Pope Francis has announced his Holy Week schedule which begins begins on Palm Sunday, March 25th, with the celebration of the thirty-third World Youth Day, celebrated at the diocesan level.
This year’s World Youth Day has the theme, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God.” Those are the words of the Archangel Gabriel to the Blessed Virgin at the Annunciation, as related in the Gospel of St Luke.
For the diocese of Rome, the celebration will take place in St Peter’s Square, with Pope Francis presiding at the Blessing of Palms and the Procession for Palm Sunday, followed by the Mass of the Passion of the Lord.
On Holy Thursday, the Chrism Mass will be celebrated in St Peter’s Basilica.
During the Chrism Mass, the local Bishop consecrates and blesses the Sacred Oils – Chrism, used for Confirmation, and also in the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Orders; the Oil of Catechumens, also used in Baptism; and the Oil of the Sick, for the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick. In Rome, the blessed oils are taken to the Cathedral Church, the Archbasilica of St John Lateran, where they are dispensed to the parishes throughout the diocese.
On Thursday evening, Pope Francis will celebrate the Mass of the Lord’s Supper, commemorating the institution of the Most Holy Eucharist and of the Priesthood. Following a custom established at the very beginning of his pontificate, the Pope will say the Mass in a prison, this year at the Regina Coeli. During the liturgy, Pope Francis will wash the feet of twelve inmates, in imitation of the actions of Jesus Himself at the Last Supper.
The following day, Good Friday, Pope Francis will preside at the solemn liturgical Celebration of the Lord’s Passion. The service on Good Friday is not a Mass, as the Holy Eucharist is not celebrated. The ritual consists in the Liturgy of the Word; the Adoration of the Cross; and the Rite of Communion, where Hosts consecrated on Holy Thursday are distributed to priests and faithful.
Following the Liturgy, Pope Francis will travel across town to the Colosseum, where he will officiate at the Via Crucis, the Way of the Cross. The Holy Father will offer a reflection at the conclusion of the service, followed by his Apostolic Blessing.
The rites of Holy Week reach their climax during the Easter Vigil of Holy Saturday, the “Mother of all Vigils.” The ceremony begins with the lighting of the new fire, which will take place in the atrium of St Peter’s Basilica. Then, with the Paschal Candle, the ministers will process to the sanctuary, where Pope Francis will preside at the Solemn Mass.
Finally, on the morning of Easter Sunday, Pope Francis will celebrate the Solemn Mass of the Resurrection of the Lord in Saint Peter’s Square. Following the Mass, the Holy Father will give his Blessing Urbi et Orbi – to the City and to the world.”
These are the holiest days of the Church’s Liturgical Year.
Let us celebrate their meaning with faith and be both peaceful and joyful in the salvation which the Lord Jesus has provided by His Passion, Death and Resurrection.
Respecting the solemnity of these days, I shall not be posting a daily article again until after the celebration of Easter Sunday!
A Blessed Holy Week for all of us, I pray!
Sunday, March 25, 2018
PRE-SYNDOAL DOCUMENT ON YOUTH TO BE PRESENTED TO POPE FRANCIS ON PALM SUNDAY
On Palm Sunday, a young man from Panama (the nation which will host the Synod of Bishops on the theme “Young People, the Faith and Vocational Discernment” in October of this year), will deliver the document which has resulted from the work of participants in a week-long Pre-synodal meeting which just took place in the Vatican and was convened in the presence of Pope Francis himself.
Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops, explained that the document is one of the sources that will contribute to the preparation of the Instrumentum Laboris for the Synod itself.
His Eminence also stated that other contributions will be provided by the Episcopal Conferences, by the Synods of the Eastern Catholic Churches and by synthesis documents resulting from listening sessions conducted in dioceses across the world.
He added that the results of the online questionnaire proposed to young people and the interventions of the international seminar on young people organized by the General Secretariat of the Synod in September 2017 will be added to all that material, as well as observations spontaneously sent in by individuals and groups from all over the planet.
The document drawn up this week is divided into three parts, preceded by an introduction: the first part deals with the challenges and opportunities of young people in today's world; the second on faith and vocation, on discernment and on the accompaniment of young people; the third on the Church's formative and pastoral activities.
The Holy Father has certainly shown enthusiasm and has offered his personal encouragement to young people in his desire to accompany and support them in their journey of faith throughout the course of their lives.
May the Holy Spirit inspire the work of the Synodal Fathers and all the participants in a gathering which we pray will be a timeless blessing for our young people and the Church.
Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops, explained that the document is one of the sources that will contribute to the preparation of the Instrumentum Laboris for the Synod itself.
His Eminence also stated that other contributions will be provided by the Episcopal Conferences, by the Synods of the Eastern Catholic Churches and by synthesis documents resulting from listening sessions conducted in dioceses across the world.
He added that the results of the online questionnaire proposed to young people and the interventions of the international seminar on young people organized by the General Secretariat of the Synod in September 2017 will be added to all that material, as well as observations spontaneously sent in by individuals and groups from all over the planet.
The document drawn up this week is divided into three parts, preceded by an introduction: the first part deals with the challenges and opportunities of young people in today's world; the second on faith and vocation, on discernment and on the accompaniment of young people; the third on the Church's formative and pastoral activities.
The Holy Father has certainly shown enthusiasm and has offered his personal encouragement to young people in his desire to accompany and support them in their journey of faith throughout the course of their lives.
May the Holy Spirit inspire the work of the Synodal Fathers and all the participants in a gathering which we pray will be a timeless blessing for our young people and the Church.
Saturday, March 24, 2018
THE ONGOING STRUGGLE AGAINST THE CULTURE OF DEATH IN AMERICA
On Tuesday the Chairman of the US Bishops’ Pro-Life Committee, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, issued a statement as the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the NIFLA v. Becerra case.
In the Statement the US Bishops praise the work of pro-life pregnancy centers and defend their First Amendment right to free speech. Here is the full text of the US Bishops’ statement.
"Pro-life pregnancy care centers embody everything that is right and good in our nation: generosity, compassion and love that is offered to support both mother and child. But rather than applauding and encouraging the selfless and life-affirming work of these centers, some governments want to force them to provide free advertising for the violent act of abortion in direct violation of their pro-life convictions and the First Amendment. The United States Supreme Court cannot let this happen. We pray that the Court will do the right thing and uphold our fundamental right to free speech when it decides this case."
In 2015, the State of California passed a law mandating that all pregnancy centers post information in their facilities that “California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services, prenatal care and abortion for eligible women.”
Lawsuits were filed immediately against the State of California arguing that the issue is not abortion, but free speech.
The primary argument is that it is unjust for the government to force anyone to provide a message that they do not agree with. In addition, the law targets pregnancy centers that do not offer abortions.
Under this law, they are forced to advertise services they do not provide; whereas the law does not require pregnancy centers that provide abortions to do the same—that is, to make information available to their clients regarding alternatives to abortion provided by other centers.
Proponents of the law, instead, say that the State has the right to regulate “professional free speech”, and that women seeking pregnancy counseling have the right to be told about every option so that an informed decision can be made.
After losing its case in the lower courts, the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates presented the case to the US Supreme Court.
In November, 2017, the Court agreed to hear the case from the perspective of the free speech argument. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday and a ruling is expected around June.
And so the battle against the culture of death that has become so pervasive in our nation continues.
It is remarkable to me how far activist courts have gone in establishing abortion as a right guaranteed in the provisions of the US Constitution.
Americans have no one to blame but themselves for electing representatives to both the Executive and Legislative branches of state and federal government who promote the appointment of judges who take it upon themselves to render verdicts which are so far afield from the clear intent of our country's Founders.
The voice of the US Bishops is but a whisper in the silence that is deafening among the American electorate.
Pitiable but true!
In the Statement the US Bishops praise the work of pro-life pregnancy centers and defend their First Amendment right to free speech. Here is the full text of the US Bishops’ statement.
"Pro-life pregnancy care centers embody everything that is right and good in our nation: generosity, compassion and love that is offered to support both mother and child. But rather than applauding and encouraging the selfless and life-affirming work of these centers, some governments want to force them to provide free advertising for the violent act of abortion in direct violation of their pro-life convictions and the First Amendment. The United States Supreme Court cannot let this happen. We pray that the Court will do the right thing and uphold our fundamental right to free speech when it decides this case."
In 2015, the State of California passed a law mandating that all pregnancy centers post information in their facilities that “California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services, prenatal care and abortion for eligible women.”
Lawsuits were filed immediately against the State of California arguing that the issue is not abortion, but free speech.
The primary argument is that it is unjust for the government to force anyone to provide a message that they do not agree with. In addition, the law targets pregnancy centers that do not offer abortions.
Under this law, they are forced to advertise services they do not provide; whereas the law does not require pregnancy centers that provide abortions to do the same—that is, to make information available to their clients regarding alternatives to abortion provided by other centers.
Proponents of the law, instead, say that the State has the right to regulate “professional free speech”, and that women seeking pregnancy counseling have the right to be told about every option so that an informed decision can be made.
After losing its case in the lower courts, the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates presented the case to the US Supreme Court.
In November, 2017, the Court agreed to hear the case from the perspective of the free speech argument. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Tuesday and a ruling is expected around June.
And so the battle against the culture of death that has become so pervasive in our nation continues.
It is remarkable to me how far activist courts have gone in establishing abortion as a right guaranteed in the provisions of the US Constitution.
Americans have no one to blame but themselves for electing representatives to both the Executive and Legislative branches of state and federal government who promote the appointment of judges who take it upon themselves to render verdicts which are so far afield from the clear intent of our country's Founders.
The voice of the US Bishops is but a whisper in the silence that is deafening among the American electorate.
Pitiable but true!
Friday, March 23, 2018
CARDINAL MUELLER YET AGAIN?
Speaking at a presentation of a book on Humanae Vitae, Cardinal Mueller, Prefect emeritus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stressed Wednesday that attempts to change the Church’s teaching are “a crime against the Church.”
“The current attempt,” he said, “to put in contrast the last three Pontificates, with the pretext of imposing an heterodox teaching to the faithful is a crime against the Church and a betrayal of her mission and mandate, whose final task is that of preserving the faith authentically inherited by the apostles.”
Such ridiculous comments are evidence that Pope Francis made a superb decision when he did not reconfirm the Cardinal in his post as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Surely, Cardinal Mueller is aware of the division among the periti called by Blessed Pope Paul VI himself to offer their insights and counsel prior to the publication of Humanae Vitae.
Surely, Cardinal Mueller is aware that last minute interventions by ultra-conservative led by Cardinal Cicognani persuaded Pope Paul not to accept the recommendations of the periti who had affirmed that there are specific situations in which the use of artificial contraception was indeed justified and permissable.
Recently, the Italian theologian, Father Maurizio Chiodi, who was recently appointed a member of the Pontifical Academy of Life, published an article, “Re-read Humanae Vitae in light of Amoris Laetitia,” in the Italian Bishop Conference’s news outlet Avvenire.
The article summarized a lecture Father Chiodi gave at the Pontifical Gregorian University, as part of a series of conferences organized by the Jesuit university in Rome to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Blessed Paul VI’s encyclical.
Reiterating the findings of Blessed Pope Paul’s commission of experts, Father Chiodi stated that “there are circumstances that require the use of contraception,” because in these cases the “technical intervention does not deny the responsibility of procreative relationships.”
He also stressed that “the insistence of the Church’s Magisterium on natural methods cannot be interpreted,as a norm which is an end in itself, nor as a mere conformity with biological laws, because the norm points to an anthropology, to the good of marital responsibility.”
Cardinal Mueller, apparently ignorant of the history of the Encyclical, in fact has labeled any attempt “reinterpret” the conservative and reactionary spin given to the teaching of Humanae Vitae as somehow contrary to the very Deposit of the Faith itself.
Rubbish!
Proponents of natural family planning, which Cardinal Mueller and others who share his tunnel vision contend the only means which are morally permissable, consistently brand this method as the “only officially recognized moral means” of regulating birth. All other forms of regulating the number of children are considered (by them) to be immoral.
But Cardinal Mueller and those who share his intransigent attitudes willfully deny that it is the intention of the couple which plays the determinant role in the morality of any means they choose to limit the size of their family.
Upon its publication, then-Cardinal Wojtyla (who would become St. Pope John Paul II) made known his interpretation of the Encyclical suggesting that that Humane Vitae constituted dogmatic and infallible teaching because, in his opinion, it was part of the universal magisterium.
Pope Paul VI, its author, never made that claim.
Pope John Paul I never made that claim.
And, most interestingly, after he became Pope, Cardinal Wojtyla never declared Humane Vitae as infallible at any time during his Pontificate.
Of course, none of this makes a bit of difference to Cardinal Mueller who takes a step further labeling as enemies of the Church those who would offer a more moderate interpretation and application of the Encyclical’s teaching.
Why do Cardinal Mueller and those like him seem so bent on sowing seeds of division among the Christian faithful of good will who seek a clearer insight and more benign application of the inherent wisdom of Humanae Vitae?
Cardinal Mueller spokes for no one but himself to a group within the Church that seeks to serve no one but itself.
To him and his consorts, I offer the following wisdom: “Silence is golden. So, please, just be quiet. Thank you!”
“The current attempt,” he said, “to put in contrast the last three Pontificates, with the pretext of imposing an heterodox teaching to the faithful is a crime against the Church and a betrayal of her mission and mandate, whose final task is that of preserving the faith authentically inherited by the apostles.”
Such ridiculous comments are evidence that Pope Francis made a superb decision when he did not reconfirm the Cardinal in his post as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Surely, Cardinal Mueller is aware of the division among the periti called by Blessed Pope Paul VI himself to offer their insights and counsel prior to the publication of Humanae Vitae.
Surely, Cardinal Mueller is aware that last minute interventions by ultra-conservative led by Cardinal Cicognani persuaded Pope Paul not to accept the recommendations of the periti who had affirmed that there are specific situations in which the use of artificial contraception was indeed justified and permissable.
Recently, the Italian theologian, Father Maurizio Chiodi, who was recently appointed a member of the Pontifical Academy of Life, published an article, “Re-read Humanae Vitae in light of Amoris Laetitia,” in the Italian Bishop Conference’s news outlet Avvenire.
The article summarized a lecture Father Chiodi gave at the Pontifical Gregorian University, as part of a series of conferences organized by the Jesuit university in Rome to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Blessed Paul VI’s encyclical.
Reiterating the findings of Blessed Pope Paul’s commission of experts, Father Chiodi stated that “there are circumstances that require the use of contraception,” because in these cases the “technical intervention does not deny the responsibility of procreative relationships.”
He also stressed that “the insistence of the Church’s Magisterium on natural methods cannot be interpreted,as a norm which is an end in itself, nor as a mere conformity with biological laws, because the norm points to an anthropology, to the good of marital responsibility.”
Cardinal Mueller, apparently ignorant of the history of the Encyclical, in fact has labeled any attempt “reinterpret” the conservative and reactionary spin given to the teaching of Humanae Vitae as somehow contrary to the very Deposit of the Faith itself.
Rubbish!
Proponents of natural family planning, which Cardinal Mueller and others who share his tunnel vision contend the only means which are morally permissable, consistently brand this method as the “only officially recognized moral means” of regulating birth. All other forms of regulating the number of children are considered (by them) to be immoral.
But Cardinal Mueller and those who share his intransigent attitudes willfully deny that it is the intention of the couple which plays the determinant role in the morality of any means they choose to limit the size of their family.
Upon its publication, then-Cardinal Wojtyla (who would become St. Pope John Paul II) made known his interpretation of the Encyclical suggesting that that Humane Vitae constituted dogmatic and infallible teaching because, in his opinion, it was part of the universal magisterium.
Pope Paul VI, its author, never made that claim.
Pope John Paul I never made that claim.
And, most interestingly, after he became Pope, Cardinal Wojtyla never declared Humane Vitae as infallible at any time during his Pontificate.
Of course, none of this makes a bit of difference to Cardinal Mueller who takes a step further labeling as enemies of the Church those who would offer a more moderate interpretation and application of the Encyclical’s teaching.
Why do Cardinal Mueller and those like him seem so bent on sowing seeds of division among the Christian faithful of good will who seek a clearer insight and more benign application of the inherent wisdom of Humanae Vitae?
Cardinal Mueller spokes for no one but himself to a group within the Church that seeks to serve no one but itself.
To him and his consorts, I offer the following wisdom: “Silence is golden. So, please, just be quiet. Thank you!”
Thursday, March 22, 2018
POPE FRANCIS APPROVES CONVENING OF AUSTRALIAN PLENARY COUNCIL, THE FIRST IN 80 YEARS
The Vatican communications office today released news that the Australian Catholic Church, with the approval of Pope Francis, will hold a Plenary Council in 2020 to discuss its way forward in light of the challenges it faces in contemporary society.
The Holy Father gave approval to the meeting of this Council, the first such gathering in 80 years.
The Council in 2020 will address the way forward for the Church in Australia in light of the challenges it faces in contemporary society.
Delegates from the 34 “local churches” of Australia will gather in a series of two sessions in 2020 and 2021. The process will begin this year at Pentecost and will be engaged in setting an agenda for the actual Plenary Council meetings.
Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, Chair of the Bishops Commission for the Plenary Council, said: “this will be a unique opportunity for people to come together and listen to God in all the ways God speaks to us, and in particular by listening to one another as together we discern what God is asking of us at this time – a time when the Church in Australia is facing significant challenges.”
Pope Francis endorsed the appointment of Archbishop Timothy Costelloe of Perth as the President of the Plenary Council.
A series of planning meetings has already taken place in which faith-filled people across the country have shared their hopes for the Church.
Decisions made at the Plenary Council will become binding for the Catholic Church in Australia, subject to the approval of the Holy See.
This announcement comes at a time in which the Church in Australia has been struggling to maintain the confidence of the faithful in light of the numerous scandals that have arisen pertaining to the sexual abuse of minors. Likewise, an increasingly secularist approach to modern day life has seriously and negatively impacted the Church’s ability to have any meaningful role to play in societal issues and mores.
Of course, any decision arising from the Plenary Council will require the approval of the Holy See. While Pope Francis is certainly enthusiastic and supportive, it remains to be seen (given his age) whether he will still be in office by the time the Plenary Council is concluded.
May the Holy Spirit guide the Holy Father and the participants in the Plenary Council in their endeavors to promote the Gospel and the teachings of the Church to our sisters and brothers who share our faith in Christ in the southern hemisphere.
The Holy Father gave approval to the meeting of this Council, the first such gathering in 80 years.
The Council in 2020 will address the way forward for the Church in Australia in light of the challenges it faces in contemporary society.
Delegates from the 34 “local churches” of Australia will gather in a series of two sessions in 2020 and 2021. The process will begin this year at Pentecost and will be engaged in setting an agenda for the actual Plenary Council meetings.
Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, Chair of the Bishops Commission for the Plenary Council, said: “this will be a unique opportunity for people to come together and listen to God in all the ways God speaks to us, and in particular by listening to one another as together we discern what God is asking of us at this time – a time when the Church in Australia is facing significant challenges.”
Pope Francis endorsed the appointment of Archbishop Timothy Costelloe of Perth as the President of the Plenary Council.
A series of planning meetings has already taken place in which faith-filled people across the country have shared their hopes for the Church.
Decisions made at the Plenary Council will become binding for the Catholic Church in Australia, subject to the approval of the Holy See.
This announcement comes at a time in which the Church in Australia has been struggling to maintain the confidence of the faithful in light of the numerous scandals that have arisen pertaining to the sexual abuse of minors. Likewise, an increasingly secularist approach to modern day life has seriously and negatively impacted the Church’s ability to have any meaningful role to play in societal issues and mores.
Of course, any decision arising from the Plenary Council will require the approval of the Holy See. While Pope Francis is certainly enthusiastic and supportive, it remains to be seen (given his age) whether he will still be in office by the time the Plenary Council is concluded.
May the Holy Spirit guide the Holy Father and the participants in the Plenary Council in their endeavors to promote the Gospel and the teachings of the Church to our sisters and brothers who share our faith in Christ in the southern hemisphere.
Monday, March 19, 2018
EUTHANASIA NOW ALLOWED IN FIVE STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND MORE STATES DEBATING PHYSICIAN ASSISTED DEATH
Helping the terminally ill end their lives is gaining traction and the voice of the Church condemning the practice is woefully mute.
Banned everywhere but Oregon until 2008, it is now legal in five states: California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. The District of Columbia has also legalized the practice.
Its advocates, who shun the term “assisted suicide,” believe that as baby boomers watch frail parents suffer, support for what they call the “aid in dying” movement will grow further.
In January, the New Mexico Supreme Court authorized doctors to provide lethal prescriptions and declared a constitutional right for “a competent, terminally ill patient to choose aid in dying.”
This Spring, advocates are strongly promoting “death with dignity” bills in Connecticut and other states.
Public support for assisted dying has grown in the past half century.
There is a quiet, constant demand all over the country for a right to die on one’s own terms, said Barbara Coombs Lee, President of Compassion & Choices, and that demand is likely to grow, she said, as the baby boomers age.
The reality is that euthanasia is not a future problem. It is a present problem. It is happening now and becoming increasingly accepted.
The Church is asleep at the switch, not realizing that growing trend is toward the massive elimination of the elderly and "incompetent," and anyone else considered to be a burden to society.
All Christians and people of good will need to oppose such moral nonsense. And the time to oppose it is now, before it becomes solidified in law in more and more States.
Our times demand courage and wisdom. May these not be lacking to any one of us!
Banned everywhere but Oregon until 2008, it is now legal in five states: California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. The District of Columbia has also legalized the practice.
Its advocates, who shun the term “assisted suicide,” believe that as baby boomers watch frail parents suffer, support for what they call the “aid in dying” movement will grow further.
In January, the New Mexico Supreme Court authorized doctors to provide lethal prescriptions and declared a constitutional right for “a competent, terminally ill patient to choose aid in dying.”
This Spring, advocates are strongly promoting “death with dignity” bills in Connecticut and other states.
Public support for assisted dying has grown in the past half century.
There is a quiet, constant demand all over the country for a right to die on one’s own terms, said Barbara Coombs Lee, President of Compassion & Choices, and that demand is likely to grow, she said, as the baby boomers age.
The reality is that euthanasia is not a future problem. It is a present problem. It is happening now and becoming increasingly accepted.
The Church is asleep at the switch, not realizing that growing trend is toward the massive elimination of the elderly and "incompetent," and anyone else considered to be a burden to society.
All Christians and people of good will need to oppose such moral nonsense. And the time to oppose it is now, before it becomes solidified in law in more and more States.
Our times demand courage and wisdom. May these not be lacking to any one of us!
HAS THE AHIARA DIOCESE SET A PRECEDENT OF SUCCESSFUL RESISTANCE TO PAPAL AUTHORITY?
The Vatican reports that Nigeria’s Bishop of Umuahia Diocese and newly appointed Apostolic Administrator of Ahiara Diocese, Lucius Iwejuru Ugorji, has called for healing, reconciliation and unity in the diocese.
The Bishop was speaking during an Inaugural Mass at the start of his ministry in the Ahiara Diocese which has witnessed division in its refusal to accept the appointment of Bishop Peter Opaleke.
“I feel highly privileged to serve a people known for their remarkable religious and enterprising spirit. I look forward to drawing closer to you during my pastoral visits in your parishes to administer the Sacraments, “Bishop Ugorji said to a packed Mater Ecclesia Cathedral in Ahiara.
Bishop Ugorji said it was a very happy coincidence that the “new springtime” he has declared, for Ahiara Diocese, was taking place during the season of Lent.
“In carrying out my mandate, I wish to stress that every authentic healing and renewal begins with reconciliation with God, who gives peace to our souls. We all need interior peace and renewal. It is, therefore, a very happy coincidence that this call for healing and renewal in the Diocese of Ahiara is being made during the holy season of Lent when the Church urges us to heed the proclamation of Christ: “Repent and believe the gospel,” the Bishop said.
The Bishop took time to praise the pastoral zeal of early missionaries and the contributions of the Indigenous Clergy who held the diocese together when many Irish missionaries were forced-out of Nigeria at the end of the civil war in 1970.
Nevertheless, Bishop Ugorji did not gloss over Ahiara Diocese’s dark period of internal conflict which just ended.
The Bishop stated that Bishop Okpaleke’s decision to resign was “wise, noble and courageous” and which paved the way for his appointment as Apostolic Administrator.
Bishop Ugorji has since appointed Fr. Ethelbert Uwadika as the Vicar General of the diocese.
The end of such division and tension is truly a blessing for the Ahiara Diocese. We wish Bishop Ugorji much success in shepherding the people entrusted to his pastoral care.
We shall see whether or not Clergy and laity of the Ahiara Diocese have set a precedent which may well affect other dioceses whose Clergy and laity refuse to accept the Bishops whom the Holy Father has appointed.
For even in the face of a Papal ultimatum directing a written letter of apology to the Pope and commitment to accept Bishop Opaleke, the majority of diocesan Clergy stood firm in their opposition to the appointment.
There have been those who have doubted that Pope Francis personally issued the ultimatum, a move so unlike this Pope’s willingness to dialogue and accompany those who struggle with issues relating to Church teaching and discipline.
Nonetheless, the Holy See itself may very well have been weakened or compromised in its decision to withdraw its threatened penalty for non-compliance with the Papal mandate.
