Should children of same-sex 'marriages' be baptized?

In November 2008, during their 43rd annual meeting in Quebec City, Canadian canonists were asked to consider a formula for the uniform registration of the baptism of children of same-sex unions. Msgr. Pedro Lopez-Gallo of Vancouver cited the instance of a lesbian couple's approaching a parish priest in his archdiocese to ask for baptism for their child. The priest referred the matter to an archdiocesan official who advised him to defer the baptism. 

Two documents spell out basic Church legislation. First, a document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith--an Instruction on Infant Baptism (Origins 10:474-48, 1980-1981); second, canon 868 sets out two conditions for the celebration of baptism: the consent of the parents (or at least one of them), and a realistic hope that the child will be educated in the Catholic religion. Without these, baptism must be deferred. 

Some might interpret the canon as a refusal to administer the sacrament. According to c. 213, Christ's faithful have a right to be assisted by their pastors from the spiritual riches of the Church, especially by the Word of God and the Sacraments. But the infant is not yet one of the Christian faithful (c. 204). 

While sacred ministers cannot refuse the sacraments to those who request them, there are three conditions to be taken into account (c. 843 [section]1): the time must be opportune; the petitioners must be properly disposed; and they must not be prohibited by law from receiving them. Same-sex couples do not qualify. First, it is possible that they are not the parents of the child and second, because of their lifestyle they are not properly disposed so that there is little realistic hope that the child will be reared in the Catholic faith. Of course, if the child is at the point of death, the norms of c. 868 [section]2 apply. 

In January 2006, the Judicial Vicar of the Archdiocese of Vancouver sought the opinion of the Apostolic Nuncio in Canada. In his reply, the nuncio stated: "The fact that a child may be raised by a homosexual couple presents an obstacle to the Christian upbringing of the child." The rite of Baptism indicates that the parents are "the first teachers of their children in the ... faith, bearing witness to the faith by what they say and do." 

A same-sex couple even if "married" according to standards of the state cannot be said to be in good standing with the Church, even if a claim is made that they are living chastely. Their civil union can be a cause of scandal or, at least, of confusion in a parochial community. Church teaching would require their separation. 

Adoption of children of same sex "marriage" 

The question of adoption was raised. Canon 877 [section]3 is interpreted to say that children who have been adopted in accordance with civil law are considered to be the children of the person(s) who has (have) adopted them. But this has always been understood in the context of a heterosexual marriage. It was suggested that this canon might have to be changed, as will those canons referring to freedom to marry, gender identification, and others. 

The Church's position has been consistently against the adoption of children by same-sex parents. In 2003, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) wrote: "Allowing children to be adopted by persons in such (homosexual) unions would actually mean doing violence to these children in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. This is gravely immoral." (CDF: "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003, Origins 33 [2003-2004] p.180) 

In Canada, there are other considerations. For example, some countries such as China restrict adoption of their children by homosexuals. In spite of this, some Canadian same-sex couples have adopted Chinese infants. One wonders how they were able to evade the authorities. 

Other countries have laws against artificial insemination of lesbian partners. In Canada there are no such restrictions. In a 2007 ruling of the Ontario Court of Appeal, the Court recognized three individuals as the parents of a five-year old boy: the two lesbian women raising him (one of whom is the biological mother), and the biological father who donated his sperm. (Court of Appeal for Ontario, AA vs BB 2007 Jan. 2, 2007, Docket C39998). To further complicate the matter, with the widespread donation or sale of ova and sperm to various sperm banks and fertility clinics how can one be certain, in the canonical sense, who the real father is? The same may be asked of surrogate mothers. 

Problems with in-vitro fertilization 

In vitro fertilization has resulted in an increasing number of children being conceived and growing up without knowing the identity of their biological fathers. According to the Irish Independent News (April 19, 2008) Kirk Maxey has fathered an estimated 200-400 children through sperm donation over the years. Having since fathered a child for himself, Maxey may well be concerned about all the children in his vicinity who are totally unaware of their connection to him or his son. We may visualize cases of incest or abnormal births due to innocent sibling mating. 

In the case of the Ontario man who donated his sperm and has now been granted the status of legal parenthood, if he were to bring his child to be baptized could the parish priest refuse to recognize his paternity and prevent him from signing the register as the father of the child? According to c.877[section]2 "The name of the father is to be entered if his paternity is established by some public document or by his own declaration in the presence of the parish priest and two witnesses." 

But there is another possibility not mentioned by Lopez-Gallo: Canon 877[section]2 continues: (where it is not possible to enter the name of the mother or the father) "the name of the baptised person is to be registered without any indication of the name of the father or of the parents." 

The "right" to receive Sacraments 

Msgr. Lopez-Gallo concludes that the right to receive the Sacraments is not absolute, and is subject to certain limitations (c.843[section]1). For example, although the right to marry is a natural right, it may be restricted for serious reasons such as impotency, lack of baptism, and the existence of a vow of celibacy. 

The intention of the canonical legislator is never to give the appearance of legitimacy to homosexual couples who pretend to be the "parents" of the child to be baptized. It might even be possible that they are seeking publicity under the pretext that the Church is softening its stance toward homosexuality and homosexual unions. "In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized by the state or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to the marriage state, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty." (CDF in Origins, June 3, 2003 op.cit) (One might stress that even in marriage there is no natural right to sodomy or anal sex--sex is not a recreational activity. Author), 

Lopez-Gallo reminded us also that if a child is not baptized he or she would not be eligible to attend a Catholic school in some places, and this would make it more difficult to obtain instruction in the Faith (if Catholic schools are still teaching the Faith--author). 

