Head of Catholic Church's Supreme Tribunal calls Catholic politicians to account

A senior Vatican prelate has said that Catholic politicians who vote for anti-life and anti-family policies should not be given Holy Communion or Catholic funerals. Speaking at a Catholic awards dinner, Archbishop Raymond Burke, prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, said:

"To deny these is not a judgment of the soul, but a recognition of the scandal and its effects."

His comments follow the public Catholic funeral for Edward Kennedy, the pro-abortion American senator.

Following Tony Blair's reception into the Catholic Church, some Catholics said that it was wrong to criticise him for his anti-life and anti-family political record, or even to ask him to repudiate it. One of their arguments was that being received into the Catholic Church wiped Mr Blair's slate clean, so to speak, as reception into the Church involved confession of past sins and a stated agreement with all the Church's teachings. Archbishop Burke, however, says:

"[W]ith greatly sinful acts about fundamental questions like abortion and marriage, [a politician's] repentance must also be public. Anyone who grasps the gravity of what [such a politician] has done will understand the need to make it public."

Not only has Tony Blair refused to repudiate his anti-life and anti-family political record, since being received into the Catholic Church, he has extended it with open attacks on Catholic teaching on sexual ethics.

Archbishop Burke's comments are a refreshing antidote to the pampered treatment Mr Blair received courtesy of L'Osservatore Romano, the semi-official Vatican newspaper.

In 2007, Archbishop Raymond Burke published a very thorough scholarly article The Discipline Regarding the Denial of Holy Comminion to Those Obstinately Persevering in Manifest Grave Sin in Periodica De Re Canonica (vol. 96 (2007) pag. 3 - 58. He concluded:

First of all, the consistent canonical discipline permits the administering of the Sacrament of Holy Communion only to those who are properly disposed externally, and forbids it to those who are not so disposed, prescinding from the question of their internal disposition, which cannot be known with certainty.

Secondly, the discipline is required by the invisible bond of communion which unites us to God and to one another. The person who obstinately remains in public and grievous sin is appropriately presumed by the Church to lack the interior bond of communion, the state of grace, required to approach worthily the reception of the Holy Eucharist.

Thirdly, the discipline is not penal but has to do with the safeguarding of the objective and supreme sanctity of the Holy Eucharist and with caring for the faithful who would sin gravely against the Body and Blood of Christ, and for the faithful who would be led into error by such sinful reception of Holy Communion.

Fourthly, the discipline applies to any public conduct which is gravely sinful, that is, which violates the law of God in a serious matter. Certainly, the public support of policies and laws which, in the teaching of the Magisterium, are in grave violation of the natural moral law falls under the discipline.

Fifthly, the discipline requires the minister of Holy Communion to forbid the Sacrament to those who are publicly unworthy. Such action must not be precipitous. The person who sins gravely and publicly must, first, be cautioned not to approach to receive Holy Communion. The memorandum, "Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion", of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in its fifth principle, gives the perennial pastoral instruction in the matter. This, in fact, is done effectively in a pastoral conversation with the person, so that the person knows that he is not to approach to receive Holy Communion and, therefore, the distribution of Holy Communion does not become an occasion of conflict. It must also be recalled that "no ecclesiastical authority may dispense the minister of Holy Communion from this obligation in any case, nor may he emanate directives that contradict it" ^*.

Finally, the discipline must be applied in order to avoid serious scandal, for example, the erroneous acceptance of procured abortion against the constant teaching of the moral law. No matter how often a Bishop or priest repeats the teaching of the Church regarding procured abortion, if he stands by and does nothing to discipline a Catholic who publicly supports legislation permitting the gravest of injustices and, at the same time, presents himself to receive Holy Communion, then his teaching rings hollow. To remain silent is to permit serious confusion regarding a fundamental truth of the moral law. Confusion, of course, is one of the most insidious fruits of scandalous behavior.

*"[…] nessuna autorità ecclesiastica può dispensare in alcun caso da quest'obbligo del ministro della sacra Comunione, né emanare direttive the lo contraddicono." PONTIFICIUM CONSILIUM DE LEGUM TEXTIBUS, "Acta Consilii: I, Dichiarazione", Communicationes 32 (2000) 161; English translation from L'Osservatore Romano, Weekly Edition in English, 12 July 2000, 4.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Why SPUC is concerned about reception of Holy Communion by divorced and civilly remarried Catholics

I am occasionally asked: Why is SPUC, through Voice of the Family, engaging in the Family Synod; and, in particular, why is SPUC so concerned about the reception of Holy Communion by divorced and civilly remarried Catholics?

SPUC is a non-confessional human rights organisation which has in its ranks members of all faiths and none. In common with virtually every other pro-life group in the world, many, if not most, of our members are Catholics.

All members of the Church enjoy the freedom to share their views with members of the hierarchy and with each other. In fact all Catholics have a duty to do so in certain circumstances. The Code of Canon Law states:

According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they [the Christian faithful] have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons. (Canon 212)

The Church has always taught that marriage is an indissoluble union of one man and one woman, which ends only with one of the death of one of the spouses. If a person “remarries”, without the first marriage being declared null by the Church, they are guilty of adultery. They cannot therefore receive Holy Communion until they have confessed this sin and resolved to amend their lives. This has been very clearly taught by the Church throughout her history and Catholics at every level of the Church have a right and a duty to defend this teaching.

This doctrine has been authoritatively restated numerous times in the last few decades including in the following documents:

- Pope John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio, 22 November 1981

- Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church concerning the Admission to Holy Communion of the Faithful who are Divorced and Remarried; 4 September 1994

- Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Concerning some Objections to the Church’s Teaching on the Reception of Holy Communion by Divorced and Remarried Members of the Faithful, 1st January 1998

- Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration concerning the Admission to Holy Communion of the Faithful who are Divorced and Remarried, 24 June 2000

- Pope Benedict XVI, Sacramentum Caritatis, 22 February 2007

- Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Responsum to the question "Can a confessor grant absolution to a penitent who, having been religiously married, has contracted a second union following divorce?"22 October 2014

You will note that the most recent decree was promulgated by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith during the pontificate of Pope Francis and since the Extraordinary Synod. In other words, the position adopted by SPUC is exactly that of the Church’s magisterium, both past and present.

Nevertheless the question remains: Is it in SPUC 's remit to campaign on this issue?

In November 2011 SPUC’s Council, our policy-making body which is elected by our grass roots volunteers, adopted a motion that the Society should “to do its utmost to fight for the retention of the traditional understanding of marriage in the history, culture and law of the United Kingdom, namely the exclusive union of one man with one woman for life; and accordingly instructs its officers and executive committee to conduct a major campaign to this end...” The defence of the traditional understanding of marriage is therefore now clearly part of SPUC’s remit. The vote of Council on that occasion in support of the resolution was unopposed.

The reason why marriage is so important is because all aspects of sexuality, marriage and the family are closely interconnected. In his encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae Pope John Paul II taught:

“It is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not help the young to accept and experience sexuality and love and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection. Sexuality, which enriches the whole person, "manifests its inmost meaning in leading the person to the gift of self in love". The trivialization of sexuality is among the principal factors which have led to contempt for new life.”

I am convinced that we cannot defeat abortion if our society does not value marriage as the exclusive and indissoluble union of one man and one woman. I have had the privilege of speaking about this topic at conferences in various parts of the world. Marriage is the natural habitat of unborn children, the place where God intends them to be conceived, educated and nurtured. When we destroy the habitat we end up destroying children too. The statistics bear this out; four out five aborted children are conceived outside of marriage. If an organisation that worked to protect orang-utans refused to do anything to protect the rainforest they would be generally considered to be failing in their duty. Similarly any organisation fighting to defend unborn children must defend their natural habitat, which is the family founded on marriage. It is for this reason that SPUC will continue to fight for the traditional understanding of marriage.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

More advice needed from Archbishop Burke

Archbishop Raymond Burke (pictured), the head of the Apostolic Signatura, the Church's top canonical court, has said regarding Catholics who support pro-abortion legislation: "There's not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion" (LifeSiteNews reports).

Archbishop Burke continues:

"The Church's law is very clear. The person who persists publicly in grave sin is to be denied Holy Communion, and it [Canon Law] doesn't say that the bishop shall decide this. It's an absolute."

He says: "I don't understand the continual debate that goes on about it."

This is an interesting and important statement about church law, in my view. It reflects, after all, what an awful lot of Catholics and non-Catholics are thinking who are a considerably less qualified in canon law.

Archbishop Burke offers clear guidance as to how bishops and priests must proceed with regard to prominent Catholics who support pro-abortion legislation. The archbishop says: "There's not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion" (My emphasis).

LifeSite's report continues: "When asked what the solution was, [Archbishop Burke] responded, "Individual bishops and priests simply have to do their duty. They have to confront politicians, Catholic politicians, who are sinning gravely and publicly in this regard. And that's their duty. And if they carry it out, not only can they not be reproached for that, but they should be praised for confronting this situation."

It would be good to obtain further advice from the archbishop as to what ordinary Catholics can do to assist their priests and bishops in doing "their duty" as he puts it.

Pope's guidance to bishops on abortion has serious implications for Ireland's Catholic politicians

Enda Kenny, Ireland's Taoiseach, who's
proposing abortion legislation which
is worse than the British Abortion Act.

Pope Francis has written to the Argentine Assembly of Bishops expressing the desire that they use the Aparecida document as their frame of reference for the government of the Church. As John-Henry Weston, editor-in-chief of LifeSite, puts it: "the [Aparacieda] document made a very clear statement regarding the consequences of supporting abortion - disallowing holy communion for anyone who facilitates an abortion, including politicians".

Pope Francis's thinking has serious implications for Ireland’s Catholic TDs (members of the Irish Parliament) and Ireland’s "Catholic" Taoiseach [prime minister] Enda Kenny, who has just introduced draft abortion legislation for Ireland - draft legislation which if enacted will be worse than the British Abortion Act.

Pope Francis's letter, of 25th March 2013, the solemnity of the Annunciation, was sent to the Argentine bishops and posted on their website. In the letter, Pope Francis writes that the Aparecida document is the “guideline we need for this point in history”.

This document opens with an address by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI to the general assembly of Latin American and Caribbean Episcopal conferences, in which he says the family is currently suffering a degree of adversity caused by:

“secularism and by ethical relativism, by movements of population internally and externally, by poverty, by social instability and by civil legislation opposed to marriage which, by supporting contraception and abortion, is threatening the future of peoples.”

The document also includes a message from the bishops to the people of Latin America and the Caribbean:

“Faithfulness to Jesus demands from us to fight against the evils that harm or destroy life, such as abortion ...We invite all the leaders of our nations to defend the truth and to watch over the inviolable and sacred right to life and dignity of the human person, from conception until natural death.”

Pro-lifers around the world are now drawing attention to the significance of this document and Pope Francis’s letter. The following sections of the Aparecida document are of particular significance to the pro-life movement:

436: We hope that legislators, heads of government, and health professionals, conscious of the dignity of human life and of the rootedness of the family in our peoples, will defend and protect it from the abominable crimes of abortion and euthanasia; that is their responsibility. Hence, in response to government laws and provisions that are unjust in the light of faith and reason, conscientious objection should be encouraged. We must adhere to “eucharistic coherence,” that is, be conscious that they cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals.

467: Today we stand before new challenges that call us to be the voice of the voiceless. The child growing in its mother’s womb and people who are in their declining years are a claim for dignified life that cries out to heaven and that cannot but make us shudder. The liberalization and routinization of abortion practices are abominable crimes, just as are euthanasia, genetic and embryonic manipulation, unethical medical testing, capital punishment, and so many other ways of assaulting the dignity and life of the human being. If we want to maintain a solid and inviolable basis for human rights, we absolutely must recognize that human life must always be defended from the very moment of conception. Otherwise, the circumstances and conveniences of the powerful will always find excuses for abusing persons.

The paragraphs quoted above cite the 2007 post-synodal apostolic exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis:

83. Here it is important to consider what the Synod Fathers described as eucharistic consistency, a quality which our lives are objectively called to embody. Worship pleasing to God can never be a purely private matter, without consequences for our relationships with others: it demands a public witness to our faith. Evidently, this is true for all the baptized, yet it is especially incumbent upon those who, by virtue of their social or political position, must make decisions regarding fundamental values, such as respect for human life, its defence from conception to natural death, the family built upon marriage between a man and a woman, the freedom to educate one's children and the promotion of the common good in all its forms. These values are not negotiable. Consequently, Catholic politicians and legislators, conscious of their grave responsibility before society, must feel particularly bound, on the basis of a properly formed conscience, to introduce and support laws inspired by values grounded in human nature. There is an objective connection here with the Eucharist (cf. 1 Cor 11:27-29). Bishops are bound to reaffirm constantly these values as part of their responsibility to the flock entrusted to them.

Evangelium Vitae, an encyclical of Pope John Paul II, is also cited, which is very appropriate in light of the argument of Enda Kenny (the Irish Prime Minister) that he has a duty to legislate for abortion:

74: Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. Such cooperation occurs when an action, either by its very nature or by the form it takes in a concrete situation, can be defined as a direct participation in an act against innocent human life or a sharing in the immoral intention of the person committing it. This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it.

Earlier this year, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, gave an interview with Irish newspaper Catholic Voice. In this interview Cardinal Burke stated:

“With regard to Canon 915, it states that those who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin should not be admitted to receive Holy Communion. There can be no question that the practice of abortion is among the gravest of manifest sins and therefore once a Catholic politician has been admonished that he should not come forward to receive Holy Communion, as long as he continues to support legislation which fosters abortion or other intrinsic evils, then he should be refused Holy Communion.”

Similar comments were made by the former head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, by the late Cardinal Trujillo, in an address to the eleventh ordinary general assembly of the synod of bishops meeting at the Vatican in 2007, saying:

Can we allow access to Eucharistic communion to those who deny human and Christian principles and values? The responsibility of politicians and legislators is great. A so-called personal option cannot be separated from the socio-political duty. This is not a “private” problem: acceptance of the Gospel, the Magisterium and right reasoning is needed!

As for everyone else, the Word of God holds true also for politicians and legislators: "Therefore anyone who eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily...is eating and drinking his own condemnation" (1 Cor 11:27-29).

Politicians and legislators must know that by proposing or defending projects for iniquitous laws, they have a serious responsibility and must find a remedy for the evil done and spread in order to be allowed access to communion with the Lord who is the way, truth and life (Cfr. John 14:6).

The Catholic teaching on abortion legislation and Catholic politicians is clear, as seen in the literature itself and the comments of the Catholic hierarchy together now with the wishes of Pope Francis in his letter to the Argentinian bishops. It is important that the Catholic hierarchy in Ireland present this teaching in a clear way to all people, especially to the TDs and to Enda Kenny.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

I am interviewed on BBC's Today programme about Family Synod

Yesterday morning I was interviewed by James Naughtie on Radio Four's Today programme about the Family Synod:



Prior to the interview, in the small hours of yesterday morning, I made notes on the key issue on which I was to be interviewed: Voice of the Family's response to the final report, in particular the section dealing with the civilly divorced and remarried. I thought it might be helpful to visitors to my blog to share with you the notes I prepared - including my explanation as to why a pro-life leader finds it necessary to engage with the issues considered by the Family Synod in Rome which has just concluded:

Catholic teaching on marriage and the Holy Eucharist and its reception

1. Catholics believe, because Jesus Christ Himself taught, that marriage is indissoluble and, Jesus taught, if someone divorces or puts away their spouse and marries another, he or she commits adultery - which is considered a mortal sin, the kind of serious sin by which one cuts oneself off from God's love. (Matthew, 19)

2. Catholics believe, because Jesus Christ Himself taught, that in going to Holy Communion we receive the body of Jesus Christ, God Himself: we receive life and the promise of eternal life. (John, 6:54)

3. Finally, Catholics believe the teaching of St Paul that if a person eats and drinks the body and blood of Jesus Christ unworthily, we don't receive life or grace, we eat and drink judgement to ourselves "not discerning the body of the Lord". (Corinthians: 1,11.29)

Mercy

4. Catholics believe that the whole of the teaching of Jesus Christ is about mercy including the demands of the Gospel: God's commandments which Jesus announced or confirmed. Catholics believe that Christ's message is not just for a select few. We believe that everyone receives from Christ the grace to live in the way God wants us to live.

5. Catholic teaching is not that following Christ is easy. Christ taught that we have to carry our cross and He promises that He will give us the help we need to carry that cross.

6. I know lots of ordinary Catholics both in my family life and through my work. I know women and men who've been deserted by their spouse for another person and either left alone with children or left alone without their children. If that deserted spouse were then to see their wife or husband with a new partner, receiving the Body of Christ in Communion, that sends the message to everyone, including the children, that marriage is not indissoluble after all. This is destructive of the truth about marriage. It's also damaging psychologically and spiritually, not least for the children.

7. Jesus Christ told the woman found in sin, who was perhaps caught up very deeply in a way of life which appeared to be impossible to escape: Go and sin no more.


The Pope

8. I believe, as all Catholics believe, that the Pope is Peter, the rock Christ chose on which to build His Church. The Pope serves the unchangeable truth of Christ's teaching. The Pope is not the master but the servant of the truth. The difficulty for Catholics with this particular document from the Synod of Bishops is that it doesn't properly reflect Catholic teaching: It's ambiguous and confusing.

Other aspects of the final report

9. The Church teaches that certain actions are wrong in themselves - or "intrinsically evil" as the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it: such things as contraception or in vitro fertilisation. This is not made unambiguously clear in the Synod document. This shows a lack of mercy because it denies Catholics the truth about right and wrong. It denies Catholics the knowledge they need to exercise true freedom, freedom from sin.

Text agreed by the Synod on Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried

10. Paragraphs 84 - 86 are not clear and the way is left open to bishops opposed to Catholic teaching in this area to give the green light to sacrilegious communion. The paragraphs refer to "exclusion" practised in liturgy and of priests accompanying interested parties on a path of discernment according to the teaching of the church and the orientations of the bishop. Catholic teaching, however, is that the truly merciful opening to Holy Communion with all mortal sins, not just sins against marriage, is repentance and a firm purpose of amendment. Confession does not provide Catholics with a license to sin: it provides grace to repent and amend one's life


Why is pro-life leader engaging in work on the Family Synod?

11. Many pro-life campaigners are Catholics, many are not Catholics. Whether or not we're Catholics evidence indicates that two things most protect unborn children: those are laws against abortion and the institution of marriage. Goverment data show that unborn children are 4 to 5 times less likely to be killed by abortion if they are conceived within marriage. Catholic teaching, the teaching of Jesus Christ, upholds the indissolubility of marriage. We must defend our Catholic faith against all ambiguous or misleading representations in order to defend the human and Divine institution which most protects unborn children.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page

Archbishop says that Catholics who support same-sex marriage shouldn't receive Holy Communion

The Detroit Free Press newspaper reports that Allen Vigneron, the Catholic archbishop of Detroit (USA), has said Catholics who support same-sex marriage shouldn't receive Holy Communion. It also quotes the archbishop saying:

"For a Catholic to receive holy Communion and still deny the revelation Christ entrusted to the church is to try to say two contradictory things at once: 'I believe the church offers the saving truth of Jesus, and I reject what the church teaches.' In effect, they would contradict themselves. This sort of behavior would result in publicly renouncing one's integrity and logically bring shame for a double-dealing that is not unlike perjury. [The Church wants to help Catholics] avoid this personal disaster."

The newspaper also reports that the archbishop told a press conference last month:

"Were we to abandon [our views opposing abortion and supporting traditional marriage], we would be like physicians who didn't tell their patients that certain forms of behavior are not really in their best interest."

I pray that all bishops and clergy will be blessed with the same admirable balance of firmness and pastoral concern as Archbishop Vigneron.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

“Senior churchmen” accused of intimidating clergy faithful to Catholic teaching on marriage

I was greatly encouraged to read this morning the press statement released by the co-ordinator of the “Support Marriage Letter”, which reveals that 461 priests from across England and Wales have signed a letter urging those cardinals and bishops attending the Ordinary Synod to uphold Catholic teaching on the nature of marriage and to affirm the unchangeable doctrine and discipline of the Church regarding the reception of Holy Communion by divorced persons living in invalid civil unions.

The priests’ letter says:

“We affirm the importance of upholding the Church’s traditional discipline regarding the reception of the sacraments, and that doctrine and practice remain firmly and inseparably in harmony.”

I was however greatly concerned to read in their press statement the accusation that there “has been a certain amount of pressure not to sign the letter and indeed a degree of intimidation from some senior Churchmen”.

It should be shocking to us to hear that senior clerics are intimidating priests who simply wish to remain faithful to the unchanging teachings of the Church. Unfortunately, I was not surprised by this allegation.

Back in December the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales published a document that insinuated that priests who remain faithful to the Catholic doctrine and discipline of the sacraments are guilty of an attitude similar to the fourth century heresy of Donatism. It is difficult to see this as anything other than an attempt to intimidate clergy who are unwilling to go along with the radical agenda being pursued by senior clerics, particularly with regard to the reception of Holy Communion by the divorced and “remarried”, and with regard to attempts to undermine the teaching of the Church on homosexuality and same-sex unions.

The President of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, Vincent Cardinal Nichols, indicated his openness to the reception of Holy Communion by the divorced and “remarried” at a press conference on 21^st October 2014 despite authoritative and irreformable Church teaching to the contrary.

Cardinal Nichols’ views on, and approach towards, homosexuality and same-sex unions have been documented many times on this blog:

• Pope Benedict is being shepherded into a political correct broad church of England, 4 July 2010
• Archbishop Vincent Nichols goes along with prevailing ideas on sex and relationships education, 21 April 2010
• Archbishop Nichols’ shows remarkable political prescience, 21 July 2010
• Families will not “hold their tongue” about bishop protected dissent on pro-life/pro-family issues, 9 September 2010
• Archbishop Nichols’ comments on gay unions endanger the souls of my children, 11 September 2010
• Pope Benedict contradicts Archbishop Nichols on “gay unions”, 13 September 2010
• Archbishop Nichols undermines Pope Benedict on gay unions the day after his return to Rome, 23 September 2010
• A reflection on Archbishop Nichols’ earlier comments on gay unions, 24 September 2010
• Archbishop Nichols should stop causing confusion regarding homosexuality, 12 January 2011
• Archbishop Nichols' Pastoral Centre to host conference for dissenting Catholic gays, 14 July 2011
• Concern grows regarding Cardinal Nichols’ views on compulsory sex education, 4 April 2014

Please write to the following bishops who will representing the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and inform them that you expect them to faithfully promote and defend the Catholic faith:

His Eminence Vincent Cardinal Nichols
Archbishop of Westminster
Archbishop’s House
Ambrosden Avenue
London
SW1P 1QJ
cardinalnichols@rcdow.org.uk

Rt Rev Peter Doyle
Bishop of Northampton
Bishop's House
Marriott Street
Northampton
NN2 6AW
bishop@northamptondiocese.com

Rt Rev Philip Egan
Bishop of Portsmouth (substitute if one of the above cannot attend)
Bishop's House
Bishop Crispan Way
Portsmouth
PO1 3HG
bishop@portsmouthdiocese.org.uk

Please also write to your own bishops to state your expectation that they will remain faithful to Catholic teaching on human life, marriage and the family and their intimate and intrinsic connection to the doctrine of the sacraments.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Archbishop Longley owes faithful pro-life/pro-family Catholics an apology

Bernard Longley (pictured), archbishop of Birmingham, has given an interview to The Tablet, in which he criticises (in similar terms to Vincent Nichols, archbishop of Westminster) those Catholics who oppose the Soho Masses for homosexuals*. He goes on to contradict himself somewhat by disagreeing - rather weakly - with Archbishop Nichols and Bishop Malcolm McMahon on civil partnerships. (Readers will recall that Archbishop Nichols said that the Catholic bishops' conference of England and Wales was not opposed to gay civil partnerships; and Bishop McMahon said that he had no problem with headteachers of Catholic schools being in civil partnerships). You can read the relevant part of the interview at the end of this blog-post.

Daphne McLeod, chairman of Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, which organises a regular prayer vigil outside the Soho Masses, has written a letter (see below) to The Tablet in response to Archbishop Longley's interview comments. Daphne has kindly given permission for her letter to be blogged.

To Daphne's excellent letter, I would add: what on earth is an archbishop doing giving an interview to The Tablet, the de facto house journal of British liberal Catholic dissent, including on pro-life/pro-family issues? Archbishop Longley owes faithful pro-life/pro-family Catholics an unreserved apology.

* The late Pope John Paul II, the great pro-life champion, taught in paragraph 97 of his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae that it is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not offer adolescents and young adults an authentic education in sexuality, and in love, and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection.

Letter from Daphne McLeod, chairman, Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice

The Editor, “The Tablet”
1, King Street Cloisters,
London. W6 OGY

11th December 2010

Dear Editor,

I am surprised to read Archbishop Longley’s attack on those of us who pray outside the Church of Our Lady and St Gregory during the five o’clock Masses for ‘lesbian and gay Catholics’ every first and third Sunday. His remarks include some inaccuracies which need correcting.

First, this is not a protest though that may be the way the homosexuals who organise these Masses describe it to the Archbishop. If he had spoken to any of us we would have explained that we are not protesting but praying in reparation for any sacrileges that might be taking place.

As it is we pray the fifteen mysteries of the Holy Rosary, and the Divine Praises in reparation, the Divine Mercy Chaplet for all sinners and, at six o’clock, before we end, the Angelus. Although small in number we know we are joined by many who cannot reach London but who pray with us in churches, in homes and in convents.

Second, the Archbishop says he doesn’t know whether any of us “have made attempts to meet the people who are going to these Masses”. If he had asked us we would have assured him that we have met many of them and I would like to put it on record here that most of them are very friendly and perfectly honest about their homosexual lifestyles, introducing us to their partners and emphasising that they are in sexual relationships. So we are not ‘making any assumptions’ about them.

Some of us have been down to the Social Hour which follows every Mass where we have received kind hospitality enabling us to spend some time eating and drinking and talking to them and examining the books they have on sale. No-one, apart from the Archbishop, tries to pretend they are living or striving to live chaste lives.

Of course there are chaste homosexuals in the Church who do live chaste lives and they demand our real respect, but they would never ask for or attend any Mass arranged especially for homosexuals. They go to Mass in their own parish and only receive Holy Communion if they are in a state of Grace, like the rest of us. I know from phone calls I have received that many of them are very concerned about the Soho Masses where everyone receives Holy Communion in spite of openly admitting they are and intend to stay in homosexual relationships.

If Archbishop Longley really thinks we are so misguided, why didn’t he approach us and put us right when he was an Auxiliary in Westminster? He had plenty of opportunity. Indeed, once when we had both attended a talk in Westminster Hall I started to approach him to discuss this problem only to see him turn and run out of the hall and disappear. I pursued him but, as I can’t run as fast as I used to now I am 82, I lost him.

We know he has spent a lot of time with ex-Carmelite priest Martin Pendergast, his long term partner Julian Filochowski and the other organisers. At the first Mass they thanked him publicly from the altar for not insisting they make any changes to their homosexual lifestyles. This was repeated later on their web-site and in the Pink Paper, the paper for practising homosexuals in London. This paper also celebrated Archbishop Longley’s elevation to Birmingham as ‘their’ bishop getting promotion.

I do feel this pretence and condoning is not in any sense compassionate or pastoral. These Catholics need and deserve proper guidance, especially the young ones who have not received good religious instruction. I cannot forget the poor young man who said to me, “There is no need to worry about us Daphne, if it were still wrong these Masses would not have been especially arranged for us.”

Of course it is still wrong. St Paul among others makes that very clear and so does the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church and they both also stress that anyone practising this life style must not receive Holy Communion without repentance, Confession and a desire to amend their lives. Who is Archbishop Longley to change this age-old universal teaching?

Perhaps after reading this, the Archbishop might like to revise his own judgemental stance about us.

Daphne McLeod
Chairman
Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice

From the interview with Bernard Longley, archbishop of Birmingham, The Tablet, 11 December 2010:

"...Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor selected him to negotiate with a group of lesbian and gay Catholics who wanted a regular Mass celebrated for them, their families and friends. For some years the Mass had been celebrated in an Anglican church in London’s Soho and the cardinal felt it should be in a Catholic church instead. It was settled in 2007 that the Soho Masses Pastoral Council should be formed and would be responsible for organising a monthly Mass at the Church of the Assumption in Warwick Street. Conservative Catholics opposed to the Mass regularly gather outside to protest but Archbishop Longley has stern words for them. 'The Church does not, as it were, have a moral means-testing of people before they come to receive the sacraments and it is very easy to jump to and come to the wrong conclusions about people when you don’t know them. I don’t know whether the people outside have made attempts to meet the people who are going to the Masses in Soho,' he says. I question whether those protesting are making assumptions about those people’s lifestyles, to which the archbishop replies: 'I would assume that is the case, and so it isn’t for any of us to make those judgements which, in conscience, people make before God and also within the sacraments, particularly the Sacrament of Reconciliation assisted by priests and other pastors within the Church. I think, at the end of the day, those sorts of protests are counterproductive and usually have the effect of hardening attitudes and polarising rather than fundamentally changing people’s minds.'

"Given his reluctance to make assumptions about the lifestyles of gay Catholics, it might be reasonable to assume that he would have no objection to civil partnerships. After all, the Archbishop of Westminster and president of the bishops’ conference, Vincent Nichols, does not oppose them. But Archbishop Longley thinks differently. 'I am not in favour of it because it establishes a legally and publicly recognised relationship which is too easily confused with the sacrament of marriage. Obviously it’s not marriage, because a marriage is between a man and a woman, but I do think it is very easy for people to be confused about civil partnerships and marriage as if they were the same thing.'

"Another of his fellow bishops, Malcolm McMahon, chairman of the Catholic Education Service, has said that a head teacher could be in a civil partnership and still live according to the Church’s teaching. But Archbishop Longley is doubtful about this. 'In those circumstances, a practising Catholic would not enter into a civil partnership in good standing with the Church. It would be a matter of concern, I think, in a school if a teacher were to enter into a civil partnership, but that would be something that would be the concern of the governing body of the school and clearly of the trustees.'"

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Cardinal Lopez Trujillo will be spinning in his grave to hear of Workshops held at the Pontifical Council for the Family

Alfonso Cardinal Lopez Trujillo

What would the late Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo think about recent events at the Pontifical Council for the Family, of which he was the President from 1991 till 2008?

I knew the late Cardinal personally.  He was one of the world's greatest defenders of the sanctity of human life and church teaching on the precious value of the family. He was SPUC's guest in Britain in 1996 and 1999.

In June 2005, he wrote to Archbishop Peter Smith, the then  archbishop of Cardiff, about the Pontifical Council for the Family's close working relationship with the Society. His Eminence wrote:

"We have seen that Mr John Smeaton, national director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, has undertaken a most laudable cause [sic] especially with the NGOs involved in promoting the values of family and life and he has been most helpful to our dicastery precisely in that field".

Reporting on Pope Benedict XVI's homily at His Eminence's funeral, the Catholic News Agency said:

‘“Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, whose motto was "Veritas in caritate", dedicated "his entire life to affirming the truth", said the Pope.’

How times have changed at the Pontifical Council for the Family (PCF)!

According to Catholic World Report, three separate Workshops have been held this year under the auspices of the PCF looking at “the possibility of an evolution of the ecclesiastical doctrine of marriage”. We read that the workshops, while perhaps not “secret,” were not publicized.

Catholic World Report states:

Among the participants was Father Eberhard Schockenhoff, professor of moral theology at the University of Freiburg in Germany. Father Schockenhoff also serves as an advisor to the German Bishops’ Conference ... In addition to Communion for the divorced and remarried, Father Schockenhoff urges approval of homosexual clergy and finds “stable” homosexual pairs to be ethical ... Support for the Schockenhoff’s position was offered by Father Gianpaolo Dianin, an expert on pastoral care of the family and a member of the Theological Faculty of Triveneto ... On the issue of the Eucharist and “irregular unions” it was noted by Father Dianin that today, given contemporary challenges that secularism has put on Catholic marriages, there are numerous pastors who wish to do “something” for their parishioners but feel constrained by Church discipline that “understands little” of the hardships.

These Workshops at the Council are not an isolated example of opposition to doctrinally sound care of the family now prevailing at the PCF. [See my blogpost of earlier today as to why SPUC is concerned about the reception of Holy Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics and my blogpost regarding SPUC's position on same-sex marriage entitled Children are being sacrificed on the altar of adults' sexual "rights"]

SPUC's representatives at a meeting about the Family Synod last January organised by the Pontifical Council for the Family were ignored in the report of the relator of the English speaking group when they sought to raise concerns about the omission of any reference to abortion in the Family Synod's final relatio. The relator preferred to draw attention to  a call for the church to address the "rights" relating to transgenderism.

Moreover, when SPUC's representatives joined fellow delegates to ask Archbishop Paglia, the current president of the PCF,  for his opinion on the proposal to admit the “remarried” to Holy Communion without amendment of life, he would not engage directly with their concerns. His Excellency told them not to worry and that a change in the discipline would only be for a small number of cases.

From my experience of Cardinal Trujillo, over many years, His Eminence will be spinning in his grave to hear of what is happening today at the Pontifical Council for the Family (established by Pope John Paul II in 1981 "for the promotion of the pastoral ministry and apostolate to the family, through the application of the teachings and guidelines of the ecclesiastical Magisterium, to help Christian families fulfill their educational and apostolic mission").

How tragically prophetic - in particular the last sentence below - are the words of a study signed by Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, on 13th May 2006, and presented to Pope Benedict XVI under the title "The Family and Human Procreation":

It is true that the natural institution of marriage and the family has never been prey to such violent attacks as it is now. New models of the family have emerged from radical movements ... Homosexual couples claim the same rights as those reserved to husband and wife; they even claim the right to adoption.

... It is not a matter of an alternative activity or one in competition with other sectors of pastoral care ... The centrality of the pastoral care of the family and of life in the Church's pastoral ministry thus characterizes her action. Today, the new evangelization in which the family is called to participate finds itself having to respond to challenges that it is not an exaggeration to call epochal. Those challenges more closely connected with the family concern the civilization of love and the service to life through responsible fatherhood and motherhood.

The Holy Father Benedict XVI said to the Bishops representing the Episcopal Commissions for the Family and Life of Latin America: "It is therefore indispensable and urgent that every person of good will should endeavor... to safeguard the fundamental values of marriage and the family. They are threatened by the current phenomenon of secularization"

It seems to me that the spirit of secularisation is alive and well and presiding now at the Pontifical Council for the Family.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Catholics and others must reflect deeply on the blasphemy in Cologne Cathedral

As a Catholic I was naturally appalled to read about Josephine Witt, a FEMEN activist, who leapt up and stood bare-breasted upon the altar in Cologne Cathedral during Holy Mass celebrated by Cardinal Joachim Meisner on Christmas day. On her chest was written the slogan “I am God.”

Euronews reports that “The activist climbed the altar to protest Vatican propaganda for the criminalisation of abortion".

The stark contrast between FEMEN and the Holy Mass and Christmas will not be lost on visitors to my blog.

As Dan Blackman, a young Catholic on SPUC's staff, put it to me: "It is precisely during the Holy Mass that the words 'This is my body' are said by the priest. Contrast the beauty and truth concerning Christ’s giving of His whole self to mankind on the Cross, with the ugliness of the pro-abortion rhetoric 'my body my rights' which seeks to justify, on the basis of a blatant lie, the killing an innocent child."

However, this incident should not simply appal Catholics (and others). We really need to reflect deeply on its significance.

The fact is that Femen is recognising through this public blasphemy, albeit in a grotesquely distorted way, the fundamental truth which explains the Catholic Church's unequivocal opposition to abortion: i.e. the link between the incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, present in body and blood, soul and Divinity in the Eucharist, and the value and inviolability of every human life.

Furthermore, Christmas is the celebration of the incarnation of Jesus and Mass is the re-enactment of Christ's death and resurrection. Pope John Paul II explains the significance of the Salvation story for humanity in this way in Evangelium Vitae [2]

"'By his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some fashion with every human being'. This saving event reveals to humanity not only the boundless love of God who "so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16), but also the incomparable value of every human person."

On the basis of this teaching, Pope John Paul goes on to confirm the unchanging and unchangeable teaching of the Church about abortion:

"Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium." [Evangelium Vitae 73]

What Femen did in Cologne Cathedral was appalling and even managed to shock the secular world. A spokesman for the Green party in Germany reportedly said:

"The action by Femen in Cologne cathedral was disrespectful and an unnecessary disturbance of worshippers during a service."

However, I feel bound to ask the question: Is the blatant, ugly, blasphemy of Femen any worse than the reception of Holy Communion by politicians and others who make no secret of their pro-abortion stance?

Should not all Catholics make a new year's resolution - Catholic laity, nuns, priests, bishops and cardinals - to do everything in our power to protect the Holy Eucharist in 2014? Femen's disgusting action simply underlines the fact that the Body of Christ is being exploited by the enemies of the unborn child to advance the "respectability" of the pro-abortion cause in Ireland, in the US, in Britain and throughout the world.


Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Cardinal Nichols' misleading statement at Chrism Mass

Cardinal Nichols holds press conference on synod, 21 October 2014

I was astonished to read in the Catholic Herald that Cardinal Nichols used his sermon at the Westminster Chrism Mass to claim that it is wrong "to think or speak of this Synod as a battle, a battle between contesting sides."

I was present in Rome during the Extraordinary Synod, working with representatives of other pro-family organisations as part of the Voice of the Family coalition. It was plainly evident to us, after numerous meetings with prelates on both sides of the divide, that a battle was taking place over crucial aspects of Catholic teaching and discipline relating to marriage and the family.

George Cardinal Pell, Prefect for the Economy, publicly stated that "radical elements" within the hierarchy were attempting to use the synod to undermine Catholic teaching on questions such as cohabitation and homosexual unions. They were, he said, using the issue of Holy Communion for the divorced and "remarried" as a "stalking horse" to help pursue these wider changes. 

These attempts to undermine the doctrine of the Church were strongly resisted on the floor of the synod hall, resulting in a partial reversal of the radical agenda outlined in the now notorious interim report. The final report remains gravely flawed however, as outlined in Voice of the Family's in-depth analysis.

This serious division between leading prelates is widening as the Ordinary Synod approaches. Cardinal Marx, Chairman of the German Bishops’ Conference, has claimed that the Church in Germany is not “a subsidiary of Rome” and that each bishops’ conference must “preach the Gospel in its own, original way.” Cardinal Müller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has called this idea “absolutely anti-Catholic” and another German, Cardinal Cordes, has accused Marx of false mercy, “theological blurriness” and language better suited to the “counter of a bar”. Furthermore Swiss-German Cardinal, Kurt Koch, has stated that the dissenters are trying to adapt the faith to the world after the manner of some German Christians under the Nazi regime.

This sounds like a battle to me.

Those interested in knowing what really happened before and during the Extraordinary Synod will benefit reading from the detailed narrative overview produced by Voice of Family.

I found Cardinal Nichols' comments particularly surprising because he himself has taken part in the current battle over Church teaching. I wrote last week about his disappointment that language about homosexuality placed in the heterodox interim report was removed from the synod's final report. He has also expressed his openness to the admission of those in public and unrepentant mortal sin to Holy Communion, which would contradict twenty centuries of Catholic teaching.

I have previously documented many of Cardinal Nichols' statements and actions relating to homosexuality and homosexual unions.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

"President Blair" of Europe and President Obama - the pro-abortionists' dream team

"Tony Blair is poised to become the first President of Europe after it was confirmed that French leader Nicolas Sarkozy is determined to help him win the post", the Daily Mail reported last week.

And about this time last month the Guardian carried an interview with Tony Blair in which he suggested he wanted to be European President.

It might seem a distant prospect ... but if Blair became President of Europe during Obama's presidency of the US, it would be the pro-abortionists' dream team.

Tony Blair, the UK’s former Prime Minister is one of the world’s leading architects of the culture of death. Since being received into the Catholic Church he has refused to repudiate the anti-life laws and policies he steadfastly pursued throughout his political career. Indeed he's reportedly determined to continue his anti-life, anti-family agenda.

As for Obama - just check his record on the US National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) website "A closer look at Senator Obama's position on abortion" And last month, in one of his first Presidential actions, he signed an order "that will put hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of organizations that aggressively promote abortion as a population-control tool in the developing world" according to NRLC.

Obama's executive order to abort the world's poor represents a policy pursued relentlessly by Tony Blair's government and is a policy with which he remains closely associated through the Faiths Act Fellowship, an initiative of the Tony Blair Faith Foundation, on which I blogged recently. It's also a policy closely associated with Tony Blair's wife Cherie Blair, also a Catholic, who endorses the work of CEDAW committee (as well as other radical pro-abortion groups) - and specifically its work on "reproductive rights". The CEDAW committee is notorious among pro-lifers for using the CEDAW convention to bully countries into allowing abortion, even though the convention doesn't mention abortion.

Earlier this week, I reported on LifeSite's interview with Archbishop Burke who said: "There's not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion". I made the point that it would be good to obtain further advice from the archbishop as to what ordinary Catholics can do to assist their priests and bishops in doing "their duty", as he puts it, in this regard. With Tony Blair's interest in the European presidency reportedly powerfully backed by Nicolas Sarkozy, the French leader, that advice is now more urgently needed.

Cardinal Nichols' criticism of faithful priests is deeply disturbing

Cardinal Nichols conducting dialogue on the Synod via the press

I am deeply disturbed by Cardinal Nichols' criticism of the 461 brave priests who signed a letter upholding the unchangeable teachings of the Catholic Church on marriage and Holy Communion.

In the letter, which was published in the Catholic Herald yesterday, priests from all over England and Wales pledged to remain faithful to Catholic teaching and to offer true pastoral care to all those who find themselves in difficult situations.

A statement made by Cardinal Nichols' spokesman said:

“Every priest in England and Wales has been asked to reflect on the Synod discussion. It is my understanding that this has been taken up in every diocese, and that channels of communication have been established.”

It continued:

“The pastoral experience and concern of all priests in these matters are of great importance and are welcomed by the Bishops. Pope Francis has asked for a period of spiritual discernment. This dialogue, between a priest and his bishop, is not best conducted through the press.”

I find this statement astonishing for a number of reasons.

Firstly, Cardinal Nichols has himself used the press to indicate sympathy for views being promoted by the "radical elements" (to use Cardinal Pell's phrase) who want to dismantle Catholic teaching on marriage and the family.

I drew attention yesterday to the press conference at which Cardinal Nichols undermined Catholic teaching on the reception of Holy Communion by the divorced and "remarried".

The Cardinal also used the press to express his disappointment that the final report of the synod did not include controversial phrases originally placed in the notorious interim report. He told BBC Radio 4’s Sunday programme:

“I didn’t think it went far enough, there were three key words as far as I was concerned … ‘respect’, ‘welcome’ and ‘value’. I was looking for those words and they weren’t there and so I didn’t think that was a good paragraph.”

He added:

“I didn’t think it was a good text because it didn’t include those words strongly enough so I wasn’t satisfied with it.”

Secondly, it is hardly surprising that priests faithful to Catholic teaching would lack confidence in the "channels of communication" that are claimed to "have been established." I also mentioned yesterday that the official document produced by Bishops' Conference of England and Wales for clergy seemed nothing other than an instrument for intimidating priests who wish to remain faithful to the Church's traditional doctrine and discipline.

Is it any surprise that these brave priests would wish to speak directly to the Catholic faithful rather than trust "channels of communication" established by the same people responsible for this truly disgraceful document?

Indeed, in their press statement an anonymous priest was quoted who alleged that priests involved in the project had been intimidated by "senior churchmen."

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, how can any Catholic bishop object to priests using the media to express their loyalty to the teaching of Christ and their desire to give true pastoral care to all who need it?

Catholics should be very disturbed by the Cardinal's comments; very disturbed indeed.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Pope must address crisis of trust within Church in wake of Synod

SPUC is a co-founder of Voice of the Family. For most of the past month I have been with the Society's Voice of the Family team here in Rome. The following is the press statement we put out Saturday night as the Synod on the Family draws to a close:

ROME, 24 October 2015: “There’s a crisis of trust regarding the family between faithful lay Catholics and those in authority at the highest levels of the Church – and only the Pope can restore that trust” according to Voice of the Family, a coalition of 26 major pro-life and pro-family organisations from five continents formed just before an Extraordinary Synod on the Family which took place in Rome last year.

As this year’s Ordinary Synod on the Family closes at the Vatican, Voice of the Family is saying to the Pope: “Holy Father, enough is enough”.

John Smeaton, co-founder of Voice of the Family and chief executive of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC)in the UK, explained:

“Paragraphs 84 – 86 of the final report published today can be interpreted as providing a number of clear openings to the reception of Holy Communion by those living in public adultery, and thus to the desecration of the Blessed Sacrament and the scandalising of the faithful, not least our children and grandchildren.

“One is mindful of the words of Our Lord:

‘he that shall scandalise one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea’ (Matthew 18:6)

“Trust between the Catholic lay faithful and the Church authorities in Rome was breached this year by the Synod’s working document, the Instrumentum Laboris, which undermined Church doctrine on contraception, parents as the primary educators of their children, fornication, adultery, homosexuality and on other fundamental issues.

“The laity’s trust was further weakened by the Pope’s special appointment to the Synod of leading prelates who have demonstrated support for positions contrary to the teaching of the Church on family or life issues.

“The crisis of trust between laity and Church authorities became still worse last week when Pope Francis told a gathering of bishops during the Synod that he ‘felt the need to proceed in a healthy decentralization of power to the Episcopal Conferences’, a power which he said earlier in his papacy would include ‘genuine doctrinal authority’.

“In view of openly heterodox positions adopted by presidents of Episcopal conferences in particular countries, ‘decentralisation of power’ on doctrinal matters would risk obscuring the universal nature of the one true faith.

“Will sanction for homosexual unions and adultery be granted by bishops’ conferences in one country and denied in another? Spouses, parents and families would be abandoned to the wolves by any such fudged arrangement,” John Smeaton said.

“In the name of conscience, the Synod organisers and leading Synod Fathers appeared to be seeking to abolish the notion of intrinsic evil, that is sin: – on contraception, on cohabitation, on homosexuality and on other fundamental matters. How can parents hope to teach their children the truth and meaning of human sexuality and the sanctity of human life when the notion of intrinsic evil is abolished? Certain Synod Fathers and Synod organisers are speaking the language of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), and not acting as shepherds of the laity.

“Only the Pope can restore trust between Catholic laypeople and Church authorities in Rome. Confusion on fundamental doctrinal matters, which has reigned at the Family Synod, is only serving to assist powerful international bodies opposed to the family and to the sanctity of human life. Holy Father, enough is enough”, concluded Mr Smeaton.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page

Bishop Philip Egan addresses SPUC's national conference

Bishop Philip Egan

This morning SPUC's national conference 2014 was privileged to be addressed by the Rt. Rev. Philip Egan, the Catholic bishop of Portsmouth, on the forthcoming Synod on the Family and the Sensus Fidei. Here are the main points from Bishop Egan's address.

What is a Synod?
An "Ecumenical Council" means a 'gathering of all', in order to discuss and decide about important matters. Ecumenical Councils are rare. A synod is a smaller gathering of bishops, such as bishops across a region or a province.

In preparation for a synod, the synod's secretariat sends out a scoping document for dioceses. The responses are sent back to Rome; and from those responses the secretariat draws up an Instrumentum Laboris, a 'working document'.

A synod is an advisory body. The Pope participates in the synod, and following the synod he issues an Apostolic Exhortation in response to the synod.

The synod on the family to be held in Rome in October is an Extraordinary Synod. The last Extraordinary Synod was in 1987 on the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This year's Extraordinary Synod is also unusual, in two ways:
1) it will be followed by an Ordinary Synod next year. The Apostolic Exhortation will be the Instrumentum Laboris for the next year’s synod
2) The 39 pre-synod questions were circulated widely throughout the Church so as to put forward concerns.

Why the family?
Pope Francis announced the synod on the family at the 2013 World Youth Day in Rio. The Pope said that today many young people do not want to get married. Also, people get married lacking maturity. This is where pastoral care needs to comes in. The pastoral care of the family is very complicated, including issues such as annulments, divorce, and access to Holy Communion. Pope Francis said the family is in crisis worldwide. The topic needs two synods to give an adequate treatment.

Instrumentum Laboris
Instrumentum Laboris, to me, is a remarkable document. It unambiguously restates Catholic teaching on the main family issues. At the same time, it emphasises God’s mercy and the need to spread it; highlights the lack of faith and lack of sufficient catechesis. The beginning deals with the Gospel of the Family, which is the term I especially like. The crisis of faith leads to a crisis of relationships and families. The Instrumentum Laboris ends with the prayer of the Holy Family.

In summary the Instrumentum Laboris deals with:

• how to communicate Church’s teaching more effectively?
• how to support those in need more mercifully?
• how to support families in teaching about openness to life?

Crisis of faith
In Britain the crisis of the family is bound to the crisis of the faith. Secularism separates Church and State. The result is moral relativism. Nothing is solid.

It is no secret that many progressive Catholics look forward to changes in Church’s teaching and doctrine from the Synod. In contrast, Blessed John Henry Newman taught that Christian teaching tends to develop organically, like an acorn, with continuity. Doctrine develops rather than changes. Developments in doctrine must be consistent.

In history the Church has experienced major controversies. Today’s issue is the anthropology of a human being: what it means to created, fallen and then redeemed. The Sensus Fidei is the belief that the Holy Spirit endows each member of the Church, each baptised Christian, with an instinct to live in truth. Some members of the Church do not understand the Church’s teaching on marriage and family. Should the doctrine then be changed?

Bl. John Henry Newman taught observed that it has been the ordinary faithful who have passed on the Church's doctrine. Like others in the Church, the faithful should be consulted, not in a democratic way, but rather as a thermometer to check the weather. It is the doctrine that Christ wills for His Church. The doctrine is not always the balanced view, but it is the truth.

My personal hopes for the Synod:
1) A fresh, attractive, easy-to-understand idea of the Gospel of the Family. I would wish that the Synod requests from the Pope a presentation of the Christian understanding of birth, sex, death, male, and female. This would greatly assist religious education in our schools. I am actively considering appointing a couple in every parish as a ministry for marriage.
2) That the Synod will find a better way how to spread mercy for those in difficulties and irregular situations. Pope Benedict suggested we need a further study on the relation of faith and the Sacrament of Matrimony. Many people fall away from the Catholic Church because they fail to form a personal relationship with Christ.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Bishop Egan answers pro-abortion Catholic MPs

In a further interview published today, Bishop Philip Egan, the bishop of Portsmouth, has responded firmly to criticism from pro-abortion Catholic MPs who were appalled when he said political advocates of abortion and same-sex “marriage” should not present themselves to receive Communion.

“Those who do not accept the Catholic Church’s principle teachings on the value of life – as expressed in her teaching on abortion, on marriage and family life, on euthanasia, on eugenics and on assisted suicide – the main tenets of Christian anthropology – are rejecting Christ’s vision for the human person, whom he redeemed on the Cross,” told LifeSite News in a second interview.

“Abortion, euthanasia, eugenics, assisted suicide gravely degrade and undermine respect for the dignity and value of human life,” he said.

LifeSite put Bishop Egan's comments about the reception of Communion into context thus:

"Egan’s statements reflect those of American Cardinal Raymond Burke who recently called a priest’s refusal to give Holy Communion to a publicly dissenting Catholic politician a 'prime act of pastoral charity', since it helps the person in question to 'avoid sacrilege and safeguard[s] the other faithful from scandal.'”

You may wish to write to Bishop Egan to thank him for his clear, firm and loving pastoral leadership at bishop@portsmouthdiocese.org.uk

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk

Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy