Matter of Inconsistency

The Vatican recently confirmed that Fr. Vasyl Kovpak of the Ukranian Greek Catholic Church has been excommunicated for schism. He was a Lefebvrist ,a movement of those who don’t accept some of the teachings of the Vatican II Council. This movement was named for Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who consecrated four bishops years ago without permission of the Vatican with the idea of preserving what he believed was purity of Catholic doctrine. What gives one pause is that while this man is excommunicated for insubordination while not rejecting a single point of doctrine The Pope has dinner with Hans Kung , a man who rejects Catholic teachings, and is still allowed to full communion in the Church.

Not a Mere Traditionalist Rant

Now, I am not a traditionalist, at least not yet. As of now I have not found in the documents of Vatican II any break with traditional Catholic doctrine . To be honest, some of the things traditionalists say concern me. Having said this they do raise some issues that need addressing. This issue quite frankly puzzles me.

Main Question


My question is, why was this priest excommunicated when he did not deny any doctrine but was charged only with a disciplinary infraction while an out and out pagan like Hans Kung is still allowed to function as a priest in the Church? This seems to me to be grossly inconsistent. What message is this sending to the faithful? Is it okay to trample on Church teachings ? Is it a worse sin to be insubordinate to the hierarchy than to subvert Catholic Truth? I personally do not think for one minute that Pope Benedict embraces syncretism or some universal Church that Catholicism and other religions will assimulate into. I have read too much of his writings to believe that. So what gives?

No Presumption Intended

Now , it is beyond my pay grade to demand excommunication. I am only a simple layman. Far be it from me to be overly critical of a man that has forgotten more about theology than I will ever know. But is it asking too much to have clarification of this issue? Is it wrong to wish that a stronger stand were taken against Kung so that much of the speculation will cease and that the faithful can see clearly which way direction the Church is going one way or the other?

Fear of Ridicule?


I would have understood if it were simply a case that the Church is reluctant to excommunicate anybody for fear of negative public opinion. I wouldn’t agree, but I would have understood. But this recent excommunication of Fr. Kovpak would indicate that this is not the case. Could it simply be a case of keeping your friends close but your enemies closer? Perhaps. If that is the case it is too risky in my opinion and looks too much like an endorsement of Kung’s teachings.


Question of Publicity

I am inclined to think that it is simply a case of avoiding what could be a stressful controversy if Kung were to be excommunicated. I believe that if he were to be excommunicated he would be an overnight sensation. Critics of the Church will be all over it. James Carroll would practically cannonize him, Another Galileo as it were. His book sales would sky rocket. There could be TV appearances and radio talk show interviews. Thus his teaching would spread like wildfire both in the Church and outside it. Kung himself probably can't wait to be excommmunicated for these reasons, which may explain why he hasn't just up and left the Church!

Out of Limelight

As it stands now many people still don’t know Hans Kung from King Kong. Perhaps the Pope wants to keep it that way. Maybe his holiness figures that tucked away in relative obscurity Kung can’t do much damage. But then, maybe he shouldn’t have had dinner with Kung in the first place and raised his public if he wasn’t ready to pull the trigger on excommunication. Pope John Paul II didn’t give Kung the time of day thus keeping him out of the limelight.

Maybe its Time

Personally I think its time for controversy. If Kung were to be excommunicated there will be a lot of negative publicity and Kung will get much attention. But then so will the Church. After all, the publicity surrounding The Passion of the Christ worked to the Church’s advantage, as did the controversy concerning the book The Da Vinci Code. The Church was able to use the attention to promote her own teachings. The Church can do the same with the extra if and when it comes down on Kung. It can explain why it excommunicated him and why his teachings are incompatible with Catholic teachings.

Clear Stand by Church


Once it is certain where the Church stands and the confusion is alleviated it can be a more effective witness for truth. To be that effective witness what is needed is clarity as to what the Church is It may be that this potential shake up is just what the Church needs if for no other reason than to achieve said clarity. If many leave the Church because of this that is their choice. The Church is not supposed to be an institution that assimulates into secular culture but one that is in opposition and an alternative to it. There is supposed to be something different about Catholicism and in order for that difference to be preserved its doctrinal integrity must stay intact. It can’t straddle the fence by letting men like Kung stay around and spread a quasi paganism with impunity.

The Curious De-Emphais on Confession

Things can be very frustrating these days for frequent sinners such as myself. There has been a disturbing de-emphasis on confession in church parishes, at least the ones I have been to. Most parishes and churches I know have only 45 minutes a week for confessions, on Saturdays . 45 minutes a week!!?? Are they kidding me? There is the downtown shrine in my hometown that has confessions several hours a day, but that is during work hours and it would take up my whole lunch time just to find parking. I need a lot more time than this what with my busy schedule and all. Saturday is a particularly busy day for me. I do make it, but I shouldn’t have to go through hoops to get to confession, at least the church shouldn’t put the hoops there!

A puzzling question
.
Why is this? Was it Vatican II? Can’t be. The Vatican II documents do not talk about confession much but it did not really need to. Anything one needs to know about confession is in other councils and documents and was not abrogated. So what is it? A perceived change brought about by Vatican II? Perhaps. There have been changes in outlook in the Church since that council. But , so far, I have not seen any of these changes in the Vatican II documents themselves. (Of course I may be eating crow in the coming months) If indeed Vatican II did not abrogate the need for confession then this de-emphasis on the need for confession is indeed puzzling!

The Catechism?

Perhaps the Catechism? This is what it actually says;
"Without being strictly necessary, confession of everyday faults (venial sins) is nevertheless strongly recommended by the Church. Indeed the regular confession of our venial sins helps us form our conscience, fight against evil tendencies, let ourselves be healed by Christ and progress in the life of the spirit."(1)
So while the catechism says it is not strictly necessary, it does encourage its frequent use. There is certainly no indication that confession time should be severely limited.


Getting the word out


It may be that the reason there is not much confession time is that not many go to begin with. Come to think of it, this makes sense. Even with the limited time for confession not many go, maybe two or three people. Why is this? Perhaps it is because the need for confession is not emphasized in the churches.
This reminds me of something I saw on EWTN a couple of years ago. On this program a priest related a story of a priest in this certain parish who noticed that not many people were going to confession. He started preaching the need to go to confession and soon the lines were out the door! It seems that if confession were to be emphasized more then people may be stimulated to pay more attention to their spiritual health.


Relationship with Christ


The Christian journey is a relationship with Christ, not merely living by a set of morals. Alfred A. Hubenig, O.M.I., had this to say about St. Eugene De Mazenod;
"And to the Galatians he says, ‘ from my mother’s womb he called me by his grace to reveal his son in me so that I might preach the good news about him to the gentiles.’ (Galatians 1:15) Note Paul says ‘God chose to reveal his son in me,’ not ‘to me’ This means that the grace received by Paul, like the grace received by Eugene, is not mere intellectual knowledge of Jesus Christ. It is a spiritual gift that reaches the very depths of the heart, bringing about an unshakable conviction and a strong attachment to the person of Jesus."(2)


No complacency


So we can’t be complacent concerning venial sin. A lackadaisical attitude towards it could lead to a weakening of our relationship with Christ. I look at venial sin like a tick on a dog. One tick may sting and suck out a little blood. If it is extracted there is no harm done. But if it is left to fester it will suck out more blood and weaken the dog more. More and more ticks will weaken the dog further and seriously compromise its health. Then, when a major illness comes along it will be too weak to fight it off. So it is with venial sin. If we ignore them and don’t deal with them they may accumulate and weaken our souls to the point that our attachment with Christ is compromised and our resistence to mortal sins will be greatly weakened. This dog knows something about this.


Conclusion



So, in my humble opinion, the churches should emphasize confession more. It doesn’t even have to be fire and brimstone, at least not yet. All they need to do is to emphasize that venial sins need to be dealt with in order to improve the spiritual lives of the faithful and to strengthen them from temptations to mortal sins. This is not so the people will obsess about venial sins, but so that they won’t obsess over them but instead form a deeper relationship with Christ.
If confession is emphasized more then it could very well be that more people will take a greater interest in caring for their souls and from there develop a greater interest in the teachings of the Church.




1. Catechism of the Catholic Church, Pauline Books and Media, 1994. P. 366
2. Hubenig, Alfred A., O.M.I., Living in the Spirit’s Fire, Novalis, Ottawa, Ontario Canada, 1995, P. 32.


Note
I am sorry I haven’t posted anything in almost a month. I have been a little busy and also I have been studying about things I am not sure of. I have been pursuing a study of certain things that I don’t wish to bring out at the present time. I need to be sure of things. I hope to be posting some more things in the future.
Frank.