Church – Page 6 – Convert Journal

The Society of St. Pius X

Tuesday, June 12, 2012 A.D. Leave a Comment

The Society of St. Pius X is an international traditionalist Catholic organization with a non-canonical status. That is, they are not in full communion with Rome. SSPX was formed in 1970 in response to Vatican II, if not the actual documents of Vatican II then in response to the manner in which its general recommendations have been implemented. This is often referred derisively by many (including me) as the “spirit of Vatican II” because it represents extraordinary steps influenced by progressives beyond the actual teaching of the Church. I have written about some of these in my 2 part piece on reform the reform early last year (part 1 and part 2).

Wikipedia has a fairly balanced article on the SSPX.

In addition to the doctrinal and discipline issues raised, SSPX also celebrates Holy Mass much as it was before Vatican II. That is not an issue as Vatican II did NOT in any way replace the traditional Mass, now referred to as the extraordinary form. In point of fact, our Holy Fathers have made this clear in Ecclesia Dei Adflicta, Summorum Pontificum (with accompanying letter) and Universae Ecclesiae. Unlike the SSPX, the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) also celebrates the Tridentine Mass but in full communion with Rome.

Pope Benedict has been working tirelessly (for years now) with the SSPX to heal this split and to restore them to full communion. This is important for Christian unity, but also for another reason – we need them. The SSPX could be a key contributor to the new evangelization, having themselves grown large by boldly teaching traditional Catholic beliefs. They currently have over 550 priests in 30+ countries (active in 30+ more), 200 seminarians (6 seminaries), 88 schools and 2 university level institutes.

From all reports, it looks like a solution is close at hand. Perhaps the biggest issue remaining is their canonical status. That is, how exactly would they exist within the Church? The SSPX is concerned (rightfully so in my opinion) that they could be forced to accept practices at odds with tradition. They need a structure that assures them that will not happen. We need a structure that provides for their contribution to the renewal of the Church.

There is another serious complication. The SSPX has been separate now for over 40 years and not all elements may be willing to reunite. They are organized under 4 bishops, Bishop Bernard Fellay (the society’s superior general), Bishop de Galarreta, Bishops Tissier de Mallerais and Bishop Richard Williamson. Bishop Fellay has led the discussion with Rome and is optimistic. The other 3 much less so. How this may influence SSPX priests, religious, laity and institutions is unknown should a schism occur within the SSPX.

Bishop Fellay speaks frankly with the Catholic News Service (an “editorially independent and a financially self-sustaining division of the USCCB”):

My personal hope is that reunion with the SSPX, in whole or part, can be announced in October to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Vatican II. In my ideal world, related to such an announcement would also be the publication of a Syllabus of Errors on Vatican II. Such a document would clarify Vatican II teaching and identify common errors made in its name. On this point:

Keeping in mind the now decades-long experience of interpretations that are doctrinally and pastorally mistaken and contrary to the bi-millennial continuity of the doctrine and prayer of the faith, there thus arises the necessity and urgency of a specific and authoritative intervention of the pontifical magisterium for an authentic interpretation of the “conciliar texts, with supplementation and doctrinal clarifications; a sort of “Syllabus” of the errors in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. “There is the need for a new Syllabus, this time directed not so much against the errors coming from outside of the Church, but against the errors circulated within the Church by supporters of the thesis of discontinuity and rupture, with its doctrinal, liturgical, and pastoral application.”

Bishop Athanasius Schneider
December 2010

Lord Jesus Christ, at your Last Supper you prayed to the Father that all should be one. Send your Holy Spirit upon all who bear your name and seek to serve you. Strengthen our faith in you, and lead us to love one another in humility. May we who have been reborn in one baptism be united in one faith under one Shepherd. Amen.

Filed Under: Church, essay, faith

Obama’s war on religion (update #7)

Sunday, May 27, 2012 A.D. Leave a Comment

Last week 43 Catholic dioceses and institutions throughout America announced lawsuits against President Obama’s attack on religious liberty. This raises significantly the number of federal suits filed over the blatantly anti-Christian (other religions are effectively exempted) moves by the administration.

Among those suing is Notre Dame. The Notre Dame administration has been a staunch supporter of Obama, awarding him an honorary doctor of laws degree at their 164th commencement. This they did before his attack on religious freedom but over the strenuous objection of the bishops who cited Obama’s atrocious record in support of abortion. The comments from Fr. Jenkins (their president) is online.

