Regensburg, Germany, Jul 2, 2019 / 05:35 pm (CNA).- Monsignor Michael Fuchs, vicar general of the Diocese of Regensburg, has published a reflection on the June 29 letter Pope Francis wrote to Catholics in Germany, in which the pope called for a focus on evangelization in the face of the “erosion” and “decline of the faith” in the country.
Numbers provided in brackets are by Mons. Fuchs and refer to the original letter. Translated by Anian Christoph Wimmer from the original German as published by CNA Deutsch.
Please find below the full text of Msgr. Fuchs’ reflection:
Pope Francis writes a letter to Catholics in Germany. He, who places so much value on the strength of the local Church and emphasizes subsidiarity and synodality, finds himself forced to step in, as both a shepherd and a father.
The result is a word of warning, and at the same time a word of encouragement. This is a serious intervention.
It comes before a backdrop of developments in the Catholic Church in Germany in recent years, and in particular the last few months, of various protest actions and letters, of the current plans for the so-called “synodal process” (cf. section 3 of the letter) and associated demands and expectations. Their direction and their vehemence must have pushed the Holy Father to this word.
Francis does not contest particular points or weigh in on minutiae. The crisis of the Church in Germany is a much more profound one, and therefore the letter also takes a more fundamental approach. In doing so, Pope Francis refers repeatedly to his address to the German bishops on occasion of their ad limina visit on 20 November 2015 (cf. the letter’s introductory words, for instance) and his letter wants to be read and understood on the basis of that address.
In both his ad limina address and the letter, the Pope – after having praised the great achievements in Germany – clearly identifies the symptoms of the current crisis: fewer Catholics attend Sunday Mass or go to confession. The very substance of the faith among many has evaporated, and the number of priests is decreasing. He assures us of his closeness and his support for our efforts to overcome this crisis and to find new ways to do so, and he wants to encourage us.
But then he identifies a number of tendencies in the German search for solutions that cause him great concern.
The Pope’s concern about a “dismemberment” of the Church
First of all, there is the concern that the church in Germany will sever ties with the universal Church and split off from the global (“Catholic”) community of the Faith – the letter describes this as a “dismemberment” of the Church.
Accordingly, Pope Francis calls for “journeying together with the whole Church” (3) and refers to the “communio [community] of all particular Churches in the universal Church” (Note 7). He points out that “especially in these times of strong fragmentation and polarization, it is necessary to ensure that the Sensus Ecclesiae is actually alive in every decision taken” and that “the particular Churches live and flourish within and out of the universal Church; if they were separated from the universal Church, they would weaken, perish and die. It is therefore a necessity always to stay in active and effective communion with the whole Body of the Church” (9), “knowing that we are an essential part of a greater Body” (ibid.).
The Pope further warns – with reference to a book by Pope Benedict XVI – against the “temptation of the promoters of Gnosticism” who “have always tried to say something new and different from what the Word of God has given them. (…) What is meant by this is the one who wants to be ahead, the advanced one, who pretends to go beyond the ‘ecclesial We'” (ibid.). The passage from the Second Letter to John (2 John 9) mentioned in the text is revealing here: “Any one who goes ahead, and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ, has not God”. The pope [adds] that there is “a temptation by the Father of Lies (…), who (…) ultimately dismembers the Body of the holy and faithful people of God” (10). In contrast to this Pope Francis presents and proposes a holistic vision of synodality.
Obviously the Holy Father has not been unaware that some of the demands of the initiators of the “synodal process” (as the “synodal way” is often also called) go beyond – or do not sufficiently take into account – the globally binding Catholic foundations of Faith. At the very least, [these demands] could jeopardize the common path and the comprehensive communion of the Church. The Pope’s choice of words is unusually clear here.
