Ministries in the Church are not just vocations, are not careers, but movements of love. No one should be out there doing activities for their own aggrandizement. Part 7 on Deus Caritas Est

The encyclical, Deus Caritas Est, moves one's thoughts from eros, to agape, to caritas. Now before I continue, I would like to emphasize that all of this movement is one of the heart. The conversion of a heart to Christ changes a life, to a life of love and service. Now, the parish life of caritas breaks down when a person, or a people do not convert. If a person or a people refuse to accept grace, the grace of repentance, then there can be no renewal of a parish. No amount of programs can renew a parish, unless these programs hit the heart with the Truth and Love of Christ. Unless the heart and mind are moved, either by eros, or through eros to agape, caritas will not happen. St. Bernard of Clairvaux created a movement of love outside himself, because he was in love with Christ. So too were St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila. St. Maximilian Kolbe and many, many other witnesses to the Faith.


Many people are closed to repentance, especially if they are contracepting or in marriages which need to be sanitized, excommunicated because of abortion, or in other stages of death. Without a personal prayer life, a personal openness to love, there is no renewal of a community.


Back to the encyclical: here is a radical reminder of the real Gospel message. 


Interior openness to the Catholic dimension of the Church cannot fail to dispose charity workers to work in harmony with other organizations in serving various forms of need, but in a way that respects what is distinctive about the service which Christ requested of his disciples. Saint Paul, in his hymn to charity (cf. 1 Cor 13), teaches us that it is always more than activity alone: “If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but do not have love, I gain nothing” (v. 3). This hymn must be the Magna Carta of all ecclesial service; it sums up all the reflections on love which I have offered throughout this Encyclical Letter. Practical activity will always be insufficient, unless it visibly expresses a love for man, a love nourished by an encounter with Christ. My deep personal sharing in the needs and sufferings of others becomes a sharing of my very self with them: if my gift is not to prove a source of humiliation, I must give to others not only something that is my own, but my very self; I must be personally present in my gift.


Looking carefully at this section, one sees the call to get involved which each other on the personal level. I have highlighted the section which is important to our understanding of real love.


So, doing good deeds is not enough, as St. Paul says. Activity can be totally selfish, totally egotistical, totally unlovable. Without virtues, love is sterile.


Now, eros, which is the basic love of marriage, and the love of the mystics towards Christ, is the first step of the ladder of perfection. But, one moves, in maturity, to agape, the selfless serving in a family, to a partner, and to a community. This movement has to happen, or one is not making the journey to perfection.


Caritas, the activity of love, follows naturally, so that we no longer merely feel and rest in love, but act, in real, concrete ways. Without this concrete exhibition of love, we shall not gain heaven.


Harsh words, but Christ had harder words. So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth. Revelations 3:16
RSV

The great spiritual writers tell us that we actually cannot work in charity without the burning heart of love. Without love, there is no activity which, in the old words of the Church, gains merit.


Back to the encyclical: 35. This proper way of serving others also leads to humility. The one who serves does not consider himself superior to the one served, however miserable his situation at the moment may be. Christ took the lowest place in the world—the Cross—and by this radical humility he redeemed us and constantly comes to our aid. Those who are in a position to help others will realize that in doing so they themselves receive help; being able to help others is no merit or achievement of their own. This duty is a grace. The more we do for others, the more we understand and can appropriate the words of Christ: “We are useless servants” (Lk 17:10). We recognize that we are not acting on the basis of any superiority or greater personal efficiency, but because the Lord has graciously enabled us to do so. There are times when the burden of need and our own limitations might tempt us to become discouraged. But precisely then we are helped by the knowledge that, in the end, we are only instruments in the Lord's hands; and this knowledge frees us from the presumption of thinking that we alone are personally responsible for building a better world. In all humility we will do what we can, and in all humility we will entrust the rest to the Lord. It is God who governs the world, not we. We offer him our service only to the extent that we can, and for as long as he grants us the strength. To do all we can with what strength we have, however, is the task which keeps the good servant of Jesus Christ always at work: “The love of Christ urges us on” (2 Cor 5:14).


Ministries in the Church are not just vocations, are not careers, but movements of love. No one should be out there doing activities for their own aggrandizement. 


One does not work in pro-life because of politics, but uses politics if necessary, and that is necessary. But, all is done through love.

