Austen Ivereigh, the former adviser to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, writes about Tony Blair's conversion in this coming week's America Magazine. The full text is only available to subscribers.

He writes about something I am also inclined to think when I hear a discussion of Catholic politicians: we don't know what struggles are going on within the person. This is not a cop-out nor is it an excuse to rationalize voting in favor of legislation that is objectively heinous. However, I have to wonder what is going on in their hearts. Politicians are thinking and feeling human beings who should always be treated as inherently good, with the dignity that comes from being a child of God. Despite their errors, I don't see how bad-mouthing them and impugning their characters in relatively anonymous blog posts is "building the kingdom."

As the presidential primaries loom, there are many who will not vote for Mitt Romney because of his "flip-flop" reputation. To me, it's more important to vote for the best candidate at the time of the election not the one who's been with me all along. Conversion is still something we preach. (Whether he changed his position to get elected or he did so legitimately is not something we can be sure of this side of heaven, so I'll leave that one to God. Intentions can be tricky.) Which leads me to wonder how our vitriolic criticism of pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage Catholic politicians is an act of charity, meant to correct our brothers and sisters. Frankly when people treat me that way, I tend to turn off the message, whether it's for my own good or not. In the end I lose, but human nature is proud.

Do not get me wrong: I firmly profess all that the Catholic Church teaches. I vote only for those politicians who best conform to those tenets. However, God is the one with the last word. He is the just judge. In the end, all our struggles and our actions will be laid bare for all to see. Catholics who cut down their brothers and sisters who are on a journey and cloak their venom in the otherwise legitimate cloak of "fraternal correction" will answer for their actions.

Let's be honest here: how many have come over to our side, convinced by the truly ugly comments? I'd rather say on Judgment Day that I stood up for Christ and acted out of love for my brothers and sisters rather than out of pride. Remember: it doesn't matter when we get there, just that we get there.

Here's how Ivereigh concludes:

It is one thing is to hold Catholics in public life to account: to question how Judge Antonin Scalia can be in favor of the death penalty, or John Kerry of abortion. But it is another to call them hypocrites, to pretend to know what choices faced them, and why they took the decisions they did. Politicians are not lackeys; they must govern in favor of the common good in a pluralist society. If a Catholic can only serve a government whose every act chimes with his conscience and with church teaching, he cannot be a politician.

Prying into a man’s conscience is something we can do only with trembling, which is why it is left to spiritual directors and priests under the seal of confession. Tony Blair has satisfied them that he assents to all that the Catholic Church believes, teaches and proclaims to be revealed by God. The rest of us can only hold out our hands in welcome, rejoice at his homecoming, and be glad that our own JFK moment–when a Catholic prime minister one day opens the door of No. 10 Downing St.–has inched a little closer.

Which leads me to the question which is still not answered and I feel will still not be answered by the end of this coming new year: in 2008, can one be both authentically Catholic and a United States politician?


I'd like to explore these questions in the new year, including the insights of revelation and the lives of the saints. Despite the rhetoric, I still do not see this as a simple discussion.

Labels: culture, dissent, politics, U.S. Church

I saw this parody on Christus Vincit. He got it from some place or other, you can see on his blog. It's to the tune of Faith of our Fathers:

Faith of the grannies, priest-wannabes,
Faux ordinations on the high seas,
In the procession, three gifts are seen:
Bread and wine, and, thank God!... Dramamine.
Their day's long gone, they grasp at straws
Strive to make sense of menopause.

Faith of the Dinosaurs, double-knit clad,
Dreaming of whate'er "edge" they once had,
And of their glory days, now long gone.
Would they let go, the Church could move on.
Lumb'ring and desp'rate, it is plain
Soon naught but fossils will remain.

Faith of the NPM, (not really "faith")
Quoting for gospel what V. Funk saith
Ah, how mistaken the poor sad things are,
And how they've lowered the aesthetic bar.
Years saying "Ave"s might make amends
For the misdeeds of Funk and Friends.

This he added in a later post, but in the same thread:

Faith of Castrati, don't leave them out!
Some holy men live "with," some "without."
Becker says Origen should be giv'n heed,
When we ask "saints" to intercede.
(Who knew that Becker had the juice,
To decide what's bound and what's loose?)

