Cardinal Marx on the Church

His Eminence Reinhard Cardinal Marx 

On July 13th, 2013, Cardinal Archbishop Reinhard Marx gave a catechism class to a group of faithful assembled in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on that article of the Creed regarding the Church, i.e.: Credo in [...] unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam. In his closing remarks, he made the following observations. Particularly noteworthy portions are highlighted for your consideration:

There are four adjectives applied to the Church which are very weighty, very strong. The first is: "I believe in the One Church." The hope that the Church will become one should motivate us. Unity in diversity - not only in a parish, but also in lifestyles and in cultures. We cannot be a Church which is uniform. Rather, we must be a Church which loves diversity. And that is a great pastoral challenge, as well as one of ecumenism. 

The second is: "I believe in the one Holy Church." Now you're thinking: "For the love of God, I look at everything happening in it, and the Church is supposed to be holy?" "Holy" is not a moral category; that's not what's being referring to. The question is whether I can find something which men cannot destroy. Can I find a place where I really encounter Jesus and where no one manipulates him with his interpretation, or argues him and his claim to power away? Where is the place where Jesus encounters me and where not men, but God himself acts? This we call the sacraments. [...] The "holy" Church means that something takes place in her which does not come from her, but from God. 

The third adjective is the Catholic Church. "Catholic" means "broad", "not petty". When the Pope says that the Church should go to the peripheries, that one should go to the limit, then this is a commission to go to the ends of the earth, to the limit of man, to spread the Gospel, so that the Gospel will reach all people. That's what "catholic" means. It is not meant in a confessional sense. Not only Catholics are catholic. This is an error which arises again and again. Some think, "I'm Catholic," and that this is what is meant in the Creed. No; everyone is. The Eastern Orthodox are also catholic. The Protestants are validly baptised, and they belong to a catholic Church. But we have not yet visibly joined. That is something else. 

And lastly: the Apostolic Church. "Apostolic" means that we believe those who first undertook the journey, those who traveled the path from the Easter experience: the Apostles. And we believe that the bishops are the successors of the Apostles. This is, of course, a pretty bold claim. Why is this claim made? To make clear that we are connected to the origins, that we do not make the Church anew, that we do not start at zero, pick up a sheet of paper and say, "Now we shall invent the Church of our dreams." Rather, we enter the long journey of the People of God at the Gospel, at the point of origin. The Apostles represent this loyalty to the origins. 

Thus: Should we continue to believe in the Church? I must leave it up to you to try, time and again, to do so. I've said it before during several discussions: after 17 years of service as a bishop, I can list - when I imagine a large set of scales before me - a thousand reasons and events which I would put on one side and because of which I would say: No. This is supposed to be the Church? No. And on the other side of the scales, what do I place? I place there a single name: Jesus of Nazareth. How could I have found him without the community of the People of God? How could I encounter him except in the celebration of the death and resurrection of Jesus? Where else is so much certainty, so much promise? The one name outweights everything else - for me at least. Perhaps also for some of you.

Need we wonder, gentle reader, why the Church is collapsing in Germany? 

(Original [German])

Death and Life

by
Archbishop Alban Goodier, S.J.

The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa
Gian Lorenzo Bernini (1598-1680)

There is one feature common to all the Saints; perhaps it is common to all who approach to sanctity. One and all they longed to die. We may not sympathize with their desire. We may think them somewhat exaggerated or mistaken. But the fact is written nevertheless in the life of every Saint without exception. Nor was it so much because they were tired of this life, though most of them had in all conscience reason enough to know it and be weary. Neither was it because they had little fellow-feeling for their fellow-men, for no one knows the meaning of love, and no one proves it by deeds better or more lavishly than a Saint. Again, it was not because they were weary in themselves, and wished merely to rest from their labours. We have one Saint saying he would gladly live on at any cost but to save a single soul more, and another who looked on the life beyond the grave as the life of intensest labour.

No, the Saints were none of them cowards; none of them were thin-skinned creatures. They did not shirk suffering or work; no one who knows them will accuse them of that. On the contrary, the more we know them the more they stand out as the models of endurance and self-sacrifice. If ever a life of any one of them gives us a different impression we know that in so far it is untrue. In them at least the longing for death was not a drooping, disheartened thing; it was allied with a superhuman energy. They were indeed weary of this life, yet they served it with all their might. They longed every day to leave it, yet they lived it and laboured in it as if it were the only thing worthy of their energies. This is but one more of the many paradoxes of sanctity; if we could but clearly understand it we should discover the secret of Apostles.

And can we not? Surely it is not so difficult. The Saints could hold their counsel when prudence or justice demanded it, but when God's glory was at stake there was no one more willing to speak. If, then, we ask them to explain, perhaps they will make it clear. Let us take two of them, so different yet so alike: St. Paul and St. Teresa. Whatever the differences between these two they were at least alike in this, that they were utterly spontaneous and true, utterly devoid of any shadow of self-consciousness. When they spoke, their words came from the heart; never, perhaps, has a writer more accurately portrayed himself and his thoughts than have these two.

How, then, does St. Paul explain himself? How does he reconcile his longing for death and his unbounded energy in this life ? For that he longed for death we know. "Unhappy man that I am," he says in one place, "who will deliver me from the body of this death?" And in another: "I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ." Of this at least the explanation was easy; it was because he saw and looked for more beyond. "We see now as in a glass after a dark manner," he says, "but then we shall see face to face." And upon this he comments elsewhere: "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive what things God hath prepared for them that love Him." For them that love Him! Then love Him he will, we seem to hear him say to himself, come what come may, nothing shall keep him from that. "I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor Angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

But love is a driving force. "The love of Christ compels me," he says once; and again another time: "Woe is unto me if I preach not the Gospel." Love drove him, love compelled him; the very prospect of what was yet to be forced him to live this life the more. Love looked out through his eyes upon the world; love, which had seen the truth, and which saw what this world might be if it would - and love can never stand still. "For which cause," he says, "we faint not. [...] For the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal. [...] And therefore we labour, whether absent or present, to please him." And how St. Paul did labour! Was ever a worker so keen? "My little children," he cries to his Galatians who had hurt him, "of whom I am in labour again, until Christ be formed in you." No, St. Paul's longing for death did not spoil his interest in life, and he tells us clearly enough the reason why.

Let us now turn to that other apostle, St. Teresa, whose fruits were so very many, though her methods were so very different. She, too, longed for death; yet she, too, spent herself in a life of untold energy. Why the first? And what had it to do with the second? She tells us very plainly, and her words are but an echo of those of St. Paul. "I know a person," she says, speaking of herself, "who longed to die, not merely that she might at last see God, but that she might be freed from the constant torment that she felt because of her base ingratitude to Him to whom she was, and ever would be, so deeply indebted. It seemed to her that no one's faults would equal hers, because she knew that there was no one whom God had endured with so much patience, and on whom He had conferred so many favours."

So much she writes as she thinks of herself. But soon her thoughts turn to God and His goodness, and she says: "Because of these unspeakable favours the soul burns with longing to enjoy Him who bestows them upon her, so that she lives in a great yet delightful torment, and is keen to die, and hence with continual tears does she beg of God that He would take her out of this exile." Then at once, to show how this longing for death stirred the spirit of zeal within her, she goes on:

O poor butterfly! Thou art bound by many bonds which will not let thee fly as thou wilt. Have pity on her, my God! Dispose everything here in such a manner that so even now she may in some degree satisfy the desire that she has for Thy honour and glory. Regard not her puny merits, consider not the baseness of her nature. Thou art able, Lord, to bid the mighty sea stand back, and great Jordan divide that the children of Israel may pass through. And yet do not pity her too much, for with Thy hand to help her she will be able to endure many crosses. This she is determined to do; she has a longing desire to endure them. Extend, Lord, Thy mighty arm! Let not her life be spent on things that are worthless. Let Thy greatness appear in this weakling woman, that men, who know she can endure nothing of herself, may be driven to praise Thee, cost what it may! This is the desire of her heart, and she would give a thousand lives, if she had them, that so a single soul might by her means praise Thee but a little more. For that gain she would hold them very well bestowed, for she knows full well that to suffer the very least cross for Thee, much less death itself, is far beyond anything she deserves.

So do the Saints blend the two lives together. They make little of this life of time, not because in itself it is little, nor because they fail to grasp its attraction; not because they have been embittered, nor because they have shuddered at its cost; but because their eyes have been opened, and because by comparison with the better thing it is so small, so tawdry - a "gigantic falsehood," as St. Teresa elsewhere calls it. And yet again they make much of it; much more, when the total is summed up, than men of the world themselves make of it. For they have stood out of it, and so have seen it in its right perspective; they have put it in the scales against another life, and so have found its true value; they have breathed another air, a clearer atmosphere, and have been permeated with a new fire. When, then, they have been brought back to it, and have been again confined within its prison, the craving that possesses them for the better will not be quieted, but must find satisfaction somewhere; and since they cannot reach that which is the best, they must needs go down among the things about them and lift them up, and make them like the best, and find a tempered relief in that. A Saint cannot count the cost, he cannot labour for a price; the thing itself made better is reward enough, if one speak of reward in his case. He gives, and esteems it a favour that he is allowed to give. He works because he is compelled to it; he has his eye and his heart on the life that alone can content him, and while it is deferred he must needs make this life as much like the reality as he may.

Who has not felt, some time, somewhere, at least a little of this enthusiasm? Who has not known from his own experience that this triumph of the Saints is the summit of human nature? Who has not looked out upon some beautiful landscape and enjoyed it, and then in a moment discovered himself alien to it - in it but not of it, as a spirit from another world who had wandered into this? And in the moment that he so stood out of it he has heard Angels telling him that in that moment he was touching the naked truth of being, of which all this outer world was but the clothing. And when he has come back to the body of this death, he has hungered for that which has passed, and has longed that all the world might see what he has seen.

And yet how little can we do! Poor little butterflies, how little can we do! But a butterfly is a thing of beauty, and the fairest of gardens is the fairer for its flitting presence. Then at least we can do so much; at least we can live in the glory of God's sunlight; and men shall praise Him the more because we have been.

The Altar and its Furnishings

First in a Series treating the Symbolism of the Traditional Form of Holy Mass

by

Fr. François Xavier Schouppe, S.J.

For the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice, a stone altar is necessary, and on it there should be placed a crucifix, wax candles lighted, a missal, a chalice and paten with its veil, a corporal, and bread and wine, the matter of the sacrifice. To the articles already mentioned, we may also add the thurible and the tabernacle.

Foreground: Altar prepared for Holy Mass.
Background: Credence table with vested chalice, missal

The Altar

The altar is a sacred table upon which the oblation is placed, that the Almighty might vouchsafe to receive it. The Eucharistic altar ought to be made of stone, and be consecrated by a bishop, and have deposited therein some relics of the Holy Martyrs. It should be raised above the grade of the steps, and be covered with three linen cloths, the outer one hanging down on both sides so as to touch the floor.

The altar denotes Christ, in whom and through whom every oblation and act of worship are offered to God. As the altar is the support of the sacrifice from which the oblation ascends in the odor of sweetness, and without which it would return to the earth, never again to arise, so Christ is the support and strength of every sacrifice and act of worship, for nothing can be offered acceptably to God except by and through Christ.

The altar is made of stone, first, because it denotes Christ who is the Mystical Stone, a name often applied to Him in the Sacred Scriptures. He is called the Foundation Stone, the Corner Stone, the Stone or Rock of the Desert: "and the rock was Christ" (1 Cor. 10:4), the rock which, being struck, not by the rod of Moses, but by that of the passion, pours forth most copiously the waters of divine grace. The altar is made of stone, second, because it is symbolic of solidity, and shows how the divine worship is most firmly established on Christ.

The altar stone is anointed with oil to denote Christ who is anointed with divinity, anointed with the priesthood, anointed with the fullness and abundance of the Holy Spirit which operates unto the sanctification of all Christians.

Altar stone with open reliquary

The consecrated altar contains the relics of the Holy Martyrs, their bones and ashes, first, because in ancient times, the tombs in which they were interred were turned into altars, and the Holy Sacrifice offered thereon: and, second, because it manifests the intimate union of Christ with the faithful in the same sacrifice. The martyrs laid down their lives, in union with and by virtue of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. It is for this that the altar is made in the form of a tomb.

The altar is always erected in a high place, above the floor of the Church. This is done, first, that the priest may easily be seen by the faithful who assist at the Holy Sacrifice; second, because it represents Mount Calvary; third, because it denotes the elevation of the soul from earthly attractions, a disposition necessary to all those who would honor God in spirit and in truth: and fourth, because it outlines the mediation which is performed on the altar between heaven and earth, God and man, through Christ who is the principal mediator, and through the priest,who is the secondary mediator, on which account the priest, who offers the Holy Sacrifice, is placed between heaven and earth.

The altar is covered with three linen cloths. These are used, in the first place, to receive reverently the Most Precious Blood in case of accidental spilling: and, in the second place, to mark the purity and cleanliness due to the material on which are placed the sacred gifts to be offered to the Almighty. Not only should the gift offered be pure, but it is likewise necessary to present it in a pure manner. Accordingly, the white linen cloth is symbolic of the purity which ought to be brought to the Holy Sacrifice.

The three linen cloths are used to signify great purity: not only external, but internal - the purity which is acquired with unceasing labor, the threefold purity of the intellect, the heart and the hand, or the purity of thought, word and deed. To this, it may be added, that the linen cloth which hangs down so as to touch the floor indicates that the perfect purity which should adorn the whole man from head to foot: that purity which our Lord Himself reminds us of in the washing of the feet of His disciples.

The Crucifix

Altar crucifix with candlesticks

The image of the Crucified raised upon the altar indicates that the Eucharistic altar is a true Calvary, in which the bloody sacrifice of Christ is renewed in an unbloody manner. The crucifix is placed in a conspicuous position, so that it may attract the eyes and hearts of all towards it: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to Myself" (John 12:32). The cross denotes the triumph of our crucified Lord who, in expiring upon it, conquered the world by faith and who, moreover, on the day of the general judgment will conquer it still more completely by His justice.

The Lights

The candlesticks and candles crown the altar, not only as a sign of honor and joy, but also as representing Christ, the Lord, who is the light of the world and, as it were, a brand from heaven casting fire into the world that it may be enkindled by Divine Love: "I am come to cast fire on the earth; and what will I, but that it be kindled?" (Luke 12:49) They represent, likewise, the hearts of the faithful, which, illumined by the light of Christ and inflamed by His fire, are ever consumed unto the honor of God. Finally, the lights used in the masses and offices of the dead remind all of the everlasting light of glory reserved for the faithful departed.

The Missal

The sacred book, which was formerly called the Sacramentarium, but now is called the Missal or Mass-book, contains the holy prayers and gospels which are recited in the mass. This sacred book denotes the Church, or, to speak more correctly, it denotes Christ Himself who speaks to us in its pages. In ancient times, it was customary to enclose it in a case of gold and even at present, it is found frequently embellished and ornamented with gold, silver, and pearl. The embellishment of the missal is symbolic of the heavenly treasures contained in the divine word, the gold and gems of celestial wisdom.

