Essencial e Urgente

Estou mesmo a acabar de ler um livro extraordinário pelo rigor, pela organização, pela vastidão de informação, pela clareza, pela inteligência. É muito perturbador e arrepiante porque revela, sem subterfúgios, o que está sucedendo ao Ocidente (fá-lo principalmente através dos USA, mas a semelhança e as implicações para Portugal e a Europa são evidentes), e o que mostra é aterrorizador. Não o patenteia porém para assustar, nem o faz com linguagem apocalíptica, mas com a finalidade de nos acordar e mobilizar para uma defesa atempada da humanidade do homem e da família, porque, caso não nos organizemos e reajamos, dentro em pouco será tarde.

Depois de estudar, ao longo dos anos, milhares e milhares de páginas sobre o assunto, estou em que esta obra é a melhor e mais actual síntese sobre a matéria. Abrange quase todos, e são abundantes, os múltiplos aspectos do tema. Cita copiosamente e sem subterfúgios as posições contrárias respondendo-lhes depois sem fugir a nenhum ponto, socorrendo-se também de referências de outros autores. É certo que num ou noutro aspecto não se concordará com ele. Mas a enorme utilidade do livro é inegável e a sua publicação, uma bênção do Céu. Diria mesmo que é essencial e urgente que seja lido pelo Clero (Bispos e Padres), pelos pais de família, pelos políticos e por todos aqueles que defendem as crianças, os jovens e a família.

Infelizmente, muitos não sabem inglês pelo que seria da maior importância que fosse rapidamente traduzido e publicado em português. Haverá por cá alguma editora com a coragem e generosidade suficientes para o fazer? Nos USA foi difícil, mas conseguiu-se. Se eu tivesse os meios económicos fá-lo-ia publicar e sei que Deus me pagaria 100 vezes mais na vida presente eainda com maior generosidade na Eterna.

O livro tem 598 páginas de texto e 1525 notas (88 páginas em letra minúscula). O seu autor é Michael L. Brown e a obra intitula-se A Queer Thing Happened to America.

Nuno Serras Pereira

03. 12. 2011

O Estripador a Presidente!...

O semanário sol traz hoje a primeira parte de uma reportagem-entrevista com o estripador de mulheres de má-vida. Nela podemos ler horrorizados a descrição pormenorizada e macabra que o mesmo faz, de “consciência tranquila”, dos crimes cometidos, a que ele chama limpezas da sujeira, “culpabilizando” simultaneamente, numa flagrante racionalização, a sua mãe. Não se compreende que assassínios tão hediondos, perpetrados por um homicida confesso, cujas declarações são em tudo coincidentes com as investigações da polícia, possa prescrever…

Mas o que mais espanta não é isso. A estupefacção maior advém de que os relatos de matadores de crianças nascituras, tão ou mais tenebrosos do que este, realizados com frieza e distância psicopáticas muito semelhantes (facilmente se encontra na Inter-rede relatos de médicos abortadores que testemunharam perante tribunais, nos U. S., os “procedimentos” dessa “arte”), nunca, mas mesmo nunca, sejam notícia ou objecto de reportagem e de escândalo. Pelo contrário, esses homicidas péssimos e os seus fautores são entrevistados - não na qualidade de criminosos mas como pessoas credíveis e merecedoras de atenção e seguimento -, por tudo quanto é comunicação social inclusive católica, e promovidos a lugares de destaque. É totalmente absurdo, por exemplo, que um estripador confesso de crianças nascituras, isto é, um assassino violento de pessoas, no seu estado de maior vulnerabilidade e de total inocência, como Miguel Oliveira da Silva tenha sido nomeado presidente do conselho nacional de ética para as ciências da vida (CNECV) e seja convidado da Rádio Renascença perorar sobre a defesa da vida. Propiciador desta besta-fera (a expressão é do P. António Vieira, para designar pessoas cruéis, bárbaras ou selvagens) é, entre outros, o presidente da república que ao promulgar a “lei” iníqua e injusta proporcionou os meios para que mais de sessenta mil crianças tenham sido “legalmente” esquartejadas com o patrocínio do estado, desde 2007. Pelo que não me admiraria nada que um dia um estripador prescrito venha a ser nomeado presidente do CNECV ou mesmo eleito presidente da república, que já foi Portugal.

Creio que foi no mesmo jornal que vi uma adversão contra a violência doméstica com a fotografia, a toda a página, de um mulher ferozmente espancada e ferida até à morte. Fomos nos últimos tempos avisados de que viria aí uma campanha chocante para ajudar a pôr um ponto final, de vez, na violência doméstica de modo a que não mais aconteça a morte matada de 14 mulheres, como sucedeu no ano transacto. Muito bem. Mas é caso para perguntar, se é tão eficaz e necessária uma publicitação desse género porque não se faz o mesmo para proteger as, não já 14, mas vinte mil crianças nascentes, a maioria delas do sexo feminino, que são raivosamente escangalhadas e despedaçadas todos os anos. Esta fereza doméstica é bem mais intensa e furibunda.

Acresce que a iracúndia doméstica sobre crianças, já nascidas, por parte das mulheres, e também a exercida sobre os anciãos é mais vasta e grave, bem como o furor “doméstico” entre pessoas do mesmo sexo, que vivem sodomiticamente juntos. Mas destas coisas, é claro, o melhor é ignorar, não se venha a conhecer a essa coisa horrível que é a verdade…

NOTA BENE: No texto anterior, intitulado “Mas que Inferno!” houve quem, para minha grande surpresa, supusesse que eu advogava que quem não gostasse de Bach iria para o Inferno. Ora o ponto não era evidentemente esse, mas sim que uma mesma causa pode provocar efeitos opostos, dependendo estes das disposições sobre quem é exercida. Santa Catarina de Génova é muito clara quando diz que o Amor ardente de Deus, ou o Amor ardente que Deus é, para uns é Céu, para outros Purgatório e para outros Inferno.

Nuno Serras Pereira

02. 12. 2011

Same-Sex "Marriage" Trickle Effect

Our friends at the Family Research Council have produced a documentary detailing some of the repercussions that have already begun to arise as a result of so-called same-sex “marriage.” The evidence and the impact that same-sex “marriage” is already having is astounding and shows the dangers it presents to our country and our culture. Watch the trailer for the documentary here and comment on our blog. Particularly chilling is the effect the gay-rights movement has had on our children: to the point where some young kids think that having friends of the same sex is homosexual. You need to talk frankly with your children about this issue. The question isn’t when are they going to learn about so-called same-sex “marriage,” but who is going to be the one to teach them about it?

We at the Manhattan Declaratio would like to thank you again for signing and supporting this vital statement of support life, marriage and religious liberty. Continue to visit ManhattanDeclaration.org to get all your up-to-date news on the sanctity of life, dignity of marriage and religious liberty. And join us at our blog. It's up to us, every one of us, to vigorously defend life, marriage, and religious liberty.

God bless you,

The Manhattan Declaration

Grey's Anatomy, l'aborto in tv - di Tommaso Scandroglio

In La Bussola Quotidiana

Il cinema, ma soprattutto il piccolo schermo sono da una parte specchio della realtà sociale e dall’altro anticipano mode, costumi e idee. Quindi da una parte mimano il vero e dall’altro lo preconizzano. La fortunata serie Tv Grey’s Anatomy forse insiste più sul primo aspetto, esasperandolo però non poco. Questo serial, nato negli States nel matrzo 2005, ha ricevuto molti prestigiosi premi ed è approdato da noi nel dicembre dello stesso anno su Fox Life, Italia 1 e sul digitale terrestre di La5. Si tratta di un medical drama dove il personaggio principale, Meredith Grey, è una giovane dottoressa che svolge il suo tirocinio presso l’immaginario Seattle Grace Hospital. Le puntate si snodano tra operazioni di routine, patologie bizzarre, amorazzi, liti furiose e melense rappacificazioni.

Il 22 settembre scorso è andata in onda sulla ABC una puntata dove una delle colleghe della Grey, la dottoressa Cristina Yang, dopo aver scoperto di essere incinta ha deciso di abortire. Inizialmente aveva tentennato, non per questioni morali, ma perché il suo fidanzato Owen si era opposto. Ma Owen viene ripreso da Meredith: che non si intrometta nella gravidanza dell’amica. La decisione deve essere solo sua. Owen obbedisce e accompagna la fidanzata ad abortire. L “amore” trionfa sempre, non conosce ostacoli, nemmeno quelli posti da una nuova vita.

Perché Cristina ha preso questa decisione? Non perché il feto era malato, non perché la sua salute sarebbe stata in pericolo oppure perché era al verde, né perché aveva subito violenza, ma semplicemente perché il bambino sarebbe stato un freno alla sua carriera. Il tasso di cinismo presente in tutti i personaggi della serie è elevato, soprattutto nell’arrivista Yang, e quindi possiamo dire che in un certo senso il pubblico si sarebbe sorpreso se quest’ultima avesse deciso di tenere il bambino piuttosto che sopprimerlo.

