Porta Fidei

[link]

1. The “door of faith” (Acts 14:27) is always open for us, ushering us into the life of communion with God and offering entry into his Church. It is possible to cross that threshold when the word of God is proclaimed and the heart allows itself to be shaped by transforming grace. To enter through that door is to set out on a journey that lasts a lifetime. It begins with baptism (cf. Rom 6:4), through which we can address God as Father, and it ends with the passage through death to eternal life, fruit of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, whose will it was, by the gift of the Holy Spirit, to draw those who believe in him into his own glory (cf. Jn 17:22). To profess faith in the Trinity – Father, Son and Holy Spirit – is to believe in one God who is Love (cf. 1 Jn 4:8): the Father, who in the fullness of time sent his Son for our salvation; Jesus Christ, who in the mystery of his death and resurrection redeemed the world; the Holy Spirit, who leads the Church across the centuries as we await the Lord’s glorious return.
[...]
Confessing with the lips indicates in turn that faith implies public testimony and commitment. A Christian may never think of belief as a private act. Faith is choosing to stand with the Lord so as to live with him. This “standing with him” points towards an understanding of the reasons for believing. Faith, precisely because it is a free act, also demands social responsibility for what one believes. The Church on the day of Pentecost demonstrates with utter clarity this public dimension of believing and proclaiming one’s faith fearlessly to every person. It is the gift of the Holy Spirit that makes us fit for mission and strengthens our witness, making it frank and courageous.
[...]
“That the word of the Lord may speed on and triumph” (2 Th 3:1): may this Year of Faith make our relationship with Christ the Lord increasingly firm, since only in him is there the certitude for looking to the future and the guarantee of an authentic and lasting love. The words of Saint Peter shed one final ray of light on faith: “In this you rejoice, though now for a little while you may have to suffer various trials, so that the genuineness of your faith, more precious than gold which though perishable is tested by fire, may redound to praise and glory and honour at the revelation of Jesus Christ. Without having seen him you love him; though you do not now see him you believe in him and rejoice with unutterable and exalted joy. As the outcome of your faith you obtain the salvation of your souls” (1 Pet 1:6-9). The life of Christians knows the experience of joy as well as the experience of suffering. How many of the saints have lived in solitude! How many believers, even in our own day, are tested by God’s silence when they would rather hear his consoling voice! The trials of life, while helping us to understand the mystery of the Cross and to participate in the sufferings of Christ (cf. Col 1:24), are a prelude to the joy and hope to which faith leads: “when I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Cor 12:10). We believe with firm certitude that the Lord Jesus has conquered evil and death. With this sure confidence we entrust ourselves to him: he, present in our midst, overcomes the power of the evil one (cf. Lk 11:20); and the Church, the visible community of his mercy, abides in him as a sign of definitive reconciliation with the Father.

Let us entrust this time of grace to the Mother of God, proclaimed “blessed because she believed” (Lk 1:45).

Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 11 October in the year 2011, the seventh of my Pontificate.

BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

John Paul II and the Truth About the Human Person

John Paul II and the Truth about the Human Person

by Fr. Joel O. Jason, SThL

(On the occasion of Pope John Paul II's Beatification on May 1, 2011, let's get to know a little about the man. This essay is a revised version of the author’s contribution to the John Paul II Commemorative Issue of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conference (FABC) periodical Info on Human Development, March-May 2005 issue.)

Pope John Paul II passed on to the house of the Father on the evening of April 2, 2005, liturgically a Second Sunday of Easter, which he dedicated during his papacy to be Divine Mercy Sunday. May 1, 2011, happens to be also the Second Sunday of Easter, the Feast of the Divine Mercy and on that day John Paul II will be beatified as Blessed John Paul II, a step away from being canonized as Saint of the Catholic Church.

While the sea of humanity that gathered at St. Peter’s for his funeral clamored “santo subito!” (sainthood now!), and the multitudes all over the world now cannot refer to him without calling him “Il Grande” (the great), critics on the other hand view John Paul II as “naïve” and his papacy “a great disappointment” mostly for his stand on feminist concerns, contraception, and human freedom among others. As the world prepares for his beatification on May 1, it is opportune to ask once again what did John Paul really teach on these issues?

John Paul II and genuine freedom

Reflecting on the biblical imagery prohibiting partaking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, “You are free to eat from any of the trees…except the tree of knowledge of good and bad” (Gen 2:16-17), John Paul teaches in Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth) that it is not because God does not want us to know what is good and what is bad. It is symbolic language, the biblical way of telling us that it is not for man to decide what is good and what is bad. To decide what is good and what is bad is God’s alone, “ …the power to decide what is good and evil does not belong to man, but to God alone.” (Veritatis Splendor 35) That was temptation of the serpent, “ the moment you eat you shall be like Gods…” (Gen 3:5) The first man and woman were indeed imago Dei, - image of God, but they fell into the seduction of wanting to be image of God apart from God and not with God. Eve, and later Adam fell into that temptation. And so began the entry of sin in history, and the distortion of human freedom.

Goodness is based on the truth and truth is objective. Man does not and cannot invent the truth. Man only discovers the truth and must cling to that truth as revealed in Scriptures (Divine Law), and in rational reflection on human nature (natural law). In that truth we become free. What if for example, lawmakers decide to vote and ignore the law of gravity. What if the president signs it into a law and then they celebrate their victory by jumping off the roof of Malacañang. Will they be able to break the law of gravity? Obviously not. The only thing that they will break is their bones. Sir Isaac Newton did not invent the law of gravity. He merely discovered the law of gravity, a law that is objective, a law that we obey, a law that makes us truly free.

For John Paul II, freedom for man is counterfeit if it is understood as the power to do what I like, regardless of its consequence on myself and others. Freedom however becomes liberating when understood as the power to choose what I ought, to do what is good. Counterfeit freedom is based on personal likes and dislikes. Genuine freedom is founded on the truth. To illustrate, false freedom tells me to beat the law of the red light in traffic. In the process, I harm or kill myself and others. Genuine freedom prompts me to embrace that law and to choose to stop. Then I become more free, because it keeps me alive and others as well.

John Paul II sees the pro-choice philosophy as founded on the same serpentine seduction. I choose abortion because this is what I like, regardless of what that choice will mean for the rights of another living person, regardless of the truth of the existence of another person over whose life I have no sovereignty. Counterfeit freedom is actually the product of our confusing freedom with license – which is the power to do what I like. (Wonder why people issued with a drivers’ license behave the way they do in the streets? Maybe it’s time to call it drivers’ freedom) And license is a sin specifically condemned in Scriptures “…from within people…come evil thoughts…licentiousness, envy, blasphemy…” (Mark 7:21-22). Freedom cannot be achieved apart from the law.