36. When we consider the immensity of others' needs, we can, on the one hand, be driven towards an ideology that would aim at doing what God's governance of the world apparently cannot: fully resolving every problem. Or we can be tempted to give in to inertia, since it would seem that in any event nothing can be accomplished. At such times, a living relationship with Christ is decisive if we are to keep on the right path, without falling into an arrogant contempt for man, something not only unconstructive but actually destructive, or surrendering to a resignation which would prevent us from being guided by love in the service of others. Prayer, as a means of drawing ever new strength from Christ, is concretely and urgently needed. People who pray are not wasting their time, even though the situation appears desperate and seems to call for action alone. Piety does not undermine the struggle against the poverty of our neighbours, however extreme. In the example of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta we have a clear illustration of the fact that time devoted to God in prayer not only does not detract from effective and loving service to our neighbour but is in fact the inexhaustible source of that service. In her letter for Lent 1996, Blessed Teresa wrote to her lay co-workers: “We need this deep connection with God in our daily life. How can we obtain it? By prayer”.

All the boldface type is my emphasis. Now, look at this section above. No prayer, no love, no action in Christ. Prayer gives us the Heart of God and takes away our cold, small, shriveled hearts

37. It is time to reaffirm the importance of prayer in the face of the activism and the growing secularism of many Christians engaged in charitable work. Clearly, the Christian who prays does not claim to be able to change God's plans or correct what he has foreseen. Rather, he seeks an encounter with the Father of Jesus Christ, asking God to be present with the consolation of the Spirit to him and his work. A personal relationship with God and an abandonment to his will can prevent man from being demeaned and save him from falling prey to the teaching of fanaticism and terrorism. An authentically religious attitude prevents man from presuming to judge God, accusing him of allowing poverty and failing to have compassion for his creatures. When people claim to build a case against God in defence of man, on whom can they depend when human activity proves powerless?

I repeat: Prayer gives us the Heart of God and takes away our cold, small, shriveled hearts. And the Pope warns us of communism and socialism in the highlighted section above. Are Catholics paying attention to this warning? Fanaticism and terrorism--socialism and communism, even Islam, which is a highly materialistic creed.

May I add my favorite saint, St. Bernard of Clairvaux's words on this journey to caritas: thanks to this link. 

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux Four Degress of Love…

“since we are carnal and are born of the lust of the flesh, it must be that our desire and our love shall have its beginning in the flesh. But rightly guided by the grace of God through these degrees, it will have its consummation in the spirit: for that was not first which is spiritual but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual (I Cor. 15.46).

 1.      At first, man loves himself for his own sake. That is the flesh, which can appreciate nothing beyond itself.

2.      Next, he perceives that he cannot exist by himself, and so begins by faith to seek after God, and to love Him as something necessary to his own welfare. When he has learned to worship God and to seek Him aright, meditating on God, reading God’s Word, praying and obeying His commandments, he comes gradually to know what God is, and finds Him altogether lovely.

3.      So, having tasted and seen how gracious the Lord is (Ps. 34.8), he advances to the third degree, when he loves God, not merely as his benefactor but as God.

4.      The fourth degree and perfect condition wherein man loves himself solely for God’s sake. Let any who have attained so far bear record; I confess it seems beyond my powers…For then in wondrous wise he will forget himself and as if delivered from self, he will grow wholly God’s. Joined unto the Lord, he will then be one spirit with Him (I Cor. 6.17).”

Can one begin to see why socialists and communists hate real marriage, the unit of family, the domestic Church which leads to the greater loves between God and humans? Can one begin to understand why homage to the State destroys love and therefore, the work of the Church on earth?

To be continued.....

Socialism Wins in France

Hollande 51.9% Sarkozy 48.1%

As France goes, so goes Europe.

Do Catholics realize that this is a disaster for France and for Europe? This is a turning point.

Part Six on Deus Caritas Est

Continuing the discussion on Deus Caritas Est, I am reminded that just in the past few days, the Pope asked for a review of Caritas, the umbrella Catholic charity, as some of the things being supported are not in keeping with the teachings of the Church. I am glad that the Pope finally decided to have this interior review. 


In conformity with the episcopal structure of the Church, the Bishops, as successors of the Apostles, are charged with primary responsibility for carrying out in the particular Churches the programme set forth in the Acts of the Apostles (cf. 2:42-44): today as in the past, the Church as God's family must be a place where help is given and received, and at the same time, a place where people are also prepared to serve those outside her confines who are in need of help. In the rite of episcopal ordination, prior to the act of consecration itself, the candidate must respond to several questions which express the essential elements of his office and recall the duties of his future ministry. He promises expressly to be, in the Lord's name, welcoming and merciful to the poor and to all those in need of consolation and assistance.[31] The Code of Canon Law, in the canons on the ministry of the Bishop, does not expressly mention charity as a specific sector of episcopal activity, but speaks in general terms of the Bishop's responsibility for coordinating the different works of the apostolate with due regard for their proper character.[32] Recently, however, the Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops explored more specifically the duty of charity as a responsibility incumbent upon the whole Church and upon each Bishop in his Diocese,[33] and it emphasized that the exercise of charity is an action of the Church as such, and that, like the ministry of Word and Sacrament, it too has been an essential part of her mission from the very beginning.[34]


