|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Should we fund
Catholic schools?
Fifth
Sunday of
January 2012:
Fourth Sunday after the Epiphany
|
|
|
|
This is the
delicate question1 raised by Bishop Campbell of
Lancaster, England, who is contemplating closing schools where
the majority of pupils and teachers are not Catholic. These
schools are Catholic in name only:
More than
nine-in-10 of the school’s pupils were Catholic a decade ago
but that number plummeted to just three per cent this year.2
Sacred
Heart Primary in Blackburn could become an Islamic faith
school due to an almost total lack of Catholics in attendance.
Bishop Campbell asked:
Faced
with fewer priests and smaller congregations, where should
our parishes and schools of the future be located? Where
should we consolidate and merge others?
Bishop
Campbell concluded:
We are living through a time of great transition for the
Church, in which Christianity changes from a religion
adhered to by the majority out of social convention to once
again being a way of discipleship deliberately chosen by
some, but not all; chosen by the faithful out of conviction…
The Church only exists to evangelize—that means buildings,
churches, parishes, schools and colleges are only valuable
insofar as they help the Church in that mission of
salvation!
The fateful
spectrum of an empty shell and a mere façade of the Faith is
before the very eyes of the bishops who are finally raising
the right questions to a 50-year old problem. And this problem
is true for the entire Western Catholic world. Relocation,
merging, the disappearance of teaching nuns and brothers, lay
recruits: these terms which were common for over two
generations are a sad but all too regular tale. We speak only
of numbers, but how many children formed in today’s average
Catholic high school will carry the flame of the Faith and
morals in the world tomorrow? That is the definite measure of
success for a Catholic school!
Another
episcopal conference—of Brazil this time—years ago already
faced the evidence of a diminishing Catholic Faith in that
formerly staunch Catholic country. It was not only the media
and the press targeting authority, family, and children; it
was not only the bad morals of pagans or the appealing
teachings of Protestant sects replete with American dollars.
One speaker was invited whose profession was business
advertising. His contribution made the first page of the daily
papers at the time. His discourse was roughly as follows:
The Catholic Church has the best advertising platform one
may dream of. You have the oldest “corporation” which had
first possession of the land. You are established in every
little town and hamlet with your prominent churches. You
have the means of drawing the attention of your “clients”
with the bells rung before the offices. You have the Sunday
Mass and sermon which allow you to demonstrate and give out
the “product”. You have also the exact means of checking the
results of your ‘advertisement’ with the confessional. You
have the most popular “logo” in the world: the Crucifix. So
what is the problem with your “company”? My opinion is that
your “company” is doing the same thing as Coca Cola giving
out Pepsi products: your “company” is in recession simply
because it has falsified the “product”.
Footnotes
1 Source:
LifeSiteNews article of January 6, 2012: "UK Catholic bishop:
should we continue funding schools that are ‘Catholic in name
only’?"
2 A pastoral
letter from the bishop of Lancaster for New Year’s Day 2012. |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Supreme
Court |
Libertas Ecclesiae versus Libertas
Religionis
Fourth
Sundayof
January 2012:
Third Sunday after the Epiphany
|
|
|
|
The
recently decided Supreme Court case of Hosanna Tabor
Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission highlights a significant confusion
of concepts that has occurred since the novelties of Vatican
II. The two distinct concepts of Libertas Ecclesiae
(freedom of the Church) and Libertas Religionis
(freedom of religion) have, in typical modernist fashion
become blurred and conflated.
The
first, freedom of the Church, is a moral good and was in fact
the rallying cry of the Gregorian Reform party in the great
restoration of the Church begun by Pope St. Gregory VII. To
understand the distinction we must understand the notion that
freedom in the abstract is morally neutral. To evaluate its
goodness we must ask “freedom for what end?”
Freedom of the Church as a concept means that the Church
should be free to accomplish her supernaturally instituted
mission, the honor and glory of God and the salvation of
souls. The civil authority may not enact laws which restrict
or hinder the Church from completing her mission, or put
another way, the civil law must ensure her freedom to achieve
her end.
