Church in Italy to issue clarification on cremation

Rome, Italy, Nov 3, 2009 / 01:50 pm (CNA).- The Italian Bishops' Conference is preparing to publish updated norms on funeral rites including cremation and the burial of ashes.

The manual, which will be reviewed and approved by the bishops' conference in Assisi on November 9, will explain that Catholic doctrine does not oppose cremation but rejects the practice of storing ashes of loved ones at home. The document will stress that this is a violation of the work of mercy that obliges Catholics to provide a holy burial to the dead.

Cremation was approved by Paul VI in 1963 as a practice that does not contradict the Church’s teaching on the resurrection, since it does not affect the soul “nor prevents the omnipotence of God from rebuilding the body.”

However, the document will note, a norm approved by the Italian government in 2001 runs contrary to Catholic teaching, as it allows the ashes of the dead to be kept in an urn at home or to be scattered in the wind, land or sea.

Keeping the ashes of the dead at home does away with the important rite of accompanying the deceased to the cemetery, “which unites the community of believers.” Burying the ashes at a cemetery, the “place of the dead,” is what makes most sense, the bishops will add.

Scattering the ashes, according to the Italian bishops, is based on a pagan ritual that supposedly symbolized the union of the deceased with “the great soul of mother earth,” and is contrary to the Christian obligation, established by the Lord Jesus himself, to bury the dead.

According to official statistics, currently 10 percent of those who die in Italy are cremated.

Vatican looks to heavens for signs of alien life

By ARIEL DAVID (AP)

VATICAN CITY — E.T. phone Rome. Four hundred years after it locked up Galileo for challenging the view that the Earth was the center of the universe, the Vatican has called in experts to study the possibility of extraterrestrial alien life and its implication for the Catholic Church.

"The questions of life's origins and of whether life exists elsewhere in the universe are very suitable and deserve serious consideration," said the Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, an astronomer and director of the Vatican Observatory.

Funes, a Jesuit priest, presented the results Tuesday of a five-day conference that gathered astronomers, physicists, biologists and other experts to discuss the budding field of astrobiology — the study of the origin of life and its existence elsewhere in the cosmos.

Funes said the possibility of alien life raises "many philosophical and theological implications" but added that the gathering was mainly focused on the scientific perspective and how different disciplines can be used to explore the issue.

Chris Impey, an astronomy professor at the University of Arizona, said it was appropriate that the Vatican would host such a meeting.

"Both science and religion posit life as a special outcome of a vast and mostly inhospitable universe," he told a news conference Tuesday. "There is a rich middle ground for dialogue between the practitioners of astrobiology and those who seek to understand the meaning of our existence in a biological universe."

Thirty scientists, including non-Catholics, from the U.S., France, Britain, Switzerland, Italy and Chile attended the conference, called to explore among other issues "whether sentient life forms exist on other worlds."

Funes set the stage for the conference a year ago when he discussed the possibility of alien life in an interview given prominence in the Vatican's daily newspaper.

The Church of Rome's views have shifted radically through the centuries since Italian philosopher Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake as a heretic in 1600 for speculating, among other ideas, that other worlds could be inhabited.

Scientists have discovered hundreds of planets outside our solar system — including 32 new ones announced recently by the European Space Agency. Impey said the discovery of alien life may be only a few years away.

"If biology is not unique to the Earth, or life elsewhere differs bio-chemically from our version, or we ever make contact with an intelligent species in the vastness of space, the implications for our self-image will be profound," he said.

This is not the first time the Vatican has explored the issue of extraterrestrials: In 2005, its observatory brought together top researchers in the field for similar discussions.

In the interview last year, Funes told Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano that believing the universe may host aliens, even intelligent ones, does not contradict a faith in God.

"How can we rule out that life may have developed elsewhere?" Funes said in that interview.

"Just as there is a multitude of creatures on Earth, there could be other beings, even intelligent ones, created by God. This does not contradict our faith, because we cannot put limits on God's creative freedom."

Funes maintained that if intelligent beings were discovered, they would also be considered "part of creation."

The Roman Catholic Church's relationship with science has come a long way since Galileo was tried as a heretic in 1633 and forced to recant his finding that the Earth revolves around the sun. Church teaching at the time placed Earth at the center of the universe.

Today top clergy, including Funes, openly endorse scientific ideas like the Big Bang theory as a reasonable explanation for the creation of the universe. The theory says the universe began billions of years ago in the explosion of a single, super-dense point that contained all matter.

Earlier this year, the Vatican also sponsored a conference on evolution to mark the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's "The Origin of Species."

The event snubbed proponents of alternative theories, like creationism and intelligent design, which see a higher being rather than the undirected process of natural selection behind the evolution of species.

Still, there are divisions on the issues within the Catholic Church and within other religions, with some favoring creationism or intelligent design that could make it difficult to accept the concept of alien life.

Working with scientists to explore fundamental questions that are of interest to religion is in line with the teachings of Pope Benedict XVI, who has made strengthening the relationship between faith and reason a key aspect of his papacy.

Recent popes have been working to overcome the accusation that the church was hostile to science — a reputation grounded in the Galileo affair.

In 1992, Pope John Paul II declared the ruling against the astronomer was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension."

The Vatican Museums opened an exhibit last month marking the 400th anniversary of Galileo's first celestial observations.

Tommaso Maccacaro, president of Italy's national institute of astrophysics, said at the exhibit's Oct. 13 opening that astronomy has had a major impact on the way we perceive ourselves.

"It was astronomical observations that let us understand that Earth (and man) don't have a privileged position or role in the universe," he said. "I ask myself what tools will we use in the next 400 years, and I ask what revolutions of understanding they'll bring about, like resolving the mystery of our apparent cosmic solitude."

The Vatican Observatory has also been at the forefront of efforts to bridge the gap between religion and science. Its scientist-clerics have generated top-notch research and its meteorite collection is considered one of the world's best.

The observatory, founded by Pope Leo XIII in 1891, is based in Castel Gandolfo, a lakeside town in the hills outside Rome where the pope has his summer residence. It also conducts research at an observatory at the University of Arizona, in Tucson.

IS CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING INHERENTLY LIBERAL?

Here is a great article by Phil Lawler from catholicculture.org taking on an issue I've always found vexing myself: Why do so many Catholics reflexively think that liberalism is closer to Catholic doctrine than Conservatism? Just the contrary, I believe liberalism is anathema to organized religion -- but they do a good job of fooling people. Just look at what Obama is doing. Anyway, read the article:

IS CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING INHERENTLY LIBERAL?

In a speech that he delivered in Washington last month, drawing kudos from many liberal Catholic analysts, Father John Langan of Georgetown argued that American Church leaders show engage the Obama White House on a broad range of issues, rather than allowing their relationship to deteriorate solely because of a disagreement on abortion.

The problem isn't only abortion, of course; the Obama administration is pursuing policies inimical to the culture of life on several different fronts. And the notion that the American Catholic hierarchy has been hostile toward the Democratic Party leadership will quickly be recognized as laughable by anyone who is acquainted with American bishops. But these are old arguments, which have been thoroughly explored elsewhere-- not my topic for today. From among all the familiar themes raised by Father Langan's talk, one sentence leapt out at me:

There seems to be a fairly strong prima facie case for Catholics to support the Obama administration and its agenda as an effort to move American society somewhat closer to the ideals of Catholic social thought and to move our society forward from the pit which it has dug for itself.

Notice, now, that our Jesuit mentor is not merely saying that it is possible to make a Catholic case for Obama's policies. He is claiming a "prima facie" case-- a case so obvious that it almost doesn't need to mentioned; an argument so strong that the burden of proof is on anyone who disagrees.

Is it really true-- is it really self-evident-- that Obama's policies match the social teachings of the Catholic Church on issues such as welfare and economic justice? Sadly, I think that many Catholics who answer that question reflexively, with a strong Yes.

Moreover, I suspect that many of the people most likely to accept Father Langan's "prima facie" argument are those involved in teaching Catholic social thought. For years the Church's institutional efforts to promote social justice have been dominated by political liberals, and years of exchanging similar ideas within their closed fraternity, their conversation has become so restricted that they can easily fail to recognize the existence of other viewpoints.

Early in the 1980s (I forget which year exactly), I was asked to address a Washington gathering of "justice and peace" coordinators from Catholic dioceses all around the country. At a forum that was, predictably, dominated by liberals, my task was to explain how a Catholic could embrace the conservative policies of the Reagan administration. The hostility of my audience was palpable. When I suggested that the universal Church has a more implacable enemy than Ronald Reagan, that attempt at sardonic humor drew not even a single responsive chuckle-- not a glimmer of understanding that the battle against Satan is more crucial to the Church's mission than the battle against Republican policies.

If the diocesan officials who greeted me with such stony silence were the same people who helped to design the social-justice curricula for parochial schools, it is not surprising that younger Catholics have drifted toward more liberal stands on political issues. It is no surprise-- to cite just one leading indicator-- that a solid majority of Notre Dame students are pleased to welcome President Obama to their campus and proud to have him receive an honorary degree.

For far too long, students in Catholic schools and subscribers to diocesan publications have heard only one side of what could and should be a lively debate about the implications of Catholic social teaching.

The Church clearly teaches that the moral duty of all believers to help those in need, to exercise the "preferential option for the poor." But is it self-evident that the effort to fight poverty should be waged through impersonal government programs, supported by mandatory taxation, rather than by the freewill offerings of charitable donors? Is it self-evident that the federal government should supervise these anti-poverty programs, although the principle of subsidiarity would seem to militate in favor of local solutions to local problems and individual approaches to needy individuals? Is there a prima facie case for allowing the Church's own charitable efforts to be subsumed into the tax-subsidized programs, so that "Catholic Charities" is for all practical purposes a government agency?

These questions are rarely raised when parish "justice and peace" committees meet. The conservative Catholics who make make these arguments are generally not members of those committees; they are already too busy with their work on the pro-life committees! So liberal Catholics eventually come to take it for granted that what seems so obvious to them must be equally obvious to their fellow Catholics. They are genuinely surprised to learn that some faithful Catholics are not enthralled by the promise of an Obama presidency, even apart from issues involving the dignity of life.

Oddly enough, to each of the questions raised above, I think that the answer isobvious. The federal government should not usurp the role of private charity. Government activism should be confined to the local level. Church agencies should eschew involvement with government programs. I would happily explain my views on each of these questions to diocesan justice-and-peace officials if I were invited to do so again. But an entire generation has passed, and I have not been invited back to their national conference, while a parade of liberal speakers has been welcomed to reinforce the group's existing prejudices.

What is obvious to me, apparently, is not obvious to the justice-and-peace clientele. So be it. I do not claim that every good Catholic must agree with me; I realize that contrary arguments can be made. And there is where we differ: Conservative Catholics would never dare to argue that a "prima facie" case can be made for their own preferred political policies. That liberal Catholics make that argument is a sign of destructive intellectual inbreeding, and an arrogance which must be corrected.

ST. PAUL ON CATHOLICS WHO POLITICALLY PROMOTE ABORTION?

Here's some great insight by Dr. Jeff Mirus from catholicCulture.org:

ST. PAUL ON CATHOLICS WHO POLITICALLY PROMOTE ABORTION?

Posted Apr. 16, 2009 10:11 AM || by Dr. Jeff Mirus

About five minutes after I completed my column “God and Mammon” concerning the falsity of Catholic arguments in favor of abortion, I came across in my daily spiritual reading the following passage from St. Paul’s second letter to Timothy (3:1-7):

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of stress. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, inhuman, implacable, slanderers, profligates, fierce, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding the form of religion but denying the power of it. Avoid such people. For among them are those who make their way into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and swayed by various impulses, who will listen to anybody and can never arrive at a knowledge of the truth.

As an exegetical note, “the last days” refers to the entire time between Christ’s first and second comings; let us not be sidetracked here by signs of the end of the world. Now note again these words: “Holding the form of religion but denying the power of it…those who make their way into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and swayed by various impulses.” Without in the least arguing that St. Paul had this present circumstance in mind, nothing could more clearly describe those Catholic worldlings who seek to facilitate abortion and their impact on the women whom they thus betray.

Easter

Good Friday at Holy Name

It was a packed house and a moving service at Holy Name on Friday afternoon. Kettle drums wound up to crescendo as the priest moved to the altar -- very powerful and dramatic.

After the Liturgy of the Word came the second part of the service, the Veneration of the Cross. This was very emotional -- two men carried a heavy cross to the altar to stirring vocals from the choir loft. Then, slowly and reverently, we all made our way to the cross, each to venerate it in our own way. Some knelt before it, touching it ever so lightly. Others bowed and placed their palm onto the rough-hewn wood. 

It was a visual and emotional reminder of Christ's sacrifice on the Cross. 

Tonight is the vigil -- at 8 pm where we, the Church, wait at the tomb. 

Holy Saturday

On Holy Saturday the Church waits at the Lord's tomb, meditating on his suffering and death. The altar is left bare, and the sacrifice of the Mass is not celebrated. Only after the solemn vigil during the night, held in anticipation of the resurrection, does the Easter celebration begin, with a spirit of joy that overflows into the following period of fifty days.

Holy Saturday (from Sabbatum Sanctum, its official liturgical name) is sacred as the day of the Lord's rest; it has been called the "Second Sabbath" after creation. The day is and should be the most calm and quiet day of the entire Church year, a day broken by no liturgical function. Christ lies in the grave, the Church sits near and mourns. After the great battle He is resting in peace, but upon Him we see the scars of intense suffering...The mortal wounds on His Body remain visible....Jesus' enemies are still furious, attempting to obliterate the very memory of the Lord by lies and slander.