How other dioceses might respond to an unpopular appointment of a Bishop remains to be seen.
We shall see what the future holds.
The Bishop was speaking during an Inaugural Mass at the start of his ministry in the Ahiara Diocese which has witnessed division in its refusal to accept the appointment of Bishop Peter Opaleke.
“I feel highly privileged to serve a people known for their remarkable religious and enterprising spirit. I look forward to drawing closer to you during my pastoral visits in your parishes to administer the Sacraments, “Bishop Ugorji said to a packed Mater Ecclesia Cathedral in Ahiara.
Bishop Ugorji said it was a very happy coincidence that the “new springtime” he has declared, for Ahiara Diocese, was taking place during the season of Lent.
“In carrying out my mandate, I wish to stress that every authentic healing and renewal begins with reconciliation with God, who gives peace to our souls. We all need interior peace and renewal. It is, therefore, a very happy coincidence that this call for healing and renewal in the Diocese of Ahiara is being made during the holy season of Lent when the Church urges us to heed the proclamation of Christ: “Repent and believe the gospel,” the Bishop said.
The Bishop took time to praise the pastoral zeal of early missionaries and the contributions of the Indigenous Clergy who held the diocese together when many Irish missionaries were forced-out of Nigeria at the end of the civil war in 1970.
Nevertheless, Bishop Ugorji did not gloss over Ahiara Diocese’s dark period of internal conflict which just ended.
The Bishop stated that Bishop Okpaleke’s decision to resign was “wise, noble and courageous” and which paved the way for his appointment as Apostolic Administrator.
Bishop Ugorji has since appointed Fr. Ethelbert Uwadika as the Vicar General of the diocese.
The end of such division and tension is truly a blessing for the Ahiara Diocese. We wish Bishop Ugorji much success in shepherding the people entrusted to his pastoral care.
We shall see whether or not Clergy and laity of the Ahiara Diocese have set a precedent which may well affect other dioceses whose Clergy and laity refuse to accept the Bishops whom the Holy Father has appointed.
For even in the face of a Papal ultimatum directing a written letter of apology to the Pope and commitment to accept Bishop Opaleke, the majority of diocesan Clergy stood firm in their opposition to the appointment.
There have been those who have doubted that Pope Francis personally issued the ultimatum, a move so unlike this Pope’s willingness to dialogue and accompany those who struggle with issues relating to Church teaching and discipline.
Nonetheless, the Holy See itself may very well have been weakened or compromised in its decision to withdraw its threatened penalty for non-compliance with the Papal mandate.
How other dioceses might respond to an unpopular appointment of a Bishop remains to be seen.
We shall see what the future holds.
Saturday, March 17, 2018
OH NO....VATICAN FAKE NEWS TOO?
The Vatican has admitted that it digitally blurred out a portion of a media handout photo of a letter in a way that The Associated Press claims alters the image’s significance and violates the standards of photojournalism.
The photo was released by the Vatican’s communications office, one day before the fifth anniversary of Pope Francis’ election and a few weeks after Francis condemned the spread of fake news as “evil” in a message to journalists.
The photo is of a February 7th letter from emeritus Pope Benedict XVI to the Vatican’s chief of communications, Monsignor Dario Vigano.
In the letter, Benedict responds to Monsignor Vigano’s request that he review a new volume of books about Pope Francis’ theology. But a blurred portion of the letter reveals that Benedict told him he did not have time to complete the request.
In the part of the letter that is more visible in the photo, Pope Benedict writes that the new book series is evidence of the “foolish prejudice” of Francis’ critics. He adds that the books demonstrate the “interior continuity between the two pontificates, with all the differences in style and temperament.”
The letter was reportedly read out in full during a news conference. Monsignor Vigano appeared to use it to repudiate Francis’ critics who claim his papal style is a significant departure from that of his predecessor.
However, at the very end of the letter, Pope Benedict appears to state that he has not read the entire 11-part book series and, as a result, would not be able to deliver a sound theological assessment.
On Wednesday, the Vatican admitted to the Associated Press that it had blurred the final two lines of the first page ― the part where Benedict starts to explain that he did not actually read the new book project.
The communications office spokesman did not explain why the lines were blurred but said that the Vatican never intended for the full letter to be released.
Most major news media sites have policies that restrict editors from digitally adding or subtracting from photographs.
So much for the Vatican’s condemnation of “fake news”!
The photo was released by the Vatican’s communications office, one day before the fifth anniversary of Pope Francis’ election and a few weeks after Francis condemned the spread of fake news as “evil” in a message to journalists.
The photo is of a February 7th letter from emeritus Pope Benedict XVI to the Vatican’s chief of communications, Monsignor Dario Vigano.
In the letter, Benedict responds to Monsignor Vigano’s request that he review a new volume of books about Pope Francis’ theology. But a blurred portion of the letter reveals that Benedict told him he did not have time to complete the request.
In the part of the letter that is more visible in the photo, Pope Benedict writes that the new book series is evidence of the “foolish prejudice” of Francis’ critics. He adds that the books demonstrate the “interior continuity between the two pontificates, with all the differences in style and temperament.”
The letter was reportedly read out in full during a news conference. Monsignor Vigano appeared to use it to repudiate Francis’ critics who claim his papal style is a significant departure from that of his predecessor.
However, at the very end of the letter, Pope Benedict appears to state that he has not read the entire 11-part book series and, as a result, would not be able to deliver a sound theological assessment.
On Wednesday, the Vatican admitted to the Associated Press that it had blurred the final two lines of the first page ― the part where Benedict starts to explain that he did not actually read the new book project.
The communications office spokesman did not explain why the lines were blurred but said that the Vatican never intended for the full letter to be released.
Most major news media sites have policies that restrict editors from digitally adding or subtracting from photographs.
So much for the Vatican’s condemnation of “fake news”!
SHAME ON SAN DIEGO BISHOP ROBERT MCELROY!
In reacting to President Trump’s inspection of prototypes of the border wall he has advocated to be built along the US border with Mexico, San Diego Bishop Robert McElroy, offered the following terse statement:
It is a sad day for our country when we trade the majestic, hope-filled symbolism of the Statue of Liberty for an ineffective and grotesque wall which both displays and inflames the ethnic and cultural divisions that have long been the underside of our national history. Our faith is in the God who is the Father of us all, and who urges us to see Jesus himself in the immigrants and refugees who seek safety and freedom.
In responding to Bishop McElroy, I offer a similar terse remark:
It is a sad day for the Catholic Church when we witness a Bishop openly supporting illegal activity and advocating an arbitrary and whimsical application of the rule of law.
The scandal which results from a Successor of the Apostles who denies the right of the any State to enforce its borders and protect its citizenry from the unlawful entry of undocumented immigrants is appalling and disgraceful.
Bishop McElroy should rightfully be ashamed of his comments and seek the forgiveness not only of the faithful of the Diocese of San Diego whom he represents but he should also apologize to the millions of Catholics and to the citizens of this great country who uphold and defend our country’s Constitution and laws.
I thank God that I am fortunate in not being a Priest of the Diocese of San Diego. The Bishop’s words would put me in conflict with the solemn promise I made to the Church to be obedient and respectful not only to the Bishop who ordained me but to his successors as well.
American Bishops are on a collision course with many of the faithful who support the rule of law and oppose attacks upon the sovereignty of our nation with respect to defending its borders.
Bishops who encourage illegal immigration and who provide safe harbor for illegals are advocating moral anarchy.
They should be held accountable not only for their infidelity to their allegiance to their country but, more especially, for the infidelity to the moral teachings of the Church.
Shame on you, Bishop McElroy for your ineffective and grotesque remarks to our President and our country!
It is a sad day for our country when we trade the majestic, hope-filled symbolism of the Statue of Liberty for an ineffective and grotesque wall which both displays and inflames the ethnic and cultural divisions that have long been the underside of our national history. Our faith is in the God who is the Father of us all, and who urges us to see Jesus himself in the immigrants and refugees who seek safety and freedom.
In responding to Bishop McElroy, I offer a similar terse remark:
It is a sad day for the Catholic Church when we witness a Bishop openly supporting illegal activity and advocating an arbitrary and whimsical application of the rule of law.
The scandal which results from a Successor of the Apostles who denies the right of the any State to enforce its borders and protect its citizenry from the unlawful entry of undocumented immigrants is appalling and disgraceful.
Bishop McElroy should rightfully be ashamed of his comments and seek the forgiveness not only of the faithful of the Diocese of San Diego whom he represents but he should also apologize to the millions of Catholics and to the citizens of this great country who uphold and defend our country’s Constitution and laws.
I thank God that I am fortunate in not being a Priest of the Diocese of San Diego. The Bishop’s words would put me in conflict with the solemn promise I made to the Church to be obedient and respectful not only to the Bishop who ordained me but to his successors as well.
American Bishops are on a collision course with many of the faithful who support the rule of law and oppose attacks upon the sovereignty of our nation with respect to defending its borders.
Bishops who encourage illegal immigration and who provide safe harbor for illegals are advocating moral anarchy.
They should be held accountable not only for their infidelity to their allegiance to their country but, more especially, for the infidelity to the moral teachings of the Church.
Shame on you, Bishop McElroy for your ineffective and grotesque remarks to our President and our country!
Friday, March 16, 2018
CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS DON'T CHANGE CHURCHES -- THEY ABANDON THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
A recent survey result concludes that Catholics and Protestants are more inclined to reject their Christian Faith than to change their church affiliation.
The three-wave Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES)—which surveyed the same individuals in 2010, 2012, and 2014, and started with 9,500 respondents—reported how few Catholics and Protestants have changed affiliations and how many have moved from one denomination (or nondenomination) to another.
During this period, Catholics remained pretty attached to their tradition; they were about half as likely as Americans on average to change their affiliation: 8.8 percent vs. 18.9 percent. When Catholics do switch, they largely shift toward having no faith, with 6.4 percent switching to agnostic, atheist, or “nothing in particular.”
For Catholics, transitioning to another religious tradition is extremely rare. Of the 2,112 Catholics in the CCES sample, fewer than 50 left: 39 became Protestants, 6 became Orthodox Christians, and 3 became Buddhists.
The Catholic sample declined by 1 percent between 2010 and 2014, though this does not suggest a decline in Catholicism as a whole. (This data only includes individuals who switch into or out of Catholicism as adults, and excludes birth or death rates, which also have a tremendous impact on the total number of adherents.)
Protestants—the largest religious tradition in the US, making up 42 percent of Americans in the 2010 CCES panel—show similar patterns to their Catholic counterparts.
Protestants largely stay Protestant, defecting at similar rates as Catholics during the four-year period: 8.8 percent vs. 9.1 percent. The vast majority of those who leave Protestantism also become nones. Of those who identified as Protestants in 2010, 7.4 percent became nones by 2014, with 5.7 percent identifying as nothing in particular.
The number of Protestants who switched into another religious tradition is minuscule. Out of the sample of more than 4,000 Protestants, just 32 became Catholics, 7 became Buddhists, and less than 5 became Mormons, Jews, Muslims, or Hindus.
The lesson for Christian leaders should be clear. When the pews in church are empty, it’s not because members of the congregation have left to join other Christian denominations, it’s because they have abandoned the Christian Faith itself.
I have maintained that most of the controversy within the Catholic Church these days has gone largely unnoticed and ignored by the vast majority of the faithful. Few are aware of the tensions which exist within the College of Bishops over many of the reforms which Pope Francis has initiated during his five-year Pontificate.
I further suggest that most American Catholics have long since ceased to pay attention to what the Bishops have to say about this or that moral issue and largely decide for themselves what is morally acceptable in a way that allows them to still remain members of the Catholic community.
Should the Catholic faithful begin to become as divided as the Bishops, I believe there will be very little to be evidenced in the manner of a public schism.
I have and continue to hold to the belief that there will simply be a quiet exodus from the Church among those who will not accept a return to a more conservative and, in some ways, demanding enunciation of Catholicism.
The good news for the moment is that Catholics (and Protestants) have not yet given in to the secularism that has decimated the Christian Faith on the European Continent.
The bad news is that the secularist trend is advancing in America and the abandonment of the Faith in a quiet revolt of sorts is on the horizon.
The Pontificate of Pope Francis has provided a shelter, a harbor within which disaffected Catholics have found a place to anchor their faith for the time being.
It will fall to Pope Francis’ successor to determine whether the Church will continue to welcome and comfort those on the edges of Catholicism or whether the Church will insist upon an orthodox adherence to traditional teaching and ritual which will result in a silent defection of many whose Catholicism is tenuous at best.
The three-wave Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES)—which surveyed the same individuals in 2010, 2012, and 2014, and started with 9,500 respondents—reported how few Catholics and Protestants have changed affiliations and how many have moved from one denomination (or nondenomination) to another.
