Winnipeg Statement: Canadian Bishops, September 1968

Here's the text of the infamous "Winnipeg Statement" published two months after the release of Pope Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae. Paragraphs #17, 25, 26 and 34 are considered problematic, with paragraph #26 taking center stage.

26. Counsellors may meet others who, accepting the teaching of the Holy Father, find that because of particular circumstances they are involved in what seems to them a clear conflict of duties, e.g., the reconciling of conjugal love and responsible parenthood with the education of children already born or with the health of the mother. In accord with the accepted principles of moral theology, if these persons have tried sincerely but without success to pursue a line of conduct in keeping with the given directives, they may be safely assure that, whoever honestly chooses that course which seems right to him does so in good conscience.

RELATED POSTING Amoris Laetitia Will Bolster Canadian Bishops’ False And Deadly Appeal To Conscience

Here's a sample of the thinking behind the Winnipeg Statement which was said to be "an honest pastoral attempt" to "maintain unity in the Canadian Church."

Supporters contend that the Canadian Bishops were merely trying to defend those who had not matured sufficiently in their faith, and that they were simply upholding the established doctrine expressed in Dignitatis humanae, the Vatican II Declaration on Religious Freedom. They argue that it was this document which compelled the bishops "to support the need for personal freedom when dealing with the Church's rejection of artificial contraception... [and to insist] that married couples could only form their consciences in an atmosphere free of coercion." [Source]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CANADIAN BISHOPS' STATEMENT ON THE ENCYCLICAL "HUMANAE VITAE''

Plenary Assembly, St. Boniface-Winnipeg

Roman Catholic Bishops of Canada
September 27, 1968

---

1. Pope Paul VI in his recent encyclical "On Human Life" has spoken on a profound human problem as is clearly evidenced by the immediate and universal reaction to his message. It is evident that he has written out of concern and love, and in a spirit of service to all mankind. Conscious of the current controversy and deep differences of opinion as to how to harmonize married love and the responsible transmission of life, we, the Canadian bishops, offer our help to the priests and Catholic people believing it to be their pastoral duty.

I - Solidarity with the Pope

2. We are in accord with the teaching of the Holy Father concerning the dignity of married life, and the necessity of a truly Christian relationship between conjugal love and responsible parenthood. We share the pastoral concern which has led him to offer counsel and direction in an area which, while controverted, could hardly be more important to human happiness.

3. By divine commission clarification of these difficult problems of morality is required from the teaching authority of the Church ⁽¹⁾. The Canadian Bishops will endeavor to discharge their obligation to the best of their ability. In this pursuit we are acting consistently with our recent submissions to the federal government on contraception, divorce and abortion, nor is there anything in those submissions which does not harmonize with the encyclical.

II - Solidarity with the Faithful

4. In the same spirit of solidarity we declare ourselves one with the People of God in the difficulties they experience in understanding, making their own, and living this teaching.

5. In accord with the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, the recent encyclical⁽²⁾ recognizes the nobility of conjugal love which is "uniquely expressed and perfected through the marital act" ⁽³⁾. Many married people experience a truly agonizing difficulty in reconciling the need to express conjugal love with the responsible transmission of human life. ⁽⁴⁾

6. This difficulty is recognized in deep sympathy and is shared by bishops and priests as counselors and confessors in their service of the faithful. We know that we are unable to provide easy answers to this difficult problem made more acute by the great variety of solutions proposed in an open society.

7. A clearer understanding of these problems and progress toward their solution will result from a common effort in dialogue, research and study on the part of all, laity, priests and bishops, guided by faith and sustained by grace. To this undertaking the Canadian bishops pledge themselves.

III - Christian Conscience and Divine Law

8. Of recent years many have entertained doubts about the validity of arguments proposed to forbid any positive intervention which would prevent the transmission of human life. As a result there have arisen opinions and practices contrary to traditional moral theology. Because of this many had been expecting official confirmation of their views. This helps to explain the negative reaction the encyclical received in many quarters. Many Catholics face a grave problem of conscience.

9. Christian theology regarding conscience has its roots in the teaching of St. Paul ⁽⁵⁾. This has been echoed in our day by Vatican II: "Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of man. There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths." ⁽⁶⁾ "On his part man acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. In all his activity a man is bound to follow his conscience faithfully, in order that he may come to God for whom he was created" ⁽⁷⁾. The dignity of man consists precisely in his ability to achieve his fulfillment in God through the exercise of a knowing and free choice.

10. However this does not exempt a man from the responsibility of forming his conscience according to truly Christian values and principles. This implies a spirit of openness to the teaching of the church which is an essential aspect of the Christian's baptismal vocation. It likewise implies sound personal motivation free from selfishness and undue external pressure which are incompatible with the spirit of Christ. Nor will he succeed in this difficult task without the help of God. Man is prone to sin and evil and unless he humbly asks and gratefully receives the grace of God this basic freedom will inevitably lead to abuse.

IV - Teaching Office of the Church

11. Belief in the Church which is the prolongation of Christ in the world, belief in the Incarnation, demands a cheerful readiness to hear that Church to whose first apostles Christ said: "He who hears you hears me" ⁽⁸⁾. True freedom of conscience does not consist, then, in the freedom to do as one likes, but rather to do as a responsible conscience directs.

12. Vatican Council II applies this concept forcefully. Christians "Therefore must always be governed according to a conscience dutifully conformed to the divine law itself and should be submissive towards the Church's teaching office which authentically interprets that law in the light of the gospel. That divine law reveals and protects the integral meaning of conjugal love and impels it towards truly human fulfillment." ⁽⁹⁾.

13. Today, the Holy Father has spoken on the question of morally acceptable means to harmonize conjugal love and responsible parenthood. Christians must examine in all honesty their reaction to what he has said.

14. The Church is competent to hand on the truth contained in the revealed word of God and to interpret its meaning. But its role is not limited to this function. In his pilgrimage to salvation, man achieves final happiness by all his human conduct and his whole moral life. Since the Church is man's guide in this pilgrimage, she is called upon to exercise her role as teacher, even in those matters which do not demand the absolute assent of faith.

15. Of this sort of teaching Vatican II wrote: "This religious submission of will and of mind must be shown in a special way to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra. That is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme teaching service is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will" ⁽¹⁰⁾.

16. It follows that those who have been commissioned by the Church to teach in her name will recognize their responsibility to refrain from public opposition to the encyclical; to do otherwise would compound confusion and be a source of scandal to God's people. However, this must not be interpreted as a restriction on the legitimate and recognized freedom of theologians to pursue loyally and conscientiously their research with a view to greater depth and clarity in the teaching of the Church.

17. It is a fact that a certain number of Catholics, although admittedly subject to the teaching of the encyclical, find it either extremely difficult or even impossible to make their own all elements of this doctrine. In particular, the argumentation and rational foundation of the encyclical, which are only briefly indicated, have failed in some cases to win the assent of men of science, or indeed of some men of culture and education who share in the contemporary empirical and scientific mode of thought. We must appreciate the difficulty experienced by contemporary man in understanding and appropriating some of the points of this encyclical, and we must make every effort to learn from the insights of Catholic scientists and intellectuals, who are of undoubted loyalty to Christian truth, to the Church and to the authority of the Holy See. Since they are not denying any point of divine and Catholic faith nor rejecting the teaching authority of the Church, these Catholics should not be considered or consider themselves, shut off from the body of the faithful. But they should remember that their good faith will be dependent on a sincere self-examination to determine the true motives and grounds for such suspension of assent and on continued effort to understand and deepen their knowledge of the teaching of the Church.

18. The difficulties of this situation have been felt by the priests of the Church, and by many others. We have been requested to provide guidelines to assist them. This we will endeavor to accomplish in a subsequent document. We are conscious that continuing dialogue, study and reflection will be required by all members of the Church in order to meet as best we can the complexities and exigencies of the problem.

19. We point out that the particular norms which we may offer will prove of little value unless they are placed in the context of man's human and Christian vocation and all of the values of Christian marriage. This formation of conscience and this education in true love will be achieved only by a well balanced pastoral insistence upon the primary importance of love which is human, total, faithful and exclusive as well as generously faithful ⁽¹¹⁾.

V - Preliminary Pastoral Guidance

20. For the moment, in conformity with traditional Christian morality, we request priests and all who may be called to guide or counsel the consciences of others to give their attention to the following considerations.

21. The pastoral directives given by Pope Paul VI in the encyclical are inspired by a positive sacramental approach. The Eucharist is always the great expression of Christian love and union. Married couples will always find in this celebration a meeting place with the Lord which will never fail to strengthen their own mutual love. With regard to the sacrament of penance the spirit is one of encouragement both for penitents and confessor and avoids both extremes of laxity and rigorism.

22. The encyclical suggests an attitude towards the sacrament of penance which is at once less juridical, more pastoral and more respectful of persons. There is real concern for their growth, however slow at times, and for the hope of the future.

23. Confession should never be envisaged under the cloud of agonizing fear or severity. It should be an exercise in confidence and respect of consciences. Paul VI invited married couples to "....have recourse with humble perseverance to the mere; of God, which is poured forth in the Sacrament of Penance' ^(12). Confession is a meeting between a sincere conscience and Christ Our Lord who was "indeed intransigent with evil, but merciful towards individuals" ⁽¹³⁾

24. Such is the general atmosphere in which the confessor and counsellor must work. We complete the concept with a few more particular applications.

25. In the situation we described earlier in this statement (par. 17) the confessor or counsellor must show sympathetic understanding and reverence for the sincere good faith of those who fall in their effort to accept some point of the encyclical.

26. Counsellors may meet others who, accepting the teaching of the Holy Father, find that because of particular circumstances they are involved in what seems to them a clear conflict of duties, e.g., the reconciling of conjugal love and responsible parenthood with the education of children already born or with the health of the mother. In accord with the accepted principles of moral theology, if these persons have tried sincerely but without success to pursue a line of conduct in keeping with the given directives, they may be safely assure that, whoever honestly chooses that course which seems right to him does so in good conscience.

27. Good pastoral practice for other and perhaps more difficult cases will be developed in continuing communication among bishops, priests and laity, and in particular in the document we have promised to prepare. In the meantime we earnestly solicit the help of medical scientists and biologists in their research into human fertility. While it would be an illusion to hope for the solution of all human problems through scientific technology, such research can bring effective help to the alleviation and solution of problems of conscience in this area.

VI - Invitation to Social Pastoral Action

28. The whole world is conscious of the growing preoccupation with the social impact of all men's thoughts, words and actions. Sexuality in all its aspects is obviously an area of the greatest human and social impact. The norms and values which govern this so vital human concern merit the attention and cooperation of all. Our world evolves at a frightening rate, creating at once a vivid sense of unity and a set of conflicting forces which could destroy us.

29. This concern will be fruitful only if it leads all of us to recognize our true human worth in the possession of our inner powers by which we are distinctively ourselves with the full recognition of our complementary sexual differences on the physical, the psychological and the spiritual plane. Only in this manner will we achieve marriages that are truly unions of love in the service of life.

30. To this end there must be brought into play all the positive forces of the family, the school, the state, the Church. No one may stand aloof, nor are there really national boundaries in a matter of such universal application. With this in mind we call on all members of the Church to realize on every level from the very youngest to the various possibilities of adult education.

31. Without wishing to specify in detail we single out for special mention a few aspects which may have richer possibilities. We place first the dialogue and cooperation, which have been so encouraging, among all members of the Church and, through the ecumenical movement with other Churches.

32. We note with deep satisfaction the spread and strength of so many activities calculated to prepare for marriage or to deepen the appreciation of married persons of this sublime state. For example, marriage preparation courses, family apostolates, discussion groups, etc.

33. Educators, too, are to be commended for their growing attention to the question. Everywhere the problem of sex education and family life is being studied. And this education is happily being deepened by scientific research and diffused through the creative use of mass media. Nothing less than this mobilization of all human forces will suffice to meet the challenge of divisive and destructive forces which begin deep in the willful selfishness of man and inhibit the true expression of his love. We pledge ourselves to the pastoral priority of encouraging and promoting these programs whenever and wherever possible.

34. We conclude by asking all to pray fervently that the Holy Spirit will continue to guide his Church through all darkness and suffering. We, the People of God, cannot escape this hour of crisis but there is no reason to believe that it will create division and despair. The unity of the Church does not consist in a bland conformity in all ideas, but rather in a union of faith and heart, in submission to God's will and a humble but honest and ongoing search for the truth. That unity of love and faith is founded in Christ and as long as we are true to Him nothing can separate us. We stand in union with the Bishop of Rome the successor of Peter, the sign and contributing cause of our unity with Christ and with one another. But this very union postulates such a love of the Church that we can do no less than to place all of our love and all of our intelligence at its service. If this sometimes means that in our desire to make the Church more intelligible and more beautiful we must, as pilgrims do, falter in the way or differ as to the way, no one should conclude that our common faith is lost or our loving purpose blunted. The great Cardinal Newman once wrote: "Lead kindly light amidst the encircling gloom." We believe that the Kindly Light will lead us to a greater understanding of the ways of God and the love of man.

FOOTNOTES

(1) On Human Life, n. 4 & 18
(2) On Human Life, n. 8
(3) The Church Today, n. 49
(4) The Church Today, n. 51
(5) Rom. 14:23 and I Cor. 10
(6) The Church Today, n. 16
(7) On Religious Freedom, n. 3; the Church Today, nn. 16, 17
(8) Luke 10:16 (9) Const. on the Church, n. 50
(10) Constitution on the Church, n. 25
(11) On Human Life, n. 9
(12) On Human Life, n. 25
(13) On Human Life, n. 29

On Pope, Bishops & Priests Bringing Every Soul To Christ

A unique article (by today’s standards) on the basic systematic means employed by Pope, Bishops and Priests to accomplish the Supreme Law of the Church which is the salvation of souls. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI recently noted the crisis in the Church since Vatican II caused by abandoning the conviction that outside of Christ (and the Church) souls are destined for hell. I have criticized the Bishops of Canada on many occasions for actions that betray an indifference to the salvation of souls, most recently here.

-------------------------------------------------

The Systematic Care of Souls: Spirituality of the Diocesan Priest

Father J.D. Jaffe, Director of Vocations

November 3, 2014

A young man interested in discerning the priesthood came by my office a few months ago. He understood that religious priests belong to an order with a specific charism and mission, both of which clarify who they are and what they do. He asked, “What about parish priests, what is their mission?” He even posited his own answer, “A priest told me once that the parish priest or diocesan priest is the general practitioner, and that the religious priest is the specialist.” Though this answer is correct, I prefer to it explain it a bit differently.

