Pope John Paul, Mother Teresa:
Instruments of hope

		Notes from the  Vicar General  Msgr. Paul J. Swain

On Oct. 16, Pope John Paul II will celebrate the 25th anniversary of his election as Pope by the College of Cardinals under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. On Oct. 19, Mother Teresa of Calcutta will be beatified. We have been privileged to live under their towering inspiration.

John Paul, though challenged physically, remains a powerful voice for peace, justice, and moral good. Mother Teresa lives eternally, yet continues to prick our consciences through the religious order she founded, the Missionaries of Charity, and her pithy sayings.

Both have touched the lives of millions around the world, Catholic and not. Words like courageous, tenacious, prayerful, and mystical inadequately describe them. Both have been examples of people of hope in the midst of a world filled with forces that encourage despair. Both call us as Christian disciples to not be afraid. Their message is that of Christ: do not worry. Tomorrow will take care of itself.

Yet, who of us has not experienced hearts that were frightened? Who of us has not needed reassurance? God chose these two great persons to offer that reassurance.

Fearful faces from Sept. 11

Faces filled with fear and anguish are etched in our minds from Sept. 11, 2001. Vivid are the memories of those who were victims, the heroic rescuers, the grief stricken loved ones who searched, waited, and grieved.

In far off countries today men and women in the armed forces work to provide security and allow the opportunity for peace and freedom to those who have not known it. They toil in danger, likely in fear, which also tears at the hearts of their loved ones.

There are many other causes for worry. Sickness ever threatens. Unemployment remains a concern, job security a question. Government budget cutbacks result in jobs lost and programs reduced, often for those living on the edge of poverty.

Sometimes to fear not is a lot to ask

Farmers worry about the lack of rain as crops and trees turn brown. High gas prices, inadequate access to health care and life saving drugs worry us. The many challenges to Gospel values in personal and moral decision-making can lead us to worry about the younger generations and fear for the future.

Sometimes the call to be strong, to fear not, is a lot to ask.

Yet Jesus tells us it is our calling as Christians. To be afraid is what those who focus in on themselves do. It is what those without faith do.

We who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior should be able to lift our vision beyond the moment. Our day has been called the age of anxiety. We will be anxious only if we do not fully trust in God's will and God's way.

Jesus does not say we will be free from the challenges of life, personal or societal. But through his sacrifice on the cross and resurrection, he showed us that there is no reason to worry or be fearful again. That faith is what the Holy Father and Mother Teresa have witnessed so powerfully.

May we thank God that they responded to God's call to be instruments of hope. May we live their reassurance to be not afraid.

Anglicans: Recent controversy shows sociology trumps theology

		The Catholic  Difference  George Weigel

While U.S. Episcopalians struggled through a difficult convention in Minneapolis, a Baltimore Sun reporter put the following lead on his story:

"As they battled over confirmation of the nation's first openly gay elected bishop - and wrestled with charges that he had engaged in sexual misconduct - a subtle subtext emerged in the public comments of some Episcopal clergy last week: We handle these issues differently than the Roman Catholic Church."

'Signs of the times'

They certainly do. No one in Minneapolis made that clearer than the controversial bishop-elect, Gene Robinson. Agreeing that his confirmation reflected a profound change in Anglican teaching, Canon Robinson said, "Just simply to say that it goes against tradition and the teaching of the Church and Scripture does not necessarily make it wrong."

Which says it all. If neither Scripture, nor tradition, nor the teaching of the Church for two millennia is authoritative, then what is? The "signs of the times," evidently - whether those be the "signs" as read by Henry VIII or the "signs" as defined by New York Times editorials today.

In both the 16th century and the 21st century the question for Episcopalians has come down to this: What is authoritative? Scripture, tradition, and consistent teaching? Or the "signs of the times"?

Serious consequences

The decisions in Minneapolis will have serious consequences throughout the Anglican Communion. Moreover, the decision in favor of Canon Robinson's ordination is going to make the international Anglican-Catholic theological dialogue even more difficult.

The handwriting was on the wall years ago for this once-promising dialogue. In a 1984-1986 exchange of letters, Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Johannes Willebrands (then the Holy See's chief ecumenical officer), and Archbishop Robert Runcie of Canterbury discussed the ecumenical difficulties created by the decision of some Anglican churches to ordain women to the priesthood.

Archbishop Runcie agreed that such a dramatic shift in practice could not be justified by a mere appeal to the culture of the day. But the archbishop argued that a male priesthood weakened the Church's witness at a time "when exclusively male leadership has been largely surrendered in many human societies."

So sociology trumps theology. As it did in Henry VIII's 16th century, when an expansive government and a rising entrepreneurial class needed the vast financial resources of the monasteries of England - and took them.

And as it did in Minneapolis, when the claims of gay liberation were deemed of more consequence than "tradition and the teaching of the Church and Scripture."

Dream shattered

I once looked forward to the day of full ecclesial unity between Rome and Canterbury. That dream has been shattered.

As the Anglican Communion has evolved, much of its British, North American, and Australasian leadership typifies what John Henry Newman critiqued in 1879 as "liberal" religion - religion that we make up as we go, rather than revealed religion to which we submit ourselves in obedience of faith.

"Just simply to say that it goes against tradition and the teaching of the Church and Scripture does not necessarily make it wrong." That's Newman's "liberal" religion. And it is killing the Anglican-Catholic dialogue.

George Weigel is a senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.