Pope Francis meets with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the Vatican on May 29, 2017. / © L’Osservatore Romano.
Rome Newsroom, Jul 23, 2022 / 08:15 am (CNA).
The 37th Apostolic Journey of Pope Francis, which will take him to Canada from July 24-30, is a “penitential pilgrimage”: The Holy Father will “meet and embrace the indigenous peoples”, and he will apologize for the role of the Church in a system guilty of deadly neglect, suffering and abuse.
In doing so, the pope may also set in motion another process of healing and reconciliation: a normalization of the Holy See’s relationship with the government of Canada.
A key moment, preparing the portentous papal pilgrimage to Canada, took place in the Vatican on May 29, 2017.
On that day, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau extended an invitation to Pope Francis to visit the country, during which time he could bring the Church’s apology for harm done to indigenous people in the mid-19th through 20th centuries.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which ran from 2008-2015, concluded that thousands of children died whilst attending “Indian Residential Schools”, and called for action on 94 points.
Of these, four were directed at the Church. The were published in the section “Church apologies and reconciliation”.
In it, the commission called on Pope Francis “to issue an apology to Survivors, their families, and communities for the Roman Catholic Church’s role in the spiritual, cultural, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children in Catholic-run residential schools.”
The commission worked out its suggestions for healing and reconciliation by drawing on voluminous reports about the legacy of the residential schools system. Assessing these, including the question of responsibilities in what was perpetrated in those schools, turned out to be far more complex than many expected.
A government program run by Christian churches
The “Indian residential schools” system was a network of boarding schools created by the Canadian federal government in the 19th century. It was mainly supported by government funds and supervised by government officials
The system existed from 1833 to 1996, when the last of these schools was closed. The schools were run by several Christian denominations, including some Catholic dioceses and religious communities.
These schools did not simply provide education to children of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples. In reality, they served to provide a program of assimilation, carried out against a population often mistakenly perceived as an “obstacle” to the nation’s “progress”.
The Canadian Bishops’ Conference explained on its website that this system had a burdensome human cost: “While many alumni and school staff have spoken positively about their experiences in some schools, many others today say of much more painful memories and legacies, such as the prohibition of Aboriginal languages and cultural practices, as well as cases of emotional abuse, physical and even sexual. “
The involvement of the Catholic Church
About 16 out of 70 Canadian dioceses have been associated with residential schools, in addition to about forty of a hundred or so religious communities in Canada.
The Canadian Bishops’ Conference acknowledged in a November 1993 brief for the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People that “the various types of abuse experienced in some residential schools have led us to a profound examination of conscience in the Church.”
Since the 1990s, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Canada and orders such as the Jesuits offered apology statements such as this one on the bishops’ official website.
The response also included the establishment of a $30 million national pledge made by Canadian Bishops in September 2021.
Similarly, the Holy See has increasingly come to terms with this chapter of the Church’s history in Canada.
Pope John Paul II visited in 1984 and 1987. On both occasions, he met indigenous people, exalting their culture and the renewal brought to them by Christianity.
Benedict XVI met with Phil Fontaine, Great Chief of the Assembly of the First Nations of Canada, at the end of the general audience on Apr. 29, 2009.
He “recalled that since the earliest days of her presence in Canada, the Church, particularly through her missionary personnel, has closely accompanied the indigenous peoples.” Referring to residential schools, Benedict XVI expressed “his sorrow at the anguish caused by the deplorable conduct of some members of the Church, and he offered his sympathy and prayerful solidarity.”
An early whistleblower and a recent warning
At the turn of the 20th century, Peter Henderson Bryce, a public health official and physician, was the first to report about unsanitary conditions in residential schools in Canada. He gathered all the information he could and then, in 1907, published his findings — according to which about a quarter of the indigenous children in residential schools had died of tuberculosis.
Bryce also pointed to the wider question of discrimination, noting that health funds for average citizens of Ottawa were about three times higher than those for First Nations peoples.
Government policies, in other words, had caused the deaths of many indigenous children.
Following attempts by government officials to silence him, Bryce published, at his expense, a small booklet on the issue, titled The Story of a National Crime.
Writing about “myth versus evidence”, Mark DeWolf noted in a 2018 essay — published by public policy think tank FCPP — that “cultural repression, abuse of all kinds, forceful incarceration and even avoidable deaths did happen, and a system that should have done much more to avoid these things should be justly condemned.”
