The Pope and That Communion Issue

Some coverage is being given to the Pope's response to a Lutheran lady who asked him if she could receive Holy Communion with her Catholic husband. Here is an extract from a Catholic Herald article which sums up what happened:

The Pope was asked whether a Lutheran and Catholic married couple might “finally participate together in Communion”. The questioner referred to “the hurt we’ve felt together due to [our] difference of faith”.

Francis said it was “not my competence” to give permission to do this, and admitted: “I ask myself and don’t know how to respond – what you’re asking me, I ask myself the [same] question.”

The Pope then stressed the role of personal discernment rather than repeating Church teaching that Protestant spouses can only receive Holy Communion if they do not “have recourse for the sacrament” at their own church.

He said: “There are questions that only if one is sincere with oneself and the little theological light one has, must be responded to on one’s own.”

When I read this first I immediately thought of President Barack Obama's response to a question on the abortion issue regarding the status of the unborn child and its rights: it's "above my pay grade".

Now we have to note that the Pope is correct when he says he does not have the competence to give permission to allow her to receive. He is right, as a servant of the Church he cannot change Church teaching on this issue, and the teaching is clear: inter-communion is not permitted. There is a provision for a very rare occasion when a non-Catholic can receive the Eucharist for a special event - a wedding perhaps when a non-Catholic marries a Catholic in a Catholic ceremony, but there are strict conditions which must be fulfilled, including an explicit belief in the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist. This provision was and is not envisioned to be utilized on a regular basis.

However, the Pope's response to the lady has created confusion. He should have told her that she could not receive the Eucharist while sharing her pain at the divisions which exist and prevent Lutherans from being in full communion with the Church. The Pope not only has the competence to do this, he has the duty, but on this occasion the Pope has created confusion among the faithful, and indeed may well have misled many on this issue. This is not a matter of conscience, it is a matter of objective reality, a reality that exists because of serious divisions that exist between the Catholic Church and Protestant communities. 

However the damage has been done and now the media have jumped on what he said and are running with the line that Lutherans can discern for themselves whether they can come forward for the Catholic Eucharist, relativising the whole issue. Was this intentional on the Pope's part? I cannot say, I cannot read his mind I can only observe what he says and does and drawing on what I observe I know he is no fool, he knows what he is doing and he knows what he is saying. 

I think we need a Paul to have a talk with Peter on this issue, and on a number of others.

Here is Edward Pentin's article on what happened. Fr Z has an interesting take on all this.

"A Little Less Than A God"

During one of the recent conclaves, I think it was the last, as the white smoke was rising in plumes from the Sistine Chapel chimney, a journalist was mingling through the gathering crowd seeking opinions on who might be the next Pope. One lady answered him, "I don't know who has been elected, but I know I love him". To love the Pope is part of our spiritual genetics as Catholics, we hold him who occupies the Office of Peter in deep veneration and give added weight to what he says because he is the Successor and Vicar of Peter and the Vicar of Christ, God's representative on earth, the head of the Church on earth. Interestingly, when Catholics lapse or turn to hate the Church, they often reserve a special contempt for the Pope; that's consistent.

However, as we hold the Pope in particular veneration, we must be careful not to make an idol of him. The Pope is a servant of the Church, the servant of the servants of God, and so he too is subject to the doctrine, teachings and traditions of the Church. As Pope Benedict once said in response to a call for him to change certain doctrines: "But I am only the Pope, I can't change them". That was not a expression of humility on Benedict's part, nor an excuse to preserve the status quo, it was a statement of fact. The office of the Papacy is to preserve and protect what Christ has revealed as an act of service not only to God and to the truth, but also to the Faithful. The Pope is the symbol of unity in the Church, hence we speak of being in communion with the Pope, in communion with Peter, and so in communion with Christ who gave the keys to Peter to govern and to strengthen the faith of his brethren.

Sadly, in the history of the Church there have been movements to extend the Pope's office beyond that which is permitted by revelation and tradition, movements to make the Pope, in a sense, an oracle in the Church. These movements are called ultramontane, a term from the Middle Ages it means "beyond the mountain" referring originally to a non-Italian who had been elected Pope and who came to Rome from beyond the mountains, the alps. It has since come to refer to a belief in the Pope's utter supremacy and infallibility in matters not only ecclesiastic and spiritual but even political. One of the most fervent periods of ultramontanism occurred in the 19th century as the dogma of the infallibility of the Pope was being debated. There were some who sought an all-encompassing definition, but there were others, Blessed John Henry Newman among them, who shied away from this, they understood the proper role of the Pope and feared the development of an attitude that raised the Pope to the level of a god, an oracle. When Blessed Pius IX defined the dogma it was within the parameters of the tradition, but there are still some who misinterpret it in high papalist fashion.

Why all this? Well yesterday I read a piece on the issues being discussed in the Synod and it seemed to be the perfect example of ultramontanism. For charity's sake I will not say who the writer is, but the person was arguing for a change in the law regarding Communion for the divorced and remarried. This writer drew on Pope Francis's remarks that the Eucharist is not a prize for the strong but a medicine for the weak. Responding to a critique of this remark that the weak did not mean the unrepentant in mortal sin, this writer came to the conclusion that the unrepentant are the weak and they need the Eucharist to make them strong to repent. The writer is wrong: arguing that in the name of mercy, those who persist in mortal sin can have access to the Eucharist because they are in a persistent state of mortal sin. Not only does this undermine the teaching of the Church and the teaching of Christ himself, it does not make sense. 

