
is precisely the children who reveal the advent of the Messianic age: in their meeting, the redemptive power of
the presence of the Son of God among men first becomes operative. As Saint Ambrose writes: "The arrival of
Mary and the blessings of the Lord's presence are also speedily declared ... Elizabeth was the first to hear the
voice; but John was the first to expe- rience grace. She heard according to the order of nature; he leaped because
of the mystery. She recognized the arrival of Mary; he the arrival of the Lord. The woman recognized the
woman's arrival; the child, that of the child. The women speak of grace; the babies make it effective from within
to the advantage of their mothers who, by a double miracle, prophesy under the inspiration of their children.
The infant leaped, the mother was filled with the Spirit. The mother was not filled before the son, but after the
son was filled with the Holy Spirit, he filled his mother too".36 

"I kept my faith even when I said, ?I am greatly afflicted' " (Ps 116:10): life in old age and at times of
suffering 

46. With regard to the last moments of life too, it would be anachronistic to expect biblical revelation to make
express reference to present-day issues concerning respect for elderly and sick persons, or to condemn explicitly
attempts to hasten their end by force. The cultural and religious context of the Bible is in no way touched by
such temptations; indeed, in that context the wisdom and experience of the elderly are recognized as a unique
source of enrichment for the family and for society.

Old age is characterized by dignity and surrounded with reverence (cf. 2 Mac 6:23). The just man does not seek
to be delivered from old age and its burden; on the contrary his prayer is this: "You, O Lord, are my hope, my
trust, O Lord, from my youth ... so even to old age and grey hairs, O God, do not forsake me, till I proclaim
your might to all the generations to come" (Ps 71:5, 18). The ideal of the Messianic age is presented as a time
when "no more shall there be ... an old man who does not fill out his days" (Is 65:20).

In old age, how should one face the inevitable decline of life? How should one act in the face of death? The
believer knows that his life is in the hands of God: "You, O Lord, hold my lot" (cf. Ps 16:5), and he accepts
from God the need to die: "This is the decree from the Lord for all flesh, and how can you reject the good
pleasure of the Most High?" (Sir 41:3-4). Man is not the master of life, nor is he the master of death. In life and
in death, he has to entrust himself completely to the "good pleasure of the Most High", to his loving plan.

In moments of sickness too, man is called to have the same trust in the Lord and to renew his fundamental faith
in the One who "heals all your diseases" (cf. Ps 103:3). When every hope of good health seems to fade before a
person's eyes-so as to make him cry out: "My days are like an evening shadow; I wither away like grass" (Ps
102:11)- even then the believer is sustained by an unshakable faith in God's life-giving power. Illness does not
drive such a person to despair and to seek death, but makes him cry out in hope: "I kept my faith, even when I
said, ?I am greatly afflicted' " (Ps 116:10); "O Lord my God, I cried to you for help, and you have healed me. O
Lord, you have brought up my soul from Sheol, restored me to life from among those gone down to the pit" (Ps
30:2-3). 

47. The mission of Jesus, with the many healings he performed, shows God's great concern even for man's
bodily life. Jesus, as "the physician of the body and of the spirit",37 was sent by the Father to proclaim the good
news to the poor and to heal the brokenhearted (cf. Lk 4:18; Is 61:1). Later, when he sends his disciples into the
world, he gives them a mission, a mission in which healing the sick goes hand in hand with the proclamation of
the Gospel: "And preach as you go, saying, ?The kingdom of heaven is at hand'. Heal the sick, raise the dead,
cleanse lepers, cast out demons" (Mt 10:7-8; cf. Mk 6:13; 16:18).

Certainly the life of the body in its earthly state is not an absolute good for the believer, especially as he may be
asked to give up his life for a greater good. As Jesus says: "Whoever would save his life will lose it; and
whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel's will save it" (Mk 8:35). The New Testament gives many
different examples of this. Jesus does not hesitate to sacrifice himself and he freely makes of his life an offering
to the Father (cf. Jn 10:17) and to those who belong to him (cf. Jn 10:15). The death of John the Baptist,
precursor of the Saviour, also testifies that earthly existence is not an absolute good; what is more important is
remaining faithful to the word of the Lord even at the risk of one's life (cf. Mk 6:17-29). Stephen, losing his
earthly life because of his faithful witness to the Lord's Resurrection, follows in the Master's footsteps and
meets those who are stoning him with words of forgiveness (cf. Acts 7:59-60), thus becoming the first of a
countless host of martyrs whom the Church has venerated since the very beginning.

No one, however, can arbitrarily choose whether to live or die; the absolute master of such a decision is the
Creator alone, in whom "we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28).

"All who hold her fast will live" (Bar 4:1): from the law of Sinai to the gift of the Spirit 

48. Life is indelibly marked by a truth of its own. By accepting God's gift, man is obliged to maintain life in this
truth which is essential to it. To detach oneself from this truth is to condemn oneself to meaninglessness and
unhappiness, and possibly to become a threat to the existence of others, since the barriers guaranteeing respect
for life and the defence of life, in every circumstance, have been broken down.

The truth of life is revealed by God's commandment. The word of the Lord shows concretely the course which
life must follow if it is to respect its own truth and to preserve its own dignity. The protection of life is not only
ensured by the spe- cific commandment "You shall not kill" (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17); the entire Law of the Lord
serves to protect life, because it reveals that truth in which life finds its full meaning.

It is not surprising, therefore, that God's Covenant with his people is so closely linked to the perspective of life,
also in its bodily dimension. In that Covenant, God's commandment is offered as the path of life: "I have set
before you this day life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God which I
command you this day, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his
commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God
will bless you in the land which you are entering to take possession of" (Dt 30:15-16). What is at stake is not
only the land of Canaan and the existence of the people of Israel, but also the world of today and of the future,
and the existence of all humanity. In fact, it is altogether impossible for life to remain authentic and complete
once it is detached from the good; and the good, in its turn, is essentially bound to the commandments of the
Lord, that is, to the "law of life" (Sir 17:11). The good to be done is not added to life as a burden which weighs
on it, since the very purpose of life is that good and only by doing it can life be built up.

It is thus the Law as a whole which fully protects human life. This explains why it is so hard to remain faithful
to the commandment "You shall not kill" when the other "words of life" (cf. Acts 7:38) with which this
commandment is bound up are not observed. Detached from this wider framework, the commandment is
destined to become nothing more than an obligation imposed from without, and very soon we begin to look for
its limits and try to find mitigating factors and exceptions. Only when people are open to the fullness of the
truth about God, man and history will the words "You shall not kill" shine forth once more as a good for man in
himself and in his relations with others. In such a perspective we can grasp the full truth of the passage of the
Book of Deuteronomy which Jesus repeats in reply to the first temptation: "Man does not live by bread alone,
but ... by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord" (Dt 8:3; cf. Mt 4:4).

It is by listening to the word of the Lord that we are able to live in dignity and justice. It is by observing the Law
of God that we are able to bring forth fruits of life and happiness: "All who hold her fast will live, and those
who forsake her will die" (Bar 4:1). 

49. The history of Israel shows how difficult it is to remain faithful to the Law of life which God has inscribed
in human hearts and which he gave on Sinai to the people of the Covenant. When the people look for ways of
living which ignore God's plan, it is the Prophets in particular who forcefully remind them that the Lord alone is
the authentic source of life. Thus Jeremiah writes: "My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken
me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns, that can hold no
water" (2:13). The Prophets point an accusing finger at those who show contempt for life and violate people's
rights: "They trample the head of the poor into the dust of the earth" (Amos 2:7); "they have filled this place
with the blood of innocents" (Jer 19:4). Among them, the Prophet Ezekiel frequently condemns the city of
Jerusalem, calling it "the bloody city" (22:2; 24:6, 9), the "city that sheds blood in her own midst" (22:3).

But while the Prophets condemn offences against life, they are concerned above all to awaken hope for a new
principle of life, capable of bringing about a renewed relationship with God and with others, and of opening up
new and extraordinary possibilities for understanding and carrying out all the demands inherent in the Gospel of
life. This will only be possible thanks to the gift of God who purifies and renews: "I will sprinkle clean water
upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new
heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you" (Ezek 36:25-26; cf. Jer 31:34). This "new heart"
will make it possible to appreciate and achieve the deepest and most authentic meaning of life: namely, that of
being a gift which is fully realized in the giving of self. This is the splendid message about the value of life
which comes to us from the figure of the Servant of the Lord: "When he makes himself an offering for sin, he
shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his life ... he shall see the fruit of the trav- ail of his soul and be
satisfied" (Is 53:10, 11).

It is in the coming of Jesus of Nazareth that the Law is fulfilled and that a new heart is given through his Spirit.
Jesus does not deny the Law but brings it to fulfilment (cf. Mt 5:17): the Law and the Prophets are summed up
in the golden rule of mutual love (cf. Mt 7:12). In Jesus the Law becomes once and for all the "gospel", the
good news of God's lordship over the world, which brings all life back to its roots and its original purpose. This
is the New Law, "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:2), and its fundamental expression,
following the example of the Lord who gave his life for his friends (cf. Jn 15:13), is the gift of self in love for
one's brothers and sisters: "We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren"
(1 Jn 3:14). This is the law of freedom, joy and blessedness.

"They shall look on him whom they have pierced" (Jn 19:37): the Gospel of life is brought to fulfilment on
the tree of the Cross 

50. At the end of this chapter, in which we have reflected on the Christian message about life, I would like to
pause with each one of you to contemplate the One who was pierced and who draws all people to himself (cf. Jn
19:37; 12:32). Looking at "the spectacle" of the Cross (cf. Lk 23:48) we shall discover in this glorious tree the
fulfilment and the complete revelation of the whole Gospel of life.

In the early afternoon of Good Friday, "there was darkness over the whole land ... while the sun's light failed;
and the curtain of the temple was torn in two" (Lk 23:44, 45). This is the symbol of a great cosmic disturbance
and a massive conflict between the forces of good and the forces of evil, between life and death. Today we too
find ourselves in the midst of a dramatic conflict between the "culture of death" and the "culture of life". But the
glory of the Cross is not overcome by this darkness; rather, it shines forth ever more radiantly and brightly, and
is revealed as the centre, meaning and goal of all history and of every human life.

Jesus is nailed to the Cross and is lifted up from the earth. He experiences the moment of his greatest
"powerlessness", and his life seems completely delivered to the derision of his adversaries and into the hands of
his executioners: he is mocked, jeered at, insulted (cf. Mk 15:24-36). And yet, precisely amid all this, having
seen him breathe his last, the Roman centurion exclaims: "Truly this man was the Son of God!" (Mk 15:39). It
is thus, at the moment of his greatest weakness, that the the Son of God is revealed for who he is: on the Cross
his glory is made manifest.

By his death, Jesus sheds light on the meaning of the life and death of every human being. Before he dies, Jesus
prays to the Father, asking forgiveness for his persecutors (cf. Lk 23:34), and to the criminal who asks him to
remember him in his kingdom he replies: "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise" (Lk
23:43). After his death "the tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were
raised" (Mt 27:52). The salvation wrought by Jesus is the bestowal of life and resurrection. Throughout his
earthly life, Jesus had indeed bestowed salvation by healing and doing good to all (cf. Acts 10:38). But his
miracles, healings and even his raising of the dead were signs of another salvation, a salvation which consists in
the forgiveness of sins, that is, in setting man free from his greatest sickness and in raising him to the very life
of God.

On the Cross, the miracle of the serpent lifted up by Moses in the desert (Jn 3:14-15; cf. Num 21:8-9) is
renewed and brought to full and definitive perfection. Today too, by looking upon the one who was pierced,
every person whose life is threatened encounters the sure hope of finding freedom and redemption. 

51. But there is yet another particular event which moves me deeply when I consider it. "When Jesus had
received the vinegar, he said, ?It is finished'; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit" (Jn 19:30).
Afterwards, the Roman soldier "pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water" (Jn
19:34).

Everything has now reached its complete fulfilment. The "giving up" of the spirit describes Jesus' death, a death
like that of every other human being, but it also seems to allude to the "gift of the Spirit", by which Jesus
ransoms us from death and opens before us a new life.

It is the very life of God which is now shared with man. It is the life which through the Sacraments of the
Church-symbolized by the blood and water flowing from Christ's side-is continually given to God's children,
making them the people of the New Covenant. From the Cross, the source of life, the "people of life" is born
and increases.

The contemplation of the Cross thus brings us to the very heart of all that has taken place. Jesus, who upon
entering into the world said: "I have come, O God, to do your will" (cf. Heb 10:9), made himself obedient to the
Father in everything and, "having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end" (Jn 13:1),
giving himself completely for them.

He who had come "not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mk 10:45), attains
on the Cross the heights of love: "Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends"
(Jn 15:13). And he died for us while we were yet sinners (cf. Rom 5:8).

In this way Jesus proclaims that life finds its centre, its meaning and its fulfilment when it is given up.

At this point our meditation becomes praise and thanksgiving, and at the same time urges us to imitate Christ
and follow in his footsteps (cf. 1 Pt 2:21).

We too are called to give our lives for our brothers and sisters, and thus to realize in the fullness of truth the
meaning and destiny of our existence.

We shall be able to do this because you, O Lord, have given us the example and have bestowed on us the power
of your Spirit. We shall be able to do this if every day, with you and like you, we are obedient to the Father and
do his will.

Grant, therefore, that we may listen with open and generous hearts to every word which proceeds from the
mouth of God. Thus we shall learn not only to obey the commandment not to kill human life, but also to revere
life, to love it and to foster it.

CHAPTER III - YOU SHALL NOT KILL  

 GOD'S HOLY LAW 

"If you would enter life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17): Gospel and commandment 

52. "And behold, one came up to him, saying, ?Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?' " (Mt
19:6). Jesus replied, "If you would enter life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17). The Teacher is speaking
about eternal life, that is, a sharing in the life of God himself. This life is attained through the observance of the
Lord's commandments, including the commandment "You shall not kill". This is the first precept from the
Decalogue which Jesus quotes to the young man who asks him what commandments he should observe: "Jesus
said, ?You shall not kill, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal...' " (Mt 19:18).

God's commandment is never detached from his love: it is always a gift meant for man's growth and joy. As
such, it represents an essential and indispensable aspect of the Gospel, actually becoming "gospel" itself: joyful
good news. The Gospel of life is both a great gift of God and an exacting task for humanity. It gives rise to
amazement and gratitude in the person graced with freedom, and it asks to be welcomed, preserved and
esteemed, with a deep sense of responsibility. In giving life to man, God demands that he love, respect and
promote life. The gift thus becomes a commandment, and the commandment is itself a gift.

Man, as the living image of God, is willed by his Creator to be ruler and lord. Saint Gregory of Nyssa writes
that "God made man capable of carrying out his role as king of the earth ... Man was created in the image of the
One who governs the universe. Everything demonstrates that from the beginning man's nature was marked by
royalty... Man is a king. Created to exercise dominion over the world, he was given a likeness to the king of the
universe; he is the living image who participates by his dignity in the perfection of the divine archetype".38
Called to be fruitful and multiply, to subdue the earth and to exercise dominion over other lesser creatures (cf.
Gen 1:28), man is ruler and lord not only over things but especially over himself, 39 and in a certain sense, over
the life which he has received and which he is able to transmit through procreation, carried out with love and
respect for God's plan. Man's lordship however is not absolute, but ministerial: it is a real reflection of the
unique and infinite lordship of God. Hence man must exercise it with wisdom and love, sharing in the boundless
wisdom and love of God. And this comes about through obedience to God's holy Law: a free and joyful
obedience (cf. Ps 119), born of and fostered by an awareness that the precepts of the Lord are a gift of grace
entrusted to man always and solely for his good, for the preservation of his personal dignity and the pursuit of
his happiness.

With regard to things, but even more with regard to life, man is not the absolute master and final judge, but
rather-and this is where his incomparable greatness lies-he is the "minister of God's plan".40

Life is entrusted to man as a treasure which must not be squandered, as a talent which must be used well. Man
must render an account of it to his Master (cf. Mt 25:14-30; Lk 19:12-27).

From man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting for human life" (Gen 9:5): human life
is sacred and inviolable  

53. "Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves ?the creative action of God', and it remains
forever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its
beginning until its end: no one can, in any circumstance, claim for himself the right to destroy directly an
innocent human being".41 With these words the Instruction Donum Vitae sets forth the central content of God's
revelation on the sacredness and inviolability of human life.

Sacred Scripture in fact presents the precept "You shall not kill" as a divine commandment (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17).
As I have already emphasized, this commandment is found in the Deca- logue, at the heart of the Covenant
which the Lord makes with his chosen people; but it was already contained in the original covenant between
God and humanity after the purifying punishment of the Flood, caused by the spread of sin and violence (cf.
Gen 9:5-6).

God proclaims that he is absolute Lord of the life of man, who is formed in his image and likeness (cf. Gen
1:26-28). Human life is thus given a sacred and inviolable character, which reflects the inviolability of the
Creator himself. Precisely for this reason God will severely judge every violation of the commandment "You
shall not kill", the commandment which is at the basis of all life together in society. He is the "goel", the
defender of the innocent (cf. Gen 4:9-15; Is 41:14; Jer 50:34; Ps 19:14). God thus shows that he does not delight
in the death of the living (cf. Wis 1:13). Only Satan can delight therein: for through his envy death entered the
world (cf. Wis 2:24). He who is "a murderer from the beginning", is also "a liar and the father of lies" (Jn 8:44).
By deceiving man he leads him to projects of sin and death, making them appear as goals and fruits of life. 

54. As explicitly formulated, the precept "You shall not kill" is strongly negative: it indicates the extreme limit
which can never be exceeded. Implicitly, however, it encourages a positive attitude of absolute respect for life;
it leads to the promotion of life and to progress along the way of a love which gives, receives and serves. The
people of the Covenant, although slowly and with some contradictions, progressively matured in this way of
thinking, and thus prepared for the great proclamation of Jesus that the commandment to love one's neighbour is
like the commandment to love God; "on these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets" (cf. Mt
22:36-40). Saint Paul emphasizes that "the commandment ... you shall not kill ... and any other commandment,
are summed up in this phrase: ?You shall love your neighbour as yourself' " (Rom 13:9; cf. Gal 5:14). Taken up
and brought to fulfilment in the New Law, the commandment "You shall not kill" stands as an indispensable
condition for being able "to enter life" (cf. Mt 19:16-19). In this same perspective, the words of the Apostle
John have a categorical ring: "Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has
eternal life abiding in him" (1 Jn 3:15).

From the beginning, the living Tradition of the Church-as shown by the Didache, the most ancient non-biblical
Christian writing-categorically repeated the commandment "You shall not kill": "There are two ways, a way of
life and a way of death; there is a great difference between them... In accordance with the precept of the
teaching: you shall not kill ... you shall not put a child to death by abortion nor kill it once it is born ... The way
of death is this: ... they show no compassion for the poor, they do not suffer with the suffering, they do not
acknowledge their Creator, they kill their children and by abortion cause God's creatures to perish; they drive
away the needy, oppress the suffering, they are advocates of the rich and unjust judges of the poor; they are
filled with every sin. May you be able to stay ever apart, o children, from all these sins!". 42

As time passed, the Church's Tradition has always consistently taught the absolute and unchanging value of the
commandment "You shall not kill". It is a known fact that in the first centuries, murder was put among the three
most serious sins-along with apostasy and adultery-and required a particularly heavy and lengthy public
penance before the repentant murderer could be granted forgiveness and readmission to the ecclesial
community. 

55. This should not cause surprise: to kill a human being, in whom the image of God is present, is a particularly
serious sin. Only God is the master of life! Yet from the beginning, faced with the many and often tragic cases
which occur in the life of individuals and society, Christian reflection has sought a fuller and deeper
understanding of what God's commandment prohibits and prescribes. 43 There are in fact situations in which
values proposed by God's Law seem to involve a genuine paradox. This happens for example in the case of
legitimate defence, in which the right to protect one's own life and the duty not to harm someone else's life are
difficult to reconcile in practice. Certainly, the intrinsic value of life and the duty to love oneself no less than
others are the basis of a true right to self-defence. The demanding commandment of love of neighbour, set forth
in the Old Testament and confirmed by Jesus, itself presupposes love of oneself as the basis of comparison:
"You shall love your neighbour as yourself " (Mk 12:31). Consequently, no one can renounce the right to self-
defence out of lack of love for life or for self. This can only be done in virtue of a heroic love which deepens
and transfigures the love of self into a radical self-offering, according to the spirit of the Gospel Beatitudes (cf.
Mt 5:38-40). The sublime example of this self-offering is the Lord Jesus himself.

Moreover, "legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's
life, the common good of the family or of the State".44 Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the
aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is
attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible
because of a lack of the use of reason. 45 

56. This is the context in which to place the problem of the death penalty. On this matter there is a growing
tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that
it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in
line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the
punishment which society inflicts is "to redress the disorder caused by the offence".46 Public authority must
redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the
crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also
fulfils the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the
offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated. 47

It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully
evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of
absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however,
as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not
practically non-existent.

In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: "If bloodless
means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of
persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete
conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person".48 

57. If such great care must be taken to respect every life, even that of criminals and unjust aggressors, the
commandment "You shall not kill" has absolute value when it refers to the innocent person. And all the more so
in the case of weak and defenceless human beings, who find their ultimate defence against the arrogance and
caprice of others only in the absolute binding force of God's commandment.

In effect, the absolute inviolability of innocent human life is a moral truth clearly taught by Sacred Scripture,
constantly upheld in the Church's Tradition and consistently proposed by her Magisterium. This consistent
teaching is the evident result of that "supernatural sense of the faith" which, inspired and sustained by the Holy
Spirit, safeguards the People of God from error when "it shows universal agreement in matters of faith and
morals".49

Faced with the progressive weakening in individual consciences and in society of the sense of the absolute and
grave moral illicitness of the direct taking of all innocent human life, especially at its beginning and at its end,
the Church's Magisterium has spoken out with increasing frequency in defence of the sacredness and
inviolability of human life. The Papal Magisterium, particularly insistent in this regard, has always been
seconded by that of the Bishops, with numerous and comprehensive doctrinal and pastoral documents issued
either by Episcopal Conferences or by individual Bishops. The Second Vatican Council also addressed the
matter forcefully, in a brief but incisive passage. 50

Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, and in communion with the
Bishops of the Catholic Church, I confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is
always gravely immoral. This doctrine, based upon that unwritten law which man, in the light of reason, finds in
his own heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15), is reaffirmed by Sacred Scripture, transmitted by the Tradition of the Church
and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. 51

The deliberate decision to deprive an innocent human being of his life is always morally evil and can never be
licit either as an end in itself or as a means to a good end. It is in fact a grave act of disobedience to the moral
law, and indeed to God himself, the author and guarantor of that law; it contradicts the fundamental virtues of
justice and charity. "Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether
a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person
who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for
another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly. Nor can
any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action".52

As far as the right to life is concerned, every innocent human being is absolutely equal to all others. This
equality is the basis of all authentic social relationships which, to be truly such, can only be founded on truth
and justice, recognizing and protecting every man and woman as a person and not as an object to be used.
Before the moral norm which prohibits the direct taking of the life of an innocent human being "there are no
privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the ?
poorest of the poor' on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal".53 

"Your eyes beheld my unformed substance" (Ps 139:16): the unspeakable crime of abortion 

58. Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it
particularly serious and deplorable. The Second Vatican Council defines abortion, together with infanticide, as
an "unspeakable crime".54

But today, in many people's consciences, the perception of its gravity has become progressively obscured. The
acceptance of abortion in the popular mind, in behaviour and even in law itself, is a telling sign of an extremely
dangerous crisis of the moral sense, which is becoming more and more incapable of distinguishing between
good and evil, even when the fundamental right to life is at stake. Given such a grave situation, we need now
more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name, without
yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception. In this regard the reproach of the
Prophet is extremely straightforward: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness" (Is 5:20). Especially in the case of abortion there is a widespread use of ambiguous
terminology, such as "interruption of pregnancy", which tends to hide abortion's true nature and to attenuate its
seriousness in public opinion. Perhaps this linguistic phenomenon is itself a symptom of an uneasiness of
conscience. But no word has the power to change the reality of things: procured abortion is the deliberate and
direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence,
extending from conception to birth.

The moral gravity of procured abortion is apparent in all its truth if we recognize that we are dealing with
murder and, in particular, when we consider the specific elements involved. The one eliminated is a human
being at the very beginning of life. No one more absolutely innocent could be imagined. In no way could this
human being ever be considered an aggressor, much less an unjust aggressor! He or she is weak, defenceless,
even to the point of lacking that minimal form of defence consisting in the poignant power of a newborn baby's
cries and tears. The unborn child is totally entrusted to the protection and care of the woman carrying him or her
in the womb. And yet sometimes it is precisely the mother herself who makes the decision and asks for the child
to be eliminated, and who then goes about having it done.

It is true that the decision to have an abortion is often tragic and painful for the mother, insofar as the decision
to rid herself of the fruit of conception is not made for purely selfish reasons or out of convenience, but out of a
desire to protect certain important values such as her own health or a decent standard of living for the other
members of the family. Sometimes it is feared that the child to be born would live in such conditions that it
would be better if the birth did not take place. Nevertheless, these reasons and others like them, however serious
and tragic, can never justify the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. 

59. As well as the mother, there are often other people too who decide upon the death of the child in the womb.
In the first place, the father of the child may be to blame, not only when he di- rectly pressures the woman to
have an abortion, but also when he indirectly encourages such a decision on her part by leaving her alone to
face the problems of pregnancy: 55 in this way the family is thus mortally wounded and profaned in its nature as
a community of love and in its vocation to be the "sanctuary of life". Nor can one overlook the pressures which
sometimes come from the wider family circle and from friends. Sometimes the woman is subjected to such
strong pressure that she feels psychologically forced to have an abortion: certainly in this case moral
responsibility lies particularly with those who have directly or indirectly obliged her to have an abortion.
Doctors and nurses are also responsible, when they place at the service of death skills which were acquired for
promoting life.

But responsibility likewise falls on the legislators who have promoted and approved abortion laws, and, to the
extent that they have a say in the matter, on the administrators of the health-care centres where abortions are
performed. A general and no less serious responsibility lies with those who have encouraged the spread of an
attitude of sexual permissiveness and a lack of esteem for motherhood, and with those who should have
ensured-but did not-effective family and social policies in support of families, especially larger families and
those with particular financial and educational needs. Finally, one cannot overlook the network of complicity
which reaches out to include international institutions, foundations and associations which systematically
campaign for the legalization and spread of abortion in the world. In this sense abortion goes beyond the
responsibility of individuals and beyond the harm done to them, and takes on a distinctly social dimension. It is
a most serious wound inflicted on society and its culture by the very people who ought to be society's promoters
and defenders. As I wrote in my Letter to Families, "we are facing an immense threat to life: not only to the life
of individuals but also to that of civilization itself".56 We are facing what can be called a "structure of sin"
which opposes human life not yet born. 

60. Some people try to justify abortion by claiming that the result of conception, at least up to a certain number
of days, cannot yet be considered a personal human life. But in fact, "from the time that the ovum is fertilized, a
life is begun which is neither that of the father nor the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with his
own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already. This has always been clear, and ...
modern genetic science offers clear confirmation. It has demonstrated that from the first instant there is
established the programme of what this living being will be: a person, this individual person with his
characteristic aspects already well determined. Right from fertilization the adventure of a human life begins,
and each of its capacities requires time-a rather lengthy time-to find its place and to be in a position to act".57
Even if the presence of a spiritual soul cannot be ascertained by empirical data, the results themselves of
scientific research on the human embryo provide "a valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a
personal presence at the moment of the first appearance of a human life: how could a human individual not be a
human person?". 58

Furthermore, what is at stake is so important that, from the standpoint of moral obligation, the mere probability
that a human person is involved would suffice to justify an absolutely clear prohibition of any intervention
aimed at killing a human embryo. Precisely for this reason, over and above all scientific debates and those
philosophical affirmations to which the Magisterium has not expressly committed itself, the Church has always
taught and continues to teach that the result of human procreation, from the first moment of its existence, must
be guaranteed that unconditional respect which is morally due to the human being in his or her totality and unity
as body and spirit: "The human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception;
and therefore from that same moment his rights as a person must be recognized, among which in the first place
is the inviolable right of every innocent human being to life".59 
61. The texts of Sacred Scripture never address the question of deliberate abortion and so do not directly and
specifically condemn it. But they show such great respect for the human being in the mother's womb that they
require as a logical consequence that God's commandment "You shall not kill" be extended to the unborn child
as well.

Human life is sacred and inviolable at every moment of existence, including the initial phase which precedes
birth. All human beings, from their mothers' womb, belong to God who searches them and knows them, who
forms them and knits them together with his own hands, who gazes on them when they are tiny shapeless
embryos and already sees in them the adults of tomorrow whose days are numbered and whose vocation is even
now written in the "book of life" (cf. Ps 139: 1, 13-16). There too, when they are still in their mothers' womb-as
many passages of the Bible bear witness60-they are the personal objects of God's loving and fatherly providence.

Christian Tradition-as the Declaration issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith points out so
well61-is clear and unanimous, from the beginning up to our own day, in describing abortion as a particularly
grave moral disorder. From its first contacts with the Greco-Roman world, where abortion and infanticide were
widely practised, the first Christian community, by its teaching and practice, radically opposed the customs
rampant in that society, as is clearly shown by the Didache mentioned earlier. 62 Among the Greek ecclesiastical
writers, Athenagoras records that Christians consider as murderesses women who have recourse to abortifacient
medicines, because children, even if they are still in their mother's womb, "are already under the protection of
Divine Providence".63 Among the Latin authors, Tertullian affirms: "It is anticipated murder to prevent someone
from being born; it makes little difference whether one kills a soul already born or puts it to death at birth. He
who will one day be a man is a man already".64

Throughout Christianity's two thousand year history, this same doctrine has been constantly taught by the
Fathers of the Church and by her Pastors and Doctors. Even scientific and philosophical discussions about the
precise moment of the infusion of the spiritual soul have never given rise to any hesitation about the moral
condemnation of abortion. 

62. The more recent Papal Magisterium has vigorously reaffirmed this common doctrine. Pius XI in particular,
in his Encyclical Casti Connubii, rejected the specious justifications of abortion. 65 Pius XII excluded all direct
abortion, i.e., every act tending directly to destroy human life in the womb "whether such destruction is
intended as an end or only as a means to an end".66 John XXIII reaffirmed that human life is sacred because
"from its very beginning it directly involves God's creative activity".67 The Second Vatican Council, as
mentioned earlier, sternly condemned abortion: "From the moment of its conception life must be guarded with
the greatest care, while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes".68

The Church's canonical discipline, from the earliest centuries, has inflicted penal sanctions on those guilty of
abortion. This practice, with more or less severe penalties, has been confirmed in various periods of history. The
1917 Code of Canon Law punished abortion with excommunication. 69 The revised canonical legislation
continues this tradition when it decrees that "a person who actually procures an abortion incurs automatic (latae
sententiae) excommunication".70 The excommu- nication affects all those who commit this crime with
knowledge of the penalty attached, and thus includes those accomplices without whose help the crime would
not have been committed. 71 By this reiterated sanction, the Church makes clear that abortion is a most serious
and dangerous crime, thereby encouraging those who commit it to seek without delay the path of conversion. In
the Church the purpose of the penalty of excommunication is to make an individual fully aware of the gravity of
a certain sin and then to foster genuine conversion and repentance.

Given such unanimity in the doctrinal and disciplinary tradition of the Church, Paul VI was able to declare that
this tradition is unchanged and unchangeable. 72 Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter
and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and
who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous
agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a
means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being.
This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's
Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. 73

No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it
is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed
by the Church. 

63. This evaluation of the morality of abortion is to be applied also to the recent forms of intervention on human
embryos which, although carried out for purposes legitimate in themselves, inevitably involve the killing of
those embryos. This is the case with experimentation on embryos, which is becoming increasingly widespread
in the field of biomedical research and is legally permitted in some countries. Although "one must uphold as
licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not
involve disproportionate risks for it, but rather are directed to its healing, the improvement of its condition of
health, or its individual survival",74 it must nonetheless be stated that the use of human embryos or fetuses as an
object of experimentation constitutes a crime against their dignity as human beings who have a right to the same
respect owed to a child once born, just as to every person. 75

This moral condemnation also regards procedures that exploit living human embryos and fetuses-sometimes
specifically "produced" for this purpose by in vitro fertilization-either to be used as "biological material" or as
providers of organs or tissue for transplants in the treatment of certain diseases. The killing of innocent human
creatures, even if carried out to help others, constitutes an absolutely unacceptable act.

Special attention must be given to evaluating the morality of prenatal diagnostic techniques which enable the
early detection of possible anomalies in the unborn child. In view of the complexity of these techniques, an
accurate and systematic moral judgment is necessary. When they do not involve disproportionate risks for the
child and the mother, and are meant to make possible early therapy or even to favour a serene and informed
acceptance of the child not yet born, these techniques are morally licit. But since the possibilities of prenatal
therapy are today still limited, it not infrequently happens that these techniques are used with a eugenic
intention which accepts selective abortion in order to prevent the birth of children affected by various types of
anomalies. Such an attitude is shameful and utterly reprehensible, since it presumes to measure the value of a
human life only within the parameters of "normality" and physical well-being, thus opening the way to
legitimizing infanticide and euthanasia as well.

And yet the courage and the serenity with which so many of our brothers and sisters suffering from serious
disabilities lead their lives when they are shown acceptance and love bears eloquent witness to what gives
authentic value to life, and makes it, even in difficult conditions, something precious for them and for others.
The Church is close to those married couples who, with great anguish and suffering, willingly accept gravely
handicapped children. She is also grateful to all those families which, through adoption, welcome children
abandoned by their parents because of disabilities or illnesses.

"It is I who bring both death and life" (Dt 32:39): the tragedy of euthanasia 

64. At the other end of life's spectrum, men and women find themselves facing the mystery of death. Today, as
a result of advances in medicine and in a cultural context frequently closed to the transcendent, the experience
of dying is marked by new features. When the prevailing tendency is to value life only to the extent that it
brings pleasure and well-being, suffering seems like an unbearable setback, something from which one must be
freed at all costs. Death is considered "senseless" if it suddenly interrupts a life still open to a future of new and
interesting experiences. But it becomes a "rightful liberation" once life is held to be no longer meaningful
because it is filled with pain and inexorably doomed to even greater suffering.
Furthermore, when he denies or neglects his fundamental relationship to God, man thinks he is his own rule and
measure, with the right to demand that society should guarantee him the ways and means of deciding what to do
with his life in full and complete autonomy. It is especially people in the developed countries who act in this
way: they feel encouraged to do so also by the constant progress of medicine and its ever more advanced
techniques. By using highly sophisticated systems and equipment, science and medical practice today are able
not only to attend to cases formerly considered untreatable and to reduce or eliminate pain, but also to sustain
and prolong life even in situations of extreme frailty, to resuscitate artifi- cially patients whose basic biological
functions have undergone sudden collapse, and to use special procedures to make organs available for
transplanting.

In this context the temptation grows to have recourse to euthanasia, that is, to take control of death and bring it
about before its time, "gently" ending one's own life or the life of others. In reality, what might seem logical and
humane, when looked at more closely is seen to be senseless and inhumane. Here we are faced with one of the
more alarming symptoms of the "culture of death", which is advancing above all in prosperous societies,
marked by an attitude of excessive preoccupation with efficiency and which sees the growing number of elderly
and disabled people as intolerable and too burdensome. These people are very often isolated by their families
and by society, which are organized almost exclusively on the basis of criteria of productive efficiency,
according to which a hopelessly impaired life no longer has any value. 

65. For a correct moral judgment on euthanasia, in the first place a clear definition is required. Euthanasia in the
strict sense is understood to be an action or omission which of itself and by intention causes death, with the
purpose of eliminating all suffering. "Euthanasia's terms of reference, therefore, are to be found in the intention
of the will and in the methods used".76

Euthanasia must be distinguished from the decision to forego so-called "aggressive medical treatment", in other
words, medical procedures which no longer correspond to the real situation of the patient, either because they
are by now disproportionate to any expected results or because they impose an excessive burden on the patient
and his family. In such situations, when death is clearly imminent and inevitable, one can in conscience "refuse
forms of treatment that would only secure a precarious and burdensome prolongation of life, so long as the
normal care due to the sick person in similar cases is not interrupted".77 Certainly there is a moral obligation to
care for oneself and to allow oneself to be cared for, but this duty must take account of concrete circumstances.
It needs to be determined whether the means of treatment available are objectively proportionate to the
prospects for improvement. To forego extraordinary or disproportionate means is not the equivalent of suicide
or euthanasia; it rather expresses acceptance of the human condition in the face of death. 78

In modern medicine, increased attention is being given to what are called "methods of palliative care", which
seek to make suffering more bearable in the final stages of illness and to ensure that the patient is supported and
accompanied in his or her ordeal. Among the questions which arise in this context is that of the licitness of
using various types of painkillers and sedatives for relieving the patient's pain when this involves the risk of
shortening life. While praise may be due to the person who voluntarily accepts suffering by forgoing treatment
with pain-killers in order to remain fully lucid and, if a believer, to share consciously in the Lord's Passion, such
"heroic" behaviour cannot be considered the duty of everyone. Pius XII affirmed that it is licit to relieve pain by
narcotics, even when the result is decreased consciousness and a shortening of life, "if no other means exist, and
if, in the given circumstances, this does not prevent the carrying out of other religious and moral duties".79 In
such a case, death is not willed or sought, even though for reasonable motives one runs the risk of it: there is
simply a desire to ease pain effectively by using the analgesics which medicine provides. All the same, "it is not
right to deprive the dying person of consciousness without a serious reason": 80 as they approach death people
ought to be able to satisfy their moral and family duties, and above all they ought to be able to prepare in a fully
conscious way for their definitive meeting with God.

Taking into account these distinctions, in harmony with the Magisterium of my Predecessors 81 and in
communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I confirm that euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of
God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person. This doctrine is based upon
the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the
ordinary and universal Magisterium. 82

Depending on the circumstances, this practice involves the malice proper to suicide or murder. 

66. Suicide is always as morally objectionable as murder. The Church's tradition has always rejected it as a
gravely evil choice. 83 Even though a certain psychological, cultural and social conditioning may induce a
person to carry out an action which so radically contradicts the innate inclination to life, thus lessening or
removing subjective responsibility, suicide, when viewed objectively, is a gravely immoral act. In fact, it
involves the rejection of love of self and the renunciation of the obligation of justice and charity towards one's
neighbour, towards the communities to which one belongs, and towards society as a whole. 84 In its deepest
reality, suicide represents a rejection of God's absolute sovereignty over life and death, as proclaimed in the
prayer of the ancient sage of Israel: "You have power over life and death; you lead men down to the gates of
Hades and back again" (Wis 16:13; cf. Tob 13:2).

To concur with the intention of another person to commit suicide and to help in carrying it out through so-called
"assisted suicide" means to cooperate in, and at times to be the actual perpetrator of, an injustice which can
never be excused, even if it is requested. In a remarkably relevant passage Saint Augustine writes that "it is
never licit to kill another: even if he should wish it, indeed if he request it because, hanging between life and
death, he begs for help in freeing the soul struggling against the bonds of the body and longing to be released;
nor is it licit even when a sick person is no longer able to live".85 Even when not motivated by a selfish refusal
to be burdened with the life of someone who is suffering, euthanasia must be called a false mercy, and indeed a
disturbing "perversion" of mercy. True "compassion" leads to sharing another's pain; it does not kill the person
whose suffering we cannot bear. Moreover, the act of euthanasia appears all the more perverse if it is carried out
by those, like relatives, who are supposed to treat a family member with patience and love, or by those, such as
doctors, who by virtue of their specific profession are supposed to care for the sick person even in the most
painful terminal stages.

The choice of euthanasia becomes more serious when it takes the form of a murder committed by others on a
person who has in no way requested it and who has never consented to it. The height of arbitrariness and
injustice is reached when certain people, such as physicians or legislators, arrogate to themselves the power to
decide who ought to live and who ought to die. Once again we find ourselves before the temptation of Eden: to
become like God who "knows good and evil" (cf. Gen 3:5). God alone has the power over life and death: "It is I
who bring both death and life" (Dt 32:39; cf. 2 Kg 5:7; 1 Sam 2:6). But he only exercises this power in
accordance with a plan of wisdom and love. When man usurps this power, being enslaved by a foolish and
selfish way of thinking, he inevitably uses it for injustice and death. Thus the life of the person who is weak is
put into the hands of the one who is strong; in society the sense of justice is lost, and mutual trust, the basis of
every authentic interpersonal relationship, is undermined at its root. 

67. Quite different from this is the way of love and true mercy, which our common humanity calls for, and upon
which faith in Christ the Redeemer, who died and rose again, sheds ever new light. The request which arises
from the human heart in the supreme confrontation with suffering and death, especially when faced with the
temptation to give up in utter desperation, is above all a request for companionship, sympathy and support in the
time of trial. It is a plea for help to keep on hoping when all human hopes fail. As the Second Vatican Council
reminds us: "It is in the face of death that the riddle of human existence becomes most acute" and yet "man
rightly follows the intuition of his heart when he abhors and repudiates the absolute ruin and total disappearance
of his own person. Man rebels against death because he bears in himself an eternal seed which cannot be
reduced to mere matter".86

This natural aversion to death and this incipient hope of immortality are illumined and brought to fulfilment by
Christian faith, which both promises and offers a share in the victory of the Risen Christ: it is the victory of the
One who, by his redemptive death, has set man free from death, "the wages of sin" (Rom 6:23), and has given
him the Spirit, the pledge of resurrection and of life (cf. Rom 8:11). The certainty of future immortality and
hope in the promised resurrection cast new light on the mystery of suffering and death, and fill the believer with
an extraordinary capacity to trust fully in the plan of God.

The Apostle Paul expressed this newness in terms of belonging completely to the Lord who embraces every
human condition: "None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. If we live, we live to the Lord,
and if we die, we die to the Lord; so then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's" (Rom 14:7-8).
Dying to the Lord means experiencing one's death as the supreme act of obedience to the Father (cf. Phil 2:8),
being ready to meet death at the "hour" willed and chosen by him (cf.Jn 13:1), which can only mean when one's
earthly pilgrimage is completed. Living to the Lord also means recognizing that suffering, while still an evil and
a trial in itself, can always become a source of good. It becomes such if it is experienced for love and with love
through sharing, by God's gracious gift and one's own personal and free choice, in the suffering of Christ
Crucified. In this way, the person who lives his suffering in the Lord grows more fully conformed to him (cf.
Phil 3:10; 1 Pet 2:21) and more closely associated with his redemptive work on behalf of the Church and
humanity. 87 This was the experience of Saint Paul, which every person who suffers is called to relive: "I rejoice
in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of
his Body, that is, the Church" (Col 1:24).

"We must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29): civil law and the moral law 

68. One of the specific characteristics of present-day attacks on human life-as has already been said several
times-consists in the trend to demand a legal justification for them, as if they were rights which the State, at
least under certain conditions, must acknowledge as belonging to citizens. Consequently, there is a tendency to
claim that it should be possible to exercise these rights with the safe and free assistance of doctors and medical
personnel.

It is often claimed that the life of an unborn child or a seriously disabled person is only a relative good:
according to a proportionalist approach, or one of sheer calculation, this good should be compared with and
balanced against other goods. It is even maintained that only someone present and personally involved in a
concrete situation can correctly judge the goods at stake: consequently, only that person would be able to decide
on the morality of his choice. The State therefore, in the interest of civil coexistence and social harmony, should
respect this choice, even to the point of permitting abortion and euthanasia.

At other times, it is claimed that civil law cannot demand that all citizens should live according to moral
standards higher than what all citizens themselves acknowledge and share. Hence the law should always express
the opinion and will of the majority of citizens and recognize that they have, at least in certain extreme cases,
the right even to abortion and euthanasia. Moreover the prohibition and the punishment of abortion and
euthanasia in these cases would inevitably lead-so it is said-to an increase of illegal practices: and these would
not be subject to necessary control by society and would be carried out in a medically unsafe way. The question
is also raised whether supporting a law which in practice cannot be enforced would not ultimately undermine
the authority of all laws.

Finally, the more radical views go so far as to maintain that in a modern and pluralistic society people should be
allowed complete freedom to dispose of their own lives as well as of the lives of the unborn: it is asserted that it
is not the task of the law to choose between different moral opinions, and still less can the law claim to impose
one particular opinion to the detriment of others. 

69. In any case, in the democratic culture of our time it is commonly held that the legal system of any society
should limit itself to taking account of and accepting the convictions of the majority. It should therefore be
based solely upon what the majority itself considers moral and actually practises. Furthermore, if it is believed
that an objective truth shared by all is de facto unattainable, then respect for the freedom of the citizens-who in
a democratic system are considered the true rulers-would require that on the legislative level the autonomy of
individual consciences be acknowledged. Consequently, when establishing those norms which are absolutely
necessary for social coexistence, the only determining factor should be the will of the majority, whatever this
may be. Hence every politician, in his or her activity, should clearly separate the realm of private conscience
from that of public conduct.

As a result we have what appear to be two diametrically opposed tendencies. On the one hand, individuals claim
for themselves in the moral sphere the most complete freedom of choice and demand that the State should not
adopt or impose any ethical position but limit itself to guaranteeing maximum space for the freedom of each
individual, with the sole limitation of not infringing on the freedom and rights of any other citizen. On the other
hand, it is held that, in the exercise of public and professional duties, respect for other people's freedom of
choice requires that each one should set aside his or her own convictions in order to satisfy every demand of the
citizens which is recognized and guaranteed by law; in carrying out one's duties the only moral criterion should
be what is laid down by the law itself. Individual responsibility is thus turned over to the civil law, with a
renouncing of personal conscience, at least in the public sphere. 

70. At the basis of all these tendencies lies the ethical relativism which characterizes much of present-day
culture. There are those who consider such relativism an essential condition of democ- racy, inasmuch as it
alone is held to guarantee tolerance, mutual respect between people and acceptance of the decisions of the
majority, whereas moral norms considered to be objective and binding are held to lead to authoritarianism and
intolerance.

But it is precisely the issue of respect for life which shows what misunderstandings and contradictions,
accompanied by terrible practical consequences, are concealed in this position.

It is true that history has known cases where crimes have been committed in the name of "truth". But equally
grave crimes and radical denials of freedom have also been committed and are still being committed in the
name of "ethical relativism". When a parliamentary or social majority decrees that it is legal, at least under
certain conditions, to kill unborn human life, is it not really making a "tyrannical" decision with regard to the
weakest and most defenceless of human beings? Everyone's conscience rightly rejects those crimes against
humanity of which our century has had such sad experience. But would these crimes cease to be crimes if,
instead of being committed by unscrupulous tyrants, they were legitimated by popular consensus?

Democracy cannot be idolized to the point of making it a substitute for morality or a panacea for immorality.
Fundamentally, democracy is a "system" and as such is a means and not an end. Its "moral" value is not
automatic, but depends on conformity to the moral law to which it, like every other form of human behaviour,
must be subject: in other words, its morality depends on the morality of the ends which it pursues and of the
means which it employs. If today we see an almost universal consensus with regard to the value of democracy,
this is to be considered a positive "sign of the times", as the Church's Magisterium has frequently noted. 88 But
the value of democracy stands or falls with the values which it embodies and promotes. Of course, values such
as the dignity of every human person, respect for inviolable and inalienable human rights, and the adoption of
the "common good" as the end and criterion regulating political life are certainly fundamental and not to be
ignored.

The basis of these values cannot be provisional and changeable "majority" opinions, but only the
acknowledgment of an objective moral law which, as the "natural law" written in the human heart, is the
obligatory point of reference for civil law itself. If, as a result of a tragic obscuring of the collective conscience,
an attitude of scepticism were to succeed in bringing into question even the fundamental principles of the moral
law, the democratic system itself would be shaken in its foundations, and would be reduced to a mere
mechanism for regulating different and opposing interests on a purely empirical basis. 89
Some might think that even this function, in the absence of anything better, should be valued for the sake of
peace in society. While one acknowledges some element of truth in this point of view, it is easy to see that
without an objective moral grounding not even democracy is capable of ensuring a stable peace, especially
since peace which is not built upon the values of the dignity of every individual and of solidarity between all
people frequently proves to be illusory. Even in participatory systems of government, the regulation of interests
often occurs to the advantage of the most powerful, since they are the ones most capable of manoeuvering not
only the levers of power but also of shaping the formation of consensus. In such a situation, democracy easily
becomes an empty word. 

71. It is therefore urgently necessary, for the future of society and the development of a sound democracy, to
rediscover those essential and innate human and moral values which flow from the very truth of the human
being and express and safeguard the dignity of the person: values which no individual, no majority and no State
can ever create, modify or destroy, but must only acknowledge, respect and promote.

Consequently there is a need to recover the basic elements of a vision of the relationship between civil law and
moral law, which are put forward by the Church, but which are also part of the patrimony of the great juridical
traditions of humanity.

Certainly the purpose of civil law is different and more limited in scope than that of the moral law. But "in no
sphere of life can the civil law take the place of conscience or dictate norms concerning things which are
outside its competence",90 which is that of ensuring the common good of people through the recognition and
defence of their fundamental rights, and the promotion of peace and of public morality. 91 The real purpose of
civil law is to guarantee an ordered social coexistence in true justice, so that all may "lead a quiet and peaceable
life, godly and respectful in every way" (1 Tim 2:2). Precisely for this reason, civil law must ensure that all
members of society enjoy respect for certain fundamental rights which innately belong to the person, rights
which every positive law must recognize and guarantee. First and fundamental among these is the inviolable
right to life of every innocent human being. While public authority can sometimes choose not to put a stop to
something which-were it prohibited- would cause more serious harm, 92 it can never presume to legitimize as a
right of individuals-even if they are the majority of the members of society-an offence against other persons
caused by the disregard of so fundamental a right as the right to life. The legal toleration of abortion or of
euthanasia can in no way claim to be based on respect for the conscience of others, precisely because society
has the right and the duty to protect itself against the abuses which can occur in the name of conscience and
under the pretext of freedom. 93

In the Encyclical Pacem in Terris, John XXIII pointed out that "it is generally accepted today that the common
good is best safeguarded when personal rights and duties are guaranteed. The chief concern of civil authorities
must therefore be to ensure that these rights are recognized, respected, co-ordinated, defended and promoted,
and that each individual is enabled to perform his duties more easily. For ?to safeguard the inviolable rights of
the human person, and to facilitate the performance of his duties, is the principal duty of every public authority'.
Thus any government which refused to recognize human rights or acted in violation of them, would not only
fail in its duty; its decrees would be wholly lacking in binding force".94 

72. The doctrine on the necessary conformity of civil law with the moral law is in continuity with the whole
tradition of the Church. This is clear once more from John XXIII's Encyclical: "Authority is a postulate of the
moral order and derives from God. Consequently, laws and decrees enacted in contravention of the moral order,
and hence of the divine will, can have no binding force in conscience...; indeed, the passing of such laws
undermines the very nature of authority and results in shameful abuse".95 This is the clear teaching of Saint
Thomas Aquinas, who writes that "human law is law inasmuch as it is in conformity with right reason and thus
derives from the eternal law. But when a law is contrary to reason, it is called an unjust law; but in this case it
ceases to be a law and becomes instead an act of violence".96 And again: "Every law made by man can be called
a law insofar as it derives from the natural law. But if it is somehow opposed to the natural law, then it is not
really a law but rather a corruption of the law".97
Now the first and most immediate application of this teaching concerns a human law which disregards the
fundamental right and source of all other rights which is the right to life, a right belonging to every individual.
Consequently, laws which legitimize the direct killing of innocent human beings through abortion or euthanasia
are in complete opposition to the inviolable right to life proper to every individual; they thus deny the equality
of everyone before the law. It might be objected that such is not the case in euthanasia, when it is requested with
full awareness by the person involved. But any State which made such a request legitimate and authorized it to
be carried out would be legalizing a case of suicide-murder, contrary to the fundamental principles of absolute
respect for life and of the protection of every innocent life. In this way the State contributes to lessening respect
for life and opens the door to ways of acting which are destructive of trust in relations between people. Laws
which authorize and promote abortion and euthanasia are therefore radically opposed not only to the good of the
individual but also to the common good; as such they are completely lacking in authentic juridical validity.
Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to
serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil
law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law. 

73. Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation
in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious
objection. From the very beginnings of the Church, the apostolic preaching reminded Christians of their duty to
obey legitimately constituted public authorities (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14), but at the same time it firmly
warned that "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). In the Old Testament, precisely in regard to
threats against life, we find a significant example of resistance to the unjust command of those in authority.
After Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn males, the Hebrew midwives refused. "They did not do as the
king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live" (Ex 1:17). But the ultimate reason for their
action should be noted: "the midwives feared God" (ibid.). It is precisely from obedience to God-to whom alone
is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty-that the strength and the courage to resist
unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to
the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for "the endurance and faith of the saints" (Rev 13:10).

In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never
licit to obey it, or to "take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it".98

A particular problem of conscience can arise in cases where a legislative vote would be decisive for the passage
of a more restrictive law, aimed at limiting the number of authorized abortions, in place of a more permissive
law already passed or ready to be voted on. Such cases are not infrequent. It is a fact that while in some parts of
the world there continue to be campaigns to introduce laws favouring abortion, often supported by powerful
international organizations, in other nations-particularly those which have already experienced the bitter fruits
of such permissive legislation-there are growing signs of a rethinking in this matter. In a case like the one just
mentioned, when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official,
whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed
at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general
opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a
legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects. 