The diocesan priest is charged with the systematic care of souls. It is his responsibility to do everything in his power to get the flock entrusted to his care to heaven. This zeal for shepherding is not unique to diocesan priests, all priests have this essential character; but diocesan priests in particular are called to do this systematically. What does this mean?

After His resurrection from the dead and before He ascended into heaven, Jesus entrusted the care of his flock, the entirety of the world, to the hands of His Church, most specifically to St. Peter the first pope. Jesus said to Peter, “Feed my lambs…tend my sheep…feed my sheep” (Jn. 21:15-17). Every pope after him has been entrusted with this same responsibility of caring for every single soul living in this world. This means that Pope Francis is responsible for doing all in his power to get 7.26 billion souls to heaven! This is true whether he comes into contact with them or not, whether they are Catholic or not. Does that sound overwhelming? You can see why it is so important to pray for our Holy Father!

Spiritually speaking, we know the pope prays and sacrifices for all these souls; but practically speaking, how does he ensure that everything possible is being done to help each of these souls get to heaven? He divides the flock into smaller, more manageable groups, or dioceses.

Canonically, a diocese is defined as a portion of the people of God. Every place on the planet is part of a diocese; there are around 3,100 dioceses all over the world! For each diocese, the Holy Father designates a bishop to be its shepherd, to be responsible for the systematic care of every soul in his diocese.

Bishop Loverde, for example, is responsible for the souls of the 3.1 million people living in the Diocese of Arlington. Whether he comes into contact with them or not, whether they are Catholic or not, he is responsible for helping them get to heaven. You might be thinking, “That still sounds pretty overwhelming,” and you’d be right. Now you can see how important it is to pray for our bishop!

To assist him in this task, the Bishop divides the diocese into parishes, and entrusts a pastor with every soul living within the boundaries of that parish. He is responsible for each and every soul, not just those who attend Mass or register in the parish, whether he ever comes into contact with them or not, whether they are Catholic or not. This is why parishes do outreach to the poor, marginalized, elderly, homebound, youth, etc. It is why the pastor works with ecumenical and civic groups to aid him in the service of all those living within his parish boundaries.

Through this systematic division of the entire world into dioceses and parishes, the Church ensures that every single soul living on this planet has at least three people who are invested in getting them to heaven: their pastor, their bishop, and the Holy Father.

Though not all diocesan priests are pastors, all diocesan priests share in the responsibility of the systematic care of souls of their particular diocese. They have been ordained to serve their entire life as a shepherd charged with the care of a particular portion of the people of God.

Pray for our Holy Father, our Bishops and our Priests!

Sheep Separated From Goats at Synod Of Bishops Via Conscience Rights

This Synod has been designed by men behind the scenes to make a huge frontal assault on the sexual morality teaching of the Church. Those men are not motivated by charity or by a concern for the suffering of families. They are motivated by their consciences, which cannot allow them to remain hidden in their sins any longer.

Witness A Revival Of The Complex Confusions Of The 1960s

Published today to SignOfContradiction.Blogspot.ca

According to Father Paul Nicholson, the current Pontificate is fostering "a revival of the complex confusions of the 1960's." This is a remarkable observation; one might even term it prophetic.

Is Cardinal Collins Admitting That Humanae Vitae Is Being Ignored In Toronto?

Published today to SignOfContradiction.Blogspot.ca

In yesterday’s interview with Brandon Vogt of WordOnFire blog on the subject of Marriage, Divorce, and Communion, Cardinal Collins did a very fine job of reiterating and confirming the Church’s teaching on marriage. In expounding and defending the Word of Christ he fulfilled his duty as a Successor of the Apostles and I trust that whatever the consequences of the upcoming Synod His Eminence will continue to be faithful in proclaiming the same truth unwaveringly to his flock in Toronto.

However, very important questions relating to the evils of the contraceptive mentality must be raised as a result of statements arising from this interview. The Cardinal is quoted as saying:

But Christian teaching is based upon the natural law that is written in our very natures by God, and especially upon the revealed word of God. We discover God's will, and the scriptures and the living faith of the Church help us to do so. We do not shape God's will according to what currently seems best to us.

So when Pope Paul did not change what he could not change, but re-affirmed Christian faith, many, many people were upset, and simply decided to ignore the teaching. That is our present situation (my emphasis).  I certainly hope that we do not suffer a repeat of that, as unfounded speculation swirls concerning a change by the Church of the explicit teaching of Jesus on marriage.

When the Cardinal said, “That is our present situation”, was he indicating that in his Archdiocese the teaching of Humanae Vitae was likewise being ignored? Either it is being ignored in Toronto also or it is not. I think we have a right to know the answer to that question.

