Abstract
The notion of discipleship has come to be considered an essential foundation and perspective in modern Catholic moral theology. Fritz Tillmann’s manual Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi was a landmark work in the early 20th century whose popularity led to a wide diffusion of the biblical concept of discipleship in Catholic moral theology. However, little mention is made of Tillmann in current academic writing. The article aims to explore the thought of Tillmann by outlining his understanding of Christian moral discipleship in conjunction with examples of key authors who influenced Tillmann, such as Hirscher and Linsenmann of the Tübingen School, as well as Neo-Scholastic authors who severely criticized his approach. The article concludes with a reflection on the current implications of discipleship in moral theology, calling for a greater recognition of the need for a transformative, loving relationship with Christ to fuel the desire to choose the good.
Discipleship is very much a fundamental notion in present-day Catholic moral theology. One only has to think of Saint John Paul II’s declaration in Veritatis Splendor that ‘Following Christ is . . . the essential and primordial foundation of Christian morality.’ 1 Thus, a moral behaviour that is truly Christian is one that is rooted in following Jesus Christ in such a way that our moral choices are shaped by our ‘participation’ 2 in the mind and life of Christ, the Way, the Truth and the Life (Jn 14:6), 3 since objective morality is not defined merely by good intention, 4 but by its ‘conformity with the dignity and integral vocation of the human person’ and to the truth that is in our God-given nature. 5 From another perspective, we could say that the truth and depth of our commitment to follow Christ is displayed each day in our moral choices and actions.
However, in the decades prior to Veritatis Splendor, the theme of discipleship coupled with the notion of imitation of Christ had already become firmly part of the language of modern moral theology. 6 Indeed, such a grace-enabled imitation and discipleship of Christ appears frequently in the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. In Lumen Gentium, the Council Fathers teach that ‘The Lord Jesus, the divine Teacher and Model of all perfection, preached holiness of life to each and every one of His disciples of every condition. He Himself stands as the author and consummator of this holiness of life: “Be you therefore perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect”.’ 7 They continue by stating that, ‘It is the love of God and the love of one’s neighbour which points out the true disciple of Christ.’ 8 Moreover, in Gaudium et Spes we read that if we follow ‘Christ, the perfect man,’ imitating his example, we will achieve a human existence that has fullness, dignity and meaning, and that witnesses in our particular vocation to facets of the mystery of God’s love. 9
Owing to his significant role in the preparation of Gaudium et Spes and Optatam Totius, but, even more so, on account of his pivotal role in synthesizing the new developments in moral theology in Das Gesetz Christi in 1954, 10 much attention has been paid to the German Redemptorist Bernard Häring, and to his development of a more Christocentric and personalist approach, with its call to responsible discipleship. 11 However, in comparison, most modern moral theology textbooks say very little of another German priest, Fritz Tillmann, who was the key proponent and instigator of the use of the theme of discipleship as the foundation for moral theory and action. Often in historical overviews, the only reference to Tillmann is merely a comment on his major works and a sentence on his introduction of the biblical theme of discipleship to the 20th-century moral theology. 12 And yet, the work of this man, whom Joseph Ratzinger once called ‘a top German moral theologian,’ was considered by the then Cardinal to be ‘avant-garde,’ 13 since it formed part of the ‘remarkable and considerable’ efforts of renewal among German moral theologians around that time. 14 So has Fritz Tillmann’s work simply been superseded by later writers or are there insights into Christian moral living as discipleship which deserve greater attention?
Some Biographical Background 15
Born in 1874 in Honnef am Rhein (now Stadt Bad Honnef), Fritz Tillmann studied Catholic Theology at the University of Bonn between 1894 and 1897 while also training for the priesthood at the seminary in Cologne. After his ordination on 17 December 1898 and a short time as a chaplain in the Münsterkirche in Essen, 16 he returned to the University of Bonn in 1901 to begin his doctoral studies and graduated with a doctorate in New Testament Exegesis in 1905, his thesis on Christ’s self-knowledge being entitled ‘Der Menschensohn. Jesu Selbstzeugnis für seine messianische Würde.’ He completed his Habilitationsschrift in 1908 on the Pauline understanding of Christ’s return in glory, entitled ‘Die Wiederkunft Christi nach den paulinischen Briefen,’ and then began teaching biblical studies at the University of Bonn until 1912 when the Vatican halted his work. 17
Under Tillmann’s editorship, a commentary on the New Testament had been published that was declared unacceptable by the decree of the Concistorial Congregation De quibusdam commentariis non admittendis of 29 June 1912. 18 The commentary was written by Tillmann’s friend Friedrich Wilhelm Maier, at that time a lecturer on the Synoptic Gospels in Strasburg. On the Synoptic question, Maier held the view of the two-source theory and presented this in his new work. Although the theory is almost universally accepted nowadays, it was considered to be so unacceptable at the time that his Commentary on the New Testament was banned and withdrawn from sale, as well as removed from every clerical institute. 19 Maier was also removed from his post and was unable to teach New Testament Studies again until 1924, first in Breslau (now Wrocław) and later in Munich. However, the decree was also the end of Tillmann’s career as a Scripture professor, as he was the editor of Maier’s work. Both Maier and Tillmann were offered the opportunity to change theological disciplines. Maier refused, and worked both in military and prison chaplaincy until he was able to resume his teaching, but Tillmann shifted his attention to moral theology and was appointed professor of moral theology at the University of Bonn in 1913, becoming the Dean of the Faculty of Theology from 1917 to 1919 and then the Rector of the University from 1919 to 1921. Tillmann was greatly involved in improving the welfare, accommodation and education of the students and was the chairman of the association of higher education. However, with the rise of National Socialism, Tillmann resigned his positions in 1933, the same year as his ground-breaking publication in morals, finally retiring fully in 1940 in a state of deteriorating health. Professor Tillmann died in 1953 in Honnef-Rhöndorf, close to the village where he had been born.
