Pope Francis: A scholarly review of the world of money and finance

The Catholic Church has always opposed the twin evils of Capitalism and Socialism: the former stemming from Locke's theory on money, the latter following Rousseau. The Church is, and always will be an advocate of the general principles of subsidiarity and true, free enterprise. 

Our Holy Father has these words of gold! (words that would warm the heart of a G.K. Chesterton) - following especially Pius XI and his great social encyclicals: 

Your Excellencies,
I am pleased to receive you for the presentation of the Letters accrediting you as Ambassadors Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Holy See on the part of your respective countries: Kyrgyzstan, Antigua and Barbuda, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and Botswana. The gracious words which you have addressed to me, for which I thank you heartily, have testified that the Heads of State of your countries are concerned to develop relations of respect and cooperation with the Holy See. I would ask you kindly to convey to them my sentiments of gratitude and esteem, together with the assurance of my prayers for them and their fellow citizens.

Ladies and Gentlemen, our human family is presently experiencing something of a turning point in its own history, if we consider the advances made in various areas. We can only praise the positive achievements which contribute to the authentic welfare of mankind, in fields such as those of health, education and communications. At the same time, we must also acknowledge that the majority of the men and women of our time continue to live daily in situations of insecurity, with dire consequences. Certain pathologies are increasing, with their psychological consequences; fear and desperation grip the hearts of many people, even in the so-called rich countries; the joy of life is diminishing; indecency and violence are on the rise; poverty is becoming more and more evident. People have to struggle to live and, frequently, to live in an undignified way. One cause of this situation, in my opinion, is in the our relationship with money, and our acceptance of its power over ourselves and our society. Consequently the financial crisis which we are experiencing makes us forget that its ultimate origin is to be found in a profound human crisis. In the denial of the primacy of human beings! We have created new idols. The worship of the golden calf of old (cf. Ex 32:15-34) has found a new and heartless image in the cult of money and the dictatorship of an economy which is faceless and lacking any truly humane goal.

The worldwide financial and economic crisis seems to highlight their distortions and above all the gravely deficient human perspective, which reduces man to one of his needs alone, namely, consumption. Worse yet, human beings themselves are nowadays considered as consumer goods which can be used and thrown away. We have begun a throw away culture. This tendency is seen on the level of individuals and whole societies; and it is being promoted! In circumstances like these, solidarity, which is the treasure of the poor, is often considered counterproductive, opposed to the logic of finance and the economy. While the income of a minority is increasing exponentially, that of the majority is crumbling. This imbalance results from ideologies which uphold the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation, and thus deny the right of control to States, which are themselves charged with providing for the common good. A new, invisible and at times virtual, tyranny is established, one which unilaterally and irremediably imposes its own laws and rules. Moreover, indebtedness and credit distance countries from their real economy and citizens from their real buying power. Added to this, as if it were needed, is widespread corruption and selfish fiscal evasion which have taken on worldwide dimensions. The will to power and of possession has become limitless.
Concealed behind this attitude is a rejection of ethics, a rejection of God. Ethics, like solidarity, is a nuisance! It is regarded as counterproductive: as something too human, because it relativizes money and power; as a threat, because it rejects manipulation and subjection of people: because ethics leads to God, who is situated outside the categories of the market. These financiers, economists and politicians consider God to be unmanageable, unmanageable even dangerous, because he calls man to his full realization and to independence from any kind of slavery. Ethics – naturally, not the ethics of ideology – makes it possible, in my view, to create a balanced social order that is more humane. In this sense, I encourage the financial experts and the political leaders of your countries to consider the words of Saint John Chrysostom: “Not to share one’s goods with the poor is to rob them and to deprive them of life. It is not our goods that we possess, but theirs” (Homily on Lazarus, 1:6 –PG 48, 992D).
Dear Ambassadors, there is a need for financial reform along ethical lines that would produce in its turn an economic reform to benefit everyone. This would nevertheless require a courageous change of attitude on the part of political leaders. I urge them to face this challenge with determination and farsightedness, taking account, naturally, of their particular situations. Money has to serve, not to rule! The Pope loves everyone, rich and poor alike, but the Pope has the duty, in Christ’s name, to remind the rich to help the poor, to respect them, to promote them. The Pope appeals for disinterested solidarity and for a return to person-centred ethics in the world of finance and economics.