With insightful distinction, John Paul proposes that genuine freedom is not anomy ( a- without; nomos – law) or the absence of law. Genuine freedom is actually autonomy (autos – self; nomos - law) or the integration of the law within one’s self. But more precisely, in the Christian point of view, genuine freedom is a participated theonomy (theos – God; nomos – law ), i.e., a participation in God’s law. John Paul summarizes this point in Veritatis Splendor 41 saying, “ Genuine moral autonomy in no way means the rejection but rather the acceptance of the moral law, of God’s command…of theonomy, or participated theonomy, since man’s free obedience to God’s law effectively implies that human reason and human will participate in God’s wisdom and providence.”

John Paul II and genuine feminism

A necessary consequence of John Paul’s teaching on the human person and genuine freedom is the affirmation that men and women will experience true fulfillment in discovering and remaining in the truth of who they really are as men and as women. John Paul II proposes that the true liberation of the sexes happens in the discovery of who humanity really is. And that means a re-affirmation and re-appreciation of the truth about their singularity, uniqueness, and complementarity, not necessarily uniformity. Adam expressed his benediction in the discovery of Eve, “this one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Gen2:23), his proper complement. At last, masculinity has found in femininity its proper fulfillment, and vice versa. This, John Paul II calls “the essence of the gift.” Masculinity can give femininity what it does not have just as femininity can gift masculinity that which it does not have. The difference of the sexes is no accident of nature. Rather, it is the necessary condition which paves the way for the man and woman to establish a communio personarum ( communion of persons), the sacrament on earth of the communion of Persons that exists in the very life of the Trinity. This is important in a world that sees the sexual differences as irrelevant and accidental and proposes gender equality as uniformity.

In Mulieris Dignitatem (The Dignity of Women) John Paul warns against the seduction that deceives women into thinking that it is only outside of marriage, maternity and the family that they can find fulfillment and the satisfaction of their legitimate longings for equality. Indeed, there are evident patriarchal biases in society that compromise the rights of women and their dignity. But it will not be solved simply by turning the wheels of imbalance in favor of women, or of pitting women against men. Then, the same cycle of deprived wholeness, and therefore deprived holiness, is perpetuated.

One letter to the editor in a broadsheet newspaper criticized John Paul II for canonizing saint, a modern-day woman who chose that should complications arise, her child be allowed to live instead of her. It was not specific but she must be referring to Gianna Beretta Molla who was beatified by Pope John Paul II on April 24, 1994, during the international Year of the Family. The letter asked, “What signal did it send? That it was alright to die and leave other children behind?” No. The signal it sends is “Can a mother forget her infant, be without tenderness for the child in her womb?” (Isaiah 49:15) The woman was canonized not because one life is better than the other. She was canonized because the signal her life sends is “ No greater love a man can have, than to lay his life for a friend.” (John 15:13) John Paul canonized that modern-day woman because motherhood is the first school where we learn these values. And some misguided feminist philosophies are robbing motherhood of its nobility.

Another developing trend nowadays is women who want children apart from a husband or marriage. Thus, the proliferation of in vitro ( in a petri dish) fertility clinics and womb-for-hire practices. Ironically, this feminist mentality all the more objectifies the women hired as surrogates. They are only as good instrumentally as their womb or their ova. Sadly, the children too are objectified. John Paul in Familiaris Consortio reminds us that children are gifts of the marital covenant. They are not properties we can have at our whim. As gifts, the first inherent right children deserve is to be nurtured in the context of a family and the paternal and maternal presence it provides. Truly, it is unfortunate that there are single parent families. We do not fault these single parents for they are not necessarily to be blamed. But to subject children purposely into such situation by our whims would be grossly irresponsible and selfish on the part of us adults.

John Paul also taught eloquently about the human body and the respect it commands. His “theology of the body” is the core of his teachings on sexual responsibility, purity, and chastity. We hear it often said, “If you have it, flaunt it” for even Sacred Scripture affirms in Genesis 2:25 that “the man and his wife were both naked yet they felt no shame.” But this is a gross misreading of the biblical text. For John Paul II, nakedness without shame is not synonymous with shamelessness. Nakedness without shame is the tranquility of the beloved, naked before his loved one because she is confident that her body-person is appreciated in a non-utilitarian way. Some things are hidden or kept private not because it’s ugly. On the contrary, some things are kept private because they are beautiful, too beautiful in fact as to be sacred. This is why couples celebrate the marital act not in parks but in the privacy of their rooms. This is why we feel violated when others invade our “inner sanctums”, the things/persons we hold sacred. Following John Paul II’s line of thought, the malice of pornography and immodesty is not because it reveals too much. On the contrary, it reveals too little of the human person. It restricts and arrests the interest we have on the another person only in his/her sexual attractiveness. It reduces the human body (most of the time, the female body) to a commodity and an object of pleasure. The true liberation of women lies in the rejection of this profound lie, something which contemporary culture has brainwashed ourselves into believing.

A recent editorial also blamed John Paul II’s teaching on contraception as the reason for the poverty in the world. Such a statement betrays a great misunderstanding of the issue. Some clarifications are in order. John Paul, nor the Church has never taught that couples should have as many children as they could. Couples are only to raise children that they could reasonably look after and provide for. The Church does not even teach that each act of marital intercourse should always result in a child because it does not. The woman is a largely “infertile” person. She is technically fertile only a few days in a month. The natural periods of female infertility point to this. What John Paul II (in Love and Resposibility and Familiaris Consortio ) and the Church teach is that each act of marital intercourse should remain open to the possibility of parenthood. This openness couples manifest when they do not resort to acts or methods (contraception) that have as its intent that no life shall be conceived from this particular act of intercourse.

In the mind of John Paul, contraception is morally problematic not because it is artificial. There are many things that are artificial that the Church finds no problem with, like artificial limbs, the use of pacemakers for those with heart problems and the like. Rather, contraception (whether chemical like contraceptives or surgical like ligation and vasectomy) is morally problematic because it is contraceptive – i.e., against life - it aims to damage the ability of the couples to conceive and prevents life from being conceived. It does not treat fertility as a good but rather as a curse to be avoided. Natural family planning or NFP (specifically the Billings Ovulation method and Symptho-Thermal Method) is essentially different. It is morally acceptable not because it is natural or not “artificial”, but because it is not contraceptive. While the intention may be not to conceive for the moment or indefinitely, in NFP, fertility and the ability of the couples to conceive is not destroyed and compromised because the couples simply appreciate the natural fertility/infertility cycles of the woman, the way God intended her to be. With a 99.5% accuracy, it is unarguably more scientific, accurate, physiologically and psychologically healthy than the so called “modern family planning” methods championed by the RH bill proponents. How could it not be? God designed the human body and NFP simply tunes in to the science of that design. Couples simply behave accordingly in tune with that design.

In NFP, no such life is destroyed or prevented from coming to be. It is simply sex in its most natural beauty, with its natural period of fertility and infertility, the way God intended it to be. For women, this is genuine CHOICE, empowerment and real control over their body. Contraception if at all shows a lack of control. With its high failure rate and inherent medical side effects, it is leaving everything to chance.

