Search Statements

Monday, January 30, 2017

Statement of Bishop Rhoades on Executive Order on Refugees

The Church stands firm in its commitment to the defense of the life and dignity of the human person and to the promotion of the common good. Just last week, I joined over 1,000 young people from our diocese at the March for Life in Washington, D.C., where we publicly witnessed to the dignity of the unborn child. It was a joy to bear witness to the Gospel of Life.

Our commitment to the Gospel of Life also includes the defense of the lives of so many innocent people who are victims of violence, war, religious persecution, and terrorism. The number of refugees in the world today, persons who have had to flee their homes because their lives are in danger, is staggering. The Church has been a leading agent in caring for and helping refugees, including resettling so many men, women, and children in our country. I am proud of the excellent work of our own diocesan Catholic Charities in this area of service to these “least of our brothers and sisters.”

I am saddened by the Executive Order of our president which suspends the entry of refugees into our country for 120 days, which indefinitely stops the admission of Syrian refugees, and which bars people from seven predominantly Muslim countries for 90 days. Many refugees are fleeing from ISIS and other extremists. They are victims and are looking for safety. Many are children. I cannot imagine what it must be like for a father or mother to be in such desperate straits, only desiring the safety and wellbeing of their family.

Clearly our government has a responsibility to protect the safety and security of the United States. Certainly we must be vigilant lest terrorists infiltrate the refugee population. But, as many attest, including our Church agencies involved in refugee settlement, “the U.S. is already using a thorough vetting process for refugees, especially for those from Syria and surrounding countries” (Sean Callahan, CRS President). Fear should not lead us to forsake the innocent, of whatever nation or religion, whose lives are in danger.

We must remember the criteria by which Jesus said we will be judged, including whether or not we welcomed the stranger among us. “I was a stranger, and you welcomed me,” Jesus said, in the parable of the last judgment, to those granted entry into His Kingdom. “I was a stranger and you gave me no welcome,” Jesus said to those who were sent to eternal punishment.

Finally, it is important to keep in mind our responsibility to work for and promote the common good. The common good is not only the good of our nation, but also the good of the human family, the universal common good. Our brothers and sisters in the human family who are refugees are crying out for our compassion and love. Let us pray fervently for refugees, for their safety, and for a renewed openness in our country to welcoming these brothers and sisters in need.

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Regarding the Orlando shooting


"I encourage all the faithful of our diocese to pray for the victims of the terrible massacre in Orlando and for their families and friends. We condemn such hate-inspired violence while also reaffirming the need to counter such violence with love and respect for the life and dignity of all people as children of God. In our sorrow over this senseless tragedy, we turn to the Lord with faith that His goodness and love triumphs over evil and hatred." — Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades

Monday, March 14, 2016

Concerning the decision of Notre Dame to honor Vice-President Biden and former Speaker Boehner with the Laetare Medal

STATEMENT OF BISHOP RHOADES

In response to many inquiries, Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend, the diocese where the University of Notre Dame is located, offers the following statement about the granting of the Laetare Medal by the University of Notre Dame to Vice-President Joseph Biden and former Speaker of the House John Boehner:

The Laetare Medal is given by the University of Notre Dame ‘in recognition of outstanding service to the Church and society.’ Several months ago, Father John Jenkins, C.S.C., the president of the university, discussed with me his consideration of conferring the Laetare Medal upon Vice-President Joseph Biden and former House Speaker John Boehner, two Catholics who have served in public office for many years, elected officials of different political parties. Father Jenkins made it clear to me that in recognizing Vice-President Biden and Speaker Boehner, Notre Dame would not be endorsing the policy positions of either, but rather, would be honoring them for their public service in politics. I know that this honor is also an attempt to recognize two Catholics from different political parties at a time when our national politics is often mired in acrimonious partisanship. I appreciate Notre Dame’s efforts to encourage civility, dialogue, mutual respect and cooperation in political life.