There are plenty of arguments out there to answer the position this writer has taken, but the person proposing this has been for many years an orthodox Catholic, a great defender of Pope Benedict XVI during his papacy when many were attacking him, a defender of that Pope's teaching on this issue as laid out quite clearly in Sacramentum Caritatis (Cf. section 29). But why the sea-change so suddenly? The answer, it seems to me concerns devotion to the Pope. This person is a great defender of Pope Francis just as much as Pope Benedict and, rightly, has defended Francis in face of unjust attacks on him. There are those in the Church who do not like him, for various reasons, and so he can do no right. That attitude to the Pope is wrong and unjust. As Pope, the legitimate Pope, Francis deserves our loyalty, our love and our prayers. 

That said it does not mean we become ultramontanist and believe that everything a Pope says and does is right and must be adhered to. Every Pope makes mistakes and there are times when, as loyal children of the Pope, we must correct him. Scripture offers us an example of this in St Paul's challenging St Peter (Galatians 2:11-14). This challenge, however, must be subject to charity and that respect due to the office. If a Pope is wrong, it is not disloyalty to question him or even at times to oppose him. If a Pope proposes a change in teaching or practice which undermines orthodox teaching it is not disloyalty to challenge or oppose him. At times Popes have been wrong in terms of decisions, judgements, personal beliefs, there have even been situations where Popes veered very close to heresy, and it would be wrong prudentially to slavishly follow them at such times. The fact that Popes can be wrong does not undermine that special charism which is given to the Pope to preserve the doctrinal integrity of the Faith. Papal infallibility falls within very narrow parameters that are defined, they do not include off cuff remarks nor casual teachings. The charism does not prevent a Pope going off in the wrong direction and preparing teaching that is erroneous, it merely prevents him promulgating it in a formal magisterial document. For a good illustration of this see the example of Pope Sixtus V (which is very sobering). 

In recent times we have heard defenders of Pope Francis brand as disloyal and unCatholic those who are troubled with some things he says. Even figures within the Vatican are targeting orthodox Catholics, great defenders of the faith known for their good lives and expertise, who are defending Church law in the face of attempts by some to change it. Ironically many of those who are responsible for these accusations were not known for their loyalty to previous Popes. But there are those who were firm defenders of Francis successors, one indeed, a senior Church figure, who told the Pope recently that the Holy Spirit speaks through him and so we must assent and follow everything he says. The Holy Spirit does try to guide the Pope in a special way, but that does not mean every word uttered by a Pope comes from the Spirit. Such panegyrics are expressions of thoughtless ultramontanism, expressions that would make Blessed Pius IX blush, and, I hope, make Pope Francis extremely uncomfortable. But, sadly, at the beginning of the 21st Century, this is where we are again. 

Pope Francis once said, "I am a faithful son of the Church" and that is what he aims to be and should aim to be, as we all should be. He has no power to change Church teaching, and even if in a fit of madness or abandon he tried to turn Church teaching on its head and demand our adherence, the loyal expression of our love to the Office of Peter would be to resist it - for our sakes, for the sake of the Church and for the sake of the Vicar of Christ. Every Pope is a weak man called to the highest office on earth, a most lonely and fearful position, and called to be the symbol of unity of the Church and the defender of the Faith. It is an office that will one day cost him his life, and he is asked to lay that life down in imitation of Christ and in imitation of the one he succeeds - Peter crucified on the very hill on which the Pope now lives. He needs the prayer and support of the faithful, not their presumption that he is an oracle, a superhuman entity infused with divine wisdom. He is a man called to be the Holy Father, the Universal Pastor, not God. 

The Civil Rights Issue Of Our Time

One of the themes of Pope Francis's encyclical Laudato Si would best be described as the eugenic solution to ecological problem, a solution he not only rejects but condemns. In this he is at one with Blessed Paul VI and what he says in his encyclical Humanae Vitae, perhaps the most prophetic encyclical ever written.  I am reminded of this as I read a report on the continuing investigation of the former president of  Peru, Alberto Fujimori into a sterilization programmed carried out on the poor of his country, allegedly implemented as a eugenic measure, a programme supported and funded by the UN and USAID. Half a million poor Peruvians were forcibly rendered sterile by their government in the 1990s. Dennis Sewell has the story in the Catholic Herald. Sewell also draws our attention to forced sterilization of the poor in India and similar programmes elsewhere including the US.  

Is eugenics on the rise? Well I think we all know the answer to that: yes. Are the poor being targeted because they are poor?  Yes, I think they are. The shades of Margaret Sanger and Marie Stopes still haunt us and their racist, anti-human ideology is alive and well, even if hidden, not just in the organisations they founded. but in many other organisations and departments of government, the UN included. We see today, as in the past, wealthy white middle and upper classes attempting to preserve their privileges and their wealth, eschewing their responsibility to our poorer brothers and sisters, by an ideology dressed up as compassion but is in reality a means to erasing those who have a moral claim to a better life. 

