Author: Pete Vere

Rights and Responsibility Go Hand in Hand

I don’t disagree that there is a fundamental difference between right and responsibility or how you define each, however, the two go hand-in-hand. In other words, either someone has reached the age of majority or not. If we say, on the one hand, that owing to age one is responsible for one’s actions to warrant capital punishment, then we are saying that they are responsible enough in their decisions to forfeit their life in the case of a bad decision. In short, we are not going to distinguish between an adult and an adolescent in this matter.

Yet we then turn around and say this same individual, whom we have judged responsible enough to go to the electric chair, is not responsible enough to reap any of the privileges society offers when one comes of age — such as drinking, voting and marrying. Sorry, either one is fully responsible for one’s actions or one is not. If one is, then why the prohibitions?

The Age of Reason is an Approximation

Coming from a country where capital punishment has not been practiced in some decades, I see the advantage to abolishing it. First of all, my father is a civil attorney who specialized in murder cases early in his career. One of his first cases involved a murder trial in which the accused was a fourteen year-old boy. The jury was reluctant to convict, knowing that he would possibly face the death penalty. This isn’t uncommon from what I hear.

Secondly, with regards to the age of reason, we have to understand that this is an approximation. Canonically, the development of the faculty of reason is ungoing and the age of reason or the age of majority simply represents an approximation of when the use of reason in the case of transition from infant to child, or the full use of reason in the case of transition from childhood to adulthood, comes into force. Is it perfect? No. One doesn’t suddenly come bounding down the stairs on one’s eighteenth birthday and yell “Mom! Dad! Guess what? At midnight last night I suddenly, in a flash of consciousness, obtained the full use of reason!”

That being said, Eric asks what difference does the eight months make? Well, voting for one. Legally smoking and, before the partial prohibitionists got their way, drinking for another. Marriage is another in many states. Therefore, if it makes a difference in terms of rights, why not in terms of responsibility?

Speaking of Illegal Immigration

In response to Eric’s post below, I’m in favor of legalizing illegal immigration. Not for Biblical or theological reasons, mind you, but rather self-interest. Keep in mind the largest number of illegal immigrants to the United States comes not from the South, but from North of the border. Yep, we Canuck form the largest group of both legal and illegal immigrants to the United States. However, since we tend to be highly educated, speak English well and are culturally similar to Americans, people seldom mention us in the immigration debate. In case you’re wondering, both my wife and I are legal. However, it reminds me of a funny incident that took place at the indult in Washington about two years’ ago. At the coffee hour afterward, I was introduced to Pat Buchanan who was going on and on about immigration, how it should be stopped, and how it was creating problems for good young men like myself (he pointed me out.) My friend and I laughed. He gave me a rather surprised look, and I showed him my Ontario birth certificate. In fairness to Pat, he laughed as well. “After all,” someone quipped, “we cannot have all those illegal immigrants from South America coming to America and taking good jobs from Canadians.”

A Worthy Cause

Wow, today is turning into a great day. First the Holy See put a stop to Dallas fallout, and now I discover that the cause is open for Catherine de Huek’s canonization. As many of my readers know, Catherine is my favorite Canadian, Eastern Catholic and female author. Originally a Russian Baroness, she escaped the Communist revolution, came to North America and was received into the Catholic Church. She then became a popular speaker, made a fortune, and in answer to God’s call gave it all to the poor and founded numerous apostolates — the most well known of which is Madonna House. Heck, she even brought an ex-Catholic turned liberal Chicago reporter back to the faith. His name was Eddie Doherty, and he was so captured by Catherine he proposed to her. She was also a prolific writer. Among my favorite of her writings, you will find Sobornost, Not Without Parables, and The Gospel Without Compromise. Anyway, check out the new Catherine de Huek Doherty Webpage.

Rome says No

First off, let me thank everyone for welcoming me to Catholic Light. It is much appreciated and I look forward to future fun here.

Having said that, I guess everyone has seen the following by now?

—

The Most Reverend Wilton D. GREGORY
President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Your Excellency,

With your letter of June 26, 2002, you forwarded to the Ho1y See the document entitled “Essential Norms for Diocesan/Eparchial Policies Dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests, Deacons or Other Church Personnel” (“Norms”), approved at the Plenary Assembly of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops which took place in Dallas (Texas) from June 13-15, and for which you requested the recognitio.

The Holy See, above all, would like to convey full solidarity with the Bishops of the United States in their firm condemnation of sexual misdeeds against minors and is deeply concerned about the distressing situation that has arisen in recent months in the Church in the
United States. Likewise, the Holy See wishes to encourage the efforts of the Episcopal Conference in assisting the Bishops to address
these difficult problems.

The sexual abuse of minors is particularly abhorrent. Deeply moved by the sufferings of the victims and their families, the Holy See supports the American Bishops in their endeavor to respond firmly to the sexual misdeeds of the very small number of those who minister or labor in the service of the Church. But such a very small number cannot overshadow “the immense spiritual, human and social good that the vast majority of priests and religious in the United States have done and are still doing” (Pope John Paul II, Address to the
Cardinals and to the Presidency of the Episcopal Conference of the United States, April 23, 2002).

The Apostolic See likewise acknowledges the efforts which the Bishops of the United States have made through the “Norms” and the guidelines contained in the “Bishops’ Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People” (“Charter”) to protect minors and to avoid future recurrences of these abuses. Such efforts should also help to preserve or restore the trust of the faithful in their pastors.

Despite these efforts, the application of the policies adopted at the Plenary Assembly in Dallas can be the source of confusion and ambiguity, because the “Norms” and “Charter” contain provisions which
in some aspects are difficult to reconcile with the universal law of the Church. Moreover, the experience of the last few months has shown
that the terminology of these documents is at times vague or imprecise and therefore difficult to interpret. Questions also remain concerning the concrete manner in which the procedures outlined in the “Norms” and “Charter” are to be applied in conjunction with the requirements of the Code of Canon Law and the Motu proprio Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela (AAS 93, 2001, p. 787).

For these reasons, it has been judged appropriate that before the recognitio can be granted, a further reflection on and revision of the “Norms” and the “Charter” are necessary. In order to facilitate this work, the Holy See proposes that a Mixed Commission be established, composed of four bishops chosen from the Episcopal
Conference of the United States, and four representatives from those Dicasteries of the Holy See which have direct competence in the
matter: the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Congregation for Bishops, the Congregation for Clergy , and the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts.

On behalf also of the other Dicasteries involved, I look forward to your response. With the promise of prayers for your important work in serving the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops, I remain

Sincerely yours in Christ,
Giovanni Battista Card. Re
Prefect Congregation for Bishops
October 14, 2002

—

It never ceases to amaze me how Rome always outsmarts her opponents — in this case, the US Bishops and the US media. Darn that was smooth. Moreover, it looks like Rome will now exert its influence in fixing the problem.