Questions Answered – May 2024

Farewell and Thanks to Fr. Mullady

For many years, Fr. Brian Thomas Becket Mullady, O.P., has been the author of HPR’s “Question and Answers” column. Fr. Mullady entered the Dominican Order in 1966 and was ordained a priest in Oakland, California in 1972. He received his Doctorate in Sacred Theology (STD) from the Angelicum in Rome, Italy and was professor there for six years. He has taught at several colleges, universities, and seminaries in the United States. Fr. Mullady has several series on Mother Angelica’s EWTN television network. He is the author of several books and numerous articles. Father Mullady is the Theological Consultant to the Institute on Religious Life.

We at HPR are so very grateful to Fr. Mullady for the tremendous work he has offered us over his many years of work at HPR, as a professor, a writer, a retreat director, and most especially, as a Friar Preacher of the Province of the Most Holy Name of Jesus.

From the second question of this month (May 2024) onward, our editor-in-chief, Fr. John P. Cush, STD (Gregorian, Rome, Italy), who is a professor of dogmatic and fundamental theology at Saint Joseph’s Seminary in Dunwoodie, New York will be handling the “Question and Answers.” Please feel free to write Fr. Cush with questions at hpr@ignatius.com.

 

Fr. Cush will be assisted by the following team of experts in theology with whom he will consult in coming up with answers which reflect the Veritas of the Church communicated in a straightforward and pastoral manner:

Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue: Fr. Joseph Zwosta, STD

Biblical Theology: Fr. Nicholas Colalella, STB, SSL, MA

Liturgy and Sacramental Theology: Fr. Timothy Eck, STL

Canon Law: Fr. Nicholas Callaghan, M.Div., M.A., S.T.B., J.C.D.

Theological Anthropology/Ecclesiology: Fr. Bradley Easterbrooks, JD, STL

The Problem of Evil: Physical and Moral

By Fr. Brian Mullady, OP

Question: We are told that God permits evil to exist for the sake of good. Can you tell me the difference between evil in nature and evil in morals and how God uses them for good?

Answer: The problem of evil has caused many an anxious thinker to doubt the existence of a beneficent creator. Evil is the lack of a good which is due to a nature. However, it is important to distinguish between physical nature and moral nature, as evil is experienced differently respectively. This relates to God’s toleration of evil. To explain this, we must understand the famous distinction between act and potency, or being and act, or first and second act. First act is all that is entailed in the perfection of nature of a thing. Second act is the action, physical or moral, by which a being is fulfilled.

In nature, evil as a lack of a perfection due to nature causes evil of action. The simple example is a curvature of the tibia leading to a leg functioning improperly (walking lamely). In other words, in evil and nature, evil of being causes evil of action. God permits certain kinds of evil consequences because of the way material beings relate to each other. There is no moral judgment implied. Lions eat lambs; lambs eat grass. What is good in one respect is evil in another: without the evil to the lamb, the lion could not eat, which is a natural good for sustaining the lion’s life.

The opposite is true of moral evil. A human soul should have certain moral conditions which constitute its nature or integrity. The primary one would be grace. When someone does a willed action which is contrary to grace, moral disorder enters the soul. This is what Christianity calls a mortal sin. As long as this disorder continues without repentance, then a condition of serious moral disorder remains. So in physical evil, evil of being causes the evil of action. But in moral evil, evil of action causes evil of being.

In physical evil, the beings are all good, their nexus of causes just interfere with each other. Though God causes them, he does not cause disorder as such in any being. In moral evil, though God sustains the will as it acts, the defect of act is due to the person who exercises the will, the doer. Evil of action causes evil of being for which the perpetrator us responsible. God uses each for good because he uses the evil in one physical being to sustain another. In moral evil there are many moral goods which cannot exist without moral evil such as repentance, courage, martyrdom and many others.

