Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

Fr. Benedict Groeschel blasts American Psychological Association

From the September 6-12, 2009, issue of National Catholic Register:

As a member of the American Psychological Association for 36 years, I am filled with indignation at the recent statement of the APA that deems it “inappropriate” for therapists to treat homosexual clients.

Such therapy is called reparative therapy and has as its goal the establishment of a heterosexual orientation in place of a homosexual one.

This statement of the APA has been issued despite the fact that there are a number of outstanding members of that organization, including two past presidents, who have strongly supported reparative treatment.

Issued in August, “Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation” advises treatments that “increase family and school support and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth.”

The report also states: “Some difficulties arise because the professional psychological community considers same-sex sexual attractions and behaviors to be a positive variant of human sexuality, while some traditional faiths continue to consider it a sin, moral failing, or disorder that needs to be changed. … We believe that licensed mental-health providers are more likely to maximize their clients’ self-determination by providing effective psychotherapy that increases a client’s abilities to cope, understand, acknowledge, explore and integrate sexual-orientation concerns into a self-chosen life in which the client determines the ultimate manner in which he or she does or does not express sexual orientation.”

Unfortunately, a statement like this issued by an organization like the APA automatically takes on a certain amount of authority. In this case, however, that claim is fraudulent.

Read Fr. Groeschel's entire piece. Visit Fr. Groeschel's author page on Ignatius Insight. Here is Fr. Groeschel's most recent Ignatius Press book, published earlier this year:

The Tears Of God: Persevering in the Face of Great Sorrow or Catastrophe

Fr. Benedict Groeschel, best-selling author and beloved spiritual teacher, writer, and psychologist, wrote this latest book for all those who have suffered great sorrow or catastrophe in their lives and for those close to such persons, who share their deep suffering. Sorrow comes into the life of every person, but only into the lives of some people comes catastrophe. These are disasters that occur either suddenly or with terrible effects, like the death of a child. They can be natural disasters like hurricanes, or they can be horrific accidents or tragedies caused by people's evil acts. They can also arise from wars and situations of great tension.

Fr. Benedict has written previously about faith and sorrow (Arise from Darkness) and seeks in this book to study catastrophes of all different kinds in relationship to our faith in divine providence, in God's goodness and mercy, and finally in the light of Christ's suffering and death. Christianity is the only religion which speaks of a God who suffered a terrible catastrophe--crucifixion and death. Therefore, the Christian must, in the midst of catastrophe, find his way to the foot of the cross, and there he will find answers which cannot be given by any other religious faith.

All religions attempt to deal with catastrophe, all confront the mystery of suffering and of evil. Christianity invites you to share the burden of your catastrophe with the person who is our Savior and Redeemer, one who Himself endured great pain and sorrow, the son of God, Jesus Christ.

"This deeply moving book draws upon Fr. Groeschel's own experience of catastrophic suffering and his insight as a psychologist and spiritual director. It is a book much needed and will be used to support, to comfort and to pray." -- Cardinal Francis George, OMI Archbishop of Chicago

"This book helps us come to grips with the ongoing mysteries of evil in our lives that, if seen in the light of Christ's death and Resurrection, are only steps to be embraced on our way to eternal life in heaven. A truly comforting and encouraging book to embrace the crosses that God allows to come our way." -- Rev. C. J. McCloskey, Author, Good News, Bad News

"Signs of Repentance or of the Status Quo?"

That's the title of Mark Brumley's essay for Catholic Exchange, posted today, about Catholic funerals for wayward Catholic politicians:

Suppose a politician is well-known for his support of abortion rights and same-sex marriage. Suppose he is a Catholic and suppose he has been told repeatedly by bishops and others what the Church teaches and of his grave responsibility to promote laws consistent it, including regarding the rights of the unborn and the defense of marriage. Furthermore, suppose despite all the politician has been told by the Church, he continues to support abortion, embryonic experimentation and same-sex marriage. Furthermore, he denies that his support of these evils is incompatible with his faith, so he receives Holy Communion at Mass, leads family prayers, and visits with priest friends.

Now suppose the Catholic politician becomes terminally ill and goes to his death bed. He has Mass in his home and receives Holy Communion, leads the family prayers, and visits with priest friends. He writes a letter to his bishop admitting that he is a fallible human being, mentions the good things he did as a politician, and asks for the bishop’s prayers. He says nothing in the letter about his public abortion rights activities, embryonic experimentation, or his public support for same-sex marriage.

Under the circumstances, do the activities of receiving Holy Communion, leading family prayers, and visiting with priests amount to “signs of repentance”? Canonists may count them as such but in the situation I just outlined, we can’t say that they really are. Why not? Because the politician received Holy Communion, led prayers, etc., before he was on his death bed and all the time maintained that his manifestly, objectively sinful activities were compatible with his Catholicism. How, then, can we suppose his death bed actions show he has repudiated his earlier actions?

Read the entire piece.

Also take in the lively conversation about this topic between Mark, Ed Peters, and others, here on Insight Scoop.

Bishop Joseph Martino and Auxiliary Bishop John Dougherty resign

As reported by The Times Leader:

Archdiocese of Philadelphia Cardinal Justin Rigali joined Diocese of Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino and Auxiliary Bishop John Dougherty in a studio on the third floor of the Guild building in Scranton to announce the resignation of Martino and Dougherty.