Some brand this teaching as “biologism” or “physicalism”. I beg to disagree. What is physicalist is to believe that man and woman is powerless before his physical/sexual urges. NFP tells us otherwise. The only birth control worthy of the human person is self control. Why do we neuter dogs and cats? Because they do not have the ability to say “no.” What then does it say about ourselves when we likewise neuter ourselves chemically or surgically? What is physicalist is to ascribe to a pill and rubber what is properly the realm of human responsibility.

Obviously, this requires discipline and dialogue from couples. Herein lies the beauty of NFP. Responsible parenthood becomes a shared responsibility. Dialogue is promoted and the husband is taught to treat the wife or vice versa, not as a passive property but as a partner. In NFP, the woman is truly respected because we do not dump her body with harmful and potentially fatal chemicals to control her fertility. In NFP, we do not pass on to chemicals something that should be owned by human responsibility and discipline.

The Church of Pope Benedict XVI

While the Cardinals prepared in conclave to choose the next Pope to succeed John Paul II, speculations of whether the next Pope should be “traditional” or “liberal” abounded. Papal biographer George Weigel, when asked how John Paul II will be remembered by history answered succinctly. “ He is the great Christian witness.”

When the Cardinals that gathered in conclave on the 18th of April 2005 chose Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as the 264th successor of Peter, I believe traditional or liberal was not the primary in the agenda. What I believe they asked the Holy Spirit for is a man of witness – a witness to the truth about God, love and humanity. In beatifying John Paul II, the man he endearingly refers to as “continuously looking upon us from the window of the Father’s house,” Pope Benedict XVI is embracing the same challenge of being a witness.

Blessed John Paul II, pray for us!

June 2001 audience with soon Blessed Pope John Paul II

On the trivilization of sexuality

Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

On the trivilization of sexuality

Regarding certain interpretations of "Light of the World"

Following the publication of the interview-book Light of the World by Benedict XVI, a number of erroneous interpretations have emerged which have caused confusion concerning the position of the Catholic Church regarding certain questions of sexual morality. The thought of the Pope has been repeatedly manipulated for ends and interests which are entirely foreign to the meaning of his words – a meaning which is evident to anyone who reads the entire chapters in which human sexuality is treated. The intention of the Holy Father is clear: to rediscover the beauty of the divine gift of human sexuality and, in this way, to avoid the cheapening of sexuality which is common today.

Some interpretations have presented the words of the Pope as a contradiction of the traditional moral teaching of the Church. This hypothesis has been welcomed by some as a positive change and lamented by others as a cause of concern – as if his statements represented a break with the doctrine concerning contraception and with the Church’s stance in the fight against AIDS. In reality, the words of the Pope – which specifically concern a gravely disordered type of human behaviour, namely prostitution (cf. Light of the World, pp. 117-119) – do not signify a change in Catholic moral teaching or in the pastoral practice of the Church.

As is clear from an attentive reading of the pages in question, the Holy Father was talking neither about conjugal morality nor about the moral norm concerning contraception. This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church and was summarized succinctly by Pope Paul VI in paragraph 14 of his Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae, when he wrote that "also to be excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means." The idea that anyone could deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in certain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely arbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought. On this issue the Pope proposes instead – and also calls the pastors of the Church to propose more often and more effectively (cf. Light of the World, p. 147) – humanly and ethically acceptable ways of behaving which respect the inseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meaning of every conjugal act, through the possible use of natural family planning in view of responsible procreation.

On the pages in question, the Holy Father refers to the completely different case of prostitution, a type of behaviour which Christian morality has always considered gravely immoral (cf. Vatican II, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, n. 27; Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2355). The response of the entire Christian tradition – and indeed not only of the Christian tradition – to the practice of prostitution can be summed up in the words of St. Paul: "Flee from fornication" (1 Cor 6:18). The practice of prostitution should be shunned, and it is the duty of the agencies of the Church, of civil society and of the State to do all they can to liberate those involved from this practice.

In this regard, it must be noted that the situation created by the spread of AIDS in many areas of the world has made the problem of prostitution even more serious. Those who know themselves to be infected with HIV and who therefore run the risk of infecting others, apart from committing a sin against the sixth commandment are also committing a sin against the fifth commandment – because they are consciously putting the lives of others at risk through behaviour which has repercussions on public health. In this situation, the Holy Father clearly affirms that the provision of condoms does not constitute "the real or moral solution" to the problem of AIDS and also that "the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of sexuality" in that it refuses to address the mistaken human behaviour which is the root cause of the spread of the virus. In this context, however, it cannot be denied that anyone who uses a condom in order to diminish the risk posed to another person is intending to reduce the evil connected with his or her immoral activity. In this sense the Holy Father points out that the use of a condom "with the intention of reducing the risk of infection, can be a first step in a movement towards a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality." This affirmation is clearly compatible with the Holy Father’s previous statement that this is "not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection."

Some commentators have interpreted the words of Benedict XVI according to the so-called theory of the "lesser evil". This theory is, however, susceptible to proportionalistic misinterpretation (cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis splendor, n. 75-77). An action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed. The Holy Father did not say – as some people have claimed – that prostitution with the use of a condom can be chosen as a lesser evil. The Church teaches that prostitution is immoral and should be shunned. However, those involved in prostitution who are HIV positive and who seek to diminish the risk of contagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the life of another – even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity. This understanding is in full conformity with the moral theological tradition of the Church.

In conclusion, in the battle against AIDS, the Catholic faithful and the agencies of the Catholic Church should be close to those affected, should care for the sick and should encourage all people to live abstinence before and fidelity within marriage. In this regard it is also important to condemn any behaviour which cheapens sexuality because, as the Pope says, such behaviour is the reason why so many people no longer see in sexuality an expression of their love: "This is why the fight against the banalization of sexuality is also part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a positive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s being" (Light of the World, p. 119).

/

So there.

Liberals pounce on "first step", trips and falls flat

Vatican Clarification on AIDS and Condoms

The Holy See Press Office has issued a clarification on the Pope’s comments on condoms and AIDS, according to Vatican Radio:

The head of the Holy See Press Office, Father Federico Lombardi, SJ, has issued a statement clarifying passages of the book Light of the World, in which Pope Benedict discusses AIDS and condom use.

The statement says Pope Benedict states that AIDs cannot be solved only by the distribution of condoms, and, in fact, concentrating on condoms just trivializes sexuality, which loses its meaning as an expression of love and becomes like a drug.

At the same time, the Pope considered an exceptional situation in which the exercise of sexuality represents a real risk to the lives of others. In this case, the Pope does not morally justify the exercise of disordered sexuality, but believes that the use of condoms to reduce the risk of infection is a “first step on the road to a more human sexuality”, rather than not to use it and risking the lives of others.

Father Lombardi’s statement clarifies Pope Benedict XVI has not reformed or changed the Church’s teaching, but by putting it in perspective reaffirms the value and dignity of human sexuality as an expression of love and responsibility.