The Chalice and Paten

Chalice with priest's paten

The chalice and paten, made of gold or silver, are consecrated with sacred oil, in order that they may contain the matter of the sacrifice, even the consecrated species. On the paten is placed unleavened bread, which is afterwards changed into the body of Christ. In the chalice is poured the wine with a little water, which is subsequently changed into the blood of Christ. The Church employs these sacred vessels in her service to represent the hearts of the faithful, which are living sacred vessels containing the treasures of Christ. On account of the great respect manifested for all that concerns our Divine Lord, these vessels are made of the most precious materials and consecrated by the bishop and, hence, we are reminded of the great value of our souls which were redeemed by the most precious blood of the Saviour and sanctified with the unction, that is, the grace of the Holy Spirit. The chalice, moreover, is a symbol of the holy alliance existing between God and man, as well as a symbol of opulence, of fraternity, etc.

Chalice veil and burse

The chalice and paten, which stand in the centre of the altar, are covered with a veil. This is symbolic, first, of the veil of faith; second, of the Eucharistic veil which conceals the body of Christ; and third, the veil of blindness covering the eyes of the Jewish people and all sinful men.

The Corporal

The corporal is a clean linen napkin which is spread out on the altar, at full length, at the beginning of mass and on which the Sacred Host or the body of Christ is placed. It is used to commemorate the linen winding sheet in which our Lord's inanimate body was shrouded by Joseph of Arimathea. The corporal is a symbol of that purity of soul in which the Lord delights to take up His abode.

The Bread and the Wine

The bread used as the matter of the Holy Sacrifice must be made from the purest wheat, unleavened and of a circular form. The wine employed for the consecration of the chalice must be extracted from the grape and mixed with a little water.

The Lord desired this to be the matter of the sacrifice, not only because bread and wine are found everywhere on earth, but also to disclose to us a number of the mysteries of faith.

In the first place, bread and wine, which form the food of man, signify that Christ our Lord, the Divine Victim, is the healthful nutriment of our souls. They signify, in the second place, the union of the faithful amongst themselves and with Christ, for as the bread is made up of many grains, and the wine from numerous grapes, so the one mystical body of Christ is formed from the multitude of the faithful. They signify, in the third place, the mortification which every one must endure to be united with Christ, for just as wheat, in order to be made into bread, must be ground in the mill and treated with water and heat, in like manner a faithful soul, to be intimately united with Christ and live with His spirit, must die to himself. 

Altar bread

This bread is known as the azymes, or the bread made without ferment, such as our Lord used at the Last Supper. It indicates the purity of soul which all should acquire and which is obtained only through Christ. Leavened bread is not used, for the leaven denotes vice, concupiscence and the principle of all corruption. "Know ye not that a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump? Purge out the old leaven that ye may be a new paste, as you are unleavened." (1 Cor. 5:6-7)

The Host is of a circular form because the circle is the most perfect of figures and is symbolic of eternity or infinity. On this account, it is the most appropriate figure to represent the presence of Him who is infinite in duration, infinite in immensity, infinite in love, and infinite also in the merits of His sacrifice.

When the wine is poured into the chalice, it is mixed with a few drops of water. Our Lord Himself is believed to have made use of this mixture. The mixture of wine and water reminds us, in the first place, of the open side of Christ whence blood and water issued profusely; in the second place, it denotes the admirable union of the divine and the human nature which our Lord cemented in His Incarnation and through which we are made partakers of the divinity, a union specially effected through the Holy Eucharist, by sanctifying grace and the glory of the next life; and in the third place, it represents the union of the faithful with Christ in one mystical body.

The Thurible

Thurible

The thurible, which in ancient times was used in the temple by Aaron, and which is now used in the sanctuary of Christ, is a vessel in which incense is burned and then offered to the Lord as a mark of the highest respect. The thurible is a symbol of Christ's humanity wherein is hidden the fullness of the divinity as a consuming fire. It is, also, a symbol of Christ who is the well-spring of all graces, which, like most fragrant odors, are diffused over the whole world. The thurible is, moreover, an image of the Church which has within her keeping the celestial fire of the divine spirit and which, the more she is disturbed by tribulations, the more copiously she emits the fragrance of her virtues. Finally, the thurible is a type of the soul inflamed by the fire of charity, as is denoted by the words of the celebrant: "May the Lord kindle in us the fire of His love and the flame of eternal charity." 

The Tabernacle

Veiled Tabernacle

The Tabernacle, in which Christ in the Eucharist vouchsafes to dwell amongst men and which is quite commonly placed on the altar itself, was prefigured in the Tabernacle of the Old Law. The Almighty commanded a Tabernacle to be erected and gave directions for its construction. Moses scrupulously obeyed the order and built it in the desert. On its completion, all considered it a memorial of the past and a figure of the future wonders of the Deity. The Tabernacle built by Moses was divided by a veil into two parts: one of which was called the Sanctum or Holy Place; the other, the Sanctuarium or the Holy of Holies. In that part called the Sanctum or Holy Place, there stood the golden candlesticks, the golden altar of incense, and the golden table containing the bread of proposition. In the other part known as the Holy of Holies, only the Ark of the Covenant was kept. This Ark was constructed of incorruptible wood and was adorned, within and without, with the purest gold. The manna, the flowering rod of Aaron, and the tables of the law written by the finger of the Almighty were preserved therein. Two cherubim with extended wings stood over the cover of the ark in such a way as to form a throne known as the Propitiatory, where the divine majesty resided amongst his people and delivered His sublime oracles.

This, however, was but a mere figure of the Tabernacle of the New Law, which, in turn, is but a figure of the eternal and ever glorious tabernacle of heaven. Whatever may be said of heaven may with propriety be said of the Eucharistic Tabernacle. "Behold the Tabernacle of God with men and He will dwell with them." (Apoc. 21:3) On our Tabernacle, as on the one of the Old Law, there is placed a veil and close by candlesticks, sacred bread, incense, the Ark of the Covenant, manna, the flowering rod, and the Divine Law, written by the finger of God. All these may be noted and contemplated in the one Eucharistic Christ.

Papal Flashback: Quod Apostolici Muneris

Pope Leo XIII

It cannot be denied - even by her fiercest critics - that the Catholic Church has a long and glorious history of caring for the weakest members of society - the poor, the sick, the disabled, the orphaned, the widowed, the aged, the imprisoned - in obedience to the word of Our Lord: "Amen, I say to you: as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me." Countless holy men and women have dedicated their lives to the service to these "least brethren", with most of their personal sacrifices being known to God alone. It would not be an exaggeration to say that these individuals made - and continue to make - the project of Western civilization possible. Even today, in her greatly diminished earthly state, the Catholic Church remains the largest non-governmental provider of health care services in the world.

It would seem, however, that Catholics today have largely forgotten this part of their collective patrimony. They are assailed by an apparently endless stream of statements from leading Church officials which cast the shadow of ignorance over this glorious past, leading them to believe that mercy and care for those "on the peripheries" of society is something foreign to the Church of Christ; that she must now be instructed in the care of the poor and sick; that she must finally go "beyond herself" and learn to "walk with the marginalized". 

Such a cavalier treatment of the Church's mission of charity, both past and present, is not merely an affront to the heroic efforts of great saints. It is, in the hands of a few crafty prelates, a program of disinformation intended to shame faithful Catholics into accepting a plan of reform which is less about authentic social justice and more about unadulterated Socialism. 

At times such as these, it is vital, gentle reader, that Catholics today familiarize themselves with the teachings of the great popes of the past in regards to the very real dangers of Socialism. With the fall of Communism in Russia, we have been led to believe that Socialism is no longer a real threat. However, Socialism is very much alive and threatening the very fabric of our civilization. Only, it operates behind the scenes, making it difficult for the man in the streets - and in the pews - to gain an overview of its machinations. It was to aid the Catholic faithful in recognizing the advancing evil of Socialism that Pope Leo XIII composed his great encyclical, Quod Apostolici Muneris, in 1878. The careful reader will observe that it has lost nothing of its applicability to our present day. Those passages which seem particularly relevant are highlighted for your consideration.

QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS

ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII

ON SOCIALISM

To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and  Bishops of the Catholic World in Grace and Communion with the Apostolic See.

At the very beginning of Our pontificate, as the nature of Our apostolic office demanded, we hastened to point out in an encyclical letter addressed to you, venerable brethren, the deadly plague that is creeping into the very fibres of human society and leading it on to the verge of destruction; at the same time We pointed out also the most effectual remedies by which society might be restored and might escape from the very serious dangers which threaten it. But the evils which We then deplored have so rapidly increased that We are again compelled to address you, as though we heard the voice of the prophet ringing in Our ears: "Cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet."(Isa. 58:1) You understand, venerable brethren, that We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning - the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever.

Surely these are they who, as the sacred Scriptures testify, "Defile the flesh, despise dominion and blaspheme majesty."(Jude 8) They leave nothing untouched or whole which by both human and divine laws has been wisely decreed for the health and beauty of life. They refuse obedience to the higher powers, to whom, according to the admonition of the Apostle, every soul ought to be subject, and who derive the right of governing from God; and they proclaim the absolute equality of all men in rights and duties. They debase the natural union of man and woman, which is held sacred even among barbarous peoples; and its bond, by which the family is chiefly held together, they weaken, or even deliver up to lust. Lured, in fine, by the greed of present goods, which is "the root of all evils, which some coveting have erred from the faith,"(1 Tim. 6:10) they assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law; and by a scheme of horrible wickedness, while they seem desirous of caring for the needs and satisfying the desires of all men, they strive to seize and hold in common whatever has been acquired either by title of lawful inheritance, or by labor of brain and hands, or by thrift in one's mode of life. These are the startling theories they utter in their meetings, set forth in their pamphlets, and scatter abroad in a cloud of journals and tracts. Wherefore, the revered majesty and power of kings has won such fierce hatred from their seditious people that disloyal traitors, impatient of all restraint, have more than once within a short period raised their arms in impious attempt against the lives of their own sovereigns.

2. But the boldness of these bad men, which, day by day, more and more threatens civil society with destruction, and strikes the souls of all with anxiety and fear, finds its cause and origin in those poisonous doctrines which, spread abroad in former times among the people, like evil seed bore in due time such fatal fruit. For you know, venerable brethren, that that most deadly war which from the sixteenth century down has been waged by innovators against the Catholic faith, and which has grown in intensity up to today, had for its object to subvert all revelation, and overthrow the supernatural order, that thus the way might be opened for the discoveries, or rather the hallucinations, of reason alone. This kind of error, which falsely usurps to itself the name of reason, as it lures and whets the natural appetite that is in man of excelling, and gives loose rein to unlawful desires of every kind, has easily penetrated not only the minds of a great multitude of men but to a wide extent civil society, also. Hence, by a new species of impiety, unheard of even among the heathen nations, states have been constituted without any count at all of God or of the order established by him; it has been given out that public authority neither derives its principles, nor its majesty, nor its power of governing from God, but rather from the multitude, which, thinking itself absolved from all divine sanction, bows only to such laws as it shall have made at its own will. The supernatural truths of faith having been assailed and cast out as though hostile to reason, the very Author and Redeemer of the human race has been slowly and little by little banished from the universities, the lyceums and gymnasia - in a word, from every public institution. In fine, the rewards and punishments of a future and eternal life having been handed over to oblivion, the ardent desire of happiness has been limited to the bounds of the present. Such doctrines as these having been scattered far and wide, so great a license of thought and action having sprung up on all sides, it is no matter for surprise that men of the lowest class, weary of their wretched home or workshop, are eager to attack the homes and fortunes of the rich; it is no matter for surprise that already there exists no sense of security either in public or private life, and that the human race should have advanced to the very verge of final dissolution.

3. But the supreme pastors of the Church, on whom the duty falls of guarding the Lord's flock from the snares of the enemy, have striven in time to ward off the danger and provide for the safety of the faithful. For, as soon as the secret societies began to be formed, in whose bosom the seeds of the errors which we have already mentioned were even then being nourished, the Roman Pontiffs Clement XII and Benedict XIV did not fail to unmask the evil counsels of the sects, and to warn the faithful of the whole globe against the ruin which would be wrought. Later on again, when a licentious sort of liberty was attributed to man by a set of men who gloried in the name of philosophers, and a new right, as they call it, against the natural and divine law began to be framed and sanctioned, Pope Pius VI, of happy memory, at once exposed in public documents the guile and falsehood of their doctrines, and at the same time foretold with apostolic foresight the ruin into which the people so miserably deceived would be dragged. But, as no adequate precaution was taken to prevent their evil teachings from leading the people more and more astray, and lest they should be allowed to escape in the public statutes of States, Popes Pius VII and Leo XII condemned by anathema the secret sects,(cf. Humanum genus) and again warned society of the danger which threatened them. Finally, all have witnessed with what solemn words and great firmness and constancy of soul our glorious predecessor, Pius IX, of happy memory, both in his allocutions and in his encyclical letters addressed to the bishops of all the world, fought now against the wicked attempts of the sects, now openly by name against the pest of socialism, which was already making headway.

4. But it is to be lamented that those to whom has been committed the guardianship of the public weal, deceived by the wiles of wicked men and terrified by their threats, have looked upon the Church with a suspicious and even hostile eye, not perceiving that the attempts of the sects would be vain if the doctrine of the Catholic Church and the authority of the Roman Pontiffs had always survived, with the honor that belongs to them, among princes and peoples. For, "the church of the living God, which is the pillar and ground of truth,"(1 Tim. 3:15) hands down those doctrines and precepts whose special object is the safety and peace of society and the uprooting of the evil growth of socialism.

5. For, indeed, although the socialists, stealing the very Gospel itself with a view to deceive more easily the unwary, have been accustomed to distort it so as to suit their own purposes, nevertheless so great is the difference between their depraved teachings and the most pure doctrine of Christ that none greater could exist: "for what participation hath justice with injustice or what fellowship hath light with darkness?"(2 Cor. 6:14) Their habit, as we have intimated, is always to maintain that nature has made all men equal, and that, therefore, neither honor nor respect is due to majesty, nor obedience to laws, unless, perhaps, to those sanctioned by their own good pleasure. But, on the contrary, in accordance with the teachings of the Gospel, the equality of men consists in this: that all, having inherited the same nature, are called to the same most high dignity of the sons of God, and that, as one and the same end is set before all, each one is to be judged by the same law and will receive punishment or reward according to his deserts. The inequality of rights and of power proceeds from the very Author of nature, "from whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named."(Eph. 3:15) But the minds of princes and their subjects are, according to Catholic doctrine and precepts, bound up one with the other in such a manner, by mutual duties and rights, that the thirst for power is restrained and the rational ground of obedience made easy, firm, and noble.

6. Assuredly, the Church wisely inculcates the apostolic precept on the mass of men: "There is no power but from God; and those that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist purchase to themselves damnation." And again she admonishes those "subject by necessity" to be so "not only for wrath but also for conscience' sake," and to render "to all men their dues; tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor."(Rom. 13:7) For, He who created and governs all things has, in His wise providence, appointed that the things which are lowest should attain their ends by those which are intermediate, and these again by the highest. Thus, as even in the kingdom of heaven He hath willed that the choirs of angels be distinct and some subject to others, and also in the Church has instituted various orders and a diversity of offices, so that all are not apostles or doctors or pastors,(1 Cor. 12:28) so also has He appointed that there should be various orders in civil society, differing indignity, rights, and power, whereby the State, like the Church, should be one body, consisting of many members, some nobler than others, but all necessary to each other and solicitous for the common good.

7. But that rulers may use the power conceded to them to save and not to destroy, the Church of Christ seasonably warns even princes that the sentence of the Supreme Judge overhangs them, and, adopting the words of divine wisdom, calls upon all in the name of God: "Give ear, you that rule the people, and that please yourselves in multitudes of nations; for power is given you by the Lord, and strength by the Most High, who will examine your works, and search out your thoughts. . . . For a most severe judgment shall be for them that bear rule. . . . For God will not except any man's person, neither will he stand in awe of any man's greatness, for he hath made the little and the great; and he hath equally care of all. But a greater punishment is ready for the more mighty."(Wisd. 6:3-4, 8-9) And if at any time it happen that the power of the State is rashly and tyrannically wielded by princes, the teaching of the Catholic church does not allow an insurrection on private authority against them, lest public order be only the more disturbed, and lest society take greater hurt therefrom. And when affairs come to such a pass that there is no other hope of safety, she teaches that relief may be hastened by the merits of Christian patience and by earnest prayers to God. But, if the will of legislators and princes shall have sanctioned or commanded anything repugnant to the divine or natural law, the dignity and duty of the Christian name, as well as the judgment of the Apostle, urge that "God is to be obeyed rather than man." (Acts 5:29)

8. Even family life itself, which is the cornerstone of all society and government, necessarily feels and experiences the salutary power of the Church, which redounds to the right ordering and preservation of every State and kingdom. For you know, venerable brethren, that the foundation of this society rests first of all in the indissoluble union of man and wife according to the necessity of natural law, and is completed in the mutual rights and duties of parents and children, masters and servants. You know also that the doctrines of socialism strive almost completely to dissolve this union; since, that stability which is imparted to it by religious wedlock being lost, it follows that the power of the father over his own children, and the duties of the children toward their parents, must be greatly weakened. But the Church, on the contrary, teaches that "marriage, honorable in all,"(Heb. 13:4) which God himself instituted in the very beginning of the world, and made indissoluble for the propagation and preservation of the human species, has become still more binding and more holy through Christ, who raised it to the dignity of a sacrament, and chose to use it as the figure of His own union with the Church.

Wherefore, as the Apostle has it (Eph. 5:23), as Christ is the head of the Church, so is the man the head of the woman; and as the Church is subject to Christ, who embraces her with a most chaste and undying love, so also should wives be subject to their husbands, and be loved by them in turn with a faithful and constant affection. In like manner does the Church temper the use of parental and domestic authority, that it may tend to hold children and servants to their duty, without going beyond bounds. For, according to Catholic teaching, the authority of our heavenly Father and Lord is imparted to parents and masters, whose authority, therefore, not only takes its origin and force from Him, but also borrows its nature and character. Hence, the Apostle exhorts children to "obey their parents in the Lord, and honor their father and mother, which is the first commandment with promise";(Eph. 6:1-2) and he admonishes parents: "And you, fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and correction of the Lord."(Eph. 6:4) Again, the apostle enjoins the divine precept on servants and masters, exhorting the former to be "obedient to their lords according to the flesh of Christ . . . with a good will serving, as to the Lord"; and the latter, to "forbear threatenings, knowing that the Lord of all is in heaven, and there is no respect of persons with God."(Eph. 6:5-9) If only all these matters were faithfully observed according to the divine will by all on whom they are enjoined, most assuredly every family would be a figure of the heavenly home, and the wonderful blessings there begotten would not confine themselves to the households alone, but would scatter their riches abroad through the nations.

9. But Catholic wisdom, sustained by the precepts of natural and divine law, provides with especial care for public and private tranquility in its doctrines and teachings regarding the duty of government and the distribution of the goods which are necessary for life and use. For, while the socialists would destroy the right of property, alleging it to be a human invention altogether opposed to the inborn equality of man, and, claiming a "community of goods," argue that poverty should not be peaceably endured, and that the property and privileges of the rich may be rightly invaded, the Church, with much greater wisdom and good sense, recognizes the inequality among men, who are born with different powers of body and mind, inequality in actual possession, also, and holds that the right of property and of ownership, which springs from nature itself, must not be touched and stands inviolate. For she knows that stealing and robbery were forbidden in so special a manner by God, the Author and Defender of right, that He would not allow man even to desire what belonged to another, and that thieves and despoilers, no less than adulterers and idolaters, are shut out from the Kingdom of Heaven. But not the less on this account does our holy Mother not neglect the care of the poor or omit to provide for their necessities; but, rather, drawing them to her with a mother's embrace, and knowing that they bear the person of Christ Himself, who regards the smallest gift to the poor as a benefit conferred on Himself, holds them in great honor. She does all she can to help them; she provides homes and hospitals where they may be received, nourished, and cared for all the world over and watches over these. She is constantly pressing on the rich that most grave precept to give what remains to the poor; and she holds over their heads the divine sentence that unless they succor the needy they will be repaid by eternal torments. In fine, she does all she can to relieve and comfort the poor, either by holding up to them the example of Christ, "who being rich became poor for our sake,(2 Cor. 8:9) or by reminding them of his own words, wherein he pronounced the poor blessed and bade them hope for the reward of eternal bliss. But who does not see that this is the best method of arranging the old struggle between the rich and poor? For, as the very evidence of facts and events shows, if this method is rejected or disregarded, one of two things must occur: either the greater portion of the human race will fall back into the vile condition of slavery which so long prevailed among the pagan nations, or human society must continue to be disturbed by constant eruptions, to be disgraced by rapine and strife, as we have had sad witness even in recent times.

10. These things being so, then, venerable brethren, as at the beginning of Our pontificate We, on whom the guidance of the whole Church now lies, pointed out a place of refuge to the peoples and the princes tossed about by the fury of the tempest, so now, moved by the extreme peril that is on them, We again lift up Our voice, and beseech them again and again for their own safety's sake as well as that of their people to welcome and give ear to the Church which has had such wonderful influence on the public prosperity of kingdoms, and to recognize that political and religious affairs are so closely united that what is taken from the spiritual weakens the loyalty of subjects and the majesty of the government. And since they know that the Church of Christ has such power to ward off the plague of socialism as cannot be found in human laws, in the mandates of magistrates, or in the force of armies, let them restore that Church to the condition and liberty in which she may exert her healing force for the benefit of all society.

11. But you, venerable brethren, who know the origin and the drift of these gathering evils, strive with all your force of soul to implant the Catholic teaching deep in the minds of all. Strive that all may have the habit of clinging to God with filial love and revering His divinity from their tenderest years; that they may respect the majesty of princes and of laws; that they may restrain their passions and stand fast by the order which God has established in civil and domestic society. Moreover, labor hard that the children of the Catholic Church neither join nor favor in any way whatsoever this abominable sect; let them show, on the contrary, by noble deeds and right dealing in all things, how well and happily human society would hold together were each member to shine as an example of right doing and of virtue. In fine, as the recruits of socialism are especially sought among artisans and workmen, who, tired, perhaps, of labor, are more easily allured by the hope of riches and the promise of wealth, it is well to encourage societies of artisans and workmen which, constituted under the guardianship of religion, may tend to make all associates contented with their lot and move them to a quiet and peaceful life.