After a brief introduction by Scranton Diocese Spokesman Bill Genello, Martino began his remarks, as he always has, with a religious reference: "May Jesus Christ be praised."

Martino noted that has soon as he took over the diocese he realized "something had to be done" about the problems in the diocese regarding finances, too many churches, and too many schools.

The diocese needs a bishop who is "vigorous," Martino said after relating health problems including severe fatigue, then said "I am not that Bishop," and formally announced he has submitted his resignation to the Pope. He also noted Dougherty's resignation will be accepted, and that Rigali will be appointed Apostolic Administrator. ...

Martino apologized to anyone he hurt through his administrative decisions and way they were implemented them.

Read the entire piece.

UPDATE: The news conference can be viewed online (as a .wmv file).

The funeral and the letter

Dr. Ed Peters, who watched the Kennedy funeral on television, writes:

But what, in the end, most struck me, through whole ceremony, was how oblivious all the participants seemed to be (again, with the sole exception of Obama, who at least made one veiled reference to Kennedy's "public faults", and who was the only speaker to offer a prayer for Teddy's soul), how oblivious, I say, all the participants were to Ted Kennedy's disgraceful and chronic failings to defend the natural right to life (e.g., abortion, embryonic stem cell research), his refusal to protect the natural institution of marriage lately under such attack, and his bad example on a host of other issues of importance to Catholics and to the country. While a funeral is no place to rehearse, say, a man's role in the death of a beautiful young woman, such events and conduct should have, I think, instilled some restraint in the rush to proclaim the man's accomplishments. (As for those "accomplishments", well, if one is wedded to the idea of a gigantic state, then Teddy's accomplishments were admittedly many. But if you're not enamored of statism, one might say that the damage Teddy helped inflict on the nation was great.) Instead, one speaker after another gushed on and on about Ted.

Hardly surprising, given the generally adulatory tone of many (if not most) newspaper columns and reports. Peters notes that "we are, it seems clear, talking to people who have no sense of the enormity of the crimes being committed daily against the innocent. None. None." Of particular interest in that regard is an excerpt from Kennedy's letter to Pope Benedict XVI:

I have been blessed to be part of a wonderful family and both of my parents, particularly my mother, kept our Catholic faith at the center of our lives. That gift of faith has sustained and nurtured and provides solace to me in the darkest hours. I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith I have tried to right my path. I want you to know Your Holiness that in my nearly 50 years of elective office I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor and open doors of economic opportunity. I have worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty and fought to end war.

"Those are the issues that have motivated me and have been the focus of my work as a United States senator. I also want you to know that even though I am ill, I am committed to do everything I can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. This has been the political cause of my life. I believe in a conscience protection for Catholics in the health field and I will continue to advocate for it as my colleagues in the Senate and I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone. I have always tried to be a faithful Catholic, Your Holiness, and though I have fallen short through human failings, I have never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings of my faith.

Even Ted, it appears, gushed on and on about Ted—to the Pope! And it also seems clear (to echo Peters) that he either lacked a sense of the enormity of the crimes being committed against the innocent, which is difficult to imagine, or he wasn't willing to admit them squarely. As a sinner, I fully understand how badly humans fail and how we as sinners find ways to justify or explain away our sins. But, also as a sinner, I simply don't understand how a man who long supported—consistently, ardently, proudly—abortion, contraceptives, "gay marriage", embryonic stell research, and the staggering growth and expansion of statism, could say he has "always tried to be a faithful Catholic."

Bishop Joseph Martino to resign?

Something big is apparently afoot, with the Diocese of Scranton holding a closed news conference on Monday. Philly.com reports:

Bishop Joseph Martino, head of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Scranton and one of the most fervent pro-life voices in the nation, is widely reported to be resigning next week after just six years in the office and long before traditional retirement age.

Martino, 62, who served as a priest and auxiliary bishop in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, has rarely appeared in public during his term in the 350,000-member Scranton diocese. Yet he has not shied from controversy, denouncing pro-choice politicians, theologically liberal academics, and Catholic teachers' unions.

The diocesan communications office declined yesterday to confirm reports by local media, the Catholic News Agency, and the National Catholic Reporter that Martino was stepping down and hinting at health problems.

Read the entire piece. More news at it becomes available.

The Scriptural Roots of St. Augustine's Spirituality

The Scriptural Roots of St. Augustine's Spirituality | Stephen N. Filippo | Ignatius Insight

Perhaps of all the Church Fathers, none shone so brightly as St. Augustine (351-430). Augustine's spirituality has deeply pervaded the Church right up to this very day. Two great Orders in the Church (just to cite a few), the Benedictines and the Franciscans took their spirituality directly from St. Augustine. St. Augustine's spirituality came into the Benedictine Order primarily through St. Anselm (1033-1109) and into the Franciscans primarily through St. Bonaventure (1221-1274). Both these men were in themselves, also great lights in the Church.

Of course, no discussion of Church giants can be complete without mentioning St. Thomas Aquinas, who is best described as 'following St. Augustine in Theology and Aristotle in Philosophy.' In sum, the Church gets her Dogmatic Theology primarily through St. Augustine. Since Spiritual Theology is based upon the correct Dogmatic Theology, it only makes sense that one of the Church's greatest Theologians, St. Augustine, is also responsible for a great deal of her Spiritual Theology.

And for St. Augustine, as it should be for all Catholics, this means a deep concentration and constant reflection on Sacred Scripture. The scriptural roots of St. Augustine's spirituality can be clearly seen by examining one of his greatest, yet lesser known works, De doctrina Christiana, literally "On Christian Doctrine," but actually "On how to read and interpret Sacred Scripture."

In De doctrina Christiana (henceforth "DDC"), St. Augustine lays the groundwork for a good, spiritual exegesis by elucidating on the virtue of charity, and all that means. Then, in order to begin the climb to spiritual perfection, he explains a scripturally based seven-step ladder. Lastly, he gives seven rules that are helpful in reading and understanding Sacred Scripture correctly.

Read the entire essay...

Health Care and the Common Good

Health Care and the Common Good | Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Denver | August 27, 2009

Last week a British Catholic journal, in an editorial titled "U.S. bishops must back Obama," claimed that America's bishops "have so far concentrated on a specifically Catholic issue—making sure state-funded health care does not include abortion—rather than the more general principle of the common good."

It went on to say that if U.S. Catholic leaders would get over their parochial preoccupations, "they could play a central role in salvaging Mr. Obama's health-care programme."

The editorial has value for several reasons. First, it proves once again that people don't need to actually live in the United States to have unhelpful and badly informed opinions about our domestic issues. Second, some of the same pious voices that once criticized U.S. Catholics for supporting a previous president now sound very much like acolytes of a new president. Third, abortion is not, and has never been, a "specifically Catholic issue," and the editors know it. And fourth, the growing misuse of Catholic "common ground" and "common good" language in the current health-care debate can only stem from one of two sources: ignorance or cynicism.

No system that allows or helps fund—no matter how subtly or indirectly—the killing of unborn children, or discrimination against the elderly and persons with special needs, can bill itself as "common ground." Doing so is a lie.

Read the entire column...

What is Sen. Ted Kennedy's "Catholic legacy"?

O God of spirits and all flesh, who have trampled death, broken the power of Satan, and have granted life to your world: grant rest, O Lord, to the soul of your departed servant, in a place of light, joy, and peace, where there is no pain, sorrow, or mourning. As a kind and gracious God, forgive every sin committed by him in word, deed, or thought, since there is no person who lives and does not sin. You alone are without sin, your justice is everlasting justice, and your word is the truth. For you are the resurrection, the life, and the repose of your departed servant, O Christ, our God, and we glorify You, together with your eternal Father, and your all-holy gracious, and life-giving Spirit, now and ever, and forever. Amen. — from the Byzantine Liturgy for the funeral of a layman

May God grant peace to Sen. Edward Kennedy. I do hope and pray he reconciled with the Church before his death. I have no interest in judging his or anyone else's soul, nor do I have any interest in combing through what is known (or allegedly known) about his personal life.

My interest is in his public, political legacy. Especially his Catholic Legacy, which is, for better or worse, bound up closely with his substantial political legacy. Especially after reading pieces such as this one, "Kennedy's legacy reflected the values of the Catholic Church", posted on the Indianapolis Star blog. The author, Robert King, assures readers of Kennedy's devout and serious Catholicism:

Kennedy, for everything he was, was Roman Catholic. And the values of the church -- concern for the poor, for the less fortunate -- were reflected in his public service. At the end of a life, the record he leaves behind is an honorable one.

The "Catholic Democrats" site goes even further, calling Kennedy "one of the most important Catholic political leaders in our country's history":

His irreplaceable brand of leadership in Congress and to the nation led to the passage of unprecedented landmark legislation that covered a broad range of social justice issues which reflected both Catholic Social Teaching and his deep personal faith.  He touched the lives of hundreds of millions of people, providing for their fundamental human needs, opening doors of opportunity, and helping create a more just society.

"Senator Kennedy's Catholicism was at the core of his identity," said Dr. Patrick Whelan, president of Catholic Democrats.  "The common thread that runs through everything he accomplished was his belief in building things for the benefit of others, particularly those most in need.  I believe this is the essence of being a good Catholic, and I think it's right at the heart of Senator Kennedy's entire legacy."

Well, there is no need to speak ill of the dead, but there is also no reason to avoid speaking honestly about his record. And there are, clearly, some serious issues with Kennedy's record when seen in the light of authentic, official Catholic social doctrine.

The most obvious is that of abortion, as most readers surely know. What some people might not know is that Kennedy did not always have a 100% rating with NARAL. Back in 1971 he wrote a letter to Catholic League member Tom Dennelly stating, "Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized. When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception."

By the late 1970s he, like many other Democrats, had completely changed his position. Part of his legacy, then, is a staunch support for "abortion rights," which included voting "No" on banning partial birth abortions and voting "No" on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion.

In addition, he supported embryonic stem research and he voted "No" onbanning human cloning. He was also a strong supporter of access to and funding for contraceptives.

Little mentioned, as far as I've seen, was Kennedy's support of "gay rights" and so-called "same-sex marriage." So much so that one homosexual writer described Kennedy as "a longtime champion of gay rights" and added, "Unlike other politicians, Kennedy never wavered in his support of gay marriage, voting against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and an anti-gay federal marriage amendment. DOMA was signed into law by President Bill Clinton."