Ma quello che più stupisce sono due aspetti. Il primo risiede nel fatto che gli sceneggiatori hanno deciso di non drammatizzare troppo l’evento. Pathos ce n’era senza dubbio, ma pareva più un ingrediente teso a rafforzare la fisionomia del personaggio della dottoressa Yang che, come sanno bene i fans della serie, non si ferma davanti a nulla pur di eccellere nel lavoro, piuttosto che una conseguenza naturale della scelta di abortire. La trama quindi sembrava tesa a normalizzare il dramma dell’aborto, a neutralizzare la sua componente fortemente emotiva.

Il secondo aspetto invece riguarda l’effetto specchio prima ricordato. Le motivazioni addotte dalla Yang sono tutt’altro che eccentriche, ma sono invece copia fedele delle ragioni che nella maggioranza dei casi spingono le donne ad abortire. Il ricercatore L.B. Finer nello studio del 2005 Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health ci informava che il 25% delle donne intervistate che aveva deciso di non tenere il proprio bambino - la maggioranza relativa del campione – lo aveva fatto perché non si sentiva pronta, perché non era il momento adatto, perché in quel frangente altre erano le priorità. Solo il 3% aveva detto sì all’aborto perché temeva che il feto fosse affetto da qualche patologia e solo lo 0,5% perché aveva subito violenza. Ma nell’immaginario collettivo la donna che abortisce lo fa sempre ed unicamente per gravissimi problemi di salute o economici, oppure perché violentata. Un’altra prova che sui temi di bioetica il percepito della gente è una cosa e la realtà dei fatti un’altra.

La puntata del 22 settembre scorso, che a breve verrà trasmessa probabilmente anche da noi, ha così instillato con disinvoltura nella mente di 10 milioni di telespettatori americani l’idea che l’aborto è legittimo quando contrasta con le proprie aspirazioni professionali. Un incidente di percorso superabilissimo senza lo spargimento di troppe lacrime. Un altro passo nella direzione del pieno assorbimento sociale di quell'atto che non è nient’altro che un omicidio pre-natale.

Ma perché gli ideatori della serie hanno deciso di trattare questo tema? Forse perché era uno dei tanti un po’ scabrosi che poteva attirare l’attenzione del pubblico? O forse perché era un espediente tra i molti per mettere un po’ di pepe nelle già intricate vicende di questi tirocinanti? Non pare proprio che la scelta sia stata casuale se andiamo a vedere chi è la creatrice della serie. Si tratta di Shonda Rhimes. Formatasi nel Marian Catholic High School a Chicago Heights, nell’Illinois, ad un certo punto della sua vita cambia strada e viene attirata dalle sirene prima del mondo dell’intrattenimento, dandosi alla sceneggiatura per la TV, poi della politica diventando membro del comitato direttivo del Planned Parenthood, nota e potente organizzazione internazionale dedita alla diffusione dell’aborto, della contraccezione e della sterilizzazione di massa. Nel 2007 la rivista Time la inserisce nella lista della 100 persone più influenti del mondo. E come dare torto al Time dato che le idee della Rhimes vengono veicolate a decine di milioni di persone ogni settimana grazie alle serie di cui è autrice o sceneggiatrice?

E così la dottoressa Yang è diventata sostenitrice e portavoce, anzi megafono, della mission del Planned Parenthood, ambasciatrice internazionale (la serie è esportata in vari paesi del mondo) dell’aborto libero e gratuito. Inutile aggiungere che nessuna voce di protesta si alzò per denunciare questo mega spot all’aborto, a parte quella di qualche gruppo pro-life.

Non così andò, guarda caso, quando un giorno del 2005 un attore di questa stessa serie, Isaiah Washington, apostrofò nel backstage un suo collega con l’appellativo di “frocio”. L’episodio arrivò alle orecchie dei media e l’organizzazione Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GAAD) pretese le pubbliche scuse di Washington. L’attore fu costretto a diramare un comunicato stampa in cui affermava: “Non posso né difendere né spiegare il mio comportamento... e non posso più negare a me stesso che ci sono delle questioni che devo ovviamente esaminare nella mia anima, ho chiesto aiuto”. Ma alla GAAD non bastò e fece fortissime pressioni sulla ABC affinchè prendesse provvedimenti. Washington fu obbligato ad andare in terapia come segno di ravvedimento e come atto di pentimento dovette recitare il seguente mea culpa: “Con l'aiuto della mia famiglia e dei miei amici, ho iniziato ad andare in terapia. Credo sia un passo necessario per capire i motivi del mio comportamento e per essere sicuro che non accada mai più. Apprezzo il fatto che mi è stata data l'opportunità di trasformare i miei errori in azioni positive, sul piano umano e professionale”.

Altro che piacevoli e innocui filmetti in prima serata: dietro alle trame di queste serie Tv si celano giochi di potere e lobby assai influenti che pilotano le ignare coscienze di centinaia di milioni di spettatori in tutto il mondo. E guai a non allinearsi.

The pastoral approach to marriage should be founded on truth - Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

In 2011-11-30 L’Osservatore Romano

In 1998 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, introduced the volume entitled '*On the Pastoral Care of the Divorced and Remarried'*, published by the Libreria in the dicastery's series ("Documenti e Studi", 17). Because of its current interest and breadth of perspective, we reproduce below the third part along with the addition of three notes.

The Letter of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of 14 September 1994 concerning the reception of Holy Communion by divorced and remarried members of the faithful was met with a very lively response across wide sections of the Church. Along with many positive reactions, more than a few critical voices were also heard. The fundamental objections against the teaching and practice of the Church are outlined below in simplified form.

Several of the more significant objections – principally, the reference to the supposedly more flexible practice of the Church Fathers which would be the inspiration for the practice of the Eastern Churches separated from Rome, as well as the allusion to the traditional principles of epicheia and of aequitas canonica – were studied in-depth by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Articles by Professors Pelland, Marcuzzi and Rodriguez Luño2, among others, were developed in the course of this study. The main conclusions of the research, which suggest the direction of an answer to the objections, will be briefly summarized here.

Some maintain that several passages of the New Testament suggest that the words of Jesus on the indissolubility of marriage allow for a flexible application and cannot be classified in a strictly legal sense.

Several exegetes point out critically that with regard to the indissolubility of marriage, the Magisterium cites almost exclusively one pericope – namely, Mk. 10:11-12 ­– and does not sufficiently take into account other passages from the Gospel of Matthew and the First Letter to Corinthians. They claim that these biblical passages speak of a certain exception to the Lord’s words about the indissolubility of marriage, notably in the case of porneia (Mt. 5:32; 19:9) and in the case of separation because of the faith (1 Cor. 7:12-16). They hold that these texts should be an indication that, already in apostolic times, Christians in difficult situations had known a flexible application of the words of Jesus.

In replying to this objection, one notes that magisterial documents do not intend to present the biblical foundations of the teachings on marriage in a complete and exhaustive way. They entrust this important task to competent experts. The Magisterium emphasizes, however, that the teaching of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage is faithful to the words of Jesus. Jesus clearly identifies the Old Testament practice of divorce as a consequence of the hardness of the human heart. He refers – over and above the law ­– to the beginning of creation, to the will of the Creator, and summarizes his teaching with the words: “Therefore what God has joined together, no human being must separate,” (Mk. 10:9). With the coming of the Redeemer, marriage is therefore restored to its original form intended at creation and is wrested away from human arbitrariness – above all from the whim of the husband, since for wives there really was no possibility of divorce. Jesus’ words on the indissolubility of marriage overcome the old order of the law with the new order of faith and grace. Only in this way can marriage fully become a God-given vocation to love and human dignity and the sign of the unconditional covenant of divine love, i.e., a sacrament (cf. Eph. 5:32).

The possibility of separation, which Paul discusses in 1 Cor. 7, regards marriage between a Christian and a non-baptized person. Later theological reflection has clarified that only marriages between baptized persons are a sacrament in the strict sense of the word, and that absolute indissolubility holds only for those marriages falling within the scope of Christian faith. So-called “natural marriage” has its dignity from the order of creation and is therefore oriented toward indissolubility, but it can be dissolved under certain circumstances because of a higher good – which in this case is faith. This is how systematic theology correctly classified St. Paul’s reference as the privilegium paulinum, that is, the possibility of dissolving a non-sacramental marriage for the good of the faith. The indissolubility of a truly sacramental marriage remains safeguarded; it is not therefore an exception to the word of the Lord. We will come back to this later.

Extensive literature exists regarding the correct understanding of the porneia clauses, with many differing and even conflicting hypotheses. There is no unanimity among exegetes on this point. Many maintain that it refers to invalid marital unions, not to an exception to the indissolubility of marriage. In any case, the Church cannot construct her doctrine and praxis on uncertain exegetical hypotheses. She must adhere to the clear teaching of Christ.

Others object that the patristic tradition leaves room for a more varied praxis, which would be more equitable in difficult situations; furthermore, the Catholic Church could learn from the principle of “economy” employed by Eastern Churches separated from Rome.

It is claimed that the current Magisterium relies on only one strand of the patristic tradition, and not on the whole legacy of the ancient Church. Although the Fathers clearly held fast to the doctrinal principle of the indissolubility of marriage, some of them tolerated a certain flexibility on the pastoral level with regard to difficult individual cases. On this basis Eastern Churches separated from Rome later developed alongside the principle of akribia, fidelity to revealed truth, that of oikonomia, benevolent leniency in difficult situations. Without renouncing the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage, in some cases they permit a second and even a third marriage, which is distinct, however, from the sacramental first marriage and is marked by a penitential character. Some say that this practice has never been explicitly condemned by the Catholic Church. They claim that the 1980 Synod of Bishops proposed to study this tradition thoroughly, in order to allow the mercy of God to be more resplendent.