He concluded that the residential schools system was bad and “a deeply flawed attempt to accomplish two main objectives: to give native children education and training that would help them survive economically and socially in a white man’s world, and to eradicate those aspects of native culture that would hold them back from achieving those goals.”
At the same time, pointing to low attendance numbers and other aspects of the system, DeWolf warned of making the residential schools “a scapegoat for 200 years of land appropriation, cultural invasion, deprivation, marginalization, and demoralization.”
Otherwise, little would be done to stop and reverse bad policies and practices today.
This point is pertinent, irrespective of whether one agrees with DeWolf otherwise: A 2019 Canadian Human Rights Court ruling established that between 2006 and 2017, the government had removed between 40,000 to 80,000 indigenous children from their families and deprived them of social services. In addition, the ruling sentenced Canada to pay $40,000 to each victim for discriminatory conduct. The government appealed the ruling, without success.
To further add to the complexity, critics have raised questions about irresponsible media reporting when the discovery of what was first described as unmarked graves on the grounds of the former Kamloops Indian Residential made international news.
On June 24, 2021, it was first announced that 751 unmarked graves had been discovered at the site of a former school. Leaders emphasized that the discovery was of unmarked graves, and not a “mass grave site.”
Nonetheless, following the news, some Catholic churches in Canada were vandalized or found ablaze.
A gesture with consequences – and an open question
Pope Francis decided to apologize for the Catholic Church’s role and assume responsibility, neither commenting on the issue of sometimes questionable media coverage, nor pursuing the question of just how responsible the Church was within the wider historical context.
In short, this visit is a great act of goodwill by the pope, and one that intends to heal and reconcile.
This may also apply to relations between Canada and the Holy See, as these have been strained for a while. The issue of the “Indian residential schools” system was likely one of the reasons.
Currently, Canada has not formally appointed an ambassador to the Holy See. There is a chargée d’Affaires, Paul Gibbard. He took the position in the year 2021, after three years of vacancy. The last Canadian ambassador to the Holy See was Dennis Savoie, who was in office from 2014 to 2018.
This Papal trip might help to somewhat normalize relations, and the position of Gibbard might be upgraded to that of an ambassador. However, after the visit, the full reality and extent of the residential schools system still needs to be fully brought to light — and not just with a view to the role of the Church.
[…]
From the back bleachers, yours truly humbly proposes that “a balanced synthesis between the laws of God and the dynamics of man’s conscience and freedom” respects the immutable and inviolable moral absolutes against intrinsically evil acts, as elaborated in “Veritatis Splendor,” combined with exercise of the moral virtues for matters which are not absolute.
Two points:
FIRST, with regard to such moral absolutes along with God’s infinite mercy, “…the commandment of love of God and neighbor does not have in its dynamic any higher limit, BUT (Caps added) it does have a lower limit, beneath which the commandment is broken” (n. 52).
SECOND, regarding other and more problematic matters, still governed still by the moral virtues (courage, temperance, justice and especially prudential judgment), and mostly the responsibility of those directly accountable for the common good, we can turn to the Catholic Social Teaching as synthesized, already, in “The Compendium” (2004). And, which might be organized to better effect into, first, the always central “transcendent dignity of the human person” and then, second, the following binaries:
(1) Solidarity & Subsidiarity, always together; (2) Dignity of the human Person & Family; (3) Rights & Responsibilities; (4) well-formed Conscience & faithful Citizenship; (5) Option for the Poor & the dignity of Work; (6) Personal Property & intergenerational care for God’s Creation.
SUMMARY: Town hall “synodality” is not enough, and Cardinal Fernandez (Fiducia Supplicans) is too much.
A balanced synthesis . . ? Hopefully an error in translation of the Pope’s words.
Isn’t this universe, world, & our human species (according to The New Testament witness) subject to the Stoikheia – that is the tenant Principalities, Powers, Dominions, Rulers, Authorities, Governments, & Thrones that reject GOD’s authority, self-identifying as “a whole host of evil in high places”.
Aren’t The Church’s many problems caused by melding with these intrinsic evils?
Isn’t the Christ-given work of The Church to confront ‘the ways of the world & its prince’ with our Holy Spirit-anointed radical obedience to & our persevering proclamation of GOD’s holy commandments; whilst not counting the cost . . ?
Now, that’s a challenge young Catholics will respond to – if given half a chance!
“Be calm but vigilant, because your enemy the devil is prowling round like a roaring lion, looking for someone to eat.”
