The Catholic Church Is To Blame....Again

 

What a week it has been. The abortion act is being pushed through parliament under the veneer of democratic debate.   Some TDs and Senators are standing by their conscience and refusing to support legislation which will condemn innocent children to death: they are to be commended and supported.  

 

Meanwhile the Association of Catholic Priests has come out in support of the abortion bill, but do so in a sneaky way by featuring a pro-abortion article on their website and as yet no pro-life article.  The excuse offered was that the ACP is just giving a woman an opportunity to reflect on the issue.   No surprise there, really.  Rebellion against the Church's moral teaching always includes the endorsement of abortion and its attendant crimes.  At the end of the day no Catholic organisation can be "pro-choice".  There can be no choice - no one has the right to choose to intentionally end the life of another human being.  We don't tolerate it in other areas, so we should certainly not tolerate it here.

 

And then there was Barack Obama's visit to Ireland.  The media coverage was wall to wall and the national broadcaster was fulsome in its coverage.  Many have commented on the sycophantic nature of the coverage, and it was pretty stomach churning.  It is amazing how Irish liberals crawl before Democrat US Presidents.  

 

But Mr Obama did not bring joy to all hearts. It seems Catholic schools in Northern Ireland were to blame for the years of violence and bloodshed.  In educating our young people and passing on our Christian faith, it seems we were planting the seeds of the Troubles.  Thankfully some are expressing their anger, among them Bishop Donal McKeown, Auxiliary Bishop of Down and Connor.  Obama's comments were not only not true, but deeply offensive.   So far no apology from the president: I don't expect one.  But why should we be surprised?  It's just another anti-Catholic diatribe, and they are very common now, even among those in the Church.

 

This, though, is interesting as Northern Ireland society is slowly changing.  While political parties are still defined along religious lines - they are really political - nationalist and unionist which are usually aligned with Catholic and Protestant traditions.  However, when you begin to look closely at what these parties stand for, you begin to see in the "Catholic" parties, a sharp distancing from Catholicism and her moral teaching.  For one Sinn Fein, the majority "Catholic" party in the North, is in fact a Marxist party, and pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage etc etc.  The minority "Catholic" party the SDLP (Social Democratic and Labour Party), while not coming out as so anti Catholic moral teaching, its members have supported the gay marriage bill in the UK, through they still maintain that they are still pro-life.

 

On other hand, a close look at some of the Protestant parties reveals something very interesting.  Some are as pro-abortion as Sinn Fein, and still anti-Catholic.  One, however, seems to be more "Catholic" than any of the other parties, "Catholic" parties included.  Though firmly founded on anti-Catholic principles, the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party), holds sacred the same moral teachings as the Catholic Church.  It is pro-life, pro-traditional marriage and pro-family.  Its founder, Ian Paisley, a rabid anti-Catholic Presbyterian minister was, in public, scathing of Catholicism, yet in private he didn't care what religion you were: if you needed help you got it.  Indeed he had a community of Catholic nuns among his fans as he was a regular visitor and supporter.  I think he used to call them "my little sisters".

 

Irony of ironies, it may well be that one day soon, with "Catholic" parties supporting immoral policies, Catholics may well turn to their traditional enemies and find in their ranks men and women of similar moral outlook and Christian commitment.  To even suggest that now will bring ire on your head, as a friend of mine discovered recently.  But on the ground now there are many committed Catholics who are having qualms of conscience voting for parties who though identifying as Catholic, are supporting measures which contradict Catholic principals and moral teaching: they are already looking elsewhere. 

 

The future of Northern Ireland may not be as simple as some may think it should be - a reconciliation based on pure secularism.  Who knows, perhaps the Catholic Church may well find in the DUP and other unionists, allies and brothers and sisters in arms to face the moral struggles which lie ahead: a reconciliation and mutual action based on a common Christian faith.  Now that would be real reconciliation.

The "Problem" Of Catholic Education

As many of my Irish readers are aware the patronage of schools in Ireland is being discussed at the moment.  Ireland, unlike many other countries, has a very liberal approach to patronage of schools.  According to our Constitution parents are the first educators of their children and they are entitled to school their children according to their ethos and the State must support that.  In practice this means a group of parents who share a common ethos or religion can set up a school and as long as it adheres to the general curriculum and standards laid down by the Department of Education, the State must finance that school.  It is very liberal, tolerant and open; it allows Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims and yes, atheists, to have their own schools so their children can be educated in their chosen ethos.  It even acknowledges the rights of parents to homeschool, something which is coming under threat in some countries.

Here is the article in the Irish Constitution which acknowledges and guarantees this right:

42: The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the Family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children.

42.2: Parents shall be free to provide this education in their homes or in private schools or in schools recognised or established by the State.

The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State, or to any particular type of school designated by the State.