While I understand Notre Dame’s intentions in conferring the Laetare Medal upon Vice-President Biden and Speaker Boehner, I disagree with the decision. In dialogue with Father Jenkins about this matter some months ago, I shared with him my concerns with honoring the Vice-President. I believe it is wrong for Notre Dame to honor any “pro-choice” public official with the Laetare Medal, even if he/she has other positive accomplishments in public service, since direct abortion is gravely contrary to the natural law and violates a very fundamental principle of Catholic moral and social teaching: the inalienable right to life of every innocent human being from the moment of conception. I also question the propriety of honoring a public official who was a major spokesman for the redefinition of marriage. The Church has continually urged public officials, especially Catholics, of the grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that supports or facilitates abortion or that undermines the authentic meaning of marriage. I disagree with awarding someone for ‘outstanding service to the Church and society’ who has not been faithful to this obligation.

I realize that Notre Dame is trying to separate or distinguish the conferral of the Laetare Medal upon the recipients from their positions on public policies. I do not think this is realistically possible or intellectually coherent. To accomplish the goal of promoting cooperation, civility, and dialogue in American politics, I think it would have been better if Notre Dame had invited Vice-President Biden and Speaker Boehner to speak at Notre Dame on this topic rather than bestow an honor that can provoke scandal. My principal concern about this whole matter is scandal. In honoring a “pro-choice” Catholic who also has supported the redefinition of marriage, which the Church considers harmful to the common good of society, it can give the impression to people, including Catholics in political office, that one can be “a good Catholic” while also supporting or advocating for positions that contradict our fundamental moral and social principles and teachings.

Notre Dame serves the Church and my diocese in many exemplary ways and I strive to serve the community of Notre Dame through my active presence and involvement on campus. For the sake of the unity of the Church and the Church’s witness in society, I wish we could overcome disagreements which, at least in the public eye, can overshadow the good collaboration that goes on in other areas of Catholic life and mission.

We need to reflect more deeply on the meaning and significance of the bestowal of honors in relation to the Catholic identity and mission of our institutions. I would encourage Notre Dame and other Catholic colleges and universities to “raise the bar” in considering the granting of honors. I believe a higher standard is needed. There are many important values which we seek to teach, uphold, and live in our Catholic colleges and universities. These are the values we should look for in the lives of those we wish to honor. We should seek to honor those who act to protect human life and dignity from conception to natural death, who respect true marriage and the family, who promote peace, justice, religious freedom, solidarity, the integral development of the poor, the just treatment of immigrants, and care for creation. We should not honor those who may be exemplary in one area but gravely irresponsible in another.

If we honor Catholic politicians or public officials, we should make sure there is a basic consistency between their political decisions and sound Catholic moral and social teaching. We should not honor those who claim to personally accept Church teaching, but act contrary to that teaching in their political choices. We should choose for honors those whose lives and work are exemplary in witnessing to the Gospel and disqualify those who dissent from the truths and values we profess and hold dear. When we do so, when we “raise the bar,” so to speak, we not only avoid scandal, but we also have an opportunity to recognize and thank authentic witnesses to the Catholic faith for their fidelity. We also lift them up in a way that may inspire others to imitate their example.

Pope Francis is calling all of us to embrace the challenge of a missionary spirituality. He refers to “a sort of inferiority complex which leads to relativizing or concealing our Christian identity and convictions.” He also warns against a “spiritual worldliness that consists in seeking not the Lord’s glory but human glory.” I think this counsel is also relevant in decisions about conferring honors.

I recommend to all the document of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. Though it does not directly address the issue of awards to public officials, I believe it gives important principles relevant to this matter and can be a helpful guide in discerning criteria for bestowing honors.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Catholic Identity, Planned Parenthood and the Gospel of Life

This past week, I was contacted by numerous people who expressed serious concern about a recent public display by some students and faculty at Saint Mary’s College that positively portrayed the services of Planned Parenthood. I was very saddened to learn that this show of support for an organization that is the largest abortion provider in our country occurred at a Catholic college in our diocese. At the same time, I have been heartened by those students, faculty and alumnae of St. Mary’s College who are committed to the cause of life and the authentic good of women and have expressed their opposition to Planned Parenthood and any positive portrayal of this organization.
The actions taken by the students and faculty in support of Planned Parenthood illustrate that even at a Catholic college, there are those who cling to the conviction that Planned Parenthood is an organization dedicated to the well-being of women. While I do not doubt the sincerity of those who hold this view, I do challenge them to seriously re-examine for what this organization stands in light of our common humanity and our Catholic faith. 
From its very beginning, Planned Parenthood came into existence as a means to promote the eugenicist vision of its founder, Margaret Sanger. Consider the astonishing words with which she expounded this worldview in her book, The Pivot of Civilization, published in 1922:
“The lack of balance between the birth rate of the ‘unfit’ and the ‘fit,’ admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. The example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit, and therefore less fertile, parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective. Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon American society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupid, cruel sentimentalism.” 
The fact that Planned Parenthood continues to operate clinics primarily in poor, minority neighborhoods raises the question whether this original vision still largely informs its strategy and its mission today. Planned Parenthood’s own website states that 80 percent of its clients receive “services” to prevent unintended pregnancy, and that the provision of contraception constitutes over a third of all the organization’s activity. From a Catholic point of view, contraception does not constitute true health care because it neither preserves nor restores the proper functioning of the body, but rather, damages one of its natural functions. In fact, there is increasing evidence that when a woman’s fertility is suppressed through the use of synthetic hormones, she is exposed to serious health risks. Especially in light of Pope Francis’ call in Laudato Si for a greater respect for human nature and an integral ecology, can’t this be seen as a lack of stewardship and care for the ecology of our human bodies? Even more problematic is the fact that the most effective contraceptives available today can also function as abortifacients. Is it any wonder that the first feminists condemned both abortion and contraception as offensive and injurious to women? Instead, they called both men and women to mutual respect and self-restraint in marriage as a way to live responsible parenthood. To the extent that Planned Parenthood does provide any legitimate health services for women — such as cancer screenings or testing for sexually transmitted diseases — those services are already widely provided by others. Community health centers, for example, provide free or low-cost services to 22 million patients in urban and rural areas and outnumber Planned Parenthood clinics 13 to 1. 
Many people have come to believe that contraception is part of the solution to the problem of abortion. What is becoming increasingly clear, however, is just how closely abortion and contraception are connected. Contraception is not part of the solution to the culture of death — it is part of the problem. This is because contraception attempts to sever the link between sex and procreation, which, if unsuccessful, can be definitively accomplished through an abortion. In his 1995 encyclical, The Gospel of Life, Pope John Paul II emphasized this connection:
“Despite their differences of nature and moral gravity, contraception and abortion are often closely connected, as fruits of the same tree. It is true that in many cases contraception and even abortion are practiced under the pressure of real-life difficulties, which nonetheless can never exonerate from striving to observe God’s law fully. Still, in very many other instances such practices are rooted in a hedonistic mentality unwilling to accept responsibility in matters of sexuality, and they imply a self-centered concept of freedom, which regards procreation as an obstacle to personal fulfillment. The life which could result from a sexual encounter thus becomes an enemy to be avoided at all costs, and abortion becomes the only possible decisive response to failed contraception.” 
One in three abortions in our nation is currently performed at a facility operated by Planned Parenthood, up from one in five abortions in 2005. In a strategy designed to increase their market share, Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) in 2010 stipulated that, by 2013, every affiliate must have one or more clinics that perform abortions on site. A few affiliates left PPFA rather than comply with this requirement, but most did not. That this strategy was successful is evidenced by the fact that as in 2013 alone — the last year for which complete data is available — Planned Parenthood affiliates performed 327,653 abortions. In fact, 94% of the “services” that Planned Parenthood provides for pregnant women are abortions, either surgical or medical, (by means of the abortion drug RU-486), outnumbering other options 16 to 1. In fact, since 1970, Planned Parenthood facilities have aborted over 5 million unborn children, and abortions currently account for over one-third of the organization’s income. 
Pope Francis has called abortion the product of a “widespread mentality of profit, the throwaway culture, which has today enslaved the hearts and minds of so many.” When he addressed the bishops of the United States during his historic visit to our country in September, Pope Francis urged us not to look the other way or remain silent in the face of such evils: 
“The innocent victims of abortion, children who die of hunger or from bombings, immigrants who drown in the search for a better tomorrow, the elderly or the sick who are considered a burden, the victims of terrorism, wars, violence and drug trafficking, the environment devastated by man’s predatory relationship with nature — at stake in all of this is the gift of God, of which we are noble stewards but not masters. It is wrong, then, to look the other way or to remain silent.”
The Gospel of Life is a seamless garment covering many issues involving human life and dignity. Respect for human life from the moment of conception is an integral part of the message of salvation and the mission of the Church, and the first principle of its social teaching upon which every other human right is founded. Catholic institutions, including Catholic colleges and universities, must not look the other way or remain silent in the face of attacks against the most vulnerable human beings among us, those as yet unborn. According to the apostolic constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae, “Catholic ideals, attitudes and principles penetrate and inform university activities” in all aspects of campus life at a Catholic college or university. 
Catholic identity is not only about what we stand for; it is also about what we will not stand for. Just as we would be rightly scandalized to see a public display portraying a racist organization like the Ku Klux Klan in a positive light, so too, we expect Catholic colleges to refuse to lend any kind of respectability to organizations like Planned Parenthood that play such a significant role in the culture of death. Authentic freedom, academic or otherwise, is always linked to the service of truth and love. It is also ordered to the formation of the human person in truth and love, formation in which Catholic colleges and universities play a critical role.
Saint John Paul II summoned us to do better by the young adults with whose formation we have been entrusted in this beautiful but difficult area of life: “It is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not help the young to accept and experience sexuality and love and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection. … Only a true love is able to protect life.” 
— Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades

Friday, June 26, 2015

Concerning the Supreme Court Decision Ruling Same-Sex Marriage Legal Nationwide.

Statement from Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend

I am saddened, yet unsurprised, by the Supreme Court’s decision to redefine marriage in our country. In our society in recent years, we have seen a cultural shift in which the truth about the meaning and purpose of marriage has been obscured by excluding the essential complementarity of man and woman, treating sexual difference as if it were irrelevant to what marriage is. Making same-sex unions equivalent to marriage disregards the very nature of marriage as naturally ordered toward authentic union and the generation of new life.

I believe that today’s decision is unjust in that it ignores the unique and proper place of husbands and wives and especially the rights of children to a mother and father. It essentially makes equal what are essentially different realities: same-sex unions and marriage.

While we must uphold the human dignity of homosexual persons and their basic human rights, no one has the right to alter the truth about marriage as established by God. The Supreme Court’s mandating of a new definition of marriage that is contrary to the divine and natural law is, as our U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops states, “a tragic error.”

I worry about the consequences of this decision for our religious liberty in teaching, upholding, and acting in accord with the truth about marriage as known by right reason and divine revelation. I call upon our Catholic faithful to continue to proclaim by word and example the true meaning of marriage even in the face of unjust and false accusations of bigotry and discrimination. We must continue to follow our Lord and to act in conformity with our faith, whether popular or unpopular. We must love all our brothers and sisters, including persons with same-sex attraction, while also upholding the true meaning of marriage.



Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Regarding the Midterm Report from the Synod of Bishops

October 14, 2014

I appreciate this opportunity to share my thoughts about the midterm report from the Synod of Bishops, a report that has been the subject of many news reports and commentaries.

I must begin with the declaration issued by the Vatican today in light of the reactions in the media to yesterday's report. The Holy See Press Office reiterated that yesterday's report is "a working document which summarises the interventions and debate of the first week and is now being offered for discussion by the members of the Synod gathered in the small groups." The Vatican explained that "often a value has been attributed to the document that does not correspond to its nature." I think this is very important to keep in mind.

I do not think it is accurate to say that there is a "seismic shift'' taking place in the Church on issues that are being discussed. I agree with Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, one of the Synod delegates, who said that the document is a draft and did not represent any kind of "earthquake" in Church teaching.

I think it is important to look at the whole report and not just a few excerpts. It is important to see the affirmation of Church teaching on marriage and the family and the importance of pastoral care of the family. At the same time, clearly there is a lot of debate, not on doctrine, but on how the Church welcomes, reaches out, and assists those who live in what we consider to be "irregular situations," such as cohabitating couples, divorced and remarried couples, and same-sex couples. How do we reach out with God's love and mercy to those living in situations that fall short of the ideals of the Gospel? There is a lot of debate going on regarding this issue. There seem to be disagreements among the bishops at the Synod regarding solutions to the pastoral challenges facing the Church, especially in the West, because of the increased numbers of people not living according to the Church's teaching on marriage and the family.

In my opinion, it is good to study and debate how the Church might do a better job in making people in the above-mentioned irregular situations feel welcomed as brothers and sisters in the Church. Here in our diocese, we have been working hard in this area. We have ministries for the separated, divorced, and the divorced and remarried and for persons with homosexual inclinations. I don't want anyone to feel excluded from the warmth of the Church's love which should mirror the love of Christ. I think many of the bishops at the Synod are also concerned with the language the Church uses in regards to persons living in irregular situations, language that may alienate, rather than attract, people.

# # #

Declaration of the Director of the Holy See Press Office on behalf of the General Secretariat of the Synod:

The General Secretariat of the Synod, in response to reactions and discussions following the publication of the Relatio post disceptationem, and the fact that often a value has been attributed to the document that does not correspond to its nature, reiterates that it is a working document, which summarises the interventions and debate of the first week, and is now being offered for discussion by the members of the Synod gathered in the Small Groups, in accordance with the Regulations of the Synod.

The work of the Small Groups will be presented to the Assembly in the General Congregation next Thursday morning.

Thursday, June 26, 2014

Statement of Catholic Bishops of Indiana Same-Sex Marriage Decision

STATEMENT OF THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS OF INDIANA
Re:  Same-Sex Marriage Decision, Baskin v. Bogan, 1:14-CV-00355-RLY, 2014 WL 1568884 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 18, 2014)

The dignity of the human person, rooted in his or her creation in the image and likeness of God, is a fundamental principle of Catholic social teaching. The Church upholds the dignity of every human person, including persons with same-sex attraction, whom we accept and love as our brothers and sisters.

At the same time, the Church upholds the dignity and sanctity of marriage as a natural union established by God between one man and one woman, intended towards the establishment of a family in which children are born, raised, and nurtured.  This is not simply a matter of belief. It is at the very heart of the nature of marriage. Thus, it is not within the power of any institution, religious or secular, to redefine marriage since it is God who is its author.

Today's decision by Richard L. Young, Chief Judge United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana,  to redefine the institution of marriage as an emotional partnership between two consenting adults regardless of gender ignores this fundamental and natural truth of marriage and opens its definition to the whims of public opinion.

With deep respect for all our brothers and sisters, we nevertheless see no basis in law or in nature for any definition of marriage that seeks to expand it beyond that of a covenant between one man and one woman.  Our position on this matter seeks only the common good of all men and women as well as the health and well being of families.

As pastors, we will continue to preach and teach the truth of marriage as it is ordered by God, encouraging all people to embrace the fullness of that truth, while upholding the dignity of all persons.  We will continue to work through the Indiana Catholic Conference to encourage our legislators and judges to uphold this truth as well.  We urge all involved in this issue to conduct themselves with mutual respect and civility in public discourse.

Most Reverend Joseph W. Tobin, C.Ss.R., D.D.
Archdiocese of Indianapolis 

Most Reverend Christopher J. Coyne, S.L.D.                              
Archdiocese of Indianapolis

Most Reverend Charles C. Thompson, D.D., J. C.L.
Diocese of Evansville            
 
Most Reverend Kevin C. Rhoades, D. D.  
Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend  

Most Reverend Dale J. Melczek, D.D.
Diocese  of Gary

Most Reverend Timothy L. Doherty, D.D., Ph.D.
Diocese of Lafayette-in-Indiana



1400 N. Meridian Street · Indianapolis, IN 46202
(p) 317-236-1455                                                 (f) 317-236-1456
indianacc.org                                                        icc@archindy.org