In other words, the Pope, when talking about the "first step", is talking about the first step to conversion. To state the obvious, any stairway has more than one step.

Janet Smith explains basically what the Pope is saying, and the extent of what he is saying (h/t Jimmy Akin):

If someone was going to rob a bank and was determined to use a gun, it would better for that person to use a gun that had no bullets in it. It would reduce the likelihood of fatal injuries. But it is not the task of the Church to instruct potential bank robbers how to rob banks more safely and certainly not the task of the Church to support programs of providing potential bank robbers with guns that could not use bullets. Nonetheless, the intent of a bank robber to rob a bank in a way that is safer for the employees and customers of the bank may indicate an element of moral responsibility that could be a step towards eventual understanding of the immorality of bank robbing.

Funny. Those people who never bother read and understand the Pope's voluminous encyclicals and other official Magisterial acts now give a lot of weight
and attention (and their own twisted interpretations) to tiny tidbits of what the Pope said in a non-Magisterial interview.
/
(excerpt of Pope's interview here)

Chrism Mass 2010 - Diocese of Cubao

The Chrism Mass comes once a year to the cathedral in every diocese, and is one of the most solemn and significant liturgies of our church. Todays Chrism Mass takes on an added significance in this Year of the Priests. In this year's Triduum, the Pope highlighted the Chrism Mass as he invites the faithful to "Live intensely this Holy Triduum", and reiterates the call to all the Priests: "Be Heralds of Hope".
/
...
"The Holy Chrism Mass, morning prelude of Holy Thursday, will find gathered together..the presbyters with their respective bishops. During a significant Eucharistic celebration, which customarily takes place in the diocesan cathedrals, the oil of the sick, of the catechumens and the chrism will be blessed. Moreover, the bishop and the presbyters will renew their priestly promises pronounced on the day of ordination." ...

"I would like to repeat to all priests the exhortation that I formulated as a conclusion of the letter of convocation: 'In the footsteps of the Curé d'Ars, let yourselves be enthralled by him. In this way you too will be, for the world in our time, heralds of hope, reconciliation and peace!'"

The Bishop of Rome invited the faithful to "dispose ourselves to live intensely this Holy Triduum now imminent, to be ever more profoundly inserted in the Mystery of Christ, dead and resurrected for us."

"May the Most Holy Virgin accompany us in this spiritual itinerary," he prayed. "May she, who followed Jesus in his passion and was present beneath the cross, introduce us into the Paschal Mystery, so that we will be able to experience the joy and peace of the Risen One."
/

Same road

The Catholic teaching (meaning the real one) looks pretty much straightforward, so it comes as a huge disappointment that 86 Catholic (?) legislators (h/t CMR) voted in favor of the bill (the final vote: 219-212), despite strong opposition by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. It seems the 2002 CDF pronouncement fell on deaf ears.

In November 24, 2002 the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) released a DOCTRINAL NOTE on some questions regarding The Participation of Catholics in Political Life.

Its introduction states:

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, having received the opinion of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, has decided that it would be appropriate to publish the present Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding the participation of Catholics in political life. This Note is directed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church and, in a particular way, to Catholic politicians and all lay members of the faithful called to participate in the political life of democratic societies.

In the light of recent developments, the Doctrinal Note is worth reiterating, and is exemplified by some excerpts from section 4 (emphasis mine).

[4]...John Paul II, continuing the constant teaching of the Church, has reiterated many times that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a «grave and clear obligation to oppose» any law that attacks human life. (Evangelium Vitae) For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them.

In this context, it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political commitment to a single isolated aspect of the Church’s social doctrine does not exhaust one’s responsibility towards the common good. Nor can a Catholic think of delegating his Christian responsibility to others; rather, the Gospel of Jesus Christ gives him this task, so that the truth about man and the world might be proclaimed and put into action.

When political activity comes up against moral principles that do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation, the Catholic commitment becomes more evident and laden with responsibility. In the face of fundamental and inalienable ethical demands, Christians must recognize that what is at stake is the essence of the moral law, which concerns the integral good of the human person. This is the case with laws concerning abortion...

What is it with this Vatican note that Catholics find very difficult to understand? With respect to declining fidelity to the Magisterium, there is an alarming trend that indicates the word 'Catholic' is now taken for granted. The outstanding thing is that there appears to be very strong state-of-denials, as each one is wont to have a personal brand of 'Catholicism'. I recently asked one US-based friend who celebrated the passage of the bill: What about the prolife concerns? He responded rather firmly (and quite indignantly, I felt) that the health care bill IS prolife, and that he IS prolife for supporting it. I guess that puts him in common ground with those LCWR nuns. House Speaker Pelosi, it can also be remembered, once said she was "an ardent, practicing Catholic".
Here in the supposedly more conservative Philippines, I believe the signs are already there. Same road.
/

On Private Revelations

The topic of private revelations, especially where ecclesiastical approvals are in suspense mode, certainly proves to be a touchy and divisive topic even among orthodox Catholics. It is no wonder that Catholic Forums bans discussions on private revelations where no ecclesiastical approvals have yet been given. Recently, CMR posted something on Medjugorje, which elicited an avalanche of entries in the combox (99 and counting). Patrick probably had an inkling of what was about to transpire when he noted at the bottom of his post: Please try not to destroy the furniture here at CMR discussing this one. Lately in CatholicFriends, a similar discussion coincidentally was going on. Well, I could see some furniture flying as well. Anyway, here is my take on the topic as a response to some of those posts.
/
Certainly Catholics are not obliged to believe in private revelations. In this regard, there are two kinds of beliefs that must be taken into consideration: 1) the belief requiring the assent of human faith; and 2) the belief requiring the assent of divine faith. We can not be obliged to give an assent of divine faith in private revelations nor is it possible to do so, for the simple reason that it does not add to the deposit of faith. It is on the assent of human faith that we are afforded some leeway by the Church. In your post above, the Bishop of Lincoln admits "the possibility of venial sins of pride and lack of prudence in such doubt or denial". Since the good Bishop did not state outright that the venial sins of pride and lack of prudence automatically follow with non-belief (he only mentions the possibility), there must be a qualifying condition/s on the part of the disbeliever that could give cause for the instantaneous or subsequent commission of the venial sins mentioned. When Catholics of good standing do not make an assent of human faith to a matter that the Church officially declares as "worthy of belief", there must be a charitable way of doing so while avoiding the venial sins of pride and lack of prudence, and without challenging the decision of the Church. Perhaps you have more Catholic material expounding on this aspect.
/
I think we can all agree that the Church has not come up (yet) with an official, definitive and final declaration for or against the supernatural nature of the facts of Medjugorje. To quote from the article you posted from CUF:

"Until the Church renders her official judgment, the faithful are free to accept (or reject) any private revelation if nothing in the message or concurring phenomena is contrary to faith and morals."

In emphasis, when we claim that something is contrary to faith and morals, we look for guidance from the official statements of the Magisterium. The 1991 declaration made by the Bishops' Conference of the former Yugoslavia supposedly apparently still holds, which partly states:

"On the basis of the investigations so far it can not be affirmed that one is dealing with supernatural apparitions and revelations".

The statement does not affirm - yet we must also note that it does not condemn.

Fr Colin B. Donovan, STL, provides an answer for EWTN that is quite instructive, from which I will quote from its ending statements (emphasis mine):

"...This means that once a private revelation has achieved Papal approbation it is unreasonable, i.e. imprudent but not against the faith, to not accept it as authentic. The contrary would also be true. If Rome judged a private revelation to not be supernatural, the reasonable person would be satisfied with that conclusion. Would they sin if they did not accept it? They might sin by imprudence, rash judgement or the like, but not against the faith or the obedience they owed the Holy Father. Catholics must always, however, following the external precepts imposed by the Church in such matters, that is, what they may or may not do, as opposed to what they think.

As far as theological judgments made at the local level, therefore, the standard could not be any higher, and is certainly lower. The issue of Medjugorje, therefore, cannot be resolved solely on the basis of the local Church's finding that there is no evidence to date of supernaturality. This is even more clear in light of the statement of Archbishop Bertone that the Bishop of Mostar's 1998 statement that it is certainly "not supernatural" is his own personal opinion. Others are therefore entitled to their personal opinions, also.

What the Church permits. As the already cited statements note, Catholics may go to Medjugorje. Such pilgrimages may even include priests acting as chaplains, as opposed to officially sponsoring them. Also, the Church has not suppressed discussion of Medjugorje, therefore, it is allowed. Common sense, however, says that Catholics on both sides of the Medjugorje issue should exercise prudence and charity in speaking of others who believe differently. Medjugorje is not a litmus test of orthodoxy, though every Catholic will have a moral obligation to accept the judgment of Rome, in the manner Pope Benedict explained, should it ever be rendered...."
/
Not a litmus test of orthodoxy. Please pass the chair. Oops...
/

ON PERSONAL ORDINARIATES

All I know about it is that it seems like an ecclesiastical structure for flexible dioceses with no geographical boundaries. It is supposed to be called Personal Ordinariates, Personal Ordinates, Personal Ordinarinates,... whatever. Patrick of CMR says he simply cannot say this term three times in a row with a blood alcohol level of .04 or above. On the other hand I simply cannot say it three times in a row without suffering a nosebleed. At any rate, I had to understand what it really means after the Vatican announced that "the Holy Father has introduced a canonical structure that provides for such corporate reunion by establishing Personal Ordinariates, which will allow former Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church...".

It's a good thing I had my friend Doctor G. to supply some enlightening information. Here goes.
/
Apostolic Constitution

First of all, the announcement speaks of the promulgation of an "Apostolic constitution." An Apostolic Consitution is the highest level of decree issued by the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church. It will be a formal charter establishing the canonical terms and conditions upon which the "personal ordinariates" which it creates are to come into being and to continue to exist within the Roman Catholic Church. Now as to the personal ordinariates: they are an amalgam of two already existing structures in the canon law of the Church: personal prelatures and military ordinariates.

Personal prelatures and Military Ordinates

A Personal prelature is an institutional structure of the Roman Catholic Church which comprises a prelate, clergy and possibly laity who undertake specific pastoral activities. Personal prelatures, similar to dioceses and military ordinariates, are under the governance of the Vatican's Congregation for Bishops. These three types of ecclesiastical structures are composed of lay people served by their own secular clergy and prelate. Unlike dioceses which cover territories, personal prelatures - like military ordinariates - take charge of persons as regards some objectives regardless of where they live. Opus Dei is an example of a personal prelature (and the only one to date), established by Pope John Paul II in November 28, 1982 thru the apostolic constitution Ut Sit. On the other hand, an example of a military ordinariate is the Military Ordinariate of the Philippines or MOP. It has jurisdiction over all military, police and coast guard personnel, their dependents, and the civilian employees of all branches of the armed forces.

Canon Law

Personal prelatures were made a feature of the 1983 Code of Canon Law after they were established by Pope Paul VI following a recommendation by the Second Vatican Council. Canons
294-297 deals with this feature. Here is Cann 294 to wit:

Can. 294 After the conferences of bishops involved have been heard, the
Apostolic See can erect personal prelatures, which consist of presbyters and
deacons of the secular clergy, to promote a suitable distribution of presbyters
or to accomplish particular pastoral or missionary works for various regions
or for different social groups…

/
So there.
Again we welcome our Anglican brethren to Rome Sweet Rome.
And again from Patrick, here’s the refrain from the ditty ‘Romeward Bound’,
with his apologies to Simon and Garfunkel and Anglicans everywhere.

Romeward bound,
I wish I was,
Romeward bound,
Rome - where TAC's escaping,
Rome - where fear's allaying,
Rome - where my Lord lies waiting,
Patiently for me.

Honesty is such a lonely word

Pope: RP needs ‘honest’ political leaders

MANILA, Oct. 7, 2009— Pope Benedict XVI said the Philippines’ continuing struggle from poverty signals the imperative need for upright political leaders.

Speaking to new Philippines Ambassador to the Vatican Mercedes Arrasitia Tuason, the pope urged public officials to rediscover the real ethical foundation of their political authority.

“The struggle against poverty in the Philippines calls for honesty, integrity and an unwavering fidelity to the principles of justice, especially on the part of those entrusted with positions of governance and public administration,” Benedict XVI said...

Honesty, integrity and an unwavering fidelity to the principles of justice. Got it.
The Pope calls for those qualities in our political leaders and I cannot agree more.
Note that he didn't mention the need for a Law degree, a Masters degree, PHD, a Harvard education, or an IQ of 130++. Our sad history shows we've had an overdose of these lofty qualities in our political leadership while we've had an underdose of honesty, and look where we are now: flooded with poverty. Likewise, American businessmen cannot agree more. Their biggest concern is... you guessed it right: corruption.

Meanwhile, the four prominent presidentiables figured out in a presidential forum lately.
The four laid bare their ideas on pork barrel, the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), Charter change, peace in Mindanao and other issues concerning local autonomy. All four of them delivered intelligent responses, but then again - who among them is being honest? Remember, ALL political leaders in the past looked very good while delivering their political promises. Planning is one thing, acting honestly on it is another.

Speaking of plans, urban-planning expert Felino Palafox Jr. says there is this Metroplan - or the Metro Manila Transport, Land Use and Development Planning Project. This was conceived more than 40 years ago to prevent -- what else but destructive flooding. It seems that National government agencies have been shall we say, less than honest, in approving subdivision plans that conform to land use criteria. And to think that there are about 32 (!) signatures to obtain just to have a development project approved! Read it here.

So it appears we blame "acts of God" too much.

On a different note, Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman still sings the same boring tune.
He said that aside from climate change, uncontrolled population growth is equally to blame for last week’s floods in Metro Manila and other parts of the country.

