Continuing on the theme of individual conscience …

51. Governmental authority, therefore, is a postulate of the moral order and derives from God. Consequently, laws and decrees passed in contravention of the moral order, and hence of the divine will, can have no binding force in conscience, since “it is right to obey God rather than (people) “(Acts 5:29).

Indeed, the passing of such laws undermines the very nature of authority and results in shameful abuse. As St. Thomas teaches, “In regard to the second proposition, we maintain that human law has the rationale of law in so far as it is in accordance with right reason, and as such it obviously derives from eternal law. A law which is at variance with reason is to that extent unjust and has no longer the rationale of law. It is rather an act of violence.”( Summa Theol. Ia-IIae, q. 93., a.3 ad 2um; cf. Pius XII’s broadcast message, Christmas 1945, AAS 37 (1945) 5-23)

52. The fact that authority comes from God does not mean that (people) have no power to choose those who are to rule the State, or to decide upon the type of government they want, and determine the procedure and limitations of rulers in the exercise of their authority. Hence the above teaching is consonant with any genuinely democratic form of government.( Cf. Leo XIII’s encyclical epistle Diuturnum illud, Acta Leonis XIII, II, 1881, pp. 271-273; and Pius XII’s broadcast message, Christmas 1944, AAS 37 (1945) 5-23)

On #52, quite right. Democracy is as much a potential tool of God’s will as heredity or aristocracy.

In today’s Twilling Twenty-Seven matchup, a difficult dilemma for us Catholics. How do you choose between the seed of the Our Father and the first half of the Hail Mary?

From the Annunciation in Luke:

And coming to her, he said “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”

From the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount:

This is how you are to pray: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name …

And from the prologue of John’s Gospel:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Have fun. I will await polling results with great anticipation.

The first half of a longer section in which Pope John explores the optimal motivation for a citizenry, namely internal:

48. Hence, a regime which governs solely or mainly by means of threats and intimidation or promises of reward, provides (people) with no effective incentive to work for the common good. And even if it did, it would certainly be offensive to the dignity of free and rational human beings. Authority is before all else a moral force. For this reason the appeal of rulers should be to the individual conscience, to the duty which every (person) has of voluntarily contributing to the common good. But since all (people) are equal in natural dignity, no (individual) has the capacity to force internal compliance on another. Only God can do that, for He alone scrutinizes and judges the secret counsels of the heart.

It occurs to me the Western indulgence for “promising” the by-the-bootstrap economic success is on the chopping block here, too. Preaching that people can succeed and grow wealthy in the economic sphere by sheer ingenuity does no good to the betterment of society. For many people it is as unlikely as winning the lottery. Better for all to have a larger share in the benefits of society and motivate all citizens to engagement, rather than make empty promises.

49. Hence, representatives of the State have no power to bind (people) in conscience, unless their own authority is tied to God’s authority, and is a participation in it.( Cf. Leo XIII’s encyclical epistle Diutumum illud, Acta Leonis XIII, 11, 1881, p. 274)

This would be a hard sell within the Church today, and probably impossible outside of it.

50. The application of this principle likewise safeguards the dignity of citizens. Their obedience to civil authorities is never an obedience paid to them as (people). It is in reality an act of homage paid to God, the provident Creator of the universe, who has decreed that (our) dealings with one another be regulated in accordance with that order which He Himself has established. And we (human beings) do not demean ourselves in showing due reverence to God. On the contrary, we are lifted up and ennobled in spirit, for to serve God is to reign.(Cf. ibid., p. 278; also Leo XIII’s encyclical epistle Immortale Dei, Acta Leonis XIII, V, 1885, p. 130)

And no, serving God has no sense of servitude or a loss of a sense of self. It is in giving and serving that we come to our full stature as human beings, becoming all that God has promised. Finding this in serving the state for mere authority’s sake, is especially meaningless in an age where leaders continually fall short of even secular ideals.

Two Old Testament barge into today’s matchup. First a minor prophet, with a not-so-minor message:

You have been told, O man, what is good, and what the Lord requires of you; Only to do the right and to love goodness, and to walk humbly with your God.

And a word from Joshua. What a leader that guy was!

If it is displeasing to you to serve the Lord, choose today whom you will serve, the gods your ancestors served beyond the River or the gods of the Amorites in whose country you are dwelling. As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.”

Every Twilling Twenty-Seven trio has at least one Gospel passage. Here’s today’s:

Jesus told her, “I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in me, even if he dies, will live.

Tough choices, it seems to me. What’s yours?

This latest episcopal misadventure has sort of a Mahony in February vibe. Or Bishop Bill, if you prefer. Given that Roberto Gonzalez Nieves is not a cardinal, but more than an Outback bishop, I suspect this will go less successfully for his 2014 Confirmation calendar than the Frequently Scheduled One. Perhaps slightly better than the Australian discussion (not promotion) of ordination.

Archbishop Gonzalez’s supposed transgression is covering up sexual predation and other offenses of his clergy. That’s somewhat John Myers material. The level of hierarchy is the same, so maybe this is a preview of the New Jersey prelate’s future. Will he try a cringe-worthy message to his people, who, so far, seem to have a supportive streak?

I beg of you, please, do not send letters to the Holy See with expressions of solidarity. There is only one thing to do in situations like these: Pray.

The Vatican wasn’t impressed with the leak of a February letter he wrote to Cardinal Marc Ouellet at the Congregation of Bishops. Federico Lombardi, Vatican spokesman, didn’t comment on the situation (the Culture of Silence) but he did say the letter’s release was an “indiscretion.”

So let’s try to sum up this thing, aware that no mortal on this planet likely has the whole story. Accusations from a reporter, and the bishop says, “Go home.” A serious investigation leads to three pink slips, and the bishop says nothing. The Vatican accuses, and the bishop claims, “Innocent!” All independent of any kind of truth in the situation.

From CNS today:

Using a phrase that translates literally as “the face of a pickled pepper,” Pope Francis said that when Christians have more of a sourpuss than a face that communicates the joy of being loved by God, they harm the witness of the church.

It’s a good thing for me to keep in mind as I continue to blog here, especially about sour news like bishops behaving badly.

While I tend to think that newcomers to the faith don’t visit me here, I do get a lot of traffic from engaged couples. While they might not be seeing this past week’s relentless and depressing news about bishops in New Jersey and Southern California, maybe they are.

My staff colleague who does the “intake” interview of RCIA inquirers reported that of the 25 talks she had in 2012, only two catechumens made it to the Rite of Acceptance and to the Easter Vigil. And we will have two candidates received into the Church tomorrow. That’s not a good year for us at all. I also remember bad RCIA years in 2002 and 2003. You know who was in the pepper jar those years, right? Another staff colleague at another parish was vilified in 2007 for a small crop. But RCIA was way down across my last diocese that year. The pickled pepper? Maybe it was Pope Benedict. Remember the SSPX fiasco and the matter of how a “church” is defined?

Mahony questionGrant Gallicho levels a devastating post on the Frequently Misspelled Scheduled One and the active ordinary of his archdiocese. And just when you thought the episcopal attack on the truth couldn’t get any more brazen:

(Archbishop Gomez) does have the authority to say who presides over confirmations in the archdiocese. Have a look at the letter. Sorry, is that link broken? It seems the letter is no longer available on the website of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. (The L.A. Times cached a copy here.) Odd that the archdiocese’s archive of press releases includes a January 22 apology from auxiliary Bishop Thomas Curry, who played a part in archdiocesan efforts to conceal accused priests from the law (and who really did cancel confirmations this spring), along with Gomez’s statement on the release of the priest-personnel files, dated January 31 — the same date on his statement on Mahony. Did that document disappear down the memory hole?

Money quote from the cardinal when asked by a reporter about his not doing the Confirmation circuit:

That’s news to me…. I’ve been doing them every week and I’m going to be doing them every week. So go home.

And what was it: yesterday the release of the Charter Audit? I wonder if that would disappear from the USCCB web site.

I’m sure Los Angeles teenagers need the Sacrament of Confirmation. But as for the workload of an ordinary and his auxiliaries, it might say something if Southern California bishops went to two-a-week Confirmations as needed and gave up that one night with a cigar and a glass of brandy in a recliner chair. As an example of selfless service and sacrifice, a gesture doesn’t come by that’s much easier than that.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 98 other followers