Some Questions
for Archbishop Andrew Chang-Mu Choi of the Kwangju Archdiocese in Korea
May 9, 2005
Your Excellency,
We express our deep respect and love for Your
Excellency, who is a successor of the Apostles personally chosen by Our
Lord and the supreme shepherd in the diocese. We are lay people of the
Church who are justly called to totally accept and follow Your
Excellency's teachings and directives on Naju and other matters.
Unfortunately, however, we have been experiencing some confusion and pain,
as we have not been able to reconcile some of the contents of Your
Excellency's announcements concerning Naju with our faith and conscience.
Even so, our respect and love for Your Excellency will remain unchanged,
as it is inseparably connected with our loyalty to the Lord and His
Church. It is our ardent desire that we can always accept and follow the
teachings and guidance of the shepherds without any hesitation or doubt
just as children follow their parents' words with love and humility. We
also know that our life in the Church can be peaceful and secure only when
we follow our shepherds with trust and love.
At the same time, we realize that our faith and
obedience in the Church cannot be a blind one but must flow from a free
exercise of our intellect and will, aided and illuminated by the graces
from the Holy Spirit. The faithful will experience true joy and gratitude
when they can see the pure beauty and power of the truths being taught by
the shepherds and embrace them willingly and fully through a free use of
their minds and hearts, without any coercion from the outside. It is
unthinkable that a forced faith and an imposed obedience are what Our Lord
wants. The Church has been unequivocal about the importance of freedom in
the life of the faithful:
To obey (from the Latin ob-audire, to "hear or
listen to") in faith is to submit freely to the word that has been
heard, because its truth is guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself.
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, #144)
To be human, "man's response to God by faith
must be free, and . . . therefore nobody is to be forced to embrace the
faith against his will. The act of faith is of its very nature a free
act." God calls men to serve him in spirit and in truth. Consequently
they are bound to him in conscience, but not coerced. (Catechism
of the Catholic Church, #160)
Men tend by nature toward the truth. He is
obliged to honor and bear witness of it: "It is in accordance with their
dignity that all men, because they are persons . . . are both impelled
by their nature and bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth,
especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth
once they come to know it and direct their whole lives in accordance
with the demands of truth." (Catechism of the Catholic Church,
#2467)
"Nobody may be forced to act against his
convictions, nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance
with his conscience in religious matters in private or in public, alone,
or in association with others, within due limits." This right is based
on the very nature of the human person, whose dignity enables him freely
to assent to the divine truth which transcends the temporal order.
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, #2106)
Since, like all the faithful, lay Christians are
entrusted by God with the apostolate by virtue of their Baptism and
Confirmation, they have the right and duty, individually or grouped in
associations, to work so that the divine message of salvation may be
known and accepted by all men throughout the earth. (Catechism
of the Catholic Church, #900)
All the faithful share in understanding and
handing on revealed truth. They have received the anointing of the Holy
Spirit, who instructs them and guides them into all truth. (Catechism
of the Catholic Church, #91)
"The whole body of the faithful . . . cannot err
in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural
appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people,
when, 'from the bishops to the last of the faithful,' they manifest a
universal consent in matters of faith and morals." (Catechism of
the Catholic Church, #92)
The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting
the truth in our relations with others. This moral prescription flows
from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is
the truth and wills the truth. Offenses against the truth express by
word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral uprightness: they are
fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the
foundations of the covenant. (Catechism of the Catholic Church,
#2464)
In the light of the above-quoted Church teachings, it
seems obvious that the faithful should listen to and follow their
shepherds with love and humility but this obedience must not be a blind
one that precludes free exercise of the faithful's intellect and will.
