Jesuit NewChurch vs the Philippine church
LINK
No mention was made, however, of the question to which the pope responded, formulated by the Spanish journalist Paloma Garcia Ovejero of the Catholic radio network COPE.
A question that was not generic, but referred to a very specific case:
“Holy Father, for a few weeks there has been great concern in a number of Latin American countries, but also in Europe, over the Zika virus. The greatest risk appears to be be for women in pregnancy: there is anguish. Some authorities have proposed abortion, or avoiding pregnancy. In this case, can the Church take into consideration the concept of a ‘lesser evil’?”
In responding, Francis made no explicit reference to the Zika case. But he gave the example of another "difficult situation," in Africa, when "Paul VI allowed the nuns to use contraception for cases of violence."
In reality, Paul VI gave no such permission, nor did he refuse it, nor did the rapes feared by the Congolese nuns really have anything to do with the conjugal acts that are the object of the Church’s magisterium.
But in offering such an example, Francis effectively made it understood that exceptions are allowed for the condemnation - formulated by “Humanae Vitae” of none other than Paul VI and reiterated by the Catechism of the Catholic Church - of “any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation, whether as an end or as a means.”
Not only that. With regard to these exceptions, what Francis did not say in explicit form has been said by others in his name.
The first, on February 19, was Fr. Federico Lombardi, in an interview with Vatican Radio in commentary and clarification on the pope’s answers on the plane:
> P. Lombardi commenta i temi affrontati dal papa con i giornalisti
The director of the press office of the Holy See not only referred explicitly to the “risk of the Zika virus” as one of the “cases of particular emergency and gravity” in which to evaluate “the possibility of recourse to contraception or condoms” with “a serious discernment of conscience,” but he also associated it with two other cases of the permitted use of contraception: the one already cited by Francis, of the nuns in the Congo, and another in which Benedict XVI is seen as having given the go-ahead “with regard to the use of condoms in situations in which there is a risk of contagion, for example, of AIDS.”
Both of these cases were improperly associated by Fr. Lombardi with the risk of Zika, both being of a different nature, as the previous article from www.chiesa documented.
But on public opinion - including the ecclesiastical - the impact of these words from Pope Francis and from his spokesman has been unequivocal: the Church’s refusal of contraception is no longer a dogma, and the time has come to make room for exceptions.
One glaring proof of this impact came on February 20 from the bishops of the Philippines, with a message addressed to the faithful in the name of the episcopal conference and signed by its president, the archbishop of Lingayen-Dagupan, Socrates B. Villegas.
Here is the complete text of the message, entitled “Truth with Love and Mercy:"
"Pope Francis is reported to have given a press conference while en route to Rome after his historical trip to Cuba and to Mexico. He was apprised of the Zika virus and the possibility that pregnant women afflicted by the disease would seek abortion.
"The Holy Father was very clear and uncompromising about the evil of abortion. And we, your bishops, reiterate Church teaching: No matter that the child in the womb may be afflicted with some infirmity or deformity, it can never be moral to bring a deliberate end to human life. It is never for us to judge who should live or die!
"He then proffered the view that the evil of contraception was not of the same magnitude as the evil of abortion. Clearly, this was sound moral reasoning. The evil of stealing a few pesos cannot be compared with the evil of plunder.
"The Pope was in no way changing Church teaching on the unacceptability of artificial means of contraception. He however usefully called attention to two important moral precepts.
"First, there may be circumstances that invite a re-evaluation of the judgment on artificial means of contraception. Second, the prodding of conscience should always be heeded, as long as every effort is made to form conscience properly.
"These positions are not in any way new. They have always formed part of Catholic moral theology and belong to the treasury of the Church’s heritage in health-care ethics.
"Once more, the Pope has shown his sensitivity to complex human situations, allowed the world see the merciful face of the Church – the sacrament of a Merciful Lord – as he has remained the faithful steward of the message of the Gospel."
This text requires a note of explanation.
In the Philippines, for two years the use of contraception has been permitted and promoted by law.
And the bishops had long fought against the approval of this law on “reproductive health,” strongly backed by President Noynoy Aquino, a Catholic.
But right on the verge of Francis’s journey to that country, in January of 2015 (see photo), a book came out that criticized from top to bottom the battle fought by the bishops. A book that Fr. Lombardi recommended to the journalists preparing to follow the papal journey.