Overall, the list (currently) includes 23 separate cases filed by 55 individual plaintiffs. The Beckett Fund has published a complete list with details about each case.

My last summary was 1 month ago. This is the latest update. To see the whole series, click here.

Video Announcements

The bishops of the Michigan Catholic Conference explain the lawsuits:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w80rsqkLDyI

Another very, very good video comes from the Archdiocese of Washington:

Cardinal Dolan

Cardinal Timothy Dolan (president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) simply describes the effect of Obama’s policy as strangling,” “straight-jacketing,” “handcuffing” and “choking” the Church:

Father Barron

Father Barron puts religious liberty in a historical context after his recent trip to the UK.

Mary Ann Glendon

The best written overview of the situation comes from Harvard Law School professor Mary Ann Glendon. It was published in the Wall Street Journal last Tuesday. This is the 1 piece I would send to someone who is confused on this issue. Many are confused too, as the administration and their proxies in government and the media do their best to make it something else (e.g. “war against women” or “Catholics taking away your birth control”).

This week Catholic bishops are heading to federal courts across the country to defend religious liberty. On Monday they filed 12 lawsuits on behalf of a diverse group of 43 Catholic entities that are challenging the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) sterilization, abortifacient and birth-control insurance mandate.

Like most Americans, the bishops have long taken for granted the religious freedom that has enabled this nation’s diverse religions to flourish in relative harmony. But over the past year they have become increasingly concerned about the erosion of conscience protections for church-related individuals and institutions. Their top-rated program for assistance to human trafficking victims was denied funding for refusing to provide “the full range of reproductive services,” including abortion. For a time, Catholic Relief Services faced a similar threat to its international relief programs. The bishops fear religious liberty is becoming a second-class right.

Along with leaders of other faiths who have conscientious objections to all or part of the mandate, they hoped to persuade the government to bring its regulations into line with the First Amendment, and with federal laws such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that provide exemptions to protect the conscience rights of religious institutions and individuals.

On Jan. 20, however, HHS announced it would not revise the mandate or expand its tight exemption, which covers only religious organizations that mainly hire and serve their co-religionists. Instead, the mandated coverage will continue to apply to hospitals, schools and social service providers run by groups whose religious beliefs require them to serve everyone in need.

Continued attempts to solve the problem by negotiation produced only an announcement by the Obama administration in February that insurance providers would pay for the contested services. Since many Catholic entities are self-insured and the others pay the premiums, the bishops’ concerns were not alleviated.

The main goal of the mandate is not, as HHS claimed, to protect women’s health. It is rather a move to conscript religious organizations into a political agenda, forcing them to facilitate and fund services that violate their beliefs, within their own institutions.

The media have implied all along that the dispute is mainly of concern to a Catholic minority with peculiar views about human sexuality. But religious leaders of all faiths have been quick to see that what is involved is a flagrant violation of religious freedom. That’s why former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister, declared, “We’re all Catholics now.”

More is at stake here than the mission of all churches, including the Catholic Church, to provide social services like health care and education to everyone regardless of creed, and to do so without compromising their beliefs. At the deepest level, we are witnessing an attack on the institutions of civil society that are essential to limited government and are important buffers between the citizen and the all-powerful state.

If religious providers of education, health care and social services are closed down or forced to become tools of administration policy, the government consolidates a monopoly over those essential services. As Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, put it, we are witnessing an effort to reduce religion to a private activity. “Never before,” he said, “have we faced this kind of challenge to our ability to engage in the public square as people of faith.”

With this week’s lawsuits, the bishops join a growing army of other plaintiffs around the country, Catholic and non-Catholic, who are asking the courts to repel an unprecedented governmental assault on the ability of religious persons and groups to practice their religion without being forced to violate their deepest moral convictions.

Religious freedom is subject to necessary limitations in the interests of public health and safety. The HHS regulations do not fall into that category. The world has gotten along fine without this mandate – the services in question are widely and cheaply available, and most employers will provide coverage for them.

But if the regulations are not reversed, they threaten to demote religious liberty from its prominent place among this country’s most cherished freedoms. That is why Cardinal Dolan told CBS’s “Face the Nation” on April 8: “We didn’t ask for this fight, but we won’t back away from it.”

I marked the bold text above as the key. Father Zuhlsdorf has also added his commentary and support.

Father Henry

Father Terence Henry, president of Franciscan University, discusses how Obama’s mandate impacts his institution:

Finding a church home

Tuesday, May 22, 2012 A.D. 2 Comments

Here in the South, upon moving to a new community, it does not take long before someone will ask if you have found a new “church home.” I love it when people are not afraid to openly live their Christian faith and work to fulfill the Great Commission.

