Father Joseph Bachand: Will you now accuse Pope Benedict XVI of "evil"?

Writing for the Associated Press, Nicole Winfield is reporting that, "Pope Benedict XVI issued a blistering denunciation Thursday of priests who have questioned church teaching on celibacy and ordaining women, saying they were being selfish in disobeying his authority.


Benedict made the rare and explicit criticism from the altar of St. Peter's Basilica in his homily on Holy Thursday, when priests recall the promises they made when ordained...In his homily, Benedict said the dissidents claim to be motivated by concern for the church. But he suggested that in reality they were just making 'a desperate push to do something to change the church in accordance with (their) own preferences and ideas.'...He said Jesus always followed true obedience to God's will, not 'human caprice.'.." (See here).

Several years ago, when I expressed concerns over La Salette priests promoting the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood during a vocation retreat, a La Salette Provincial [Father Joseph Bachand, m.s.] accused me of engaging in "evil." Father Bachand had been involved with the infamous St. Luke Institute.

While Fr. Bachand considered my defense of Church teaching as “evil,” Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, “Where religious assent is known to be due, it is a sin to withhold it. Here this sin is called deliberate nonassent. To communicate such nonassent to others with the intention of encouraging them to share in it is a more serious sin, called here sinful dissent.”

It should come as no surprise that dissent within the Church leads to polarization and undermines truth which is the principle of the Church’s communion. In its Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, No. 40, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said that, “The Church ‘is like a sacrament, a sign and instrument, that is, of communion with God and of unity among all men’ (LG, 1). Consequently, to pursue concord and communion is to enhance the force of her witness and credibility. To succumb to the temptation of dissent, on the other hand, is to allow the ‘leaven of infidelity to the Holy Spirit’ to start to work.”


The warning of Pope Paul VI, given during his Homily at Holy Thursday Mass on April 3, 1969, has been largely ignored by confused clerics like Fr. Bachand and the laity who follow these selfish guides:

"There is talk of renewal in the doctrine and in the conscience of the Church of God; but how can the living and true Church be authentic and persistent if the complex structure that forms it and defines it a spiritual and social 'mystical body', is today so often and so gravely corroded by dissent and challenge and by forgetfulness of its hierarchical structure, and is countered in its divine and indispensable constituent charism, its pastoral authority? How can it claim to be a Church, that is a united people, even though locally broken up and historically and legitimately diversified, when a practically schismatic ferment is dividing it, subdividing it and breaking it into groups which are more than anything else zealous for arbitrary and fundamentally egoistical autonomy, masked by Christian pluralism or liberty of conscience?"

Related reading here.

Some spiritual Febreze for the Diocese of Worcester...

Saint Augustine, in his Confessions, Book VIII, Chapter X, describes his torment at being torn between two wills, the carnal and the spiritual, and writes, "..as yet I was bound by the iron chain of my own will. The enemy held fast my will, and had made of it a chain, and had bound me tight with it. For out of the perverse will came lust, and the service of lust ended in habit, and habit, not resisted, became necessity. By these links, as it were, forged together -- which is why I called it 'a chain' - a hard bondage held me in slavery. But that new will which had begun to spring up in me freely to worship thee and to enjoy thee, O my God, the only certain Joy, was not able as yet to overcome my former willfulness, made strong by long indulgence. Thus my two wills -- the old and the new, the carnal and the spiritual -- were in conflict within me; and by their discord they tore my soul apart."

When one reads The Catholic Free Press, official newspaper for the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, one can see this spiritual struggle expressed within its pages.  On the one hand, in an editorial this week entitled "Sharing our faith more," we read about the recent men's conference and Father Dwight Longenecker who told participants that, "Obedience means learning to listen...Giving hard truths a fair hearing increases joy, instead of strangling it...Not one scrap or whiff of hell is to remain in Christians; they are to be transformed totally into Christ's image.." (March 30, 2012 edition).

The editorial says that, "Excruciating Church teachings just might raise us from the dead."

And yet, as I noted here, for years those who produce The Catholic Free Press have been promoting deliberate nonassent from the Church's moral teaching by advancing a dissenting concept of the primacy of conscience.  This even though the publication's masthead cites John 8: 32: "You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free."  Of course, astute readers will notice immediately that part of this passage [beginning with verse 31] is missing.  For Our Lord said, "If you live according to My teaching, you are truly My disciples; then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."


