Archive for the ‘Father Federick Faber’ Category

Father Connell Answers Moral Questions

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

by Very Rev. Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., S.T.D., LL.D., L.H.D.

Baptismal Record Of An Illegitimate Child

Question: Recently I baptized an illegitimate child, and entered in the register the names of the mother and of the persons who acted as sponsors. Shortly afterward the child was adopted. I have now received from the Catholic lawyer who arranged the adoption a baptismal certificate, all made out, with the same names of the adopting couple recorded as the true parents and two relatives as the godparents. The lawyer requested that I sign a certificate and enter the baptism in the register in accordance with these fictitious data. What can I do in such circumstances?

Answer: There must be kept in the church files a true account of the baptized person’s parentage, as far as this can be known, and this information must be available to the ecclesiastical authorities on occasion when it may be pertinent, especially if the individual later plans to marry, or to enter the religious life or the priesthood. This does not mean, however, that the full and correct data must necessarily be presented on the baptismal certificate when the reason for demanding the document is only to obtain assurance that the person received Catholic baptism– for example, on the occasion of the admittance of a child to a Catholic school or to First Holy Communion. Illegitimacy need not be revealed in such circumstances; indeed, some fictitious data may be presented. Such, at least, is the opinion of Msgr. E. Robert Arthur, of the Washington Archdiocese, in an excellent article on this difficult problem in The Jurist, of January, 1953. In certain circumstances, he says, “one would hardly object if the local Ordinary should authorize the issuance of certificates for the adopted exactly like those customarily used in this country, with names of the adoptive parent inserted as if they were the natural parents, and even with the others than the real sponsors given as godparents.” Msgr. Arthur would even permit both the true and the “quasi-record” to be inscribed in the register, but always in such a wise that the former is available in such instances as marriage, entrance into a seminary or a religious institute, etc. Such a procedure, however, should not be used unless it is approved by the local Ordinary.

Record Of Private Baptism

Question: If the child of non-Catholic parents is baptized privately by a nurse in the hospital because the little one is in danger of death, is there an obligation on the part of the nurse to inform anyone of the Baptism or to make a record of it, in the event that the child recovers?

Answer: In the case described a record of the Baptism should be kept either by the hospital chaplain or (preferably) by the pastor of the place where the child’s parents reside. The nurse should see that the information is given to either of these two. The record in question should be kept in a private book, not the regular baptismal register. If it is evident that the child’s parents would not object to the Baptism or may even have desired it, they can be informed. (Cf. McAllister, Emergency Baptism [Milwaukee, 1945], pp 17 f.)

a world without the Precious Blood

Friday, May 21st, 2010

Such would be the condition of the world without the Precious Blood. As generations succeeded each other, original sin would go on developing those inexhaustible malignant powers which come from the almost infinite character of evil. Sin would work earth into hell. Men would become devils, devils to others and to themselves. Every thing which makes life tolerable, which counteracts any evil, which softens any harshness, which sweetens any bitterness, which causes the machinery of society to work smoothly, or which consoles any sadness–is simply due to the Precious Blood of Jesus, in heathen as well as in Christian lands. It changes the whole position of an offending creation to its Creator. It changes, if we may dare in such a matter to speak of change, the aspect of God’s immutable perfections toward his human children. It does not work merely in a spiritual sphere. It is not only prolific in temporal blessings, but it is the veritable cause of all temporal blessings whatsoever. We are all of us every moment sensibly enjoying the benignant influence of the Precious Blood. Yet who thinks of all this? Why is the goodness of God so hidden, so imperceptible, so unsuspected? Perhaps because it is so universal and so excessive, that we should hardly be free agents if it pressed sensibly upon us always. God’s goodness is at once the most public of all his attributes, and at the same time the most secret. Has life a sweeter task than to seek it, and to find it out?

Men would be far more happy, if they separated religion less violently from other things. It is both unwise and unloving to put religion into a place by itself, and mark it off with an untrue distinctness from what we call worldly and unspiritual things. Of course there is a distinction, and a most important one, between them; yet it is easy to make this distinction too rigid and to carry it too far. Thus we often attribute to nature what is only due to grace; and we put out of sight the manner and degree in which the blessed majesty of the Incarnation affects all created things. But this mistake is forever robbing us of hundreds of motives for loving Jesus. We know how unspeakably much we owe to him; but we do not see all that it is not much we owe him, but all, simply and absolutely all. We pass through times and places in life, hardly recognizing how the sweetness of Jesus is sweetening the air around us and penetrating natural things with supernatural blessings.

Hence it comes to pass that men make too much of natural goodness. They think too highly of human progress. They exaggerate the moralizing powers of civilization and refinement, which, apart from grace, are simply tyrannies of the few over the many, or of the public over the individual soul. Meanwhile they underrate the corrupting capabilities of sin, and attribute to unassisted nature many excellences which it only catches, as it were by the infection, by the proximity of grace, or by contagion, from the touch of the Church. Even in religious and ecclesiastical matters they incline to measure progress, or test vigor, by other standards rather than that of holiness. These men will consider the foregoing picture of the world without the Precious Blood as overdrawn and too darkly shaded. They do not believe in the intense malignity of man when drifted from God, and still less are they inclined to grant that cultivation and refinement only intensify still further this malignity. They admit the superior excellence of Christian charity; but they also think highly of natural philanthropy. But has this philanthropy ever been found where the indirect influences of the true religion, whether Jewish or Christian, had not penetrated? We may admire the Greeks for their exquisite refinement, and the Romans for the wisdom of their political moderation. Yet look at the position of children, of servants, of slaves, and of the poor, under both these systems, and see if, while extreme refinement only pushed sin to an extremity of foulness, the same exquisite culture did not also lead to a social cruelty and an individual selfishness which mae life unbearable to the masses. Philanthropy is but a theft from the gospel, or rather a shadow, not a substance, and as unhelpful as shadows are want to be. . . .

an excerpt from Father Frederick Faber, The Precious Blood, TAN Books and Publishers.