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

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]

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.

Vestments in Hot Climates And More on Ending a Homily

ROME, OCT. 16, 2012 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university. 

Q: Why do priests and religious still vest in their habit, cassocks, chasuble, albs and the like in our modern world? I am in Ghana and the weather can be so hot that you pity the priests in their cassock, alb and the chasuble during Mass. -- E.S., Accra, Ghana 

A: I think our reader has hit a nerve that touches on deeper motivations than the practical or on the question of fulfillment of liturgical laws. 

I think the question can be divided into two parts, one is more theoretical: Why do priests wear such vestments in our modern world? The second part deals with what changes can be made for climatic purposes. 

The reason why priests wear liturgical vestments today is the same reason why they have been worn for most of the Church's history. It is true that there were no special vestments for the celebration in the first few centuries, but these developed as a natural process in which the best clothes were reserved for the liturgy and little by little developed forms exclusive to their sacred use. 

Vestments help all involved to understand the role that is proper to them. They remind priest and faithful alike that he is above all a sacred minister. Although they appear to single out the priest, in fact the individual, with his quirks and qualities, disappears below the symbol of his ministerial role. 

I remember reading many years ago the story of an English Catholic prisoner of war during World War II. A German military chaplain came to celebrate Mass. The English soldier commented that, once the enemy uniform was covered by the sacred vestments, the German was simply a priest representing God, the Church and nobody else. 

Vestments, with their ample form and almost zero practicality, also remind us that we are in a solemn time when actions should be carried out with unhurried pace and due reverence. In other words, they slow us down and remind us to give God time to speak. 

The beauty of vestments is also a way of reminding us that God deserves our best. The vestments are also a means of teaching through the use of liturgical colors and symbols. 

With respect to the second part of the question I would first say that it is not necessary to go to Ghana for uncomfortable climates; a Roman summer can be muggy enough. 

Also, if anything, modern technology makes it far less uncomfortable to wear liturgical dress than in former times. Even in places where air-conditioning is not available, there are options such as beautiful light fabrics for vestments that ease the discomfort. 

Furthermore, in very hot climates, a priest can wear lighter clothing under his alb and could dispense with the cassock during the celebration of Mass. 

In conclusion, although there are times and climes that occasionally make it uncomfortable to don full vestments, this is a small sacrifice to make in order to give Our Lord the best we can offer in our acts of worship. 

This is why the Church asks that liturgical norms be respected in all places. Many priests offer excellent example, not only of obedience to the law, but above all of a sense of the importance of their sacred ministry. 

* * * 

Follow-up: Ending a Homily 

In the wake of our <A HREF="http://www.zenit.org/article-35635?l=english">Oct. 2</A> article on ending the homily several readers reminded me of an official reply on this matter from 1973 which I should have mentioned. 

A reader from Congo wrote: "In the Notitiae 9 (1973), 178, there was this question: Is it opportune before or after the homily to invite the faithful to sign themselves with the sign of the cross, to greet them, e.g., saying, 'Praised be Jesus Christ,' etc.? The Congregation for the Divine Worship replied in these terms: This depends on legitimate local uses, but generally speaking it is not opportune to observe these customs, since they were introduced into the homily from preaching outside of Mass. The homily is part of the liturgy; the faithful have already made the sign of the cross at the beginning of Mass, and they have been greeted. It is preferable, therefore, that these things not be repeated before or after the homily." 

I don't think it changes substantially what I said in the original article, although it strengthens the point that such greetings are preferably avoided. I would note that the official reply still defers to local custom. 

For the sake of precision, I would comment that the historical argument offered in the reply -- that such phrases entered into the homily from preaching outside of Mass -- is true insofar as we are dealing with a time from the late Middle Ages onward. This is when most preaching was done outside of Mass and such standard formulas were useful. 

It would not apply to the examples of concluding Trinitarian evocations offered in the original article; these examples were drawn from patristic and early medieval sources. These homilies were generally preached during Mass, and the Trinitarian invocation was not just a stock formula but a profession of faith.