Yeah, right. Blame uncontrolled population growth for ALL of our problems: lack of education, healthcare, corruption, trade deficits, heavy debt servicing, unemployment, inflation, global crisis, typhoons, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and yes - massive floods.

Maybe Lagman is right after all, as there really is an uncontrolled population growth... of dishonest politicians.

As Billy Joel used to sing: Honesty, is such a lonely word...and mostly what I need from you.
/

Giving birth at 100?

Why not?

Just as I thought in my previous post, the issue of a 66 year-old giving birth via IVF then dying 3 years later would raise many questions.
CNN now asks among others: Should you get pregnant if you're 50 or older? (H/T CMR)
Of course the answer to the basic question for Catholics is definitively decided when it comes to the acceptability of In Vitrio Fertilization (IVF). Donum Vitae and Dignitas Personae cannot be more explicit in its teaching.

In the CNN column, Dr. John Jain, a physician at the Santa Monica (California) Fertility Clinic tries to justify: "The 40 and 45-year-old of today is not the 40-year-old of the past; the 50-year-old [today] is not the same of the past,"

If so, why do they even discuss an age limit? If the possibilities of science are endless and unrestricted, then the talk about regulating the age of women desiring to give birth via IVF is irrelevant. Who knows if females (make that males, or even animals!) with the aid of science can carry IVF embryos to term at age 100++ in the near future? A true prochoice advocate should have no qualms in this respect, otherwise they would only be contradicting their own purely scientific, amoral, secular, right-to-my-own-body, its-my-life-my-choice worldview. It is also astonishing that the entire article never mentions the need for a father, or even remotely a father-figure. Along the prochoice line, anyone should have the right to either abort or manufacture human beings at will as far as science permits.

But of course science does not understand the concept of family, which has kept civilizaton going for ages on end, and its impact on the future. The very future of humanity, as Pope John Paul II says. And it is being attacked.

I think even George Lucas had an inkling.

Swords or plowshares

Cattle for hostages?

Promises of more cows, carabaos (water buffalos), tractors and development projects helped convince the Abu Sayyaf kidnappers to release Italian Red Cross volunteer Eugenio Vagni, a businessman involved in the hostage negotiations claimed Monday.

Speaking at the Kapihan sa Manila Hotel, Armando de Rossi, a Filipino citizen of Italian descent, said reports of ransom payments or that a "prisoner swap" prompted the bandits to release Vagni were "completely a huge lie."

Meanwhile, there are demands for an all-out attack on the Abu Sayyaf.

Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro Jr. Monday said it was time for the military to escalate operations on Jolo island and get its "high-valued" leaders.
A day after the release of Italian Red Cross volunteer Eugenio Vagni from six months of harsh jungle captivity, Teodoro said he had directed the military to intensify pursuit operations against the al-Qaeda-linked kidnappers...

Sen. Rodolfo Biazon, chair of the Senate committee on national defense and security, also supported the intensified drive.
"The total destruction of the terrorists or kidnappers will be a great legacy of this administration, even if the total elimination of insurgency cannot be achieved within the remaining term of the President," Biazon said...

Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay, president of the United Opposition, said in a statement:..."With Vagni’s release, there should be no more obstacle to neutralizing this terror group. They should be stopped."

Time and again, the government has vowed to eradicate the insurgents and lawless elements in the South. The history of unceasing armed conflict and bloodshed in the South since time immemorial does not inspire much in terms of the government forces succeeding this time around, notwithstanding the fresh bold words coming from the administration.

But Sen. Richard Gordon, chair of the Philippine National Red Cross, urged the Arroyo administration to open the lines of communication with the rebel group.
"The government should talk to the Abu Sayyaf. You cannot say that they are purely outlaws. If an outlaw wants to surrender, you have to talk to him," the senator said....That the Abu Sayyaf released the three workers of the International Committee of the Red Cross and was willing to accept government aid point to a breakthrough, Gordon said.

The group, he said, had lost so much during the six months of military offensives against them and were probably tired. He said two brothers of the Abu Sayyaf leader Albader Parad were killed and another commander, Abu Ali, also lost a brother.

The military suffered 14 dead, Gordon said. "These are not complicated people. They want a life again. Their families are important to them. Maybe it’s time to talk to them," he said.

Maybe Sen. Gordon has a point there. For example, if even half of the money spent so far by the government for this war were used to buy cows, carabaos, tractors and such others to develop livelihood programs in the South, we might be seeing a different scenario. In addition, there are a lot of innocent people displaced by the armed conflict, while the government is already spending so much for resettlement areas that leave much to be desired. We should not tolerate lawlessness, but we also wonder if the people in the South had enough cows and carabaos in the first place. In the news flash early this evening, the incoming army commander said something to the effect - "Armed battle would only serve a temporary victory, we should address the root cause of the conflict". The commander is most likely tired too. We must be all tired...and very sad I should add.

"But if war can end without winners or losers in a suicide of humanity, then we must repudiate the logic which leads to it: the idea that the effort to destroy the enemy, confrontation and war itself are factors of progress and historical advancement" - Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II.

CARITAS IN VERITATE

"Charity in truth, to which Jesus Christ bore witness by his earthly life and especially by his death and resurrection, is the principal driving force behind the authentic development of every person and of all humanity."

The 3rd encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI - CARITAS IN VERITATE - released July 7, 2009.

Preparatory reading: Pope Paul VI's POPULORUM PROGRESSIO.

On Unitatis Redintegratio and Nostra Aetate

"In this perspective an expression which I have frequently employed finds its deepest meaning: the Church must breathe with her two lungs!"
- Pope John Paul II, Ut unum sint

/
Unitatis Redintegratio and Nostra Aetate

Lately, I've been reading these two Vatican II documents from my old copy of the book "The Documents of Vatican II" by America Press, edited by Walter M. Abbott S.J. In his introduction to Unitiatis Redintegratio, Fr Abbot says that "It has been well said that the Decree on Ecumenism is not an end but a new beginning full of hope and promises...much has been accomplished by the Decree, but what counts more is what remains to be done". On the other hand, on the editor's note # 2 in Nostre Aetate, he says "The stress on what men have in common was one of Pope John's (XXIII) operative principles. As he often made clear, this approach does not deny or neglect differences; it simply gives primary consideration to common goals and interests". I have selected some key passages (emphasis mine) from these documents that are noteworthy for their significance. I have extracted the actual texts from the Vatican website as there are some differences in the translations from the book. Useful reference at these times but in the end, it remains enormously complex. In each and every particular situation, it is up to men of good will to shape effective policies of cooperation for the common good, with deep attention to these principles.

Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio)

...
For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect....

Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ...

The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.

It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church...

The term "ecumenical movement" indicates the initiatives and activities planned and undertaken, according to the various needs of the Church and as opportunities offer, to promote Christian unity...

In addition, the way is prepared for cooperation between them in the duties for the common good of humanity which are demanded by every Christian conscience; and, wherever this is allowed, there is prayer in common...