During this period, Catholics remained pretty attached to their tradition; they were about half as likely as Americans on average to change their affiliation: 8.8 percent vs. 18.9 percent. When Catholics do switch, they largely shift toward having no faith, with 6.4 percent switching to agnostic, atheist, or “nothing in particular.”
For Catholics, transitioning to another religious tradition is extremely rare. Of the 2,112 Catholics in the CCES sample, fewer than 50 left: 39 became Protestants, 6 became Orthodox Christians, and 3 became Buddhists.
The Catholic sample declined by 1 percent between 2010 and 2014, though this does not suggest a decline in Catholicism as a whole. (This data only includes individuals who switch into or out of Catholicism as adults, and excludes birth or death rates, which also have a tremendous impact on the total number of adherents.)
Protestants—the largest religious tradition in the US, making up 42 percent of Americans in the 2010 CCES panel—show similar patterns to their Catholic counterparts.
Protestants largely stay Protestant, defecting at similar rates as Catholics during the four-year period: 8.8 percent vs. 9.1 percent. The vast majority of those who leave Protestantism also become nones. Of those who identified as Protestants in 2010, 7.4 percent became nones by 2014, with 5.7 percent identifying as nothing in particular.
The number of Protestants who switched into another religious tradition is minuscule. Out of the sample of more than 4,000 Protestants, just 32 became Catholics, 7 became Buddhists, and less than 5 became Mormons, Jews, Muslims, or Hindus.
The lesson for Christian leaders should be clear. When the pews in church are empty, it’s not because members of the congregation have left to join other Christian denominations, it’s because they have abandoned the Christian Faith itself.
I have maintained that most of the controversy within the Catholic Church these days has gone largely unnoticed and ignored by the vast majority of the faithful. Few are aware of the tensions which exist within the College of Bishops over many of the reforms which Pope Francis has initiated during his five-year Pontificate.
I further suggest that most American Catholics have long since ceased to pay attention to what the Bishops have to say about this or that moral issue and largely decide for themselves what is morally acceptable in a way that allows them to still remain members of the Catholic community.
Should the Catholic faithful begin to become as divided as the Bishops, I believe there will be very little to be evidenced in the manner of a public schism.
I have and continue to hold to the belief that there will simply be a quiet exodus from the Church among those who will not accept a return to a more conservative and, in some ways, demanding enunciation of Catholicism.
The good news for the moment is that Catholics (and Protestants) have not yet given in to the secularism that has decimated the Christian Faith on the European Continent.
The bad news is that the secularist trend is advancing in America and the abandonment of the Faith in a quiet revolt of sorts is on the horizon.
The Pontificate of Pope Francis has provided a shelter, a harbor within which disaffected Catholics have found a place to anchor their faith for the time being.
It will fall to Pope Francis’ successor to determine whether the Church will continue to welcome and comfort those on the edges of Catholicism or whether the Church will insist upon an orthodox adherence to traditional teaching and ritual which will result in a silent defection of many whose Catholicism is tenuous at best.
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
POPE FRANCIS ANNOUNCES THEME OF AMAZONIA SYNOD
Given the fact that I will be travelling, I am posting this article a day early. There will be no post tomorrow.
“Amazonia: new pathways for the Church and for an integral ecology” is the theme announced by Pope Francis for the Special Assembly of the Synod of Bishops of the Pan-Amazon Region.
That title contains an urgent call to undertake new action because, as the Pope has warned repeatedly in various occasions, failure to act and make radical changes in lifestyles and energy consumption will have grave consequences for all of us.
That’s why, in accordance with Latin American Bishops, the Holy Father has called for a Special Assembly of the Synod of Bishops that will involve Prelates and consultants from Latin America’s Pan-Amazon region.
One of the 18 members of the pre-Synodal Council which is tasked with collaborating with the General Secretariat in the preparation of the Special Assembly, is Mauricio Lopez, Executive Secretary of REPAM, the Pan-Amazon Ecclesiastical Network.
Lopez explained that the work of REPAM is essentially to connect the network to the identity of the territory it represents.
“The Amazon region integrates 9 different countries, (Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guyana, Guyana, Peru, Venezuela and Surinam)” he said.
Covering 5 million square miles the Amazon is a place where the Church tries to respond to the challenges and the cries of the people.
The Amazon is home to some 33 million people, of which 3 million represent indigenous communities from almost 400 different tribes or groups.
“Each one of them with such richness, identity and diversity. So we really have to recognize the richness and what is there and also at the same time there is a big number of people already living in the cities” Lopez said.
Increased urbanization is resulting in the fact that some of those groups are more and more under threat “especially those who we describe as ‘in voluntary isolation’ or non-contacted indigenous communities”.
In the world, there are about 140 ‘un-contacted indigenous communities’, 130 of them are in the Amazon region. Some of them have never had contact with the Western world while others have had some contact and have decided not to have contact anymore and to remain apart.
It is especially these communities which are being threatened by the increased monoculture in the agro-business, and extractive industries.
The Pope’s call for a Synod for the Amazon makes the point of the universality of the call to respond to and respect the reality of the indigenous people on the one hand and on the other to protect and defend this territory.
The future of the Church and the planet hinges on how we respect and defend the environment, the Pope has insisted repeatedly.
Directing his attention to the Bishops of Brazil when he was there for World Youth Day in 2013, the Pope stated: “If we fail in the Amazon, then we might have failed completely.”
The “Amazonia” Synod already has sparked much conversation and speculation regarding the Pope’s openness to considering a “married” Priesthhood and a greater involvement of women in ministry.
We shall keep track of developments as they occur on what could be a truly transforming moment in the history of the Church.
“Amazonia: new pathways for the Church and for an integral ecology” is the theme announced by Pope Francis for the Special Assembly of the Synod of Bishops of the Pan-Amazon Region.
That title contains an urgent call to undertake new action because, as the Pope has warned repeatedly in various occasions, failure to act and make radical changes in lifestyles and energy consumption will have grave consequences for all of us.
That’s why, in accordance with Latin American Bishops, the Holy Father has called for a Special Assembly of the Synod of Bishops that will involve Prelates and consultants from Latin America’s Pan-Amazon region.
One of the 18 members of the pre-Synodal Council which is tasked with collaborating with the General Secretariat in the preparation of the Special Assembly, is Mauricio Lopez, Executive Secretary of REPAM, the Pan-Amazon Ecclesiastical Network.
Lopez explained that the work of REPAM is essentially to connect the network to the identity of the territory it represents.
“The Amazon region integrates 9 different countries, (Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guyana, Guyana, Peru, Venezuela and Surinam)” he said.
Covering 5 million square miles the Amazon is a place where the Church tries to respond to the challenges and the cries of the people.
The Amazon is home to some 33 million people, of which 3 million represent indigenous communities from almost 400 different tribes or groups.
“Each one of them with such richness, identity and diversity. So we really have to recognize the richness and what is there and also at the same time there is a big number of people already living in the cities” Lopez said.
Increased urbanization is resulting in the fact that some of those groups are more and more under threat “especially those who we describe as ‘in voluntary isolation’ or non-contacted indigenous communities”.
In the world, there are about 140 ‘un-contacted indigenous communities’, 130 of them are in the Amazon region. Some of them have never had contact with the Western world while others have had some contact and have decided not to have contact anymore and to remain apart.
It is especially these communities which are being threatened by the increased monoculture in the agro-business, and extractive industries.
The Pope’s call for a Synod for the Amazon makes the point of the universality of the call to respond to and respect the reality of the indigenous people on the one hand and on the other to protect and defend this territory.
The future of the Church and the planet hinges on how we respect and defend the environment, the Pope has insisted repeatedly.
Directing his attention to the Bishops of Brazil when he was there for World Youth Day in 2013, the Pope stated: “If we fail in the Amazon, then we might have failed completely.”
The “Amazonia” Synod already has sparked much conversation and speculation regarding the Pope’s openness to considering a “married” Priesthhood and a greater involvement of women in ministry.
We shall keep track of developments as they occur on what could be a truly transforming moment in the history of the Church.
ARE WE BRAVE ENOUGH TO ADMIT THE TRUTH?
Behold, the seven words of every dying institution: “We have always done it this way!”
Nowhere is a preconceived narrative more entrenched than in the Catholic Church.
Among most Bishops, the message is that we should just keep doing everything as we have done it for the past generation: catechesis, Marriage preparation, liturgy, and so on.
But an objective analysis of Catholic practice belies the claim that everything is in fact fine.
In recent years, several studies have been conducted that give an in-depth look at the practices (and non-practices) of Catholics in America.
I have referred to these studies a number of times in many of the articles which appear on this blogsite.
For example, a major study done by Pew Research in 2009 found that over 30% of Americans who were raised Catholic no longer consider themselves Catholic. This is a well-known figure, but what about those who do still self-identify as Catholic?
These are the people who still have some attachment to the Church, at least enough to call themselves “Catholic.”
Less than 30% of them attend Mass once a week, and according to another study, only 25% go to Confession at least once a year. Furthermore, only 62% of those who attend Mass weekly also go to Confession at least once a year.
Correlating this data, we find that less than 10% of baptized Catholics in this country both attend Mass on Sundays and go to Confession at least once a year.
In other words, less than 1 in 10 baptized Catholics actually follow the two most measurable precepts of the Church, which all Catholics are obliged to follow.
The Pew Study referenced above notes that of those who have abandoned the Church, most stated that they “gradually and quietly drifted away because their spiritual needs were not being met.”
A more recent, smaller survey conducted by the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois details that the majority left because their “spiritual needs [were] not met” and they “lost interest” in being Catholic.
The one clear conclusion that can be drawn from all the findings is this: most people do not see any compelling reason to live as Catholics.
This is true both for those who left the Church and for most who continue to self-identify as Catholic. For if one thought it was worthwhile to live as a Catholic, he or she would attend Mass faithfully, go to Confession regularly, learn the Faith, and strive to live its teachings, even the hard ones.
But so few Catholics are doing this.
I admit that numbers (and surveys) aren’t everything. But surely when vast numbers of people are saying they are leaving the Church because their spiritual needs are not being met – the precise reason the Church exists – then something would appear to be fundamentally wrong.
It is true that evangelization does not always produce large numbers of converts – Jesus himself was rejected by many of his initial disciples – but the staggering number of baptized Catholics who don’t find value in practicing their Faith should give us serious pause.
If we have the courage to draw some inferences from the surveys, then we have to admit unquivocally that Catholic dioceses and parishes by and large are failing to meet their parishioners’ perceived spiritual needs.
So how should the Bishops, Priests and parishes respond in the face of these facts?
Thus far, the response has been denial.
Both Clergy and laity have ignored or downplayed the problem and continue to do the same things that got the Church into this mess. But continuing with the same strategy and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.
What is needed is a radically honest approach to the reality of the status of the Church today.
Can you imagine a Catholic Pastor getting up in the pulpit and saying, “Listen, things are not good – the school is failing to educate kids in the Faith, people are leaving in droves, and no one believes Catholic doctrine anymore”?
Of course not!
And why?
Because should faithful Catholics see how bad things really are, they might just lose hope that the situation can ever be fixed; the problems of today can be overwhelming and appear unsolvable.
And so, since we don’t have the courage to admit the truth, our leaders and we along with them make no effort to improve the state of affairs in the Church.
I contend that being honest about the problems is the necessary starting point.
But, honesty and truth are tricky things.
Most Bishops and Pastors as well as those in leadership positions within the Church don’t want to hear the truth. And those bold enough to speak the truth find themselves either labeled as cynics or ostracized from any position of leadership or influence.
I do not pretend to know what the practical solutions to these problems are. But I am convinced that no solutions are possible when we continue to deceive ourselves with false narratives about the real issue facing the Church: Catholicism is not attractive anymore to a massive number of Americans.
Right now, should things continue as they are, I believe the Church is in the twilight of its history in this country and in the world.
I know and accept the fact that saying this will cause many to brand me as a pessimist. To those who do, I say: you can simply continue to ignore the facts and keep deceiving yourselves.
But I believe the better option is to recognize the reality and begin rebuilding on a foundation of honesty and truth.
We can do so if we trust the Holy Spirit to give us the courage,the insight and the energy to do so.
Let us ask the Holy Spirit to do just that. Please!
Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful and kindle within us the fire of Your Love.
Nowhere is a preconceived narrative more entrenched than in the Catholic Church.
Among most Bishops, the message is that we should just keep doing everything as we have done it for the past generation: catechesis, Marriage preparation, liturgy, and so on.
But an objective analysis of Catholic practice belies the claim that everything is in fact fine.
In recent years, several studies have been conducted that give an in-depth look at the practices (and non-practices) of Catholics in America.
I have referred to these studies a number of times in many of the articles which appear on this blogsite.