CHƠI MÔN ĐẤM ĐÁ (BOXING) CÓ TỘI KHÔNG?

Hỏi:
1. Nhân có bài viết của một linh mục về một võ sĩ boxing đã thắng đối thủ nhờ cầu nguyện, xin cha cho biết chơi môn đấm đá này có tội không?
2. Và có được phép hành hạ súc vật không?
Trả lời:
Tôi thật ngạc nhiên khi nghe linh mục nào đó nói có võ sĩ quyền anh (boxer) kia đã hạ đo ván đối thủ nhờ cầu nguyện trước khi giao đấu.
Nhưng trước khi trả lời hai câu hỏi trên, tôi thấy cần nói lại ở đây một lần nữa những lời dạy của Giáo Hội, liên quan đến việc áp dụng Điều Răn Thứ Năm: cấm giết người mà Thiên Chúa đã truyền cho con người phải nghiêm khắc thi hành để được chúc phúc và cứu rỗi.
Thật vậy, áp dụng điều răn này cách nghiêm túc, đòi hỏi không những phải tôn trọng thể xác và mạng sống của riêng mình cũng như của người khác, mà còn phải tôn trọng cả nhân phẩm, đời tư, thanh danh và nhất là linh hồn của tha nhân nữa. Cụ thể không được phép tự tử, hay hủy hoại thân thể của mình và đả thương hay giết người khác, trừ trường hợp phải tự về chính đáng, để chống lại kẻ muốn hại mạng sống của mình. Ngoài ra, cũng không được phép làm hay tạo gương xấu khiến cho người khác vấp phạm vì mình. Về điểm này chính Chúa Giê su đã nói rõ như sau:
"Không thể không có cớ làm cho người ta vấp ngã. Nhưng khốn cho kẻ làm cớ cho người ta vấp ngã! Thà buộc cối đá lớn vào cổ nó và xô xuống biển, còn lợi cho nó hơn là để nó làm cớ cho cho một trong những kẻ bé nhỏ này vấp ngã. Anh em hãy coi chừng." ( Lc 17: 1-3)
Thi hành lời Chúa trên đây, Giáo Hội cũng dạy như sau:
"Gương xấu là thái độ hoặc cử chỉ khuyến khích tha nhân làm điều ác. Người làm gương xấu đã trở thành kẻ cám dỗ người khác. Nó phá hoại nhân đức và sự ngay chính. Nó có thể lôi kéo người đồng loại vào chỗ chết về phần linh hồn. Gương xấu sẽ là lỗi nặng, nếu hành vi hoặc thái độ của người đó cố ý lôi kéo tha nhân vào một lỗi nặng." (SGLGHCG, số 2284)
Như vậy, mở sòng bài, nhà chứa gái mãi dâm, buôn bán ma túy, sách báo, phim ảnh khiêu dâm, bạo động, tổ chức khiêu vũ, để cho trẻ già trai gái ôm nhau nhẩy cuồng loạn thâu đêm suốt sáng, là những dịp tội khuyến khích người khác phạm tội, vì gương xấu mình đã tạo ra vì mục đích kiếm tiền, và làm giầu bằng những phương tiện tội lỗi.
Như vậy, người Công giáo, người tín hữu Chúa Kitô có được phép tổ chức hay tham gia vào những cách làm ăn và vui chơi tội lỗi, rất nguy hại cho phần rỗi linh hồn của mình và của người khác hay không? Chúa nói: "Ai có tai nghe thì nghe" (Mt 13:9; Mc 4: 23; Lc 8: 8; 14: 35).
Mặt khác, điều răn thứ năm cũng ngăn cấm những việc làm, hay cách sống phương hại đến sức khỏe của thân xác như ăn uống quá độ, lạm dụng rượu, thuốc lá nhất là cần sa ma túy, chắc chắn gây nguy hại cho sức khỏe. Cũng không được phép lái xe quá tốc độ khiến có nguy cơ gây tại nạn, tử vong cho chính mình và cho người khác. (Sđd, số 2291-92)
Sau hết ,cũng trong mục địch bảo toàn thân xác, không ai được phép chặt cắt (amputation) một bộ phần nào của cơ thể, trừ trường hợp y khoa đòi buộc phải mổ xẻ, cắt xén phần nào vì nhu cầu chữa trị đòi hỏi.
Như thế, môn "thể thao đấm đá boxing" là một nguy cơ to lớn có thể gây thương tích, hay tử vong cho chính mình và cho đối thủ. Có biết bao boxers đã mang thương tật suốt đời hay chết sau một trận thi đấu với sự cổ võ điên rồ của khán giả say mê trò chơi dã man này. Phải nói đây là trò chơi man rợ và phi luân, vì nguy cơ to lớn có thể gây ra như thương tích thể xác, chấn thương thần kinh và có thể gây tử thương cho các đấu thủ ngay trên võ đài! Kẻ thắng và người thua đều không nhiều thì ít bị thương nơi cơ thể và thương tích này sẽ dẫn đến nguy cơ lớn lao hơn cho sức khỏe sau này của các boxer. Cho nên Giáo Hội đã lên án môn thể thao thô bạo này, cùng với những tệ trạng phi luân khác như phá thai, chết êm dịu (euthanasia) hôn nhân đồng tính (same sex mariage), bạo động, giệt chủng (genocide), kỳ thị chủng tộc (racial discrimination). Nói rõ hơn, Giáo Hội không khuyến khích , mà còn chỉ trích mạnh mẽ, trò chơi đấm đá và những thực hành vô luân vô đạo nói trên. Boxing chắc chắn không phải là một môn thể thao lành mạnh, phục vụ cho lợi ích tinh thần và thể lý của con người. Thực chất của môn chơi này, ngược lại, chỉ nhằm thỏa mãn "thú tính bạo hành" (brutal violence) của con người mà thôi. Nó hoàn hoàn đi ngược với bản chất hiền hòa, êm ái, nhân từ và thánh thiện mà Thiên Chúa mong muốn con người phát huy, để sống xứng với phẩm chức là con người, mang hình ảnh của một Thiên Chúa nhân hiền, thánh thiện, giầu lòng thương xót và hay tha thứ. Nó chỉ thích hợp với bản chất hung dữ, thô bạo, tàn nhẫn, gian ác, vô nhân đạo của Satan và đồng bọn mà thôi. Nói rõ hơn, môn chơi đấm đá boxing tự bản chất (by essence) là một sự dữ (evil), hoàn toàn không phù hợp với tiêu chuẩn đạo đức và luân lý vì thực chất bạo động và man rợ của nó.
Cho nên, cầu nguyện cho ai chiến thắng trong những cuộc chơi dã man này là lạm dụng cầu nguyện để xin điều không đẹp lòng Chúa. Đúng vậy, Chúa không thể ban ơn giúp ai chiến thắng bằng cách đả thương hay gây tử vọng cho cho người khác. Một võ sĩ boxing mà hạ đo ván (knock out) được địch thủ thì chắc chắn đã giáng cho đối thủ một đòn chí tử khiến phải ngã quỵ đầu hàng và ôm thân thể bị đánh trọng thương về nhà chữa trị! Do đó, ai cầu nguyện cho mục đích này thì chắc chắn không đẹp lòng Chúa, vì nó đi ngược lại với bản chất thiện hảo của Chúa, và ước muốn của Chúa cho con cái loài người sống với bản chất thiện hảo, hiền hòa, yêu thường êm ái của chính Người. Mọi hành vi bạo động đưa đến bất an trong tâm hồn và đau khổ cho thể xác của chính mình và cho người khác đều là phi luân và phi nhân (immoral and inhuman) cần phải xa tránh.
Thiên Chúa là tình yêu và an bình, nên Người không thể chấp nhận những gì đi ngược với bản chất thiện hảo, đầy nhân ái và hiền hòa của Người. Do đó, người có niềm tin có Chúa là Cha nhân lành, yêu thương và nhân ái, thì tuyệt đối phải xa tránh không những tội lỗi mà còn không được làm những việc thô bạo như chơi trò đấm đá boxing và tìm thú vui trong trò "dã man" này mà nhiều người trên thế giới đang hăng say thưởng thức và cỏ võ cho thú vui vô luân, vô đạo này. Phải nói đó là trò chơi vô luân vì thực chất bạo động, có thể gây tử thương cho mình và cho đối thủ, tức là vi phạm điều răn thứ năm "cấm giết người".
Cũng liên quan đến trò chơi phi luân "đấm đá", còn phải kể thêm trò chơi không kém dã man nữa là thú chọi gà, đấu chó, đấu bò (toro) mà nhiều người Việt Nam và ngoại quốc cũng rất say mê thưởng thức, khi thấy những con gà chọi, những con chó cắn xé nhau cho đến chết để đem thắng lợi cho chủ gà, chủ chó, nhất là cho bọn cá độ sát phạt nhau trong những cuộc chọi gà, đấu chó. Mới đây, ở Mỹ một người kia đã bị đưa ra tòa về tội tổ chức đấu chó (dog fight), khiến nhiều con chó đã bị giết sau những cuộc cắn xé nhau làm trò mua vui cho những kẻ say mê thú dã man này. Trong trường hợp này, người ta không thể cầu nguyện để xin Chúa ban cho "gà ,chó" của mình thắng cuộc thi đấu, nghĩa là hạ thủ những con vật bị thua, bị giết.
