The Prohibition of Certain Groups Devoted to Luisa
As for the decision of a few episcopates to prohibit in their respective dioceses certain lay groups from promoting interpretations of the poor translations of Luisa’s writings, noteworthy is Archbishop Peter Chung Soon-taick of the Seoul Archdiocese in South Korea and, more recently, Bishop James Golka of Colorado Springs.
First, Archbishop Peter Chung Soon-taick. In 2023 and based on the opinion reached by the Committee of the Korean Bishops’ Conference, he prohibited the continuation of a lay group devoted to Luisa and revoked permission to publish books related thereto on account of doctrinal and spiritual errors. Reasons that precipitated this prohibition included concerns that those who attended this group “unintentionally spread false devotion or cause confusion in the Church;” “in this book, through the ‘Fiat’ project, Piccarreta is elevated to a special position in the history of salvation, comparable to, and even surpassing, Jesus and the Virgin Mary;” presenting Luisa as “opening up a new era of salvation in the church,” which “subordinates Christ’s work of salvation.”
I wish to emphasize that the Korean bishops’ concerns appear to be well founded, as nowhere in Luisa’s original Italian text will one find the above false teachings, which appear to be the result of a lack of proper theological guidance.
Second, Bishop James Golka. In his recent letter of 2024 he refers to the cause being temporarily on pause and, citing “publicly” from an alleged “confidential” alleged letter of April 18, 2024, prohibits the dissemination of her writings and the gathering of any groups meeting to study and promote her writings. He adds, however perplexingly, that Luisa’s writings have “doctrinal errors” despite the fact that neither the Vatican, the Archdiocese entrust with her cause nor the confidential letter he publicly cites attribute ‘doctrinal errors’ to her original Italian original texts, several of which enjoy the Church’s present-day official seals of approval. Rather the letter the good bishop cites refers to “difficulties” - not ‘doctrinal errors’ - which may be clarified and resolved with theological contributions and clarifications. Consider, for example, the ‘difficulties’ identified by the Vatican in the writings of St. Faustina Kowlaska and Blessed Antonio Rosmini, all of which were later, through theological contributions, clarified, resolved and approved. It would appear to me that the good bishop intended to express that if doctrinal errors exist, they are not to be found in Luisa’s original text, but in its poor present-day translations.
Thus the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints and the Doctrine of Faith have determined that in this period of reflection, a deeper study of and contributions by theologians is required to clarify some of Luisa’s expressions and language, the result of her limited education, dialect, cultural milieu, environment and religious ethos of the life of the community in which she wrote.
Canon Law Grants the Christian Faithful the Right to Gather
Allow me to cite canon 215 of the Church’s Code of Canon law that all clerics and laity are obliged to uphold: “The Christian faithful are at liberty freely to found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world and to hold meetings for the common pursuit of these purposes.” Inasmuch as one cannot prohibit the Christian faithful from holding meetings that adhere to those teachings and devotions that are in conformity with Magisterial teaching, and insofar as several of Luisa’s published works enjoy the seals of approval of the same Magisterium that remain in full effect today, e.g., The Hours of the Passion, the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Kingdom of the Divine Will, etc., one cannot prohibit them from holding said gatherings. However, if what is being taught or observed in these gatherings contradicts Magisterial teaching, a cleric may intervene either to ensure that canon 223 §2 is not neglected, e.g., providing proper theological guidance or, if those attending said gatherings refuse such guidance or compliance with the Magisterium, to prohibit such gatherings.
It is noteworthy that an alleged letter (private or alleged) does not constitute an official public Church document and, as such, does not constitute grounds for prohibiting the Christian faithful from gathering.
Fr. J.L. Iannuzzi, STL, S,Th.D.
July 21, 2024
Негізгі бет Ep 22: Online Lessons w Fr. Iannuzzi- Prohibiting Certain Groups Devoted to Luisa & St Hannibal
Пікірлер: 28