When such actions are undertaken prudently and patiently by the Catholic faithful, with the attentive guidance of their bishops, they promote justice and truth, concord and collaboration, as well as the spirit of brotherly love and unity...

We believe that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.

However, it is evident that, when individuals wish for full Catholic communion, their preparation and reconciliation is an undertaking which of its nature is distinct from ecumenical action. But there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God...

The way and method in which the Catholic faith is expressed should never become an obstacle to dialogue with our brethren. It is, of course, essential that the doctrine should be clearly presented in its entirety. Nothing is so foreign to the spirit of ecumenism as a false irenicism, in which the purity of Catholic doctrine suffers loss and its genuine and certain meaning is clouded...

Before the whole world let all Christians confess their faith in the triune God, one and three in the incarnate Son of God, our Redeemer and Lord. United in their efforts, and with mutual respect, let them bear witness to our common hope which does not play us false. In these days when cooperation in social matters is so widespread, all men without exception are called to work together, with much greater reason all those who believe in God, but most of all, all Christians in that they bear the name of Christ. Cooperation among Christians vividly expresses the relationship which in fact already unites them, and it sets in clearer relief the features of Christ the Servant. This cooperation, which has already begun in many countries, should be developed more and more, particularly in regions where a social and technical evolution is taking place be it in a just evaluation of the dignity of the human person, the establishment of the blessings of peace, the application of Gospel principles to social life, the advancement of the arts and sciences in a truly Christian spirit, or also in the use of various remedies to relieve the afflictions of our times such as famine and natural disasters, illiteracy and poverty, housing shortage and the unequal distribution of wealth. All believers in Christ can, through this cooperation, be led to acquire a better knowledge and appreciation of one another, and so pave the way to Christian unity. ..


Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions (Nostra Aetate)

...
Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.

The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men. .
...
Besides, as the Church has always held and holds now, Christ underwent His passion and death freely, because of the sins of men and out of infinite love, in order that all may reach salvation. It is, therefore, the burden of the Church's preaching to proclaim the cross of Christ as the sign of God's all-embracing love and as the fountain from which every grace flows.

We cannot truly call on God, the Father of all, if we refuse to treat in a brotherly way any man, created as he is in the image of God. Man's relation to God the Father and his relation to men his brothers are so linked together that Scripture says: "He who does not love does not know God" (1 John 4:8).
/

Outrage at the Truth (2)

A PORTUGESE bishop has openly contradicted Pope Benedict XVI's controversial stance on condoms, saying people with AIDS are "morally obliged" to use them if they have sex.

A person with AIDS "who cannot avoid having sexual relations is morally obliged to avoid passing on the disease by using a condom", Monsignor Ilidio Leandro wrote in a message published on the website of the Viseu diocese in central Portugal today.
/

I guess there is a step-by-step logic into what Monsignor Leandro is saying:

1) The irresponsible person practices illicit sex (thats why he got AIDS in the first place).

2) The person contracts AIDS due to his wanton sexual behavior.

3) Now he is "morally obliged" to use condoms whenever he has sex. "He cannot avoid" sex, not because he will die as a result of avoiding sex, but because he has not been taught to cultivate the cardinal value of temperance. No, we have not heard Bishop Leandro say a word about temperance, nor chastity. And so, our morality-driven guy continues his promiscuous sexual behavior, but now he is "morally obliged" to use condoms in faithful obedience to Bishop Leandro.

4) In one of his many sexual encounters, his condom breaks in action.
It was bound to happen, as no one claims that condoms are 100% effective in preventing AIDS - although Bishop Leandro is silent about this.

5) Repeat steps 1 to 4, over and over.
/

Outrage at the truth

The lords of the mass media are spouting their outrage at the Pope--again.

This time the Pontiff's alleged offense is his failure to believe that condoms provide the world's best hope against the AIDS epidemic. Pope Benedict dared to voice a few simple truths (see Vatican press office communique here) --that chastity is foolproof, and that people can control their own sexual behavior--and the guardians of secular wisdom are rending their garments and howling their outrage.

The Pope is simply wrong about the facts, dozens of headlines proclaim.

The outrage more or less goes along the lines of: the Pope is ignorant about AIDS and, the Pope condemns millions to die of AIDS.
/
The truth really hurts (those who don't like it).
Expect more outrage to come...

Freedom to the laundry captives

Washing machine 'did more to liberate women than the Pill'

"It may send feminists into a spin but the Vatican's official newspaper has pronounced the washing machine more important for the liberation of women than the contraceptive Pill."

"In the 20th century, what contributed most to the emancipation of western women?" asked the editorial.

"The debate is still open. Some say it was the pill, others the liberalisation of abortion, or being able to work outside the home. Others go even further: the washing machine." The first rudimentary washing machines appeared as far back as 1767, noted the article, with the first electrical models being produced at the beginning of the 20th century.

The article provoked an angry response from some commentators and politicians.

"Instead of entering into an abstract debate on gender, it would be better if L'Osservatore Romano discussed reality, such as the fear in which many women still live when they are in the streets and between the walls of their own homes," Paola Concia, and MP from the opposition Democratic Party, told La Stampa newspaper.
/
Hmm. I would say washing machines should liberate men as well. In modern times, husbands must also do their share in doing the laundry. It's like forced labor. Forced in the sense that women can't possibly do all the household chores, as most women nowadays also work outside the home to contribute to the family income. So, washing machines liberate women as well as men. Yes dear, "hiwalay ang de-kolor sa puti". That goes for microwave ovens, electric floor polishers, and take-out food as well. Now that's reality.

And now a word from the Pope on the occasion of International Women's Day:

"Today's date," he affirmed, "invites us to reflect on the condition of women and to renew our commitment, that always and everywhere every woman can live and fully manifest her particular abilities, obtaining complete respect for her dignity."

"Today I pledge my prayer for all women, that they be evermore respected in their dignity and valued in their positive possibilities."
/

Release Barabbas?

Majority of Manila residents support Reproductive Health bill

MANILA, Philippines - A recent survey by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) showed that a majority or 86 percent of Manila residents support a law on reproductive health (RH).

...“We do hope that with this latest survey result, our respective legislators in the House of Representatives won’t have any qualms on passing the Reproductive Health bill which would benefit the majority of Filipinos especially couples. The survey is echoing the voice of the true constituency of Congress,” The Forum president Benjamin De Leon said.

De Leon said majority of the respondents agree that there should be a law requiring government to distribute legal contraceptives like condoms, IUDs, and pills to people who want to avail, as well as providing of free supplies or services to the poor who wish to use any modern method. The survey also revealed that 92 percent agree that students aged 15 to 24 years old should be given adolescent health education.
/
In a recent, lively email exchange with a friendly dissenting Catholic, I offered the opinion that the Church suffers from anemic marketing strategies coupled with a bad press. You have a good product but you can't push it to the market (particularly referring to NFP). My response was elicited when he observed that majority of the church body seem at odds with the Magisterium in its stand on contraceptives. This SWS survey perhaps confirms his observations. Now then if my theory is true, it would be just about the right time to revisit what Pope John Paul II means by "New Evangelization". In Redemptoris Missio, the late Pope said:

"Clearly, the ordinary means of pastoral work are not sufficient: what are needed are associations, institutions, special centers and groups, and cultural and social initiatives for young people. This is a field where modern ecclesial movements have ample room for involvement".



