Annulment Nation; Marriage in the United States

.
The United States, with 6 percent of the world’s Catholics, accounts for 60 percent of the Church’s annulments

I've never seen the Church's laws pertaining to marriage listed anywhere as being a primary reason for Catholics leaving their Church. But I believe that to be the case.

My statement is based not on evidence, but just a common sense understanding of what it is to be a human being. Catholics get divorced at about the same rate as protestants. Given the horrible state of catechesis in the Church these past 50 years, it seems unrealistic that Catholics would have refrained from re-marriage during the era of sex, drugs and rock 'n roll.

Therefore, if a Catholic couple gets divorced and they don't know about the possibility of an annulment, or can't get one, it seems highly unlikely that most of them they would stay celibate the remainder of lives. So it seems highly likely that they would join another church if they retained a belief in God, one that provides "spiritual, if not Catholic, sustenance for them.

This is an interesting article from the always interesting print publication, Catholic World Report, on "Catholic Divorce", as annulments are often called. Only a very few of CWR's articles appear on the internet. This is one of them from the March 2011 issue.

Apart from the papacy, few doctrines divide the Catholic Church from non-Catholic ecclesial communities as does the doctrine of the indissolubility of a consummated Christian marriage. Eastern Orthodox Christians are permitted three marriages; King Henry VIII’s desire to remarry helped lead to the formation of the Anglican Communion. Martin Luther permitted divorce in the cases of adultery, desertion, failure to fulfill conjugal duties, and “where husband and wife cannot get along together.”

The Catholic Church holds that the teaching of Jesus Christ is clear: husband and wife “are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.… Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery” (Mark 10:8-12).

Thus, in 1563, the Council of Trent decreed that

if anyone shall say that the Church has erred in having taught, and in teaching that, according to the teaching of the Gospel and the Apostles, the bond of matrimony cannot be dissolved, and that neither party—not even the innocent, who has given no cause by adultery—can contract another marriage while the other lives, and that he, or she, commits adultery who puts away an adulterous wife, or husband, and marries another; let him be anathema.

In our own time, Pope John Paul II taught that “it is a fundamental duty of the Church to reaffirm strongly…the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage” (Familiaris Consortio, 1981). He affirmed the discipline of “not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried,” adding that

reconciliation in the sacrament of penance, which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.

Declarations of nullity

While most New Testament passages on marriage make no exception for divorce, our Lord says in St. Matthew’s Gospel that “whoever divorces his wife, except for porneia (unchastity), and marries another, commits adultery.” Catholic exegetes have debated the meaning of porneia for centuries, with the Navarre Bible explaining that “it is almost certain that the phrase refers to unions accepted as marriage among some pagan peoples, but prohibited as incestuous in the Mosaic Law and in rabbinical tradition. The reference, then, is to unions radically invalid because of some impediment.… They had never in fact been joined in true marriage.”

This explanation speaks to the development of the annulment, the declaration by Church authorities that a putative marriage never truly existed because of reasons such as consanguinity or lack of consent. In the West, popes and bishops were declaring marriages invalid in the early Middle Ages, with Pope St. Gregory VII beginning to systematize ecclesiastical court procedures in the 11th century.

Over the centuries, the Church’s discipline in this matter changed several times. In 1741, Pope Benedict XIV, concerned about the ease with which annulments were granted in his day, mandated that the declaration of nullity be appealed to another court, and created the office of the defender of the bond, whose function in ecclesiastical trials is to argue for the validity of the disputed marriage.

In 1970, the bishops of the United States obtained permission from the Holy See to modify canonical procedures in the adjudication of marriage cases. One judge, and not three, could render a decision, and cases could be heard in the diocese of the person seeking the annulment; in addition, appeal of a declaration of nullity to another court became discretionary rather than obligatory. The latter provision lapsed with the promulgation of the new Code of Canon Law in 1983, which expanded the grounds of invalid consent: “they are incapable of contracting marriage…who are not capable of assuming the essential obligations of matrimony due to causes of a psychic nature” (canon 1095).

Partly for these reasons, the number of annulments granted annually in the United States soared from 338 in 1968, to 28,918 in 1974, to a peak of 63,933 in 1991. By 2004 the number had fallen to 46,330, and it fell even further, to 35,009, in 2007—a remarkable decline of 24 percent in three years.

US statistics

Despite this decline, the United States, with 5.9 percent of the world’s Catholics, still accounts for 60 percent of the Church’s 58,322 declarations of nullity (2007 statistics in the Vatican Secretariat of State’s Statistical Yearbook of the Church). Of the 35,009 declarations of nullity granted in the US, 79 percent were granted through the ordinary process, while 21 percent were granted through the documentary process.

The documentary (administrative) process is used for relatively black-and-white cases, such as those involving defect of form (which occurs when a Catholic is married outside the Church), consanguinity, marriage below the legal age, marriage to a person validly married to another, marriage (under certain circumstances) to one’s abductor or the murderer of one’s spouse, or marriage to clerics or religious not dispensed from their vows. Of the 7,355 declarations of nullity granted in the US by the documentary process, 74 percent were granted for reasons of defect of form.

The ordinary process, on the other hand, entails a trial that determines whether a valid marriage took place. Questions over the validity of consent and over perpetual and antecedent impotence are adjudicated in the ordinary process. On occasion, disputes over defect of form and other impediments to marriage are dealt with in the ordinary process. Of the 27,654 declarations of nullity granted in the US by the ordinary process, 99.6 percent were granted for reasons of defect of consent—the most oft-criticized grounds for annulment.

In the US, 6 percent of ordinary-process cases are renounced by those seeking an annulment, while an additional 6 percent are abated because the parties failed to follow through with the procedural acts necessary for a trial to take place. Of the remaining 88 percent of cases in which sentences are given, 96 percent of sentences are in favor of nullity.

Sentences in favor of nullity are automatically appealed to a court of second instance in another diocese. One percent of these cases are renounced or abated, 69 percent are confirmed by decree, and 30 percent proceed to an additional trial. In this final category, 98 percent are eventually ruled null.

Worldwide statistics

The United States leads the world in declarations of nullity (with 35,009 in 2007) by a very large margin; the country with the next highest annulment rate—Italy—had only 2,625 that same year. Brazil, Poland, Canada, Mexico, Spain, India, South Korea, Germany, Australia, Colombia, France, Ukraine, and Great Britain round out the world’s top 15 nations for annulments. These 15 countries account for 91 percent of declarations of nullity. On the other hand, Africa, which has 14 percent of the world’s Catholics, accounts for a mere 0.9 percent of the Church’s declarations of nullity.

An analysis of international annulment statistics reveals some similarities and some differences between the United States and the rest of the world. Of the 23,313 declarations of nullity granted outside the United States, 94 percent were granted through the ordinary process, while only 6 percent were granted through the documentary process; in the latter category, 57 percent were granted for reasons of defect of form. Since the United States accounts for 87 percent of annulments worldwide granted for defect of form, the US has a relatively high percentage of Catholics who took part in a civil marriage outside the Church and who now wish to get married within the Church.

Of the 21,879 declarations of nullity granted outside the United States by the ordinary process, 98.2 percent were granted for reasons of defect of consent. However, in 140 nations and territories, there was not a single declaration of nullity for reasons of defect of consent in 2007. Thirty-nine of these nations and territories are in Africa, 32 are in Asia, and 17 are in Europe. An additional 37 nations worldwide granted between one and a dozen declarations of nullity on defect-of-consent grounds.

There is a deep chasm between the United States and the rest of the world in the quantity of annulments granted; there is a similarly deep chasm between those nations that are relatively willing to grant annulments for reasons of defect of consent and those that are not. Twenty-eight nations grant more than 100 defect-of-consent annulments each year. From 2005 to 2007, the nations and territories with the highest ratio of defect-of-consent annulments to Catholics were Denmark, the United States, the Cook Islands, Norway, Japan, Tonga, South Korea, Thailand, Lebanon, Sweden, Samoa, and Finland.

Outside the US, 9.5 percent of first-instance ordinary process cases are renounced by those seeking an annulment, while an additional 7.5 percent are abated because the parties failed to follow through with the necessary procedural acts. Of the remaining 83 percent of cases in which sentences are given, 89.8 percent of sentences are granted in favor of nullity—a bit lower, but not much, than the 96 percent rate in the US.

Of all the nations of the world in which such trials take place, only in Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Malawi, Uganda, and Vietnam do 50 percent or more of cases result in rulings against nullity. Most of the world’s nations with high numbers of annulments decide 93-97 percent of sentences in favor of nullity, with Canada (at 99.5 percent) and Australia (at 98 percent) having particularly high affirmative sentence rates and Germany (at 82 percent) and Poland (at 79.5 percent) relatively low ones.

Outside the United States, almost 3 percent of second-instance cases are renounced or abated, 69.5 percent are confirmed by decree, and nearly 28 percent proceed to an additional trial, at which 87 percent of sentences are in favor of nullity. This rate is lower than the United States’ 98 percent rate, largely because of statistics from Europe, where only 65 percent of second-instance trials end with a sentence in favor of nullity.

Why the disparity?

Several factors contribute to the high number of annulments granted in the United States relative to other nations, according to several sources well-acquainted with the annulment process.

“Tribunals can be expensive to run and canonists are expensive to educate,” says Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix, who himself holds a doctorate in canon law. “Therefore, I would imagine that in some countries where the resources are few, and the availability for training is minimal, there is likely to be little opportunity for a Catholic to process an annulment petition.”

Bishop Daniel Conlon of Steubenville, who also holds a doctorate in canon law, agrees. “The Church in developed countries—the US in particular—has been able and willing to educate large numbers of canonists, especially priests, and operate sophisticated tribunal offices,” he says. “Churches in less developed nations generally cannot afford the money or personnel or both. I have seen firsthand how this lack is an injustice to the Catholic faithful in these places. The popes have consistently urged the ‘richer’ churches to share their canonical resources with their poorer sisters.”

The traditional law-abiding nature of Americans may also contribute to the magnitude of annulments. “We have a tendency in this country to follow the law and to abide by it,” says Bishop Olmsted. “So if the Church has a legal process for annulments, Americans will usually enter into those legal procedures.”

Father Andres Ligot, judicial vicar of the Diocese of San Jose, California, believes the early identification of cases unlikely to result in a nullity verdict may also contribute to the US’ high number of annulments.

“We are able to inform the applicants right away if sufficient grounds do not seem to be present,” says Father Ligot. “When that is the situation, applicants often choose not to pursue the process, which is time-consuming and emotionally difficult for them. Thus, weaker cases are frequently not pursued, and the result can be a higher percentage of cases that result in nullity.”

The relative immaturity of Americans at the time they make their marriage vows, combined with the collapse of catechesis, may also play a role.

“Part of the problem would seem to be due to the tremendous immaturity of many of our American young people,” says Dr. Timothy O’Donnell, president of Christendom College and a consultor to the Pontifical Council for the Family. “Today we seem to have the most prolonged period of adolescence in all of human history. It also would seem that there has been a real failure in catechesis in this area. This is one of the reasons Pope Benedict XVI has called upon the Pontifical Council for the Family to come up with some basic guidelines and norms to provide proper catechesis, beginning at a very early age, for all those who want to enter into the married state.”

Asked why US tribunals grant a higher percentage of decisions in favor of nullity than some other Western nations, Bishop Conlon says that “although the canonical process is identical throughout the world, there can be variations in the care with which the parish priests or other advocates assist petitioners with their cases, in the manner with which tribunals accept cases for trial, and in the cultural issues that impinge on the validity of marriage.”

Bishop Olmsted agrees that “there is probably a cultural difference as well in how the laws and the grounds for nullity are applied to marriage cases involving people in their respective countries.” He adds:

I think that the US situation has been unique in that there have not been the same kinds of challenges internally in the United States that have galvanized other European and non-European nations. Put another way, as the conflicts and tragedies within a culture can tend to strengthen marital relationships as families struggle for survival and friendship, other societies like the United States have enjoyed much more freedom and much less unrest internally, which has led to some extent to a kind of laziness about marriage commitments and a kind of boredom with traditional marriage, prompting Americans to lose sight of the crucial impact and importance of committed and loving marriages.

Bishop Conlon suspects that the recent decline in the numbers of declarations of nullity in the US “has to do with the continuing decline in the acceptance and practice of the faith by American Catholics. Catholics who do not practice the faith are not likely to see the need to seek a declaration of nullity in order to enter a valid marriage.” Father Ligot concurs: “Unfortunately, in today’s world some may have less sensitive consciences and not seek to have a marriage tribunal investigate issues that might leave them free to remarry in the Church.”

The decline in marriage may also play a part in the recent decline in the number of annulments in the United States. Amy Strickland, a canonist who has worked for the metropolitan tribunal of the Archdiocese of Boston, attributes the recent decline in annulments “in large part to the declining number of persons in the United States choosing to wed.” “Fewer Americans might be seeking annulments because fewer care about Catholic marriage,” adds Bai McFarlane, who founded Mary’s Advocates, a non-profit educational organization that upholds marriage and assists spouses seeking defend their marriages against petitions for annulment.

Bishop Olmsted adds that Dignitas Connubii, a 2005 Vatican instruction on marriage nullity trials, offered “the opportunity to reassert the seriousness of the nullity trial and the expectations of the law that the decision regarding the validity or invalidity of a marital bond is arrived at with moral certitude and in accord with procedural norms that cannot be ignored or dismissed as unimportant or unnecessary.”

The sexual abuse scandal may also have contributed to the decline in the number of Americans seeking annulments.

“In the years since 2002, there is a growing ‘anti-establishment’ mentality among many Catholics as a result of the sexual abuse scandal,” says Strickland. “Therefore, they do not feel the need to subject themselves to the authority of the Church when it comes to the decision to have a second wedding.”

Jan Leary, who founded Save Our Sacrament in 1997 to help spouses defend the validity of their marriages in ecclesiastical tribunals, believes that fewer Catholics are seeking declarations of nullity because “Catholics are finally opening their eyes to the hypocrisy in the Church, first via the clergy sex scandal and now—at least the individuals I talk to—seeing how hurtful the annulment process is to everyone, but especially the children.”

The annulment scandal

In their annual addresses to the Roman Rota, Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have offered blunt criticism of the large number of annulments granted worldwide, particularly on the grounds of defect of consent.

“For the canonist the principle must remain clear that only incapacity and not difficulty in giving consent and in realizing a true community of life and love invalidates a marriage,” said Pope John Paul in 1987. “Only the most severe forms of psychopathology impair substantially the freedom of the individual,” he said the following year, as he called upon defenders of the bond to prevent “tensions and difficulties, inevitably involved in the choice and achievement of the ideals of marriage, from being confused with the signs of a serious pathology.”

In 2009, Pope Benedict, quoting Pope John Paul, spoke of the “urgent need” of “preserving the ecclesial community from the scandal of seeing the value of Christian marriage being destroyed in practice by the exaggerated and almost automatic multiplication of declarations of nullity, in cases of the failure of marriage, on the pretext of some immaturity or psychic weakness on the part of the contracting parties.”

“We concur with those statements by both popes,” says Leary. “The current statistics on annulments mandated by US tribunals are truly a scandal, and I have appreciated the popes making these statements…Save Our Sacrament receives many, many requests for help from mostly women respondents. Many of these respondents are good, upstanding Catholics who have three or more grown children, and whose husbands are simply going through midlife crises and want an easy way to remarry in the Roman Catholic Church, which is, more often than not, granted.”

“Scandal is an attitude or behavior that leads others to do evil,” says MacFarlane, whose husband left her and pursued a civil divorce without her consent. “Tribunal judges give scandal to the general public, priests, and dissatisfied spouses.… Exaggerated multiplication of annulments is diocesan-sanctioned cooperation with the evil of no-fault divorce.”

“When tribunals require civil divorce, and then issue nearly automatic annulments, the public concludes the Church has no objection whatsoever to divorce,” MacFarlane adds. “Dissatisfied spouses are scandalized by the prevalent annulment mentality of local tribunals. Therefore, they choose divorce rather than persevering through difficult times.… Priests and deacons are scandalized if they are taught by their local tribunal staff that any spouse who feels his or her marriage has ‘failed’ has a right to an annulment on the basis of immaturity or psychic weakness. These priests will erroneously counsel a dissatisfied spouse to get divorced, which results in the mutilation of an intact family.”

“I do not believe that either Venerable John Paul II or His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI was pointing his critiques at the United States specifically,” Strickland says. “Instead, I believe that both pontiffs were addressing those disreputable canonists around the world who will proudly assert that they can find grounds to annul any marriage.”

Bishop Olmsted, on the other hand, believes that “it is very likely that both John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have in mind the United States when making these kinds of comments, particularly in light of the busy activity of American tribunals and also the influence of the American Catholic Church in the last few decades in the English-speaking world.… The popes have been vigilant in their duty to remind bishops and canonists that there is no such thing as an ‘automatic’ annulment. Moreover, the popes have recently reminded us of the immense harm that is done when seemingly all annulments are granted affirmative decisions.”

The Apostolic Signatura—the Church’s highest court, now headed by American Cardinal Raymond Burke—plays a role in bridging the gap between papal exhortations and the work of individual dioceses. “Each year the Signatura receives a report from every diocesan tribunal, reviews it, and offers recommendations for improving the work of that tribunal,” says Bishop Conlon. “I appreciate that review and take the recommendations offered for our tribunal seriously.”

“Part of the annulment scandal,” observes Dr. O’Donnell, is “that Church teaching concerning the indissolubility of the marriage bond has never changed, and this commitment, solemnly ratified by vows, remains a very important witness not only to the Church but to all society.… Although it is true that nullity declares that no marriage was ever there, when you have such an enormous number being ratified by tribunals around our country, it must give one pause, that truly it is hard to maintain the integrity the sacrament when so many are unable to effect it properly.”

“It is a grave scandal to the faithful when so many marriages fail,” concurs Bishop Olmsted. “While nearly 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce in the United States, it does not mean that every marriage that is presented to a tribunal for consideration of an annulment is likely to be invalid either.” Catholic World Report

Jeff Ziegler writes from North Carolina. This article appears in the March 2011 issue of CWR.

Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo: How long will pro-abort politicians be able to receive Communion?

.

Bishop Samuel Aquila

PHILADELPHIA, PA, March 23, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - “One must honestly ask, how many times and years may a Catholic politician vote for the so called right to abortion, - “murder” in the words of John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae (58), and still be able to receive Holy Communion?” The remark came as part of a keynote address delivered by Most Rev. Samuel J. Aquila, bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Fargo on March 18.

“The continual reception of Holy Communion by those who so visibly contradict and promote a grave evil, even more than simply dissent, only creates grave scandal, undermines the teaching and governing authority of the Church and can be interpreted by the faithful as indifference to the teaching of Christ and the Church on the part of those who have the responsibility to govern,” Bishop Aquila told over 150 participants at the 10th Annual Symposium on the Spirituality and Identity of the Diocesan Priest in Philadelphia, PA .

Concentrating his remarks on the exercise of authority in the Church, Bishop Aquila noted that in Matthew 18 Christ lays out a plan for correction of a wayward believer. First correct him personally, then with another believer or two, then with the Church and if there is still not a change shun them.

“The steps in this passage are clear and Jesus is teaching us, but do we listen and follow his example?, said the Bishop. “If this criteria had been followed with dissenting theologians, priests, religious and faithful in 1968 with the encyclical, Humanae Vitae, would we still be dealing with the problem today of those who dissent on contraception, abortion, same sex unions, euthanasia and so many other teachings of the Church? “

The Bishop of Fargo excoriates the notion of “faithful dissent, when this phrase describes a refusal to adhere to the deposit of faith”, as the “work of ?the father of lies.”

Bishop Aquila noted finally “Correction can be difficult and painful, as parents know, yet as a shepherd I am willing to suffer the rejection and anger of another when I speak the truth for the good of the person and the Bride of Christ. To correct and/or to punish someone who has gravely sinned against real love is an act of servant love and is found in the truth!”

The Bishop concluded his talk saying: “We must come to accept the fact that the exercise of true authority will be divisive as it was in the time of Jesus. Ultimately living the pastoral authority of Jesus in loving obedience will lead us to the Cross as it led him to the Cross, for we will love the Father with the heart of Jesus.”

See LSN Special Report
Best Quotable Quotes from Bishop Samuel Aquila Talk

Also, the full talk is available here

Parishioners wear chaplet fashioned of string, cross as Lenten devotion

.



For the past 10 years, Father James Statz has been inspiring Lenten devotions with his missionary-style chaplet.

The chaplet consists of a cross on a cord with seven sets of three knots each that is worn around the neck over one's clothing, visible for all of Lent.

Starting Ash Wednesday, parishioners wear the cross and pray seven Our Fathers, Hail Marys, and Glory Bes everyday for a specific member of the parish or community. On Good Friday, that cross is then given to that person.

During his time as a missionary in Venezuela, Father Statz noted that there was need for a visible sign of the cross.

"There was an evangelical church on almost every street corner," the Minnesota priest said in a telephone interview with Catholic News Service. He decided that a tradition where the cross could be seen by all would be good for both the faith of his parishioners and it would help to evangelize the barrios where he ministered.

The opportunity afforded by Ash Wednesday to visibly display the cross gave him the idea for what would later become the Lenten chaplet. "It's a good way to evangelize our own people and others in the barrios," he said. He views it a powerful tool in bringing the word of God to everyone.

Through the cross, "people are brought into the church," said Father Statz.

The Venezuelans assembled rosary-type crosses out of "wood and leaves" in such a manner that they could be worn for the whole of Lent. "The immediate response was very positive," the priest said.

After returning to the United States, Father Statz introduced the tradition to his own parish, Our Lady of the Angels in Sauk Centre, Minn. His parishioners were receptive to the practice and immediately adopted the idea. Since its introduction almost10 years ago, the local youth groups also have incorporated it into their fundraisers.

"We've done it since it started," said one parishioner, Maria Minette. "I like it a lot because it helps to focus on others during Lent."

"Sometimes we do it as a family and sometimes we do it individually," she said. Commenting on the effectiveness and the power of the cross, she added, "It's especially powerful for teens, for younger adults -- visually wearing the cross for the days of Lent and having people ask about it gives them a chance to talk about their faith."

The youth groups in the Diocese of St. Cloud, Minn., make the chaplets. "Each year we get a new crucifix and this year we had them blessed by (Pope) Benedict XVI," Father Statz said.

This tradition is used especially for the confirmation students, but the entire congregation is invited to participate. And the practice has started to spread to other churches in the area, including St. Paul's Parish, also in Sauk Centre.

"Sacramentals assist the sacraments -- they go with the liturgy and extend it. Some other parishes have picked up on it and benefited," Father Statz said.

The parishioners have been instrumental in the spreading of the tradition and in participating in the Lenten devotion. "I actually would like to see it spread farther," said Minette. Catholic News Service

Crucifixes Allowed in European Union Classrooms

.
Vatican pleased by court decision, which effects 47 countries of Europe.


When do you suppose they will be allowed at St. Thomas???

A crucifix hangs in a school classroom in Rome in this 2009 file photo. A European human rights court ruled March 18 that crucifixes are acceptable in public schools. The decision effects the 47 countries of the European Union.

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Crucifixes displayed publicly in Italy, including in classrooms, are a sign of Christianity’s key contribution to European culture and civilization, said Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, president of the Pontifical Council for Culture.

Christianity is a “founding element” of Western civilization, and “even if someone does not want to recognize it, it is an objective fact that the Christian presence is absolutely relevant, decisive,” the cardinal told reporters March 18.

Cardinal Ravasi spoke just a few hours before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of Italy in a case where a mother claimed crucifixes in Italian public-school classrooms violated her children’s freedom of conscience.

A lower chamber of the European court had ruled in 2009 that the classroom crucifixes violated the religious-freedom clauses of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, said the Vatican welcomed the Grand Chamber ruling, which recognizes that “human rights must not be placed in opposition to the religious foundations of European civilization.”

The decision is an affirmation of the respect owed to each country of the European Union for “the religious symbols of its cultural history and national identity” and for national decisions on how the symbols can and should be displayed, Father Lombardi said.

A lack of respect, he said, would lead to a situation in which, “in the name of religious liberty, paradoxically one would limit or even deny this freedom, ending up excluding every expression of it from the public sphere.”

Speaking to reporters at a news conference about a Vatican project to promote dialogue with atheists and other nonbelievers, Cardinal Ravasi had said that while a crucifix is a religious symbol to believers, it also is “a sign of civilization” in the West.

In every culture, he said, people find symbols that express their identity and, in losing those symbols, “we run the great risk of losing our identity.”

“Having white walls leads to a void, to cultural fragility. You may need to explain what a religious symbol means, but it isn’t right to have to take down your symbols simply to avoid offending someone,” the cardinal said.

Similarly, he said, “when you go to a Muslim city, you aren’t concerned when you see golden crescent moons” lit at night and dotting the skyline.

During his news conference, the cardinal presented the program for his office’s “Courtyard of the Gentiles” project, which aims to promote discussions between Christians and atheists or nonbelievers.

The first sessions will be held in Paris March 24-25, bringing Christian clergy, artists and activists together with nonbelievers from the world of politics, economics, law, literature and the arts.
Dialogue — whether with other Christians, with other religions or with atheists — isn’t about finding the “lowest common denominator,” Cardinal Ravasi said. He said it is about getting to know one another, learning from one another, working together to promote the common good and seeing how the other’s values may need more attention in your own life.

Of course, he said, the dialogue can take place only if both sides are willing to talk and to listen; the Courtyard of the Gentiles project involves nonbelievers or atheists who find the question of God interesting and who share the Catholic Church’s concern to promote the good of individuals and society.

The cardinal said the project tentatively is scheduled to hold sessions in other cities around the world, including in Quebec in 2012 and in Chicago and Washington in 2013.

Dialogue, if it is serious, is not simply an exchange of information, Cardinal Ravasi said. It is about presenting all of who one is and, therefore, it means witnessing: “We don’t dialogue to broadcast a theory, but to share a vision that has an impact on our lives.”
National Catholic Register

Minnesota Legislature Moves Ahead with Prohibition on Human Cloning

.

Minnesota House and Senate committees have approved on voice votes, bills that would prohibit human cloning for any purpose; the bills have now been referred to further committees. The Human Cloning Prohibition Act, companion bills SF 695 and HF 998, would specifically prohibit creation of cloned human embryos for any purpose, but would not affect any stem cell research, including human embryonic stem cell research. Some have proposed using cloning (technically termed somatic cell nuclear transfer) to create embryos, which would then be cannibalized for their stem cells, even though no one has yet successfully harvested stem cells from cloned human embryos, and only one lab has even been able to create a handful of clones.

Most scientists have turned their backs on cloning (nuclear transfer) technology, including Ian Wilmut, who is the cloner of Dolly the sheep. This is because nuclear transfer cloning techniques can be abused to create born human clones. In addition, newer techniques can reprogram skin cells into “induced pluripotent stem cells” (iPS cells) that act like embryonic stem cells yet potentially match the patient from whom they were created, by methods that are cheaper and easier than nuclear transfer cloning, and bypass the ethical problems in use of embryos, eggs, or cloning.

The Minnesota Medical Association has come out against the cloning prohibition bills, and in support of nuclear transfer cloning both for experiments as well as for born human clones. They say in the last paragraph of their press release:

“The MMA supports research on multipotent stem cells (including adult and cord blood stem cells); using somatic cell nuclear transfer technology in biomedical research (therapeutic cloning); the use of somatic cell nuclear transfer technology for producing a human child (reproductive cloning), and strong public support of federal funding for research involving human pluripotent stem cells.”

So, they support anything and everything.

Family Research Council

A Rreader Writes to Mark Shea on One of the Deadly of Mortal Sins: Masturbation

.

A reader writes to Mark Shea, one of the finest and most prolific writers on Catholic Issues today [See his blog, Catholic and Enjoying It: Mark's Motto for his blog: "So That No Thought of Mine, No Matter How Stupid, Should Ever Go Unpublished Again!"]:

I'm wondering if you could help me with a question about mortal sin. I recently learned that the Catechism teaches that masturbation, if done with full knowledge and consent, would count as a mortal sin. (I realize there are a few additional caveats.) Does this mean that masturbation is, in the eyes of the Church, on par with adultery? Or are some mortal sins worse than others? To my mind, adultery is a far more heinous offense, but perhaps I am missing something.

Sure, some mortal sins are worse than others. The notion of degrees of sin can be elaborated beyond the two basic categories of mortal and venial sin -- and sometimes this is useful, provided we do it in the right spirit (namely, that of charity). So, for instance, we can extend charity to the thief and say, "Well, at least he didn't shoot his victims, but just left them bound and gagged" (by which we acknowledge that murder is a more serious sin than theft.)

This is basically the reasoning behind Dante's division of Hell into various circles, each one worse than the last. Similarly, he ranks the different sins being purged on Mount Purgatory from the most to the least grave. Pride is the worst, followed by envy and anger, because all these are spiritual sins that corrupt more deeply than the sins of the flesh. Interestingly, the one that modernity focuses all its energy on -- lust -- has typically been regarded as the least of the seven deadlies (though that's like saying, "Mercury poisoning doesn't kill you as quick as a bullet to the brain"). Just as we understand that there are different degrees and kinds of beatitude (so that, as Jesus taught, the apostles were to be accorded special honors to sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel and, as the Church teaches, Mary is the greatest of all the saints), so there are different degrees and kinds of damnable offense.

But of course, it is also possible to exploit all this distinction-making in the wrong spirit, too, as the Guardhouse Lawyer Catholic does when he tells himself, "Hey! It's just a venial sin, so it's not really a sin at all compared to serious sin like the stuff That Guy Over There does." Thinking that way can lead people to justify all kinds of sins (typically starting with venial ones and leading on to mortal ones), with the excuse that, "As long as I don't do [insert despised mortal sin here], then I'm not really a sinner sinner, but just an adorable rogue with a few charming foibles." No doubt those in the upper circles of Hell gloat over those in the lower circles in just such a manner.

In reality, of course, the trick is to stay out of Hell completely, not to find the least uncomfortable spot. So I think that, as a general rule, trying to rank mortal sins according to gravity, while it may be useful in extending charity to others, is probably best avoided in one's own case. I think the impulse to try to figure out where one's own grave sins go on the hierarchy of mortal sins is usually pernicious and an introduction to rationalization. If one realizes one is committing a grave sin, our first impulse should not be, "Yeah, but is it as bad as this other sin over here that I'm not committing?" Rather, one should think, "Okay, how do I tackle this sin and free myself from it by the grace of God?"

That said, it is worth noting a few things about the specific sin of masturbation my reader references. First, of course, is the fact that his is not the first somewhat incredulous reaction I have seen to this teaching. When most folk run across this teaching for the first time it can be a shock, since it seems (to our culture) like the matter of masturbation is so trivial that to talk of mortal sin in connection with it is (they suppose) surely some sort of holdover reaction from the Dark Ages. In a world full of war, rape, pillage, and murder, how can anybody take seriously the notion that this seeming triviality is a sin as capable of sending somebody to Hell (if unrepented) as adultery or murder. . . ?

In contrast, the newer sort of narcissist, such as the pathetically self-obsessed Woody Allen, doesn't even attempt that. He simply voices chemically pure selfishness: "The heart wants what it wants." Not surprisingly, Allen likewise offers the ringing defense of masturbation as "sex with someone I love" -- which pretty much sums up the deep (and banal) evil of the thing.

If you want to transpose the evil of this perversion of marriage to the indulgence of another sort of appetite excluding all communion with other persons, then transpose it to another sacrament: the Eucharist. Think of it as analogous to guzzling the consecrated blood to the last drop and leaving nothing for anyone else. Imagine it as breaking open the tabernacle to wolf down the last particle of Eucharist. Blasphemous desecration of the sacrament, you say? Yeah, that's kind of the point.

The trick, of course, is to communicate this, not in such a way as to terrify scrupulous people or unnecessarily enrage licentious ones, but to get people to see what the Church is trying to guard: namely, the joy of mutually self-donating marital love, which is one of our great icons of and sacramental participations in the union of Christ the Bridegroom and His Bride the Church. Seeing this, those who are in the thrall of this particular sin can, with the help of grace, begin to overcome it and step out of their loneliness in the hope of the love of marriage or of the still higher state of consecrated virginity, which are both ordered to love and communion with God and neighbor in exactly the way masturbation is not. . . .
Read the entire article at the Inside Catholic blog:

And, remember when debating with your conscience whether this is a serious sin or not that it is quite often done while viewing pornography or having lustful thoughts, both Mortal Sins in themselves.

Bishop Cordileone of Oakland: Future prospects of marriage, democracy go hand-in-hand

.

Another Good Shepherd in California: Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, formerly an Auxiliary Bishop in San Diego, under Bishop Robert Brom, formerly Bishop of Duluth, was appointed to Oakland in 2009. He was recently joined by Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, who was appointed Bishop of Santa Rosa, just north of San Francisco and Bishop Jose Gomez, a priest of Opus Dei, in Los Angelse, replacing Cardinal Roger Mahony. Archbishop Gomez had been an Auxiliary in Denver and Archbishop of San Antonio, TX. There is currently an opening in the Diocese of Fresno where Bishop John Steinbock recently died and mandatory retirement letter requests from Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco and Bishop Tod Brown of Orange, near Los Angeles, are expected later this year. This is a seismic shift for California.

It is a curious irony that in this moment of history, when people in a number of countries in the Middle East are agitating for change from dictatorship to democracy, here in our own country, the oldest democracy with a written constitution in the world, there is a movement of the ruling class toward taking more and more power into its own hands

March 7, 2011 • VOL. 49, NO. 5 • Oakland, CA

Future prospects of marriage, democracy go hand-in-hand

By Bishop Salvatore J. Cordileone

It is a curious irony that in this moment of history, when people in a number of countries in the Middle East are agitating for change from dictatorship to democracy, here in our own country, the oldest democracy with a written constitution in the world, there is a movement of the ruling class toward taking more and more power into its own hands. The flashpoint for this movement? The hot-button issue of our day: marriage.

The comparison of the Middle East and the United States, though, is just irony No. 1 among many others in the ongoing saga of the inter-relation between the marriage issue and democracy. The examples are legion, and it would not be possible to list all of them here. I will, though, mention some of the more salient ones.

Hundreds of supporters of traditional marriage line the street across from the Massachusetts Statehouse in Boston in 2007, urging legislators to restrict future marriages to the union of one man and one woman. The same day, the joint Legislature voted 151-45 to kill the amendment. CNS photo/Gregory L. Tracy, The Pilot

In an explicit denial of his public duty, the then attorney general of the state of California (now governor) refused to defend the law of the state in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case concerning the constitutionality of Proposition 8. His reason? He is personally opposed to it.

Irony No. 2: after decades of hearing Catholic legislators (whose job, admittedly, is to make the law, not enforce it) claim that they could not let their personal views on a public issue (in this case, abortion) influence their public role, we now have the chief law enforcer in the state doing exactly that.

When the City Council of Washington, D.C., passed a local ordinance to allow same-sex “marriage,” the citizens organized to put it to a vote so they could decide for themselves. The City Council obstructed them from doing so every step of the way. Bear in mind that the city of Washington has a very large African-American population.

Fundamental right denied

Thus, irony No. 3: a small group of political elites (almost all of them white), in a claim to expand rights, deny one of the most fundamental rights in a constitutional democracy — the right to vote — to the masses of black citizens.

In an egregious violation of separation of powers, the president of the United States has ordered the Department of Justice not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. (DOMA — passed by an overwhelming majority with bipartisan support in Congress and signed into law by President Clinton — preserves the right of the states not to recognize same-sex “marriages” contracted in other states.) Obama claimed to do so on the basis that it discriminates against a sexual minority, and is unconstitutional and irrational.

Sadly, the Department of Justice had already submitted an apparently deliberately weak defense of DOMA — setting up its being overturned in the courts — by omitting the one argument that has convinced every court in which the argument was made: the connection between marriage and the good of children. For example, this is what Maryland’s high court stated in a ruling in 2007: “Marriage enjoys its fundamental status due, in large part, to its link to procreation. This ‘inextricable link’ between marriage and procreation reasonably could support the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman only, because it is that relationship that is capable of producing biological offspring of both members.”

This latest decision of our president brings us even more ironies.

A change of course

Irony No. 4: During the presidential campaign, Obama stated that he favored preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman. In a change of course, he more recently had said he favors the repeal of DOMA, but asserts it should be done through the legislative process, not the courts. Now, he has taken an action that does exactly that, i.e., repeals DOMA by the decision of a federal court judge.

The affirmation of marriage does not discriminate against anyone and casts no judgments on how people work out their intimate relationships, but rather affirms the most fundamental good in any healthy society. But if we were to admit the argument that it did, it would bring us to irony No. 5: In the court case challenging the constitutionality of the legislation that allowed the revival of cases of sexual abuse of minors by clergy that had expired long in the past, the federal district court judge ruled against the plaintiffs. With regard to the argument that the Church was targeted, he did not deny this claim (the evidence was apparently too overwhelming that we were). Rather, he argued that it is not unconstitutional to target a religious group, as long as their access to worship is not impeded. Why, then, would it be unconstitutional to target a sexual minority (which defining marriage in the law does not do, anyway) as long as their freedom to engage in sexual activity as they choose is not impeded?

Most disturbing of all, irony No. 6: It is not the role of the executive branch to decide which laws are unconstitutional. That is the exclusive purview of the courts. The job of the executive branch is to administer and defend the law of the land. That is why this latest decision of our president is an egregious violation of the separation of powers.

Avoiding the democratic process

The fact of the matter is, wherever “gay marriage” has become the law of the land, it has happened in a way that avoids the democratic process, and sometimes even goes directly against it. On the other hand, whenever the people have had the chance to vote on marriage, they have consistently affirmed it. And this, despite the proponents being outspent (sometimes by huge margins), facing opposition from the cultural elites and enduring strong media bias. Often this bias is quite blatant, but sometimes it is subtle. For example, in a recent report on this story on National Public Radio, the reporter said: “Backers of Prop. 8 say that nearly every time gay marriage has been put on the ballot, voters rejected it.” The fact is “gay marriage” has never been put on the ballot. Rather, the traditional definition of marriage has. Moreover, in the 31 states that put this on the ballot as a constitutional amendment, voters have approved it 31 times, i.e., not “nearly every time,” but every time. And this is not counting states where the people have approved the traditional definition of marriage as a statute.

Cause for concern

Regardless of one’s position on the marriage issue, these and so many other moves by our public officials should give cause for concern about the fate of democracy in our country. I urge all of our people to inform themselves of the facts, to inform their consciences from the natural moral law and Church teaching — understanding that marriage is not discrimination against anyone, but benefits everyone and that we must treat those who disagree with us on this issue with respect and compassion — and then to take action by speaking truth to power, advocating for this fundamental good of our society and voting their conscience at the ballot box.

Many people describe our country as currently being engaged in a “culture war.” A century-and-a-half ago, we were engaged in a civil war. Now, as then, the conflict puts the future prospects of our democracy at stake. Now, as then, no more apt words can describe the moment than those spoken by President Abraham Lincoln in what has become the most famous speech in American history: “It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us . . . that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

St. Thomas: Priest preferred, no longer required

.
The next president of the University of St. Thomas won't have to be a priest to get the post.

The St. Paul university's governing board changed its bylaws last month to allow a Roman Catholic layperson serve as president.

It will still show priests "strong preference."

The move acknowledges the shrinking number of Catholic priests interested in and qualified for colleges' top jobs. Seton Hall University in New Jersey recently hired a layperson after its first search -- for priests only -- was unsuccessful.

About 60 percent of Catholic colleges are now led by lay people, said Michael Galligan-Stierle, president of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities.

"The board felt that while it has a strong preference to continue to have a priest, it also wants to have the broadest pool possible," said Doug Hennes, St. Thomas vice president for university relations. The action also allows a brother or sister to become president.

Still, some alumni are concerned.

"I believe the action the board has taken is designed to separate it from the diocese," said Dick Houck, who graduated from St. Thomas in 1951.

He worries that picking a non-priest will "only take St. Thomas further away from the teachings of the church."

To respond to such concerns and to preserve Catholic identity on campus, many Catholic colleges and universities have hired Catholic mission and identity officers, Galligan-Stierle said.

The bylaws change doesn't hint at a coming retirement for the Rev. Dennis Dease, who has led the university for two decades, Hennes said.

"He has no immediate plans to retire," he said. "It's just good planning to look ahead."

Most of Minnesota's Catholic colleges and universities still have leaders with a "Father," "Brother" or "Sister" before their names. But the College of St. Benedict and the College of St. Scholastica are led by lay presidents. Star Tribune

I would doubt that they would hire a "local boy." What they want more than anything in the world is to be respected by Harvard. And that means hiring a layperson with Harvard (or equivalent) credentials. It helps with the fund-raising.

Archbishop John Nienstedt's Address to 1,000 Catholic Men Last Saturday Morning at the Cathedral/Shrine of St. Paul

.
Address to Men’s Conference:

“My Vision for Our Archdiocese, and the Crucial Role of Men in that Mission”

Saturday, March 12, 2011
Cathedral of St. Paul
The Most Reverend John C. Nienstedt


I wish to begin my remarks with a word of thanks to the members of the Archdiocesan Family, Youth and Life Office, who have coordinated this day. I also owe a debt of gratitude to our renowned speakers, Fr. Bill Baer, Dr. John Buri, Mr. Wes Walz and Mr. Dave Rinaldi. Your presence today is a tremendous grace for us all, and I thank each of you for your insightful presentations. Finally, yet perhaps most importantly, I am grateful to all of you men who are present here: fathers, grandfathers, godfathers, brothers, uncles, and sons. How great it is, when brothers come together in unity and in faith! (adapted from Psalm 133)

As Archbishop, I am sometimes asked, “What do you think is the top priority for our Church today? What is your vision for a stronger, more vibrant Church?” While these questions are thoughtfully asked, they do seem to imply that the Church is much like any other kind of business, bent on efficiency and increasing its numbers and that I, as the appointed leader, have my own agenda in guiding this institution. But the Church is concerned with much more than the bottom line or even the personal agenda of a given bishop. In his book-length interview, Light of the World, our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI states,

“We are not a production plant, we are not a for-profit business, we are Church. That means a community of men standing together in faith. The task is not to manufacture some product or to be a success at selling merchandise. Instead, the task is to live the faith in an exemplary way, to proclaim it and at the same time to keep this voluntary association, which cuts across all cultures, nations and times and is not based on external interests, spiritually connected with Christ and so with God himself.” (Light of World, 73)

Today, we come to this gathering as a community of men, standing together in faith. We have not come here to learn how to be more successful or efficient. We have come here because we are parts of a whole. We live for something greater than ourselves. And from time to time, we need to reexamine how our individual roles fit within that larger picture. Because of its importance, I am grateful to have this opportunity to share with you my thoughts on how this can be done.

Like the Holy Father, my goal is to live the Catholic faith in an exemplary way and to proclaim the Gospel in season and out of season. My only agenda, if one can even speak of such a thing, is to make the name of Jesus Christ known and loved, which is, in fact, the work of evangelization. To make this vision a reality, however, I need the understanding and cooperation of every Catholic in this Archdiocese. As fathers and brothers, you are a fundamental part of this undertaking. Like any leader, the Archbishop needs his men marching alongside him. And for this we have come here today; we rally together, united as a community of believers standing under the banner of our Catholic faith.

What I ask of you today is to take a moment to think about how your role as men in this Archdiocese, in relation to me as the Archbishop, is carried out in your everyday lives. How do you, a faithful, Catholic man, build up the community of the Church under the spiritual leadership of the chief shepherd of that local church? How do you balance the many demands of your time and still address your God-given call to evangelize the world?

We know that every man, woman and child is a precious gift from God. In his or her own way, each is called to be a blessing, or a sign of God’s presence in this world. As men, you are called to be a particular blessing in a three-fold manner: a blessing to family, to your Church and to the society at large. In each of these three areas you are given an opportunity to “step up to the plate” in living your life of Christian manhood as a blessing for others.

First, you are called to be a blessing to those with whom you have significant relationships, be it your spouse, your parents, your children, or your friends. Next, you are called to be a blessing within the Church, where growth in holiness, both on the individual and communal level, must be considered. Finally, you are to be a blessing within society as agents of transformation in your witness to what is good and true.

When I was rector of Sacred Heart, Major Seminary in Detroit, I came across a book, entitled Iron John, by the American poet Robert Bly. Now I admit that Bly was not a big fan of the Catholic church, but I do think he had some insightful observations on the men’s movements that were taking place in the 1970’s and 80’s.

Bly uses the Brothers’ Grimm fairy tale, Iron John, to analyze the role that the “wild man” had on the life of the king’s family. This “wild man” is distinct from the “savage” who sets out to plunder and destroy both the earth and the human soul. The “wild man”, instead, is one who is not afraid to branch out on his own, leaving mother, father and other creature comforts behind in order to set out to resolve the riddles of life on his own. Such a “wild man” becomes one who is able to initiate other men into the reality of manhood even as he had been initiated by his own father and male mentors.

Bly contends that something was profoundly lost when Western civilization moved from an agricultural society to a largely industrial one. On the farm, young boys worked side by side with their father at home and in the fields. This gave the sons an opportunity to observe and actually participate in the daily labor of their father. The result was not only a sense of respect and appreciation for the father, but also the opportunity for the father to mentor his sons.

That relationship was radically altered with the advent of factories and business offices.

In many families, the father still remains the major breadwinner, which is to say that like his ancestors, the man provides the income for his family to survive, and hopefully, to flourish. The difference is that many men now work away from home. His job in the office or on the assembly line does not allow for meaningful interaction with his family. In the evening, the father returns home, giving his wife and children what is left over from his day of work: which too often consists of tired, frustrated, and even resentful emotions. He continues to provide to the “bread” of material comfort, but not the “bread” of a life-giving relationship.

My brothers in Christ, you are called to be a blessing to those whom God has entrusted to your care. For your wife and children, for your extended families and friends, you are called to be an example of the paternal care and compassion of our heavenly Father, who is for his children a source of life-giving love. Husbands, your marriage is a sacramental reflection of Christ’s love for his bride, the Church. And that means a kind of sacrificial love that is not afraid to get involved, in order to give of itself completely.

Being a blessing to those entrusted to your care means not only providing just your labor, but also being a source of life-giving affirmation in who you are and how you relate to those whom you love. The question becomes, “Am I a father, husband, brother, son or grandfather who lives a life of self-sacrifice? Do I give of myself in all that I do for the good of those whom I love?”

Let us, at this point, widen our focus a little more. Now that we have resolved to be a blessing in our relationships at home, let us commit to being a blessing within the Church, as agents of God’s forgiveness.

Recently, I read a report of a CNN interview that took place just after the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9-11. A Jewish rabbi had just explained the Scriptural adage, “An eye for an eye”, when the interviewer turned to the Catholic priest who was present. He asked, “And, Father, what do the Christian Scripture have to say to this situation?” Without hesitation, the priest answered, “Forgiveness, forgiveness is the central message of the Gospel.” The interviewer sat speechless at the force of those words.

Do we really believe this? Do we truly believe that forgiveness, compassion and mercy are the life giving hallmarks demanded by our Savior, or do we simply mouth the words of the Gospel while remaining committed to a life of strict justice, or even vengeance? Are we men of patience and understanding, or men of demands and unremitting judgment? In short, are we men of the Gospel, or men of the world?

As disciples of the Master, you and I are called to be agents of forgiveness, especially among the members of the Body of Christ. But how often do we find that the discord and even rancor which so often characterizes the polarized voices of opinion in our secular society today even boils over into debates within the Church. Christ’s prayer should ring in our ears – “I pray Father, that they might be one, as we are one.” In our petty disagreements and ideological struggles within the Church, (I speak here not of fundamental disagreements involving dogma or doctrine), we bring shame to the body of Christ, and stand in opposition to the challenge and prayer of Christ for unity within the household of God.

Now, to be sure, there is objective truth that gives credibility to the beliefs we hold dear. And when these beliefs are questioned, attacked or otherwise undermined, then we must defend them with all the strength we can muster. At the same time, however, we must do so in a manner that is respectful of the other person as being a son or daughter of God and a sinner, like ourselves, called to be a saint. We must love at all times, even in battle. Ad hominem attacks have no place in debates between Christians.

The compassion and mercy we show to others in the household of God flows not only from the commandment of God to forgive and to listen. It also needs to flow from an awareness that we ourselves stand in need of the compassion and patience of God. We all need forgiveness – we all need mercy, no exceptions. This is one of the underlying themes that marks the season of Lent, just begun this past Wednesday. Lent is a penitential season and that implies an acknowledgement that each of us has sinned and stands in need of God’s mercy and forgiveness. Yet, this sin not only affects my relationship with God, it also has an impact on my relationship with others who make up the community of faith. Personal sin has a way of weakening the witness of our faith and calling into doubt the efficacy of the graces that accompany the works of the faithful. We don’t have to look any further than the horrific impact that the revelation of clerical, sexual abuse of children has had both inside and outside the Church, causing many within the Church to walk away from their practice of the faith and others outside the Church to doubt the credibility of her witness or her message. Yes, there is no such thing as a “private” sin, for sooner or later it will have consequences beyond the individual sinner.

Having taught a course on the Sacrament of Penance/Reconciliation in the seminary for thirteen years, I am a firm believer in the power of that sacrament. Here one learns that indeed love means having to say you are sorry as the harmful deeds of our lives are acknowledged in true sorrow, verbally exposed before Christ the divine healer and then absolved by his mercy, restoring us to the full life of grace. Confession is a kind of school—if you will—a house of mercy, a place in which we learn how to forgive just as we are forgiven. Let me be clear and direct – no matter how long it has been since your last confession, I urge you to return to this sacrament, so that you may receive the rich blessings of the fullness of the Christian life. Contrary to some widespread error, the auricular confession of sins to a priest has never gone out of style or been reconsidered by the Church – it has remained a critical instrument within the Church by which Christ continues to reach out to his fallen people who long to rise up again. My friends, make this great sacrament a regular part of your life of faith.

But making a good confession leads to another sacrament – the sacrament of the Eucharist, and participation in the sacrifice that is the Mass. The fathers of the Second Vatican Council stated that the Eucharist is “the source and summit of the Christian life.” (LG 11, CCC 1324) Therefore, what we do as men must lead to and flow from this perfect sacrifice, which is, after all, Christ’s own sacrifice. Living a life of sacrifice, that is, a life focused on others, is a challenge to be sure, and so we must continually turn to Christ in the Blessed Sacrament for the wisdom and strength to overcome all obstacles.

Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict tells us:

“If we want the world to move forward a little, the only criterion in terms of which this can happen is God, who enters into our lives as a real presence. The Eucharist is the place where men can receive the kind of formation from which new things come into being. This is why the great figures who throughout history have really brought revolutions for the good have been the saints who, touched by Christ, have brought new impulses into the world.” (Light of the World, 158)

Besides attending Sunday Mass and weekday Mass, when you are able, I encourage you to spend time before our Lord in Adoration. I am grateful to those men who make a commitment for taking the time from their busy schedules to keep watch for an hour before the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. Many of the parishes in our Archdiocese offer perpetual adoration. Sign up for an hour, even if it is only once a week. Commit yourself to that time. I assure you, you will not regret it. By spending time with the Master in silent adoration, we slowly begin to learn the lessons of His life, a life of service and silent listening to the voice of the Father.

Finally, a life of forgiveness must be nourished in daily prayer, especially rooted in the reading the Sacred Scriptures. Throughout the Scriptures, our Lord speaks plainly to the importance of reading the Word of God and appropriating it into our lives. In his response to Satan’s first temptations, Jesus said, “Not by bread alone does man live, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4) And again we read in the letter to the Hebrews: “Indeed, the word of God is living and effective, sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating even between soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and able to discern reflections and thoughts of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12) What is this voice that comes from the lips of God except that of Bible, authoritatively interpreted by the Church? What is this two edged sword but those passages of Scripture in which our lives are made clear and the way of life and death is put plainly before us?

Being a man of God’s Word is more than a mere reading of the text; it is praying the Word, it is being steeped in the Scripture to the point of being able to share that Word and to explain to others the Church’s teachings, which are based on that Word. When you immerse yourself in the Word, you will find your lives transformed, especially in becoming agents of Christ’s forgiveness.

In going out into the world to bring all things together in Christ, we broaden our focus beyond our family and beyond our Church to include the whole of society around us. In this arena, we can expect to meet others who do not always share our faith and who can even be quite hostile to the teachings of the Catholic Church. I am thinking here of those who deny the right to life of babies in their mother’s womb or those who would have us believe that marriage could be properly defined as something other than a union between one man and one woman or even those who would usurp the power of God in deciding when the life of the sick or the aged can be extinguished. These are serious challenges that, if allowed to take hold, will dramatically alter the ethical landscape of our human society. Such challenges call upon us to stand firm and defend the truth. As they say in Detroit, this is where the rubber hits the road.

As Catholic men, we are called to be salt of the earth in a world that is barren without Jesus. But how do we preach Christ’s message in such a secular world? What do we say to those who reject the Church and her teachings? We must ‘clothe ourselves with Christ’, as St. Paul tells the Ephesians, and “put on the armor of God so that you may be able to stand firm.” (Ephesians 6:11) In doing so, we set Christ before us, so that others may see Him, through our word and example, in the marketplace, on the street, within our home, as we become salt of the earth and a light for the world.

In referencing Matthew 13:33, Pope Benedict XVI says that "As a small amount of leaven, mixed with flour, ferments all the dough, so the Church, present in society, makes grow and mature what in her is true, good and beautiful." (Audience to Italian Catholic Media, Nov. 2010) Therefore, by faithfully living out your marriage in vows, you give witness to marriage as God intends it for one man and one woman. When you treat others with respect and dignity, you affirm the truth that each person is made in the image and likeness of God. Furthermore, when confronted with pressure to the contrary, you boldly proclaim the teachings of the Church as you defend our faith.

Recently, I was made aware of three bills, which will come up next week in the Minnesota Legislature that I want to bring to your attention. I believe that we should all voice our approval of these pro-life initiatives: the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act”, a bill to ban Taxpayer Funded Abortion in Minnesota, and a move to ban Human cloning. Please go to the website for the Minnesota Catholic Conference for more information, and then contact your representatives.

Here are links to pro-life bills, and info about hearings coming up this week.

Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act
Hearing: Wednesday, 2:30. Room 200 State Office Building

Ban on Taxpayer Funded Abortion
Hearing: Tuesday evening, time uncertain. Room 200 State Office Building

Ban on Human Cloning
Hearing: Tuesday, 10:30. Room 15 Capitol.
Hearing: Tuesday, 8:15 a.m. Room 10 State Office Building.

_______

My dear brothers – always be mindful of your dignity! You have been chosen in the waters of baptism to be, through divine grace, what Christ is by nature – a son of God, made holy by incorporation into His body, and given purpose and direction by his choice. The world needs you because it needs Jesus, and you are his body, making him present to others.

Of course, the fulfillment of your noble calling, to be salt of the earth and witnesses of Christ’s redeeming love in the world, will not happen through wishful thinking. The goal of this day is not just to reaffirm each other, as important as that is. The goal is to re-ignite a fire within you, and to compel you to act.

The Church needs you to stand up and defend her, to fight for the truth she proclaims. Let the world know of the convincing arguments of the beauty of each human life, the truth about marriage and the good of family life – arguments that flow not only from the Gospel, but from right reason and the natural law. But let the world also know by the way in which we teach and preach that we are likewise convicted in our faith, hope, and love.

My brothers, we know that living as a Christian in this world is not easy. But we have the help of the Holy Spirit, who, through Divine grace, gives us His gifts: wisdom, understanding, knowledge, counsel, piety, fortitude, and fear of the Lord. We are equipped through these gifts to courageously bear witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in season and out.

Let us now go forth, to live as men aware of our own weaknesses but not limited by them, so as to teach as Jesus has taught, defending what is right and true.

May God Bless you!

Church O' the Day: Benedictine Altar Arrangement at the Cathedral of the Epiphany, Sioux City, IA

.

...The Cathedral of the Epiphany has been going through a liturgical renewal: the return of the cassock and surplice for servers and acolytes; chanting the Mass text; Fr. Brent Lingle, parochial vicar of Cathedral and Director of Worship for the Sioux City Diocese, has begun offering the Mass in the Extraordinary Form on the second Sunday of the month; the more frequent use of incense; taking youth to the liturgical leadership conference One Bread, One Cup; youth group ends with Benediction or Night Prayer every time; both English Confirmation classes end with the Divine Office every week; the youth group has a confession night once a month; the parish is working on starting perpetual adoration; and the recent January/February announcement of communion under the form of bread alone and on more solemn occasions both forms being available. . . .

See more at Brandon Harvey's
Holy Things for Holy People blog

Treating Traumatic Brain Injuries in Children Using Adult Stem Cells

.
Use of adult stem cells to treat traumatic brain injury in children appears safe and effective. .Scientists at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston have published preliminary results of a Phase I clinical trial showing the safety of bone marrow adult stem cells in treating traumatic brain injury in children. A total of ten children between the age of 5 and 14 years old were treated within 48 hours of their injury with their own adult stem cells; the cells were collected from their bone marrow, processed and returned to them intravenously. Using the patient’s own adult stem cells avoids potential complications of cell rejection, graft versus host disease, and blood-borne disease transfer.

Over 2.5 million Americans live with the devastating consequences of traumatic brain injury, and children who survive such an injury often have serious long-term problems. Six months after their adult stem cell treatment, all of the children showed significant improvement and seven of the 10 children had a “good outcome,” meaning no or only mild disability. The medical team is also testing use of cord blood stem cells for treatment of traumatic brain injury.

According to Dr. Charles S. Cox, Jr., lead author:

“Our data demonstrate that the acute harvest of bone marrow and infusion of bone marrow mononuclear cells to acutely treat severe TBI in children is safe.”

The results are published in the journal Neurosurgery.

Family Research Council

Catholic scholar to discuss St. Benedict and American culture in lecture Monday night

.

Dr. Russell Hittinger, the Warren Professor of Catholic Studies at the University of Tulsa, will discuss “What St. Benedict Taught the Dark Ages: His and Ours” in a lecture at 7:30 p.m. Monday, March 14, in the auditorium of the O’Shaughnessy Educational Center on the St. Paul campus of the University of St. Thomas.

Dr. Russell Hittinger

The lecture, free and open to the public, is sponsored by the university’s Center for Catholic Studies. For more information, call the center at (651) 962-5700.

Hittinger is widely recognized for his work on Catholic social thought and on natural law. His lecture will focus on the current state of American culture and its implications for Catholics.

He is a member of the Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas and the Pontifical Academy for Social Science. He has written many articles and books, including The First Grace: Rediscovering Natural Law in a Post-Christian Age and Thomas Aquinas and the Rule of Law.