For her part, the Church always works for the integral development of every person. In this sense, she reiterates that the common good should not be simply an extra, simply a conceptual scheme of inferior quality tacked onto political programmes. The Church encourages those in power to be truly at the service of the common good of their peoples. She urges financial leaders to take account of ethics and solidarity. And why should they not turn to God to draw inspiration from his designs? In this way, a new political and economic mindset would arise that would help to transform the absolute dichotomy between the economic and social spheres into a healthy symbiosis.

Finally, through you, I greet with affection the Pastors and the faithful of the Catholic communities present in your countries. I urge them to continue their courageous and joyful witness of faith and fraternal love in accordance with Christ’s teaching. Let them not be afraid to offer their contribution to the development of their countries, through initiatives and attitudes inspired by the Sacred Scriptures! And as you inaugurate your mission, I extend to you, dear Ambassadors, my very best wishes, assuring you of the assistance of the Roman Curia for the fulfilment of your duties. To this end, upon you and your families, and also upon your Embassy staff, I willingly invoke abundant divine blessings.

The Bureaucratic Bishop (a reflection on Freyr's Post)

This post began as a reply to Freyr's post, but, being somewhat long, I decided to create a post of it. Freyr rightly points out in his post on the corruption of what a conference should be, that lack of responsibility is a major defect in the functioning of the Conference. The "conference" has ceased truly being one, and has turned into an unaccountable and irresponsible nightmare needing to be abolished. Really, I should not have been shocked to the CCCB not wishing to ascribe any "blame", "responsibility" etc. for the Lahey fiasco. 

This myopia continues unabated.... to whit the somewhat bizarre - mild words - "Roman Missal .ca" website (again under the CCCB - which sub-committee determines the information - who knows - do even the bishops?)  that contains a link to an article, and other "educational" materials that are gravely suspect of heresy. I shall be posting on this aspect of CCCB detachment for reality shortly. 

All of this asks some serious questions: Pope Francis is moving in one direction, the bishops in another, the Pope is a real Pastor; most bishops are faceless administrators...

As an example of the local church moving away from the desires of the Supreme Pontiff, consider the Toronto Archdiocesan Plan. Have you read it? Can you decode it? Is there something for you? (Ah, how bureaucrats love "Plans"!!!)

This Plan obfuscates the real, serious issues: how is this Plan going to make the local church truly a local church? Could it not be time for a restructuring? Do we really need a huge archdiocese? Could it not be time to break it up - WHILE at the same time ABOLISHING the CCCB? Indeed, without the abolishment of the CCCB, a breaking down of the archdiocese would just create another series of local bureaucracies further distancing the lay faithful, while digging even deeper into the local widow's handbag for the few mites left. 

I can inform all readers that my reference to cash is based on personal knowledge, not just some angry reaction, but inside information - whereby one of the local Toronto auxiliaries identified that the archdiocese has made a financial calculation of well in excess of $100 million dollars that should be targeted. This calculation was based on each parish church having at least one parishioner who would bequest his or her property to the Archdiocese. Sounds very, very mercenary to me. 

Friends - keep your wallets shut tight. Find good, holy priests to support. 

Is the CCCB Outmoded?

We have seen many words changed and perverted in meaning over the centuries. None has suffered more degradation than the word "comitatus". It was originally used by Tacitus to describe the close bonds of fealty and kinship that existed between a lord and his sworn retainers. The essence of this bond is beautifully illustrated in the Anglo-saxon poem The Battle of Maldon. The battle was lost but even as they faced defeat, Bryhtwold encouraged his companions. 

