DOCTRINAL NOTE on some questions regarding The Participation of Catholics in Political Life (excerpts)

DOCTRINAL NOTE
on some questions regarding
The Participation of Catholics in Political Life
(excerpts)
/
..A kind of cultural relativism exists today, evident in the conceptualization and defence of an ethical pluralism, which sanctions the decadence and disintegration of reason and the principles of the natural moral law. Furthermore, it is not unusual to hear the opinion expressed in the public sphere that such ethical pluralism is the very condition for democracy. As a result, citizens claim complete autonomy with regard to their moral choices, and lawmakers maintain that they are respecting this freedom of choice by enacting laws which ignore the principles of natural ethics and yield to ephemeral cultural and moral trends,as if every possible outlook on life were of equal value. At the same time, the value of tolerance is disingenuously invoked when a large number of citizens, Catholics among them, are asked not to base their contribution to society and political life – through the legitimate means available to everyone in a democracy – on their particular understanding of the human person and the common good. The history of the twentieth century demonstrates that those citizens were right who recognized the falsehood of relativism, and with it, the notion that there is no moral law rooted in the nature of the human person, which must govern our understanding of man, the common good and the state.
[...]
...It is, however, the Church’s right and duty to provide a moral judgment on temporal matters when this is required by faith or the moral law.If Christians must «recognize the legitimacy of differing points of view about the organization of worldly affairs«,they are also called to reject, as injurious to democratic life, a conception of pluralism that reflects moral relativism. Democracy must be based on the true and solid foundation of non-negotiable ethical principles, which are the underpinning of life in society.
[...]
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 and euthanasia (not to be confused with the decision to forgo extraordinary treatments, which is morally legitimate). Such laws must defend the basic right to life from conception to natural death. In the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect and protect the rights of the human embryo....The same is true for the freedom of parents regarding the education of their children; it is an inalienable right recognized also by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights....
[...]
The appeal often made to «the rightful autonomy of the participation of lay Catholics» in politics needs to be clarified. Promoting the common good of society, according to one’s conscience, has nothing to do with «confessionalism» or religious intolerance. For Catholic moral doctrine, the rightful autonomy of the political or civil sphere from that of religion and the Church – but not from that of morality – is a value that has been attained and recognized by the Catholic Church and belongs to inheritance of contemporary civilization.
...
[and I think Fr. Julio Penacoba echoes that last paragraph -- very well - WillyJ]

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.

Communications Fail

Clergy can't be more popish than the Pope - Palace

MANILA, Philippines - Malacañang welcomed yesterday the pronouncement of Pope Benedict XVI that condom use may be allowed to prevent the spread of HIV-AIDS, and urged local Church officials to take the same stand because “they cannot be more popish than the Pope.” [what a charitable insult]

“That’s a good step. I think our own clergy should be informed by the views of the Vatican [they're not?] because they’ve always referred to the Vatican when they stated their position, now that the Vatican’s position [what position?] is such then I think that should result in a corresponding flexibility on the part of our Church,” Presidential Communications Development Secretary Ricky Carandang said. [the Vatican's position has a flexibility...where?]

Carandang said the Pope’s statement could “absolutely” boost support for the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill. [Boost support? In short, separation of church and state is only applicable when the Church disagrees with you?]

Deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said a meeting on the RH bill between the Palace and the CBCP has been tentatively scheduled between Dec. 7 and 15.

President Aquino has said he is for responsible parenthood, including educating couples on how to plan their families and providing them assistance with artificial birth control methods such as the use of condoms.

“I don’t want to misquote the Pope. [You just did] I think he was very qualified in what he said [Of course. And you Mr Carandang, is very qualified in what?] but still what you can say [you mean what YOU can say] is the Pope has shown some flexibility [flexibility? Substantiate it then, Mr Theology expert] on an issue that is still controversial here. It’s not controversial in the rest of the world anymore,” [so what?] Carandang said. “I think the Pope’s position should inform the position of the local clergy [you mean they don't?]. Like I said, our clergy cannot be more popish than the pope.