Also not discussed much is Kennedy's consistent support of compulsory public education, constantly increasing funding for public schools, and the NEA. Massachusetts, the home state of seminal "American educationist" Horace Mann, has a history of being on the cutting edge of public school "reform", and Kennedy certainly fit well within that culture. Kennedy opposed vouchers, he opposed allowing schools to have voluntary prayer, and he opposed abstinence education. As one commentator (and Kennedy admirer) rightly observed, " Liberal in spirit, he served as conservator for public education, always recognizing it as the foundation of the U.S. educational system. ... Mr. Kennedy opposed school vouchers and anything that would draw funds away from the public education system. ... He opposed tax-free savings accounts of up to $2000 per child annually which would be used for public or private school tuition." Of course, Kennedy and his siblings attended private schools. It is the sort of progressive, paternalistic elitism found among so many political liberals, including President Obama, Hilary Clinton, and Co.

Which brings me to an excellent post on "The Corner" by Fr. Robert Sirico, who writes that Kennedy's death "marks the passing of a generation that thought that being Catholic, Democratic, and pro–New Deal were synonymous. We now live in an age where many Catholic Americans are very happy to be described as pro-market and are suspicious of New Deal–like solutions — as, of course, they are entitled to be in a way that they are not on, for example, life issues. Senator Kennedy had it exactly the wrong way around."

Kennedy, like his brothers, was a believer in statism, in the goodness of large government, in the benevolent wisdom of experts and bureaucrats, in the need for Mother State to not just guard her little tax-paying chicks, but to potentially guide and shape their every step, thought, and action. His public record does not indicate a strong understanding of Catholic social doctrine, nor a willingness to adhere to it. It simply does not mesh well with the Church's call to protect the unborn, the family, the principle of subsidiarity:

The starting point for a correct and constructive relationship between the family and society is the recognition of the subjectivity and the social priority of the family. Their intimate relationship requires that “society should never fail in its fundamental task of respecting and fostering the family”.[570] Society, and in particular State institutions, respecting the priority and “antecedence” of the family, is called to guarantee and foster the genuine identity of family life and to avoid and fight all that alters or wounds it. This requires political and legislative action to safeguard family values, from the promotion of intimacy and harmony within families to the respect for unborn life and to the effective freedom of choice in educating children. Therefore, neither society nor the State may absorb, substitute or reduce the social dimension of the family; rather, they must honour it, recognize it, respect it and promote it according to the principle of subsidiarity (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, par. 252).

Ted Kennedy should not be demonized, but neither should he be lionized as a politician whose public legacy reflects a serious and principled Catholicism. He undoubtedly had a complicated and often contentious relationship with the Church. But TIME magazine got it right (amazing, yes) in the title of its article about Kennedy's passing: "Ted Kennedy's Quiet Catholic Faith." Kennedy's public and political persona, which was large and loud and bold, was noticeably quiet when it came to Catholic beliefs about the unborn, contraceptives, bio-ethics, homosexuality, and other important issues. Jim Wallis, quoted in the TIME piece, said that Kennedy "was deeply conflicted on abortion, feeling kind of trapped by the liberal side, frankly." Fine. But we are also told, by other liberal admirers, that Kennedy was not the sort of man to back down; he was, after all, the Lion of the Senate.

Either way, the legacy is a troubling one: he was, in one reading, willing to sell (or at least lease) his faith for political porridge, or he really believed his private beliefs could be quarantined from his political actions (Mario Cuomo, anyone?). Perhaps both were the case. Unfortunately, the wheels of the Kennedy mythological manufacturing plant are already in motion, and it is already trying to rewrite the record and whitewash the legacy, coating it with a layer of Catholic blessings it simply doesn't deserve.

Requiescat in pace.

Sen. Ted Kennedy's right to a Catholic funeral

Dr. Ed Peters considers the canonical ins and outs of the matter:

Most of Teddy Kennedy's politics, and most of whatever parts of his personal life I knew through the media, angered and sometimes even disgusted me. But my opinions about Teddy's legacy are not at issue in assessing his right to a Catholic funeral under canon law. I trust that my writings on the proper understanding and correct application of 1983 CIC 1184 (the canon regulating the funeral rites to be accorded - - or not, as the case may be - - to Catholics) are reasonably well-known to readers of this blog.* So let's move directly to the canonical question of Kennedy's funeral.

Now, any man with a 100% rating from NARAL (to highlight just the tip of the iceberg of Teddy's decades-long campaign against natural rights) has, to put it mildly, the burden of proof in seeking a Catholic funeral (okay, technically, his executors have the burden of proof, but you see the point) in that notorious pro-aborts seem to be "manifest sinners who cannot be granted ecclesiastical funerals without public scandal of the faithful."

Unless, that is, "they gave some sign of repentance before death." And there is at least some evidence that Ted Kennedy did just that.

Read the entire post at "In the Light of the Law" site.