The warning of a “secularized mindset”
A second topic in the papal letter concerns the temptation to strive only for a “reform of structures, organizations and administration”, constituting “a kind of new Pelagianism” (5), of which Pope Francis had already warned the German bishops during their ad limina visit in 2015. Pelagianism, rejected by the Church in the fifth century, claimed that there was no need for salvation from sins through Christ, and that man was sufficiently strong and good by himself.
In 2015 the Pope in this context already pointed out the temptation of “putting our trust in administration, in the perfect apparatus”. In his letter Francis warns against “secularization and a secularized attitude of mind” (5). “May God free us from a secular Church under spiritual or pastoral drapery! This suffocating worldliness is healed by tasting the pure air of the Holy Spirit, who frees us from revolving around ourselves, concealed underneath a semblance of religiosity, above a godless void” (5). (Note 13)
Rather, a “theologal perspective” is what is required: “The Gospel of Grace (…) should be the beacon and guide. Whenever an ecclesial community has tried to get out of its problems by itself, (…) it ended up multiplying the evils it wanted to overcome” (6). “Without ‘faithfulness of the Church to her own vocation’, any new structure will perish within a short period of time”. (ibid.) Therefore the Church should not simply respond to “external facts and needs”, “isolated from the mystery of the Church” (ibid.).
Much of what has been happening in Germany in recent times probably looks to the Pope like the activist undertakings of a quasi-political association, a “pious non-governmental organization”, as he has often described it in other contexts. And indeed, some things uttered on behalf of the Church time and again appear to demand just that – without consideration of preconditions of Faith and in contradiction to freely receiving the faithful gift of becoming.
Tensions and imbalances instead of adaption
Pope Francis speaks in his letter several times of “tension” and “adaptation”. He warns of “adapting [the life of the Church] to the currently prevailing logic or to that of a particular group” (5), and of establishing an “order which then puts an end to the very tensions that are inherent in our humanity and which the Gospel seeks to provoke” (ibid.). “We must not forget that there are tensions and imbalances which have the taste of the Gospel, which must be maintained because they promise new life” (ibid.). Evangelization is “not a ‘retouching’ which adapts the Church to the spirit of the times but makes her lose her originality and her prophetic mission” (7). Rather, it is a matter of “recognizing the signs of the times, which is not synonymous with mere adaptation to the spirit of the times (cf. Rom 12:2)” (8).
Much of what was said before the synodal process is predicated on an anxious need to not lose touch with the world’s plurality and the intention of closing the gap between the Church and the reality of life. Pope Francis dismisses this argument decisively.
Reclaiming the primacy of evangelization
Instead, “it is necessary to regain the primacy of evangelization (…) because the Church, the bearer of evangelization, begins by evangelizing herself” (7). It should be “our main concern to encounter our brothers and sisters, especially those who can be found on the thresholds of our church doors, on the streets, in prisons, in hospitals, in public squares and cities. The Lord expressed himself clearly: ‘But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well’ (Mt 6:33)”. (8). “It is the holiness ‘from next door’ (…) that protects and has always guarded the Church against every ideological, pseudo-scientific and manipulative reduction.” (ibid.)
For this the Pope demands a basic attitude of “vigilance and conversion” (12), an “attitude of withdrawal” (ibid.), and he refers to “true spiritual remedies (prayer, penance and adoration)” (ibid.). Joy should be the defining factor: “Evangelization leads us to regain the joy of the Gospel, the joy of being Christians”. (7)
Have we abandoned the primacy of evangelization in Germany, and lost, through obstinacy and defiance, the joy of Faith? Pope Francis spells out clearly what he means by evangelization and encountering the poor, and he criticizes any reduction thereof to mere adaptations, administrative reforms, and tendencies to isolation. He thus calls us to think bigger, to step outside of our own homes and to spread the Good News in word and deed.
Do not downplay conflicts by way of polls
In his letter, the Pope does not comment on formal technical details of the synodal process (such as its regulation, voting rules, etc.), but the following words are thought provoking: “The synodal view does not remove contradictions or confusion, nor does it subordinate conflicts to decisions of ‘good consensus’ that compromise faith as a result of censuses or surveys on this or that subject.” Rather, it is about the “centrality of evangelization and the Sensus Ecclesiae as determining elements of our ecclesial DNA” (11).