Catholics were given a timely warning by Blessed Pope Paul VI which many did not heed, and still do not heed. Today the West is dying, and resentful of the fecundity and "threat" of the poor, the powerful West uses its resources to curb that threat. That is the civil rights issue of our time - not gay marriage, not "women's reproductive rights", but rather the dehumanisation, deprivation and sterilization of those who are poor. Pope Francis is quite right to draw our attention to this in his ministry and in his latest encyclical. 

A Few Initial Thoughts On The Encyclical Laudato Si

I am making time in a busy schedule to read Laudato Si, of what I have seen so far I am impressed with the Pope's tackling our consumer society reminding us that our "throwaway culture" has consequences for the earth which God has given us and we have a duty to care for. I also agree with his critique of ecologists who are pro-abortion or who peddle the overpopulation myth and present abortion and diminishing the population of those in the Third World as the only solutions to the planet's ecological problems. These are middle class solutions which ultimately shift the blame onto others (usually the poor and vulnerable) so the middle class and wealthy can hang on to their privileges and lifestyles. We cannot use other human beings as pawns in an ideological campaign to "save the planet" - they are part of the solution, not the problem. Sorting the problem includes a greater distribution of the world's wealth with the poor - that is not communism, it is Christian. There is enough for all of us,it is the greedy who say otherwise.

The Pope is correct to remind us that the earth is God's gift, it belongs to him and we have a duty to care for it. We cannot manipulate it to the point that its integrity and flourishing is diminished to meet our short term desires and concerns. The earth's integrity and flourishing are necessary for us. This is our home for the time being and we must ensure it is cared for. The parable of the tenants comes to mind: are we the tenants who usurp and destroy, or are we the heirs who care for our inheritance? 

An interesting and welcome point in the encyclical is the Pope's wresting the ecological question from neo-paganism. It seems that the whole ecological industry has become a springboard to a new pantheism, to a mother earth religion, a pagan faith that has even captured the hearts of our more ecologically minded priests and religious. In speaking of sister earth, a Franciscan term, the Pope reminds us that the earth is a creature of God - yes , it bears his signature, but it is not to be worshipped, it is to be cared for by a higher creature, the one made in the image and likeness of God: man. 

The Pope's emphasis on the need for human beings to change is correct. The Lord Jesus told us that we must change in order to enter the kingdom of heaven. That change cannot be divided into categories - we cannot speak about virtues and holiness but confine it our overtly religious practice: be orthodox in our adherence to dogma but then treat with contempt or ignore other areas of life.  If we seek to be faithful to Christ, we must change every attitude that disrespects him and our neighbour, and that includes the environment. St Francis is the example offered to us in this encyclical as one whose holiness was whole and complete, his obedience to God was also reflected in his love for nature and the other creatures he shared this earth with. For those concerned with the liturgy, proper worship of God must also include respecting that natural liturgy which we find in nature and in the environment, where all creation praises God in accordance with its ability. This was the first liturgy celebrated on earth and it has not ceased. We must ensure that that liturgy continues in all its richness until the Last Day. 

These are but a few initial thoughts and reflections. The encyclical is not perfect, it is an unusual one in that it draws on contemporary science, so we should be careful in considering this dimension as being part of the Magisterium. It is very long, as are all of Francis's writings and it rambles: Francis needs a good editor, as I suppose we all do - certainly me! It is challenging, but Catholics should be careful in critiquing it and certainly not reject it without reading and considering it.

Some useful articles to assist your reading:

Jimmy Aiken provides some background and an initial summary: 13 things to share.

Fr Raymond de Souza has a good summary and some reflections here.

Kevin Cotter of FOCUS has a longer summary which is worth looking at.

And The Stream's summary is a must read.

A few good quotes:

"When media and the digital world become omnipresent, their influence can stop people from learning how to live wisely, to think deeply and to love generously. In this context, the great sages of the past run the risk of going unheard amid the noise and distractions of an information overload. Efforts need to be made to help these media become sources of new cultural progress for humanity and not a threat to our deepest riches. True wisdom, as the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between persons, is not acquired by a mere accumulation of data which eventually leads to overload and confusion, a sort of mental pollution. Real relationships with others, with all the challenges they entail, now tend to be replaced by a type of internet communication which enables us to choose or eliminate relationships at whim, thus giving rise to a new type of contrived emotion which has more to do with devices and displays than with other people and with nature." (47)

"Instead of resolving the problems of the poor and thinking of how the world can be different, some can only propose a reduction in the birth rate. At times, developing countries face forms of international pressure which make economic assistance contingent on certain policies of “reproductive health.” Yet “while it is true that an unequal distribution of the population and of available resources creates obstacles to development and a sustainable use of the environment, it must nonetheless be recognized that demographic growth is fully compatible with an integral and shared development.” To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues."(50)

"A spirituality which forgets God as all-powerful and Creator is not acceptable. That is how we end up worshipping earthly powers, or ourselves usurping the place of God, even to the point of claiming an unlimited right to trample his creation underfoot. The best way to restore men and women to their rightful place, putting an end to their claim to absolute dominion over the earth, is to speak once more of the figure of a Father who creates and who alone owns the world. Otherwise, human beings will always try to impose their own laws and interests on reality." (75)

"Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties? “If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of the new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away." (120)

"It is troubling that, when some ecological movements defend the integrity of the environment, rightly demanding that certain limits be imposed on scientific research, they sometimes fail to apply those same principles to human life. There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when experimentation is carried out on living human embryos. We forget that the inalienable worth of a human being transcends his or her degree of development. In the same way, when technology disregards the great ethical principles, it ends up considering any practice whatsoever as licit." (136)

And finally, I wholehearted agree with this, the Holy Father hits the nail on the head here:

"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it. We have had enough of immorality and the mockery of ethics, goodness, faith and honesty. It is time to acknowledge that lighthearted superficiality has done us no good. When the foundations of social life are corroded, what ensues are battles over conflicting interests, new forms of violence and brutality, and obstacles to the growth of a genuine culture of care for the environment." (229)

Laudato Si

The Holy Father has published his second encyclical, Laudato Si on the environment. I haven't had a chance to read it properly, that will take time and will require digestion to take place. However I could not escape the reactions to it, and wow, one would think a bomb hit the earth and wiped out all life and sense. I am not going to comment on them. 

However I would like to refer you to a good piece in First Things which has some interesting things to say about the encyclical, and they might well be surprising. Reading it, and some of the encyclical itself I was reminded of Tolkien and his attitude to what industrialization was doing to the environment. Is this encyclical Tolkienesque?

The Acton Institute has some good resources on the encyclical, including a piece which reflects on the influence Chesterton may have had on it. It also offers a section by section summary. Fr Z also points out the positive aspects of the encyclical.

Media Is Baffled

I note with interest the surprise some in the media are expressing with what seems to be Pope Francis's rejection of France's candidate as ambassador to the Holy See. The candidate, Laurent Stefanini, the media maintain, is openly homosexual, although other sources deny it, the man seems to have backing from some solid people in France. We don't know. However, the media reaction is telling. The Telegraph has an interesting article informing us that Francis's reputation as a liberal is now taking a hitting because of this supposed move. The journalist here, Henry Samuel quotes - or more correctly misquotes Francis's "Who Am I To Judge" remark, and wondered what has happened.

Well, actually, nothing has happened. You see, if the media had reported that remark as it was made and not according to their own agenda they would not be confused now. Francis said that if a gay person was living a good life, following the Gospel and nurturing a relationship with God, then who was he to judge them. And that is orthodox, old fashioned Catholic teaching. If someone adheres to the moral law laid down by Christ, regardless of their sexuality, living it and seeking holiness, then there is no issue. The Church does not condemn a person for their sexuality, but rather counsels us all to use our sexuality in accordance with the moral law (though it may be more difficult for some than others - sacramental grace is there to help those who have a hard struggle) . 

This is what Francis meant, but it is not what the media reported. It reminds me of the story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery, a story usually half-told. Jesus does not condemn the woman - he will not kill her for her sin because he is the one who will die for it. However before he lets her go he says, "Go, and sin no more"; this last bit is usually omitted and then leads to the error, propagated by some, that Jesus does not judge our sins.

As for this story, there are lots of unknowns, so caution.

Pray For The Holy Father

I suppose we expected this: ISIS have threatened the life of the Holy Father. As the world's foremost Christian leader, it should come as no surprise that those martyring Christians would want to take a shot at the Pope. 

Well we can be sure Francis is surrounded by good men who can look after him, just as long as he lets them. He is courageous, no doubt about that, but let's hope he's not foolhardy and eschew the Swiss Guard.  In reality, the protection he receives, and the care that must be taken, is not about Bergoglio, it is about the Pope who belongs to the People of God. For our sake he must be prudent and take care. 

Let us pray for our Holy Father.

An Idea For the Pope Regarding The Homeless

The Vatican is getting into the hairdressing business, it seems, according to recent reports: it will provide a free hair-cutting service for the homeless of Rome. Very good. That will go well with the showers that are being installed near St Peter's Square.  However, I think we can do better than that. 

I was talking with a friend of mine who also studied in Rome and he told me that the Holy See owns a lot of apartments around the city which are standing empty. Meanwhile she has some large buildings in which members of the Curia live - Domus Sancta Martha being one, but I believe there is another one down towards the end of the Via di Conciliazione which is mostly empty. My friend suggested that it might be good idea if the priests in the Curia would be allowed move into the apartments, and then take one of the large buildings and turn it into a house for the homeless? That house would be on Vatican territory, so the Holy See would not be hampered by unwieldy Italian/EU legislation etc. There are plenty of priests and religious in the city who could assist in running it and the Holy Father could pop down now and again to offer Mass there. 

The house could also serve as a drop-in centre for those homeless who prefer to live on the streets. Basic medical care could be provided, as well as the showers and the hair-dressing service. Now I know the Church has countless houses and support agencies for the homeless in Rome and around the world and many dining rooms and drop-in centres, but what a wonderful symbol this house would be - in the heart of the Church, on Vatican territory, and a marvellous legacy from a Pope whose first concern in his Pontificate has been the poor. To be honest, while they are nice gestures, the showers and now the hair cuts seem paltry in comparison with what could be done. 

Just an idea.

