News From the Oratory

SAINT FRANCIS DE SALES ORATORY EMAIL NEWSLETTER 2653 Ohio Avenue Saint Louis, Missouri 63118 www.institute-christ-king.org www.TraditionForTomorrow.com 314-771-3100

February 25, 2011 NEW GYMNASIUM ROOF – PILGRIMAGE WITH CARDINAL BURKE DIACONAL ORDINATIONS Dear Faithful and Friends of Saint Francis de Sales Oratory, NEW GYMNASIUM ROOF Last August, a visitor to the Summer at the Oratory event recounted the many happy memories he and his friends had spent playing basketball in the gym of SFDS as a child and as a student. As had other buildings on our church campus which served the community for many decades, the gymnasium had fallen into serious disrepair. After consulting with the Archbishop, we were able to obtain funding for the replacement of the roof from an endowment fund which had been set aside prior to the erection of the Oratory in 2005. The work to replace the roof began a few months ago, when Mr. Wally Feld sifted through a good number of bids from roofers to replace the entire roof, comprising of both sloped and flat portions. The actual work began Monday, February 14, with the removal of the old roof, and repairing some of the broken underlying 1x6 planks. The gymnasium is presently used on a regular basis by the KIPP charter school (and occasionally by our home school co-op and the candidates here at the rectory). After the repair of the roof we will be able to continue the restoration of the apartment in the building adjacent to the gymnasium: Canon Lenhardt, first rector of the Oratory, had planned on offering this apartment to a family or an individual interested in living “on campus” at St. Francis de Sales. As St. Francis de Sales continues to be a focal point of the community, it seems important and worthwhile to maintain the integrity of the whole campus, so that the church and all its buildings can again serve this neighborhood and all those who congregate here. We are very grateful for the generosity God Almighty shows towards us, visible in the assistance of the Most Reverend Archbishop and of all of you through your prayers and material support. For more information about ongoing restoration work on the campus of St. Francis de Sales Oratory, please consult TraditionForTomorrow and the blog on this site. PILGRIMAGE TO TREVISO AND PONTIFICAL MASS WITH CARDINAL BURKE In what has become an annual tradition for the Institute’s Seminary, the feast of St. Francis de Sales is celebrated with a pilgrimage to Treviso, Italy, where the heart of our holy patron is enshrined in the convent church of the Visitation Sisters. This year, Institute superiors, canons, seminarians and sisters made this pilgrimage, in the honored presence of His Eminence, Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. His Eminence celebrated a Solemn Pontifical Mass in honor of the Doctor of Divine Charity. The very gracious and hospitable Visitation Sisters assisted from their cloistered choir stalls. In the late afternoon, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament was celebrated, after which the holy relic was presented to the clergy, sisters, and faithful for pious veneration. This grace-filled pilgrimage was a very fitting preparation for the following day, when His Eminence, Cardinal Burke, was to ordain three Institute seminarians to the holy diaconate in the seminary chapel of Gricigliano. From Cardinal Burke’s sermon: "God has blessed us today the feast of St. Francis de Sales, on the occasion of this pilgrimage to the very place where the heart of this saint is venerated. For you, my sons of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, and my daughters, the Adorers of the Royal Heart of Jesus, this pilgrimage to venerate the heart of St. Francis de Sales is rich in graces for your obedient response to the inspirations of the Holy Ghost in your vocation. By your veneration of the heart of St. Francis de Sales and your prayers, by his intercession in this place dedicated to his name, you will receive a new inspiration and new strength to serve Christ, Master, Priest and King, in His Mystical Body, the Church. You will receive the grace to imitate St. Francis de Sales in the union of his heart with the Royal Heart of Jesus." DIACONAL ORDINATIONS In the International Seminary’s Chapel of the Immaculate Conception on Sunday, January 30, Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, ordained three men to the holy diaconate: two from France and one from Spain. One of the newly-ordained deacons will serve in the Institute’s growing apostolates in Ireland.   From Cardinal Burke’s sermon: "Receive the mystery of Faith with a love that is pure and single-hearted. Express in your actions the mystery of your life in Christ. Proclaim the mystery of Faith in all that you say and do, so that all those you meet may be drawn through the Immaculate Heart of Mary to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the only source of eternal salvation. Live every day in anticipation of your meeting with Our Lord on the last day, so that on that day, you may hear the words, “Well done, good and faithful servant; enter into the joy of thy Lord” (Mt. 25:21)." Canon Michael K. Wiener Rector, St. Francis de Sales Oratory

A Flock of Geese

Geese flying overhead, at Willmore Park, in Saint Louis.