Faith of myself, and similar cranks,
Carping at motes, no doubt missing planks.
What could the greatest Lit-abuse be?
(Hat tip to Chesterton), why, it's ME!
So here my snarking finds its end,
Contrite, lest some I did offend.

Labels: dissent, music

After last week's letter to the Catholics of China and tomorrow's Motu Proprio, it looks like we'll have more to read next Tuesday [h/t Rorate Caeli]:

Andrea Tornielli reports today in Il Giornale that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is about to release a Doctrinal Document stating in definitive and clear terms the interpretation of the Lumen Gentium passage according to which, "Haec ...unica Christi Ecclesia ... in hoc mundo ut societas constituta et ordinata, subsistit in Ecclesia catholica" ("this ...one Church of Christ ... constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church")

Rorate Caeli has an actual translation with more background that you can check out.

Labels: dissent, doctrine, Vatican

Rich Leonardi posted a letter by Archbishop Curtiss regarding some teachers in his diocese who wrote an article for U.S. Catholic on cohabitation.

June 5, 2007

Letters to the Editor

U.S.Catholic
205 W. Monroe St.
Chicago, IL 60606

Dear Editor,

I would like to respond to the article in your June edition entitled "A Betrothal Proposal" by Michael G. Lawler and Gail S. Risch.

The teaching of the Catholic Church about fornication is clear and unambiguous: it is always objectively a serious sin (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church #1755, #1852, #2353). Couples who live together without marriage do in fact live in sin objectively.

Because the position of the authors is contrary to Church teaching about the intrinsic evil of fornication, I have disassociated the Omaha Archdiocese from the Center for Marriage and Family at Creighton University.

Neither Lawler nor Risch are reliable teachers of Catholic moral theology, and certainly are not spokespeople for the Church regarding human sexuality and sacramental marriage.

I remain sincerely yours in Christ,

Most Reverend Elden Francis Curtiss

Archbishop of Omaha

I've looked around and can't find anything else on the Archbishop's response, either in the secular or Catholic press. No doubt this is not the last we'll hear from these two. Congratulations to the Archbishop for speaking out!

Labels: dissent, U.S. Church

Gerald points to a post by Diane on more goings-on in Medjugorje. Apparently Father Cantalamessa was supposed to preach a retreat for priests there next month and he's canceled his appearance. Apparently, the local bishops conference requires preachers from outside the diocese to first request permission from the Ordinary. This was not done in this case. The statement mentions some other interesting things which is the real reason I'm posting this at all. From the press release:

Despite the above mentioned decision, the news of a spiritual retreat for priests directed by Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa OFM Cap., Preacher of the Papal Household, to be held in Medjugorje at the beginning of July 2007 appeared on the internet many months ago, yet the organizers of this retreat did not inform the Diocesan Chancery in Mostar according to the norm, prior to the event. In this regard, celebrations of the sacrament of reconciliation are being publicized billing, alongside Fr Cantalamessa, Fr. Jozo Zovko [left]; yet the latter since 2004 has been relieved of all priestly faculties in the territory of the dioceses of Herzegovina (Vrhbosna, 3/2004, pp.293-298).

The Pastoral decision of 23 August 2001 regarding leaders of spiritual retreats and conferences was reaffirmed and expressly emphasized by the Bishop of Mostar-Duvno, Msgr. Ratko Perić [right]in his discourse and invitation given during the Chapter elections on 16 April this year at Humac, where he was officially invited to preside at Holy Mass. On that occasion the Diocesan bishop mentioned the following regarding Medjugorje:

1. “The pastoral obstinacy of the pastors and other associates of Medjugorje is quite evident on the ‘Medjugorje’ internet site which bears the title ‘Marian Shrine’. ‘Medjugorje’ is neither a diocesan nor national or international shrine. This status must be acknowledged while the events remain as they stand.



2. The obstinacy of the pastors and other associates of Medjugorje is also evident in the their disregard for the circular letter of the Chancery of 2001, which states that priests coming from beyond the areas where the Croatian language is spoken are not to be invited without the express and written
   permission of the Diocesan Chancery.