12. Venerable brethren, may He who is the beginning and end of every good work inspire your and Our endeavors. And, indeed, the very thought of these days, in which the anniversary of our Lord's birth is solemnly observed, moves us to hope for speedy help. For the new life which Christ at His birth brought to a world already aging and steeped in the very depths of wickedness He bids us also to hope for, and the peace which He then announced by the angels to men He has promised to us also. For the Lord's "hand is not shortened that he cannot save, neither is his ear heavy that he cannot hear."(Isa. 59:1) In these most auspicious days, then, venerable brethren, wishing all joy and happiness to you and to the faithful of your churches, We earnestly pray the Giver of all good that again "there may appear unto men the goodness and kindness of God our Saviour,"(Tit. 3:4) who brought us out of the power of our most deadly enemy into the most noble dignity of the sons of God. And that We may the sooner and more fully gain our wish, do you, venerable brethren, join with Us in lifting up your fervent prayers to God and beg the intercession of the Blessed and Immaculate Virgin Mary, and of Joseph her spouse, and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, in whose prayers We have the greatest confidence. And in the meanwhile We impart to you, with the inmost affection of the heart, and to your clergy and faithful people, the apostolic benediction as an augury of the divine gifts. 

(Original)

On Mercy and the Synod

An Interview with Fr. Marcel Guarnizo

October 30, 2014

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo
(Photo: M. R. Stafanik/CNA)

Q. Prior to the Synod, you had some concerns over the direction of the debate. How did the Relatio address those concerns, and/or confirm them? 

A. I think to understand the nature of these concerns (which are shared by many), a few things need to be established regarding the nature of the synod itself. A synod is a gathering of bishops from around the world who meet to, "… foster a closer unity between the Roman Pontiff and the bishops, to assist the roman Pontiff with their counsel in safeguarding and increasing faith and morals and in preserving and strengthening ecclesiastical discipline…" (Canon 342.) The current synod on the family is not an ecumenical council. It is not a Church council - a Vatican III - or any such thing. A proper understanding of the synod’s authority should put what is taking place in its proper perspective. A synod cannot overturn ecumenical councils or remake the Church’s definition of dogma. 

Second, as a Catholic I believe firmly that the office of Peter cannot teach error. When Peter, as universal shepherd of the Church, speaks regarding faith and morals, his pronouncements are unerring throughout the universal Church regarding matters of belief. Defined doctrine cannot be changed by any human power, so I have no concerns in this regard. 

The charism of infallibility though, is only a negative protection of the office of Peter as universal shepherd of the Church. What I mean by this is that God has promised to prevent, or impede, Peter from teaching error or heresy as doctrine for belief of the Catholic Church. Infallibility does not, however, guarantee that the Pope will further the promotion of truth and faith. It also does not insure that he will not err or fail to communicate effectively and forcefully the truth of the Gospel in homilies, interviews, and the like. 

I think the present concerns are due to weeks and weeks of Cardinal Kasper's prominent role in the synod and his multiple reiterations of proposals which seem, upon review, not just theologically unsound but philosophically and logically contradictory. The concern of which you speak, has been shared by many bishops and cardinals around the world. This has been openly stated by many in attendance at the synod and was evidenced by the book and articles authored by Cardinal Burke, Brandmuller, Carfarra, De Paolis, Pell and others as a response to the proposals of Cardinal Kasper and Kasper's co-thinkers. Cardinal Gerhard Muller (Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith), had made his own negative views of Cardinal Kasper's proposal known as well. I agree with their concerns and am grateful for their articulation and studious elucidation of the facts surrounding the question of marriage and other doctrinal issues. 

I think there is legitimate concern that, regardless of the doctrinal facts, speculative theories on the doctrine of marriage, homosexual unions, cohabitation, and other fractious issues, cause tremendous confusion and even scandal among the faithful, Catholic and non-Catholic. In practice, ambiguous and imprecise statements send a signal that these doctrinal matters are perhaps no longer relevant in our day and age. 

If discussions of these "hot button" issues are not treated with great care, the signal can be sent that fundamental doctrinal teaching of the Church may be irrelevant, or up to the subjective judgment of each priest or bishop in pastoral practice. Clearly, there is political and media pressure seeking impossible doctrinal change and we should be careful not to give the illusion that any change is possible or forthcoming. 

The Relatio must cause astonishment and concern. Even the main relator, Cardinal Peter Erdo, openly stated that some of the most controversial paragraphs had been inserted in the final draft and he was clearly not about to defend them or even explain them. Instead he called publicly on Archbishop Bruno Forte, the author of the controversial statements, to assume responsibility for his own words. 

To see Cardinal Erdo's concern and the objections voiced by bishops from Africa, Poland, and elsewhere on the synod floor must cause concern. If one of the goals of a synod as stated in the Code of Canon Law is the, "… preserving and strengthening of ecclesial discipline…" but openly there seems to be a faction proposing to change not preserve, and weaken not strengthen, the discipline of the Church, then I believe there is cause for concern. If this is so, some of the goals of the synod, seem to me are not being met. It also seems to me, that Cardinal Kasper's proposals have not served as a vehicle to foster unity among the bishops and cardinals. 

This I do not mind, as unity in the Church can only come as a communion (common union) vis à vis the true and correct doctrine of the Church. Unanimity in accepting to support the proposals of Cardinal Kasper and others would be very preoccupying, indeed. 

The doctrinal issues at hand do not, in my view, require heroic powers of discernment. But the Relatio, I think, lacked rigor, precision, and operational definition of terms. Given the circumstances of today and the need for clarity, it was not helpful in this regard. My impression is that, in many paragraphs, it was not grounded on a solid, philosophical, biblical, or theological ecclesial foundation. The international reaction to it, was telling of the final result. Given the partiality of the document, to release it to predictable public clamor was bound to increase pressure for doctrinal change, augment confusion, and frankly promote scandal among many. If the actual statements of all the bishops speaking about these matters are not accessible what is the point of releasing such draft documents? 

Q. Do you see the effort in the Relatio as strictly pastoral, or does it raise doctrinal issues? 

A. There is no such thing as "strictly pastoral." Pastoral practice cannot contradict Church doctrine. Pastoral practice depends on doctrinal teaching. Practice follows necessarily from theory. 

Pastoral practice exists to teach, to implement in practice Divine revelation as mediated and defined by the Magisterium of the Church. It is not within the jurisdiction of pastoral practice to decide what is true in the deposit of faith. Pastoral practice necessarily takes its guiding principles from the dogmatic teaching of the Church, not the other way around. Pastoral "theology" is the praxis which depends necessarily on the dogmatic teaching of the Church. To think that pastoral practice, rules or even guides dogmatic theology is a mistake. 

Theoretical science and its principles, in this case given by the Divine person, are in no way subject for their truth and certitude upon pastoral concerns. If Divine doctrine could be settled by votes, popular opinion, or the opinion of a few theologians, such doctrine would be anything but of Divine origin. God's word and its teaching by the Church is immutable - not because some are not with the times but rather because God cannot change and His Divine Word for the salvation of mankind is - unlike man’s testimony - immutable. It is immutable because it is true. 

Theology requires much intellectual humility. God cannot deceive or be deceived. God is not the consultant from whom we seek opinions to determine what is true and good. He is Truth and Goodness itself. 

Pastoral practice cannot determine or grant the promise of truth. Truth of a Divine origin has been true before there were any pastoral agents in the Church. These new "pastoral theologians," need to be reminded of their function. Judging revelation is not one of them. 

The granting of communion to the divorced and remarried without a previous annulment is evidently a doctrinal issue in the Catholic Church. To claim that this is a disciplinary issue and does not touch doctrine is at best an error in thought by the proponents of such a theory. The merciful obligation to deny communion to individuals in situations which are objectively gravely sinful in the teaching of the Church is a solemn duty. Simply put, to attempt a second marriage while still validly married is taught by Our Lord and the Church to be adultery. Sexual relations in such invalid marriages are also grave matter and clearly forbidden by the Sixth Commandment, ergo those who engage in them cannot receive communion. Communion is denied in practice by the Church, as an act of mercy. 