For example, a major study done by Pew Research in 2009 found that over 30% of Americans who were raised Catholic no longer consider themselves Catholic. This is a well-known figure, but what about those who do still self-identify as Catholic?
These are the people who still have some attachment to the Church, at least enough to call themselves “Catholic.”
Less than 30% of them attend Mass once a week, and according to another study, only 25% go to Confession at least once a year. Furthermore, only 62% of those who attend Mass weekly also go to Confession at least once a year.
Correlating this data, we find that less than 10% of baptized Catholics in this country both attend Mass on Sundays and go to Confession at least once a year.
In other words, less than 1 in 10 baptized Catholics actually follow the two most measurable precepts of the Church, which all Catholics are obliged to follow.
The Pew Study referenced above notes that of those who have abandoned the Church, most stated that they “gradually and quietly drifted away because their spiritual needs were not being met.”
A more recent, smaller survey conducted by the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois details that the majority left because their “spiritual needs [were] not met” and they “lost interest” in being Catholic.
The one clear conclusion that can be drawn from all the findings is this: most people do not see any compelling reason to live as Catholics.
This is true both for those who left the Church and for most who continue to self-identify as Catholic. For if one thought it was worthwhile to live as a Catholic, he or she would attend Mass faithfully, go to Confession regularly, learn the Faith, and strive to live its teachings, even the hard ones.
But so few Catholics are doing this.
I admit that numbers (and surveys) aren’t everything. But surely when vast numbers of people are saying they are leaving the Church because their spiritual needs are not being met – the precise reason the Church exists – then something would appear to be fundamentally wrong.
It is true that evangelization does not always produce large numbers of converts – Jesus himself was rejected by many of his initial disciples – but the staggering number of baptized Catholics who don’t find value in practicing their Faith should give us serious pause.
If we have the courage to draw some inferences from the surveys, then we have to admit unquivocally that Catholic dioceses and parishes by and large are failing to meet their parishioners’ perceived spiritual needs.
So how should the Bishops, Priests and parishes respond in the face of these facts?
Thus far, the response has been denial.
Both Clergy and laity have ignored or downplayed the problem and continue to do the same things that got the Church into this mess. But continuing with the same strategy and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.
What is needed is a radically honest approach to the reality of the status of the Church today.
Can you imagine a Catholic Pastor getting up in the pulpit and saying, “Listen, things are not good – the school is failing to educate kids in the Faith, people are leaving in droves, and no one believes Catholic doctrine anymore”?
Of course not!
And why?
Because should faithful Catholics see how bad things really are, they might just lose hope that the situation can ever be fixed; the problems of today can be overwhelming and appear unsolvable.
And so, since we don’t have the courage to admit the truth, our leaders and we along with them make no effort to improve the state of affairs in the Church.
I contend that being honest about the problems is the necessary starting point.
But, honesty and truth are tricky things.
Most Bishops and Pastors as well as those in leadership positions within the Church don’t want to hear the truth. And those bold enough to speak the truth find themselves either labeled as cynics or ostracized from any position of leadership or influence.
I do not pretend to know what the practical solutions to these problems are. But I am convinced that no solutions are possible when we continue to deceive ourselves with false narratives about the real issue facing the Church: Catholicism is not attractive anymore to a massive number of Americans.
Right now, should things continue as they are, I believe the Church is in the twilight of its history in this country and in the world.
I know and accept the fact that saying this will cause many to brand me as a pessimist. To those who do, I say: you can simply continue to ignore the facts and keep deceiving yourselves.
But I believe the better option is to recognize the reality and begin rebuilding on a foundation of honesty and truth.
We can do so if we trust the Holy Spirit to give us the courage,the insight and the energy to do so.
Let us ask the Holy Spirit to do just that. Please!
Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful and kindle within us the fire of Your Love.
Monday, March 12, 2018
A CURIOUS LAWSUIT INDEED!
InfoVaticana, a conservative Spanish website harshly critical of Pope Francis, has been embroiled in a legal battle with Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin.
Cardinal Parolin sent a request several months ago to Infovaticana to renounce their web domain, claiming that the Vatican has exclusive property rights over the name of the physical center of the Catholic world."
In response, InfoVaticana stated: "This is a political prosecution because we talk about corruption in the Spanish Episcopal Conference," he added.
At least two other news sites use the word "Vatican" in their titles and domain name: Inside the Vatican, and Vatican Insider. There is also Vatican.com, privately owned and unaffiliated with the Vatican. And a cryptic website with explicit language operates with the domain name the-vaticancity.com. All of these are allowed to operate freely without the threat of lawsuits by the Holy See.
According to InfoVaticana, "the Spanish Episcopal Conference does not like what we say" — which includes exposing clerical corruption. Although it allows websites like Religion Digital to promote heterodox content, "It seems, for our bishops, the doctrinal dissidence is not as serious as denouncing abuses of the clergy."
Cardinal Ricardo Blázquez filed a complaint against InfoVaticana last year with the Apostolic Nuncio.
The Secretary of State afterwards secured the help of Baker & MacKenzie, one of the world's largest and most prestigious law firms, to demand transfer of InfoVaticana's domain name to the Vatican within seven days, or else face "a very expensive lawsuit."
Spokespersons for InfoVaticana stated that they offered a compromise solution, asking to retain the domain name while giving up the Papal Keys logo and making clear "the private and independent nature" of the blog and that it has no relationship with the Vatican other than as a portal for news coming from Rome.
The answer was emphatic: the demands of the Vatican, defended by Baker & McKenzie, are non-negotiable and the InfoVaticana blog must be terminated.
In the most recent communication with InfoVaticana, Cardinal Parolin has extended the grace period to six months for InfoVaticana to make arrangements to hand over its domain name.
The case currently lies before the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, where the Vatican filed its complaint.
The lawsuit is strangely curious for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that Baker & MacKenzie is well known for the promotion of homosexuality, and even represented the abortion giant, Planned Parenthood.
In August of last year, Baker & McKenzie’s office in Belfast, Ireland partnered with the homosexual group “Cara-Friend” to fund its “LGBTQ+ Awareness Teacher Training program.” James Richards, the Executive Director of Baker & McKenzie’s Belfast office said: “We believe that no-one should be put at a disadvantage, professionally, financially or socially, on the basis of who they are. Here in Belfast, we set up our LGBT network just over a year ago and we are thrilled to be sponsoring Cara-Friend’s Awareness Teacher programme, to help influence our future leaders to respect and support all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Northern Ireland.”
In September of last year, Baker & McKenzie’s London office implemented “Gender Transition Guidelines.” Following the implementation of the Firm’s “North America Gender Transition and Identity Guidelines,” the London Office guidelines are intended to: “support transitioning employees and ensure that the Firm, and all relevant managers and employees, support individuals through their transition. This includes, for example, a Workplace Transition Plan which provides a framework for the transitioning individual, their line manager and HR to follow.”
In December of 2017, Baker & McKenzie advised the homosexual group called “Stonewall” as it fought against what it called an “ultra-orthodox Charedi Jewish Community.”
Baker & McKenzie’s statement says that the case was about “the right of a transgender woman to have direct contact with her children who belong to the ultra-orthodox Charedi Jewish Community. The case raised the questions of human rights and discrimination, in evaluating a child’s welfare.”
In 2016, Baker & McKenzie was named “Best Place to Work for LGBT Equality” by the Human Rights Campaign.
Moreover, the Secretary of State’s argument that the crossed keys used in InfoVaticana’s application for its trademarked logo is a violation of the Vatican’s intellectual property in the form of “State Symbols.” is rather ingenuous.
Such argumentation would imply that any portion of the formal symbols representing Vatican City (the Cross, the keys, a tassel, a gold and white flag) are prohibited from use by any entity without express permission from the Vatican.
If this is actually the case, then the Vatican would need to pursue lawsuits against the following as well: The Society of the Crossed Keys, Prime Real Estate of Florida, Metro Local Locksmith,
Cross Keys Animal Hospital, The Cross Keys Inn and York Minster.
There seems hardly a day passes by that the Holy See does not see itself immersed in yet another controversy.
It will be interesting to see how this dispute is eventually resolved and what the reaction will be to having hired Baker & MacKenzie to represent the Holy See.
Cardinal Parolin sent a request several months ago to Infovaticana to renounce their web domain, claiming that the Vatican has exclusive property rights over the name of the physical center of the Catholic world."
In response, InfoVaticana stated: "This is a political prosecution because we talk about corruption in the Spanish Episcopal Conference," he added.
At least two other news sites use the word "Vatican" in their titles and domain name: Inside the Vatican, and Vatican Insider. There is also Vatican.com, privately owned and unaffiliated with the Vatican. And a cryptic website with explicit language operates with the domain name the-vaticancity.com. All of these are allowed to operate freely without the threat of lawsuits by the Holy See.
According to InfoVaticana, "the Spanish Episcopal Conference does not like what we say" — which includes exposing clerical corruption. Although it allows websites like Religion Digital to promote heterodox content, "It seems, for our bishops, the doctrinal dissidence is not as serious as denouncing abuses of the clergy."
Cardinal Ricardo Blázquez filed a complaint against InfoVaticana last year with the Apostolic Nuncio.
The Secretary of State afterwards secured the help of Baker & MacKenzie, one of the world's largest and most prestigious law firms, to demand transfer of InfoVaticana's domain name to the Vatican within seven days, or else face "a very expensive lawsuit."
Spokespersons for InfoVaticana stated that they offered a compromise solution, asking to retain the domain name while giving up the Papal Keys logo and making clear "the private and independent nature" of the blog and that it has no relationship with the Vatican other than as a portal for news coming from Rome.
The answer was emphatic: the demands of the Vatican, defended by Baker & McKenzie, are non-negotiable and the InfoVaticana blog must be terminated.
In the most recent communication with InfoVaticana, Cardinal Parolin has extended the grace period to six months for InfoVaticana to make arrangements to hand over its domain name.
The case currently lies before the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, where the Vatican filed its complaint.
The lawsuit is strangely curious for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that Baker & MacKenzie is well known for the promotion of homosexuality, and even represented the abortion giant, Planned Parenthood.
In August of last year, Baker & McKenzie’s office in Belfast, Ireland partnered with the homosexual group “Cara-Friend” to fund its “LGBTQ+ Awareness Teacher Training program.” James Richards, the Executive Director of Baker & McKenzie’s Belfast office said: “We believe that no-one should be put at a disadvantage, professionally, financially or socially, on the basis of who they are. Here in Belfast, we set up our LGBT network just over a year ago and we are thrilled to be sponsoring Cara-Friend’s Awareness Teacher programme, to help influence our future leaders to respect and support all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Northern Ireland.”
In September of last year, Baker & McKenzie’s London office implemented “Gender Transition Guidelines.” Following the implementation of the Firm’s “North America Gender Transition and Identity Guidelines,” the London Office guidelines are intended to: “support transitioning employees and ensure that the Firm, and all relevant managers and employees, support individuals through their transition. This includes, for example, a Workplace Transition Plan which provides a framework for the transitioning individual, their line manager and HR to follow.”
In December of 2017, Baker & McKenzie advised the homosexual group called “Stonewall” as it fought against what it called an “ultra-orthodox Charedi Jewish Community.”
Baker & McKenzie’s statement says that the case was about “the right of a transgender woman to have direct contact with her children who belong to the ultra-orthodox Charedi Jewish Community. The case raised the questions of human rights and discrimination, in evaluating a child’s welfare.”
In 2016, Baker & McKenzie was named “Best Place to Work for LGBT Equality” by the Human Rights Campaign.
Moreover, the Secretary of State’s argument that the crossed keys used in InfoVaticana’s application for its trademarked logo is a violation of the Vatican’s intellectual property in the form of “State Symbols.” is rather ingenuous.
Such argumentation would imply that any portion of the formal symbols representing Vatican City (the Cross, the keys, a tassel, a gold and white flag) are prohibited from use by any entity without express permission from the Vatican.
If this is actually the case, then the Vatican would need to pursue lawsuits against the following as well: The Society of the Crossed Keys, Prime Real Estate of Florida, Metro Local Locksmith,
Cross Keys Animal Hospital, The Cross Keys Inn and York Minster.
There seems hardly a day passes by that the Holy See does not see itself immersed in yet another controversy.
It will be interesting to see how this dispute is eventually resolved and what the reaction will be to having hired Baker & MacKenzie to represent the Holy See.
CARDINAL COCCOPALMERIO'S RESIGNATION ACCEPTED BY POPE FRANCIS
Pope Francis has accepted the resignation of Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, President of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts since 2007, who turned 80 years old March 6.
The Council is tasked with preparing official interpretations of Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts of Canon Law, which must be approved by the Pope, when questions regarding its meaning or application arise.
The Council also provides canonical guidance to Bishops, religious orders, and offices of the Roman Curia.
Cardinal Coccopalmerio has already begun living in Milan, his native city. Hisretirement has been long expected.
It seems likely that the Cardinal’s successor could be Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrietta, a Spaniard, who was appointed Secretary to the Council in 2007, at the same time Cardinal Coccopalmerio was appointed president. Bishop Arrietta, 66, was ordained a priest of Opus Dei, and was founding Dean of the Canon Law school at the prelature’s Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome.
In a 2017 booklet on the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, Cardinal Coccopalmerio wrote that “the Church could admit to Penance and to the Eucharist faithful who find themselves in an illegitimate union when two essential conditions occur: they want to change the situation, but they are unable to fulfill their desire.”
The Council is tasked with preparing official interpretations of Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts of Canon Law, which must be approved by the Pope, when questions regarding its meaning or application arise.
The Council also provides canonical guidance to Bishops, religious orders, and offices of the Roman Curia.
Cardinal Coccopalmerio has already begun living in Milan, his native city. Hisretirement has been long expected.
It seems likely that the Cardinal’s successor could be Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrietta, a Spaniard, who was appointed Secretary to the Council in 2007, at the same time Cardinal Coccopalmerio was appointed president. Bishop Arrietta, 66, was ordained a priest of Opus Dei, and was founding Dean of the Canon Law school at the prelature’s Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome.
In a 2017 booklet on the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, Cardinal Coccopalmerio wrote that “the Church could admit to Penance and to the Eucharist faithful who find themselves in an illegitimate union when two essential conditions occur: they want to change the situation, but they are unable to fulfill their desire.”
Sunday, March 11, 2018
FINALLY, A POPE CRITICIZES STIPENDS FOR MASSES
The Church’s catechesis regarding Mass intentions and the practice of stipends has been and continues to be deplorable and scandalous.
Finally (in my lifetime), a Pope has had the courage to at least address the matter and label it for the reprehensible practice it has been and continues to be.
On Wednesday, Pope Francis issued a harsh critique of the trend to ask parishioners for a financial contribution in order to have Mass said for a loved one, saying that to make a personal offering is fine, but the liturgy should never have a price tag.
“If I have someone who is in need, relatives and friends, I can name them in that moment, internally in silence,” he said, referring to the moments of silence during the Eucharistic Prayer recited in Mass.
However, he also discussed the expectation in many parishes of having the faithful pay for a Mass to be offered for a specific person.
“The Mass,” he said, “is not paid for, redemption is free. If you want to make an offering, okay, but the Mass cannot be paid for.”
The Holy Father spoke during his March 7 General Audience, which this week centered on the Eucharistic Prayer as part of his ongoing catechesis on Mass and the Eucharist.
Ask the average Catholic about the Church’s official teaching on the subject and you will find that most believe that they are “buying a Mass” which will be offered solely for the person whom they are asking be remembered at a specific celebration of the Eucharist.
But, in fact, the official teaching of the Church is that no one receives any more graces or merit by being specifically remembered than someone who is for whom a Mass intention is never offered.
So, what actually happens when a specific individual is remembered by way of a Mass intention and offering?
No more or less than what happens by not having that person remembered.
The graces flowing from the Eucharist are infinite, and apply equally to every human being who has ever lived. Grace from the Eucharist comes to all of us, whether or not a particular intention is remembered or offered at a specific celebration of the Mass.
The ancient custom of providing gifts (stips) to a Priest in response for his offering Mass began when the Church was quite poor. The gift that a Priest received for celebrating his daily Mass for a specific intention was oftentimes his sole source of income.
Over time, abuses arose on account of human weakness and avarice. The custom of offering stips (gifts) to the Priest degenerated into the practice of providing a stipend (payment) for service.
The pre-Reformation practice of communities of Priests who had no other ministry except to say Mass all day was a logical result of holding such abuse.
Martin Luther remarked he once watched three consecutive Masses being said on the main altar of Rome's St. Peter in Chains Church in less than a half hour.
Whole religious communities were not only supported by stipends; they got rich from them. The faster Masses were said, the more Masses could be said. Priests didn't even waste time reading the Eucharistic formularies; many simply memorized one formula and kept repeating it over and over again.
Thankfully, the Council of Trent got rid of the worst stipend abuses — for instance, they limited Priests to just one Mass stipend a day, except on special occasions — but not even those 16th-century reforming Bishops had the courage to completely abolish the practice. By then, it was too deeply ingrained into Catholic people's approach to the Faith.
Still today, in many poor countries, a Priest’s Mass stipend remains a primary source of his support.
While Mass stipends in developed nations do not serve the same purpose today, the Church’s laws surrounding the teaching on Mass stipends remains essentially the same.
The problem that was and remains is this: once the Church began to look at the Eucharist as a thing instead of an action, it became a commodity. In some sense, like all commodities, it could be bought and sold.
And, if the truth be told (as Pope Francis just attempted telling it), this is the common understanding of Catholics: that they “buy” a Mass by way of "paying the Priest" a stipend to have a particular intention remembered.
In my own personal experience, I remember serving on an ad hoc Committee established by the Presbyteral Council of the Archdiocese of Saint Louis to address the matter of Priests’ salaries which were woefully insufficient and, quite honestly, insulting to the Church's teachings on a just wage.
The members of the Committee formally requested that Archbishop John May suppress the practice of Mass stipends being used to augment Priests’ incomes. The Archbishop would hear none of this. The practice continues to this very day in the Archdiocese of Saint Louis.
A dear Priest friend of mine in a diocese where the Priests voluntarily agreed not to personally take Mass stipends has told me of his personal knowledge that a number of Pastors did not hesitate to reduce Masses during the week.
I long ago stopped personally accepting stipends for Mass or associating any fee for Sacramental or spiritual services. Any such offerings were placed in a special fund from which I administered financial help to the poor of the parish.
I am aware that my feelings about stipends and fees connected to the Sacraments may be rare among my Priest-brothers.
I also believe that Catholics have no major issues regarding stipends because they simply want their loved one’s not to be forgotten. Seeing their names in the Mass Intentions section of their parish bulletin gives them some sort of ongoing presence even after they have died.
But I do welcome the words of Pope Francis in reminding us all that the Mass and the Grace of Redemption comes to us as pure and unconditional gift from Our Heavenly Father through the Sacrifice of Jesus for our sins.
We would do well to keep in mind that, at every moment of every day wherever and whenever a Mass is offered, we and all our loved ones, living and deceased, are remembered before Our Heavenly Father and the Grace that flows from Calvary comes to us abundantly and generously from the wounds of Christ Himself.
That gift no amount of money, no offering, stip or stipend, can ever match or purchase.
Finally (in my lifetime), a Pope has had the courage to at least address the matter and label it for the reprehensible practice it has been and continues to be.
On Wednesday, Pope Francis issued a harsh critique of the trend to ask parishioners for a financial contribution in order to have Mass said for a loved one, saying that to make a personal offering is fine, but the liturgy should never have a price tag.
“If I have someone who is in need, relatives and friends, I can name them in that moment, internally in silence,” he said, referring to the moments of silence during the Eucharistic Prayer recited in Mass.
However, he also discussed the expectation in many parishes of having the faithful pay for a Mass to be offered for a specific person.
“The Mass,” he said, “is not paid for, redemption is free. If you want to make an offering, okay, but the Mass cannot be paid for.”
The Holy Father spoke during his March 7 General Audience, which this week centered on the Eucharistic Prayer as part of his ongoing catechesis on Mass and the Eucharist.
Ask the average Catholic about the Church’s official teaching on the subject and you will find that most believe that they are “buying a Mass” which will be offered solely for the person whom they are asking be remembered at a specific celebration of the Eucharist.
But, in fact, the official teaching of the Church is that no one receives any more graces or merit by being specifically remembered than someone who is for whom a Mass intention is never offered.
So, what actually happens when a specific individual is remembered by way of a Mass intention and offering?
No more or less than what happens by not having that person remembered.
The graces flowing from the Eucharist are infinite, and apply equally to every human being who has ever lived. Grace from the Eucharist comes to all of us, whether or not a particular intention is remembered or offered at a specific celebration of the Mass.
The ancient custom of providing gifts (stips) to a Priest in response for his offering Mass began when the Church was quite poor. The gift that a Priest received for celebrating his daily Mass for a specific intention was oftentimes his sole source of income.
Over time, abuses arose on account of human weakness and avarice. The custom of offering stips (gifts) to the Priest degenerated into the practice of providing a stipend (payment) for service.
The pre-Reformation practice of communities of Priests who had no other ministry except to say Mass all day was a logical result of holding such abuse.
Martin Luther remarked he once watched three consecutive Masses being said on the main altar of Rome's St. Peter in Chains Church in less than a half hour.
Whole religious communities were not only supported by stipends; they got rich from them. The faster Masses were said, the more Masses could be said. Priests didn't even waste time reading the Eucharistic formularies; many simply memorized one formula and kept repeating it over and over again.
Thankfully, the Council of Trent got rid of the worst stipend abuses — for instance, they limited Priests to just one Mass stipend a day, except on special occasions — but not even those 16th-century reforming Bishops had the courage to completely abolish the practice. By then, it was too deeply ingrained into Catholic people's approach to the Faith.
Still today, in many poor countries, a Priest’s Mass stipend remains a primary source of his support.
While Mass stipends in developed nations do not serve the same purpose today, the Church’s laws surrounding the teaching on Mass stipends remains essentially the same.
The problem that was and remains is this: once the Church began to look at the Eucharist as a thing instead of an action, it became a commodity. In some sense, like all commodities, it could be bought and sold.
And, if the truth be told (as Pope Francis just attempted telling it), this is the common understanding of Catholics: that they “buy” a Mass by way of "paying the Priest" a stipend to have a particular intention remembered.
In my own personal experience, I remember serving on an ad hoc Committee established by the Presbyteral Council of the Archdiocese of Saint Louis to address the matter of Priests’ salaries which were woefully insufficient and, quite honestly, insulting to the Church's teachings on a just wage.
The members of the Committee formally requested that Archbishop John May suppress the practice of Mass stipends being used to augment Priests’ incomes. The Archbishop would hear none of this. The practice continues to this very day in the Archdiocese of Saint Louis.
A dear Priest friend of mine in a diocese where the Priests voluntarily agreed not to personally take Mass stipends has told me of his personal knowledge that a number of Pastors did not hesitate to reduce Masses during the week.
I long ago stopped personally accepting stipends for Mass or associating any fee for Sacramental or spiritual services. Any such offerings were placed in a special fund from which I administered financial help to the poor of the parish.
I am aware that my feelings about stipends and fees connected to the Sacraments may be rare among my Priest-brothers.
I also believe that Catholics have no major issues regarding stipends because they simply want their loved one’s not to be forgotten. Seeing their names in the Mass Intentions section of their parish bulletin gives them some sort of ongoing presence even after they have died.
But I do welcome the words of Pope Francis in reminding us all that the Mass and the Grace of Redemption comes to us as pure and unconditional gift from Our Heavenly Father through the Sacrifice of Jesus for our sins.
We would do well to keep in mind that, at every moment of every day wherever and whenever a Mass is offered, we and all our loved ones, living and deceased, are remembered before Our Heavenly Father and the Grace that flows from Calvary comes to us abundantly and generously from the wounds of Christ Himself.
That gift no amount of money, no offering, stip or stipend, can ever match or purchase.
Saturday, March 10, 2018
FEWER ADULTS CHOOSING MARRIAGE: CIVILIZED SOCIETY HANGS IN THE BALANCE
According to a recent study, wedding bells are not ringing for the majority of younger adults in the United States, while marriage rates for older adults have increased over the past 50 years.
The study, conducted by the Institute for Family Studies, showed that only 48.6 percent of adults in the U.S. between the ages of 18-64 are currently married. This constitutes an all-time low.
According to the research, there are a number of different factors playing into this decline.
More couples are marrying later, or have decided to live with their significant other instead of getting married. Additionally, the number of never-married adults in this age group rose from 26 percent in 1990 to 36 percent in 2016.
The study also found that individuals who are under the age of 35 and those without a college education are more prone to staying unmarried.
In addition, the decline in marriage for young adults was seen across the board, from varying racial and ethnic groups, and included both men and women.
If there is anything positive to be found in this study, it is the fact that while a smaller share of adults is married today, among those who are married, the good news is that their likelihood of divorce is also lower.
Marriage for adults in their retired years, 65 and older, is seeing a slight increase, rising from 36 percent to 45 percent in 2016.
Factors such as longer life expectancies, particularly among men, were a major contributor in the increase of marriage for older adults. While older men previously outnumbered women among married adults in their age group, the gap has become more narrow in recent years. Today, for every 100 married men above the age of 65, there are 80 married women – compared to 64 women in 1960.
The study also noted that the divorce rate among this age group has roughly remained the same – around 3 divorces per 1,000 married adults since 2008.
Future trends indicate that the gap between married and non-married younger adults will most likely continue to grow.
The bedrock of society, the nuclear family, has been set upon by forces which threaten to bring it to extinction.
How humanity will fare in the face of this negative barrage against marriage and the family will be the topic of future research and study.
Let us hope there is a civilized society left to learn from those findings.
The study, conducted by the Institute for Family Studies, showed that only 48.6 percent of adults in the U.S. between the ages of 18-64 are currently married. This constitutes an all-time low.
According to the research, there are a number of different factors playing into this decline.
More couples are marrying later, or have decided to live with their significant other instead of getting married. Additionally, the number of never-married adults in this age group rose from 26 percent in 1990 to 36 percent in 2016.
The study also found that individuals who are under the age of 35 and those without a college education are more prone to staying unmarried.
In addition, the decline in marriage for young adults was seen across the board, from varying racial and ethnic groups, and included both men and women.
If there is anything positive to be found in this study, it is the fact that while a smaller share of adults is married today, among those who are married, the good news is that their likelihood of divorce is also lower.
Marriage for adults in their retired years, 65 and older, is seeing a slight increase, rising from 36 percent to 45 percent in 2016.
Factors such as longer life expectancies, particularly among men, were a major contributor in the increase of marriage for older adults. While older men previously outnumbered women among married adults in their age group, the gap has become more narrow in recent years. Today, for every 100 married men above the age of 65, there are 80 married women – compared to 64 women in 1960.
The study also noted that the divorce rate among this age group has roughly remained the same – around 3 divorces per 1,000 married adults since 2008.
Future trends indicate that the gap between married and non-married younger adults will most likely continue to grow.
The bedrock of society, the nuclear family, has been set upon by forces which threaten to bring it to extinction.
How humanity will fare in the face of this negative barrage against marriage and the family will be the topic of future research and study.
Let us hope there is a civilized society left to learn from those findings.
Friday, March 9, 2018
POPE FRANCIS POPULAR AS EVER AMONG MAJORITY OF AMERICAN CATHOLICS
As Francis approaches the fifth anniversary of his Papacy next week (March 13), the Pew Research Center has published the following findings from a recently concluded (January 31, 2015) survey of American Catholics.
First, Pope Francis remains very popular among US Catholics, 84% of whom say they have a favorable opinion of him. This is statistically identical to the 85% of U.S. Catholics who had a positive opinion of Pope Francis in 2014, just a year after the start of his Papacy. Even larger shares of U.S. Catholics see the Pope as compassionate (94%) and humble (91%), exactly the same as in 2015.
Second, the expected “Francis effect" has never materialized. The Pope’s consistently high approval ratings haven’t led to an increase in Mass attendance among U.S. Catholics. About four-in-ten (38%) now say they attend Mass at least once a week, slightly less than the 41% who said so in a series of aggregated surveys conducted in 2012 and the beginning of 2013, right before Francis was elected pope.
Third, among self-confessed conservative Catholics, there is a growing trend to see the Pope as being too liberal (34%) as well as naïve (24%), up from 19% and 15%, respectively, in 2015.
Four, fewer American Catholics now give Francis high marks for addressing one of the greatest challenges facing the church: the sexual abuse of minors carried out by priests. Between 2015 and 2018, the share of U.S. Catholics who give the Pontiff “good” or “excellent” marks for handling the sex abuse scandal dropped from 55% to 45%.
Five, most Catholics say Francis has done at least a little to make the Church more accepting of homosexuality as well as divorce and remarriage. About three-quarters of U.S. Catholics say Francis has done either a little (41%) or a lot (33%) to increase acceptance of homosexuality, while seven-in-ten say he has done either a little (43%) or a lot (26%) to increase acceptance of divorce and remarriage.
Finally, six-in-ten Catholics (58%) say the Pope represents a positive change for the church – down from 68% who felt that way early in his Papacy in 2014, but still quite high. About six-in-ten Catholics (58%) also say Pope Francis has done an excellent or good job appointing new Bishops and Cardinals.
I find these surveys very interesting for they are as much a “report card” on American Catholicism as they are on the Pontificate of Pope Francis.
One thing appears certain.
Long held moral teachings and standards (especially regarding the Sacrament of Marriage and human sexuality) have shifted in America as elsewhere among the nations of the West.
How that shift will affect the practice and expression of the Catholic Faith among Americans is still anyone’s guess.
And, whether or not any attempt to reverse that shift by the election of a Papal successor who is more conservative will prove beneficial or disastrous to the American Church remains to be seen.
First, Pope Francis remains very popular among US Catholics, 84% of whom say they have a favorable opinion of him. This is statistically identical to the 85% of U.S. Catholics who had a positive opinion of Pope Francis in 2014, just a year after the start of his Papacy. Even larger shares of U.S. Catholics see the Pope as compassionate (94%) and humble (91%), exactly the same as in 2015.
Second, the expected “Francis effect" has never materialized. The Pope’s consistently high approval ratings haven’t led to an increase in Mass attendance among U.S. Catholics. About four-in-ten (38%) now say they attend Mass at least once a week, slightly less than the 41% who said so in a series of aggregated surveys conducted in 2012 and the beginning of 2013, right before Francis was elected pope.
Third, among self-confessed conservative Catholics, there is a growing trend to see the Pope as being too liberal (34%) as well as naïve (24%), up from 19% and 15%, respectively, in 2015.
Four, fewer American Catholics now give Francis high marks for addressing one of the greatest challenges facing the church: the sexual abuse of minors carried out by priests. Between 2015 and 2018, the share of U.S. Catholics who give the Pontiff “good” or “excellent” marks for handling the sex abuse scandal dropped from 55% to 45%.
Five, most Catholics say Francis has done at least a little to make the Church more accepting of homosexuality as well as divorce and remarriage. About three-quarters of U.S. Catholics say Francis has done either a little (41%) or a lot (33%) to increase acceptance of homosexuality, while seven-in-ten say he has done either a little (43%) or a lot (26%) to increase acceptance of divorce and remarriage.
Finally, six-in-ten Catholics (58%) say the Pope represents a positive change for the church – down from 68% who felt that way early in his Papacy in 2014, but still quite high. About six-in-ten Catholics (58%) also say Pope Francis has done an excellent or good job appointing new Bishops and Cardinals.
I find these surveys very interesting for they are as much a “report card” on American Catholicism as they are on the Pontificate of Pope Francis.
One thing appears certain.
Long held moral teachings and standards (especially regarding the Sacrament of Marriage and human sexuality) have shifted in America as elsewhere among the nations of the West.
How that shift will affect the practice and expression of the Catholic Faith among Americans is still anyone’s guess.
And, whether or not any attempt to reverse that shift by the election of a Papal successor who is more conservative will prove beneficial or disastrous to the American Church remains to be seen.
Thursday, March 8, 2018
GOOD AND LONG OVERDUE NEWS INDEED!
It’s official!
Blessed Paul VI will be declared a Saint in late October at the end of the Synod of Bishops, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State, has announced.
After mentioning the late Pope in a speech to the International Catholic Migration Commission March 6, Cardinal Parolin confirmed that the canonization will take place at the end of the October Synod.
The timing of his canonization is fitting especially since it was Pope Paul VI who revived the ancient custom of synodal gatherings as part of the reforms instituted as a result of Vatican Council II.
As I shared on this blogsite, the Congregation for Saints’ Causes voted on February 6th to recognize as a miracle the healing of an unborn baby and helping her reach full term. The baby’s mother, who was told she had a very high risk of miscarrying the baby, had prayed for Blessed Paul’s intercession a few days after his beatification by Pope Francis in 2014.
Blessed Paul, who was born Giovanni Battista Montini, served as Supreme Pontiff from 1963 to 1978.
And as I share the joy of this announcement, I am delighted to be able to celebrate the fact that Salvadoran Archbishop Óscar Arnulfo Romero, murdered by a right-wing death squad in 1980 at the start of the country's civil war, finally will be canonized.
Archbishop Romero, who had denounced a crackdown on leftist opponents of the country's military government, was killed while celebrating Mass in March 1980. Vatican theologians declared him a “martyr", because he was killed in odium fidei — "in hatred of the faith."
The Archbishop’s path to sainthood shamefully has been a long one. His process was intentionally stalled during the Pontificate of Pope Saint John Paul II who very publicly and repeated took exception to the liberation theology movement which had arisen in Latin America during the 1960s.
However, in 2014, Pope Francis said Romero's case for sainthood had been "unlocked" after being put on hold by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The delay is over and the honor and respect due him on account of his heroic witness to the Faith can now be recognized and celebrated universally by the Church.
Blessed Paul VI will be declared a Saint in late October at the end of the Synod of Bishops, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State, has announced.
After mentioning the late Pope in a speech to the International Catholic Migration Commission March 6, Cardinal Parolin confirmed that the canonization will take place at the end of the October Synod.
The timing of his canonization is fitting especially since it was Pope Paul VI who revived the ancient custom of synodal gatherings as part of the reforms instituted as a result of Vatican Council II.
As I shared on this blogsite, the Congregation for Saints’ Causes voted on February 6th to recognize as a miracle the healing of an unborn baby and helping her reach full term. The baby’s mother, who was told she had a very high risk of miscarrying the baby, had prayed for Blessed Paul’s intercession a few days after his beatification by Pope Francis in 2014.
Blessed Paul, who was born Giovanni Battista Montini, served as Supreme Pontiff from 1963 to 1978.
And as I share the joy of this announcement, I am delighted to be able to celebrate the fact that Salvadoran Archbishop Óscar Arnulfo Romero, murdered by a right-wing death squad in 1980 at the start of the country's civil war, finally will be canonized.
Archbishop Romero, who had denounced a crackdown on leftist opponents of the country's military government, was killed while celebrating Mass in March 1980. Vatican theologians declared him a “martyr", because he was killed in odium fidei — "in hatred of the faith."
The Archbishop’s path to sainthood shamefully has been a long one. His process was intentionally stalled during the Pontificate of Pope Saint John Paul II who very publicly and repeated took exception to the liberation theology movement which had arisen in Latin America during the 1960s.
However, in 2014, Pope Francis said Romero's case for sainthood had been "unlocked" after being put on hold by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The delay is over and the honor and respect due him on account of his heroic witness to the Faith can now be recognized and celebrated universally by the Church.
Wednesday, March 7, 2018
A WELCOME MESSAGE WE ALL NEED TO HEED
Pope Francis explains in his prayer intentions video for March that “the time in which we live calls us to develop a deep capacity for discernment.”
A woman appears in the video walking through a park with a map in her hand while trying to find the right path. She decides to ask various people for directions. However, each one of them gives her a different answer.
Desperate because she can't find the answer, the woman decides to sit down on a bench. She puts the map down and asks God for help. Through her internal reflection, she discovers the answer she was looking for.
The Pope asks Catholics “to discern the Lord's voice among all the voices; which is His voice that drives us to the resurrection, the voice that frees us from falling into the culture of death.”
The Holy Father explains that everyone needs to internally decipher what the Lord asks of him or her to live with love and continue his mission of love.
Finally, Pope Francis asks the Church to recognize the urgent need for formation in spiritual discernment, on an individual level as well as in communities.
A woman appears in the video walking through a park with a map in her hand while trying to find the right path. She decides to ask various people for directions. However, each one of them gives her a different answer.
Desperate because she can't find the answer, the woman decides to sit down on a bench. She puts the map down and asks God for help. Through her internal reflection, she discovers the answer she was looking for.
The Pope asks Catholics “to discern the Lord's voice among all the voices; which is His voice that drives us to the resurrection, the voice that frees us from falling into the culture of death.”
The Holy Father explains that everyone needs to internally decipher what the Lord asks of him or her to live with love and continue his mission of love.
Finally, Pope Francis asks the Church to recognize the urgent need for formation in spiritual discernment, on an individual level as well as in communities.
Tuesday, March 6, 2018
A "PARADIGM SHIFT" NEEDED IN CATHOLIC EDUCATION
Republican lawmakers in Tennessee have finally gotten honest with their constituents and officially abandoned their lack luster push to legalize school vouchers in the State.
In response, a network of struggling Roman Catholic schools in Memphis has announced dramatic plans to keep its campuses open and serving students—converting all the schools into public charter schools.
This is not the first time this strategy has been deployed to keep urban Catholic K-12 campuses open.
And as enrollment in Catholic schools continues to plunge nationwide—a trend in part driven by competition from charter schools—such conversions may become more commonplace.
Financial instability is at the root of the Catholic Diocese of Memphis' decision to close the schools.
The Memphis Jubilee Catholic Schools Network, which served mostly low-income students free of tuition, relied on donations to run. Without the hope of getting public money through state-funded school vouchers, the Diocese has decided to shutter the schools at the end of next school year.