If it is being ignored in Toronto also then only Cardinal Collins can, and must, answer for that grave denial of the Catholic faith. As the Cardinal himself stated, “Pope Paul did not change what he could not change, but re-affirmed Christian faith.” If Toronto is ignoring Humanae Vitae, it is ignoring a divine truth that even a Pope dared not change, a weighty truth that was intimately connected with the Christian faith, according to Cardinal Collins.

But how would we evaluate whether Toronto was ignoring Humanae Vitae? By definition, to ignore is “to refrain from noticing or recognizing” and to “disregard.” If the Archdiocese functioned as though HV did not exist or as though it didn’t matter, then couldn’t we say that Toronto was ignoring Humanae Vitae?

In his encyclical Humanae Vitae, which Cardinal Collins noted “upset” many people, Pope Paul VI declared contraception to be a grave sin and intrinsically evil. Were the majority of practicing Catholics (those that generally seek to live out their Catholic faith) in Toronto ignoring Humanae Vitae, we should probably find that they, like Catholics from other prominent dioceses in Canada, disregarded the Pope’s characterization of contraception and that they failed to identify the behaviour as gravely sinful. As a result, we should also expect to see high numbers of Catholics engaging in the practice, as do high numbers of the general population.

Again, if Toronto were ignoring Humanae Vitae, we should probably find that it was due largely to a lack of emphasis by the Archdiocese on the subject matter of Humanae Vitae. That is to say, very little effort would be expended in teaching and preaching on the subject of contraception, either in homilies, statements by the Cardinal or in printed matter released by parishes or the Archdiocese. Very few, if any, seminars or workshops dealing specifically with the evils of the contraceptive mentality, as expressed in Humanae Vitae, would be taking place.

On a more basic and practical level, since the teaching of Humanae Vitae is so intimately connected with the marital act, one would expect to see very little emphasis on the “hard teaching” about contraception taking place in marriage preparation classes in the Archdiocese. More to the point, one would expect that the Archdiocese would rarely, if ever, highlight the practice of contraception as a grave (mortal) sin and again would rarely, if ever, characterize it as an evil practice. To further avoid the possibility that Catholics would take seriously the sinfulness of artificial birth control, as identified in Humanae Vitae, the Archdiocese would be very reluctant to insist on its priests requiring Confession of their parishioners who practiced this mortal sin, in contravention of the Vatican’s Vademecum for Confessors (Prop. 2.4).

Furthermore, when discussing abortion and pro-life matters, the Archdiocese would be very reluctant to highlight the incontrovertible connection between the practice of contraception and the resultant outcome of abortion, what some call the “evil twin” link, because contraception, in fact, does more to fuel abortion than any other phenomenon.

In short, the Archdiocese would, largely through silence, ignore that the “knowing choice to reject the definitive teaching of the Magisterium on an important matter of morality [in this case, contraception] is formal heresy.”

So I ask again: Was the Cardinal indicating that in his Archdiocese the teaching of Humanae Vitae was likewise being ignored? Either it is being ignored in Toronto also or it is not. If it is NOT being ignored then we should observe an entirely different dynamic—than the one described above—at work in the Archdiocese of Toronto in regard to the practice of contraception by Catholics. If the teaching of Humanae Vitae is being honoured in Toronto, let us understand what Cardinal Collins is doing there that other Bishops in Canada are not doing so that His Eminence might lead the charge and help to turn back the tide of the culture of death in our great nation.

However, if the teaching of Humanae Vitae IS being ignored in Toronto, then we have a right to ask the Cardinal why he is not, as a worthy Bishop, doing everything possible to teach the divine truth contained in Humanae Vitae and to spare the sheep under his care the temporal and spiritual judgments of a pernicious, evil practice?

Some Catholic leaders claim that, in respect to Humanae Vitae, the current state of affairs in our parishes is just too big a problem to tackle and fix. Presumably, Catholics are doomed to continue in the practice of behaviour which to God is repulsive and repugnant, which also is fatal to one’s faith and which also contributes to the deaths and murders of millions of innocent Canadians? Is it conceivable that the Cardinal also could be resigned to such a horrendous and preposterous notion?

If we examine more of the Cardinal’s statements in his recent interview, we are forced to ask more questions:

In a society in which permanent commitments are not valued - and that applies to the priesthood and religious life as well as to marriage - it can take great spiritual strength, and is certainly counter-cultural, to renew each day a sacred lifelong commitment, trusting in the grace of God. That must be our path as Christians, and anything that tends (even unintentionally) to re-inforce a culture that undermines fidelity to sacred permanent commitments must be resisted, as also any action that suggests that the Church does not take seriously the permanence of such covenants.

Our Lord's teaching on marriage, like his whole teaching on discipleship, can at times be very difficult. Especially in the world in which we live, but really in all periods of history, a certain heroism is required in the Christian life. We are all called to holiness; that is not just the vocation of the few who are canonized, but of all of us.