The Cardinal

The Cardinal | Rudolf Voderholzer | From Meet Henri de Lubac: His Life and Work

On September 16, 1991, the international weekly newsmagazine Time reported:

Cardinal Henri de Lubac, one of the top theologians among the French Jesuits, died at the age of 95 in Paris. De Lubac was prohibited from teaching from 1946 to 1954 after the publication of his book Surnaturel. [1] Rehabilitated in 1958, he took part in the [Second Vatican] Council at the request of John XXIII. His relations with Rome then became even more intensive during the reign of John Paul II, who, during a visit to Paris in 1980, interrupted a speech that he was giving when he saw the priest and said, "I bow my head to Father de Lubac."

In 1983, the Pope appointed the then eighty-seven-year-old theologian a cardinal in recognition of his services in the field of theology.  This honor, which Henri de Lubac dedicated to the Jesuit Order as a whole, was the last step in the rehabilitation of a man who for a time was suspected, even within the Church, of watering down the true faith with all sorts of "innovations" and who from 1950 to 1958—here the Time report is inaccurate—was dismissed from his teaching position on the basis of such suspicions and was forbidden to publish scholarly books on theology.

Henri de Lubac and Karol Wojtyla, who later became Pope, were already acquainted from the days of the Second Vatican Council and held one another in high esteem. They had worked together on that "Schema 13" which eventually became known as the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et spes [2] (Joy and Hope). Even more than by his direct collaboration on the conciliar texts, de Lubac influenced the Council through the voluminous theological studies that he published in the years leading up to the Council, through which he had contributed to a renewal of theology based on the sources, that is, Sacred Scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers. Essential preliminary work for both the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen gentium, and the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Del Verbum, which are the most important theological documents of the Council, was done in the writings of Henri de Lubac.

For his part, Henri de Lubac recognized, in his encounters with the learned Archbishop of Krakow, that he was dealing with an extraordinary individual. The two became friends and corresponded. De Lubac wrote a foreword to the French translation of Wojtyla's book Love and Responsibility, while Wojtyla commissioned a Polish translation of de Lubac's essay Églises particulières et Église universelle [Motherhood of the Churches]. In 1970 and 1971, Wojtyla invited de Lubac to Poland. Only de Lubac's illness kept him from carrying out his travel plans. De Lubac recalled that in familiar conversations he had repeatedly made the assertion: "After Paul VI, Wojtyla is my candidate."

Continue reading...

The ABC's: Aquinas, Books, Catholic identity

The Ventura County Star newspaper has a feature piece (Aug. 24, 2009) on Thomas Aquinas College:

Thomas Aquinas College is not your typical modern university. Students read the classics, not textbooks. Girls must wear skirts or dresses to class. There’s a curfew of 11 on school nights.

Yet the conservative Catholic college, nestled in the hills of Santa Paula, is attracting national attention for its small classes, generous financial aid and strong academics. U.S. News & World Report this month ranked it among the nation’s top 100 liberal arts colleges.

Now, as students return to class this week, Thomas Aquinas is at a turning point, choosing only its third president since it was founded in 1971.

Thomas Aquinas stands out among Catholic colleges because Catholicism plays such a major role in its identity and curriculum, said Richard Yanikoski, president of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities.

“They see themselves as building on a very evangelical notion of Catholicism, much more like the smaller Protestant evangelical colleges,” Yanikoski said. “From the faith perspective, they are perfectly forthright about their Catholic identity. They have built an insular culture, saying, ‘We are an island in a world that is going another direction, and our curriculum is a match to that.’ ”

What was it that G.K. Chesterton once wrote? Ah, here it is: "A dead thing goes with the stream. Only a living thing can go against it." Why, I wonder, does the president of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities have against a Catholic school being Catholic? Does Derek Jeter apologize for being a Yankee? Does Oprah Winfrey downplay her identity as an influential television program host? Do we chastise geese for being part of gaggle instead of joining a herd of horses or a mob of deer?

Still, Yanikoski, while not criticizing the curriculum, sees some limitations to it.

“They are teaching a Euro-centric Catholic church in the context of a Euro-centric Great Books curriculum, at the same time that the church is moving inexorably away from the Euro-centric model,” he said. “A person could make the argument that Thomas Aquinas is preparing students for the past.”

Sure, a person—say, a lesbian Marxist or a French vegan deconstructionist—could make that argument, but I hope that person wouldn't be the president of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities. What was it, after all, that George Santayana once noted? Oh, here it is: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Of course, you would only know of that quote if you were stuck in the Euro-centric past. Granted, it takes less work to read books of the future, as they have yet to be written. But if you are keen on books that have already been written, you are going to have to look to the past. Even Oprah knows that.

A bishop publicly criticizing another bishop? By name?

Yes, and with specifics. In fact, Bishop Thomas J. Tobin even used the "d" word in reflecting on the life and memoirs of a certain Archbishop Rembert Weakland:

It strikes me that critics of Archbishop Weakland should be at least a little restrained in their umbrage, for after all there are many redeeming qualities of the Archbishop’s life and ministry. He responded willingly to the Lord’s call to the consecrated life; he has served the Church generously in a variety of difficult leadership positions; he has shown a determined commitment to the progress of the Church and the implementation of the Second Vatican Council; and he has consistently reached-out to the poor, the weak and the disenfranchised members of the Church and society. If his service has been marred by human imperfections, so be it. So is mine, and so is yours.

On the other hand, supporters of Archbishop Weakland should also be able to recognize the self-serving inconsistencies and contradictions contained in his story.