Examples of times in which Libertas Ecclesiae was
restricted are the early centuries of Roman persecution and
the Dark Ages (approximately 600-1100 A.D). Throughout this
latter period, during which the rallying cry “Libertas
Ecclesiae” resonated from the defenders of the Church, the
civil rulers of secular society had amassed a great influence
over the operation of the Church. The Holy Father, for
example, was elected by the secular nobility of Rome. Bishops
were invested in office by, and swore oaths of loyalty to,
secular princes. These practices restricted the freedom of the
Church to fulfill her spiritual mission as many of her rulers
were beholden to secular princes who had the power to choose
and install Church officials for their own temporal
aggrandizement rather than for the salvation of souls. In this
sense, the preservation of the freedom of the Church as a
distinct perfect society free to govern herself independently
of the civil power is a moral good.
Libertas
Religionis
(freedom of
religion) is a very different type of freedom. It is freedom
to choose whatever religion (true or false) one wishes. Unlike
freedom of the Church which entails freedom to pursue a
supernaturally good end, freedom of religion is a freedom to
choose a false and evil end, a false religion.
The Tabor Case in itself¾and
in the commentary upon it¾conflates
these two distinct concepts. The case involves a Lutheran
community (the court calls it a church) which fired one of its
teachers who had elected to become a “minister” in addition to
a teacher. The teacher sued the Lutherans under federal
anti-discrimination law claiming she was fired as a result of
a disability. The court upheld the Lutherans’ argument that
federal anti-discrimination law contains a “ministerial
exception,” meaning that employment and salary decisions of
religious groups are not subject to federal
anti-discrimination review under the First Amendment of the
Constitution. The court opinion discusses the issue as one of
freedom of religion alongside discussing Constitutional
restrictions on the federal government becoming involved in
the decisions of religious groups as to the identity of their
ministers.
In one sense, this is a good result for the Catholic Church
in America. It means that bishops should not be liable for
defrocking homosexual priests or priests supporting abortion
or for refusing to ordain and assign women as pastors. If a
bishop claims he is restrained from disciplining a priest for
moral or doctrinal error on the grounds of fear of a lawsuit,
he has little legal ground to stand on (or moral for that
matter). The Church can use this “ministerial exception” as a
defense to anti-discrimination lawsuits.
Yet, the decision goes beyond this result and protects the
freedom not only of the Church but any false religion. On a
prudential level such a result may be tolerated for the good
of protecting the freedom of the Church from an increasingly
atheistic secular United States government bent on punishing
anyone who refuses to accept the liberal errors it promotes.
Yet, toleration is different from affirming a principle. The
principle is that the Church of Christ, that is
(not subsists in) the Catholic Church, must enjoy the
freedom of operation necessary to her mission.
This same freedom is not in justice due to so-called
ministers of false religions who perform an objectively
immoral act by preaching their false religion. This does not
mean that false religions must be interfered with by civil
society. Other moral considerations may require such a
decision. Yet, it is not by virtue of a freedom of religion
that such restrain would be shown. For example, St. Thomas
considers whether the children of Jewish parents should be
taken from their parents and raised Catholic. He rejects such
a proposal not because they have a freedom of religion but
rather because doing so would harm the natural good of the
family. Again in the current environment, the Supreme Court’s
over-inclusiveness to apply the ministerial exception to false
religions may be tolerated for the good of the protection of
the Church yet it should not be celebrated as a victory for
religious freedom, which itself is a moral evil.
Sadly, the confusion over this case reaches the highest
levels of the Church in this country. Bishop William Lori,
chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty for the
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, in a statement
issued after the ruling proclaimed: “The Supreme Court
decision marks a victory for religious liberty and the U.S.
Constitution.”
Some may argue this is quibbling over words. If he had said
this marks a victory for the freedom of the Catholic Church,
his statement would have been laudatory. Yet, principles are
formed of precise concepts (expressed in precise words). Like
a medicine, a slight alteration of the correct formula can be
deadly. Particularly in light of the false so-called doctrine
of religious freedom insinuated since Vatican II, His
Excellency’s statement will be understood in this context of
proclaiming a natural right to practice a false religion, a
“right” which is really a wrong. Thus, celebrate the Supreme
Court’s unanimous decision as a victory for Libertas
Ecclesiae but not Libertas Religionis. |
|
|
|
|
|
Latin America |
Hispanic influence in
the U.S. Catholic Church
Third of
January 2012:
Second Sunday after the Epiphany
The
Hispanic community in America, which was below two million
in 1940, has increased tremendously in the last few decades.