Fish Fries and Lenten Dinners

.

• The Catholic Spirit

Is your parish fish fry or Lenten dinner missing here? Send an email to spiritcalendar@archspm.org to get it listed (No attachments, please.)

Fish Dinners at St. Albert the Great, Minneapolis --- All Fridays of Lent
(not Good Friday): 4:30 to 7:30 p.m., Bingo, Raffles, at 2836 33rd Ave. S.

Enchilada dinner at Our Lady of Guadalupe, St. Paul — All Fridays of Lent: 11:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. at 401 Concord St. Take-out and enchiladas by the dozen also available.

Lebanese Lenten dinner at Holy family Maronite Church, Mendota Heights — All Fridays of Lent: 5 to 7 p.m. at 1960 Lexington Ave. S.

Fish fry at Knights of Columbus Hall, Bloomington — All Fridays of Lent: 5 to 9 p.m. at 1114 American Blvd. Call (952) 888-1492 for reservations.

Fish fry at Epiphany, Coon Rapids — All Fridays of Lent: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 1900 111th Ave. N.W.

Fish fry at St. John the Baptist, Hugo — All Fridays of Lent: 5 to 8 p.m. at 14383 Forest Blvd. N.

Fish fry at St. Peter, Forest Lake — All Fridays of Lent: 5 to 7 p.m. at 1250 South Shore Drive.

Fish fry at St. Pascal Baylon, St. Paul — All Fridays of Lent: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 1757 Conway St.

Fish fry at St. Bernard, St. Paul — All Fridays of Lent: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at the corner of Rice Street and Geranium Avenue.

Fish fry at St. Matthew, St. Paul — All Fridays of Lent: 4:30 to 7:30 p.m. at 510 Hall Ave.

Fish fry at St. Timothy, Blaine — March 4 and All Fridays of Lent: 7 p.m. at 707 89th Ave. N.E.

Fish fry at St. Patrick of Cedar Lake, Jordan — March 4: 5 to 8 p.m. at 24425 Old Hwy. 13 Blvd.

Fish fry at St. Peter Catholic School, North St. Paul — March 11, Mar 25, Apr 8, Apr 15: 4 to 7 p.m. at 2620 N. Margaret St.

Fish fry at Knights of Columbus Hall, Shakopee — March 11, March 18: 5 to 8 p.m. at 1760 Fourth Ave. E.

Fish fry at St. Michael, Prior Lake – March 11: 5 to 8 p.m. at 16311 Duluth Ave. Menu also includes macaroni and cheese

Fish fry at St. Bernard, Cologne — March 11: 3:30 to 8 p.m. at 300 Church St.

Fish fry at Guardian Angels, Chaska — March 11: 4:30 to 7:30 p.m. at 215 W. Second St.

Fish fry at St. Pius X, White Bear Lake — March 11: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 3878 Highland Ave.

Fish fry at Most Holy Trinity, St. Louis Park — March 18, Apr 8: 5 to 8 p.m. at 3946 Wooddale Ave. S.

Fish fry at Mary, Queen of Peace, Rogers — March 18: 5 to 7 p.m. at 21304 Church Ave.

Fish fry at St. Anne, Hamel — March 18: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 200 Hamel Road.

Fish fry at St. Jerome, Maplewood — April 15: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 384 E. Roselawn.

Fish fry at Holy Cross, Minneapolis — All Fridays of Lent: 5 to 7 p.m. at 1621 University Ave. N.E.

Soup supper at Holy Cross, Minneapolis — All Wednesdays of Lent: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 1621 University Ave. N.E.

Fish fry at Sacred Heart, Robbinsdale — All Fridays of Lent: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 4780 W. Broadway.

Fish dinner at St. Bonaventure, Bloomington — March 18: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 901 E. 90th St.

Fish fry at Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Maplewood — March 18, Apr 1, Apr 15: 4 to 7 p.m. at 1735 Kennard St.

Fish fry at St. Albert, Albertville — March 25: 4:30 to 7:30 p.m. at 11458 57th St. N.E.

Fish fry at St. Charles, Bayport — All Fridays of Lent: 4 to 7:30 p.m. at 409 N. Third St.

Fish fry at St. Raphael, Crystal — March 25: 5 to 7 p.m. at 7301 Bass Lake Road.

Fish fry at Transfiguration School, Oakdale — March 25, Apr 8: 5 to 7 p.m. at 6135 15th St. N.

Fish fry at Totino-Grace High School, Fridley — March 25, Apr 8: 4:30 to 7 p.m. at 1350 Gardena Ave. N.E.

Examine "Catholic Mythbusters" at St. Pius X Parish in White Bear during Lent

.

click poster to enlarge

Archbishop Chaput: Lukewarm Christianity Is A Convient Form Of Paganism!

.
The idols of sex, technology, and the state are particularly prevalent in our day.

Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver warns on the growing crisis of faith, and the many different forms of idolatry which have choked the life out of Christians and the Church as a whole. The Archbishop warns explicitly on the idols of sex, technology, and the state as being particularly prevalent in our day.

Addressing a gathering of European church officials on March 4, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver warned that many contemporary Christians have reduced their faith to a convenient “form of paganism,” which cannot compete with the widespread “idolatry” of modern consumer culture.

Archbishop Chaput offered his observations at a conference in Paris honoring the late Cardinal Archbishop Jean-Marie Lustiger, a Jewish convert to Catholicism who was the Archbishop of Paris from 1981 to 2005.

The Denver archbishop described Cardinal Lustiger as “an unsentimental realist” who dared to speak about disturbing trends in the Church and society – including a lack of faith among professed Christians, leaving a vacuum that would be filled by other “gods” such as sex and money.

“Lustiger named lukewarm Christians and superficial Christianity for what they are: a congenial form of paganism,” said Archbishop Chaput. “The Church needs a great deal more of his medicine.”

Many Christians Have Reduced God To An Idol

He recalled Cardinal Lustiger’s prophetic warnings against “creating alibis and escaping the implications of our faith.” In a passage cited by Archbishop Chaput, the cardinal wrote that “many Christians,” through evasions and misunderstandings, had “reduced the God of the Covenant to a mere idol.”

“The main crisis of modern Christianity is not one of resources, or personnel, or marketing,” Archbishop Chaput asserted. “It is a crisis of faith. Millions of people claim to be Christian, but they don’t really believe.”

“They don’t study Scripture. They don’t love the Church as a mother and teacher. And they settle for an inoffensive, vanilla Christianity that amounts to a system of decent social ethics.”

The Worst Kind Of Phony Christianity!

“This is self-delusion,” he warned, “the worst kind of phony Christianity that has no power to create hope out of suffering, to resist persecution, or to lead anyone else to God.”

Archbishop Chaput said that these weakened forms of Christian faith would not be able to compete with the many modern cults of instant gratification and success.

Cardinal Lustiger, he recalled, had “warned that one of the deepest and oldest instincts of man is idolatry.” The Denver archbishop said he sees that instinct taking on several forms today.

“There are no real atheists in America – quite the opposite,” he said. “We have a thriving free market of little gods to worship. Sex and technology have very large congregations.”

The Modern State Is A Great Idol!

“I was especially struck,” he noted, “by Lustiger’s description of the modern state ‘as one of the strongest forms of idolatry that exists; it has become the most absolute substitute for God that men have been able to give themselves . . . and it is a tyrant god, feeding itself on its victims.’”

But the Archbishop of Denver said that these human tendencies, leading to the worship of objects and of oneself, could not be driven out by the mere exercise of authority.

To Purge Christianity Of These Great Idols Demands Total Conversion Of Individuals

“The Christian remedy to these idolatries,” he explained, “can never simply be coerced from the outside, by stronger statements from stronger bishops.” He quoted Cardinal Lustiger’s insight that these forms of idolatry “must be exorcised from the inside … To uproot them, we must be converted in depth.”

He also indicated that Cardinal Lustiger’s unique perspective was just as important for U.S. Catholics today as it was for European Catholics during his lifetime. The cardinal’s work, Archbishop Chaput noted, “continues to influence our seminary formation” at Denver’s St. John Vianney seminary.

“He is a Jew who discovers Jesus Christ … His mother is murdered at Auschwitz. He survives the most horrific war in history, but he refuses to hate and despair. Instead, he turns to God more deeply and gives himself to the priesthood.”

“Most of the young men I meet hunger for examples of manliness, confidence, courage and faith,” Archbishop Chaput noted. “Cardinal Lustiger’s personal story is itself a catechesis – an invitation to pursue God heroically.” Courageous Priest.com