Discipleship and Renewal in Moral Theology
The painful experience of having lost his biblical teaching post became a graced opportunity for Tillmann to examine the field of moral theology with fresh eyes, as he was able to bring his biblical expertise to the subject. Thus, it became not only a graced opportunity for Tillmann but a graced moment, a ‘Kairos’ for the development of moral theology. 20 His first moral theological work of 1919, Persönlichkeit und Gemeinschaft in der Predigt Jesu (= Personality and Community in the Preaching of Jesus), is a slim work of only a few pages, as it is a publication of his speech marking the Foundation Day of the University of Bonn and the occasion of his taking office as Rector of the University. 21 However, his major breakthrough was his four-volume work entitled Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehre (= Manual of Catholic Moral Doctrine). The first edition was produced between 1933 and 1938 in collaboration with Theodor Steinbüchel and Theodor Müncker, who provided two volumes of philosophical and psychological foundations, 22 and the final two volumes specifically on Catholic moral theology were written by Fritz Tillmann himself. 23 Immediately we can see that this work of Tillmann has a different structure and purpose. As Tillmann writes, ‘Catholic moral doctrine is, first of all, a general science that is of use to every Catholic Christian, not a matter for the clergy and pastors alone.’ 24 Clearly, Tillmann sees the aim and scope of moral theology as broader than simply an aid to confessors. Rather, he sees moral theology as having the task of ‘presenting and justifying the building up of the Catholic ideal of life in its magnitude.’ 25 For this reason, Tillmann considers Catholic morality to be a doctrine of virtue, not of sins (Tugendlehre, nicht Sündenlehre). 26 Such a statement stands in stark contrast to the perspective of the English Jesuit Thomas Slater, who said that ‘manuals of moral theology . . . are books of moral pathology.’ 27
We must be careful, however, and not conclude that Tillmann’s approach and desire for reform appear completely out of the blue. Already by the second half of the 19th century we can see the beginnings of a renewal of moral theology, chiefly through a fresh appreciation of the sources of morals in the Catholic Tübingen School and later spurred on by the publication of Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Aeterni Patris in 1879. 28 The longstanding Kantian-influenced rationalist approach to Catholic moral theology, so ‘deeply imprinted’ in German and European thought as a whole, had led to an impoverished use of Holy Scripture. 29 The theologians of the Tübingen School sought to emphasize the importance of biblical inspiration in moral theology, to heal the separation between morals and ascetical theology and to organize the content of their manuals according to one central principle. A key example of this is to be found in the work of Johann Baptist von Hirscher, who used the fundamental idea from Christian Revelation of the Kingdom of God and its realization in humanity through moral teaching and action as the thread which held together his three-volume presentation of fundamental moral theology, issues of special morals and of the practice of the Church, particularly in the Sacraments. 30 Hirscher defined Christian moral theology as the scientific knowledge and doctrine of the real revival of man to being a child of God (divine filiation) through the mediation of Christ. 31 Later, in response to Aeterni Patris, another Tübingen theologian, Franz Xaver Linsenmann, wrote his Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie along Thomistic lines, while still maintaining the aims of the Tübingen School. 32 Linsenmann also considered discipleship to epitomize the moral quality of the life of grace and of perfection through virtue and asceticism, such that ‘our moral task is the reproduction of Jesus’ life in ourselves, [is] the following of Jesus (Nachfolge Jesu).’ 33 He saw discipleship and the imitation of Christ as the linking principle between the two phases of ‘the moral ideal of Christian life or the doctrine of Christian perfection,’ namely, the fulfilment of God’s commandments in keeping with justice, according to the order of nature, and the fulfilment of the evangelical counsels in the order of grace. 34 Subsequently, he also presents discipleship as the ‘positive side of Christian virtuous living’ which accompanies the ‘negative side’ of penance and satisfaction for sin in the ‘morals of rebirth.’ 35 Linsenmann’s presentation of discipleship is brief, but contains significant aspects which would be further developed by Tillmann. 36
Thus, already before the beginning of the 20th century we have a firm trend of reform, which had sown the seeds that began to grow and flourish in the 1900s. We can see a continuation of this reform, therefore, in the Neo-Scholastic moral manuals of theologians such as Tanquerey, Vermeersch, Merkelbach and Prümmer, 37 whose criticism of the reductive casuist model led them to build their manuals upon the virtues, 38 taking the notion of our ultimate end as the organizing principle of the moral material, rather than basing the structure of their works on the Commandments, as had previously been the case, thus providing a ‘more positive perspective in the treatment of moral problems.’ 39 We can also recognize in their works their attempts to reunify the fields of theology. Such isolation of theological fields had led to the loss of the treatises on grace, virtue and perfection from moral theology, ceding the first two to dogmatic theology and the latter to ascetic or mystical theology. 40 Therefore, in the work of these reforming Neo-Scholastics we can observe their attempts to move away from perpetuating a style of moral theology that was detached from other fields, which, as Peinador states, left it ‘cold, supernaturally inoperative, with little theology and much taken from positive law.’ 41
More immediate to the development of Tillmann’s own moral theology, was the influence of the work of Joseph Mausbach (1861–1931), whose respect for Sacred Scripture as a fundamental source of morals, spurred on by Leo XIII’s Encyclical Providentissimus Deus of 1893, would have appealed to the biblical scholar turned moral theologian.
42
Mausbach’s basic theme was the perfection of being, using the glory of God as ‘the supreme measure.’
43
In his outline of the nature of a ‘higher morality’ than the mere ‘instruction on duty’ presented by casuistic morals for the purposes of the confessional,
44
Mausbach points to the Cologne Catechism (originally of 1887, but later revised by Jakob Linden, SJ) to explore the question of Christian perfection. Mausbach writes: The question is asked, ‘Wherein does Christian perfection consist?’ The answer is ‘Christian perfection consists in our keeping ourselves free from inordinate love of the world and of self, and in loving God above all things, and all things in God.’ Further on, we are told, ‘the way to perfection lies in following Jesus Christ, and in practising the virtues taught us in the eight beatitudes.’
45
Tillmann took up these threads of the ‘Mausbachsche Reformprogramm’ to forge ahead with the as-yet unfulfilled desire for a more widely understandable, positive, faith-based moral textbook. 46 Thus, the focus on Scripture, virtue and the way of perfection would become central in the writing of Tillmann as he sought to encourage a morality that was rooted in the following of Christ and in application of the Sermon on the Mount to the lives of all Christians.
James Keenan observes that Tillmann’s Handbuch was ‘a tremendous success,’ which led to the publication of a series of editions even long after the German priest’s death. 47 Dom Odon Lottin, himself a major proponent of a thorough review of the form of moral theology, 48 declared that ‘one could not recommend too highly a reading of Fritz Tillman’s Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi (1934).’ 49 However, not all were happy with these changes to the casuist model (or to the abandonment of the Neo-Scholastic revision), nor with Tillmann’s highly biblical approach, with some from the outset considering it to be hardly a complete treatment of moral theology, and one that lacked the precision of moral guidelines found in the manualist style. 50 For example, despite declaring Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi to be of ‘undeniable worth,’ Antonio Peinador considers Tillmann to have gone to the other extreme in reaction against casuistry and presented an ‘ideal,’ 51 whose value lies in viewing it as a preacherly exhortation to follow Christ and to put it into action by following the command to love God and one’s neighbour as oneself. 52 Peinador concludes that Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi is not a scientific work of systematic moral theology, but a ‘moralizing’ work, whose reading of the Person and divine commands of Christ ‘illustrates, orientates and encourages,’ but does not offer a system of practical truths. 53 Peinador is of the view that Tillmann gives a marvellous description of the ideal of discipleship, but he challenges his assertions, saying that Tillmann does not explain why the ideal of moral life is definitively to be found in the sequela Christi, nor why the realization of this ideal is precisely to be seen in the practice of love. 54
It is striking to note that, while the Neo-Scholastic theologian Peinador epitomizes the criticism of Tillmann’s writing on discipleship as not being a scientific work of moral theology, over 30 years earlier, Tillmann had already questioned the casuist and Neo-Scholastic models’ status as true moral theology. He writes: The above-mentioned moral theological manuals actually fall under the category of instructions intended for the confessor and pastor. Here they have their right and do their job. But they should not call themselves moral theology, but better and more correctly: Instructio pastorialis in usum confessariorum. . . . If, therefore, these works are to be truly justified, they must be appreciated from this point of view, but they are not the manual of Catholic moral doctrine, which is scientifically drawing from the sources of faith and presenting for all Catholic Christians the Christian ideal of life in its severe strictness.