Rabbit-Free Zone

I'm saying nothing ! Let's just pray and try to parse what the Holy Father is really saying, even if it is said awkwardly.

A Rose From Therese

I am sure many of you have heard, and perhaps even pray, the novena to St Therese of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face asking her to send a rose as a sign. I have done it many times myself and always got a rose. 

It seems the Holy Father was doing the same novena for the success of his trip to Sri Lanka and The Philippines, and he got his rose - in the form of an image of St Therese given to him by one of the journalists. 

The Holy Father is quoted as saying that he asked Therese for a rose, but got an image instead. I would respectfully disagree, Holy Father, the rose can take many forms, and in this case it seems to be that you got the Little Flower herself, surely a sign of her particular intercession.

May St Therese continue to pray for the Holy Father and for all of us.  For those who never heard of the novena, here is the prayer for you.

O Little Therese of the Child Jesus
Please pick for me a rose
from the heavenly garden
and send it to me
as a message of love.

O Little Flower of Jesus,
ask God to grant the favors
I now place with confidence
in you hands
( mention your special prayer request here )

St. Therese, help me to always believe
as you did, in God's great love for me,
so that I may imitate your "Little Way" each day.
Amen.

Pope Defends Catholic Teaching, Media Shocked?

Pope Francis has certainly raised a hornet's nest, again. His interview on board the flight back from Manila dealing with, among other things, issues of sexual morality has stunned members of the media. The media and others who share the ideological bent of the left tend to ignore Christian teaching on many other areas, they tend to focus on sex all the time. 

Anyway, Francis revealed, once again, that he supports Blessed Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae which simply reiterates Church teaching on marriage, procreation and life issues, indeed Francis has said that Humanae Vitae is a prophetic document, as indeed it is. The Holy Father's veneration for the work and its author was thoroughly revealed when he beatified Pope Paul last year. The media are not pleased.

The Holy Father's words on so-called "gay marriage", which he has spoken about before, has led to the media here in Ireland going nuts, assuming that this is Francis's (unwelcome) contribution to the debate on the same sex marriage referendum that is due to take place here in May. For all the talk about free speech, here in Ireland we see, and will see with greater intensity, efforts by the usual suspects to prevent reasoned objections to the referendum getting out. As one journalist said recently: the right to free speech does not imply the right to a platform to express it.

Is this the beginning of the end of the liberal media's honeymoon with Francis? Or will they ignore his orthodox teaching and use the ambiguous stuff to push their own agenda. I may be getting cynical in my old age, but I think the latter is more likely. That said, it falls to us, the faithful, to continue to proclaim the Gospel as given. We are at war, people. We didn't start it, but I'm afraid we have to fight it. Our chief weapon is the witness of our lives, then our carefully considered words. And don't forget prayer and fasting, necessary practices when we are facing the evil one and his work.

Here is the full text of the Pope's interview. Caroline Farrow offers some thoughts on one reaction to it.

The Pope On Euthanasia

The Holy Father has issued his message for World Day of the Sick, you can read it here. 

He has wonderful words of encouragement for those who serve the sick, usually a hidden and difficult ministry which often requires untold sacrifices. He also has a word to say about those who speak about the "quality of life".

World Day of the Sick is celebrated annually on the feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, 11th February.

The Ongoing Saga

Damien Thompson's most recent article in The Spectator has received some coverage in the last few hours. Both the guys over at Creative Minority Report and Fr Z devote posts to it. Thompson is writing on the German Bishops' attempts to force a change in Church teaching with regard to the Eucharist for the divorced and remarried.

There is enough being said there and Thompson's article is comprehensive. So just for the record, for those poor souls who might be confused.  

The Church's position emerges from divine law, uttered by Jesus Christ himself and laid out most explicitly in the Gospels. If Christians are not happy with that law they have to take it up with God and argue with him. 

If the Church were to change her law she would be committing an act of infidelity to Christ and would no longer be the Church, the bride of Christ. Scripture uses other quite explicit images for the people of God who break covenant with him, see the Prophet Hosea for an example.

Compassion is grounded in truth. There is no compassion in leading people into sin and perdition.

All the so-called progress in worldly terms will never negate a teaching of Christ: his teachings do not need updating, they are uttered by the Eternal God. We must change, not God nor his teachings.  God is God, he does not change his mind, what he uttered in and through his Word is eternal teaching.

All the money in the world cannot be used to justify defying the law of God. Those who try to use their wealth and power to force people to abandon the true faith and the commandments laid down by God are guilt of serious sin and, as Jesus himself said, it would have been better that they had never been born rather than lead any of the little ones astray. A millstone will be put around their neck and they will be thrown into the sea.

Bishops are entrusted with preaching the truth, if they fail in that they will be judged severely at their personal judgment and it will effect their personal salvation.  

And for those anxious about the Church:

We must trust in God: the gates of hell will not prevail. Have faith. 

If others are unfaithful, even bishops, you must be faithful.

Pray for the bishops of the Church, especially those in Germany.

Pray for the Pope, do not rebel, he is the Vicar of Christ and the Holy Spirit will ensure he will not betray the Gospel. If the Holy Father's children abandon him, he is left alone. This is the time to gather around the Pope and encourage him to stand firm against those who are trying to force him to do what is contrary to the Lord's teaching.