74. The passing of unjust laws often raises difficult problems of conscience for morally upright people with
regard to the issue of cooperation, since they have a right to demand not to be forced to take part in morally evil
actions. Sometimes the choices which have to be made are difficult; they may require the sacrifice of
prestigious professional positions or the relinquishing of reasonable hopes of career advancement. In other
cases, it can happen that carrying out certain actions, which are provided for by legislation that overall is unjust,
but which in themselves are indifferent, or even positive, can serve to protect human lives under threat. There
may be reason to fear, however, that willingness to carry out such actions will not only cause scandal and
weaken the necessary opposition to attacks on life, but will gradually lead to further capitulation to a mentality
of permissiveness.
In order to shed light on this difficult question, it is necessary to recall the general principles concerning
cooperation in evil actions. Christians, like all people of good will, are called upon under grave obligation of
conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to
God's law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. Such cooperation
occurs when an action, either by its very nature or by the form it takes in a concrete situation, can be defined as
a direct participation in an act against innocent human life or a sharing in the immoral intention of the person
committing it. This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by
appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it. Each individual in fact has moral responsibility for
the acts which he personally performs; no one can be exempted from this responsibility, and on the basis of it
everyone will be judged by God himself (cf. Rom 2:6; 14:12).

To refuse to take part in committing an injustice is not only a moral duty; it is also a basic human right. Were
this not so, the human person would be forced to perform an action intrinsically incompatible with human
dignity, and in this way human freedom itself, the authentic meaning and purpose of which are found in its
orientation to the true and the good, would be radically compromised. What is at stake therefore is an essential
right which, precisely as such, should be acknowledged and protected by civil law. In this sense, the opportunity
to refuse to take part in the phases of consultation, preparation and execution of these acts against life should be
guaranteed to physicians, health-care personnel, and directors of hospitals, clinics and convalescent facilities.
Those who have recourse to conscientious objection must be protected not only from legal penalties but also
from any negative effects on the legal, disciplinary, financial and professional plane.

"You shall love your neighbour as yourself" (Lk 10:27):"promote" life  

75. God's commandments teach us the way of life. The negative moral precepts, which declare that the choice
of certain actions is morally unacceptable, have an absolute value for human freedom: they are valid always and
everywhere, without exception. They make it clear that the choice of certain ways of acting is radically
incompatible with the love of God and with the dignity of the person created in his image. Such choices cannot
be redeemed by the goodness of any intention or of any consequence; they are irrevocably opposed to the bond
between persons; they contradict the fundamental decision to direct one's life to God. 99

In this sense, the negative moral precepts have an extremely important positive function. The "no" which they
unconditionally require makes clear the absolute limit beneath which free individuals cannot lower themselves.
At the same time they indicate the minimum which they must respect and from which they must start out in
order to say "yes" over and over again, a "yes" which will gradually embrace the entire horizon of the good (cf.
Mt 5:48). The commandments, in particular the negative moral precepts, are the beginning and the first
necessary stage of the journey towards freedom. As Saint Augustine writes, "the beginning of freedom is to be
free from crimes... like murder, adultery, fornication, theft, fraud, sacrilege and so forth. Only when one stops
committing these crimes (and no Christian should commit them), one begins to lift up one's head towards
freedom. But this is only the beginning of freedom, not perfect freedom".100

76. The commandment "You shall not kill" thus establishes the point of departure for the start of true freedom.
It leads us to promote life actively, and to develop particular ways of thinking and acting which serve life. In
this way we exercise our responsibility towards the persons entrusted to us and we show, in deeds and in truth,
our gratitude to God for the great gift of life (cf. Ps 139:13-14).

The Creator has entrusted man's life to his responsible concern, not to make arbitrary use of it, but to preserve it
with wisdom and to care for it with loving fidelity. The God of the Covenant has entrusted the life of every
individual to his or her fellow human beings, brothers and sisters, according to the law of reciprocity in giving
and receiving, of self-giving and of the acceptance of others. In the fullness of time, by taking flesh and giving
his life for us, the Son of God showed what heights and depths this law of reciprocity can reach. With the gift of
his Spirit, Christ gives new content and meaning to the law of reciprocity, to our being entrusted to one another.
The Spirit who builds up communion in love creates between us a new fraternity and solidarity, a true reflection
of the mystery of mutual self-giving and receiving proper to the Most Holy Trinity. The Spirit becomes the new
law which gives strength to believers and awakens in them a responsibility for sharing the gift of self and for
accepting others, as a sharing in the boundless love of Jesus Christ himself. 

77. This new law also gives spirit and shape to the commandment "You shall not kill". For the Christian it
involves an absolute imperative to respect, love and promote the life of every brother and sister, in accordance
with the requirements of God's bountiful love in Jesus Christ. "He laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay
down our lives for the brethren" (1 Jn 3:16).

The commandment "You shall not kill", even in its more positive aspects of respecting, loving and promoting
human life, is binding on every individual human being. It resounds in the moral conscience of everyone as an
irrepressible echo of the original covenant of God the Creator with mankind. It can be recognized by everyone
through the light of reason and it can be observed thanks to the mysterious working of the Spirit who, blowing
where he wills (cf. Jn 3:8), comes to and involves every person living in this world.

It is therefore a service of love which we are all committed to ensure to our neighbour, that his or her life may
be always defended and promoted, especially when it is weak or threatened. It is not only a personal but a social
concern which we must all foster: a concern to make unconditional respect for human life the foundation of a
renewed society.

We are asked to love and honour the life of every man and woman and to work with perseverance and courage
so that our time, marked by all too many signs of death, may at last witness the establishment of a new culture
of life, the fruit of the culture of truth and of love.

CHAPTER IV - YOU DID IT TO ME 

FOR A NEW CULTURE OF HUMAN LIFE

"You are God's own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness
into his marvellous light" (1 Pet 2:9): a people of life and for life 

78. The Church has received the Gospel as a proclamation and a source of joy and salvation. She has received it
as a gift from Jesus, sent by the Father "to preach good news to the poor" (Lk 4:18). She has received it through
the Apostles, sent by Christ to the whole world (cf. Mk 16:15; Mt 28:19-20). Born from this evangelizing
activity, the Church hears every day the echo of Saint Paul's words of warning: "Woe to me if I do not preach
the Gospel!" (1 Cor 9:16). As Paul VI wrote, "evangelization is the grace and vocation proper to the Church, her
deepest identity. She exists in order to evangelize".101

Evangelization is an all-embracing, progressive activity through which the Church participates in the prophetic,
priestly and royal mission of the Lord Jesus. It is therefore inextricably linked to preaching, celebration and the
service of charity. Evangelization is a profoundly ecclesial act, which calls all the various workers of the Gospel
to action, according to their individual charisms and ministry.

This is also the case with regard to the proclamation of the Gospel of life, an integral part of that Gospel which
is Jesus Christ himself. We are at the service of this Gospel, sustained by the awareness that we have received it
as a gift and are sent to preach it to all humanity, "to the ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8). With humility and
gratitude we know that we are the people of life and for life, and this is how we present ourselves to everyone. 
79. We are the people of life because God, in his unconditional love, has given us the Gospel of life and by this
same Gospel we have been transformed and saved. We have been ransomed by the "Author of life" (Acts 3:15)
at the price of his precious blood (cf. 1 Cor 6:20; 7:23; 1 Pet 1:19). Through the waters of Baptism we have
been made a part of him (cf. Rom 6:4-5; Col 2:12), as branches which draw nourishment and fruitfulness from
the one tree (cf. Jn 15:5). Interiorly renewed by the grace of the Spirit, "who is the Lord and giver of life", we
have become a people for life and we are called to act accordingly.

We have been sent. For us, being at the service of life is not a boast but rather a duty, born of our awareness of
being "God's own people, that we may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called us out of darkness into
his marvellous light" (cf. 1 Pet 2:9). On our journey we are guided and sustained by the law of love: a love
which has as its source and model the Son of God made man, who "by dying gave life to the world".102

We have been sent as a people. Everyone has an obligation to be at the service of life. This is a properly
"ecclesial" responsibility, which requires concerted and generous action by all the members and by all sectors of
the Christian community. This community commitment does not however eliminate or lessen the responsibility
of each individual, called by the Lord to "become the neighbour" of everyone: "Go and do likewise" (Lk 10:37).

Together we all sense our duty to preach the Gospel of life, to celebrate it in the Liturgy and in our whole
existence, and to serve it with the various programmes and structures which support and promote life.

"That which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you" (1 Jn 1:3): proclaiming the Gospel of life 

80. "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we
have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life ... we proclaim also to you, so that
you may have fellowship with us" (1 Jn 1:1, 3). Jesus is the only Gospel: we have nothing further to say or any
other witness to bear.

To proclaim Jesus is itself to proclaim life. For Jesus is "the word of life" (1 Jn 1:1). In him "life was made
manifest" (1 Jn 1:2); he himself is "the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us" (1
Jn 1:2). By the gift of the Spirit, this same life has been bestowed on us. It is in being destined to life in its
fullness, to "eternal life", that every person's earthly life acquires its full meaning.

Enlightened by this Gospel of life, we feel a need to proclaim it and to bear witness to it in all its marvellous
newness. Since it is one with Jesus himself, who makes all things new 103 and conquers the "oldness" which
comes from sin and leads to death, 104 this Gospel exceeds every human expectation and reveals the sublime
heights to which the dignity of the human person is raised through grace. This is how Saint Gregory of Nyssa
understands it: "Man, as a being, is of no account; he is dust, grass, vanity. But once he is adopted by the God of
the universe as a son, he becomes part of the family of that Being, whose excellence and greatness no one can
see, hear or understand. What words, thoughts or flight of the spirit can praise the superabundance of this grace?
Man surpasses his nature: mortal, he becomes immortal; perishable, he becomes imperishable; fleeting, he
becomes eternal; human, he becomes divine".105

Gratitude and joy at the incomparable dignity of man impel us to share this message with everyone: "that which
we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us" (1 Jn 1:3). We need
to bring the Gospel of life to the heart of every man and woman and to make it penetrate every part of society. 

81. This involves above all proclaiming the core of this Gospel. It is the proclamation of a living God who is
close to us, who calls us to profound communion with himself and awakens in us the certain hope of eternal life.
It is the affirmation of the inseparable connection between the person, his life and his bodiliness. It is the
presentation of human life as a life of relationship, a gift of God, the fruit and sign of his love. It is the
proclamation that Jesus has a unique relationship with every person, which enables us to see in every human
face the face of Christ. It is the call for a "sincere gift of self" as the fullest way to realize our personal freedom.
It also involves making clear all the consequences of this Gospel. These can be summed up as follows: human
life, as a gift of God, is sacred and inviolable. For this reason procured abortion and euthanasia are absolutely
unacceptable. Not only must human life not be taken, but it must be protected with loving concern. The
meaning of life is found in giving and receiving love, and in this light human sexuality and procreation reach
their true and full significance. Love also gives meaning to suffering and death; despite the mystery which
surrounds them, they can become saving events. Respect for life requires that science and technology should
always be at the service of man and his integral development. Society as a whole must respect, defend and
promote the dignity of every human person, at every moment and in every condition of that person's life. 

82. To be truly a people at the service of life we must propose these truths constantly and courageously from the
very first proclamation of the Gospel, and thereafter in catechesis, in the various forms of preaching, in personal
dialogue and in all educational activity. Teachers, catechists and theologians have the task of emphasizing the
anthropological reasons upon which respect for every human life is based. In this way, by making the newness
of the Gospel of life shine forth, we can also help everyone discover in the light of reason and of personal
experience how the Christian message fully reveals what man is and the meaning of his being and existence.
We shall find important points of contact and dialogue also with non- believers, in our common commitment to
the establishment of a new culture of life.

Faced with so many opposing points of view, and a widespread rejection of sound doctrine concerning human
life, we can feel that Paul's entreaty to Timothy is also addressed to us: "Preach the word, be urgent in season
and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching" (2 Tim 4:2). This
exhortation should resound with special force in the hearts of those members of the Church who di- rectly share,
in different ways, in her mission as "teacher" of the truth. May it resound above all for us who are Bishops: we
are the first ones called to be untiring preachers of the Gospel of life. We are also entrusted with the task of
ensuring that the doctrine which is once again being set forth in this Encyclical is faithfully handed on in its
integ- rity. We must use appropriate means to defend the faithful from all teaching which is contrary to it. We
need to make sure that in theological faculties, seminaries and Catholic institutions sound doctrine is taught,
explained and more fully investigated. 106 May Paul's exhortation strike a chord in all theologians, pastors,
teachers and in all those responsible for catechesis and the formation of consciences. Aware of their specific
role, may they never be so grievously irresponsible as to betray the truth and their own mission by proposing
personal ideas contrary to the Gospel of life as faithfully presented and interpreted by the Magisterium.

In the proclamation of this Gospel, we must not fear hostility or unpopularity, and we must refuse any
compromise or ambiguity which might conform us to the world's way of thinking (cf. Rom 12:2). We must be
in the world but not of the world (cf. Jn 15:19; 17:16), drawing our strength from Christ, who by his Death and
Res- urrection has overcome the world (cf. Jn 16:33).

"I give you thanks that I am fearfully, wonderfully made" (Ps 139:14): celebrating the Gospel of life 

83. Because we have been sent into the world as a "people for life", our proclamation must also become a
genuine celebration of the Gospel of life. This celebration, with the evocative power of its gestures, symbols
and rites, should become a precious and significant setting in which the beauty and grandeur of this Gospel is
handed on.

For this to happen, we need first of all to foster, in ourselves and in others, a contemplative outlook. 107 Such an
outlook arises from faith in the God of life, who has created every individual as a "wonder" (cf. Ps 139:14). It is
the outlook of those who see life in its deeper meaning, who grasp its utter gratuitousness, its beauty and its
invitation to freedom and responsibility. It is the outlook of those who do not presume to take possession of
reality but instead accept it as a gift, discovering in all things the reflection of the Creator and seeing in every
person his living image (cf. Gen 1:27; Ps 8:5). This outlook does not give in to discouragement when
confronted by those who are sick, suffering, outcast or at death's door. Instead, in all these situations it feels
challenged to find meaning, and precisely in these circumstances it is open to perceiving in the face of every
person a call to encounter, dialogue and solidarity.

It is time for all of us to adopt this outlook, and with deep religious awe to rediscover the ability to revere and
honour every person, as Paul VI invited us to do in one of his first Christmas messages. 108 Inspired by this
contemplative outlook, the new people of the redeemed cannot but respond with songs of joy, praise and
thanksgiving for the priceless gift of life, for the mystery of every individual's call to share through Christ in the
life of grace and in an existence of unending communion with God our Creator and Father. 

84. To celebrate the Gospel of life means to celebrate the God of life, the God who gives life: "We must
celebrate Eternal Life, from which every other life proceeds. From this, in proportion to its capacities, every
being which in any way participates in life, receives life. This Divine Life, which is above every other life,
gives and preserves life. Every life and every living movement proceed from this Life which transcends all life
and every principle of life. It is to this that souls owe their incorruptibility; and because of this all animals and
plants live, which receive only the faintest glimmer of life. To men, beings made of spirit and matter, Life
grants life. Even if we should abandon Life, because of its overflowing love for man, it converts us and calls us
back to itself. Not only this: it promises to bring us, soul and body, to perfect life, to immortality. It is too little
to say that this Life is alive: it is the Principle of life, the Cause and sole Wellspring of life. Every living thing
must contemplate it and give it praise: it is Life which overflows with life".109

Like the Psalmist, we too, in our daily prayer as individuals and as a community, praise and bless God our
Father, who knitted us together in our mother's womb, and saw and loved us while we were still without form
(cf. Ps 139:13, 15-16). We exclaim with overwhelming joy: "I give you thanks that I am fearfully, wonderfully
made; wonderful are your works. You know me through and through" (Ps 139:14). Indeed, "despite its
hardships, its hidden mysteries, its suffering and its inevitable frailty, this mortal life is a most beautiful thing, a
marvel ever new and moving, an event worthy of being exalted in joy and glory".110 Moreover, man and his life
appear to us not only as one of the greatest marvels of creation: for God has granted to man a dignity which is
near to divine (Ps 8:5-6). In every child which is born and in every person who lives or dies we see the image of
God's glory. We celebrate this glory in every human being, a sign of the living God, an icon of Jesus Christ.

We are called to express wonder and gratitude for the gift of life and to welcome, savour and share the Gospel
of life not only in our personal and community prayer, but above all in the celebrations of the liturgical year.
Particularly important in this regard are the Sacraments, the efficacious signs of the presence and saving action
of the Lord Jesus in Christian life. The Sacraments make us sharers in divine life, and provide the spiritual
strength necessary to experience life, suffering and death in their fullest meaning. Thanks to a genuine
rediscovery and a better appreciation of the significance of these rites, our liturgical celebrations, especially
celebrations of the Sacraments, will be ever more capable of expressing the full truth about birth, life, suffering
and death, and will help us to live these moments as a participation in the Paschal Mystery of the Crucified and
Risen Christ. 

85. In celebrating the Gospel of life we also need toappreciate and make good use of the wealth of gestures and
symbols present in the traditions and customs of different cultures and peoples. There are special times and
ways in which the peoples of different nations and cultures express joy for a newborn life, respect for and
protection of individual human lives, care for the suffering or needy, closeness to the elderly and the dying,
participation in the sorrow of those who mourn, and hope and desire for immortality.

In view of this and following the suggestion made by the Cardinals in the Consistory of 1991, I propose that a
Day for Life be celebrated each year in every country, as already established by some Episcopal Conferences.
The celebration of this Day should be planned and carried out with the active participation of all sectors of the
local Church. Its primary purpose should be to foster in individual consciences, in families, in the Church and in
civil society a recognition of the meaning and value of human life at every stage and in every condition.
Particular attention should be drawn to the seriousness of abortion and euthanasia, without neglecting other
aspects of life which from time to time deserve to be given careful consideration, as occasion and circumstances
demand. 

86. As part of the spiritual worship acceptable to God (cf. Rom 12:1), the Gospel of life is to be celebrated
above all in daily living, which should be filled with self-giving love for others. In this way, our lives will
become a genuine and respon- sible acceptance of the gift of life and a heartfelt song of praise and gratitude to
God who has given us this gift. This is already happening in the many different acts of selfless generosity, often
humble and hidden, carried out by men and women, children and adults, the young and the old, the healthy and
the sick.

It is in this context, so humanly rich and filled with love, that heroic actions too are born. These are the most
solemn celebration of the Gospel of life, for they proclaim it by the total gift of self. They are the radiant
manifestation of the highest degree of love, which is to give one's life for the person loved (cf. Jn 15:13). They
are a sharing in the mystery of the Cross, in which Jesus reveals the value of every person, and how life attains
its fullness in the sincere gift of self. Over and above such outstanding moments, there is an everyday heroism,
made up of gestures of sharing, big or small, which build up an authentic culture of life. A particularly
praiseworthy example of such gestures is the donation of organs, performed in an ethically acceptable manner,
with a view to offering a chance of health and even of life itself to the sick who sometimes have no other hope.

Part of this daily heroism is also the silent but effective and eloquent witness of all those "brave mothers who
devote themselves to their own fam- ily without reserve, who suffer in giving birth to their children and who are
ready to make any effort, to face any sacrifice, in order to pass on to them the best of themselves".111 In living
out their mission "these heroic women do not always find support in the world around them. On the contrary,
the cultural models frequently promoted and broadcast by the media do not encourage motherhood. In the name
of progress and modernity the values of fidelity, chastity, sacrifice, to which a host of Christian wives and
mothers have borne and continue to bear outstanding witness, are presented as obsolete ... We thank you, heroic
mothers, for your invincible love! We thank you for your intrepid trust in God and in his love. We thank you for
the sacrifice of your life ... In the Paschal Mystery, Christ restores to you the gift you gave him. Indeed, he has
the power to give you back the life you gave him as an offering".112

"What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works?" (Jas 2:14): serving the
Gospel of life 

87. By virtue of our sharing in Christ's royal mission, our support and promotion of human life must be
accomplished through the service of charity, which finds expression in personal witness, various forms of
volunteer work, social activity and political commitment. This is a particularly pressing need at the present
time, when the "culture of death" so forcefully opposes the "culture of life" and often seems to have the upper
hand. But even before that it is a need which springs from "faith working through love" (Gal 5:6). As the Letter
of James admonishes us: "What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can
his faith save him? If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, ?Go in
peace, be warmed and filled', without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? So faith
by itself, if it has no works, is dead" (2:14-17).

In our service of charity, we must be inspired and distinguished by a specific attitude: we must care for the other
as a person for whom God has made us responsible. As disciples of Jesus, we are called to become neighbours
to everyone (cf. Lk 10:29-37), and to show special favour to those who are poorest, most alone and most in
need. In helping the hungry, the thirsty, the foreigner, the naked, the sick, the imprisoned-as well as the child in
the womb and the old person who is suffering ornear death-we have the opportunity to serve Jesus. He himself
said: "As you did it to one of the least of these my breth- ren, you did it to me" (Mt 25:40). Hence we cannot but
feel called to account and judged by the ever relevant words of Saint John Chrysostom: "Do you wish to honour
the body of Christ? Do not neglect it when you find it naked. Do not do it homage here in the church with silk
fabrics only to neglect it outside where it suffers cold and nakedness".113
Where life is involved, the service of charity must be profoundly consistent. It cannot tolerate bias and
discrimination, for human life is sacred and inviolable at every stage and in every situation; it is an indivisible
good. We need then to "show care" for all life and for the life of everyone. Indeed, at an even deeper level, we
need to go to the very roots of life and love.

It is this deep love for every man and woman which has given rise down the centuries to an outstanding history
of charity, a history which has brought into being in the Church and society many forms of service to life which
evoke admiration from all unbiased observers. Every Christian community, with a renewed sense of
responsibility, must continue to write this history through various kinds of pastoral and social activity. To this
end, appropriate and effective programmes of support for new life must be implemented, with special closeness
to mothers who, even without the help of the father, are not afraid to bring their child into the world and to raise
it. Similar care must be shown for the life of the marginalized or suffering, especially in its final phases. 

88. All of this involves a patient and fearless work of education aimed at encouraging one and all to bear each
other's burdens (cf. Gal 6:2). It requires a continuous promotion of vocations to service, particularly among the
young. It involves the implementation of long-term practical projects and initiatives inspired by the Gospel.

Many are the means towards this end which need to be developed with skill and serious commitment. At the
first stage of life, centres for natural methods of regulating fertility should be promoted as a valuable help to
responsible parenthood, in which all individuals, and in the first place the child, are recognized and respected in
their own right, and where every decision is guided by the ideal of the sincere gift of self. Marriage and family
counselling agencies by their specific work of guidance and prevention, carried out in accordance with an
anthropology consistent with the Christian vision of the person, of the couple and of sexuality, also offer
valuable help in rediscovering the meaning of love and life, and in supporting and accompanying every family
in its mission as the "sanctuary of life". Newborn life is also served by centres of assistance and homes or
centres where new life receives a welcome. Thanks to the work of such centres, many unmarried mothers and
couples in difficulty discover new hope and find assistance and support in overcoming hardship and the fear of
accepting a newly conceived life or life which has just come into the world.

When life is challenged by conditions of hardship, maladjustment, sickness or rejection, other programmes-such
as communities for treating drug addiction, residential communities for minors or the mentally ill, care and
relief centres for AIDS patients, associations for solidarity especially towards the disabled-are eloquent
expressions of what charity is able to devise in order to give everyone new reasons for hope and practical
possibilities for life.

And when earthly existence draws to a close, it is again charity which finds the most appropriate means for
enabling the elderly, especially those who can no longer look after themselves, and the terminally ill to enjoy
genuinely humane assistance and to receive an adequate response to their needs, in particular their anxiety and
their loneliness. In these cases the role of families is indispensable; yet families can receive much help from
social welfare agencies and, if necessary, from recourse to palliative care, taking advantage of suitable medical
and social services available in public institutions or in the home.

In particular, the role of hospitals, clinics and convalescent homes needs to be reconsidered. These should not
merely be institutions where care is provided for the sick or the dying. Above all they should be places where
suffering, pain and death are acknowledged and understood in their human and specifically Christian meaning.
This must be especially evident and effective in institutes staffed by Religious or in any way connected with the
Church. 

89. Agencies and centres of service to life, and all other initiatives of support and solidarity which
circumstances may from time to time suggest, need to be directed by people who are generous in their
involvement and fully aware of the importance of the Gospel of life for the good of individuals and society.
A unique responsibility belongs to health-care personnel: doctors, pharmacists, nurses, chaplains, men and
women religious, administrators and volunteers. Their profession calls for them to be guardians and servants of
human life. In today's cultural and social context, in which science and the practice of medicine risk losing sight
of their inherent ethical dimension, health-care professionals can be strongly tempted at times to become
manipulators of life, or even agents of death. In the face of this temptation their responsibility today is greatly
increased. Its deepest inspiration and strongest support lie in the intrinsic and undeniable ethical dimension of
the health-care profession, something already recognized by the ancient and still relevant Hippocratic Oath,
which requires every doctor to commit himself to absolute respect for human life and its sacredness.

Absolute respect for every innocent human life also requires the exercise of conscientious objection in relation
to procured abortion and euthanasia. "Causing death" can never be considered a form of medical treatment,
even when the intention is solely to comply with the patient's request. Rather, it runs completely counter to the
health- care profession, which is meant to be an impassioned and unflinching affirmation of life. Bio- medical
research too, a field which promises great benefits for humanity, must always reject experimentation, research
or applications which disregard the inviolable dignity of the human being, and thus cease to be at the service of
people and become instead means which, under the guise of helping people, actually harm them. 

90. Volunteer workers have a specific role to play: they make a valuable contribution to the service of life when
they combine professional ability and generous, selfless love. The Gospel of life inspires them to lift their
feelings of good will towards others to the heights of Christ's charity; to renew every day, amid hard work and
weariness, their awareness of the dignity of every person; to search out people's needs and, when necessary, to
set out on new paths where needs are greater but care and support weaker.

If charity is to be realistic and effective, it demands that the Gospel of life be implemented also by means of
certain forms of social activity and commitment in the political field, as a way of defending and promoting the
value of life in our ever more complex and pluralistic societies. Individuals, families, groups and associations,
albeit for different reasons and in different ways, all have a responsibility for shaping society and developing
cultural, economic, political and legislative projects which, with respect for all and in keeping with democratic
principles, will contribute to the building of a society in which the dignity of each person is recognized and
protected and the lives of all are defended and enhanced.

This task is the particular responsibility of civil leaders. Called to serve the people and the common good, they
have a duty to make courageous choices in support of life, especially through legislative measures. In a
democratic system, where laws and decisions are made on the basis of the consensus of many, the sense of
personal responsibility in the consciences of individuals invested with authority may be weakened. But no one
can ever renounce this responsibility, especially when he or she has a legislative or decision-making mandate,
which calls that person to answer to God, to his or her own conscience and to the whole of society for choices
which may be contrary to the common good. Although laws are not the only means of protecting human life,
nevertheless they do play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and
behaviour. I repeat once more that a law which violates an innocent person's natural right to life is unjust and, as
such, is not valid as a law. For this reason I urgently appeal once more to all political leaders not to pass laws
which, by disregarding the dignity of the person, undermine the very fabric of society.

The Church well knows that it is difficult to mount an effective legal defence of life in pluralistic democracies,
because of the presence of strong cultural currents with differing outlooks. At the same time, certain that moral
truth cannot fail to make its presence deeply felt in every conscience, the Church encourages political leaders,
starting with those who are Christians, not to give in, but to make those choices which, taking into account what
is realistically attainable, will lead to the re- establishment of a just order in the defence and promotion of the
value of life. Here it must be noted that it is not enough to remove unjust laws. The underlying causes of attacks
on life have to be eliminated, especially by ensuring proper support for families and motherhood. A family
policy must be the basis and driving force of all social policies. For this reason there need to be set in place
social and political initiatives capable of guaranteeing conditions of true freedom of choice in matters of
parenthood. It is also necessary to rethink labour, urban, residential and social service policies so as to
harmonize working schedules with time available for the family, so that it becomes effectively possible to take
care of children and the elderly. 

91. Today an important part of policies which favour life is the issue of population growth. Certainly public
authorities have a responsibility to "intervene to orient the demography of the population".114 But such
interventions must always take into account and respect the primary and inalienable responsibility of married
couples and families, and cannot employ methods which fail to respect the person and fundamental human
rights, beginning with the right to life of every innocent human being. It is therefore morally unacceptable to
encourage, let alone impose, the use of methods such as contraception, sterilization and abortion in order to
regulate births. The ways of solving the population problem are quite different. Governments and the various
international agencies must above all strive to create economic, social, public health and cultural conditions
which will enable married couples to make their choices about procreation in full freedom and with genuine
responsibility. They must then make efforts to ensure "greater opportunities and a fairer distribution of wealth
so that everyone can share equitably in the goods of creation. Solutions must be sought on the global level by
establishing a true economy of communion and sharing of goods, in both the national and international
order".115 This is the only way to respect the dignity of persons and families, as well as the authentic cultural
patrimony of peoples.

Service of the Gospel of life is thus an immense and complex task. This service increasingly appears as a
valuable and fruitful area for positive cooperation with our brothers and sisters of other Churches and ecclesial
communities, in accordance with the practical ecumenism which the Second Vatican Council authoritatively
encouraged. 116 It also appears as a providential area for dialogue and joint efforts with the followers of other
religions and with all people of good will. No single person or group has a monopoly on the defence and
promotion of life. These are everyone's task and responsibility. On the eve of the Third Millennium, the
challenge facing us is an arduous one: only the concerted efforts of all those who believe in the value of life can
prevent a setback of unforeseeable consequences for civilization.

"Your children will be like olive shoots around your table" (Ps 128:3): the family as the "sanctuary of life" 

92. Within the "people of life and the people for life", the family has a decisive responsibility. This
responsibility flows from its very nature as a community of life and love, founded upon marriage, and from its
mission to "guard, reveal and communicate love".117 Here it is a matter of God's own love, of which parents are
co-workers and as it were interpreters when they transmit life and raise it according to his fatherly plan. 118 This
is the love that becomes selflessness, receptiveness and gift. Within the family each member is accepted,
respected and honoured precisely because he or she is a person; and if any family member is in greater need, the
care which he or she receives is all the more intense and attentive.

The family has a special role to play throughout the life of its members, from birth to death. It is truly "the
sanctuary of life: the place in which life-the gift of God-can be properly welcomed and protected against the
many attacks to which it is exposed, and can develop in accordance with what constitutes authentic human
growth".119 Consequently the role of the family in building a culture of life is decisive and irreplaceable.

As the domestic church, the family is summoned to proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life. This is a
responsibility which first concerns married couples, called to be givers of life, on the basis of an ever greater
awareness of the meaning of procreation as a unique event which clearly reveals that human life is a gift
received in order then to be given as a gift. In giving origin to a new life, parents recognize that the child, "as
the fruit of their mutual gift of love, is, in turn, a gift for both of them, a gift which flows from them".120

It is above all in raising children that the family fulfils its mission to proclaim the Gospel of life. By word and
example, in the daily round of relations and choices, and through concrete actions and signs, parents lead their
children to authentic freedom, actualized in the sincere gift of self, and they cultivate in them respect for others,
a sense of justice, cordial openness, dialogue, generous service, solidarity and all the other values which help
people to live life as a gift. In raising children Christian parents must be concerned about their children's faith
and help them to fulfil the vocation God has given them. The parents' mission as educators also includes
teaching and giving their children an example of the true meaning of suffering and death. They will be able to
do this if they are sensitive to all kinds of suffering around them and, even more, if they succeed in fostering
attitudes of closeness, assistance and sharing towards sick or elderly members of the family. 

93. The family celebrates the Gospel of life through daily prayer, both individual prayer and family prayer. The
family prays in order to glorify and give thanks to God for the gift of life, and implores his light and strength in
order to face times of difficulty and suffering without losing hope. But the celebration which gives meaning to
every other form of prayer and worship is found in the family's actual daily life together, if it is a life of love
and self-giving.

This celebration thus becomes a service to the Gospel of life, expressed through solidarity as experienced within
and around the family in the form of concerned, attentive and loving care shown in the humble, ordinary events
of each day. A particularly significant expression of solidarity between families is a willingness to adopt or take
in children abandoned by their parents or in situations of serious hardship. True parental love is ready to go
beyond the bonds of flesh and blood in order to accept children from other families, offering them whatever is
necessary for their well-being and full development. Among the various forms of adoption, consideration
should be given to adoption-at-a-distance, preferable in cases where the only reason for giving up the child is
the extreme poverty of the child's family. Through this type of adoption, parents are given the help needed to
support and raise their children, without their being uprooted from their natural environment.

As "a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good",121 solidarity also needs to be
practised through participation in social and political life. Serving the Gospel of life thus means that the family,
particularly through its membership of family associations, works to ensure that the laws and institutions of the
State in no way violate the right to life, from conception to natural death, but rather protect and promote it. 

94. Special attention must be given to the elderly. While in some cultures older people remain a part of the
family with an important and active role, in others the elderly are regarded as a useless burden and are left to
themselves. Here the temptation to resort to euthanasia can more easily arise.

Neglect of the elderly or their outright rejection are intolerable. Their presence in the family, or at least their
closeness to the family in cases where limited living space or other reasons make this impossible, is of
fundamental importance in creating a climate of mutual interaction and enriching communication between the
different age-groups. It is therefore important to preserve, or to re-establish where it has been lost, a sort of
"covenant" between generations. In this way parents, in their later years, can receive from their children the
acceptance and solidarity which they themselves gave to their children when they brought them into the world.
This is required by obedience to the divine commandment to honour one's father and mother (cf. Ex 20:12; Lev
19:3). But there is more. The elderly are not only to be considered the object of our concern, closeness and
service. They themselves have a valuable contribution to make to the Gospel of life. Thanks to the rich treasury
of experiences they have acquired through the years, the elderly can and must be sources of wisdom and
witnesses of hope and love.

Although it is true that "the future of humanity passes by way of the family",122 it must be admitted that modern
social, economic and cultural conditions make the family's task of serving life more difficult and demanding. In
order to fulfil its vocation as the "sanctuary of life", as the cell of a society which loves and welcomes life, the
family urgently needs to be helped and supported. Communities and States must guarantee all the support,
including economic support, which families need in order to meet their problems in a truly human way. For her
part, the Church must untiringly promote a plan of pastoral care for families, capable of making every family
rediscover and live with joy and courage its mission to further the Gospel of life.
"Walk as children of light" (Eph 5:8): bringing about a transformation of culture 

95. "Walk as children of light ... and try to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful
works of darkness" (Eph 5:8, 10-11). In our present social context, marked by a dramatic struggle between the
"culture of life" and the "culture of death", there is need to develop a deep critical sense, capable of discerning
true values and authentic needs.

What is urgently called for is a general mobilization of consciences and a united ethical effort to activate a great
campaign in support of life. All together, we must build a new culture of life: new, because it will be able to
confront and solve today's unprecedented problems affecting human life; new, because it will be adopted with
deeper and more dynamic conviction by all Christians; new, because it will be capable of bringing about a
serious and courageous cultural dialogue among all parties. While the urgent need for such a cultural
transformation is linked to the present historical situation, it is also rooted in the Church's mission of
evangelization. The purpose of the Gospel, in fact, is "to transform humanity from within and to make it
new".123 Like the yeast which leavens the whole measure of dough (cf. Mt 13:33), the Gospel is meant to
permeate all cultures and give them life from within, 124 so that they may express the full truth about the human
person and about human life.

We need to begin with the renewal of a culture of life within Christian communities themselves. Too often it
happens that believers, even those who take an active part in the life of the Church, end up by separating their
Christian faith from its ethical requirements concerning life, and thus fall into moral subjectivism and certain
objectionable ways of acting. With great openness and courage, we need to question how widespread is the
culture of life today among individual Christians, families, groups and communities in our Dioceses. With equal
clarity and determination we must identify the steps we are called to take in order to serve life in all its truth. At
the same time, we need to promote a serious and in-depth exchange about basic issues of human life with
everyone, including non-believers, in intellectual circles, in the various professional spheres and at the level of
people's everyday life. 

96. The first and fundamental step towards this cultural transformation consists in forming consciences with
regard to the incomparable and inviolable worth of every human life. It is of the greatest importance to re-
establish the essential connection between life and freedom. These are inseparable goods: where one is violated,
the other also ends up being violated. There is no true freedom where life is not welcomed and loved; and there
is no fullness of life except in freedom. Both realities have something inherent and specific which links them
inextricably: the vocation to love. Love, as a sincere gift of self, 125 is what gives the life and freedom of the
person their truest meaning.

No less critical in the formation of conscience is the recovery of the necessary link between freedom and truth.
As I have frequently stated, when freedom is detached from objective truth it becomes impossible to establish
personal rights on a firm rational basis; and the ground is laid for society to be at the mercy of the unrestrained
will of individuals or the oppressive totalitarianism of public authority. 126

It is therefore essential that man should acknowledge his inherent condition as a creature to whom God has
granted being and life as a gift and a duty. Only by admitting his innate dependence can man live and use his
freedom to the full, and at the same time respect the life and freedom of every other person. Here especially one
sees that "at the heart of every culture lies the attitude man takes to the greatest mystery: the mystery of God".127
Where God is denied and people live as though he did not exist, or his commandments are not taken into
account, the dignity of the human person and the inviolability of human life also end up being rejected or
compromised. 

97. Closely connected with the formation of conscience is the work of education, which helps individuals to be
ever more human, leads them ever more fully to the truth, instils in them growing respect for life, and trains
them in right interpersonal relationships.
In particular, there is a need for education about the value of life from its very origins. It is an illusion to think
that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not help the young to accept and experience sexuality and
love and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection. Sexuality, which
enriches the whole person, "manifests its inmost meaning in leading the person to the gift of self in love".128 The
trivialization of sexuality is among the principal factors which have led to contempt for new life. Only a true
love is able to protect life. There can be no avoiding the duty to offer, especially to adolescents and young
adults, an authentic education in sexuality and in love, an education which involves training in chastity as a
virtue which fosters personal maturity and makes one capable of respecting the "spousal" meaning of the body.

The work of educating in the service of life involves the training of married couples in responsible procreation.
In its true meaning, responsible procreation requires couples to be obedient to the Lord's call and to act as
faithful interpreters of his plan. This happens when the family is generously open to new lives, and when
couples maintain an attitude of openness and service to life, even if, for serious reasons and in respect for the
moral law, they choose to avoid a new birth for the time being or indefinitely. The moral law obliges them in
every case to control the impulse of instinct and passion, and to respect the biological laws inscribed in their
person. It is precisely this respect which makes legitimate, at the service of responsible procreation, the use of
natural methods of regulating fertility. From the scientific point of view, these methods are becoming more and
more accurate and make it possible in practice to make choices in harmony with moral values. An honest
appraisal of their effectiveness should dispel certain prejudices which are still widely held, and should convince
married couples, as well as health-care and social workers, of the importance of proper training in this area. The
Church is grateful to those who, with personal sacrifice and often unacknowledged dedication, devote
themselves to the study and spread of these methods, as well to the promotion of education in the moral values
which they presuppose.

The work of education cannot avoid a consideration of suffering and death. These are a part of human existence,
and it is futile, not to say misleading, to try to hide them or ignore them. On the contrary, people must be helped
to understand their profound mystery in all its harsh reality. Even pain and suffering have meaning and value
when they are experienced in close connection with love received and given. In this regard, I have called for the
yearly celebration of the World Day of the Sick, emphasizing "the salvific nature of the offering up of suffering
which, experienced in communion with Christ, belongs to the very essence of the Redemption".129 Death itself
is anything but an event without hope. It is the door which opens wide on eternity and, for those who live in
Christ, an experience of participation in the mystery of his Death and Resurrection. 

98. In a word, we can say that the cultural change which we are calling for demands from everyone the courage
to adopt a new life-style, consisting in making practical choices-at the personal, family, social and international
level-on the basis of a correct scale of values: the primacy of being over having, 130 of the person over things. 131
This renewed life-style involves a passing from indifference to concern for others, from rejection to acceptance
of them. Other people are not rivals from whom we must defend ourselves, but brothers and sisters to be
supported. They are to be loved for their own sakes, and they enrich us by their very presence.

In this mobilization for a new culture of life no one must feel excluded: everyone has an important role to play.
Together with the family, teachers and educators have a particularly valuable contribution to make. Much will
depend on them if young people, trained in true freedom, are to be able to preserve for themselves and make
known to others new, authentic ideals of life, and if they are to grow in respect for and service to every other
person, in the family and in society.

Intellectuals can also do much to build a new culture of human life. A special task falls to Catholic intellectuals,
who are called to be present and active in the leading centres where culture is formed, in schools and
universities, in places of scientific and technological research, of artistic creativity and of the study of man.
Allowing their talents and activity to be nourished by the living force of the Gospel, they ought to place
themselves at the service of a new culture of life by offering serious and well documented contributions,
capable of commanding general respect and interest by reason of their merit. It was precisely for this purpose
that I established the Pontifical Acad- emy for Life, assigning it the task of "studying and providing information
and training about the principal problems of law and biomedicine pertaining to the promotion of life, especially
in the direct relationship they have with Christian morality and the directives of the Church's Magisterium".132 A
specific contribution will also have to come from Universities, particularly from Catholic Universities, and from
Centres, Institutes and Committees of Bioethics.

An important and serious responsibility belongs to those involved in the mass media, who are called to ensure
that the messages which they so effectively transmit will support the culture of life. They need to present noble
models of life and make room for instances of people's positive and sometimes heroic love for others. With
great respect they should also present the positive values of sexuality and human love, and not insist on what
defiles and cheapens human dignity. In their interpretation of things, they should refrain from emphasizing
anything that suggests or fosters feelings or attitudes of indifference, contempt or rejection in relation to life.
With scrupulous concern for factual truth, they are called to combine freedom of information with respect for
every person and a profound sense of humanity. 

99. In transforming culture so that it supports life, women occupy a place, in thought and action, which is
unique and decisive. It depends on them to promote a "new feminism" which rejects the temptation of imitating
models of "male domination", in order to acknowledge and affirm the true genius of women in every aspect of
the life of society, and overcome all discrimination, violence and exploitation.

Making my own the words of the concluding message of the Second Vatican Council, I address to women this
urgent appeal: "Reconcile people with life".133 You are called to bear witness to the meaning of genuine love, of
that gift of self and of that acceptance of others which are present in a special way in the relationship of husband
and wife, but which ought also to be at the heart of every other interpersonal relationship. The experience of
motherhood makes you acutely aware of the other person and, at the same time, confers on you a particular
task: "Motherhood involves a special communion with the mystery of life, as it develops in the woman's
womb ... This unique contact with the new human being developing within her gives rise to an attitude towards
human beings not only towards her own child, but every human being, which profoundly marks the woman's
personality".134 A mother welcomes and carries in herself another human being, enabling it to grow inside her,
giving it room, respecting it in its otherness. Women first learn and then teach others that human relations are
authentic if they are open to accepting the other person: a person who is recognized and loved because of the
dignity which comes from being a person and not from other considerations, such as usefulness, strength,
intelligence, beauty or health. This is the fundamental contribution which the Church and humanity expect from
women. And it is the indispensable prerequisite for an authentic cultural change.

I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many
factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful
and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was
and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand
what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and
trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of
Reconciliation. To the same Father and his mercy you can with sure hope entrust your child. With the friendly
and expert help and advice of other people, and as a result of your own painful experience, you can be among
the most eloquent defenders of everyone's right to life. Through your commitment to life, whether by accepting
the birth of other children or by welcoming and caring for those most in need of someone to be close to them,
you will become promoters of a new way of looking at human life. 

100. In this great endeavour to create a new culture of life we are inspired and sustained by the confidence that
comes from knowing that the Gospel of life, like the Kingdom of God itself, is growing and producing abundant
fruit (cf. Mk 4:26-29). There is certainly an enormous disparity between the powerful resources available to the
forces promoting the "culture of death" and the means at the disposal of those working for a "culture of life and
love". But we know that we can rely on the help of God, for whom nothing is impossible (cf. Mt 19:26).
Filled with this certainty, and moved by profound concern for the destiny of every man and woman, I repeat
what I said to those families who carry out their challenging mission amid so many difficulties: 135 a great
prayer for life is urgently needed, a prayer which will rise up throughout the world. Through special initiatives
and in daily prayer, may an impassioned plea rise to God, the Creator and lover of life, from every Christian
community, from every group and association, from every family and from the heart of every believer. Jesus
himself has shown us by his own example that prayer and fasting are the first and most effective weapons
against the forces of evil (cf. Mt 4:1-11). As he taught his disciples, some demons cannot be driven out except
in this way (cf. Mk 9:29). Let us therefore discover anew the humility and the courage to pray and fast so that
power from on high will break down the walls of lies and deceit: the walls which conceal from the sight of so
many of our brothers and sisters the evil of practices and laws which are hostile to life. May this same power
turn their hearts to resolutions and goals inspired by the civilization of life and love.

"We are writing this that our joy may be complete" (1 Jn 1:4): the Gospel of life is for the whole of human
society 

101. "We are writing you this that our joy may be complete" (1 Jn 1:4). The revelation of the Gospel of life is
given to us as a good to be shared with all people: so that all men and women may have fellowship with us and
with the Trinity (cf. 1 Jn 1:3). Our own joy would not be complete if we failed to share this Gospel with others
but kept it only for ourselves.

The Gospel of life is not for believers alone: it is for everyone. The issue of life and its defence and promotion
is not a concern of Christians alone. Although faith provides special light and strength, this question arises in
every human conscience which seeks the truth and which cares about the future of humanity. Life certainly has
a sacred and religious value, but in no way is that value a concern only of believers. The value at stake is one
which every human being can grasp by the light of reason; thus it necessarily concerns everyone.

Consequently, all that we do as the "people of life and for life" should be interpreted correctly and welcomed
with favour. When the Church declares that unconditional respect for the right to life of every innocent person-
from conception to natural death-is one of the pillars on which every civil society stands, she "wants simply to
promote a human State. A State which recognizes the defence of the fundamental rights of the human person,
especially of the weakest, as its primary duty".136

The Gospel of life is for the whole of human society. To be actively pro-life is to contribute to the renewal of
society through the promotion of the common good. It is impossible to further the common good without
acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are
founded and from which they develop. A society lacks solid foundations when, on the one hand, it asserts
values such as the dignity of the person, justice and peace, but then, on the other hand, radically acts to the
contrary by allowing or tolerating a variety of ways in which human life is devalued and violated, especially
where it is weak or marginalized. Only respect for life can be the foundation and guarantee of the most precious
and essential goods of society, such as democracy and peace.

There can be no true democracy without a rec- ognition of every person's dignity and without respect for his or
her rights.

Nor can there be true peace unless life is defended and promoted. As Paul VI pointed out: "Every crime against
life is an attack on peace, especially if it strikes at the moral conduct of people... But where human rights are
truly professed and publicly recognized and defended, peace becomes the joyful and operative climate of life in
society".137

The "people of life" rejoices in being able to share its commitment with so many others. Thus may the "people
for life" constantly grow in number and may a new culture of love and solidarity develop for the true good of
the whole of human society.
  

CONCLUSION 

102. At the end of this Encyclical, we naturally look again to the Lord Jesus, "the Child born for us" (cf. Is 9:6),
that in him we may contemplate "the Life" which "was made manifest" (1 Jn 1:2). In the mystery of Christ's
Birth the encounter of God with man takes place and the earthly journey of the Son of God begins, a journey
which will culminate in the gift of his life on the Cross. By his death Christ will conquer death and become for
all humanity the source of new life.

The one who accepted "Life" in the name of all and for the sake of all was Mary, the Virgin Mother; she is thus
most closely and personally associated with the Gospel of life. Mary's consent at the Annunciation and her
motherhood stand at the very beginning of the mystery of life which Christ came to bestow on humanity (cf. Jn
10:10). Through her acceptance and loving care for the life of the Incarnate Word, human life has been rescued
from condemnation to final and eternal death.

For this reason, Mary, "like the Church of which she is the type, is a mother of all who are reborn to life. She is
in fact the mother of the Life by which everyone lives, and when she brought it forth from herself she in some
way brought to rebirth all those who were to live by that Life".138

As the Church contemplates Mary's motherhood, she discovers the meaning of her own motherhood and the
way in which she is called to express it. At the same time, the Church's experience of motherhood leads to a
most profound understanding of Mary's experience as the incomparable model of how life should be welcomed
and cared for.

"A great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun" (Rev 12:1): the motherhood of Mary
and of the Church 

103. The mutual relationship between the mystery of the Church and Mary appears clearly in the "great portent"
described in the Book of Rev- elation: "A great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with
the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars" (12:1). In this sign the Church recognizes an
image of her own mystery: present in history, she knows that she transcends history, inasmuch as she
constitutes on earth the "seed and beginning" of the Kingdom of God. 139 The Church sees this mystery fulfilled
in complete and exemplary fashion in Mary. She is the woman of glory in whom God's plan could be carried
out with supreme perfection.

The "woman clothed with the sun"-the Book of Revelation tells us-"was with child" (12:2). The Church is fully
aware that she bears within herself the Saviour of the world, Christ the Lord. She is aware that she is called to
offer Christ to the world, giving men and women new birth into God's own life. But the Church cannot forget
that her mission was made possible by the motherhood of Mary, who conceived and bore the One who is "God
from God", "true God from true God". Mary is truly the Mother of God, the Theotokos, in whose motherhood
the vocation to motherhood bestowed by God on every woman is raised to its highest level. Thus Mary becomes
the model of the Church, called to be the "new Eve", the mother of believers, the mother of the "living" (cf. Gen
3:20).

The Church's spiritual motherhood is only achieved-the Church knows this too-through the pangs and "the
labour" of childbirth (cf. Rev 12:2), that is to say, in constant tension with the forces of evil which still roam the
world and affect human hearts, offering resistance to Christ: "In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it" (Jn 1:4-5).

Like the Church, Mary too had to live her motherhood amid suffering: "This child is set ... for a sign that is
spoken against-and a sword will pierce through your own soul also-that thoughts out of many hearts may be
revealed" (Lk 2:34-35). The words which Simeon addresses to Mary at the very beginning of the Saviour's
earthly life sum up and prefigure the rejection of Jesus, and with him of Mary, a rejection which will reach its
culmination on Calvary. "Standing by the cross of Jesus" (Jn 19:25), Mary shares in the gift which the Son
makes of himself: she offers Jesus, gives him over, and begets him to the end for our sake. The "yes" spoken on
the day of the Annunciation reaches full maturity on the day of the Cross, when the time comes for Mary to
receive and beget as her children all those who become disciples, pouring out upon them the saving love of her
Son: "When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, ?
Woman, behold, your son!' " (Jn 19:26).

"And the dragon stood before the woman ... that he might devour her child when she brought it forth" (Rev
12:4): life menaced by the forces of evil 

104. In the Book of Revelation, the "great portent" of the "woman" (12:1) is accompanied by "another portent
which appeared in heaven": "a great red dragon" (Rev 12:3), which represents Satan, the personal power of evil,
as well as all the powers of evil at work in history and opposing the Church's mission.

Here too Mary sheds light on the Community of Believers. The hostility of the powers of evil is, in fact, an
insidious opposition which, before affecting the disciples of Jesus, is directed against his mother. To save the
life of her Son from those who fear him as a dangerous threat, Mary has to flee with Joseph and the Child into
Egypt (cf. Mt 2:13-15).

Mary thus helps the Church to realize that life is always at the centre of a great struggle between good and evil,
between light and darkness. The dragon wishes to devour "the child brought forth" (cf. Rev 12:4), a figure of
Christ, whom Mary brought forth "in the fullness of time" (Gal 4:4) and whom the Church must unceasingly
offer to people in every age. But in a way that child is also a figure of every person, every child, especially
every helpless baby whose life is threatened, because-as the Council reminds us-"by his Incarnation the Son of
God has united himself in some fashion with every person".140 It is precisely in the "flesh" of every person that
Christ continues to reveal himself and to enter into fellowship with us, so that rejection of human life, in
whatever form that rejection takes, is really a rejection of Christ. This is the fascinating but also demanding
truth which Christ reveals to us and which his Church continues untiringly to proclaim: "Whoever receives one
such child in my name receives me" (Mt 18:5); "Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my
brethren, you did it to me" (Mt 25:40).

"Death shall be no more" (Rev 21:4): the splendour of the Resurrection 

105. The angel's Annunciation to Mary is framed by these reassuring words: "Do not be afraid, Mary" and "with
God nothing will be impossible" (Lk 1:30, 37). The whole of the Virgin Mother's life is in fact pervaded by the
certainty that God is near to her and that he accompanies her with his providential care. The same is true of the
Church, which finds "a place prepared by God" (Rev 12:6) in the desert, the place of trial but also of the
manifestation of God's love for his people (cf. Hos 2:16). Mary is a living word of comfort for the Church in her
struggle against death. Showing us the Son, the Church assures us that in him the forces of death have already
been defeated: "Death with life contended: combat strangely ended! Life's own Champion, slain, yet lives to
reign".141

The Lamb who was slain is alive, bearing the marks of his Passion in the splendour of the Res- urrection. He
alone is master of all the events of history: he opens its "seals" (cf. Rev 5:1-10) and proclaims, in time and
beyond, the power of life over death. In the "new Jerusalem", that new world towards which human history is
travelling, "death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former
things have passed away" (Rev 21:4).

And as we, the pilgrim people, the people of life and for life, make our way in confidence towards "a new
heaven and a new earth" (Rev 21:1), we look to her who is for us "a sign of sure hope and solace".142
 IOANNES PAULUS PP. II

VERITATIS SPLENDOR
 

Blessing

Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate,

Health and the Apostolic Blessing!

The splendour of truth shines forth in all the works of the Creator and, in a special way, in man, created in the
image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 1:26). Truth enlightens man's intelligence and shapes his freedom, leading
him to know and love the Lord. Hence the Psalmist prays: "Let the light of your face shine on us, O Lord" (Ps
4:6).