It's about time for the Church to seriously consider, think creatively, and act fast on what Pope JP2 said. Sooner than later. Otherwise the crowd may soon be shouting: "Let His blood be on us and on our children!"
/

The Hermeneutic of Continuity

There is a brief yet very informative article by Dr. Jeff Mirus in the CatholicCulture.org on the subject: "Benedict's Hermeneutic of Continuity".

Highlights:

- Hermeneutics is the branch of theology which deals with the principles of Biblical exegesis.

- When interpreting Scripture, one text cannot be preferred to another or played off against another. Since everything the Holy Spirit intends to teach in Scripture is true, all texts which relate to a given problem must be examined for what they say about it, and the correct understanding will necessarily be an understanding which permits every text to retain its full force

- Because the Magisterium of the Church teaches with the same authority as Sacred Scripture (after all, the same Holy Spirit inspires and guarantees both), a Catholic can properly understand a Christian teaching only if he takes into account everything that both Scripture and the Magisterium have said on a subject.

- Any understanding which fastens on what Scripture says to the exclusion of the Magisterium (as Protestants typically do) or which fastens on this or that statement of the Magisterium in preference to others (as Traditionalists typically do) is doomed to be incorrect. The proper interpretation will always be the one which allows for the truth of all the relevant Scriptural and Magisterial texts.

- Any new development in Catholic teaching, Catholic devotion, Catholic discipline and Catholic worship must be understood as a development which corroborates and confirms what has come before, even as it proposes a new and deeper insight, a more precise formulation, or an important emphasis that has either been overlooked or has special relevance to our current situation.

- This is the "hermeneutic of continuity". It must give rise to a culture of continuity among Catholics which will bear fruit everywhere in the Church.

- Benedict has been at pains to argue that everyone who has been guilty of a "hermeneutic of rupture" must rethink and reevaluate everything according to a "hermeneutic of continuity". This applies particularly to the project of recovering the true purpose of the Council, and it applies to all those who teach and act as if the Second Vatican Council (and all the reforms since that time) are a decisive break with the past, invalidating most of what came before.

- May Benedict succeed in restoring a hermeneutic of continuity within the Church, on all sides, and in all directions.
/
Amen. Read the entire piece here.

It is in this light that the lifting of the excommunication of the SSPX Bishops is best understood.

Also, here is a site devoted to the topic.

PRIMACY OF TRUTH (2)

"It is of course undisputed that one must follow a certain conscience or at least not act against it. But whether the judgment of conscience or what one takes to be such, is always right, indeed whether it is infallible, is another question. For if this were the case, it would mean that there is no truth - at least not in moral and religious matters, which is to say, in the areas which constitute the very pillars of our existence."

- Pope Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger in his 1991 address: CONSCIENCE AND TRUTH)

That is a very good point, TE. I actually have problems understanding what is meant by the terms half-Catholics, progressive Catholics, thinking Catholics, liberal Catholics, conservative Catholics, whatever. Just being a plain, persevering Catholic is fine by me, and it is a choice to be one. When we choose to be a Catholic, we choose to be in unity with the body of Christ, known as full communion with the Church. It is a unity that must of necessity be unbroken by heresy or schism, and requires agreement on essential doctrine and practise. This is not to mean that we have to be in absolute uniformity in theology and usage, provided that essential unity is maintained. When Catholics find cause in their consciences to express dissent to the Church, it must be worthwhile to determine whether this dissent involves any essential doctrine or practise. In today's challenging times when the faithful finds themselves in constant deliberations on public issues that concerns their faith, it is of essence to take note of Pope Benedict XVI's address on the three non-negotiables in the public sphere:

/
As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable.

Among these the following emerge clearly today:

[FIRST NON-NEGOTIABLE]

- protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death;

[SECOND NON-NEGOTIABLE]

- recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family - as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage - and its defense from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its destabilization, obscuring its particular character and its irreplaceable social role;

[THIRD NON-NEGOTIABLE]

- the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.

These principles are not truths of faith, even though they receive further light and confirmation from faith; they are inscribed in human nature itself and therefore they are common to all humanity.

The Church’s action in promoting them is therefore not confessional in character, but is addressed to all people, prescinding from any religious affiliation they may have. On the contrary, such action is all the more necessary the more these principles are denied or misunderstood, because this constitutes an offence against the truth of the human person, a grave wound inflicted onto justice itself.

/

To choose to be Catholic, is to respond to the call to be “credible and consistent witness[es] of these basic truths”.

Of warnings, prophecies, and prayers

"...the terrorism of tenth-rate professors..."-G.K. Chesterton
"...The thing that really is trying to tyrannize through government is Science. The thing that really does use the secular arm is Science. And the creed that really is levying tithes and capturing schools, the creed that really is enforced by fine and imprisonment, the creed that really is proclaimed not in sermons but in statutes, and spread not by pilgrims but by policemen --- that creed is the great but disputed system of thought which began with Evolution and has ended in Eugenics. Materialism is really our established Church; for the Government will really help it to persecute its heretics....I am not frightened of the word "persecution" when it is attributed to the churches; nor is it in the least as a term of reproach that I attribute it to the men of science. It is as a term of legal fact. If it means the imposition by the police of a widely disputed theory, incapable of final proof --- then our priests are not now persecuting, but our doctors are...Now here we find ourselves confronted with an amazing fact. When, in the past, opinions so arguable have been enforced by State violence, it has been at the instigation of fanatics who held them for fixed and flaming certainties. If truths could not be evaded by their enemies, neither could they be altered even by their friends. But what are the certain truths that the secular arm must now lift the sword to enforce?..."
/
Interesting that G.K. Chesterton talks about state-enforced "science" through his work "Eugenics and other Evils", back in 1922. Eighty-six years fast forward today and we see the realization of the dire warning with the recent passage thru 3rd reading of the UK Human Fertilization and Embryology Bill. Closer to home, HB 5043 has already passed 3rd reading in Congress, the same version which includes punitive provisions of fines and/or imprisonment of upto 6 months for conscientious objectors. Pope Paul VI, in an eerily similar prophetic warning contained in Humanae Vitae, circa 1968, stated:

"...Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife..."
/
By the way, G.K. Chesterton begins that treatise by stating:

"The wisest thing in the world is to cry out before you are hurt. "

Pope Paul VI on the other hand, ends Humanae Vitae by stating:

"We implore from the God of all holiness and pity an abundance of heavenly grace..."

And so I say:

Let us both cry out and pray.
/