The Smoke of Satan Returns

 Saint Benedict Metals for Christmas?
 
Thanks to Catholic Parent's Online a member of Catholic Media Coalition for sending me this.
 
The Smoke of Satan Returns

October 28, 2013

William Doino Jr.

In 1972, on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, Pope Paul VI delivered a sermon that startled the world. Describing the chaos then consuming the post-conciliar Church, he lamented: “From some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”

Paul’s words were a warning to all who, taken with the “spirit of Vatican II”—rather than the Council’s actual teachings—had fallen under the sway of dark spirits. But Catholic dissidents didn’t want to be criticized, much less told they might be assisting the devil. So they struck back—with sarcasm, ridicule and contempt. One of Paul’s biographers describes their reaction:

Cartoonists refurbished their stock of clichés, producing cloven hoofs, long sinuous tails, ugly contorted faces and terrifying implements of torture. For the cartoonists Paul VI was definitely not a modern man.

Neither, as we’ve come to learn, is Pope Francis—if by “modern” we mean an abandonment of the supernatural, and a flight from Christianity’s most challenging teachings. Like his venerable predecessor, Francis has made it a point to draw the world’s attention to the wiles of the devil. But whereas Paul waited nearly ten years to speak so dramatically about Satan, Francis took only a day.

Within twenty-four hours of being elected, the new pope declared: “When one does not profess Jesus Christ—I recall the phrase of Leon Bloy—‘Whoever does not pray to God, prays to the devil.’” The following day, Francis continued: “Let us never give in to pessimism, to that bitterness that the devil tempts us with every day.” In his homily for Palm Sunday, he spoke of problems which appear insurmountable: “In this moment the enemy, the devil, comes, often disguised as an angel, and slyly speaks his word to us. Do not listen to him!”

In July, Francis consecrated Vatican City State to St. Michael, the Archangel, who “defends the People of God from their enemies, and above all from the arch-enemy par excellence, the devil.” And in early October, Francis powerfully rebuked those who deny the existence of Satan, warning against relativism, deceit, and “the seduction of evil.”

Striking as his words are, they are not surprising. During his formation as a Jesuit, Jorge Bergoglio adopted the intense spirituality of St. Ignatius, who always recognized the reality of spiritual warfare. In On Heaven and Earth, his 2010 book with his friend, Rabbi Abraham Skorka, the then Cardinal Bergoglio spoke of the devil in the starkest terms: “He is the tempter, the one that looks to destroy the work of God, he that brings us to self-sufficiency, to pride. Jesus defines him as the father of lies.”

Contending with the devil, he continued, “is precisely man’s battle on earth.” That same year, Cardinal Bergolio rose to publicly challenge Argentina’s move to redefine marriage:

At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts. Let us not be naïve: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a “move” of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.

President Cristina Kirchner, who pushed hard for the radical legislation, responded: “Bergoglio’s position is medieval.” But truth is objective and not time-conditioned, so Bergoglio’s defense of marriage stands.

During the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the devil was by no means downplayed: John Paul’s Catechism highlights his presence, and Benedict was inveighing against Satan long before he became pope, notably in the Ratzinger Report. But Francis has taken the subject to a new level. He has three very clear ideas about humanity’s struggle against Satan.

The first is that no one should ever use the devil to excuse scandal, immorality, and criminal behavior—as has sometimes happened in the Church. The faithful Christian always accepts personal responsibility, and understands that the devil can never force us to do anything against our will. He tempts, he misleads, he brings us to the point of danger, but in the final analysis, it is our choice whether to succumb to evil or not.

The second principle is never to allow our fight against Satan to end dialogue with our opponents. Back in May, Francis proclaimed, “You cannot dialogue with the prince of the world,” and his statement immediately provoked questions: How can we improve anything in a conflicted world, if we demonize our opponents and summarily end dialogue with them? But that’s not what Francis said, in context. In the very next sentence, he stressed the importance of dialogue, which is “necessary for peace.” What he meant by warning us never to dialogue with the devil is never to sacrifice ultimate truth when meeting with our opponents—not that we shouldn’t search for common ground, or try to win hearts for Christ.