The commandments are commandments, not suggestions or proposals. From a philosophical point of view, to change pastoral practice and grant communion and maintain the condition of such communicants to be objectively disordered, would be a logical contradiction which cannot be exercised at a practical level. Both cannot be maintained simultaneously. 

Furthermore, to grant communion touches the doctrinal teaching of the Church in matters regarding grace, the sacrament of confession and the authority of the Magisterium of the Church. Cardinal Kasper has proposed a mysterious "penitential path," which somehow would conclude with confession and absolution. But this is also a logical contradiction. Of what would these divorced and remarried individuals be absolved? If they are being absolved for attempting a marriage outside of the Church or for illicit sexual relations outside of marriage, how is it that it would be sinful for that one confession concluding the penitential path and then, they could go back to commit and persevere in the same actions which a priest has just absolved and recognized as sinful? How were such actions determined to be sinful once and the same exact actions thereafter are perfectly fine? It makes no sense. No priest in a confessional could solve these illogical and irrational dilemmas. Are they to absolve them once and then say that the same actions are fine? If they are morally sound after the confession why weren’t they acceptable the day of the confession at the end of the penitential path? No theology is needed to see the problems. A previous science, namely logic and philosophy, disqualifies these proposals as contrary to reason. 

Finally, all priests are held to serve and protect their faithful from spiritual damage. To "do no harm," is the most basic and fundamental ethical principle of human action. The Church teaches with St. Paul, who taught that, "For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm and a considerable number are dying." (1 Cor. 11: 29-30). 

It is of no benefit to the communicant who is objectively in a condition of serious sin to receive communion. Since we have a moral obligation to endeavor for the good of souls, we must not give to people what de facto will do damage to them. It is in my view, positively unmerciful to give communion knowingly to such individuals. We hold to the doctrine of the proper reception of communion and counsel souls not to receive if they are not in a state of grace, for many reasons. The fact that mercy obliges us to do this is one of them. There should be no shame, fear, or discomfort in this; we cannot give what would harm another person. 

Communion without conversion is an impossible proposition, morally and theologically. Our Lord taught the conditions for discipleship, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, take up his cross and follow Me." (Matthew 16:24). This is the order required by wisdom and true discipleship. We must first deny ourselves that which God forbids. This will not be easy, but with God’s grace we must carry our cross and then and only then, does He invite us to follow Him. Cardinal Kasper's proposal, supported by others as well, is in my view, the antithesis of the Divine requirement. If Communion without conversion were possible, Our Lord would have perhaps stated: "Do not deny yourselves, do not pick up your cross, just follow me." 

It seems to me, that it is a grave oversight to forget that the sacrament of Confession is the visible and effective sign, instituted by the Divine person as an endless fountain of mercy for humanity. Confession is the sacrament of mercy. Mercy as a virtue cannot exist outside of that which is true and it cannot exist without the proper observance of justice. It is unjust and unmerciful and a bad error to propose or imagine human solutions that offer guarantees which may depart in doctrine or practice from Divine teaching. 

The Relatio's review and proposals on all other issues, including that of cohabitation and homosexual unions, compounds all these problems. But, in my view, there is little complexity to the proposals being offered. They all follow, from the same erroneous start, to multiply the dangers for the souls of the faithful. If the teaching of Our Lord and the Sixth Commandment is to hold any relevance, all types of sexual unions outside of marriage (between one man and one woman), fall under the same logical and doctrinal judgment. Sexual relations outside of marriage being forbidden by the Sixth Commandment also would forbid adultery, homosexual relations, the sexual relations of those who cohabitate and are not married. All of these are simply a different specie or kind of the same sin forbidden by the Sixth Commandment, namely fornication. None of these can be advised without contradicting the Sixth Commandment. There is really in my view, very little complexity to the proposals being deliberated. 

Q. The paragraphs on homosexuality seem to be gaining the most attention in American media. Do you see these as the most troubling and/or remarkable? 

A. It seems the analysis and focus on trying to accommodate these relations  are futile efforts within the context of Catholic doctrine. I do agree that a pastoral plan is needed, given the extraordinary changes in our culture and the public lobbying by a small but vociferous group of people. Most men and women with homosexual tendencies are grateful to have a father and a mother, and do not want to destroy marriage or change any Church doctrine. 

The missing pastoral plan to which mercy obliges us, is to minister to men and women with homosexual tendencies for, as of now, they have been like "sheep without shepherds." The pastoral plan needed would be for every diocese in the world to open up a ministry to counsel and lend a merciful ear to those with such non-normative tendencies, who wish to speak about them. To celebrate and congratulate people "coming out," cloaks a great deal of moral irresponsibility. There is real suffering in many of these cases, about which we should feel great mercy. 

Sufficient for those who at present want to make such relations normative, would be to ask them to enter into dialogue with men and women with homosexual tendencies. If they did this, they would discover the immense number of our brothers and sisters who have suffered sexual abuse, family dysfunction, and other psychological and physical harms. 

Many of the people with homosexual tendencies in fact are seeking someone to talk to. They are not ministered properly if some shepherds continue to pretend there is no issue at hand. Many young people who have been sexually abused, have developed homosexual tendencies but they cannot easily find a responsible adult to speak to about their situation. If institutionally we close our doors, exclude them from our ministry by pretending there is no issue, we ignore our duty in mercy to be available to all people regardless of their situation. The real pastoral plan is not, through theological acrobatics, seeking to ignore the presence of non-normative sexual tendencies and therefore refuse to seek solutions. This position of the Church, may be a sign of contradiction in our day and age but nonetheless, mercy obliges us not to tell falsehoods, scientifically, morally or theologically. The Church has been very clear on this matter. What is needed in my view is not accommodation but a realization of suffering and pain which requires the mercy of our ministry. 

Furthermore, there are great questions of justice which are owed to children. Namely, the right of every child to be nurtured by a father and a mother in a family, and the social, psychological, cultural, and moral benefits such an arrangement affords them. 

Q. The Relatio is a work in progress, and already some participants have called for changes to walk back some of the language released. Do you expect that the second draft on Saturday will address those concerns? 

A. It all depends apparently, on who deals with the final redaction of the document.  Certainly a great number of bishops and cardinals oppose Cardinal Kasper’s proposal as being inconsistent with logic, sound philosophy, morals, Church law, and Catholic theology. But the response should be thoughtful. And I do think the counter arguments to Cardinal Kasper & company, have been thoughtful, steeped in Catholic tradition and theology, and consistent with the aim of theology, pastoral practice, and the discipline of the Church, namely the felicity and happiness of man. A respect for human dignity requires clarity and precision when conveying the doctrine of salvation. 

Q. How does the "law of graduality" as mentioned in the relatio impact the teaching on the indissolubility of marriage? Does this tend to give license to those who want access to the Eucharist regardless of the status of their communion with Church teachings, and why? 

A. The law of graduality in my view does not apply to marriage. One is either married or not. A determination by the Church may be needed to discover and assess the fact. The process of annulment exists to determine this, if a marriage is called into question. But one cannot be partially married, somewhat married, married but not fully. There is no possible graduality here. To make an analogy to ecclesial communion by different ecclesial communities or particular churches in this regard a false analogy. The Church can be in communion on some points with other ecclesial communities and not in communion on other points, that is, the degree of unity may vary. Sacramental communion, communion of faith, and hierarchical communion are all needed to be in full communion with the Catholic Church. Therefore, different degrees of communion are possible. 

In the case of marriage the determination is singular and unique. A couple married or not, period. There is no such thing as married in some respects and not married in other respects. If it were possible to have degrees of marriage, it would be to propose yet another logical contradiction, that one could be married and not married at one and the same time. It is analogous to a mother being pregnant. She is either pregnant or she is not, she cannot be somewhat pregnant or gradually pregnant. Seeking some status to accommodate other "unions," is in my view, again, a futile exercise. Sacraments affect the grace they signify upon completion of the sacrament, after the rite of baptism you are baptized. Before baptism, you are not. If there is a valid, sacrament the reality of the sacrament takes effect immediately. 

