Latest

Oscar Yuill reflects on why so many American Catholics are drawn to Tolkien, Chesterton, tweed waistcoats and the world of the English Catholic literary revival, despite its collapse in the country that produced it A friend recently invited my wife and me to North Carolina for a seminary-run BBQ, chock full of vibrant Catholic families and with the promise of succulent meats, home-grown tobacco and chortling allusions to that magnificent beast, the Chesterbelloc. Indeed, I have seldom met an American Catholic, at least of a certain age, who is not immersed in the works of the 20th-century British Catholic literary revival. Photographs from my friend’s wedding, in the same Carolinian town, show toddlers dressed, it seems, for Bilbo Baggins’s eleventy-first birthday. The groomsmen hold churchwarden pipes. And the best man resembles Chesterton to a degree scarcely believable. We had not so much been invited to North Carolina as to 1930s Oxford. Why should this be so? Why is the dominant traditionalist subculture in America so keen to ape the language, liturgical preferences and sartorial eccentricities of a revival that was, arguably, a complete failure? Only in 1852, at the first Provincial Synod of Westminster, had Newman declared: “Canterbury has gone its way. The Church in England has died, and the Church lives again. Westminster and Nottingham, Beverley and Hexham, Northampton and Shrewsbury, if the world lasts, shall become names as musical to the ear, as stirring to the heart, as the glories we have lost.” It seemed for a brief period that Hilaire Belloc, G.K. Chesterton, J.R.R. Tolkien, Gerard Manley Hopkins, Muriel Spark, David Jones, Eric Gill, Christopher Dawson, Ronald Knox, Arnold Lunn and countless others were the fulfilment of Newman’s optimism, inaugurating a new epoch of triumphal cultural Catholicism. (Such, indeed, was the fear among their cultural and moral competitors, such as the Bloomsbury Group.) “Arise,” Newman went on to say, quoting Solomon; “make haste, my love, my dove, my beautiful one, and come. For the winter is now past, and the rain is over and gone. The flowers have appeared in our land.” Bernard Shaw, Hilaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton in 1927 Yet the flowers in this “Second Spring” were to be the lilacs and “dried tubers” of Eliot’s wasteland. Many of the buds were mown down in Flanders and Ypres and Passchendaele before they could bloom. No sooner had the Catholic Church been replanted in England than all Christendom leapt to the same assisted suicide. Surviving Catholics were forced to contend, in their poems and paintings and novels, with a disintegration of truth and meaning more total than Newman could have predicted, though certainly he detected its stirrings in the spectre of theological liberalism. Even at the level of technique – Evelyn Waugh was one of the first novelists to use the stilted language of “telephonese” – the works of the post-war generation often seemed forced into mirroring the fragmentation of a morally traumatised continent. When the 1960s rolled in, the vandalism extended even to the liturgies that had given them all their only anchor in the maelstrom. (Waugh et al.’s consternation with the Mass of Paul VI is well documented.) Vocations and church attendance cratered, only now showing signs of arrest. To the likes of Wilde, a Catholic conversion was a great, romantic thing, “the only religion to die in”. To Orwell, merely half a century later, commenting on Marchmain’s deathbed conversion in Waugh’s Brideshead: “One cannot really be Catholic and grown-up.” In which case, why grow up at all? Enter, then, the American mind. The average American, particularly in their jamboree-style politics, exudes an earnestness and sincerity that we in England often find perplexing. I am far from the first to make this observation, and I wonder if it has something to do with their lack of a deep “blood memory”: centuries of political and religious strife, culminating in the horrors of Hitler and Stalin, have created in Europe a collection of more or less jaded peoples. For example, patriotism in England or France or Germany may be derided, it may be ironic, it may be defensive. But the one thing it never is, and what in America it routinely is, is perfectly natural. Innocent. Dare I say child-like. I have a son of my own on the way and am looking forward to seeing the world afresh through his eyes. I know that, in four or five years, I have only to hand him a rotten stick covered in lichen and it shall become Excalibur. Children, of course, love belonging to clubs and gangs and posses. There is nothing that a child likes so much as to have a secret society and to make no secret of it. The same could be said of Americans and, in fact, that last sentence was a quote from Chesterton about Americans; I had only to substitute the word “child”. I should be clear. None of this is a comment on the intelligence of Americans. Chesterton himself thought them rather better educated than the average Englishman. I am suggesting, rather, that, for my Carolinian friend, enthusiasm for Tolkien & Co. – and dip pens and bitter ale and tweed waistcoats and churchwarden pipes – are effectively ways in which American Catholicism, much like the American Constitution, puts old wine into new wineskins. Much as the Celtic monks of Skellig Michael, at the outermost reaches of the world, were eventually to look back Romeward for their ecclesiological integrity, it was perhaps inevitable that American Catholics fell in love with a “style” of Catholicism rooted in the soil of the mother country. Wouldn’t you long for the Shire in a nation whose defining image, according to a recent meme, is the liminal space of the glowing Shell petrol station? In the end, my wife and I were compelled to stay put. We couldn’t afford the trip. She’s also 25 weeks pregnant. Add to that an elderly greyhound, for whom finding a dog-sitter is a nightmare. As good, jaded English folk, we know, of course, that Belloc’s cherished Sussex inns are shuttered, Tolkien’s beloved Midlands scoured and Chesterton’s fence torn up with insufficient reason. Tweed is reserved for the Mogg dynasty; pipes, for rosaceous pensioners quaffing their fifth Doom Bar of the morning on a Wetherspoons patio. The Catholic literary revival failed in England: England rejected it, ceding to paganism on the one hand and Islam on the other. Americans don’t have that legacy; to them, it was never a failure. Far away, in the touching sincerity of the American imagination, it all still exists, and can exist anywhere. Christ plays in ten thousand places, including in Gastonia, NC.

Dom Alcuin Reid warns against possible SSPX excommunications in a homily for the Sunday after the Ascension, saying Catholics attached to the older liturgical rites have faced exclusion and “ecclesiastical displacement” since Traditionis custodes In these days after the Ascension, as the Paschal candle stands extinguished and we wait in expectation and hope for the consoling fire of Pentecost, the Sacred Liturgy of our Holy Mother the Church gives us a somewhat stark warning about living as faithful witnesses to Christ. “They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me,” we are informed by the words of Our Lord Himself in this morning’s Gospel. Historically, these words apply to the expulsion of early Christians from the Jewish synagogues as it became clear that Christian faith and life was a substantial development of Jewish belief that the authorities of the time deemed unacceptable. Christianity rightly boasts of and venerates its roots in the Old Covenant, but it remains a fact that the New Covenant fulfils the Old and surpasses it. The Old Covenant no longer suffices. Because of this reality, Christians were expelled from Jewish synagogues and, as we see clearly in the martyrdom of St Stephen (cf. Acts 7), were indeed killed out of a supposedly godly zeal. But what are we to make of this prophecy today? We hear it proclaimed only days after the Holy See has threatened to excommunicate those who plan to consecrate new bishops for the Society of St Pius X, and the new bishops themselves, at the beginning of July. (In spite of much sensational reporting, there is no question of the excommunication of their faithful.) The parallel is not exact: there are many issues involved, and they are complex. But the echo of Our Lord’s prophecy at this time is unnerving, particularly given the zeal with which those who wish to celebrate according to the older liturgical rites of the Church have been excluded from their churches and chapels since the liturgical, historical and pastoral travesty that is the Motu Proprio Traditionis custodes of 2021, which has brought about further disunity and division whilst purportedly seeking unity through the imposition of a ritual uniformity never before known, or required, in the life of the Church. Many are the good and loyal Catholics who have experienced expulsion from their places of worship and the killing off of the sources of grace and pastoral care for themselves and their families at the hands of prelates who, seemingly, “do this because they have not known the Father, nor me.” We ourselves have had to step outside of the system, as it were, in order simply to survive: something no one wishes to do, but which, in extraordinary times, may become truly necessary in conscience. Necessity is the key, as the Society of St Pius X often says. For the older liturgical rites are not a matter of mere aesthetic preference: they are the integral source and summit of our Christian life and mission and guarantee a ritual and doctrinal integrity that is, at best, “watered down” in their successors and which, if we examine the increasingly poisonous fruits of the virus of synodalism that has been unleashed in the Church, is at times utterly compromised, if not downright rejected, by those who would proscribe that which, of its very nature, “remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” (Benedict XVI, Letter, 7 July 2007.) Maintaining the rites of the usus antiquior, including the Divine Office, the sacraments and sacramentals, is not a personal “choice”: it is the conviction that, at this time in the history of the Church, they are necessary to guarantee a continuity of faith and life with the Church founded by Christ on the Apostles, at a time when other means do so less effectively or are at times hijacked for ends utterly inimical to the Deposit of Faith. This is not to malign the good will of many of those in authority, or of clergy, religious and laity who have struggled for decades, and who continue to struggle, to be faithful, often in the face of much opposition and, at times, from bishops and other ecclesiastical superiors. Nor is it to question the validity of the newer rites when celebrated correctly. This is, however, to underline the pastoral necessity, that is, the necessity for the salvation of souls, of free access to the Church’s unadulterated rites and teaching: something that the fruits produced by communities who celebrate them make abundantly evident. Sadly, this is a reality which still seems to be ignored. What, then, can we do when the choice seems to be between disobedience and dissolution? This is no small question, and we do well to consult St Thomas Aquinas and other sound theologians on its implications. In doing so, we find that material disobedience to positive law, as distinct from Divine law, can, extraordinarily, be tolerated for a truly necessary good: a father must feed and protect his family. There is no virtue in allowing them to starve to death or to be destroyed by danger. At certain times we must act outside the norm. And, as the fourth century martyrs of Abitene teach us so eloquently, sacramental starvation is not tolerable: sine dominico, non possumus (without the Sunday Eucharist, without the liturgy and the sacraments, we simply cannot live). But first and foremost, we must pray. In the context in which we find ourselves, the counsel of this morning’s Epistle is particularly pertinent: “Keep sane and sober for your prayers,” St Peter insists. So too he urges us: “Above all hold unfailing your love for one another, since charity covers a multitude of sins. Practice hospitality ungrudgingly to one another. As each has received a gift, employ it for one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace.” Prayer, charity, hospitality and mutual service are most certainly necessary at all levels of the Church in our times, and persevering in each of them will bring many graces, particularly for those who are persecuted or who, as it were, find themselves “ecclesiastically displaced”. In these days when we await the coming of the Counsellor whom Our Lord promises to send us from the Father, we can, then, each redouble our prayers that the Spirit of Truth shall truly inhabit those in authority and, as we shall sing in the Sequence of Pentecost, flecte quod est rigidum, fove quod est frigidum, rege quod est devium. (Bend what is inflexible, warm what is chilled, correct what has gone astray.) Not only should we beg Almighty God to send the Holy Spirit to melt the hearts that govern the Church, we should also implore Him in particular to fill the Holy Father with His sevenfold gifts of wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord in the exercise of his unenviable but utterly crucial duty to protect the integrity of the Deposit of Faith and the unity of the Church under it, of which the Sacred Liturgy is the living source and sacramental. The Holy Father needs our prayers at this time! Let us begin praying earnestly that, through the inspiration and gifts of God the Holy Spirit, charity and Truth will prevail on all sides and all talk of excommunication shall cease; that true hospitality will be shown; and that those who have been given the gift of the episcopacy and papacy will employ them, as good stewards, in the service of all their flock after the example of the Good Shepherd Himself (cf. Jn 10). With the help of our prayers, through the power of God the Holy Spirit, this can yet come to pass. Dom Alcuin Reid is the Prior of the Monastère Saint-Benoît in Brignoles, France, www.monasterebrignoles.org

The Society of St Pius X has issued a forceful public response to Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández’s warning that planned episcopal consecrations without papal approval would constitute “a schismatic act”, arguing that the Society is acting out of necessity for the “salvation of souls” The Society of St Pius X has issued a forceful response to Cardinal Fernández’s warning that planned episcopal consecrations without papal approval would constitute “a schismatic act”, arguing that the Society is acting out of necessity for the “salvation of souls” and therefore incurs no automatic excommunication under canon law. The response was published on 15 May by the Society’s official in-house news service, through Fr Jean-Michel Gleize, the French professor at the seminary at Écône who took part in doctrinal discussions with Rome between 2009 and 2011. The intervention follows a statement issued two days earlier by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, who warned that the episcopal consecrations announced by the SSPX “do not have the corresponding pontifical mandate”. Cardinal Fernández said: “This gesture will constitute ‘a schismatic act’ (John Paul II, Ecclesia Dei, n. 3), and ‘formal adherence to the schism constitutes a grave offense against God and entails the excommunication established by Church law’.” The cardinal added that the Holy Father was praying that the Society’s leaders would “retrace their steps regarding the very serious decision they have taken”. Fr Gleize’s reply interpreted the Vatican declaration as confirmation that Pope Leo XIV will refuse to grant authorisation for the consecrations expected to take place on July 1. “The novelty that appears in this declaration from Rome,” Fr Gleize wrote, “is that the episcopal consecrations scheduled for July 1st will not be ‘accompanied by the corresponding papal mandate’. Coming from a Prefect of a Vatican dicastery, this remark is quite clearly an attempt to convey to the Society that Pope Leo XIV will refuse to authorise the consecrations.” Fr Gleize based much of his argument on Canons 1323 and 1324 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, maintaining that a person acting out of necessity, or under the sincere belief that such necessity exists, is not subject to automatic penalties. Quoting canon law directly, Fr Gleize argued that a person who violates a law “out of necessity, or to avoid serious harm, is not punishable by any penalty”, provided the act is not “intrinsically evil or causes harm to souls”. He further contended that even if Church authorities judged the act objectively wrong, “the penalty of latae sententiae is not incurred” where the accused acted in good faith under a perceived necessity. “In other words,” Fr Gleize wrote, “even if one admits that there is no real necessity to justify the act, the mere fact that the perpetrator committed the act driven by what he believed to be a real necessity is sufficient to excuse him from the crime.” The SSPX professor insisted that the Society’s intention remained the good of the Church rather than rebellion against papal authority. “This is why it disregards this application of ecclesiastical law that would accuse it of a crime and impose the corresponding penalty,” Fr Gleize stated. “Why? Simply because ecclesiastical law cannot be applied to the detriment of the salvation of souls.” Fr Gleize added: “In all reality, there is no wrongdoing, no schism on the part of the Fraternity. But only the same zeal which remains unchanged, even if it takes on paradoxical forms in the eyes of the world, for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.” The response concluded with an unusually confrontational passage directed at senior churchmen associated with more progressive currents in the Church. “Excommunicated? But by whom?” Fr Gleize asked. “By those who receive the blessing of a schismatic woman, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally? By those who authorise the blessing of Fiducia Supplicans? And who kneel before Pachamama?” Cardinal Fernández’s statement had drawn immediate comparisons with events preceding the 1988 consecrations carried out by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre at Écône without papal mandate. Shortly before those consecrations, Cardinal Bernardin Gantin, then prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, issued a formal canonical warning to Archbishop Lefebvre declaring that such an act would incur automatic excommunication. “Since on June 15, 1988 you stated that you intended to ordain four priests to the episcopate without having obtained the mandate of the Supreme Pontiff,” Cardinal Gantin wrote, “I myself convey to you this public canonical warning.” His Eminence added: “If you should carry out your intention as stated above, you yourself and also the bishops ordained by you shall incur ipso facto excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.” Archbishop Lefebvre nevertheless proceeded with the consecrations on June 30, 1988, leading Pope St John Paul II to issue the motu proprio Ecclesia Dei, which described the act as schismatic. The SSPX has long disputed that interpretation, insisting that Archbishop Lefebvre acted in a state of necessity amid what the Society viewed as a profound doctrinal and liturgical crisis in the Church following the Second Vatican Council. The latest public exchange between Cardinal Fernández and Fr Gleize now appears to indicate that tensions between Rome and the Society are entering a new and potentially decisive phase ahead of the proposed July consecrations. Photo credit: Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith

Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana in Kazakhstan, has said that excommunicating the SSPX would be “not synodal” and warned that, if the Pope were to excommunicate the Society, “this will go down in history as a huge error of rigidity”. Speaking to EWTN’s The World Over with Raymond Arroyo, the 65 year old […] Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana in Kazakhstan, has said that excommunicating the SSPX would be “not synodal” and warned that, if the Pope were to excommunicate the Society, “this will go down in history as a huge error of rigidity”. Speaking to EWTN’s The World Over with Raymond Arroyo , the 65 year old prelate spoke openly about the planned July episcopal consecrations by the Society of St Pius X, which have led to reports that the entire Society and its faithful could find themselves excommunicated. Bishop Schneider pointed to what he described as a contradiction in the approach, saying that the Vatican is “promoting the inclusivity of synodal methods and are generous with the German Synodal Way” as well as being “generous with the Communist Chinese Party to grant them to ordain bishops there”, whilst coming down with full ecclesial force on the Society of St Pius X. The bishop further said that he had written to the Pope asking him to give the SSPX permission to consecrate bishops “as a first step to integrate them, to create an atmosphere of mutual trust”. He also appealed directly to the Pope during the interview, saying: “Holy Father, please avoid such a wound in the Church which you can avoid.” Throughout the interview, Bishop Schneider was notably more forgiving towards the Society than other prelates have been when discussing the its canonical irregularity. He said that he did not think they were “schismatics” and that they “love the Pope, pray for the Pope, and want simply to have the guarantee to transmit the faith of all times without any ambiguity”. When the topic turned to whether the concerns of the SSPX were purely related to their attachment to the Tridentine Mass, the bishop responded by saying “the problem is deeper”. Acknowledging their criticisms of parts of the Second Vatican Council, he said: “There are ambiguities in some council texts. There are ambiguities in the post-conciliar Magisterium.” He also appeared grateful for the role played by the Society in raising such questions about the Second Vatican Council, telling Arroyo that “we must be honest, and therefore we must be thankful to the Society of Pius X to address it publicly”. Appointed a bishop at the age of 49 by Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop Schneider has long been associated with the traditional Latin Mass and the communities attached to it. In 2015 he was appointed by the Holy See to carry out visitations to two SSPX seminaries. After the visit, he stated that “there are no serious reasons to deny the clergy and faithful of the Society of Saint Pius X official canonical recognition”. At present, every indication points towards the Society of St Pius X consecrating bishops on July 1, with a website recently created requiring attendees to complete compulsory registration “for security reasons”. Photo by: Monegasque2 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=48468039

The Society of St Pius X has opened official registration for pilgrims wishing to attend the priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations at Écône this summer, with organisers insisting that registration will be compulsory “for security reasons”. A new multilingual website launched by the seminary authorities says: “Access to the ceremonies is reserved for registered attendees. […] The Society of St Pius X has opened official registration for pilgrims wishing to attend the priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations at Écône this summer, with organisers insisting that registration will be compulsory “for security reasons”. A new multilingual website launched by the seminary authorities says: “Access to the ceremonies is reserved for registered attendees. Please complete your registration below.” The ceremonies, which will take place from June 29 to July 2 at the International Seminary of Saint Pius X in Switzerland, are expected to attract thousands of faithful from across Europe and beyond. Visitors are asked to register according to their category, including “Faithful”, “Clergy”, “Organised Group” and “Press / Media”. The website describes the gathering as four “days of grace” centred on the priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations in the “majestic setting of the Écône meadow”. A countdown clock on the homepage marked 43 days remaining before the ceremonies at the time of publication. The programme published by the organisers provides one of the clearest indications yet of the scale and detailed planning surrounding the event. Priestly ordinations will begin on Monday, June 29, with a Pontifical Mass of Ordination scheduled for 9am in the meadow at Écône, followed by first blessings from the newly ordained priests and Pontifical Vespers with Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. The following day will include a series of first Masses celebrated by the newly ordained priests at various locations around the seminary grounds. The schedule published online includes Masses to be celebrated by Fr Bunge, Fr Braun, Fr Richter and Fr Hernanz. The episcopal consecrations themselves are due to take place on Wednesday, July 1, beginning at 9am, followed later in the day by Pontifical Vespers and Benediction. A final Pontifical Mass celebrated by one of the newly consecrated bishops is scheduled for Thursday, July 2. The website also includes a dedicated section titled “Our Future Bishops”, inviting visitors to “discover the priests who will receive episcopal consecration at Écône” and to “support them with your prayers and encouragement”. No further official details about the candidates for episcopal consecration had been published in the section at the time of writing. The launch of the portal appears intended not only to organise pilgrim access but also to coordinate accommodation and transport for the large international crowds expected to travel to the Swiss Alps. The organisers have published accommodation listings under sections marked “Private hosts” and “Partner hosts”, while a dedicated carpooling system allows pilgrims to offer or request transport. Users are instructed to create accounts in order to participate in the ride-sharing system, which allows searches “by city”. The seminary authorities have also published extensive logistical guidance under a “Plan my visit” section, including travel information, maps and practical instructions for pilgrims attending the ceremonies. The scale of the preparations points to the significance of the upcoming consecrations for the Society of St Pius X, founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1970. Écône has occupied a central place in the history of the Society since Archbishop Lefebvre established the seminary there following the reforms after Vatican II. The Swiss seminary became internationally known in 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops without papal mandate alongside Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, prompting Rome to declare that the bishops involved had incurred automatic excommunication. The Vatican later lifted the excommunications of the surviving bishops in 2009 under Pope Benedict XVI, although the Society’s canonical situation within the Church remains unresolved. The forthcoming consecrations have already attracted widespread interest internationally, particularly because episcopal consecrations at Écône remain comparatively rare and historically significant events in the life of the Society. The new registration system now makes clear that attendance at the ceremonies will be tightly controlled through advance accreditation and organised access procedures. Image credit: DICI – http://www.dici.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/econe_11.jpg, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=53945183

Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk has issued one of the strongest episcopal critiques yet of the Synod on Synodality Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk has issued one of the strongest episcopal interventions yet against the Synod on Synodality’s treatment of moral theology. The Dutch Cardinal has warned that the final report of Study Group 9 risks undermining settled Catholic teaching on sexuality and the nature of moral truth itself. Writing in the National Catholic Register , Cardinal Eijk said the report “fundamentally contradicts Catholic moral teaching and thoroughly undermines its application to moral conduct”, adding that the document “must be forcefully refuted”. The report at the centre of the controversy, entitled Theological Criteria and Synod Methodologies for Shared Discernment of Emerging Doctrinal, Pastoral, and Ethical Issues , was produced by one of 10 study groups established by Pope Francis in February 2024 after the Synod assemblies concluded that insufficient time remained to address several contentious themes before the final Vatican gathering later that year. Study Group 9 had been tasked with examining doctrinal and ethical questions initially described as “controversial”. The report later explained that the phrase had been replaced with “emerging issues” as part of what it called an “authentic paradigm shift” inspired by the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. Particular controversy has surrounded the inclusion of testimonies from two men in same-sex “civil marriages”. One contributor from Portugal described building “a life of shared faith and service with my husband”, while another American witness wrote that his sexuality “isn’t a perversion, disorder, or cross; it’s a gift from God. I have a happy, healthy marriage and am flourishing as an openly gay Catholic”. The report stated that one testimony “bears witness to the discovery that sin, at its root, does not consist in the (same-sex) couple relationship, but in a lack of faith in a God who desires our fulfilment”. Cardinal Eijk said the authors reproduced the statement “without correction or clarification”. “Homosexual acts are intrinsically evil – this is settled Catholic doctrine,” Cardinal Eijk wrote. “A believing Christian who engages in such acts certainly falls short in faith, insofar as he fails to trust in God’s grace, which enables him to avoid sin. But this does not mean the sin lies primarily in lack of faith rather than in the act itself, as the witness suggests.” His Eminence also criticised the report’s treatment of Courage International, the apostolate founded in New York in 1980 to help Catholics with same-sex attraction live according to Church teaching. The American testimony portrayed Courage negatively, suggesting that it “separates faith and sexuality” and associated it with conversion therapy. Cardinal Eijk argued that by presenting such testimonies without doctrinal response, the report effectively normalised homosexual relationships within a Church context. “This represents a clear attempt to weaken the proclamation of Catholic moral teaching,” Cardinal Eijk said. Much of Cardinal Eijk’s criticism focused not only on sexuality but on the report’s wider theological method. The study group rejected what it described as the “abstractly proclaiming and deductively applying principles that are set out in an immutable and rigid manner”, instead advocating what it termed a “fruitful tension” between doctrine and lived experience. The report also insisted that discernment should avoid “a problem-solving perspective” and should not presume “to deduce action from the simple application of norms”. Instead, local Churches were encouraged to prioritise listening and dialogue rather than “pre-packaged” doctrinal solutions. Cardinal Eijk said such language concealed “a radical departure from Catholic moral theology”. Referring to the report’s use of Christ’s words that “the Sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the Sabbath”, His Eminence wrote: “This is a fundamental misreading of Scripture.” Cardinal Eijk argued that the report confused changeable ritual law with the permanent moral law rooted in creation. “The moral law concerning marriage and sexuality is of an entirely different character,” Cardinal Eijk wrote. “These norms flow from the natural law, which reflects God’s purposes in creating human beings, marriage and sexuality itself.” His Eminence then restated traditional Catholic teaching on marriage in classical terms, writing that “sexual differentiation and openness to life are essential elements” of marriage as a “mutual total self-giving between a man and a woman”. Cardinal Eijk added that “sexual acts between persons of the same sex cannot constitute such a total gift because they are closed to the transmission of life by their very nature”. Study Group 9 repeatedly insisted that its aim was not to produce “generalisable solutions” but to initiate “processes in the form of listening”. The report argued that moral understanding should emerge gradually through dialogue across cultures and local Churches rather than through the direct application of universal norms. For Cardinal Eijk, that approach strikes at the heart of Catholic moral teaching. “The Church’s teaching is not obscure, nor is it subject to revision through synodal processes,” Cardinal Eijk wrote. “It is the truth that sets us free.” His Eminence concluded by stating that “a number of cardinals and bishops will make their objections known to the Roman Magisterium.”