3. The obstinacy of the pastors and other associates of Medjugorje is evident in that a member of your Province, Fr. Jozo Zovko, who has no priestly faculties and who is forbidden from celebrating any priestly functions in this diocese, has been invited this year to preside at the Way of the Cross in Medjugorje and has been in this regard presented as available for confessions”.

The discourse was published in its entirety at the beginning of May this year in the diocesan pastoral monthly (Crkva na kamenu, 5/2007, pp. 33-35).

After exchanging various letters between the Diocesan Chancery and the Parish Rectory of Medjugorje, the pastor of Medjugorje Fr. Ivan Sesar notified the bishop in his letter dated 13 June 2007 that: “Upon my insistence due to the shortness of time, I asked P. Cantalamessa to send his acknowledgment of receipt of my letter by fax, which he did in the meantime. He accepts my apology and regrets that due to the newly arisen circumstances he cannot come, since in principle he never does public appearances without the permission of the local Ordinary”.

Bishop Perić and Fr. Cantalamessa exchanged letters on 13 June. Fr. Cantalamessa informed the bishop that he wrote a letter to Fr. Sesar on 8 June. Fr. Cantalamessa wrote in his letter to the bishop on 13 June: “My principle is not to preach, especially not to the clergy, without the permission of the local bishop”.

Labels: dissent, international, Virgin Mary

Dom reports the good news:

Frances Kissling, founder of the pro-abortion Catholics for a Free Choice, an organization composed of basically a few people supported by some very big foundations, is retiring. Kissling has waged a one-woman war to advance the proposition that it is acceptable for Catholics to dissent from the Church’s teachings on abortion, contraception, sexual moral ethics, and other fundamental matters. She has worked to have the United Nations strip the Holy See of its observer status and has orchestrated worldwide advertising campaigns blaming the Church’s bishops for millions of AIDS deaths through the tortuous logic that the Church’s call to abstinence somehow forces fornicators not to use condoms but to fornicate anyway.

Good riddance to Kissling, but don’t let down your guard: There are plenty of others willing to step into her shoes.

Labels: dissent, life issues

I greeted this week's news of the Holy See's agreement with Bishop Bruskewitz's excommunication decision of certain fringe groups ten years ago with joy. Although excommunication is never joyful, it can sometimes be necessary. These groups, on both the right and left of the theological spectrum, are so far from the middle that they've literally fallen off the radar.

Take Call to Action, for example. There's nothing wrong with being in favor of relaxing the discipline of mandatory celibacy for priests of the Latin Rite, since it is just a discipline (one that I happen to love, by the way) and could be changed. However, existing in order to protest women's ordination and the Church's teaching on artificial contraception is an exercise in futility. These will not (and cannot) change and beginning a "Catholic" group in order to oppose them just promotes disunity and is waste of energy. If you want to fight for justice, first figure out what that means, then work with the Church, not against it.

In a statement released by Call to Action yesterday, they continued beating their drum against the hierarchy of the Church. They even resorted to the very tired argument that Jesus sometimes challenged the religious hierarchy of his day. It seems these folks so easily forget that Jesus set up a hierarchy when he founded the Church.

In the same statement they also rail against the penalty of excommunication, calling it "medieval" which we all know is a dirty word in today's world. While excommunication is not always the best solution to a problem, sometimes it seems we have to exercise some standard of membership in order to preserve the unity of the Body of Christ.

They say that they believe in the Nicene Creed. Whatever happened to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church? Lower our standards, abandon our tradition, and ditch our structures of authority and you have what many other Christians experience today: disunity, misunderstanding, constant disputes with no recourse to authority, and a lack of corporate memory. These often lead me to wonder that if you don't have a past, can you have a future?

If we, as Catholics, have these wonderful things at our disposal (a unified structure that is faithful to a common tradition) we should embrace it because it truly is who we are. Those who don't like it should really examine why they are Catholics at all. This is how we believe that we can stay faithful to the mission of Jesus. After 2,000 years of varying historical circumstances including both good and bad, how can we not trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit?

Labels: dissent, reflection, U.S. Bishops, U.S. Church, Vatican