Brief News from here and there

In a declaration published on 7^th of March, 2002, the Assembly of the Bishops of Quebec (AEQ) have come to a decision contrary to that of the Pope regarding the rights of adoption of homosexual “couples”. This declaration was motivated by a decree of the provincial government of Quebec permitting the homosexual “couples” to engage in a civil union, and granting to this union the same rights as that of married couples (hence, the right of adoption). The bishops of Quebec affirmed that the term “marriage” must be reserved to a union between a man and a woman, but they did not condemn the idea of permitting a civil union for the homosexuals. What is more, this declaration leaves open the possibility of adoption by this kind of “couple”, arguing that one must consider the good of the child himself, because “when one of the partners is the biological parent, it’s possible that adoption constitutes the best solution.” (Source: Catholic News Service)

This position is in flagrant contradiction with the words of Pope John Paul II in his discourse to the participants of the 14^th plenary assembly of the Pontifical Council for the Family, of June 4^th, 1999, when he said: “Moreover, when the ‘common law relationships’ demand the right to adoption, they clearly show that they ignore the superior good of the child and the basic conditions which are due to him for an adequate formation. Furthermore, the ‘same-gender spouse relationships’ between homosexuals constitutes a deplorable distortion of that which should be a communion of love and of life between a man and a woman, in a reciprocal gift, open to life.”

“Today, in particular in the nations which are richer on the economic level, is diffused, on the one hand, the fear of being a parent, and then also, the ignorance of the right that the children have of being conceived in the context of a totally human gift, an indispensable presupposition for their serene and harmonious growth.

“It is in this manner that a so-called right to the fatherhood-motherhood is maintained at all costs, by which one searches for this realisation through intermediaries of a technical nature, that comprise a series of illegal manipulations on the moral scale.

“Another characteristic of the social context in which we live is the disposition of numerous parents to renounce their role and to take on that of being just a friend to their children, abstaining from recalling them to order and from correcting them, even when this be necessary to educate them in the truth, with of course all the love and tenderness possible. It is therefore appropriate to emphasise that the education of the children is a sacred duty and a solidarity task of the parents, be it from the father or the mother: it requires warmth, proximity, dialogue, example. The parents are called to represent in the domestic home the good Father in heaven, the unique, perfect Model from which we should be inspired”.

Tuesday, March 5^th, 2002 was a great day in Argentina. The constitutional Court has, in reality, decreed that the famous “morning-after pill” cannot be fabricated, distributed or sold in Argentina, because of its abortive effect, which consists in a violation of its constitution. This (constitution) protects the human life from the instant of conception.

Let us remember that Argentina has kept full liberty in the realm of life in comparison with the monstrous globalist who would impose the “culture of death” urbi et orbi. Abortion is still forbidden there. After this country dissociated itself financially from the American dollar, it hereby took another step in the direction of true liberty.

Argentina had been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on November 30, 1969 at the sanctuary of Our Lady of Lujan. We hope that this country will be able to resist the international pressure.

On the 20th of July, 2001, the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity promulgated a memorandum of criteria for admission into holy Eucharist between the Chaldean Church and the Eastern Assyrian Church (schismatic).¹ This text dealing directly with inter-communion makes mention of a decision concerning the anaphora² of Addai and Mari. "The Anaphora of Addai and Mari is remarkable for the fact that, since time immemorial, it has been used without the recital of the institution³. Knowing that the Catholic Church considers the words of the eurcharistic consecration as an integral and therefore indispensable part of the anaphora, (canon) or eucharistic prayer, it has conducted a long in depth study on the anaphora Addai and Mari from a historical, liturgical and theological point of view. At the end of which, on the 17th of January, 2001, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith arrived at the conclusion that this anaphora could be considered valid. His Holiness John Paul II approved this decision."

Then follows an enumeration of the reasons which motivated this decision. They are of an historical and non-theological nature.

The consequences of this decision are very weighty for it completely overthrows the sacramental theology ratified by the Council of Trent. For a sacrament to be valid three elements are necessary: the matter, the form, and the intention of the priest to do what the Church intends. Well, here the form (the words of consecration) is lacking. They justify it be asserting that "the words of the institution of the Eucharist are in fact present in the anaphora of Addai and Mari, not in the form of a coherent narration and in a literal way but in a eucological and disseminated manner, that is to say they are integrated in the prayers of thanksgiving, praise and intercession which follow". This explanation is not good enough; on the contrary- and we will see it later, it justifies the acceptance of a theology other than that of the Catholic Church.

In so far as one calls forth historical arguments, as the Roman document does, one wonders how one can explain the absence of the words of consecration in this anaphora. The origin of it is very probably in the secret of the hidden mystery, this law of secrecy which, in the first centuries of the Church, required to keep the sacred realities hidden from profane eyes. Before the schism of the Eastern Assyrian Church, these words were actually pronounced, even if they were not written; after the schism it ceased to be done.

However, it would seem that there are other reasons. Certain modernists do not deny themselves the use of this precedent in view of radical modifications concerning theology and the action of the sacraments, wishing thus to make an end of medieval theology and its miracle- working words.

1 . The English original text of this document wasn’t published in the Osservatore Romano until October 26, 2001, and in the Documentation catholique until March 3, 2002.

2 . Anaphora is a Greek term designating in the Orient what we call in the Roman liturgy the Canon of the Mass.

The general arrangement of the Anaphora is usually the following: Preface, Sanctus, post-Sanctus, recital of the Institution (normally with the words of Consecration), anamnesis (Unde et memores), epiclesis, and great intercession (Memento of the living and of the dead). This last prayer can sometimes be put in another place.

3 . Consequently, without the sacramental form, i.e. the words of consecration.