For example, although the Archbishop always took pride in his liberal theological tendencies and his public pronouncements on controversial issues, he seemed to be genuinely puzzled, even hurt, when others labeled him a dissident.

He passionately promoted the dignity of the laity and their role in the governance and ministry of the Church, but had little hesitation about quietly using their money to cover-up his egregious sexual offense.

He disparaged the secrecy of the Holy See but for twenty years hid his own indiscretions behind the walls of the chancery, indiscretions that were not just a matter of personal behavior but also profoundly affected the reputation and welfare of the Church.

He railed against what he considered the authoritarian pontificate of Pope John Paul II, but clearly used his own persona and authority to impose his vision of the Church upon his own fiefdom in Milwaukee, easily dismissing those who opposed him as conservative, right-wing nuts.

In short, like many dissidents in the Church, throughout his life Archbishop Weakland benefited generously from the support of the institutional Church, but never hesitated to criticize the Church whenever it served his own purposes to do so.

Read the entire August 27, 2009, column, "Archbishop Weakland’s Perplexing Pilgrimage." Big hat tip to Jack Smith of The Catholic Key blog.

The Life of Mother Benedict Duss

The Life of Mother Benedict Duss | Preface to Mother Benedict (Mother Benedict Duss, O.S.B.): Foundress of the Abbey of Regina Laudis | Antoinette Bosco

I had the privilege of interviewing Mother Benedict Duss over a period of several years before her death on October 2, 2005, learning her story so that one day it could be told and preserved. This book would never have come about if she had not been told by her Bishop to write her autobiography and the story of the founding and development of the Abbey of Regina Laudis. I can say that, but for her obedience to the Bishop, the book would not have been written. For as I came to know the Lady Abbess (her official title), I found she was a truly private woman, not given to talking about herself and essentially reserved.

In the hundreds of hours I spent with Mother Benedict, it became my privilege to get to know this remarkable woman, who was never pretentious, pious, false or unresponsive to someone in need. If there is one quality that characterized her, it was her availability to the members of the Community. She explained that as Abbess, "you have to turn all your energy toward fulfilling the expectations of each woman who has entered. It is sometimes very difficult, but for the fertility of the life, you always have to give more of your personal substance than you are really willing to do. That is also true for the nuns here. But as the head of the Community, I have to be available all the time. People have a right to barge in, and I must be able to respond to a problem they cannot postpone. Yet, while I listen with empathy and concern for their individual problem, I must pray for the gift of discernment because always, at all times, I have to be primarily concerned with and open to the needs of the Community."

It was her complete focus on her responsibilities to the Community that made it difficult for Mother Benedict to offer what I once called "a personal profile" of herself to me, an interviewer. She did not like to turn a mirror on self-not ever. She lived the contemplative life, believing that "when the time comes to find out what you are to do, you'll be told." And she was given her marching orders to follow fifty years ago--a call from the Lord to found a Benedictine Community for women in Bethlehem, Connecti- cut! I asked her once to look back at these past fifty years and tell me how she felt now about all she had accomplished. She looked at me and, in her matter-of-fact, quiet way, answered directly, and perhaps almost a bit impatiently, "I didn't do it." This is a woman who doesn't change her story!

Continue reading...

Priest as Pastor, Servant and Shepherd

Priest as Pastor, Servant and Shepherd | Fr. James McCarthy, Archdiocese of Sydney | Ignatius Insight

The Easter season is a time for celebrating the Resurrection of Christ

Additionally in many places in the Catholic world, the Easter Season is the time when celebrations of Ordinations often occur. In fact, on the fourth Sunday of Easter, on May 3, 2009, the Holy Father ordained nineteen men as priests for the Diocese of Rome. Three days earlier, on Thursday, April 30th, in Sydney, Australia, Archbishop of Sydney Cardinal George Pell ordained four men to the Priesthood of Jesus Christ, the largest Ordination for Sydney since 1988.



This was particularly significant for me as I returned home to Sydney from Rome, where I am currently studying, to be ordained as one of the four. The Ordination was a magnificent celebration of the presence of the Catholic Church in Australia, with over 3,000 in attendance at Sydney's St Mary's Cathedral. As a 27-year-old recently ordained priest, I am greatly consoled by the fact that throughout the world, the number of men ordained every year is continuing to rise, as is the number of men who are entering seminaries.

The priesthood is a unique vocation, and it is unlike any career or profession. When I answered the call to enter into formation for the priesthood, I was studying History and Politics at the University of Sydney. It was in the context of a secular public university that I heard the call to serve God, the Church and our world as a priest.

Read the entire essay...

An "icon" who grew sideways, then disappeared

It's a few years old, but here is my Quote of the Week about Pop Culture—more specifically, about the late Michael Jackson:

Singers, groups or lead performers are nor constrained by musical standards. But they are constrained by their totemic role. They must be young, sexually attractive, and with the plaintive voice of youthful desire—like the girly group called All Saints. Of course, popular musicians have always been idolised, as were Frank Sinatra, Bing Crosby, and Cliff Richard. But those old-style icons grew up in time, passed over from adolescence to adulthood, became mellow, avuncular and religious. The modern pop star does not grow up. He grows sideways, like Mick Jagger or Michael Jackson, becoming waxy and encrusted as though covered by a much-repainted mask. Such spectral creatures haunt for a while the halls of fame, trailing behind them the ghosts of their vanished fans. And then, overnight, they disappear."  — From "Yoofanasia," in Modern Culture (Continuum, 2005), by Roger Scruton.