The commandments and the law of God are also not subject to graduality. It is not possible to believe that the prohibition against fornication applies as a prohibition gradually to different people. If not, someone could therefore be licitly fornicating for some months, others for some years as the commandment applies differently to each person. Who could with certainty of truth imply that for some couples the prohibition of the commandment does not apply yet? This is to empty revelation of its clear meaning. It matters little if they cannot change doctrine; the effect in practice is to make the teaching of Christ and the Church vacuous, in practice. Again, all this is impossible from a philosophical, theological, and ethical perspective. 

Q. There has been a lot of talk about mercy before and during the synod, what is your view on mercy as the justification for these new pastoral approaches? 

A. It seems to me at the heart of the matter lies yet another problem that has been afflicting the opinions of more than one bishop at the synod. This problem is the lack of and great need in the age of postmodernity for proper operational definitions of terms. There seems to be in our day and age a great deal of confusion about the meanings of all sorts of things, family, unions, gender, homosexual tendencies, doctrine vs. discipline, dogma vs. pastoral practice, and much more. Mercy as a virtue is most necessary in the Church, but it unfortunately does not escape the deconstruction of postmodern thinking in our times. Mercy denotes, as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches, "...a kind of sorrow" (Summa Theologica II-IIae, Q.30, a.1-a.4) – sorrow for the plight of another. The origin of this sorrow is originated necessarily from the recognition of a privation of a good in the person for which one feels "… a kind of sorrow." This privation of a good could be physical, moral, spiritual, or for any other reason. Therefore, to properly understand mercy as a virtue one must first recognize the inadequacy, defect, lack of a perfection or goodness in the person one feels sorrow for. This implies, of course, recognition of the privation of good in all the cases being addressed at the synod – divorced and remarried (without a previous annulment), those cohabitating outside of marriage, homosexual "unions," and the rest. Mercy is impossible even as a feeling without the recognition of the objective deficiency present, for it is in the recognition of the deficiency that mercy as a feeling originates. 

But more is needed to actually attain mercy as a virtue. A feeling is not a virtue. We all have feelings, many beyond rational control. But a feeling of sorrow for someone’s plight is far from constituting the virtue of mercy. Thomas distinguishes between "a feeling of sorrow," which is not more than a movement of the sensitive appetite, a passion and mercy which is the virtue. The feeling by itself does not constitute the virtue of mercy. For mercy to exist as a virtue, (which I take is what really is of value), mercy must be "…a movement of the intellective appetite…" This movement, for mercy to be an actual virtue, must be ruled, "…in accordance with reason and in accordance with this movement regulated by reason, the movement of the lower appetite (the feeling of sorrow), may be regulated." 

The "feeling of sorrow," is not mercy. It must be regulated to be a virtue by adherence through right reason to the good and to that which is true. It seems to me much of what we have today is feeling sorry that someone cannot receive communion. But to assert that this feeling is a manifestation of the virtue of mercy is just simply a bad theoretical error. 

Furthermore, to determine the defect in a relationship for which one "feels sorry," requires a judgment. Therefore to oppose a judgment of the mind to mercy is to be speaking of emotive mercy (irrational feeling), vs. the virtue of mercy which requires reason and judgment. Much of what today is being called mercy is nothing more than a feeling by which no serious judgments, let alone pastoral practice or doctrinal determinations, can be made. 

Finally as Thomas teaches, quoting St. Augustine, the virtue of mercy exists as, "… this movement of the mind (i.e. not feeling) obeys reason, when mercy is vouchsafed in such a way that justice is safeguarded, whether we give to the needy or forgive the repentant." (De Civ. Dei ix. 5). 

Pseudo mercy or emotive mercy - just feeling sorry for someone - is what sustains flawed arguments in cases such as euthanasia, "mercy killing." Indeed one may have "a feeling of sorrow," for the plight of an older person who is suffering. But this is not a virtue it is just a sentiment. To propose putting them to death to alleviate their suffering is a departure from reason and does not secure the obligations of justice to the sick and disabled. This is not the virtue of mercy. Equally to destroy the unborn, for reasons of mercy” - they have Down syndrome, they will suffer, they are not wanted - is irrational and unjust. 

I think much of the debate has been between those who think mercy is an irrational feeling, emotive mercy against those who are upholding the real virtue of mercy, which requires, reason, a judgment of the mind, the recognition of the lack of good in a situation and the absolute need for securing through right thinking the ends of justice, truth, and goodness. 

(Source) 

The Epistle of Pope St. Clement to the Corinthians

Pope St. Clement

Rome, A.D. 97. The spiritual presence of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, who were martyred a mere 30 years prior, is still very much palpable in the Eternal City. Numerous from among the faithful possess a living memory of the words and deeds of those great and holy men. Further afield, the Holy Apostle John, though exiled and very near the end of his life, is still actively spreading the Faith through his writings. Emperor Domitian, who had initiated a brutal persecution of the Church, claiming the lives of many faithful, including that of Pope St. Anacletus, was assassinated in his palace some months ago. His successor, Nerva, shows decidedly more restraint towards the Christians, and a brief period of calm has ensued. Pope St. Clement, the third successor to the Chair of St. Peter, uses this respite as an opportunity to turn his attention from the waning fires of Rome to more distant communities under his pastoral care, such as that at Corinth, where schism appears imminent.

It is this very city of Corinth which the Holy Apostle Paul had admonished in several letters regarding apparent divisions among the faithful, who were fond of saying, "I am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas [i.e. Peter]" (1 Corinthians 1:12). Despite the wise council of the Holy Apostle, it seemed that the situation had continued to deteriorate, and that it now required the judgment of the Supreme Pontiff. Pope St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians was the result.

The Epistle was so well received by the Corinthians, and was so successful in resolving the difficulties, that it was held by the community to be second in importance only to Sacred Scripture, and was taken up into the regular Sunday readings - a practice which is attested as having continued for at least the next 70 years.

Even a casual reading of the Epistle demonstrates that it has lost nothing of its clarity, its zeal for souls, its authentic pastoral care. A more careful reading in light of current events in the Church, however, reveals that it has also retained all of its appositeness. The words of St. Clement could just as easily have been written for our own generation:

Every kind of honour and happiness was bestowed upon you, and then was fulfilled that which is written, "My beloved did eat and drink, and was enlarged and became fat, and kicked." Hence flowed emulation and envy, strife and sedition, persecution and disorder, war and captivity. So the worthless rose up against the honoured, those of no reputation against such as were renowned, the foolish against the wise, the young against those advanced in years. For this reason righteousness and peace are now far departed from you, inasmuch as every one abandons the fear of God, and is become blind in His faith, neither walks in the ordinances of His appointment, nor acts a part becoming of a Christian, but walks after his own wicked lusts, resuming the practice of an unrighteous and ungodly envy, by which death itself entered into the world.

I warmly recommend, gentle reader, that you make a note of this Epistle, and pray that you may soon find the time to read and meditate upon the wise council it contains.

Full Text: Epistle of Pope St. Clement to the Corinthians

In Festo Omnium Sanctorum

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui nos omnium Sanctorum tuorum merita sub una tribuiste celebritate venerari: quaesumus; ut desideratam nobis tuae propitiationis abundantiam, multiplicatis intercessoribus largiaris.

Almighty, everlasting God, Who hast granted us to venerate in one solemnity the merits of all Thy Saints, we beseech Thee, that as our intercessors are multiplied, Thou wouldst bestow upon us the desired abundance of Thy mercy.