Father Pelland’s study points out the direction in which the answers to these questions can be sought. Naturally, for the interpretation of individual patristic texts, the work of historians is necessary. Because of the difficult textual issues involved, controversies will not be lacking in the future. Theologically, one must affirm the following:

a. There exists a clear consensus among the Fathers regarding the indissolubility of marriage. Since it derives from the will of the Lord, the Church has no authority over it. For this reason, from the outset Christian marriage was distinct from marriage in Roman society, even though in the first centuries there did not yet exist any canonical system. The Church in the time of the Fathers clearly excluded divorce and remarriage, precisely out of faithful obedience to the New Testament.

b. In the Church at the time of the Fathers, divorced and remarried members of the faithful were never officially admitted to Holy Communion after a time of penance. It is true, however, that the Church did not always rigorously revoke concessions in certain territories, even when they were identified as not in agreement with her doctrine and discipline. It also seems true that individual Fathers, Leo the Great being among them, sought pastoral solutions for rare borderline cases.

c. This led to two opposing developments:

- In the Imperial Church after Constantine, with the ever stronger interplay between Church and State, a greater flexibility and readiness for compromise in difficult marital situations was sought. Up until the Gregorian reform, a similar tendency was present in Gallic and Germanic lands. In the Eastern churches separated from Rome, this development progressed farther in the second millennium and led to an increasingly more liberal praxis. Today in some of these churches there are numerous grounds for divorce, even a theology of divorce, which is in no way compatible with Jesus’ words regarding the indissolubility of marriage. Without fail, this problem must be addressed in ecumenical dialogue.

- In the West, on account of the Gregorian reform, the original concept of the Church Fathers was recovered. This development came to its conclusion at the Council of Trent and was once again expressed as a doctrine of the Church at the Second Vatican Council.

On doctrinal grounds, the praxis of the Eastern churches separated from Rome cannot be taken up by the Catholic Church, as it is the result of a complex historical process, an increasingly liberal – and thus more and more removed from the words of the Lord – interpretation of several obscure patristic texts which were significantly influenced by civil law. Furthermore, the claim is incorrect that the Church simply tolerated such a praxis. Admittedly, the Council of Trent did not pronounce any explicit condemnation. The medieval canonists, however, consistently spoke of the praxis as improper. Furthermore, there is evidence that groups of Orthodox believers who became Catholic had to sign a profession of faith with an explicit reference to the impossibility of a second marriage.

Many propose to allow exceptions to the Church’s norm on the basis of the traditional principles of epikeia and aequitas canonica.

Certain marriage cases, it is said, cannot be handled in the external forum. Some claim that the Church should not simply rely on juridical norms, but on the contrary ought to respect and tolerate the conscience of the individual. They say that theological notions of epikeia and aequitas canonica could serve to justify, from moral theology as well as juridically, a decision of conscience at variance from the general norm. Especially regarding the question of receiving the sacraments, they claim that the Church should take some steps forward and not just issue prohibitions to the faithful.

The contributions made by Professor Marcuzzi and Professor Rodríguez Luño throw light on his complex problem. To this end, there are three areas of inquiry which clearly need to be distinguished from each other:

a. Epikeia and aequitas canonica exist in the sphere of human and purely ecclesiastical norms of great significance, but cannot be applied to those norms over which the Church has no discretionary authority. The indissoluble nature of marriage is one of these norms which goes back to Christ Himself and is thus identified as a norm of divine law. The Church cannot sanction pastoral practices - for example, sacramental pastoral practices - which contradict the clear instruction of the Lord.

In other words, if the prior marriage of two divorced and remarried members of the faithful was valid, under no circumstances can their new union be considered lawful and therefore reception of the sacraments is intrinsically impossible. The conscience of the individual is bound to this norm without exception.3

b. However the Church has the authority to clarify those conditions which must be fulfilled for a marriage to be considered indissoluble according to the sense of Jesus' teaching. In line with the Pauline assertion in 1 Cor. 7, she established that only two baptized Christians can enter into a sacramental marriage. She developed the legal concept of the Pauline privilege and the Petrine privilege. With reference to the porneia clauses in Matthew and in Acts 15:20, the impediments to marriage were established. Furthermore, grounds for the nullity of marriage were identified with ever greater clarity, and the procedural system was developed in greater detail. All of this contributed to delineating and articulating more precisely the concept of the indissolubility of marriage. One can say that, in this way, the Western Church also made allowance for the principle of oikonomia, but without touching the indissolubility of marriage as such. The further juridical development of the 1983 Code of Canon Law was in this same direction, granting probative force to the declarations of the parties. Therefore, according to experts in this area, it seems that cases in which an invalid marriage cannot be shown to be such by the procedural are practically excluded.

Since marriage has a fundamental public ecclesial character and the axiom applies that nemo iudex in propria causa (no one is judge in his own case), marital cases must be resolved in the external forum. If divorced and remarried members of the faithful believe that their prior marriage was invalid, they are thereby obligated to appeal to the competent marriage tribunal so that the question will be examined objectively and under all available juridical possibilities.

c. Admittedly, it cannot be excluded that mistakes occur in marriage cases. In some parts of the Church, well-functioning marriage tribunals still do not exist. Occasionally, such cases last an excessive amount of time. Once in a while they conclude with questionable decisions. Here it seems that the application of epikeia in the internal forum is not automatically excluded from the outset. This is implied in the 1994 letter of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in which it was stated that new canonical ways of demonstrating nullity should exclude “as far as possible” every divergence from the truth verifiable in the judicial process (cf. No. 9). Some theologians are of the opinion that the faithful ought to adhere strictly even in the internal forum to juridical decisions which they believe to be false. Others maintain that exceptions are possible here in the internal forum, because the juridical forum does not deal with norms of divine law, but rather with norms of ecclesiastical law. This question, however, demands further study and clarification. Admittedly, the conditions for asserting an exception would need to be clarified very precisely, in order to avoid arbitrariness and to safeguard the public character of marriage, removing it from subjective decisions.

4. Some accuse the current Magisterium of reversing the doctrinal development of the Council and of substituting a pre-conciliar view of marriage.

Some theologians claim that at the new magisterial documents having to do with questions of marriage are based on a naturalistic, legalistic concept of marriage. Attention is given to the contract between the spouses and to the ius in corpus. It is claimed that the Council overturned this static understanding and described marriage in a more personalistic way as a covenant of love and life. Thus it would have opened up possibilities for resolving difficult situations more humanely. Thinking further along this line, some scholars pose the question of whether or not one could speak of the death of the marriage, if the personal bond of love between the spouses no longer exists. Others resurrect the old question of whether or not the Pope would have the capability of dissolving marriage in such cases.

Yet anyone who attentively reads the more recent statements of the Church will note that their central assertions are based on Gaudium et spes and that they further develop the teaching contained therein in a thoroughly personalist line, in the direction indicated by the Council. However, it is inappropriate to set up a contradiction between the personalist and juridical views of marriage. The Council did not break with the traditional concept of marriage, but on the contrary developed it further. When, for example, it is continually pointed out that the Council substituted the broader and theologically more profound concept of covenant for the strictly legal concept of contract, one must not forget that within covenant, the element of contract is also contained and indeed placed within a broader perspective. The fact that marriage reaches well beyond the purely juridical realm into the depths of humanity and into the mystery of the divine, has always been indicated by the word “sacrament,” although often it has not been pondered with the same clarity which the Council gave to these aspects. Law is not everything, but it is an indispensable part, one dimension of the whole. Marriage without a juridical dimension which integrates it into the whole fabric of society and the Church simply does not exist. If the post-Conciliar revision of canon law included the realm of marriage, this is not a betrayal of the Council, but the implementation of its mandate.

If the Church were to accept the theory that a marriage is dead when the two spouses no longer love one another, then she would thereby sanction divorce and would uphold the indissolubility of marriage only in word, and no longer in fact. Therefore, the opinion that the Pope could potentially dissolve a consummated sacramental marriage, which has been irrevocably broken, must be considered erroneous. Such a marriage cannot be dissolved by anyone. At their wedding, the spouses promise to be faithful to each other until death.

Further study is required, however, concerning the question of whether non-believing Christians – baptized persons who never or who no longer believe in God – can truly enter into a sacramental marriage. In other words, it needs to be clarified whether every marriage between two baptized persons is ipso facto a sacramental marriage. In fact, the Code states that only a “valid” marriage between baptized persons is at the same time a sacrament (cf. CIC, can. 1055, § 2). Faith belongs to the essence of the sacrament; what remains to be clarified is the juridical question of what evidence of the “absence of faith” would have as a consequence that the sacrament does not come into being.4

5. Many argue that the position of the Church on the question of divorced and remarried faithful is overly legalistic and not pastoral.

A series of critical objections against the doctrine and praxis of the Church pertain to questions of a pastoral nature. Some say, for example, that the language used in the ecclesial documents is too legalistic, that the rigidity of law prevails over an understanding of dramatic human situations. They claim that the human person of today is no longer able to understand such language, that Jesus would have had an open ear for the needs of people, particularly for those on the margins of society. They say that the Church, on the other hand, presents herself like a judge who excludes wounded people from the sacraments and from certain public responsibilities.

One can readily admit that the Magisterium’s manner of expression does not seem very easy to understand at times. It needs to be translated by preachers and catechists into a language which relates to people and to their respective cultural environments. The essential content of the Church’s teaching, however, must be upheld in this process. It must not be watered down on allegedly pastoral grounds, because it communicates the revealed truth.

Certainly, it is difficult to make the demands of the Gospel understandable to secularized people. But this pastoral difficulty must not lead to compromises with the truth. In his Encyclical Veritatis splendor, John Paul II clearly rejected so-called pastoral solutions which stand in opposition to the statements of the Magisterium (cf. ibid. 56).

Furthermore, concerning the position of the Magisterium as regards the question of divorced and remarried members of the faithful, it must be stressed that the more recent documents of the Church bring together the demands of truth with those of love in a very balanced way. If at times in the past, love shone forth too little in the explanation of the truth, so today the danger is great that in the name of love, truth is either to be silenced or compromised. Assuredly, the word of truth can be painful and uncomfortable. But it is the way to holiness, to peace, and to inner freedom. A pastoral approach which truly wants to help the people concerned must always be grounded in the truth. In the end, only the truth can be pastoral. “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (Jn. 8:32).

Notes:

1 This text reproduces the third part of Cardinal Ratzinger’s Introduction to Volume 17 of the series produced by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, entitled “Documenti e Studi”, On the Pastoral Care of the Divorced and Remarried, LEV, Vatican City 1998, pp. 20-29. Footnotes have been added.

2 Cf. Angel Rodríguez Luño, L’epicheia nella cura pastorale dei fedeli divorziati risposati, ibid., pp. 75-87; Piero Giorgio Marcuzzi, S.D.B., Applicazione di "aequitas et epikeia" ai contenuti della Lettera della Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede del 14 settembre 1994, ibid., pp. 88-98; Gilles Pelland, S.J., La pratica della Chiesa antica relativa ai fedeli divorziati risposati, ibid., pp. 99-131.

3 On this matter the norm referred to by John Paul II in his Apostolic Letter Familiaris consortio, no. 84, is quite valuable: “Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children's upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they ‘take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.’” See also the Apostolic Letter of Benedict XVI, Sacramentum caritatis, n. 29.

4 During the meeting with clergy in the Diocese of Aosta, which took place 25 July 2005, Pope Benedict XVI spoke of this difficult question: “ those who were married in the Church for the sake of tradition but were not truly believers, and who later find themselves in a new and invalid marriage and subsequently convert, discover faith and feel excluded from the Sacrament, are in a particularly painful situation. This really is a cause of great suffering and when I was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I invited various Bishops’ Conferences and experts to study this problem: a sacrament celebrated without faith. Whether, in fact, a moment of invalidity could be discovered here because the Sacrament was found to be lacking a fundamental dimension, I do not dare to say. I personally thought so, but from the discussions we had I realized that it is a highly complex problem and ought to be studied further. But given these people's painful plight, it must be studied further.”

Advancing the Culture of Life in Hope and With Obedience - by Cardinal Raymond L. Burke, D.D., J.C.D.

Introduction

It brings me great joy to speak at your prayer breakfast. It is my hope to foster the most worthy mission of the McHenry County Catholic Prayer Breakfast, namely, "to strengthen the Catholic faith of its members."¹

It pleases me, in particular, to support a work which has the blessing of the Most Reverend Thomas G. Doran, Bishop of Rockford, who will complete fifty years of priestly life and ministry, on this coming December 20'h. As a true shepherd of souls in your midst, His Excellency has been an indefatigable teacher of Catholic faith and discipline. He has not hesitated to state clearly the great challenge of living in Christ in our time, what Blessed Pope John Paul II called meeting "the high standard of ordinary Christian living."² In Bishop Doran's book, At the Crossroads: A Vision of Hope, published during the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, he wrote:

We accept things in contemporary society that we know in the depths of our being are terribly, terribly wrong, and we do not want to talk about them. If a child is inconvenient before it is born, kill him, kill her, but do not call it killing, call it abortion. If a person lives beyond the years when the doctor and society consider that person to be useful, kill him, kill her, but do not call it killing, call it euthanasia.³

Before the grave evils which beset our time, above all the attacks on the inviolable dignity of innocent human life and the integrity of marriage and the family, Bishop Doran has consistently offered solid hope, the hope which has its foundation in Christ alive for us in the Church. He has helped us to see the way to true freedom and happiness, which is taught to us by Christ through our conscience, and has shown how Christ, in His Church, has provided for us, in a wonderful way, every help to live a good and upright life, to find joy and peace in this life, and to attain the fullness of joy and peace in the life which is to come.

In his just-mentioned book, he carefully set forth the riches of Catholic faith and practice: the Ten Commandments, the Nicene Creed, and the Sacraments. He provided the context for his presentation with these words:

God knows our flawed nature, knows us better than we know ourselves, loves us in spite of our flaws, and has given us in the Church every help, every aid, every assistance, every advantage to help us respond to his love. Those helps all fit together in the Church like the beautiful mosaic mentioned earlier, locking together like the pieces of a puzzle which satisfies our search, our quest.⁴

Bishop Thomas Doran has truly exemplified in his ministry as priest and bishop, the motto which he chose for his coat of arms: Spes Anchora Vitae, Hope Anchor of Life.

When I received the invitation from Fred Wickham to speak to you and learned that the Prayer Breakfast would honor, in a special way, Bishop Doran, on the occasion of his fiftieth anniversary of priesthood ordination, I wanted to do everything within my power to be with you for the celebration. I thank God that He has made it possible for me to be with you as you honor Bishop Doran and to express personally to him my sentiments of deepest fraternal esteem and my prayerful best wishes on the occasion of his golden priestly jubilee.

In the meantime, there is another cause of great joy for me in coming to the Diocese of Rockford, at this time, namely, our Holy Father's recent naming of Bishop-Elect David D. Kagan, Vicar General and Moderator of the Curia of the Diocese, to the See of Bismarck. Bishop Kagan and I were classmates during the last four years of preparation for priesthood ordination. As you know better than I, he has, for many years, in a most competent and discreet manner, assisted Bishop Doran in carrying out his many and often difficult responsibilities as Diocesan Bishop. Bishop-Elect Kagan is well prepared, both by his studies and by his most rich priestly experience, to take up his new pastoral responsibilities. I personally hold him in the highest esteem, and I am pleased to be able to congratulate him publicly in his home diocese which he loves very much and has served so well.

Finally, I commend Fred Wickham. your chairman; Monsignor Daniel Hermes, your chaplain; and the entire Board of Directors for the outstanding work which you are doing. There can be no more effective way to address the challenges in our personal lives and in our society than to deepen and fortify our understanding and practice of the Catholic faith, the great work to which the McHenry County Catholic Prayer Breakfast directs all its efforts. That truth, after all, was the inspiration of Bishop Doran's writing of At the Crossroads: A Vision of Hope.

Struggle in the Advancement of the Culture of Life

We are presently experiencing in our nation a period of intense struggle in the advancement of the culture of life. Our government follows openly and aggressively a totally secularist philosophy with its inherent anti-life and anti-family agenda. On this past October 6th, for example, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, spoke at the "Power of Choice" Luncheon of the National Abortion Rights Action League, at The Standard Club in Chicago, to advance our government's promotion of procured abortion. Referring to those who are working to have our government cease the funding of procured abortions and of organizations like Planned Parenthood which promote and provide procured abortions, she declared: "We've come a long way in women's health over the last few decades, but we are in a war."⁵ Recalling Bishop Doran's words about the language used to describe gravely evil acts, we see that the Secretary of Health and Human Services refuses to talk about the destruction of an innocent and defenseless human life in the mother's womb, describing it as promoting woman's health.

Even though the language of Christian faith may be used in public discourse and the name of God may be invoked, programs and policies are proposed and legislated for us, which totally fail to respect God and His Law written upon the human heart.⁶ Regarding the speech of Kathleen Sebelius, it is profoundly saddening to note that she presents herself as a practicing Catholic, while engaging in public speech which is gravely injurious to good morals.⁷ Catholics in public office, who obstinately persist in advocating and providing for the most egregious violations of the natural moral law, are the cause of the gravest scandal; they confuse and lead into error their fellow Catholics and non-Catholics alike regarding the most fundamental truths of the moral law.

Other Cultures and American Culture

The struggle which we are experiencing has been suffered in other cultures. Western Europe, for example, has become pervasively secularized. A culture which is totally Christian in its roots and owes its entire development to the Christian faith now does not want in any way to be associated with the name of Christ, It is a culture which is dying, but there arc many faithful Christians who live in Western Europe, who have not given up hope and who work to transform the society. Often, before Western Europe, America has a sense of inferiority, at least, from the cultural point of view. The truth is that Western Europe now looks to America for a sign that the battle against secularization, against practical atheism, can be won for the sake of life and the spread of the Christian faith.

With all of the difficulties which we face in America, America, thanks be to God, has still not renounced the Christian roots of our culture. Many of our citizens are not ashamed to invoke the name of God and of His only-begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ. Many of our citizens defend the right to observe the dictates of a rightly-formed Christian conscience, against those, even in government, who want to force Christians to violate the dictates of conscience regarding the most fundamental moral truths, that is, the inviolable dignity of innocent and defenseless human life, and the integrity of marriage as the faithful, enduring and life-giving union of one man and one woman. But the forces which would lead us down the path of cultural death through the denial of the Christian roots of our culture are strong, and we must be steadfast in encouraging all who are engaged in the battle for life and for a culture of life.

In advancing the respect for human life in our culture, we should acknowledge publicly the truth that our service of human life is Christian, that is, it is a service carried out in the name of Christ and with the love of Christ. For example, our service offered to mothers and the infants in their wombs is inspired by Christ who loves all men, without boundary, and seeks to save all. We carry out our mission in Christ through the support of others inspired by the love of Christ, and not the support of tax dollars. Our apostolate of life must clearly reflect the truth that the victory of life will be won by Christ alone and, first, through the family.

Today, sadly, through a failure of education, first, in the family and then in our schools, many do not understand the nature of human life itself, created in the image and likeness of God, and redeemed by the suffering and death of God the Son Incarnate. They have lost the sense of their own inherent dignity as true sons and daughters of God and, therefore, have lost respect for their neighbors as brothers and sisters in the one family whose Father is in Heaven and loves His children with all His heart. Our mission of promoting respect for all human life must, in a particular way, devote itself to promoting purity of heart, sexual purity. The virtue of purity is fundamentally the disciplined expression of respect for life as God created us, male and female.8 In this regard, I note the confusion and error diffused through the language of gender, which fundamentally denies manhood and womanhood, and manipulates human sexuality to include a host of immoral activities which are a violation of the relationship of male and female, as God ordained it from the beginning.

Consistent Witness to the Truth

What our society needs so desperately is the consistent witness to the truth, expressed in the Sacred Scriptures and in Tradition, which, demands, first and foremost, that we safeguard and foster all human life from its inception to natural death, and that we honor and promote the integrity of the conjugal union of man and woman, who, cooperating with God, generate and bring into the world new human life. The safeguarding of human life and the respect for the marital union are the fundamental and essential foundation stones for the building of a culture of life in our nation.

With regard to procured abortion, witness to the truth not only demands that we assist troubled mothers directly but also that we engage in the work of educating our children and young people to know the truth that "the institution of matrimony itself and conjugal love are ordained for the procreation and education of children, and find in them their ultimate crown."⁹ It, therefore, also demands that we teach our children and young people the virtue of purity, which prepares a man and a woman to give themselves totally to each other and to their offspring in marriage. Sadly, our culture has robbed from the work of education the teaching of the very first lessons of life, the lessons without which nothing else which the culture teaches us makes any sense.

The tireless promotion of the culture of life, in accord with the truth inscribed upon the heart of every man and announced in the Gospel, in fact, responds to the deepest longing of every man, and of society itself. Right reason itself teaches us the Golden Rule, which our Lord Jesus Christ enunciated in the Sermon on the Mount. God the Father inscribes upon every human heart the truth declared by our Lord: "So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets."¹⁰

For my part. I refuse to believe that most of our fellow countrymen are in favor of destroying babies in the womb in order to honor the so-called right of a woman to make a choice about pregnancy, as if we are ever free to choose with regard to what nature itself has ordained, in accord with God's plan for man and woman.) refuse to believe that most of our countrymen are in favor of generating human life artificially and then destroying it at the embryonic stage of development for the sake of experiments, no matter how noble may be the supposed goals of the experimentation. I refuse to believe that most of our countrymen are in favor of the redefinition of what nature has ordained regarding the union of man and woman in marriage for the sake of their salvation and the procreation and education of offspring to include relationships which are contrary to nature and a betrayal of true friendship between persons of the same sex.

Sadly, American culture is becoming more and more a culture of death, but we. as Christians, as sons and daughters of God brought to life and made heirs of eternal life, know that the culture can be transformed by our cooperation with God's grace. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself began the description of His vocation and mission as the Good Shepherd with the words: "1 came that they may have life and have it abundantly."¹¹ Our Lord, seated in glory at the right hand of the Father, continues the mission through His Church, through us who are the living members of His Mystical Body.

The First Presupposition of the Advancement of the Culture of Life

The first presupposition of our tireless struggle to advance the respect for the inviolable dignity of innocent human life and for the integrity of marriage and the family is the truth that the struggle against total secularization, which is, by definition, opposed to human life and to the family, is full of hope. It is, by no means, futile, that is, it is not ultimately destined to failure. The fundamental presupposition is the victory of life, which Our Lord Jesus Christ, has already won.

Christ animates the Church in time with the grace of His victory over sin and death, accomplished on Calvary, until the victory reaches its consummation, at His Final Coming, in the Heavenly Jerusalem. Notwithstanding the grave situation of the attack on innocent and defenseless human life and on the integrity of marriage as the union of man and woman in a bond of lifelong, faithful and procreative love, there remains a strong voice in defense of our littlest and most vulnerable brothers and sisters, without boundary or exception, and of the truth about the marital union as it was constituted by God at the Creation. The Christian voice, the voice of Christ, which reaches us through the apostolic ministry, remains always strong in the world. The voice of men and women of good will, who recognize. and obey the law of God written upon their hearts, remains strong.

Living in a totally secularized culture, we must open our eyes to sec that many recognize the human bankruptcy of our culture and are looking with hope to the Church for the inspiration and strength to claim anew the God-fearing and Christian foundations of every truly human society. God has created us to choose life; God the Son Incarnate has won the victory of life for us, the victory over sin and everlasting death.¹²We, therefore, must never give up in the struggle to advance a culture founded on the choice of life, which God has written upon our hearts, and the victory of life, which Christ has won in our human nature. In fact, we witness every day the commitment of God-fearing brothers and sisters who advance the cause of life and the family in their homes, in their local communities, in their homelands, and in the world.

The Second Presupposition: The Essential Relationship of Human Life and the Family

The second fundamental presupposition of our struggle to advance the culture of life is the essential relationship of the respect for human life and the respect for the integrity of marriage and the family. The attack on the innocent and defenseless life of the unborn has its origin in an erroneous view of human sexuality, which attempts to eliminate, by mechanical or chemical means, the essentially procreative nature of the conjugal act. The error maintains that the artificially altered conjugal act retains its integrity. The claim is that the act remains unitive or loving, even though the procreative nature of the act has been radically violated. In fact, it is not unitive, for one or both of the partners withholds an essential part of the gift of self, which is the essence of the conjugal union. The so-called "contraceptive mentality" is essentially anti-life. Many forms of so-called contraception are, in fact, abortifacient, that is, they destroy, at its beginning, a life which has already been conceived.

The manipulation of the conjugal act, as the Servant of God Pope Paul VI prophetically observed, has led to many forms of violence to marriage and family life.¹³ Through the spread of the contraceptive mentality, especially among the young, human sexuality is no longer seen as the gift of God, which draws a man and a woman together in a bond of lifelong and faithful love, crowned by the gift of new human life, but, rather, as a tool for personal gratification. Once sexual union is no longer seen to be, by its very nature, procreative, human sexuality is abused in ways that are profoundly harmful and indeed destructive of individuals and of society itself. One has only to think of the devastation which is daily wrought in our world by the multi-million dollar industry of pornography. Essential to the advancement of the culture of life is the proclamation of the truth about the conjugal union, in its fullness, and the correction of the contraceptive thinking which fears life, which fears procreation.

It is instructive to note that Pope Benedict XVI, in his Encyclical Letter on the Church's social doctrine, makes special reference to Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, underscoring its importance "for delineating the fully human meaning of the development that the Church proposes."¹⁴ Pope Benedict XVI makes clear that the teaching in Humanae Vitae was not a matter of "purely individual morality," declaring:

Humane vitae indicates the strong links between life ethics and social ethics, ushering in a new area of magisterial teaching that has gradually been articulated in a series of documents, most recently John Paul II's Encyclical Evangelium vitae.¹⁵

His Holiness reminds us of the essential part which a right understanding of our sexuality has in true human development.

In treating the whole question of procreation, he underscores the critical nature of the right understanding of human sexuality, marriage and the family. He declares:

The Church, in her concern for man's authentic development, urges him to have full respect for human values in the exercise of his sexuality. It cannot be reduced merely to pleasure or entertainment, nor can sex education be reduced to technical instruction aimed solely at protecting the interested parties from possible disease or the "risk" of procreation. This would be to impoverish and disregard the deeper meaning of sexuality, a meaning which needs to be acknowledged and responsibly appropriated not only by individuals but also by the community.¹⁶

The respect for the integrity of the conjugal act is essential to the advancement of the culture of life. In the words of Pope Benedict XVI, it is necessary "once more to hold up to future generations the beauty of marriage and the family, and the fact that these institutions correspond to the deepest needs and dignity of the person."¹⁷ Accordingly, he notes that "States are called to enact policies promoting the centrality and integrity of the family founded on marriage between a man and a woman, the primary vital cell of society, and to assume responsibility for its economic and fiscal needs, while respecting its essentially relational character."¹⁸

The Magisterium and the Advancement of the Culture of Life

The relationship of the Magisterium to our eternal salvation lies at the very foundation of our life in Christ. In a world which prizes, above all else, individualism and self-determination, the Christian is easily tempted to view the Magisterium in relationship to his individualism and self-pursuit. In other words, he is tempted to relativize the authority of the Magisterium. The phenomenon today is popularly known as "cafeteria Catholicism."

The service of the Bishop, as true shepherd of the flock, is essential, indeed irreplaceable. The Venerable Pope John Paul II, in his Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Pastores Gregis, "On the Bishop, Servant of the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the Hope of the World," promulgated on October 16, 2003, the twenty-fifth anniversary of his election to the See of Saint Peter, recalled the Rite of Ordination of a Bishop and, specifically, the imposition of the Book of the Gospels on the head of the Bishop-elect," during the Prayer of Consecration, which contains the form of the Sacrament, observing:

This gesture indicates, On the one hand, that the Word embraces and watches over the Bishop's ministry and, on the other, that the Bishop's life is to be completely submitted to the Word of God in his daily commitment of preaching the Gospel in all patience and sound doctrine (cf. 2 Tim, 4).¹⁹

A bit earlier in the same Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, he stressed that the proclamation of Christ always takes first place and that the Bishop is the first preacher of the Gospel by his words and by the witness of his life."²⁰ He then reminded Bishops to "be aware of the challenges of the present hour and have the courage to face them."²¹

The entire content of our faith, what Saint Paul in his First and Second Letters to Timothy calls the deposit of faith, is found in Sacred Scripture and Tradition.²² The faith, in its integrity, has been entrusted to the Church by Christ through the ministry of the Apostles. The deposit of faith is the teaching of the Apostles and the living of that teaching in the life of prayer and the sacramental life, and the witness of the teaching in the moral life. The foundation is the sound doctrine which finds its highest expression in the Sacraments, above all the Holy Eucharist, and which is witnessed in the holiness of life of the believer.²³

The responsibility for the deposit of the faith and its transmission in every age belongs "exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church."²⁴ The "living teaching office" or Magisterium of the Church, exercised by the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops in communion with him, has its authority from our Lord Jesus Christ. Christ has conferred upon the Apostles, with Peter as their Head, and their successors, the Bishops, with the Successor of Peter, as their head, the authority to teach authentically.²⁵

The Roman Pontiff and the Bishops are servants of Christ and of His holy Word. The Magisterium "is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed."²⁶ The Roman Pontiff and the Bishops in communion with him teach only what is contained in the deposit of faith as divinely revealed truth.²⁷

The Magisterium, in obedience to Christ and by the power of the particular grace of the Holy Spirit, interprets the Word of God, contained in the Sacred Scriptures and Tradition, in matters of both faith and morals. The Roman Pontiff and the Bishops in communion with him define the dogmas of the faith, that is, the truths contained in the deposit of faith and "truths having a necessary connection with these."²⁸

With regard to morals, the Magisterium presents faithfully the Decalogue and the requirements of the life of the virtues. The teaching office would fail in its God-given mission, if it did not apply the living Tradition to the circumstances of daily life in Christ. Blessed Pope John Paul exhorted Bishops to exercise the Magisterium regarding the moral life with these words:

The rules that the Church sets forth reflect the divine Commandments, which find their crown and synthesis in the Gospel command of love. The end to which every divine rule tends is the greater good of human beings.... Nor must we forget that the Ten Commandments have a firm foundation in human nature itself, and thus the goods which they defend have universal validity. This is particularly true of goods such as human life, which must be defended from conception until its end in natural death; the freedom of individuals and of nations, social justice and the structures needed to achieve it.²⁹

In a culture beset by what Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, in his homily on the morning of the beginning of the conclave in which he was elected Successor of Saint Peter, called the "dictatorship of relativism," the Bishop, as Chief Teacher of the faith and morals in the Diocese, carries an especially heavy and constant burden in providing the sound teaching which safeguards and promotes the good of all the faithful, especially of those who cannot take care of or defend themselves.³⁰

Catechesis is a most fundamental responsibility which the Bishop exercises on behalf of the good of the faithful entrusted to his care, ultimately, of the supreme good of their eternal salvation. Pope John Paul II reminded Bishops that they fulfill their responsibility by the first proclamation of the faith, or kerygma, "which is always needed for bringing about the obedience of faith, but is all the more urgent today, in times marked by indifference and by religious ignorance on the part of many Christians."³¹ United to the kerygma is the catechesis of those who have embraced the faith and strive to be obedient to the faith. Pope John Paul II declared: "It is therefore the duty of every Bishop to give real priority in his particular Church to active and effective catechesis. He must demonstrate his personal concern through direct interventions aimed at promoting and preserving an authentic passion for catechesis."³²

As Pope John Paul II reminded the Bishops, in the just-quoted exhortation, the Magisterium includes also the precepts of the natural law written by God upon the human heart, the requirements of conduct inherent in man's very nature and in the order of the world, God's creation. Obedience to the demands of the natural law is necessary for salvation, and, therefore, the teaching of the natural law is within the authority of the Magisterium and part of its solemn responsibility. "In recalling the prescriptions of the natural law, the Magisterium of the Church exercises an essential part of its prophetic office of proclaiming to men who they truly are and reminding them of what they should be before God."³³ When Bishops and faithful obediently submit themselves in mind and heart to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, the perennial truth of the faith shines forth in the whole Church for the building up of the Body of Christ and the transformation of the world.

The Response of Obedience of Faith

The response of both Bishop and the faithful to the exercise of the teaching authority of Christ is obedience, for they recognize in the truths proclaimed, regarding faith and morals, the infallible guide to their salvation in Christ Who said to His Apostles: "He who hears you, hears me."³⁴ The words of our Lord are unmistakable in their meaning for us.

Obedience to the Magisterium is a virtue and is attained, with the help of God's grace, through the practice of such obedience. When the shepherds of the flock are obedient to the Magisterium, entrusted to their exercise, then the members of the flock grow in obedience and proceed, with Christ, along the way of salvation. If the shepherd is not obedient, the flock easily gives way to confusion and error. The shepherd must be especially attentive to the assaults of Satan who knows that, if he can strike the shepherd, the work of scattering the flock will be made easy.³⁵

In his Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio, "On the Relationship between Faith and Reason," Pope John Paul II reminded us that the Magisterium is bound strictly to Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, while, at the same time, Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are handed on from one generation to the next through the obedience to the Magisterium. He declared:

The "supreme rule of her faith" derives from the unity which the Spirit has created between Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church in a reciprocity which means that none of the three can survive without the others.³⁶

The faith is living. The faith is received through the action of the Holy Spirit dwelling within the soul, and it is expressed by the purifying and strengthening action of the Holy Spirit Who inspires man to put the faith into practice.

The disposition of mind and heart to believe all that God has revealed to us and to do all that He asks of us is the obedience of faith. The obedience of faith is the fitting response to the revelation of God, which has its fullness in Our Lord Jesus Christ.³⁷ Obedience to the Magisterium, the guardian and teacher of the faith, is the Fundamental disposition of the baptized and confirmed Catholic.³⁸

The Blessed Virgin Mary lived perfectly the obedience of faith. At the Visitation. Elizabeth, her cousin, described Mary's identity as Mother of the Redeemer with the words: "Blessed is she who believed that the Lord's words to her would be fulfilled." ³⁹ Mary's response to the announcement of the Archangel Gabriel expressed perfectly the disposition of total obedience, which marked her soul: "I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be done to me according to your word."⁴⁰ Mary's response is the model of our daily response to God's will in our lives, which the Church's Magisterium teaches to us. The last words of our Blessed Mother, recorded in the Gospel, are the summary of her maternal instruction to us. When the wine stewards at the Wedding Feast of Cana approached her, seeking her help, she directed them to the Son of God, her Son, with the counsel: "Do whatever He tells you."⁴¹ Obeying her maternal counsel, the wine stewards witnessed the first miracle during the public ministry of Jesus.

Faith is, first of all, "personal adherence of man to God."⁴² When we believe all that God has revealed to us, we place all our trust in Him, in His Providence. Such trust can be placed in God alone. Faith in God the Father and total trust in His promises is clearly faith in Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son, and in the Holy Spirit Who dwells with us always in the Church.⁴³ Our Lord Jesus Christ makes us one with Him in doing all that the Father asks of us by pouring forth into our souls the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit: the grace of the Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to know God's will and to do it with courage. The sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit produces in our souls a sevenfold disposition which may be described as the obedience of faith.

The moral life flows from our faith in God. It is the "obedience of faith" in action. The first tablet of the Ten Commandments governs our right relationship with God, which makes possible our right relationship with others and the world, governed by the second tablet. When we fail morally, we also fail in faith.⁴⁴ I often recall the words of a sage professor of Canon Law, who taught me the Church's discipline regarding clerics. More than once, he told the class: "Where there are problems of chastity, there are problems of obedience." Our rebellion against the moral truth is a rebellion against God and all that He teaches us.

Challenges to the Obedience to the Magisterium

Obedience to the Magisterium is difficult for man in every age. The practice of the "obedience of faith" is difficult to master. The difficulty comes both from within us and from outside of us. We suffer the effects of the sin of our First Parents, which fundamentally was a sin of prideful disobedience, of rebellion against God's will. The grace of the Holy Spirit, poured forth into our soul through Baptism, strengthened and increased in our soul through Confirmation, and nourished within our soul through the Holy Eucharist. alone helps us to overcome our inherited tendency to rebellion and disobedience.