INTRODUCTION

Jesus Christ, the true light that enlightens everyone

1. Called to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, "the true light that enlightens everyone" (Jn 1:9), people
become "light in the Lord" and "children of light" (Eph 5:8), and are made holy by "obedience to the truth" (1
Pet 1:22).

This obedience is not always easy. As a result of that mysterious original sin, committed at the prompting of
Satan, the one who is "a liar and the father of lies" (Jn 8:44), man is constantly tempted to turn his gaze away
from the living and true God in order to direct it towards idols (cf. 1 Thes 1:9), exchanging "the truth about God
for a lie" (Rom 1:25). Man's capacity to know the truth is also darkened, and his will to submit to it is
weakened. Thus, giving himself over to relativism and scepticism (cf. Jn 18:38), he goes off in search of an
illusory freedom apart from truth itself.

But no darkness of error or of sin can totally take away from man the light of God the Creator. In the depths of
his heart there always remains a yearning for absolute truth and a thirst to attain full knowledge of it. This is
eloquently proved by man's tireless search for knowledge in all fields. It is proved even more by his search for
the meaning of life. The development of science and technology, this splendid testimony of the human capacity
for understanding and for perseverance, does not free humanity from the obligation to ask the ultimate religious
questions. Rather, it spurs us on to face the most painful and decisive of struggles, those of the heart and of the
moral conscience.

2. No one can escape from the fundamental questions: What must I do? How do I distinguish good from evil?
The answer is only possible thanks to the splendour of the truth which shines forth deep within the human spirit,
as the Psalmist bears witness: "There are many who say: 'O that we might see some good! Let the light of your
face shine on us, O Lord' " (Ps 4:6).

The light of God's face shines in all its beauty on the countenance of Jesus Christ, "the image of the invisible
God" (Col 1:15), the "reflection of God's glory" (Heb 1:3), "full of grace and truth" (Jn 1:14). Christ is "the
way, and the truth, and the life" (Jn 14:6). Consequently the decisive answer to every one of man's questions,
his religious and moral questions in particular, is given by Jesus Christ, or rather is Jesus Christ himself, as the
Second Vatican Council recalls: "In fact,it is only in the mystery of the Word incarnate that light is shed on the
mystery of man. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of the future man, namely, of Christ the Lord. It is Christ,
the last Adam, who fully discloses man to himself and unfolds his noble calling by revealing the mystery of the
Father and the Father's love".1

Jesus Christ, the "light of the nations", shines upon the face of his Church, which he sends forth to the whole
world to proclaim the Gospel to every creature (cf. Mk 16:15).2 Hence the Church, as the People of God among
the nations,3 while attentive to the new challenges of history and to mankind's efforts to discover the meaning of
life, offers to everyone the answer which comes from the truth about Jesus Christ and his Gospel. The Church
remains deeply conscious of her "duty in every age of examining the signs of the times and interpreting them in
the light of the Gospel, so that she can offer in a manner appropriate to each generation replies to the continual
human questionings on the meaning of this life and the life to come and on how they are related".4

3. The Church's Pastors, in communion with the Successor of Peter, are close to the faithful in this effort; they
guide and accompany them by their authoritative teaching, finding ever new ways of speaking with love and
mercy not only to believers but to all people of good will. The Second Vatican Council remains an
extraordinary witness of this attitude on the part of the Church which, as an "expert in humanity",5 places
herself at the service of every individual and of the whole world.6

The Church knows that the issue of morality is one which deeply touches every person; it involves all people,
even those who do not know Christ and his Gospel or God himself. She knows that it is precisely on the path of
the moral life that the way of salvation is open to all. The Second Vatican Council clearly recalled this when it
stated that "those who without any fault do not know anything about Christ or his Church, yet who search for
God with a sincere heart and under the influence of grace, try to put into effect the will of God as known to
them through the dictate of conscience... can obtain eternal salvation". The Council added: "Nor does divine
Providence deny the helps that are necessary for salvation to those who, through no fault of their own, have not
yet attained to the express recognition of God, yet who strive, not without divine grace, to lead an upright life.
For whatever goodness and truth is found in them is considered by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel
and bestowed by him who enlightens everyone that they may in the end have life".7

The purpose of the present Encyclical

4. At all times, but particularly in the last two centuries, the Popes, whether individually or together with the
College of Bishops, have developed and proposed a moral teaching regarding the many different spheres of
human life. In Christ's name and with his authority they have exhorted, passed judgment and explained. In their
efforts on behalf of humanity, in fidelity to their mission, they have confirmed, supported and consoled. With
the guarantee of assistance from the Spirit of truth they have contributed to a better understanding of moral
demands in the areas of human sexuality, the family, and social, economic and political life. In the tradition of
the Church and in the history of humanity, their teaching represents a constant deepening of knowledge with
regard to morality.8

Today, however, it seems necessary to reflect on the whole of the Church's moral teaching, with the precise
goal of recalling certain fundamental truths of Catholic doctrine which, in the present circumstances, risk being
distorted or denied. In fact, a new situation has come about within the Christian community itself, which has
experienced the spread of numerous doubts and objections of a human and psychological, social and cultural,
religious and even properly theological nature, with regard to the Church's moral teachings. It is no longer a
matter of limited and occasional dissent, but of an overall and systematic calling into question of traditional
moral doctrine, on the basis of certain anthropological and ethical presuppositions. At the root of these
presuppositions is the more or less obvious influence of currents of thought which end by detaching human
freedom from its essential and constitutive relationship to truth. Thus the traditional doctrine regarding the
natural law, and the universality and the permanent validity of its precepts, is rejected; certain of the Church's
moral teachings are found simply unacceptable; and the Magisterium itself is considered capable of intervening
in matters of morality only in order to "exhort consciences" and to "propose values", in the light of which each
individual will independently make his or her decisions and life choices.

In particular, note should be taken of the lack of harmony between the traditional response of the Church and
certain theological positions, encountered even in Seminaries and in Faculties of Theology, with regard to
questions of the greatest importance for the Church and for the life of faith of Christians, as well as for the life
of society itself. In particular, the question is asked: do the commandments of God, which are written on the
human heart and are part of the Covenant, really have the capacity to clarify the daily decisions of individuals
and entire societies? Is it possible to obey God and thus love God and neighbour, without respecting these
commandments in all circumstances? Also, an opinion is frequently heard which questions the intrinsic and
unbreakable bond between faith and morality, as if membership in the Church and her internal unity were to be
decided on the basis of faith alone, while in the sphere of morality a pluralism of opinions and of kinds of
behaviour could be tolerated, these being left to the judgment of the individual subjective conscience or to the
diversity of social and cultural contexts.

5. Given these circumstances, which still exist, I came to the decision — as I announced in my Apostolic Letter
Spiritus Domini, issued on 1 August 1987 on the second centenary of the death of Saint Alphonsus Maria de'
Liguori — to write an Encyclical with the aim of treating "more fully and more deeply the issues regarding the
very foundations of moral theology",9 foundations which are being undermined by certain present day
tendencies.

I address myself to you, Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate, who share with me the responsibility of
safeguarding "sound teaching" (2 Tim 4:3), with the intention of clearly setting forth certain aspects of doctrine
which are of crucial importance in facing what is certainly a genuine crisis, since the difficulties which it
engenders have most serious implications for the moral life of the faithful and for communion in the Church, as
well as for a just and fraternal social life.

If this Encyclical, so long awaited, is being published only now, one of the reasons is that it seemed fitting for it
to be preceded by the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which contains a complete and systematic exposition
of Christian moral teaching. The Catechism presents the moral life of believers in its fundamental elements and
in its many aspects as the life of the "children of God": "Recognizing in the faith their new dignity, Christians
are called to lead henceforth a life 'worthy of the Gospel of Christ' (Phil 1:27). Through the sacraments and
prayer they receive the grace of Christ and the gifts of his Spirit which make them capable of such a life".10
Consequently, while referring back to the Catechism "as a sure and authentic reference text for teaching
Catholic doctrine",11 the Encyclical will limit itself to dealing with certain fundamental questions regarding the
Church's moral teaching, taking the form of a necessary discernment about issues being debated by ethicists
and moral theologians. The specific purpose of the present Encyclical is this: to set forth, with regard to the
problems being discussed, the principles of a moral teaching based upon Sacred Scripture and the living
Apostolic Tradition,12 and at the same time to shed light on the presuppositions and consequences of the dissent
which that teaching has met.

CHAPTER I - "TEACHER, WHAT GOOD MUST I DO...? " (Mt 19:16) - Christ and the answer to the
question about morality

"Someone came to him..." (Mt 19:16)

6. The dialogue of Jesus with the rich young man, related in the nineteenth chapter of Saint Matthew's Gospel,
can serve as a useful guide for listening once more in a lively and direct way to his moral teaching: "Then
someone came to him and said, 'Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?' And he said to him, 'Why do
you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the
commandments. 'He said to him, 'Which ones?' And Jesus said, 'You shall not murder; You shall not commit
adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; Honour your father and mother; also, You shall
love your neighbour as yourself.' The young man said to him, 'I have kept all these; what do I still lack?' Jesus
said to him, 'If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will
have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me' " (Mt 19:16-21).13

7. "Then someone came to him...". In the young man, whom Matthew's Gospel does not name, we can recognize
every person who, consciously or not, approaches Christ the Redeemer of man and questions him about
morality. For the young man, the question is not so much about rules to be followed, but about the full meaning
of life. This is in fact the aspiration at the heart of every human decision and action, the quiet searching and
interior prompting which sets freedom in motion. This question is ultimately an appeal to the absolute Good
which attracts us and beckons us; it is the echo of a call from God who is the origin and goal of man's life.
Precisely in this perspective the Second Vatican Council called for a renewal of moral theology, so that its
teaching would display the lofty vocation which the faithful have received in Christ,14 the only response fully
capable of satisfying the desire of the human heart.

In order to make this "encounter" with Christ possible, God willed his Church. Indeed, the Church "wishes to
serve this single end: that each person may be able to find Christ, in order that Christ may walk with each
person the path of life".15

"Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?" (Mt 19:16)

8. The question which the rich young man puts to Jesus of Nazareth is one which rises from the depths of his
heart. It is an essential and unavoidable question for the life of every man, for it is about the moral good which
must be done, and about eternal life. The young man senses that there is a connection between moral good and
the fulfilment of his own destiny. He is a devout Israelite, raised as it were in the shadow of the Law of the
Lord. If he asks Jesus this question, we can presume that it is not because he is ignorant of the answer contained
in the Law. It is more likely that the attractiveness of the person of Jesus had prompted within him new
questions about moral good. He feels the need to draw near to the One who had begun his preaching with this
new and decisive proclamation: "The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe
in the Gospel" (Mk 1:15).

People today need to turn to Christ once again in order to receive from him the answer to their questions about
what is good and what is evil. Christ is the Teacher, the Risen One who has life in himself and who is always
present in his Church and in the world. It is he who opens up to the faithful the book of the Scriptures and, by
fully revealing the Father's will, teaches the truth about moral action. At the source and summit of the economy
of salvation, as the Alpha and the Omega of human history (cf. Rev 1:8; 21:6; 22:13), Christ sheds light on
man's condition and his integral vocation. Consequently, "the man who wishes to understand himself
thoroughly — and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards
and measures of his being — must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his
life and death, draw near to Christ. He must, so to speak, enter him with all his own self; he must 'appropriate'
and assimilate the whole of the reality of the Incarnation and Redemption in order to find himself. If this
profound process takes place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but also of deeper
wonder at himself".16

If we therefore wish to go to the heart of the Gospel's moral teaching and grasp its profound and unchanging
content, we must carefully inquire into the meaning of the question asked by the rich young man in the Gospel
and, even more, the meaning of Jesus' reply, allowing ourselves to be guided by him. Jesus, as a patient and
sensitive teacher, answers the young man by taking him, as it were, by the hand, and leading him step by step to
the full truth.

"There is only one who is good" (Mt 19:17)

9. Jesus says: "Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you wish to enter into
life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17). In the versions of the Evangelists Mark and Luke the question is
phrased in this way: "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone" (Mk 10:18; cf. Lk 18:19).

Before answering the question, Jesus wishes the young man to have a clear idea of why he asked his question.
The "Good Teacher" points out to him — and to all of us — that the answer to the question, "What good must I
do to have eternal life?" can only be found by turning one's mind and heart to the "One" who is good: "No one
is good but God alone" (Mk 10:18; cf. Lk 18:19). Only God can answer the question about what is good,
because he is the Good itself.

To ask about the good, in fact, ultimately means to turn towards God, the fullness of goodness. Jesus shows that
the young man's question is really a religious question, and that the goodness that attracts and at the same time
obliges man has its source in God, and indeed is God himself. God alone is worthy of being loved "with all
one's heart, and with all one's soul, and with all one's mind" (Mt 22:37). He is the source of man's happiness.
Jesus brings the question about morally good action back to its religious foundations, to the acknowledgment of
God, who alone is goodness, fullness of life, the final end of human activity, and perfect happiness.

10. The Church, instructed by the Teacher's words, believes that man, made in the image of the Creator,
redeemed by the Blood of Christ and made holy by the presence of the Holy Spirit, has as the ultimate purpose
of his life to live "for the praise of God's glory" (cf. Eph 1:12), striving to make each of his actions reflect the
splendour of that glory. "Know, then, O beautiful soul, that you are the image of God", writes Saint Ambrose.
"Know that you are the glory of God (1 Cor 11:7). Hear how you are his glory. The Prophet says: Your
knowledge has become too wonderful for me (cf. Ps. 138:6, Vulg.). That is to say, in my work your majesty has
become more wonderful; in the counsels of men your wisdom is exalted. When I consider myself, such as I am
known to you in my secret thoughts and deepest emotions, the mysteries of your knowledge are disclosed to me.
Know then, O man, your greatness, and be vigilant".17

What man is and what he must do becomes clear as soon as God reveals himself. The Decalogue is based on
these words: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage"
(Ex 20:2-3). In the "ten words" of the Covenant with Israel, and in the whole Law, God makes himself known
and acknowledged as the One who "alone is good"; the One who despite man's sin remains the "model" for
moral action, in accordance with his command, "You shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy" (Lev
19:2); as the One who, faithful to his love for man, gives him his Law (cf. Ex 19:9-24 and 20:18-21) in order to
restore man's original and peaceful harmony with the Creator and with all creation, and, what is more, to draw
him into his divine love: "I will walk among you, and will be your God, and you shall be my people" (Lev
26:12).

The moral life presents itself as the response due to the many gratuitous initiatives taken by God out of love for
man. It is a response of love, according to the statement made in Deuteronomy about the fundamental
commandment: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all
your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command you this day
shall be upon your heart; and you shall teach them diligently to your children" (Dt 6:4-7). Thus the moral life,
caught up in the gratuitousness of God's love, is called to reflect his glory: "For the one who loves God it is
enough to be pleasing to the One whom he loves: for no greater reward should be sought than that love itself;
charity in fact is of God in such a way that God himself is charity".18
11. The statement that "There is only one who is good" thus brings us back to the "first tablet" of the
commandments, which calls us to acknowledge God as the one Lord of all and to worship him alone for his
infinite holiness (cf. Ex 20:2-11). The good is belonging to God, obeying him, walking humbly with him in
doing justice and in loving kindness (cf.Mic 6:8). Acknowledging the Lord as God is the very core, the heart of
the Law, from which the particular precepts flow and towards which they are ordered. In the morality of the
commandments the fact that the people of Israel belongs to the Lord is made evident, because God alone is the
One who is good. Such is the witness of Sacred Scripture, imbued in every one of its pages with a lively
perception of God's absolute holiness: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts" (Is 6:3).

But if God alone is the Good, no human effort, not even the most rigorous observance of the commandments,
succeeds in "fulfilling" the Law, that is, acknowledging the Lord as God and rendering him the worship due to
him alone (cf. Mt 4:10). This "fulfilment" can come only from a gift of God: the offer of a share in the divine
Goodness revealed and communicated in Jesus, the one whom the rich young man addresses with the words
"Good Teacher" (Mk 10:17; Lk 18:18). What the young man now perhaps only dimly perceives will in the end
be fully revealed by Jesus himself in the invitation: "Come, follow me" (Mt 19:21).

"If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17)

12. Only God can answer the question about the good, because he is the Good. But God has already given an
answer to this question: he did so by creating man and ordering him with wisdom and love to his final end,
through the law which is inscribed in his heart (cf. Rom 2:15), the "natural law". The latter "is nothing other
than the light of understanding infused in us by God, whereby we understand what must be done and what must
be avoided. God gave this light and this law to man at creation".19 He also did so in the history of Israel,
particularly in the "ten words", the commandments of Sinai, whereby he brought into existence the people of the
Covenant (cf. Ex 24) and called them to be his "own possession among all peoples", "a holy nation" (Ex 19:5-
6), which would radiate his holiness to all peoples (cf. Wis 18:4; Ez 20:41). The gift of the Decalogue was a
promise and sign of the New Covenant, in which the law would be written in a new and definitive way upon the
human heart (cf. Jer 31:31-34), replacing the law of sin which had disfigured that heart (cf. Jer 17:1). In those
days, "a new heart" would be given, for in it would dwell "a new spirit", the Spirit of God (cf. Ez 36:24-28).20

Consequently, after making the important clarification: "There is only one who is good", Jesus tells the young
man: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17). In this way, a close connection is
made between eternal life and obedience to God's commandments: God's commandments show man the path of
life and they lead to it. From the very lips of Jesus, the new Moses, man is once again given the commandments
of the Decalogue. Jesus himself definitively confirms them and proposes them to us as the way and condition of
salvation. The commandments are linked to a promise. In the Old Covenant the object of the promise was the
possession of a land where the people would be able to live in freedom and in accordance with righteousness
(cf. Dt 6:20-25). In the New Covenant the object of the promise is the "Kingdom of Heaven", as Jesus declares
at the beginning of the "Sermon on the Mount" — a sermon which contains the fullest and most complete
formulation of the New Law (cf. Mt 5-7), clearly linked to the Decalogue entrusted by God to Moses on Mount
Sinai. This same reality of the Kingdom is referred to in the expression "eternal life", which is a participation in
the very life of God. It is attained in its perfection only after death, but in faith it is even now a light of truth, a
source of meaning for life, an inchoate share in the full following of Christ. Indeed, Jesus says to his disciples
after speaking to the rich young man: "Every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother
or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life" (Mt 19:29).

13. Jesus' answer is not enough for the young man, who continues by asking the Teacher about the
commandments which must be kept: "He said to him, 'Which ones?' " (Mt 19:18). He asks what he must do in
life in order to show that he acknowledges God's holiness. After directing the young man's gaze towards God,
Jesus reminds him of the commandments of the Decalogue regarding one's neighbour: "Jesus said: 'You shall
not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not bear false witness; Honour your father and mother;
also, You shall love your neighbour as yourself' " (Mt 19:18-19).

From the context of the conversation, and especially from a comparison of Matthew's text with the parallel
passages in Mark and Luke, it is clear that Jesus does not intend to list each and every one of the
commandments required in order to "enter into life", but rather wishes to draw the young man's attention to the
"centrality" of the Decalogue with regard to every other precept, inasmuch as it is the interpretation of what the
words "I am the Lord your God" mean for man. Nevertheless we cannot fail to notice which commandments of
the Law the Lord recalls to the young man. They are some of the commandments belonging to the so-called
"second tablet" of the Decalogue, the summary (cf. Rom 13: 8-10) and foundation of which is the
commandment of love of neighbour: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself" (Mt 19:19; cf. Mk 12:31). In
this commandment we find a precise expression of the singular dignity of the human person, "the only creature
that God has wanted for its own sake".21 The different commandments of the Decalogue are really only so many
reflections of the one commandment about the good of the person, at the level of the many different goods
which characterize his identity as a spiritual and bodily being in relationship with God, with his neighbour and
with the material world. As we read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, "the Ten Commandments are part
of God's Revelation. At the same time, they teach us man's true humanity. They shed light on the essential
duties, and so indirectly on the fundamental rights, inherent in the nature of the human person".22

The commandments of which Jesus reminds the young man are meant to safeguard the good of the person, the
image of God, by protecting his goods. "You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not
steal; You shall not bear false witness" are moral rules formulated in terms of prohibitions. These negative
precepts express with particular force the ever urgent need to protect human life, the communion of persons in
marriage, private property, truthfulness and people's good name.

The commandments thus represent the basic condition for love of neighbour; at the same time they are the proof
of that love. They are the first necessary step on the journey towards freedom, its starting-point. "The beginning
of freedom", Saint Augustine writes, "is to be free from crimes... such as murder, adultery, fornication, theft,
fraud, sacrilege and so forth. When once one is without these crimes (and every Christian should be without
them), one begins to lift up one's head towards freedom. But this is only the beginning of freedom, not perfect
freedom...".23

14. This certainly does not mean that Christ wishes to put the love of neighbour higher than, or even to set it
apart from, the love of God. This is evident from his conversation with the teacher of the Law, who asked him a
question very much like the one asked by the young man. Jesus refers him to the two commandments of love of
God and love of neighbour (cf. Lk 10:25-27), and reminds him that only by observing them will he have eternal
life: "Do this, and you will live" (Lk 10:28). Nonetheless it is significant that it is precisely the second of these
commandments which arouses the curiosity of the teacher of the Law, who asks him: "And who is my
neighbour?" (Lk 10:29). The Teacher replies with the parable of the Good Samaritan, which is critical for fully
understanding the commandment of love of neighbour (cf. Lk 10:30-37).

These two commandments, on which "depend all the Law and the Prophets" (Mt 22:40), are profoundly
connected and mutually related. Their inseparable unity is attested to by Christ in his words and by his very life:
his mission culminates in the Cross of our Redemption (cf. Jn 3:14-15), the sign of his indivisible love for the
Father and for humanity (cf. Jn 13:1).

Both the Old and the New Testaments explicitly affirm that without love of neighbour, made concrete in
keeping the commandments, genuine love for God is not possible. Saint John makes the point with
extraordinary forcefulness: "If anyone says, 'I love God', and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not
love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen" (Jn 4:20). The Evangelist echoes
the moral preaching of Christ, expressed in a wonderful and unambiguous way in the parable of the Good
Samaritan (cf. Lk 10:30-37) and in his words about the final judgment (cf. Mt 25:31-46).
15. In the "Sermon on the Mount", the magna charta of Gospel morality,24 Jesus says: "Do not think that I have
come to abolish the Law and the Prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them" (Mt 5:17). Christ
is the key to the Scriptures: "You search the Scriptures...; and it is they that bear witness to me" (Jn 5:39).
Christ is the centre of the economy of salvation, the recapitulation of the Old and New Testaments, of the
promises of the Law and of their fulfilment in the Gospel; he is the living and eternal link between the Old and
the New Covenants. Commenting on Paul's statement that "Christ is the end of the law" (Rom 10:4), Saint
Ambrose writes: "end not in the sense of a deficiency, but in the sense of the fullness of the Law: a fullness
which is achieved in Christ (plenitudo legis in Christo est), since he came not to abolish the Law but to bring it
to fulfilment. In the same way that there is an Old Testament, but all truth is in the New Testament, so it is for
the Law: what was given through Moses is a figure of the true law. Therefore, the Mosaic Law is an image of
the truth".25

Jesus brings God's commandments to fulfilment, particularly the commandment of love of neighbour, by
interiorizing their demands and by bringing out their fullest meaning. Love of neighbour springs from a loving
heart which, precisely because it loves, is ready to live out the loftiest challenges. Jesus shows that the
commandments must not be understood as a minimum limit not to be gone beyond, but rather as a path
involving a moral and spiritual journey towards perfection, at the heart of which is love (cf. Col 3:14). Thus the
commandment "You shall not murder" becomes a call to an attentive love which protects and promotes the life
of one's neighbour. The precept prohibiting adultery becomes an invitation to a pure way of looking at others,
capable of respecting the spousal meaning of the body: "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, 'You
shall not kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment'. But I say to you that every one who is angry with
his brother shall be liable to judgment... You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery'. But I
say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart"
(Mt 5:21-22, 27-28). Jesus himself is the living "fulfilment" of the Law inasmuch as he fulfils its authentic
meaning by the total gift of himself: he himself becomes a living and personal Law, who invites people to
follow him; through the Spirit, he gives the grace to share his own life and love and provides the strength to
bear witness to that love in personal choices and actions (cf. Jn 13:34-35).

"If you wish to be perfect" (Mt 19:21)

16. The answer he receives about the commandments does not satisfy the young man, who asks Jesus a further
question. "I have kept all these; what do I still lack? " (Mt 19:20). It is not easy to say with a clear conscience "I
have kept all these", if one has any understanding of the real meaning of the demands contained in God's Law.
And yet, even though he is able to make this reply, even though he has followed the moral ideal seriously and
generously from childhood, the rich young man knows that he is still far from the goal: before the person of
Jesus he realizes that he is still lacking something. It is his awareness of this insufficiency that Jesus addresses
in his final answer. Conscious of the young man's yearning for something greater, which would transcend a
legalistic interpretation of the commandments, the Good Teacher invites him to enter upon the path of
perfection: "If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will
have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me" (Mt 19:21).

Like the earlier part of Jesus' answer, this part too must be read and interpreted in the context of the whole
moral message of the Gospel, and in particular in the context of the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes (cf.
Mt 5:3-12), the first of which is precisely the Beatitude of the poor, the "poor in spirit" as Saint Matthew makes
clear (Mt 5:3), the humble. In this sense it can be said that the Beatitudes are also relevant to the answer given
by Jesus to the young man's question: "What good must I do to have eternal life? ". Indeed, each of the
Beatitudes promises, from a particular viewpoint, that very "good" which opens man up to eternal life, and
indeed is eternal life.
The Beatitudes are not specifically concerned with certain particular rules of behaviour. Rather, they speak of
basic attitudes and dispositions in life and therefore they do not coincide exactly with the commandments. On
the other hand, there is no separation or opposition between the Beatitudes and the commandments: both refer
to the good, to eternal life. The Sermon on the Mount begins with the proclamation of the Beatitudes, but also
refers to the commandments (cf. Mt 5:20-48). At the same time, the Sermon on the Mount demonstrates the
openness of the commandments and their orientation towards the horizon of the perfection proper to the
Beatitudes. These latter are above all promises, from which there also indirectly flow normative indications for
the moral life. In their originality and profundity they are a sort of self- portrait of Christ, and for this very
reason are invitations to discipleship and to communion of life with Christ.26

17. We do not know how clearly the young man in the Gospel understood the profound and challenging import
of Jesus' first reply: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments". But it is certain that the young
man's commitment to respect all the moral demands of the commandments represents the absolutely essential
ground in which the desire for perfection can take root and mature, the desire, that is, for the meaning of the
commandments to be completely fulfilled in following Christ. Jesus' conversation with the young man helps us
to grasp the conditions for the moral growth of man, who has been called to perfection: the young man, having
observed all the commandments, shows that he is incapable of taking the next step by himself alone. To do so
requires mature human freedom ("If you wish to be perfect") and God's gift of grace ("Come, follow me").

Perfection demands that maturity in self-giving to which human freedom is called. Jesus points out to the young
man that the commandments are the first and indispensable condition for having eternal life; on the other hand,
for the young man to give up all he possesses and to follow the Lord is presented as an invitation: "If you
wish...". These words of Jesus reveal the particular dynamic of freedom's growth towards maturity, and at the
same time they bear witness to the fundamental relationship between freedom and divine law. Human freedom
and God's law are not in opposition; on the contrary, they appeal one to the other. The follower of Christ knows
that his vocation is to freedom. "You were called to freedom, brethren" (Gal 5:13), proclaims the Apostle Paul
with joy and pride. But he immediately adds: "only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but
through love be servants of one another" (ibid.). The firmness with which the Apostle opposes those who
believe that they are justified by the Law has nothing to do with man's "liberation" from precepts. On the
contrary, the latter are at the service of the practice of love: "For he who loves his neighbour has fulfilled the
Law. The commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You shall
not covet,' and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, 'You shall love your neighbour as
yourself' " (Rom 13:8-9). Saint Augustine, after speaking of the observance of the commandments as being a
kind of incipient, imperfect freedom, goes on to say: "Why, someone will ask, is it not yet perfect? Because 'I
see in my members another law at war with the law of my reason'... In part freedom, in part slavery: not yet
complete freedom, not yet pure, not yet whole, because we are not yet in eternity. In part we retain our
weakness and in part we have attained freedom. All our sins were destroyed in Baptism, but does it follow that
no weakness remained after iniquity was destroyed? Had none remained, we would live without sin in this life.
But who would dare to say this except someone who is proud, someone unworthy of the mercy of our
deliverer?... Therefore, since some weakness has remained in us, I dare to say that to the extent to which we
serve God we are free, while to the extent that we follow the law of sin, we are still slaves".27

18. Those who live "by the flesh" experience God's law as a burden, and indeed as a denial or at least a
restriction of their own freedom. On the other hand, those who are impelled by love and "walk by the Spirit"
(Gal 5:16), and who desire to serve others, find in God's Law the fundamental and necessary way in which to
practise love as something freely chosen and freely lived out. Indeed, they feel an interior urge — a genuine
"necessity" and no longer a form of coercion — not to stop at the minimum demands of the Law, but to live
them in their "fullness". This is a still uncertain and fragile journey as long as we are on earth, but it is one made
possible by grace, which enables us to possess the full freedom of the children of God (cf. Rom 8:21) and thus
to live our moral life in a way worthy of our sublime vocation as "sons in the Son".
This vocation to perfect love is not restricted to a small group of individuals. The invitation, "go, sell your
possessions and give the money to the poor", and the promise "you will have treasure in heaven", are meant for
everyone, because they bring out the full meaning of the commandment of love for neighbour, just as the
invitation which follows, "Come, follow me", is the new, specific form of the commandment of love of God.
Both the commandments and Jesus' invitation to the rich young man stand at the service of a single and
indivisible charity, which spontaneously tends towards that perfection whose measure is God alone: "You,
therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Mt 5:48). In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus makes
even clearer the meaning of this perfection: "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful" (Lk 6:36).

"Come, follow me" (Mt 19:21)

19. The way and at the same time the content of this perfection consist in the following of Jesus, sequela
Christi, once one has given up one's own wealth and very self. This is precisely the conclusion of Jesus'
conversation with the young man: "Come, follow me" (Mt 19:21). It is an invitation the marvellous grandeur of
which will be fully perceived by the disciples after Christ's Resurrection, when the Holy Spirit leads them to all
truth (cf. Jn 16:13).

It is Jesus himself who takes the initiative and calls people to follow him. His call is addressed first to those to
whom he entrusts a particular mission, beginning with the Twelve; but it is also clear that every believer is
called to be a follower of Christ (cf. Acts 6:1). Following Christ is thus the essential and primordial foundation
of Christian morality: just as the people of Israel followed God who led them through the desert towards the
Promised Land (cf. Ex 13:21), so every disciple must follow Jesus, towards whom he is drawn by the Father
himself (cf. Jn 6:44).

This is not a matter only of disposing oneself to hear a teaching and obediently accepting a commandment.
More radically, it involves holding fast to the very person of Jesus, partaking of his life and his destiny, sharing
in his free and loving obedience to the will of the Father. By responding in faith and following the one who is
Incarnate Wisdom, the disciple of Jesus truly becomes a disciple of God (cf. Jn 6:45). Jesus is indeed the light
of the world, the light of life (cf. Jn 8:12). He is the shepherd who leads his sheep and feeds them (cf. Jn 10:11-
16); he is the way, and the truth, and the life (cf. Jn 14:6). It is Jesus who leads to the Father, so much so that to
see him, the Son, is to see the Father (cf. Jn 14:6-10). And thus to imitate the Son, "the image of the invisible
God" (Col 1:15), means to imitate the Father.

20. Jesus asks us to follow him and to imitate him along the path of love, a love which gives itself completely to
the brethren out of love for God: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you" (Jn
15:12). The word "as" requires imitation of Jesus and of his love, of which the washing of feet is a sign: "If I
then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given
you an example, that you should do as I have done to you" (Jn 13:14-15). Jesus' way of acting and his words,
his deeds and his precepts constitute the moral rule of Christian life. Indeed, his actions, and in particular his
Passion and Death on the Cross, are the living revelation of his love for the Father and for others. This is exactly
the love that Jesus wishes to be imitated by all who follow him. It is the "new" commandment: "A new
commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one
another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" (Jn 13:34-35).

The word "as" also indicates the degree of Jesus' love, and of the love with which his disciples are called to love
one another. After saying: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you" (Jn
15:12), Jesus continues with words which indicate the sacrificial gift of his life on the Cross, as the witness to a
love "to the end" (Jn 13:1): "Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" (Jn
15:13).
As he calls the young man to follow him along the way of perfection, Jesus asks him to be perfect in the
command of love, in "his" commandment: to become part of the unfolding of his complete giving, to imitate
and rekindle the very love of the "Good" Teacher, the one who loved "to the end". This is what Jesus asks of
everyone who wishes to follow him: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his
cross and follow me" (Mt 16:24).

21. Following Christ is not an outward imitation, since it touches man at the very depths of his being. Being a
follower of Christ means becoming conformed to him who became a servant even to giving himself on the Cross
(cf. Phil 2:5-8). Christ dwells by faith in the heart of the believer (cf. Eph 3:17), and thus the disciple is
conformed to the Lord. This is the effect of grace, of the active presence of the Holy Spirit in us.

Having become one with Christ, the Christian becomes a member of his Body, which is the Church (cf. Cor
12:13, 27). By the work of the Spirit, Baptism radically configures the faithful to Christ in the Paschal Mystery
of death and resurrection; it "clothes him" in Christ (cf. Gal 3:27): "Let us rejoice and give thanks", exclaims
Saint Augustine speaking to the baptized, "for we have become not only Christians, but Christ (...). Marvel and
rejoice: we have become Christ! ".28 Having died to sin, those who are baptized receive new life (cf. Rom 6:3-
11): alive for God in Christ Jesus, they are called to walk by the Spirit and to manifest the Spirit's fruits in their
lives (cf. Gal 5:16-25). Sharing in the Eucharist, the sacrament of the New Covenant (cf. 1 Cor 11:23-29), is the
culmination of our assimilation to Christ, the source of "eternal life" (cf. Jn 6:51-58), the source and power of
that complete gift of self, which Jesus — according to the testimony handed on by Paul — commands us to
commemorate in liturgy and in life: "As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's
death until he comes" (1 Cor 11:26).

"With God all things are possible" (Mt 19:26)

22. The conclusion of Jesus' conversation with the rich young man is very poignant: "When the young man
heard this, he went away sorrowful, for he had many possessions" (Mt 19:22). Not only the rich man but the
disciples themselves are taken aback by Jesus' call to discipleship, the demands of which transcend human
aspirations and abilities: "When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astounded and said, "Then who can
be saved?' " (Mt 19:25). But the Master refers them to God's power: "With men this is impossible, but with God
all things are possible" (Mt 19:26).

In the same chapter of Matthew's Gospel (19:3-10), Jesus, interpreting the Mosaic Law on marriage, rejects the
right to divorce, appealing to a "beginning" more fundamental and more authoritative than the Law of Moses:
God's original plan for mankind, a plan which man after sin has no longer been able to live up to: "For your
hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so" (Mt 19:8).
Jesus' appeal to the "beginning" dismays the disciples, who remark: "If such is the case of a man with his wife,
it is not expedient to marry" (Mt 19:10). And Jesus, referring specifically to the charism of celibacy "for the
Kingdom of Heaven" (Mt 19:12), but stating a general rule, indicates the new and surprising possibility opened
up to man by God's grace. "He said to them: 'Not everyone can accept this saying, but only those to whom it is
given' " (Mt 19:11).

To imitate and live out the love of Christ is not possible for man by his own strength alone. He becomes
capable of this love only by virtue of a gift received. As the Lord Jesus receives the love of his Father, so he in
turn freely communicates that love to his disciples: "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in
my love" (Jn 15:9). Christ's gift is his Spirit, whose first "fruit" (cf. Gal 5:22) is charity: "God's love has been
poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom 5:5). Saint Augustine asks:
"Does love bring about the keeping of the commandments, or does the keeping of the commandments bring
about love?" And he answers: "But who can doubt that love comes first? For the one who does not love has no
reason for keeping the commandments".29
23. "The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom 8:2). With
these words the Apostle Paul invites us to consider in the perspective of the history of salvation, which reaches
its fulfilment in Christ, the relationship between the (Old) Law and grace (the New Law). He recognizes the
pedagogic function of the Law, which, by enabling sinful man to take stock of his own powerlessness and by
stripping him of the presumption of his self-sufficiency, leads him to ask for and to receive "life in the Spirit".
Only in this new life is it possible to carry out God's commandments. Indeed, it is through faith in Christ that we
have been made righteous (cf. Rom 3:28): the "righteousness" which the Law demands, but is unable to give, is
found by every believer to be revealed and granted by the Lord Jesus. Once again it is Saint Augustine who
admirably sums up this Pauline dialectic of law and grace: "The law was given that grace might be sought; and
grace was given, that the law might be fulfilled".30

Love and life according to the Gospel cannot be thought of first and foremost as a kind of precept, because what
they demand is beyond man's abilities. They are possible only as the result of a gift of God who heals, restores
and transforms the human heart by his grace: "For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came
through Jesus Christ" (Jn 1:17). The promise of eternal life is thus linked to the gift of grace, and the gift of the
Spirit which we have received is even now the "guarantee of our inheritance" (Eph 1:14).

24. And so we find revealed the authentic and original aspect of the commandment of love and of the perfection
to which it is ordered: we are speaking of a possibility opened up to man exclusively by grace, by the gift of
God, by his love. On the other hand, precisely the awareness of having received the gift, of possessing in Jesus
Christ the love of God, generates and sustains the free response of a full love for God and the brethren, as the
Apostle John insistently reminds us in his first Letter: "Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God and
knows God. He who does not love does not know God; for God is love... Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought
also to love one another... We love, because he first loved us" (1 Jn 4:7-8, 11, 19).

This inseparable connection between the Lord's grace and human freedom, between gift and task, has been
expressed in simple yet profound words by Saint Augustine in his prayer: "Da quod iubes et iube quod vis"
(grant what you command and command what you will).31

The gift does not lessen but reinforces the moral demands of love: "This is his commandment, that we should
believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another just as he has commanded us" (1 Jn 3:32). One
can "abide" in love only by keeping the commandments, as Jesus states: "If you keep my commandments, you
will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love" (Jn 15:10).

Going to the heart of the moral message of Jesus and the preaching of the Apostles, and summing up in a
remarkable way the great tradition of the Fathers of the East and West, and of Saint Augustine in particular,32
Saint Thomas was able to write that the New Law is the grace of the Holy Spirit given through faith in Christ.33
The external precepts also mentioned in the Gospel dispose one for this grace or produce its effects in one's life.
Indeed, the New Law is not content to say what must be done, but also gives the power to "do what is true" (cf.
Jn 3:21). Saint John Chrysostom likewise observed that the New Law was promulgated at the descent of the
Holy Spirit from heaven on the day of Pentecost, and that the Apostles "did not come down from the mountain
carrying, like Moses, tablets of stone in their hands; but they came down carrying the Holy Spirit in their
hearts... having become by his grace a living law, a living book".34

"Lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age" (Mt 28:20)

25. Jesus' conversation with the rich young man continues, in a sense, in every period of history, including our
own. The question: "Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?" arises in the heart of every individual,
and it is Christ alone who is capable of giving the full and definitive answer. The Teacher who expounds God's
commandments, who invites others to follow him and gives the grace for a new life, is always present and at
work in our midst, as he himself promised: "Lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age" (Mt 28:20).
Christ's relevance for people of all times is shown forth in his body, which is the Church. For this reason the
Lord promised his disciples the Holy Spirit, who would "bring to their remembrance" and teach them to
understand his commandments (cf. Jn 14:26), and who would be the principle and constant source of a new life
in the world (cf. Jn 3:5-8; Rom 8:1-13).

The moral prescriptions which God imparted in the Old Covenant, and which attained their perfection in the
New and Eternal Covenant in the very person of the Son of God made man, must be faithfully kept and
continually put into practice in the various different cultures throughout the course of history. The task of
interpreting these prescriptions was entrusted by Jesus to the Apostles and to their successors, with the special
assistance of the Spirit of truth: "He who hears you hears me" (Lk 10:16). By the light and the strength of this
Spirit the Apostles carried out their mission of preaching the Gospel and of pointing out the "way" of the Lord
(cf. Acts 18:25), teaching above all how to follow and imitate Christ: "For to me to live is Christ" (Phil 1:21).

26. In the moral catechesis of the Apostles, besides exhortations and directions connected to specific historical
and cultural situations, we find an ethical teaching with precise rules of behaviour. This is seen in their Letters,
which contain the interpretation, made under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, of the Lord's precepts as they are
to be lived in different cultural circumstances (cf. Rom 12-15; 1 Cor 11-14; Gal 5-6; Eph 4-6; Col 3-4; 1 Pt and
Jas). From the Church's beginnings, the Apostles, by virtue of their pastoral responsibility to preach the Gospel,
were vigilant over the right conduct of Christians,35 just as they were vigilant for the purity of the faith and the
handing down of the divine gifts in the sacraments.36 The first Christians, coming both from the Jewish people
and from the Gentiles, differed from the pagans not only in their faith and their liturgy but also in the witness of
their moral conduct, which was inspired by the New Law.37 The Church is in fact a communion both of faith
and of life; her rule of life is "faith working through love" (Gal 5:6).

No damage must be done to the harmony between faith and life: the unity of the Church is damaged not only by
Christians who reject or distort the truths of faith but also by those who disregard the moral obligations to which
they are called by the Gospel (cf. 1 Cor 5:9-13). The Apostles decisively rejected any separation between the
commitment of the heart and the actions which express or prove it (cf. 1 Jn 2:3-6). And ever since Apostolic
times the Church's Pastors have unambiguously condemned the behaviour of those who fostered division by
their teaching or by their actions.38

27. Within the unity of the Church, promoting and preserving the faith and the moral life is the task entrusted by
Jesus to the Apostles (cf. Mt 28:19-20), a task which continues in the ministry of their successors. This is
apparent from the living Tradition, whereby — as the Second Vatican Council teaches — "the Church, in her
teaching, life and worship, perpetuates and hands on to every generation all that she is and all that she believes.
This Tradition which comes from the Apostles, progresses in the Church under the assistance of the Holy
Spirit".39 In the Holy Spirit, the Church receives and hands down the Scripture as the witness to the "great
things" which God has done in history (cf. Lk 1:49); she professes by the lips of her Fathers and Doctors the
truth of the Word made flesh, puts his precepts and love into practice in the lives of her Saints and in the
sacrifice of her Martyrs, and celebrates her hope in him in the Liturgy. By this same Tradition Christians receive
"the living voice of the Gospel",40 as the faithful expression of God's wisdom and will.

Within Tradition, the authentic interpretation of the Lord's law develops, with the help of the Holy Spirit. The
same Spirit who is at the origin of the Revelation of Jesus' commandments and teachings guarantees that they
will be reverently preserved, faithfully expounded and correctly applied in different times and places. This
constant "putting into practice" of the commandments is the sign and fruit of a deeper insight into Revelation
and of an understanding in the light of faith of new historical and cultural situations. Nevertheless, it can only
confirm the permanent validity of Revelation and follow in the line of the interpretation given to it by the great
Tradition of the Church's teaching and life, as witnessed by the teaching of the Fathers, the lives of the Saints,
the Church's Liturgy and the teaching of the Magisterium.
In particular, as the Council affirms, "the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether in its
written form or in that of Tradition, has been entrusted only to those charged with the Church's living
Magisterium, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ".41 The Church, in her life and teaching,
is thus revealed as "the pillar and bulwark of the truth" ( 1 Tim 3:15), including the truth regarding moral action.
Indeed, "the Church has the right always and everywhere to proclaim moral principles, even in respect of the
social order, and to make judgments about any human matter in so far as this is required by fundamental human
rights or the salvation of souls".42

Precisely on the questions frequently debated in moral theology today and with regard to which new tendencies
and theories have developed, the Magisterium, in fidelity to Jesus Christ and in continuity with the Church's
tradition, senses more urgently the duty to offer its own discernment and teaching, in order to help man in his
journey towards truth and freedom.

CHAPTER II - "DO NOT BE CONFORMED TO THIS WORLD " (Rom 12:2) - The Church and the
discernment of certain tendencies in present-day moral theology

Teaching what befits sound doctrine (cf. Tit 2:1)

28. Our meditation on the dialogue between Jesus and the rich young man has enabled us to bring together the
essential elements of Revelation in the Old and New Testament with regard to moral action. These are: the
subordination of man and his activity to God, the One who "alone is good"; the relationship clearly indicated in
the divine commandments, between the moral good of human acts and eternal life; Christian discipleship,
which opens up before man the perspective of perfect love; and finally the gift of the Holy Spirit, source and
means of the moral life of the "new creation" (cf. 2 Cor 5:17).

In her reflection on morality, the Church has always kept in mind the words of Jesus to the rich young man.
Indeed, Sacred Scripture remains the living and fruitful source of the Church's moral doctrine; as the Second
Vatican Council recalled, the Gospel is "the source of all saving truth and moral teaching".43 The Church has
faithfully preserved what the word of God teaches, not only about truths which must be believed but also about
moral action, action pleasing to God (cf. 1 Th 4:1); she has achieved a doctrinal development analogous to that
which has taken place in the realm of the truths of faith. Assisted by the Holy Spirit who leads her into all the
truth (cf. Jn 16:13), the Church has not ceased, nor can she ever cease, to contemplate the "mystery of the Word
Incarnate", in whom "light is shed on the mystery of man".44

29. The Church's moral reflection, always conducted in the light of Christ, the "Good Teacher", has also
developed in the specific form of the theological science called "moral theology ", a science which accepts and
examines Divine Revelation while at the same time responding to the demands of human reason. Moral
theology is a reflection concerned with "morality", with the good and the evil of human acts and of the person
who performs them; in this sense it is accessible to all people. But it is also "theology", inasmuch as it
acknowledges that the origin and end of moral action are found in the One who "alone is good" and who, by
giving himself to man in Christ, offers him the happiness of divine life.

The Second Vatican Council invited scholars to take "special care for the renewal of moral theology", in such a
way that "its scientific presentation, increasingly based on the teaching of Scripture, will cast light on the
exalted vocation of the faithful in Christ and on their obligation to bear fruit in charity for the life of the
world".45 The Council also encouraged theologians, "while respecting the methods and requirements of
theological science, to look for a more appropriate way of communicating doctrine to the people of their time;
since there is a difference between the deposit or the truths of faith and the manner in which they are expressed,
keeping the same meaning and the same judgment".46 This led to a further invitation, one extended to all the
faithful, but addressed to theologians in particular: "The faithful should live in the closest contact with others of
their time, and should work for a perfect understanding of their modes of thought and feelings as expressed in
their culture".47

The work of many theologians who found support in the Council's encouragement has already borne fruit in
interesting and helpful reflections about the truths of faith to be believed and applied in life, reflections offered
in a form better suited to the sensitivities and questions of our contemporaries. The Church, and particularly the
Bishops, to whom Jesus Christ primarily entrusted the ministry of teaching, are deeply appreciative of this
work, and encourage theologians to continue their efforts, inspired by that profound and authentic "fear of the
Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom" (cf. Prov 1:7).

At the same time, however, within the context of the theological debates which followed the Council, there have
developed certain interpretations of Christian morality which are not consistent with "sound teaching" (2 Tim
4:3). Certainly the Church's Magisterium does not intend to impose upon the faithful any particular theological
system, still less a philosophical one. Nevertheless, in order to "reverently preserve and faithfully expound" the
word of God,48 the Magisterium has the duty to state that some trends of theological thinking and certain
philosophical affirmations are incompatible with revealed truth.49

30. In addressing this Encyclical to you, my Brother Bishops, it is my intention to state the principles necessary
for discerning what is contrary to "sound doctrine", drawing attention to those elements of the Church's moral
teaching which today appear particularly exposed to error, ambiguity or neglect. Yet these are the very elements
on which there depends "the answer to the obscure riddles of the human condition which today also, as in the
past, profoundly disturb the human heart. What is man? What is the meaning and purpose of our life? What is
good and what is sin? What origin and purpose do sufferings have? What is the way to attaining true happiness?
What are death, judgment and retribution after death? Lastly, what is that final, unutterable mystery which
embraces our lives and from which we take our origin and towards which we tend?".50 These and other
questions, such as: what is freedom and what is its relationship to the truth contained in God's law? what is the
role of conscience in man's moral development? how do we determine, in accordance with the truth about the
good, the specific rights and duties of the human person? — can all be summed up in the fundamental question
which the young man in the Gospel put to Jesus: "Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?" Because
the Church has been sent by Jesus to preach the Gospel and to "make disciples of all nations..., teaching them to
observe all" that he has commanded (cf. Mt 28:19-20), she today once more puts forward the Master's reply, a
reply that possesses a light and a power capable of answering even the most controversial and complex
questions. This light and power also impel the Church constantly to carry out not only her dogmatic but also her
moral reflection within an interdisciplinary context, which is especially necessary in facing new issues.51

It is in the same light and power that the Church's Magisterium continues to carry out its task of discernment,
accepting and living out the admonition addressed by the Apostle Paul to Timothy: "I charge you in the
presence of God and of Christ Jesus who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his
kingdom: preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in
patience and in teaching. For the time will come when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching
ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to
the truth and wander into myths. As for you, always be steady, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist,
fulfil your ministry" (2 Tim 4:1-5; cf. Tit 1:10, 13-14).

"You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (Jn 8:32)

31. The human issues most frequently debated and differently resolved in contemporary moral reflection are all
closely related, albeit in various ways, to a crucial issue: human freedom.
Certainly people today have a particularly strong sense of freedom. As the Council's Declaration on Religious
Freedom Dignitatis Humanae had already observed, "the dignity of the human person is a concern of which
people of our time are becoming increasingly more aware".52 Hence the insistent demand that people be
permitted to "enjoy the use of their own responsible judgment and freedom, and decide on their actions on
grounds of duty and conscience, without external pressure or coercion".53 In particular, the right to religious
freedom and to respect for conscience on its journey towards the truth is increasingly perceived as the
foundation of the cumulative rights of the person.54

This heightened sense of the dignity of the human person and of his or her uniqueness, and of the respect due to
the journey of conscience, certainly represents one of the positive achievements of modern culture. This
perception, authentic as it is, has been expressed in a number of more or less adequate ways, some of which
however diverge from the truth about man as a creature and the image of God, and thus need to be corrected and
purified in the light of faith.55

32. Certain currents of modern thought have gone so far as to exalt freedom to such an extent that it becomes an
absolute, which would then be the source of values. This is the direction taken by doctrines which have lost the
sense of the transcendent or which are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a
supreme tribunal of moral judgment which hands down categorical and infallible decisions about good and evil.
To the affirmation that one has a duty to follow one's conscience is unduly added the affirmation that one's
moral judgment is true merely by the fact that it has its origin in the conscience. But in this way the inescapable
claims of truth disappear, yielding their place to a criterion of sincerity, authenticity and "being at peace with
oneself", so much so that some have come to adopt a radically subjectivistic conception of moral judgment.

As is immediately evident, the crisis of truth is not unconnected with this development. Once the idea of a
universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason, is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also
changes. Conscience is no longer considered in its primordial reality as an act of a person's intelligence, the
function of which is to apply the universal knowledge of the good in a specific situation and thus to express a
judgment about the right conduct to be chosen here and now. Instead, there is a tendency to grant to the
individual conscience the prerogative of independently determining the criteria of good and evil and then acting
accordingly. Such an outlook is quite congenial to an individualist ethic, wherein each individual is faced with
his own truth, different from the truth of others. Taken to its extreme consequences, this individualism leads to a
denial of the very idea of human nature.

These different notions are at the origin of currents of thought which posit a radical opposition between moral
law and conscience, and between nature and freedom.

33. Side by side with its exaltation of freedom, yet oddly in contrast with it, modern culture radically questions
the very existence of this freedom. A number of disciplines, grouped under the name of the "behavioural
sciences", have rightly drawn attention to the many kinds of psychological and social conditioning which
influence the exercise of human freedom. Knowledge of these conditionings and the study they have received
represent important achievements which have found application in various areas, for example in pedagogy or
the administration of justice. But some people, going beyond the conclusions which can be legitimately drawn
from these observations, have come to question or even deny the very reality of human freedom.

Mention should also be made here of theories which misuse scientific research about the human person.
Arguing from the great variety of customs, behaviour patterns and institutions present in humanity, these
theories end up, if not with an outright denial of universal human values, at least with a relativistic conception
of morality.

34. "Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?". The question of morality, to which Christ provides the
answer, cannot prescind from the issue of freedom. Indeed, it considers that issue central, for there can be no
morality without freedom: "It is only in freedom that man can turn to what is good".56 But what sort of
freedom? The Council, considering our contemporaries who "highly regard" freedom and "assiduously pursue"
it, but who "often cultivate it in wrong ways as a licence to do anything they please, even evil", speaks of
"genuine" freedom: "Genuine freedom is an outstanding manifestation of the divine image in man. For God
willed to leave man "in the power of his own counsel" (cf. Sir 15:14), so that he would seek his Creator of his
own accord and would freely arrive at full and blessed perfection by cleaving to God".57 Although each
individual has a right to be respected in his own journey in search of the truth, there exists a prior moral
obligation, and a grave one at that, to seek the truth and to adhere to it once it is known.58 As Cardinal John
Henry Newman, that outstanding defender of the rights of conscience, forcefully put it: "Conscience has rights
because it has duties".59

Certain tendencies in contemporary moral theology, under the influence of the currents of subjectivism and
individualism just mentioned, involve novel interpretations of the relationship of freedom to the moral law,
human nature and conscience, and propose novel criteria for the moral evaluation of acts. Despite their variety,
these tendencies are at one in lessening or even denying the dependence of freedom on truth.