The third principle is to be on constant guard against the devil, never assume we cannot sin like those we are trying to correct, and ask ourselves some pointed questions:

Do I guard myself, my heart, my feelings, my thoughts? Do I guard the treasure of grace? Do I guard the presence of the Holy Spirit in me? Or do I let go, feeling secure, believing that all is going well? But if you do not guard yourself, he who is stronger than you will come.

On all these points, says Francis, “there are no nuances. There is a battle and a battle where salvation is at play, eternal salvation.”

Those who support Francis’ exhortations should follow his lead, knowing they will meet resistance. Sin, evil, temptation, the devil, eternal judgment—these are not topics the modern world wants to discuss, or even that many Christians do. When Archbishop Chaput addressed the reality of Satan a few years ago, he called out the “many religious leaders” who were “embarrassed to talk about the devil” and spiritual warfare. Doing so invites charges of harboring irrational, superstitious, even dangerous beliefs. But the real peril is the denial of evil that began with Satan, and is still being fomented by his legions. “I believe that the devil exists,” Francis told Rabbi Skorka. “Maybe his greatest achievement in these times has been to make us believe that he does not exist.”

We need to keep driving that message home. For as Pope Francis keeps reminding us, until the Lord returns in his full triumph and glory, the smoke of Satan is here to stay.

William Doino Jr. is a contributor to Inside the Vatican magazine, among many other publications, and writes often about religion, history and politics. He contributed an extensive bibliography of works on Pius XII to The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII. His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here.

October 28, 2013

William Doino Jr.

In 1972, on the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, Pope Paul VI delivered a sermon that startled the world. Describing the chaos then consuming the post-conciliar Church, he lamented: “From some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”

Paul’s words were a warning to all who, taken with the “spirit of Vatican II”—rather than the Council’s actual teachings—had fallen under the sway of dark spirits. But Catholic dissidents didn’t want to be criticized, much less told they might be assisting the devil. So they struck back—with sarcasm, ridicule and contempt. One of Paul’s biographers describes their reaction:

Cartoonists refurbished their stock of clichés, producing cloven hoofs, long sinuous tails, ugly contorted faces and terrifying implements of torture. For the cartoonists Paul VI was definitely not a modern man.

Neither, as we’ve come to learn, is Pope Francis—if by “modern” we mean an abandonment of the supernatural, and a flight from Christianity’s most challenging teachings. Like his venerable predecessor, Francis has made it a point to draw the world’s attention to the wiles of the devil. But whereas Paul waited nearly ten years to speak so dramatically about Satan, Francis took only a day.

Within twenty-four hours of being elected, the new pope declared: “When one does not profess Jesus Christ—I recall the phrase of Leon Bloy—‘Whoever does not pray to God, prays to the devil.’” The following day, Francis continued: “Let us never give in to pessimism, to that bitterness that the devil tempts us with every day.” In his homily for Palm Sunday, he spoke of problems which appear insurmountable: “In this moment the enemy, the devil, comes, often disguised as an angel, and slyly speaks his word to us. Do not listen to him!”

In July, Francis consecrated Vatican City State to St. Michael, the Archangel, who “defends the People of God from their enemies, and above all from the arch-enemy par excellence, the devil.” And in early October, Francis powerfully rebuked those who deny the existence of Satan, warning against relativism, deceit, and “the seduction of evil.”

Striking as his words are, they are not surprising. During his formation as a Jesuit, Jorge Bergoglio adopted the intense spirituality of St. Ignatius, who always recognized the reality of spiritual warfare. In On Heaven and Earth, his 2010 book with his friend, Rabbi Abraham Skorka, the then Cardinal Bergoglio spoke of the devil in the starkest terms: “He is the tempter, the one that looks to destroy the work of God, he that brings us to self-sufficiency, to pride. Jesus defines him as the father of lies.”