Controversy Over Consequences

UNDOUBTABLY MOST of my readers are familiar with the current controversy raging in Catholic circles in the United States:

Did Live Action lie?
Is Deception Always Wrong? I'm Not Convinced
Building a Culture of Lie
Why Live Action did right and why we all should know that
Faustian Bargains
Augustine vs. the Priscillianists
In Defense of Live Action
Live Action president responds to controversy over group's tactics
Moral Theology? Bah! Humbug!
Justified Deception or Lying? The Case of Live Action v. Planned Parenthood
Is Lying Ever Right?
Catechism of the Catholic Church ¶2464

The controversy is so bad that old friends have become enemies and people are losing their faith over this. Satan laughs.

The argument is revolving around two basic thoughts:

1. Lying is sinful.
2. We have to do something about abortion. What Live Action did worked.

Some the arguments found in the links above — especially in the comments — tend to neglect the threefold nature of moral culpability:

• Objective moral law.
• Subjective mental state.
• Relative circumstance.

All three of these have to be taken into account when judging moral culpability: and we must be very much aware that we don't claim to know the ultimate culpability for any particular sinful act when it comes to God's judgement. However, a civil society requires that we must encourage morally right behavior and discourage or punish morally wrong behavior. There is no distinction between personal morality and public ethics, we simply disagree on what what is right and what is wrong; we distinguish the two only because we have a different morality than our social conditioners in the media, education, and government.

Many are arguing purely from the objective moral law. Lying is a sin, and the Saints, the Magisterium, moral theologians, sacred Tradition, and sacred Scripture all strongly agree. But neglecting the subjective and relative circumstances is legalism and is unjust. Jesus criticized the Pharisees for legalism. But Martin Luther coined the term ‘antinomian’ to describe those Protestant sects whom he accused of rejecting legalism to the point of recognizing no law at all. True virtue is found between legalism and antinomianism.

Others may only consider subjective factors, which is pure hedonism — if it feels good, do it. This can hardly be the foundation for a good society, for only the strong will thrive. More nuanced views will claim that someone ought to put off easy pleasures to gain greater pleasures, but then this brings up the problem of distinguishing greater and lesser desires: could this hierarchy of desire be somehow rooted in human nature, or something higher?

Relativism only takes circumstances into account. This is very fashionable because it appears to be tolerant, but again it isn't a basis for a good society because it fails to answer why some actions are better than another. Why not choose any action? If relativism is the only means of judging moral culpability, then why should society judge any action wrong? Were you there? How can you judge? But we know from history that moral relativists judge others extremely harshly, more than those who have the orthodox view of moral culpability.

Modern thinking rejects the objective component of moral culpability (usually for reasons of sexuality or greed), and tries to devise ethical systems based solely on subjective and relative factors. Situational Ethics, devised in the 1960s by the Episcopalian priest Joseph Fletcher (R.I.P.), ignored all moral law except supposedly agape love. Fletcher's system justified abortion, euthanasia, sterilization, eugenics, genetic engineering, and infanticide. Fletcher later became an atheist.

Proponents of these antinomian moral systems like to construct difficult moral dilemmas, where you have to decide on a course of action. Here is one of Fletcher's examples:

I dropped in on a patient at the hospital who explained that he only had a set time to live. The doctors could give him some pills (that would cost $40 every three days) that would keep him alive for the next three years, but if he didn't take the pills, he’d be dead within six months. Now he was insured for $100,000, double indemnity and that was all the insurance he had. But if he took the pills and lived past next October when the insurance was up for renewal, they were bound to refuse the renewal, and his insurance would be canceled. So he told me that he was thinking that if he didn't take the pills, then his family would get left with some security, and asked my advice on the situation.