If we wish to undertake a critical discernment of these tendencies — a discernment capable of acknowledging

what is legitimate, useful and of value in them, while at the same time pointing out their ambiguities, dangers
and errors — we must examine them in the light of the fundamental dependence of freedom upon truth, a
dependence which has found its clearest and most authoritative expression in the words of Christ: "You will
know the truth, and the truth will set you free" (Jn 8:32).

I. Freedom and Law

"Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat" (Gen 2:17)

35. In the Book of Genesis we read: "The Lord God commanded the man, saying, 'You may eat freely of every
tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat
of it you shall die' " (Gen 2:16-17).

With this imagery, Revelation teaches that the power to decide what is good and what is evil does not belong to
man, but to God alone. The man is certainly free, inasmuch as he can understand and accept God's commands.
And he possesses an extremely far-reaching freedom, since he can eat "of every tree of the garden". But his
freedom is not unlimited: it must halt before the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", for it is called to
accept the moral law given by God. In fact, human freedom finds its authentic and complete fulfilment precisely
in the acceptance of that law. God, who alone is good, knows perfectly what is good for man, and by virtue of
his very love proposes this good to man in the commandments.

God's law does not reduce, much less do away with human freedom; rather, it protects and promotes that
freedom. In contrast, however, some present-day cultural tendencies have given rise to several currents of
thought in ethics which centre upon an alleged conflict between freedom and law. These doctrines would grant
to individuals or social groups the right to determine what is good or evil. Human freedom would thus be able
to "create values" and would enjoy a primacy over truth, to the point that truth itself would be considered a
creation of freedom. Freedom would thus lay claim to a moral autonomy which would actually amount to an
absolute sovereignty.

36. The modern concern for the claims of autonomy has not failed to exercise an influence also in the sphere of
Catholic moral theology. While the latter has certainly never attempted to set human freedom against the divine
law or to question the existence of an ultimate religious foundation for moral norms, it has, nonetheless, been
led to undertake a profound rethinking about the role of reason and of faith in identifying moral norms with
reference to specific "innerworldly" kinds of behaviour involving oneself, others and the material world.
It must be acknowledged that underlying this work of rethinking there are certain positive concerns which to a
great extent belong to the best tradition of Catholic thought. In response to the encouragement of the Second
Vatican Council,60 there has been a desire to foster dialogue with modern culture, emphasizing the rational —
and thus universally understandable and communicable — character of moral norms belonging to the sphere of
the natural moral law.61 There has also been an attempt to reaffirm the interior character of the ethical
requirements deriving from that law, requirements which create an obligation for the will only because such an
obligation was previously acknowledged by human reason and, concretely, by personal conscience.

Some people, however, disregarding the dependence of human reason on Divine Wisdom and the need, given
the present state of fallen nature, for Divine Revelation as an effective means for knowing moral truths, even
those of the natural order,62 have actually posited a complete sovereignty of reason in the domain of moral
norms regarding the right ordering of life in this world. Such norms would constitute the boundaries for a
merely "human" morality; they would be the expression of a law which man in an autonomous manner lays
down for himself and which has its source exclusively in human reason. In no way could God be considered the
Author of this law, except in the sense that human reason exercises its autonomy in setting down laws by virtue
of a primordial and total mandate given to man by God. These trends of thought have led to a denial, in
opposition to Sacred Scripture (cf. Mt 15:3-6) and the Church's constant teaching, of the fact that the natural
moral law has God as its author, and that man, by the use of reason, participates in the eternal law, which it is
not for him to establish.

37. In their desire, however, to keep the moral life in a Christian context, certain moral theologians have
introduced a sharp distinction, contrary to Catholic doctrine,63 between an ethical order, which would be human
in origin and of value for this world alone, and an order of salvation, for which only certain intentions and
interior attitudes regarding God and neighbour would be significant. This has then led to an actual denial that
there exists, in Divine Revelation, a specific and determined moral content, universally valid and permanent.
The word of God would be limited to proposing an exhortation, a generic paraenesis, which the autonomous
reason alone would then have the task of completing with normative directives which are truly "objective", that
is, adapted to the concrete historical situation. Naturally, an autonomy conceived in this way also involves the
denial of a specific doctrinal competence on the part of the Church and her Magisterium with regard to
particular moral norms which deal with the so-called "human good". Such norms would not be part of the
proper content of Revelation, and would not in themselves be relevant for salvation.

No one can fail to see that such an interpretation of the autonomy of human reason involves positions
incompatible with Catholic teaching.

In such a context it is absolutely necessary to clarify, in the light of the word of God and the living Tradition of
the Church, the fundamental notions of human freedom and of the moral law, as well as their profound and
intimate relationship. Only thus will it be possible to respond to the rightful claims of human reason in a way
which accepts the valid elements present in certain currents of contemporary moral theology without
compromising the Church's heritage of moral teaching with ideas derived from an erroneous concept of
autonomy.

"God left man in the power of his own counsel" (Sir 15:14)

38. Taking up the words of Sirach, the Second Vatican Council explains the meaning of that "genuine freedom"
which is "an outstanding manifestation of the divine image" in man: "God willed to leave man in the power of
his own counsel, so that he would seek his Creator of his own accord and would freely arrive at full and blessed
perfection by cleaving to God".64 These words indicate the wonderful depth of the sharing in God's dominion to
which man has been called: they indicate that man's dominion extends in a certain sense over man himself. This
has been a constantly recurring theme in theological reflection on human freedom, which is described as a form
of kingship. For example, Saint Gregory of Nyssa writes: "The soul shows its royal and exalted character... in
that it is free and self-governed, swayed autonomously by its own will. Of whom else can this be said, save a
king?... Thus human nature, created to rule other creatures, was by its likeness to the King of the universe made
as it were a living image, partaking with the Archetype both in dignity and in name".65

The exercise of dominion over the world represents a great and responsible task for man, one which involves his
freedom in obedience to the Creator's command: "Fill the earth and subdue it" (Gen 1:28). In view of this, a
rightful autonomy is due to every man, as well as to the human community, a fact to which the Council's
Constitution Gaudium et spes calls special attention. This is the autonomy of earthly realities, which means that
"created things have their own laws and values which are to be gradually discovered, utilized and ordered by
man".66

39. Not only the world, however, but also man himself has been entrusted to his own care and responsibility.
God left man "in the power of his own counsel" (Sir 15:14), that he might seek his Creator and freely attain
perfection. Attaining such perfection means personally building up that perfection in himself. Indeed, just as
man in exercising his dominion over the world shapes it in accordance with his own intelligence and will, so too
in performing morally good acts, man strengthens, develops and consolidates within himself his likeness to
God.

Even so, the Council warns against a false concept of the autonomy of earthly realities, one which would
maintain that "created things are not dependent on God and that man can use them without reference to their
Creator".67 With regard to man himself, such a concept of autonomy produces particularly baneful effects, and
eventually leads to atheism: "Without its Creator the creature simply disappears... If God is ignored the creature
itself is impoverished".68

40. The teaching of the Council emphasizes, on the one hand, the role of human reason in discovering and
applying the moral law: the moral life calls for that creativity and originality typical of the person, the source
and cause of his own deliberate acts. On the other hand, reason draws its own truth and authority from the
eternal law, which is none other than divine wisdom itself.69 At the heart of the moral life we thus find the
principle of a "rightful autonomy"70 of man, the personal subject of his actions. The moral law has its origin in
God and always finds its source in him: at the same time, by virtue of natural reason, which derives from divine
wisdom, it is a properly human law. Indeed, as we have seen, the natural law "is nothing other than the light of
understanding infused in us by God, whereby we understand what must be done and what must be avoided. God
gave this light and this law to man at creation".71 The rightful autonomy of the practical reason means that man
possesses in himself his own law, received from the Creator. Nevertheless, the autonomy of reason cannot
mean that reason itself creates values and moral norms.72 Were this autonomy to imply a denial of the
participation of the practical reason in the wisdom of the divine Creator and Lawgiver, or were it to suggest a
freedom which creates moral norms, on the basis of historical contingencies or the diversity of societies and
cultures, this sort of alleged autonomy would contradict the Church's teaching on the truth about man.73 It would
be the death of true freedom: "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day
that you eat of it you shall die" (Gen 2:17).

41. Man's genuine moral autonomy in no way means the rejection but rather the acceptance of the moral law, of
God's command: "The Lord God gave this command to the man..." (Gen 2:16). Human freedom and God's law
meet and are called to intersect, in the sense of man's free obedience to God and of God's completely gratuitous
benevolence towards man. Hence obedience to God is not, as some would believe, a heteronomy, as if the moral
life were subject to the will of something all-powerful, absolute, ex- traneous to man and intolerant of his
freedom. If in fact a heteronomy of morality were to mean a denial of man's self-determination or the
imposition of norms unrelated to his good, this would be in contradiction to the Revelation of the Covenant and
of the redemptive Incarnation. Such a heteronomy would be nothing but a form of alienation, contrary to divine
wisdom and to the dignity of the human person.
Others speak, and rightly so, of theonomy, or participated theonomy, since man's free obedience to God's law
effectively implies that human reason and human will participate in God's wisdom and providence. By
forbidding man to "eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", God makes it clear that man does not
originally possess such "knowledge" as something properly his own, but only participates in it by the light of
natural reason and of Divine Revelation, which manifest to him the requirements and the promptings of eternal
wisdom. Law must therefore be considered an expression of divine wisdom: by submitting to the law, freedom
submits to the truth of creation. Consequently one must acknowledge in the freedom of the human person the
image and the nearness of God, who is present in all (cf. Eph 4:6). But one must likewise acknowledge the
majesty of the God of the universe and revere the holiness of the law of God, who is infinitely transcendent:
Deus semper maior.74

Blessed is the man who takes delight in the law of the Lord (cf. Ps 1:1-2)

42. Patterned on God's freedom, man's freedom is not negated by his obedience to the divine law; indeed, only
through this obedience does it abide in the truth and conform to human dignity. This is clearly stated by the
Council: "Human dignity requires man to act through conscious and free choice, as motivated and prompted
personally from within, and not through blind internal impulse or merely external pressure. Man achieves such
dignity when he frees himself from all subservience to his feelings, and in a free choice of the good, pursues his
own end by effectively and assiduously marshalling the appropriate means".75

In his journey towards God, the One who "alone is good", man must freely do good and avoid evil. But in order
to accomplish this he must be able to distinguish good from evil. And this takes place above all thanks to the
light of natural reason, the reflection in man of the splendour of God's countenance. Thus Saint Thomas,
commenting on a verse of Psalm 4, writes: "After saying: Offer right sacrifices (Ps 4:5), as if some had then
asked him what right works were, the Psalmist adds: There are many who say: Who will make us see good?
And in reply to the question he says: The light of your face, Lord, is signed upon us, thereby implying that the
light of natural reason whereby we discern good from evil, which is the function of the natural law, is nothing
else but an imprint on us of the divine light".76 It also becomes clear why this law is called the natural law: it
receives this name not because it refers to the nature of irrational beings but because the reason which
promulgates it is proper to human nature.77

43. The Second Vatican Council points out that the "supreme rule of life is the divine law itself, the eternal,
objective and universal law by which God out of his wisdom and love arranges, directs and governs the whole
world and the paths of the human community. God has enabled man to share in this divine law, and hence man
is able under the gentle guidance of God's providence increasingly to recognize the unchanging truth".78

The Council refers back to the classic teaching on God's eternal law. Saint Augustine defines this as "the reason
or the will of God, who commands us to respect the natural order and forbids us to disturb it".79 Saint Thomas
identifies it with "the type of the divine wisdom as moving all things to their due end".80 And God's wisdom is
providence, a love which cares. God himself loves and cares, in the most literal and basic sense, for all creation
(cf. Wis 7:22; 8:11). But God provides for man differently from the way in which he provides for beings which
are not persons. He cares for man not "from without", through the laws of physical nature, but "from within",
through reason, which, by its natural knowledge of God's eternal law, is consequently able to show man the
right direction to take in his free actions.81 In this way God calls man to participate in his own providence, since
he desires to guide the world — not only the world of nature but also the world of human persons — through
man himself, through man's reasonable and responsible care. The natural law enters here as the human
expression of God's eternal law. Saint Thomas writes: "Among all others, the rational creature is subject to
divine providence in the most excellent way, insofar as it partakes of a share of providence, being provident
both for itself and for others. Thus it has a share of the Eternal Reason, whereby it has a natural inclination to its
proper act and end. This participation of the eternal law in the rational creature is called natural law".82
44. The Church has often made reference to the Thomistic doctrine of natural law, including it in her own
teaching on morality. Thus my Venerable Predecessor Leo XIII emphasized the essential subordination of
reason and human law to the Wisdom of God and to his law. After stating that "the natural law is written and
engraved in the heart of each and every man, since it is none other than human reason itself which commands us
to do good and counsels us not to sin", Leo XIII appealed to the "higher reason" of the divine Lawgiver: "But
this prescription of human reason could not have the force of law unless it were the voice and the interpreter of
some higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be subject". Indeed, the force of law consists in its
authority to impose duties, to confer rights and to sanction certain behaviour: "Now all of this, clearly, could not
exist in man if, as his own supreme legislator, he gave himself the rule of his own actions". And he concluded:
"It follows that the natural law is itself the eternal law, implanted in beings endowed with reason, and inclining
them towards their right action and end; it is none other than the eternal reason of the Creator and Ruler of the
universe".83

Man is able to recognize good and evil thanks to that discernment of good from evil which he himself carries
out by his reason, in particular by his reason enlightened by Divine Revelation and by faith, through the law
which God gave to the Chosen People, beginning with the commandments on Sinai. Israel was called to accept
and to live out God's law as a particular gift and sign of its election and of the divine Covenant, and also as a
pledge of God's blessing. Thus Moses could address the children of Israel and ask them: "What great nation is
that that has a god so near to it as the Lord our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation
is there that has statutes and ordinances so righteous as all this law which I set before you this day?" (Dt 4:7-8).
In the Psalms we encounter the sentiments of praise, gratitude and veneration which the Chosen People is called
to show towards God's law, together with an exhortation to know it, ponder it and translate it into life. "Blessed
is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of
scoffers, but his delight is in the law of the Lord and on his law he meditates day and night" (Ps 1:1-2). "The
law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; the
precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes"
(Ps 1819:8-9).

45. The Church gratefully accepts and lovingly preserves the entire deposit of Revelation, treating it with
religious respect and fulfilling her mission of authentically interpreting God's law in the light of the Gospel. In
addition, the Church receives the gift of the New Law, which is the "fulfilment" of God's law in Jesus Christ
and in his Spirit. This is an "interior" law (cf. Jer 31:31-33), "written not with ink but with the Spirit of the
living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts" (2 Cor 3:3); a law of perfection and of
freedom (cf. 2 Cor 3:17); "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:2). Saint Thomas writes that this
law "can be called law in two ways. First, the law of the spirit is the Holy Spirit... who, dwelling in the soul, not
only teaches what it is necessary to do by enlightening the intellect on the things to be done, but also inclines
the affections to act with uprightness... Second, the law of the spirit can be called the proper effect of the Holy
Spirit, and thus faith working through love (cf. Gal 5:6), which teaches inwardly about the things to be done...
and inclines the affections to act".84

Even if moral-theological reflection usually distinguishes between the positive or revealed law of God and the
natural law, and, within the economy of salvation, between the "old" and the "new" law, it must not be forgotten
that these and other useful distinctions always refer to that law whose author is the one and the same God and
which is always meant for man. The different ways in which God, acting in history, cares for the world and for
mankind are not mutually exclusive; on the contrary, they support each other and intersect. They have their
origin and goal in the eternal, wise and loving counsel whereby God predestines men and women "to be
conformed to the image of his Son" (Rom 8:29). God's plan poses no threat to man's genuine freedom; on the
contrary, the acceptance of God's plan is the only way to affirm that freedom.

"What the law requires is written on their hearts" (Rom 2:15)

46. The alleged conflict between freedom and law is forcefully brought up once again today with regard to the
natural law, and particularly with regard to nature. Debates about nature and freedom have always marked the
history of moral reflection; they grew especially heated at the time of the Renaissance and the Reformation, as
can be seen from the teaching of the Council of Trent.85 Our own age is marked, though in a different sense, by
a similar tension. The penchant for empirical observation, the procedures of scientific objectification,
technological progress and certain forms of liberalism have led to these two terms being set in opposition, as if a
dialectic, if not an absolute conflict, between freedom and nature were characteristic of the structure of human
history. At other periods, it seemed that "nature" subjected man totally to its own dynamics and even its own
unbreakable laws. Today too, the situation of the world of the senses within space and time, physio-chemical
constants, bodily processes, psychological impulses and forms of social conditioning seem to many people the
only really decisive factors of human reality. In this context even moral facts, despite their specificity, are
frequently treated as if they were statistically verifiable data, patterns of behaviour which can be subject to
observation or explained exclusively in categories of psychosocial processes. As a result, some ethicists,
professionally engaged in the study of human realities and behaviour, can be tempted to take as the standard for
their discipline and even for its operative norms the results of a statistical study of concrete human behaviour
patterns and the opinions about morality encountered in the majority of people.

Other moralists, however, in their concern to stress the importance of values, remain sensitive to the dignity of
freedom, but they frequently conceive of freedom as somehow in opposition to or in conflict with material and
biological nature, over which it must progressively assert itself. Here various approaches are at one in
overlooking the created dimension of nature and in misunderstanding its integrity. For some, "nature" becomes
reduced to raw material for human activity and for its power: thus nature needs to be profoundly transformed,
and indeed overcome by freedom, inasmuch as it represents a limitation and denial of freedom. For others, it is
in the untrammelled advancement of man's power, or of his freedom, that economic, cultural, social and even
moral values are established: nature would thus come to mean everything found in man and the world apart
from freedom. In such an understanding, nature would include in the first place the human body, its make-up
and its processes: against this physical datum would be opposed whatever is "constructed", in other words
"culture", seen as the product and result of freedom. Human nature, understood in this way, could be reduced to
and treated as a readily available biological or social material. This ultimately means making freedom
selfdefining and a phenomenon creative of itself and its values. Indeed, when all is said and done man would
not even have a nature; he would be his own personal life-project. Man would be nothing more than his own
freedom!

47. In this context, objections of physicalism and naturalism have been levelled against the traditional
conception of the natural law, which is accused of presenting as moral laws what are in themselves mere
biological laws. Consequently, in too superficial a way, a permanent and unchanging character would be
attributed to certain kinds of human behaviour, and, on the basis of this, an attempt would be made to formulate
universally valid moral norms. According to certain theologians, this kind of "biologistic or naturalistic
argumentation" would even be present in certain documents of the Church's Magisterium, particularly those
dealing with the area of sexual and conjugal ethics. It was, they maintain, on the basis of a naturalistic
understanding of the sexual act that contraception, direct sterilization, autoeroticism, pre-marital sexual
relations, homosexual relations and artificial insemination were condemned as morally unacceptable. In the
opinion of these same theologians, a morally negative evaluation of such acts fails to take into adequate
consideration both man's character as a rational and free being and the cultural conditioning of all moral norms.
In their view, man, as a rational being, not only can but actually must freely determine the meaning of his
behaviour. This process of "determining the meaning" would obviously have to take into account the many
limitations of the human being, as existing in a body and in history. Furthermore, it would have to take into
consideration the behavioural models and the meanings which the latter acquire in any given culture. Above all,
it would have to respect the fundamental commandment of love of God and neighbour. Still, they continue, God
made man as a rationally free being; he left him "in the power of his own counsel" and he expects him to shape
his life in a personal and rational way. Love of neighbour would mean above all and even exclusively respect
for his freedom to make his own decisions. The workings of typically human behaviour, as well as the so-called
"natural inclinations", would establish at the most — so they say — a general orientation towards correct
behaviour, but they cannot determine the moral assessment of individual human acts, so complex from the
viewpoint of situations.

48. Faced with this theory, one has to consider carefully the correct relationship existing between freedom and
human nature, and in particular the place of the human body in questions of natural law.

A freedom which claims to be absolute ends up treating the human body as a raw datum, devoid of any meaning
and moral values until freedom has shaped it in accordance with its design. Consequently, human nature and the
body appear as presuppositions or preambles, materially necessary for freedom to make its choice, yet extrinsic
to the person, the subject and the human act. Their functions would not be able to constitute reference points for
moral decisions, because the finalities of these inclinations would be merely "physical" goods, called by some
"pre-moral". To refer to them, in order to find in them rational indications with regard to the order of morality,
would be to expose oneself to the accusation of physicalism or biologism. In this way of thinking, the tension
between freedom and a nature conceived of in a reductive way is resolved by a division within man himself.

This moral theory does not correspond to the truth about man and his freedom. It contradicts the Church's
teachings on the unity of the human person, whose rational soul is per se et essentialiter the form of his body.86
The spiritual and immortal soul is the principle of unity of the human being, whereby it exists as a whole —
corpore et anima unus 87 — as a person. These definitions not only point out that the body, which has been
promised the resurrection, will also share in glory. They also remind us that reason and free will are linked with
all the bodily and sense faculties. The person, including the body, is completely entrusted to himself, and it is in
the unity of body and soul that the person is the subject of his own moral acts. The person, by the light of reason
and the support of virtue, discovers in the body the anticipatory signs, the expression and the promise of the gift
of self, in conformity with the wise plan of the Creator. It is in the light of the dignity of the human person — a
dignity which must be affirmed for its own sake — that reason grasps the specific moral value of certain goods
towards which the person is naturally inclined. And since the human person cannot be reduced to a freedom
which is self-designing, but entails a particular spiritual and bodily structure, the primordial moral requirement
of loving and respecting the person as an end and never as a mere means also implies, by its very nature, respect
for certain fundamental goods, without which one would fall into relativism and arbitrariness.

49. A doctrine which dissociates the moral act from the bodily dimensions of its exercise is contrary to the
teaching of Scripture and Tradition. Such a doctrine revives, in new forms, certain ancient errors which have
always been opposed by the Church, inasmuch as they reduce the human person to a "spiritual" and purely
formal freedom. This reduction misunderstands the moral meaning of the body and of kinds of behaviour
involving it (cf. 1 Cor 6:19). Saint Paul declares that "the immoral, idolaters, adulterers, sexual perverts,
thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers" are excluded from the Kingdom of God (cf. 1 Cor 6:9). This
condemnation — repeated by the Council of Trent"88 — lists as "mortal sins" or "immoral practices" certain
specific kinds of behaviour the wilful acceptance of which prevents believers from sharing in the inheritance
promised to them. In fact, body and soul are inseparable: in the person, in the willing agent and in the
deliberate act, they stand or fall together.

50. At this point the true meaning of the natural law can be understood: it refers to man's proper and primordial
nature, the "nature of the human person",89 which is the person himself in the unity of soul and body, in the unity
of his spiritual and biological inclinations and of all the other specific characteristics necessary for the pursuit of
his end. "The natural moral law expresses and lays down the purposes, rights and duties which are based upon
the bodily and spiritual nature of the human person. Therefore this law cannot be thought of as simply a set of
norms on the biological level; rather it must be defined as the rational order whereby man is called by the
Creator to direct and regulate his life and actions and in particular to make use of his own body".90 To give an
example, the origin and the foundation of the duty of absolute respect for human life are to be found in the
dignity proper to the person and not simply in the natural inclination to preserve one's own physical life. Human
life, even though it is a fundamental good of man, thus acquires a moral significance in reference to the good of
the person, who must always be affirmed for his own sake. While it is always morally illicit to kill an innocent
human being, it can be licit, praiseworthy or even imperative to give up one's own life (cf. Jn 15:13) out of love
of neighbour or as a witness to the truth. Only in reference to the human person in his "unified totality", that is,
as "a soul which expresses itself in a body and a body informed by an immortal spirit",91 can the specifically
human meaning of the body be grasped. Indeed, natural inclinations take on moral relevance only insofar as
they refer to the human person and his authentic fulfilment, a fulfilment which for that matter can take place
always and only in human nature. By rejecting all manipulations of corporeity which alter its human meaning,
the Church serves man and shows him the path of true love, the only path on which he can find the true God.

The natural law thus understood does not allow for any division between freedom and nature. Indeed, these two
realities are harmoniously bound together, and each is intimately linked to the other.

"From the beginning it was not so" (Mt 19:8)

51. The alleged conflict between freedom and nature also has repercussions on the interpretation of certain
specific aspects of the natural law, especially its universality and immutability. "Where then are these rules
written", Saint Augustine wondered, "except in the book of that light which is called truth? From thence every
just law is transcribed and transferred to the heart of the man who works justice, not by wandering but by being,
as it were, impressed upon it, just as the image from the ring passes over to the wax, and yet does not leave the
ring".92

Precisely because of this "truth" the natural law involves universality. Inasmuch as it is inscribed in the rational
nature of the person, it makes itself felt to all beings endowed with reason and living in history. In order to
perfect himself in his specific order, the person must do good and avoid evil, be concerned for the transmission
and preservation of life, refine and develop the riches of the material world, cultivate social life, seek truth,
practise good and contemplate beauty.93

The separation which some have posited between the freedom of individuals and the nature which all have in
common, as it emerges from certain philosophical theories which are highly influential in present- day culture,
obscures the perception of the universality of the moral law on the part of reason. But inasmuch as the natural
law expresses the dignity of the human person and lays the foundation for his fundamental rights and duties, it
is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all mankind. This universality does not ignore the
individuality of human beings, nor is it opposed to the absolute uniqueness of each person. On the contrary, it
embraces at its root each of the person's free acts, which are meant to bear witness to the universality of the true
good. By submitting to the common law, our acts build up the true communion of persons and, by God's grace,
practise charity, "which binds everything together in perfect harmony" (Col 3:14). When on the contrary they
disregard the law, or even are merely ignorant of it, whether culpably or not, our acts damage the communion of
persons, to the detriment of each.

52. It is right and just, always and for everyone, to serve God, to render him the worship which is his due and to
honour one's parents as they deserve. Positive precepts such as these, which order us to perform certain actions
and to cultivate certain dispositions, are universally binding; they are "unchanging".94 They unite in the same
common good all people of every period of history, created for "the same divine calling and destiny".95 These
universal and permanent laws correspond to things known by the practical reason and are applied to particular
acts through the judgment of conscience. The acting subject personally assimilates the truth contained in the
law. He appropriates this truth of his being and makes it his own by his acts and the corresponding virtues. The
negative precepts of the natural law are universally valid. They oblige each and every individual, always and in
every circumstance. It is a matter of prohibitions which forbid a given action semper et pro semper, without
exception, because the choice of this kind of behaviour is in no case compatible with the goodness of the will of
the acting person, with his vocation to life with God and to communion with his neighbour. It is prohibited — to
everyone and in every case — to violate these precepts. They oblige everyone, regardless of the cost, never to
offend in anyone, beginning with oneself, the personal dignity common to all.

On the other hand, the fact that only the negative commandments oblige always and under all circumstances
does not mean that in the moral life prohibitions are more important than the obligation to do good indicated by
the positive commandments. The reason is this: the commandment of love of God and neighbour does not have
in its dynamic any higher limit, but it does have a lower limit, beneath which the commandment is broken.
Furthermore, what must be done in any given situation depends on the circumstances, not all of which can be
foreseen; on the other hand there are kinds of behaviour which can never, in any situation, be a proper response
— a response which is in conformity with the dignity of the person. Finally, it is always possible that man, as
the result of coercion or other circumstances, can be hindered from doing certain good actions; but he can never
be hindered from not doing certain actions, especially if he is prepared to die rather than to do evil.

The Church has always taught that one may never choose kinds of behaviour prohibited by the moral
commandments expressed in negative form in the Old and New Testaments. As we have seen, Jesus himself
reaffirms that these prohibitions allow no exceptions: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments...
You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness" (Mt
19:17-18).

53. The great concern of our contemporaries for historicity and for culture has led some to call into question the
immutability of the natural law itself, and thus the existence of "objective norms of morality" 96 valid for all
people of the present and the future, as for those of the past. Is it ever possible, they ask, to consider as
universally valid and always binding certain rational determinations established in the past, when no one knew
the progress humanity would make in the future?

It must certainly be admitted that man always exists in a particular culture, but it must also be admitted that man
is not exhaustively defined by that same culture. Moreover, the very progress of cultures demonstrates that there
is something in man which transcends those cultures. This "something" is precisely human nature: this nature is
itself the measure of culture and the condition ensuring that man does not become the prisoner of any of his
cultures, but asserts his personal dignity by living in accordance with the profound truth of his being. To call
into question the permanent structural elements of man which are connected with his own bodily dimension
would not only conflict with common experience, but would render meaningless Jesus' reference to the
"beginning", precisely where the social and cultural context of the time had distorted the primordial meaning
and the role of certain moral norms (cf. Mt 19:1-9). This is the reason why "the Church affirms that underlying
so many changes there are some things which do not change and are ultimately founded upon Christ, who is the
same yesterday and today and for ever".97 Christ is the "Beginning" who, having taken on human nature,
definitively illumines it in its constitutive elements and in its dynamism of charity towards God and
neighbour.98

Certainly there is a need to seek out and to discover the most adequate formulation for universal and permanent
moral norms in the light of different cultural contexts, a formulation most capable of ceaselessly expressing
their historical relevance, of making them understood and of authentically interpreting their truth. This truth of
the moral law — like that of the "deposit of faith" — unfolds down the centuries: the norms expressing that
truth remain valid in their substance, but must be specified and determined "eodem sensu eademque sententia"
99
in the light of historical circumstances by the Church's Magisterium, whose decision is preceded and
accompanied by the work of interpretation and formulation characteristic of the reason of individual believers
and of theological reflection.100

II. Conscience and truth

 
Man's sanctuary

54. The relationship between man's freedom and God's law is most deeply lived out in the "heart" of the person,
in his moral conscience. As the Second Vatican Council observed: "In the depths of his conscience man detects
a law which he does not impose on himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love
good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience can when necessary speak to his heart more specifically: 'do this,
shun that'. For man has in his heart a law written by God. To obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it
he will be judged (cf. Rom 2:14-16)".101

The way in which one conceives the relationship between freedom and law is thus intimately bound up with
one's understanding of the moral conscience. Here the cultural tendencies referred to above — in which
freedom and law are set in opposition to each other and kept apart, and freedom is exalted almost to the point of
idolatry — lead to a "creative" understanding of moral conscience, which diverges from the teaching of the
Church's tradition and her Magisterium.

55. According to the opinion of some theologians, the function of conscience had been reduced, at least at a
certain period in the past, to a simple application of general moral norms to individual cases in the life of the
person. But those norms, they continue, cannot be expected to foresee and to respect all the individual concrete
acts of the person in all their uniqueness and particularity. While such norms might somehow be useful for a
correct assessment of the situation, they cannot replace the individual personal decision on how to act in
particular cases. The critique already mentioned of the traditional understanding of human nature and of its
importance for the moral life has even led certain authors to state that these norms are not so much a binding
objective criterion for judgments of conscience, but a general perspective which helps man tentatively to put
order into his personal and social life. These authors also stress the complexity typical of the phenomenon of
conscience, a complexity profoundly related to the whole sphere of psychology and the emotions, and to the
numerous influences exerted by the individual's social and cultural environment. On the other hand, they give
maximum attention to the value of conscience, which the Council itself defined as "the sanctuary of man, where
he is alone with God whose voice echoes within him".102 This voice, it is said, leads man not so much to a
meticulous observance of universal norms as to a creative and responsible acceptance of the personal tasks
entrusted to him by God.

In their desire to emphasize the "creative" character of conscience, certain authors no longer call its actions
"judgments" but "decisions" : only by making these decisions "autonomously" would man be able to attain
moral maturity. Some even hold that this process of maturing is inhibited by the excessively categorical position
adopted by the Church's Magisterium in many moral questions; for them, the Church's interventions are the
cause of unnecessary conflicts of conscience.

56. In order to justify these positions, some authors have proposed a kind of double status of moral truth.
Beyond the doctrinal and abstract level, one would have to acknowledge the priority of a certain more concrete
existential consideration. The latter, by taking account of circumstances and the situation, could legitimately be
the basis of certain exceptions to the general rule and thus permit one to do in practice and in good conscience
what is qualified as intrinsically evil by the moral law. A separation, or even an opposition, is thus established
in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid in general, and the norm of the individual
conscience, which would in fact make the final decision about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an
attempt is made to legitimize so-called "pastoral" solutions contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to
justify a "creative" hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by
a particular negative precept.

No one can fail to realize that these approaches pose a challenge to the very identity of the moral conscience in
relation to human freedom and God's law. Only the clarification made earlier with regard to the relationship,
based on truth, between freedom and law makes possible a discernment concerning this "creative"
understanding of conscience.
 

The judgment of conscience

57. The text of the Letter to the Romans which has helped us to grasp the essence of the natural law also
indicates the biblical understanding of conscience, especially in its specific connection with the law: "When
Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law unto themselves, even though
they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience
also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them" (Rom 2:14-15).

According to Saint Paul, conscience in a certain sense confronts man with the law, and thus becomes a
"witness" for man: a witness of his own faithfulness or unfaithfulness with regard to the law, of his essential
moral rectitude or iniquity. Conscience is the only witness, since what takes place in the heart of the person is
hidden from the eyes of everyone outside. Conscience makes its witness known only to the person himself.
And, in turn, only the person himself knows what his own response is to the voice of conscience.

58. The importance of this interior dialogue of man with himself can never be adequately appreciated. But it is
also a dialogue of man with God, the author of the law, the primordial image and final end of man. Saint
Bonaventure teaches that "conscience is like God's herald and messenger; it does not command things on its
own authority, but commands them as coming from God's authority, like a herald when he proclaims the edict
of the king. This is why conscience has binding force".103 Thus it can be said that conscience bears witness to
man's own rectitude or iniquity to man himself but, together with this and indeed even beforehand, conscience
is the witness of God himself, whose voice and judgment penetrate the depths of man's soul, calling him fortiter
et suaviter to obedience. "Moral conscience does not close man within an insurmountable and impenetrable
solitude, but opens him to the call, to the voice of God. In this, and not in anything else, lies the entire mystery
and the dignity of the moral conscience: in being the place, the sacred place where God speaks to man".104

59. Saint Paul does not merely acknowledge that conscience acts as a "witness"; he also reveals the way in
which conscience performs that function. He speaks of "conflicting thoughts" which accuse or excuse the
Gentiles with regard to their behaviour (cf. Rom 2:15). The term "conflicting thoughts" clarifies the precise
nature of conscience: it is a moral judgment about man and his actions, a judgment either of acquittal or of
condemnation, according as human acts are in conformity or not with the law of God written on the heart. In the
same text the Apostle clearly speaks of the judgment of actions, the judgment of their author and the moment
when that judgment will be definitively rendered: "(This will take place) on that day when, according to my
Gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus" (Rom 2:16).

The judgment of conscience is a practical judgment, a judgment which makes known what man must do or not
do, or which assesses an act already performed by him. It is a judgment which applies to a concrete situation the
rational conviction that one must love and do good and avoid evil. This first principle of practical reason is part
of the natural law; indeed it constitutes the very foundation of the natural law, inasmuch as it expresses that
primordial insight about good and evil, that reflection of God's creative wisdom which, like an imperishable
spark (scintilla animae), shines in the heart of every man. But whereas the natural law discloses the objective
and universal demands of the moral good, conscience is the application of the law to a particular case; this
application of the law thus becomes an inner dictate for the individual, a summons to do what is good in this
particular situation. Conscience thus formulates moral obligation in the light of the natural law: it is the
obligation to do what the individual, through the workings of his conscience, knows to be a good he is called to
do here and now. The universality of the law and its obligation are acknowledged, not suppressed, once reason
has established the law's application in concrete present circumstances. The judgment of conscience states "in
an ultimate way" whether a certain particular kind of behaviour is in conformity with the law; it formulates the
proximate norm of the morality of a voluntary act, "applying the objective law to a particular case".105
60. Like the natural law itself and all practical knowledge, the judgment of conscience also has an imperative
character: man must act in accordance with it. If man acts against this judgment or, in a case where he lacks
certainty about the rightness and goodness of a determined act, still performs that act, he stands condemned by
his own conscience, the proximate norm of personal morality. The dignity of this rational forum and the
authority of its voice and judgments derive from the truth about moral good and evil, which it is called to listen
to and to express. This truth is indicated by the "divine law", the universal and objective norm of morality. The
judgment of conscience does not establish the law; rather it bears witness to the authority of the natural law and
of the practical reason with reference to the supreme good, whose attractiveness the human person perceives
and whose commandments he accepts. "Conscience is not an independent and exclusive capacity to decide what
is good and what is evil. Rather there is profoundly imprinted upon it a principle of obedience vis-à-vis the
objective norm which establishes and conditions the correspondence of its decisions with the commands and
prohibitions which are at the basis of human behaviour".106

61. The truth about moral good, as that truth is declared in the law of reason, is practically and concretely
recognized by the judgment of conscience, which leads one to take responsibility for the good or the evil one
has done. If man does evil, the just judgment of his conscience remains within him as a witness to the universal
truth of the good, as well as to the malice of his particular choice. But the verdict of conscience remains in him
also as a pledge of hope and mercy: while bearing witness to the evil he has done, it also reminds him of his
need, with the help of God's grace, to ask forgiveness, to do good and to cultivate virtue constantly.

Consequently in the practical judgment of conscience, which imposes on the person the obligation to perform a
given act, the link between freedom and truth is made manifest. Precisely for this reason conscience expresses
itself in acts of "judgment" which reflect the truth about the good, and not in arbitrary "decisions". The maturity
and responsibility of these judgments — and, when all is said and done, of the individual who is their subject —
are not measured by the liberation of the conscience from objective truth, in favour of an alleged autonomy in
personal decisions, but, on the contrary, by an insistent search for truth and by allowing oneself to be guided by
that truth in one's actions.

Seeking what is true and good

62. Conscience, as the judgment of an act, is not exempt from the possibility of error. As the Council puts it,
"not infrequently conscience can be mistaken as a result of invincible ignorance, although it does not on that
account forfeit its dignity; but this cannot be said when a man shows little concern for seeking what is true and
good, and conscience gradually becomes almost blind from being accustomed to sin".107 In these brief words the
Council sums up the doctrine which the Church down the centuries has developed with regard to the erroneous
conscience.

Certainly, in order to have a "good conscience" (1 Tim 1:5), man must seek the truth and must make judgments
in accordance with that same truth. As the Apostle Paul says, the conscience must be "confirmed by the Holy
Spirit" (cf. Rom 9:1); it must be "clear" (2 Tim 1:3); it must not "practise cunning and tamper with God's word",
but "openly state the truth" (cf. 2 Cor 4:2). On the other hand, the Apostle also warns Christians: "Do not be
conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of
God, what is good and acceptable and perfect" (Rom 12:2).

Paul's admonition urges us to be watchful, warning us that in the judgments of our conscience the possibility of
error is always present. Conscience is not an infallible judge; it can make mistakes. However, error of
conscience can be the result of an invincible ignorance, an ignorance of which the subject is not aware and
which he is unable to overcome by himself.
The Council reminds us that in cases where such invincible ignorance is not culpable, conscience does not lose
its dignity, because even when it directs us to act in a way not in conformity with the objective moral order, it
continues to speak in the name of that truth about the good which the subject is called to seek sincerely.

63. In any event, it is always from the truth that the dignity of conscience derives. In the case of the correct
conscience, it is a question of the objective truth received by man; in the case of the erroneous conscience, it is a
question of what man, mistakenly, subjectively considers to be true. It is never acceptable to confuse a
"subjective" error about moral good with the "objective" truth rationally proposed to man in virtue of his end, or
to make the moral value of an act performed with a true and correct conscience equivalent to the moral value of
an act performed by following the judgment of an erroneous conscience.108 It is possible that the evil done as the
result of invincible ignorance or a non-culpable error of judgment may not be imputable to the agent; but even
in this case it does not cease to be an evil, a disorder in relation to the truth about the good. Furthermore, a good
act which is not recognized as such does not contribute to the moral growth of the person who performs it; it
does not perfect him and it does not help to dispose him for the supreme good. Thus, before feeling easily
justified in the name of our conscience, we should reflect on the words of the Psalm: "Who can discern his
errors? Clear me from hidden faults" (Ps 19:12). There are faults which we fail to see but which nevertheless
remain faults, because we have refused to walk towards the light (cf. Jn 9:39-41).

Conscience, as the ultimate concrete judgment, compromises its dignity when it is culpably erroneous, that is to
say, "when man shows little concern for seeking what is true and good, and conscience gradually becomes
almost blind from being accustomed to sin".109 Jesus alludes to the danger of the conscience being deformed
when he warns: "The eye is the lamp of the body. So if your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light;
but if your eye is not sound, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how
great is the darkness!" (Mt 6:22-23).

64. The words of Jesus just quoted also represent a call to form our conscience, to make it the object of a
continuous conversion to what is true and to what is good. In the same vein, Saint Paul exhorts us not to be
conformed to the mentality of this world, but to be transformed by the renewal of our mind (cf. Rom 12:2). It is
the "heart" converted to the Lord and to the love of what is good which is really the source of true judgments of
conscience. Indeed, in order to "prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect" (Rom
12:2), knowledge of God's law in general is certainly necessary, but it is not sufficient: what is essential is a sort
of "connaturality" between man and the true good.110 Such a connaturality is rooted in and develops through the
virtuous attitudes of the individual himself: prudence and the other cardinal virtues, and even before these the
theological virtues of faith, hope and charity. This is the meaning of Jesus' saying: "He who does what is true
comes to the light" (Jn 3:21).

Christians have a great help for the formation of conscience in the Church and her Magisterium. As the Council
affirms: "In forming their consciences the Christian faithful must give careful attention to the sacred and certain
teaching of the Church. For the Catholic Church is by the will of Christ the teacher of truth. Her charge is to
announce and teach authentically that truth which is Christ, and at the same time with her authority to declare
and confirm the principles of the moral order which derive from human nature itself ".111 It follows that the
authority of the Church, when she pronounces on moral questions, in no way undermines the freedom of
conscience of Christians. This is so not only because freedom of conscience is never freedom "from" the truth
but always and only freedom "in" the truth, but also because the Magisterium does not bring to the Christian
conscience truths which are extraneous to it; rather it brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess,
developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith. The Church puts herself always and only
at the service of conscience, helping it to avoid being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine proposed by
human deceit (cf. Eph 4:14), and helping it not to swerve from the truth about the good of man, but rather,
especially in more difficult questions, to attain the truth with certainty and to abide in it.

III. Fundamental choice and specific kinds of behaviour

 

"Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh" (Gal 5:13)

65. The heightened concern for freedom in our own day has led many students of the behavioural and the
theological sciences to develop a more penetrating analysis of its nature and of its dynamics. It has been rightly
pointed out that freedom is not only the choice for one or another particular action; it is also, within that choice,
a decision about oneself and a setting of one's own life for or against the Good, for or against the Truth, and
ultimately for or against God. Emphasis has rightly been placed on the importance of certain choices which
"shape" a person's entire moral life, and which serve as bounds within which other particular everyday choices
can be situated and allowed to develop.

Some authors, however, have proposed an even more radical revision of the relationship between person and
acts. They speak of a "fundamental freedom", deeper than and different from freedom of choice, which needs to
be considered if human actions are to be correctly understood and evaluated. According to these authors, the
key role in the moral life is to be attributed to a "fundamental option", brought about by that fundamental
freedom whereby the person makes an overall self-determination, not through a specific and conscious decision
on the level of reflection, but in a "transcendental" and "athematic" way. Particular acts which flow from this
option would constitute only partial and never definitive attempts to give it expression; they would only be its
"signs" or symptoms. The immediate object of such acts would not be absolute Good (before which the freedom
of the person would be expressed on a transcendental level), but particular (also termed "categorical" ) goods. In
the opinion of some theologians, none of these goods, which by their nature are partial, could determine the
freedom of man as a person in his totality, even though it is only by bringing them about or refusing to do so
that man is able to express his own fundamental option.

A distinction thus comes to be introduced between the fundamental option and deliberate choices of a concrete
kind of behaviour. In some authors this division tends to become a separation, when they expressly limit moral
"good" and "evil" to the transcendental dimension proper to the fundamental option, and describe as "right" or
"wrong" the choices of particular "innerworldly" kinds of behaviour: those, in other words, concerning man's
relationship with himself, with others and with the material world. There thus appears to be established within
human acting a clear disjunction between two levels of morality: on the one hand the order of good and evil,
which is dependent on the will, and on the other hand specific kinds of behaviour, which are judged to be
morally right or wrong only on the basis of a technical calculation of the proportion between the "premoral" or
"physical" goods and evils which actually result from the action. This is pushed to the point where a concrete
kind of behaviour, even one freely chosen, comes to be considered as a merely physical process, and not
according to the criteria proper to a human act. The conclusion to which this eventually leads is that the
properly moral assessment of the person is reserved to his fundamental option, prescinding in whole or in part
from his choice of particular actions, of concrete kinds of behaviour.

66. There is no doubt that Christian moral teaching, even in its Biblical roots, acknowledges the specific
importance of a fundamental choice which qualifies the moral life and engages freedom on a radical level
before God. It is a question of the decision of faith, of the obedience of faith (cf. Rom 16:26) "by which man
makes a total and free self-commitment to God, offering 'the full submission of intellect and will to God as he
reveals' ".112 This faith, which works through love (cf. Gal 5:6), comes from the core of man, from his "heart"
(cf. Rom 10:10), whence it is called to bear fruit in works (cf. Mt 12:33-35; Lk 6:43-45; Rom 8:5-10; Gal 5:22).
In the Decalogue one finds, as an introduction to the various commandments, the basic clause: "I am the Lord
your God..." (Ex 20:2), which, by impressing upon the numerous and varied particular prescriptions their
primordial meaning, gives the morality of the Covenant its aspect of completeness, unity and profundity. Israel's
fundamental decision, then, is about the fundamental commandment (cf. Jos 24:14-25; Ex 19:3-8; Mic 6:8). The
morality of the New Covenant is similarly dominated by the fundamental call of Jesus to follow him — thus he
also says to the young man: "If you wish to be perfect... then come, follow me" (Mt 19:21); to this call the
disciple must respond with a radical decision and choice. The Gospel parables of the treasure and the pearl of
great price, for which one sells all one's possessions, are eloquent and effective images of the radical and
unconditional nature of the decision demanded by the Kingdom of God. The radical nature of the decision to
follow Jesus is admirably expressed in his own words: "Whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever
loses his life for my sake and the Gospel's will save it" (Mk 8:35).

Jesus' call to "come, follow me" marks the greatest possible exaltation of human freedom, yet at the same time
it witnesses to the truth and to the obligation of acts of faith and of decisions which can be described as
involving a fundamental option. We find a similar exaltation of human freedom in the words of Saint Paul:
"You were called to freedom, brethren" (Gal 5:13). But the Apostle immediately adds a grave warning: "Only
do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh". This warning echoes his earlier words: "For freedom
Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" (Gal 5:1). Paul
encourages us to be watchful, because freedom is always threatened by slavery. And this is precisely the case
when an act of faith — in the sense of a fundamental option — becomes separated from the choice of particular
acts, as in the tendencies mentioned above.

67. These tendencies are therefore contrary to the teaching of Scripture itself, which sees the fundamental
option as a genuine choice of freedom and links that choice profoundly to particular acts. By his fundamental
choice, man is capable of giving his life direction and of progressing, with the help of grace, towards his end,
following God's call. But this capacity is actually exercised in the particular choices of specific actions, through
which man deliberately conforms himself to God's will, wisdom and law. It thus needs to be stated that the so-
called fundamental option, to the extent that it is distinct from a generic intention and hence one not yet
determined in such a way that freedom is obligated, is always brought into play through conscious and free
decisions. Precisely for this reason, it is revoked when man engages his freedom in conscious decisions to the
contrary, with regard to morally grave matter.

To separate the fundamental option from concrete kinds of behaviour means to contradict the substantial
integrity or personal unity of the moral agent in his body and in his soul. A fundamental option understood
without explicit consideration of the potentialities which it puts into effect and the determinations which express
it does not do justice to the rational finality immanent in man's acting and in each of his deliberate decisions. In
point of fact, the morality of human acts is not deduced only from one's intention, orientation or fundamental
option, understood as an intention devoid of a clearly determined binding content or as an intention with no
corresponding positive effort to fulfil the different obligations of the moral life. Judgments about morality
cannot be made without taking into consideration whether or not the deliberate choice of a specific kind of
behaviour is in conformity with the dignity and integral vocation of the human person. Every choice always
implies a reference by the deliberate will to the goods and evils indicated by the natural law as goods to be
pursued and evils to be avoided. In the case of the positive moral precepts, prudence always has the task of
verifying that they apply in a specific situation, for example, in view of other duties which may be more
important or urgent. But the negative moral precepts, those prohibiting certain concrete actions or kinds of
behaviour as intrinsically evil, do not allow for any legitimate exception. They do not leave room, in any
morally acceptable way, for the "creativity" of any contrary determination whatsoever. Once the moral species
of an action prohibited by a universal rule is concretely recognized, the only morally good act is that of obeying
the moral law and of refraining from the action which it forbids.

68. Here an important pastoral consideration must be added. According to the logic of the positions mentioned
above, an individual could, by virtue of a fundamental option, remain faithful to God independently of whether
or not certain of his choices and his acts are in conformity with specific moral norms or rules. By virtue of a
primordial option for charity, that individual could continue to be morally good, persevere in God's grace and
attain salvation, even if certain of his specific kinds of behaviour were deliberately and gravely contrary to
God's commandments as set forth by the Church.

In point of fact, man does not suffer perdition only by being unfaithful to that fundamental option whereby he
has made "a free self-commitment to God".113 With every freely committed mortal sin, he offends God as the
giver of the law and as a result becomes guilty with regard to the entire law (cf. Jas 2:8-11); even if he
perseveres in faith, he loses "sanctifying grace", "charity" and "eternal happiness".114 As the Council of Trent
teaches, "the grace of justification once received is lost not only by apostasy, by which faith itself is lost, but
also by any other mortal sin".115

Mortal and venial sin

69. As we have just seen, reflection on the fundamental option has also led some theologians to undertake a
basic revision of the traditional distinction between mortal sins and venial sins. They insist that the opposition
to God's law which causes the loss of sanctifying grace — and eternal damnation, when one dies in such a state
of sin — could only be the result of an act which engages the person in his totality: in other words, an act of
fundamental option. According to these theologians, mortal sin, which separates man from God, only exists in
the rejection of God, carried out at a level of freedom which is neither to be identified with an act of choice nor
capable of becoming the object of conscious awareness. Consequently, they go on to say, it is difficult, at least
psychologically, to accept the fact that a Christian, who wishes to remain united to Jesus Christ and to his
Church, could so easily and repeatedly commit mortal sins, as the "matter" itself of his actions would sometimes
indicate. Likewise, it would be hard to accept that man is able, in a brief lapse of time, to sever radically the
bond of communion with God and afterwards be converted to him by sincere repentance. The gravity of sin,
they maintain, ought to be measured by the degree of engagement of the freedom of the person performing an
act, rather than by the matter of that act.

70. The Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia reaffirmed the importance and
permanent validity of the distinction between mortal and venial sins, in accordance with the Church's tradition.
And the 1983 Synod of Bishops, from which that Exhortation emerged, "not only reaffirmed the teaching of the
Council of Trent concerning the existence and nature of mortal and venial sins, but it also recalled that mortal
sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate
consent".116

The statement of the Council of Trent does not only consider the "grave matter" of mortal sin; it also recalls that
its necessary condition is "full awareness and deliberate consent". In any event, both in moral theology and in
pastoral practice one is familiar with cases in which an act which is grave by reason of its matter does not
constitute a mortal sin because of a lack of full awareness or deliberate consent on the part of the person
performing it. Even so, "care will have to be taken not to reduce mortal sin to an act of 'fundamental option' —
as is commonly said today — against God", seen either as an explicit and formal rejection of God and
neighbour or as an implicit and unconscious rejection of love. "For mortal sin exists also when a person
knowingly and willingly, for whatever reason, chooses something gravely disordered. In fact, such a choice
already includes contempt for the divine law, a rejection of God's love for humanity and the whole of creation:
the person turns away from God and loses charity. Consequently, the fundamental orientation can be radically
changed by particular acts. Clearly, situations can occur which are very complex and obscure from a
psychological viewpoint, and which influence the sinner's subjective imputability. But from a consideration of
the psychological sphere one cannot proceed to create a theological category, which is precisely what the
'fundamental option' is, understanding it in such a way that it objectively changes or casts doubt upon the
traditional concept of mortal sin".117

The separation of fundamental option from deliberate choices of particular kinds of behaviour, disordered in
themselves or in their circumstances, which would not engage that option, thus involves a denial of Catholic
doctrine on mortal sin: "With the whole tradition of the Church, we call mortal sin the act by which man freely
and consciously rejects God, his law, the covenant of love that God offers, preferring to turn in on himself or to
some created and finite reality, something contrary to the divine will (conversio ad creaturam). This can occur
in a direct and formal way, in the sins of idolatry, apostasy and atheism; or in an equivalent way, as in every act
of disobedience to God's commandments in a grave matter".118

IV. The moral act

Teleology and teleologism

71. The relationship between man's freedom and God's law, which has its intimate and living centre in the moral
conscience, is manifested and realized in human acts. It is precisely through his acts that man attains perfection
as man, as one who is called to seek his Creator of his own accord and freely to arrive at full and blessed
perfection by cleaving to him.119

Human acts are moral acts because they express and determine the goodness or evil of the individual who
performs them.120 They do not produce a change merely in the state of affairs outside of man but, to the extent
that they are deliberate choices, they give moral definition to the very person who performs them, determining
his profound spiritual traits. This was perceptively noted by Saint Gregory of Nyssa: "All things subject to
change and to becoming never remain constant, but continually pass from one state to another, for better or
worse... Now, human life is always subject to change; it needs to be born ever anew... But here birth does not
come about by a foreign intervention, as is the case with bodily beings...; it is the result of a free choice. Thus
we are in a certain way our own parents, creating ourselves as we will, by our decisions".121

72. The morality of acts is defined by the relationship of man's freedom with the authentic good. This good is
established, as the eternal law, by Divine Wisdom which orders every being towards its end: this eternal law is
known both by man's natural reason (hence it is "natural law"), and — in an integral and perfect way — by
God's supernatural Revelation (hence it is called "divine law"). Acting is morally good when the choices of
freedom are in conformity with man's true good and thus express the voluntary ordering of the person towards
his ultimate end: God himself, the supreme good in whom man finds his full and perfect happiness. The first
question in the young man's conversation with Jesus: "What good must I do to have eternal life? " (Mt 19:6)
immediately brings out the essential connection between the moral value of an act and man's final end. Jesus, in
his reply, confirms the young man's conviction: the performance of good acts, commanded by the One who
"alone is good", constitutes the indispensable condition of and path to eternal blessedness: "If you wish to enter
into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17). Jesus' answer and his reference to the commandments also make
it clear that the path to that end is marked by respect for the divine laws which safeguard human good.Only the
act in conformity with the good can be a path that leads to life.