However, any eventual baptism should not be construed as legitimization of homosexual unions or persons who present themselves as "parents." As the Apostolic Nuncio has written: homosexual couples cannot pretend to enjoy those natural and inherent rights of parenthood, and therefore should not have any role during the celebration of Baptism, nor should they receive the special blessing normally reserved for the father or mother, nor should they be registered in the baptismal register." 

In considering whether there is hope of the child's being raised in the Catholic faith, it is not sufficient to rely on grandparents, extended family or good Christian friends to circumvent canon law. The parish priest must carefully evaluate circumstances, realizing that in this highly mobile society, the child may be forced to move with his 'family', away from the support he counted on. 

In trying to promote a common policy, Lopez-Gallo asks how does a parish priest respond? How can he be morally certain that there is a realistic hope for the child? 

The most reliable criterion would be if the couple were to separate. Although a surrogate might be used to inculcate moral principles in the child, a child learns best by example. Since not all cases can be referred to the chancery; clear guidelines should be established. Although Lopez-Gallo would prefer a special rite for these special cases he recognizes that "liturgical books are to be faithfully followed ... no one may on personal initiative add to, omit, or alter anything in those books" (c. 846[section]1). 

Listing conditions for possibly allowing such a baptism, Lopez-Gallo stresses that if it is obvious that the parents are actively promoting homosexual or legal adoption rights, prudence would demand that baptism be deferred. He indicates further that such a baptism should not be carried out during Sunday Mass or in the presence of other children being baptized. The norms of c. 877 on registration of the baptism should be followed. 

An active question period followed. One person asked: "Are the sins of the father to be visited on the sons?" He added that denying baptism was penalizing the child. Without realizing it, he reminded the group that homosexuals adopt boys, most likely to inculcate in them their chosen lifestyle. Someone suggested that adoption of children by homosexuals could be considered child abuse because it deprived them of the attention and examples of a normal mother and father, roles that God Himself had designed. Lopez-Gallo disagreed. 

J. Huels then reminded the chairman that according to c. 110, children who have been adopted in accordance with civil law are considered to be the children of those who have adopted them. 

Father Daniel Smilanic, President of the American Canon Law Society suggested that we might have to sanate [Latin. cure] the civil law that recognizes same sex unions. What he meant by that is not clear. How can we sanate a law that should never have been passed? 

Dr. Ferrari is a graduate of University of Toronto Faculty of Pharmacy, of University of Western Ontario School of Medicine, and of St. Paul University Faculty of Canon Law. Since retiring from the Federal Public Service she has worked as a free-lance writer.
Source:  http://www.thefreelibrary.com

French cardinal says 'gay marriage' opens door to incest, polygamy

Lyon, France, Sep 18, 2012 (CNA/EWTN News) - Cardinal Philippe Barbarin of Lyon said government approval of gay “marriage” in France could pave the way for the legalization of incest and polygamy.

The cardinal made his statements on Sept.14 after a meeting with France’s Interior Minister, Manuel Valls.

In an interview on French radio, Cardinal Barbarin said that same-sex unions constitute “a breakdown in society.”

“This will lead to unspeakable consequences. Next they will want unions between three or four people.  One day, perhaps, the prohibition against incest will fall,” the cardinal warned.

French President Francois Hollande promised during his campaign that if elected he would push for the legalization of homosexual marriage and adoption by same-sex couples. 

A bill that would allow such practices is currently under debate in France and is expected to come before the Council of Ministers on Oct. 24.

“Marriage is a word that represents a wall, in order to ensure that in the most fragile place of society, that is, in a woman who gives life to a child, all of the stable conditions are present to ensure that this takes place under the best of possibilities,” the cardinal said.

Admitting children of same-sex couples to Catholic elementary schools: thinking beyond the clichés

 

By Dr. Edward Peters

Original News Article

 

6 January 2004 EWTNews Brief 52609

 

DIOCESE, CATHOLIC LEAGUE DEFEND CHILDREN OF SAME-SEX COUPLE IN CATHOLIC SCHOOL

COSTA MESA, CALIF., USA, Jan. 06, 2005 (CNA) - Parents in the Diocese of Orange County have threatened to pull their children from a Catholic school and to seek the Vatican’s intervention after school officials have refused to meet their demands.

Some parents have accused the diocese of violating Church teaching by allowing a homosexual couple to enroll their two children in a Catholic school. They say the boys’ attendance in the kindergarten of St. John the Baptist School in Costa Mesa is part of the homosexual community’s efforts to change the Church, reported the Los Angeles Times.

The group demanded that the school only accept children of families that follow Catholic teachings. But school officials rejected the demand. Superintendent Fr. Gerald M. Horan said the parents’ demand is a “slippery slope” that would lead to the expulsion and ban of children whose parents divorced, used birth control or married outside the Church, he said.

Catholic League president William Donohue agreed with Fr. Horan, adding that the most important element to consider is the spiritual well-being of the children in question. “On a prudential level, it makes no sense to single out kids for retribution whose parents are gay,” said Donohue. “What should be done about kids who were born out-of-wedlock? Should we expel kids whose parents are cohabiting or are known adulterers?

