Notes: Wednesday, July 13-Tuesday, July 19, 2011 (part 1 of 2)

1. Interesting discussion on Assisi III

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/07/card-levada-opines-about-the-upcoming-assisi-meeting/#comments

Labels: Benedict XVI. Ratzinger, ecumenism, inter-religious dialogue

2. Mr. Muehlenberg on the A.B.C. and its recent Compass episode on so-called gay marriage

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/07/11/the-abc-should-be-put-out-of-its-misery/

(See also Mr. Clarkson's comment of 13.7.11 / 2pm in that post's combox; his comment deals with the first episode of what was apparently a two-part series.) The remarks by Prof. Altman as recorded in the episode transcript are of particular interest. (See this web-page for a follow-up piece by Mr. Muehlenberg on one of those remarks and gay polyamory.)

Labels: A.B.C., Compass, Dennis Altman, Frank Brennan, G.L.B.T., marriage, morality, polyamory

3. Msgr. de Galarreta with some quotations from then-Cardinal Ratzinger

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38113

Labels: Benedict XVI. Ratzinger

4. Fr. Zuhlsdorf on the nine ways in which one might "participate in the sin of another person"

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/07/quaeritur-participation-in-the-sins-of-other-people/

Labels: morality

5. "[Ireland's] Justice Minister Alan Shatter vowed to bring in ... new laws" under which priests "will be jailed for up to five years if they fail to report paedophiles to gardai -- even if they are told of the abuse in the confession box"

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/priests-will-be-jailed-if-they-dont-report-abuse-2821151.html

(That web-page came to my attention via this AQ comment.) Related coverage:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/vatican-ignored-abuse-guidelines-irish-report-finds-20110714-1hfxt.html?skin=text-only

http://www.smh.com.au/world/irish-child-abuse-report-attacks-vatican-and-powerful-bishop-20110714-1hfzy.html?skin=text-only

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=27239

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38149

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38195

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38200

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=27270

Labels: Alan Shatter, Ireland, sexual abuse

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Vincent de Paul, Confessor, A.D. 2011

Secularism vs. The Church after WYD08: war of attrition

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s2316508.htm

No, the word ‘deaconess’ was not used (not even once!) but we did hear the classic “trying to learn new ways to be church”! This week’s installment of Compass was, perhaps unsurprisingly, even worse than last week’s drivel, since it was even weaker and less substantial. Again we had a group of interviewees who all either dissented from or failed adequately to stand up for the impossibility of women’s ordination. With this week’s interviewees it became all the clearer to me how unprofessional and open to abuse this ‘documentary’ format (as opposed to the traditional, formal question-and-answer interview) is. Although the tone was not as stridently tendentious as last week’s episode, it was clear that the producers wanted to portray the invalidity of women ‘Orders’ as a matter of injustice, and the style of interview facilitated this nicely; it seemed that it drew the interviewees into either agreeing with or at least not dissenting from the editorial position. What exactly were the questions put to them?

But the producers of this tripe are not fools; they know that there is no theological basis for women’s Orders, as one can tell by their failure to involve any expert commentators, such as theologians or canon lawyers, like in last week’s episode. But this only weakened the story further, since the thoughts of the interviewees were wishy-washy at best, a grab-bag of the usual talk of ‘exclusion’ and vague feelings of injustice. Also absent from this programme was a failure to involve any women who were both perfectly happy with their state in life and able eloquently to stand up for women’s contributions to the Church (our Holy Mother) in marriage and family or the religious life. But we have come to expect this kind of bias.

Interestingly, Cathnews indicates that next week’s Compass will be another Catholic story, reporting on an Irish Priest who, among others things, conducted an affair with his housekeeper. Presumably this is meant to reinforce last week’s attempt to portray celibacy as unrealistic. It seems that the A.B.C. is perfectly prepared to prosecute its anti-Catholic campaign as a war of attrition. And we here at this virtual Lambeth Palace are prepared to man the trenches for as long as it takes.

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Secularism vs. The Church after WYD08: the opening barrage

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s2309743.htm

On the night that World Youth Day festivities came to a close, the A.B.C. launched its counter-offensive against the Church with an episode of Compass entitled “Catholic Dilemma: Part 1: - Sex or celibacy”. Presumably one is supposed to categorise it as a documentary, but it was so totally biased that it is no exaggeration to describe it as a piece of advocacy, advocacy for the insidious agenda of the ‘Catholics for Ministry’ set. This ‘documentary’ failed to explain in a remotely adequate way the meaning of the Mass as a True Sacrifice and the importance of celibacy for the Priest in associating himself with Christ, i.e. the importance of celibacy for theological reasons rather than practical reasons; is it really too hard to convey that the Priesthood is primarily sacrificial rather than pastoral (contrary to Vatican II’s re-orientations as enshrined in the 1983 C.I.C., see here for more on this: http://christianorder.com/features/features_2001/features_nov01.html) and that whoever will not renounce marriage and family (the second biggest sacrifice that one can make, next after the sacrifice of life and limb) is not worthy of being the one through whom Christ offers Himself to the Father?

Now, this is to be expected from a secular humanist programme (since the humanist can only ever understand celibacy as a means to the end of ‘greater availability’; for him man is the end of all things, so that even if he tries to understand things with God in the picture he can only ever see the value of celibacy in utilitarian terms rather than as a sacrifice offered directly to God—see here http://news.stjamescatholic.org/2006/week51/index.html for H.H. The Pope’s thoughts on the matter, under the title “Benedict XVI Meets Roman Curia For Christmas Greetings”) but what was inexcusable was the biased selection of interviewees, who were all either opposed or seemingly neutral to the question of celibacy; none offered (or was allowed to offer) an articulate, cogent justification for celibacy, though one did offer a timid, materialistic argument based on the cost of supporting a married Priest’s family. What I found most remarkable of all, though, was that by a brilliant rhetorical sleight-of-hand, Mr. Paul Collins was able to position himself and, by association, his fellow-travellers in ‘Catholics for Ministry’ as the defenders of the Catholic understanding of Mass against creeping Protestantism! Listen to this (from Mr. Collins himself):

We’re talking about the unavailability of Mass and the Sacraments. We’re talking
about replacing the celebration of Mass with readings from Scripture and a
communion service. Now with respect, I mean I have a fairly good record
ecumenically, but with respect that’s a more Protestant approach and I don’t
belong to a Protestant Church nor do I intend to join one. I belong to the
Catholic Church. And at the core of Catholic belief is the Mass. And if we don’t
have the Mass then it seems to me we are taking away from the essence of being
Catholic.

No mention of sacrifice or anything, of course; the word only appears once during the course of the show, and not in a strictly theological sense.

Surely the producers could have found, somewhere in this wide brown land, a forthright defender of the gift of celibacy? Just a single apologist for this venerable norm? Instead the producers took care to portray the requirement for celibacy as a mere matter of positive law (achieved by the use of a non-cassock-wearing Jesuit canon lawyer), with the possibility of a theological dimension rejected through Mr. Collins.

Add to these shortcomings the usual stereotypes of Rome and the Australian hierarchy as out-of-touch and unresponsive, in contrast to the two former priests, the married convert from Anglicanism and a ‘pastoral leader’ nun, hard at work (over-worked, even) at the “front line” and you have a piece of journalism that gives only one side of the argument. It was truly dreadful. One can hardly wait to see what rubbish they’ll offer next week (I expect the word ‘deaconess’ will get a good showing).

Reginaldvs Cantvar