The rational ordering of the human act to the good in its truth and the voluntary pursuit of that good, known by
reason, constitute morality. Hence human activity cannot be judged as morally good merely because it is a
means for attaining one or another of its goals, or simply because the subject's intention is good.122 Activity is
morally good when it attests to and expresses the voluntary ordering of the person to his ultimate end and the
conformity of a concrete action with the human good as it is acknowledged in its truth by reason. If the object of
the concrete action is not in harmony with the true good of the person, the choice of that action makes our will
and ourselves morally evil, thus putting us in conflict with our ultimate end, the supreme good, God himself.

73. The Christian, thanks to God's Revelation and to faith, is aware of the "newness" which characterizes the
morality of his actions: these actions are called to show either consistency or inconsistency with that dignity and
vocation which have been bestowed on him by grace. In Jesus Christ and in his Spirit, the Christian is a "new
creation", a child of God; by his actions he shows his likeness or unlikeness to the image of the Son who is the
first-born among many brethren (cf. Rom 8:29), he lives out his fidelity or infidelity to the gift of the Spirit, and
he opens or closes himself to eternal life, to the communion of vision, love and happiness with God the Father,
Son and Holy Spirit.123 As Saint Cyril of Alexandria writes, Christ "forms us according to his image, in such a
way that the traits of his divine nature shine forth in us through sanctification and justice and the life which is
good and in conformity with virtue... The beauty of this image shines forth in us who are in Christ, when we
show ourselves to be good in our works".124

Consequently the moral life has an essential "teleological" character, since it consists in the deliberate ordering
of human acts to God, the supreme good and ultimate end (telos) of man. This is attested to once more by the
question posed by the young man to Jesus: "What good must I do to have eternal life? ". But this ordering to
one's ultimate end is not something subjective, dependent solely upon one's intention. It presupposes that such
acts are in themselves capable of being ordered to this end, insofar as they are in conformity with the authentic
moral good of man, safeguarded by the commandments. This is what Jesus himself points out in his reply to the
young man: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17).

Clearly such an ordering must be rational and free, conscious and deliberate, by virtue of which man is
"responsible" for his actions and subject to the judgment of God, the just and good judge who, as the Apostle
Paul reminds us, rewards good and punishes evil: "We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so
that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body" (2 Cor 5:10).

74. But on what does the moral assessment of man's free acts depend? What is it that ensures this ordering of
human acts to God? Is it the intention of the acting subject, the circumstances — and in particular the
consequences — of his action, or the object itself of his act?

This is what is traditionally called the problem of the "sources of morality". Precisely with regard to this
problem there have emerged in the last few decades new or newly-revived theological and cultural trends which
call for careful discernment on the part of the Church's Magisterium.

Certain ethical theories, called "teleological", claim to be concerned for the conformity of human acts with the
ends pursued by the agent and with the values intended by him. The criteria for evaluating the moral rightness
of an action are drawn from the weighing of the non-moral or pre-moral goods to be gained and the
corresponding non-moral or pre-moral values to be respected. For some, concrete behaviour would be right or
wrong according as whether or not it is capable of producing a better state of affairs for all concerned. Right
conduct would be the one capable of "maximizing" goods and "minimizing" evils.

Many of the Catholic moralists who follow in this direction seek to distance themselves from utilitarianism and
pragmatism, where the morality of human acts would be judged without any reference to the man's true ultimate
end. They rightly recognize the need to find ever more consistent rational arguments in order to justify the
requirements and to provide a foundation for the norms of the moral life. This kind of investigation is legitimate
and necessary, since the moral order, as established by the natural law, is in principle accessible to human
reason. Furthermore, such investigation is well-suited to meeting the demands of dialogue and cooperation with
non-Catholics and non-believers, especially in pluralistic societies.

75. But as part of the effort to work out such a rational morality (for this reason it is sometimes called an
"autonomous morality" ) there exist false solutions, linked in particular to an inadequate understanding of the
object of moral action. Some authors do not take into sufficient consideration the fact that the will is involved in
the concrete choices which it makes: these choices are a condition of its moral goodness and its being ordered to
the ultimate end of the person. Others are inspired by a notion of freedom which prescinds from the actual
conditions of its exercise, from its objective reference to the truth about the good, and from its determination
through choices of concrete kinds of behaviour. According to these theories, free will would neither be morally
subjected to specific obligations nor shaped by its choices, while nonetheless still remaining responsible for its
own acts and for their consequences. This "teleologism", as a method for discovering the moral norm, can thus
be called — according to terminology and approaches imported from different currents of thought —
"consequentialism" or "proportionalism". The former claims to draw the criteria of the rightness of a given way
of acting solely from a calculation of foreseeable consequences deriving from a given choice. The latter, by
weighing the various values and goods being sought, focuses rather on the proportion acknowledged between
the good and bad effects of that choice, with a view to the "greater good" or "lesser evil" actually possible in a
particular situation.

The teleological ethical theories (proportionalism, consequentialism), while acknowledging that moral values
are indicated by reason and by Revelation, maintain that it is never possible to formulate an absolute prohibition
of particular kinds of behaviour which would be in conflict, in every circumstance and in every culture, with
those values. The acting subject would indeed be responsible for attaining the values pursued, but in two ways:
the values or goods involved in a human act would be, from one viewpoint, of the moral order (in relation to
properly moral values, such as love of God and neighbour, justice, etc.) and, from another viewpoint, of the pre-
moral order, which some term non-moral, physical or ontic (in relation to the advantages and disadvantages
accruing both to the agent and to all other persons possibly involved, such as, for example, health or its
endangerment, physical integrity, life, death, loss of material goods, etc.). In a world where goodness is always
mixed with evil, and every good effect linked to other evil effects, the morality of an act would be judged in two
different ways: its moral "goodness" would be judged on the basis of the subject's intention in reference to
moral goods, and its "rightness" on the basis of a consideration of its foreseeable effects or consequences and of
their proportion. Consequently, concrete kinds of behaviour could be described as "right" or "wrong", without it
being thereby possible to judge as morally "good" or "bad" the will of the person choosing them. In this way, an
act which, by contradicting a universal negative norm, directly violates goods considered as "pre-moral" could
be qualified as morally acceptable if the intention of the subject is focused, in accordance with a "responsible"
assessment of the goods involved in the concrete action, on the moral value judged to be decisive in the
situation.

The evaluation of the consequences of the action, based on the proportion between the act and its effects and
between the effects themselves, would regard only the pre-moral order. The moral specificity of acts, that is
their goodness or evil, would be determined exclusively by the faithfulness of the person to the highest values
of charity and prudence, without this faithfulness necessarily being incompatible with choices contrary to
certain particular moral precepts. Even when grave matter is concerned, these precepts should be considered as
operative norms which are always relative and open to exceptions.

In this view, deliberate consent to certain kinds of behaviour declared illicit by traditional moral theology would
not imply an objective moral evil.

The object of the deliberate act

76. These theories can gain a certain persuasive force from their affinity to the scientific mentality, which is
rightly concerned with ordering technical and economic activities on the basis of a calculation of resources and
profits, procedures and their effects. They seek to provide liberation from the constraints of a voluntaristic and
arbitrary morality of obligation which would ultimately be dehumanizing.

Such theories however are not faithful to the Church's teaching, when they believe they can justify, as morally
good, deliberate choices of kinds of behaviour contrary to the commandments of the divine and natural law.
These theories cannot claim to be grounded in the Catholic moral tradition. Although the latter did witness the
development of a casuistry which tried to assess the best ways to achieve the good in certain concrete situations,
it is nonetheless true that this casuistry concerned only cases in which the law was uncertain, and thus the
absolute validity of negative moral precepts, which oblige without exception, was not called into question. The
faithful are obliged to acknowledge and respect the specific moral precepts declared and taught by the Church
in the name of God, the Creator and Lord.125 When the Apostle Paul sums up the fulfilment of the law in the
precept of love of neighbour as oneself (cf. Rom 13:8-10), he is not weakening the commandments but
reinforcing them, since he is revealing their requirements and their gravity. Love of God and of one's neighbour
cannot be separated from the observance of the commandments of the Covenant renewed in the blood of Jesus
Christ and in the gift of the Spirit. It is an honour characteristic of Christians to obey God rather than men (cf.
Acts 4:19; 5:29) and accept even martyrdom as a consequence, like the holy men and women of the Old and
New Testaments, who are considered such because they gave their lives rather than perform this or that
particular act contrary to faith or virtue.

77. In order to offer rational criteria for a right moral decision, the theories mentioned above take account of the
intention and consequences of human action. Certainly there is need to take into account both the intention —
as Jesus forcefully insisted in clear disagreement with the scribes and Pharisees, who prescribed in great detail
certain outward practices without paying attention to the heart (cf. Mk 7:20-21; Mt 15:19) — and the goods
obtained and the evils avoided as a result of a particular act. Responsibility demands as much. But the
consideration of these consequences, and also of intentions, is not sufficient for judging the moral quality of a
concrete choice. The weighing of the goods and evils foreseeable as the consequence of an action is not an
adequate method for determining whether the choice of that concrete kind of behaviour is "according to its
species", or "in itself", morally good or bad, licit or illicit. The foreseeable consequences are part of those
circumstances of the act, which, while capable of lessening the gravity of an evil act, nonetheless cannot alter its
moral species.

Moreover, everyone recognizes the difficulty, or rather the impossibility, of evaluating all the good and evil
consequences and effects — defined as pre-moral — of one's own acts: an exhaustive rational calculation is not
possible. How then can one go about establishing proportions which depend on a measuring, the criteria of
which remain obscure? How could an absolute obligation be justified on the basis of such debatable
calculations?

78. The morality of the human act depends primarily and fundamentally on the "object" rationally chosen by
the deliberate will, as is borne out by the insightful analysis, still valid today, made by Saint Thomas.126 In order
to be able to grasp the object of an act which specifies that act morally, it is therefore necessary to place oneself
in the perspective of the acting person. The object of the act of willing is in fact a freely chosen kind of
behaviour. To the extent that it is in conformity with the order of reason, it is the cause of the goodness of the
will; it perfects us morally, and disposes us to recognize our ultimate end in the perfect good, primordial love.
By the object of a given moral act, then, one cannot mean a process or an event of the merely physical order, to
be assessed on the basis of its ability to bring about a given state of affairs in the outside world. Rather, that
object is the proximate end of a deliberate decision which determines the act of willing on the part of the acting
person. Consequently, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, "there are certain specific kinds of
behaviour that are always wrong to choose, because choosing them involves a disorder of the will, that is, a
moral evil".127 And Saint Thomas observes that "it often happens that man acts with a good intention, but
without spiritual gain, because he lacks a good will. Let us say that someone robs in order to feed the poor: in
this case, even though the intention is good, the uprightness of the will is lacking. Consequently, no evil done
with a good intention can be excused. 'There are those who say: And why not do evil that good may come?
Their condemnation is just' (Rom 3:8)".128

The reason why a good intention is not itself sufficient, but a correct choice of actions is also needed, is that the
human act depends on its object, whether that object is capable or not of being ordered to God, to the One who
"alone is good", and thus brings about the perfection of the person. An act is therefore good if its object is in
conformity with the good of the person with respect for the goods morally relevant for him. Christian ethics,
which pays particular attention to the moral object, does not refuse to consider the inner "teleology" of acting,
inasmuch as it is directed to promoting the true good of the person; but it recognizes that it is really pursued
only when the essential elements of human nature are respected. The human act, good according to its object, is
also capable of being ordered to its ultimate end. That same act then attains its ultimate and decisive perfection
when the will actually does order it to God through charity. As the Patron of moral theologians and confessors
teaches: "It is not enough to do good works; they need to be done well. For our works to be good and perfect,
they must be done for the sole purpose of pleasing God".129
 

"Intrinsic evil": it is not licit to do evil that good may come of it (cf. Rom 3:8)

79. One must therefore reject the thesis, characteristic of teleological and proportionalist theories, which holds
that it is impossible to qualify as morally evil according to its species — its "object" — the deliberate choice of
certain kinds of behaviour or specific acts, apart from a consideration of the intention for which the choice is
made or the totality of the foreseeable consequences of that act for all persons concerned.

The primary and decisive element for moral judgment is the object of the human act, which establishes whether
it is capable of being ordered to the good and to the ultimate end, which is God. This capability is grasped by
reason in the very being of man, considered in his integral truth, and therefore in his natural inclinations, his
motivations and his finalities, which always have a spiritual dimension as well. It is precisely these which are
the contents of the natural law and hence that ordered complex of "personal goods" which serve the "good of
the person": the good which is the person himself and his perfection. These are the goods safeguarded by the
commandments, which, according to Saint Thomas, contain the whole natural law.130

80. Reason attests that there are objects of the human act which are by their nature "incapable of being ordered"
to God, because they radically contradict the good of the person made in his image. These are the acts which, in
the Church's moral tradition, have been termed "intrinsically evil" (intrinsece malum): they are such always and
per se, in other words, on account of their very object, and quite apart from the ulterior intentions of the one
acting and the circumstances. Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by
circumstances and especially by intentions, the Church teaches that "there exist acts which per se and in
themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object".131 The
Second Vatican Council itself, in discussing the respect due to the human person, gives a number of examples
of such acts: "Whatever is hostile to life itself, such as any kind of homicide, genocide, abortion, euthanasia and
voluntary suicide; whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental
torture and attempts to coerce the spirit; whatever is offensive to human dignity, such as subhuman living
conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution and trafficking in women and children;
degrading conditions of work which treat labourers as mere instruments of profit, and not as free responsible
persons: all these and the like are a disgrace, and so long as they infect human civilization they contaminate
those who inflict them more than those who suffer injustice, and they are a negation of the honour due to the
Creator".132

With regard to intrinsically evil acts, and in reference to contraceptive practices whereby the conjugal act is
intentionally rendered infertile, Pope Paul VI teaches: "Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a
lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good, it is never lawful, even
for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (cf. Rom 3:8) — in other words, to intend directly
something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of
man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in
general".133

81. In teaching the existence of intrinsically evil acts, the Church accepts the teaching of Sacred Scripture. The
Apostle Paul emphatically states: "Do not be deceived: neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor
sexual perverts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the Kingdom of
God" (1 Cor 6:9-10).

If acts are intrinsically evil, a good intention or particular circumstances can diminish their evil, but they cannot
remove it. They remain "irremediably" evil acts; per se and in themselves they are not capable of being ordered
to God and to the good of the person. "As for acts which are themselves sins (cum iam opera ipsa peccata sunt),
Saint Augustine writes, like theft, fornication, blasphemy, who would dare affirm that, by doing them for good
motives (causis bonis), they would no longer be sins, or, what is even more absurd, that they would be sins that
are justified?".134

Consequently, circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object
into an act "subjectively" good or defensible as a choice.

82. Furthermore, an intention is good when it has as its aim the true good of the person in view of his ultimate
end. But acts whose object is "not capable of being ordered" to God and "unworthy of the human person" are
always and in every case in conflict with that good. Consequently, respect for norms which prohibit such acts
and oblige semper et pro semper, that is, without any exception, not only does not inhibit a good intention, but
actually represents its basic expression.

The doctrine of the object as a source of morality represents an authentic explicitation of the Biblical morality
of the Covenant and of the commandments, of charity and of the virtues. The moral quality of human acting is
dependent on this fidelity to the commandments, as an expression of obedience and of love. For this reason —
we repeat — the opinion must be rejected as erroneous which maintains that it is impossible to qualify as
morally evil according to its species the deliberate choice of certain kinds of behaviour or specific acts, without
taking into account the intention for which the choice was made or the totality of the foreseeable consequences
of that act for all persons concerned. Without the rational determination of the morality of human acting as
stated above, it would be impossible to affirm the existence of an "objective moral order"135 and to establish any
particular norm the content of which would be binding without exception. This would be to the detriment of
human fraternity and the truth about the good, and would be injurious to ecclesial communion as well.

83. As is evident, in the question of the morality of human acts, and in particular the question of whether there
exist intrinsically evil acts, we find ourselves faced with the question of man himself, of his truth and of the
moral consequences flowing from that truth. By acknowledging and teaching the existence of intrinsic evil in
given human acts, the Church remains faithful to the integral truth about man; she thus respects and promotes
man in his dignity and vocation. Consequently, she must reject the theories set forth above, which contradict
this truth.

Dear Brothers in the Episcopate, we must not be content merely to warn the faithful about the errors and
dangers of certain ethical theories. We must first of all show the inviting splendour of that truth which is Jesus
Christ himself. In him, who is the Truth (cf. Jn 14:6), man can understand fully and live perfectly, through his
good actions, his vocation to freedom in obedience to the divine law summarized in the commandment of love
of God and neighbour. And this is what takes place through the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth, of
freedom and of love: in him we are enabled to interiorize the law, to receive it and to live it as the motivating
force of true personal freedom: "the perfect law, the law of liberty" (Jas 1:25).

CHAPTER III - "LEST THE CROSS OF CHRIST BE EMPTIED OF ITS POWER (1 Cor 1:17) - Moral
good for the life of the Church and of the world

"For freedom Christ has set us free" (Gal 5:1).

84. The fundamental question which the moral theories mentioned above pose in a particularly forceful way is
that of the relationship of man's freedom to God's law; it is ultimately the question of the relationship between
freedom and truth.
According to Christian faith and the Church's teaching, "only the freedom which submits to the Truth leads the
human person to his true good. The good of the person is to be in the Truth and to do the Truth".136

A comparison between the Church's teaching and today's social and cultural situation immediately makes clear
the urgent need for the Church herself to develop an intense pastoral effort precisely with regard to this
fundamental question. "This essential bond between Truth, the Good and Freedom has been largely lost sight of
by present-day culture. As a result, helping man to rediscover it represents nowadays one of the specific
requirements of the Church's mission, for the salvation of the world. Pilate's question: "What is truth" reflects
the distressing perplexity of a man who often no longer knows who he is, whence he comes and where he is
going. Hence we not infrequently witness the fearful plunging of the human person into situations of gradual
self-destruction. According to some, it appears that one no longer need acknowledge the enduring absoluteness
of any moral value. All around us we encounter contempt for human life after conception and before birth; the
ongoing violation of basic rights of the person; the unjust destruction of goods minimally necessary for a human
life. Indeed, something more serious has happened: man is no longer convinced that only in the truth can he find
salvation. The saving power of the truth is contested, and freedom alone, uprooted from any objectivity, is left
to decide by itself what is good and what is evil. This relativism becomes, in the field of theology, a lack of trust
in the wisdom of God, who guides man with the moral law. Concrete situations are unfavourably contrasted
with the precepts of the moral law, nor is it any longer maintained that, when all is said and done, the law of
God is always the one true good of man".137

85. The discernment which the Church carries out with regard to these ethical theories is not simply limited to
denouncing and refuting them. In a positive way, the Church seeks, with great love, to help all the faithful to
form a moral conscience which will make judgments and lead to decisions in accordance with the truth,
following the exhortation of the Apostle Paul: "Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the
renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect"
(Rom 12:2). This effort by the Church finds its support — the "secret" of its educative power — not so much in
doctrinal statements and pastoral appeals to vigilance, as in constantly looking to the Lord Jesus. Each day the
Church looks to Christ with unfailing love, fully aware that the true and final answer to the problem of morality
lies in him alone. In a particular way, it is in the Crucified Christ that the Church finds the answer to the
question troubling so many people today: how can obedience to universal and unchanging moral norms respect
the uniqueness and individuality of the person, and not represent a threat to his freedom and dignity? The
Church makes her own the Apostle Paul's awareness of the mission he had received: "Christ... sent me... to
preach the Gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.... We preach
Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and
Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God" (1 Cor 1:17, 23-24). The Crucified Christ reveals the
authentic meaning of freedom; he lives it fully in the total gift of himself and calls his disciples to share in his
freedom.

86. Rational reflection and daily experience demonstrate the weakness which marks man's freedom. That
freedom is real but limited: its absolute and unconditional origin is not in itself, but in the life within which it is
situated and which represents for it, at one and the same time, both a limitation and a possibility. Human
freedom belongs to us as creatures; it is a freedom which is given as a gift, one to be received like a seed and to
be cultivated responsibly. It is an essential part of that creaturely image which is the basis of the dignity of the
person. Within that freedom there is an echo of the primordial vocation whereby the Creator calls man to the
true Good, and even more, through Christ's Revelation, to become his friend and to share his own divine life. It
is at once inalienable self-possession and openness to all that exists, in passing beyond self to knowledge and
love of the other.138 Freedom then is rooted in the truth about man, and it is ultimately directed towards
communion.

Reason and experience not only confirm the weakness of human freedom; they also confirm its tragic aspects.
Man comes to realize that his freedom is in some mysterious way inclined to betray this openness to the True
and the Good, and that all too often he actually prefers to choose finite, limited and ephemeral goods. What is
more, within his errors and negative decisions, man glimpses the source of a deep rebellion, which leads him to
reject the Truth and the Good in order to set himself up as an absolute principle unto himself: "You will be like
God" (Gen 3:5). Consequently, freedom itself needs to be set free. It is Christ who sets it free: he "has set us free
for freedom" (cf. Gal 5:1).

87. Christ reveals, first and foremost, that the frank and open acceptance of truth is the condition for authentic
freedom: "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free" (Jn 8:32).139 This is truth which sets one free
in the face of worldly power and which gives the strength to endure martyrdom. So it was with Jesus before
Pilate: "For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth" (Jn 18:37). The
true worshippers of God must thus worship him "in spirit and truth" (Jn 4:23): in this worship they become free.
Worship of God and a relationship with truth are revealed in Jesus Christ as the deepest foundation of freedom.

Furthermore, Jesus reveals by his whole life, and not only by his words, that freedom is acquired in love, that is,
in the gift of self. The one who says: "Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his
friends" (Jn 15:13), freely goes out to meet his Passion (cf. Mt 26:46), and in obedience to the Father gives his
life on the Cross for all men (cf. Phil 2:6-11). Contemplation of Jesus Crucified is thus the highroad which the
Church must tread every day if she wishes to understand the full meaning of freedom: the gift of self in service
to God and one's brethren. Communion with the Crucified and Risen Lord is the never-ending source from
which the Church draws unceasingly in order to live in freedom, to give of herself and to serve. Commenting on
the verse in Psalm 100 "Serve the Lord with gladness", Saint Augustine says: "In the house of the Lord, slavery
is free. It is free because it serves not out of necessity, but out of charity... Charity should make you a servant,
just as truth has made you free... you are at once both a servant and free: a servant, because you have become
such; free, because you are loved by God your Creator; indeed, you have also been enabled to love your
Creator... You are a servant of the Lord and you are a freedman of the Lord. Do not go looking for a liberation
which will lead you far from the house of your liberator!".140

The Church, and each of her members, is thus called to share in the munus regale of the Crucified Christ (cf. Jn
12:32), to share in the grace and in the responsibility of the Son of man who came "not to be served but to serve,
and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mt 20:28).141

Jesus, then, is the living, personal summation of perfect freedom in total obedience to the will of God. His
crucified flesh fully reveals the unbreakable bond between freedom and truth, just as his Resurrection from the
dead is the supreme exaltation of the fruitfulness and saving power of a freedom lived out in truth.

Walking in the light (cf. 1 Jn 1:7)

88. The attempt to set freedom in opposition to truth, and indeed to separate them radically, is the consequence,
manifestation and consummation of another more serious and destructive dichotomy, that which separates faith
from morality.

This separation represents one of the most acute pastoral concerns of the Church amid today's growing
secularism, wherein many, indeed too many, people think and live "as if God did not exist". We are speaking of
a mentality which affects, often in a profound, extensive and all-embracing way, even the attitudes and
behaviour of Christians, whose faith is weakened and loses its character as a new and original criterion for
thinking and acting in personal, family and social life. In a widely dechristianized culture, the criteria employed
by believers themselves in making judgments and decisions often appear extraneous or even contrary to those of
the Gospel.

It is urgent then that Christians should rediscover the newness of the faith and its power to judge a prevalent and
all-intrusive culture. As the Apostle Paul admonishes us: "Once you were darkness, but now you are light in the
Lord; walk as children of the light (for the fruit of the light is found in all that is good and right and true), and
try to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful words of darkness, but instead expose
them... Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of the time, because
the days are evil" (Eph 5:8-11, 15-16; cf. 1 Th 5:4-8).

It is urgent to rediscover and to set forth once more the authentic reality of the Christian faith, which is not
simply a set of propositions to be accepted with intellectual assent. Rather, faith is a lived knowledge of Christ,
a living remembrance of his commandments, and a truth to be lived out. A word, in any event, is not truly
received until it passes into action, until it is put into practice. Faith is a decision involving one's whole
existence. It is an encounter, a dialogue, a communion of love and of life between the believer and Jesus Christ,
the Way, and the Truth, and the Life (cf. Jn 14:6). It entails an act of trusting abandonment to Christ, which
enables us to live as he lived (cf. Gal 2:20), in profound love of God and of our brothers and sisters.

89. Faith also possesses a moral content. It gives rise to and calls for a consistent life commitment; it entails and
brings to perfection the acceptance and observance of God's commandments. As Saint John writes, "God is light
and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and
do not live according to the truth... And by this we may be sure that we know him, if we keep his
commandments. He who says ' I know him' but disobeys his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
but whoever keeps his word, in him truly love for God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in him:
he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked" (1 Jn 1:5-6; 2:3-6).

Through the moral life, faith becomes "confession", not only before God but also before men: it becomes
witness. "You are the light of the world", said Jesus; "a city set on a hill cannot be hid. Nor do men light a lamp
and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. Let your light so shine before
men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven" (Mt 5:14-16). These
works are above all those of charity (cf. Mt 25:31-46) and of the authentic freedom which is manifested and
lived in the gift of self, even to the total gift of self, like that of Jesus, who on the Cross "loved the Church and
gave himself up for her" (Eph 5:25). Christ's witness is the source, model and means for the witness of his
disciples, who are called to walk on the same road: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and
take up his cross daily and follow me" (Lk 9:23). Charity, in conformity with the radical demands of the Gospel,
can lead the believer to the supreme witness of martyrdom. Once again this means imitating Jesus who died on
the Cross: "Be imitators of God, as beloved children", Paul writes to the Christians of Ephesus, "and walk in
love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God" (Eph 5:1-2).

Martyrdom, the exaltation of the inviolable holiness of God's law

90. The relationship between faith and morality shines forth with all its brilliance in the unconditional respect
due to the insistent demands of the personal dignity of every man, demands protected by those moral norms
which prohibit without exception actions which are intrinsically evil. The universality and the immutability of
the moral norm make manifest and at the same time serve to protect the personal dignity and inviolability of
man, on whose face is reflected the splendour of God (cf. Gen 9:5-6).

The unacceptability of "teleological", "consequentialist" and "proportionalist" ethical theories, which deny the
existence of negative moral norms regarding specific kinds of behaviour, norms which are valid without
exception, is confirmed in a particularly eloquent way by Christian martyrdom, which has always accompanied
and continues to accompany the life of the Church even today.

91. In the Old Testament we already find admirable witnesses of fidelity to the holy law of God even to the
point of a voluntary acceptance of death. A prime example is the story of Susanna: in reply to the two unjust
judges who threatened to have her condemned to death if she refused to yield to their sinful passion, she says: "
I am hemmed in on every side. For if I do this thing, it is death for me; and if I do not, I shall not escape your
hands. I choose not to do it and to fall into your hands, rather than to sin in the sight of the Lord!" (Dan 13:22-
23). Susanna, preferring to "fall innocent" into the hands of the judges, bears witness not only to her faith and
trust in God but also to her obedience to the truth and to the absoluteness of the moral order. By her readiness to
die a martyr, she proclaims that it is not right to do what God's law qualifies as evil in order to draw some good
from it. Susanna chose for herself the "better part": hers was a perfectly clear witness, without any compromise,
to the truth about the good and to the God of Israel. By her acts, she revealed the holiness of God.

At the dawn of the New Testament, John the Baptist, unable to refrain from speaking of the law of the Lord and
rejecting any compromise with evil, "gave his life in witness to truth and justice",142 and thus also became the
forerunner of the Messiah in the way he died (cf. Mk 6:17-29). "The one who came to bear witness to the light
and who deserved to be called by that same light, which is Christ, a burning and shining lamp, was cast into the
darkness of prison... The one to whom it was granted to baptize the Redeemer of the world was thus baptized in
his own blood".143

In the New Testament we find many examples of followers of Christ, beginning with the deacon Stephen (cf.
Acts 6:8-7:60) and the Apostle James (cf. Acts 12:1-2), who died as martyrs in order to profess their faith and
their love for Christ, unwilling to deny him. In this they followed the Lord Jesus who "made the good
confession" (1 Tim 6:13) before Caiaphas and Pilate, confirming the truth of his message at the cost of his life.
Countless other martyrs accepted persecution and death rather than perform the idolatrous act of burning
incense before the statue of the Emperor (cf.Rev 13:7-10). They even refused to feign such worship, thereby
giving an example of the duty to refrain from performing even a single concrete act contrary to God's love and
the witness of faith. Like Christ himself, they obediently trusted and handed over their lives to the Father, the
one who could free them from death (cf. Heb 5:7).

The Church proposes the example of numerous Saints who bore witness to and defended moral truth even to the
point of enduring martyrdom, or who preferred death to a single mortal sin. In raising them to the honour of the
altars, the Church has canonized their witness and declared the truth of their judgment, according to which the
love of God entails the obligation to respect his commandments, even in the most dire of circumstances, and the
refusal to betray those commandments, even for the sake of saving one's own life.

92. Martyrdom, accepted as an affirmation of the inviolability of the moral order, bears splendid witness both to
the holiness of God's law and to the inviolability of the personal dignity of man, created in God's image and
likeness. This dignity may never be disparaged or called into question, even with good intentions, whatever the
difficulties involved. Jesus warns us most sternly: "What does it profit a man, to gain the whole world and
forfeit his life? " (Mk 8:36).

Martyrdom rejects as false and illusory whatever "human meaning" one might claim to attribute, even in
"exceptional" conditions, to an act morally evil in itself. Indeed, it even more clearly unmasks the true face of
such an act: it is a violation of man's "humanity", in the one perpetrating it even before the one enduring it.144
Hence martyrdom is also the exaltation of a person's perfect "humanity" and of true "life", as is attested by Saint
Ignatius of Antioch, addressing the Christians of Rome, the place of his own martyrdom: "Have mercy on me,
brethren: do not hold me back from living; do not wish that I die... Let me arrive at the pure light; once there I
will be truly a man. Let me imitate the passion of my God".145

93. Finally, martyrdom is an outstanding sign of the holiness of the Church. Fidelity to God's holy law,
witnessed to by death, is a solemn proclamation and missionary commitment usque ad sanguinem, so that the
splendour of moral truth may be undimmed in the behaviour and thinking of individuals and society. This
witness makes an extraordinarily valuable contribution to warding off, in civil society and within the ecclesial
communities themselves, a headlong plunge into the most dangerous crisis which can afflict man: the confusion
between good and evil, which makes it impossible to build up and to preserve the moral order of individuals and
communities. By their eloquent and attractive example of a life completely transfigured by the splendour of
moral truth, the martyrs and, in general, all the Church's Saints, light up every period of history by reawakening
its moral sense. By witnessing fully to the good, they are a living reproof to those who transgress the law (cf.
Wis 2:12), and they make the words of the Prophet echo ever afresh: "Woe to those who call evil good and good
evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" (Is 5:20).

Although martyrdom represents the high point of the witness to moral truth, and one to which relatively few
people are called, there is nonetheless a consistent witness which all Christians must daily be ready to make,
even at the cost of suffering and grave sacrifice. Indeed, faced with the many difficulties which fidelity to the
moral order can demand, even in the most ordinary circumstances, the Christian is called, with the grace of God
invoked in prayer, to a sometimes heroic commitment. In this he or she is sustained by the virtue of fortitude,
whereby — as Gregory the Great teaches — one can actually "love the difficulties of this world for the sake of
eternal rewards".146

94. In this witness to the absoluteness of the moral good Christians are not alone: they are supported by the
moral sense present in peoples and by the great religious and sapiential traditions of East and West, from which
the interior and mysterious workings of God's Spirit are not absent. The words of the Latin poet Juvenal apply
to all: "Consider it the greatest of crimes to prefer survival to honour and, out of love of physical life, to lose the
very reason for living".147 The voice of conscience has always clearly recalled that there are truths and moral
values for which one must be prepared to give up one's life. In an individual's words and above all in the
sacrifice of his life for a moral value, the Church sees a single testimony to that truth which, already present in
creation, shines forth in its fullness on the face of Christ. As Saint Justin put it, "the Stoics, at least in their
teachings on ethics, demonstrated wisdom, thanks to the seed of the Word present in all peoples, and we know
that those who followed their doctrines met with hatred and were killed".148

Universal and unchanging moral norms at the service of the person and of society

95. The Church's teaching, and in particular her firmness in defending the universal and permanent validity of
the precepts prohibiting intrinsically evil acts, is not infrequently seen as the sign of an intolerable
intransigence, particularly with regard to the enormously complex and conflict-filled situations present in the
moral life of individuals and of society today; this intransigence is said to be in contrast with the Church's
motherhood. The Church, one hears, is lacking in understanding and compassion. But the Church's motherhood
can never in fact be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always carry out as the faithful Bride
of Christ, who is the Truth in person. "As Teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm... The Church
is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is
reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to
all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection".149

In fact, genuine understanding and compassion must mean love for the person, for his true good, for his
authentic freedom. And this does not result, certainly, from concealing or weakening moral truth, but rather
from proposing it in its most profound meaning as an outpouring of God's eternal Wisdom, which we have
received in Christ, and as a service to man, to the growth of his freedom and to the attainment of his
happiness.150

Still, a clear and forceful presentation of moral truth can never be separated from a profound and heartfelt
respect, born of that patient and trusting love which man always needs along his moral journey, a journey
frequently wearisome on account of difficulties, weakness and painful situations. The Church can never
renounce the "the principle of truth and consistency, whereby she does not agree to call good evil and evil
good";151 she must always be careful not to break the bruised reed or to quench the dimly burning wick (cf. Is
42:3). As Paul VI wrote: "While it is an outstanding manifestation of charity towards souls to omit nothing from
the saving doctrine of Christ, this must always be joined with tolerance and charity, as Christ himself showed by
his conversations and dealings with men. Having come not to judge the world but to save it, he was
uncompromisingly stern towards sin, but patient and rich in mercy towards sinners".152

96. The Church's firmness in defending the universal and unchanging moral norms is not demeaning at all. Its
only purpose is to serve man's true freedom. Because there can be no freedom apart from or in opposition to the
truth, the categorical — unyielding and uncompromising — defence of the absolutely essential demands of
man's personal dignity must be considered the way and the condition for the very existence of freedom.

This service is directed to every man, considered in the uniqueness and singularity of his being and existence:
only by obedience to universal moral norms does man find full confirmation of his personal uniqueness and the
possibility of authentic moral growth. For this very reason, this service is also directed to all mankind: it is not
only for individuals but also for the community, for society as such. These norms in fact represent the
unshakable foundation and solid guarantee of a just and peaceful human coexistence, and hence of genuine
democracy, which can come into being and develop only on the basis of the equality of all its members, who
possess common rights and duties. When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are
no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the
"poorest of the poor" on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal.

97. In this way, moral norms, and primarily the negative ones, those prohibiting evil, manifest their meaning
and force, both personal and social. By protecting the inviolable personal dignity of every human being they
help to preserve the human social fabric and its proper and fruitful development. The commandments of the
second table of the Decalogue in particular — those which Jesus quoted to the young man of the Gospel (cf. Mt
19:19) — constitute the indispensable rules of all social life.

These commandments are formulated in general terms. But the very fact that "the origin, the subject and the
purpose of all social institutions is and should be the human person" 153 allows for them to be specified and
made more explicit in a detailed code of behaviour. The fundamental moral rules of social life thus entail
specific demands to which both public authorities and citizens are required to pay heed. Even though intentions
may sometimes be good, and circumstances frequently difficult, civil authorities and particular individuals
never have authority to violate the fundamental and inalienable rights of the human person. In the end, only a
morality which acknowledges certain norms as valid always and for everyone, with no exception, can guarantee
the ethical foundation of social coexistence, both on the national and international levels.

Morality and the renewal of social and political life

98. In the face of serious forms of social and economic injustice and political corruption affecting entire peoples
and nations, there is a growing reaction of indignation on the part of very many people whose fundamental
human rights have been trampled upon and held in contempt, as well as an ever more widespread and acute
sense of the need for a radical personal and social renewal capable of ensuring justice, solidarity, honesty and
openness.

Certainly there is a long and difficult road ahead; bringing about such a renewal will require enormous effort,
especially on account of the number and the gravity of the causes giving rise to and aggravating the situations of
injustice present in the world today. But, as history and personal experience show, it is not difficult to discover
at the bottom of these situations causes which are properly "cultural", linked to particular ways of looking at
man, society and the world. Indeed, at the heart of the issue of culture we find the moral sense, which is in turn
rooted and fulfilled in the religious sense.154

99. Only God, the Supreme Good, constitutes the unshakable foundation and essential condition of morality,
and thus of the commandments, particularly those negative commandments which always and in every case
prohibit behaviour and actions incompatible with the personal dignity of every man. The Supreme Good and the
moral good meet in truth: the truth of God, the Creator and Redeemer, and the truth of man, created and
redeemed by him. Only upon this truth is it possible to construct a renewed society and to solve the complex
and weighty problems affecting it, above all the problem of overcoming the various forms of totalitarianism, so
as to make way for the authentic freedom of the person. "Totalitarianism arises out of a denial of truth in the
objective sense. If there is no transcendent truth, in obedience to which man achieves his full identity, then there
is no sure principle for guaranteeing just relations between people. Their self-interest as a class, group or nation
would inevitably set them in opposition to one another. If one does not acknowledge transcendent truth, then the
force of power takes over, and each person tends to make full use of the means at his disposal in order to
impose his own interests or his own opinion, with no regard for the rights of others.... Thus, the root of modern
totalitarianism is to be found in the denial of the transcendent dignity of the human person who, as the visible
image of the invisible God, is therefore by his very nature the subject of rights which no one may violate — no
individual, group, class, nation or State. Not even the majority of a social body may violate these rights, by
going against the minority, by isolating, oppressing, or exploiting it, or by attempting to annihilate it".155

Consequently, the inseparable connection between truth and freedom — which expresses the essential bond
between God's wisdom and will — is extremely significant for the life of persons in the socio-economic and
socio-political sphere. This is clearly seen in the Church's social teaching — which "belongs to the field... of
theology and particularly of moral theology" 156 — and from her presentation of commandments governing
social, economic and political life, not only with regard to general attitudes but also to precise and specific kinds
of behaviour and concrete acts.

100. The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms that "in economic matters, respect for human dignity
requires the practice of the virtue of temperance, to moderate our attachment to the goods of this world; of the
virtue of justice, to preserve our neighbour's rights and to render what is his or her due; and of solidarity,
following the Golden Rule and in keeping with the generosity of the Lord, who 'though he was rich, yet for your
sake... became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich' (2 Cor 8:9)".157 The Catechism goes on to
present a series of kinds of behaviour and actions contrary to human dignity: theft, deliberate retention of goods
lent or objects lost, business fraud (cf. Dt 25:13-16), unjust wages (cf. Dt 24:14-15), forcing up prices by
trading on the ignorance or hardship of another (cf. Am 8:4-6), the misappropriation and private use of the
corporate property of an enterprise, work badly done, tax fraud, forgery of cheques and invoices, excessive
expenses, waste, etc.158 It continues: "The seventh commandment prohibits actions or enterprises which for any
reason — selfish or ideological, commercial or totalitarian — lead to the enslavement of human beings,
disregard for their personal dignity, buying or selling or ex- changing them like merchandise. Reducing persons
by violence to use-value or a source of profit is a sin against their dignity as persons and their fundamental
rights. Saint Paul set a Christian master right about treating his Christian slave 'no longer as a slave but... as a
brother... in the Lord' (Philem 16)".159

101. In the political sphere, it must be noted that truthfulness in the relations between those governing and those
governed, openness in public administration, impartiality in the service of the body politic, respect for the rights
of political adversaries, safeguarding the rights of the accused against summary trials and convictions, the just
and honest use of public funds, the rejection of equivocal or illicit means in order to gain, preserve or increase
power at any cost — all these are principles which are primarily rooted in, and in fact derive their singular
urgency from, the transcendent value of the person and the objective moral demands of the functioning of
States.160 When these principles are not observed, the very basis of political coexistence is weakened and the life
of society itself is gradually jeopardized, threatened and doomed to decay (cf. Ps 14:3-4; Rev 18:2-3, 9-24).
Today, when many countries have seen the fall of ideologies which bound politics to a totalitarian conception of
the world — Marxism being the foremost of these — there is no less grave a danger that the fundamental rights
of the human person will be denied and that the religious yearnings which arise in the heart of every human
being will be absorbed once again into politics. This is the risk of an alliance between democracy and ethical
relativism, which would remove any sure moral reference point from political and social life, and on a deeper
level make the acknowledgement of truth impossible. Indeed, "if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct
political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history
demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism".161

Thus, in every sphere of personal, family, social and political life, morality — founded upon truth and open in
truth to authentic freedom — renders a primordial, indispensable and immensely valuable service not only for
the individual person and his growth in the good, but also for society and its genuine development.

Grace and obedience to God's law

102. Even in the most difficult situations man must respect the norm of morality so that he can be obedient to
God's holy commandment and consistent with his own dignity as a person. Certainly, maintaining a harmony
between freedom and truth occasionally demands uncommon sacrifices, and must be won at a high price: it can
even involve martyrdom. But, as universal and daily experience demonstrates, man is tempted to break that
harmony: "I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate... I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do
not want" (Rom 7:15, 19).

What is the ultimate source of this inner division of man? His history of sin begins when he no longer
acknowledges the Lord as his Creator and himself wishes to be the one who determines, with complete
independence, what is good and what is evil. "You will be like God, knowing good and evil" (Gen 3:5): this
was the first temptation, and it is echoed in all the other temptations to which man is more easily inclined to
yield as a result of the original Fall.

But temptations can be overcome, sins can be avoided, because together with the commandments the Lord gives
us the possibility of keeping them: "His eyes are on those who fear him, and he knows every deed of man. He
has not commanded any one to be ungodly, and he has not given any one permission to sin" (Sir 15:19-20).
Keeping God's law in particular situations can be difficult, extremely difficult, but it is never impossible. This is
the constant teaching of the Church's tradition, and was expressed by the Council of Trent: "But no one,
however much justified, ought to consider himself exempt from the observance of the commandments, nor
should he employ that rash statement, forbidden by the Fathers under anathema, that the commandments of God
are impossible of observance by one who is justified. For God does not command the impossible, but in
commanding he admonishes you to do what you can and to pray for what you cannot, and he gives his aid to
enable you. His commandments are not burdensome (cf. 1 Jn 5:3); his yoke is easy and his burden light (cf. Mt
11:30)".162

103. Man always has before him the spiritual horizon of hope, thanks to the help of divine grace and with the
cooperation of human freedom.

It is in the saving Cross of Jesus, in the gift of the Holy Spirit, in the Sacraments which flow forth from the
pierced side of the Redeemer (cf. Jn 19:34), that believers find the grace and the strength always to keep God's
holy law, even amid the gravest of hardships. As Saint Andrew of Crete observes, the law itself "was enlivened
by grace and made to serve it in a harmonious and fruitful combination. Each element preserved its
characteristics without change or confusion. In a divine manner, he turned what could be burdensome and
tyrannical into what is easy to bear and a source of freedom".163

Only in the mystery of Christ's Redemption do we discover the "concrete" possibilities of man. "It would be a
very serious error to conclude... that the Church's teaching is essentially only an "ideal" which must then be
adapted, proportioned, graduated to the so-called concrete possibilities of man, according to a "balancing of the
goods in question". But what are the "concrete possibilities of man" ? And of which man are we speaking? Of
man dominated by lust or of man redeemed by Christ? This is what is at stake: the reality of Christ's
redemption. Christ has redeemed us! This means that he has given us the possibility of realizing the entire truth
of our being; he has set our freedom free from the domination of concupiscence. And if redeemed man still sins,
this is not due to an imperfection of Christ's redemptive act, but to man's will not to avail himself of the grace
which flows from that act. God's command is of course proportioned to man's capabilities; but to the
capabilities of the man to whom the Holy Spirit has been given; of the man who, though he has fallen into sin,
can always obtain pardon and enjoy the presence of the Holy Spirit".164

104. In this context, appropriate allowance is made both for God's mercy towards the sinner who converts and
for the understanding of human weakness. Such understanding never means compromising and falsifying the
standard of good and evil in order to adapt it to particular circumstances. It is quite human for the sinner to
acknowledge his weakness and to ask mercy for his failings; what is unacceptable is the attitude of one who
makes his own weakness the criterion of the truth about the good, so that he can feel self-justified, without even
the need to have recourse to God and his mercy. An attitude of this sort corrupts the morality of society as a
whole, since it encourages doubt about the objectivity of the moral law in general and a rejection of the
absoluteness of moral prohibitions regarding specific human acts, and it ends up by confusing all judgments
about values.

Instead, we should take to heart the message of the Gospel parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector (cf. Lk
18:9-14). The tax collector might possibly have had some justification for the sins he committed, such as to
diminish his responsibility. But his prayer does not dwell on such justifications, but rather on his own
unworthiness before God's infinite holiness: "God, be merciful to me a sinner! " (Lk 18:13). The Pharisee, on
the other hand, is self-justified, finding some excuse for each of his failings. Here we encounter two different
attitudes of the moral conscience of man in every age. The tax collector represents a "repentant" conscience,
fully aware of the frailty of its own nature and seeing in its own failings, whatever their subjective justifications,
a confirmation of its need for redemption. The Pharisee represents a "self-satisfied" conscience, under the
illusion that it is able to observe the law without the help of grace and convinced that it does not need mercy.

105. All people must take great care not to allow themselves to be tainted by the attitude of the Pharisee, which
would seek to eliminate awareness of one's own limits and of one's own sin. In our own day this attitude is
expressed particularly in the attempt to adapt the moral norm to one's own capacities and personal interests, and
even in the rejection of the very idea of a norm. Accepting, on the other hand, the "disproportion" between the
law and human ability (that is, the capacity of the moral forces of man left to himself) kindles the desire for
grace and prepares one to receive it. "Who will deliver me from this body of death?" asks the Apostle Paul. And
in an outburst of joy and gratitude he replies: "Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! " (Rom 7:24-
25).

We find the same awareness in the following prayer of Saint Ambrose of Milan: "What then is man, if you do
not visit him? Remember, Lord, that you have made me as one who is weak, that you formed me from dust.
How can I stand, if you do not constantly look upon me, to strengthen this clay, so that my strength may
proceed from your face? When you hide your face, all grows weak (Ps 104:29): if you turn to look at me, woe is
me! You have nothing to see in me but the stain of my crimes; there is no gain either in being abandoned or in
being seen, because when we are seen, we offend you. Still, we can imagine that God does not reject those he
sees, because he purifies those upon whom he gazes. Before him burns a fire capable of consuming our guilt (cf.
Joel 2:3)".165

Morality and new evangelization

106. Evangelization is the most powerful and stirring challenge which the Church has been called to face from
her very beginning. Indeed, this challenge is posed not so much by the social and cultural milieux which she
encounters in the course of history, as by the mandate of the Risen Christ, who defines the very reason for the
Church's existence: "Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to the whole creation" (Mk 16:15).
At least for many peoples, however, the present time is instead marked by a formidable challenge to undertake a
"new evangelization", a proclamation of the Gospel which is always new and always the bearer of new things,
an evangelization which must be "new in its ardour, methods and expression".166 Dechristianization, which
weighs heavily upon entire peoples and communities once rich in faith and Christian life, involves not only the
loss of faith or in any event its becoming irrelevant for everyday life, but also, and of necessity, a decline or
obscuring of the moral sense. This comes about both as a result of a loss of awareness of the originality of
Gospel morality and as a result of an eclipse of fundamental principles and ethical values themselves. Today's
widespread tendencies towards subjectivism, utilitarianism and relativism appear not merely as pragmatic
attitudes or patterns of behaviour, but rather as approaches having a basis in theory and claiming full cultural
and social legitimacy.

107. Evangelization — and therefore the "new evangelization" — also involves the proclamation and
presentation of morality. Jesus himself, even as he preached the Kingdom of God and its saving love, called
people to faith and conversion (cf. Mk 1:15). And when Peter, with the other Apostles, proclaimed the
Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead, he held out a new life to be lived, a "way" to be followed, for
those who would be disciples of the Risen One (cf. Acts 2:37-41; 3:17-20).

Just as it does in proclaiming the truths of faith, and even more so in presenting the foundations and content of
Christian morality, the new evangelization will show its authenticity and unleash all its missionary force when it
is carried out through the gift not only of the word proclaimed but also of the word lived. In particular, the life
of holiness which is resplendent in so many members of the People of God, humble and often unseen,
constitutes the simplest and most attractive way to perceive at once the beauty of truth, the liberating force of
God's love, and the value of unconditional fidelity to all the demands of the Lord's law, even in the most
difficult situations. For this reason, the Church, as a wise teacher of morality, has always invited believers to
seek and to find in the Saints, and above all in the Virgin Mother of God "full of grace" and "all-holy", the
model, the strength and the joy needed to live a life in accordance with God's commandments and the
Beatitudes of the Gospel.

The lives of the saints, as a reflection of the goodness of God — the One who "alone is good" — constitute not
only a genuine profession of faith and an incentive for sharing it with others, but also a glorification of God and
his infinite holiness. The life of holiness thus brings to full expression and effectiveness the threefold and
unitary munus propheticum, sacerdotale et regale which every Christian receives as a gift by being born again
"of water and the Spirit" (Jn 3:5) in Baptism. His moral life has the value of a "spiritual worship" (Rom 12:1; cf.
Phil 3:3), flowing from and nourished by that inexhaustible source of holiness and glorification of God which is
found in the Sacraments, especially in the Eucharist: by sharing in the sacrifice of the Cross, the Christian
partakes of Christ's self-giving love and is equipped and committed to live this same charity in all his thoughts
and deeds. In the moral life the Christian's royal service is also made evident and effective: with the help of
grace, the more one obeys the new law of the Holy Spirit, the more one grows in the freedom to which he or she
is called by the service of truth, charity and justice.

108. At the heart of the new evangelization and of the new moral life which it proposes and awakens by its
fruits of holiness and missionary zeal, there is the Spirit of Christ, the principle and strength of the fruitfulness
of Holy Mother Church. As Pope Paul VI reminded us: "Evangelization will never be possible without the
action of the Holy Spirit".167 The Spirit of Jesus, received by the humble and docile heart of the believer, brings
about the flourishing of Christian moral life and the witness of holiness amid the great variety of vocations,
gifts, responsibilities, conditions and life situations. As Novatian once pointed out, here expressing the authentic
faith of the Church, it is the Holy Spirit "who confirmed the hearts and minds of the disciples, who revealed the
mysteries of the Gospel, who shed upon them the light of things divine. Strengthened by his gift, they did not
fear either prisons or chains for the name of the Lord; indeed they even trampled upon the powers and torments
of the world, armed and strengthened by him, having in themselves the gifts which this same Spirit bestows and
directs like jewels to the Church, the Bride of Christ. It is in fact he who raises up prophets in the Church,
instructs teachers, guides tongues, works wonders and healings, accomplishes miracles, grants the discernment
of spirits, assigns governance, inspires counsels, distributes and harmonizes every other charismatic gift. In this
way he completes and perfects the Lord's Church everywhere and in all things".168

In the living context of this new evangelization, aimed at generating and nourishing "the faith which works
through love" (cf. Gal 5:6), and in relation to the work of the Holy Spirit, we can now understand the proper
place which continuing theological reflection about the moral life holds in the Church, the community of
believers. We can likewise speak of the mission and the responsibility proper to moral theologians.

The service of moral theologians

109. The whole Church is called to evangelization and to the witness of a life of faith, by the fact that she has
been made a sharer in the munus propheticum of the Lord Jesus through the gift of his Spirit. Thanks to the
permanent presence of the Spirit of truth in the Church (cf. Jn 14:16-17), "the universal body of the faithful who
have received the anointing of the holy one (cf. 1 Jn 2:20, 27) cannot be mistaken in belief. It displays this
particular quality through a supernatural sense of the faith in the whole people when, 'from the Bishops to the
last of the lay faithful ', it expresses the consensus of all in matters of faith and morals".169

In order to carry out her prophetic mission, the Church must constantly reawaken or "rekindle" her own life of
faith (cf. 2 Tim 1:6), particularly through an ever deeper reflection, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, upon
the content of faith itself. The "vocation" of the theologian in the Church is specifically at the service of this
"believing effort to understand the faith". As the Instruction Donum Veritatis teaches: "Among the vocations
awakened by the Spirit in the Church is that of the theologian. His role is to pursue in a particular way an ever
deeper understanding of the word of God found in the inspired Scriptures and handed on by the living Tradition
of the Church. He does this in communion with the Magisterium, which has been charged with the
responsibility of preserving the deposit of faith. By its nature, faith appeals to reason because it reveals to man
the truth of his destiny and the way to attain it. Revealed truth, to be sure, surpasses our telling. All our concepts
fall short of its ultimately unfathomable grandeur (cf. Eph 3:19). Nonetheless, revealed truth beckons reason —
God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of truth — to enter into its light and thereby come to understand in a
certain measure what it has believed. Theological science responds to the invitation of truth as it seeks to
understand the faith. It thereby aids the People of God in fulfilling the Apostle's command (cf. 1 Pet 3:15) to
give an accounting for their hope to those who ask it".170

It is fundamental for defining the very identity of theology, and consequently for theology to carry out its proper
mission, to recognize its profound and vital connection with the Church, her mystery, her life and her mission:
"Theology is an ecclesial science because it grows in the Church and works on the Church... It is a service to the
Church and therefore ought to feel itself actively involved in the mission of the Church, particularly in its
prophetic mission".171 By its very nature and procedures, authentic theology can flourish and develop only
through a committed and responsible participation in and "belonging" to the Church as a "community of faith".
In turn, the fruits of theological research and deeper insight become a source of enrichment for the Church and
her life of faith.

110. All that has been said about theology in general can and must also be said for moral theology, seen in its
specific nature as a scientific reflection on the Gospel as the gift and commandment of new life, a reflection on
the life which "professes the truth in love" (cf. Eph 4:15) and on the Church's life of holiness, in which there
shines forth the truth about the good brought to its perfection. The Church's Magisterium intervenes not only in
the sphere of faith, but also, and inseparably so, in the sphere of morals. It has the task of "discerning, by means
of judgments normative for the consciences of believers, those acts which in themselves conform to the
demands of faith and foster their expression in life and those which, on the contrary, because intrinsically evil,
are incompatible with such demands".172 In proclaiming the commandments of God and the charity of Christ,
the Church's Magisterium also teaches the faithful specific particular precepts and requires that they consider
them in conscience as morally binding. In addition, the Magisterium carries out an important work of vigilance,
warning the faithful of the presence of possible errors, even merely implicit ones, when their consciences fail to
acknowledge the correctness and the truth of the moral norms which the Magisterium teaches.

This is the point at which to consider the specific task of all those who by mandate of their legitimate Pastors
teach moral theology in Seminaries and Faculties of Theology. They have the grave duty to instruct the faithful
— especially future Pastors — about all those commandments and practical norms authoritatively declared by
the Church.173 While recognizing the possible limitations of the human arguments employed by the
Magisterium, moral theologians are called to develop a deeper understanding of the reasons underlying its
teachings and to expound the validity and obligatory nature of the precepts it proposes, demonstrating their
connection with one another and their relation with man's ultimate end.174 Moral theologians are to set forth the
Church's teaching and to give, in the exercise of their ministry, the example of a loyal assent, both internal and
external, to the Magisterium's teaching in the areas of both dogma and morality.175 Working together in
cooperation with the hierarchical Magisterium, theologians will be deeply concerned to clarify ever more fully
the biblical foundations, the ethical significance and the anthropological concerns which underlie the moral
doctrine and the vision of man set forth by the Church.

111. The service which moral theologians are called to provide at the present time is of the utmost importance,
not only for the Church's life and mission, but also for human society and culture. Moral theologians have the
task, in close and vital connection with biblical and dogmatic theology, to highlight through their scientific
reflection "that dynamic aspect which will elicit the response that man must give to the divine call which comes
in the process of his growth in love, within a community of salvation. In this way, moral theology will acquire
an inner spiritual dimension in response to the need to develop fully the imago Dei present in man, and in
response to the laws of spiritual development described by Christian ascetical and mystical theology".176

Certainly moral theology and its teaching are meeting with particular difficulty today. Because the Church's
morality necessarily involves a normative dimension, moral theology cannot be reduced to a body of knowledge
worked out purely in the context of the so-called behavioural sciences. The latter are concerned with the
phenomenon of morality as a historical and social fact; moral theology, however, while needing to make use of
the behavioural and natural sciences, does not rely on the results of formal empirical observation or
phenomenological understanding alone. Indeed, the relevance of the behavioural sciences for moral theology
must always be measured against the primordial question: What is good or evil? What must be done to have
eternal life?

112. The moral theologian must therefore exercise careful discernment in the context of today's prevalently
scientific and technical culture, exposed as it is to the dangers of relativism, pragmatism and positivism. From
the theological viewpoint, moral principles are not dependent upon the historical moment in which they are
discovered. Moreover, the fact that some believers act without following the teachings of the Magisterium, or
erroneously consider as morally correct a kind of behaviour declared by their Pastors as contrary to the law of
God, cannot be a valid argument for rejecting the truth of the moral norms taught by the Church. The
affirmation of moral principles is not within the competence of formal empirical methods. While not denying
the validity of such methods, but at the same time not restricting its viewpoint to them, moral theology, faithful
to the supernatural sense of the faith, takes into account first and foremost the spiritual dimension of the human
heart and its vocation to divine love.

In fact, while the behavioural sciences, like all experimental sciences, develop an empirical and statistical
concept of "normality", faith teaches that this normality itself bears the traces of a fall from man's original
situation — in other words, it is affected by sin. Only Christian faith points out to man the way to return to "the
beginning" (cf. Mt 19:8), a way which is often quite different from that of empirical normality. Hence the
behavioural sciences, despite the great value of the information which they provide, cannot be considered
decisive indications of moral norms. It is the Gospel which reveals the full truth about man and his moral
journey, and thus enlightens and admonishes sinners; it proclaims to them God's mercy, which is constantly at
work to preserve them both from despair at their inability fully to know and keep God's law and from the
presumption that they can be saved without merit. God also reminds sinners of the joy of forgiveness, which
alone grants the strength to see in the moral law a liberating truth, a grace-filled source of hope, a path of life.

113. Teaching moral doctrine involves the conscious acceptance of these intellectual, spiritual and pastoral
responsibilities. Moral theologians, who have accepted the charge of teaching the Church's doctrine, thus have a
grave duty to train the faithful to make this moral discernment, to be committed to the true good and to have
confident recourse to God's grace.

While exchanges and conflicts of opinion may constitute normal expressions of public life in a representative
democracy, moral teaching certainly cannot depend simply upon respect for a process: indeed, it is in no way
established by following the rules and deliberative procedures typical of a democracy.Dissent, in the form of
carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to
a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God. Opposition to the teaching of the
Church's Pastors cannot be seen as a legitimate expression either of Christian freedom or of the diversity of the
Spirit's gifts. When this happens, the Church's Pastors have the duty to act in conformity with their apostolic
mission, insisting that the right of the faithful to receive Catholic doctrine in its purity and integrity must always
be respected. "Never forgetting that he too is a member of the People of God, the theologian must be respectful
of them, and be committed to offering them a teaching which in no way does harm to the doctrine of the
faith".177

Our own responsibilities as Pastors

114. As the Second Vatican Council reminds us, responsibility for the faith and the life of faith of the People of
God is particularly incumbent upon the Church's Pastors: "Among the principal tasks of Bishops the preaching
of the Gospel is pre-eminent. For the Bishops are the heralds of the faith who bring new disciples to Christ.
They are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people
entrusted to them the faith to be believed and put into practice; they illustrate this faith in the light of the Holy
Spirit, drawing out of the treasury of Revelation things old and new (cf. Mt 13:52); they make it bear fruit and
they vigilantly ward off errors that are threatening their flock (cf. 2 Tim 4:1-4)".178

It is our common duty, and even before that our common grace, as Pastors and Bishops of the Church, to teach
the faithful the things which lead them to God, just as the Lord Jesus did with the young man in the Gospel.
Replying to the question: "What good must I do to have eternal life?", Jesus referred the young man to God, the
Lord of creation and of the Covenant. He reminded him of the moral commandments already revealed in the
Old Testament and he indicated their spirit and deepest meaning by inviting the young man to follow him in
poverty, humility and love: "Come, follow me! ". The truth of this teaching was sealed on the Cross in the
Blood of Christ: in the Holy Spirit, it has become the new law of the Church and of every Christian.

This "answer" to the question about morality has been entrusted by Jesus Christ in a particular way to us, the
Pastors of the Church; we have been called to make it the object of our preaching, in the fulfilment of our
munus propheticum. At the same time, our responsibility as Pastors with regard to Christian moral teaching
must also be exercised as part of the munus sacerdotale: this happens when we dispense to the faithful the gifts
of grace and sanctification as an effective means for obeying God's holy law, and when with our constant and
confident prayers we support believers in their efforts to be faithful to the demands of the faith and to live in
accordance with the Gospel (cf. Col 1:9-12). Especially today, Christian moral teaching must be one of the chief
areas in which we exercise our pastoral vigilance, in carrying out our munus regale.
115. This is the first time, in fact, that the Magisterium of the Church has set forth in detail the fundamental
elements of this teaching, and presented the principles for the pastoral discernment necessary in practical and
cultural situations which are complex and even crucial.

In the light of Revelation and of the Church's constant teaching, especially that of the Second Vatican Council, I
have briefly recalled the essential characteristics of freedom, as well as the fundamental values connected with
the dignity of the person and the truth of his acts, so as to be able to discern in obedience to the moral law a
grace and a sign of our adoption in the one Son (cf. Eph 1:4-6). Specifically, this Encyclical has evaluated
certain trends in moral theology today. I now pass this evaluation on to you, in obedience to the word of the
Lord who entrusted to Peter the task of strengthening his brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), in order to clarify and aid our
common discernment.

Each of us knows how important is the teaching which represents the central theme of this Encyclical and which
is today being restated with the authority of the Successor of Peter. Each of us can see the seriousness of what is
involved, not only for individuals but also for the whole of society, with thereaffirmation of the universality and
immutability of the moral commandments, particularly those which prohibit always and without exception
intrinsically evil acts.

In acknowledging these commandments, Christian hearts and our pastoral charity listen to the call of the One
who "first loved us" (1Jn 4:19). God asks us to be holy as he is holy (cf. Lev 19:2), to be — in Christ — perfect
as he is perfect (cf. Mt 5:48). The unwavering demands of that commandment are based upon God's infinitely
merciful love (cf. Lk 6:36), and the purpose of that commandment is to lead us, by the grace of Christ, on the
path of that fullness of life proper to the children of God.

116. We have the duty, as Bishops, to be vigilant that the word of God is faithfully taught. My Brothers in the
Episcopate, it is part of our pastoral ministry to see to it that this moral teaching is faithfully handed down and
to have recourse to appropriate measures to ensure that the faithful are guarded from every doctrine and theory
contrary to it. In carrying out this task we are all assisted by theologians; even so, theological opinions
constitute neither the rule nor the norm of our teaching. Its authority is derived, by the assistance of the Holy
Spirit and in communion cum Petro et sub Petro, from our fidelity to the Catholic faith which comes from the
Apostles. As Bishops, we have the grave obligation to be personally vigilant that the "sound doctrine" (1 Tim
1:10) of faith and morals is taught in our Dioceses.

A particular responsibility is incumbent upon Bishops with regard to Catholic institutions. Whether these are
agencies for the pastoral care of the family or for social work, or institutions dedicated to teaching or health
care, Bishops can canonically erect and recognize these structures and delegate certain responsibilities to them.
Nevertheless, Bishops are never relieved of their own personal obligations. It falls to them, in communion with
the Holy See, both to grant the title "Catholic" to Church-related schools,179 universities,180 health-care facilities
and counselling services, and, in cases of a serious failure to live up to that title, to take it away.

117. In the heart of every Christian, in the inmost depths of each person, there is always an echo of the question
which the young man in the Gospel once asked Jesus: "Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?" (Mt
19:16). Everyone, however, needs to address this question to the "Good Teacher", since he is the only one who
can answer in the fullness of truth, in all situations, in the most varied of circumstances. And when Christians
ask him the question which rises from their conscience, the Lord replies in the words of the New Covenant
which have been entrusted to his Church. As the Apostle Paul said of himself, we have been sent "to preach the
Gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the Cross of Christ be emptied of its power" (1 Cor 1:17). The
Church's answer to man's question contains the wisdom and power of Christ Crucified, the Truth which gives of
itself.

When people ask the Church the questions raised by their consciences, when the faithful in the Church turn to
their Bishops and Pastors, the Church's reply contains the voice of Jesus Christ, the voice of the truth about
good and evil. In the words spoken by the Church there resounds, in people's inmost being, the voice of God
who "alone is good" (cf. Mt 19:17), who alone "is love" (1 Jn 4:8, 16).

Through the anointing of the Spirit this gentle but challenging word becomes light and life for man. Again the
Apostle Paul invites us to have confidence, because "our competence is from God, who has made us competent
to be ministers of a new covenant, not in a written code but in the Spirit... The Lord is the Spirit, and where the
Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And all of us, with unveiled faces, reflecting the glory of the Lord, are
being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit" (2
Cor 3:5-6, 17-18).

CONCLUSION

Mary, Mother of Mercy

118. At the end of these considerations, let us entrust ourselves, the sufferings and the joys of our life, the moral
life of believers and people of good will, and the research of moralists, to Mary, Mother of God and Mother of
Mercy.

Mary is Mother of Mercy because her Son, Jesus Christ, was sent by the Father as the revelation of God's mercy
(cf. Jn 3:16-18). Christ came not to condemn but to forgive, to show mercy (cf. Mt 9:13). And the greatest
mercy of all is found in his being in our midst and calling us to meet him and to confess, with Peter, that he is
"the Son of the living God" (Mt 16:16). No human sin can erase the mercy of God, or prevent him from
unleashing all his triumphant power, if we only call upon him. Indeed, sin itself makes even more radiant the
love of the Father who, in order to ransom a slave, sacrificed his Son:181 his mercy towards us is Redemption.
This mercy reaches its fullness in the gift of the Spirit who bestows new life and demands that it be lived. No
matter how many and great the obstacles put in his way by human frailty and sin, the Spirit, who renews the
face of the earth (cf.Ps 104:30), makes possible the miracle of the perfect accomplishment of the good. This
renewal, which gives the ability to do what is good, noble, beautiful, pleasing to God and in conformity with his
will, is in some way the flowering of the gift of mercy, which offers liberation from the slavery of evil and gives
the strength to sin no more. Through the gift of new life, Jesus makes us sharers in his love and leads us to the
Father in the Spirit.

119. Such is the consoling certainty of Christian faith, the source of its profound humanity and extraordinary
simplicity. At times, in the discussions about new and complex moral problems, it can seem that Christian
morality is in itself too demanding, difficult to understand and almost impossible to practise. This is untrue,
since Christian morality consists, in the simplicity of the Gospel, in following Jesus Christ, in abandoning
oneself to him, in letting oneself be transformed by his grace and renewed by his mercy, gifts which come to us
in the living communion of his Church. Saint Augustine reminds us that "he who would live has a place to live,
and has everything needed to live. Let him draw near, let him believe, let him become part of the body, that he
may have life. Let him not shrink from the unity of the members".182 By the light of the Holy Spirit, the living
essence of Christian morality can be understood by everyone, even the least learned, but particularly those who
are able to preserve an "undivided heart" (Ps 86:11). On the other hand, this evangelical simplicity does not
exempt one from facing reality in its complexity; rather it can lead to a more genuine understanding of reality,
inasmuch as following Christ will gradually bring out the distinctive character of authentic Christian morality,
while providing the vital energy needed to carry it out. It is the task of the Church's Magisterium to see that the
dynamic process of following Christ develops in an organic manner, without the falsification or obscuring of its
moral demands, with all their consequences. The one who loves Christ keeps his commandments (cf. Jn 14:15).

120. Mary is also Mother of Mercy because it is to her that Jesus entrusts his Church and all humanity. At the
foot of the Cross, when she accepts John as her son, when she asks, together with Christ, forgiveness from the
Father for those who do not know what they do (cf. Lk 23:34), Mary experiences, in perfect docility to the
Spirit, the richness and the universality of God's love, which opens her heart and enables it to embrace the entire
human race. Thus Mary becomes Mother of each and every one of us, the Mother who obtains for us divine
mercy.

Mary is the radiant sign and inviting model of the moral life. As Saint Ambrose put it, "The life of this one
person can serve as a model for everyone",183 and while speaking specifically to virgins but within a context
open to all, he affirmed: "The first stimulus to learning is the nobility of the teacher. Who can be more noble
than the Mother of God? Who can be more glorious than the one chosen by Glory Itself?".184 Mary lived and
exercised her freedom precisely by giving herself to God and accepting God's gift within herself. Until the time
of his birth, she sheltered in her womb the Son of God who became man; she raised him and enabled him to
grow, and she accompanied him in that supreme act of freedom which is the complete sacrifice of his own life.
By the gift of herself, Mary entered fully into the plan of God who gives himself to the world. By accepting and
pondering in her heart events which she did not always understand (cf. Lk 2:19), she became the model of all
those who hear the word of God and keep it (cf. Lk 11:28), and merited the title of "Seat of Wisdom". This
Wisdom is Jesus Christ himself, the Eternal Word of God, who perfectly reveals and accomplishes the will of
the Father (cf.Heb 10:5-10). Mary invites everyone to accept this Wisdom. To us too she addresses the
command she gave to the servants at Cana in Galilee during the marriage feast: "Do whatever he tells you" (Jn
2:5).

Mary shares our human condition, but in complete openness to the grace of God. Not having known sin, she is
able to have compassion on every kind of weakness. She understands sinful man and loves him with a Mother's
love. Precisely for this reason she is on the side of truth and shares the Church's burden in recalling always and
to everyone the demands of morality. Nor does she permit sinful man to be deceived by those who claim to love
him by justifying his sin, for she knows that the sacrifice of Christ her Son would thus be emptied of its power.
No absolution offered by beguiling doctrines, even in the areas of philosophy and theology, can make man truly
happy: only the Cross and the glory of the Risen Christ can grant peace to his conscience and salvation to his
life.

ENCYCLICAL LETTER
FIDES ET RATIO
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN FAITH AND REASON

Blessing

My Venerable Brother Bishops,

Health and the Apostolic Blessing!

Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has
placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and
loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9;
63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).

INTRODUCTION - “KNOW YOURSELF”

1. In both East and West, we may trace a journey which has led humanity down the centuries to meet and
engage truth more and more deeply. It is a journey which has unfolded—as it must—within the horizon of
personal self-consciousness: the more human beings know reality and the world, the more they know
themselves in their uniqueness, with the question of the meaning of things and of their very existence becoming
ever more pressing. This is why all that is the object of our knowledge becomes a part of our life. The
admonition Know yourself was carved on the temple portal at Delphi, as testimony to a basic truth to be adopted
as a minimal norm by those who seek to set themselves apart from the rest of creation as “human beings”, that
is as those who “know themselves”.

Moreover, a cursory glance at ancient history shows clearly how in different parts of the world, with their
different cultures, there arise at the same time the fundamental questions which pervade human life: Who am I?
Where have I come from and where am I going? Why is there evil? What is there after this life? These are the
questions which we find in the sacred writings of Israel, as also in the Veda and the Avesta; we find them in the
writings of Confucius and Lao-Tze, and in the preaching of Tirthankara and Buddha; they appear in the poetry
of Homer and in the tragedies of Euripides and Sophocles, as they do in the philosophical writings of Plato and
Aristotle. They are questions which have their common source in the quest for meaning which has always
compelled the human heart. In fact, the answer given to these questions decides the direction which people seek
to give to their lives.

2. The Church is no stranger to this journey of discovery, nor could she ever be. From the moment when,
through the Paschal Mystery, she received the gift of the ultimate truth about human life, the Church has made
her pilgrim way along the paths of the world to proclaim that Jesus Christ is “the way, and the truth, and the
life” (Jn 14:6). It is her duty to serve humanity in different ways, but one way in particular imposes a
responsibility of a quite special kind: the diakonia of the truth.1 This mission on the one hand makes the
believing community a partner in humanity's shared struggle to arrive at truth; 2 and on the other hand it obliges
the believing community to proclaim the certitudes arrived at, albeit with a sense that every truth attained is but
a step towards that fullness of truth which will appear with the final Revelation of God: “For now we see in a
mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully” (1 Cor 13:12).

3. Men and women have at their disposal an array of resources for generating greater knowledge of truth so that
their lives may be ever more human. Among these is philosophy, which is directly concerned with asking the
question of life's meaning and sketching an answer to it. Philosophy emerges, then, as one of noblest of human
tasks. According to its Greek etymology, the term philosophy means “love of wisdom”. Born and nurtured
when the human being first asked questions about the reason for things and their purpose, philosophy shows in
different modes and forms that the desire for truth is part of human nature itself. It is an innate property of
human reason to ask why things are as they are, even though the answers which gradually emerge are set within
a horizon which reveals how the different human cultures are complementary.

Philosophy's powerful influence on the formation and development of the cultures of the West should not
obscure the influence it has also had upon the ways of understanding existence found in the East. Every people
has its own native and seminal wisdom which, as a true cultural treasure, tends to find voice and develop in
forms which are genuinely philosophical. One example of this is the basic form of philosophical knowledge
which is evident to this day in the postulates which inspire national and international legal systems in regulating
the life of society.

4. Nonetheless, it is true that a single term conceals a variety of meanings. Hence the need for a preliminary
clarification. Driven by the desire to discover the ultimate truth of existence, human beings seek to acquire
those universal elements of knowledge which enable them to understand themselves better and to advance in
their own self-realization. These fundamental elements of knowledge spring from the wonder awakened in them
by the contemplation of creation: human beings are astonished to discover themselves as part of the world, in a
relationship with others like them, all sharing a common destiny. Here begins, then, the journey which will lead
them to discover ever new frontiers of knowledge. Without wonder, men and women would lapse into
deadening routine and little by little would become incapable of a life which is genuinely personal.

Through philosophy's work, the ability to speculate which is proper to the human intellect produces a rigorous
mode of thought; and then in turn, through the logical coherence of the affirmations made and the organic unity
of their content, it produces a systematic body of knowledge. In different cultural contexts and at different
times, this process has yielded results which have produced genuine systems of thought. Yet often enough in
history this has brought with it the temptation to identify one single stream with the whole of philosophy. In
such cases, we are clearly dealing with a “philosophical pride” which seeks to present its own partial and
imperfect view as the complete reading of all reality. In effect, every philosophical system, while it should
always be respected in its wholeness, without any instrumentalization, must still recognize the primacy of
philosophical enquiry, from which it stems and which it ought loyally to serve.

Although times change and knowledge increases, it is possible to discern a core of philosophical insight within
the history of thought as a whole. Consider, for example, the principles of non-contradiction, finality and
causality, as well as the concept of the person as a free and intelligent subject, with the capacity to know God,
truth and goodness. Consider as well certain fundamental moral norms which are shared by all. These are
among the indications that, beyond different schools of thought, there exists a body of knowledge which may be
judged a kind of spiritual heritage of humanity. It is as if we had come upon an implicit philosophy, as a result
of which all feel that they possess these principles, albeit in a general and unreflective way. Precisely because it
is shared in some measure by all, this knowledge should serve as a kind of reference-point for the different
philosophical schools. Once reason successfully intuits and formulates the first universal principles of being and
correctly draws from them conclusions which are coherent both logically and ethically, then it may be called
right reason or, as the ancients called it, orthós logos, recta ratio.

5. On her part, the Church cannot but set great value upon reason's drive to attain goals which render people's
lives ever more worthy. She sees in philosophy the way to come to know fundamental truths about human life.
At the same time, the Church considers philosophy an indispensable help for a deeper understanding of faith
and for communicating the truth of the Gospel to those who do not yet know it.

Therefore, following upon similar initiatives by my Predecessors, I wish to reflect upon this special activity of
human reason. I judge it necessary to do so because, at the present time in particular, the search for ultimate
truth seems often to be neglected. Modern philosophy clearly has the great merit of focusing attention upon
man. From this starting-point, human reason with its many questions has developed further its yearning to know
more and to know it ever more deeply. Complex systems of thought have thus been built, yielding results in the
different fields of knowledge and fostering the development of culture and history. Anthropology, logic, the
natural sciences, history, linguistics and so forth—the whole universe of knowledge has been involved in one
way or another. Yet the positive results achieved must not obscure the fact that reason, in its one-sided concern
to investigate human subjectivity, seems to have forgotten that men and women are always called to direct their
steps towards a truth which transcends them. Sundered from that truth, individuals are at the mercy of caprice,
and their state as person ends up being judged by pragmatic criteria based essentially upon experimental data, in
the mistaken belief that technology must dominate all. It has happened therefore that reason, rather than voicing
the human orientation towards truth, has wilted under the weight of so much knowledge and little by little has
lost the capacity to lift its gaze to the heights, not daring to rise to the truth of being. Abandoning the
investigation of being, modern philosophical research has concentrated instead upon human knowing. Rather
than make use of the human capacity to know the truth, modern philosophy has preferred to accentuate the ways
in which this capacity is limited and conditioned.

This has given rise to different forms of agnosticism and relativism which have led philosophical research to
lose its way in the shifting sands of widespread scepticism. Recent times have seen the rise to prominence of
various doctrines which tend to devalue even the truths which had been judged certain. A legitimate plurality of
positions has yielded to an undifferentiated pluralism, based upon the assumption that all positions are equally
valid, which is one of today's most widespread symptoms of the lack of confidence in truth. Even certain
conceptions of life coming from the East betray this lack of confidence, denying truth its exclusive character
and assuming that truth reveals itself equally in different doctrines, even if they contradict one another. On this
understanding, everything is reduced to opinion; and there is a sense of being adrift. While, on the one hand,
philosophical thinking has succeeded in coming closer to the reality of human life and its forms of expression, it
has also tended to pursue issues—existential, hermeneutical or linguistic—which ignore the radical question of
the truth about personal existence, about being and about God. Hence we see among the men and women of our
time, and not just in some philosophers, attitudes of widespread distrust of the human being's great capacity for
knowledge. With a false modesty, people rest content with partial and provisional truths, no longer seeking to
ask radical questions about the meaning and ultimate foundation of human, personal and social existence. In
short, the hope that philosophy might be able to provide definitive answers to these questions has dwindled.

6. Sure of her competence as the bearer of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, the Church reaffirms the need to
reflect upon truth. This is why I have decided to address you, my venerable Brother Bishops, with whom I share
the mission of “proclaiming the truth openly” (2 Cor 4:2), as also theologians and philosophers whose duty it is
to explore the different aspects of truth, and all those who are searching; and I do so in order to offer some
reflections on the path which leads to true wisdom, so that those who love truth may take the sure path leading
to it and so find rest from their labours and joy for their spirit.

I feel impelled to undertake this task above all because of the Second Vatican Council's insistence that the
Bishops are “witnesses of divine and catholic truth”.3 To bear witness to the truth is therefore a task entrusted to
us Bishops; we cannot renounce this task without failing in the ministry which we have received. In reaffirming
the truth of faith, we can both restore to our contemporaries a genuine trust in their capacity to know and
challenge philosophy to recover and develop its own full dignity.

There is a further reason why I write these reflections. In my Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, I drew
attention to “certain fundamental truths of Catholic doctrine which, in the present circumstances, risk being
distorted or denied”.4 In the present Letter, I wish to pursue that reflection by concentrating on the theme of
truth itself and on its foundation in relation to faith. For it is undeniable that this time of rapid and complex
change can leave especially the younger generation, to whom the future belongs and on whom it depends, with
a sense that they have no valid points of reference. The need for a foundation for personal and communal life
becomes all the more pressing at a time when we are faced with the patent inadequacy of perspectives in which
the ephemeral is affirmed as a value and the possibility of discovering the real meaning of life is cast into doubt.
This is why many people stumble through life to the very edge of the abyss without knowing where they are
going. At times, this happens because those whose vocation it is to give cultural expression to their thinking no
longer look to truth, preferring quick success to the toil of patient enquiry into what makes life worth living.
With its enduring appeal to the search for truth, philosophy has the great responsibility of forming thought and
culture; and now it must strive resolutely to recover its original vocation. This is why I have felt both the need
and the duty to address this theme so that, on the threshold of the third millennium of the Christian era,
humanity may come to a clearer sense of the great resources with which it has been endowed and may commit
itself with renewed courage to implement the plan of salvation of which its history is part.

CHAPTER I - THE REVELATION OF GOD'S WISDOM

Jesus, revealer of the Father

7. Underlying all the Church's thinking is the awareness that she is the bearer of a message which has its origin
in God himself (cf. 2 Cor 4:1-2). The knowledge which the Church offers to man has its origin not in any
speculation of her own, however sublime, but in the word of God which she has received in faith (cf. 1 Th
2:13). At the origin of our life of faith there is an encounter, unique in kind, which discloses a mystery hidden
for long ages (cf. 1 Cor 2:7; Rom 16:25-26) but which is now revealed: “In his goodness and wisdom, God
chose to reveal himself and to make known to us the hidden purpose of his will (cf. Eph 1:9), by which, through
Christ, the Word made flesh, man has access to the Father in the Holy Spirit and comes to share in the divine
nature”.5 This initiative is utterly gratuitous, moving from God to men and women in order to bring them to
salvation. As the source of love, God desires to make himself known; and the knowledge which the human
being has of God perfects all that the human mind can know of the meaning of life.

8. Restating almost to the letter the teaching of the First Vatican Council's Constitution Dei Filius, and taking
into account the principles set out by the Council of Trent, the Second Vatican Council's Constitution Dei
Verbum pursued the age-old journey of understanding faith, reflecting on Revelation in the light of the teaching
of Scripture and of the entire Patristic tradition. At the First Vatican Council, the Fathers had stressed the
supernatural character of God's Revelation. On the basis of mistaken and very widespread assertions, the
rationalist critique of the time attacked faith and denied the possibility of any knowledge which was not the fruit
of reason's natural capacities. This obliged the Council to reaffirm emphatically that there exists a knowledge
which is peculiar to faith, surpassing the knowledge proper to human reason, which nevertheless by its nature
can discover the Creator. This knowledge expresses a truth based upon the very fact of God who reveals
himself, a truth which is most certain, since God neither deceives nor wishes to deceive.6

9. The First Vatican Council teaches, then, that the truth attained by philosophy and the truth of Revelation are
neither identical nor mutually exclusive: “There exists a twofold order of knowledge, distinct not only as
regards their source, but also as regards their object. With regard to the source, because we know in one by
natural reason, in the other by divine faith. With regard to the object, because besides those things which natural
reason can attain, there are proposed for our belief mysteries hidden in God which, unless they are divinely
revealed, cannot be known”.7 Based upon God's testimony and enjoying the supernatural assistance of grace,
faith is of an order other than philosophical knowledge which depends upon sense perception and experience
and which advances by the light of the intellect alone. Philosophy and the sciences function within the order of
natural reason; while faith, enlightened and guided by the Spirit, recognizes in the message of salvation the
“fullness of grace and truth” (cf. Jn 1:14) which God has willed to reveal in history and definitively through his
Son, Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Jn 5:9; Jn 5:31-32).

10. Contemplating Jesus as revealer, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council stressed the salvific character of
God's Revelation in history, describing it in these terms: “In this Revelation, the invisible God (cf. Col 1:15; 1
Tim 1:17), out of the abundance of his love speaks to men and women as friends (cf. Ex 33:11; Jn 15:14-15) and
lives among them (cf. Bar 3:38), so that he may invite and take them into communion with himself. This plan of
Revelation is realized by deeds and words having an inner unity: the deeds wrought by God in the history of
salvation manifest and confirm the teaching and realities signified by the words, while the words proclaim the
deeds and clarify the mystery contained in them. By this Revelation, then, the deepest truth about God and
human salvation is made clear to us in Christ, who is the mediator and at the same time the fullness of all
Revelation”.8

11. God's Revelation is therefore immersed in time and history. Jesus Christ took flesh in the “fullness of time”
(Gal 4:4); and two thousand years later, I feel bound to restate forcefully that “in Christianity time has a
fundamental importance”.9 It is within time that the whole work of creation and salvation comes to light; and it
emerges clearly above all that, with the Incarnation of the Son of God, our life is even now a foretaste of the
fulfilment of time which is to come (cf. Heb 1:2).

The truth about himself and his life which God has entrusted to humanity is immersed therefore in time and
history; and it was declared once and for all in the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth. The Constitution Dei Verbum
puts it eloquently: “After speaking in many places and varied ways through the prophets, God 'last of all in
these days has spoken to us by his Son' (Heb 1:1-2). For he sent his Son, the eternal Word who enlightens all
people, so that he might dwell among them and tell them the innermost realities about God (cf. Jn 1:1-18). Jesus
Christ, the Word made flesh, sent as 'a human being to human beings', 'speaks the words of God' (Jn 3:34), and
completes the work of salvation which his Father gave him to do (cf. Jn 5:36; 17:4). To see Jesus is to see his
Father (Jn 14:9). For this reason, Jesus perfected Revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making
himself present and manifesting himself: through his words and deeds, his signs and wonders, but especially
though his death and glorious Resurrection from the dead and finally his sending of the Spirit of truth”.10

For the People of God, therefore, history becomes a path to be followed to the end, so that by the unceasing
action of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 16:13) the contents of revealed truth may find their full expression. This is the
teaching of the Constitution Dei Verbum when it states that “as the centuries succeed one another, the Church
constantly progresses towards the fullness of divine truth, until the words of God reach their complete
fulfilment in her”.11

12. History therefore becomes the arena where we see what God does for humanity. God comes to us in the
things we know best and can verify most easily, the things of our everyday life, apart from which we cannot
understand ourselves.

In the Incarnation of the Son of God we see forged the enduring and definitive synthesis which the human mind
of itself could not even have imagined: the Eternal enters time, the Whole lies hidden in the part, God takes on a
human face. The truth communicated in Christ's Revelation is therefore no longer confined to a particular place
or culture, but is offered to every man and woman who would welcome it as the word which is the absolutely
valid source of meaning for human life. Now, in Christ, all have access to the Father, since by his Death and
Resurrection Christ has bestowed the divine life which the first Adam had refused (cf. Rom 5:12-15). Through
this Revelation, men and women are offered the ultimate truth about their own life and about the goal of history.
As the Constitution Gaudium et Spes puts it, “only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of
man take on light”.12 Seen in any other terms, the mystery of personal existence remains an insoluble riddle.
Where might the human being seek the answer to dramatic questions such as pain, the suffering of the innocent
and death, if not in the light streaming from the mystery of Christ's Passion, Death and Resurrection?

Reason before the mystery

13. It should nonetheless be kept in mind that Revelation remains charged with mystery. It is true that Jesus,
with his entire life, revealed the countenance of the Father, for he came to teach the secret things of God.13 But
our vision of the face of God is always fragmentary and impaired by the limits of our understanding. Faith alone
makes it possible to penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently.

The Council teaches that “the obedience of faith must be given to God who reveals himself”.14 This brief but
dense statement points to a fundamental truth of Christianity. Faith is said first to be an obedient response to
God. This implies that God be acknowledged in his divinity, transcendence and supreme freedom. By the
authority of his absolute transcendence, God who makes himself known is also the source of the credibility of
what he reveals. By faith, men and women give their assent to this divine testimony. This means that they
acknowledge fully and integrally the truth of what is revealed because it is God himself who is the guarantor of
that truth. They can make no claim upon this truth which comes to them as gift and which, set within the
context of interpersonal communication, urges reason to be open to it and to embrace its profound meaning.
This is why the Church has always considered the act of entrusting oneself to God to be a moment of
fundamental decision which engages the whole person. In that act, the intellect and the will display their
spiritual nature, enabling the subject to act in a way which realizes personal freedom to the full.15 It is not just
that freedom is part of the act of faith: it is absolutely required. Indeed, it is faith that allows individuals to give
consummate expression to their own freedom. Put differently, freedom is not realized in decisions made against
God. For how could it be an exercise of true freedom to refuse to be open to the very reality which enables our
self-realization? Men and women can accomplish no more important act in their lives than the act of faith; it is
here that freedom reaches the certainty of truth and chooses to live in that truth.
To assist reason in its effort to understand the mystery there are the signs which Revelation itself presents.
These serve to lead the search for truth to new depths, enabling the mind in its autonomous exploration to
penetrate within the mystery by use of reason's own methods, of which it is rightly jealous. Yet these signs also
urge reason to look beyond their status as signs in order to grasp the deeper meaning which they bear. They
contain a hidden truth to which the mind is drawn and which it cannot ignore without destroying the very signs
which it is given.

In a sense, then, we return to the sacramental character of Revelation and especially to the sign of the Eucharist,
in which the indissoluble unity between the signifier and signified makes it possible to grasp the depths of the
mystery. In the Eucharist, Christ is truly present and alive, working through his Spirit; yet, as Saint Thomas said
so well, “what you neither see nor grasp, faith confirms for you, leaving nature far behind; a sign it is that now
appears, hiding in mystery realities sublime”.16 He is echoed by the philosopher Pascal: “Just as Jesus Christ
went unrecognized among men, so does his truth appear without external difference among common modes of
thought. So too does the Eucharist remain among common bread”.17

In short, the knowledge proper to faith does not destroy the mystery; it only reveals it the more, showing how
necessary it is for people's lives: Christ the Lord “in revealing the mystery of the Father and his love fully
reveals man to himself and makes clear his supreme calling”,18 which is to share in the divine mystery of the life
of the Trinity.19

14. From the teaching of the two Vatican Councils there also emerges a genuinely novel consideration for
philosophical learning. Revelation has set within history a point of reference which cannot be ignored if the
mystery of human life is to be known. Yet this knowledge refers back constantly to the mystery of God which
the human mind cannot exhaust but can only receive and embrace in faith. Between these two poles, reason has
its own specific field in which it can enquire and understand, restricted only by its finiteness before the infinite
mystery of God.

Revelation therefore introduces into our history a universal and ultimate truth which stirs the human mind to
ceaseless effort; indeed, it impels reason continually to extend the range of its knowledge until it senses that it
has done all in its power, leaving no stone unturned. To assist our reflection on this point we have one of the
most fruitful and important minds in human history, a point of reference for both philosophy and theology:
Saint Anselm. In his Proslogion, the Archbishop of Canterbury puts it this way: “Thinking of this problem
frequently and intently, at times it seemed I was ready to grasp what I was seeking; at other times it eluded my
thought completely, until finally, despairing of being able to find it, I wanted to abandon the search for
something which was impossible to find. I wanted to rid myself of that thought because, by filling my mind, it
distracted me from other problems from which I could gain some profit; but it would then present itself with
ever greater insistence... Woe is me, one of the poor children of Eve, far from God, what did I set out to do and
what have I accomplished? What was I aiming for and how far have I got? What did I aspire to and what did I
long for?... O Lord, you are not only that than which nothing greater can be conceived (non solum es quo maius
cogitari nequit), but you are greater than all that can be conceived (quiddam maius quam cogitari possit)... If
you were not such, something greater than you could be thought, but this is impossible”.20

15. The truth of Christian Revelation, found in Jesus of Nazareth, enables all men and women to embrace the
“mystery” of their own life. As absolute truth, it summons human beings to be open to the transcendent, whilst
respecting both their autonomy as creatures and their freedom. At this point the relationship between freedom
and truth is complete, and we understand the full meaning of the Lord's words: “You will know the truth, and
the truth will make you free” (Jn 8:32).

Christian Revelation is the true lodestar of men and women as they strive to make their way amid the pressures
of an immanentist habit of mind and the constrictions of a technocratic logic. It is the ultimate possibility
offered by God for the human being to know in all its fullness the seminal plan of love which began with
creation. To those wishing to know the truth, if they can look beyond themselves and their own concerns, there
is given the possibility of taking full and harmonious possession of their lives, precisely by following the path
of truth. Here the words of the Book of Deuteronomy are pertinent: “This commandment which I command you
is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven that you should say, 'Who will go up for us to
heaven, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who
will go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, that we may hear and do it?' But the word is very near you; it is in
your mouth and in your heart, that you can do it” (30:11-14). This text finds an echo in the famous dictum of the
holy philosopher and theologian Augustine: “Do not wander far and wide but return into yourself. Deep within
man there dwells the truth” (Noli foras ire, in te ipsum redi. In interiore homine habitat veritas).21

These considerations prompt a first conclusion: the truth made known to us by Revelation is neither the product
nor the consummation of an argument devised by human reason. It appears instead as something gratuitous,
which itself stirs thought and seeks acceptance as an expression of love. This revealed truth is set within our
history as an anticipation of that ultimate and definitive vision of God which is reserved for those who believe
in him and seek him with a sincere heart. The ultimate purpose of personal existence, then, is the theme of
philosophy and theology alike. For all their difference of method and content, both disciplines point to that
“path of life” (Ps 16:11) which, as faith tells us, leads in the end to the full and lasting joy of the contemplation
of the Triune God.

CHAPTER II - CREDO UT INTELLEGAM

 “Wisdom knows all and understands all” (Wis 9:11)

16. Sacred Scripture indicates with remarkably clear cues how deeply related are the knowledge conferred by
faith and the knowledge conferred by reason; and it is in the Wisdom literature that this relationship is
addressed most explicitly. What is striking about these biblical texts, if they are read without prejudice, is that
they embody not only the faith of Israel, but also the treasury of cultures and civilizations which have long
vanished. As if by special design, the voices of Egypt and Mesopotamia sound again and certain features
common to the cultures of the ancient Near East come to life in these pages which are so singularly rich in deep
intuition.

It is no accident that, when the sacred author comes to describe the wise man, he portrays him as one who loves
and seeks the truth: “Happy the man who meditates on wisdom and reasons intelligently, who reflects in his
heart on her ways and ponders her secrets. He pursues her like a hunter and lies in wait on her paths. He peers
through her windows and listens at her doors. He camps near her house and fastens his tent-peg to her walls; he
pitches his tent near her and so finds an excellent resting-place; he places his children under her protection and
lodges under her boughs; by her he is sheltered from the heat and he dwells in the shade of her glory” (Sir
14:20-27).

For the inspired writer, as we see, the desire for knowledge is characteristic of all people. Intelligence enables
everyone, believer and non-believer, to reach “the deep waters” of knowledge (cf. Prov 20:5). It is true that
ancient Israel did not come to knowledge of the world and its phenomena by way of abstraction, as did the
Greek philosopher or the Egyptian sage. Still less did the good Israelite understand knowledge in the way of the
modern world which tends more to distinguish different kinds of knowing. Nonetheless, the biblical world has
made its own distinctive contribution to the theory of knowledge.

What is distinctive in the biblical text is the conviction that there is a profound and indissoluble unity between
the knowledge of reason and the knowledge of faith. The world and all that happens within it, including history
and the fate of peoples, are realities to be observed, analysed and assessed with all the resources of reason, but
without faith ever being foreign to the process. Faith intervenes not to abolish reason's autonomy nor to reduce
its scope for action, but solely to bring the human being to understand that in these events it is the God of Israel
who acts. Thus the world and the events of history cannot be understood in depth without professing faith in the
God who is at work in them. Faith sharpens the inner eye, opening the mind to discover in the flux of events the
workings of Providence. Here the words of the Book of Proverbs are pertinent: “The human mind plans the
way, but the Lord directs the steps” (16:9). This is to say that with the light of reason human beings can know
which path to take, but they can follow that path to its end, quickly and unhindered, only if with a rightly tuned
spirit they search for it within the horizon of faith. Therefore, reason and faith cannot be separated without
diminishing the capacity of men and women to know themselves, the world and God in an appropriate way.

17. There is thus no reason for competition of any kind between reason and faith: each contains the other, and
each has its own scope for action. Again the Book of Proverbs points in this direction when it exclaims: “It is
the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out” (Prov 25:2). In their respective
worlds, God and the human being are set within a unique relationship. In God there lies the origin of all things,
in him is found the fullness of the mystery, and in this his glory consists; to men and women there falls the task
of exploring truth with their reason, and in this their nobility consists. The Psalmist adds one final piece to this
mosaic when he says in prayer: “How deep to me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! If I
try to count them, they are more than the sand. If I come to the end, I am still with you” (139:17-18). The desire
for knowledge is so great and it works in such a way that the human heart, despite its experience of
insurmountable limitation, yearns for the infinite riches which lie beyond, knowing that there is to be found the
satisfying answer to every question as yet unanswered.

18. We may say, then, that Israel, with her reflection, was able to open to reason the path that leads to the
mystery. With the Revelation of God Israel could plumb the depths of all that she sought in vain to reach by
way of reason. On the basis of this deeper form of knowledge, the Chosen People understood that, if reason
were to be fully true to itself, then it must respect certain basic rules. The first of these is that reason must
realize that human knowledge is a journey which allows no rest; the second stems from the awareness that such
a path is not for the proud who think that everything is the fruit of personal conquest; a third rule is grounded in
the “fear of God” whose transcendent sovereignty and provident love in the governance of the world reason
must recognize.

In abandoning these rules, the human being runs the risk of failure and ends up in the condition of “the fool”.
For the Bible, in this foolishness there lies a threat to life. The fool thinks that he knows many things, but really
he is incapable of fixing his gaze on the things that truly matter. Therefore he can neither order his mind (Prov
1:7) nor assume a correct attitude to himself or to the world around him. And so when he claims that “God does
not exist” (cf. Ps 14:1), he shows with absolute clarity just how deficient his knowledge is and just how far he is
from the full truth of things, their origin and their destiny.

19. The Book of Wisdom contains several important texts which cast further light on this theme. There the
sacred author speaks of God who reveals himself in nature. For the ancients, the study of the natural sciences
coincided in large part with philosophical learning. Having affirmed that with their intelligence human beings
can “know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements... the cycles of the year and the
constellations of the stars, the natures of animals and the tempers of wild beasts” (Wis 7:17, 19-20)—in a word,
that he can philosophize—the sacred text takes a significant step forward. Making his own the thought of Greek
philosophy, to which he seems to refer in the context, the author affirms that, in reasoning about nature, the
human being can rise to God: “From the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding
perception of their Creator” (Wis 13:5). This is to recognize as a first stage of divine Revelation the marvellous
“book of nature”, which, when read with the proper tools of human reason, can lead to knowledge of the
Creator. If human beings with their intelligence fail to recognize God as Creator of all, it is not because they
lack the means to do so, but because their free will and their sinfulness place an impediment in the way.

20. Seen in this light, reason is valued without being overvalued. The results of reasoning may in fact be true,
but these results acquire their true meaning only if they are set within the larger horizon of faith: “All man's
steps are ordered by the Lord: how then can man understand his own ways?” (Prov 20:24). For the Old
Testament, then, faith liberates reason in so far as it allows reason to attain correctly what it seeks to know and
to place it within the ultimate order of things, in which everything acquires true meaning. In brief, human
beings attain truth by way of reason because, enlightened by faith, they discover the deeper meaning of all
things and most especially of their own existence. Rightly, therefore, the sacred author identifies the fear of God
as the beginning of true knowledge: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” (Prov 1:7; cf. Sir
1:14).

“Acquire wisdom, acquire understanding” (Prov 4:5)

21. For the Old Testament, knowledge is not simply a matter of careful observation of the human being, of the
world and of history, but supposes as well an indispensable link with faith and with what has been revealed.
These are the challenges which the Chosen People had to confront and to which they had to respond. Pondering
this as his situation, biblical man discovered that he could understand himself only as “being in relation”—with
himself, with people, with the world and with God. This opening to the mystery, which came to him through
Revelation, was for him, in the end, the source of true knowledge. It was this which allowed his reason to enter
the realm of the infinite where an understanding for which until then he had not dared to hope became a
possibility.

For the sacred author, the task of searching for the truth was not without the strain which comes once the limits
of reason are reached. This is what we find, for example, when the Book of Proverbs notes the weariness which
comes from the effort to understand the mysterious designs of God (cf. 30:1-6). Yet, for all the toil involved,
believers do not surrender. They can continue on their way to the truth because they are certain that God has
created them “explorers” (cf. Qoh 1:13), whose mission it is to leave no stone unturned, though the temptation
to doubt is always there. Leaning on God, they continue to reach out, always and everywhere, for all that is
beautiful, good and true.

22. In the first chapter of his Letter to the Romans, Saint Paul helps us to appreciate better the depth of insight
of the Wisdom literature's reflection. Developing a philosophical argument in popular language, the Apostle
declares a profound truth: through all that is created the “eyes of the mind” can come to know God. Through the
medium of creatures, God stirs in reason an intuition of his “power” and his “divinity” (cf. Rom 1:20). This is to
concede to human reason a capacity which seems almost to surpass its natural limitations. Not only is it not
restricted to sensory knowledge, from the moment that it can reflect critically upon the data of the senses, but,
by discoursing on the data provided by the senses, reason can reach the cause which lies at the origin of all
perceptible reality. In philosophical terms, we could say that this important Pauline text affirms the human
capacity for metaphysical enquiry.

According to the Apostle, it was part of the original plan of the creation that reason should without difficulty
reach beyond the sensory data to the origin of all things: the Creator. But because of the disobedience by which
man and woman chose to set themselves in full and absolute autonomy in relation to the One who had created
them, this ready access to God the Creator diminished.

This is the human condition vividly described by the Book of Genesis when it tells us that God placed the
human being in the Garden of Eden, in the middle of which there stood “the tree of knowledge of good and
evil” (2:17). The symbol is clear: man was in no position to discern and decide for himself what was good and
what was evil, but was constrained to appeal to a higher source. The blindness of pride deceived our first
parents into thinking themselves sovereign and autonomous, and into thinking that they could ignore the
knowledge which comes from God. All men and women were caught up in this primal disobedience, which so
wounded reason that from then on its path to full truth would be strewn with obstacles. From that time onwards
the human capacity to know the truth was impaired by an aversion to the One who is the source and origin of
truth. It is again the Apostle who reveals just how far human thinking, because of sin, became “empty”, and
human reasoning became distorted and inclined to falsehood (cf. Rom 1:21-22). The eyes of the mind were no
longer able to see clearly: reason became more and more a prisoner to itself. The coming of Christ was the
saving event which redeemed reason from its weakness, setting it free from the shackles in which it had
imprisoned itself.

23. This is why the Christian's relationship to philosophy requires thorough-going discernment. In the New
Testament, especially in the Letters of Saint Paul, one thing emerges with great clarity: the opposition between
“the wisdom of this world” and the wisdom of God revealed in Jesus Christ. The depth of revealed wisdom
disrupts the cycle of our habitual patterns of thought, which are in no way able to express that wisdom in its
fullness.

The beginning of the First Letter to the Corinthians poses the dilemma in a radical way. The crucified Son of
God is the historic event upon which every attempt of the mind to construct an adequate explanation of the
meaning of existence upon merely human argumentation comes to grief. The true key-point, which challenges
every philosophy, is Jesus Christ's death on the Cross. It is here that every attempt to reduce the Father's saving
plan to purely human logic is doomed to failure. “Where is the one who is wise? Where is the learned? Where is
the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Cor 1:20), the Apostle asks
emphatically. The wisdom of the wise is no longer enough for what God wants to accomplish; what is required
is a decisive step towards welcoming something radically new: “God chose what is foolish in the world to
shame the wise...; God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not to reduce to nothing
things that are” (1 Cor 1:27-28). Human wisdom refuses to see in its own weakness the possibility of its
strength; yet Saint Paul is quick to affirm: “When I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Cor 12:10). Man cannot
grasp how death could be the source of life and love; yet to reveal the mystery of his saving plan God has
chosen precisely that which reason considers “foolishness” and a “scandal”. Adopting the language of the
philosophers of his time, Paul comes to the summit of his teaching as he speaks the paradox: “God has chosen
in the world... that which is nothing to reduce to nothing things that are” (cf. 1 Cor 1:28). In order to express the
gratuitous nature of the love revealed in the Cross of Christ, the Apostle is not afraid to use the most radical
language of the philosophers in their thinking about God. Reason cannot eliminate the mystery of love which
the Cross represents, while the Cross can give to reason the ultimate answer which it seeks. It is not the wisdom
of words, but the Word of Wisdom which Saint Paul offers as the criterion of both truth and salvation.

The wisdom of the Cross, therefore, breaks free of all cultural limitations which seek to contain it and insists
upon an openness to the universality of the truth which it bears. What a challenge this is to our reason, and how
great the gain for reason if it yields to this wisdom! Of itself, philosophy is able to recognize the human being's
ceaselessly self-transcendent orientation towards the truth; and, with the assistance of faith, it is capable of
accepting the “foolishness” of the Cross as the authentic critique of those who delude themselves that they
possess the truth, when in fact they run it aground on the shoals of a system of their own devising. The
preaching of Christ crucified and risen is the reef upon which the link between faith and philosophy can break
up, but it is also the reef beyond which the two can set forth upon the boundless ocean of truth. Here we see not
only the border between reason and faith, but also the space where the two may meet.

CHAPTER III - INTELLEGO UT CREDAM

Journeying in search of truth

24. In the Acts of the Apostles, the Evangelist Luke tells of Paul's coming to Athens on one of his missionary
journeys. The city of philosophers was full of statues of various idols. One altar in particular caught his eye, and
he took this as a convenient starting-point to establish a common base for the proclamation of the kerygma.
“Athenians,” he said, “I see how extremely religious you are in every way. For as I went through the city and
looked carefully at the objects of your worship, I found among them an altar with the inscription, 'To an
unknown god'. What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you” (Acts 17:22-23). From this
starting-point, Saint Paul speaks of God as Creator, as the One who transcends all things and gives life to all. He
then continues his speech in these terms: “From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and
he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they
would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him—though indeed he is not far from each one of
us” (Acts 17:26-27).

The Apostle accentuates a truth which the Church has always treasured: in the far reaches of the human heart
there is a seed of desire and nostalgia for God. The Liturgy of Good Friday recalls this powerfully when, in
praying for those who do not believe, we say: “Almighty and eternal God, you created mankind so that all
might long to find you and have peace when you are found”.22 There is therefore a path which the human being
may choose to take, a path which begins with reason's capacity to rise beyond what is contingent and set out
towards the infinite.

In different ways and at different times, men and women have shown that they can articulate this intimate desire
of theirs. Through literature, music, painting, sculpture, architecture and every other work of their creative
intelligence they have declared the urgency of their quest. In a special way philosophy has made this search its
own and, with its specific tools and scholarly methods, has articulated this universal human desire.

25. “All human beings desire to know”,23 and truth is the proper object of this desire. Everyday life shows how
concerned each of us is to discover for ourselves, beyond mere opinions, how things really are. Within visible
creation, man is the only creature who not only is capable of knowing but who knows that he knows, and is
therefore interested in the real truth of what he perceives. People cannot be genuinely indifferent to the question
of whether what they know is true or not. If they discover that it is false, they reject it; but if they can establish
its truth, they feel themselves rewarded. It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he writes: “I have met
many who wanted to deceive, but none who wanted to be deceived”.24 It is rightly claimed that persons have
reached adulthood when they can distinguish independently between truth and falsehood, making up their own
minds about the objective reality of things. This is what has driven so many enquiries, especially in the
scientific field, which in recent centuries have produced important results, leading to genuine progress for all
humanity.

No less important than research in the theoretical field is research in the practical field—by which I mean the
search for truth which looks to the good which is to be performed. In acting ethically, according to a free and
rightly tuned will, the human person sets foot upon the path to happiness and moves towards perfection. Here
too it is a question of truth. It is this conviction which I stressed in my Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor:
“There is no morality without freedom... Although each individual has a right to be respected in his own
journey in search of the truth, there exists a prior moral obligation, and a grave one at that, to seek the truth and
to adhere to it once it is known”.25

It is essential, therefore, that the values chosen and pursued in one's life be true, because only true values can
lead people to realize themselves fully, allowing them to be true to their nature. The truth of these values is to
be found not by turning in on oneself but by opening oneself to apprehend that truth even at levels which
transcend the person. This is an essential condition for us to become ourselves and to grow as mature, adult
persons.

26. The truth comes initially to the human being as a question: Does life have a meaning? Where is it going? At
first sight, personal existence may seem completely meaningless. It is not necessary to turn to the philosophers
of the absurd or to the provocative questioning found in the Book of Job in order to have doubts about life's
meaning. The daily experience of suffering—in one's own life and in the lives of others—and the array of facts
which seem inexplicable to reason are enough to ensure that a question as dramatic as the question of meaning
cannot be evaded.26 Moreover, the first absolutely certain truth of our life, beyond the fact that we exist, is the
inevitability of our death. Given this unsettling fact, the search for a full answer is inescapable. Each of us has
both the desire and the duty to know the truth of our own destiny. We want to know if death will be the
definitive end of our life or if there is something beyond—if it is possible to hope for an after-life or not. It is
not insignificant that the death of Socrates gave philosophy one of its decisive orientations, no less decisive now
than it was more than two thousand years ago. It is not by chance, then, that faced with the fact of death
philosophers have again and again posed this question, together with the question of the meaning of life and
immortality.

27. No-one can avoid this questioning, neither the philosopher nor the ordinary person. The answer we give will
determine whether or not we think it possible to attain universal and absolute truth; and this is a decisive
moment of the search. Every truth—if it really is truth—presents itself as universal, even if it is not the whole
truth. If something is true, then it must be true for all people and at all times. Beyond this universality, however,
people seek an absolute which might give to all their searching a meaning and an answer—something ultimate,
which might serve as the ground of all things. In other words, they seek a final explanation, a supreme value,
which refers to nothing beyond itself and which puts an end to all questioning. Hypotheses may fascinate, but
they do not satisfy. Whether we admit it or not, there comes for everyone the moment when personal existence
must be anchored to a truth recognized as final, a truth which confers a certitude no longer open to doubt.

Through the centuries, philosophers have sought to discover and articulate such a truth, giving rise to various
systems and schools of thought. But beyond philosophical systems, people seek in different ways to shape a
“philosophy” of their own—in personal convictions and experiences, in traditions of family and culture, or in
journeys in search of life's meaning under the guidance of a master. What inspires all of these is the desire to
reach the certitude of truth and the certitude of its absolute value.

The different faces of human truth

28. The search for truth, of course, is not always so transparent nor does it always produce such results. The
natural limitation of reason and the inconstancy of the heart often obscure and distort a person's search. Truth
can also drown in a welter of other concerns. People can even run from the truth as soon as they glimpse it
because they are afraid of its demands. Yet, for all that they may evade it, the truth still influences life. Life in
fact can never be grounded upon doubt, uncertainty or deceit; such an existence would be threatened constantly
by fear and anxiety. One may define the human being, therefore, as the one who seeks the truth.

29. It is unthinkable that a search so deeply rooted in human nature would be completely vain and useless. The
capacity to search for truth and to pose questions itself implies the rudiments of a response. Human beings
would not even begin to search for something of which they knew nothing or for something which they thought
was wholly beyond them. Only the sense that they can arrive at an answer leads them to take the first step. This
is what normally happens in scientific research. When scientists, following their intuition, set out in search of
the logical and verifiable explanation of a phenomenon, they are confident from the first that they will find an
answer, and they do not give up in the face of setbacks. They do not judge their original intuition useless simply
because they have not reached their goal; rightly enough they will say that they have not yet found a satisfactory
answer.

The same must be equally true of the search for truth when it comes to the ultimate questions. The thirst for
truth is so rooted in the human heart that to be obliged to ignore it would cast our existence into jeopardy.
Everyday life shows well enough how each one of us is preoccupied by the pressure of a few fundamental
questions and how in the soul of each of us there is at least an outline of the answers. One reason why the truth
of these answers convinces is that they are no different in substance from the answers to which many others
have come. To be sure, not every truth to which we come has the same value. But the sum of the results
achieved confirms that in principle the human being can arrive at the truth.

30. It may help, then, to turn briefly to the different modes of truth. Most of them depend upon immediate
evidence or are confirmed by experimentation. This is the mode of truth proper to everyday life and to scientific
research. At another level we find philosophical truth, attained by means of the speculative powers of the
human intellect. Finally, there are religious truths which are to some degree grounded in philosophy, and which
we find in the answers which the different religious traditions offer to the ultimate questions.27

The truths of philosophy, it should be said, are not restricted only to the sometimes ephemeral teachings of
professional philosophers. All men and women, as I have noted, are in some sense philosophers and have their
own philosophical conceptions with which they direct their lives. In one way or other, they shape a
comprehensive vision and an answer to the question of life's meaning; and in the light of this they interpret their
own life's course and regulate their behaviour. At this point, we may pose the question of the link between, on
the one hand, the truths of philosophy and religion and, on the other, the truth revealed in Jesus Christ. But
before tackling that question, one last datum of philosophy needs to be weighed.

31. Human beings are not made to live alone. They are born into a family and in a family they grow, eventually
entering society through their activity. From birth, therefore, they are immersed in traditions which give them
not only a language and a cultural formation but also a range of truths in which they believe almost
instinctively. Yet personal growth and maturity imply that these same truths can be cast into doubt and
evaluated through a process of critical enquiry. It may be that, after this time of transition, these truths are
“recovered” as a result of the experience of life or by dint of further reasoning. Nonetheless, there are in the life
of a human being many more truths which are simply believed than truths which are acquired by way of
personal verification. Who, for instance, could assess critically the countless scientific findings upon which
modern life is based? Who could personally examine the flow of information which comes day after day from
all parts of the world and which is generally accepted as true? Who in the end could forge anew the paths of
experience and thought which have yielded the treasures of human wisdom and religion? This means that the
human being—the one who seeks the truth—is also the one who lives by belief.

32. In believing, we entrust ourselves to the knowledge acquired by other people. This suggests an important
tension. On the one hand, the knowledge acquired through belief can seem an imperfect form of knowledge, to
be perfected gradually through personal accumulation of evidence; on the other hand, belief is often humanly
richer than mere evidence, because it involves an interpersonal relationship and brings into play not only a
person's capacity to know but also the deeper capacity to entrust oneself to others, to enter into a relationship
with them which is intimate and enduring.

It should be stressed that the truths sought in this interpersonal relationship are not primarily empirical or
philosophical. Rather, what is sought is the truth of the person—what the person is and what the person reveals
from deep within. Human perfection, then, consists not simply in acquiring an abstract knowledge of the truth,
but in a dynamic relationship of faithful self-giving with others. It is in this faithful self-giving that a person
finds a fullness of certainty and security. At the same time, however, knowledge through belief, grounded as it
is on trust between persons, is linked to truth: in the act of believing, men and women entrust themselves to the
truth which the other declares to them.

Any number of examples could be found to demonstrate this; but I think immediately of the martyrs, who are
the most authentic witnesses to the truth about existence. The martyrs know that they have found the truth about
life in the encounter with Jesus Christ, and nothing and no-one could ever take this certainty from them. Neither
suffering nor violent death could ever lead them to abandon the truth which they have discovered in the
encounter with Christ. This is why to this day the witness of the martyrs continues to arouse such interest, to
draw agreement, to win such a hearing and to invite emulation. This is why their word inspires such confidence:
from the moment they speak to us of what we perceive deep down as the truth we have sought for so long, the
martyrs provide evidence of a love that has no need of lengthy arguments in order to convince. The martyrs stir
in us a profound trust because they give voice to what we already feel and they declare what we would like to
have the strength to express.

33. Step by step, then, we are assembling the terms of the question. It is the nature of the human being to seek
the truth. This search looks not only to the attainment of truths which are partial, empirical or scientific; nor is it
only in individual acts of decision-making that people seek the true good. Their search looks towards an ulterior
truth which would explain the meaning of life. And it is therefore a search which can reach its end only in
reaching the absolute.28 Thanks to the inherent capacities of thought, man is able to encounter and recognize a
truth of this kind. Such a truth—vital and necessary as it is for life—is attained not only by way of reason but
also through trusting acquiescence to other persons who can guarantee the authenticity and certainty of the truth
itself. There is no doubt that the capacity to entrust oneself and one's life to another person and the decision to
do so are among the most significant and expressive human acts.

It must not be forgotten that reason too needs to be sustained in all its searching by trusting dialogue and sincere
friendship. A climate of suspicion and distrust, which can beset speculative research, ignores the teaching of the
ancient philosophers who proposed friendship as one of the most appropriate contexts for sound philosophical
enquiry.

From all that I have said to this point it emerges that men and women are on a journey of discovery which is
humanly unstoppable—a search for the truth and a search for a person to whom they might entrust themselves.
Christian faith comes to meet them, offering the concrete possibility of reaching the goal which they seek.
Moving beyond the stage of simple believing, Christian faith immerses human beings in the order of grace,
which enables them to share in the mystery of Christ, which in turn offers them a true and coherent knowledge
of the Triune God. In Jesus Christ, who is the Truth, faith recognizes the ultimate appeal to humanity, an appeal
made in order that what we experience as desire and nostalgia may come to its fulfilment.

34. This truth, which God reveals to us in Jesus Christ, is not opposed to the truths which philosophy perceives.
On the contrary, the two modes of knowledge lead to truth in all its fullness. The unity of truth is a fundamental
premise of human reasoning, as the principle of non-contradiction makes clear. Revelation renders this unity
certain, showing that the God of creation is also the God of salvation history. It is the one and the same God
who establishes and guarantees the intelligibility and reasonableness of the natural order of things upon which
scientists confidently depend,29 and who reveals himself as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. This unity of
truth, natural and revealed, is embodied in a living and personal way in Christ, as the Apostle reminds us:
“Truth is in Jesus” (cf. Eph 4:21; Col 1:15-20). He is the eternal Word in whom all things were created, and he
is the incarnate Word who in his entire person 30 reveals the Father (cf. Jn 1:14, 18). What human reason seeks
“without knowing it” (cf. Acts 17:23) can be found only through Christ: what is revealed in him is “the full
truth” (cf. Jn 1:14-16) of everything which was created in him and through him and which therefore in him
finds its fulfilment (cf. Col 1:17).

35. On the basis of these broad considerations, we must now explore more directly the relationship between
revealed truth and philosophy. This relationship imposes a twofold consideration, since the truth conferred by
Revelation is a truth to be understood in the light of reason. It is this duality alone which allows us to specify
correctly the relationship between revealed truth and philosophical learning. First, then, let us consider the links
between faith and philosophy in the course of history. From this, certain principles will emerge as useful
reference-points in the attempt to establish the correct link between the two orders of knowledge.

CHAPTER IV - THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FAITH AND REASON

Important moments in the encounter of faith and reason

36. The Acts of the Apostles provides evidence that Christian proclamation was engaged from the very first
with the philosophical currents of the time. In Athens, we read, Saint Paul entered into discussion with “certain
Epicurean and Stoic philosophers” (17:18); and exegetical analysis of his speech at the Areopagus has revealed
frequent allusions to popular beliefs deriving for the most part from Stoicism. This is by no means accidental. If
pagans were to understand them, the first Christians could not refer only to “Moses and the prophets” when they
spoke. They had to point as well to natural knowledge of God and to the voice of conscience in every human
being (cf. Rom 1:19-21; 2:14-15; Acts 14:16-17). Since in pagan religion this natural knowledge had lapsed into
idolatry (cf. Rom 1:21-32), the Apostle judged it wiser in his speech to make the link with the thinking of the
philosophers, who had always set in opposition to the myths and mystery cults notions more respectful of divine
transcendence.

One of the major concerns of classical philosophy was to purify human notions of God of mythological
elements. We know that Greek religion, like most cosmic religions, was polytheistic, even to the point of
divinizing natural things and phenomena. Human attempts to understand the origin of the gods and hence the
origin of the universe find their earliest expression in poetry; and the theogonies remain the first evidence of this
human search. But it was the task of the fathers of philosophy to bring to light the link between reason and
religion. As they broadened their view to include universal principles, they no longer rested content with the
ancient myths, but wanted to provide a rational foundation for their belief in the divinity. This opened a path
which took its rise from ancient traditions but allowed a development satisfying the demands of universal
reason. This development sought to acquire a critical awareness of what they believed in, and the concept of
divinity was the prime beneficiary of this. Superstitions were recognized for what they were and religion was, at
least in part, purified by rational analysis. It was on this basis that the Fathers of the Church entered into fruitful
dialogue with ancient philosophy, which offered new ways of proclaiming and understanding the God of Jesus
Christ.

37. In tracing Christianity's adoption of philosophy, one should not forget how cautiously Christians regarded
other elements of the cultural world of paganism, one example of which is gnosticism. It was easy to confuse
philosophy—understood as practical wisdom and an education for life—with a higher and esoteric kind of
knowledge, reserved to those few who were perfect. It is surely this kind of esoteric speculation which Saint
Paul has in mind when he puts the Colossians on their guard: “See to it that no-one takes you captive through
philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe
and not according to Christ” (2:8). The Apostle's words seem all too pertinent now if we apply them to the
various kinds of esoteric superstition widespread today, even among some believers who lack a proper critical
sense. Following Saint Paul, other writers of the early centuries, especially Saint Irenaeus and Tertullian, sound
the alarm when confronted with a cultural perspective which sought to subordinate the truth of Revelation to the
interpretation of the philosophers.

38. Christianity's engagement with philosophy was therefore neither straight-forward nor immediate. The
practice of philosophy and attendance at philosophical schools seemed to the first Christians more of a
disturbance than an opportunity. For them, the first and most urgent task was the proclamation of the Risen
Christ by way of a personal encounter which would bring the listener to conversion of heart and the request for
Baptism. But that does not mean that they ignored the task of deepening the understanding of faith and its
motivations. Quite the contrary. That is why the criticism of Celsus—that Christians were “illiterate and
uncouth”31—is unfounded and untrue. Their initial disinterest is to be explained on other grounds. The
encounter with the Gospel offered such a satisfying answer to the hitherto unresolved question of life's meaning
that delving into the philosophers seemed to them something remote and in some ways outmoded.

That seems still more evident today, if we think of Christianity's contribution to the affirmation of the right of
everyone to have access to the truth. In dismantling barriers of race, social status and gender, Christianity
proclaimed from the first the equality of all men and women before God. One prime implication of this touched
the theme of truth. The elitism which had characterized the ancients' search for truth was clearly abandoned.
Since access to the truth enables access to God, it must be denied to none. There are many paths which lead to
truth, but since Christian truth has a salvific value, any one of these paths may be taken, as long as it leads to the
final goal, that is to the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

A pioneer of positive engagement with philosophical thinking—albeit with cautious discernment—was Saint
Justin. Although he continued to hold Greek philosophy in high esteem after his conversion, Justin claimed with
power and clarity that he had found in Christianity “the only sure and profitable philosophy”.32 Similarly,
Clement of Alexandria called the Gospel “the true philosophy”,33 and he understood philosophy, like the
Mosaic Law, as instruction which prepared for Christian faith 34 and paved the way for the Gospel.35 Since
“philosophy yearns for the wisdom which consists in rightness of soul and speech and in purity of life, it is well
disposed towards wisdom and does all it can to acquire it. We call philosophers those who love the wisdom that
is creator and mistress of all things, that is knowledge of the Son of God”.36 For Clement, Greek philosophy is
not meant in the first place to bolster and complete Christian truth. Its task is rather the defence of the faith:
“The teaching of the Saviour is perfect in itself and has no need of support, because it is the strength and the
wisdom of God. Greek philosophy, with its contribution, does not strengthen truth; but, in rendering the attack
of sophistry impotent and in disarming those who betray truth and wage war upon it, Greek philosophy is
rightly called the hedge and the protective wall around the vineyard”.37

39. It is clear from history, then, that Christian thinkers were critical in adopting philosophical thought. Among
the early examples of this, Origen is certainly outstanding. In countering the attacks launched by the
philosopher Celsus, Origen adopts Platonic philosophy to shape his argument and mount his reply. Assuming
many elements of Platonic thought, he begins to construct an early form of Christian theology. The name
“theology” itself, together with the idea of theology as rational discourse about God, had to this point been tied
to its Greek origins. In Aristotelian philosophy, for example, the name signified the noblest part and the true
summit of philosophical discourse. But in the light of Christian Revelation what had signified a generic doctrine
about the gods assumed a wholly new meaning, signifying now the reflection undertaken by the believer in
order to express the true doctrine about God. As it developed, this new Christian thought made use of
philosophy, but at the same time tended to distinguish itself clearly from philosophy. History shows how
Platonic thought, once adopted by theology, underwent profound changes, especially with regard to concepts
such as the immortality of the soul, the divinization of man and the origin of evil.

40. In this work of christianizing Platonic and Neo-Platonic thought, the Cappadocian Fathers, Dionysius called
the Areopagite and especially Saint Augustine were important. The great Doctor of the West had come into
contact with different philosophical schools, but all of them left him disappointed. It was when he encountered
the truth of Christian faith that he found strength to undergo the radical conversion to which the philosophers he
had known had been powerless to lead him. He himself reveals his motive: “From this time on, I gave my
preference to the Catholic faith. I thought it more modest and not in the least misleading to be told by the
Church to believe what could not be demonstrated—whether that was because a demonstration existed but
could not be understood by all or whether the matter was not one open to rational proof—rather than from the
Manichees to have a rash promise of knowledge with mockery of mere belief, and then afterwards to be ordered
to believe many fabulous and absurd myths impossible to prove true”.38 Though he accorded the Platonists a
place of privilege, Augustine rebuked them because, knowing the goal to seek, they had ignored the path which
leads to it: the Word made flesh.39 The Bishop of Hippo succeeded in producing the first great synthesis of
philosophy and theology, embracing currents of thought both Greek and Latin. In him too the great unity of
knowledge, grounded in the thought of the Bible, was both confirmed and sustained by a depth of speculative
thinking. The synthesis devised by Saint Augustine remained for centuries the most exalted form of
philosophical and theological speculation known to the West. Reinforced by his personal story and sustained by
a wonderful holiness of life, he could also introduce into his works a range of material which, drawing on
experience, was a prelude to future developments in different currents of philosophy.

41. The ways in which the Fathers of East and West engaged the philosophical schools were, therefore, quite
different. This does not mean that they identified the content of their message with the systems to which they
referred. Consider Tertullian's question: “What does Athens have in common with Jerusalem? The Academy
with the Church?”.40 This clearly indicates the critical consciousness with which Christian thinkers from the
first confronted the problem of the relationship between faith and philosophy, viewing it comprehensively with
both its positive aspects and its limitations. They were not naive thinkers. Precisely because they were intense in
living faith's content they were able to reach the deepest forms of speculation. It is therefore minimalizing and
mistaken to restrict their work simply to the transposition of the truths of faith into philosophical categories.
They did much more. In fact they succeeded in disclosing completely all that remained implicit and preliminary
in the thinking of the great philosophers of antiquity.41 As I have noted, theirs was the task of showing how
reason, freed from external constraints, could find its way out of the blind alley of myth and open itself to the
transcendent in a more appropriate way. Purified and rightly tuned, therefore, reason could rise to the higher
planes of thought, providing a solid foundation for the perception of being, of the transcendent and of the
absolute.

It is here that we see the originality of what the Fathers accomplished. They fully welcomed reason which was
open to the absolute, and they infused it with the richness drawn from Revelation. This was more than a
meeting of cultures, with one culture perhaps succumbing to the fascination of the other. It happened rather in
the depths of human souls, and it was a meeting of creature and Creator. Surpassing the goal towards which it
unwittingly tended by dint of its nature, reason attained the supreme good and ultimate truth in the person of the
Word made flesh. Faced with the various philosophies, the Fathers were not afraid to acknowledge those
elements in them that were consonant with Revelation and those that were not. Recognition of the points of
convergence did not blind them to the points of divergence.

42. In Scholastic theology, the role of philosophically trained reason becomes even more conspicuous under the
impulse of Saint Anselm's interpretation of the intellectus fidei. For the saintly Archbishop of Canterbury the
priority of faith is not in competition with the search which is proper to reason. Reason in fact is not asked to
pass judgement on the contents of faith, something of which it would be incapable, since this is not its function.
Its function is rather to find meaning, to discover explanations which might allow everyone to come to a certain
understanding of the contents of faith. Saint Anselm underscores the fact that the intellect must seek that which
it loves: the more it loves, the more it desires to know. Whoever lives for the truth is reaching for a form of
knowledge which is fired more and more with love for what it knows, while having to admit that it has not yet
attained what it desires: “To see you was I conceived; and I have yet to conceive that for which I was conceived
(Ad te videndum factus sum; et nondum feci propter quod factus sum)”.42 The desire for truth, therefore, spurs
reason always to go further; indeed, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always go beyond
what it has already achieved. It is at this point, though, that reason can learn where its path will lead in the end:
“I think that whoever investigates something incomprehensible should be satisfied if, by way of reasoning, he
reaches a quite certain perception of its reality, even if his intellect cannot penetrate its mode of being... But is
there anything so incomprehensible and ineffable as that which is above all things? Therefore, if that which
until now has been a matter of debate concerning the highest essence has been established on the basis of due
reasoning, then the foundation of one's certainty is not shaken in the least if the intellect cannot penetrate it in a
way that allows clear formulation. If prior thought has concluded rationally that one cannot comprehend
(rationabiliter comprehendit incomprehensibile esse) how supernal wisdom knows its own accomplishments...,
who then will explain how this same wisdom, of which the human being can know nothing or next to nothing, is
to be known and expressed?”.43

The fundamental harmony between the knowledge of faith and the knowledge of philosophy is once again
confirmed. Faith asks that its object be understood with the help of reason; and at the summit of its searching
reason acknowledges that it cannot do without what faith presents.

The enduring originality of the thought of Saint Thomas Aquinas

43. A quite special place in this long development belongs to Saint Thomas, not only because of what he taught
but also because of the dialogue which he undertook with the Arab and Jewish thought of his time. In an age
when Christian thinkers were rediscovering the treasures of ancient philosophy, and more particularly of
Aristotle, Thomas had the great merit of giving pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and
reason. Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no
contradiction between them.44
More radically, Thomas recognized that nature, philosophy's proper concern, could contribute to the
understanding of divine Revelation. Faith therefore has no fear of reason, but seeks it out and has trust in it. Just
as grace builds on nature and brings it to fulfilment,45 so faith builds upon and perfects reason. Illumined by
faith, reason is set free from the fragility and limitations deriving from the disobedience of sin and finds the
strength required to rise to the knowledge of the Triune God. Although he made much of the supernatural
character of faith, the Angelic Doctor did not overlook the importance of its reasonableness; indeed he was able
to plumb the depths and explain the meaning of this reasonableness. Faith is in a sense an “exercise of thought”;
and human reason is neither annulled nor debased in assenting to the contents of faith, which are in any case
attained by way of free and informed choice.46

This is why the Church has been justified in consistently proposing Saint Thomas as a master of thought and a
model of the right way to do theology. In this connection, I would recall what my Predecessor, the Servant of
God Paul VI, wrote on the occasion of the seventh centenary of the death of the Angelic Doctor: “Without
doubt, Thomas possessed supremely the courage of the truth, a freedom of spirit in confronting new problems,
the intellectual honesty of those who allow Christianity to be contaminated neither by secular philosophy nor by
a prejudiced rejection of it. He passed therefore into the history of Christian thought as a pioneer of the new
path of philosophy and universal culture. The key point and almost the kernel of the solution which, with all the
brilliance of his prophetic intuition, he gave to the new encounter of faith and reason was a reconciliation
between the secularity of the world and the radicality of the Gospel, thus avoiding the unnatural tendency to
negate the world and its values while at the same time keeping faith with the supreme and inexorable demands
of the supernatural order”.47

44. Another of the great insights of Saint Thomas was his perception of the role of the Holy Spirit in the process
by which knowledge matures into wisdom. From the first pages of his Summa Theologiae,48 Aquinas was keen
to show the primacy of the wisdom which is the gift of the Holy Spirit and which opens the way to a knowledge
of divine realities. His theology allows us to understand what is distinctive of wisdom in its close link with faith
and knowledge of the divine. This wisdom comes to know by way of connaturality; it presupposes faith and
eventually formulates its right judgement on the basis of the truth of faith itself: “The wisdom named among the
gifts of the Holy Spirit is distinct from the wisdom found among the intellectual virtues. This second wisdom is
acquired through study, but the first 'comes from on high', as Saint James puts it. This also distinguishes it from
faith, since faith accepts divine truth as it is. But the gift of wisdom enables judgement according to divine
truth”.49

Yet the priority accorded this wisdom does not lead the Angelic Doctor to overlook the presence of two other
complementary forms of wisdom—philosophical wisdom, which is based upon the capacity of the intellect, for
all its natural limitations, to explore reality, and theological wisdom, which is based upon Revelation and which
explores the contents of faith, entering the very mystery of God.

Profoundly convinced that “whatever its source, truth is of the Holy Spirit” (omne verum a quocumque dicatur
a Spiritu Sancto est) 50 Saint Thomas was impartial in his love of truth. He sought truth wherever it might be
found and gave consummate demonstration of its universality. In him, the Church's Magisterium has seen and
recognized the passion for truth; and, precisely because it stays consistently within the horizon of universal,
objective and transcendent truth, his thought scales “heights unthinkable to human intelligence”.51 Rightly, then,
he may be called an “apostle of the truth”.52 Looking unreservedly to truth, the realism of Thomas could
recognize the objectivity of truth and produce not merely a philosophy of “what seems to be” but a philosophy
of “what is”.

The drama of the separation of faith and reason

45. With the rise of the first universities, theology came more directly into contact with other forms of learning
and scientific research. Although they insisted upon the organic link between theology and philosophy, Saint
Albert the Great and Saint Thomas were the first to recognize the autonomy which philosophy and the sciences
needed if they were to perform well in their respective fields of research. From the late Medieval period
onwards, however, the legitimate distinction between the two forms of learning became more and more a fateful
separation. As a result of the exaggerated rationalism of certain thinkers, positions grew more radical and there
emerged eventually a philosophy which was separate from and absolutely independent of the contents of faith.
Another of the many consequences of this separation was an ever deeper mistrust with regard to reason itself. In
a spirit both sceptical and agnostic, some began to voice a general mistrust, which led some to focus more on
faith and others to deny its rationality altogether.

In short, what for Patristic and Medieval thought was in both theory and practice a profound unity, producing
knowledge capable of reaching the highest forms of speculation, was destroyed by systems which espoused the
cause of rational knowledge sundered from faith and meant to take the place of faith.

46. The more influential of these radical positions are well known and high in profile, especially in the history
of the West. It is not too much to claim that the development of a good part of modern philosophy has seen it
move further and further away from Christian Revelation, to the point of setting itself quite explicitly in
opposition. This process reached its apogee in the last century. Some representatives of idealism sought in
various ways to transform faith and its contents, even the mystery of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus, into
dialectical structures which could be grasped by reason. Opposed to this kind of thinking were various forms of
atheistic humanism, expressed in philosophical terms, which regarded faith as alienating and damaging to the
development of a full rationality. They did not hesitate to present themselves as new religions serving as a basis
for projects which, on the political and social plane, gave rise to totalitarian systems which have been disastrous
for humanity.

In the field of scientific research, a positivistic mentality took hold which not only abandoned the Christian
vision of the world, but more especially rejected every appeal to a metaphysical or moral vision. It follows that
certain scientists, lacking any ethical point of reference, are in danger of putting at the centre of their concerns
something other than the human person and the entirety of the person's life. Further still, some of these, sensing
the opportunities of technological progress, seem to succumb not only to a market-based logic, but also to the
temptation of a quasi-divine power over nature and even over the human being.

As a result of the crisis of rationalism, what has appeared finally is nihilism. As a philosophy of nothingness, it
has a certain attraction for people of our time. Its adherents claim that the search is an end in itself, without any
hope or possibility of ever attaining the goal of truth. In the nihilist interpretation, life is no more than an
occasion for sensations and experiences in which the ephemeral has pride of place. Nihilism is at the root of the
widespread mentality which claims that a definitive commitment should no longer be made, because everything
is fleeting and provisional.

47. It should also be borne in mind that the role of philosophy itself has changed in modern culture. From
universal wisdom and learning, it has been gradually reduced to one of the many fields of human knowing;
indeed in some ways it has been consigned to a wholly marginal role. Other forms of rationality have acquired
an ever higher profile, making philosophical learning appear all the more peripheral. These forms of rationality
are directed not towards the contemplation of truth and the search for the ultimate goal and meaning of life; but
instead, as “instrumental reason”, they are directed—actually or potentially—towards the promotion of
utilitarian ends, towards enjoyment or power.

In my first Encyclical Letter I stressed the danger of absolutizing such an approach when I wrote: “The man of
today seems ever to be under threat from what he produces, that is to say from the result of the work of his
hands and, even more so, of the work of his intellect and the tendencies of his will. All too soon, and often in an
unforeseeable way, what this manifold activity of man yields is not only subject to 'alienation', in the sense that
it is simply taken away from the person who produces it, but rather it turns against man himself, at least in part,
through the indirect consequences of its effects returning on himself. It is or can be directed against him. This
seems to make up the main chapter of the drama of present-day human existence in its broadest and universal
dimension. Man therefore lives increasingly in fear. He is afraid of what he produces—not all of it, of course, or
even most of it, but part of it and precisely that part that contains a special share of his genius and initiative—
can radically turn against himself”.53

In the wake of these cultural shifts, some philosophers have abandoned the search for truth in itself and made
their sole aim the attainment of a subjective certainty or a pragmatic sense of utility. This in turn has obscured
the true dignity of reason, which is no longer equipped to know the truth and to seek the absolute.

48. This rapid survey of the history of philosophy, then, reveals a growing separation between faith and
philosophical reason. Yet closer scrutiny shows that even in the philosophical thinking of those who helped
drive faith and reason further apart there are found at times precious and seminal insights which, if pursued and
developed with mind and heart rightly tuned, can lead to the discovery of truth's way. Such insights are found,
for instance, in penetrating analyses of perception and experience, of the imaginary and the unconscious, of
personhood and intersubjectivity, of freedom and values, of time and history. The theme of death as well can
become for all thinkers an incisive appeal to seek within themselves the true meaning of their own life. But this
does not mean that the link between faith and reason as it now stands does not need to be carefully examined,
because each without the other is impoverished and enfeebled. Deprived of what Revelation offers, reason has
taken side-tracks which expose it to the danger of losing sight of its final goal. Deprived of reason, faith has
stressed feeling and experience, and so run the risk of no longer being a universal proposition. It is an illusion to
think that faith, tied to weak reasoning, might be more penetrating; on the contrary, faith then runs the grave
risk of withering into myth or superstition. By the same token, reason which is unrelated to an adult faith is not
prompted to turn its gaze to the newness and radicality of being.

This is why I make this strong and insistent appeal—not, I trust, untimely—that faith and philosophy recover
the profound unity which allows them to stand in harmony with their nature without compromising their mutual
autonomy. The parrhesia of faith must be matched by the boldness of reason.

CHAPTER V - THE MAGISTERIUM'S INTERVENTIONS IN PHILOSOPHICAL MATTERS

The Magisterium's discernment as diakonia of the truth

49. The Church has no philosophy of her own nor does she canonize any one particular philosophy in
preference to others.54 The underlying reason for this reluctance is that, even when it engages theology,
philosophy must remain faithful to its own principles and methods. Otherwise there would be no guarantee that
it would remain oriented to truth and that it was moving towards truth by way of a process governed by reason.
A philosophy which did not proceed in the light of reason according to its own principles and methods would
serve little purpose. At the deepest level, the autonomy which philosophy enjoys is rooted in the fact that reason
is by its nature oriented to truth and is equipped moreover with the means necessary to arrive at truth. A
philosophy conscious of this as its “constitutive status” cannot but respect the demands and the data of revealed
truth.

Yet history shows that philosophy—especially modern philosophy—has taken wrong turns and fallen into error.
It is neither the task nor the competence of the Magisterium to intervene in order to make good the lacunas of
deficient philosophical discourse. Rather, it is the Magisterium's duty to respond clearly and strongly when
controversial philosophical opinions threaten right understanding of what has been revealed, and when false and
partial theories which sow the seed of serious error, confusing the pure and simple faith of the People of God,
begin to spread more widely.

50. In the light of faith, therefore, the Church's Magisterium can and must authoritatively exercise a critical
discernment of opinions and philosophies which contradict Christian doctrine.55 It is the task of the Magisterium
in the first place to indicate which philosophical presuppositions and conclusions are incompatible with
revealed truth, thus articulating the demands which faith's point of view makes of philosophy. Moreover, as
philosophical learning has developed, different schools of thought have emerged. This pluralism also imposes
upon the Magisterium the responsibility of expressing a judgement as to whether or not the basic tenets of these
different schools are compatible with the demands of the word of God and theological enquiry.

It is the Church's duty to indicate the elements in a philosophical system which are incompatible with her own
faith. In fact, many philosophical opinions—concerning God, the human being, human freedom and ethical
behaviour— engage the Church directly, because they touch on the revealed truth of which she is the guardian.
In making this discernment, we Bishops have the duty to be “witnesses to the truth”, fulfilling a humble but
tenacious ministry of service which every philosopher should appreciate, a service in favour of recta ratio, or of
reason reflecting rightly upon what is true.

51. This discernment, however, should not be seen as primarily negative, as if the Magisterium intended to
abolish or limit any possible mediation. On the contrary, the Magisterium's interventions are intended above all
to prompt, promote and encourage philosophical enquiry. Besides, philosophers are the first to understand the
need for self-criticism, the correction of errors and the extension of the too restricted terms in which their
thinking has been framed. In particular, it is necessary to keep in mind the unity of truth, even if its formulations
are shaped by history and produced by human reason wounded and weakened by sin. This is why no historical
form of philosophy can legitimately claim to embrace the totality of truth, nor to be the complete explanation of
the human being, of the world and of the human being's relationship with God.

Today, then, with the proliferation of systems, methods, concepts and philosophical theses which are often
extremely complex, the need for a critical discernment in the light of faith becomes more urgent, even if it
remains a daunting task. Given all of reason's inherent and historical limitations, it is difficult enough to
recognize the inalienable powers proper to it; but it is still more difficult at times to discern in specific
philosophical claims what is valid and fruitful from faith's point of view and what is mistaken or dangerous. Yet
the Church knows that “the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3) and therefore
intervenes in order to stimulate philosophical enquiry, lest it stray from the path which leads to recognition of
the mystery.

52. It is not only in recent times that the Magisterium of the Church has intervened to make its mind known
with regard to particular philosophical teachings. It is enough to recall, by way of example, the pronouncements
made through the centuries concerning theories which argued in favour of the pre-existence of the soul,56 or
concerning the different forms of idolatry and esoteric superstition found in astrological speculations,57 without
forgetting the more systematic pronouncements against certain claims of Latin Averroism which were
incompatible with the Christian faith.58

If the Magisterium has spoken out more frequently since the middle of the last century, it is because in that
period not a few Catholics felt it their duty to counter various streams of modern thought with a philosophy of
their own. At this point, the Magisterium of the Church was obliged to be vigilant lest these philosophies
developed in ways which were themselves erroneous and negative. The censures were delivered even-handedly:
on the one hand, fideism 59 and radical traditionalism,60 for their distrust of reason's natural capacities, and, on
the other, rationalism 61 and ontologism 62 because they attributed to natural reason a knowledge which only the
light of faith could confer. The positive elements of this debate were assembled in the Dogmatic Constitution
Dei Filius, in which for the first time an Ecumenical Council—in this case, the First Vatican Council—
pronounced solemnly on the relationship between reason and faith. The teaching contained in this document
strongly and positively marked the philosophical research of many believers and remains today a standard
reference-point for correct and coherent Christian thinking in this regard.

53. The Magisterium's pronouncements have been concerned less with individual philosophical theses than with
the need for rational and hence ultimately philosophical knowledge for the understanding of faith. In
synthesizing and solemnly reaffirming the teachings constantly proposed to the faithful by the ordinary Papal
Magisterium, the First Vatican Council showed how inseparable and at the same time how distinct were faith
and reason, Revelation and natural knowledge of God. The Council began with the basic criterion, presupposed
by Revelation itself, of the natural knowability of the existence of God, the beginning and end of all things,63
and concluded with the solemn assertion quoted earlier: “There are two orders of knowledge, distinct not only
in their point of departure, but also in their object”.64 Against all forms of rationalism, then, there was a need to
affirm the distinction between the mysteries of faith and the findings of philosophy, and the transcendence and
precedence of the mysteries of faith over the findings of philosophy. Against the temptations of fideism,
however, it was necessary to stress the unity of truth and thus the positive contribution which rational
knowledge can and must make to faith's knowledge: “Even if faith is superior to reason there can never be a true
divergence between faith and reason, since the same God who reveals the mysteries and bestows the gift of faith
has also placed in the human spirit the light of reason. This God could not deny himself, nor could the truth ever
contradict the truth”.65

54. In our own century too the Magisterium has revisited the theme on a number of occasions, warning against
the lure of rationalism. Here the pronouncements of Pope Saint Pius X are pertinent, stressing as they did that at
the basis of Modernism were philosophical claims which were phenomenist, agnostic and immanentist.66 Nor
can the importance of the Catholic rejection of Marxist philosophy and atheistic Communism be forgotten.67

Later, in his Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII warned against mistaken interpretations linked to
evolutionism, existentialism and historicism. He made it clear that these theories had not been proposed and
developed by theologians, but had their origins “outside the sheepfold of Christ”.68 He added, however, that
errors of this kind should not simply be rejected but should be examined critically: “Catholic theologians and
philosophers, whose grave duty it is to defend natural and supernatural truth and instill it in human hearts,
cannot afford to ignore these more or less erroneous opinions. Rather they must come to understand these
theories well, not only because diseases are properly treated only if rightly diagnosed and because even in these
false theories some truth is found at times, but because in the end these theories provoke a more discriminating
discussion and evaluation of philosophical and theological truths”.69

In accomplishing its specific task in service of the Roman Pontiff's universal Magisterium, 70 the Congregation
for the Doctrine of Faith has more recently had to intervene to re-emphasize the danger of an uncritical adoption
by some liberation theologians of opinions and methods drawn from Marxism.71

In the past, then, the Magisterium has on different occasions and in different ways offered its discernment in
philosophical matters. My revered Predecessors have thus made an invaluable contribution which must not be
forgotten.

55. Surveying the situation today, we see that the problems of other times have returned, but in a new key. It is
no longer a matter of questions of interest only to certain individuals and groups, but convictions so widespread
that they have become to some extent the common mind. An example of this is the deep-seated distrust of
reason which has surfaced in the most recent developments of much of philosophical research, to the point
where there is talk at times of “the end of metaphysics”. Philosophy is expected to rest content with more
modest tasks such as the simple interpretation of facts or an enquiry into restricted fields of human knowing or
its structures.

In theology too the temptations of other times have reappeared. In some contemporary theologies, for instance,
a certain rationalism is gaining ground, especially when opinions thought to be philosophically well founded
are taken as normative for theological research. This happens particularly when theologians, through lack of
philosophical competence, allow themselves to be swayed uncritically by assertions which have become part of
current parlance and culture but which are poorly grounded in reason.72
There are also signs of a resurgence of fideism, which fails to recognize the importance of rational knowledge
and philosophical discourse for the understanding of faith, indeed for the very possibility of belief in God. One
currently widespread symptom of this fideistic tendency is a “biblicism” which tends to make the reading and
exegesis of Sacred Scripture the sole criterion of truth. In consequence, the word of God is identified with
Sacred Scripture alone, thus eliminating the doctrine of the Church which the Second Vatican Council stressed
quite specifically. Having recalled that the word of God is present in both Scripture and Tradition, 73 the
Constitution Dei Verbum continues emphatically: “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture comprise a single
sacred deposit of the word of God entrusted to the Church. Embracing this deposit and united with their pastors,
the People of God remain always faithful to the teaching of the Apostles”.74 Scripture, therefore, is not the
Church's sole point of reference. The “supreme rule of her faith” 75 derives from the unity which the Spirit has
created between Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church in a reciprocity which
means that none of the three can survive without the others.76

Moreover, one should not underestimate the danger inherent in seeking to derive the truth of Sacred Scripture
from the use of one method alone, ignoring the need for a more comprehensive exegesis which enables the
exegete, together with the whole Church, to arrive at the full sense of the texts. Those who devote themselves to
the study of Sacred Scripture should always remember that the various hermeneutical approaches have their
own philosophical underpinnings, which need to be carefully evaluated before they are applied to the sacred
texts.

Other modes of latent fideism appear in the scant consideration accorded to speculative theology, and in disdain
for the classical philosophy from which the terms of both the understanding of faith and the actual formulation
of dogma have been drawn. My revered Predecessor Pope Pius XII warned against such neglect of the
philosophical tradition and against abandonment of the traditional terminology.77

56. In brief, there are signs of a widespread distrust of universal and absolute statements, especially among
those who think that truth is born of consensus and not of a consonance between intellect and objective reality.
In a world subdivided into so many specialized fields, it is not hard to see how difficult it can be to
acknowledge the full and ultimate meaning of life which has traditionally been the goal of philosophy.
Nonetheless, in the light of faith which finds in Jesus Christ this ultimate meaning, I cannot but encourage
philosophers—be they Christian or not—to trust in the power of human reason and not to set themselves goals
that are too modest in their philosophizing. The lesson of history in this millennium now drawing to a close
shows that this is the path to follow: it is necessary not to abandon the passion for ultimate truth, the eagerness
to search for it or the audacity to forge new paths in the search. It is faith which stirs reason to move beyond all
isolation and willingly to run risks so that it may attain whatever is beautiful, good and true. Faith thus becomes
the convinced and convincing advocate of reason.

The Church's interest in philosophy

57. Yet the Magisterium does more than point out the misperceptions and the mistakes of philosophical
theories. With no less concern it has sought to stress the basic principles of a genuine renewal of philosophical
enquiry, indicating as well particular paths to be taken. In this regard, Pope Leo XIII with his Encyclical Letter
Æterni Patris took a step of historic importance for the life of the Church, since it remains to this day the one
papal document of such authority devoted entirely to philosophy. The great Pope revisited and developed the
First Vatican Council's teaching on the relationship between faith and reason, showing how philosophical
thinking contributes in fundamental ways to faith and theological learning.78 More than a century later, many of
the insights of his Encyclical Letter have lost none of their interest from either a practical or pedagogical point
of view—most particularly, his insistence upon the incomparable value of the philosophy of Saint Thomas. A
renewed insistence upon the thought of the Angelic Doctor seemed to Pope Leo XIII the best way to recover the
practice of a philosophy consonant with the demands of faith. “Just when Saint Thomas distinguishes perfectly
between faith and reason”, the Pope writes, “he unites them in bonds of mutual friendship, conceding to each its
specific rights and to each its specific dignity”.79
58. The positive results of the papal summons are well known. Studies of the thought of Saint Thomas and other
Scholastic writers received new impetus. Historical studies flourished, resulting in a rediscovery of the riches of
Medieval thought, which until then had been largely unknown; and there emerged new Thomistic schools. With
the use of historical method, knowledge of the works of Saint Thomas increased greatly, and many scholars had
courage enough to introduce the Thomistic tradition into the philosophical and theological discussions of the
day. The most influential Catholic theologians of the present century, to whose thinking and research the
Second Vatican Council was much indebted, were products of this revival of Thomistic philosophy. Throughout
the twentieth century, the Church has been served by a powerful array of thinkers formed in the school of the
Angelic Doctor.

59. Yet the Thomistic and neo-Thomistic revival was not the only sign of a resurgence of philosophical thought
in culture of Christian inspiration. Earlier still, and parallel to Pope Leo's call, there had emerged a number of
Catholic philosophers who, adopting more recent currents of thought and according to a specific method,
produced philosophical works of great influence and lasting value. Some devised syntheses so remarkable that
they stood comparison with the great systems of idealism. Others established the epistemological foundations
for a new consideration of faith in the light of a renewed understanding of moral consciousness; others again
produced a philosophy which, starting with an analysis of immanence, opened the way to the transcendent; and
there were finally those who sought to combine the demands of faith with the perspective of phenomenological
method. From different quarters, then, modes of philosophical speculation have continued to emerge and have
sought to keep alive the great tradition of Christian thought which unites faith and reason.

60. The Second Vatican Council, for its part, offers a rich and fruitful teaching concerning philosophy. I cannot
fail to note, especially in the context of this Encyclical Letter, that one chapter of the Constitution Gaudium et
Spes amounts to a virtual compendium of the biblical anthropology from which philosophy too can draw
inspiration. The chapter deals with the value of the human person created in the image of God, explains the
dignity and superiority of the human being over the rest of creation, and declares the transcendent capacity of
human reason.80 The problem of atheism is also dealt with in Gaudium et Spes, and the flaws of its
philosophical vision are identified, especially in relation to the dignity and freedom of the human person.81
There is no doubt that the climactic section of the chapter is profoundly significant for philosophy; and it was
this which I took up in my first Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis and which serves as one of the constant
reference-points of my teaching: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery
of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a type of him who was to come, Christ the Lord. Christ, the
new Adam, in the very revelation of the mystery of the Father and of his love, fully reveals man to himself and
brings to light his most high calling”.82

The Council also dealt with the study of philosophy required of candidates for the priesthood; and its
recommendations have implications for Christian education as a whole. These are the Council's words: “The
philosophical disciplines should be taught in such a way that students acquire in the first place a solid and
harmonious knowledge of the human being, of the world and of God, based upon the philosophical heritage
which is enduringly valid, yet taking into account currents of modern philosophy”.83

These directives have been reiterated and developed in a number of other magisterial documents in order to
guarantee a solid philosophical formation, especially for those preparing for theological studies. I have myself
emphasized several times the importance of this philosophical formation for those who one day, in their pastoral
life, will have to address the aspirations of the contemporary world and understand the causes of certain
behaviour in order to respond in appropriate ways.84

61. If it has been necessary from time to time to intervene on this question, to reiterate the value of the Angelic
Doctor's insights and insist on the study of his thought, this has been because the Magisterium's directives have
not always been followed with the readiness one would wish. In the years after the Second Vatican Council,
many Catholic faculties were in some ways impoverished by a diminished sense of the importance of the study
not just of Scholastic philosophy but more generally of the study of philosophy itself. I cannot fail to note with
surprise and displeasure that this lack of interest in the study of philosophy is shared by not a few theologians.

There are various reasons for this disenchantment. First, there is the distrust of reason found in much
contemporary philosophy, which has largely abandoned metaphysical study of the ultimate human questions in
order to concentrate upon problems which are more detailed and restricted, at times even purely formal.
Another reason, it should be said, is the misunderstanding which has arisen especially with regard to the
“human sciences”. On a number of occasions, the Second Vatican Council stressed the positive value of
scientific research for a deeper knowledge of the mystery of the human being.85 But the invitation addressed to
theologians to engage the human sciences and apply them properly in their enquiries should not be interpreted
as an implicit authorization to marginalize philosophy or to put something else in its place in pastoral formation
and in the praeparatio fidei. A further factor is the renewed interest in the inculturation of faith. The life of the
young Churches in particular has brought to light, together with sophisticated modes of thinking, an array of
expressions of popular wisdom; and this constitutes a genuine cultural wealth of traditions. Yet the study of
traditional ways must go hand in hand with philosophical enquiry, an enquiry which will allow the positive
traits of popular wisdom to emerge and forge the necessary link with the proclamation of the Gospel.86

62. I wish to repeat clearly that the study of philosophy is fundamental and indispensable to the structure of
theological studies and to the formation of candidates for the priesthood. It is not by chance that the curriculum
of theological studies is preceded by a time of special study of philosophy. This decision, confirmed by the Fifth
Lateran Council,87 is rooted in the experience which matured through the Middle Ages, when the importance of
a constructive harmony of philosophical and theological learning emerged. This ordering of studies influenced,
promoted and enabled much of the development of modern philosophy, albeit indirectly. One telling example of
this is the influence of the Disputationes Metaphysicae of Francisco Suárez, which found its way even into the
Lutheran universities of Germany. Conversely, the dismantling of this arrangement has created serious gaps in
both priestly formation and theological research. Consider, for instance, the disregard of modern thought and
culture which has led either to a refusal of any kind of dialogue or to an indiscriminate acceptance of any kind
of philosophy.

I trust most sincerely that these difficulties will be overcome by an intelligent philosophical and theological
formation, which must never be lacking in the Church.

63. For the reasons suggested here, it has seemed to me urgent to re-emphasize with this Encyclical Letter the
Church's intense interest in philosophy—indeed the intimate bond which ties theological work to the
philosophical search for truth. From this comes the Magisterium's duty to discern and promote philosophical
thinking which is not at odds with faith. It is my task to state principles and criteria which in my judgement are
necessary in order to restore a harmonious and creative relationship between theology and philosophy. In the
light of these principles and criteria, it will be possible to discern with greater clarity what link, if any, theology
should forge with the different philosophical opinions or systems which the world of today presents.

CHAPTER VI - THE INTERACTION BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY

The knowledge of faith and the demands of philosophical reason

64. The word of God is addressed to all people, in every age and in every part of the world; and the human
being is by nature a philosopher. As a reflective and scientific elaboration of the understanding of God's word in
the light of faith, theology for its part must relate, in some of its procedures and in the performance of its
specific tasks, to the philosophies which have been developed through the ages. I have no wish to direct
theologians to particular methods, since that is not the competence of the Magisterium. I wish instead to recall
some specific tasks of theology which, by the very nature of the revealed word, demand recourse to
philosophical enquiry.

65. Theology is structured as an understanding of faith in the light of a twofold methodological principle: the
auditus fidei and the intellectus fidei. With the first, theology makes its own the content of Revelation as this
has been gradually expounded in Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Church's living Magisterium.88
With the second, theology seeks to respond through speculative enquiry to the specific demands of disciplined
thought.

Philosophy contributes specifically to theology in preparing for a correct auditus fidei with its study of the
structure of knowledge and personal communication, especially the various forms and functions of language.
No less important is philosophy's contribution to a more coherent understanding of Church Tradition, the
pronouncements of the Magisterium and the teaching of the great masters of theology, who often adopt
concepts and thought-forms drawn from a particular philosophical tradition. In this case, the theologian is
summoned not only to explain the concepts and terms used by the Church in her thinking and the development
of her teaching, but also to know in depth the philosophical systems which may have influenced those concepts
and terms, in order to formulate correct and consistent interpretations of them.

66. With regard to the intellectus fidei, a prime consideration must be that divine Truth “proposed to us in the
Sacred Scriptures and rightly interpreted by the Church's teaching” 89 enjoys an innate intelligibility, so
logically consistent that it stands as an authentic body of knowledge. The intellectus fidei expounds this truth,
not only in grasping the logical and conceptual structure of the propositions in which the Church's teaching is
framed, but also, indeed primarily, in bringing to light the salvific meaning of these propositions for the
individual and for humanity. From the sum of these propositions, the believer comes to know the history of
salvation, which culminates in the person of Jesus Christ and in his Paschal Mystery. Believers then share in
this mystery by their assent of faith.

For its part, dogmatic theology must be able to articulate the universal meaning of the mystery of the One and
Triune God and of the economy of salvation, both as a narrative and, above all, in the form of argument. It must
do so, in other words, through concepts formulated in a critical and universally communicable way. Without
philosophy's contribution, it would in fact be impossible to discuss theological issues such as, for example, the
use of language to speak about God, the personal relations within the Trinity, God's creative activity in the
world, the relationship between God and man, or Christ's identity as true God and true man. This is no less true
of the different themes of moral theology, which employ concepts such as the moral law, conscience, freedom,
personal responsibility and guilt, which are in part defined by philosophical ethics.

It is necessary therefore that the mind of the believer acquire a natural, consistent and true knowledge of created
realities—the world and man himself—which are also the object of divine Revelation. Still more, reason must
be able to articulate this knowledge in concept and argument. Speculative dogmatic theology thus presupposes
and implies a philosophy of the human being, the world and, more radically, of being, which has objective truth
as its foundation.

67. With its specific character as a discipline charged with giving an account of faith (cf. 1 Pet 3:15), the
concern of fundamental theology will be to justify and expound the relationship between faith and philosophical
thought. Recalling the teaching of Saint Paul (cf. Rom 1:19-20), the First Vatican Council pointed to the
existence of truths which are naturally, and thus philosophically, knowable; and an acceptance of God's
Revelation necessarily presupposes knowledge of these truths. In studying Revelation and its credibility, as well
as the corresponding act of faith, fundamental theology should show how, in the light of the knowledge
conferred by faith, there emerge certain truths which reason, from its own independent enquiry, already
perceives. Revelation endows these truths with their fullest meaning, directing them towards the richness of the
revealed mystery in which they find their ultimate purpose. Consider, for example, the natural knowledge of
God, the possibility of distinguishing divine Revelation from other phenomena or the recognition of its
credibility, the capacity of human language to speak in a true and meaningful way even of things which
transcend all human experience. From all these truths, the mind is led to acknowledge the existence of a truly
propaedeutic path to faith, one which can lead to the acceptance of Revelation without in any way
compromising the principles and autonomy of the mind itself.90

Similarly, fundamental theology should demonstrate the profound compatibility that exists between faith and its
need to find expression by way of human reason fully free to give its assent. Faith will thus be able “to show
fully the path to reason in a sincere search for the truth. Although faith, a gift of God, is not based on reason, it
can certainly not dispense with it. At the same time, it becomes apparent that reason needs to be reinforced by
faith, in order to discover horizons it cannot reach on its own”.91

68. Moral theology has perhaps an even greater need of philosophy's contribution. In the New Testament,
human life is much less governed by prescriptions than in the Old Testament. Life in the Spirit leads believers
to a freedom and responsibility which surpass the Law. Yet the Gospel and the Apostolic writings still set forth
both general principles of Christian conduct and specific teachings and precepts. In order to apply these to the
particular circumstances of individual and communal life, Christians must be able fully to engage their
conscience and the power of their reason. In other words, moral theology requires a sound philosophical vision
of human nature and society, as well as of the general principles of ethical decision-making.

69. It might be objected that the theologian should nowadays rely less on philosophy than on the help of other
kinds of human knowledge, such as history and above all the sciences, the extraordinary advances of which in
recent times stir such admiration. Others, more alert to the link between faith and culture, claim that theology
should look more to the wisdom contained in peoples' traditions than to a philosophy of Greek and Eurocentric
provenance. Others still, prompted by a mistaken notion of cultural pluralism, simply deny the universal value
of the Church's philosophical heritage.

There is some truth in these claims which are acknowledged in the teaching of the Council.92 Reference to the
sciences is often helpful, allowing as it does a more thorough knowledge of the subject under study; but it
should not mean the rejection of a typically philosophical and critical thinking which is concerned with the
universal. Indeed, this kind of thinking is required for a fruitful exchange between cultures. What I wish to
emphasize is the duty to go beyond the particular and concrete, lest the prime task of demonstrating the
universality of faith's content be abandoned. Nor should it be forgotten that the specific contribution of
philosophical enquiry enables us to discern in different world-views and different cultures “not what people
think but what the objective truth is”.93 It is not an array of human opinions but truth alone which can be of help
to theology.

70. Because of its implications for both philosophy and theology, the question of the relationship with cultures
calls for particular attention, which cannot however claim to be exhaustive. From the time the Gospel was first
preached, the Church has known the process of encounter and engagement with cultures. Christ's mandate to his
disciples to go out everywhere, “even to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8), in order to pass on the truth which he
had revealed, led the Christian community to recognize from the first the universality of its message and the
difficulties created by cultural differences. A passage of Saint Paul's letter to the Christians of Ephesus helps us
to understand how the early community responded to the problem. The Apostle writes: “Now in Christ Jesus
you who once were far off have been brought near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who has made us
both one, and has broken down the wall of hostility” (2:13-14).

In the light of this text, we reflect further to see how the Gentiles were transformed once they had embraced the
faith. With the richness of the salvation wrought by Christ, the walls separating the different cultures collapsed.
God's promise in Christ now became a universal offer: no longer limited to one particular people, its language
and its customs, but extended to all as a heritage from which each might freely draw. From their different
locations and traditions all are called in Christ to share in the unity of the family of God's children. It is Christ
who enables the two peoples to become “one”. Those who were “far off” have come “near”, thanks to the
newness brought by the Paschal Mystery. Jesus destroys the walls of division and creates unity in a new and
unsurpassed way through our sharing in his mystery. This unity is so deep that the Church can say with Saint
Paul: “You are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are saints and members of the household of God”
(Eph 2:19).

This simple statement contains a great truth: faith's encounter with different cultures has created something new.
When they are deeply rooted in experience, cultures show forth the human being's characteristic openness to the
universal and the transcendent. Therefore they offer different paths to the truth, which assuredly serve men and
women well in revealing values which can make their life ever more human.94 Insofar as cultures appeal to the
values of older traditions, they point—implicitly but authentically—to the manifestation of God in nature, as we
saw earlier in considering the Wisdom literature and the teaching of Saint Paul.

71. Inseparable as they are from people and their history, cultures share the dynamics which the human
experience of life reveals. They change and advance because people meet in new ways and share with each
other their ways of life. Cultures are fed by the communication of values, and they survive and flourish insofar
as they remain open to assimilating new experiences. How are we to explain these dynamics? All people are
part of a culture, depend upon it and shape it. Human beings are both child and parent of the culture in which
they are immersed. To everything they do, they bring something which sets them apart from the rest of creation:
their unfailing openness to mystery and their boundless desire for knowledge. Lying deep in every culture, there
appears this impulse towards a fulfilment. We may say, then, that culture itself has an intrinsic capacity to
receive divine Revelation.

Cultural context permeates the living of Christian faith, which contributes in turn little by little to shaping that
context. To every culture Christians bring the unchanging truth of God, which he reveals in the history and
culture of a people. Time and again, therefore, in the course of the centuries we have seen repeated the event
witnessed by the pilgrims in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. Hearing the Apostles, they asked one another:
“Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native
language? Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and
Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both
Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians, we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God”
(Acts 2:7-11). While it demands of all who hear it the adherence of faith, the proclamation of the Gospel in
different cultures allows people to preserve their own cultural identity. This in no way creates division, because
the community of the baptized is marked by a universality which can embrace every culture and help to foster
whatever is implicit in them to the point where it will be fully explicit in the light of truth.

This means that no one culture can ever become the criterion of judgment, much less the ultimate criterion of
truth with regard to God's Revelation. The Gospel is not opposed to any culture, as if in engaging a culture the
Gospel would seek to strip it of its native riches and force it to adopt forms which are alien to it. On the
contrary, the message which believers bring to the world and to cultures is a genuine liberation from all the
disorders caused by sin and is, at the same time, a call to the fullness of truth. Cultures are not only not
diminished by this encounter; rather, they are prompted to open themselves to the newness of the Gospel's truth
and to be stirred by this truth to develop in new ways.

72. In preaching the Gospel, Christianity first encountered Greek philosophy; but this does not mean at all that
other approaches are precluded. Today, as the Gospel gradually comes into contact with cultural worlds which
once lay beyond Christian influence, there are new tasks of inculturation, which mean that our generation faces
problems not unlike those faced by the Church in the first centuries.

My thoughts turn immediately to the lands of the East, so rich in religious and philosophical traditions of great
antiquity. Among these lands, India has a special place. A great spiritual impulse leads Indian thought to seek
an experience which would liberate the spirit from the shackles of time and space and would therefore acquire
absolute value. The dynamic of this quest for liberation provides the context for great metaphysical systems.
In India particularly, it is the duty of Christians now to draw from this rich heritage the elements compatible
with their faith, in order to enrich Christian thought. In this work of discernment, which finds its inspiration in
the Council's Declaration Nostra Aetate, certain criteria will have to be kept in mind. The first of these is the
universality of the human spirit, whose basic needs are the same in the most disparate cultures. The second,
which derives from the first, is this: in engaging great cultures for the first time, the Church cannot abandon
what she has gained from her inculturation in the world of Greco-Latin thought. To reject this heritage would be
to deny the providential plan of God who guides his Church down the paths of time and history. This criterion is
valid for the Church in every age, even for the Church of the future, who will judge herself enriched by all that
comes from today's engagement with Eastern cultures and will find in this inheritance fresh cues for fruitful
dialogue with the cultures which will emerge as humanity moves into the future. Thirdly, care will need to be
taken lest, contrary to the very nature of the human spirit, the legitimate defense of the uniqueness and
originality of Indian thought be confused with the idea that a particular cultural tradition should remain closed
in its difference and affirm itself by opposing other traditions.

What has been said here of India is no less true for the heritage of the great cultures of China, Japan and the
other countries of Asia, as also for the riches of the traditional cultures of Africa, which are for the most part
orally transmitted.

73. In the light of these considerations, the relationship between theology and philosophy is best construed as a
circle. Theology's source and starting-point must always be the word of God revealed in history, while its final
goal will be an understanding of that word which increases with each passing generation. Yet, since God's word
is Truth (cf. Jn 17:17), the human search for truth—philosophy, pursued in keeping with its own rules—can
only help to understand God's word better. It is not just a question of theological discourse using this or that
concept or element of a philosophical construct; what matters most is that the believer's reason use its powers of
reflection in the search for truth which moves from the word of God towards a better understanding of it. It is as
if, moving between the twin poles of God's word and a better understanding of it, reason is offered guidance and
is warned against paths which would lead it to stray from revealed Truth and to stray in the end from the truth
pure and simple. Instead, reason is stirred to explore paths which of itself it would not even have suspected it
could take. This circular relationship with the word of God leaves philosophy enriched, because reason
discovers new and unsuspected horizons.

74. The fruitfulness of this relationship is confirmed by the experience of great Christian theologians who also
distinguished themselves as great philosophers, bequeathing to us writings of such high speculative value as to
warrant comparison with the masters of ancient philosophy. This is true of both the Fathers of the Church,
among whom at least Saint Gregory of Nazianzus and Saint Augustine should be mentioned, and the Medieval
Doctors with the great triad of Saint Anselm, Saint Bonaventure and Saint Thomas Aquinas. We see the same
fruitful relationship between philosophy and the word of God in the courageous research pursued by more
recent thinkers, among whom I gladly mention, in a Western context, figures such as John Henry Newman,
Antonio Rosmini, Jacques Maritain, Étienne Gilson and Edith Stein and, in an Eastern context, eminent scholars
such as Vladimir S. Soloviev, Pavel A. Florensky, Petr Chaadaev and Vladimir N. Lossky. Obviously other
names could be cited; and in referring to these I intend not to endorse every aspect of their thought, but simply
to offer significant examples of a process of philosophical enquiry which was enriched by engaging the data of
faith. One thing is certain: attention to the spiritual journey of these masters can only give greater momentum to
both the search for truth and the effort to apply the results of that search to the service of humanity. It is to be
hoped that now and in the future there will be those who continue to cultivate this great philosophical and
theological tradition for the good of both the Church and humanity.

Different stances of philosophy

75. As appears from this brief sketch of the history of the relationship between faith and philosophy, one can
distinguish different stances of philosophy with regard to Christian faith. First, there is a philosophy completely
independent of the Gospel's Revelation: this is the stance adopted by philosophy as it took shape in history
before the birth of the Redeemer and later in regions as yet untouched by the Gospel. We see here philosophy's
valid aspiration to be an autonomous enterprise, obeying its own rules and employing the powers of reason
alone. Although seriously handicapped by the inherent weakness of human reason, this aspiration should be
supported and strengthened. As a search for truth within the natural order, the enterprise of philosophy is always
open—at least implicitly—to the supernatural.

Moreover, the demand for a valid autonomy of thought should be respected even when theological discourse
makes use of philosophical concepts and arguments. Indeed, to argue according to rigorous rational criteria is to
guarantee that the results attained are universally valid. This also confirms the principle that grace does not
destroy nature but perfects it: the assent of faith, engaging the intellect and will, does not destroy but perfects
the free will of each believer who deep within welcomes what has been revealed.

It is clear that this legitimate approach is rejected by the theory of so-called “separate” philosophy, pursued by
some modern philosophers. This theory claims for philosophy not only a valid autonomy, but a self-sufficiency
of thought which is patently invalid. In refusing the truth offered by divine Revelation, philosophy only does
itself damage, since this is to preclude access to a deeper knowledge of truth.

76. A second stance adopted by philosophy is often designated as Christian philosophy. In itself, the term is
valid, but it should not be misunderstood: it in no way intends to suggest that there is an official philosophy of
the Church, since the faith as such is not a philosophy. The term seeks rather to indicate a Christian way of
philosophizing, a philosophical speculation conceived in dynamic union with faith. It does not therefore refer
simply to a philosophy developed by Christian philosophers who have striven in their research not to contradict
the faith. The term Christian philosophy includes those important developments of philosophical thinking which
would not have happened without the direct or indirect contribution of Christian faith.

Christian philosophy therefore has two aspects. The first is subjective, in the sense that faith purifies reason. As
a theological virtue, faith liberates reason from presumption, the typical temptation of the philosopher. Saint
Paul, the Fathers of the Church and, closer to our own time, philosophers such as Pascal and Kierkegaard
reproached such presumption. The philosopher who learns humility will also find courage to tackle questions
which are difficult to resolve if the data of Revelation are ignored—for example, the problem of evil and
suffering, the personal nature of God and the question of the meaning of life or, more directly, the radical
metaphysical question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?”.

The second aspect of Christian philosophy is objective, in the sense that it concerns content. Revelation clearly
proposes certain truths which might never have been discovered by reason unaided, although they are not of
themselves inaccessible to reason. Among these truths is the notion of a free and personal God who is the
Creator of the world, a truth which has been so crucial for the development of philosophical thinking, especially
the philosophy of being. There is also the reality of sin, as it appears in the light of faith, which helps to shape
an adequate philosophical formulation of the problem of evil. The notion of the person as a spiritual being is
another of faith's specific contributions: the Christian proclamation of human dignity, equality and freedom has
undoubtedly influenced modern philosophical thought. In more recent times, there has been the discovery that
history as event—so central to Christian Revelation—is important for philosophy as well. It is no accident that
this has become pivotal for a philosophy of history which stakes its claim as a new chapter in the human search
for truth.

Among the objective elements of Christian philosophy we might also place the need to explore the rationality of
certain truths expressed in Sacred Scripture, such as the possibility of man's supernatural vocation and original
sin itself. These are tasks which challenge reason to recognize that there is something true and rational lying far
beyond the straits within which it would normally be confined. These questions in fact broaden reason's scope
for action.
In speculating on these questions, philosophers have not become theologians, since they have not sought to
understand and expound the truths of faith on the basis of Revelation. They have continued working on their
own terrain and with their own purely rational method, yet extending their research to new aspects of truth. It
could be said that a good part of modern and contemporary philosophy would not exist without this stimulus of
the word of God. This conclusion retains all its relevance, despite the disappointing fact that many thinkers in
recent centuries have abandoned Christian orthodoxy.

77. Philosophy presents another stance worth noting when theology itself calls upon it. Theology in fact has
always needed and still needs philosophy's contribution. As a work of critical reason in the light of faith,
theology presupposes and requires in all its research a reason formed and educated to concept and argument.
Moreover, theology needs philosophy as a partner in dialogue in order to confirm the intelligibility and
universal truth of its claims. It was not by accident that the Fathers of the Church and the Medieval theologians
adopted non-Christian philosophies. This historical fact confirms the value of philosophy's autonomy, which
remains unimpaired when theology calls upon it; but it shows as well the profound transformations which
philosophy itself must undergo.

It was because of its noble and indispensable contribution that, from the Patristic period onwards, philosophy
was called the ancilla theologiae. The title was not intended to indicate philosophy's servile submission or
purely functional role with regard to theology. Rather, it was used in the sense in which Aristotle had spoken of
the experimental sciences as “ancillary” to “prima philosophia”. The term can scarcely be used today, given the
principle of autonomy to which we have referred, but it has served throughout history to indicate the necessity
of the link between the two sciences and the impossibility of their separation.

Were theologians to refuse the help of philosophy, they would run the risk of doing philosophy unwittingly and
locking themselves within thought-structures poorly adapted to the understanding of faith. Were philosophers,
for their part, to shun theology completely, they would be forced to master on their own the contents of
Christian faith, as has been the case with some modern philosophers. Either way, the grounding principles of
autonomy which every science rightly wants guaranteed would be seriously threatened.

When it adopts this stance, philosophy, like theology, comes more directly under the authority of the
Magisterium and its discernment, because of the implications it has for the understanding of Revelation, as I
have already explained. The truths of faith make certain demands which philosophy must respect whenever it
engages theology.

78. It should be clear in the light of these reflections why the Magisterium has repeatedly acclaimed the merits
of Saint Thomas' thought and made him the guide and model for theological studies. This has not been in order
to take a position on properly philosophical questions nor to demand adherence to particular theses. The
Magisterium's intention has always been to show how Saint Thomas is an authentic model for all who seek the
truth. In his thinking, the demands of reason and the power of faith found the most elevated synthesis ever
attained by human thought, for he could defend the radical newness introduced by Revelation without ever
demeaning the venture proper to reason.

79. Developing further what the Magisterium before me has taught, I intend in this final section to point out
certain requirements which theology—and more fundamentally still, the word of God itself—makes today of
philosophical thinking and contemporary philosophies. As I have already noted, philosophy must obey its own
rules and be based upon its own principles; truth, however, can only be one. The content of Revelation can
never debase the discoveries and legitimate autonomy of reason. Yet, conscious that it cannot set itself up as an
absolute and exclusive value, reason on its part must never lose its capacity to question and to be questioned. By
virtue of the splendour emanating from subsistent Being itself, revealed truth offers the fullness of light and will
therefore illumine the path of philosophical enquiry. In short, Christian Revelation becomes the true point of
encounter and engagement between philosophical and theological thinking in their reciprocal relationship. It is
to be hoped therefore that theologians and philosophers will let themselves be guided by the authority of truth
alone so that there will emerge a philosophy consonant with the word of God. Such a philosophy will be a place
where Christian faith and human cultures may meet, a point of understanding between believer and non-
believer. It will help lead believers to a stronger conviction that faith grows deeper and more authentic when it
is wedded to thought and does not reject it. It is again the Fathers who teach us this: “To believe is nothing other
than to think with assent... Believers are also thinkers: in believing, they think and in thinking, they believe... If
faith does not think, it is nothing”.95 And again: “If there is no assent, there is no faith, for without assent one
does not really believe”.96

CHAPTER VII - CURRENT REQUIREMENTS AND TASKS

The indispensable requirements of the word of God

80. In Sacred Scripture are found elements, both implicit and explicit, which allow a vision of the human being
and the world which has exceptional philosophical density. Christians have come to an ever deeper awareness
of the wealth to be found in the sacred text. It is there that we learn that what we experience is not absolute: it is
neither uncreated nor self-generating. God alone is the Absolute. From the Bible there emerges also a vision of
man as imago Dei. This vision offers indications regarding man's life, his freedom and the immortality of the
human spirit. Since the created world is not self-sufficient, every illusion of autonomy which would deny the
essential dependence on God of every creature—the human being included—leads to dramatic situations which
subvert the rational search for the harmony and the meaning of human life.

The problem of moral evil—the most tragic of evil's forms—is also addressed in the Bible, which tells us that
such evil stems not from any material deficiency, but is a wound inflicted by the disordered exercise of human
freedom. In the end, the word of God poses the problem of the meaning of life and proffers its response in
directing the human being to Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, who is the perfect realization of human
existence. A reading of the sacred text would reveal other aspects of this problem; but what emerges clearly is
the rejection of all forms of relativism, materialism and pantheism.

The fundamental conviction of the “philosophy” found in the Bible is that the world and human life do have a
meaning and look towards their fulfilment, which comes in Jesus Christ. The mystery of the Incarnation will
always remain the central point of reference for an understanding of the enigma of human existence, the created
world and God himself. The challenge of this mystery pushes philosophy to its limits, as reason is summoned to
make its own a logic which brings down the walls within which it risks being confined. Yet only at this point
does the meaning of life reach its defining moment. The intimate essence of God and of the human being
become intelligible: in the mystery of the Incarnate Word, human nature and divine nature are safeguarded in all
their autonomy, and at the same time the unique bond which sets them together in mutuality without confusion
of any kind is revealed.97

81. One of the most significant aspects of our current situation, it should be noted, is the “crisis of meaning”.
Perspectives on life and the world, often of a scientific temper, have so proliferated that we face an increasing
fragmentation of knowledge. This makes the search for meaning difficult and often fruitless. Indeed, still more
dramatically, in this maelstrom of data and facts in which we live and which seem to comprise the very fabric of
life, many people wonder whether it still makes sense to ask about meaning. The array of theories which vie to
give an answer, and the different ways of viewing and of interpreting the world and human life, serve only to
aggravate this radical doubt, which can easily lead to scepticism, indifference or to various forms of nihilism.

In consequence, the human spirit is often invaded by a kind of ambiguous thinking which leads it to an ever
deepening introversion, locked within the confines of its own immanence without reference of any kind to the
transcendent. A philosophy which no longer asks the question of the meaning of life would be in grave danger
of reducing reason to merely accessory functions, with no real passion for the search for truth.
To be consonant with the word of God, philosophy needs first of all to recover its sapiential dimension as a
search for the ultimate and overarching meaning of life. This first requirement is in fact most helpful in
stimulating philosophy to conform to its proper nature. In doing so, it will be not only the decisive critical factor
which determines the foundations and limits of the different fields of scientific learning, but will also take its
place as the ultimate framework of the unity of human knowledge and action, leading them to converge towards
a final goal and meaning. This sapiential dimension is all the more necessary today, because the immense
expansion of humanity's technical capability demands a renewed and sharpened sense of ultimate values. If this
technology is not ordered to something greater than a merely utilitarian end, then it could soon prove inhuman
and even become potential destroyer of the human race.98

The word of God reveals the final destiny of men and women and provides a unifying explanation of all that
they do in the world. This is why it invites philosophy to engage in the search for the natural foundation of this
meaning, which corresponds to the religious impulse innate in every person. A philosophy denying the
possibility of an ultimate and overarching meaning would be not only ill-adapted to its task, but false.

82. Yet this sapiential function could not be performed by a philosophy which was not itself a true and authentic
knowledge, addressed, that is, not only to particular and subordinate aspects of reality—functional, formal or
utilitarian—but to its total and definitive truth, to the very being of the object which is known. This prompts a
second requirement: that philosophy verify the human capacity to know the truth, to come to a knowledge
which can reach objective truth by means of that adaequatio rei et intellectus to which the Scholastic Doctors
referred.99 This requirement, proper to faith, was explicitly reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council:
“Intelligence is not confined to observable data alone. It can with genuine certitude attain to reality itself as
knowable, though in consequence of sin that certitude is partially obscured and weakened”. 100

A radically phenomenalist or relativist philosophy would be ill-adapted to help in the deeper exploration of the
riches found in the word of God. Sacred Scripture always assumes that the individual, even if guilty of duplicity
and mendacity, can know and grasp the clear and simple truth. The Bible, and the New Testament in particular,
contains texts and statements which have a genuinely ontological content. The inspired authors intended to
formulate true statements, capable, that is, of expressing objective reality. It cannot be said that the Catholic
tradition erred when it took certain texts of Saint John and Saint Paul to be statements about the very being of
Christ. In seeking to understand and explain these statements, theology needs therefore the contribution of a
philosophy which does not disavow the possibility of a knowledge which is objectively true, even if not perfect.
This applies equally to the judgements of moral conscience, which Sacred Scripture considers capable of being
objectively true. 101

83. The two requirements already stipulated imply a third: the need for a philosophy of genuinely metaphysical
range, capable, that is, of transcending empirical data in order to attain something absolute, ultimate and
foundational in its search for truth. This requirement is implicit in sapiential and analytical knowledge alike;
and in particular it is a requirement for knowing the moral good, which has its ultimate foundation in the
Supreme Good, God himself. Here I do not mean to speak of metaphysics in the sense of a specific school or a
particular historical current of thought. I want only to state that reality and truth do transcend the factual and the
empirical, and to vindicate the human being's capacity to know this transcendent and metaphysical dimension in
a way that is true and certain, albeit imperfect and analogical. In this sense, metaphysics should not be seen as
an alternative to anthropology, since it is metaphysics which makes it possible to ground the concept of personal
dignity in virtue of their spiritual nature. In a special way, the person constitutes a privileged locus for the
encounter with being, and hence with metaphysical enquiry.

Wherever men and women discover a call to the absolute and transcendent, the metaphysical dimension of
reality opens up before them: in truth, in beauty, in moral values, in other persons, in being itself, in God. We
face a great challenge at the end of this millennium to move from phenomenon to foundation, a step as
necessary as it is urgent. We cannot stop short at experience alone; even if experience does reveal the human
being's interiority and spirituality, speculative thinking must penetrate to the spiritual core and the ground from
which it rises. Therefore, a philosophy which shuns metaphysics would be radically unsuited to the task of
mediation in the understanding of Revelation.

The word of God refers constantly to things which transcend human experience and even human thought; but
this “mystery” could not be revealed, nor could theology render it in some way intelligible, 102 were human
knowledge limited strictly to the world of sense experience. Metaphysics thus plays an essential role of
mediation in theological research. A theology without a metaphysical horizon could not move beyond an
analysis of religious experience, nor would it allow the intellectus fidei to give a coherent account of the
universal and transcendent value of revealed truth.

If I insist so strongly on the metaphysical element, it is because I am convinced that it is the path to be taken in
order to move beyond the crisis pervading large sectors of philosophy at the moment, and thus to correct certain
mistaken modes of behaviour now widespread in our society.

84. The importance of metaphysics becomes still more evident if we consider current developments in
hermeneutics and the analysis of language. The results of such studies can be very helpful for the understanding
of faith, since they bring to light the structure of our thought and speech and the meaning which language bears.
However, some scholars working in these fields tend to stop short at the question of how reality is understood
and expressed, without going further to see whether reason can discover its essence. How can we fail to see in
such a frame of mind the confirmation of our present crisis of confidence in the powers of reason? When, on the
basis of preconceived assumptions, these positions tend to obscure the contents of faith or to deny their
universal validity, then not only do they abase reason but in so doing they also disqualify themselves. Faith
clearly presupposes that human language is capable of expressing divine and transcendent reality in a universal
way—analogically, it is true, but no less meaningfully for that. 103 Were this not so, the word of God, which is
always a divine word in human language, would not be capable of saying anything about God. The
interpretation of this word cannot merely keep referring us to one interpretation after another, without ever
leading us to a statement which is simply true; otherwise there would be no Revelation of God, but only the
expression of human notions about God and about what God presumably thinks of us.

85. I am well aware that these requirements which the word of God imposes upon philosophy may seem
daunting to many people involved in philosophical research today. Yet this is why, taking up what has been
taught repeatedly by the Popes for several generations and reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council itself, I
wish to reaffirm strongly the conviction that the human being can come to a unified and organic vision of
knowledge. This is one of the tasks which Christian thought will have to take up through the next millennium of
the Christian era. The segmentation of knowledge, with its splintered approach to truth and consequent
fragmentation of meaning, keeps people today from coming to an interior unity. How could the Church not be
concerned by this? It is the Gospel which imposes this sapiential task directly upon her Pastors, and they cannot
shrink from their duty to undertake it.

I believe that those philosophers who wish to respond today to the demands which the word of God makes on
human thinking should develop their thought on the basis of these postulates and in organic continuity with the
great tradition which, beginning with the ancients, passes through the Fathers of the Church and the masters of
Scholasticism and includes the fundamental achievements of modern and contemporary thought. If philosophers
can take their place within this tradition and draw their inspiration from it, they will certainly not fail to respect
philosophy's demand for autonomy.

In the present situation, therefore, it is most significant that some philosophers are promoting a recovery of the
determining role of this tradition for a right approach to knowledge. The appeal to tradition is not a mere
remembrance of the past; it involves rather the recognition of a cultural heritage which belongs to all of
humanity. Indeed it may be said that it is we who belong to the tradition and that it is not ours to dispose of at
will. Precisely by being rooted in the tradition will we be able today to develop for the future an original, new
and constructive mode of thinking. This same appeal is all the more valid for theology. Not only because
theology has the living Tradition of the Church as its original source, 104 but also because, in virtue of this, it
must be able to recover both the profound theological tradition of earlier times and the enduring tradition of that
philosophy which by dint of its authentic wisdom can transcend the boundaries of space and time.

86. This insistence on the need for a close relationship of continuity between contemporary philosophy and the
philosophy developed in the Christian tradition is intended to avert the danger which lies hidden in some
currents of thought which are especially prevalent today. It is appropriate, I think, to review them, however
briefly, in order to point out their errors and the consequent risks for philosophical work.

The first goes by the name of eclecticism, by which is meant the approach of those who, in research, teaching
and argumentation, even in theology, tend to use individual ideas drawn from different philosophies, without
concern for their internal coherence, their place within a system or their historical context. They therefore run
the risk of being unable to distinguish the part of truth of a given doctrine from elements of it which may be
erroneous or ill-suited to the task at hand. An extreme form of eclecticism appears also in the rhetorical misuse
of philosophical terms to which some theologians are given at times. Such manipulation does not help the
search for truth and does not train reason—whether theological or philosophical—to formulate arguments
seriously and scientifically. The rigorous and far-reaching study of philosophical doctrines, their particular
terminology and the context in which they arose, helps to overcome the danger of eclecticism and makes it
possible to integrate them into theological discourse in a way appropriate to the task.

87. Eclecticism is an error of method, but lying hidden within it can also be the claims of historicism. To
understand a doctrine from the past correctly, it is necessary to set it within its proper historical and cultural
context. The fundamental claim of historicism, however, is that the truth of a philosophy is determined on the
basis of its appropriateness to a certain period and a certain historical purpose. At least implicitly, therefore, the
enduring validity of truth is denied. What was true in one period, historicists claim, may not be true in another.
Thus for them the history of thought becomes little more than an archeological resource useful for illustrating
positions once held, but for the most part outmoded and meaningless now. On the contrary, it should not be
forgotten that, even if a formulation is bound in some way by time and culture, the truth or the error which it
expresses can invariably be identified and evaluated as such despite the distance of space and time.

In theological enquiry, historicism tends to appear for the most part under the guise of “modernism”. Rightly
concerned to make theological discourse relevant and understandable to our time, some theologians use only the
most recent opinions and philosophical language, ignoring the critical evaluation which ought to be made of
them in the light of the tradition. By exchanging relevance for truth, this form of modernism shows itself
incapable of satisfying the demands of truth to which theology is called to respond.

88. Another threat to be reckoned with is scientism. This is the philosophical notion which refuses to admit the
validity of forms of knowledge other than those of the positive sciences; and it relegates religious, theological,
ethical and aesthetic knowledge to the realm of mere fantasy. In the past, the same idea emerged in positivism
and neo-positivism, which considered metaphysical statements to be meaningless. Critical epistemology has
discredited such a claim, but now we see it revived in the new guise of scientism, which dismisses values as
mere products of the emotions and rejects the notion of being in order to clear the way for pure and simple
facticity. Science would thus be poised to dominate all aspects of human life through technological progress.
The undeniable triumphs of scientific research and contemporary technology have helped to propagate a
scientistic outlook, which now seems boundless, given its inroads into different cultures and the radical changes
it has brought.

Regrettably, it must be noted, scientism consigns all that has to do with the question of the meaning of life to
the realm of the irrational or imaginary. No less disappointing is the way in which it approaches the other great
problems of philosophy which, if they are not ignored, are subjected to analyses based on superficial analogies,
lacking all rational foundation. This leads to the impoverishment of human thought, which no longer addresses
the ultimate problems which the human being, as the animal rationale, has pondered constantly from the
beginning of time. And since it leaves no space for the critique offered by ethical judgement, the scientistic
mentality has succeeded in leading many to think that if something is technically possible it is therefore morally
admissible.

89. No less dangerous is pragmatism, an attitude of mind which, in making its choices, precludes theoretical
considerations or judgements based on ethical principles. The practical consequences of this mode of thinking
are significant. In particular there is growing support for a concept of democracy which is not grounded upon
any reference to unchanging values: whether or not a line of action is admissible is decided by the vote of a
parliamentary majority. 105 The consequences of this are clear: in practice, the great moral decisions of humanity
are subordinated to decisions taken one after another by institutional agencies. Moreover, anthropology itself is
severely compromised by a one-dimensional vision of the human being, a vision which excludes the great
ethical dilemmas and the existential analyses of the meaning of suffering and sacrifice, of life and death.

90. The positions we have examined lead in turn to a more general conception which appears today as the
common framework of many philosophies which have rejected the meaningfulness of being. I am referring to
the nihilist interpretation, which is at once the denial of all foundations and the negation of all objective truth.
Quite apart from the fact that it conflicts with the demands and the content of the word of God, nihilism is a
denial of the humanity and of the very identity of the human being. It should never be forgotten that the neglect
of being inevitably leads to losing touch with objective truth and therefore with the very ground of human
dignity. This in turn makes it possible to erase from the countenance of man and woman the marks of their
likeness to God, and thus to lead them little by little either to a destructive will to power or to a solitude without
hope. Once the truth is denied to human beings, it is pure illusion to try to set them free. Truth and freedom
either go together hand in hand or together they perish in misery. 106

91. In discussing these currents of thought, it has not been my intention to present a complete picture of the
present state of philosophy, which would, in any case, be difficult to reduce to a unified vision. And I certainly
wish to stress that our heritage of knowledge and wisdom has indeed been enriched in different fields. We need
only cite logic, the philosophy of language, epistemology, the philosophy of nature, anthropology, the more
penetrating analysis of the affective dimensions of knowledge and the existential approach to the analysis of
freedom. Since the last century, however, the affirmation of the principle of immanence, central to the
rationalist argument, has provoked a radical requestioning of claims once thought indisputable. In response,
currents of irrationalism arose, even as the baselessness of the demand that reason be absolutely self-grounded
was being critically demonstrated.

Our age has been termed by some thinkers the age of “postmodernity”. Often used in very different contexts,
the term designates the emergence of a complex of new factors which, widespread and powerful as they are,
have shown themselves able to produce important and lasting changes. The term was first used with reference to
aesthetic, social and technological phenomena. It was then transposed into the philosophical field, but has
remained somewhat ambiguous, both because judgement on what is called “postmodern” is sometimes positive
and sometimes negative, and because there is as yet no consensus on the delicate question of the demarcation of
the different historical periods. One thing however is certain: the currents of thought which claim to be
postmodern merit appropriate attention. According to some of them, the time of certainties is irrevocably past,
and the human being must now learn to live in a horizon of total absence of meaning, where everything is
provisional and ephemeral. In their destructive critique of every certitude, several authors have failed to make
crucial distinctions and have called into question the certitudes of faith.

This nihilism has been justified in a sense by the terrible experience of evil which has marked our age. Such a
dramatic experience has ensured the collapse of rationalist optimism, which viewed history as the triumphant
progress of reason, the source of all happiness and freedom; and now, at the end of this century, one of our
greatest threats is the temptation to despair.
Even so, it remains true that a certain positivist cast of mind continues to nurture the illusion that, thanks to
scientific and technical progress, man and woman may live as a demiurge, single-handedly and completely
taking charge of their destiny.

Current tasks for theology

92. As an understanding of Revelation, theology has always had to respond in different historical moments to
the demands of different cultures, in order then to mediate the content of faith to those cultures in a coherent
and conceptually clear way. Today, too, theology faces a dual task. On the one hand, it must be increasingly
committed to the task entrusted to it by the Second Vatican Council, the task of renewing its specific methods in
order to serve evangelization more effectively. How can we fail to recall in this regard the words of Pope John
XXIII at the opening of the Council? He said then: “In line with the keen expectation of those who sincerely
love the Christian, Catholic and apostolic religion, this doctrine must be known more widely and deeply, and
souls must be instructed and formed in it more completely; and this certain and unchangeable doctrine, always
to be faithfully respected, must be understood more profoundly and presented in a way which meets the needs
of our time”. 107

On the other hand, theology must look to the ultimate truth which Revelation entrusts to it, never content to stop
short of that goal. Theologians should remember that their work corresponds “to a dynamism found in the faith
itself” and that the proper object of their enquiry is “the Truth which is the living God and his plan for salvation
revealed in Jesus Christ”. 108 This task, which is theology's prime concern, challenges philosophy as well. The
array of problems which today need to be tackled demands a joint effort—approached, it is true, with different
methods—so that the truth may once again be known and expressed. The Truth, which is Christ, imposes itself
as an all-embracing authority which holds out to theology and philosophy alike the prospect of support,
stimulation and increase (cf. Eph 4:15).

To believe it possible to know a universally valid truth is in no way to encourage intolerance; on the contrary, it
is the essential condition for sincere and authentic dialogue between persons. On this basis alone is it possible to
overcome divisions and to journey together towards full truth, walking those paths known only to the Spirit of
the Risen Lord. 109 I wish at this point to indicate the specific form which the call to unity now takes, given the
current tasks of theology.

93. The chief purpose of theology is to provide an understanding of Revelation and the content of faith. The
very heart of theological enquiry will thus be the contemplation of the mystery of the Triune God. The approach
to this mystery begins with reflection upon the mystery of the Incarnation of the Son of God: his coming as
man, his going to his Passion and Death, a mystery issuing into his glorious Resurrection and Ascension to the
right hand of the Father, whence he would send the Spirit of truth to bring his Church to birth and give her
growth. From this vantage-point, the prime commitment of theology is seen to be the understanding of God's
kenosis, a grand and mysterious truth for the human mind, which finds it inconceivable that suffering and death
can express a love which gives itself and seeks nothing in return. In this light, a careful analysis of texts
emerges as a basic and urgent need: first the texts of Scripture, and then those which express the Church's living
Tradition. On this score, some problems have emerged in recent times, problems which are only partially new;
and a coherent solution to them will not be found without philosophy's contribution.

94. An initial problem is that of the relationship between meaning and truth. Like every other text, the sources
which the theologian interprets primarily transmit a meaning which needs to be grasped and explained. This
meaning presents itself as the truth about God which God himself communicates through the sacred text.
Human language thus embodies the language of God, who communicates his own truth with that wonderful
“condescension” which mirrors the logic of the Incarnation. 110 In interpreting the sources of Revelation, then,
the theologian needs to ask what is the deep and authentic truth which the texts wish to communicate, even
within the limits of language.
The truth of the biblical texts, and of the Gospels in particular, is certainly not restricted to the narration of
simple historical events or the statement of neutral facts, as historicist positivism would claim. 111 Beyond
simple historical occurrence, the truth of the events which these texts relate lies rather in the meaning they have
in and for the history of salvation. This truth is elaborated fully in the Church's constant reading of these texts
over the centuries, a reading which preserves intact their original meaning. There is a pressing need, therefore,
that the relationship between fact and meaning, a relationship which constitutes the specific sense of history, be
examined also from the philosophical point of view.

95. The word of God is not addressed to any one people or to any one period of history. Similarly, dogmatic
statements, while reflecting at times the culture of the period in which they were defined, formulate an
unchanging and ultimate truth. This prompts the question of how one can reconcile the absoluteness and the
universality of truth with the unavoidable historical and cultural conditioning of the formulas which express that
truth. The claims of historicism, I noted earlier, are untenable; but the use of a hermeneutic open to the appeal
of metaphysics can show how it is possible to move from the historical and contingent circumstances in which
the texts developed to the truth which they express, a truth transcending those circumstances.

Human language may be conditioned by history and constricted in other ways, but the human being can still
express truths which surpass the phenomenon of language. Truth can never be confined to time and culture; in
history it is known, but it also reaches beyond history.

96. To see this is to glimpse the solution of another problem: the problem of the enduring validity of the
conceptual language used in Conciliar definitions. This is a question which my revered predecessor Pius XII
addressed in his Encyclical Letter Humani Generis. 112

This is a complex theme to ponder, since one must reckon seriously with the meaning which words assume in
different times and cultures. Nonetheless, the history of thought shows that across the range of cultures and their
development certain basic concepts retain their universal epistemological value and thus retain the truth of the
propositions in which they are expressed. 113 Were this not the case, philosophy and the sciences could not
communicate with each other, nor could they find a place in cultures different from those in which they were
conceived and developed. The hermeneutical problem exists, to be sure; but it is not insoluble. Moreover, the
objective value of many concepts does not exclude that their meaning is often imperfect. This is where
philosophical speculation can be very helpful. We may hope, then, that philosophy will be especially concerned
to deepen the understanding of the relationship between conceptual language and truth, and to propose ways
which will lead to a right understanding of that relationship.

97. The interpretation of sources is a vital task for theology; but another still more delicate and demanding task
is the understanding of revealed truth, or the articulation of the intellectus fidei. The intellectus fidei, as I have
noted, demands the contribution of a philosophy of being which first of all would enable dogmatic theology to
perform its functions appropriately. The dogmatic pragmatism of the early years of this century, which viewed
the truths of faith as nothing more than rules of conduct, has already been refuted and rejected; 114 but the
temptation always remains of understanding these truths in purely functional terms. This leads only to an
approach which is inadequate, reductive and superficial at the level of speculation. A Christology, for example,
which proceeded solely “from below”, as is said nowadays, or an ecclesiology developed solely on the model of
civil society, would be hard pressed to avoid the danger of such reductionism.

If the intellectus fidei wishes to integrate all the wealth of the theological tradition, it must turn to the
philosophy of being, which should be able to propose anew the problem of being—and this in harmony with the
demands and insights of the entire philosophical tradition, including philosophy of more recent times, without
lapsing into sterile repetition of antiquated formulas. Set within the Christian metaphysical tradition, the
philosophy of being is a dynamic philosophy which views reality in its ontological, causal and communicative
structures. It is strong and enduring because it is based upon the very act of being itself, which allows a full and
comprehensive openness to reality as a whole, surpassing every limit in order to reach the One who brings all
things to fulfilment. 115 In theology, which draws its principles from Revelation as a new source of knowledge,
this perspective is confirmed by the intimate relationship which exists between faith and metaphysical
reasoning.

98. These considerations apply equally to moral theology. It is no less urgent that philosophy be recovered at
the point where the understanding of faith is linked to the moral life of believers. Faced with contemporary
challenges in the social, economic, political and scientific fields, the ethical conscience of people is disoriented.
In the Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, I wrote that many of the problems of the contemporary world stem
from a crisis of truth. I noted that “once the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason,
is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also changes. Conscience is no longer considered in its prime reality
as an act of a person's intelligence, the function of which is to apply the universal knowledge of the good in a
specific situation and thus to express a judgment about the right conduct to be chosen here and now. Instead,
there is a tendency to grant to the individual conscience the prerogative of independently determining the
criteria of good and evil and then acting accordingly. Such an outlook is quite congenial to an individualist
ethic, wherein each individual is faced with his own truth different from the truth of others”. 116

Throughout the Encyclical I underscored clearly the fundamental role of truth in the moral field. In the case of
the more pressing ethical problems, this truth demands of moral theology a careful enquiry rooted
unambiguously in the word of God. In order to fulfil its mission, moral theology must turn to a philosophical
ethics which looks to the truth of the good, to an ethics which is neither subjectivist nor utilitarian. Such an
ethics implies and presupposes a philosophical anthropology and a metaphysics of the good. Drawing on this
organic vision, linked necessarily to Christian holiness and to the practice of the human and supernatural
virtues, moral theology will be able to tackle the various problems in its competence, such as peace, social
justice, the family, the defence of life and the natural environment, in a more appropriate and effective way.

99. Theological work in the Church is first of all at the service of the proclamation of the faith and of catechesis.
117
Proclamation or kerygma is a call to conversion, announcing the truth of Christ, which reaches its summit in
his Paschal Mystery: for only in Christ is it possible to know the fullness of the truth which saves (cf. Acts 4:12;
1 Tm 2:4-6).

In this respect, it is easy to see why, in addition to theology, reference to catechesis is also important, since
catechesis has philosophical implications which must be explored more deeply in the light of faith. The teaching
imparted in catechesis helps to form the person. As a mode of linguistic communication, catechesis must
present the Church's doctrine in its integrity, 118 demonstrating its link with the life of the faithful. 119 The result
is a unique bond between teaching and living which is otherwise unattainable, since what is communicated in
catechesis is not a body of conceptual truths, but the mystery of the living God. 120

Philosophical enquiry can help greatly to clarify the relationship between truth and life, between event and
doctrinal truth, and above all between transcendent truth and humanly comprehensible language. 121 This
involves a reciprocity between the theological disciplines and the insights drawn from the various strands of
philosophy; and such a reciprocity can prove genuinely fruitful for the communication and deeper
understanding of the faith.

CONCLUSION

100. More than a hundred years after the appearance of Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical Æterni Patris, to which I
have often referred in these pages, I have sensed the need to revisit in a more systematic way the issue of the
relationship between faith and philosophy. The importance of philosophical thought in the development of
culture and its influence on patterns of personal and social behaviour is there for all to see. In addition,
philosophy exercises a powerful, though not always obvious, influence on theology and its disciplines. For these
reasons, I have judged it appropriate and necessary to emphasize the value of philosophy for the understanding
of the faith, as well as the limits which philosophy faces when it neglects or rejects the truths of Revelation. The
Church remains profoundly convinced that faith and reason “mutually support each other”; 122 each influences
the other, as they offer to each other a purifying critique and a stimulus to pursue the search for deeper
understanding.

101. A survey of the history of thought, especially in the West, shows clearly that the encounter between
philosophy and theology and the exchange of their respective insights have contributed richly to the progress of
humanity. Endowed as it is with an openness and originality which allow it to stand as the science of faith,
theology has certainly challenged reason to remain open to the radical newness found in God's Revelation; and
this has been an undoubted boon for philosophy which has thus glimpsed new vistas of further meanings which
reason is summoned to penetrate.

Precisely in the light of this consideration, and just as I have reaffirmed theology's duty to recover its true
relationship with philosophy, I feel equally bound to stress how right it is that, for the benefit and development
of human thought, philosophy too should recover its relationship with theology. In theology, philosophy will
find not the thinking of a single person which, however rich and profound, still entails the limited perspective of
an individual, but the wealth of a communal reflection. For by its very nature, theology is sustained in the
search for truth by its ecclesial context 123 and by the tradition of the People of God, with its harmony of many
different fields of learning and culture within the unity of faith.

102. Insisting on the importance and true range of philosophical thought, the Church promotes both the defence
of human dignity and the proclamation of the Gospel message. There is today no more urgent preparation for
the performance of these tasks than this: to lead people to discover both their capacity to know the truth 124 and
their yearning for the ultimate and definitive meaning of life. In the light of these profound needs, inscribed by
God in human nature, the human and humanizing meaning of God's word also emerges more clearly. Through
the mediation of a philosophy which is also true wisdom, people today will come to realize that their humanity
is all the more affirmed the more they entrust themselves to the Gospel and open themselves to Christ.

103. Philosophy moreover is the mirror which reflects the culture of a people. A philosophy which responds to
the challenge of theology's demands and evolves in harmony with faith is part of that “evangelization of
culture” which Paul VI proposed as one of the fundamental goals of evangelization. 125 I have unstintingly
recalled the pressing need for a new evangelization; and I appeal now to philosophers to explore more
comprehensively the dimensions of the true, the good and the beautiful to which the word of God gives access.
This task becomes all the more urgent if we consider the challenges which the new millennium seems to entail,
and which affect in a particular way regions and cultures which have a long-standing Christian tradition. This
attention to philosophy too should be seen as a fundamental and original contribution in service of the new
evangelization.

104. Philosophical thought is often the only ground for understanding and dialogue with those who do not share
our faith. The current ferment in philosophy demands of believing philosophers an attentive and competent
commitment, able to discern the expectations, the points of openness and the key issues of this historical
moment. Reflecting in the light of reason and in keeping with its rules, and guided always by the deeper
understanding given them by the word of God, Christian philosophers can develop a reflection which will be
both comprehensible and appealing to those who do not yet grasp the full truth which divine Revelation
declares. Such a ground for understanding and dialogue is all the more vital nowadays, since the most pressing
issues facing humanity—ecology, peace and the co-existence of different races and cultures, for instance—may
possibly find a solution if there is a clear and honest collaboration between Christians and the followers of other
religions and all those who, while not sharing a religious belief, have at heart the renewal of humanity. The
Second Vatican Council said as much: “For our part, the desire for such dialogue, undertaken solely out of love
for the truth and with all due prudence, excludes no one, neither those who cultivate the values of the human
spirit while not yet acknowledging their Source, nor those who are hostile to the Church and persecute her in
various ways”. 126 A philosophy in which there shines even a glimmer of the truth of Christ, the one definitive
answer to humanity's problems, 127 will provide a potent underpinning for the true and planetary ethics which
the world now needs.

105. In concluding this Encyclical Letter, my thoughts turn particularly to theologians, encouraging them to pay
special attention to the philosophical implications of the word of God and to be sure to reflect in their work all
the speculative and practical breadth of the science of theology. I wish to thank them for their service to the
Church. The intimate bond between theological and philosophical wisdom is one of the Christian tradition's
most distinctive treasures in the exploration of revealed truth. This is why I urge them to recover and express to
the full the metaphysical dimension of truth in order to enter into a demanding critical dialogue with both
contemporary philosophical thought and with the philosophical tradition in all its aspects, whether consonant
with the word of God or not. Let theologians always remember the words of that great master of thought and
spirituality, Saint Bonaventure, who in introducing his Itinerarium Mentis in Deum invites the reader to
recognize the inadequacy of “reading without repentance, knowledge without devotion, research without the
impulse of wonder, prudence without the ability to surrender to joy, action divorced from religion, learning
sundered from love, intelligence without humility, study unsustained by divine grace, thought without the
wisdom inspired by God”. 128

I am thinking too of those responsible for priestly formation, whether academic or pastoral. I encourage them to
pay special attention to the philosophical preparation of those who will proclaim the Gospel to the men and
women of today and, even more, of those who will devote themselves to theological research and teaching.
They must make every effort to carry out their work in the light of the directives laid down by the Second
Vatican Council 129 and subsequent legislation, which speak clearly of the urgent and binding obligation,
incumbent on all, to contribute to a genuine and profound communication of the truths of the faith. The grave
responsibility to provide for the appropriate training of those charged with teaching philosophy both in
seminaries and ecclesiastical faculties must not be neglected. 130 Teaching in this field necessarily entails a
suitable scholarly preparation, a systematic presentation of the great heritage of the Christian tradition and due
discernment in the light of the current needs of the Church and the world.

106. I appeal also to philosophers, and to all teachers of philosophy, asking them to have the courage to recover,
in the flow of an enduringly valid philosophical tradition, the range of authentic wisdom and truth—
metaphysical truth included—which is proper to philosophical enquiry. They should be open to the impelling
questions which arise from the word of God and they should be strong enough to shape their thought and
discussion in response to that challenge. Let them always strive for truth, alert to the good which truth contains.
Then they will be able to formulate the genuine ethics which humanity needs so urgently at this particular time.
The Church follows the work of philosophers with interest and appreciation; and they should rest assured of her
respect for the rightful autonomy of their discipline. I would want especially to encourage believers working in
the philosophical field to illumine the range of human activity by the exercise of a reason which grows more
penetrating and assured because of the support it receives from faith.

Finally, I cannot fail to address a word to scientists, whose research offers an ever greater knowledge of the
universe as a whole and of the incredibly rich array of its component parts, animate and inanimate, with their
complex atomic and molecular structures. So far has science come, especially in this century, that its
achievements never cease to amaze us. In expressing my admiration and in offering encouragement to these
brave pioneers of scientific research, to whom humanity owes so much of its current development, I would urge
them to continue their efforts without ever abandoning the sapiential horizon within which scientific and
technological achievements are wedded to the philosophical and ethical values which are the distinctive and
indelible mark of the human person. Scientists are well aware that “the search for truth, even when it concerns a
finite reality of the world or of man, is never-ending, but always points beyond to something higher than the
immediate object of study, to the questions which give access to Mystery”. 131

107. I ask everyone to look more deeply at man, whom Christ has saved in the mystery of his love, and at the
human being's unceasing search for truth and meaning. Different philosophical systems have lured people into
believing that they are their own absolute master, able to decide their own destiny and future in complete
autonomy, trusting only in themselves and their own powers. But this can never be the grandeur of the human
being, who can find fulfilment only in choosing to enter the truth, to make a home under the shade of Wisdom
and dwell there. Only within this horizon of truth will people understand their freedom in its fullness and their
call to know and love God as the supreme realization of their true self.

108. I turn in the end to the woman whom the prayer of the Church invokes as Seat of Wisdom, and whose life
itself is a true parable illuminating the reflection contained in these pages. For between the vocation of the
Blessed Virgin and the vocation of true philosophy there is a deep harmony. Just as the Virgin was called to
offer herself entirely as human being and as woman that God's Word might take flesh and come among us, so
too philosophy is called to offer its rational and critical resources that theology, as the understanding of faith,
may be fruitful and creative. And just as in giving her assent to Gabriel's word, Mary lost nothing of her true
humanity and freedom, so too when philosophy heeds the summons of the Gospel's truth its autonomy is in no
way impaired. Indeed, it is then that philosophy sees all its enquiries rise to their highest expression. This was a
truth which the holy monks of Christian antiquity understood well when they called Mary “the table at which
faith sits in thought”. 132 In her they saw a lucid image of true philosophy and they were convinced of the need
to philosophari in Maria.

May Mary, Seat of Wisdom, be a sure haven for all who devote their lives to the search for wisdom. May their
journey into wisdom, sure and final goal of all true knowing, be freed of every hindrance by the intercession of
the one who, in giving birth to the Truth and treasuring it in her heart, has shared it forever with all the world.

Given in Rome, at Saint Peter's, on 14 September, the Feast of the Triumph of the Cross, in the year 1998, the
twentieth of my Pontificate.