Archbishop Clifford on UCC Stem Cell Decision

From the Irish Times:

THE ARCHBISHOP of Cashel, Dr Dermot Clifford, a member of UCC's governing body, has distanced himself from its decision on stem-cell research.
In a brief statement last night, Dr Clifford said he had informed the governing body of Catholic Church teaching on stem-cell research "and reiterated that human life is sacred from the moment of conception until death".
He said he believed that "it is wrong to conduct research on embryonic stem cells and such research should be prohibited by law. It is contrary to the ethical and moral teaching of the Catholic Church because it is contrary to the common good."
The Pro-Life Campaign has accused the UCC governing body of gross misrepresentation and hypocrisy, while Senator Ronán Mullen said the decision was "irresponsible" and "to be deplored".
Dr Audrey Dillon of the Pro-Life Campaign said it was "a gross misrepresentation for UCC to claim it has found an 'ethical solution' to embryo research that does not involve destroying human life".
She added: "Under the UCC proposal, human embryos are destroyed somewhere else. The university imports the stem cells to use in their research, hypocritically denying their complicity in the killing that produced them."
Dr Dillon said: "The onset of induced pluripotent stem cells [iPS] offers the prospect of a win-win solution, where science and ethics can successfully coexist. Shamefully, UCC has chosen to ignore these possibilities and opted for a socially divisive stance.
"It has absolutely no authority to speak for the Irish people on such sensitive matters. Clearly, it is the preserve of the legislature and electorate to decide these issues," Dr Dillon said.

I've tried in vain to locate a copy of Archbishop Clifford's statement. I'm a little puzzled by his reference to the 'common good' rather than the dignity of human life, but without the full statement it's difficult to assess his statement.
On this issue, I think it's important to stress that Catholic opposition to embryonic stem cell research is based on the natural law rather than simply referring to Catholic doctrine. Our Catholicism should make us passionate in our defence of the unborn, but the basis for that defence is rationally defensible.
UCC's decision is doubly-flawed. It obviously fails to respect the dignity of the embryonic human person. Additionally, the idea that one can avoid the moral problems of embryonic stem cell research by having the 'dirty work' of destroying embryos performed outside the State is a fudge... and an inherently contradictory one at that. If there were no moral reservations about using embryonic stem cells, UCC would not be stipulating that the cells come from outside the State. However, once one admits that there are moral difficulties, then the fact the destruction of the embryo happens abroad changes nothing. It seems to be a case of keeping the embryos out of sight and out of mind.

Unholy row?

Via the Irish Times:

A Minister of State was booed off the altar in St Andrew's Church on Westland Row this morning when he tried to address the Age Action meeting called to protest over the abolition of the automatic entitlement to medical cards for the over 70s.

More than 1,000 older people attended the meeting and there were angry shouts of protest every time the Government and Fianna Fáil were mentioned.

Minister of State for Health John Moloney was the Government's representative at the meeting, but when he stood up to speak, he was loudly heckled and he eventually left the microphone.

The meeting was due to be held in a room in a hotel with a capacity for 300, but when hundreds of older people began to turn up, the meeting was moved to the nearby church.

More than two dozen older people addressed the meeting before political leaders were given two minutes each to speak.

PD senator Fiona O'Malley was also heckled but addressed the crowd and said it was wrong that the minister was not allowed to speak. Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny, Labour Party leader Eamon Gilmore and Sinn Féin's Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin all received a warm welcome.

I'm baffled by the fact that someone at the parish or diocesan level thought it fit to give permission for a political meeting of this sort in a church. It doesn't seem to respect the sacred nature of the building.

Religious Reporting...

There's another example of the poverty of religious reporting in today's Irish Times. This piece deals with Opus Dei's first parish in Ireland...

In attempts to soften concerns, it was noted that 42 of Dublin's 200 parishes are already in the care of religious orders. That, however, is disingenuous. Opus Dei - aka The Work - is an entirely different creature, a highly traditionalist lay organisation, guided by an authoritarian ideology, that happens to have its own priests. It is also an organisation that has been shot through with obsessive secrecy and elitism up to recent times. Far from rubbing along with the traditional religious orders, Opus Dei is perceived as the vanguard of an other-worldly view of Christianity, replacing the influence of the religious orders which had become more grounded in their support of an experiential faith.

Quite apart from the editorial swipe ('disingenuous'), in terms of describing various orders and associations, Opus Dei falls under the 'conservative' rather than the 'traditionalist' banner.
I was also struck by the following:

It is the only Roman Catholic organisation, other than the church itself, that believes it was created by God. This view of itself was copper-fastened by the 2002 canonisation of its founder, Josemaría Escrivá, and its placing at the heart of the Catholic church by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

That's hardly accurate... Firstly, the legenda of many religious orders bring out their being founded according to the divine will. Secondly, I'm pretty sure that Opus Dei doesn't see its role in the Divine plan as being comparable to that of the Church herself. Thirdly, note the misuse of the word 'created'.

(Should I note that I have absolutely no connection with Opus Dei?)

A very apt letter on funerals...

From the letters page of Irish Times:

Madam, - Last year I returned to Ireland for the funeral of my late father. He was a practising Catholic and his funeral took place in his local parish church.

At that time we had hoped that several pieces of Dad's favourite music might form part of the celebration, as well as a short tribute from my eldest brother.