Somewhat prophetic, I suppose. When I heard of Jackson's death back in late June (yes, this post is a couple months late), I was momentarily surprised. But why? Frankly, I'm nearly as surprised, in hindsight, that he lived until the age of fifty. There was something so desperate and sad about the man, who seemed to live solely for the adulation he had enjoyed as a "global pop icon." Again and again, ad nauseum, we are told that Jackson was an "icon." In considering why that is so, contemplate the heart of the legacy:

Bishop John M. D'Arcy responds to "America" editors...

... in the pages of America (August 31, 2009, edition):

As summer plays itself out on the beautiful campus by the lake where the young Holy Cross priest, Edward Sorin, C.S.C., pitched his camp 177 years ago and began his great adventure, we must clarify the situation that so sundered the church last spring: What it is all about and what it is not about.

It is not about President Obama. He will do some good things as president and other things with which, as Catholics, we will strongly disagree. It is ever so among presidents, and most political leaders.

It is not about Democrats versus Republicans, nor was it a replay of the recent general election.

It is not about whether it is appropriate for the president of the United States to speak at Notre Dame or any great Catholic university on the pressing issues of the day. This is what universities do. No bishop should try to prevent that.

The response, so intense and widespread, is not about what this journal called “sectarian Catholicism.” Rather, the response of the faithful derives directly from the Gospel. In Matthew’s words, “Your light must shine before others, that they may see your good works, and glorify your heavenly Father” (5:13).

Public Witness

Does a Catholic university have the responsibility to give witness to the Catholic faith and to the consequences of that faith by its actions and decisions—especially by a decision to confer its highest honor? If not, what is the meaning of a life of faith? And how can a Catholic institution expect its students to live by faith in the difficult decisions that will confront them in a culture often opposed to the Gospel?

Read the entire essay.

What was that about "bearing false witness"?

FactCheck.org takes on the question, "Abortion: Which Side Is Fabricating?":

Will health care legislation mean "government funding of abortion"?

President Obama said Wednesday that’s "not true" and among several "fabrications" being spread by "people who are bearing false witness." But abortion foes say it’s the president who’s making a false claim. "President Obama today brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component" of health care legislation, said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee. So which side is right?

The truth is that bills now before Congress don’t require federal money to be used for supporting abortion coverage. So the president is right to that limited extent. But it’s equally true that House and Senate legislation would allow a new "public" insurance plan to cover abortions, despite language added to the House bill that technically forbids using public funds to pay for them. Obama has said in the past that "reproductive services" would be covered by his public plan, so it’s likely that any new federal insurance plan would cover abortion unless Congress expressly prohibits that. Low- and moderate-income persons who would choose the "public plan" would qualify for federal subsidies to purchase it. Private plans that cover abortion also could be purchased with the help of federal subsidies. Therefore, we judge that the president goes too far when he calls the statements that government would be funding abortions "fabrications."

Read the entire analysis.

In somewhat related news, Richard McBrien's most recent regurgitation of someone else's article (in this case, an essay by E. J. Dionne), includes the claim "that the Pope's new encyclical shows that President Obama is in accord with most of Catholic social teaching. Indeed, Barack Obama is more in accord with that teaching and with the substantial message of Caritas in Veritate than the many politically conservative Catholics who berated the University of Notre Dame and its president, Holy Cross Father John Jenkins, for inviting Obama to deliver this year's graduation address and receive an honorary degree."

That statement, it should be noted, came a few sentences after this: "This is not to say that President Obama and Pope Benedict XVI are in full agreement on all moral issues, such as abortion, contraception, or embryonic stem-cell research."

In other words, the President's positions on sexuality, conception, abortion, embryonic stem-cells, and related bio-ethical issues aren't compatible with Catholic teaching, but (and here I quote McBrien quoting Dionne) the President and the Pope have a "shared approach to a quest for peace in the Middle East, and the opening of a dialogue with Islam."

Ah ha! Why, if only President Bush would have pursued peace in the Middle East and dialogue with Islam, he, too, might have been in accord with Catholic teaching! Yep, if only...

Benedict and Bonaventure

Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican, has written a helpful essay for ZENIT about Benedict XVI's deep and abiding love for St. Bonaventure, whose understanding of divine revelation and salvation history was the focus of then-Fr. Ratzinger's Habilitationsschrift in the mid 1950s. "In two weeks, on Sept. 6," Moynihan notes, "the Pope will go out of Rome to visit Bagnoreggio and Viterbo. ... Why stop in such a little, seemingly unimportant town? Because St. Bonaventure was born there in 1217.":

Ratzinger received his degree on Feb. 21, 1957, at nearly 30 years of age, but not without controversy.

The academic committee judging his work actually rejected the "critical" part of his thesis, so he was obliged to cut and edit it, and present the "historical" part only, centered on the analysis of the relation between St. Bonaventure and Joachim of Flora.