There are other reasons people seek a new church home too. The loss of a much loved pastor, internal political battles and changes in direction of the church community or the individual — to name a few.

So, what might be a “check list” of considerations when looking for a new church? Here are some that are common:

A welcoming environment: how does the church make you “feel”? How much do they want you?
A comfortable environment: is parking easy and seating comfortable? Is the sound system awesome and are big screens used to bring everyone closer to the action?
Physical proximity: is it the closest church? If not, how much further must you drive to get there and how many other churches will you pass?
Spiritual proximity: are their apparent beliefs compatible with yours? Do they agree with your position on homosexuality, abortion, women clergy, the death penalty, forgiveness of sin and eternal salvation? Pay special attention to this point because you certainly don’t want to hear a bunch of sermonizing on things you reject.
Rules: are they easy-going or do they have a bunch of “rules” that you are expected to follow such as attendance, tithing, music, dress, alcohol, dating, displays of affection and so on. You are an adult and don’t need to be told what to do, right?
A powerful preacher: does the pastor preach well? Are his or her topics interesting and pertinent to your life? Do you feel engaged by his manner of presentation? Can she extensively quote scripture to support her points?
Moving / uplifting music: does the music “do something for you”? Do you enjoy it and look forward to each performance?
Size: do you prefer a large or small church family?
Ease of joining: are you accepted as a baptized Christian or do they force you to attend classes before letting you join?
Member neighbors: will membership improve and strengthen your social standing in the community? Will it give you another thing to have in common with your neighbors?
Professional benefits: does the church have a lot of members who are “movers and shakers,” whose shared affiliation at church could be a professional asset?

These and similar points are on many folks’ lists, explicitly or implicitly, when (for whatever reason) they look for a new church home.

If I might be so bold (and indeed I might!) gentle reader, these are all wrong-headed. These questions do not bring you closer to the truth taught by our Lord, lead to increased holiness or necessarily keep you on the path to salvation. This is consumerism.

Don’t get me wrong, we live in a consumer driven society and there is nothing wrong with optimizing our personal interests per se. Common examples are buying a new house or car, choosing a gym or doctor, searching for a new job, joining an organization or even deciding which charities to support. All of these things can be approached from the perspective of a consumer.

Your faith is a completely different matter. There is only one God, the Creator of all things, who became incarnate in His Son, who revealed His Father’s will and through His blood our sins are atoned. Your questions should be pointed to Him, not yourself:

When was this church founded and by who? Jesus was very clear that there is 1 Church and He expects unity within it. He promised it would be protected against the forces of evil until the end of time.
How was the organization of this church determined? What are the requirements to be a leader in the church.
Does this church teach the truth? By what authority is it guaranteed? Truth is not relative to what you want or a democratic vote. There are not multiple, conflicting truths.
Has the church modified, added to or removed from its teaching over time? Have adjustments been made to accommodate modern thinking and social changes or have the teachings of Jesus been preserved.
In what manner do you worship as a community? How does it differ from the early Church?

Only the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Himself. It is the universal (consistent, unchanging, “catholic”) Christian Church. Jesus selected and formed the apostles and appointed Peter as their leader. The Catholic Church maintains direct, uninterrupted succession to them. The Church is NOT empowered to change or redefine the deposit of faith, but rather preserves it under the protection of the Holy Spirit. We have taught the same thing for 2,000 years. The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass was first celebrated by our Lord himself at the Last Supper and His Passion. We canonized (compiled) the Holy Bible and through our Magisterium, guided by the Holy Spirit, alone interpret it without error.

We were not founded by men – with differing beliefs – 1,500 years after Jesus. We do not have newly invented doctrines (after 1,500 years) such as Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone), Sola Gratia (Grace Alone), Sola Fide (Faith Alone), Solus Christus (Christ Alone) and Soli Deo Gloria (To God Alone Be Glory). All faithful Catholics worldwide share common beliefs, the same today as they were 500, 1,000, 1,500… 2,000 years ago.

Christians in other communities are our brothers and sisters in Christ. They too form the Body of Christ. They too are part of the Communion of Saints. They too are partially Catholic! There is only 1 Christian Church, the Catholic Church. Some are in full communion with the Church (faithful Catholics) while other Christian communities, to varying extents, lack the fullness of the faith and are burdened by error. Come home.

