Dear Friends of the Kolbe Center,
Christ is born! Glorify Him!
Nowadays it is widely asserted that defenders of the traditional Catholic doctrine of creation only accept Magisterial teachings that agree with their own views and reject more recent pronouncements that contradict earlier teachings. Since this accusation goes to the heart of the creation-evolution debate within the Catholic community, it is worth taking the time to examine it closely. What is really at issue here is whether an ambiguous or non-authoritative teaching of a Pope or Council on a matter of faith or morals trumps a more authoritative prior Magisterial teaching on the same matter. Fr. Chad Ripperger has written a penetrating reflection on this very question entitled “Conservative vs. Traditional Catholicism.” In his essay Fr. Ripperger observes that:
some ecclesial documents today do not have any connection to the positions held by the Magisterium prior to the Second Vatican Council. For example, in the document of Vatican II on ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, there is not a single mention of the two previous documents that deal with the ecumenical movement and other religions: Leo XIII’s Satis Cognitum and Pius XI’s Mortalium Animos. The approach to ecumenism and other religions in these documents is fundamentally different from the approach of the Vatican II document or Ut Unum Sint by Pope John Paul II. While the current Magisterium can change a teaching that falls under non-infallible ordinary magisterial teaching, nevertheless, when the Magisterium makes a judgment in these cases, it has an obligation due to the requirements of the moral virtue of prudence to show how the previous teaching was wrong or is now to be understood differently by discussing the two different teachings. However, this is not what has happened. The Magisterium since Vatican II often ignores previous documents which may appear to be in opposition to the current teaching, leaving the faithful to figure out how the two are compatible, such as in the cases of Mortalium Animos and Ut Unum Sint. This leads to confusion and infighting within the Church as well as the appearance of contradicting previous Church teaching without explanation or reasoned justification. Moreover, the problem is not just with respect to the Magisterium prior to Vatican II but even with the Magisterium since the Council.
The Husband Is the Head of the Family
For an example of the problem that Fr. Ripperger highlights here, consider a fundamental element of the Church’s traditional teaching on the roles of husband and wife in the family which is not explicitly affirmed in the 1994 Catechism—that is, the God-given role of the husband and father to be the spiritual head of his wife and children. This—the constant teaching of all the Fathers, Doctors, Popes, and Council Fathers in their authoritative teaching—was re-affirmed by Pope Pius XI in Casti connubii, the same encyclical that re-affirmed the Church's constant teaching on the evil of birth control. He wrote:
The submission of the wife neither ignores nor suppresses the liberty to which her dignity as a human person and her noble functions as wife, mother and companion give her the full right. It does not oblige her to yield indiscriminately to all the desires of her husband, which may be unreasonable or incompatible with her wifely dignity. Nor does it mean that she is on a level with persons who in law are called minors and who are ordinarily denied the unrestricted exercise of their rights on the ground of their immature judgment and inexperience. But it does forbid such abuse of freedom as would neglect the welfare of the family; it refuses, in this body which is the family, to allow the heart to be separated from the head, with great detriment to the body itself and even with risk of disaster. If the husband is the head of the domestic body, then the wife is its heart; and as the first holds the primacy of authority, so the second can and ought to claim the primacy of love (Casti connubii, 10).
In spite of the fact that this has been the constant authoritative teaching of the Church from the time of the Apostles until now, it is nowhere to be found in the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church. Moreover, when Pope St. John Paul II wrote that husbands and wives should practice "mutual submission" he did not explain how his exhortation could be reconciled with the constant teaching of the Church on the roles of husband and wife prior to his pontificate.
Mutual Submission in Marriage: An Orthodox Catholic Interpretation
Are the faithful to conclude that the traditional teaching on the spiritual headship of the husband and father has been abrogated, because it is not explicitly affirmed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Absolutely not! That has NEVER been the modus operandi of the Magisterium. On the contrary, the Church has always operated on the principle that her authoritative teaching on a doctrine of faith or morals must be upheld, unless and until a new definition of that doctrine is proclaimed at the same—or a higher—level of authority. Since no authoritative Magisterial teaching has ever abrogated the constant teaching of the Church on the God-given roles of husband and wife in the family, Catholics are obliged to uphold the traditional doctrine.
Moreover, we are obliged to ask the Magisterium to explain how the doctrine of “mutual submission” should be reconciled with the constant teaching of the Church on the roles of husband and wife in holy marriage, since we know that God cannot contradict Himself. It is actually not difficult to reconcile Pope St. John Paul II’s “mutual submission” with the traditional doctrine, but, sadly, very few contemporary theologians make the effort to do this. One way to reconcile the two is to recognize that a Catholic husband and father must submit himself to the spiritual and material needs—not wants!—of his wife and children, while his wife and children should submit to his authority in all things but sin. However, any interpretation of “mutual submission” that does not uphold the spiritual authority of Catholic husbands and fathers over their wives and children in everything but sin contradicts the constant authoritative teaching of the Church and must be false.
I think that it would be helpful for the reader to pause for a moment and reflect on the question, “Does the treatment of family roles contained in the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church and its silence on the spiritual headship of the Catholic husband and father abrogate the traditional teaching of the Church summarized in Casti connubii?” How one answers this question is crucial for any constructive discussion of the Church’s authoritative teaching on creation and evolution. On the one hand, the Catechism is an authoritative guide for bishops’ conferences to use in developing their own contemporary catechisms. On the other hand, the treatment of family relationships contained in the new Catechism leaves out an essential element of the subject that has been taught since the time of the Apostles and summarized in Casti connubii. When faced with a contradiction of this kind, should the faithful follow the more recent teaching because it necessarily reflects the guidance of the Holy Spirit? If so, does this mean that Catholic fathers are no longer the spiritual heads of their families? Or does the informed Catholic have an obligation to evaluate the more recent teaching in the light of the constant teaching—the “traditional doctrine”—of the Church?
Spiritual Fatherhood
All of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church recognized that Adam was created first—to show that man was appointed by God to be the spiritual head of his wife and family. This is why God revealed the commandment not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to Adam and not to Eve. Eve had to learn of the commandment indirectly through her husband. The traditional teaching on the special creation of Adam underscores the fact that God has given men the responsibility to be the spiritual leaders of their wives and families, and of society in general. Theistic evolution denies that there is anything special about the origin of man that points to his having a unique role as a spiritual leader. It is no coincidence, then, that Catholic families and communities are being devastated by the spiritual apathy and abdication of leadership by Catholic men, particularly on the part of husbands and fathers of families.
The creation of Adam before Eve so that he could serve as a priest to his wife and children and to the whole human family is also the foundation of the Church’s doctrine that only men can serve as ordained priests. Nowadays, in the face of mounting demands for the ordination of women, the common defense of a male-only priest is that Our Lord Jesus Christ only chose men to be His Apostles. But this argument hardly sounds convincing to men and women who are convinced that evolution is a fact and that Our Lord was merely adapting Himself to the culture of His time. For them, this argument is easily refuted by observing that we have evolved into a different situation where women can vote, work outside the home and even be chancellors of Catholic dioceses; therefore, the male-only priesthood should be regarded as outdated. The only argument that truly establishes the divine ordinance of the male-only priesthood is the one that sees in the Creation of Adam as the first priest the permanent pattern of the priesthood, and this is how the Fathers and Doctors of the Church viewed the matter, even if they did not see the need to make this explicit in most cases, since, until recently, no one questioned it.
The denial of the literal historical truth of the Genesis account of the creation of St. Adam and St. Eve has led directly to the destruction of fatherhood in the domestic church of the family but also in the priesthood. Again and again, bishops and priests who try to exercise their spiritual fatherhood are crushed by their own superiors. I have witnessed this phenomenon many times in my own life. One of the most gifted pastors I have ever known—a priest who took seriously his obligation to help every member of his parish, from the youngest to the oldest, to become a saint—spoke the truth in charity about the errors of Amoris Latitiae, was crushed by his own superiors in a traditional congregation, and condemned to internal exile without a parish assignment ever since. Every reader of this newsletter could probably cite a host of similar cases. As bishops and priests regain their faith in the special creation of Adam and in the literal historical truth of the whole sacred history of Genesis, we will see a revival of true spiritual fatherhood, both in the domestic church and in the larger ecclesial community.
St. Padre Pio: An Exemplary Spiritual Father
It is no coincidence that one of the greatest examples of spiritual fatherhood in the priesthood in modern times, St. Padre Pio, always held fast to the traditional reading of the sacred history of Genesis. As more and more Catholic theologians embraced the long ages of theistic evolution during his lifetime, Padre Pio proclaimed his faith in the Biblical chronology of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. This is reflected in his beautiful Christmas prayer:
Far into the night, at the coldest time of the year, in a chilly grotto, more suitable for a flock of beasts than for humans, the promised Messiah – Jesus – the savior of mankind, comes into the world in the fullness of time. There are none who clamor around him: only an ox and an ass lending their warmth to the newborn infant; with a humble woman, and a poor and tired man, in adoration beside him.
