Chocolate's acceptance in the Catholic diet was clearly less the result of what theologians or canon lawyers did or said than of the decisions of ordinary clergy and laity who drank it regardless, says Australian Catholic University academic Dr Miles Pattenden.

There are lessons in that for other things that the Church would have Catholics abstain from, he says.

Chocolate has a history but, for Catholics, it also has a theology.

Long and learned treatises were written about whether it was licit to consume it - and when, writes Pattenden in a piece on History Today.

The Church was initially uncomfortable with its adherents drinking chocolate because the drink had been used as part of Aztec religious rituals. The Aztecs regarded chocolate as a gift of the gods and associated it with the human heart, and many Maya and Mixtec images of human sacrificial victims show those victims as anthropomorphic cacao pods.

Such ideas and images hardly endeared chocolate to the first friars who crossed the Atlantic to convert indigenous peoples to Christianity.

Some wondered whether it could be appropriate for Christians to drink something so intimately associated with idolatry and ritual murder.

On the other hand, some priests thought the use of chocolate in rituals could be effectively converted along with its users, and in some American indigenous communities chocolate replaced wine.

Another problem created by chocolate was how it should be treated in relation to laws of fasting and luxury, and the question of whether fasting religious ought to be allowed to drink chocolate was a matter of debate.

For more than 100 years the debate continued - was chocolate food or drink? Did it break the spirit of the laws against luxuries even if it was not technically forbidden?

An Augustinian theologian came out in favour of chocolate as a fast-busting refreshment, while an Inquisition lawyer disagreed.

The Dominicans were at the forefront of the campaign to limit it and sent a representative to Rome in 1577 to seek Pope Gregory XIII's opinions on a beverage he had neither seen nor tasted.

But eventually, in 1664, it was the Jesuits who had developed commercial interests in cacao production and distribution, and who secured a 16-page opinion from Cardinal Francesco Maria Brancaccio on the use of chocolate.

With the printing press now around 200 years old, the Jesuits immediately published the opinion, reprinting it at least four times in the next decade.

In the end, none of the Church's attempts to manage or restrict the consumption of chocolate was effective.

Canon lawyers' squabbles, the theological opinions and moral arguments all proved academic because chocolate consumption became so popular that the Church could do little to shape the behaviour of its faithful in the matter.

Heaven forbid it confused even the holy, with the Carmelites in Madrid seeking dispensation to drink chocolate behind the walls of their convent.

Pope Innocent refused the request and it was not until almost a century later that Pope Pius VI issued a definitive ruling that clerics could drink chocolate; albeit only away from Church premises.

Yet, by then, at least three 18th-century popes, Benedict XIII, Clement XII, and Benedict XIV, had been keen chocolate drinkers.

So while for a time the Church's attempts to manage or restrict the consumption of chocolate was effective, however, the processes surrounding its theological and canonical acceptance holds lessons for how the Church works in practice.

• The Church takes time to incorporate new things and ideas into its worldview.
• Those who set the Church's rules only have partial control over them.
• The acceptance of chocolate into the Catholic diet was less a result of theological and canonical opinions than it was of the decisions of ordinary clergy and laity who drank it.
• Despite all the moral and legal positioning, some popes have a broader view. It is said that when asked for permission to consume chocolate Pope Gregory burst into laughter at the absurdity of the request.

Pattenden suggests there are lessons in this for other things that the Church would have Catholics abstain from.

• Supplied: Dr Miles Pattenden, Senior Research Fellow in Medieval and Early Modern Studies at the Australian Catholic University.
• History Today: The Theology of Chocolate.

Health officials in some Latin American nations have advised women not to get pregnant.

This is because the virus, which is typically transmitted by the Aedes aegypti mosquito, has been linked to cases of babies having microcephaly and related conditions.

Fr James Bretzke, SJ, and Fr John Paris, SJ, both from Boston College, expect bishops in affected nations will not reiterate the Church's ban on contraception.

A condemnation of contraceptive use may not be best pastoral approach, said Fr Bretzke, a theologian.

He said in the face of such consequences — in this case, a baby who could suffer greatly — he thinks the Church might not be so hard line, especially under the leadership of Pope Francis.

"In Catholic Church teaching, some would say it would be acceptable to try to prevent conception in cases like this," Fr Bretzke said.

Fr Paris, a bioethicist, agreed that extenuating circumstances call for more nuanced approaches.

"In the older world, you couldn't eat meat on Friday, but if you were starving and meat was the only food available, of course you would eat meat," he said.

Or consider German families who, in the aftermath of World War II, stole coal, he said.

"The Bible says ‘thou shalt not steal', but is it wrong for a father to go get a bucket of coal to keep his family from freezing to death? The answer is no, of course not," Fr Paris said.

Fr Frank Pavone, the national director of Priests for Life in the US, said the prohibition on contraception does not change based on circumstances.

"So couples have a responsibility to live according to the Church's teachings in whatever circumstances they find themselves," Fr Pavone said.

He expects Latin America's bishops to issue a statement that married couples should not use "artificial" birth control.

The Zika virus issue has triggered debate on liberalising abortion laws in some affected nations.

Sources

• CNN
• IB Times
• Image: Stat News

Sri Lankan Redemptorist Fr Vimal Tirimanna told the first pan-Asian conference of Catholic moral theologians, held in Bangalore, India, last month, that fresh approaches are required.

Theologians have failed to take seriously indications from the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences about living in a specifically Asian context, Fr Tirimanna said.

The FABC has promoted a threefold dialogue with Asia's poor, cultures and religions to help the Church discover its identity and forge bonds of unity and build community.

Fr Tirimanna teaches theology in colleges in Sri Lanka and Rome.

He said the inclination by Asian theologians to the classical Western framework is "obvious if one were to glance through the syllabuses of Asian seminaries and other theological institutes where moral theology is taught and studied".

"Even in their writings, the majority of Asian moral theologians seem to be locked inside the Western classical framework of moral theology."

The "classical European theology", he explained, perceives faith as a body of truths and dogmas and uses philosophy to explain them.

Asian theology, on the other hand, starts with experience of the faith and analyses concrete situations with the help of sociology, psychology and anthropology, along with Asians resources.

What matters to the bishops in Asia, Fr Tirimanna said, are the daily experiences of their people rather than "purely abstract theological concepts".

Fr Tirimanna expressed the hope that moral theologians in Asia would work towards a genuinely Asian moral theology.

Such a theology would, among other things, seek to understand issues like suicides of farmers, starvation deaths, pollution and gang war killings.

Interfaith marriages are an "unavoidable reality" in multi-religious Asia, posing both opportunities and challenges for evangelisation in the region, he said.

He wants theologians to help the Church find "pastoral ways to protect the faith" of Asian Catholics who enter into such marriages.

Sources

• National Catholic Reporter
• Image: Redemptorists International

In a presentation at the so-called "shadow council" at Rome's Pontifical Gregorian University in May, Fr Alain Thomasset, SJ, described such labelling is one of the main problems in the pastoral care of families.

Understanding some acts as intrinsically evil, he said, "seems incomprehensible to many and seems pastorally counterproductive".

He wrote there is a just insistence "on points of reference as the targets of the moral life".

But this approach neglects the "biographical dimension of existence" and the "conditions of each personal journey".

He suggested that a "narrative and biographical perspective obliges one to believe that moral evaluation does not cover isolated acts".

Rather it covers "human acts included in a story".

Thus "one should not be too quick to qualify a sexual or contraceptive act as intrinsically evil!"

Fr Thomasset said that "the objective ethical references provided by the Church are just one item (essential, certainly, but not the only item) of moral discernment that must be operated within the personal conscience".

He called for increased listening to the experience and the sensus fidei of couples "who are seeking to best live out their call to holiness".

The priest, who is a professor of moral theology at Centre Sèvres-Facultés Jésuites de Paris, proposed an interpretation of human moral acts "remaining within the context of Catholic tradition, which would bear various consequences".

The first of these consequences, he said, is that "in certain cases, because of particular circumstances, the sexual acts of remarried couples would no longer be considered as morally guilty".

"This would open their access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist".

The other consequences, according to a Catholic News Agency article: the use of contraceptives would not be morally wrong, as long as the couple were married and "remain open" to welcoming life; and the "subjective moral responsibility" of sexual acts between homosexuals in a stable and faithful relationship would be "diminished or eliminated".

"It's about helping people live the humanly possible in a path of growth toward the desirable," Fr Thomasset wrote.

Sources

• Catholic News Agency
• Image: Our Greater Destiny

The challenge involves ice-cold water being poured over a person's head, in order to raise money for research into amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), sometimes known as Lou Gehrig's disease.

But some archdioceses, including Cincinnati and Chicago, have told Catholic schools not to donate to the ALS Association, which is behind the challenge.

This is because the association currently funds one study that uses embryonic stem cell research, which Church does not consider morally licit.

The Archbishop of New Orleans, Gregory Aymond, emailed priests asking them to ensure their parishioners only donated to "morally acceptable" research.

The Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey, has also asked parishioners to donate to charities that only use adult stem cells.

The Bishop of Evansville, Indiana, Charles Thompson praised participants' "humbling generosity", but said that the association's research went against Church teaching.

But he urged Catholics to donate instead to the John Paul II Medical Research Institute in Iowa and for people suffering in Gaza, Iraq and Syria.

The institute does ALS research, but only uses adult stem cells.

A spokesperson for the ALS Association, Carrie Munk, told Time that the organisation currently funds one study using embryonic stem cells, but added that donors can ask that their money not be used for this purpose.

In Boston, John Frates, a Catholic who spearheaded the ice-bucket campaign after his son Peter was stricken with ALS, said that he recognised the reasons for Church leader's qualms about the effort.

"I understand the Catholic dogma," he told the Boston Herald.

"I'm also conflicted with the teachings. I struggle with it, too. I just want my son cured."

Writing for the National Catholic Reporter, columnist Michael Sean Winters questioned the Church's lack of imagination on the issue.

"Did the officials in the archdiocese of Cincinnati reach out to the ALS foundation and voice their concern about embryonic stem cell research?" Winters asked.