“Priests have often been asked by morally delinquent parents to baptize their children, and in most instances the priests have rightfully obliged,” he continued. “Now just as the priest is in no way condoning the moral delinquency of the parents, school officials at St. John the Baptist are in no way condoning the lifestyle of the gay parents. And in both cases, the spiritual well-being of the kids is, or should be, the paramount concern.”

END

 

Opinion / Analysis

 

As the moral fabric of Western society continues to unravel, novel problems such as those facing parents, teachers, and Church officials in the Diocese of Orange—namely, how Catholic schools should handle requests to admit children of same-sex couples—will continue to arise. Moreover, as the pace of social disintegration quickens, these new problems will be both more numerous and more complex. Just ten years ago, did parents paying for their children to attend a Catholic kindergarten really have to worry about explaining (assuming it is explainable) to their own youngsters why some of their classmates have two mommies or two daddies?

 

From the outset, let's recognize that neither the opposition parents nor school officials wanted this conflict to arise. Who needs another fight these days? But arise it has, and it must be considered carefully. I do not know what the best response to this latest manifestation of social disorientation should be but, knowing of the situation only what the above article tells us, I doubt that the best answer has been hit upon yet by either side in this debate.

 

The solution proposed by the “anti-admission parents” (basically, that Catholic schools should admit only children from families that live in accord with Church teaching) is, at first glance certainly, too vague to be enforced and too severe if it could be enforced. The Church is full of sinners, and Fr. Gerald Horan is right to fear stepping onto such slippery slopes. But that does not mean that “pro-admission” voices like his and William Donohue’s are correct in their reasoning; indeed, I think some of their rhetoric introduces its own problems and makes slippery slope concessions that might be very difficult to take back in other cases.

 

Fr. Horan, for example, claims that barring children of homosexual parents from Catholic schools would lead to banning children whose parents are divorced, use birth control, or are married outside the Church. Oh, really?

 

Civil divorce is a bane built largely on sin, but divorced persons, as such, are not barred from any participation in Catholic life whatsoever. (Are there still Catholics in positions of influence who don't know this?) Why, then, use the specter of expelling children whose parents are simply divorced as an example of frightful consequences, unless one has a taste for red herring?

 

Contraception, too, is a very serious matter, but it is addressed by moral and pastoral theology, not by canon law and ecclesiastical governance. Thus parental contraception, though objectively sinful, provides no basis for consequences upon children in the external forum. (I’m assuming that contracepting parents don’t drop their kids off at Catholic school in sports cars blazoned with bumpers stickers proclaiming “Contracepting and Proud!”). Ironically, the acceptance of contraception by large numbers of Catholic laity, to say nothing of overwhelming numbers of non-Catholics, is the tap root for the gross caricature of marriage that same-sex weddings represent. On that, read experts such as Pope Paul VI or Dr. Janet Smith.

 

But, as for admitting into Catholic schools the children of those who are married outside the Church (or, while we’re at it, of couples simply cohabiting), that’s a somewhat different matter. Maybe it is time to reconsider the practice of tacit tolerance that Catholic institutions have shown on this point over the years, at least where such tolerance is being used as a wedge to widen the sore gap between Catholic principles and Catholic life in the crucial context of Catholic education. Homosexual behavior is objectively more disordered than modernity's version of concubinage, but decades of accommodating the latter have dulled our senses to its intrinsic gravity, leaving us in a weaker position to uphold marriage as Christ and His Church proclaim it.

 

Horan’s remarks are enlarged by Mr. Donohue. Leaving aside his prejudicial use of the word “retribution” (who wants to be in favor of that?), Donohue seems to have overlooked that the Church herself distinguishes between sinful actions, even grave ones, and sinful lifestyles. Sinful actions are usually treated in sacramental confession upon showing sorrow for the deed and exhibiting a firm purpose of amendment; sinful lifestyles, however, precisely because of their public nature and their persistent and defiant attitudes, can indeed provoke public consequences.

 

Moreover, surely Donohue acknowledges that Catholic schools are committed to a holistic educational approach, believing as they do that that the entire environment of a religious school contributes to the proper formation of the child. Are we suddenly to hold that, when faced with this prong of the homosexual agenda, the Church’s interest in defending the free exercise of religion within her own schools falters outside the catechism class? Are Catholic institutions so powerless over their own governance policies that surely any restriction they might wish to establish in this matter will “make no sense”? Donohue correctly points out that the children of homosexual couples have real rights, but then, do not also the children of families recognized by Christian (nay, every religious) tradition? How is it that the concerns of traditional parents are so obviously and completely wrong while those of same-sex couples are so obviously and completely right?

 

As for Donohue’s worry about what should be done with kids born out of wedlock, the answer is simple: nothing, if only because such a condition, of itself, says nothing about the lifestyle of the parents today. Donohue asks further, should we expel children whose parents are cohabiting? But, as I suggested above, while there might come a time when school practices on this point will need to be rethought, for now, the situation in Orange is more about admitting kids into elementary schools rather than expelling ones already enrolled. In other words, the problem before us is complex enough; let’s not complicate it prematurely.