Incidentally, Francis uses the term “Sensus Ecclesiae” five times in the letter, which he deploys in a universal sense, and he avoids the term “Sensus fidelium” which is theologically and ecclesiastically founded, but is sometimes misunderstood as “groupthink” or mere majority opinion.
A synodal togetherness and the Sensus Ecclesiae obviously mean more to Pope Francis than to suppress conflicts, so to speak, technically, by votes or by polls or relying on false compromises “which subvert the faith”.
Is the contents of the letter surprising?
Not for those who have followed the Pope’s statements on the topics that the synodal process is to work on and decide. And not for those who listen to the Pope on fundamental questions of renewal and evangelization.
On the ordination of women to the diaconate, he has repeatedly called for restraint, even after several studies: “I cannot make a sacramental decree without a theological, historical basis,” he replied to those who demanded it.
In 2016, on his return flight from Sweden, he was asked whether he could imagine the ordination of women to the priesthood. His answer was clear: he referred to his predecessor John Paul II, who had spoken the last word with his “No”. “And that remains.” In response to a question asked by the journalist, Pope Francis referred to the Petrine and Marian dimensions of the Church and briefly explained them.
Perhaps some still remember his various statements on the conditions for admission to the priesthood. He expressly excludes the dissolution of celibacy thus: “The sentence of Saint Paul VI comes to mind: ‘I would rather give my life than change the law of celibacy’. This occurred to me, and I would like to say it, because it is a courageous sentence, in a more difficult time than this one, in the years around 1968/70 … Personally, I think that celibacy is a gift for the Church. Secondly, I do not agree to allow optional celibacy, no. Only for the remotest places would some possibility remain…” (Return flight from Panama, 27.01.2019). For the Amazon region just such an exception is, as is public knowledge, in discussion.
In addition, the Holy Father has repeatedly called problematic the presence of homosexual men in seminaries, and affirmed a corresponding regulation of the competent Congregation, which has led to weeks of fierce debate in Germany.
The letter “Maschio e femmina li creó” (“As man and woman he created her”) on the gender question, which the Congregation for Catholic Education published recently, has so far also received predominantly public malice and criticism from the Church in Germany.
What does this mean for the “synodal process”?
Following this papal letter, simply “carrying on as planned” is no longer an option, neither in content nor in form. Actually, the letter urges a complete rewriting of the process, which should be directed towards evangelization and spiritual renewal and towards “the people on the margins”; a process which does not “do” or “adapt”, but relies on God who can renew and convert and give us the joy of the Gospel; and a process which in all concerns goes with the community of the Catholic Church, which encompasses time and space.
During our ad limina visit, Pope Francis told us to take to heart the following – and perhaps we could also summarize his letter in this way: “The renewal of structures demanded by pastoral conversion can only be understood in this light: as part of an effort to make them more mission-oriented, to make ordinary pastoral activity on every level more inclusive and open, to inspire in pastoral workers a constant desire to go forth and in this way to elicit a positive response from all those whom Jesus summons to friendship with himself (Evangelii gaudium, 27)”.
[…]
We read: “When we took that oath, we swore in regard to such teachings that we would ‘hold fast to’ the Church’s doctrine, ‘faithfully hand it on and explain it, and… avoid any teachings contrary to it.'”
Small matter, apparently, that the doctrine also contains the baked-in natural law–reasonably knowable even apart from revelation. And, about which, the Church is neither the “author” nor the “arbiter” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 95). The acrobat cardinals might parse their oath with exemptions, or even turn it on its head, butt natural “courage” can still tell the difference between our head and a hole in the ground, or wherever…
As Thomas More said to the perjuring Sir Richard, “Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world…But for Wales!” But for a synodal bubble!! And earlier to daughter Meg: “When a man takes an oath, Meg, he’s holding his own self in his own hands. Like water. And if he opens his fingers then–he needn’t hope to find himself again.”