Cầu nguyện là việc đạo đức rất cần thiết cho đời sống đức tin vì: "không có Thầy anh em chẳng làm gì được" (Ga 15:5). Nhưng phải cầu nguyện cách đẹp lòng Chúa, như xin Người ban thêm đức tin, tăng thêm lòng yêu mến Chúa và giúp ta có đủ sức để chống lại mọi cám dỗ của ma quỉ, xác thịt và trần thế để sống trong tình yêu của Chúa và an hòa với mọi người. Nhưng không thể cầu xin cho đội banh, đội football, đội volley ball... của mình đá bại đội khách, nhất là cầu cho mình đánh bại, hạ "đo ván" đối thủ trong trò chơi vô luân đấm đá boxing, chọi gà, đấu chó, đấu bò v.v.
Riêng môn đấu bò (Toro=Bullfight) rất thịnh hành và cổ truyền ở Tây Ban Nha, nhưng mới đây nhà cầm quyền nước này đã cấm trò chơi nguy hiểm này kể từ năm tới.
Tóm lại, không thể cầu nguyện cho mục đích vị kỷ, thiếu bác ái, thiếu lành mạnh, như cầu cho được bình an trước khi đi "du hí tội lỗi" ở nơi xa, hoặc cầu cho được thắng lợi khi đi cờ bạc ở các Casino.Cầu xin như vậy chắc chắn không đẹp lòng Chúa vì Người không bao giờ ban ơn bừa bãi, không có lợi ích gì cho phần rỗi của ai cầu xin.
2- Về câu hỏi thứ hai, xin được trả lời như sau:
Thiên Chúa là Đấng tạo dựng con người, và mọi sinh vật thảo mộc trên trần thế này. Chúa ban loài vật cho con người sử dụng vào những mục đích tốt, phục vụ cho lợi ích của con người. Do đó, được phép ăn thịt những con vật như heo, bò, trâu, nai, gà, vịt chim, cá, tôm, cua, sò, ốc v. v.. Được phép ăn thịt chúng nhưng không được phép hành hạ con vật nào để tìm thú vui bất chính như chọi gà, đấu chó, chọi cá v.v… như đã nói ở trên, hoặc cố ý đả thương con vật nào như đánh đập khiến nó bị thương tật như mù mắt, què chân, cụt tai v.v. Hành hạ súc vật như thế là có tội đối với luật pháp xã hội, mà cùng lỗi luật yêu thương của Chúa, căn cứ theo lời dạy sau đây của Giáo Hội:
"Các loài động vật là những tạo vật của Thiên Chúa. Ngài bao bọc chúng bằng sự ân cần quan phòng của Ngài. Qua sự hiên hữu của chúng, chúng chúc tụng Chúa và tôn vinh Ngài. Bởi vậy, con người phải có lòng nhân hậu đối với chúng. Chúng ta hãy nhớ các thánh như thánh Phanxicô Asissi và thánh Philip Neri đã cư xử tế nhị với súc vật như thế nào... vì thế, làm khổ những con vật cách vô ích và phí phạm sinh mạng của chúng là điều nghịch với nhân phẩm con người." (SGLGHCG, số 2415; 2418)
Tóm lại, con người được phép hưởng thụ cuộc sống và mọi phương tiện cần thiết cho sự sống trên trần thể này. Nhưng con người phải biết phân biệt, đâu là thú vui chính đáng được phép tận hưởng như ăn uống ngủ nghỉ và giải trí lành mạnh. Nhưng không thể tìm thú vui bất chính như chơi và mê thú đấm đá boxing, đấu chó, chọi gà, chọi cá hay hành hạ súc vật; hoặc đã già khú đế rồi mà con ham vui đi thi khiêu vũ để chọn "đôi chân ngà" hưởng thú dâm dật của những kẻ no cơm rửng mỡ tổ chức trò chơi thiếu đạo đức này.. Phải nói tất cả những trò chơi trên đây đều không lành mạnh và vô luân mà người yêu mến Thiên Chúa là cội nguồn của mọi hạnh phúc, vui thú, yêu thương và hiền hòa phải xa tránh cho được đẹp lòng Chúa. " úai có tai nghe ,thì nghe."
LM. Phanxicô Xaviê Ngô Tôn Huấn

Power of community is measured in giving

By Gayle Simonson, Edmonton Journal January 8, 2011

Religious groups today are often referred to as faith communities. Most try to work together to support each other but also to reach far beyond their own locale to be a force in the world.

But how effective is that force when so many people suggest that we are in a post-religious society? How do people outside the religious groups see these faith communities?

A letter to the editor suggested that churches contribute nothing to the community. Nothing could be farther from the truth, but can we measure their current role in the wider community?

In the past it was obvious. The churches provided schools and hospitals. Church leaders spoke out on social issues and were respected and reported. Today it is less obvious, but a 2007 report, co-sponsored by Imagine Canada, Volunteer Canada and Statistics Canada, called Caring Canadians -- Involved Canadians contains some interesting information. The report is based on the Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating, a survey conducted every three years.

According to this report, those who attend religious services weekly are eight per cent of the population but contribute 39 per cent of all charitable donations. Even ignoring their religious contributions, on average they donate considerably more to other charities than those donors who are not religiously active.

Acting on their faith

Similarly, rates of volunteerism are highest among those who are religiously active. Forty-five per cent of all Canadians volunteer, but 25 per cent of those who do volunteer contribute 78 per cent of total hours. That means about 11 per cent of Canadians provide that 78 per cent of volunteer hours and a high proportion of that 11 per cent are religiously active.

While it offers valuable information, the report actually underestimates the value of faith groups when it uses only donations outside those groups as a measure. Many of the donations through a faith group also go to local community and international support. As an example, the United Church works with partners in more than 30 countries and members contribute millions through the church to global emergency appeals such as the Haiti earthquake.

Many social service agencies are faith-sponsored. Consider Catholic Social Services, Jewish Family Services, the Mustard Seed Church, the Bissell Centre, Hope Mission, the work of the Salvation Army, and many more. In addition to financial support, people of faith offer volunteer support for these initiatives and others such as the Edmonton Food Bank, Amnesty International and Habitat for Humanity.

Certainly many people not affiliated with a faith group offer strong support as well, but on average, contributions from those in faith communities are higher.

We recognize the positive side of community, but not all communities are positive. While we may call it peer pressure when teens are struggling to relate to their own age group, it is in fact a search for community as young people struggle to develop an individual sense of identity. For some, that pressure can lead to dangerous behaviour. After all, even criminal gangs are a form of community. It is important therefore that young people see good modelling of community, whether within a religious group or elsewhere.

In his book When Atheism Becomes Religion, Chris Hedges suggests some problems facing North American society are a result of personal isolation and a search for meaning in material things rather than community.

He writes that North Americans are "plagued by its consumer culture, (and) waste their energy on attempting to satisfy the insatiable demands of an all-consuming self. People have become cut off, engulfed in the fruitless search to find an unachievable happiness in the things they accumulate, the experiences and products they are sold, and the careers they have built. The promised self-fulfillment never arrives."

In her book Christianity for the Rest of Us, Diana Butler Bass has concluded: "People need community to change, to sustain a life of pilgrimage, and to go deeper in change. Pilgrim people need pilgrim congregations."

She would agree with Toronto activist and church member Kofi Hope: "In community with others, dreams can be achieved."

The power of community is strong. Whether that community is through a faith organization or is formed on some other basis, community has the power to work for good.

A previous report on the same topic concluded: "We would do well to pay more attention to the enormous contribution already made by the faith community, to tap into its great potential and to share in the concern about its diminishing role in society .... Without our faith communities, our network of charities and non-profit organizations would drastically diminish."

Gayle Simonson writes columns on

United Church history and is the author of Ever-Widening Circles: A

History of St. Stephen's College.

Offerings

Offerings is your opportunity to express thoughts on religious issues.

Submissions up to 750 words can be sent to: Religion Department, The Edmonton Journal, Box 2421, Edmonton, Alta., T5J 2S6 or e-mail: jvlieg@edmontonjournal.com

Please include a few lines about your faith tradition and involvement in your place of worship.

Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/life/Power+community+measured+giving/4079791/story.html#ixzz1B1aGoqvZ

House Blessing

Catholic House Blessing
Adapted from Catholic Household Blessings and Prayers
Bishop's Committee on the Liturgy
National Conference of Catholic Bishops © 1988, pp. 297-301

Gather as a family (roommates, friends, relatives) in any room you desire, with a crucifix present if possible. Yes, you can--and are encouraged to--bless your own home/apartment/condo/dorm room even if a priest isn't available!
(Also available in PDF (15kb) for printing only)

All make the sign of the cross.
The leader, which the Bishops encourage to be a layperson, begins:
Peace be with this house and with all who live here. Blessed be the name of the Lord.
All respond: Amen.

The leader may use these or similar words to introduce the house blessing:
When Christ took flesh through the Blessed Virgin Mary, he made his home with us. Let us now pray that he will enter this home and bless it with his presence. May he always be here among us; may he nurture our love for each other, share in our joys, comfort us in our sorrows. Inspired by his teachings and example, let us seek to make our home before all else a dwelling place of love, diffusing far and wide the goodness of Christ.
Then the Scripture is read by another family member:

A reading from the letter of Paul to the Colossians
You are God's chosen race, his saints; He loves you, and you should be clothed in sincere compassion, in kindness and humility, gentleness and patience.
Bear with one another; forgive each other as soon as a quarrel begins. The Lord has forgiven you; now you must do the same.
Over all these clothes, to keep them together and complete them, put on love.
And may the peace of Christ reign in your hearts, because it is for this that you were called together as parts of one body. Always be thankful.
Let the message of Christ, in all its richness, find a home with you. Teach each other, and advise each other, in all wisdom. With gratitude in your hearts sing psalms and hymns and inspired songs to God;
And never say or do anything except in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
The word of the Lord.

All Respond: Thanks be to God.
(Alternate readings may be selected)

After the scripture reading, all go from room to room, offering prayers of intercession and sprinkling holy water, if desired. Some of the following prayers may be used.
At the entrance:
O God, protect our going out and our coming in; Let us share the hospitality of this home
with all who visit us, that those who enter here may know your love and peace.
Grant this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.

In the living room:
O God, give your blessings to all who share this room, that we may be knit together in companionship.
Grant this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.

In the kitchen:
O God, you fill the hungry with good things. Send your blessing on us, as we work in this kitchen, and make us ever thankful for our daily bread.
Grant this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.

In the dining room:
Blessed are you, Lord of heaven and earth, for you give us food and drink to sustain our lives and make our hearts glad. Help us to be grateful for all your mercies, and mindful of the needs of others.
Grant this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.

In the bedrooms:
Protect us, Lord, as we stay awake; watch over us as we sleep, that awake we may keep watch with Christ, and asleep, we may rest in his peace.
Grant this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.

In the bathroom:
Blessed are you, Lord of heaven and earth. You formed us in wisdom and love. Refresh us in body and in spirit, and keep us in good health that we might serve you.
Grant this through Christ our Lord
Amen.

All return to the starting place. A cross or icon is kissed by each person, and then put in a permanent place of honor. A candle may be lighted before it.
All recite the Lord's Prayer.

The Leader speaks the prayer of blessing:
Be our shelter, Lord, when we are at home, our companion when we are away,
and our welcome guest when we return. and at last receive us into the dwelling place
you have prepared for us in your Father's house, where you live for ever and ever.
Amen.

All make the sign of the cross as the leader concludes:
May the peace of Christ rule in our hearts, and may the word of Christ in all its richness
dwell in us, so that whatever we do in word and in work, we will do in the name of the Lord.
Amen.

The blessing may conclude with a song such as "Now Thank We All Our God."

Worthiness to receive Holy Communion: General Principles

by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

Issued June 20041.

Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgement regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorise or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propoganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it’" (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.4. Apart from an individuals’s judgement about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgement on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

Catholic Vocabularies

Even if you aren't Catholic, you'll get a laugh out of these definitions..... This information is normally for Catholics only, but is revealed here to Catholics and non-Catholics. It's important that everyone know the code words for each of the following:
AMEN: The only part of a prayer that everyone knows.
BULLETIN: Your receipt for attending Mass.
CHOIR: A group of people whose singing allows the rest of the Parish to lip-sync.
HOLY WATER: A liquid whose chemical formula is H2OLY.
HYMN: A song of praise usually sung in a key three octaves higher than that of the congregation's range.
RECESSIONAL HYMN: The last song at Mass often sung a little more quietly, since most of the people have already left.
INCENSE: Holy Smoke!
JESUITS: An order of priests known for their ability to find colleges with good basketball teams. JONAH: The original "Jaws" story.
JUSTICE: When kids have kids of their own.
KYRIE ELEISON: The only Greek words that most Catholics can recognize besides gyros and baklava. (for you non-Catholics it means Lord have mercy).
MAGI: The most famous trio to attend a baby shower.
MANGER: Where Mary gave birth to Jesus because Joseph wasn't covered by an HMO. (The Bible's way of showing us that holiday travel has always been rough.)
PEW: A medieval torture device still found in Catholic churches.
PROCESSION: The ceremonial formation at the beginning of Mass consisting of altar servers, the celebrant, and late parishioners looking for seats.
RECESSIONAL: The ceremonial procession at the conclusion of Mass led by parishioners trying to beat the crowd to the parking lot.
RELICS: People who have been going to Mass for so long, they actually know when to sit, kneel, and stand.
TEN COMMANDMENTS: The most important Top Ten list not given by David Letterman. USHERS: The only people in the parish who don't know the seating capacity of a pew.

No "Yahweh" in songs

Nancy Frazier O'BrienCatholic News Service
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- In the not-too-distant future, songs such as "You Are Near," "I Will Bless Yahweh" and "Rise, O Yahweh" will no longer be part of the Catholic worship experience in the United States.At the very least, the songs will be edited to remove the word "Yahweh" -- a name of God that the Vatican has ruled must not "be used or pronounced" in songs and prayers during Catholic Masses.Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli of Paterson, N.J., chairman of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Divine Worship, announced the new Vatican "directives on the use of 'the name of God' in the sacred liturgy" in an Aug. 8 letter to his fellow bishops.He said the directives would not "force any changes to official liturgical texts" or to the bishops' current missal translation project but would likely have "some impact on the use of particular pieces of liturgical music in our country as well as in the composition of variable texts such as the general intercessions for the celebration of the Mass and the other sacraments."John Limb, publisher of OCP in Portland, Ore., said the most popular hymn in the OCP repertoire that would be affected was Dan Schutte's "You Are Near," which begins, "Yahweh, I know you are near."He estimated that only "a handful" of other OCP hymns use the word "Yahweh," although a search of the OCP Web site turned up about a dozen examples of songs that included the word.OCP is a nonprofit publisher of liturgical music and worship resources.Limb said the company would be contacting composers to "ask them to try to come up with alternate language" for their hymns. But he said hymnals for 2009 had already been printed, so the affected hymns would not include the new wording for at least another year.Even when the new hymnals are out, "it may take time for people to get used to singing something different," he added in an Aug. 11 telephone interview with Catholic News Service.At Chicago-based GIA Publications, another major Catholic publisher of hymnals, no major revisions will be necessary, because of the company's longtime editorial policy against use of the word "Yahweh."Kelly Dobbs-Mickus, senior editor at GIA Publications, told CNS Aug. 11 that the policy, which dates to 1986, was based not on Vatican directives but on sensitivity to concerns among observant Jews about pronouncing the name of God. As an example, she cited Heinrich Schutz's "Thanks Be to Yahweh," which appears in a GIA hymnal under the title "Thanks Be to God."Bishop Serratelli said the Vatican decision also would provide "an opportunity to offer catechesis for the faithful as an encouragement to show reverence for the name of God in daily life, emphasizing the power of language as an act of devotion and worship."His letter to bishops came with a two-page letter from the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, dated June 29 and addressed to episcopal conferences around the world."By directive of the Holy Father, in accord with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, this congregation ... deems it convenient to communicate to the bishops' conferences ... as regards the translation and the pronunciation, in a liturgical setting, of the divine name signified in the sacred Tetragrammaton," said the letter signed by Cardinal Francis Arinze and Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, congregation prefect and secretary, respectively.The Tetragrammaton is YHWH, the four consonants of the ancient Hebrew name for God."As an expression of the infinite greatness and majesty of God, it was held to be unpronounceable and hence was replaced during the reading of sacred Scripture by means of the use of an alternate name: 'Adonai,' which means 'Lord,'" the Vatican letter said. Similarly, Greek translations of the Bible used the word "Kyrios" and Latin scholars translated it to "Dominus"; both also mean Lord."Avoiding pronouncing the Tetragrammaton of the name of God on the part of the church has therefore its own grounds," the letter said. "Apart from a motive of a purely philological order, there is also that of remaining faithful to the church's tradition, from the beginning, that the sacred Tetragrammaton was never pronounced in the Christian context nor translated into any of the languages into which the Bible was translated."The two Vatican officials noted that "Liturgiam Authenticam," the congregation's 2001 document on liturgical translations, stated that "the name of almighty God expressed by the Hebrew Tetragrammaton and rendered in Latin by the word 'Dominus,' is to be rendered into any given vernacular by a word equivalent in meaning.""Notwithstanding such a clear norm, in recent years the practice has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel's proper name," the letter said. "The practice of vocalizing it is met with both in the reading of biblical texts taken from the Lectionary as well as in prayers and hymns, and it occurs in diverse written and spoken forms," including Yahweh, Jahweh and Yehovah.END