So the Vatican has asked national bishops’ conferences around the world to seek input from Catholics at “all levels” about how the Church should respond to sometimes difficult questions of modern family life, such as divorce and remarriage. It was reported this week that bishops have been asked to respond in mercy and avoid basing their pastoral care solely on current Catholic doctrine.
This comes a year after the English and Welsh bishops’ conference decided to publish widely the Vatican consultative questionnaire on the family, in preparation for last October’s extraordinary synod and next year’s ordinary synod on the family. Catholics welcomed this move even though the questionnaire had been amateurishly constructed and was therefore not at all academically respectable. But the bishops – unlike their counterparts in Germany and Austria – suppressed the responses to the questionnaire, leaving many Catholics with the impression that our answers were not as our bishops would have wished them to be.
Reading the recent interview of bishops’ conference president Cardinal Vincent Nichols’ with The Tablet’s acting editor, Elena Curti, I found it difficult to understand whether the bishops are going to follow their initial procedure of wide consultation or just rely on parish clergy without speaking to parishioners. Blessed John Henry Newman suggested that consulting the laity is a branch of evidence that needs to be taken into account in matters of doctrine.
I am concerned at this possible lack of consultation “at all levels” in England and Wales. We know from the failure of the majority of the lay faithful to “receive” the teaching of Humanae Vitae how important it is that the teaching of the Church needs to be exercised by the People of God as a whole, as set out in Vatican II – that is by the Pope, bishops, clergy, and lay faithful. As we know, Pope Paul VI had removed the debate on responsible parenthood and contraception, married priests, and women priests from the Second Vatican Council agenda. He then went against the decision of the committee that had been set up by his predecessor and himself on responsible parenthood and
which through prayer and the Eucharist came to disagree with the Church’s position on artificial contraception.
Although Humanae Vitae was good in parts, its promulgation damaged the standing of the magisterium when it was not “received” fully by the laity. Surveys have shown that large numbers of practising Catholics ignore the Church’s teaching on contraception, and remarriage.
Pope Francis has brought out Christ’s loving message of mercy and forgiveness and in Evangelii Gaudium has offered pastors guidance on
interpreting traditional teaching on marriage and family life.
The need to consult with the laity on family matters is more important than on other questions of doctrine and morals, because it is lay Catholics who have families, not celibate bishops and clergy. Modern IT and broadcasting give the Church every opportunity to be collegial in consulting with the faithful in matters of doctrine, particularly on the family.
Many Catholics are well aware of the developments in church teaching over the centuries on slavery, usury, just war, sexual activity in marriage not being just for procreation, and capital punishment. I hope that our English and Welsh ordinary synod bishops, Vincent Nichols and Peter Doyle, will bear in mind God’s compassion, forgiveness and mercy when looking at family life for the forthcoming synod.
Loading ...
What do you think?
You can post as a subscriber user ...
User comments (4)
Fear of change or admitting error is the Achille's heel of the Vatican.
During the 1966 Papal Birth Control Commission, at which Chicago Catholics and co-directors of the Christian Family Movement, Patty & Pat Crowley were members, a heated discussion about how the church could save face if it were to allow couples to decide how to limit offspring.
Marcelino Zalba, a Spanish Jesuit member of the commission, asked, “What then with the millions we have sent to hell” if the rules are relaxed? Patty immediately responded in what became perhaps her most memorable quote. “Fr. Zalba,” she said, “do you really believe God has carried out all your orders?”
In the end, the commission recommended overwhelmingly that the strict prohibition against contraception should be lifted, and a belatedly summoned “overseer” commission of cardinals and bishops concurred with the decision. “I don’t think there was a doubt in any of our minds that the pope would follow the commission report,” Patty said at the time. But after a two-year wait Paul VI issued the encyclical Humanae Vitae, which flatly rejected the commission report and declared the prohibition would remain in force.
See also: http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2005d/120905/120905o.php
The promulgation of Humanae Vitae by Paul VI in 1968 gave rise to a significant fault line in the Church during the early post-conciliar years.
After setting up a Commission to consider the issue, the pope, under pressure from conservative elements in Rome, rejected its conclusion.
So did a multitude of Catholics world-wide reject his teaching, and they have continued to do so.
The lasting consequence of 1968 has been a conscientious decision by many to ignore the papal document as a statement of faith.
At the time many priests felt unable to adhere to its teaching and incurred the wrath of their bishops as a result.
The aftershocks have been felt through subsequent years.
But we are all pilgrims in a pilgrim church and so we journey on, trusting the Lord will meet the needs of his people
'Surveys have shown that large numbers of practising Catholics ignore the Church’s teaching on contraception, and remarriage'. Is Michael Phelan suggesting that because Church teaching is ignored it should be changed?
Surveys consistently show capital punishment is supported by significant majorities. Should the Church's teaching in relation to the death penalty change to reflect popular opinion - rather than the views of 'celibate bishops and clergy', whom Mr Phelan seems to hold in some disdain? I sincerely pray to God that 'popular opinion' does not prevail in this matter.
Our Saviour taught us that spreading the Good News is not like entering a public popularity contest, quite the contrary at times: 'Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake'. (Matt. 5:11)
Humane Vitae is a wonderful document and guide for married couples. The problem is its context has never been articulated to the laity. Even as we speak today many newly weds have no idea what this document is all about. I want to disagree with what has been alluded to in this article that Humane vitae was not “received” fully by the laity. How can they receive something they are not aware about? Surveys have shown that large numbers of practising Catholics ignore the Church’s teaching on contraception - this is interpreted by the laity as a rule. While the laity is very aware that Church promotes Natural family Planning, for those who would like to practice the big question is where can I access? How has the church invested to ensure that these services are widely available to the laity? Majority of married couples are using contraceotives out of frustration and lack of no alternative. Human Vitaes context in relation to human life and conjugal must be well understood to be appreciated. There is a huge void and no wonder weak families, push for approval of divorce and remarriage.