This is a conditional statement.  Such as: if X = 2, then X + 5 = 7.  Our Lord is telling us that if we accept His teaching, then - and only then - are we truly His disciples.  And, as a result, we will know the truth and this truth will set us free.  In John 14: 15, Our Lord says, "If you love Me, keep My commandments."  This is how we prove our love for the Lord Jesus.  Not by advancing a subjectivist conscience.

The first Bishop of Worcester (later made a Cardinal), The Most Rev. John J. Wright, D.D., in an essay entitled "Reflections on Conscience and Authority," which appeared in the April-May 1964 issue of The Critic, reminded us that, "Individual conscience is not always on the side of freedom, nor of life, nor of God, nor of man; 'modern conscience' can mean moral sophism, the arrogance and arbitrariness of which can be more horrendous, because more inaccessible to protest, than almost any despotism and certainly than any duly constituted authority which must function under written law - civil or canon."

I have been fighting against this despotism within the Diocese of Worcester - this tyranny and arrogance - for many years.  Which is why I am an outsider.  Often it is only by standing on the outside that we may have a clear view of things.  Which is why the prophets were most often on the outside looking in.

Cardinal Wright continues:

"..expressions such as 'the judgment of the Christian conscience,' or, 'to judge according to the Christian conscience,' mean this: that the pattern of the ultimate and personal decision for a moral action must be taken from the word and will of Christ.  In fact, He is the way, the truth, and the life, not only for all men collectively, but for each single one; the mature man, the child, and the youth.  And so, the formation of the Christian conscience consists, above all, in illuminating the mind with respect to Christ's will, law and way; guiding it, also, so far as this can be done from outside, freely and constantly to execute the divine will.  This is the highest present task of moral education and moral education presupposes authority; it is the first contact between conscience and authority, that of the parent, of the teacher, above all, of those who teach divine law - and of all these within the Church...only one with a totally perverted concept of the real nature and function of conscience could repudiate the infallible magisterium of the Church in the name of conscience..."

But this is precisely what those who produce The Catholic Free Press have been doing for years.  Time and again they have repudiated the infallible Magisterium in the name of subjectivist conscience.

Not one scrap or whiff of hell is to remain in Christians?  Amen to that!  But what is Hell but self-will embraced to the point of final impenitence?  That's exactly what a subjectivist conscience is: self-will over the will of Christ as expressed through His Church.

Note how the Catholic Free Press editorial refers to Church teachings as "excruciating."  They are not so for those who love the Lord Jesus.  For He has said that His yoke is easy and His burden is light.  If we love Him, we will keep His commandments.  We will not rationalize our sin through recourse to a subjectivist conscience.  We will instead repent.

The National "Catholic" Reporter sets itself against the teaching of the Catholic Church

An editorial in the National "Catholic" Reporter entitled "Ordination ban not infallibly taught" (May 23rd edition), referring to Pope John Paul II's infallible teaching in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4, asserts that, "At issue fundamentally is whether John Paul, in his 1994 apostolic letter, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (“Priestly Ordination”), intended to (or actually did) lay out an infallible teaching when he said, 'I declare that the church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the church’s faithful.'"

Then the editorial says that, "John Paul did not formally pronounce the teaching ex cathedra (speaking from the chair of Peter) or say he was teaching infallibly in his declaration. It is also notable that he said only that it was a 'judgment' that is 'to be definitively held' - not a matter of  'divine faith' that must be 'believed.' For any serious Catholic or student of Catholic teaching, the issue of the words employed in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not of minor import."  (See here).

More word games.  Notice the wording in this editorial?  "..he said only that it was a 'judgment' that is 'to be definitively held.'" 


Only?  This is a cheap attempt to downplay the wording of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4.  Canon Law, specifically Canon 750, states that: “each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.”

In its editorial, the National "Catholic" Reporter is in effect setting itself against the teaching of the Church by treating the ordination of women as “an open question.” Deliberate nonassent is a grave matter. This situation is all the more serious since the judgment of Pope John Paul II (and he invoked his supreme authority in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis) is to be “definitively held by all.”