Contending with the devil, he continued, “is precisely man’s battle on earth.” That same year, Cardinal Bergolio rose to publicly challenge Argentina’s move to redefine marriage:

At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts. Let us not be naïve: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a “move” of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.

President Cristina Kirchner, who pushed hard for the radical legislation, responded: “Bergoglio’s position is medieval.” But truth is objective and not time-conditioned, so Bergoglio’s defense of marriage stands.

During the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the devil was by no means downplayed: John Paul’s Catechism highlights his presence, and Benedict was inveighing against Satan long before he became pope, notably in the Ratzinger Report. But Francis has taken the subject to a new level. He has three very clear ideas about humanity’s struggle against Satan.

The first is that no one should ever use the devil to excuse scandal, immorality, and criminal behavior—as has sometimes happened in the Church. The faithful Christian always accepts personal responsibility, and understands that the devil can never force us to do anything against our will. He tempts, he misleads, he brings us to the point of danger, but in the final analysis, it is our choice whether to succumb to evil or not.

The second principle is never to allow our fight against Satan to end dialogue with our opponents. Back in May, Francis proclaimed, “You cannot dialogue with the prince of the world,” and his statement immediately provoked questions: How can we improve anything in a conflicted world, if we demonize our opponents and summarily end dialogue with them? But that’s not what Francis said, in context. In the very next sentence, he stressed the importance of dialogue, which is “necessary for peace.” What he meant by warning us never to dialogue with the devil is never to sacrifice ultimate truth when meeting with our opponents—not that we shouldn’t search for common ground, or try to win hearts for Christ.

The third principle is to be on constant guard against the devil, never assume we cannot sin like those we are trying to correct, and ask ourselves some pointed questions:

Do I guard myself, my heart, my feelings, my thoughts? Do I guard the treasure of grace? Do I guard the presence of the Holy Spirit in me? Or do I let go, feeling secure, believing that all is going well? But if you do not guard yourself, he who is stronger than you will come.

On all these points, says Francis, “there are no nuances. There is a battle and a battle where salvation is at play, eternal salvation.”

Those who support Francis’ exhortations should follow his lead, knowing they will meet resistance. Sin, evil, temptation, the devil, eternal judgment—these are not topics the modern world wants to discuss, or even that many Christians do. When Archbishop Chaput addressed the reality of Satan a few years ago, he called out the “many religious leaders” who were “embarrassed to talk about the devil” and spiritual warfare. Doing so invites charges of harboring irrational, superstitious, even dangerous beliefs. But the real peril is the denial of evil that began with Satan, and is still being fomented by his legions. “I believe that the devil exists,” Francis told Rabbi Skorka. “Maybe his greatest achievement in these times has been to make us believe that he does not exist.”

We need to keep driving that message home. For as Pope Francis keeps reminding us, until the Lord returns in his full triumph and glory, the smoke of Satan is here to stay.

William Doino Jr. is a contributor to Inside the Vatican magazine, among many other publications, and writes often about religion, history and politics. He contributed an extensive bibliography of works on Pius XII to The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII. His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here.

Archdiocese of Portland's Office of Justice and Peace Still Funding Same Blatantly Anti-Catholic Organizations.

Catholic Campaign for Human Development 2013 Grants

Catholic Sentinel: 2013 CCHD grants support social justice programs

These organization are chosen by the CCHD Committee.  These programs are funded year after year supporting values against the Catholic church. Sometimes fungible funding makes grantees seem in accordance with Church teachings, but this actually lets them use monies to work against the Church.

When CCHD collections are not supported the Catholic church organizations are forced to find other avenues of revenue which is really a good thing.  We need to be good stewards of our collection plate.

We need to know who's on the CCHD Board and their biographies and if they are being open to all people and not just their friends.

CATHOLIC CAMPAIGN FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 2013 GRANT RECIPIENTS

The Catholic Campaign for Human Development has awarded three Oregon organizations with its 2012-13 national grants. Two additional organizations were awarded Technical Assistance Grants. The Archdiocese of Portland's Catholic Campaign for Human Development has also awarded its 2013 local grants to five programs that aim to fight the root causes of poverty.