55
Thus, while appreciating each other’s work to a certain degree, the two approaches seem to be fundamentally at loggerheads with one another. Tillmann’s presentation of an idea or ideal rooted in Christ in his Handbuch is called into question as an adequate basis for moral theology. Clearly Tillmann saw no difficulty with the premise. Indeed, as we have already noted in his inaugural speech as Rector of Bonn University, Tillmann had defined moral theology in terms of presenting the Christian ideal. Moreover, decades earlier, Hirscher had likewise pointed to the centrality of the ‘high idea of Christ’ in moral theology, 56 and Linsenmann had also written both of der Idee Christusnachfolge and das Ideal der Christusnachfolge. 57 However, despite this previous use of the term, Antonio Peinador would still challenge Tillmann’s approach, saying that, while the ideal is more pleasing to read about, the science of moral theology should base itself on ‘real life’ instead. 58 For those clinging to the Neo-Scholastic position, the biblical foundation of discipleship was not sufficiently prescriptive, and so Tillmann was accused of presenting an ethos instead of ethics, 59 which was more suited to the ‘doctrine of the spiritual life’ than to the particular problems of ‘ordinary life’ in its struggles with the mysterium iniquitatis. 60
Therefore, is it fair to say that Tillmann’s model of the idea of discipleship and of morality is detached from ordinary reality? It is certainly Tillmann’s view that discipleship touches this reality. Indeed, he says ‘the service which the Gospel and the following of Christ render, by their very nature, to every human activity must be regarded as of the greatest importance and of inestimable value.’ 61 For Tillmann, the idea of discipleship shines a light on all activity in the life of the baptized Christian. Bruijs’s criticism that Tillmann lacks a special moral theology is unfounded, given the two-part elaboration of duties of love towards God, neighbour and self in the fourth volume of the Handbuch and summarized in The Master Calls. 62 However, it must be said that the transition from the general principle of discipleship and imitation of Christ to its application falters in the particular issues of ordinary life, as Tillmann fails to break the schema of a manualistic morality of duty and obligation. 63 Thus, one might say that Tillmann’s attempt to produce a coherent Christocentric system of morality is ‘not without its faults.’ 64 That having been said, it must be acknowledged that Tillmann did not claim to have achieved a perfect or definitive work. 65
For some, however, the criticism of Tillman’s method did not end with the question of its connection to ordinary life. While accepting that the Christian life is a communicating with God as his sons and daughters, as well as being a life in the Spirit and, more concretely, a ‘sequela Christi et . . . communio cum Christo,’ 66 the Dutch Redemptorist Leonard Buijs considered Fritz Tillmann to be going ‘the wrong way’ in his moral theology by presenting his model of discipleship as the foundation of moral action. 67 Buijs sees such union with Christ as the end rather than the beginning of the moral and spiritual path, since it relates to the fullness (plenitudo) and perfection of Christian life rather than to ordinary life in its imperfection. 68 Therefore, Buijs concludes that the foundation of moral teaching must be a series of precepts rather than virtues, particularly virtues that are elevated by grace, 69 and so he considers sequela Christi to be the wrong place to start, as he says that ‘sequela Christi is not a synthesis of principles but the ideal and concrete form which encompasses and completes everything.’ 70
It is true that you cannot run before you can walk, and so the first stage of moral development understandably focuses upon moral prescriptions and obligation, 71 but to stop there in the definition of moral theology by leaving further development to the ascetical works is to ignore the full sense of Christian morality as a dynamic process of growth in journeying to God. 72 Moreover, this restricted focus overlooks the fact that the prescriptions themselves stem from the ontological reality underlying them. 73 This is why Tillmann premises his comments on the way of the Christian disciple 74 with a description in Pauline and Johannine terms of the lasting ontological foundation of that discipleship achieved by God in Baptism, whereby Christ dwells in the person who has become a child of God. 75 In this way, Tillmann seeks to replace a static morality of obligation with a dynamic morality of growth, where the Christian is called to look at Christ and learn from him (cf. Mt 11:29), 76 so that the disciple can come to be 77 like his teacher (cf. Mt 10:25). 78
From this perspective, it is clear that Christian perfection and holiness are truly part and parcel of Christian morality, rather than some optional extra.
79
Tillmann therefore declares: Christian perfection is the duty of every one of Christ’s followers. No distinctions are made; it is not just the goal of a few especially endowed Christians. True, in the context of the Sermon on the Mount, the demand for perfection is related primarily to the precept of the love of enemies. But because of the motivation which Jesus gives to this precept, He clearly indicates its universal character and its obligatory force for all. Perfection applies to the whole of the Christian life and hence is based on the fundamental relationship of the child of God to his Father in heaven. . . . Only he is a genuine child of God and His true son who seriously strives to follow the example of His Father and to become ever more like Him.