“Think of the love that The FATHER has lavished on us, by letting us be called GOD’s children; and that is what we
A balanced synthesis . . ? Hopefully an error in translation of the Pope’s words.
Isn’t this universe, world, & our human species (according to The New Testament witness) subject to the Stoikheia – that is the tenant Principalities, Powers, Dominions, Rulers, Authorities, Governments, & Thrones that reject GOD’s authority, self-identifying as “a whole host of evil in high places”.
Aren’t The Church’s many problems caused by melding with these intrinsic evils?
Isn’t the Christ-given work of The Church to confront ‘the ways of the world & its prince’ with our Holy Spirit-anointed radical obedience to & our persevering proclamation of GOD’s holy commandments; whilst not counting the cost . . ?
Now, that’s a challenge young Catholics will respond to – if given half a chance!
“Be calm but vigilant, because your enemy the devil is prowling round like a roaring lion, looking for someone to eat.”
“Think of the love that The FATHER has lavished on us, by letting us be called GOD’s children; and that is what we are. Because the world refused to acknowledge Him, therefore it does not acknowledge us.”
“No created thing can hide from Him; everything is uncovered & open to the eyes of The One who to whom we must give an account of ourselves.”
“A balanced synthesis?”
About a year ago a friend thought to balance my bookshelf by unloading seven volumes of the complete works of St. Alphonsus de Liguori (1926!), lifted many years ago from a real pastor who passed away in 1988. I need to spend some time with this…
Thinking about “God’s mercy” and turning almost randomly to Part I of “The Way of Salvation and of Perfection,” we find many dozens of Meditations, including VIII: “The abuse of God’s Mercy”:
The reader is counseled to avoid both despair and presumption [….]. Second, “God is merciful, but he is also just [….]. Then third, “God is not mocked [….] The hope of those who commit sin because God is forgiving, is an abomination in his sight: their hope, says the holy Job, is an abomination [much in italics].”
Any “synthesis” conforming to “the spirit of St. Alphonsus Maria de’ Liguori” will be a daunting and sobering task, given the 3,000 pages of unambiguous fine print such as this.
SUMMARY: Not much here on “time is greater than space.”
A presumption there is a synthesis. If we’re addressing Hegel’s thesis antithesis synthesis it’s argued that Hegel does not give evidence of using the formula in any of his works (see Leonard F Wheat in Undiscovered Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis Dialectics).
Intelligence in Man is not distinguished by level rather by kind. Among animal species only man can make the following comparative distinctions: 1. universal and particular 2. one and many 3. union and separation 4. essence and existence 5. divine and human 6. inner and outer 7. in itself and for itself 8. potential and actual 9. unconscious and conscious 10. artificial [man-made] and natural 11. God and man. 12. Father and Son Jesus (Wheat).
The proposition of synthesis poses a presumption these appositional parings can be synthesized. Except for the Father and Son Jesus. If we take a moral principle [principle here replaces absolute] can we modify it to satisfy its opposite and retain a morally acceptable compromise? For example communion for divorced and remarried. If using Amoris Laetitia as a guide can we retain the precept Adultery and allow communion – even if based on mitigating circumstances? Is that not accommodation rather than synthesis?
It seems Pope Leo’s premise “balanced synthesis’ between God’s law, human freedom” cannot satisfy both principle/precept and freedom. A solution is found when it’s shown as given the example of Alphonsus Ligouri that a famished man secretly taking fruit from someone’s orchard is not stealing because life or death presents a right. Whereas taking another man’s wife for sensual fulfillment presents an evil. The natural law that undergirds our conscience tells us that.
Leo XIV has made a terrible decision to open up doctrinal moral principles for discussion in reaching a synthesis with human freedom – in a regional Bogotá setting attended by a cadre of Redemptorist lecturers, professors from Columbia, a handful from elsewhere – with immense repercussions [particularly doctrinal fragmentation] for the universal Church.
Leo, a canon lawyer, must be aware that what occurs regionally by a group of unknowns [despite the heady title International Congress of Theologians] with his papal sanction will be taken elsewhere as the rule or at least the option, and for other such regional discussion of doctrine.
Hegel, when addressing thesis antithesis synthesis, theorized these dynamics in reference to the history of nations and cultures. Not to definitive moral principles.
These secular philosophers also know their ruminations including dialectics are taken as rules and options for other things beyond the initial application.
Becoming popularized or well spread it takes on bulk or immenseness sometimes personalized or “authored” and in general through “autonomous” anonymity.