The emphasis on the role of the bishops is also key. In some countries, the bishops' conferences are very involved in fantastic ways in charitable activities. One hopes that these same bishops do not play footsy with either Liberation Theology, or socialism, or Marxism in their efforts to help the poor and displaced. Unfortunately, in too many dioceses, the bishops and individual priests have confused social welfare with charity, or socialism with caritas. Only the Church, through and in and with the Love of Christ can truly meet the needs of the entire person, the real individual, body and soul.


to be continued....

On Baptism again and again and again.....

OK, back to the necessity of Baptism. Today, a person in my parish noted that it was not necessary to get babies baptized who were seriously ill in the hospital, (are you ready for this?) because one could not have a baptismal party for the family. I cannot stress too much that Pelagianism is a heresy gaining popularity  here in England.

Pelagius supposedly said, and his ideas were condemned soundly at the Council of Carthage in 418, that humans could merit heaven and gain salvation without baptism. His emphasis was on human will power choosing good over evil and thus meriting heaven. My little friend in Ireland a few months ago insisted that she would go to heaven, "just by being good." It is not that simple. I hope she is baptized, as she wants to go to heaven. I hope she is a practicing Catholic.


Obviously, these ideas are contrary to the teachings of Christ and His Church. Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except any one be born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Douay Rheims. John 3:5. This is not the doctrine of Supertradmum but of Jesus Christ, True God and True Man.


Basically Pelagianism denies that the human soul is flawed and lost through Original Sin.  Pelagianism denies the efficacy of baptism, sanctifying grace, and the life of the infuse virtues.  Pelagianism denies the need for Christ to die for our sins on the Cross, the need for atonement. Here is a snippet from the online Catholic Encyclopedia.  Much of this will sound familiar to you, as it does me, as I here these ideas almost daily.


During his sojourn in Rome he composed several works: "De fide Trinitatis libri III", now lost, but extolled by Gennadius as "indispensable reading matter for students"; "Eclogarum ex divinis Scripturisliber unus", in the main collection of Bible passages based on Cyprian's "Testimoniorum libri III", of which St. Augustine has preserved a number of fragments; "Commentarii in epistolas S. Pauli", elaborated no doubt before the destruction of Rome by Alaric (410) and known to St. Augustine in 412. Zimmer (loc. cit.) deserves credit for having rediscovered in this commentary on St. Paul the original work of Pelagius, which had, in the course of time, been attributed to St. Jerome (P.L., XXX, 645-902). A closer examination of this work, so suddenly become famous, brought to light the fact that it contained the fundamental ideas which the Church afterwards condemned as "Pelagian heresy". In it Pelagius denied the primitive state in paradise and original sin (cf. P.L., XXX, 678, "Insaniunt, qui de Adam per traducem asserunt ad nos venire peccatum"), insisted on the naturalness ofconcupiscence and the death of the body, and ascribed the actual existence and universality of sin to the bad example which Adam set by his first sin. As all his ideas were chiefly rooted in the old, paganphilosophy, especially in the popular system of the Stoics, rather than in Christianity, he regarded themoral strength of man's will (liberum arbitrium), when steeled by asceticism, as sufficient in itself to desire and to attain the loftiest ideal of virtue. The value of Christ's redemption was, in his opinion, limited mainly to instruction (doctrina) and example (exemplum), which the Saviour threw into the balance as a counterweight against Adam's wicked example, so that nature retains the ability to conquer sin and to gain eternal life even without the aid of grace. By justification we are indeed cleansed of our personal sins through faith alone (loc. cit., 663, "per solam fidem justificat Deus impium convertendum"), but this pardon (gratia remissionis) implies no interior renovation of sanctification of the soul. 


I am not taking out the blue links, but these probably will not work unless you are on the website linked here.


I have come to the conclusion that the bad catechesis of forty years and the influence of the Anglican Church, which is heavily Pelagian, has affected Catholics. This must be stopped, as the stupidity of passing up a baptism for a baby who is critically ill and waiting until he is released from the hospital cannot be acceptable to any real Catholic. All this is connected to a need for an understanding of baptism....sound familiar? Read my post a few days ago and this past winter on the same subject.


We cannot deny Original Sin and the state of the soul without grace. Another heretic, Caelestius, believed that if one only followed the Ten Commandments, that was sufficient for salvation. Sorry, folks. Here are the eight ideas clarified n the condemnation of Pelagianism,  listed in the Catholic Encyclopedia. 