The author is a gifted Jesuit, Pierre de Charentenay, former president of the Centre Sèvres, the institute of higher studies of the Society of Jesus in Paris, former director from 2004 to 2012 of the magazine of the French Jesuits “Études,” and since 2014 a member of the college of writers of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” the magazine of the Rome Jesuits printed with the imprimatur of the Vatican authorities and directed by a man very close to the current pope, Fr. Antonio Spadaro.
So then, among the accusations that Fr. de Charentenay lodged against the bishops of the Philippines was that of being closed off and backward, not only with respect to the driving forces of modernity but also with respect to the urging of Francis.
This article from www.chiesa reproduced the pages from the book by Fr. de Charentenay most cutting in their criticism of the Filipino bishops’ resistance to the pro-contraception law:
> Bishops of the Philippines Under Pressure. Examined and Rejected (27.1.2015)
Today, a year later, those bishops seem to have learned their lesson and to have passed their contraception exam with flying colors.
_____________
The document of the Filipino bishops on the website of their episcopal conference:
> Truth with Love and Mercy
The complete transcription of the press conference with Pope Francis on the return flight from Mexico to Rome:
as I have written elsewhere, people use the pill for all sorts of medical reasons. Heck, as a woman who suffered for 30 years with painful periods and various medical problems, in retrospect I should have been on the pill, and maybe I would have been spared two surgeries and many days of trying to work while in pain.
If a virgin uses the pill she is not breaking the law that stopping pregnancy using illicit methods.
So the bishop told our sisters that if they wished to go on the pill it was okay. There was no actual danger at the time, but one never knew. However, he left the use up to the consciences of the sisters. Two of our nuns did take the pill...however, the only one who (later at another mission) was raped by unknown assailants was also killed, so the problem never came up with her or the other nuns at missions attacked for the same reason: They didn't survive.
I suggested elsewhere what the bishop should have done is evacuate the sisters, or maybe show them how to shoot.
Ah, but when you are representing the prince of peace do you defend yourself? Maybe not..but since Peter had a sword, and knew how to use it, it suggests they were armed for attack on those lonely back roads. When Jesus told Peter to put the sword down, it was because his arrest was against a legal authority: We have no idea what he would have said if the attack would be brigands who had not only stealing and murder but the raping of the women including his mom who went around with Jesus to cook and clean.
No mention was made, however, of the question to which the pope responded, formulated by the Spanish journalist Paloma Garcia Ovejero of the Catholic radio network COPE.
A question that was not generic, but referred to a very specific case:
“Holy Father, for a few weeks there has been great concern in a number of Latin American countries, but also in Europe, over the Zika virus. The greatest risk appears to be be for women in pregnancy: there is anguish. Some authorities have proposed abortion, or avoiding pregnancy. In this case, can the Church take into consideration the concept of a ‘lesser evil’?”
In responding, Francis made no explicit reference to the Zika case. But he gave the example of another "difficult situation," in Africa, when "Paul VI allowed the nuns to use contraception for cases of violence."
In reality, Paul VI gave no such permission, nor did he refuse it, nor did the rapes feared by the Congolese nuns really have anything to do with the conjugal acts that are the object of the Church’s magisterium.
But in offering such an example, Francis effectively made it understood that exceptions are allowed for the condemnation - formulated by “Humanae Vitae” of none other than Paul VI and reiterated by the Catechism of the Catholic Church - of “any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation, whether as an end or as a means.”
Not only that. With regard to these exceptions, what Francis did not say in explicit form has been said by others in his name.
The first, on February 19, was Fr. Federico Lombardi, in an interview with Vatican Radio in commentary and clarification on the pope’s answers on the plane:
> P. Lombardi commenta i temi affrontati dal papa con i giornalisti
The director of the press office of the Holy See not only referred explicitly to the “risk of the Zika virus” as one of the “cases of particular emergency and gravity” in which to evaluate “the possibility of recourse to contraception or condoms” with “a serious discernment of conscience,” but he also associated it with two other cases of the permitted use of contraception: the one already cited by Francis, of the nuns in the Congo, and another in which Benedict XVI is seen as having given the go-ahead “with regard to the use of condoms in situations in which there is a risk of contagion, for example, of AIDS.”
Both of these cases were improperly associated by Fr. Lombardi with the risk of Zika, both being of a different nature, as the previous article from www.chiesa documented.
But on public opinion - including the ecclesiastical - the impact of these words from Pope Francis and from his spokesman has been unequivocal: the Church’s refusal of contraception is no longer a dogma, and the time has come to make room for exceptions.
One glaring proof of this impact came on February 20 from the bishops of the Philippines, with a message addressed to the faithful in the name of the episcopal conference and signed by its president, the archbishop of Lingayen-Dagupan, Socrates B. Villegas.
Here is the complete text of the message, entitled “Truth with Love and Mercy:"
"Pope Francis is reported to have given a press conference while en route to Rome after his historical trip to Cuba and to Mexico. He was apprised of the Zika virus and the possibility that pregnant women afflicted by the disease would seek abortion.
"The Holy Father was very clear and uncompromising about the evil of abortion. And we, your bishops, reiterate Church teaching: No matter that the child in the womb may be afflicted with some infirmity or deformity, it can never be moral to bring a deliberate end to human life. It is never for us to judge who should live or die!
"He then proffered the view that the evil of contraception was not of the same magnitude as the evil of abortion. Clearly, this was sound moral reasoning. The evil of stealing a few pesos cannot be compared with the evil of plunder.
"The Pope was in no way changing Church teaching on the unacceptability of artificial means of contraception. He however usefully called attention to two important moral precepts.
"First, there may be circumstances that invite a re-evaluation of the judgment on artificial means of contraception. Second, the prodding of conscience should always be heeded, as long as every effort is made to form conscience properly.
"These positions are not in any way new. They have always formed part of Catholic moral theology and belong to the treasury of the Church’s heritage in health-care ethics.
"Once more, the Pope has shown his sensitivity to complex human situations, allowed the world see the merciful face of the Church – the sacrament of a Merciful Lord – as he has remained the faithful steward of the message of the Gospel."
This text requires a note of explanation.
In the Philippines, for two years the use of contraception has been permitted and promoted by law.
And the bishops had long fought against the approval of this law on “reproductive health,” strongly backed by President Noynoy Aquino, a Catholic.
But right on the verge of Francis’s journey to that country, in January of 2015 (see photo), a book came out that criticized from top to bottom the battle fought by the bishops. A book that Fr. Lombardi recommended to the journalists preparing to follow the papal journey.
The author is a gifted Jesuit, Pierre de Charentenay, former president of the Centre Sèvres, the institute of higher studies of the Society of Jesus in Paris, former director from 2004 to 2012 of the magazine of the French Jesuits “Études,” and since 2014 a member of the college of writers of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” the magazine of the Rome Jesuits printed with the imprimatur of the Vatican authorities and directed by a man very close to the current pope, Fr. Antonio Spadaro.
So then, among the accusations that Fr. de Charentenay lodged against the bishops of the Philippines was that of being closed off and backward, not only with respect to the driving forces of modernity but also with respect to the urging of Francis.
This article from www.chiesa reproduced the pages from the book by Fr. de Charentenay most cutting in their criticism of the Filipino bishops’ resistance to the pro-contraception law:
> Bishops of the Philippines Under Pressure. Examined and Rejected (27.1.2015)
Today, a year later, those bishops seem to have learned their lesson and to have passed their contraception exam with flying colors.
_____________
The document of the Filipino bishops on the website of their episcopal conference:
> Truth with Love and Mercy
The complete transcription of the press conference with Pope Francis on the return flight from Mexico to Rome:
as I have written elsewhere, people use the pill for all sorts of medical reasons. Heck, as a woman who suffered for 30 years with painful periods and various medical problems, in retrospect I should have been on the pill, and maybe I would have been spared two surgeries and many days of trying to work while in pain.
If a virgin uses the pill she is not breaking the law that stopping pregnancy using illicit methods.
So the bishop told our sisters that if they wished to go on the pill it was okay. There was no actual danger at the time, but one never knew. However, he left the use up to the consciences of the sisters. Two of our nuns did take the pill...however, the only one who (later at another mission) was raped by unknown assailants was also killed, so the problem never came up with her or the other nuns at missions attacked for the same reason: They didn't survive.
I suggested elsewhere what the bishop should have done is evacuate the sisters, or maybe show them how to shoot.
Ah, but when you are representing the prince of peace do you defend yourself? Maybe not..but since Peter had a sword, and knew how to use it, it suggests they were armed for attack on those lonely back roads. When Jesus told Peter to put the sword down, it was because his arrest was against a legal authority: We have no idea what he would have said if the attack would be brigands who had not only stealing and murder but the raping of the women including his mom who went around with Jesus to cook and clean.
posted by Nancy Reyes at
7:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home