• Bulletin Board, Announcements, Calendar
• Welcome and Website Protocol
• Editorial - Op Ed
• Article Archive

Print this page

Article Categories

• Book Reviews
• Open Letter
• Editorials
• Notes, Quotes & Comments
• Pastor's Study
• Project Millstones
• Sidebar Comments
• Weekly Message

Links

AMERICA Magazine
A balanced Catholic weekly magazine published by the jesuits of the United States for an intelligent Catholic readership. Go online to subscribe.

Liturgy
This link will keep 'parishioners-at-large' in touch with current creative liturgy sources and resources that respect a variety of 'traditions' within the Church.

Voice of the Faithful
A 'movement' of lay Catholics 'inspired' by the abuse scandal calling for greater accountability of bishops to 'Catholics in the Pew.'

Survivos' Network for those Abused by Priests or Religious
A National Network of self-help support groups for people abused by clergy or religious.

Bishop Accountability
Vital information about the disclosure of sexual abuse and related issues affecting Catholics in the pew and the manner in which Bishops continue to exempt themselves from accountability

National Catholic Reporter
A national Catholic lay newspaper covering events not usually covered or presented with a clerical bias in the local diocesan press or but of concern and interest to Catholics.

COMMONWEAL Magazine
A 'lay' Catholic weekly publication with an accent on an intelligent analysis and commentary on curent issues, trends and concerns of interest to Catholics.

Search

Daily Scripture

+ 7th Week of Easter

Much ado about nothing or, is there something to it?

Readings: Acts 19:1-8 Psalm 68:2-7 John 16:29-33

Paul traveled through the interior of the country and down to Ephesus where he found some disciples. He said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you became believers?” They answered him, “We have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” [Acts 19:1-3]

Depending on one’s sacramental theology and pastoral practice, this text has been variously interpreted. For example, those who work with the RCIA (catecheumenate) hold that the sacrament of Confirmation should be administered with Baptism as it was in the early Church. It is one of the sacraments of initiation—Baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist. The Eastern Rite of the Roman Catholic Church has retained the tradition of administering all three at Baptism. Yes, the infant receives a small piece of the Eucharist bread. And so in the Eastern Rite, there is no formal celebration of First Holy Communion at the age of reason or Confirmation by the bishop at whatever age the local diocese has determined the age of maturity appropriate for Confirmation. All three sacraments are administered shortly after birth.

Others feel that the celebration of First Communion and Confirmation at a later age ensures the participation of youngsters in parish religious education programs – at least until Confirmation. In this case, many Catholics view Confirmation as the completion of or graduation from religious studies.

In recent years I have become convinced that the RCIA folks and the Eastern Rite Catholics have it right. All three sacraments of initiation should be administered together. First Holy Communion and Confirmation have become more social than spiritual. I do not mean to suggest that there is no connection or that there should be no celebration after sacramental ceremonies but for many, the accent is on the wrong syllable.

The path from Baptism to Christian maturity is life-long and the benchmarks for progress are not easily measured by grouping children by age or grade level for a period of preparation that is largely academic.

This is not to suggest that religious education is optional. Faith development is unique to each person within the context first of family and then of parish. Religious education / formation is intended to provide insight into faith development at an age-appropriate level.

Catholicism has become ‘child-centered’ the result of which, we have an adult population whose religious and spiritual development stopped at Confirmation.

The celebration of Eucharist is the primary setting for faith formation. Religious education is a necessary component but detached from Eucharist, it remain just another subject to master.

Of course this all assumes that the parish celebration of the Eucharist is truly inclusive and meaningful rather than just an empty ritual. The parish at worship should be a rendition of a community of faith that strives to live its faith ‘in the town square’ as I mentioned in Sunday’s homily.

Notwithstanding my commitment to religious dialogue, I do believe that effective dialogue is based on the assumption that although both parties are knowledgeable about the topic. Though they may have different perspectives, they are not based on ignorance of the subject.

Guest Editorial

Saturday June 5, 2010

A Pattern of Missteps, an editorial from COMMONWEAL Magazine.
June 4, 2010

Apart from such political blunders, recent pastoral failures within the American church have also undermined the credibility of its teaching about abortion. Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix recently alarmed even many staunchly prolife Catholics when he publicly announced that Sr. Margaret McBride, RSM, had excommunicated herself by approving a request to remove a fetus from its mother’s womb in order to save her life. McBride served on the ethics committee at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix. Late in 2009 a woman was brought to the hospital suffering from acute pulmonary hypertension, a life-threatening condition for any pregnant woman. If the pregnancy, then in its eleventh week, continued, both mother and child would probably die.

Abortion is not permissible under any circumstances, says Bishop Olmsted, not even to save the life of the mother. But others, including some very conservative Catholic moralists, think that, in cases where a pregnancy will almost certainly kill both the woman and her unborn child, separating the child from the mother is morally justified. The arguments here are complicated. Suffice it to say that the intention of those who remove the embryo or fetus from its mother’s womb is not to kill a developing child but to save the mother in a situation where the child has no chance of survival and the woman has no other chance. It is not clear to many Catholics why in cases of ectopic pregnancy the church will allow the removal of a fallopian tube—and with it an embryo—in order to save a pregnant woman’s life, while it will not allow the removal of a nonviable fetus to save a woman from dying because of pulmonary hypertension. It is not enough for bishops to say or imply: “Trust us. There’s a difference.” Nor is it fair to expect Catholics to overlook the death and human suffering occasioned by such theoretical subtleties.

The statements issued by Olmsted admit of no complexity or uncertainty when it comes to such hard cases. Certainly, the bishop had a responsibility to question Sr. McBride’s decision. What he should not have done was assume that she and others were acting in intentional defiance of Catholic teaching. Instead of simply announcing the excommunication of someone of good faith and great dedication who was faced with a now-or-never, life-or-death decision, why didn’t the bishop simply express concern that McBride might have erred, and explain that it is a bishop’s duty to investigate the incident? In that way, he might have avoided lending support to those who argue that the church cares more about embryos and fetuses than about their mothers, and that Catholic bishops won’t be satisfied until the law forces women to continue pregnancies that are a death sentence for both them and their unborn children.