80
Thus, the path of Christian moral growth is one and the same path as that presented by the great Christian mystics, that of purgation, illumination and union with Christ, where the Christian seeks first to convert and abandon sinful ways, then to grow through virtue and finally to be drawn into ever closer loving union with Christ through humble submission of the will. 81
Tillmann’s model of dynamic moral growth in imitation of Christ is clearly rooted in the Gospel. It is there we find both the pearl of great price in a new life in Christ (Mt 13:45–46), but also the challenge of conversion, to change and to leave behind that which is at odds with our union with God. Here Tillmann relies heavily on St Paul’s description of our new creation in Christ (2 Cor 5:17), such that ‘it is now no longer I that lives, but Christ lives in me’ (Gal 2:20). 82 This is no superficial change of lifestyle, but a becoming ‘another Christ’; a fundamental reforming of the person (Cf. Gal 4:9) to freely follow Christ in thought, word and deed by seeking to do God’s will. 83 Thus, in Tillmann’s analysis we find a description of the seriousness of the task of conversion and of following Christ in our daily lives and actions. 84 Just as Pope Saint John Paul II would later highlight Christ’s encounter with the rich young man at the start of Veritatis Splendor, 85 so Fritz Tillmann also points to the event as an example which highlights the high demands of following Christ. 86
One might think that this biblical basis would be beyond question; after all, ‘moral theology must be evangelical’ [i.e. Gospel-based]. 87 But Tillmann’s heavy emphasis on Scripture as his primary source left him facing the accusation of ‘supernatural unilateralism,’ 88 as well as ‘evangelical puritanism’ in not sufficiently combining human reason (natural law) and supernatural revelation in the presentation of his moral theology. 89 To some extent, this argument of an over-reliance on one key source of Christian morality is justified, and it would be up to later theologians to develop a more nuanced approach which better combined Scripture, human reason, natural law, patristic sources and the Magisterium. 90 That having been said, although his footnotes are limited, it should not be forgotten that Tillmann’s third and fourth volumes do contain references which include the other key Christian moral sources, and that his work is also to be seen in conjunction with the personalist philosophy and psychology of Steinbüchel and Müncker. 91 However, the systematic shortcomings of Tillmann’s moral theology should not eclipse the profound importance of his efforts to restore Holy Scripture to its rightful place in Christian moral theology, bringing a renewed ‘vigour’ to the subject. 92
A Relational Basis for Morality—Implications for Moral Theology Today
We can see from this overview of the foundation of Fritz Tillmann’s model of morality as discipleship that his work greatly served the process of renewal in moral theology by highlighting the importance of refocusing Christian morality on Christ, starting with Sacred Scripture. His emphasis on the dynamism of morals in a growth of perfection helped to draw moral thinking away from a legalist framework. However, this leads us to ask what drives this dynamism of growth beyond blindly following a prescriptive minimum morality, where one ceases ‘to live and think by proxy’?
93
Clearly, beyond the natural capacities through which God calls us to do the good, such as the natural inclinations and conscience (both synderesis and conscientia),
94
the transformed ontological reality of the Christian as a new creation in Christ through Baptism, lived in the communio of the Church,
95
creates the graced condition for thinking and acting with the mind of Christ, but such a condition still does not necessarily lead to acting in accord with God’s will, challenged as we are by concupiscence and sin. Therefore, if we are not merely complying out of fear of punishment (a minimal response to a morality of obligation), what else leads the Christian more fully to act justly and to keep God’s commandments? Like Servais Pinckaers, one might point to a morality of happiness and freedom for excellence, rooted in the life of grace that facilitates the growth of connaturality with God’s will in the conscience of the person.
96
However, what creates and sustains the momentum to seek to grow in virtue and perfection in the first place? Here, Tillmann provides the key to what drives a moral choice if it is not simply to be driven by blind obligation or only fear,
97
and the key is love. It is a matter of the desire of the will. He writes: What does it mean to ‘follow’ a person? It means to choose someone as a model and to form and transform one’s own life according to his example. The fundamental prerequisite is to find a person whom we wish to imitate, because it will be in his conception and manner of life that we recognize a great good, the ideal. Love of the ideal opens the way to this recognition. Only in the light of love does the model appear to us in all his unique splendour. Because of the irresistible attraction he exerts, the determination to become like the ideal grows in us. Hence to follow someone means to choose him as a model, because one has been captivated by love of him.
98
From this passage we can see that Tillmann frames discipleship and the imitation of Christ in the light of love and in the context of relationship. Christ states, ‘You did not choose me, no, I chose you and I commissioned you to go out and to bear fruit’ (Jn 15:16). So, the starting point of our moral life is God’s loving choice, his choosing us to be his servants and disciples, but for that choice to be fruitful, we have to make a positive, loving choice for God in return, since God acts in nobis cum nobis. 99 However, Tillmann makes an important observation when he describes the resolution to become like Christ as a decision driven by the fact that the person is ‘captivated by love of him’ (von Liebe zu ihm ergriffen ist), attracted irresistibly or carried away (mitreißen) by this love. Thus, the choice to follow Christ is powerfully fuelled by Christ himself. Once the person has spent time in the presence of Christ, they long to stay with him (cf. Jn 1:39) and to follow him. In other words, the truly fruitful moral response of the Christian is driven by a close personal union with Christ. 100 Therefore, in this case the Christian wants to do God’s will because of his intimate, loving relationship with Christ and not simply because it is commanded. 101 Such a transformative, captivating love, in which one is invited to share in God’s life, 102 is far from the mere acceptance of some abstract high ideals or the external imitation of the example of Christ. Captivated by this love, ‘a robust and vital union with the glorified and transfigured Christ’ takes hold, 103 transforming the person through and through. 104
All this, therefore, implies that the opportunity for such a deep encounter needs to be fostered in the life of the Church if we are to make the spiritual-moral model of discipleship truly flourish in our day. Thus, the shift from legalism to discipleship necessarily demands greater mysticism in the life of the Christian, since it is the personal experience of Christ that becomes the central motivation of the Christian to want to do God’s will.
In the current cultural context of less regard for institution and authority, with the consequent effects on the diminished appreciation of the Church’s Magisterium, 105 and in a climate where Christian faith and morals face much rejection or ridicule in the social sphere, 106 a morality rooted in a living relationship with Christ becomes all the more necessary, since without the experience of the depth of prayer that Christian discipleship implies, the individual runs the risk of falling between two stools, that is, neither obeying on account of the law, nor obeying on account of love. In this way, Rahner commented that ‘the devout Christian of the future will either be a “mystic”, one who has “experienced” something, or he will cease to be anything at all.’ 107
To focus on the call of the individual Christian to ‘Come and see’ (Jn 1:39), to ‘savour Christ’s friendship’ 108 by deepening his or her mystical experience of Christ is not a descent into individualism or private illuminationism, somehow undermining the communio or the teaching authority of the Church. Rather, it is an essential aspect of a living faith and morals which recognizes that ‘the call of Jesus Christ is directed to each one personally’ 109 and that each individual is called to make a personal response both in faith and action. To that extent, a deep, loving union with Christ both underpins our positive response to the call to ‘Come, follow’ and to the command to ‘Go and do likewise’ (cf. Mk 10,21; Lk 10:37), because we are driven by love to desire what Christ wants. 110 As Pope Francis states, ‘In union with Jesus, we seek what he seeks and we love what he loves. In the end, what we are seeking is the glory of the Father; we live and act “for the praise of his glorious grace” (Eph 1:6).’ 111 This mystical union also fuels the missionary ‘passion’ of members of the Church in their efforts of evangelization, 112 and also provides a starting point for this evangelization, through personal encounter and witness.
Conclusion
Far from being some vague idea or generic motivation, Christian discipleship is a fundamental point of reference in Christian morality, providing the existential thread of the vocation of disciple (both divine call and personal response) to the nature of all our moral choices, which are to be made in union with Christ and imitation of him, supported and guided by the vast community of disciples that is the Church.
113
With his central focus on the biblical notion of discipleship, Fritz Tillmann created the paradigm shift which saw a definitive move away from a minimalist morality to maintain salvation,
114
to a flourishing moral life which seeks to act in union with Christ in the light of the Beatitudes, in order to live life ‘to the full’ (Jn 10:10). Earlier moral theologians provided the stepping stones to his landmark work Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, and others developed it further, but Fritz Tillmann deserves the credit for providing a powerful text which truly emphasizes the reality of moral action in the context of the life of grace. It is a call to take seriously the impact of Christ’s presence in our lives if we stay in union with him as faithful, loving disciples. St Teresa of Ávila, as teacher and example of the effects of this union, thus encourages us: Draw near, then, to this good Master with strong determination to learn what He teaches you, and His Majesty will so provide that you will turn out to be good disciples. He will not abandon you if you do not abandon Him. Consider the words that divine mouth speaks, for in the first word you will understand immediately the love He has for you; it is no small blessing and gift for the disciple to see that his Master loves him.
115
Footnotes
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
1
St John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 19. The Latin text says that this sequela Christi is the ‘essential and natural foundation of Christian moral teaching’ [essentiale et naturale].
2
Livio Melina, Sharing in Christ’s Virtues: For a Renewal of Moral Theology in Light of Veritatis Splendor, trans. William E. May (Washington DC: CUA, 2001), 89, 132.
3
Livio Melina, ‘Un haz de luz para la renovación moral’ in Una luz para el obrar: Experiencia moral, caridad y acción cristiana, eds Livio Melina, José Noriega and Juan José Pérez-Soba, (Madrid: Palabra, 2006), 22–23.
4
St John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, 78.
5
Ibid., 67, 51.
6
For example, cf. Gilbert Bouwman, Folgen und Nachfolgen in Zeugnis der Bibel, (Salzburg: Otto Müller, 1965); Raymond Thysman, ‘Imitation du Christ dans le Nouveau Testament,’ Ephemerides Theologicae Louvanienses 42 (1966), 138–75. For further examples, see José-Ramón Flecha Andrés, Teología moral fundamental (Madrid: BAC, 2010), 65, n.80.
7
Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, 40.
8
Ibid., 42.
9
Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes, 22, 41, 52.
10
Bernard Häring, Das Gesetz Christi: Moraltheologie für Priester und Laien, 3 vols (Freiburg: Erich Wewel, 1954); idem, The Law of Christ, 3 vols, trans. Edwin G. Kaiser (Cork: Mercier, 1963). Cf. James F. Keenan, ‘Vatican II and Theological Ethics,’ Theological Studies 74 (2013), 162–90, 171–73; idem, ‘Redeeming Conscience,’ Theological Studies 76 (2015), 129–47, 133.
11
Häring, The Law of Christ, I, 51–53, at 51: ‘For the true disciple receives the word of Christ, actively fulfilling it in his life on his own responsibility and in his own time. This means that he must imitate the example of Christ in his own individuality, according to his own unique possession of particular gifts and endowments bestowed on him with all self-accountability in the sight of God’; ibid., 135: ‘Within us conscience re-echoes the call of the Master inviting us to follow Him.’ Cf. idem, Free and Faithful in Christ: Moral Theology for Priests and Laity, vol. 1, General Moral Theology (Slough: St Pauls, 1978), 74, 224.
12
For example, cf. Servais Pinckaers, The Sources of Christian Ethics, 3rd ed., trans. Sr Mary Thomas Noble, (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), 301; Flecha Andrés, Teología moral fundamental, 62, 65, n. 80. Exceptions to this would be the greater attention to Tillmann given by certain authors in the German-speaking world. For example, cf. Konrad Hilpert, Christliche Ethik im Portät: Leben und Werk bedeutender Moraltheologen (Freiburg: Herder, 2012); Rupert Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie: Impulse aus der deutschen Moraltheologie zwischen 1900 und dem II. Vatikanischen Konzil, (Freiburg: Academic Press Fribourg, 2008); Emil Piront, Fritz Tillmann (1874–1953) und sein Beitrag zur Erneuerung der Moraltheologie im 20 Jahrhundert. (Doctoral Thesis, University of Mainz, 1996).
13
14
Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 301.
15
Cf. Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 123–25; James F. Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology in the Twentieth Century: From Confessing Sins to Liberating Consciences (New York: Continuum, 2010), 60–61; Ratzinger, ‘Il rapporto fra Magistero della Chiesa ed esegesi’; Michael Holz, ‘Fritz Tillmann,’ Internetportal Rheinische Geschichte, 29 October 2020, 
.
16
There appears to be a discrepancy in the date of Tillmann’s ordination according to different sources. Rupert Grill states that he was ordained on 17 December 1898, while Michael Holz’s website biography says that it was exactly a year earlier, on 17 December 189
17
Ratzinger, ‘Il rapporto fra Magistero della Chiesa ed esegesi.’
18
Ibid. Cf. Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 123–24.
19
Ratzinger, ‘Il rapporto fra Magistero della Chiesa ed esegesi’: ‘expungenda omnino esse ab institutione clericorum.’
20
Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 124.
21
Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology, 60; Fritz Tillmann, Persönlichkeit und Gemeinschaft in der Predigt Jesu (Düsseldorf: Schwannsche, 1919), 5.
22
Theodor Steinbüchel, Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehere, I,1–2: Die philosophische Grundlegung der katholischen Sittenlehre (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1938); Theodor Müncker, Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehere, II: Die psychologischen Grundlagen der katholischen Sittenlehre (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1934).
23
Keenan only mentions one volume by Tillmann: Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi. However, there is another volume, in two parts, after this. Cf. Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology, 60; Fritz Tillmann, Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehere, IV,1: Der Verwirklichung der Nachfolge Christi: Die Pflichten gegen Gott (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1935); idem, Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehere, IV,2: Der Verwirklichung der Nachfolge Christi: Die Pflichten gegen sich selbst und gegen den Nächsten (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1935). A fifth volume on sociological foundations was added in the year of Tillmann’s death by Schöllgen, who had been a doctoral student of Tillmann. See Werner Schöllgen, Die soziologischen Grundlagen der katholischen Sittenlehre (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1953); Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 344–45.
24
Fritz Tillmann, Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehre, III, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 3rd ed., (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1949), original 1933 ed. Foreword, n.p.
25
Ibid. Cf. Tillmann, Persönlichkeit und Gemeinschaft, 5: ‘Moral theology considers it its scientific task to grasp the moral life in the fullness and diversity of its manifestations, to measure it against the doctrine and the spirit of Christ.’
26
Tillmann, Persönlichkeit und Gemeinschaft, 5.
27
Thomas Slater, A Manual of Moral Theology, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (New York: Benziger, 1908), 5–6. Cf. Stuart P. Chalmers, Conscience in Context: Historical and Existential Perspectives (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014), 155.
28
Augusto Sarmiento, Enrique Molina and Tomás Trigo, Teología moral fundamental (Pamplona: EUNSA, 2013), 81. Cf. Miguel Antolí, ‘El principio fundamental de la moral desde Hirscher hasta Tillmann,’ Anales Valentinos 8 (1982), 19–102; José Román Flecha, Sed Perfectos: Notas de moral fundamental (Madrid: Comisión Episcopal del Clero, 1992), 66–67.
29
Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 301.
30
Johann Baptist von Hirscher, Die christliche Moral als Lehre von der Verwirklichung des göttlichen Reiches in der Menschheit, vol. 1 (Tübingen: Laupp’schen, 1851), iv–viii. For Tillmann’s comments on the significant role of Hirscher in the reform of moral theology, see Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 42–44.
31
Hirscher, Die christliche Moral, 3: ‘Die christliche Moral ist die wissenschaftliche Erkenntnis (und Lehre) von der durch Christus vermittelten wirklichen Wiederkehr des Menschen zur Kindschaft Gottes’ (parenthesis in original). Subsequently, Tillmann also presents divine filiation as a fundamental principle of the nature of the baptized Christian disciple, both as individual and as member of the Christian Community. See Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 68–83, 85, 90–95, 105–10, 191; idem, Der Meister Ruft: Eine Laienmoral für gläubige Christen (Düsseldorf: Mosella, 1937), 26–27; idem, The Master Calls: A Handbook of Christian Living, trans. Gregory J. Roettger (Baltimore: Helicon, 1960), 29.
32
Franz Xaver Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1878).
33
Ibid., 29.
34
Cf. Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, 16; Antolí, ‘El principio fundamental de la moral,’ 84.
35
Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, 187–88.
36
On Linsenmann’s view of discipleship, see Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, 29–30, 188–90, 405–6.
37
See Peinador’s commentary on the constructive method of these authors, which sought to avoid presenting a moral theology ‘in tablet form or of ready-made formulas.’ Cf. Antonio Peinador, ‘Boletín de teología moral,’ Salmanticensis 6 (1958): 499–531, 501.
38
For example, cf. D. Prümmer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis, 6th ed., vol. 1 (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1931), prologue; tract. 1 (De fine ultimo hominis); A.B. Tanquerey, Synopsis Theologiae moralis et pastoralis, vol. 2, 8th ed. (Paris: Desclée, 1927), 34–35: ‘Praeterea non versabatur solummodo circa ea quae stricte prohibentur, sed etiam circa virtutes quae ad vitam vere christianam desiderantur’.
39
Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 299.
40
Peinador, ‘Boletín de teología moral,’ 501.
41
Ibid. While acknowledging some pastoral and pedagogical advantages of the separation of theological fields, Murphy points out the disadvantages of the manualist separation as ‘rigid legalism, stereotyped casuistry and an almost Pelagian rationalism’. See Francis X. Murphy, ‘The Background to a History of Patristic Moral Thought,’ Studia Moralia 1(1963): 49–85, at 51.
42
Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus (1893), 3, 14; Joseph Mausbach, Die katholische Moral, ihre Methoden, Grundsätze und Aufgabe (Cologne: J.P. Bachem, 1901), 22–23; idem, Katholische Moraltheologie, vol. 1 (Münster in Westfalen: Aschendorff, 1919), 6; idem, Die katholische Moral und ihre Gegner, (Cologne: J.P. Bachem, 1913); idem, Catholic Moral Teaching and its Antagonists, trans. from 6th German ed. by A.M. Buchanan (New York: Joseph F. Wagner, 1914), 219.
43
Cf. Mausbach, Catholic Moral Teaching and its Antagonists, 271: ‘Love is the very essence of Christian perfection, and this love is not a Counsel, but the first and greatest Commandment’; Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 32; Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 301.
44
Mausbach, Catholic Moral Teaching and its Antagonists, 76, 69.
45
Ibid, 271.
46
Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 125–26. Grill comments that it comes as no surprise, therefore, that the reform proposals of Mausbach appear in Tillmann’s own aims in his introduction to his Handbuch der katholischen Sittenlehere.
47
Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology, 60.
48
Odon Lottin, Principes de morale, 2 vols (Louvain: Mont César, 1947); idem, Morale fondamentale (Tournai: Desclée, 1954); Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology, 37–38.
49
Lottin, Morale fondamentale, 15.
50
Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology, 61.
51
Peinador, ‘Boletín de teología moral,’ 504.
52
Ibid. Leonard Buijs also considers that there is a difference between preaching and the science of theology in both their form of argumentation and their purpose. Cf. Leonardus Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali et Sermone Montano,’ Studia Moralia 2 (1964): 11–41, at 15 and 27. As the introduction to the article points out, this article was first published in Dutch in 1944 and republished in Latin 20 years later.
53
Peinador, ‘Boletín de teología moral,’ 504.
54
Ibid.
55
Fritz Tillmann, ‘Aus der moraltheologischen Literatur,’ Bonner Zeitschrift für Theologie und Seelsorge 8 (1928): 355–63, at 356, quoted in Grill, Wegbereiter einer erneuerten Moraltheologie, 127.
56
Hirscher, Die christliche Moral, vol. 1, iv.
57
Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, 189. These are very similar to Tillmann’s own terms.
58
Peinador, ‘Boletín de teología moral,’ 504–5.
59
Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 32–33. Häring also identifies Tillmann’s approach as presenting the ‘ethos of Christian love, [and] the ethos of the Sermon on the Mount,’ but clearly does not understand ‘ethos’ in a negative sense, nor as preventing Tillmann from also using this basis to present as a ‘system’ of moral theology. See Häring, The Law of Christ, I, 31.
60
Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 30, 38, 41. Tillmann presents the opposite argument, saying that casuistry cannot calculate the diversity of real concrete situations of life. See Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 13.
61
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 52 (emphasis my own).
62
Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 25. It is not my intention to present the content of the particular issues of Tillmann’s special moral theology, but to focus on the foundation of his model. For an outline of the subjects covered by Tillmann as presented in The Master Calls, see Keenan, A History of Catholic Moral Theology, 63–69.
63
Gustavo Irrazabal, ‘Cristocentrismo moral y hermenéutica,’ Revista de Teología 42 (2005): 43–90, at 49. Both parts of Tillmann’s fourth volume on the realization of discipleship (Die Verwirklichung der Nachfolge Christi) contain a subtitle beginning with Die Pflichten—the duties towards God, one’s neighbour and oneself.
64
Édouard Hamel, ‘L’usage de l’Écriture Sainte en théologie morale,’ Gregorianum, 47 (1966): 53–85, at 63.
65
Cf. ibid.; Johannes Stelzenberger, ‘Biblisch oder romantisch ausgerichtete Moraltheologie?,’ Theologische Quartalschrift 140 (1960): 291–303, at 295.
66
Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 27.
67
Ibid., 24.
68
Ibid., 30, 38–39. Mausbach also raised the question of starting point, but in terms of success rather than theology. See Mausbach, Catholic Moral Teaching and its Antagonists, 84: ‘It is quite true that the essence of morality and perfection is to be found, not in minute regulations for conduct, but in inward purity and energetic enthusiasm for God and virtue. But it is doubtful in the first place whether the most effectual means of diffusing this sense of morality is to begin by describing and recommending virtue. Of greater efficacy are practical training in right conduct, affecting every action, the silent influence of example and environment, and the impression produced by heroic deeds and dogmatic representations.’
69
Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 28.
70
Ibid.: ‘Sequela Christi non est syntheseos principium sed effigies et forma concreta, que omnia complectitur et absolvit.’
71
In his critique, Buijs appears to be influenced by the stages of moral development presented by St Thomas Aquinas, but he stops at the first stage. Aquinas’s model is divided into three stages: beginners, progressives and the perfect. Beginners in the order of charity (incipientes) are schooled by the law of the Decalogue in avoiding sins and in fighting against inclinations opposed to charity. Progressives (proficientes) at the second level aim to strengthen their active charity through developing the virtues and thus a limited moral theory of avoiding evil is expanded to progress in seeking the good. St Thomas calls those who have become moral and spiritual adults ‘the perfect’ (perfecti), who are such because of the perfection of their love of God and of their attainment of union with and enjoyment of God in contemplation. Cf. ST II-II, 24.9; I-II, 106.1; Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 362–65, 368; Chalmers, Conscience in Context, 24–25.
72
Agapito de Sobradillo, ‘La Moral Cristiana,’ Salmanticensis, 1967 (14), 553–79, at 577.
73
See Chalmers, Conscience in Context, 233–55; St Basil the Great, Regula fusius tractatae, interrogatio II, 1, resp., PG 31, 907: ‘The love of God is not based on some discipline imposed on us from outside, but as a capacity and indeed as a necessity it is a constitutive element of our rational being,’ quoted in Joseph Ratzinger, ‘Conscience and Truth,’ in On Conscience (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2007), 31. Cf. Tillmann, The Master Calls, 23: ‘Thus, the concept of “child of God” possesses a twofold meaning. It signifies the new supernatural mode of the Christian’s existence and, on the other hand, the religious and moral obligation that is imposed upon him—not externally, but necessarily and logically. Both meanings are based on the salvific work of God and of Christ.’ Tillmann criticizes the natural immanent ethic based upon the natural law rather than on a spiritual foundation. Cf. idem, De Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 21; Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 18–21. One might find similarities here with Bonhoeffer’s comments on discipleship. See Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, vol. 4: Discipleship (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001), 143–44: ‘How are disciples different from nonbelievers? What does “being Christian” consist of? At this point the word appears toward which the whole fifth chapter [of Matthew’s Gospel] is pointed, in which everything already said is summarized: what is Christian is what is “peculiar,” περισσόν, the extraordinary, irregular, not self-evident. . . . What is distinctly Christian begins with the περισσόν, and that is what finally places what is natural in the proper light. . . . What is Christian depends on the “extraordinary.” That is why Christians cannot conform to the world, because their concern is the περισσόν.’ (Originally published as Nachfolge in 1937.)
74
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 53–68.
75
Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 11, 84–110; idem, The Master Calls, 15–23, at 15: ‘Baptism alone supplies the essential foundation for the establishment of the Christian manner of life—that is, the following of Christ—by which the individual must seek progressively to become a genuine and true child of the heavenly Father.’
76
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 54–59. De Sobradillo, ‘La Moral Cristiana,’ 556. In the light of Tillmann, De Sobradillo sums up the two views: ‘There are those who reduce Christian morals solely to avoiding sin and keeping oneself in grace. . . . The Christian cannot content himself with preserving grace and avoiding sin, rather, he must continually advance in virtue and walk always forward.’ See ibid., 579. Cf. Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 67–73, at 69–70.
77
Translating the verb ginomai to mean becoming rather than the static verb eimi to be.
78
As can be seen in the text, it is clear that Tillmann also uses the idea of Christ as moral model and exemplar, as found in the ethics of Max Scheler. However, Tillmann’s overall concept runs far deeper, and so it would be wrong to claim that Tillmann stops at a superficial level of moral imitation rather than exploring the question of ontological and moral transformation. Cf. Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 49–50; Max Scheler, Der Formalismus in der Ethik und die materiale Wertethik (Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1916), 598, 604; published in English as Formalism in Ethics and Non-Formal Ethics of Values (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University, 1973), 572–95; idem, Zur Ethik und Erkenntnisslehre (Berlin: Neue Geist, 1933), published in Spanish as El santo, el genio y el héroe (Buenos Aires: Nova, 1961); Sergio Sánchez-Migallón, ‘El seguimiento y los valores en la ética de Max Scheler,’ Scripta Theologica 39 (2007): 405–23. Irrazabal claims that Häring criticizes Tillmann’s model as superficial, but I can find no evidence of this. In fact, Bonandi considers Häring’s supernatural approach to morals to be ‘in full continuity with Tillmann.’ Cf. Irrazabal, ‘Cristocentrismo moral y hermenéutica,’ 49; Alberto Bonandi, ‘Modelli di teologia morale nel ventesimo secolo,’ Teologia 24 (1999): 206–43, at 212.
79
See Yves Congar, Sobre el Espíritu Santo: Espíritu del Hombre, Espíritu de Dios, 2nd Spanish ed. (Salamanca: Sígueme, 2012), 87: ‘There is no real contradiction between an authentic interior life and the active realisation of that which we are called to do.’ Buijs holds the opposite view. Cf. ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 28: ‘perfection transcends strict obligation’.
80
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 45.
81
Ibid., 30–32. De Sobradillo, ‘La Moral Cristiana,’ 571, 577; Pinckaers, Sources 365; St Bernard of Clairvaux, In Purificatione Beatae Mariae Virginis, II, PL 183, 962: ‘In via vitae non progredi regredi est’ (Not to go forward on the way of life is to go back); St Teresa of Avila, The Collected Works of Saint Teresa of Avila, II: The Way of Perfection (Washington, DC: ICS, 1980), 16,2; 39,2; 41,9: ‘Here you see how, with these two virtues—love and fear of God—you can advance on this road calmly and quietly, but not carelessly since fear must always take the lead.’
82
Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 90–95; idem, The Master Calls, 17–19.
83
Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 94; idem, The Master Calls, 30, 40–44, at 44: ‘Every baptized person, then, must carry out this internal transformation in himself; thus he will become a man who thinks of the things that are above. . . . This can only come about, today as in times past, by an all-embracing and lasting metamorphosis that reaches the very depths of the spirit and the will.’
84
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 41: ‘The man who decides to walk in the footsteps of Jesus must know that his decision has to be absolute and irrevocable.’ Cf. De Sobradillo, ‘La Moral Cristiana,’ 568, 562: ‘Christian morals consists precisely in living this supernatural life in the most intense way possible, to the point that one is transformed into the image of Christ.’
85
St John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, 6–8; Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 69: ‘Denn Gott ist ein strenger Forderer’ (For God is a strict demander).
86
Tillmann, Die Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 69–70.
87
Buijs, ‘De Theologia Morali,’ 20. Cf. Mausbach, Die katholische Moral, 156 [referring to ‘Catholic morality]: ‘Its unalterable basis is the morality of the Gospel; its handing on is placed under the care of that Spirit, which is at the same time the Spirit of truth and the Spirit of holiness.’
88
Hamel, ‘L’usage de l’Écriture Sainte en théologie morale,’ 63.
89
Buijs, “De Theologia Morali”, 20, 22, 24–25, at 20: ‘Theologia moralis debet esse evangelica, sed habitus ille evangelicus in puritanismum evangelicum ne abeat.’
90
Hamel, ‘L’usage de l’Écriture Sainte en théologie morale,’ 63, 71.
91
This is acknowledged by Häring. See The Law of Christ, I, 32–33.
92
Hamel, ‘L’usage de l’Écriture Sainte en théologie morale,’ 75.
93
Enda McDonagh, Gift and Call: Towards a Christian Theology of Morality (Dublin: Gill and MacMillan, 1975), 11.
94
Aquinas, ST I-II, 94.2; Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 405–8; Chalmers, Conscience in Context, 95–96, 135–37, 143, 184–90.
95
Livio Melina, ‘Moral Theology and the Ecclesial Sense: Points for a Theological “Re-dimensioning” of Morality,’ Communio 19 (1992): 67–93; Chalmers, Conscience in Context, 387–91.
96
Pinckaers, Sources of Christian Ethics, 354–78; idem, La vie selon l’Esprit: Essai de théologie spirituelle selon saint Paul et saint Thomas d’Aquin (Luxembourg: Saint-Paul, 1996), 149.
97
McDonagh observes that the ‘threat-fear’ of punishment in relation to offending God should always be understood as part of the basis for our moral response, but that the ‘gift-call’ of God’s love is always to be seen in conjunction with it, and indeed is always greater. This is an important consideration, as at times the current emphasis of God’s love and mercy in reaction to an exaggerated focus on God’s wrath in the past has perhaps diminished a sense of reverent fear of offending God in one’s actions. Similarly, Tillmann’s description of the mercy of God is combined with a commentary of God’s punishment of the unmerciful, namely, those who are hardened in their cruelty, such that ‘they had lost all claim to divine clemency.’ Cf. McDonagh, Gift and Call, 76–80; Tillmann, The Master Calls, 261–62.
98
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 3 (emphasis my own); idem, Der Meister Ruft, 6. Cf. Scheler, Formalism in Ethics, 577–78: ‘In striving and willing we “follow” the [model] person whom we love.’ Attracted by the apprehension of ‘a moral content’ presented by the model person, according to Scheler, the individual undergoes a ‘transformation of . . . moral tenor.’ See ibid., 580. As mentioned earlier, Scheler’s notion of transformation does not seem to reach the depth of the ontological transformation of mystical union.
99
Cf. Edward Collins Vacek, ‘Discernment within a Mutual Love Relationship with God: A New Theological Foundation,’ Theological Studies 2013 (74), 683–710, at 702; Aquinas, ST I-II, 55.4; ST I-II, 63.2.
100
One should note that Linsenmann had already described discipleship in terms of not only a moral union, but a mystical “union of being” with Christ. See Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, 190.
101
On the development of a morality based on this relationship of mutual love, see Edward Collins Vacek, ‘Divine-Command, Natural-Law, and Mutual-Love Ethics,’ Theological Studies 57 (1996), 633–53.
102
Vacek, ‘Mutual Love Relationship with God,’ 710.
103
Tillmann, The Master Calls, 22.
104
For example, see St Teresa of Ávila, The Collected Works of Saint Teresa of Ávila: I, The Book of her Life, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC: ICS, 1987), 28,13: ‘For I saw clearly that by these experiences I was at once changed.’ Tillmann highlights, therefore, that the relationship with Christ does not remain at the level of a ‘purely spiritual union, a oneness produced by love,’ nor at the level of a merely ‘symbolic union,’ but is rather a ‘vital union’ which sustains fruitful discipleship. See Tillmann, The Master Calls, 21–22.
105
D. Vincent Twomey, Moral Theology after Humanae Vitae: Fundamental Issues in Moral Theology and Sexual Ethics (Dublin: Four Courts, 2010), 71–79.
106
Ángel Cordovilla, “Como el Padre me envió, así os envío yo”: Teología y espiritualidad de ministerio apostólico presbiteral (Salamanca: Sígueme, 2019), 31; Karl Rahner, ‘Christian Living Formerly and Today,’ in Theological Investigations, vol. 7 (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1971), 12–13.
107
Rahner, ‘Christian Living Formerly and Today,’ 15. Cf. Ángel Cordovilla, ‘La mística en la teología del siglo XX: Karl Rahner y Hans Urs von Balthasar,’ Estudios Eclesiásticos 93 (2018), 1–25; idem,“Como el Padre me envió, así os envío yo”, 30–31; Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 264.
108
Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, 266.
109
De Sobradillo, ‘La Moral Cristiana,’ 570; Tillmann, Der Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 67–73.
110
St Bernard of Clairvaux, In Vigilia Nativitatis Domini, II, 8, PL 183, 760: ‘Curramus desideriis et profectu virtutum’ [Let us run ahead by our desires and by progress in virtue].
111
Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, 267. Similarly, Edward Vacek comments, ‘Since [through our frailty] we cannot love all that God loves, we unite with at least some of God’s loves. We do so focally by uniting with the mind and heart of Jesus, which is the basis of imitatio Christi.’ See Vacek, ‘Mutual Love Relationship with God,’ 698.
112
Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, 266.
113
Tillmann, Der Idee der Nachfolge Christi, 73–83.
114
Cf. Marciano Vidal, La morale di sant’Alfonso: Dal rigorismo alla benignità (Rome: EDACALF, 1992), 137.
115
St Teresa of Ávila, The Way of Perfection, 26,10.