When Pope Francis rejected Cardinal Marx’s recent resignation, could Marx have rejected the pope’s rejection? But, instead, Marx remains center stage standing erect on a rainbow banner, and his resume remains inflated with strategic membership on the kitchen cabinet C-7.
St. Peter, who probably doesn’t traffic in layered deceptions, will be really impressed.
Sadly, this priest’s request will fall on deaf ears.
Don’t count us out yet.
Cardinal Marx is obviously being blackmailed and playing a game in an attempt to not be “outed”…
‘Tis the pity and the scandal that Francis hasn’t written such a letter. Or excommunicated the purple dinosaur.
Hollerich and Marx have apostatized from the Catholic faith, and should therefore be removed from all offices they hold in the Church. End of story.
As Jesus said: “It would be better for [those men] if [they] had never been born.”
#1. I sent a note of thanks to Fr. Bochanski at Courage. I ask that others here do the same.
#2. To those bishops like Marx, Hollerich and those who recently met in secret in Chicago I say this: “And they were like shepherds without any sheep.”
I will do so Ed. Thank you for the great suggestion.
Absolutely true, but who in the Church has the spiritual integrity and moral authority to take that necessary step? I just hear crickets chirping.
We all go astray in one area or another. The church should be a place of cleansing and renewal. When God admonishes us not to do something, it is for our uppermost good.The church should not reflect the evils of the world, instead it should be a beacon of light.
A Spiritu sancto ordinatus, Fr Bochanski true to his allegiance to Jesus Christ in the tradition of the Apostles, takes to task those of superior rank, men invested with the office of defenders of the faith, Cardinals Marx, Hollerich who not only do not defend the faith, they repudiate it.
May a mere presbyter challenge, however submissively the greater in the Mystical Body’s chain off command. Instituted by Christ. We might ask can an Athanasius, Paul challenge the supreme pontiff? Yes. Though these possessed authority as defenders of the faith. What of presbyter Fr Thomas Weinandy OFM, Cap? Yes. Although he lacks Apostolic authority by ordination, he possesses by the laying of hands the priesthood of Christ in the tradition of the Apostles. He’s obliged to teach the truth, and repudiate it’s violation – wherever it occurs.
The question is why don’t more priests defend and witness to the faith on the key issues tearing faith in Catholicism apart? Partly cowardice, partly ignorance, and the most common factor ambiguity regards all and every aspect of Catholic doctrine from adultery, homosexuality, the permanence of sacramental marriage that found in the most paradigmatic document in the history of Catholicism Amoris Laetitia.
No one is exempt from challenge on faith and practice of Apostolic tradition. Nor is the supreme pontiff. What we find in Amoris is appeal to conscience and mitigating conditions that presumably absolve the person living in manifest adultery, or in irregular union [referencing adult homosexual relationships] that omits reference to grace, to sacramental reconciliation and repudiation of sin – based on sentiment driven discernment.
Priest both presbyter and bishop are disarmed, inwardly ambivalent. Compromised in conscience floating in a sea of ineffectual ministry like so much flotsam. Why we have laity crying out some evident in response to the article Things Worth Dying For. Why don’t priests address what really matters form the pulpit, especially the indoctrination of schoolchildren in diabolically inspired perverse sexual liceity? Moral cowardice has many forms, and today the most prevalent is fear that faithful witness to Christ will inevitably be painful.
Reasonably, however, is it not infinitely better to suffer in a limited time frame now than to suffer afterwards for eternity?
Isn’t it pathetic that a priest has to write a letter like this when Bergoglio, Marx, Hollerich, Scicluna Tobin, Cupich have all been silent and in fact have confirmed and encouraged active homosexuals? Get rid of the whole pack of these pseudo-Catholic Judas bishops, I say.