“I gave them your word, and the world hated them, because they do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world. I do not ask that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one. They do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world. Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world. And I consecrate myself for them, so that they also may be consecrated in truth.”

“I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me. And I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one, that the world may know that you sent me, and that you loved them even as you loved me.”

John 17:14-23

Filed Under: Church, essay, faith

Obama’s war on religion (update #6)

Sunday, April 29, 2012 A.D. 1 Comment

More and more people are beginning to understand the staggering implications of the war on religious liberty. It has united all of the Catholic bishops, together with leaders of other religions and other people of good will who simply want to preserve and protect the constitution.

This is not a war we started or want, but it will not end until the unprecedented attack on our basic freedom is neutered, one way or another. President Obama’s mandate is carefully crafted to protect everyone except Christian ministries. He could literally end this tomorrow if he so wished.

My last summary was 4 weeks ago. This is the latest update. To see the whole series, click here.

Face the Nation

On April 9th, Cardinal Dolan appeared on Face the Nation:

Missouri Rally

Archbishop Robert Carlson (Archdiocese of St. Louis) spoke at the Rally for Religious Liberty in Missouri on March 27th. Check-out this brief clip:

Chelsea Zimmerman has some good coverage of the event. A longer version of the video is available here.

“Balancing” rights

On April 26th, Kathleen Sebelius testified before a congressional hearing on the “balance” she used against religious liberty. This video starts out a little slow, but things pick-up after 2 minutes:

Religious Liberty

The Newark, NJ Newman Center produced this video on Religious Liberty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiDAeIkEX9E

Obama’s war on religion (update #5)

Sunday, April 1, 2012 A.D. 2 Comments

Last week the Supreme Court heard arguments on the constitutionality of ObamaCare’s so called “individual mandate”. 26 states, along with the National Federation of Independent Business and two individuals, are plaintiffs. The issue is: does the federal government have the power to force people to buy health insurance.

No decision is expected until the end of June and it could go either way. Based solely upon the questions asked by the justices, it appears that a majority are leaning against the Obama administration. One of the topics they explored is if they in fact decide for the plaintiffs, what should be the scope of their finding (severability). This could range from blocking only the individual mandate to overturning ObamaCare in its entirety.

According to recent polls, the majority of Americans oppose ObamaCare. Few would argue that reform is desperately needed in healthcare, but this law on the whole will make things far worse. Rasmussen reports only 39% of the public now supports the law while CBS reports support at only 36%.

I stand with the majority for a multitude of reasons, but primarily because of its use against religious freedom. Even if, by some miracle, Obama decides to reverse course on his HHS mandate and not force Catholics to act against their conscience – the underlying threat remains. Nothing stands in his way from reversing course again after the November elections. Nothing stops any future (Democrat) president from doing likewise. How many other ways can this law be used to attack the Church?

If the court overturns the law completely (pray for that), it will be up to congress to pass a new law that passes constitutional muster. Of course, without complete control of both houses of congress as he had in his first 2 years, there is no chance that such an expensive, freedom quashing, bureaucrat regulated, healthcare system destroying law would be again passed. Most importantly, Obama’s HHS mandate attack on religious freedom will be DOA.

The constitution’s commerce clause says: [the Congress shall have power] “to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.” If the supreme court somehow interprets that as granting the federal government the power to force citizens to purchase insurance, the matter will be far from dead. There are other suits behind this one. There are several challenges on religious freedom grounds. There is the November election – where we can fix this at the source.

My last summary was 2 weeks ago. This is the latest update. To see the whole series, click here.

Cardinal Dolan’s Interview

On Wednesday, Cardinal Timothy Dolan (President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops) was interviewed by Bill O’Reilly:

Naturally, the left is not pleased with the slow but steady impact we are having. One of Obama’s surrogates appeared in a later discussion and as Father Z notes “stages a spittle-flecked nutty”:

Monica Crowley (a radio talk show host) does a good job laying out the issues His Eminence raised. Obama’s man is Christopher Hahn, a former aid to Democrat senator Chuck Schumer. In response to Hahn’s question “who cares (what the bishops think)?” she replies “I do!”

Among other lunacy, Hahn argues that in these tough economic times recreational sex is necessary because it is affordable – especially with free contraception. He goes on to quote scripture (out of context, of course), speaks of dogma he says we created ourselves in the 15th century and gives us advice on church attendance. Obviously little effort was made to hide his seething bigotry, contempt and hatred for the Church.

We all know that the Obama administration thinks this way. The surprising part is that this guy actually said it.