1. Death did not come to Adam from a physical necessity, but through sin.
2. New-born children must be baptized on account of original sin.
3. Justifying grace not only avails for the forgiveness of past sins, but also gives assistance for the avoidance of future sins.
4. The grace of Christ not only discloses the knowledge of God's commandments, but also imparts strength to will and execute them.
5. Without God's grace it is not merely more difficult, but absolutely impossible to perform goodworks.
6. Not out of humility, but in truth must we confess ourselves to be sinners.
7. The saints refer the petition of the Our Father, "Forgive us our trespasses", not only to others, but also to themselves.
8. The saints pronounce the same supplication not from mere humility, but from truthfulness.
9. Some codices containing a ninth canon (Denzinger, loc. cit., note 3): Children dying without baptism do not go to a "middle place" (medius locus), since the non reception of baptism excludes both from the "kingdom of heaven" and from "eternal life".

The first eight are articles of our faith and we must believe these, in order to be in keeping with the Teaching Magisterium. According to this text, two pupils of Pelagius brought the heresy to England-Agricola and Fastidius. We are fighting this heresy still here.

People, it is only through Baptism, in the Passion and Resurrection of Christ, that we are saved. We must be baptized In the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

If we withhold baptism from our children, it is child abuse of the worst kind-denying the children eternal life.


And, may I add a nice summary of St. Augustine's arguments against this heresy from R. Scott Clark at http://clark.wscal.edu/pelagianism.php

• Human nature was created blameless, without vitium. All sin and weakness is ex originali peccato. (13)
• The threat of punishment upon the first disobedience entailed bodily & spiritual death. (14)
• Adam's sin is transmitted from him to all humans through natural descent. (15)
• The reason infants are baptized, is to wash away original sin. (16.
• Just as sin is propagated (traducere) by natural descent, grace is infused .(17)
• Romans 5.12 teaches that in quo all sinned. (A misreading of the Greek here as as a locative rather than a causal phrase?) In this he may have followed "Ambrosiaster." (18)
• Original sin is to be distinguished from actual sin. Original sin is not just the first actual sin. It is corporate in nature. Therefore we are born to condemnation. We sin in actu because we are sinners, in Adam. (19)
• After baptism, the guilt of original sin is removed, but concupiscentia (spark of sin, yearning of lower appetites) remains. (20)
• The result of Adam's sin is that humanity is now massa damnitionis or massa peccatorum et impiorum corporately and individually. (21.
• The result of original sin is spiritual and physical death. (22)
• Therefore grace is, in the nature of the case, "free" and unmerited.
• God justly condemns those who have not heard the gospel because all have sinned in Adam.

Part Five: Caritas vs. Socialism

Continuing the examination of how the Church combats socialism, one can see a movement from eros to agape to caritas. The State does not need to step into the realm of personal relationships. Here is the Pope on the issue. I have to admit that one does not see love in the Church at the extent that the Pope describes it, but I have seen this in the past, many years ago when I was in a community. But, the parish life is more fragmented and not all Catholics have a personal, loving relationship with Christ.

We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need. The Church is one of those living forces: she is alive with the love enkindled by the Spirit of Christ. This love does not simply offer people material help, but refreshment and care for their souls, something which often is even more necessary than material support. In the end, the claim that just social structures would make works of charity superfluous masks a materialist conception of man: the mistaken notion that man can live “by bread alone” (Mt4:4; cf. Dt 8:3)—a conviction that demeans man and ultimately disregards all that is specifically human.

This section delineates the battle between materialism and the spiritual life. This fact alone, of the difference between the true materialist view of politics, history and government, and the Catholic care of the spiritual life, separates us from the true socialist.

The doctrine of the Church never pits poor against rich, but invites all into a loving relationship of brother and sister, joined in caritas. 

What concerns me most about certain generations in the States, is the quietism or the non-involvement in politics which is the responsibility of the lay person. A lay person who does not get involved, is not only apathetic, but ignoring the duty to teach and inform public life. Another section follows:

As citizens of the State, they are called to take part in public life in a personal capacity. So they cannot relinquish their participation “in the many different economic, social, legislative, administrative and cultural areas, which are intended to promote organically and institutionally the common good.”[21] The mission of the lay faithful is therefore to configure social life correctly, respecting its legitimate autonomy and cooperating with other citizens according to their respective competences and fulfilling their own responsibility.[22] Even if the specific expressions of ecclesial charity can never be confused with the activity of the State, it still remains true that charity must animate the entire lives of the lay faithful and therefore also their political activity, lived as “social charity”.[23]

The Church's charitable organizations, on the other hand, constitute an opus proprium, a task agreeable to her, in which she does not cooperate collaterally, but acts as a subject with direct responsibility, doing what corresponds to her nature. The Church can never be exempted from practising charity as an organized activity of believers, and on the other hand, there will never be a situation where the charity of er jach individual Christian is unnecessary, because in addition to justice man needs, and will always need, love.

Among some people who are Catholic, a cynicism has seeped into their consciousness regarding political involvement. Now, not all people are called to be involved at intenese levels of activity, but studying the political stands of those for whom one votes, would be the minimum gesture. But, we are called to more than that. We are called a charity which speaks to the State and teaches it. Obviously, in situations as in America today with the great negative challenge to religious liberty, and the abortion laws, one group which must stand united against such evil is the Catholic Church on the local and national levels. St. Paul's description and the description of the early Churches in both the Acts and Revelation reveal complex organizations which cared for all those in need, including widows. This has fallen away in our times as unnecessary, "let the State do it." As we know, St. Benedict brought a revolution in caritas, with the schools and hospitals, which grew up in every country in Europe and the Middle East, and eventually the New World, because of the vision of charity in the Church.

In the Catholic Church, and also in the other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, new forms of charitable activity have arisen, while other, older ones have taken on new life and energy. In these new forms, it is often possible to establish a fruitful link between evangelization and works of charity. Here I would clearly reaffirm what my great predecessor John Paul II wrote in his Encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis [28] when he asserted the readiness of the Catholic Church to cooperate with the charitable agencies of these Churches and Communities, since we all have the same fundamental motivation and look towards the same goal: a true humanism, which acknowledges that man is made in the image of God and wants to help him to live in a way consonant with that dignity. His Encyclical Ut Unum Sint emphasized that the building of a better world requires Christians to speak with a united voice in working to inculcate “respect for the rights and needs of everyone, especially the poor, the lowly and the defenceless.” [29] Here I would like to express my satisfaction that this appeal has found a wide resonance in numerous initiatives throughout the world.

We need to as we say in the Midwest, "get down and dirty" involved in whatever it takes to secure and extend freedoms. I use this platform for such issues as abortion, and the horror of honor killings, among other issues facing our jusdicial system in the States. Catholics ignore issues at their own peril.

Socialism lulls one into thinking that the State will always be on the side of the "little guy". This is a great lie, and as the Christian knows, we are all little in the eyes of God and class warfare is an evil heresy.  To be continued...

Eros to Agape and Caritas continued--Catholicism vs. Socialism, Part 4

I am going to skip some of this excellent encyclical and move to more modern considerations, as this is a mini-series on the answer to socialism. Many commentators would agree with the Pope that the influence of Marxism in the world has changed the argument and made it more difficult for the Church to deal with criticisms. However, the Holy Spirit is in the Church and the call to a just social order must be based on what is here and elsewhere called subsidiarity.

Here is the Pope on this: 

Since the nineteenth century, an objection has been raised to the Church's charitable activity, subsequently developed with particular insistence by Marxism: the poor, it is claimed, do not need charity but justice. Works of charity—almsgiving—are in effect a way for the rich to shirk their obligation to work for justice and a means of soothing their consciences, while preserving their own status and robbing the poor of their rights. Instead of contributing through individual works of charity to maintaining the status quo, we need to build a just social order in which all receive their share of the world's goods and no longer have to depend on charity. There is admittedly some truth to this argument, but also much that is mistaken. It is true that the pursuit of justice must be a fundamental norm of the State and that the aim of a just social order is to guarantee to each person, according to the principle of subsidiarity, his share of the community's goods. This has always been emphasized by Christian teaching on the State and by the Church's social doctrine. Historically, the issue of the just ordering of the collectivity had taken a new dimension with the industrialization of society in the nineteenth century. The rise of modern industry caused the old social structures to collapse, while the growth of a class of salaried workers provoked radical changes in the fabric of society. The relationship between capital and labour now became the decisive issue—an issue which in that form was previously unknown. Capital and the means of production were now the new source of power which, concentrated in the hands of a few, led to the suppression of the rights of the working classes, against which they had to rebel

With the background, the Church responded quickly to the challenge of Marx, with encyclicals coming out only one year after the publication of Das Capital in English. The Popes wasted no time, as the threat of atheism in Italy was growing with the rise of communism. The Pope thinks the overall view was late in coming, but the documents against Modernist heresies set the stage for the later encyclicals. Here is his comment:

It must be admitted that the Church's leadership was slow to realize that the issue of the just structuring of society needed to be approached in a new way. There were some pioneers, such as Bishop Ketteler of Mainz († 1877), and concrete needs were met by a growing number of groups, associations, leagues, federations and, in particular, by the new religious orders founded in the nineteenth century to combat poverty, disease and the need for better education. In 1891, the papal magisterium intervened with the Encyclical Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII. This was followed in 1931 by Pius XI's Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno. In 1961 Blessed John XXIII published the Encyclical Mater et Magistra, while Paul VI, in the Encyclical Populorum Progressio (1967) and in the Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (1971), insistently addressed the social problem, which had meanwhile become especially acute in Latin America. My great predecessor John Paul II left us a trilogy of social Encyclicals: Laborem Exercens (1981), Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1987) and finally Centesimus Annus (1991). Faced with new situations and issues, Catholic social teaching thus gradually developed, and has now found a comprehensive presentation in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church published in 2004 by the Pontifical Council Iustitia et Pax. Marxism had seen world revolution and its preliminaries as the panacea for the social problem: revolution and the subsequent collectivization of the means of production, so it was claimed, would immediately change things for the better. This illusion has vanished. In today's complex situation, not least because of the growth of a globalized economy, the Church's social doctrine has become a set of fundamental guidelines offering approaches that are valid even beyond the confines of the Church: in the face of ongoing development these guidelines need to be addressed in the context of dialogue with all those seriously concerned for humanity and for the world in which we live.


I have a kinder view, in that I believe that the great Popes Pius IX and X in their statements against the Italian encroachment of the Vatican States and the Concordats led to more intense political statements of the later popes. However, what is clear is that the Bride of Christ has strong views on the role of the individual and the State, and how government should uphold the dignity of every human being, while calling Christians to task to take care of their neighbours. The Pope refers to Justice, which flows from Love: justice is perhaps one of the most misunderstood virtues in our time.


The just ordering of society and the State is a central responsibility of politics. As Augustine once said, a State which is not governed according to justice would be just a bunch of thieves: “Remota itaque iustitia quid sunt regna nisi magna latrocinia?”.[18] Fundamental to Christianity is the distinction between what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God (cf. Mt 22:21), in other words, the distinction between Church and State, or, as the Second Vatican Council puts it, the autonomy of the temporal sphere.[19] The State may not impose religion, yet it must guarantee religious freedom and harmony between the followers of different religions. For her part, the Church, as the social expression of Christian faith, has a proper independence and is structured on the basis of her faith as a community which the State must recognize. The two spheres are distinct, yet always interrelated.
Justice is both the aim and the intrinsic criterion of all politics. Politics is more than a mere mechanism for defining the rules of public life: its origin and its goal are found in justice, which by its very nature has to do with ethics. The State must inevitably face the question of how justice can be achieved here and now. But this presupposes an even more radical question: what is justice? The problem is one of practical reason; but if reason is to be exercised properly, it must undergo constant purification, since it can never be completely free of the danger of a certain ethical blindness caused by the dazzling effect of power and special interests.
Now, finally, we get to the core. 


Here politics and faith meet. Faith by its specific nature is an encounter with the living God—an encounter opening up new horizons extending beyond the sphere of reason. But it is also a purifying force for reason itself. From God's standpoint, faith liberates reason from its blind spots and therefore helps it to be ever more fully itself. Faith enables reason to do its work more effectively and to see its proper object more clearly. This is where Catholic social doctrine has its place: it has no intention of giving the Church power over the State. Even less is it an attempt to impose on those who do not share the faith ways of thinking and modes of conduct proper to faith. Its aim is simply to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgment and attainment of what is just.
The Church's social teaching argues on the basis of reason and natural law, namely, on the basis of what is in accord with the nature of every human being. It recognizes that it is not the Church's responsibility to make this teaching prevail in political life. Rather, the Church wishes to help form consciences in political life and to stimulate greater insight into the authentic requirements of justice as well as greater readiness to act accordingly, even when this might involve conflict with situations of personal interest.

We have moved very quickly from eros to agape to caritas. But the movement of the heart should be the same. If one loves God and His People, politics is part of the result of living in a society which must be just. As the conscience for the State, the Church is necessary for the natural order of rule. Here is the last part of this discussion on justice before the Pope moves back to caritas and justice.


Building a just social and civil order, wherein each person receives what is his or her due, is an essential task which every generation must take up anew. As a political task, this cannot be the Church's immediate responsibility. Yet, since it is also a most important human responsibility, the Church is duty-bound to offer, through the purification of reason and through ethical formation, her own specific contribution towards understanding the requirements of justice and achieving them politically.
The Church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible. She cannot and must not replace the State. Yet at the same time she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice. She has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice, which always demands sacrifice, cannot prevail and prosper. A just society must be the achievement of politics, not of the Church. Yet the promotion of justice through efforts to bring about openness of mind and will to the demands of the common good is something which concerns the Church deeply.

to be continued....