From outside of us, Satan never rests in proposing to us the same temptation which he proposed to our First Parents, the temptation to act as if God did not exist, to act as if we are gods. The world around us, the culture in which we live, to the degree that it is has succumbed to Satan's deceptions, is a source of strong temptation for us. Our culture, in fact, has been described as "godless" both by Pope John Paul II and by Pope Benedict XVI. Our culture teaches us to act as if God did not exist. At the same time, it teaches a radical individualism and self-interest which lead us away from the love of God and from the love of one another.

Often the lack of obedience to the Magisterium is not total but selective. Our culture teaches us to believe what is convenient and to reject what is difficult for us or challenges us. Thus, we can easily fall into "cafeteria Catholicism," a practice of the faith, which picks and chooses what part of the deposit of faith to believe and practice. A most tragic example of the lack of obedience of faith, also on the part of certain Bishops, was the response of many to the Encyclical Letter Humanae vitae of Pope Paul VI, published on July 25, 1968. The confusion which resulted has led many Cath9olics into habits of sin in what pertains to the procreation and education of human life.

The lack of integrity in obeying the Magisterium is also seen in the hypocrisy of Catholics who claim to be practicing their faith but who refuse to apply the truth of the faith in their exercise of politics, medicine, business and the other human endeavors. These Catholics claim to hold "personally" to the truth of the faith, for example, regarding the inviolability of innocent and defenseless human life, while, in the political arena or in the practice of medicine, they cooperate in the attack on our unborn brothers and sisters, or on our brothers and sisters who have grown weak under the burden of years, of illness, or of special needs. Their disobedience pertains not to some truth particular to the life of the Church, that is, not to some confessional matter, but to the truth of the divine natural law written on every human heart and, therefore, to be obeyed by all men.

The obedience of faith obliges us in all situations of life, also in situations in which it is most difficult to do what God asks of us. Ultimately, the obedience of faith could require martyrdom. In his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, "Regarding Certain Fundamental Questions of the Church's Moral Teaching" of August 6, 1993, Pope John Paul II taught us that there can be no compromise in the obedience to the moral teaching of the Magisterium:

Even in the most difficult situations man must respect the norm of morality so that he can be obedient to God's holy commandments and consistent with his own dignity as a person. Certainly, maintaining a harmony between freedom and truth occasionally demands uncommon sacrifices, and must be won at a high price: it can even involve martyrdom.⁴⁵

The Common Good and the Promotion of the Culture of Life

Finally, in advancing the culture of life, we must be clear about the objective meaning of the common good. The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council described the common good as --the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily."⁴⁶ The fulfillment of individuals and societies is not some subjective determination by those, for example, who are in power. It is the fulfillment which is written in the very nature of man, in nature itself. It is the fulfillment for which God has created us and our world, not the fulfillment which, at any given time, we may find attractive or useful. It is interesting to note that the English word, fulfillment, translates the Latin word, perfectio, that is, the perfection of the individual or group, according to man's proper nature and end.

In advancing the culture of life, we must be clear about the objective nature of the common good and of the perfection which it makes possible. Not everyone who uses the term, common good, understands its true meaning. A well-known European Catholic theologian, commenting on the Commencement Address of United States President Barack Obama at Notre Dame University on May 1 of 2009, declared:

In fact, the speech to the University of Notre Dame seems strewn with references taken from the Christian tradition. There is, for example an expression which frequently returns, "common ground," which corresponds to a fundamental concept of the social teaching of the Church, that of the common good .⁴⁷

The common good refers to an objective perfection which is not defined by common agreement among some or even a majority of us. The common good is defined by creation itself as it has come from the hand of the Creator. Not only does the notion of common ground not correspond to the reality of the common good, it can well be antithetical to it, for instance, should there be common agreement in society to accept as good for society what is, in reality, always and everywhere evil.

In the words of Pope Benedict XVI, the common good "is the good of 'all of use, made up of individuals, families and intermediate groups who together constitute society."'⁴⁸ The common good corresponds "to the real needs of our neighbors"; it is an act of charity which each Christian is to exercise In a manner corresponding to his vocation and according to the degree of influence he wields in the polls."⁴⁹ Pope Benedict XVI consoles and urges us onward in seeking the common good:

God's love calls us to move beyond the limited and the ephemeral, it gives us the courage to continue seeking and working for the benefit of all, even if this cannot be achieved immediately and if what we are able to achieve, alongside political authorities and those working in the field of economics, is always less than we might wish. God gives us the strength to fight and to suffer for love of the common good, because he is our All, our greatest hope.⁵⁰

Conclusion

Let us, obedient to the Magisterium, engage with new enthusiasm and new energy in the struggle to advance the culture of life in our nation. The struggle is fierce, and the contrary forces are many and clever. But the victory has already been won, and the Victor never fails to accompany us in the struggle, for he is faithful to His promise to us: "[A]nd lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."⁵¹

The obedience to the Magisterium is alone the way to participate in the victory of eternal life, and the service of the Bishops is irreplaceable in leading us all to an ever purer and stronger obedience. There is no other way to salvation than hearing God's Word and putting it into practice with all our being. We know that, if we speak the truth and live the truth, Who is Christ the Lord of heaven and earth, we will foster a culture of life in our world, a culture in which the common good is safeguarded and fostered for all, without boundary or exception.

The Letter to the Hebrews which teaches us, in a particular way, the "obedience of faith" reminds us that our Lord Himself "learned obedience through what he suffered" and thus became the source of eternal life, of eternal salvation, for us al1.⁵² We ask for the obedience of Christ each time we pray to God the Father in the words which our Savior Himself taught to us: "Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven." The Catechism of the Catholic Church, commenting on these words of the Lord's Prayer, assures us that we, inspired by prayer, Christ's prayer in us, can do what is impossible for us, on our own, but becomes possible for us in Christ, through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit from His glorious pierced Heart:

How much more reason have we sinful creatures to learn obedience – we who in Him have become children of adoption, We ask our Father to unite our will to His Son's, in order to fulfill His will, His plan of salvation for the life of the world. We are radically incapable of this, but united with Jesus and with the power of His Holy Spirit, we can surrender our will to Him and decide to choose what His Son has always chosen: to do what is pleasing to the Father.⁵³

Let us confide ourselves and our world to the prayers of the Mother of God. Through her ceaseless maternal care, she will not fail to bring us and our world to the truth, to her Divine Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ. I conclude by making my own the prayer with which Pope Benedict XVI concluded his Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate:

May the Virgin Mary – proclaimed Mater Ecclesiae by Paul VI and honored by Christians as Speculum Iustitiae and Regina Pacis – protect us and obtain for us, through her heavenly intercession, the strength, hope and joy necessary to continue to dedicate ourselves with generosity to the task of bringing about "the development of the whole man and of all men."⁵⁴

Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura

Endnotes

1 McHenry County Catholic Prayer Breakfast, Mission Statement

2 "superiorern modum m ordinariae vitae christianae." Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Epistula Apostolica Novo Millennio Ineunte,"Magni Iubilaei anni MM sub exitum." 6 Ianuarii 2001, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 93 (2001), p. 288, n. 31. English translation: Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte,"At the Close of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000," 6 January 2001, Boston: Pauline Books & Media, 2001, p. 43, no. 31.

3 Thomas G. Doran, At the Crossroads: A Vision of Hope, Rockford, Illinois: JGC/United Publishing Corps, 2000, pp. 26-27.

4 Ibid., p. 44. Cf. Ibid., pp. 171-172.

5 http://www.lifenews.com/2011/10/06/sebelius-attacks-republicans-on-abortion-at-naral-event/

6 Cf. Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Adhortatio Apostolica Post-Synodalis Christifideles Laici, "De Vocatione et missione Laicorum in Ecclesia et in mundo,.." 30 Decembris 1988, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 81 (1989), pp. 454-457. n. 34. English translation: Pope John Paul II, Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles laici, "On the Vocation and the Mission of the Lay Faithful in the Church and in the World," 30 December 1988, Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 95-99, no. 34.

7 Cf. can. 1369.

8 Cf. Gn 1:27.

9 "Indole autem sua naturali, ipsum institutum matrimonii amorque coniugalis ad procreationem et educationem prolis ordinantur iisque veluti suo fastigio coronantur." Sacrosanctum Concilium Oecumenicum Vaticanum II Constitutio Pastoralis Gaudium et Spes, "De Ecclesia in Mundo Huius Temporis," 7 Decembris 1965, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 58 (1966), p. 1068, n. 48. [Hereafter, GS), English translation: Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes. "On the Church in the Modern World," 7 December 1965, in The Documents of Vatican II. Vatican Translation, Strathfield, NSW (Australia): St Pauls Publications, 2009, p. 160, no, 48. [Hereafter, GSE].

10 Mt 7:12.

11 Jn 10:10.

12 Cf. Dt 30:19: Jn 10:10.

13 Cf. Paulus PP. VI, Litterae Encyclicae Humanae Vitae, "De propagations humanae prolis recta ordinanda," 25 Iulii 1968, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 60 (1968), pp. 492-494, n. 17. English translation: Pope Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, "On the Proper Regulation of the Propagation of Offspring," 25 July 1968. Boston: Pauline Books & Media, nd,. pp. 8-9, no. 17.