CCHD is the Catholic Church's domestic anti-poverty program. The campaign assists local anti-poverty groups in organizing programs by and for poor and marginalized people.

Grant applicants are assessed on their ability to find solutions to local problems and to improve local economic conditions.
CCHD supports programs that

• respect human life
• foster human dignity
• empower the disadvantaged to take control of their own lives by having and maintaining a strong voice in the organization's leadership
• strive to create economic opportunity or bring about institutional change by addressing the root causes of poverty in the U.S. through change to our laws, culture, corporations, stereotypes, or unjust social structures

2013 NATIONAL GRANT RECIPIENTS
Community Alliance of Tenants (CAT) is Oregon's only grassroots, tenant-led, tenant-rights organization. CAT educates, organizes and develops low-income tenants into community leaders to challenge unjust housing policies and practices and obtain safe, stable and affordable housing. CAT's Housing Justice Program organizes buildings' tenants and empowers them to secure housing improvements and repairs.

Organizing apartment buildings develops tenant leaders and increases tenant knowledge and power. Tenant leaders become advocates, organizing renter-identified housing policy campaigns including: increased funding for affordable housing, rental inspections, and barrier free housing opportunities within the Oregon Landlord/Tenant statues and local policy.

This CCHD grant will fund the Housing Justice Program's efforts to mobilize and empower low-income tenants in buildings with serious repair problems to win immediate improvements; work for long-term funding for affordable housing; developing leaders to initiate campaigns for improved protections for tenants; and develop a comprehensive response to unsafe housing.
CAT is the epitome of CCHD and Catholic principles of listening to the cries of the poor and empowering them.

Hacienda Community Development Corporation (HCDC) works with a group of low-income Latino entrepreneurs to develop metro Portland's first Latino Public Market (the Mercado), owned and operated by a cooperative of the market vendors themselves. The Market is currently in a start-up phase.

While most of the Latino-focused CCHD-funded organizations in Portland work on metro, county and state immigrant right, all legislative issues, Hacienda CDC works on issues of economic opportunity for working Latino families and others in Oregon by promoting healthy living and economic advancement. HCDC is unique.

(Below is an organization following the Saul Alinsky anti-Catholic values formula.)

MACG Vision is the only established community organization with an identifiable faith-based -- Catholic -- element. Its organizing efforts are in the Latino communities of Catholic parishes.
MACG Vision applies the tools learned through training to change the culture of their parishes to ones that are based in strong relationships, shared leadership, and accountability among members.
Routinely in Catholic churches, skills learned through leadership training are used to share stories and strengthen community relationships.

This CCHD grant will fund its Latino Organizing outreach efforts to current and prospective member institutions with low-income and/or minority populations, focusing especially on the diverse, low-income East Portland/East Multnomah County areas, and fund a Latino organizer who will organize Latino members of these current and prospective member institutions.


2013 LOCAL GRANT RECIPIENTS

Huerto de la Familia offers Latino families a place to connect with their roots and the earth by growing their own food. Its vision is to cultivate community integration and economic self-sufficiency by offering opportunities and training in organic gardening and farming, and the development of food and farm-based micro-enterprises.

Thirty-percent of Oregon Latinos live below the Federal Poverty Level. The Cambios Micro Development Program offers business training and business counseling to Spanish-speaking individuals who want to create or enhance food and farm businesses and transition from laborers to business owners. Specifically, the program supports individuals in developing business plans, financial literacy, and marketing skills.

Huerto de la Familia has previously been awarded local and national CCHD grant. It is the only CCHD-funded organization in the Eugene Metropolitan area. We are glad to continue a wonderful relationship.

(Below is something for pregnant women that is a positive move)

Madonna's Center is a uniquely-designed response in Clackamas County serving Madonna's Center serves teens (age19 and under) who are “with child” and without essential family/financial support or not eligible for government-funded programs because of age/circumstances, and are assuming primary responsibility for parenting their children (age 3 and under) while also working towards self-sufficiency.

Madonna's Center serves Clackamas County, has Catholic roots, and is dedicated to protecting new life.

This CCHD grant funds the teen parents' efforts to mobilize to advocate for changes in public laws/policies regarding housing solutions for teen parents. Teen parents advocating for changes to unjust structures that are keeping them from succeeding. CCHD funded them two years ago for another project and it was remarkable to see the confidence instilled in these women.
Salem-Keizer Coalition for Equality (SKCE) organized in the Latino migrant community to develop meaningful parental involvement to increase the graduation rate for, and educational outcomes of, low income and minority students in Salem-Keizer.
Education is the surest way out of poverty.
SKCE is located in Salem, with workshops in Corvallis and Southern Oregon.
This CCHD grant will partially fund Reading Together We Advance (Leyendo Avanzamos), a parent-led, outcome-based family literacy project empowering low-income, Spanish-speaking parents of struggling or at risk pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, first-, or second-grade students to become engaged in their children's school.

Unete is a volunteer-led movement of farmworkers and immigrants in rural Southern Oregon educating their community and advocating for worker rights, humane immigration policy, and full participation in the decision-making processes affecting their lives.

The CCHD funds Unete's organizing efforts -- Voces Unidas -- to improve educational outcomes for Latino students in the Medford School district. This program includes Parent Education, Peer Tutoring for Elementary through High school students, and parent leadership development, which gives parents the tools to advocate for their children in the public school setting.
Unete is the only Latino-led non-profit in the Rogue Valley and would be the only CCHD-funded organization in southern Oregon.

Voz Workers' Rights Education Project (Voz) is a worker-led organization that empowers day laborers to advocate for their own just working conditions through leadership development, community organizing, and policy reform. Voz operates the Martin Luther King, Jr. Worker Center, where day laborers find work and build community skills.
Voz is recognized as a leader for immigrant rights, especially at the local level but also at the state level, with an office at St. Francis Catholic Church.

CCHD funds will support Voz's efforts in its "Save the Center Campaign," mobilizing day laborers and community members to advocate the City of Portland government for a permanent solution for a Worker Center.
2013 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT RECIPIENTS
New City Kitchen and Catering is a project of New City Initiative that provides employment training and opportunity to people who have experienced homelessness. It also creates its own employment opportunities through a newly-launched catering program.
By creating employment opportunity, New City Kitchen supports respect for human life and dignity as well as cultural diversity (racial minorities are disproportionately represented in the homeless population).
This social enterprise has a promising future. To solidify this promise, New City will receive a Technical Assistance Grant for Business Planning.

OPAL Environmental Justice Oregon (OPAL) is a grassroots community-based organization working to educate, engage and empower low-income communities of color to build leadership and capacity to effectively participate in the civic process to protect their community health and interests.
It is the only membership-controlled, environmental justice organization supported by CCHD.
OPAL receives a Technical Assistance Grant for Strategic Planning for its Bus Riders Unite (BRU) membership program, focusing on developing BRU's core leadership, membership retention, and membership-driven campaign work.

This project seeks to educate and mobilize transit-dependent riders in East Portland to engage in a community-driven project to increase the accessibility, safety and connectivity of transit, and to build awareness of the connections between transit and positive health outcomes.

The project will also create opportunities for meaningful engagement in local decision-making and advocate for prioritizing the needs of transit-dependent communities. Organizing a voice for the voiceless.

"Our Differences Make Us Beautiful" Pope Francis

Ex-abortionist surrenders abortion instruments to Pope Francis.

Ex-abortionist surrenders abortion instruments to Pope Francis

by Hilary White

Tue Oct 01, 2013 13:43 EST

ROME, October 1, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A former abortionist’s far-fetched dream of surrendering the medical instruments with which he had once performed abortions to Pope Francis became a reality recently, when, to his astonishment, Dr. Antonio Oriente found himself face to face with the pontiff.
In a testimony posted to Facebook, Dr. Antonio Oriente expresses his surprise at the encounter, explaining that he had originally decided not to go to Rome for a conference of gynecologists to which he was invited, because of a father-in-law in “grave health” and the fact that there was no guarantee he could even see the pope personally. But at the last minute, he changed his mind.

Former abortionist Dr. Antonio Oriente meets with Pope Francis

 

Oriente, the vice president and founder of the Associazione Italiana Ginecologi Ostetrici Cattolici (AIGOC), told ACI Presna, “I used to do abortions before my conversion, and I had the desire to entrust the [instruments] to the Holy Father, after I had failed to do it with John Paul II nor with Benedict XVI.”

A fellow member of AIGOC had confirmed that the group would be included in a papal audience for the conference, but said only a small number would be able to meet personally with the Holy Father. Of AIGOC, he said, only the president and secretary were in that number.

“I knew I could not confer with the Pope, and that therefore my desire to give him the surgical instruments which I used as an abortionist would have been nearly impossible,” Oriente said in his testimony. But despite these reservations, and worries about bringing the instruments on a flight, Oriente decided to take the flight up from Messina to Rome, “after I prayed and asked the Lord just the same”.

After explaining his desire to hand over his abortion instruments at an audience with Pope Francis, airport security authorities in Palermo allowed him to fly. “But in the meantime the boarding had concluded and the doors of the boarding gates were locked. But even here,” he wrote, “I prayed in my heart.” A policeman called a fellow employee, who allowed Oriente to reach the plane and board.
Click "like" if you want to end abortion! 



Upon arriving in Rome, more obstacles appeared, with little chance of speaking directly to the pope. But at the last possible moment, following the pope’s speech, Oriente said he told a bishop his story. This bishop, whom he did not name, spoke directly with “Padre George,” Archbishop Georg Ganswein, who brought him before the pope “immediately, without hesitation.”

Oriente handed the package of instruments to the pope, who, he says, “gave me the mandate to evangelize the pro life [message] and to defend life itself.”

Pope Francis, he said, told him, “This evening I will pray. This [the instruments] I have to bring with me to my room to Santa Marta.”

“Then he laid his hands on me, and said, ‘You are blessed and fight for life.”

Oriente said, “The instruments of death were abandoned at the foot of the successor of Peter in the world, as death is put at the feet of Jesus in favor of life.”

Oriente told ACI Prensa that he became an abortionist for the money, but changed his mind after he married and he and his wife experienced the pain of infertility. He attributed the start of his conversion to a meeting with a Christian couple who invited him to a prayer meeting, “to achieve some peace”.
Previously, he said, God had seemed like nothing more than an “obligation,” but at this meeting he encountered a merciful God.

Sitting one day before the crucifix, he said, he wrote a letter to the Lord, “What I call a spiritual Testament: never more death until death.”


“What kind of son am I that I am a killer to the children of others? I abandon the culture of death and embrace life.”
AIGOC, based at the famed Gemelli Catholic hospital in Rome, was formed in 2009 in order to make “a preferential choice to improving the life and health of mothers and children, either born or unborn, through new service initiatives, training, research and publicity intended to combat abortion in its varied forms, maternal mortality and perinatal, obstetric conditions”.

A member of the group, Dr. Giuseppe Noia, vice president of the Centre for Foetal Diagnosis and Therapy at the Gemelli, told the Catholic newspaper Avvenire that AIGOC “will fit into the contemporary cultural debate by proposing a language based on scientific data and philosophical foundations, legal and anthropological, to open up space for reflection on the dignity of the human person acceptable to believers and non-believers, because it is founded on evidence.”

Dr. Noia said the Association expects to see “a great cultural challenge in the current educational crisis.”

The aim is not to “to stir up a banner of victory or ideological supremacy, but to do a service of clarification of thought and promotion of discernment. Not to build walls or barriers of misunderstanding but to build bridges of sharing, with the aim to be more aware and more free and so reclaim the true meaning of humanity.”

Pro-abortion organisations are increasingly frustrated as the number of doctors and other medical professionals willing to participate in abortion goes down in Italy. In November, 2011 the Free Association of Italian Gynaecologists for the Application of Law 194 (Italy's law legalization abortion), met in Rome for its first national convention, and issued a statement that it is because “almost all new doctors employed make a conscientious objection.”

Government statistics from 2011 said that throughout the country, 70.7 per cent of gynecologists are conscientious objectors; 51.7 per cent of anesthesiologists, and 44.4 per cent of all nurses, also refuse.
Responding to LAIGA’s claims, Dr. Noia said that the choice of the majority of medical objectors was “formed by their awareness of the physical and psychological damage caused by the interruption of pregnancy”.

“They call it therapeutic abortion, but killing a fetus is not a therapy. Women who have had abortions, in fact, often fall into depression and are seven times more likely to commit suicide than others.”
Noia added, “Today, the doctor seems to want to regain possession of his identity: a professional in the service of life and not of death.”

A Definition of Infallibility in Light of the Pope Francis Interviews.

VOCAL has highlighted passages that are sure to be helpful.  Again, our world is turning upside down as the Scriptures have taught Isaiah 5:20.  We have three foundations of our Faith.  Tradition, Scripture and Magisterium How God Speaks to Us.   There is nothing new under the sun.

 

A definition of infallibility in light of the Pope Francis interviews

by LifeSiteNews.com   Thu Oct 03, 2013 15:21 EST 

The following essay was written by a theologian in Rome who specializes in ecclesiology.

The advent of mass media has raised a number of issues with regard to interpreting and evaluating the words of the Roman Pontiffs. This essay will look, very briefly, at two of those issues: papal infallibility (how to determine if a given papal statement is infallible); and how Catholics can respond to non-infallible papal statements.

The teaching on papal infallibility is found primarily in the First Vatican Council’s dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus; that teaching is repeated, almost verbatim, by the Vatican II. The Holy Father is infallible in the same way that the Church is infallible when he teaches: as head of the Church, determining an object of faith and morals to be held by the whole Church. This manner of teaching is called ex cathedra, that is, teaching “from the chair.”

 It’s important not to unduly limit the extent of this teaching. Anytime the Pope definitively decides a question of faith and morals, for the whole Church, he acts infallibly. Examples include not only the teaching on the Immaculate Conception and on the Assumption, but also moral questions such as Pope John Paul II’s condemnation of direct abortion in Evangelium vitae. It also includes, for instance, the canonization of saints (but not beatifications).

Infallibility is a charism, a special grace, by which God guarantees that the teaching in question is not in error. It does NOT guarantee that a teaching is expressed in the best way, or that the arguments advanced to support the teaching are necessarily true—that is, a pope might argue from erroneous scientific facts to a dogmatic conclusion. The dogma is true, even if the arguments are later determined to be inaccurate.

The vast majority of a pope’s comments do not share in the charism of infallibility. This can be seen from the purpose of infallibility. The charism is granted to the pope in order to ensure that the pope does not lead the Church astray concerning the revelation granted once for all through Jesus Christ.

All Christians are bound to accept, and believe in their hearts, all that the Church teaches. When a pope teaches in a definitive matter, all Christians are obliged to believe what he teaches. This means, though, that the pope must intend to bind Christians in conscience to believe what he is teaching.

Clearly, off the cuff remarks in a newspaper or to a journalist do not meet this criteria. Even direct teaching, such as teaching in a General Audience or even in an Encyclical does not necessarily reach this level. A pope may believe his teaching is correct, may want Catholics (and men and women of good will) to believe something—but this is entirely different from invoking his supreme authority to compel belief. Canon law confirms this point, stating that for a teaching to be infallible, it must be clearly so.

Once again, a distinction must be made. For a pope to clearly intend to make an infallible dogmatic judgment is an objective criteria. An infallible teaching does not become less than infallible because some people make the argument that it is unclear.