Notice of Pontifical Mass with H.E. Raymond Cardinal Burke

At the Brompton Oratory

Pontifical High Mass 

celebrated by 

H.E. Raymond Cardinal Burke

Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura

St Philip’sDay

26 May 2012

11am

Updates on France

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9246706/France-election-Nicolas-Sarkozy-hits-out-at-bias-media-as-Francois-Hollande-nears-victory.html

Good article from The Telegraph on France....and I updated earlier post with this http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/278412e6-9538-11e1-8faf-00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=published_links%2Frss%2Fworld_uk%2Ffeed%2F%2Fproduct

As France goes, so goes Europe....prayers, please.

Pray for our sisters

For my sisters, for whom I post and pray....watch this video, please, and the others below it.

Freedom is not free, but takes hard work, involvement and prayer. Please, do not become complacent, or behave like none of this will effect you in the future. Freedom to be a Christian and witness to the Faith may pass away more quickly than you realize. 

Catholic Parish Life vs. Socialism continued...Part 3

The early Christian community stood out as a loving group of people who took care of each other in daily, temporal needs, as well as spiritual needs. In the encyclical, Deus Caritas Est, Pope Benedict, in Part II clarifies this difference. 



Love of neighbour, grounded in the love of God, is first and foremost a responsibility for each individual member of the faithful, but it is also a responsibility for the entire ecclesial community at every level: from the local community to the particular Church and to the Church universal in its entirety. As a community, the Church must practise love. Love thus needs to be organized if it is to be an ordered service to the community. The awareness of this responsibility has had a constitutive relevance in the Church from the beginning: “All who believed were together and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods and distributed them to all, as any had need” (Acts 2:44-5). In these words, Saint Luke provides a kind of definition of the Church, whose constitutive elements include fidelity to the “teaching of the Apostles”, “communion” (koinonia), “the breaking of the bread” and “prayer” (cf. Acts 2:42). The element of “communion” (koinonia) is not initially defined, but appears concretely in the verses quoted above: it consists in the fact that believers hold all things in common and that among them, there is no longer any distinction between rich and poor (cf. also Acts 4:32-37). As the Church grew, this radical form of material communion could not in fact be preserved. But its essential core remained: within the community of believers there can never be room for a poverty that denies anyone what is needed for a dignified life.


What happened? How did the local Church move away from real community to relying on socialism and the State for carrying for each other needs? I am old enough to remember women in the neighborhood, Lutherans and Catholics, surrounding the woman who had six children and an ill husband. There were no programs for such, as yet, she was taken care of in the 1950s. Now, people assume the government will take care of people-this is socialism. 
. 
A dignified life is now the middle-class dream, and sadly, those who fall into poverty are judged according to Calvinism, to be unholy, or worse, under a curse, instead of an opportunity for charity. I personally know three women who have been homeless this past year. One had her house ruined in a flood. No one in her affluent town helped her with living space or moving. She is in her 70s and lived in a hotel for 20 months. That is a scandal, as many of her parishioners have very large houses with plenty of space. The second woman's flat burnt down and she could not get government housing. At this time, she is still, I think, in a hotel. These women are both active members of Catholic parishes and not one person made room for either. The third woman, a pensioner, was forced to look for cheaper rent in an area where governmental housing has a three year waiting list. The members of the parish wanted to charge her, and I am ashamed to say this, 100 dollars per day for rent, as she was living in a resort town and "that was the going rate". I cannot imagine a pagan saying now, "See how they love one another." None of these women have husbands or families to take care of them. The priest who was trying to help her find housing in the parish gave up and was ashamed of his people, but nothing happened and still has not happened. When I tried to get help for one of these ladies,  the response from all the people in the parish was. "Isn't there a government program for her?" We are living in great need of love in our Church, and it begins with a loving relationship with God.


Certain people avoid the poor as if they have leprosy, letting the State become the Big Mama.


Clearly, the Pope delineates other alternatives. 


A few references will suffice to demonstrate this. Justin Martyr († c. 155) in speaking of the Christians' celebration of Sunday, also mentions their charitable activity, linked with the Eucharist as such. Those who are able make offerings in accordance with their means, each as he or she wishes; the Bishop in turn makes use of these to support orphans, widows, the sick and those who for other reasons find themselves in need, such as prisoners and foreigners.[12] The great Christian writer Tertullian († after 220) relates how the pagans were struck by the Christians' concern for the needy of every sort.[13] And when Ignatius of Antioch († c. 117) described the Church of Rome as “presiding in charity (agape)”,[14] we may assume that with this definition he also intended in some sense to express her concrete charitable activity.