 

Finally, Donohue’s baptism analogy is quite weak. For starters, the “baptize-anybody-who-asks” days are drawing to a close. Deo gratias. Such a practice is clearly at odds with the 1983 Code of Canon Law, requiring, as it does for the licit baptism of a child, a “founded hope” that the child will actually be raised Catholic (see 1983 CIC 868, and its predecessor 1917 CIC 750 suggesting the same point). Slothful clerical attitudes toward baptism and the demands of Christian living have simply enabled negligent pastors to pass along problems (invariably aggravated over time) to more conscientious persons, instead of dealing with them from the outset--and we all know where that sorry mindset has gotten us in other areas of Church life. In any case, it escapes me how Christ’s mandate to baptize all nations (Mt 28:19) and the unparalleled eschatological consequences of the sacrament of baptism are so easily parleyed into an admissions requirement for Catholic grade schools.

 

What I am suggesting is simply this: The issues raised by admitting into Catholic grade schools children from same-sex households are much deeper than implied by the statements offered so far in favor of or in opposition to such admission. Catholic schools are dogged by the impression that they are basically refuges for the rich fleeing failed public education. I think that view is unfair, but when parental contempt for the fundamental goals of Catholic education is so flagrant, how do Church officials escape the charge that one’s willingness to pay tuition is more important than one’s own willingness to live by and cooperate in the transmission of the vital values being taught? Certainly a Catholic child’s right to a Catholic education is of great importance (1983 CIC 217, 229, 793-795). But since when does this particular right become the prime directive before which all other considerations yield (1983 CIC 223)?

 

I urge that much more consideration be given to all of the demands that are made on students, parents, teachers, and administrators as the legitimate consequences of a Catholic school's very identity. ++

Source:  http://www.canonlaw.info/a_samesex.htm

Vicar refuses to allow lesbian couple to both be named as child's mother

The Rev George Gebauer says he feels sorry for gay people and believes there is something wrong with their make-up

• 
  
• 
  

• theguardian.com, Tuesday 3 September 2013 19.52 BST

A vicar would not allow a lesbian couple to be both named as mother on the register of their son's baptism. Photograph: Elly Godfroy / Alamy/Alamy

A British vicar has refused to allow a lesbian couple to both be named as mother on the register of their child's baptism and claimed there was something wrong with the make-up of gay people.

The Rev George Gebauer argued that it would be illegal for both women to be recorded as the one-year-old boy's mother even though both have legal parental responsibility.

He went on to say he felt sorry for gay and lesbian people. "They produce too much hormone — they're imbalanced," he said. "That's the way they are. It's a medical issue."

After the vicar's stance became public, a more senior Church of England cleric stepped in to say that both women – the child's biological mother, Aimi Leggett, and her civil partner, Victoria Leggett – could after all be named as mothers to the child, Alfie, and the baptism would go ahead.

Aimi, 25, and Victoria, 22, had arranged the baptism at St Mary's churchin Warsash, Hampshire, with a previous vicar, but he left before the ceremony could take place. Retired clergy, including Gebauer, 87, are officiating until a replacement can be found.

When the Leggetts went to meet Gebauer he insisted one of them would have to be godmother, claiming the church register only had space for one mother and one father.

The pair promptly left the meeting deeply upset. Aimi, from Gosport, said: "There was no way one of us was going to be listed as the godparent. We are both Alfie's mum."

Aimi, who was herself baptised at St Mary's, said: "Rev Gebauer sat there and told us no child could have parents of the same sex, no child could have two mothers."

When he was questioned on Tuesday about his stance, Gebauer argued he did not refuse to baptise Alfie and the couple's sexuality was not an issue.

"However, when it came to the administrative side of things they insisted on both being listed as mum and refused to budge from their position," he said. "I told them I was unable to do this because the church baptism register only has space for one mother and one father. I believe it would be illegal for me to register them both as mother.

"This is nothing to do with their sexuality. The soul of the little boy is more important than anything else. We did not even push them for the name of the father, we were happy to leave that space blank."

He went on to say he felt sorry for gay people: "We know there is something not right within their make-up."

Later, one of the archdeacons of the Portsmouth diocese, the Ven Gavin Collins, intervened. He said: "Having spoken to Aimi Leggett, I'm pleased to report that the baptism of Alfie will go ahead at St Mary's church. We have addressed the legal issue.

"As I understand it, her partner, Victoria, has full legal co-parental responsibility for Alfie. We can therefore enter their details on to the baptism register as 'mother' and 'mother', as they would like."

Aimi, a design student, became pregnant with the use of an anonymous sperm donor. Alfie's birth certificate lists Aimi as mother but the father space remains blank.

She has been in a relationship with Victoria, a law student, for four years. They entered a civil partnership in October 2011 and the courts have given Victoria the same parental rights as Aimi. Formal adoption papers are being processed.

Gebauer will not be carrying out the baptism.

Source: theguardian.com

CCCB clears up confusion about baptism for children of same-sex couples

Ottawa, Canada, Jul 18, 2005 / 12:00 am (CNA).- Speaking on the impact of same-sex marriage on the Catholic Church in Canada, Cardinal Marc Ouellet reportedly told the Senate hearing committee last Wednesday that in the case of baptism, “according to our canon law, we cannot accept the signatures of two fathers or two mothers as parents of an infant” in our baptismal registers. His statement left the impression with several senators and observers that the Catholic Church would not allow the baptism of children of same-sex couples.

Senator Marcel Prud'homme took issue with the cardinal’s statement, saying that a child should not be denied baptism.

But Benoit Bariteau, associate general secretary of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, told the Ottawa Citizen that this would only be the case if both partners in a same-sex union insisted on signing the baptismal certificate.

"If the parents insist that the two signatures be on the act of baptism, if we say no, it will be their choice of seeking baptism or not," said Bariteau.

He explained that if one signature is sufficient for both parents, the Church would not refuse to baptize children of a same-sex couple.

In an interview with the Montreal Gazette the following day, Msgr. Allan McCormack pointed out that the Canadian bishops have not issued a uniform position on the issue. The Ottawa-based canon lawyer reportedly said it is up to individual priests, working under the authority of their bishop, to decide whether to baptize an infant.

Fr. John Walsh, pastor at St. John Brebeuf in Montreal, told the Gazette that it is a basic Catholic principle that the Church never refuses baptism to an infant. Fr. Walsh said he has already baptized children of same-sex couples and modified the register in these cases to list a mother and “parent.”
Source: catholicnewsagency.com

After three days of hearings, the Senate committee approved the bill and is expected to report back to the Senate today with a recommendation to pass Bill C-38 with no amendments.

The bill is expected to receive final passage in the Senate Tuesday or Wednesday.

Pope's Homily During Episcopal Ordinations

VATICAN CITY, October 25, 2013 (Zenit.org) - Here is the translation of Pope Francis’ homily during the Episcopal ordination of Archbishop Jean-Marie Speich, the newly appointed Apostolic Nuncio to Ghana and Archbishop Giampiero Gloder, newly appointed Apostolic Nuncio and President of the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy.

* * *

Let us reflect attentively on the lofty ecclesial responsibility to which these, our Brothers, have been called. Our Lord Jesus Christ sent by the Father to redeem men, in turn sent twelve Apostles to the world so that, full of the power of the Holy Spirit, they would proclaim the Gospel to all peoples  gathering them under one Shepherd, to sanctify them and lead them to salvation.

In order to perpetuate this apostolic ministry from generation to generation, the twelve made use of apostolic collaborators, transmitting to them with the imposition of hands, the gift of the Spirit received from Christ, which conferred the fullness of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Thus, through the uninterrupted succession of Bishops in the living tradition of the Church, this primary ministry has been preserved; it is the work of the Savior that is followed and developed down to our times.

In the Bishop surrounded by his presbyters Our Lord Jesus Christ himself is present in your midst, as High Priest in eternity.

It is Christ, in fact, who in the ministry of the Bishop continues preaching the Gospel of salvation and sanctifying believers through the sacraments of the faith. It is Christ who through the Bishop’s paternity adds new members to His Body, which is the Church. It is Christ who in the wisdom and prudence of the Bishop leads the People of God in the earthly pilgrimage to eternal happiness.

Receive, therefore, with joy and gratitude these our Brothers whom we Bishops, with the imposition of our hands, associate to the Episcopal College. Render them the honor that is due to Christ’s ministers and to those who dispense God’s ministries, to whom is entrusted the witness of the Gospel and the ministry of the Spirit for sanctification. Remember Jesus Christ’s words to the Apostles: “He who hears you hears me, he who scorns you scorns me, and he who scorns you scorns the One who sent me.”

As for you, Jean-Marie and Gianpiero, chosen by the Lord, reflect that you have been chosen among men and for men, you have been constituted in the things that refer to God. “Episcopate” is in fact the name of a service, not of an honor. It is for the Bishop to serve rather than dominate, according to the Master’s commandment: he who is the greatest among you must be the least, who governs as one who serves, always in service, always the service. Proclaim the word at all times, whether opportune or inopportune. Admonish, reprimand, exhort with all magnanimity and doctrine, and through prayer and the offering of sacrifice for your people, attain the fullness of sanctity of Christ, the manifold richness of divine grace, through prayer. Recall the first conflict in the Church of Jerusalem, when the Bishops had so much work to protect widows and orphans that they decided to appoint deacons. Why? To pray and to preach the Word. A Bishop who does not pray is a halfway bishop, and if he does not pray to the Lord he ends up in worldliness. In the Church that has been entrusted to you, be faithful custodians and dispensers of the mystery of Christ, placed by the Father at the head of his family. Follow always the example of the Good Shepherd who knows his sheep and is known by them, and who did not hesitate to give his life for them. The love of the Bishop: love with the love of a father and a brother all those whom God entrusts to you. Above all love the presbyters and deacons who are your collaborators, they are the ones who are closer to those close to you. Never make a presbyter wait for an audience. Answer them immediately. Be close to them. Love, also, the poor and the vulnerable and those who are in need of hospitality and help. And go with love to the whole flock, in which the Holy Spirit places you to rule the Church of God. Watch in the name of the Father in whose name you take the image, in the name of Jesus Christ his Son from whom you are constituted teachers, priests and pastors. And in the name of the Holy Spirit who gives life to the Church and with his power sustains our weakness. So be it.

[Translation by ZENIT]

Prayers of Augustines

According to St. Augustine, we need not pray for what we need because God already knows what we need before we even ask. Instead, we ought to pray, he suggests, to increase our desire for God, and so that we might be able to receive what He is preparing to give us.

"The deeper our faith, the stronger our hope, the greater our desire, the larger will be our capacity to receive the gift, which is very great indeed. .... The more fervent the desire, the more worthy will be its fruits. When the Apostle tells us: Pray without ceasing (1 Thes 5:16), he means this: Desire unceasingly that life of happiness which is nothing if not eternal, and ask it of him alone who is able to give it."
(Letter 130)

The prayers below are widely attributed to Saint Augustine. Where verified, a citation is provided. The portrait of Augustine on this page was painted by German artist Willy Jakob, circa 1945 - 1949.

Prayer to the Holy Spirit

Breathe in me O Holy Spirit, that my thoughts may all be holy.
Act in me O Holy Spirit, that my work, too, may be holy.
Draw my heart O Holy Spirit, that I love but what is holy.
Strengthen me O Holy Spirit, to defend all that is holy.
Guard me, then, O Holy Spirit, that I always may be holy. Amen.

Act of Petition

Give me yourself, O my God, give yourself to me. Behold I love you, and if my love is too weak a thing, grant me to love you more strongly. I cannot measure my love to know how much it falls short of being sufficient, but let my soul hasten to your embrace and never be turned away until it is hidden in the secret shelter of your presence. This only do I know, that it is not good for me when you are not with me, when you are only outside me. I want you in my very self. All the plenty in the world which is not my God is utter want. Amen.

Prayer for the Indwelling of the Spirit

Holy Spirit, powerful Consoler, sacred Bond of the Father and the Son, Hope of the afflicted, descend into my heart and establish in it your loving dominion. Enkindle in my tepid soul the fire of your Love so that I may be wholly subject to you. We believe that when you dwell in us, you also prepare a dwelling for the Father and the Son. Deign, therefore, to come to me, Consoler of abandoned souls, and Protector of the needy. Help the afflicted, strengthen the weak, and support the wavering. Come and purify me. Let no evil desire take possession of me. You love the humble and resist the proud. Come to me, glory of the living, and hope of the dying. Lead me by your grace that I may always be pleasing to you. Amen.

Prayer on Finding God after a Long Search

Too late have I loved you, O Beauty so ancient, O Beauty so new. Too late have I loved you!  You were within me but I was outside myself, and there I sought you! In my weakness I ran after the beauty of the things you have made. You were with me, and I was not with you. The things you have made kept me from you - the things which would have no being unless they existed in you! You have called, you have cried, and you have pierced my deafness. You have radiated forth, you have shined out brightly, and you have dispelled my blindness. You have sent forth your fragrance, and I have breathed it in, and I long for you. I have tasted you, and I hunger and thirst for you. You have touched me, and I ardently desire your peace. 

Confessions, X, 27, 38

Prayer to Seek God Continually

O Lord my God, I believe in you, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Insofar as I can, insofar as you have given me the power, I have sought you. I became weary and I labored.  O Lord my God, my sole hope, help me to believe and never to cease seeking you. Grant that I may always and ardently seek out your countenance. Give me the strength to seek you, for you help me to find you and you have more and more given me the hope of finding you.   Here I am before you with my firmness and my infirmity. Preserve the first and heal the second. Here I am before you with my strength and my ignorance. Where you have opened the door to me, welcome me at the entrance; where you have closed the door to me, open to my cry; enable me to remember you, to understand you, and to love you. Amen.

Prayer for Self Knowledge

Lord Jesus, let me know myself and know You, and desire nothing save only You.
Let me hate myself and love You.
Let me do everything for the sake of You.
Let me humble myself and exalt You.
Let me think of nothing except You.
Let me die to myself and live in You.
Let me accept whatever happens as from You.
Let me banish self and follow You, and ever desire to follow You.
Let me fly from myself and take refuge in You,
That I may deserve to be defended by You.
Let me fear for myself.
Let me fear You, and let me be among those who are chosen by You.
Let me distrust myself and put my trust in You.
Let me be willing to obey for the sake of You.
Let me cling to nothing save only to You,
And let me be poor because of You.
Look upon me, that I may love You.
Call me that I may see You, and for ever enjoy You. Amen.

Act of Hope

For your mercies' sake, O Lord my God, tell me what you are to me. Say to my soul: "I am your salvation." So speak that I may hear, O Lord; my heart is listening; open it that it may hear you, and say to my soul: "I am your salvation." After hearing this word, may I come in haste to take hold of you. Hide not your face from me. Let me see your face even if I die, lest I die with longing to see it. The house of my soul is too small to receive you; let it be enlarged by you. It is all in ruins; do you repair it. There are thing in it - I confess and I know - that must offend your sight. But who shall cleanse it? Or to what others besides you shall I cry out? From my secret sins cleanse me, O Lord, and from those of others spare your servant. Amen.

Prayer for the Sick

Watch, O Lord, with those who wake, or watch, or weep tonight, and give your angels charge over those who sleep. Tend your sick ones, O Lord Christ. Rest your weary ones. Bless your dying ones. Soothe your suffering ones. Pity your afflicted ones. Shield your joyous ones. And for all your love's sake. Amen.

Prayer of Trust in God's Heavenly Promise

My God, let me know and love you, so that I may find my happiness in you. Since I cannot fully achieve this on earth, help me to improve daily until I may do so to the full. Enable me to know you ever more on earth, so that I may know you perfectly in heaven. Enable me to love you ever more on earth, so that I may love you perfectly in heaven. In that way my joy may be great on earth, and perfect with you in heaven. O God of truth, grant me the happiness of heaven so that my joy may be full in accord with your promise. In the meantime let my mind dwell on that happiness, my tongue speak of it, my heart pine for it, my mouth pronounce it, my soul hunger for it, my flesh thirst for it, and my entire being desire it until I enter through death in the joy of my Lord forever. Amen.

Source: Zenit

Cardinals to begin reform summit with pope

Reuters

Pope Francis attends a consistory at the Vatican
.
Pope Francis (R) attends a consistory at the Vatican September 30, 2013. REUTERS/Osservatore Romano

By Philip Pullella

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Eight cardinals will begin closed-door meetings with Pope Francis on Tuesday to help him reform the Vatican's troubled administration and map out possible changes in the worldwide Church.

Francis, who has brought a new style of openness, simplicity and a conciliatory tone to the papacy, wants to consult more with Church officials around the world before making decisions affecting the life of the 1.2-billion-member Church.

Some of the topics expected to be discussed are how to give women a greater role in the Church short of the priesthood, financial reform, the position of divorced Catholics, and the continued fallout from the worldwide sexual abuse crisis.

Francis announced the papal advisory board of cardinals, revolutionary for a Church steeped in hierarchical tradition, a month after his election as the first non-European pope in 1,300 years and the first from Latin America.

His decision to take advise from the cardinals from Italy, Chile, India, Germany, Democratic Republic of Congo, the United States, Australia and Honduras, is a clear sign that he intends to take seriously calls from within the Church for de-centralization in a traditionally top-heavy institution.

Each cardinal polled their faithful and bishops about what should be discussed at the meetings, which will be closed to even top officials from the Vatican's Secretariat of State, which is itself a target of reform.

The group's chairman, Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, told a Canadian Catholic television network he had 80 pages of suggestions from Latin America alone.

The other cardinals on the advisory board are Giuseppe Bertello of Italy, Francisco Javier Errazuriz Ossa of Santiago, Chile, Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, India, Reinhard Marx of Munich, Laurent Monsengwo Pasinya of Kinshasa, Sean Patrick O'Malley of Boston and George Pell of Sydney.

CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

The group's main task is to suggest changes to a constitution by the late Pope John Paul II called "Pastor Bonus," which gave the various departments that run the Church their current structure in 1988.

The Curia, as it is known, has been riven by scandals over the years and bishops around the world have deemed it heavy-handed, autocratic, condescending and overly bureaucratic.

Maradiaga said the constitution governing the structure of the Curia would have to be re-written rather than modified.

Former Pope Benedict, who resigned in February, left a secret report for Francis on the problems of the Curia, which were exposed when sensitive documents were stolen from Benedict's desk by his butler and leaked to the media.

There have been suggestions that some Vatican departments be merged and others closed in order to make the Curia more efficient and to prevent corruption.

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi told reporters on Monday about 80 documents had been prepared for discussion.

"No-one should expect the Curia or the governance of the Church to be reformed in three days," he said, adding Francis had decided to make the council a permanent fixture with an open-ended mandate.

After three days of meetings, the eight cardinals will accompany Francis to the central Italian hill town of Assisi on Friday. Francis took his name from the saint who is revered around the world as a symbol of austerity, simplicity, concern for the poor and a love of the environment.

(Reporting By Philip Pullella; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

    * Religion & Beliefs
    * Society & Culture

First Friday Devotion to Sacred Heart 

By Father Edward McNamara, LC

ROME, September 17, 2013 (Zenit.org) - Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and dean of theology at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: My Christians have the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus which is observed on the first Fridays of the month for nine months. Because of another pastoral commitment, when I am not available to offer Mass for them on one of the first Fridays, can I authorize a change of the first Friday to the second Friday of the month? -- D.M., Nairobi, Kenya

A: This question relates to the promise of the Sacred Heart to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque (1647-1690). Among other promises he stated:

"I promise you, in the excessive mercy of my Heart, that my all-powerful love will grant to all those who communicate on the First Friday of nine consecutive months, the grace of final penitence; they shall not die in my disgrace, nor without receiving their sacraments, my Divine Heart shall be their safe refuge in this last moment."

While the devotion to the Sacred Heart gained great popularity after the apparitions to St. Margaret Mary, it does not depend on these visions. In some form or other it is rooted in Christianity itself as a particular way of approaching Christ. As St. Augustine says, it is reaching Christ God through Christ the man.

Devotion to the Sacred Heart was already implied in many masters of the spiritual life. Blessed Henry Suso, a Dominican religious inspired by St. Augustine, said, "If you desire to attain knowledge of the divinity, it is necessary to ascend gradually through the humanity and the Passion of this humanity as the easiest path."

The devotion was inculcated over the centuries by the meditations on Christ's wounds and especially the wound to his heart. These reflections were aided by biblical texts such as John 19:34 and Isaiah 53:5. Especially influential was Song of Songs 4:9: "You have ravished my heart, my sister, my spouse, you have ravished my heart." Many writers such as Origen, St. Ambrose and St John Chrysostom applied this text to the Passion. This tradition was later strengthened by the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible which translated the text as "wounded" (vulnerasti) rather than ravished.