Could not the same challenges be put forth in regard to adhering to the Church’s teaching on contraception? Is not the grace of God sufficient and effectual for heroic living in terms of the full understanding of chastity, which forbids contraception? “We are all called to holiness; that is not just the vocation of the few who are canonized, but of all of us.”

The Cardinal stated well:

Many people who are divorced, and who are not free to marry, do enter into a second marriage. There are various reasons that can lead to this, and their fellow parishioners should not occupy themselves speculating about them. Catholics in that tragic situation can be involved in many ways in the life of the community, but they may not receive the sacraments, such as Holy Communion, since whatever their personal disposition is or the reasons for their situation, known perhaps only to God, they are continuing in a way of life which is objectively against the clear command of Jesus. That is the point.

Cardinal Collins says that Catholics who continue “in a way of life which is objectively against the clear command of Jesus” may not receive the sacraments. Humanae Vitae reiterates the clear command of Christ as well. Will he likewise forbid the sacraments to Catholics who obstinately persist, after clear instruction, in the grave sin of contraception? If not, then why not? He needs to explain this scandalous contradiction.

Was the Cardinal blinded to an obvious truth when he later said in his interview:

The Synod on the Family will surely deal with the whole range of issues facing the family today, not only this one issue of communion for those who are divorced and remarried. For example, one of the key problems we face now is that couples are more often living together without getting married. And there are many societal trends, especially in the western world, that undermine the family.

Notice that the Cardinal admits that it’s a “key problem” in the entire debate. He says “couples are more often living together without getting married.” Why is that? It would be both pointless and impossible for such a cultural norm described by the Cardinal to occur except for the widespread availability and practice of contraception. Your Eminence, why not attack the problem at its root? Why not re-examine the upcoming Synod in that light? Be bold, Your Eminence, and lead the way to a new future for Canada!

As Monsignor Foy said, “the greatest evil in the Church today is the contraceptive mentality.” It is, in fact, almost single handedly responsible for a host of other evils that we face, not the least of which is the crisis affecting the subject of this interview: Marriage, Divorce, and Communion.

Saving Terri Schiavo: Florida, March 2005

Nine years ago today, Terri Schiavo died at a hospice in Florida. I was a matter of only yards away when it happened.  I dedicate this posting to Terri.

Published in The Telegram, April 2005                    

 -----------------------------------------------

On Tuesday March 29, 2005 I traveled to Pinellas Park in Florida to stand with others in proclaiming the unjust and immoral killing of Terri Schiavo, a 41 year old woman whose only crime was that she was a disabled person. Less than 24 hours before the airplane left St John’s for Florida I had been experiencing a troubling day but I wasn’t sure why. Just after supper that day I realized that I was much more concerned about Terri’s plight than I had realized. After two weeks or more listening to and watching the in depth media coverage and my own intense inquiries into her circumstances for more than a month, I think it had gradually, and subtly, forced me to a point of decision. Was I just going to let the tragedy happen, let it continue without a murmur? What could I do anyway?  She could die before I even get there, I thought. I’ve left it so late, too late to do anything. And who am I, a Canadian, so far away? As my evening progressed from this point of climax I spent several hours thinking to find a reason not to bring a drink of water to Terri in Florida. But I could find no good reason not to go, no good reason to allow a great travesty of justice to continue without lifting a finger. It was obvious that the countless prayers of thousands of people had not prevailed and my continued silence would accomplish nothing as well. Terri was being starved to death, and all the world was doing was watching. How could this be happening? The whole world seemed powerless to stop it. Well perhaps if I went maybe thousands of others from all other parts of the world would join me in doing the same thing. Maybe that’s how Terri was to be rescued I thought.

What turned the tables irrevocably and finalized my decision that evening to go to Florida was my discovery of the call from the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, which went out into the entire world in 1995 in the form of his encyclical “Evangelium Vitae.” In it he said: “Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.” He made it clear in his address that Catholics have a moral obligation to actively resist and disobey unjust laws. And the Church had spoken many times very clearly on behalf of Terri Schaivo. The withdrawal of food and water is “an unjust condemnation to death of an innocent person by one of the most inhumane and cruel forms that exist, that of starvation.” Pointing to the questions and doubts surrounding Terri’s medical condition, Cardinal Martino said, “it is a murder which one cannot take part in without become an accomplice.” I was not going to be an accomplice….I fully intended to take a drink of water to Florida directly to Terri Schiavo to alleviate her pain and suffering, or get arrested by police trying to do so.

