Bishop Kevin Farrell

The Chief Shepherd of the Catholic Diocese of Dallas

Connect

4-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision in United States v. Texas

By

United States v. Texas

It is ironic that the Supreme Court deadlock on the appeal of the injunction blocking President Obama’s 2014 deferred action executive order, was announced simultaneously with the publication of a study done by the Public Religion Research Institute and The Brookings Institution called “How Immigration and Concerns about Culture Changes Are Shaping the 2016 Election.” This study indicates how out of sync Washington is with American citizens on immigration Policy.

SCOTUS’ 4-4 split let the lower court ruling blocking the injunction stand and dashed the hopes of an estimated four million immigrants whose threat of deportation had been deferred by the executive order. They are men and women who have been in the U.S. since 2010, have not committed any serious crimes and have children who are American citizens.

This case reflects an anti-immigrant movement that is antithetical to the feelings of most Americans as illustrated by the Public Research Institute document. The Religion Institute found that  “Close to six in 10 white Americans (57%) and more than seven in ten black (71%) and Hispanic Americans (75%) favor a policy that would offer illegal immigrants a chance to become citizens.” Among religious groups, “62 percent of Catholics, 61 percent of Protestants and 69 percent of black Protestants favor a citizenship path for immigrants and 49 percent of white evangelical Protestants favor allowing immigrants living here illegally to become citizens.”

Xenophobia appears to be a disease of Pennsylvania Ave. more than of Main Street where mercy is more abundant.

Pope Francis, on his visit to Washington, addressed Congress and cautioned against allowing immigration challenges to overwhelm us noting that, “We must not be taken aback by their numbers, but rather view them as persons, seeing their faces and listening to their stories, trying to respond as best we can to their situation,” and “respond in a way which is always humane, just and fraternal. We need to avoid a common temptation nowadays: to discard whatever proves troublesome.”

Let us pray for all those mothers and fathers and their children who now live in constant fear that their families will be torn apart.

—

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

Catholic teaching on the Sacrament of Marriage

By

Catholic Teaching on the Sacrament of Marriage

In light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision finding same-sex marriage as a constitutional right, some Catholics feel confused and somewhat apprehensive. I would like to make several observations to put the situation in context.

Catholic teaching on the Sacrament of Marriage remains as it always has been: marriage is the sacred lifelong commitment of one man and one woman and is about creating new life and the next generation. This requires both a man and a woman. The SCOTUS ruling addresses the civil definition of marriage. It confirms same-sex marriage as a civil right.

The court’s ruling also ensures the First Amendment rights of religious organizations, holding that “Religions and those who adhere to religious doctrines may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere convictions that by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.” (Page 27) The same section confirms our First Amendment rights to the free practice of religion.

Of course, there will be no same-sex marriages in Catholic churches. But, it is important to state that while the Catholic Church can never condone same-sex marriage, the Church makes clear that persons with a homosexual orientation “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church Par. 2358) This acceptance of gay and lesbian people must be real and not merely symbolic. The Church, in her mission, is committed to reaching out to all people.

As a result of this action by SCOTUS, we know some are taking it as one more opportunity to characterize the Church and the Catholic faithful as bigots opposed to a fundamental human right guaranteed by the constitution. This is nothing new. In opposing the abortion rights granted by Roe vs. Wade, the Church is in a similar situation. Of course, we are not alone in our opposition.

There are those who see this as the oft referred to “slippery slope,” foreseeing dark days ahead for the Church in America. The Church has seen much darker days. It is no stranger to adversity. The New York Times (May 15, 2008) described Catholics as “a persecuted minority in colonial New York … denied all religious and civil liberties except for a few years in the 1680s when the Catholic Stuart monarchs ruled England.” The first Catholic parish was not established in New York until 1785.

Lord Calvert’s Maryland colony was composed of Catholics fleeing the English penal laws against the practice of Catholicism. Many German immigrants came to America seeking refuge from Bismarck’s Kulturkampf in the 1870s.

Yet a Christian consensus around biblical morality emerged.

President John Quincy Adams wrote, “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.” That consensus has been destroyed, first by legislation and adjudication, and later by the recasting of biblical teachings on morality by some religious bodies.

As Catholics, our response to these legal and societal changes is still the same: to proclaim the gospel in word and deed and to witness the healing and forgiving love of Jesus. St. John Paul II pointed the way in his encyclical Redemptoris Missio, “The Church addresses people with full respect for their freedom. Her mission does not restrict freedom but rather promotes it. The Church proposes; she imposes nothing. She respects individuals and cultures, and she honors the sanctuary of conscience. To those who for various reasons oppose missionary activity, the Church repeats: Open the doors to Christ!”

—

Image credit: bm.iphone on Flickr

A response to the SCOTUS ruling on marriage

By

A response to the SCOTUS ruling on marriage

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a ruling that redefines the civil definition of marriage. Marriage, as understood in the Catholic faith, has always been and still is the sacred lifelong commitment of one man and one woman. Marriage as the union of one man and one woman predates all nations, laws and constitutions. Marriage is not only a relationship of love between two persons who are committed to one another, but it is also about creating the next generation — this requires both a man and a woman.

The same Constitution that has now been held to open civil marriage to same-sex couples confirms and protects the Church’s right to carry forward the historic teaching of the Church regarding the Sacrament of Marriage.

As Catholics we believe in the dignity of each and every human being made in the image and likeness of God. As such, we accept all persons with respect, compassion, and sensitivity and must be mindful that, even in polarizing times, there is no place for derision or smugness. I pray that all persons who hold dear the civil liberties afforded by the United States Constitution will join us in working to safeguard the rights of people of faith to live and exercise that faith as they believe God requires.

I ask all to pray for the sanctity of the Sacrament of Marriage and to join me in continuing to always pray for our country.

—

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons

Bishop Farrell’s Red Mass Homily in Washington

By

 The following was delivered at the annual Red Mass at Washington’s St. Matthew’s Cathedral on Sunday, October, 6.

For me, there is something of a “homecoming” occurring here this morning.  As many of you know, I came to the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. in 1982 and was ordained auxiliary bishop here in 2002.   In 2007 I was not told “go West, young man,” but I was told by the Holy Father to “go Southwest” and so it is there that I am blessed to serve as the bishop of the sprawling Diocese of Dallas, Texas.

When I have thought about this homecoming for me here today, I pondered the words of Robert Frost, who wrote “Home is the place where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in.”   Far more than that, I find a kind welcome each and every time I return to this archdiocese and want to thank Cardinal Wuerl for this opportunity to be with you today.

In preparing for this homecoming, I also thought about the title of Thomas Wolfe’s book, You Can’t Go Home Again.  It is the story of a fledgling author who writes a book and makes several references to his hometown.  The book is a national success but the residents of the town were unhappy with his depiction of them and so sent him menacing letters and death threats.

I would hope that what follows may be as invitational as is your welcome to me and that it confirms you in your faith and trust in God. I also hope that it gives each of us something to think about and to ponder.  Many of us, myself included, often ask “What did you think of the homily?”  Might I suggest that another question today might be, “What did you think about differently in light of the homily?” My hope is that if you find some of these words particularly challenging, they would not be so troubling that you preferred I followed Thomas Wolfe’s instruction [And] Not Come Home Again (!).

The Red Mass finds its origin in mid-thirteenth century France, and takes its name from the color of the vestments we wear today to recall the descent of the Holy Spirit with tongues as of fire as recounted in the Acts of the Apostles (2:3).  The reading continues to say that those gathered were devout Jews from more than a dozen places and who spoke a variety of languages. However, on that Pentecost day, they could understand each one speaking in his own language (2:7).

In point of fact, the background to the way the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost is recounted here in Acts comes from the 11th chapter of the book of Genesis.  There in Genesis, believers who were united in language and purpose decided to build a tower in order, as the Bible recounts, “to make a name for themselves” (Gn. 11:4).  One more time pride goes before the fall.  God finds out about this and goes down to them, confuses their language so that they cannot understand each other and scatters them to the ends of the earth. Thus they leave behind the tower, now to be called Babel “Because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth… [And] from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the earth.” (Gn. 11:8-9)

If you Google the word “babble” from “the free dictionary,” it states that babble means “To utter a meaningless confusion of words or sounds. Babies babble before they can talk.” In fact, the devout Jews at Pentecost were initially more like babblers whose speech became clear only through the coming of the Holy Spirit.   Pentecost is Babel undone.

Pentecost is clear speech over babbling, insight over ignorance, true wisdom over knowledge alone, the common good over individual privilege or individual ideology, communication over confusion, true humility over self-deceiving pride, and praying and speaking in God’s name over trying to make a name for oneself. That is what this liturgy celebrates, and even more.

I am not the first person to comment that we seem to live at a time of highly polarized and polarizing rhetoric. In that sense, today, we are more like Babel than Pentecost, we are more about confusion than wisdom, more separated in and by rhetoric than united. Among the things that we celebrate at this Mass today is the countercultural reality of God’s very spirit hovering over us as it did at the beginning of Genesis to create clarity out of chaos, (Gen. 1:1-2)  and, as the Holy Spirit did at that first Pentecost, he now bestows wisdom, clarity, insight and, yes, unity.

Please notice that I did not say uniformity.  I deliberately said unity because the Holy Spirit is the source of unity on all that matters and the source of variety in and among the differences we have that make us who we are.

It also means that we can and should debate, refine positions, truly listen to each other and seek consensus on essentials and respect details that may well be different.  The history of Catholicism is that there is a kaleidoscope of figures in our theological tradition to which we can turn and on whom we rely for a history of evolving and ever refined theological ideas and statements in our teaching called the magisterium. In essentials unity, but there was diversity between even medieval masters such as St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventure, to cite just two from a compelling time and highpoint in our theological tradition, the rise of the Catholic universities.

The same is true in the church today and should be in our world today.  We exacerbate tensions and deepen polarizations when we caricature another’s position and, worse, when we caricature another person.

We believe in the dignity of each and every human being made in the image and likeness of God.  We may disagree. But there can be no place for derision or smugness.  Especially at this time of particular polarizations, we need to be reminded that we Catholics have every right to register what we believe in the public square and do it with pride and conviction.  However, in a pluralistic society, we also need to be respectful of those who do not agree with or follow our teachings.

If dialogue means anything, it means not only that we take another seriously but it means that we revere the other as a fellow human being with gifts and talents from God.  If honest and respectful dialogue means anything, it means that we need to strike a balance in our words and rhetoric so that conviction should never become stridency and saying things with commitment should never become caricaturing anyone else’s positions or beliefs.

E pluribus unum means just that. It does not mean one size fits all.  And it does not mean “I Did It My Way” has replaced the national anthem.

When I visualize what e pluribus unum means I think of the church of the Shrine of the Sacred Heart at the corner of Sixteenth Street and Park Road, about a 10-minute drive from here.

It is a very special place in the archdiocese, served by Capuchin Friars. Built by Irish and German immigrants at the end of the 19th century, the parish now serves many immigrant populations. Sunday Masses are in four languages.  Each weekend Mass is celebrated once in Vietnamese, once in Creole, twice in English and five times in Spanish.   A little Pentecost happens every weekend at Sacred Heart. E pluribus unum indeed.

The parish also does what so many parishes do today.  They welcome the stranger in our midst in new and ever-changing circumstances.  The immigrants who built the church building and the immigrants who populate the church today had and have different needs. The languages spoken are many, and it is from the many languages that we and they offer praise and thanks to God for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness on these shores.  There may be many languages spoken on the Fourteenth Street corridor but there is among so very many a common purpose; many languages yet a common purpose to better themselves and the lives of their families and the nation where they have made their home.  The history of our nation is a living proof of this common goal.

The parish also helps to give voice to the voiceless.   It is there that the Holy Spirit’s power breaks in like tongues of fire and driving winds to continue the welcome of Miss Liberty in saying “give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses….”

With pride the Catholic Church can say that the poor are welcomed by the Spirit, called the “father of the poor” (Sequence Pentecost Sunday). And we can say with pride that we serve all in need not because they are Catholic but because we are Catholic.  That is our mission and ministry.  That is not just what we do; it is who we are. With pride the Catholic Church serves the Fourteenth Street corridor in this city, which was destroyed when race relations meant race riots in this federal city less than 50 years ago. Yet from the ashes has risen the phoenix of prosperity, multicultural diversity and economic success.  There are countless “Fourteenth Streets” in our nation and countless Sacred Heart Churches which serve them.  The term “catholic” means “universal.”  This is the universal church in miniature on the street of this, my adopted hometown.

All of this is an expression of the abiding presence and power of the Holy Spirit whom we invoke today at this Mass on our nation’s highest court and on our nation’s elected officials.

Petty partisanship and ever-politicizing rhetoric should have no place at all when men and women of goodwill come together to serve the common good.

In a few moments we will consecrate bread and wine to become the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  We do this by invoking the name and power of the Holy Spirit. And we will then pray that this sacred meal might make us “one body, one spirit in Christ.”

Those are not merely high hopes; they are high ideals always realizable in and through the Holy Spirit.

When we admit our differences in honesty, then there is the possibility of unity in diversity.

When we offer our gifts that differ as a result of the Holy Spirit dwelling in us, then we can together do something beautiful for God and country.

When we see and revere in the other person of a different color or creed or ethnic background the image and likeness of God, then we together can move forward as God’s pilgrims on this good earth.

When we remove obstacles in the way of welcoming the stranger in our midst, then we truly reflect the best of what this country stands for as a nation of immigrants.

When we respect differences of opinion in dialogue, we respect and revere the differences that provide variety and give texture to this great country of ours, made so by others having welcomed our forefathers and mothers.

When we recognize and revere the many cultures that comprise this great nation and the many languages, we speak as we seek to be one in mind and heart, then we live the gospel of good news with all peoples, to the ends of the earth.

This Eucharist is about confirming what is the best of our church’s teachings about how the Holy Spirit continues to guide, inspire and renew.

It is about shoring up a unity that is begun at the waters of baptism and is strengthened by this eucharistic food.  In that sense all the baptized find here and in every church a home.  May the possibility of a homecoming never be made impossible because of narrow-mindedness or mean-spiritedness.  May it be possible because of what is represented in the breaking of one bread and sharing the one cup of salvation.

In the end, we are a nation and a church whose best instincts and interests lie in homecoming at its very best. That means eschewing Thomas Wolfe’s You Can’t Go Home Again.  We can always come home.  And it means capitalizing on Robert Frost’s words, “Home is the place where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in.”   More than that, home is the place where, when you go, no matter who you are, they want to take you in. And to them, by word and deed, we would say what my Irish parents said and my relatives say to this day:

“Cead mile failte.”

“A hundred thousand welcomes.”

May God bless you all with the gift of his wisdom.

Photo Credit: John Carroll Society photo by Christopher Newkumet

SCOTUS is out of bounds

By

In an op-ed column Friday ,Washington’s Cardinal Donald Weurl in commenting on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act pointed out that “Far from settling the debate over the meaning of marriage, the Supreme Court decisions have simply reminded all of us that there is a great difference between what a law can decree and what God has created.” (Washington Post, June 29, 2013)

It reminds us of the attempt in 1894 by the Indiana State Legislature to redefine pi in order to make it possible to square a circle. Fortunately the bill did not pass. The legislators recognized that even the government cannot change the laws of nature by fiat.

Unfortunately a majority of the justices on the Supreme Court failed to recognize that reality when it comes to marriage. Like the nature of a circle, the nature of marriage is not subject to governmental fiat. Marriage is not a creature of government and therefore is not subject to its jurisdiction.

Cardinal Wuerl further notes “Marriage is the word used in many translations across human history to signify the permanent, faithful and fruitful union of one man and one woman. It is the only institution that brings a man and a woman together in a partnership for life directed toward their mutual support and the generation and education of children. This is a human community that predates government.

“Marriage is not simply a committed relationship of any two adults, the Cardinal states, adding “No matter what a court, legislator, president or voter may claim to the contrary, the essence of marriage cannot be redefined. Its meaning is intrinsic, grounded in human nature and discoverable by human reason with or without the aid of faith.”

Government can address the legal consequences of any union and may choose to call it a marriage but as previously noted the action on the Supreme Court simply reminds us “that there is a great difference between what a law can decree and what God has created.”