[And like I said, people who can't understand the Pope's communications correctly should just shut up, especially if one is the head of Malacañang's Communications Department. Ironically, Carandang thinks is more capable than the bishops in interpreting the Pope. More popish than the pope eh? Does PNoy agree with your choice of words? Methinks Carandang wants to be more presidential than the president. This is a simple case of a super-lightweight in theology trying to interpret a super-heavyweight's statements on morality, and FAILS...miserably.]

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)

24 new cardinals: Cheers!

24 new cardinals

Congratulations to Archbishop Raymond Burke !!!

I can see the Pro-lifers exchanging hi-fives.

The new cardinals will be elevated in a consistory set for Nov. 20 in Rome.

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations..."

A lesser antidote to the culture of death: A millstone around the neck

LifesiteNews has highlighted the speech of Archbishop Burke to the Human Life International World Prayer Congress last Saturday. Abp Burke is the Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura. Apart from the Pope himself, who is the supreme ecclesiastical judge, the Apostolic Signatura is the highest Church tribunal. His complete talk in PDF format maybe downloaded here. The message bears emphasizing today to all the countries around the world with prominent 'Catholic' politicians, although at first glance I had the impression that it was specifically addressed to the Philippines. Here are some excerpts (emphasis mine).

CATHOLIC ORTHODOXY: ANTIDOTE AGAINST THE CULTURE OF DEATH

...Often the lack of obedience to the Magisterium is not total but selective. Our culture teaches us to believe what is convenient and to reject what is difficult for us or challenges us. Thus, we can easily fall into “cafeteria Catholicism,” a practice of the faith, which picks and chooses what part of the deposit of faith to believe and practice. A most tragic example of the lack of obedience of faith, also on the part of certain Bishops, was the response of many to the Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae of Pope Paul VI, published on July 25, 1968.

The confusion which resulted has led many Catholics into habits of sin in what pertains to the procreation and education of human life...

[The sponsors of the RH bill are a paramount examples, wherein these self-professed Catholics dismiss Humanae Vitae as 'not infallible' and may be conveniently disregarded. The rationale goes typically like this: Contraceptives should be allowed in a poverty-stricken, overpopulated country, doesn't the Church care for the poor? Ahem. I will translate their euphemistic words for all it’s worth: Humanae Vitae is erroneus, and what their conscience tells them is morally superior to the teachings therein by Pope Paul VI, and Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI, and so on, and so on.]

Regarding the Magisterium and public life, there has developed in many places the false notion that the Christian or any person of faith, in order to be a true citizen of his nation, must bracket his faith life from his public life. According to such a notion, one ends up with Christians, for example, who claim personally to be faithful members of the Church and, therefore, to hold to the demands of the natural moral law, while they sustain and support the right to violate the moral law in its most fundamental tenets. We find self-professed Catholics, for example, who sustain and support the right of a woman to procure the death of the infant in her womb, or the right of two persons of the same sex to the recognition which gives to a man and a woman who have entered into marriage. It is not possible to be a practicing Catholic and to conduct oneself publicly in this manner...

[This has many translations and flavors: Not all Filipinos are Catholics; I am first and foremost a public servant, I will just check-in my conscience at the door; Jesus did not judge, who are we to judge. And the hands-down, all-time favorite: Separation of Church and State!!! The latter is especially invoked when one’s personal opinion does not square with 2000++ years of solid Church teaching.]

...When a person has publicly espoused and cooperated in gravely sinful acts, leading many into confusion and error about fundamental questions of respect for human life and the integrity of marriage and the family, his repentance of such actions must also be public. The person in question bears a heavy responsibility for the grave scandal which he has caused. The responsibility is especially heavy for political leaders. The repair of such scandal begins with the public acknowledgment of his own error and the public declaration of his adherence to the moral law. The soul which recognizes the gravity of what he has done will, in fact, understand immediately the need to make public reparation...