I arrived in Florida just after noon hour the next day, and within a couple of hours I found myself walking towards the hospice where Terri’s execution was taking place. The first obvious signs of unusual activity were flashing lights from a distance and then an abundance of police activity…sheriffs and officers everywhere, on the sidewalks  and on the street, controlling traffic access to the area approaching the hospice…questioning drivers, checking the interiors and trunks of vehicles. It was like a terrorist zone, except they weren’t keeping the pedestrians away. I was free to follow the sidewalk directly to the hospice entrance, where police cars blocked the entrance and seemed to fill the entire parking lot of the hospice. About 50 meters from the sidewalk was the actual entrance door to the hospice. Again, there were police officers everywhere, along the property perimeter, at every point of access to the hospice. On the green lawn spaces directly in front of hospice property, between sidewalk and street, were fenced off areas where protestors were gathered in various ways or standing with their signs, posters, pictures, and other forms of messages. Some were talking about the latest news regarding Terri….which seemed to come in a constant stream, sometimes small details sometimes exciting stories.  Many were praying, singing and reading scripture. Some were catching a nap on a lawn chair under an umbrella. One or two had been beating a small drum non-stop for days maybe weeks, at about human heart rate, eerily signifying that Terri’s heart was still beating. Directly across the street from the protestors and the police was a huge community of media crews, with their trailers, tents and satellite towers shooting up about 7 or 8 stories high into the air. Every time there was a story in the air, the entire community would come to life, with reporters and camera men scurrying around at break neck speed to catch and report the story to the world.

It’s difficult to describe the impact of all this activity on someone who had never before been a part of such a wide scale, intense passionate protest. Perhaps my first thought was that it was pointless to think that crossing the “line” and getting arrested for bringing my 500ml bottle of Canadian water to Terri was going to make any significant impact on the situation, particularly the effort to rescue her. I had discovered very early that first day that a total of almost 50 people had been similarly arrested up to that point. Maybe some day in retrospect I will wish that I had proceeded directly, without further thought and analysis, to the hospice entrance with Terri’s drink and found myself shortly thereafter in a Florida jail. After all, if everyone had done something as similar or radical as that, wouldn’t that have maybe stirred the nation out of apathy and indifference and led to Terri’s rescue?

There were three main grassy areas in front of the hospice where protesters were gathered. I tended to stay mostly in the area with fellow Catholics who were praying more or less constantly day and night. I was able to meet and to speak with Monsignor Thaddeus Malanowski, Terri’s family priest for the last 5 or more years who was seeing Terri daily, giving updates and encouragement to those who gathered and prayed, and who also arranged to celebrate daily mass right on location. I talked to quite a few people from different areas and a great many, perhaps even a majority, were individuals or couples (at great personal expense and inconvenience) who had traveled from all parts of America (a handful from Canada too!) out of extreme conviction and urgency to speak and to protest in some way on Terri’s behalf. There were other small groups present as well, at least two or three representing disabled persons, and who had brought along severely disabled friends and relatives to protest the starvation of a innocent disabled woman with whom they identified.  Quite honestly I was shocked at how few people were really there to protest what was happening. In fact I would say without fear of being refuted that there were more reporters and police there than protesters. I don’t think at any time I was there I saw more than 200-300 people gathered at once who had come to defend Terri. This to me was unbelievable!! Out of all America, a country of approx. 350 million or more and out of all Canada, with 30 million or more, only a few hundred persons had come to raise their voices. And yet what a noise was heard throughout the world! Imagine if the number had been a thousand, or two thousand or ten thousand! Terri surely would have been saved. Was that asking too much? Where was everyone who said they were concerned? Honestly, it was a heartbreaking experience facing the truth of what was happening.

And then, as quickly as I had arrived, it was all over! Two days later Terri died and once again it was a heartbreaking experience, an outpouring of grief and loss among those who had gone the distance for Terri, with many weeping and trembling souls overtaken also by the shock, disappointment, and betrayal of it all. This was the solemn conclusion to the long battle that the Schindler family had fought to save the life of their daughter Terri.

I realize that a significant number of people will protest about my protest. They see the Terri Schaivo case as simply a personal family matter that everybody else should have simply butted out of. Or they maintain quite simply that it was better to pull the plug and let Terri die because they would want the same thing done to them. They see it as a “quality of life” issue. But to me these arguments only add to the sense of confusion I saw in many people surrounding me those few days outside Terri’s hospice. I heard the voices of concerned persons who were aiming their protest at Michael Schaivo, or at his attorney George Felos, angered by what they believed to be their heartlessness, treachery and hidden agendas. And there were a hundred legitimate reasons to be concerned about just that.  Other concerned Americans who were there focused on the courts as the problem, and saw ‘wicked’ judges as the downfall of Terri, along with the failure of political parties.  

I’m afraid at what I saw in Florida. It was the ugly, subtle, and sinister face of a new ‘culture of death’ overtaking our minds and hearts. Terri was a fellow North American, a fellow human being with special needs. So much information has been disseminated yet it masks the simple truth and overpowers us. I shouldn’t have to, but I remind myself that Terri was not comatose before the killing began, was not on a respirator, and was not unaware of her circumstances. She smiled faintly, she followed people and objects with her eyes and according to the registered nurse who had cared for her, she succeeded in saying a few words. She was a healthy disabled woman who was not terminally ill.