In the case of the Original Sin, God permits it to bring forth and even greater mercy than the Original Justice. He permits us to lose the Original Justice to accomplish the good of redemption which would be accomplished through his Incarnate Son. There can be no greater good than this. God gives the grace of the Incarnation so that he might die for us and so lead us to resurrection.

So we can partially grasp a response to the problem of evil by considering the goods that the world could not have without the tolerated evil. In the case of material evils this would be the fact of the order of material nature. In the case of moral evil, this would be the good of the redemption and resurrection so we can go to heaven by union with the Incarnate Lord: in the case of physical good, the physical good of one thing may be the physical evil of another.

Confirming the Historical Existence of Jesus

By Rev. John P. Cush, STD

Question from Reader: I have listened to a podcast on the Internet that stated that it is doubtful that Jesus actually historically even existed. This broadcaster said that we cannot state that the Gospels themselves have any historical value. These statements really have been bothering me. How can I respond to them as a Catholic?

Answer from Fr. Cush: First, realize that, as I am sure you already do, not everything one hears or reads on the Internet is completely accurate. One without faith can deny that Jesus of Nazareth was Divine. One who does not believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, can deny that he is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. But no one can deny that Jesus of Nazareth historically existed!

First, let’s look into the fact that this YouTube personality stated that the Gospels were not historical records. Yes, of course, we believe that the four Evangelists were inspired by God, assisted in their writing, so that they correctly conceived, accurately wrote down, and truthfully expressed all that God intended and only what God intended, and therefore God is the author of the Bible. We learn this in Pope Leo XIII’s 1893 Encyclical, Providentissimus Deus.

We also understand that, in addition to Divine Revelation, the human author is very much involved in the process of writing the Gospel, from its oral tradition, to its written tradition, to its redacted tradition. These Evangelists were very real men and they lived in history. Their thought reflects the history, culture, and lived experience of the times in which they lived. Therefore, the Gospels themselves are matters of history, not just documents of faith. The New York Archdiocesan Priest, Monsignor John P. Meier (d. 2022), in his multi-volumed work from the Anchor Bible Reference Library, entitled A Marginal Jew, details several criteria for determining the historicity of Gospel pericopes. Pope Benedict XVI, as Joseph Ratzinger, stated that he valued and used Msgr. Meier’s work in the writing of his three-volume Jesus of Nazareth. The Gospels are faith-based, but because they are in time (and thus incarnational), are historical documents as well.

There are several non-Christian sources from antiquity that mention Jesus or early Christians. While these sources may not provide detailed accounts of Jesus’ life, they do offer evidence of his existence and the movement that formed around him. Some of the notable non-Christian sources include:

1. Josephus was a first-century Jewish historian who mentioned Jesus twice in his works. The most significant reference is found in the “Antiquities of the Jews,” where Josephus describes Jesus as a wise man and a doer of startling deeds. Although this passage has been subject to some debate regarding later Christian interpolation, most scholars believe it contains an authentic core.
2. Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived in the first and second centuries AD, mentioned Jesus in his work “Annals.” In a passage discussing the persecution of Christians under Emperor Nero, Tacitus refers to Christus (Latin for Christ) and his execution under Pontius Pilate.
3. Pliny the Younger was a Roman governor and letter-writer who corresponded with the Emperor Trajan in the early second century. In one of his letters, he mentions the early Christian practice of worshiping Christ as a god.
4. Another Roman historian, Suetonius, makes a passing reference to Chrestus (a variant of Christ) in his biography of Emperor Claudius. This reference likely pertains to disturbances among Jews in Rome related to beliefs about Jesus.
5. Lucian of Samosata was a satirist and writer from the second century AD. In one of his works, he mentions Jesus as the founder of Christianity and mocks the Christian faith.

With this in mind, no one in good faith can deny that Jesus of Nazareth historically existed! It only needs an open mind and the spark of the gift of faith to determine that, as we firmly believe, Jesus is Lord!