We ought to be aware that the situation proposed is designed to force you to chose euthanasia. It is a simple extension from this conclusion to euthanasia as public policy. In fact, our options are not limited, nor can we predict the future with great accuracy, and situationism ignores or trivializes grace.

Another problem with antinomians is that they apply this morality only to themselves; everyone else will be forced to follow their laws without choice or conscientious objection — which is pure legalism. Please remember that evils are found in opposite pairs.

Here is another moral dilemma:

Former President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama have been kidnapped and are tied to the tracks in a railroad switching yard. A train is heading towards them. You can throw a switch one of two ways, so that only one of either President Bush or President Obama is run over, while saving the other; if you do nothing, both of them will be run over by the train. What do you do?

Undoubtably many people would love to throw the switch one way or the other — or chose to do nothing. But my advice is to not play the game at all — for this game is designed purely to reveal your partisan bias. If you do reveal a choice, please be very aware of what you are publicly advocating.

The intention of situational ethics is to make you to chose evil.

Likewise in the Live Action controversy (seen in the links above) people have constructed moral dilemmas regarding lying, and why it might be justified in some situations. For example:

It is World War II and you are hiding Jews in your attic. The Gestapo knocks on your door and asks you if any Jews are in your home. If the Gestapo finds them, they will be certainly murdered. But lying is a sin, so you cannot lie to the Gestapo; moral theology says you cannot sin to prevent sin. So in defense of the truth, do you honestly reply to the Gestapo, even though your Jews will be murdered?

This is a classic situational ethics dilemma, and from this dilemma come charges of Pharisaism, legalism, and even disbelief — some refuse to believe in a God that would prefer a person not to lie than to save innocent lives. Controversialists are jumping through hoops attempting to nuance what is a lie and what is not, while others are saying that it doesn't matter at all — the ends justify the means.

But it isn't World War II. There is no Gestapo. Although the Jews will remain a target of destruction by Satan and his minions until the end of the age, this scenario will never happen in precisely this way. We can discuss moral culpability from the comfort of our homes or offices, but can we predict with certainty what we would do under extreme circumstances? Who has the right to determine morality from an artificial situation like this? If you believe that the ends justify the means, why is it that some ends are preferable over some means? Doesn't this require an objective factor in moral culpability? Aren't the means ends in themselves?

The answer to this controversy is to understand what the objective moral law is about. Lying is a sin, one of many sins. It is a person's responsibility to avoid sin every day, even in ordinary situations. Do you habitually lie to your family, friends, superiors, subordinates, or to the strangers you meet every day? Or do you make truthfulness a part of yourself? Do you lie when you can get away with it, and are truthful if you will be found out? Do you lie in trivial situations, while you pretend that you will be truthful in important situations? Are you plainspoken, or are you always trying to find nuanced ways to tell untruth so that you don't feel guilt about it? Or do you hold to a philosophy that there is no truth so that you can lie with impunity?

Constant daily practice of upholding the truth makes you a more truthful person. Daily practice of the virtues will make you a more virtuous person. Forget about hypothetical situations. Be truthful and moral NOW (yes, I am preaching to myself here). If a modern-day Gestapo comes knocking on your door, then, and only then will you know what to do, with God's grace.

"Where Have All the Good (Wo)Men Gone?"

SEE THE ARTICLE Where Have All the Good (Wo)Men Gone? by Jennifer Fulwiler, which quotes the article Where Have The Good Men Gone? by Kay S. Hymowitz.

Social Justice is not just a catchphrase for those who want to pursue liberal issues. It in fact derives from Catholic teaching greatly developed in the 19^th and is de fide. The situation described in the articles above is very much a social justice issue. Unfortunately, the division between the sexes is presented as class conflict of the marxist kind: instead of partners, men and women are seen as competitors.

Upon This Rock I Will Build My Church

ACCORDING TO ancient tradition, on February 22^nd Our Lord granted Saint Peter leadership of His Church on earth, symbolically represented with keys in this stained glass window:



At Saint Joseph Church, in Louisiana, Missouri.