14 "ut progressionis prorsus huntana significatio describatur, quam Ecclesia proponit." Benedictus PP. XVI, Litterae Encyclicae Caritas in Veritate, "De humana integra progression in caritate veritateque," 29 June 2009, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 101 (2009), p. 631, n. 15. [Hereafter, CV]. English translation: Pope Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, "On Integral Human Development in Charity and Truth," 29 June 2009, Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2009, p. 20, no. 15. [Hereafter, CVE].

15 "de re morali solummodo singuloram.... Litterae encyclicae «Humanae vitae» solida vincula designant, quae inter vitae ethicam et ethicam socialem intercedunt, magistrale quoddam insinuantes argumentum, quod gadatim variis in documentis auctum est, novissime in Ioannis Paul II Lieteris encyclicis Evangelium vitae." CV, p. 651, n. 15, English translation: CVE, p. 21, no. 15.

16 "Exclesia, cui corgi cst verus hominis progressus, monet eum ad plenam valorum observantiam, in sexualitate quoque exercenda: quae ad meram rem hedonisticam ludicramque redigi non potest, sicut educatio sexualis in technicam institutionem coartari non potest, si tantum cura habeatur eos quorum interest arcendi a quodam contagio vel a generandi "periculo". Hoc modo pauperior fieret et altus sexualitatis sensus extenuaretur, qui econtra agnosci et accipi debet cum responsalitate tam singularum personarum quam communitatis," CV, p. 680, n. 44. English translation; CVE, pp. 73-74. no. 44.

17 "novis generationibus adhuc proponendi pulchritudinem familiae et matrimonii, congruentiam huiusmodi institutionum cum altioribus postulatis cordis dignitatisque personae." CV, p. 681, n. 44. English translation: CVE, p. 75, no. 44.

18 "Hoc in prospectu Status vocantur ad normas politicas edendas, praeeminentiam integritatemque familiae promoventes, quae matrimonio nititur unius viri uniusque mulieris, quaeque exstat prima vitaliszue cellula atque in se recipit etiam quaestiones oeconomicas et nummarias, quoad ad ipsius necessitudinis indolem attinet." CV, p. 681, n. 44. English translation: CVE, p. 75, no. 44.

19 "quod significant, una ex parte, Verbum Episcopi ministerium involvere et custodire, et altera ex parte, vitam illius omnino subici debere Verbo Dei dum cotidie in praedicationem Evengelii incumbit omni longanimitate et doctrina (cfr 2 Tim 4)." Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Adhortatio Apostolica Post-Synodalis Pastures Gregis, "De Episcopo Ministro Evangelii Iesu Christi pro Mundi Spe," 16 Octobris 2003, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 96 (2004), p. 861, n. 28. [Hereafter, PG). English translation: Pope John Paul II, Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Pastores Gregis, "On the Bishop, Servant of the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the Hope of the World," 16 October 2003. Vatican City State: Libreria Ediirice Vaticana, nd. 73-74, no. 28.[Hereafter. PGE].

20 "nuntium Christi primum locum obtinere et Episcopum tam verbis quam vitae testimonio primum esse Evangelii praeconem." PG, p. 860, n. 26. English translation: PGE, p. 71, no. 26.

21 "De provocationibus quae aetas nostra secumfert Episcopus conscius esse debet easque audacter oppetere." PG, p. 860, n. 26, English translation: PGE, p. 71. no. 26.

22 Cf. 1 Tm 6:20; and 2 Tm 1:12-14.

23 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 84.

24 "soli vivo Ecclesiae Magisterio." Sacrosanctum Concilium Oecumenicum Vaticanum II, Constitutio Dogmatica Del Verbum, "De Divina Revelatione," 18 Novembris 1965, Acta Apostalicae Sedis 58 (1966), p. 822, n. 10. [Hereafter, DV] English translation: Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution Del Verbum, "On Divine Revelation, "18 November 1965, in The Documents of Vatican II, Vatican Translation. Strathfield, NSW (Australia): St Pauls Publications, 2009, p. 81, no. 10, [Hereafter, DVE].

25 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 85.

26 "non supra verbum Dei est, sed eidem rninistrat, docens nonnisi quad traditum est, quatenus illud, ex divine mandato et Spiritu Sancto assistente, pie audit, sancte custodit at fideliter exponit, ac ea omnia ex hoc uno fidei deposito haurit quae tamquam divinitus revelata credenda proponit." DV, p. 822, n. 10. English translation: DVE, p. 81, no. 10.

27 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 86.

28 Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 88.

29 "Normae ab Ecclesia propositate referunt mandata divina, quae compendium constituunet et consummalionem in evangelico caritatis mandato. Finis ad quem tendunt singulae normae divinae optimum est hominis donum. . .Minime insuper obliviscendum est mandata Decalogi radices penitus immittere in ipsam naturam humanam et ideo animi bona, quae ipsi tuentur, universali pollere pondere. Hoc quidem praesertim respicit humanam vitam inde ab exordiis tuendam useque ad expletum cursum suum per mortem communem, libertatem personarum et nationum, iustitiam socialem necnon structuras ad eam exsequendam." PG. p. 865, n. 29. English translation: PGE, pp. 80-81, no. 29.

30 "dittatura del relativismo." "Initium Conclavis,"Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 97 [2005], p. 687. English translation by author.

31 "quod semper requiritur ad oboeditionem fidei sucitandam, sed adhuc urgentius fit hodierna in rerum condicione, in qua inter innumeros christifideles incuria saevit et ignorantia religiosa." PG, p. 864, n. 29. English translation: PGE, p. 78, no. 29.

32 "Qua de re cuiuslibet cpiscopi est in propria Ecclesia particulari primas partes actuosae et efitcaci catechesi tribuere. Immo ipsemet exsequi debet suam huiusmodi sollicitudinem per immediatos actus, quibus ipse directe quoque intersit ad authenticum flagransque catechesis studium excitandum et servandum." PG, p. 864. n. 29. English translation: POE, p. 79, no. 29. 33 Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2036.

34 Lk 10:16.

35 Cf Zec 13:7.

36 "Etenim "suprema fidei eius regula" ex unitate oritur quam inter Sacram Traditionem, Sacram Scripturam et Ecclesiae Magisterium posuit Spiritus, quae si mutuo implicantur, ut haec tria seiunctim nullo modo esse possint." Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Litterae Encyclicae Fides et Ratio, "De necessitudinis natura inter fidem et rationem," 14 Septembris 1998, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 91 (1999), p. 49, n. 55. English translation: Pope John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides at Ratio, "On the Relationship between Faith and Reason," 14 September 1998, Vatican City State: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, nd, p. 85, no. 55.

37 Cf. Heb 11:8.

38 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 142-141

39 Lk 1:45.

40 Lk 1:37-38.

41 Jn 2:5.

42 Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 150.

43 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 151-152.

44 Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 2087-2088.

45 "Etiam in difficillimis condicionibus homo debet normam moralem servare, ut sancto Dei oboediat Mandato et sua congruens sit personali dignitati. Libertatis profecto veritatisque concordia postulat, interdum, impendia haud mediocria, atque magno comparatur: requirere potest etiam martyrium." Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Litterae Encyclicae Veritaiis Splendor, "De quibusdam quaestionibus fundamentalibus doctrinae moralis Ecclesiae," 7 Augusti 1993, Acta Aposiolicae Sedis p. 1213, n. 102. English translation: London: Catholic Truth Society, 1993, p. 105. no. 102.

46 "sumrnam eorum vitae socialis condicionum quae tum coetibus tum sigulis membris permittunt ut propriam perfectionem plenius atque expeditius consequantur," GS, p. 1056, n. 26. English translation: GSE, p. 142, no. 26.

47 Georges Cottier. O.P., "La politica, la morale e il peccato originale," 30Giorni. 2009, no. 5, p. 33.

48 "[b]onum est "omnium nostrorum" quod singuli, familiae atque coetus medii constituunt, qui in communitatem socialem confluunt " CV, p. 645, n. 7. English translation: CVE, p. 9, no. 7.

49 "quod veris necessitatibus occurrat.,.. pro sua vocatione ac pro suis facultatibus polin attigentibus." CV, p. 645, n. 7. English translation: CVE, p. 10, no. 7.

50 "Dei amor nos ad deserendun quod terminatum est et non definitum vocat; nobis addit animum operandi ac boni omnium inquisitionem producendi, etsi extemplo non efficitur, tametsi ea quae facimus nos et politicae potestates et oeconomici operatores minora sunt quam ea quae optamus. Nobis pugnandi ac patiendi propter boni communis amorem suppeditat vires Deus, quandoquidem est nobis Totum, summa nostra spes." CV. p. 708, n. 78. English translation: CVE, p. 125, no. 78.

51 Mt 28:20.

52 ffeb 5:8.

53 Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2825.

54 "Virgo Maria, quae a Paulo VI Mater Ecclesiae est renuntiata quaeque a populo christiano Speculum iustitiae et Regina pacis honoratur, nos tueatur ipsaque sua caelesti intercessione vim, spem laetitiamque necessariam nobis obtineat ut alacriter studioseque "profectui totius hominis et cunctorum hominum consulere» pergamus." CV, p. 709, n. 79. English translation: CVE, p. 127, no. 79.