Enough said for now. Let us be vigilant in prayer, faithful in our observance, prudent in judgment, and above all, charitable. And may God forgive us all for the times we have failed in these.

Pope Attacks Curia

The Pope's criticisms of the Curia have made headlines all over the world, as one would expect I suppose. As you know the Holy Father delivered his stinging critique during the annual meeting at which the Pontiff traditionally imparts his Christmas greetings to the priests, religious and laity that serve the Holy See. 

I am not going to comment on what the Holy Father said, at this stage there are enough people jumping on it making hay. I will only say that if an employer in any area of business, industry or service spoke to his employees in a similar manner he or she would have not only lost goodwill and trust, but would probably have a major strike to deal with, and perhaps even rightly so.

It needs to be said that most of those who work in the Curia are hardworking, devoted men and women who serve the Pope and the Church with an enormous amount of goodwill and generosity. Are there bad eggs, careerists there?  Yes, of course, as in every organisation and group, just as there are among priests, religious, bishops and even the college of Cardinals, and there have been bad eggs and heartless careerists among the Popes too if you look over the Church's history. And lest the secularists be preening themselves there are bad eggs in secular organisations too and, yes, surprisingly, there are bad eggs among those who have made a career of criticizing and attacking the Church. We can thank original sin and human sinfulness for all this.

It seems the Curia has become the scapegoat for all that is wrong in the Church, and to be honest that attitude is not just wrong and uncharitable, it is lazy, it is a refusal to see that there are bigger problems in the Church than the Pope's civil service. Yes, there were scandals and the sources of those scandals need to be sorted, but to do so requires a larger reform of the Curia than some have been suggesting. 

And what should this reform consist of? Sacking bad eggs? If you can find them, yes. Outlawing careerism? Well that will be a harder nut to crack simply because the Holy See in a way depends on careerism to keep the Curia going. How so, you might ask? Well not because of entrepreneurial ambition where good results get you promotions. No, because the pay is so bad in the Curia the carrot to keep the priests happy and dedicated, or at least working, has often been the possibility of becoming a monsignor and perhaps even a bishop.

Life in Curia is not easy, that is why most priests dread the thought of being sent there. Priests who spend their working lives in parishes and other ministries, with the freedom to serve the people of God, form friendships and be part of people's lives shutter at the thought of going into a system which is run like a junior seminary, where loneliness is the most common disease and being overworked is ignored; and then having to navigate their way through intrigue, disillusionment and cynicism. Some priests in the Curia try to nurture a pastoral ministry in the city or suburbs to keep them sane as well as sharpen pastoral skills which can be blunted in Papal service. 

The lifeline for many good curialists is prayer. But, sadly, some turn to other distractions, chief among them alcohol, the scourge of many a burnt-out worker. Often these priests do not have their family or loving parishioners around them to see the warning signs and come to their help.  And as I have seen on a couple of occasions, when Curial priests fall to this they are retired out and left to their own devices, and that can be disastrous. Indeed I know of some bishops who try and resist requests by the Holy See to second their priests to the Curia, not only because they do not want to lose manpower in the diocese, but out of concern for their priests.

The Curia is not perfect, and I will not defend all that is wrong in it: it is typical of all human organisations. The fact that the Church has not fallen because of human failings and sin is proof that God is in charge. However, we do have to recognise that there are good people who work hard with little in the way of remuneration for the Holy See and the Church. Popes do actually rely on the goodwill of their Curial officers who give vastly more than they receive from any Pope or the Church. Reform must take place, but it must also include charity and justice: working conditions do have to be improved within the service; as any employer will tell you - treat your workers right and they will work hard, be loyal and you will diminish intrigue, ill will and frustration. 

Some might say to me: "Well, they are doing it for God and they should be happy to do so, to give all" - I do not disagree, but we must also remember that Jesus made a point of reminding us that the labourer deserves his just wage, and the Church has taken that so seriously that she has included among the sins that cry to heaven for vengeance acts of injustice towards workers and their pay. The Church should be a leader in world industrial relations and labour rights - did Pope Leo XIII write his encyclicals in vain? As with charity, justice must also begin at home. Get that right and the Church will have gone a long way to beginning a reform of the Curia. 

Has Heaven Gone To The Dogs?

Well that's a question people have been asking all week as the media have been reporting that Pope Francis said that pets go to heaven.  But, with a few days to let it sink it and some people actually parsing what the Pope said, it seems he didn't say that at all but it was Blessed Paul VI, or did he? It was St Paul, or did he? That's where we are at the moment. The media are gradually waking up to what was not said, or are they? Business as usual it seems.  

So the moral of the lesson: media - check your facts, double check them, as the old hacks used to do in the old days when objectivity and accurate reporting were the aims of the media. Faithful: take everything reported about this pope with a hefty dose of salt and hold fire, and say a prayer for him. 

One interesting response to the story has come from Fr Z: if pets can go to heaven, there is also the chance that they may go to hell too. PETA won't be happy to hear that. Fr Z also reminds us of the teaching of St Thomas Aquinas in this regard: animals do have souls, but they are different to our immortal souls: animals have sentient souls, humans have intellective souls, so when the animal's body dies, so too its soul, they are not subsistent.

There's a great way to start a week: parsing Aquinas.

Burke To Malta

Well, it's official: Cardinal Burke has been relieved of his position at the Apostolic Signatura and retired out to the Knights of Malta. I say retired out because, since its inception, not that long ago (1961), the position of Cardinalis Patronus has been one given to Cardinals as they retired from other appointments.  The Cardinal's successor at the Signatura is a diplomat, Archbishop Dominique Mamberti.

The Holy Father is entitled to appoint anyone or release anyone - he is Supreme Pontiff, and as he does so we can only hope that he does so for the good of the Church and the promotion of the faith. We also hope that a pope can put personal animosity to one side for the sake of the good of the Church. That does not always happen, and the Church can suffer when a pope uses his office to settle personal scores - it is also scandalous for a pontiff to do so. 

Cardinal Burke's series of demotions have been publicly humiliating for him and many are speculating that Francis is settling scores against the American Cardinal. I do not know what is going on inside the Pope's head, or what his plans are - he is a most ambiguous man, but I hope that what seems to be is not, in reality, what it seems to be.

Fr Z's comments are interesting.  Rumours abound - next on the list: Cardinal Muller. I hope not.

So It Begins...

The Synod on the Family has begun in Rome. After a vigil on Saturday evening, the Pope celebrated Mass yesterday, and this morning the first plenary session began with an invocation of the Holy Spirit. We must keep the proceedings in our prayers.

As expected there has been a great deal of coverage by the media.  I was watching the Irish media and the BBC to see what they would say. They rehashed the usual commentary on Pope Francis, selectively quoted from his homily and tweaked what he said in order to give viewers/listeners the impression that he is going to use this Synod to change Church teaching on same sex marriage, contraception, divorce etc.  So the narrative has been laid out.  We must be very careful when it comes to media reports. At this stage my attitude to the mainstream media is a hermeneutic of suspicion; not always because journalists are being mischievous or malicious in their reporting, but because a lot of the time they are just ignorant of the Church, her teachings, her systems and her intentions, So take care. Rely on Catholic media, but then again be careful there too.

The Synod is a wonderful opportunity for the Church to look again at her mission to the family, and to iterate the importance of marriage and the family in the Church. There is so much for the Council Fathers to draw upon as they seek to find new ways of proclaiming the Gospel to the family while reflecting on challenges to marriage and family life. This is the first Synod on these themes since St John Paul developed his theology of the body, and that holds many treasures which should really be explored in the deliberations. I know Pope Francis has said that the Synod is not to be the place for rarefied theologising (my phrase), but theology cannot be excluded since its purpose is to understand in a deeper way what our faith is and help us to live it in our time. 

The Pope has said that the Synod must seek to do what God wants, so that means human expectations must be grounded in Christ's teaching, and if the synod wishes to be faithful to Christ then the expected abandoning of Christian teaching on marriage should not be on the agenda. That said, listening to the media and commentators I fear unchristian expectations are growing and being nurtured.

Of course we shouldn't be surprised at this. There is little doubt that marriage and the family is now the front-line in the war between the secular world and Christianity. Marriage and family life are ultimately a threat to the progress of the secularist agenda. As the domestic Church, as the place where values are passed on, ideologues have always tried to demolish the family so to form the next generation themselves. The Church has always resisted this and its main form of opposition was to nurture good Christian marriage - virtuous parents who raised their children in love and virtue. This sticks in the throat of ideologues for whom the exclusive nature of the family not only offends their permissive agenda but serves as a wall, a filter, through which their ideas must fight to penetrate.

I do believe this Synod has become a trophy for the secularists within the Church, for many of them it is their last chance to force through their agenda as old age is catching up with them.  They have managed to create enormous expectations and I fear that we may well be facing a repeat of 1968 with similar results. As with Pope Paul VI on contraception, Francis cannot jettison Christ's teaching to satisfy those who no longer want to live it; even if he wants to do it for mercy's sake, as some maintain, he will be prevented, not by conservative cardinals as some liberals have suggested, but by God himself who made the law and proclaimed it in the Gospel. Like the tenants in the vineyard in yesterday's Gospel - we have no right to usurp what is not ours: it is God's Church, his law, his Gospel, his way not ours. Re-imagining a more liberal, permissive Jesus who renounces his own moral teachings in order to fit in with an unbelieving generation is an exercise in fantasy, one which will ultimately lead to disappointment and, even worse, misleading souls.

I am heartened by the first reading from the Mass this morning, from St Paul's Letter to the Galatians (1:6-12). I wonder if the Synod Fathers took it as a message for how the Synod should proceed. Here it is for your meditation:

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ. I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Francis In Korea

The Holy Father has arrived in Korea. His arrival was marked with missiles fired by North Korea in defiance. Thankfully they landed in the sea and not on the papal plane. But the gesture was merely symbolic, one of those crazy shows of strength the North Korean leader feels he has to make to remind the world that he is still the centre of the universe. The gesture, however, reveals the nature of relationships on the Korean peninsula, and the Holy Father, in his opening speech, referred to the continuing tensions between the two Korean countries. Officially a state of war still exists. In his talk Pope Francis called for peace, and in our prayers we must support that call.