Byrhtwold spoke, shield raised aloft -- 
he was an old loyal retainer -- and brandished his spear; 
he very boldly commanded the warriors: 
"Our hearts must grow resolute, our courage more valiant, 
our spirits must be greater, though our strength grows less.
Here lies our Lord all hewn down, 
goodly he lies in the dust.  A kinsman mourns 
that who now from this battle-play thinks to turn away.
I am advanced in years. I do not desire to be taken away,
but I by my liege Lord,
by that favorite of men I intend to lie."

This word, comitatus, with its connotations of fealty, honor and filial devotion has devolved into our modern word committee thus losing all of its ancient meaning. Unfortunately a similar fate has befallen the word conference. Originally it described a group of people gathered to confer about a topic. In this it is similar to the words council and synod. Today it means nothing of the sort. The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops meets once a year in the fall and while this meeting is taking place it may properly be called a conference. Unfortunately the meaning has been extended to include the Permanent Council, Executive Committee and even the Secretariat of the CCCB. Each of these subordinate bodies is responsible to the one above it and ultimately to the Plenary Assembly which meets once a year.

It should be pointed out that episcopal conferences do not participate in the magisterium although individual bishops do as part of the College of Bishops acting in union with the Pope. Thus a bishops conference cannot issue a doctrinal decree except by two thirds vote and then only upon receiving a recognitio from the Pope. This seems clear enough and there seems to be some virtue in promulgating liturgical norms over an entire region but there seems to be no end of confusion. When the CCCB promulgates a press release or places material on its websites, it is difficult to discern with the many layers of committees and functionaries who is responsible.

This devolution seems to be an attempt to accommodate the structures of the Catholic Church to better fit in with a modern age which expects such a large organization to have a head office with a CEO which can respond to media requests in a way they will understand. Unfortunately we seem to have thrown out the baby with the bath water in this case. Individual bishops seem to have their very real authority abrogated by a phantom organization which has no authority at all. We need our bishops to behave like pastors who can command the kind of loyalty and filial devotion displayed by Byrhtwold. 

On those few occasions I have had to write my pastor, he has responded in a timely and appropriate fashion. Is it too much to expect that our bishops will also display such pastoral concern for their flocks?

Pope Francis as a Pastor of Souls decides on Cardinal O'Brien

Our beloved Holy Father, Pope Francis - ever the true Pastor of souls - has move quickly, deciding that Keith Cardinal O'Brien will retire to a Monastery to do penance. We should rejoice. Here is a man who has sinned horribly. Yet, in obeying the Holy Father, he has accepted his sin, and his penance. May we do likewise for our own sins.

Our Holy Father has moved to apply not only discipline and healing to the Church in Scotland, but, as a pastor of souls he is striving to bring Cardinal O'Brien to repentance, so that he too will be saved by the Blood of the Lamb. We should rejoice that Cardinal O' Brien has accepted with docility the order for repentence from the Supreme Pontiff. Let us offer aprayer of thanksgiving for Pope Francis' powerful and decisive actions, and let us equally offer a prayer for Cardinal O' Brien.

Vatican City, 15 May 2013 (VIS) – This afternoon, the Holy See Press Office issued the following press release: “His Eminence Cardinal Keith Patrick O’Brien, archbishop emeritus of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, for the same reasons he decided not to participate in the last Conclave, and in agreement with the Holy Father, will be leaving Scotland for several months for the purpose of spiritual renewal, prayer, and penance. Any decision regarding future arrangements for His Eminence shall be agreed with the Holy See.”

Are Bishops being held hostage by technocrats?

This will be a preliminary post on a serious subject of the bishop, his relationship to the teaching Magisterium, his relationship to the layman, and the bishop's relationship to the various bureaucratic appendages that have been created within the post-Conciliar period. It stems from a series of discussions with Freyr and is a collaborative effort. 

This first post will also include an overview of my personal experiences (Barona) over the past few years. Indeed, it is always best to start with what one has actually experienced. When this blog started, the horrifying Raymond Lahey paedo-porn affair was just working its way through the Courts. I took a bit of time to read up on this man and noticed that photos, sermons and interventions before our late Holy Father, John Paul II were still maintained on the CCCB website. 

