Following are excerpts from Oblate Fr. Tissa Balasuriya's book Mary and Human Liberation, published in 1990 by his Centre for Society and Religion in Sri Lanka. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has declared Balasuriya "no longer a Catholic theologian" and excommunicated latae sententiae -- that is, automatically -- under a canon that relates to heresy. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who heads the congregation, said during a news conference in late January that a primary problem with Balasuriya's work was his view of original sin, set forth in this book.

Balasuriya writes in an Asian context. Christians are a small minority in Sri Lanka -- just 8 percent of the population. Buddhists predominate with 69 percent; Hindus are 15 percent; and Muslims about 8 percent.

The excerpts are reprinted here with Fr. Balasuriya's permission.

By TISSA BALASURIYA

All the teachings of a religion do not merit the same type of faith. Some of them are directly from the founder; others are elaborations by successive generations who are members of the religious community. ... [It is important to determine] what is incumbent on all in Christian theology as the message of Jesus and what is its particular clothing in Jewish and European world views, philosophy, culture and popular religiosity. ... We must distinguish between the faith due in Christianity to what Jesus teaches and to what the churches have subsequently developed as interpretations of his teachings.

In considering the development of theology, we have therefore to keep in mind that during almost all its history of over 1,500 years the authority for the evolution of theology has been controlled by clerics who are males, and in the Catholic Church, celibates. Further, until this generation they have been Europeans or the descendants of Europeans in other countries such as the United States and Latin America. Hence there is a strong likelihood of Catholic theology being evolved for the furtherance of the interests of the male Euro-American clergy. ... In Mariology we should keep in mind the suspicion that it is possible, likely and even probable, that the male clergy would foster a theology that would be in keeping with their interests and power in the religious community. ...

Myths or narratives concerning symbols which are to be pointers to the ultimate realities may themselves be taken as literal truths. Their interpretation may be such as to serve the power holders in the community. ... It is therefore very important that an endeavor be made to distinguish myth or narrative and historical fact; presuppositions from revealed doctrine. Thus much of the limitations in the theologizing of the previous centuries was due to their accepting the Genesis story of the creation and fall of humanity rather literally as historical data revealed by God. ... When the interpretation of a myth is done by the power holders in a community it is likely that they will do so in such a manner as to safeguard their interests. ... In Christian theology we have the situation in which the original mythical presentation of the beginnings of the universe and of human life have been the subject of interpretation in later centuries by the ecclesiastical authorities. These in turn have claimed divine authority to do so on the basis of divine inspiration and the power given to them by Jesus Christ. ...

Thus there are different explanations concerning the origin of Eve from Adam, but generally in favor of the priority of the male. Varying interpretations are given concerning the condition of Adam and Eve before the alleged "Fall." This is spoken of in general Catholic theology as the state of original justice. This is something about which we cannot know anything by reason or experience. The Genesis narrative itself does not describe it except briefly and idyllically. It is later writers who refer to the action of the first parents as a grave sin against God's commands. The concept of original sin as we have in Catholic theology is evolved over the centuries of Christian experience ... [and is] very much a matter of theological imagination. ...

Yet these concepts led to conclusions about the nature and necessity of the grace of Christ and of the church for the salvation of every human being. From thence it was easy to conclude, as the churches did, that the other religions were not salvific. Thus very vital theological questions were responded to on the basis of conclusions derived from the interpretation over time of a mythical story. ...

The graces and privileges of Mary are deduced from the presuppositions assumed on the basis of the creation myth and its later reinterpretation especially by Paul. These in turn led to the proclamation of Jesus as Son of God and Mary as Mother of God. The immaculate conception of Mary depends on the concept of the state of original justice and original sin in Catholic theology. ...

The teaching on the holiness of Mary, unparalleled by any other human except Jesus, is concluded from these doctrines. This holiness is interpreted in such a way as to fit into the power system in the church. J.F. Murphy in the article on the "Holiness of Mary" in the New Catholic Encyclopedia writes, "Traditionally, therefore, the church has always attributed to Mary any grace that has been granted to a lesser saint. ... Certain graces, of course, could not be directly bestowed on Mary. The priesthood, for an instance, was not appropriate for our Lady AS A WOMAN, but the divine maternity brought her the local, not simply the sacramental, presence of Christ's body."

Such theological elaborations show how the theologian's imagination can be guided and tainted by the prevailing positive law of the church. ... The church discipline is binding on Mary. She could procreate the physical Jesus in her womb, but her gender is against her making Jesus sacramentally present on the altar. This shows how far ideology and prejudice can condition theological elaborations. ...

Developments in theology concerning the virginity of Mary and the role of Joseph in the holy family are another area in which the imagination of preachers and writers ... has had much leeway. ... Due to a desire to affirm a certain perspective of holiness there has been a trend to attribute perfect and perpetual virginity to Mary even when the scriptural evidence itself is of doubtful import. ...

A doctrine evolved in one context in which it is harmless may have bad effects in another situation. Thus Christian theology that has been elaborated in a situation of relative isolation as of Europe during the middle ages may have to be rethought when the church has to live in a plural context of different religions and social systems. ...

Thus if any teaching or practice of [any religion] looks down on other religions, considers itself as so possessing the truth as to be intolerant of others, or marginalizes a section of humanity such as the poor or women ... it cannot be from God. ...

In Asia we have to question the bases of a theology that has been hurting our peoples for centuries and which are still an obstacle for Christians to be fully open to interreligious dialogue. ... In this it is our suggestion that the critical rethinking has to be concerning the basic construct or framework of Christian theology. This is based on the responses given to the issues raised by us elsewhere concerning the origin of humanity, our proneness to sin, and the nature of salvation, the role of religions and religious foundations in salvation, the identity of Jesus Christ, Gautama the Buddha, the Prophet Mohammed and the seers of other religions. ...

A more immediately relevant question is the recognition of the limits of religion in relation to the eternal salvation of humans. ... Insofar as God's grace is necessary for salvation, the teaching of the church is that God's grace is available to every person irrespective of one's religion or even without adherence to a religion. Insofar as salvation is through the redeeming action of Jesus Christ, he has not denied it to any person of good will. God's grace and the merits of Jesus Christ cannot be controlled or channeled exclusively by any religion or religious authority. ... In this sense the question of salvation of human beings after this life ... is a non-issue. The debate whether religions are salvific in the next life is a question concerning which we cannot have evidence. Different religions can have faith beliefs concerning the criteria on which salvation takes place. ... But the earthly religions as institutions and organizations do not operate beyond this life.

What is relevant and important is the role of religions concerning the realization of human fulfillment, salvation and liberation in this life for individuals and communities on this mother earth.

The traditional doctrine of original sin as generally prevalent in Christian theology has several drawbacks. [It is] not directly from the Bible, is not taught by Jesus or by St. Paul, as such. [The doctrine] lacks internal coherency and is not compatible with the goodness of God. [Among] its consequences, it discriminates against females, discriminates against persons of other religions or of no religion, it led to a wrong accent in the understanding of the mission of the disciples of Jesus and the church. ...

The Jewish people did not understand the story of Genesis to imply a human fall and inadequacy due to which they could not reach their eternal destiny without a divine redeemer. ... Jesus who taught clearly and categorically concerning what constituted holiness and goodness does not speak of original sin. He does not speak of his mission and ministry as one of redemption, i.e., of having to buy back humanity. ... The teaching of Jesus concerning human salvation is that we must love God and love neighbor as ourselves. ... The teaching of Jesus is one that all human persons can practice, e.g., the Sermon on the Mount. He does not say that God's grace is denied to anyone, or is based on the sacraments of the church. ...

The principal scriptural arguments for original sin are drawn from the letters of St. Paul, especially Romans 5:6-21. ... These texts themselves do not contain the theological conclusions that were drawn in subsequent centuries both by Catholic and Protestant theologians and church leaders. ... St. Paul has a doctrine that explains how all persons, Jews and Gentiles, can be justified according to their fidelity to their conscience. This is quite different from the future elaborations of Christian thinkers about original sin and the necessity of baptism for remission. ...

There was no universal agreement on the issues concerning the existence, nature and consequences of original sin prior to the time of St. Augustine. ... In the fourth century St. Augustine (354-430) propounded the teaching on original sin as communicated by the first parents through generation. ...

We can see in the evolution of this doctrine how much the presuppositions and assumptions of a group influence the development of dogma, leaving room for imagination combined with authoritarian justifications. ...

The doctrine [on original sin] is based on unproved and unprovable assumptions. ... [Further] this doctrine of original sin was interpreted in a manner that was anti-sexual. Human sexual relationships were said to bring into being a person who was a sinner, an enemy of God. ... In the mentality of Augustine, Ambrose and Jerome, the woman had a special responsibility for this situation. ... They praised celibacy and virginity as a higher and holier state than marriage, as did also the Council of Trent in Canon 10 of its 24th session. ... The doctrine tended to make Catholic moral theology hyper-conscious about sins of sexuality and correspondingly neglect the other sins such as those of injustice and abuse of power. ...

The doctrine of original sin as developed in Christian theology taught that humanity was in such a state of original and unavoidable sinfulness that only Jesus and his merits could save human beings. ... The dogma concerning redemption was developed from the presuppositions concerning original sin. ...

This claim of the church to be the vehicle of eternal salvation has a twofold impact which are questionable. First it claims for a religious establishment the power to mediate salvation beyond this life. ...

To us this is a form of religionism in which one or several religions claim to be able to mediate eternal salvation even after death. This is an area which religion as an organized community cannot reach, and salvation at that stage is a mystery of a person's relationship to the Absolute Transcendent -- God.

A second aspect of discrimination in this doctrine is concerning persons of other faiths. ... [The] weight of this Christian tradition has been to explain original sin in such a way that the remedy for it was said to be in and through the church thanks to the merits of Christ. This did not cause much difficulty in Euro-American society where all were presumed to have the opportunity of baptism and therefore of undoing the damage of original sin.

The traditional perspective of original sin is linked to a concept of God that is not acceptable to the other religions in our Asian countries. In our countries this idea of humanity being born alienated from the Creator would seem an abominable concept of the divine. To believe that whole generations of entire continents lived and died with a lesser chance of salvation is repugnant to the notion of a just and loving God.

Jesus preached the reign of God and conversion to righteousness. The conversion he wanted was a personal internal change of heart and a consequent transformation in human relationships and the structures of society. ... [But] Christianity became church-centered and not Jesus-God, or human centered.

The church therefore claimed the right and felt the obligation to bring all peoples to her faith community. ... Thus original sin, the doctrine concerning salvation (soteriology) and missiology were linked together conceptually. It is this view that made the church historically intolerant of other religions, and even of non-European cultures.

Considering the overall baneful effects of this doctrine of original sin as it was evolved, including its missiological implications, we may go further and ask whether this doctrine itself is not the original sin of traditional Christian theology. ...

This accusation that all of humanity other than Jesus and Mary are under the hegemony of Satan at conception is based on the hypothesis of original sin, and this is what we find unproved and unprovable. We appreciate the holiness of Mary, but it is not necessary to so deprecate the rest of humanity for this. When the English hymn sings of "Mary's unspotted womb," there is an unfair implication that all other wombs are spotted or stained. Our criticism has therefore to be concerning the ground of doctrine of original sin which accuses the rest of humanity of such sinfulness. ...

Mary has to be liberated to be truly human. This is necessary even for us to understand her life, her struggles and her agonies. Otherwise we have a sort of dehydrated Mary, one who cannot feel the attraction of what is less good. ... She is said to be the perfect mother because she does not even feel the attraction to sexuality. ... Is it better for Mary to be immaculate or to be normally human? ... Is it necessarily better to be a virgin mother than an ordinary mother? ... It will be seen that in this way the very biological constitution and functioning of women were made to seem less good and less holy and hence unbecoming of a relationship to the divine.

The Orthodox churches ... take objection to the definition of the Immaculate Conception ... [and] place the Assumption at the level of a theological opinion. ... The Orthodox insist on the mystery of the divine maternity and do not stress, unlike the Latins, on detailed analyses and definition. ...

Along with a rethinking of Christology that sees Jesus as a full, conscious human being ... we have to rethink Mariology. Mary's full humanity has to be recognized and, as it were, restored to her in theology and spirituality. ...

If the doctrine of original sin and its consequences are questioned, then the concept of redemption is also questioned. If we do not understand human nature as essentially fallen and incapable of doing good on its own ... (i.e., God's grace is available to all insofar as it is necessary) then there is no need of an ontological redemption by Jesus Christ. ... The traditional understanding of redemption in which Jesus Christ is considered the unique, universal and necessary redeemer in an ontological sense that transforms human nature is one which is not presentable in our multi-religious context. ... [We] have a situation in which dialogue with other religions becomes difficult if not impossible at the level of doctrine.

We should not dilute doctrine for the sake of dialogue; but ... this doctrine itself is the result of a previous adjustment to another context and is not necessarily from Jesus Christ or God or even directly and clearly from the Bible. In fact, our having to dialogue with persons of other religions and other world views can be an occasion for reassessing our own traditional theological assumptions and their conclusions. ...

(The) Mary of the New Testament does not have much in common with the Mary of the theological elaborations. ... It is from such types of elaborations that Mary has to be liberated. ... The most important realities concerning Mary are not so much that she is immaculate, a virgin, and in what form she is the mother of God, but that she was intimately associated with Jesus of Nazareth, flesh of her flesh, in the beginning of this new community that was to carry the message of human liberation and fulfillment in loving one another, sharing what we have, and in building a new humanity. In this Mary is an example to all humankind.

National Catholic Reporter, February 21, 1997

• Top of page