The modern society does not look at the Church and say "See how they love one another."


Now, the Church was more organized in earlier days, and in pioneer days in the States, then it is now regarding real love in action. The deacons had two roles, depending on their call-spiritual and physical. The permanent deaconate in the dioceses where I have lived in the States have been active to a certain extent-one, now retired, was at the food bank he helped to organize. However, this is not usually the case. He was a light in the darkness of selfishness.


Here is the Pope again:



Here it might be helpful to allude to the earliest legal structures associated with the service of charity in the Church. Towards the middle of the fourth century we see the development in Egypt of the “diaconia”: the institution within each monastery responsible for all works of relief, that is to say, for the service of charity. By the sixth century this institution had evolved into a corporation with full juridical standing, which the civil authorities themselves entrusted with part of the grain for public distribution. In Egypt not only each monastery, but each individual Diocese eventually had its owndiaconia; this institution then developed in both East and West. Pope Gregory the Great († 604) mentions the diaconia of Naples, while in Rome the diaconiae are documented from the seventh and eighth centuries. But charitable activity on behalf of the poor and suffering was naturally an essential part of the Church of Rome from the very beginning, based on the principles of Christian life given in the Acts of the Apostles. It found a vivid expression in the case of the deacon Lawrence († 258). The dramatic description of Lawrence's martyrdom was known to Saint Ambrose († 397) and it provides a fundamentally authentic picture of the saint. As the one responsible for the care of the poor in Rome, Lawrence had been given a period of time, after the capture of the Pope and of Lawrence's fellow deacons, to collect the treasures of the Church and hand them over to the civil authorities. He distributed to the poor whatever funds were available and then presented to the authorities the poor themselves as the real treasure of the Church.[15]Whatever historical reliability one attributes to these details, Lawrence has always remained present in the Church's memory as a great exponent of ecclesial charity.
24. A mention of the emperor Julian the Apostate († 363) can also show how essential the early Church considered the organized practice of charity. As a child of six years, Julian witnessed the assassination of his father, brother and other family members by the guards of the imperial palace; rightly or wrongly, he blamed this brutal act on the Emperor Constantius, who passed himself off as an outstanding Christian. The Christian faith was thus definitively discredited in his eyes. Upon becoming emperor, Julian decided to restore paganism, the ancient Roman religion, while reforming it in the hope of making it the driving force behind the empire. In this project he was amply inspired by Christianity. He established a hierarchy of metropolitans and priests who were to foster love of God and neighbour. In one of his letters,[16] he wrote that the sole aspect of Christianity which had impressed him was the Church's charitable activity. He thus considered it essential for his new pagan religion that, alongside the system of the Church's charity, an equivalent activity of its own be established. According to him, this was the reason for the popularity of the “Galileans”. They needed now to be imitated and outdone. In this way, then, the Emperor confirmed that charity was a decisive feature of the Christian community, the Church.


What happened? Socialism and the Communist Manifesto leaked into Church leadership and the labor unions, as well as certain political parties in Europe and in America. We were warned by the succession of Popes up to the present day. The answer to socialism lies in the radical living of the Gospel and the intense relationship with Christ every Catholic should have individually, that love relationship which spills out into the parish.


Are Catholics really listening or reading what this Pope and those before have to say about charity, which is from and in God, going out into the community? One person said to me that "God will take care of these people?" Yes, but through His Church, not through some magical means....



25. Thus far, two essential facts have emerged from our reflections:
a) The Church's deepest nature is expressed in her three-fold responsibility: of proclaiming the word of God (kerygma-martyria), celebrating the sacraments (leitourgia), and exercising the ministry of charity (diakonia). These duties presuppose each other and are inseparable. For the Church, charity is not a kind of welfare activity which could equally well be left to others, but is a part of her nature, an indispensable expression of her very being.[17]
b) The Church is God's family in the world. In this family no one ought to go without the necessities of life. Yet at the same time caritas- agape extends beyond the frontiers of the Church. The parable of the Good Samaritan remains as a standard which imposes universal love towards the needy whom we encounter “by chance” (cf. Lk 10:31), whoever they may be. Without in any way detracting from this commandment of universal love, the Church also has a specific responsibility: within the ecclesial family no member should suffer through being in need. The teaching of the Letter to the Galatians is emphatic: “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (6:10).

This does not and is not happening, especially in socialist countries like Ireland and Great Britain, where the State is the "nanny" and the Catholics bow to this power which they cannot control. Look at the elections yesterday and pay attention to France tomorrow-as France goes, Europe goes...to be continued.