Putting to one side the deeply concerning fact that an admitted pervert and betrayer of the holy priesthood would still have his addresses on the CCCB website, was the disturbing reality that this was potential cannon fodder for anti-Catholic trolls to access this information and beat the Church in Canada over the head. 

In Witness' more recent involvement in posting on the on-going homosexual crisis in the clergy in Scotland - again, we see the oblivious and myopic attitude by the Motherwell diocese with regards to  maintaining a photograph of Cardinal O'Brien, as well as the Scottish Catholic Social Office maintaining a link to a so-called Cardinal O'Brien Lapel Cross Pin. 

I begin to wonder - do the bishops even know what is on the various websites? Do they care? If they do, are they able to intervene and stop it? In an upcoming post the issue of heterodox and orthodox theology sitting side by side will be discussed (specifically on the Mass and the Holy Eucharist). Now, if the bishops are orthodox, why allow heresy? Then again, we don't even know who controls the websites - I don't think even the bishops know. And the issue becomes even muddier with organizations that have no canonical standing such as episcopal conferences. Where does the buck stop? Perhaps with an ad hoc sub committee? 

In the case Lahey, I wrote to a number of Bishops (commencing January 5th, 2012) (the Archdiocese of Toronto distinguishing itself in being very unhelpful), until I finally received an email on February 5th, stating that action was being taken. Within two days, the highly offensive material - that is, the photos of him, his speeches before Pope John Paul II - were gone. Offensive to not only the Church, but to the boys and their families who had to be subjected to horrendous abuse to satisfy the demonic lust of Lahey. 

Illustrative of episcopal confusion, disorganization - nay myopia - is the following extract from an email I received from a high ranking CCCB cleric pertaining to the Lahey case:

I am somewhat disappointed to learn that no one ever answered his letter, it was indeed my understanding that we would do so. ...Does anyone know how we dropped the ball? Not for blame, just to avoid this happening again.  I left this with those with whom I met and forgot about it.  Maybe I need to keep these things on my radar?... 

With respect, someone was to blame. This should not have happened. The "not to blame..." is the nexus point of bureaucratic ineptitude. The purpose of a bureaucracy is to diffuse responsibility just as the purpose of a corporation is to limit liability. In both cases self preservation and continued growth take precedence over all else. And this self-preservation is nicely presented by the high ranking cleric -- just blame no one, even when serious mistakes happen.

The Church, on the other hand is organized along completely different principles. We have a Vicar of Christ, not a committee. The purpose of a hierarchical structure is to focus responsibility. Responsibility is handed down along feudal lines of fealty and vassalage. A bishop's synod is more in line with these organizational principles than a standing bishop's conference. It is time for the abolition of the CCCB and for bishops to take responsibility, and to free themselves from the manipulation and facelessness of the bureaucratic organizational mentality. 

Pope Francis: “The Church is not a bureaucratic organization, but a love story” 

When the Church boasts about its size, creating organisations and offices and becoming a bit bureaucratic, the Church loses its key substance  and runs the risk of turning into an NGO. And the Church is not an NGO. It's a love story ... But there are those from the IOR ... excuse me, eh! .. some things are necessary, offices are required ... ok! but they are necessary up to a certain point: as an aid to this love story. But when organization takes first place, love falls down and the Church, poor thing, becomes an NGO. And this is not the way forward.

At a time when Pope Francis is openly challenging the bureaucratic structures of the curia we need to ask why bishops continue to hold onto such things in their own dioceses? On a personal note I wonder... I write to my bishop, but he never replies. A number of my friends have had the same experience. Serious people, with serious concerns, respectfully expressed. 

Is he in touch with the lay faithful? Or, is he boxed in by technocrats, with responsibility unattainable? 

Pope Francis and the "old maids" address to nuns

Our Holy Father, Pope Francis, in his now familiar refreshing style warned nuns bluntly to avoid being "old maids" (or spinsters as the Zenit translation has below). The key element in this masterly address is the nun as an "icon" of our Blessed Mother. In part, the Holy Father spoke:

Obedience as listening to the will of God in the interior motion of the Holy Spirit, authenticated by the Church, accepting that obedience passes also through human mediations. Remember that the authority-obedience relation is placed in the wider context of the mystery of the Church and constitutes a particular accomplishment of her mediating function (cf. Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, The Service of Authority and Obedience, 12.)

Poverty as the overcoming of all egoism in the logic of the Gospel, which teaches us to trust in the Providence of God. Poverty as an indication to the whole Church that we are not the ones who build the Kingdom of God; it is not human means that make it grow, but primarily the power, the grace of the Lord, who works through our weakness. “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness,” states the Apostle to the Gentiles (2 Corinthians 12:9). Poverty that teaches solidarity, sharing and charity, and which is also expressed in a sobriety and joy in the essential, to be on guard against material idols that obfuscate the authentic meaning of life. Poverty that is learned with the humble, the poor, the sick and all those who are on the existential peripheries of life. Theoretical poverty is of no use to us. Poverty is learned by touching the flesh of the poor Christ, in the humble, the poor, the sick, in children.

And then chastity as a precious charism, which widens the freedom of the gift to God and to others, with the tenderness, the mercy, the closeness of Christ. Chastity for the Kingdom of Heaven shows how affectivity has its place in mature freedom and becomes a sign of the future world, to make God’s primacy shine always. But, please, a “fecund” chastity, a chastity that generates spiritual children in the Church. The consecrated woman is mother, she must be a mother and not a “spinster!” Excuse me if I speak this way, but this maternity, this fecundity of consecrated life is important! May this joy of spiritual fecundity animate your existence. Be mothers, as the figure of Mother Mary and of the Mother Church. Mary cannot be understood without her maternity; the Church cannot be understood without her maternity and you are icons of Mary and of the Church.

The full address may be read here. 

Kermit Gosnell and Ariel Castro: Two monsters receive different media coverage: and both of it is sick

Kermit Gosnell and Ariel Castro are both monsters of iniquity. The former, a vile abortionist and live baby butcher; the worst mass murderer in US history. Insert his name into a Google search and you will come up with just over 500 news items (I got 549). 

Castro, a rapist, kidnapper, baby killer (we now know that he induced abortions through blows to the stomachs of his victims) receives over 20000 news items in a Google search (I got 20904). 

In a nutshell, Castro has received nearly 40 times the media exposure than Gosnell. Something is wrong here. Simply put....... the issue is abortion. Yes, ABORTION. The word that we are not to dare utter. The word that is far, far "dirtier" than various four letter words... so pass on Gosnell, he doesn't quite fit the bill for a sensation. 

And this leads to another issue, related to the covering up of the abortionists crimes: the cheapening of human life. The reduction of crime into media circus events - especially if it fits the prevailing political sentiment. Thus, rape and kidnap get the greenlight for a "show"; abortion is hush-hush.   

Take CNN. That station has outdone itself in what has quickly become a nearly 24/7 fetishistic indulgence in all the sickening details of Castro's crimes. Media helicopters hover incessantly over the neighbourhood, a well known "keeping them honest" journalist from CNN (now there is a misnomer, if ever I heard one!) rushes to the scene to conduct fatuous interviews. And so on. A crime scene has been turned into a "big top". These three, poor young women are in a sense being re-raped psychologically by this outrageous media activity. But what else should we expect from a media that denies human life? And what can  be said about a public that feeds this media frenzy? Media manipulation has indeed become a fine art. Fascism in white gloves... but that leads to another story. 

Toronto area Catholics! - Solemn Latin Mass for May 9 - Ascension of the Lord

Tomorrow, May 9th, please join the Toronto Traditional Mass Society - Una Voce Toronto for a Solemn Latin Mass celebrating the Feast of the Ascension of the Lord. Mass will be at St. Issac Jogues, at 1166 Finch Ave, in Pickering at 8.p.m.