The State shall, however, as guardian of the common good, require in view of actual conditions that the children receive a certain minimum education, moral, intellectual and social.

The State shall provide for free primary education and shall endeavour to supplement and give reasonable aid to private and corporate educational initiative, and, when the public good requires it, provide other educational facilities or institutions with due regard, however, for the rights of parents, especially in the matter of religious and moral formation.

However it seems this liberal approach to education is too much for our liberals – they want to impose a “one size fits all” model: secular state schools in which all the children of Ireland will be educated. Or at least that’s what I understand Senator Ivana Bacik and her friends are looking for.   For my non-Irish readers, Senator Bacik is a Labour senator and one of the most prominent members of the pro-abortion and radical secularist movements in Ireland. 

 

At the moment the vast majority of schools are under the patronage of the Catholic Church, simply reflecting the fact that, up until now, the vast majority of Irish citizens were Catholic and wanted a Catholic education for their children.   As religious affiliation is changing, naturally schools become an issue.  Atheist or secular parents now want an atheist or secular ethos in their children’s schools; that is fair enough and our Constitution supports them.  However, while some have formed new schools which the State is financing, in some parts of the country there are not enough of them, so they must send their children to Catholic schools.  Those schools accept the children, they are excused from religion classes and their parents wishes are respected.

For some, however, that is not acceptable.  Some atheist/secularist parents try to get the school to change its ethos, and on national level, many secularists want to get the Church out of schools altogether: instead of setting up their own they want to take the Catholic schools and make them secular and non-denominational.   In some cases that might be possible – where secular parents are a majority in a locality then I think the Church should relinquish the local school.  However, if the majority of parents in an area want a Catholic education, then under the Constitution they are perfectly entitled to have it and the State must support it.    Senator Bacik wants to see the end of the Church in education and wants to create system of schools with no religious ethos at all. If people want RE for their children, it can take place after school or on Saturdays or Sundays, she says.  There are a number of problems with this.  

First of all it is inadequate and narrow, not the diversity liberals talk about so much.  Indeed the proposition is illiberal and monolithic. 

Secondly it takes education out of the hands of parents and puts it into the hands of the State.  Unfortunately this is happening in practice in many areas of education, yet the Constitution sees education as the preserve of parents, the state is only there to support it.  This proposal seems to be another step in the State’s growing power over its citizens. 

Thirdly, it is naïve to think that a school will not have an ethos – every school has an ethos.  When these state schools are established an ethos will have to be chosen and there is little doubt that if there is no room for religion that ethos will be secular and perhaps even atheistic; and let’s call a spade a spade – secularism is not neutral as its defenders try to maintain, it is highly ideological.  Supporters of these schools say they will respect religion but not favour one, but we know from experience this approach becomes very judgemental of faith, and of one faith in particular (guess which one!).  This will of course contravene article 42.2  as it may violate the consciences of Catholic parents. 

Finally, the proposal is unconstitutional as it deprives parents of their constitutional right to educate their children in schools of their choice.

I support the provision of schools for the children of secular and atheist parents, as I support the provision of schools for Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Muslims.  Given the change in demographics the Church may well relinquish schools where there are not enough Catholics in an area.  If a parish had two Catholic schools and only one was required, then the second could well be relinquished.   This may also benefit Catholic schools and allow us, in this secular age, to deepen our ethos and our identity as Catholics.  Ironically, as we see in other countries, even when lots of secular schools are available, a Catholic education is in great demand and you even find that secularists are desperate to get their children into the Catholic schools.  That may well happen in Ireland, but if it does, the seculars should be directed to the state schools: Catholic schools will have to tighten up their admissions policy.

Of course the way the government can change the educational landscape is by a Constitutional referendum, but I think the parents of Ireland, once they understand the liberal nature of the Constitution on this issue, will not pass it: I think the government knows this and this is why, it seems to be, they are trying to slither their way around the Constitution and put a secular state schools system in place.  But if they try to make those schools the only ones permitted in the State surely that would be unconstitutional and open to challenge.

At the moment the Church is in dialogue with the government over this issue.  Great care must be taken by our negotiators, they must be aware of our constitutional rights and not sign them away no matter how sweet the agreement may seem.  Ultimately until the constitution is changed, the government’s hands are tied.  If we have to relinquish schools, we must negotiate a tightening of our constitutional rights and ensure government interference is kept to a minimum, particularly in the area of admissions policy and ethos.  Not exactly a time for horse trading, but the time to squeeze as much as we can out of the government in order to protect ourselves and our freedom.  The Lord's advice comes to mind: "as innocent as doves and as shrewd as serpents".  An important thing to remember is that we are no longer dealing with friends and not to presume we can trust them.

However, reflecting on what I am hearing from Senator Bacik and her friends it seems to me that here we may have another example of government trying to dilute the rights and freedom of its citizens at the behest of the secular liberal agenda.  And of course the illiberal intolerance of the liberals is once again exposed.

A True Son Of St Teresa

Among the many Catholics who perished in the Spanish Civil War were a number of notable Catholics, one of whom was the renowned Fr Pedro Poveda, the founder of the Teresian Association, shot on the 28th July 1936 in Madrid.  He is also one of the few Civil War martyrs canonised so far.

Fr Pedro was born in Linares on the 3rd December 1874.  Like many other families, the Povedas were devout and Pedro received a profoundly Catholic upbringing.  It came as no surprise to his parents when he expressed a desire to become a priest.  In 1889 he entered the seminary in nearby Jaen, and later transferred to Guadix in Grenada where he completed his studies.  He was ordained on the 17th April 1897.  He continued his studies and graduated with a Licentiate in Theology in 1900.

Fr Pedro began his pastoral ministry in Guadix where he found some of the poorest people in Spain trying to eke out a living.  In the caves outside the town the poorest of the poor made their homes and it was to them that he was drawn.  Helping with their material needs, he also initiated catechism classes, and then founded a school for the children.  Aware of the importance of education for all, he also organised evening classes for the adults.  To help his people he travelled around the province and even went to Madrid seeking alms.   This led to greater attention for his mission, but it was not all positive.

Jealousy raised its ugly head – Fr Pedro selfless work was bearing fruit and some resented this success, and so they began to spread rumours about him.   These rumours and the gossip which resulted reached the ears of his bishop and he began to doubt the priest and his work.  Aware of what was going on, Fr Pedro did not seek to defend himself – he trusted that the truth would emerge eventually: it did not come soon enough and he was forced to leave his beloved poor.

The Dark Night descended on the young priest, but he endured it in faith.  In 1906 the clouds lifted when he was appointed a canon of the Shrine of Our Lady of Covadonga in the north of Spain.  There Our Lady took him under her care as he fulfilled his pastoral duties, got time to study and of course had the space to pray.  This time proved to be providential for it was during the seven years he served at the shrine that he began to develop his system of Christian education as a means of challenging the secularists ideas which were being adopted in the Spanish educational system.  He saw that men and women of faith must play an important role in education and to do so they need to be properly formed and prepared to meet the challenges they might face. 

Publishing articles he shared his ideas with the Catholic world: some understood what he was trying to do, others did not.  In 1911 he founded an academy in Oviedo to provide further education for young women who wanted to be teachers.  Two other academies followed in Linares in 1912 and Jaen in 1913.  In 1914 he took his ideas to Madrid when he founded a university residence for women – the first in Spain.

In 1913 he moved to Jaen where he sought approval from the Church and the civil authorities for his organisation, naming it in honour of St Teresa of Avila, the saint who had inspired him most.  The Teresian Association, under her protection, was to be an organisation inspired by this great woman of letters and faith, and she was presented as model for the members of the Association to imitate.  For the next ten years he worked at building up this new educational family in the Church so that by 1923 it had spread all over Spain. 

Moving to Madrid in 1921, Fr Pedro took up an appointment as Chaplain to the Royal Household – this allowed him to stay in the Archdiocese – the Archbishop had problems with Spanish priests from all over Spain looking to stay in the capital with little to do, so he would not allow priests take up residence and faculties unless they had a decent appointment.  There was no fear of Fr Pedro having too much time on his hands.  He had to deal with a lot of criticism – he was seen as a revolutionary in that his work as he was working with laywomen and forming them to take up their place in the Church.  Nevertheless, sustained by the idea, or indeed the vision, he continued.  In 1924 his Association received approval from Rome – in a symbolic gesture it was the laity of the Association who petitioned the Pope.  The Association was also affiliated with the Order of Discalced Carmelites, a necessary link with St Teresa and a formal recognition that Fr Pedro and the Association are members of that spiritual family.

During these years in Madrid he met St Josemaria Escriva who himself was struggling to get Opus Dei up on its feet.  The two priests understood each other perfectly – both wanted to help the laity to take their place in the Church mission and to realise that they too were called to holiness.  Fr Josemaria found in Fr Pedro the wisdom and experience which helped him understand his own vision. 

By this time Fr Pedro was not only respected as an important educationalist in Spain and founder, but his reputation for holiness was also known.   It also made him a target for the Republicans.  His Association was considered a dangerous organisation by those in the socialist/anarchist movements who sought to use education as a means of bringing the next generation around to their way of thinking.  Like many priests in Madrid, he tried to lie low as the militias were hunting down priests and religious.  On the 28th July he was captured, when asked who he was, he admitted that he was a priest, and he was shot.  He said in the days before his capture and martyrdom: “If we have to die, we have to die, but we die with Christ, in the name of Christ and for the glory of Christ”.

St Pedro was beatified on the 10th October 1993 and canonised by Blessed Pope John Paul II during his Apostolic Visit to Spain, on the 4th May 2003.  St Pedro would be a wonderful intercessor for those who struggle to maintain Catholic schools in the face of the secularising tendencies of governments and various lobby groups.  We will commend our Catholic schools here in Ireland to his prayers, care and protection.

"To Die For Christ...Is To Live"

St Christopher Magallanes (second row, second from the right) and Companions.

Today is the feast of St Christopher Magallanes and Companions, the first martyrs from the Mexican persecution of the Church to be canonised.  I will continue my reflections on the martyrs of the Spanish Civil War in a moment, but we need also heed the lessons to be learned from the Mexican conflict.

Mexico was different from Spain in that faithful Catholics took up arms against their persecutors in the Cristero movement.  None of the martyrs whose feast we celebrate today were involved in that movement, but some of the beatified Mexican martyrs were, most notably the fourteen year old Blessed Jose Sanchez del Rio.    The question which one might ask oneself is: can we take up arms against our persecutors?  In terms of the Spanish Civil War most historians seem to imply that we Catholics can't - we just lie down, support the Republicans and then take the bullet they have reserved for us.   Can we defend ourselves against martyrdom?

Well the answer to that is yes, we can, within certain limits - limits laid down by the Just War theory.  We have the right to defend ourselves, our family and our faith, but must do so within ethical limits and only as a means of defence.  We cannot run headlong into martyrdom - if it comes upon us and there is no means of escape, we embrace it, but we have a responsibility to preserve our lives, but not, of course, denying Christ or his teachings to do so.    The rising in the Vendee following the French Revolution was one such effort, as was the Cristero movement - though I'm sure ethicists will argue back and forth.

Our martyrs today were not involved in the armed struggle against the persecuting government of Mexico, though one of them, St Christopher Magallanes, was accused of stirring it up.  The group consists of twenty-two priests and three laymen, all killed simply because they were Catholic, and indeed apostolic in their labours in the vineyard.  St Christopher was a most remarkable priest, full of initiatives to help the poor of his parish and beyond. 

Back to the martyrs of the Spanish Civil War: in my last post I spoke about the canonised martyrs of Turon, today I would like to draw your attention to another Saint-Martyr, St Jaime Hilario, also a De La Salle brother.

St Jaime was a most attractive person: he was dedicated to Christ, to his vocation and to the children he served as a teacher, but he also had many obstacles to overcome even before he was called to martyrdom.  He was born Manuel Barban Cosan in the foothills of the Pyrenees in northern Spain, in the village of Enviny on the 2nd January 1898.   He was a rather serious young boy who lived his faith with great earnestness.  When he was twelve he had made up his mind to become a priest, and at that young age entered the minor seminary.  While he was there he developed problems with his hearing, and so it was decided that he could not go forward for ordination

Disappointed, Manuel returned home to his family, but did not lose his hope of giving his life to God.  He believed that God did not want him to be a priest, his rejection from seminary revealed that, so he must try and see if God wanted him in the consecrated life as a brother.  He approached the De La Salle brothers, and after careful consideration the superiors invited him to enter the congregation.  He was thrilled, and so on 24th February 1917 he entered the novitiate in Irun.   It was where God wanted him:  professing his vows, he began work as a teacher and served for sixteen years in the classroom.

His hearing problems did not go away, however, and he was finding it increasingly difficult to perform his duties in the classroom.  His superiors made the painful decision (for Jaime) to take him out of teaching and appointed him the gardener at the congregation's house of formation in San Jose, Tarragona.  The move was difficult - some would say that it was a humiliation, but Jaime, already walking the path of holiness, embraced this sacrifice and threw himself into this humble work, living each day with joy and serenity as his hearing gradually worsened.

In July 1936, given a short break, Br Jaime was making his way home for a family visit when the Civil War broke out.   He never reached Enviny: recognised as a brother, he was arrested by Republicans  and jailed.  In December he was brought to Tarragona and there transferred onto a prison ship where he joined a number of other De La Salle brothers.  Conditions on the ship were not too good, and aware of what lay ahead, Jaime prepared for death. 

On the 15th January 1937 a "trial" was held in which Br Jaime was condemned as a teacher of the Catholic faith.  While he insisted that he was only a gardener, he also confirmed that he was a religious and made it clear that he was not going to abandon either his vocation or his faith.  He was condemned to death and the sentence was carried out the next morning in a local cemetery known as the Mount of Olives.  His last words were: "To die for Christ, my young friends, is to live".    Two volleys missed him: terrified, the executioners fled - their commander, however, had no such fear.  Walking up to Br Jaime he shot him at close range, discharged five bullets, killing him. 

Jaime was beatified on the 29th April 1990, and canonised in the same ceremony as his brothers, the Martyrs of Turon, on the 21st November 1999. 

For The Cause Of Catholic Education

Lest you think that in my recent reflections on the martyrs of the Spanish Civil War, I am engaging in a Carmelfest, today I will look at the first martyrs who have been canonised.  So far hundreds have been beatified - bishops, priests, religious and laity, but to date only eleven martyrs have been canonised: nine De La Salle brothers, a Passionist Priest and St Pedro Poveda, the renowned educationalist and founder of the Teresian Association (yes, another Carmelite connection, though St Pedro was a diocesan priest).

Today we might look at the first to be canonised: the eight De La Brothers of Turon and St Inocencio Canoura Arnau, a Passionist priest.   These martyrs are among the first to be killed, dying on 9th October 1934, before the real rage began.  Although they were martyred before the Civil War broke out, their deaths were part of the same persecution which began not in 1936, but in 1931. 

Turon is in the north of Spain, in Asturias.  It was a coal mining town, and anti-Catholic feeling was rising as socialists and communists fought for the hearts of miners.  A ban on teaching religion had been imposed, but it was well known that the De La Salle brothers ignored the ban and remained an important religious influence on the people, particularly the young.  The brothers, led by their Superior, Br Cirilo, encouraged the young to take their faith seriously, and had great success in promoting sacramental observance among them.  The brothers openly escorted their students to Mass on Sunday, much to the chagrin of the authorities.

The community was known for its piety.  The brothers were dedicated to their vocations and to the children they served.  Br Cilio Bertran was the Superior, and he governed with a wise and generous heart.  Most of the members of the community were in their twenties, so the lives of the older members had inspired a number of vocations to the Lasalian way of life. 

In the first days of October 1934, a general strike was called, and the miners of Asturias took up arms.  They formed a virtual army, and began to occupy various towns in the province.  On Friday 5th October, they arrived in Turon.  Given their anti-clerical nature, they headed for the De La Salle school.  As it was the First Friday, the brothers had a priest staying with them to hear confessions and offer Mass for them and their students.  Fr Inocenio was a Passionist from the nearby community at Mieres.

Born on the 10th March 1887 in Galicia, Manuel as he was, joined the Passionists when he was 14, and was given the name Br Incocenio of Mary Immaculate upon entering novitiate. He was ordained a priest in 1920 and had spent his life preaching missions and teaching. 

The miners arrived at the house at dawn, and storming it arrested the eight brothers and Fr Inocencio.  They were taken to what was called the "House of the People".  While there they were imprisoner there, they were condemned to death by a revolutionary "court".  At dawn on the 9th October the nine were led out and shot, their bodies thrown into a common grave.

Given their influence on the young, and their dedication to Catholic education, the De La Salle brothers were a serious threat to the revolution.   The martyrs were beatified together on 29th April 1990, and canonised on 21st November 1999.  Their feast day is the 9th October.

The brothers were: St Cirilio Bertran, the Superior; St Marciano Jose, the cook; St Julian Alfredo, St Victoriano Pio, St Benjamin Julian,  St Augusto Andres, St Benio de Jesus, and St Aniceto Adolfo, who was still in first vows. 

Time To Say NO!

The committee charged with examining patronage of primary schools has issued its report, and, surprise surprise, it is nothing more than another attack on the Catholic Church and her patronage of schools.  In its recommendations, the report says that religious education should not be conducted in schools, prayer should be changed so as to be more inclusive ie not Catholic prayers, and religious symbols of all faiths should be on display rather than Catholic religious symbols.  Now remember they are not talking about state schools here - they are talking about Catholic schools. 

So to sum it up: the report is recommending that Catholic schools should not be allowed to be Catholic, but rather conform to a secularist, left-wing, relativist agenda.  That's objective for you in modern Ireland. 

Well, the Church's response to this should be very simple: No way, and then just get on as per normal and ignore any efforts the Minister for Education makes to force Catholic schools to conform.  But will the hierarchy and Catholic parents do that?  Certainly the parents of Ashbourne, Co. Meath, will not be impressed.  They are up in arms because the government told them they cannot have a Catholic education for their children. 

This, my friends, is actually unconstitutional in Ireland.  The constitution states that parents are the primary educators of their children and they have the constitutional right to decide what type of education they want for their children and the government is bound by the constitution to support and provide for this.  We have a very liberal constitution when it comes to education here in Ireland, and that's the best way.  Our government and their left-wing secularist allies want to de-liberalise this and force all parents of all religious traditions and none to send their children to the same types of schools - schools which will only cater for secularists and atheists.

 A friend of mine said this morning that the report is deliberately extreme so as to force the Church to compromise.  I do realise that there has been a tendency in the Church here to compromise even when she does not have to.  She relinquishes certain rights in order to reach out.  That may be noble at times, but in the present age with the attack of radical secularism, this is not the time to reach out and compromise - now is the time to fight, and fight hard.   Now is the time to stick by our constitutional rights and tell the government that we will not allow them to take away our liberty here.  The government already has plans for a constitutional convention which will aim at giving Ireland a new constitution - you can bet that the creature they bring to life will be worse than the Frankenstein monster, and the liberties people of faith enjoy in this country will be significantly diminished.  Religious schools will be high on agenda.

Is it not time for the Catholic Church to form alliances with other faith groups?  I have said this before. In Ireland in the past the Church was strong, she had power and could wield that power in the face of governments and politicians.  That was not always a good thing.  Now she has no power, and certainly not with an agressive secularist government headed by a man who wants to break the country's ancient relationship with the Holy See.  Is it not time, then, for the Cardinal, the other Archbishops and Bishops to get talking with other Christian leaders, the new evangelicals among them, with the Chief Rabbi and the Muslims, to form a grand alliance to defy the government?  The Taoiseach and Minister for Education will fob off a delegation from the Bishops, but they will not fob off a delegation of Catholics, other Christians, Jews, Muslims and other religious groups united in a defiant stand against the radical secularist agenda that wants to prevent us passing on the "faith of our fathers and mothers" to our children. 

Catholics, much to the chagrin of radical secularists, are the majority in this country.  United with other Christians, Jews, Muslims and people of other faiths, we are the overwhelming majority, and we all want to keep our schools and their individual faith ethos.  If we got together, the government would be very foolish to defy us.  Yes, I'm sure they would try, but by God, if they do not listen to us, come the next election not only can we boot them out of office, but we can wipe their parties off the political landscape.  It was almost done to Fianna Fail in the last election, it can be done again.

Catholic Education

Pontifical University of Peru

Well, I've been a good priest this morning and, so far, have marked a fair number of parishioners with the ashen cross.  I am just back from the schools, as I as left them, the pupils were all comparing the size of their ashen crosses.   I have two schools in my parish - St Louis's in Rathkenny and St Patrick's in Stackallen.  Both are excellently run, two fine principals and dedicated staff.  I am a blessed priest!

Of course you will know that we in Ireland are getting ready for a battle to keep our Catholic schools.  Thankfully both my principals and their staff are committed to providing Catholic education which the people of the parish want for their children.  And we will do everything we can to keep that service.

Catholic education goes beyond primary schools, even into Universities, and I see the Rector of the Pontifical University of Peru has been given an ultimatum by Cardinal Bertone: comply with the Church requirements for Catholic colleges, as laid down by Ex Corde Ecclesiae, by Easter Sunday or else....   By the way, this problem with the University has been going on since the 1970's - so we can't say the Vatican is acting rashly. Here's the background.

I'm sure staff in the University must be in shock - the Holy See rarely issues such ultimatums.  No doubt we will hear the mantra of "academic freedom".  This ultimatum does not interfere with academic freedom, it just reminds the University that it has to be true to the honours and privileges it has received, or else lose them. 

A Pontifical University has to follow certain guidelines, and it must not become an institute which acts in a manner which is contrary to Church teaching.  By all means embrace the secular agenda, but if a University does so, it must not expect the patronage of the Church or her benefactors.  One of the problems we have with organisations which were once Catholic but have since disavowed their relationship with the Church, is that they want to hang on to benefices and privileges which were conferred because they were Catholic and because they were dedicated to promoting the faith.  I know of one charitable organisation that was trying to break its link with the Church, but still wanted to be the charity which the Church promoted during the Lenten period.  That's not on. 

The Pontifical University of Peru finds itself in a very difficult position - it has no choice but to accept the Holy See's decision otherwise it looks like it will lose its Pontifical status and that means they lose their campus - the donor when giving the land for the University did so on condition that it remains a Pontifical University - if it no longer has that privilege, then the land goes to the Archdiocese of Lima.  That will mean the end of the University, or at best, a desperate attempt to rent from the Archdiocese or find alternative accommodation - I'd imagine the latter would be the most likely outcome.

I notice that in response to this news story, some are saying that the Vatican should look at other Catholic colleges.  I have to agree with that.  A review of Catholic education in these third level institutes might be a good idea.  Too many people, organisations and institutes are trading under the title Catholic and yet they represent not the teaching of the faith, but the exact opposite.   In such cases, the greatest irony is that the very Church they are attacking and rebelling against is the one which is providing them with their livelihood. 

We have so much to pray for as we weep for our own sins!   Thank God for Lent - it is a time for us to get our lives straight again and do some good, honest fasting.  I wish you all a Blessed Lent!

Catching Up

Back to the Hedge School: the future of Catholic schools in Ireland?

Getting time to blog has been difficult in the last week - various pastoral duties; yesterday was pretty busy.  So time, I think, for a little news round up so Father Director can get on his pony and rant for a bit - we all need a bit of a rant every now and again.  Famous last words which will be regretted, no doubt, as I sit in the rogue's gallery waiting for my turn in confession.   So "Charitas" as St Francis de Paolo would say.

My colleague over at the St Genesius blog has an interesting post on the ongoing discussions over the future of Catholic education in Ireland.  Our American and British readers will know all about this since they have been dealing with the assault on Catholic education for decades.  It seems that the draft proposals for Catholic schools (ie those the government decides to leave with us) are suggesting that religious education, and indeed ethos, be strictly kept to certain times and not permitted to "infiltrate" (my word) the rest of the curriculum.

Well, the Catholic Church's response to this should be brief and unambiguous: "Not on your Nellie!"  Here's where the new appointments to Irish Sees becomes important.  The new Irish bishops will need to be strong and indeed defiant in the face of such suggestions.  If these proposals are to implemented by the government, then the Church should refuse to accept them and refuse to implement them in our schools. 

Lest the fearful among us object - the Constitution of this country is on our side on this one, and we should use it.  I often ask myself, why is the Church in Ireland terrified to use the Constitutional protections we have and actually feel the need to negotiate a compromise when there is no need to do so?  There seems to be a fear of standing up to the government. 

We do not have to hand over schools.  Regardless of what Irish ecclesiastical figure says we should, there is no onus on us at all.  It is up to parents to decide if they want a Catholic education for their children.  If the majority do, then there is a need for lots of Catholic schools.  If secularists want non-denominational schools, they are entitled to them under the Constitution - so they go and set them up and the government must support them.  But why are they whining on about Catholic schools?  Is it the case that they do not want to go to the bother of setting up their own, they want to take the easy way out and take over ours?  Or is it a case they want to get rid of Catholic education altogether? 

Ironically, as has happened in other countries, when all this has been settled, and there are secular schools galore, there will be a clamour to get children into the remaining Catholic schools, and no doubt you'll find plenty of secularists among them. 

As for the suggestion that the display of religious artifacts "be inclusive of all belief systems".  With all due respect, if you pop into a Jewish or Muslim school you will not find a crucifix (which is offensive to Muslims by the way - they do not believe Jesus was crucified), nor a statue of Our Lady of Lourdes.  Nor, in a Catholic school, should we find statues of Hindu gods, Buddha or a mihrab. Nor should we celebrate the festivals of other faiths since many of these are offensive to our Christian faith.  How can we, as followers of Christ and as monotheists have our children, whom we are trying to catechize, celebrate Rama Navami, the feast of the birth of the god Rama?  Yes, we must teach our children respect for other religions, and something about them, but as for putting them on the same level as Christianity by celebrating the feasts and erecting shrines to other gods, that's not on.  Again, the response to this must also be decisive "No".

In other news, RTE is reeling (no pun intended) from the government's decision to hold an enquiry into the defamation of Fr Kevin Reynolds.  As we all know this case was horrific, and to be honest I am delighted things have turned out as they have: we need to expose the shoddy journalism which has become commonplace in a number of media organisations.  Here is one priest who did not sit down and take the accusations, and while I have little time for the ACP's ideological agenda, I think they have done the Church in Ireland a service by pushing Fr Reynold's case.  I know of too many cases where innocent priests and religious were not permitted to challenge accusations.  It was easier to pay the compensation and apologise, and so some superiors took that road rather than risk offending people in the current climate.   

The question is: how will this inquiry turn out?  Will RTE learn?  And will other stories which were not entirely true be investigated also?  Is this a single enquiry into one case, or will the government bite the bullet and conduct a thorough investigation?

The full implementation of the corrected translation of the Missal is upon us. On Saturday evening, with the Vigil Masses, all texts for the Mass must come from the new Missal - the old Missals are no longer to be used.  As you trot across the net you'll find many articles and blog posts on this, and many are not happy. One writer says the implementation of the new Missal is an act of Vatican Vandalism (some say the implementation of the vernacular Missal was another such act - I shall not comment).  What I find most amusing, is that the liberals who are protesting are in the same position as the traditionalists back in the Seventies - they do not want the change, they will resist it; they will cling to the old Missal for dear life.  I wonder if that irony has dawned on them.

My own experience has been positive.  In my parish my people have responded most generously to the new translation.  My daily Mass goers have the new responses off by heart.  Some have wondered why the change, and they have listened to the explanations.  For a number of weeks I devoted the Sunday homilies to the new translation and to a catechesis on the Mass in general and it was well received.  I think when people are introduced to the new translation with openness and enthusiasm, they respond.  A friend of mine, a layman, said that in parishes where the priests are positive and explain the changes and reasons for them, the people will be positive and welcome the translation; in parishes where priests are negative and rebellious, the people will be negative.  There is some truth in that. In the meantime I must pop out to the cemetery and find a nice spot to bury the old Missals - I don't like the idea of burning them.

And to end, today is the feast of the Martyrs of Vietnam: to all our brothers and sisters in that country, we wish you a happy feast day.  May the example of your holy martyrs, who offer the whole Church an outstanding witness to the Catholic faith, sustain you and all of us as we seek to live the Gospel with greater fidelity.

Among these martyrs is St Theophane Venard, a young French priest beheaded in Tomkin in 1861.  St Therese of the Child Jesus was a devotee of his: she had his photograph pinned to the curtain hanging over her bed as she was preparing for death.  She prayed to him often and sought his help in her suffering: I believe he obtained many graces for her.  There is something about Theophane which is very Theresian - a practitioner of the Little Way, I think.  May he watch over all of us in these times.  And to end, a photograph of Theophane, to print out and pin up over your bed just in case the angel of death decides to pop in for a chat.

St Theophane Venard, priest and martyr

(1829-1861)

Catholic Education In Ireland

The future of Catholic education is now exercising the minds of many in Ireland today.  No doubt you have been following Caroline McCamley's posts on the St Genesius Blog: as a Catholic parent of four school-going children she is more qualified than most to speak, but, as experience teaches, she and those like her will be the last the powers that be will listen to in the debate. Why?  Because of agendas.   With a country that has the most liberal approach to education - allowing parents decide and our Constitution demanding that the government support them and provide finance for the schools parents have chosen, there seems to be little desire on all sides to actually respect this liberal approach.  Instead, it seems to me, many movers and shakers want to impose a State system which will restrict choice.  Now there's a thing - I'm pro-choice....when it comes to education.  Why?  Because that system allows for and respects religious freedom.

That said, the Catholic Church does have a lot of schools, and it is unfair for the Church to have to carry the burden of providing education for all the children of the state.  Now that, of course, is no problem if there is no other provider, but there is, or if the majority of the parents in the state want a Catholic education for their children.  This burden is even more unfair when you have a system where government insists on secularising Catholic schools in the name of "equality" to cater for non-Catholics who have no choice but to go to these schools.  There is also the problem of sacramental preparation which takes place in school and that has not been as successful in recent years as it has in the past.  Part of the problem there is an awful catechetical programme which should be consigned the flames and a new team of orthodox catechists appointed to write a new one.

So I'll put my cards on the table.  I favour Catholic schools primarily for Catholic children.  If we have to lose some of our schools to achieve that, well and good, but we do not let go without getting a very good deal from the state and cast-iron guarantees that we can have Catholic schools with a Catholic ethos with Catholic teachers, or at least those who support and will implement a Catholic ethos.  I do not think getting palsy-walsy with the government is a good idea - we have to have our wits about us to get a good deal and the freedom we require, so doomsday speeches and homilies and a quick rush to the solicitors to sign over properties is a bad idea.  If that is the way things are going to go, then we will be a pushover and we will lose our schools, even those we are "allowed" to keep.  The Constitution allows us to keep our schools and our freedom - time we used that wise document to our favour. And we do not give away schools if we have a Catholic population to fill them - so the numbers game is a no-no for now.  We do not hand over 50% or 40% or 90% unless the Catholic parents do not require these schools. 

Regarding sacramental preparation.  Well my personal opinion is that it needs to be taken out of the schools and returned to the parish.  In our Catholic schools we should have a strong catechetical programme taught by those who know and practice the faith, but the preparation for sacraments should then require additional catechises in a parish context.  Now some may say that is unreasonable - it will take too much time: exactly, that's the idea.  Such a programme might finally finish the "rite of passage only" dimension to the sacraments where those who are not committed to the faith go through the programme for the day out, the dressing up, the photographs etc.  This system will also provide for children who cannot get into Catholic schools but who are committed to their faith.   Will this system exclude people?  Yes, of course it will - it will exclude those who do not really want to be included. 

We can look to the US and the UK for examples of how all this can be done.  Now the Church in the UK is having difficulties at the moment, the old guard, left-wing by nature, is trying to enforce its own agenda and it seems that they having some success, as recent developments in London's Cardinal Vaughan Memorial School affair reveal. So we have to be careful.  If we play our cards right and stick to our guns, and get the right people involved, we will be successful and we will find that our schools, as in every other country, will rise to the top.  Of course there will be accusations of elitism, and our socialists in the Church may not like that, they may prefer "bog comprehensives", but such ideas and those who insist on them will just have to be pushed to one side.  We must give our Catholic children the best education we can - in faith, and for the world.   If we bear that in mind we will do well.  Indeed if we put half the energy we have put in to the Child Protection procedures into building a new Catholic educational system and exorcising the old, then we will have one of the best in the world.  But will the Church in Ireland bother........?