During the Middle Ages these initial reflections were deepened and broadened with new ideas, especially with more personal and tender elements. Among the writers who influenced this development were St. Bede the Venerable, Haimo of Auxerre, and John of Fécamp, a Benedictine. Their meditations on the Passion inspired numerous imitations. The figure of St. Bernard of Clairvaux dominates his epoch, and his meditations on the Song of Songs gave new impulse to this devotion. His devotion directly influenced many others such as his friend Aelred of Rievaulx and Ekbert of Schönau whose "Stimulus Dilectionis" was incorporated by St. Bonaventure in Nos. 18-31 of his work "Lignum Vitae."

These works also influenced popular piety and devotions as well as the liturgy with many hymns and feasts related to themes of the Passion, such as the feast of the "Transfixation" of Christ's heart. For example, we offer a rough translation of the 12th-century hymn "Summi Regis Cor Aveto," composed at the Premonstratensian Abbey of Seinfield near Cologne.

"Let me sing to you, Heart of my God, and present you a cheerful and cordial greeting. My heart desires to joyfully embrace you. Let me speak to you. What love is it that has forced you? What pain has penetrated you, so that you empty yourself so fully, and, lover, you surrender yourself to us, and thus not even death can overpower us?"

In the following centuries other saints influenced the spread of this devotion, such as Matilda and Gertrude the Great, and the Carthusians of St. Barbara of Cologne. Among the disciples of the doctrine propagated by this monastery were the early Jesuits St. Peter Canisius and Peter Fabro. This devotion to the Sacred Heart promoted by the early Jesuits prepared the terrain which years later led fellow Jesuit St. Claude de la Colombiere to understand and accept the visions of his penitent, St. Margaret Mary. It also explains in part the strong impulse and support that this order would give to this devotion in the centuries to come.

With respect to the precise question, I believe there are two possible solutions to this difficulty regarding the impossibility of fulfilling the First Fridays.

First of all, since the promise is united to receiving Communion, and not necessarily to attending Mass, a Communion service could be arranged on the Friday when Mass is impossible. This would appear the safest solution.

Second, a few authors point out that the object of this devotion is to inflame our hearts with an ardent love for Jesus and make reparation for the offenses committed against him, above all in the Blessed Sacrament. Since this can be done on a daily basis, these authors suggest that the pious practices tied to the First Fridays are not confined to this particular day. Therefore if someone is legitimately prevented from carrying out the practices on a Friday, he may offer the devotions in the same spirit on any other day.

This is a legitimate, but far from universal, opinion based on God's infinite mercy and knowledge. Most authors make no mention of exceptions, as the grace is tied to a specific promise made in a private revelation. It is clear, however, that someone who carries out these practices with the proper intention will be duly assisted by divine grace.

There does not appear to be any Church law on the subject. In general, except in granting indulgences, the Church refrains from legislating on matters related to private revelations, even if they are officially approved and recommended as this devotion certainly is.

* * *

Bringing Pets into Church

By Father Edward McNamara, LC

ROME, September 10, 2013 (Zenit.org) - Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy and dean of theology at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: I have sought some clarification on a point, that is, about bringing a dog into the church during Mass. -- T.K., Maharashtra state, India

A: A search in several languages has failed to produce much in the way of Church norms on this point.

Even civil legislation varies widely. An Italian law, for example, allows dogs on leash into most public spaces except where food is prepared. Guide or service dogs for the blind are allowed even into these. In other countries entrance to public spaces is more or less restricted, or the decision is left to the owners of the premises.

Local culture and attitudes toward animals is also an important factor. Some societies have a very positive attitude towards the presence of pets, while others are less welcoming. It does not appear that any universal norm can be established.

This would also hold true, more or less, for churches. From what I have been able to glean from various sources, it would appear that in most cases the final decision would fall upon the priest, who should decide in accordance with general principles and local situations.

In most cases, however, the response of priests would be to discourage the faithful from bringing their pets to church, except for the case of service animals.

Indeed, this feeling would be shared by the majority of the faithful. Most people would consider it inappropriate to bring their own pets to church and would be uncomfortable in a situation where those of others were present.

Among the reasons for this reluctance are the following:

-- Most members of the faithful come to church to worship God with their full attention. If they want to be entertained, then they go to a concert or a play. If they desire to enjoy a pet's company, then they go to the park. Likewise they probably leave their pets alone at home on many other occasions such as when they go to work, the theater, or attend a formal social event. Therefore, there is even more reason not to bring them along to church where they could be a source of distraction to themselves or others.

-- The pets do not benefit from the celebration, and indeed the close-packed environment might even be a source of stress for the animals themselves.

The exception is, of course, the annual blessings of animals that are carried out on the feasts of certain saints such as Francis of Assisi. On these occasions, however, the entire celebration or the blessing ceremony is usually held outdoors and not inside the church building.

-- Even the best-trained and cleanest pets can still cause allergic or phobic reactions for no small number of people young and old. Most Christians would wish to avoid being an agent, even involuntarily, of such difficulties for fellow worshippers.

These are just some reasons why both priests and faithful would be generally unfavorable toward bringing dogs and other animals into church. There may be some exceptions and more or less tolerance in some places, but I believe this is the overall view.

This fact does not mean that the Church has a negative view of animals and does not appreciate them as part of God's creation. As the Catechism says:

"2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity. Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man's dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.

"2416. Animals are God's creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

"2417. God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

"2418. It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons."

Not having animals in church means simply that the context of worship is not the usual or proper place for showing such respect and kindness toward them.