"Did not the Pope say that he would rather a Church that makes mistakes in its efforts to help the poor, than a Church cooped up in the sacristy?"

Among those who have taken part in the challenge is former US president George W. Bush, who, in 2001, restricted federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Sources

• The Tablet
• Catholic World News
• National Catholic Reporter
• Image: The Guardian

Society of Mary Superior General Fr John Hannan told CathNews that he is pleased the threat of further sanctions, stipulated in 2010, have been removed and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will no longer adjudicate on them.

Fr Fagan, 86, a moral theologian, was silenced by the Vatican in 2008 following the publication of his book "Whatever happened to sin?"

The Vatican advised him if any word of their actions against him reached the media he would be stripped of his priesthood.

The Irish Times reports that Pope Francis is believed to have intervened directly with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on Fr Fagan's behalf.

Former President of Ireland, Mary McAleese is also thought to be directly involved.

The Irish Times learned that Mrs McAleese wrote to Pope Francis last December requesting he intervene. Receipt of the letter was acknowledged by the Holy Father's secretary.

Mrs McAleese, in 2012, criticised the Vatican's treatment of five silenced Irish priests, labelling their treatment as "dreadful".

She described Fr Fagan and similarly silenced Redemptorist, Fr Tony Flannery as "good men who have loved this Church with passion".

Others who also understood to have been approached to intervene on Fr Fagan's behalf are

• the Society of Mary,
• Diarmuid Martin, the Archbishop of Dublin,
• Archbishop Charles Brown, the new papal nuncio to Ireland, and
• Fr Timothy Radcliffe, the former head of the Dominicans.

As part of Fr Fagan's silence, the Ireland province of the Society of Mary was required to purchase all remaining copies of the book, and disassociate itself from his views.

In 2013, the Marist Fathers Ireland published a notice on its website saying that Fr Fagan's writings in the book "What happened to sin" do not have the approval of or represent the views of the Society of Mary.

The Vatican has also dropped its veto on the 1950s writings of the late Fr Lorenzo Milani, who argued that the Church of that time was more involved in ritual than faith.

Sources

• Society of Mary (NZ)
• Irish Times
• Irish Examiner
• Marist Fathers Ireland
• Catholic News Service
• Image: Michael V Hurley

Father Neil Vaney, an Auckland Roman Catholic moral theologian, said the secular media and various people were "pushing" the same sex issue. He said the Church should "show great compassion" to people from whom it had differing views.

"It is important the Church does not come across as homophobic or as being anti-gay. It is also important that Christians stay humble," said Fr Vaney.

"Several leaders said anti-gay-type comments would not alter what seemed inevitable — so was it worth getting offside with those the Church should be reaching out to?" he asked.

Fr Vaney noted that it was "ironic that after so much rhetoric to create the legal category of civil union, with its avowedly secular repudiation of all religious tradition, that the homosexual lobby should be fighting so hard to reclaim the label of marriage for their unions".

"Perhaps it is the aura of stability, commitment and lasting community that they are pining after - if so, all to the good…" he said.

A number of other ministry and church leaders believe a cautious approach to same-sex marriage is needed so as not to alienate those outside the church.

The church's main role, they point out, is to proclaim the Gospel and bring people to salvation and faith in Jesus and not get sidetracked. Many of them who did not want to make a public comment said Jesus came alongside people and sought to form friendships rather than judge a person from a distance.

Read other Church Leaders' opinions

Source

• Challenge Weekly
• Image: Eucharistic Congress Convention 2005

Humans share a common nature and possess common ways of acting. This comes about because our minds function according to a similar mechanism, and because we have comparable needs. The mechanism is this: where we have discretion, we make choices based on our values. This is called subjective valuation.

If I had a nickel for every time a person argued that this means that economics does not accept the idea of objective values, I could buy a candy bar (since the currency is so inflated). While it may be true that some economists do not believe in objective values, the existence of objective values has little bearing on the analysis of choices. People make choices based on the values that they subjectivize, whether they are objectively better or not.

Take the case of Michelangelo's statue of Moses. Very few people would deny that this statue is, objectively speaking, a powerful and impressive sculpture. Yet some tourists in Rome have no understanding of art, and if asked would not want to spend their time admiring that statue; based on their subjective valuation of art, it isn't on their list of priorities. This in no way undercuts the objective power of Michelangelo's work.

And this is just one of countless possible examples. When you eat cereal for breakfast and are confronted with a number of different brands, you choose the one you like best, based on what you value. If you are trying to live a healthful life, you might choose the box whose contents look like rabbit pellets. If taste is more important to you, that will be the basis of your choice, and you may opt for the sugary, chocolate cereal.

Economics is a science about persons and their actions, not about whether they should or should not make certain specific choices — that task belongs to ethics or moral theology. Nor does economics focus on the interior workings of the mind; that is for psychology. As individual persons, and as believers, economists are concerned about all of these things, of course. But as economists, the study of moral theology, ethics, and psychology falls outside their discipline.

Continue reading the article on Economics not being a business science.

Source

• Image: Blog - Journey of a social entrepreneur