Ratzinger's professor, Michael Schmaus, thought Ratzinger's interpretation of Bonaventure's concept of revelation showed "a dangerous modernism that had to lead to the subjectivization of the concept of revelation," as Ratzinger himself recalls in his autobiography, Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977. (Ratzinger felt, and still feels, that Schmaus's criticisms were not valid.)

What was it that Ratzinger found in Bonaventure that aroused such controversy?

For Ratzinger, Bonaventure's concept of revelation did not mean what it does for us today, that is, "all the revealed contents of the faith."

In Ratzinger's view, for Bonaventure, "revelation" always connoted the idea of action -- that is, revelation means the act by which God reveals himself, and not simply the result of this act.

Why is this important?

Ratzinger wrote in Milestones: "Because this is so, the concept of 'revelation' always implies a receiving subject: where there is no one to perceive 'revelation,' no re-vel-ation has occurred, because no veil has been removed. By definition, revelation requires a someone who apprehends it."

And why does this matter?

"These insights," Ratzinger continued, "gained through my reading of Bonaventure, were later on very important for me at the time of the conciliar discussion on revelation, Scripture, and tradition. Because, if Bonaventure is right, then revelation precedes Scripture and becomes deposited in Scripture but is not simply identical with it. This in turn means that revelation is always something greater than what is merely written down. And this again means that there can be no such thing as pure sola scriptura ["by Scripture alone"], because an essential element of Scripture is the Church as understanding subject, and with this the fundamental sense of tradition is already given."

Read the entire piece.

The full account of Fr. Ratzinger's difficulty with the Habilitationsschrift (or habilitation) is found in chapter 8 of Milestones (pp. 103-114). The thesis is titled Theology of History in Bonaventure, and is also available from Ignatius Press. Fr. Maximilian Heinrich Heim, in Joseph Ratzinger: Life in the Church and Living Theology (Ignatius Press, 2007), discusses the significance of Ratzinger's research and thesis in his subsequent writings on ecclesiology and other theological matters in his biographical sketch of Ratzinger (pp. 160-63).

• Ratzinger's Faith and Reason | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.
• Benedict XVI's Theological Vision: An Introduction | Monsignor Joseph Murphy | From the introduction to Christ, Our Joy: The Theological Vision of Pope Benedict XVI
• Pope Benedict XVI, Theologian of Joy | Monsignor Joseph Murphy | An interview with the author of Christ, Our Joy: The Theological Vision of Pope Benedict XVI
• Spe Salvi and Vatican II | Brian A. Graebe
• Vatican II and the Ecclesiology of Joseph Ratzinger | Maximilian Heinrich Heim | Introduction to Joseph Ratzinger: Life in the Church and Living Theology.
• The Courage To Be Imperfect | Fr. D. Vincent Twomey, S.V.D. | The Introduction to Pope Benedict XVI: The Conscience of Our Age
• The Theological Genius of Joseph Ratzinger | An Interview with Fr. D. Vincent Twomey, S.V.D.

Oh, this is soooooo rich

From The Bourgeois Globe (aka, The Boston Globe):

A prominent priest whose support for women’s ordination has him in trouble with the Catholic Church ratcheted up his confrontation with the hierarchy yesterday, calling the church’s refusal to ordain women a “scandal’’ and “spiritual violence.’’

“I will not be silenced on this issue,’’ said the priest, the Rev. Roy Bourgeois, to about 100 people in Weston at an event hosted by the congregation of Jean Marchant, a former staffer for the Archdiocese of Boston who claims she was ordained as a priest in an unsanctioned ceremony four years ago.

<snip>
“What’s going on in our church today is spiritual assassination, it’s spiritual violence being done that’s inexcusable. That is a scandal,’’ he said.

<snip>

In an interview yesterday, Bourgeois, 70, a Louisiana native, said he has stopped wearing a clerical collar and celebrating the Eucharist and other sacraments out of respect for the church’s view that he has been excommunicated.

Let's see if I understand this correctly: Roy claims the Church is causing "scandal", accuses her of "spiritual violence", further accuses her of "spiritual assassination" and "spiritual violence"—but then says he is not wearing his Roman collar out of respect for the Church's view that he is excommunicated?

Out of respect?! Respect? What does this man know about respect? Or logic? Or Church teaching?

And he's not alone:

Roberta Robinson, 60, of West Roxbury, said she now worships at an “ecumenical Catholic congregation’’ - a group not recognized by Rome - and that she came to the event “to support the movement.’’

She said she believes the Catholic Church will change its position on women’s ordination, saying, “it has to, or it will fall.’’

Ah, it has to! If you say so! [Fumbling and bumbling and frightened conversations as the Church quickly changes its position on women's ordination, with cardinals and the Pope whispering in quavering voices, "Hurry! Roberta Robinson said we must! Hurry, Holy Father, hurry! We only have 24 hours before the Church falls unless you ordain a priestette!"]

Well, dear Roberta, if the "powers of death shall not prevail" against the Church, as the Lord promised, than I'll go out on a limb and guess that the powers of dissent, discord, cognitive dissonance, and theological distortion also will not prevail. Of course, I'm only basing that on the words of Jesus, the Tradition of the Church, and the teachings of the Magisterium.

And you have ... Roy. Hmmmmm....

Looking for a way to say, "Thank you!" to your pastor?

Here's an idea from Ignatius Press: