Oink, Oink?

In a report last week the leadership of the ACP (Association of Catholic Priests), which claims to represent a thousand priests in Ireland, having made a round of the councils of priests in the dioceses, said that a "substantial number of bishops, and some priests" believe people in Ireland have become pagan.  The report raised the ire of the media and some people.  What was most astonishing was that the media did not ask the bishops if they actually said this, but took the word of an unofficial group of priests who dissent from Catholic teaching without question.

 

Well in The Irish Catholic this week, staff reporters have consulted the councils of priests in Ireland to see what they actually said, and it seems that in the discussions, while secularism was discussed in some, the word "pagan" was not referred to at all.

 

So, did the ACP take it up wrong or are they telling porkies to get more publicity? 

Spinning A Cocoon

Yesterday the ACP and various other groups held a conference in Dublin.   As expected it was a liberal love-in, where the reform of the Church, attendees were told, is to be found in ordaining women, allowing priests to marry, promoting contraception, giving communion to couples in irregular relationships and blessing those relationships, also, I presume, allowing homosexuals to “marry” each other, permitting abortion and, one might conclude, overthrowing the Pope. In other words: throwing out the moral teachings of Scripture and most of the Church’s teaching and canonising desires and feelings as the only authentic guides to truth and the Christian life.

They cited Vatican II and how it had been taken away from them, mentioning the first 16 documents of the Council: listening to what they are looking for one wonders if they have actually read those documents.  They want a new form of Church where inclusiveness is the hallmark – not faith I presume.   It is obvious their definition of the Church is very different from what most of us believe it to be: since the beginning the Church was understood as a communion of faith, of those who follow Christ and his teachings.  Given that these people reject many of those teachings, their definition of the Church is surely as loose as what people feel: that is certainly not the basis of any credible or stable organisation, much less a universal communion.

There was incredible naivety: incredible in that such naivety should exist in a group of people who are, for the most part, senior citizens.  For one thing they actually believe that the abuse crisis would not have happened if women were in control of the Church.  With all due respects to women, they are as sinful and corrupt as men.  Yet since the radical feminist revolution there persists the myth that women are sinless and always righteous.  Women are well capable of ignoring and covering up abuse as much as men.  Indeed it has been known that some women have actually ignored the abuse of their own children by their husbands out of fear.  The new law on mandatory reporting is going present problems in this area: will mothers who cover up the abuse of their children be granted immunity from prosecution?

In reality these children of the Age of Aquarius are spinning a cocoon around themselves.  Ignoring reality, they hold fast to their liberal dream, a dream which has become a nightmare for so many.  A dream that has devastated the Anglican Communion and other Christian denominations where attendance at Church has plummeted and these institutions no longer have any credibility in the eyes of most people.  The fact that the Catholic Church is being attacked left, right and centre and the media feel the need to be a thorn in her side means that she cannot be ignored: she is credible – so credible she has enemies who are working hard to destroy her.  Unfortunately among those enemies are those who claim to know how to “reform” her.  

This dream of theirs has left two uncatechised generations, with a third being misinformed as I write.  Three generations who have had the faith taken away from them and replaced with the fashionable opinions of a single, disaffected generation.  Three generations who have been told that mere human thinking is the Gospel by people who think that their opinions comprise the word of God.

A dream which has devastated religious life, stripped it of its prophetic nature, and made it a sap for left wing politics.  A dream which has led to rejection of the worship of God for worship of the self, even worship of nature: thirty years behind everywhere else, Irish liberals are dancing around trees and preaching free love – “Hey dude, it’s the Seventies here!”   And in face of the appalling vista their dream has created in other countries and other denominations, they have shut their eyes and ears, refusing to see and hear and just keep chanting their mantra over and over again. 

My advice to those who went to the conference yesterday: if what was said there reflects your opinions and what you want for the Catholic Church, then you had better have serious rethink.  The Church will not change her teachings – if she did, she would no longer be the Church, but rather the creation of mere human thinking.  You are not unique in your dissent, the Church has had many like you in the past, and she’ll sit this one out just as she sat the others out.  That’s why it seems she acts so slowly in dealing with you – she knows you and your ideas will die out, as a merciful mother she’ll be patient and loving and hope you’ll get sense.  (Take heart, faithful Catholics!) 

The Church will reform, as she has in the past, but true reform, a new preaching of the Gospel and the moral teaching of the Church which actually respects life and human beings.  She will experience a new Renaissance in faith, authentic orthodox faith.  It will take time, but it will happen: there are many of my generation committed to serving the Church in this New Evangelisation, and among the generation coming after us there are already many young missionaries eager to get involved.  You allowed such young people to speak to you yesterday; they spoke of the beauty of the faith and communion with Peter, the rock on which the Church is built.  You ignored them, accused them of lecturing to you and wrapped the comfort blankets even tighter around you.  The Church needs reform, no doubt about it, but it is you rather than the Church, which need to change beliefs.  You no longer share the faith of the Church: time for a rethink or an exit.  Be true to yourselves, as St Dominic Savio would say.

However rather than live the rest of your lives living with frustration and bitterness (realising that the vast majority of you are at least middle aged and most elderly), if you cannot return to the communion of faith of the Roman Catholic Church, I would suggest that you look around and see if there are other denominations which formally hold what you believe.  The Anglican Communion, for example, needs members, they believe everything you believe: I’m sure they would be delighted to have you.  And in their ranks you will have everything you want.

Bits And Pieces

Happy feast day to you all: today is of course the optional memoria of St Joseph the Worker (I think that needs an upgrade - it should be a memoria at least).  Every blessing to all our workers who, like St Joseph, faithfully serve their families, their society and God through their toil.  Through the intercession of St Joseph may they be sanctified through their work and encourage others to see the true dignity of man and woman revealed through honest labour.

I see the case of the Chinese dissident is causing problems for both the US and China: he is the elephant in the parlour as the two countries work out their trade deals.  Human rights tend to get in the way of economics, so best to ignore them - at least that is the message that seems to becoming out of Ireland, the US and other countries who covet China's business.  Another reason why Chen Guangcheng might not be top of Barak Obama's Christmas card list is because the dissident is opposing China's forced abortion and sterilisation policies.  Seeing as Obama, Sebelius and their cohorts are trying to force Catholics to pay for contraception and abortaficients the parallels are just a little too similar for comfort.  Lucky then that they can "eat around" the issues. 

In other news, I refer you again to Christopher McCamley's blog: he's been doing a bit of investigation into the ACP and how they run their website.  It seems, despite all their talk of tolerance, censorship and their anger over priests being silenced (they were censured - different thing), they employ a rather tough line in censoring the comments that are left on their site: they delete those comments they don't agree with.  What's new?  Self-styled liberals tend to be the most illiberal of all.  Indeed a friend of mine refuses to call them liberals or progressives because they actually want to limit freedom and make their own view the only valid one. 

I remember when in seminary we were constantly being lectured to by these "liberals" - I can say this now because the Visitation Report is out.  Time and time again our formators tried to quash orthodoxy and expose us to "progressive ideas" which, funnily enough, always contradicted the teaching of the Church, the will of the Holy Father and at times even the Commandments.  To contradict their opinions, to expose them, was to bring wrath on your head - which many of us did many times.   There was no room for dialogue - to question (even innocently) what they were preaching was to expose yourself as bigot: "You're so closed".  There was one way to do things: their way.  There was one way to "do liturgy" - their way.  There was one way to be a priest: their way.  Veer from this and they would do what they could to get rid of you.  So am I upset that certain "liberal" priests are being investigated?  Not at all. 

Another interesting opinion for you, from a friend of mine.  Looking at the moves which the government seems to be taking to legislate for abortion here, he wondered if there was an economic reason for this.  His argument goes like this:  Ireland is the best place to have a baby - the safest.  Pregnant women are well cared for (absolutely true - our health professionals are fantastic, God bless them).  If a woman has a difficult pregnancy, everything is done for her and the baby; hospitals will even keep a pregnant woman at risk of serious complications in care for the duration of her pregnancy to make sure that she is looked after and any emergencies are dealt with quickly (the pro-aborts don't tell you about that when they are raking up the hard stories).

However, such care costs money - lots of money, money Ireland is struggling to find in these hard times.  Is it possible, my friend has asked, that abortion is being seen as a cheaper option for a difficult pregnancy? That abortion is cheaper than having to provide for babies and children that have serious medical needs?  And so in order to keep the national budget on course, certain cuts have to be made??  Would a government be so cynical, so uncaring? What do you think?   Are the Minister of Health and the Fine Gael/Labour government considering the financial benefits of legalised abortion?

A Quick Scan

It has been a hectic weekend!  And it looks like a very hectic week, so if I disappear without trace from the blog, don't be surprised!  I'll do my best to get a few rants in over the week.

But there have been a number of developments in various areas over the last few days.  First of all we beat Italy in the Rugby World Cup down under, so Ireland is through to the quarter finals!!   That's good news for us here in Ireland - we like our rugby!

I see the Austrian priests who are revolting against the Church and her teaching, have been reminded that they do not represent the views of ordinary Catholics.   How true this is.  When our self-styled progressives get on their high horses and demand what they call reform, which is in reality a reinventing of Christian teaching, they think they speak for the people.  In reality they don't - they speak for themselves and perhaps a small constituency within the Church. 

This is also true of the ACP in Ireland. As they too revolt against the Church and the Holy Father, they think they represent the majority of Irish priests.  They don't.  They represent a small group of disaffected liberals who are still caught up in a distorted understanding of the Second Vatican Council, one which has failed and has now been cast aside for the authentic teachings of the Council. 

In reality, back in the Sixties, a number of priests, religious and laity did not like what was coming out of the Council, so they issued their own doctrines and statements, offered these to the media and the waiting world as the teachings and decisions Council, and then when the truth came out, they called those presenting the truth as reactionaries who were trying to dismantle the reforms of the Council.  It was all about spin, and these guys and gals started spinning stories and the Church has been trying to deal with their web of deceit which has caught countless Catholics since the Sixties.  Weak and confused hierarchies and Rome's naivety, and at times incompetence, with regard to the media, made space for this web to grow. 

But things are getting back on track, thank God, though Rome and local ordinaries, still need to come to grips with the secular media.  An interesting observation from a friend of mine who is a journalist.  He attended the monster meeting of ACP in Portlaoise last year and counted the number of priests there; the figure given was somewhere between 400 and 500.  He said he counted 250 and most of them seemed to be of a certain generation.

I see Ryan Tubridy is making an ass of himself again.  In his show on Friday night he had the seven presidential candidates on talking about their campaigns and culminating in a debate.  Tubridy laid into Dana and quizzed her on the Church's position on the Seal of the Confession.  He treated her very badly and soon found that Dana is not the pushover our secular media like to think she is - this lady has teeth!  She rightly asked him why he was putting her into a box as the "Catholic candidate".  He tried to get back at her.  Later in the show Dana was the one who elicited a round of applause from the audience, which Tubridy resented and asked the audience to stop. 

It seems to me RTE and the media's tactic is clear with regard to Dana.  It can be summed up as follows:

Dana is the Catholic candidate

Catholic Church evil and bad, abuses children

A vote for Dana is a vote for the evil and bad Catholic Church which abuses children

          Don't vote for Dana

or, we might express it in another way (if he read this, my former logic professor will be tearing his hair out):

Dana is a Christian singer

Christian singers are stupid

Therefore Dana is stupid

          Don't vote for Dana    QED

Now we might also consider the following syllogism (I can see my degree in philosophy coming up for review!):

Dana is capable, warm, intelligent, patriotic, fair and grounded

A good President of Ireland must be capable, warm, intelligent, patriotic, fair and grounded

Therefore Dana would be a good President of Ireland

Like RTE and the other media outlets, I am not taking sides nor pushing any candidates - indeed like those venerable institutions I would never think of being partisan when it comes to politics, just reflecting....

Meanwhile more scandals are being unearthed about David Norris.  Interestingly the print media are carrying the stories, but RTE is doing its best to ignore them.  There seems to be a pattern emerging here - RTE may be pushing its own candidate.

To end, it seems good old Irish hypocrisy is alive and well on the political front.  In The Irish Catholic this weekend is a letter from an M. O'Brien in Castletroy, Co. Limerick, who tells us that Fine Gael were outside the Catholic church there on their annual Church Gate Collection.  This person was rightly angry - after all Enda Kenny said about the Church they have the nerve to turn up and look for our money.  I also believe one Fine Gael TD said that they would be canvasing outside the churches for their presidential candidate.  Ah yes, and you know we Catholics are worse fools if we let them.  As I told you before I had to run political candidates from Church property during the last election.  Seems I may have to do so again.