Today it includes over 50 millions souls and represents 16%
of the 308 million Americans. Two thirds of Hispanics are
Catholic, and 15% Evangelical.
|
|
|
|
The first
Hispanic bishop was consecrated in 1970. There are presently
50 such bishops. Today, the Catholic Church in America counts
68 millions baptized persons, which represents about 22% of
the total population, 40% of which are of Hispanic origin. To
top it off, it is estimated that the growth of the Catholic
population is coming from them at the rate of 70%. One of our
every four children in Catholic kindergarten is Hispanic. At
such a rate, the Hispanic community will compromise the
majority of Catholics in America as soon as 2030.
Such
statistics call for some remarks:
-
By now
most United States dioceses have set up well-established
Hispanic parishes where the faithful and children are taught
the Faith and can grow with little need of adaptation. This
continues the Catholic battle which all immigrants faced
from the 19th century regarding the use of their own
language and traditions in their Catholic schools. (I am
thinking specifically of the Germans in the Midwest.) The
children are growing up perfectly bilingual and they serve
as mediators to less adaptable parents.
-
Without a
doubt, Latin American culture has a lot to offer to the
United States Catholic Church. Just think of the great
mystics like St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila.
Think too of the wonderful cultural development,
evangelization, and education brought about by the Spanish
settlers under the Catholics Ferdinand and Isabella. They
are the heirs of the highest cultural achievement which was
brought about from the connection of the Old and New World.
Who can boast of establishing two flourishing universities
in the New World 150 years before Harvard?
-
Most
southern States of the USA were at one time the property of
the Spanish crown. Are we witnessing the revenge of the
Hispanics who were kicked out of their own territory by a
fiercely Masonic government?
-
Yet, one
may fear that the Spanish influence may be less Catholic
than numbers tell. Like the waves of immigrations of the
last century, the incoming Hispanics are mostly
underprivileged families seeking asylum in a country which
promises a rosy future for them. They have little education
and little ambition. It will take generations to turn them
into the powerhouse of Catholic America in leadership.
-
More to
the point, there is here a large reserve of vital forces
into which the present hierarchy must tap, under pain of
letting the easy, happy-clappy Church leaders swing them to
their side. It seems inevitable that our Society of St. Pius
X needs to direct much of its efforts along the same lines
and promote study in Spanish at the seminary. And—this is
not negligible—our college students will fare better in job
interviews if they can present some bilingual capacity in
their resume.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cardinal Wuerl
(left)
and Fr. Steenson (right) |
USA
Ordinariate
for former Anglicans
Second
Sunday of January 2012:
Feast of the Holy Family
On November
2009, Pope Benedict XVI issued the document Anglicanorum
Coetibus which hastened the conversion of certain
Anglican groups to the Catholic Church. He constituted
specific parishes into a juridical Ordinariate (a
centralized government equivalent in rank to a local
diocese) as an integral part of the Catholic Church.
|
|
|
|
Since then,
Wales has also created its own Ordinariate. Now it is the turn
of the United States to open the way for Anglicans to join the
Catholic Church as a group. When Cardinal Wuerl, Archbishop of
Washington D.C., presented the report to his confreres, they
expressed some concerns about the juridical and pastoral
connection with the local Ordinaries. They were also concerned
about which Anglican traditions would be preserved and judged
compatible with the Church's liturgy.
It is
significant that the Cardinal had little to say by way of
clarification on these two essential matters. He was much
clearer regarding circumstantial things, like the head of this
organization and its leaders. The Ordinary will be Fr. Jeffrey
Steenson, a former Episcopalian bishop who converted in 2007
and was ordained a Catholic priest. His position
of Ordinary would grant him a seat at the United States
Bishops’ Conference, but since he's married, he could not be
ordained a bishop. At the start, there could be as many as 100
Anglican priests ready to be ordained as Catholic priests and
about 2,000 faithful. At least two entire Episcopalian congregations
would be integrated right away, both from Maryland,
including St. Luke of Bladensburg, which would be the Ordinary
See.
It is interesting to consider this piece of news in light of
the Pastor’s Corner we wrote in
May 2011
on whole Anglican parishes turning Catholic overnight. Our
concerns are similar to those expressed now by some United
States bishops. Here are the remarks we had mentioned then:
-
The main aspect is that a singular status is given
to former Anglicans who always took the Church of Christ to
be an invisible reality. This Ordinariate, created within
the British (now United States) Episcopal Conference, enjoys
a semi-independent situation, unlike any other in the
Western Catholic hierarchy.
-
It is a whole parish which becomes Catholic together
with its Anglican pastor. But conversion to the Catholic
Faith is a personal act and an individual profession of the
Faith should be required and insisted upon. Submitting only
to a text and not to a living authority who interprets the
text is quite dangerous for someone who has been raised with
the erroneous mentality of sola Scriptura.
-
The law of celibacy is weakened as we may soon see a
multiplication of legitimately married priests in the Latin
Rite. As a matter of fact, the Ordinary in the United States
Ordinariate will be a married priest. Doesn't the papal
document leave the door open to ordain married laymen to the
priesthood?
There is
little doubt that the American Church authorities are voicing
their worries about potential tensions and insubordinations in
an already fractured Catholic Church. This issue of authority
is so much more crucial as the Catholic Church is losing both
visibility and credibility by the day. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Three Magi
presenting gifts
to the Divine Infant King |
Reflections from
Archbishop Lefebvre
First
Sunday of January 2012:
Octave Day of the
Nativity of Our Lord
We present
here
some extracts from a
lengthy sermon given by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1972
to the seminarians at Econe, Switzerland.
|
|
|
|
To follow
Our Lord Jesus Christ, to imitate Him, to "put Him on," is no
small thing, especially in our modern world, especially in the
present time. My dear friends, the present time cries out for
heroes, at a time when everything seems to be vanishing in the
structure of society, and even in the structure of the Church.
This is no time for tepid souls, for souls who give themselves
in the face of the troubles or doubts which are circulating
all over the world, even on the divinity of Our Lord Jesus
Christ, even throughout the Catholic Church. The time belongs
to those who believe—believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ,
who believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ by His Cross has given
the solution to all the problems of our life, even personal
problems.
(...)
...you must
undergo a conversion, you must do penance as Our Lord Jesus
Christ give us an example on the Cross, but you have
understood that this must be done through love, out of
charity, for the love of God, for the love of souls, for the
love of your own soul. For the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ
is a Cross which breathes love. The Office for Our Lady of the
Seven Sorrows says it explicitly in the beautiful liturgy for
that day: "Dilectus meus rubicundus, candidus, totus
desiderabilis... omnis figura eius amorem spirat—(These
words are put on the lips of the Blessed Virgin)—"My
beloved is all resplendent in white, but also red, reddened by
his own blood," for He is covered with His own blood. Thus
does He draw us—He is for us the object of an immense desire,
an immense love. "Omnis gifura eius amorem spirat—His
whole attitude inspires love," and this evocation of the
liturgy continues, "Caput inclinatum... manus extentae....
pectus perforatum." Yes, His head bent over, His arms
stretched out, His pierced Heart all breathe love.
(...)
This is what
you must come to understand, my dear friends. You will come to
understand through meditation, through prayer, through
everything which is taught you, that it is Our Lord Jesus
Christ Who gives us charity, true charity, the charity of God,
the charity which above all attaches us to God. And so you
will detest your sins, your own failings, you will always have
a spirit of sorrow for your sins, but this spirit of sorrow
will be provoked by the love of God, by the love of Our Lord
Jesus Christ. It will not be an inefficacious penance, a
somber and sad kind of penance which will depress your heart,
but on the contrary, it will dilate your heart through the
love of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Here is something you must
never forget, that in the Christian life there are always two
fundamental aspects—the penitential aspect, the detestation of
sin and flight from it, and the desire for God, the love of
God. And as St. Thomas said so well, there are two aspects of
the Christian life in the same act of charity, for if one
loves God one will flee whatever separates us from Him. Now
sin separates us from God; hence by the act of charity which
we have for God and for Our Lord, we must at the same time
detest our sins, detest everything that renders our path to
God difficult, and always love more He who is the Author of
our own being and of the grace we have.
(...)
We will ask
this especially today on this feast of the Epiphany, like the
Magi, the Kings who came to seek the Light of the Child Jesus.
They found Him, in the company of Mary and Joseph—we will ask
Mary and Joseph to give you conviction in these
sentiments which I have tried to evoke these morning, so that
they remain in you...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
