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)”.
[…]
So the guy who made a vow of chastity is chosen superior because he tells everyone with whom he prefers to have sex. Go figure.
He did not say or admit to engaging in sexual matters. But on the other hand, then why be so open (or even proud) about one’s inclination? I am sure you agree that we are not allowed to judge the soul or position of another because that person may not have been given the same opportunity as we, or may have been born into a difficult situation, raised improperly, traumatized, etc. But neither should the Church promote homosexuality or any sex outside of marriage in any way. ———- I don’t know? I have had it trying to reconcile it all, even worse, observing the USA and the West become so disengaged with God, turn into hedonists and narcissists who make fun of those who champion morality, family, and holiness. It cannot be much longer before severe judgments befall this planet.
Why be so open? He explained why.
This seems to be the same kind of intentional thing that one sees when some Catholics at “Who am I to judge?” and don’t read the context. Also, this is a CWR pickup from CNA. No telling if the whole piece is here. Many media just hit the main paragraphs and keep the rest blog-short.
“Immorality in the Church” – 1 CORINTHIANS 5:12-13 – “After all it is none of my business to judge outsiders. God will juge them. But should you not judge the members of your own fellowship? As the scripture says, “Remove the evil person from your group.” – Reference: Good News Bible GNT
Bravo.
“Immorality in the Church” – 1 CORINTHIANS 5:12-13 – “After all it is none of my business to judge outsiders. God will judge them. But should you not judge the members of your own fellowship? As the scripture says, “Remove the evil person from your group.” – Reference: Good News Bible GNT
Bravo, bravo.
Yes, this is a CWR ‘pickup’ from CNA. (But is that correct editorial lingo?) You are certainly not clever if you cannot tell if CWR has put the ‘whole piece’ here. You may be correct in saying, “Many media just hit the main paragraphs and keep the rest blog-short.” You are definitely not correct to suggest that CWR has here engaged in editing for context according to an ideology. Look at and judge yourself. Be ‘open.’ Good luck.
“No telling if the whole piece is here. Many media just hit the main paragraphs and keep the rest blog-short.”
CWR never shortens or edits CNA pieces, except for the occasional and obvious typological errors.
Yes, he explained why, but it still doesn’t make him fit to be a priest, much less a superior. Plus he’s in favor of women being ordained. What’s scary is he was probably their best choice.
Perhaps that is why he is in favour of redefining celibacy. Mind you most gay clergy consider the celibacy rule not applicable to them.
Always the Germans. Why?
The spirit of Luther and of Hitler? Roger Scruton, British philosopher, wrote an interesting work on guilt and mourning of Germany which it may need to purge or resolve. Without this purgation, worse and more horrid distortions of the common good may manifest. https://www.firstthings.com/article/2022/10/the-work-of-mourning
PSALM 137
v.1:By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
“If I am gay myself, then I want to show that I can also be part of the Church in this ministry. That’s important because it’s not supposed to be like that in the Church. Unfortunately, there is too much institutional hypocrisy in our Church,” he said.
Interpreting the above, he’s saying that homosexuals are not supposed to be in ordained ministry, but yet he in fact “can” be, and there’s “too much hypocrisy in our Church.” Well, that’s for sure, but his solution is to disfigure the Bride of Christ by redefining Her, because, as with most homosexuals, he’s a narcissist, and so embracing his perverse orientation is far more important to him than embracing his cross.
What Church do you belong to? “Perverse orientation?” There’s nothing perverse about Gods children who have SSA.
I suspect he’s not the only one in that bunch.
See also :
“Fall of Father Dr. Wolfgang Rothe alias ‘Whisky-Vicar’ (…And he fell, and his fall was great – Mt 7,27)”:
https://www.salon24.pl/u/edalward/1290891,the-fall-of-father-dr-wolfgang-rothe
or :
https://gloria.tv/post/LUpCzi9KybgA23DjcZtZGjKNw
… and also see this:
“Counterattack by the Brotherhood of the nine commandments”
https://gloria.tv/post/oTHdAs9PPYuW1LkoVTSwsfjJm
Thank you
I await with anticipatory mirth Peter Beaulieu’s reference to diaper material when his creative urge churns at Furman’s saying: “a big change is imminent, and I want and must shape it together with the brothers.”
As for me and my children, we will play in our new and enclosed sandbox.
Coming out of the hidden closet is passé today. Now they’re bursting out with gusto. “Unfortunately, there is too much institutional hypocrisy in our Church” (Fr Fuhrmann). It appears to indicate more than an attraction to men. If not, then he’s in my prayers to remain chaste. If active I’ll still pray that he converts.
Fr Fuhrmann is not so much the issue in the Catholic Church. Rather it’s the normalization taking place within the ranks. We need acknowledge that the atmosphere for this normalization began to accelerate since 2013. His Holiness and associates, some elevated to ranking positions, are in unison.
Laity are either complacently accepting or devastated. Priests including bishops don’t seem inclined to address it as an issue, most prefer to stick to the Gospels on Sunday. Insofar as the devastated laity they also need understand that this change is occurring informally, meaning that there are no formal, definitive pronouncements to the universal Church – instead they’re informal words, suggestions, either by word, appointments [Hollerich SJ, Card Grech, Fr Martin SJ, Card McElroy, Archbishop Fernandez, on and increasingly on], and restructuring of the Curia.
The trend is spiritually unhealthy. A disease that infiltrates the Mystical Body, symptoms effeminate passivity, lack of commitment to the Gospels. Antidote, reigniting the fire of divine love.
Thinking of St. Francis, our attention is immediately turned to his love for all animals, large and small.
About such animals, take, for example, the two giraffes featured in part of the movie “Gladiator.” Says the gladiator trader before demanding his money back for giraffes that won’t mate, “you sold me queer giraffes!”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRe_x5CECQg
Now, regarding the Synods, Father Fuhrmann sticks his own neck out, or whatever.
A misunderstood issue among the faithful are the differences in papal teaching, that is, degrees of a binding nature, and as stated in Lumen Gentium 25 requirement to observe with religious reverence. Strictly speaking, that doesn’t mean binding understood as that which must be believed such as the Deposit of Faith left by Christ in the Gospels and the tradition of the Apostles.
For example, Amoris Laetitia falls under the category of observing with reverence, although it is not a formal, binding doctrine. It’s also subject to interpretation. Whereas Humanae Vitae is considered as a binding doctrine on the conjugal act and contraception [Card Ratzinger who wrote the Doctrinal Commentary on Ratio et Fides for John Paul II expressed that opinion] because of its serious wording, its definitive nature, representative of a long history of doctrine within the Church.
Pope Francis’ teaching on the death penalty does not change traditional Catholic doctrine because it doesn’t definitively condemn, it simply says it’s inadmissible. That suggests its admissibility.
Homosexuality has been condemned as intrinsically evil throughout the Bible. When I spoke about ‘commitment to the Gospels’ in my previous comment here, I was referring to the full import of the Gospels and the teaching of the Apostles. Not simply passing over its content absent of an in depth elocution. That in depth articulation with reference to the outstanding issues of the day, abortion, homosexuality is what’s too often missing. Obviously then, we have to get back to preaching as did the Apostles.