Some with the grace of God hear the cries of the sheep, the plaintive baa of the lambs. If we dare come close to the heart of Jesus Christ, even those of us the less worthy cannot but help hear. Whether in prayer or not it stays with you. We hear it visually at every Mass, we read it on the internet.
They graze impoverished vales ridden with poisonous weeds. We’re compelled to feed them the unvarnished, fragrant Word of life.
It was necessary for the Pontiff Francis to orchestrate the idolatry in Rome in 2019, to groom “the Church” into silently accepting the Church-sponsored violation of the 1st Commandment, so that when his “Psycho-Sexual-Synod” dismantles the God’s Sixth Commandment, “the Church” will also silently accept the Church’s outright rejection of the Christian sexual morality.
As St. Paul warned, the violations of the 1st and 6th Commandments go hand-in-hand, per his letter to the Romans, “Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man…. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves….Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural…and the men likewise…consumed with passion…committing shameless acts with men….” Do you not know that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?” (Rom 1:22-23, 26-27; 2:4)
To repentance…
Tacit.
#1. I sent a note of thanks to Fr. Bochanski at Courage. I ask that others here do the same.
#2. To those bishops like Marx, Hollerich and those who recently met in secret in Chicago I say this: “And they were like shepherds without any sheep.”
I took your advice and sent a thankful and encouraging letter to Father Bochanski. There are over 5000 Bishops in the world. If only half of them read this and can stir themselves into action, perhaps it might even awaken the Bishop of Rome.
I would appreciate a real debate w knowledge from scripture. I simply do not believe we cannot challenge teachings created by men given the history of politics influencing our teaching. But I love and respect the use of scripture to reinforce teaching. I found the letter mostly opinion. It would be more valuable if it actually taught
We are second-hand readers of a letter written to Cardinal Marx from Fr. Bochanski. Only Fr. Bochanski knows why he doesn’t quote Scripture. I would guess that Fr. Bochanski inferred that the cardinal’s position exposes him to requisite scripture. A priest’s study and job require that he pray and read scripture in his daily Divine Office and Mass Lectionary.
Are you Catholic? Catholics believe in scripture. They also believe in reason. Both reason and scripture are clear that homosexual behavior is neither ‘natural’ nor ‘good.’ Homosexual sex is sterile, so it breaks the first command God issued to his first man and woman: “Be fruitful and multiply.” Two men cannot propagate the species. The purpose of the rectum is to carry waste out of the body. The mouth, lips, and tongue are for eating, speaking and expressing emotion.
Are you familiar with these scripture verses?
1) Genesis 18:20-21 – “Then the Lord said, ‘The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.’”
2) Jude 1:7 – “Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”
3) St. Paul says more at 1 Corinthians 6:9-11.
Thank you for your comments. I wholeheartedly agree with you. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Addendum: Earlier I had only skimmed the OP. After fully reading, I have to add:
The basic idea of the letter was not to engage in debate for/against Church teaching. Membership in Christ’s Catholic Church calls each member to assent to her teaching. So it seems the basic theme of the letter is to call the cardinals is to recall, reconsider, and honor the fact and nature of the VOWS these men took at their ordination/consecration as men of God in His Church. There ought be no doubt or debate about keeping a sacred vow. NONE. Jesus commanded at Matthew 5:37 and elsewhere about our speech. We are not to bear false witness. We are to have no idols. Etc.
I think priests teaching that homosexuality is ok goes against the Christian faith. The photo of the priest on the rainbow rug made me sick to my stomach. Two people of the same sex laying together is not what they are taught. It’s not what we’ve been taught is right. It goes against scripture. It seems the devil is hard at work. In this case he’s winning. Why would the Church allow this? My deceased husband use to say he was a recovering Catholic. This is the type of thing that drove him away from the Catholic church.
May God richly bless Fr Bochanski and all those he works with and cares for ~