We encountered a young(ish) priest who while extremely polite and sympathetic absolutely refused to permit any "secular" elements in the Mass, quoting liturgical correctness as the main reason. While deeply unhappy, we had no option but to acquiesce. I was enraged therefore to see that Ronnie Drew had a "send-off" like no other complete with a congregational rendering of Wila wila wallya, and all presided over by an auxiliary bishop of Dublin. Perhaps celebrity ensures an appropriately robed bishop as chorus master.

It is either permitted or not to have "secular elements" and one's status should have no bearing on the matter. This is another example of the hypocrisy which is turning many from holy mother church. - Yours, etc,

LAURENCE LACEY, Rue de Blayes, Toulouse, France.

It's difficult not to sympathise with the letter-writer in this case. Many of our dioceses have regulations about acceptable music and the giving of eulogies at funerals. They're sensible, and mean that the deceased and the bereaved receive the benefit of the Church's liturgy and the care of the parish community. Whether clergy are applying these regulations consistently or not is another issue.
For those who do, it's therefore disheartening when celebrity and political funerals come along which don't seem to follow best practice. It gives the impression that the Church has one set of rules for the famous and another for the ordinary man. It obscures the fact that all are equal before the judgement of God. It diffuses a misleading and false impression about what the funeral liturgy is, and gives rise to unreasonable expectations about what is acceptable in a Catholic Church. Pastorally, it makes the planning of funerals more traumatic than it need be, and (as in this case) has the potential to upset the bereaved who will feel that they have been treated unjustly by their local priest.
Adherence to the rubrics is about more than a desire for the abstract value of 'liturgical correctness' - rather, it is also an eminently pastoral approach which is aimed at giving the People of God the benefit of the Church's liturgy.

I didn't see any of the media coverage of Ronnie Drew's funeral, so I can't really say how out-of-line the liturgy was. Nor, in these cases, is every detail of the liturgy approved by the presiding cleric in advance. Sometimes these things can be 'sprung' on a celebrant. One can hardly imagine the idea of Weela weela wallia being sung in a church being approved by anyone with a sensitivity to the liturgy.

Wonderful Vocations Poster

Thanks to Fr Z for publicising this poster which was issued by the Diocese of Raleigh. (Click image to enlarge)

The quotation from Sacramentum Caritatis is especially apt :

The pastoral care of vocations needs to involve the entire Christian community in every area of its life. Obviously, this pastoral work on all levels also includes exploring the matter with families, which are often indifferent or even opposed to the idea of a priestly vocation. Families should generously embrace the gift of life and bring up their children to be open to doing God's will. In a word, they must have the courage to set before young people the radical decision to follow Christ, showing them how deeply rewarding it is.

Do we appreciate this sufficiently in Ireland? Year of Vocation notwithstanding, I wonder how much the shortage of priests will have to 'hurt' parishes before the Holy Father's point is taken. What can we do in parishes to ensure that our young people are brought up in homes where the idea of a priestly or religious vocation is something which would be seriously and supportively considered?

Newman on the Assumption

From his Meditations and Devotions:

Mary is the "Rosa Mystica," the Mystical Rose

MARY is the most beautiful flower that ever was seen in the spiritual world. It is by the power of God's grace that from this barren and desolate earth there have ever sprung up at all flowers of holiness and glory. And Mary is the Queen of them. She is the Queen of spiritual flowers; and therefore she is called the Rose, for the rose is fitly called of all flowers the most beautiful.

But moreover, she is the Mystical, or hidden Rose; for mystical means hidden. How is she now "hidden" from us more than are other saints? What means this singular appellation, which we apply to her specially? The answer to this question introduces us to a third reason for believing in the reunion of her sacred body to her soul, and its assumption into heaven soon after her death, instead of its lingering in the grave until the General Resurrection at the last day.

It is this:—if her body was not taken into heaven, where is it? how comes it that it is hidden from us? why do we not hear of her tomb as being here or there? why are not pilgrimages made to it? why are not relics producible of her, as of the saints in general? Is it not even a natural instinct which makes us reverent towards the places where our dead are buried? We bury our great men honourably. St. Peter speaks of the sepulchre of David as known in his day, though he had died many hundred years before. When our Lord's body was taken down from the Cross, He was placed in an honourable tomb. Such too had been the honour already paid to St. John Baptist, his tomb being spoken of by St. Mark as generally known. Christians from the earliest times went from other countries to Jerusalem to see the holy places. And, when the time of persecution was over, they paid still more attention to the bodies of the Saints, as of St. Stephen, St. Mark, St. Barnabas, St. Peter, St. Paul, and other Apostles and Martyrs. These were transported to great cities, and portions of them sent to this place or that. Thus, from the first to this day it has been a great feature and characteristic of the Church to be most tender and reverent towards the bodies of the Saints. Now, if there was anyone who more than all would be preciously taken care of, it would be our Lady. Why then do we hear nothing of the Blessed Virgin's body and its separate relics? Why is she thus the hidden Rose? Is it conceivable that they who had been so reverent and careful of the bodies of the Saints and Martyrs should neglect her—her who was the Queen of Martyrs and the Queen of Saints, who was the very Mother of our Lord? It is impossible. Why then is she thus the hidden Rose? Plainly because that sacred body is in heaven, not on earth.

Fr Ladaria Ordained Bishop

I was delighted to learn that one of my former professors, Luis Ladaria SJ, was appointed secretary of the CDF. This page carries the news story and a brief video of the occasion of his episcopal consecration.