Parents were informed by the Diocese that an independent group was planning to open a charter network in place of the Jubilee schools where current students could "maintain continuity in education with a strong foundation already in place."
That group, newly-formed and led by the president of a local Catholic university, notified the Shelby County school district last week it plans to submit applications to open charter schools in each of the Jubilee network school buildings for the 2019-20 school year.
Should the school district approve all of the applications, the new group would become the largest charter network in the city.
If the Jubilee network schools make the switch to charters, they will join a small but growing club of Catholic schools in cities such as Indianapolis, Miami, and Washington that have opted to shed their religious identities to remain open.
A 2014 report from EdChoice (formally called the Friedman Foundation), found that switching sectors dramatically increased enrollment and resources for schools.
Local dioceses, which often continue to own the buildings and rent them to the newly converted charter schools, can use the rent money to help the parishes.
This strategy could do much for the plight facing Catholic education nationally.
Catholic school enrollment has plummeted from 5.2 million during its heyday in the 1960s to about 1.9 million today. And how many of that number of Catholic school students are actually Catholic is perhaps among the best kept secrets since no reliable statistics have ever been made available.
A mixture of changing demographics, rising tuition costs, and increased competition from charter schools—some of which, with their strict codes of conduct and uniforms, appear very similar to parochial schools—have hit urban Catholic schools especially hard.
But the National Catholic Education Association (NCEA) and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have remained adamantine in their resistance to the charter school strategy.
In the meantime, an enormous amount of human and financial resource continues to be allocated to a system which is facing rapid extinction.
According to some, Pope Francis has called for a “paradigm shift” in the way the Church accompanies people who are struggling in their faith and moral lives.
Perhaps, the NCEA and USCCB need to consider conversion to charter schools as a “paradigm shift” in the Catholic education and formation of its children, the future generations of the Church.
Such adaptations and changes are difficult to make for those in authority and those who are personally invested in the old models of Catholic parochial education.
They should be mindful of this wise advice and caution and remember the words of every institution that has died and is presently on its way to the graveyard: “But we’ve always done it this way!”
As long as the NCEA and USCCB continue to support the “dinosaur” of the traditional Catholic parochial school system, the Catholic education and formation of children will continue to be put in jeopardy.
Let us all remember what happened to the dinosaur!
In response, a network of struggling Roman Catholic schools in Memphis has announced dramatic plans to keep its campuses open and serving students—converting all the schools into public charter schools.
This is not the first time this strategy has been deployed to keep urban Catholic K-12 campuses open.
And as enrollment in Catholic schools continues to plunge nationwide—a trend in part driven by competition from charter schools—such conversions may become more commonplace.
Financial instability is at the root of the Catholic Diocese of Memphis' decision to close the schools.
The Memphis Jubilee Catholic Schools Network, which served mostly low-income students free of tuition, relied on donations to run. Without the hope of getting public money through state-funded school vouchers, the Diocese has decided to shutter the schools at the end of next school year.
Parents were informed by the Diocese that an independent group was planning to open a charter network in place of the Jubilee schools where current students could "maintain continuity in education with a strong foundation already in place."
That group, newly-formed and led by the president of a local Catholic university, notified the Shelby County school district last week it plans to submit applications to open charter schools in each of the Jubilee network school buildings for the 2019-20 school year.
Should the school district approve all of the applications, the new group would become the largest charter network in the city.
If the Jubilee network schools make the switch to charters, they will join a small but growing club of Catholic schools in cities such as Indianapolis, Miami, and Washington that have opted to shed their religious identities to remain open.
A 2014 report from EdChoice (formally called the Friedman Foundation), found that switching sectors dramatically increased enrollment and resources for schools.
Local dioceses, which often continue to own the buildings and rent them to the newly converted charter schools, can use the rent money to help the parishes.
This strategy could do much for the plight facing Catholic education nationally.
Catholic school enrollment has plummeted from 5.2 million during its heyday in the 1960s to about 1.9 million today. And how many of that number of Catholic school students are actually Catholic is perhaps among the best kept secrets since no reliable statistics have ever been made available.
A mixture of changing demographics, rising tuition costs, and increased competition from charter schools—some of which, with their strict codes of conduct and uniforms, appear very similar to parochial schools—have hit urban Catholic schools especially hard.
But the National Catholic Education Association (NCEA) and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have remained adamantine in their resistance to the charter school strategy.
In the meantime, an enormous amount of human and financial resource continues to be allocated to a system which is facing rapid extinction.
According to some, Pope Francis has called for a “paradigm shift” in the way the Church accompanies people who are struggling in their faith and moral lives.
Perhaps, the NCEA and USCCB need to consider conversion to charter schools as a “paradigm shift” in the Catholic education and formation of its children, the future generations of the Church.
Such adaptations and changes are difficult to make for those in authority and those who are personally invested in the old models of Catholic parochial education.
They should be mindful of this wise advice and caution and remember the words of every institution that has died and is presently on its way to the graveyard: “But we’ve always done it this way!”
As long as the NCEA and USCCB continue to support the “dinosaur” of the traditional Catholic parochial school system, the Catholic education and formation of children will continue to be put in jeopardy.
Let us all remember what happened to the dinosaur!
Monday, March 5, 2018
WHAT WE WON'T HEAR IN THE DEBATES ABOUT THE VALENTINE'S DAY SCHOOL MASSACRE
On Valentine's Day, 17 people — including students and teachers— at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, were killed by a 19-year-old former student.
This was the 10th mass school shooting in the United States in the past five years.
Massacres of this type occur with such frequency that law enforcement has now established a separate category of crime which identifies a mass shooting as one where at least four people are killed in a single incident.
Once again, those immediately affected and the nation itself collectively will ask: why?
And yet again, we will hear the noisy and meaningless debates over gun control.
This shooting in Florida has added another political aspect to the violence with politicians and police turning attention away from their failures and focusing in upon the need for more effective "mental health screening".
As in the past, the same tired cliched explanations will be uttered by those in public authority with the means to do something real and positive about protecting school children, teachers and staff: poverty, lack of opportunity, the proliferation of violence in entertainment and on social media.
But here's the real explanation the politicians, law enforcement, and public officials won’t mention and certainly are not open to hearing: the lack of moral formation that is so prevalent among our young people and exhibited throughout our modern day culture.
God, good and evil, right and wrong have been declared to be subjects which are anathema in schools and anywhere in the public forum.
Moral values no longer exercise any governorship over choices people make.
There is a whole new value system which has replaced traditional morality: instant self-gratification, the immediate and un-filtered fulfillment of oneself.
The fact is personal gratification is the new gospel in our society and certainly among our youth.
Of course, when such liberality and license encounter the deep resentments which find harbor in certain troubled individuals, their depression and despair are expressed in dramatic acts of violence often exerted upon the weakest and most vulnerable.
Secularists have been successful in removing God, prayer, moral and civic formation from the classroom.
Hooray for them! An empty and horrific victory!
For they must accept that the blood of the innocent victims is on their hands as the value of human life and common decency which those values instilled has been erased from classrooms.
Late night talk show hosts and daytime gurus love to disparage anything to do with faith or religion, holding up for ridicule anyone who would suggest that the Evangelical Counsels contained in Sacred Scripture are a pathway to successful personal and social well-being.
These sociopaths (for that is what they are) are quite popular and enjoy legions of followers. They are the "blind leading the blind" of whom the Lord spoke.
Let Americans, one and all, accept part of the blame on account of our indifference and our penchant for not holding those in authority accountable for their incompetence and political posturing.
God have mercy on those who have died, their families and dear ones.
God have mercy on our country.
Help us, Lord, turn away from a culture of hedonism and death toward a culture of life and decency which flows from the knowledge of Your Will and Your Way.
This was the 10th mass school shooting in the United States in the past five years.
Massacres of this type occur with such frequency that law enforcement has now established a separate category of crime which identifies a mass shooting as one where at least four people are killed in a single incident.
Once again, those immediately affected and the nation itself collectively will ask: why?
And yet again, we will hear the noisy and meaningless debates over gun control.
This shooting in Florida has added another political aspect to the violence with politicians and police turning attention away from their failures and focusing in upon the need for more effective "mental health screening".
As in the past, the same tired cliched explanations will be uttered by those in public authority with the means to do something real and positive about protecting school children, teachers and staff: poverty, lack of opportunity, the proliferation of violence in entertainment and on social media.
But here's the real explanation the politicians, law enforcement, and public officials won’t mention and certainly are not open to hearing: the lack of moral formation that is so prevalent among our young people and exhibited throughout our modern day culture.
God, good and evil, right and wrong have been declared to be subjects which are anathema in schools and anywhere in the public forum.
Moral values no longer exercise any governorship over choices people make.
There is a whole new value system which has replaced traditional morality: instant self-gratification, the immediate and un-filtered fulfillment of oneself.
The fact is personal gratification is the new gospel in our society and certainly among our youth.
Of course, when such liberality and license encounter the deep resentments which find harbor in certain troubled individuals, their depression and despair are expressed in dramatic acts of violence often exerted upon the weakest and most vulnerable.
Secularists have been successful in removing God, prayer, moral and civic formation from the classroom.
Hooray for them! An empty and horrific victory!
For they must accept that the blood of the innocent victims is on their hands as the value of human life and common decency which those values instilled has been erased from classrooms.
Late night talk show hosts and daytime gurus love to disparage anything to do with faith or religion, holding up for ridicule anyone who would suggest that the Evangelical Counsels contained in Sacred Scripture are a pathway to successful personal and social well-being.
These sociopaths (for that is what they are) are quite popular and enjoy legions of followers. They are the "blind leading the blind" of whom the Lord spoke.
Let Americans, one and all, accept part of the blame on account of our indifference and our penchant for not holding those in authority accountable for their incompetence and political posturing.
God have mercy on those who have died, their families and dear ones.
God have mercy on our country.
Help us, Lord, turn away from a culture of hedonism and death toward a culture of life and decency which flows from the knowledge of Your Will and Your Way.
Saturday, March 3, 2018
WHO'S IN CHARGE OF APPOINTING BISHOPS ANYHOW?
What do Bishop Peter Okpaleke, former head of the Diocese of Ahiara in Nigeria, Bishop Juan Barros of the Chilean Diocese of Osorno and Joseph Cardinal Zen, retired Bishop of Hong Kong, share in common?
They are at the heart of a fundamental question which is being raised during the Pontificate of Pope Francis.
The question is this: who exercises final authority over the selection of Bishops? Is it the Pope? Protesting Clergy and laity who refused to accept a Bishop? Or a national government?
In the case of Bishop Okpaleke, it appears that Pope Francis has backed away from a previous ultimatum to the Priests of Ahiara whom he threatened to excommunicate if they did not each send him a letter of apology for their resistance to the Bishop’s appointment.
In the end, Pope Francis accepted Bishop Okpaleke’s resignation in pursuit of a greater good, peace in the besieged diocese.
In so doing, has Pope Francis signaled his willingness (even if reluctant) to relinquish his supreme autonomy as regards the selection of Bishops?
What happens in Chile with Bishop Barros remains to be seen. Certainly, the opposition to Bishop Barros is no less intense in Osorno, Chile than it was against Bishop Okpaleke in Ahiara in Nigeria.
And what eventually is decided regarding the selection of Bishops in China will be critical as the Holy See desires to establish closer ties with one-fifth of the world’s population and its Communist leadership.
As we near the Fifth Anniversary of Pope Francis’ election of the Office of Peter, questions such as these lead many to wonder what the legacy of this Holy Father will be and how the Papacy itself will be affected for decades, if not centuries, to come.
They are at the heart of a fundamental question which is being raised during the Pontificate of Pope Francis.
The question is this: who exercises final authority over the selection of Bishops? Is it the Pope? Protesting Clergy and laity who refused to accept a Bishop? Or a national government?
In the case of Bishop Okpaleke, it appears that Pope Francis has backed away from a previous ultimatum to the Priests of Ahiara whom he threatened to excommunicate if they did not each send him a letter of apology for their resistance to the Bishop’s appointment.
In the end, Pope Francis accepted Bishop Okpaleke’s resignation in pursuit of a greater good, peace in the besieged diocese.
In so doing, has Pope Francis signaled his willingness (even if reluctant) to relinquish his supreme autonomy as regards the selection of Bishops?
What happens in Chile with Bishop Barros remains to be seen. Certainly, the opposition to Bishop Barros is no less intense in Osorno, Chile than it was against Bishop Okpaleke in Ahiara in Nigeria.
And what eventually is decided regarding the selection of Bishops in China will be critical as the Holy See desires to establish closer ties with one-fifth of the world’s population and its Communist leadership.
As we near the Fifth Anniversary of Pope Francis’ election of the Office of Peter, questions such as these lead many to wonder what the legacy of this Holy Father will be and how the Papacy itself will be affected for decades, if not centuries, to come.