Paul VI’s teaching on artificial contraception in Humanae vitae, and John Paul II’s teaching on the ordination of women to the priesthood in n.n. are manifestly infallible. The two popes explicitly intend to bind the whole Church to their teaching. That some theologians or others profess to not be certain whether these dogmas are clearly infallible is not sufficient to compromise the infallibility of those teachings.

Now, how can we tell if a statement is an ex cathedra decision? Pastor Aeternus (chapter 4) lays out several criteria. The Pope teaches ex cathedra—that is, infallibly—when, “exercising his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by his supreme apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals which must be held by the universal Church.” Vatican II essentially repeats this: the Pope, the Head of the College of Bishops, by virtue of his office, is possessed of the infallibility “with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to endowed in defining matters of faith or morals . . . when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all of Christ’s faithful and the one who confirms his brothers in the faith (cf. Lk. 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act doctrine concerning faith and morals” (Lumen gentium, 25).

With regard to the recent statements of Pope Francis, it is obvious—really obvious—that most of his comments are not infallible definitions. Letters to the editor, interviews with journalists, even daily homilies fail to meet the criteria necessary for a statement to be infallible. Although he may be speaking about faith or morals, he is emphatically not making a solemn definition that the Church must hold this teaching.

Most often, he is speaking in a familiar manner about his own personal feelings. As many people have pointed out, precisely because he is speaking to individuals or to small audience, his remarks often lack the precision of a formal definition. Moreover, he is usually tailoring his remarks to that particular audience. Further, because of his informal manner of speaking, he often leaves out necessary precisions and clarifications that might help clarify his thought.

It should be noted, too, that often he is not making an objective statement about the truth. That is, there are many kinds of statements that do not make truth claims. Questions, for instance, cannot be evaluated as true or false. “It is raining,” makes a claim that can be verified as true or rejected as false; “Is it raining?” does not make a claim one way or another. Pope Francis often uses rhetorical devices that do not make truth claims.

Scripture - Tradition - Magisterium

Many statements, especially in casual conversation (Pope Francis’ preferred way of speaking) have a minimal truth value. When you say, “It’s a nice day” you’re not making a profound statement. It can be true or false in different ways, depending on the context in which it is said. It might mean the weather is pleasant, or that the speaker is having a good day, or that it’s a nice day for this time of year, or it could be a meaningless platitude. In none of these cases is the speaker making any profound claims about the niceness of that particular day—and he is certainly not obliging his hearers to accept this as the truth.

Still, for all that he is nonetheless the Pope, and in virtue of his role as Vicar of Christ, he is given the graces necessary for his state in life. Of course, we all have the experience of failing to respond to the graces we are given; that one is given graces does not mean that we necessarily respond positively to them. However, because he is the Pope, we must have a certain respect for the man and the office, especially when he is trying to teach us or lead us into good Christian belief and practice.

It seems obvious that Pope Francis is sincere in his belief. It is our duty, as good Christians, to be predisposed to think the best of what the Pope says and to be genuinely open to his teaching and docile to his leadership.

Pope Francis, though, has himself called on the laity to take a greater role in the Church, and has called on us to challenge him and to make our own contributions to the Church. We can look at the Pope’s words and actions, and, with a spirit of humility and charity, come to the conclusion that they are not particularly helpful—or that they are positively counter-productive, even dangerous.

In that case, we might have an obligation to speak out or even resist the Pope. I say might: one does not always have the duty to act, especially when one recognizes that acting would do no good, or that it might even cause greater harm. All of this calls for great prayer and discernment. The spiritual counsels that we must begin with humility and charity; that we must have a great distrust of ourselves and a great confidence in God; that we must begin by looking at and correcting our own faults, are all relevant and necessary. This doesn’t mean we must be perfect before we do anything—else we could never act. As always, we must rely on God to guide and direct us, doing what we can, with God’s grace, to know His will and to do it.