Yet we allowed an estranged husband to insist upon her execution. We allowed a ‘justice’ system to sanction and enforce the execution. We allowed ‘society’ to redefine the essence of our humanity. We said we can measure ourselves by our perceived productivity, by our potential contribution to society. We said that our quality of life can be judged as unworthy of quantity of life. For a number of years now we have been adjusting our thinking of the designation and termination of new life simply in terms of "choice." We have been routinely make judgments about which lives are worth living and which are not. We have declared who is a "burden" at birth, and now it is becoming much easier to decide the nature of "burden" when a "loved one" is dying.

Did Terri’s disability and medical condition negate her essential dignity as a human person? Did Terri’s disability and medical condition limit her fundamental right to life? Was her ‘right’ to a ‘dignified death’ simply another expedient euphemism for her murder? Wasn’t Terri’s dignity (as well as yours and mine) untouchable? After all, isn’t it a gift from God?   I defer once again to the Holy Father, the late John Paul II, whom so many of us praise and admire, yet whom so few of us have the courage to imitate. For him, euthanasia was neither a matter of personal choice nor a matter of private morality. “The value of a man's life cannot be made subordinate to any judgment of its quality expressed by other men. Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.”

My visit to Florida left me with an even stronger conviction to be bolder in discovering, declaring and defending the truth about the wonder and beauty of life, in all its stages. God help each one of us to do our utmost in this regard or face the consequences of a moral catastrophe that will exceed anything we have yet experienced in this generation or previous generations. Questions and concerns raised by Terri’s death move closer and closer to our own doorstep. Soon it will be too late to speak or act.

Eric Alcock

Paradise, NL

 

Blockbuster Homily By Archbishop Alexander Sample On The Mass Of The Ages

On March 1, 2014 Archbishop Alexander Sample of the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon celebrated a Pontifical High Mass in the Extraordinary Form at the Brigittine Monastery "Our Lady of Consolation" in Amity, Oregon. The Mass was the crowning celebration of a 3-day conference on Gregorian Chant and the role of sacred music in the liturgy.

Here is video of his blockbuster homily on the Mass of the Ages:



h/t EM

UPDATED: Perhaps Henry VIII Was Right After All!

There's a battle brewing in the Catholic hierarchy over marriage, divorce, remarriage and Holy Communion. This video provides some context.



There's more context here.

UPDATE: Some Canadian perspective from National Post.

How Evil And Lies Infiltrate And Predominate Throughout The Catholic World

Head honchos from Notre Dame w/ Cardinal Wuerl as buffer.
Classic snow job.
Any way you look at it Notre Dame comes out looking good.

The Barque Of Peter Plus A Pro-Life Reflection

Be sure to watch all of this video. It has a second section which starts at 3:32. It's an interesting reflection for "pro-lifers" on contraception.

Cardinal O'Malley's Sprinkling More Than A Simple Blessing Centred On Baptism

Really, we have enough confusion and ambiguity in the Catholic Church these days; we don't need more.

Keep in mind, Cardinal O'Malley is Pope Francis' point man in the USA.

Now dubbed as the ‘prince’ of the U.S. Roman Catholic Church, O’Malley is one of eight cardinals and the only North American representative on the pope’s committee to reform the Apostolic Constitution on the Roman Curia. 

 As with all the recent controversies raised by statements and interviews involving Pope Francis, a host of parties immediately arose to defend the Cardinal's peculiar actions. 

For those wrestling with such unsettling behaviours, my recommendation is to take the advice of Canon lawyer Dr. Edward Peters:

Bottom line: Whether Francis wants to baptize this baby or that, whether O’Malley wishes to be blessed by this person or that, is up to them; they are prelates who understand well sacraments and sacramentals, and they can decide what kind of message (if any) they want to send by their choices. Their defenders, however, should know about sacraments and sacramentals, too, and should not confuse other Catholics by offering misleading defenses of such deeds. 

"Confusion" being the operative word, because there's nothing attractive about confusion. It can very easily scandalize or discourage faithful Catholics. Furthermore, you would think the hierarchs would know that the "New Evangelization" is absolutely dependent on clear and cogent witness, not a "kumbaya" type melding together.

The Salvation Of Souls Today Demands Courageous Preaching In Full Accord With Catholic Doctrine

Much has been said of the style and words of Pope Francis, particularly in regard to some of his comments on today’s weightier moral issues. In this 40 minute homily Fr. Michael Rodriguez shares the mind and heart of the Church in a clear and straightforward manner. His aim is to safeguard the souls of his people through the teaching of sound doctrine and morals. Fr. Rodriguez is a priest of the Diocese of El Paso, Texas and offers only the traditional Latin Mass at his parish. Sadly, this fact may prejudice some individuals against Fr. Rodriguez and his message. However, my opinion is that Fr. Rodriguez is a holy and faithful priest, a great blessing to his people and to our Lord Jesus Christ.