The visit is highly symbolic, the Pope visits a divided people, and during that visit he will beatify a large group of martyrs from the 18th and 19th centuries, all Korean natives. Some Irish news media outlets have been reporting that the Irish Columban martyrs are among this group, they are not, their Cause is that of the Modern Korean Martyrs of the 20th Century and it has just opened. Given that the current regime in North Korea was responsible for the martyrdom of a number of those modern martyrs we can expect more than a few rockets flying in defiance when their beatification is to be celebrated.  That the Pope should be beatifying Catholics massacred for their Christian faith is poignant at the present time when Catholics in Iraq are also being massacred for their faith.  One day we may well see the beatification of many of those now being beheaded, crucified and shot, but as we reflect on the Koreans we must be emboldened to stand up to do what we can to save innocent lives today.

Let us pray for the Holy Father in this most important trip. Many believe the future of Catholicism is in the East, and it may well be. Certainly the Catholics of Korea have not only given us a wonderful example of fidelity to the faith, but in their endurance and continued testimony to the Gospel they have furrowed a field rich and ready for planting. 

The "One In Fifty" Interview

I'm not going to comment on the latest Papal "interview" fiasco. At this stage I don't know what's going on. This evening at the weekly prayer group I minister to there was a lot of confusion and upset among good people, and these people have to be cared for, led and guided. I advised them to keep praying - putting their trust in the Lord Jesus, reading their Scripture and Catechism, and to follow the example of the Saints. And to pray for the Pope. As a priest I have my own views and disappointments, and today life was a little harder than usual. But ultimately, God is in charge, so such times are opportunities to pray for and nurture faith, hope and charity.

Papal Heroism

The Holy Father's condemnation of the Mafia has had considerable coverage around the world. As you all know Pope Francis said that those in the Mafia were not in communion with God, but excommunicated. Strong words rightly expressed at demonic organisations that have had too much power and influence in Italy and beyond for far too long. There are some questions which are being asked.

The first: can the Pope excommunicate an organisation? Yes and no. An organisation is not a person so it cannot be excommunicated, although it can be proscribed, condemned and shown to be operating in opposition to God and his teachings. However members of an organisation can be excommunicated for being members of that organisation simply by joining it. The best example of this is that of the Freemasons - once a Catholic joined the Freemasons they incurred an automatic excommunication.

The second: are the members of the Mafia now formally excommunicated? Well, that's a question for the canon lawyers, but it seems to me that they are not formally excommunicated because the Holy Father has not (yet) issued a formal decree proscribing the Mafia and placing an automatic excommunication on those who join it or cooperate with it. The Holy Father was given an exhortation and in it he was condemning the Ndrangheta and telling its members that they have broken communion with God and the Church through their activities.

Concerns have now been expressed for the safety of the Holy Father: will the Mafia retaliate? There is a possibility that they will, but I do not think they will attack the person of the Pope, such an action would probably lead to serious tensions with the ordinary people who tolerate or turn a blind eye to their activities but whose silence protects the mafiosi. To kill a popular Pope like Francis could have nightmare consequences for the killers. 

That said, we cannot rule out some sort of retaliation: denunciations and condemnations by previous Pontiffs were greeted with revenge attacks including a bomb in St John Lateran's. Pressure might also be applied to local bishops and priests. The Mafia cherish honour and for the Pope to publicly offend that honour will have touched a raw nerve. The Mafia also like to use the local church as a means of maintaining respectability within a community - the Pope has undermined that, and perhaps he has even sent a message to priests and bishops who out of fear facilitate the mafiosi - it has to stop. The mafiosi are very careful and calculating, so they will weigh up very cautiously how they will respond.

Pope Francis has shown great courage in saying what he said, many bishops and priests would have avoided such a naked denunciation on the grounds of prudence, but Francis knows that as universal pastor he has to speak out against this evil and dainty words don't quite hit the target. He is not the first to do so. St John Paul II was even more forthright in his condemnation of the Mafia. During his visit to Sicily following the murder, now martyrdom, of the Palermo priest Blessed Pino Puglisi, St John Paul went out with all guns blazing. See the video below for part of his condemnation. Notice Archbishop Marini, the Papal MC, he looks like he's having a stroke with anxiety as the Pope rails against the Mafia. Papal officials were terrified during and following St John Paul's condemnation, they were convinced they would be slaughtered before they left Sicily.

In a similar vein Pope Benedict launched a stinging attack on South American drug dealers during his visit to Brazil in 2007. People were stunned that quiet, mild Benedict should attack such powerful and vindictive forces in their own backyard. Again as the defender of the flock Benedict had to speak up.

These are three examples of Papal heroism in the face of great evil at work in the world. The shepherds defending the flock of Christ from the wolves. As the flock we must pray for these heroic shepherds, so we must keep Pope Francis in our prayers that the Lord may protect him, and then watch over all those who live under the shadow of the Mafia and similar evil organisations. I would urge you to invoke our new martyr, Blessed Pino Puglisi, a faithful priest who was martyred by the Mafia. They tried to silence him, to stop his work, but instead their killing him led him to a crown of glory and have given the Church a powerful intercessor. So let us commend the Holy Father into Blessed Pino's care. See my pieces on Blessed Pino here and here.

Blessed Pino, protect our Holy Father,

pray for the flock of Christ