Because nonassent is serious in and of itself, and because deliberate nonassent interferes with communion in the Church and serves to polarize people, it is a grave matter. Pope Pius XII, in Humani generis, explains that once a pope makes a point of settling a matter which is disputed among theologians, it can no longer be treated as an open question.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a Responsum ad Dubium in 1995 which read:

"Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.


Responsum: In the affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect

Tarcisio Bertone
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli"

No serious Catholic or student of Catholic teaching would dismiss a teaching of the Church which is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.  The National "Catholic" Reporter is setting itself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.  And the U.S. Bishops need to address this most grave matter.

Father Bryan Hehir on the ordination of women...

Father Bryan Hehir of the Boston Archdiocese has said that, "The ordination of women raises doctrinal questions that have to be worked through in a Church that takes doctrine seriously." See here. As I said in the comments section of Bryan Hehir Exposed:


"In his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4, Pope John Paul II said that, “..the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women” and that “this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”

Canon Law, specifically Canon 750, states that: “each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.”

Therefore, Fr. Bryan Hehir is setting himself against the teaching of the Church by treating the ordination of women as “an open question.” Deliberate nonassent is a grave matter. This situation is all the more serious since the judgment of Pope John Paul II (and he invoked his supreme authority in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis) is to be “definitively held by all.”

Because nonassent is serious in and of itself, and because deliberate nonassent interferes with communion in the Church and serves to polarize people, it is a grave matter. Pope Pius XII, in Humani generis, explains that once a pope makes a point of settling a matter which is disputed among theologians, it can no longer be treated as an open question.

This situation is very serious and needs to be addressed immediately by His Eminence, Cardinal Sean O’Malley."

If anyone questions why Joe Sacerdo over at Bryan Hehir Exposed or the other members of his Blog team desire to remain anonymous for the moment, I would like to demonstrate why there is ample reason for concern. As I mentioned in a previous post:


"A few years ago I attended a vocation retreat at La Salette Attleboro as part of my discernment process (a period of some 15 months during which I was never even considered as an applicant or taken seriously - I suspect because of my orthodoxy). It was at this retreat that I overheard a couple of La Salette priests suggest that there is "wiggle room" on the question of ordaining women to the ministerial priesthood.

I wrote an email to the La Salette religious who had attended this retreat as well as to the other retreatants who were looking into the La Salette community (we had all been given an email list of retreat attendees). I expressed my concerns over being given the "run around" for some 15 months as well as my concerns over not being taken seriously because of my commitment to Magisterial teaching. I also addressed what La Salette priests had said about ordaining women to the priesthood. I received two very different responses from La Salette religious. The first response I received was from Fr. Dan Bradley, M.S., who said, "Paul, I am sorry you have not been dealt with by our community in a forthright manner. I cannot speak for the others you address this letter to, only to myself. I am not sure that your position on the teaching of the Church would be a sufficient reason for neglecting to dialogue with you about your vocation and our community. We do have a mix of people whose opinions vary, and who have different theological perspectives...Again, sorry that those charged with this responsibility did not do more to respond to you...hopefully your own experience will be a learning experience for us."

The second email was from Fr. Joe Bachand, the Provincial Superior of the La Salette Missionaries. Fr. Bachand dismissed my concerns over being given the proverbial run around ( I had said in my email that "..it has been fifteen months since I first approached the La Salette Missionaries and I am not one step closer to being admitted - or even considered - as an applicant) and wrote, "If I ever needed evidence of the evils of the internet, you have supplied it...If someone said something about women's ordination, it was not as part of the program."

Actually, it was "as part of the program." All of the candidate retreatants were sitting in the same room engaging in a conversation with the La Salette priests who suggested that there is "wiggle room" on the question of women's ordination. In fact, we had all been led to this room by La Salette priests conducting the retreat."

I stood up for the Church's teaching as I have my entire life. I was therefore rejected and not even considered as an applicant to the La Salette Missionaries. And even though the Church's teaching that women cannot be admitted to the ministerial priesthood is to be "definitively held by all," I was assured there is "wiggle room" on the subject.

I was accused of "evil" by the La Salette Provincial Superior. The cost of discipleship.