Thanks, dear Fr Dr Peter Morello for illuminating what appears to be yet another crafty scheme to deceive & manipulate The Church towards blatant denial of GOD’s strict but benevolent instructions, that enable us to live a life of Grace.
Ps 118 “How shall we remain sinless? By obeying Your Word.”
“I have sought You with all my heart: let me not stray from Your commands”
“I treasure Your promise in my heart, lest I sin against You.”
“Blessed are You, O LORD, teach me Your statutes.”
Not to dismiss your analysis–which applies especially to the past twelve years–my proposition is that a synthesis of the Hegelian vintage is not possible if attempted within the spirit of St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori. Which is why I used the terms “daunting and sobering.”
Thomists celebrate Aquinas’ “synthesis” of Faith and Reason, and this direction is clearly not Hegelian. With you, I would prefer if Leo XIV had used the better term “coherence” instead of synthesis, which was preferred by Benedict XVI.
A Hegelian outcome would/will (?) be out of step with Liguori. That’s my point–a not-entirely-subtle invitation for theologians to consider that what the magisterium upholds about God and human freedom is not “rigid, bigoted, fixistic and backwardist.”
Agreed.
Although Peter, Faith and Reason cohesive by nature [as God ordained] are not two opposing premises. God’s Law and human freedom are opposed. Unless we attribute freedom to following God’s Law. Which is not a true synthesis. The phrasing by Leo XIV means freedom from God’s Law.
Although Peter, Faith and Reason cohesive by nature [as God ordained] are not two opposing premises. God’s Law and human freedom are opposed. Unless we attribute freedom to following God’s Law. Which is not a true synthesis. The phrasing by Leo XIV means freedom from God’s Law.
Faith is a gift. Reason a natural faculty. Neither are opposed although differ, both compliment the other.
“God’s Law and human freedom are opposed”?
“It follows that the authority of the Church, when she pronounces on moral questions, in no way undermines the freedom of conscience of Christians. This is so not only because freedom of conscience is never freedom ‘from’ the truth [!] but always and only freedom ‘in’ the truth [!], but also because the Magisterium does not bring to the Christian conscience truths which are extraneous to it; rather it brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith” (St. John Paul II, “Veritatis Splendor,” 1993, n. 64).
“God’s Law and human freedom are opposed. Unless we attribute freedom to following God’s Law”.
By ordained nature the will is not opposed to God’s law. By tendency due to original sin it is opposed.
Jesus Christ is the balance between the laws of God and the dynamics of man’s conscience and freedom.
“It brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith” (St. John Paul II, “Veritatis Splendor,” 1993, n. 64).
John Paul is not precise in this diagram in reference to the natural law within, that prescient knowledge that all men possess realized in the act of apprehension of good from evil. ‘We do not require grace to apprehend this law within’, which law is a reflection of the divine law. That is why all men are subject to judgment if they commit intrinsically evil sin. It is this natural law that undergirds conscience. Insofar as freedom it belongs to the will. Which is why Aquinas holds, evil is in the will.
Faith enlightens the intellect regarding natural law and strengthens the will to observe the law. Whereas revealed knowledge of heroic virtue required for salvation are not found by reason, rather they are gifts of the Holy Spirit, knowledge of which and adherence by grace surpass Man’s natural capacity.
A correction to “John Paul is not precise in this diagram”. John Paul is likely focused on the baptized who are certainly recipients of grace at baptism, and other non baptized to whom God wishes to confer grace – all of whom would be subject “to [the] light [of] truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith”.
“Balanced synthesis”? The corruptions going on in liturgy said to be according to VATICAN II the pastoral Council, are not pastoral.
At least, this sounds properly Papal –
‘The interview appears in the Spanish-language book “León XIV: ciudadano del mundo, misionero del siglo XXI” (“Leo XIV: Citizen of the World, Missionary of the XXI Century”), a biography by Crux correspondent Elise Ann Allen, published on Sept. 18 in Spanish by Penguin Peru. English and Portuguese editions are expected in 2026.
In the book, Pope Leo, a longtime missionary in Peru before he was pope, underlines that the Church’s primary mission remains spiritual, not political.
“My role is announcing the good news, preaching the Gospel,” he said. “I don’t see my primary role as trying to be the solver of the world’s problems. I don’t see my role as that at all, really, although I think that the Church has a voice, a message that needs to continue to be preached, to be spoken and spoken loudly.”’