Nothing can be heard except the sobs and whimpers of the infant God. And by means of his crying and weeping he offers to the Divine justice the first ransom for our redemption. He had been expected for forty centuries; with longing sighs the ancient Fathers had implored his arrival. The sacred scriptures clearly prophesy the time and the place of his birth, and yet the world is silent and no one seems aware of great event. Only some shepherds, who had been busy watching over their sheep in the meadows, come to visit him. Heavenly visitors had alerted them to the wondrous event, inviting them to approach his cave.
So plentiful, O Christians, are the lessons that shine forth from the grotto of Bethlehem! Oh how our hearts should be on fire with love for the one who with such tenderness was made flesh for our sakes! Oh how we should burn with desire to lead the whole world to this lowly cave, refuge of the King of kings, greater than any worldly palace, because it is the throne and dwelling place of God! Let us ask this Divine child to clothe us with humility, because only by means of this virtue can we taste the fullness of this mystery of Divine tenderness (emphasis added).
As a spiritual father, St. Padre Pio was not content to see his penitents confess their sins without a firm purpose of amendment. Perhaps as many as one out of three of those who entered his confessional were thrown out without receiving absolution—because the Holy Ghost enlightened St. Padre Pio to see their lack of sorrow for their offenses and their lack of resolve to avoid the near occasions of sin. As one penitent recalled who was refused absolution for the same sin four times, it was only when she resolved to die rather than commit that sin again that Padre Pio immediately granted her absolution.
Become a Spiritual Child of St. Padre Pio
Before concluding this newsletter, I would like to remind all of our readers of a very special promise that St. Padre Pio made before his death to his American followers, and, by extension, to all of his followers throughout the world. As explained on Mary O’ Regan’s website “Mary’s Blog”:
Padre Pio showed himself to be very, very fond of Americans. While World War II was raging Pio passed on a message to his Americans followers, but by extension to all of his followers throughout the world. those who were alive then and those who were yet to live - through Joe Peluso. Joe was a soldier stationed in Italy fighting in the theater of war, far from his native Pennsylvania. He first heard about Pio from his mother who was home in America and wrote a letter to Joe urging him to look up the holy friar. When Joe asked the military chaplain about Pio's whereabouts, the chaplain chuckled and pointed to mountain behind their army base and said, "Padre Pio lives right on that mountain!"
Joe went to see Padre Pio and struck up a warm friendship with the friar. They spent much time in each other's company over the next ten months. Joe had the rare privilege of joining Pio for meals and observed Pio ate like a bird, pecking at his food like the dove in the arms of St Francis as opposed to shoveling food into his mouth. Revealing the great grace of his simplicity of life, Pio said to Joe, "I need very little of this world's goods. I need just a little bit of food, a little sleep and few possessions."
A day came when Joe looked at Pio and asked if he would be his spiritual father. Pio agreed. But Pio wanted Joe to be his emissary back home in America and make known his will and his desire to be the spiritual father of every American: "Joe, when the war is over and you return to the United States, tell the American people, that for those who would like me to be their spiritual father, my answer is yes. I accept all Americans as my spiritual children."
This is as true today as it was in Joe's day. Padre Pio is open to "all" of the American people becoming his spiritual sons and spiritual daughters. If you are American and reading this and would like to ask Pio to be your spiritual father you have a very great opportunity to have Pio as your spiritual father.
During the same conversation with Joe Peluso, Pio did add, "I only have two requirements - that they lead very good Catholic lives and that they regularly receive the sacraments. And please, tell them never to embarrass me in front of Jesus and Mary. You must tell them, Joe."
Prayer to Become a Spiritual Child of St. Padre Pio
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost:
Dear Padre Pio, I recall your promise to the Lord, “I will stand at the gates of heaven until I see all my spiritual children have entered.” Encouraged by your gracious promise, I ask you to accept me as your spiritual child. I will try my best to practice my Catholic faith wholeheartedly for the rest of my life. I will receive the Sacraments regularly, and I will try never to embarrass you in front of Jesus and Mary.
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
Through the prayers of the Mother of God, of St. Joseph, of St. Padre Pio and of all the Saints, may the Holy Ghost deliver us from all evil and error and lead us into all the Truth!
Hugh Owen
P.S. Today is a First Saturday. Please be sure to answer Our Lady’s appeal for the First Saturday devotions as described by the Fatima Center at this link.
P.P.S. According to St. Alphonsus Liguori in The Glories of Mary, “St. Denis the Carthusian relates, that on the festivals of the birth and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Mary descends into purgatory, by troops of angels, and releases many souls from their torments.” In this Christmas season, if you are living in the U.S. and you have not made a will and specifically requested Holy Masses (ideally Gregorian Masses) for the repose of your soul after death, please take advantage of the opportunity to make a will at no cost by using the template at this link: https://mycatholicwill.com/kolbecenter.