[Yes, yes -- public repentance is required. Whenever the sin is publicly espoused as to account for massive scandal, It is only appropriate that repentance must also be public, otherwise, one has to face Pope Benedict XVI’s minimum proper prescription. Besides there is also Canon law 1364#1, and Canon 1399 which calls for just penalties (yes, including excommunication).

If a politician thinks denial of Communion or excommunication is a tad harsh, wait till he or she reads Luke 17:1-2]

"Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come! It would be better for him if amillstone were hung round his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin."

CFC AT THE CONGRESS ON ASIAN CATHOLIC LAITY

Couples for Christ participated in the recently-concluded Congress on Asian Catholic Laity sponsored by the Pontifical Council for the Laity. Held in Seoul, Korea from August 31 to September 5, 2010, the congress was attended by about 400 delegates from 35 international lay associations, ecclesial movements and new communities in 20countries. The congress theme was “Proclaiming Jesus Christ in Asia today.”

During the conference proper, CFC was one of only five associations asked to make a presentation before the body. CFC, among the more than 100 international lay associations recognized by the Vatican, is also the only one that originated in Asia.

Cardinal Stanislaw Rylko, president of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, in his closing address at the Congress, entitled, “Catholic Laity: Witnesses of Hope for the Good of the People of Asia,” spoke of HOPE as the common denominator of experiences that emerged from the various discussions and testimonies shared at the congress. He said, “This is the hope that the Church and every Christian is called to witness to the world, making it an important service to humanity in our time.”

The Cardinal also exhorted the participants to be mindful of their role as witnesses, particularly since “As we know, Catholics in Asia are a tiny minority, but we are certainly not a timid minority closed in on ourselves. On the contrary, we are a “creative minority”, full of vitality and stimulated by the hope that comes from faith.” He ended with these words: “Dear brothers and sisters, I conclude by making my own the exhortation of the Apostle to the Gentiles: “So, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in him, rooted in him and built upon him and established in the faith as you were taught” (Col 2. 6). The three International Council members present, Joe Tale, Executive Director Joe Yamamoto and International Missions Director Rouquel Ponte, could only marvel at the awesome affirmation – that the Cardinal had chosen the very same Gospel verse that CFC was given as its theme for 2010.

CFC chairman Joe Tale made a 10-minute powerpoint presentation on the evangelization programs of Couples for Christ, a presentation so well received that it made Cardinal Rylko comment, “Couples for Christ, your presentation was excellent!”
Joe Tale called the congress “very affirming” of the evangelization efforts and of the very life and mission of CFC. He shared that during the imposition of the cross necklace, Cardinal Rylko whispered a message for the entire community: “God bless you and all of Couples for Christ.”

Professor Guzman Carriquiry, the Undersecretary of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, also imparted a very affirming message for CFC. During the Friday night fellowship, he informed the three IC members that CFC should no longer worry because the problems the community had in the past were over. When pressed for explanation, he told Rouquel Ponte that the Vatican is aware that CFC is doing good things and is a major force for evangelization, particularly in Asia. He urged CFC to continue doing its mission and not to dwell on the past storms because the mere fact that it was CFC, represented by the International Council, that was invited to the Congress is ample confirmation of its Vatican recognition.

Pics and the rest here.

Montalvan on John Henry Newman

Antonio J. Montalvan II writes an informative article in his Inquirer column on Blessed John Henry Newman.

The beatification of John Henry Newman coincides with the momentous UK visit of Pope Benedict XVI. In his article, Montalvan focuses on Newman's pronouncements on education, citing the volume of lectures on “The Idea of a University” that Newman wrote as rector of the then newly established Catholic University of Ireland. Here are some excerpts from that column.
/
His philosophy of education, which educators of today can take heed of, is mainly this: that education is founded on truths in the natural order, “when we use what we have by nature to the utmost, at the same time that we look out for what is beyond nature in the confidence of faith and hope.”...

In the typically classic Victorian prose of his day, Newman may not be easy reading for ordinary mortals like us. But his ideas remain as fresh in their relevance. Consider this: education must teach self-respect as “the motive principle of the soul.” “It is directed into the channel of industry, frugality, honesty, and obedience; and it becomes the very staple of the religion and morality held in honor in a day like our own. It becomes the safeguard of chastity, the guarantee of veracity, in high and low; it is the very household god of society, inspiring neatness and decency, propriety of carriage and refined manners, uprightness, manliness, and generosity.” Precisely because they sound alien in today’s educational standards, the more Newman’s ethics continue to ring painfully true...

Of late, we read in the news what was probably the best pronouncement ever by Archbishop Soc Villegas at the installation of the new president of De La Salle University. Bishop Villegas said it very simply but not without a shocking value. The aim of the Catholic university (and I would propose even for non-sectarian universities, for faith and praxis must be solidly in harmony) is to produce saints. Every student, he said, is a soul. It is amazing news in an era when many of our educators have long discarded that duty in exchange for “mercenarianism.” Those lines reflect Newman: “he cared for standards, but never forgot the person.”
/

I have learned in a past CFC formation talk that prophecy is not only that which is concerned with future events, but also that of which is divinely inspired to illuminate that which is currently elusive by natural reasoning. Cardinal Neuman's treatise on education is prophetic in both senses, and it is quite insightful (and to a certain extent, prophetic) for Montalvan and Bishop Soc to zero-in on Neuman's legacy on education in at this time. I am of a firm stand that the way this country manages education is the key in bringing this country forward. Enough of "mercenarianism".

We can start by having Catholic Theology professors teach real theology.

Susan Boyle sings for the Pope

Attacking the Church

Catholics angry as church puts female ordination on par with sex abuse

Uh-oh. The liberal press is having a field day gain. One just has to read the headlines to get
an idea where the rest of the article spins. Just who are those 'Catholics' mentioned in the article who are
angry?

Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, called the document "one of the most insulting and misogynistic pronouncements that the Vatican has made for a very long time.

Vivienne Hayes, the chief executive of the Women's Resource Centre, said the decision to raise women's ordination to the level of a serious crime was "appalling".

Ceri Goddard, chief executive of the Fawcett Society, said: "We are sure that the vast majority of the general public will share in our abject horror at the Vatican's decision to categorise the ordination of women as an 'offence' in the same category as paedophilia – deemed to be one of the 'gravest offences a priest can commit'.

Barbara Doris of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (Snap) said it was tackling the issue the wrong way round. "Defrocking a predator, by definition, is too late," she said. "Severe harm has already been done.".

Oh you mean those 'Catholics'. I see.

Now let's see what the Vatican Document really says.

Modifications made in the Normae de gravioribus delictis

Norms

Delicta Graviora

"VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican has revised its procedures for handling priestly sex abuse cases, streamlining disciplinary measures, extending the statute of limitations and defining child pornography as an act of sexual abuse of a minor.

Vatican officials said the changes allow the church to deal with such abuse more rapidly and effectively, often through dismissal of the offending cleric from the priesthood.

As expected, the Vatican also updated its list of the "more grave crimes" against church law, called "delicta graviora," including for the first time the "attempted sacred ordination of a woman." In such an act, it said, the cleric and the woman involved are automatically excommunicated, and the cleric can also be dismissed from the priesthood.

Vatican officials emphasized that simply because women's ordination was treated in the same document as priestly sex abuse did not mean the two acts were somehow equivalent in the eyes of the church.

"There are two types of 'delicta graviora': those concerning the celebration of the sacraments, and those concerning morals. The two types are essentially different and their gravity is on different levels," said Msgr. Charles Scicluna, an official of the Vatican's doctrinal congregation.

Sexual abuse of a minor by a priest was added to the classification of "delicta graviora" in 2001, and at that time the Vatican established norms to govern the handling of such cases, which were reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The norms affect how church law treats sex abuse cases; civil law deals with the crime separately.

The latest revisions, approved by Pope Benedict XVI May 21 and released July 15, for the most part codify practices that have been implemented through special permissions granted over the last nine years and make them part of universal law.

The Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, said publication of the revisions "makes a great contribution to the clarity and certainty of law in this field, a field in which the church is today strongly committed to proceeding with rigor and transparency."

The norms on sexual abuse of minors by priests now stipulate:

-- The church law's statute of limitations on accusations of sexual abuse has been extended, from 10 years after the alleged victim's 18th birthday to 20 years. For several years, Vatican officials have been routinely granting exceptions to the 10-year statute of limitations. Exceptions to the 20-year limit will be possible, too, but the Vatican rejected a suggestion to do away with the statute of limitations altogether, sources said...

etc, etc...

So there. At any rate, attempted ordination of women is already covered in canon law. Canons #1024, 1381-84. It merits latae sententiae - automatic excommunication. 'Attempted ordination' is a proper word, because any action of women ordination is just that: an attempt.

Fr Z, again, is right on the button:

...Another thing you will perhaps will see in the press, secular and Catholic, are criticisms of the list of crimes. They may complain that, for example, trying to ordain a woman is not nearly as horrible as abusing a minor and it shouldn’t simply be lumped in with other sins, as if they all did they same damage. In a sense, they are right, especially from the perspective of the victim of abuse. But they are wrong from another perspective. Critics might assert that pouring the Precious Blood down the sink or selling a Host or pretending to ordain a woman is a "victimless" crime, bad to be sure but really not that bad. They are wrong. There are still victims: the whole Church suffers because all the crimes involved attack who and what the Church is.

The crimes do belong together when seen in the correct perspective. All of the crimes here involve sacred things...

...and...

It is patently false that the Church didn’t see the abuse of children as a crime.

It must also be remembered that the Church regards abuse of children as a grave sin, and a heinous crime for that matter. As such, it places the unrepentant offender in a state of mortal sin, having automatically severed his communion with the Body of Christ. So is attempted ordination of women. In this sense Fr Z is right: they all involve attacking the Church. Sadly, attacking the Church seems to be a trendy pastime, in oh so many ways.
/

Odds and Ends 6/25/10

Solon to Luistro: View sex education with an open mind

MANILA, Philippines--A staunch advocate of reproductive health in the House of Representatives urged newly-appointed Department of Education (DepEd) Secretary Armin Luistro to view with open mind the need to pursue sexuality education for children.

“Sex or reproductive health education is one aspect our society direly needs . . .This, I believe is something that Secretary Luistro will consider,” Iloilo Representative Janette Garin said in a text message.

Garin says view sex education with an open mind - as opposed to viewing sex education with a closed mind? Of course what the "open-minded" solon means is that all those who oppose sex education are closed-minded people. If we go by the declaration of this solon (a rabid advocate of contraceptives) who feels she and her RH-bill cohorts are the only thinking persons around, the only thing to do for the incoming DepEd Secretary is to approve of the UN-prescribed brand of sex education, otherwise he must be automatically branded as closed-minded. Again, again, again: The church is not against sex education per se. Catholic schools have been teaching sex education for a long time. What the church is against is the faith-incompatible instruction (read:immoral teaching) that goes along with their version of secular sex education. Show us the modules if it ain't so.

"...direly needs....", my foot.
/
Tennis: Longest-ever match finishes after 11 hours 5 minutes

LONDON—(UPDATE) The longest tennis match in history finally finished on Thursday after an epic 11 hours and five minutes at Wimbledon, with John Isner beating Nicolas Mahut by an incredible 70-68 in the final set.

American Isner dropped his racquet and fell to the ground in delight before embracing his opponent at the net when the marathon match ended at last – two days after it had begun.

A host of tennis records were shattered in an extraordinary contest which finally ended at 6-4, 3-6, 6-7 (7/9), 7-6 (7/3), 70-68, a record unlikely ever to be beaten.

Had this been a basketball game, it would be a lot like going through 20 overtimes. These two guys hit more than 200 aces between themselves, and it appears neither of them lost their serves that much. This thing can only happen in the fast surfaces of Wimbledon. At least it was also an historic treat for the spectators, whose tickets were good for 3 days. Bravo!
/
Lasers Reveal First Icons of Sts. Peter and Paul
Vatican Unveils 4th Century Paintings found in Chamber Beneath Office Building in Downtown Rome

(AP) Twenty-first century laser technology has opened a window into the early days of the Catholic Church, guiding researchers through the dank catacombs beneath Rome to a startling find: the first known icons of the Apostles Peter and Paul.

Vatican officials on Tuesday unveiled the paintings, located in an underground burial chamber under an eight-story modern office building on a busy street in a working-class neighborhood of Rome.

The images, which date from the second half of the 4th century, were uncovered using a new laser technique that allowed restorers to burn off centuries of thick white calcium carbonate deposits without damaging the brilliant dark colors of the original paintings underneath...

Monsignor Giovanni Carru, the No. 2 in the Vatican's Pontifical Commission of Sacred Archaeology, which maintains the catacombs, said:

"The Christian catacombs, while giving us value with a religious and cultural patrimony, represent an eloquent and significant testimony of Christianity at its origin,".

Awesome.
/

On the matter of endorsing political candidates

CFC WILL NOT ENDORSE ANY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

Related cbcpnews item here: ‘Mainstream’ CFC will not endorse candidates

In this memo CFC merely clarifies its stand to remain non-partisan, to avoid confusing its position with that of the breakaway group who insists on using the CFC name in some form. From a prerogative point of view, it is acceptable for a Catholic lay organization to either support or refrain from supporting particular candidates. As long as it's the official stand of the leadership, I would say it falls under a matter of legitimate prerogative. Of course if there is a particular endorsement, it goes without saying that it should never carry any element of coercion to its members. Endorsement or no endorsement, the bottom line is that in the final reckoning, it is still the individual's conscientious choice that must be respected. In the contentious matter of selecting the best political candidate, reasonable people can come to different conclusions.

The matter is different though, when we talk of an official endorsement coming from the Catholic clergy. The danger lies when such an endorsement is perceived to represent an official Church stand that the faithful must follow. To my knowledge, there is no allowance in the Church's principles for political partisan endorsements. The Church as a matter of principle avoids endorsing particular candidates for public office, as the matter of voter's choice rests upon contingent and controvertible matters that are beyond the scope of certainty as it relates to the articles of faith. It is the role of the Church however, to issue moral guidelines for arriving at a conscientious choice in line with Catholic teaching.

Here are some profitable readings along the line.

DOCTRINAL NOTE on some questions regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life

- A document released in 2002 by the Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith, headed by then Cardinal Ratzinger. An interesting portion of the document talks about "moral principles that do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation". Thus we infer that that voting for persons who unquestionably hold such adverse positions goes against a conscientious Catholic choice.
/
A Catechism on Family and Life for the 2010 Elections

- The voters guide released by the CBCP Episcopal Commission on Family and Life, which is rather heavy in its admonition against voting for candidates who promote contraceptives. Coincidentally, when the document was released last December 27, 2009, all the popular leading presidential candidates changed their tune and withdrew their support for the RH-bill. Interesting coincidence.
/
Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics

- A good explanation by Catholic Answers on the Five Non-Negotiable Issues
/
Abortion Is the Black Hole of Moral Issues

- A great explanation by Jimmy Akin in his featured article for Catholic Answers, explaining Cardinal Ratzinger’s "Proportionate Reasons".
/
Voters Guide, NOT!

- And lastly, a Voters Guide for the Not-so-Serious Catholics
/

10 days to go and I am still undecided. Sigh.

Arrest the Pope!

The story originated from a call from British atheists Dawkins and Hitchens, as well as from a similar call in an article by a UN lawyer. Curiously, they called for an international trial based upon unfounded charges.

British atheists call for pope's arrest

UN Judge Says Pope Should be Prosecuted at International Criminal Court

I guess silliness knows no bounds in the current trend to smear the Pope with imagined charges. The fictional 'reporting' of New York Times and Associated Press is oh so typical. Dawkins and Hitchens, who pride themselves in idolizing empirical science, apparently are ready to abandon their facts-based 'ideology' when it comes to saying things about the Pope.

More on the Murphy Case

Journalists abandon standards to attack the Pope

/

Odds and Ends 4/12/10

Maternal mortality decline in Chile quashes pro-abortion claims

NEW YORK, USA, February 11, 2010—A CHILEAN epidemiologist’s findings examining the dramatic decrease in maternal mortality in Chile over the past fifty years appear to nullify claims by abortion advocates that liberal abortion laws reduce maternal deaths.

From the University of Chile’s Faculty of Medicine, Dr. Elard Koch said that the promotion of “safe pregnancy” measures such as “prenatal detection” and accessibility to professional birth attendants in a hospital setting are primarily responsible for the decrease in maternal mortality in the Latin American country. The maternal mortality rate declined from 275 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in 1960 to 18.7 deaths in 2000, the largest reduction in any Latin country...

Statistics released by the World Health Organization (WHO) support such conclusions. In South America, according to WHO, Chile boasts of the lowest rate of maternal mortality, whereas Guyana, which significantly liberalized its laws in the mid-1990s citing concern over maternal deaths, has the highest...

Well, we've always known long before that 1 + 1 = 2.
/
Journalists abandon standards to attack the Pope

The "exclusive" story released by AP yesterday, which has been dutifully passed along now by scores of major media outlets, would never have seen the light of day if normal journalistic standards had been in place. Careful editors should have asked a series of probing questions, and in every case the answer to those questions would have shown that the story had no "legs."...

So to review: This was not a case in which a bishop wanted to discipline his priest and the Vatican official demurred. This was not a case in which a priest remained active in ministry, and the Vatican did nothing to protect the children under his pastoral care. This was not a case in which the Vatican covered up evidence of a priest's misconduct. This was a case in which a priest asked to be released from his vows, and the Vatican-- which had been flooded by such requests throughout the 1970s -- wanted to consider all such cases carefully. In short, if you're looking for evidence of a sex-abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, this case is irrelevant.

Now AP joins NYT and the rest of the "dutiful" media in reporting that 2 + 2 = 5.
/
Tycoon builds dams vs drought in north Luzon

MANILA, Philippines—Tycoon Lucio Tan is building more mini dams and water catchment basins to help mitigate the impact of El Nino and severe drought in most parts of Northern Luzon.

Tan, 76, made the commitment during the inauguration of his latest water impounding project in Casilagan Norte, Banayoyo, Ilocos Sur on Good Friday.

The eighth mini dam restored by the tycoon in the last five years, the Casilagan Norte diversion dam is capable of storing 60,000 cubic meters of water. It was designed to serve 120 hectares of rice and tobacco farmlands even through the dry summer months...

The tycoon said he is building and rehabilitating mini dams to set an example that it doesn’t take much to store water that will enable farmers to plant even during the hot summer months. More importantly, he said his project teaches water conservation, helps farmers enhance productivity, and provides extra sources of livelihood.

Now here is one guy who knows how to do the math. Rehab and build dams = mitigate farmlands drought.
As for the government who's supposed to...
/

Odds and Ends 4/6/10

Noynoy's campaign blues
or
How NOT to campaign:

“It will be theirs clear and free,” Noynoy Aquino said in an interview in Manila.

However, cousin Fernando Cojuangco, CEO of Hacienda Luisita: “No, we’re not going to [give up the land]”

And Kris Aquino: “Please Tito Noy, never get married.”

Over TV Patrol, Kris told baby James "say hello to everybody", whereupon
2 year-old Baby James says: "Hello...Villar !!"

Kris: "Noo..."
/
Pangilinan quits Ateneo amid flap over `borrowed’ grad speech

MANILA, Philippines--Manuel V. Pangilinan on Saturday quit as chairman of the board of the Ateneo de Manila University after it was revealed that sections of the speech he made during the school's graduation rites last week were from speeches made by TV personality Oprah Winfrey and author J.K. Rowling in past years.

At UP we used to say jokingly that if you copy from one source, it's plagiarism, but when you copy from multiple sources, it's research. At least when you don't get caught. Tsk-tsk.

However, I agree with the Inquirer editorial when it says: "In the case of Pangilinan, the fault was that of his assistants, but he gallantly took full and sole responsibility for the 'borrowed' parts of his speech. Taken as a whole, as he said, the body and substance of his speech represented his own story and his thoughts."
/
Milwaukee church judge clarifies case of abusive priest Father Murphy

"To provide context to this article, I was the Judicial Vicar for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee from 1995-2003. During those years, I presided over four canonical criminal cases, one of which involved Father Lawrence Murphy...."

"As I have found that the reporting on this issue has been inaccurate and poor in terms of the facts, I am also writing out of a sense of duty to the truth. The fact that I presided over this trial and have never once been contacted by any news organization for comment speaks for itself..."

Read the rest here.

Jimmy Akin says: "So let’s look at the facts of the case in light of the documents..."

Read it here.

Fr. Longenecker has More on the Murphy Case, wherein he cites the Smoking Gun Memo.

Father L. says:

"The simple version according to the New York Times is that Murphy was let off the hook and Cardinal Ratzinger (as Pope Benedict then was) was responsible. The NY Times didn't even bother to get a proper translation of the document in question. Instead they got busy spreading innuendo, half truths and lies."

"Turns out the Murphy case was mishandled by Archbishop Weakland and his predecessor, but by the time it got to Rome the very complicated case (from the canon law point of view) was not actually mishandled, and more to the point, Cardinal Ratzinger had nothing to do with the case."
/
NYT has done it again.

Oh, and Inquirer's de Quiros too.

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 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.

Welcome home Anglicans!

If you build it, they will come...

The Holy See took the ecumenical imperative to new heights with the result that the reunion of Christians --at least in one limited area of schism -- ensued. From the Vatican website:
/
With the preparation of an Apostolic Constitution, the Catholic Church is responding to the many requests that have been submitted to the Holy See from groups of Anglican clergy and faithful in different parts of the world who wish to enter into full visible communion. In this Apostolic Constitution 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 while preserving elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony. Under the terms of the Apostolic Constitution, pastoral oversight and guidance will be provided for groups of former Anglicans through a Personal Ordinariate, whose Ordinary will usually be appointed from among former Anglican clergy...

According to Levada: "It is the hope of the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, that the Anglican clergy and faithful who desire union with the Catholic Church will find in this canonical structure the opportunity to preserve those Anglican traditions precious to them and consistent with the Catholic faith. Insofar as these traditions express in a distinctive way the faith that is held in common, they are a gift to be shared in the wider Church. The unity of the Church does not require a uniformity that ignores cultural diversity, as the history of Christianity shows. Moreover, the many diverse traditions present in the Catholic Church today are all rooted in the principle articulated by St. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians: ‘There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (4:5). Our communion is therefore strengthened by such legitimate diversity, and so we are happy that these men and women bring with them their particular contributions to our common life of faith."...
/
Meanwhile, an early response from the Anglicans.
/
JOINT STATEMENT BY THE ARCHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER AND THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY

Today’s announcement of the Apostolic Constitution is a response by Pope Benedict XVI to a number of requests over the past few years to the Holy See from groups of Anglicans who wish to enter into full visible communion with the Roman Catholic Church, and are willing to declare that they share a common Catholic faith and accept the Petrine ministry as willed by Christ for his Church....

The announcement of this Apostolic Constitution brings to an end a period of uncertainty for such groups who have nurtured hopes of new ways of embracing unity with the Catholic Church. It will now be up to those who have made requests to the Holy See to respond to the Apostolic Constitution...
/

This is a great, great reason for Roman Catholics and their Anglo-Catholic friends to rejoice over.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.