God, who is the truth itself and the infinite love itself, will never give
us what is untrue; and the shepherds in the Church also, who teach the
faithful with the truths from God and distribute to the faithful the
sacramental graces from God must always make their best efforts not to
misrepresent God's truths by distorting, diluting, blocking or omitting
them. The Church teaches concerning this subject:
"Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the
Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed
on to it. At the divine command and with the help of Holy Spirit, it
listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication, and expounds it
faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed
is drawn from this single deposit of faith." (Catechism of the
Catholic Church, #86)
This means that the divine teaching authority
entrusted to the shepherds in the Church is not intended to appoint them
as sources of the truths or judges over the truths, but only to authorize
them to officially discern whatever is proposed as truth in the light of
the Lord's own teachings and to propagate faithfully what has been
received from the Lord. It is essentially an authority with which the
shepherds can serve the Lord and His people. Also when the faithful have
any questions or concerns about any of the teachings or actions by the
shepherds, they can freely but sincerely bring their questions to the
shepherds and also share their concerns with other faithful to help each
other in the search of the true teachings of the Lord. The Church
declares on this subject as follows:
"In accord with the knowledge, competence, and
preeminence which they possess, [lay people] have the right and even at
times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters
which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make
their opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to
the integrity of faith and morals and reverence towards their pastors,
and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, #907)
Based the above Church teachings, we would like to
present the following questions to Your Excellency:
1.
In the most recent declaration of May 5, 2005 and the previous
similar documents issued by Your Excellency, the importance of obedience
to the teaching authority of the Church was strongly emphasized. It was
also indicated that Julia Kim and her supporters were disobedient by
refusing to abandon the messages and miraculous signs from Our Lord and
Our Lady. But, if Julia Kim and her supporters are convinced that these
messages and miraculous signs are truly coming from God, how can they
comply with Your Excellency's demand to desert them? Is it not requesting
a blind obedience from them, as there has never been any clear and valid
explanation of the reasons of why the events in Naju are in conflict with
the Church teaching and, therefore, are not coming from God? Of course,
Julia and her supporters wish to be obedient both to God and to Your
Excellency, but what if they see that the two are in conflict with each
other? To them, neglecting and abandoning the messages and signs from Our
Lord and Our Lady would be the same as betraying Them.
2.
With letters, in publications, and in sites on the Internet, we
have repeatedly raised a number of specific questions concerning the
Kwangju declarations on Naju, but have not received any answers yet except
the repeated demands for unconditionally accepting the decision to condemn
the events in Naju. Do the faithful not have the right to receive sincere
and sensible answers and explanations from their shepherds to their
questions on important religious issues? Is it right and fair that they
only keep hearing demands for blind obedience without ever hearing any
valid reasons that can justify these demands? The following is a summary
of the questions we have raised concerning Naju:
a.
The number of people who have personally experienced or witnessed
miraculous signs in Naju may be in the hundreds of thousands or more. The
Naju investigating committee only briefly interviewed 14 people who were
not all direct witnesses of the miraculous signs. None of those who have
been miraculously healed of serious illnesses and have test results and
doctors' statements have been invited. Does this not indicate that the
Naju investigating committee ignored and neglected to examine the fruits
of the reported supernatural events in Naju, which in fact is one of the
most important standards for discerning the reports of supernatural
events?
b.
Pope John Paul II, two Korean bishops, and at least five foreign
bishops have personally witnessed miraculous signs through Julia Kim and
have expressed their opinions verbally or in writing. Nevertheless, none
of these Church leaders have been consulted or their views taken into
consideration by the Kwangju Archdiocese. Is this not a violation of the
principle that important decisions concerning the faith must be made in
the spirit of unity in the universal Church? Can a local church choose
and maintain a position on the faith tailored to its local conditions and
tastes but not in tune with what is upheld in the universal Church?
c.
There have already been many scientific tests on the evidences from
Naju, conducted both inside Korea and abroad. These include brain-wave
tests on Julia to determine her mental condition; DNA tests on the blood
samples taken from the Eucharistic miracles and also from the blood
descended on the thousands of little rocks on the Blessed Mother's
Mountain in Naju; and medical records on the reported cases of miraculous
healings. All these tests have indicated that the reported phenomena in
Naju are genuine and beyond the doubts of human fabrication or accidental
coincidences. However, none of these test results have been considered by
the Kwangju Archdiocese; nor have any other tests been ordered by it. Is
this not a radical deviation from the traditional methods of investigation
used by the Church? Does it not also mean that the investigation of Naju
by the Kwangju Archdiocese was seriously insufficient?
d.
In the first declaration on Naju issued in the name of Archbishop
Victorinus Youn on January 1, 1998, it was mentioned that "the strange
phenomena surrounding Julia Kim" such as tears and tears of blood from the
Blessed Mother's statue, fragrant oil from the same statue, the sufferings
and Stigmata endured by Julia, the fragrance of roses, and so on "may have
been caused by some preternatural power." Is it responsible and
appropriate to make such a statement in an official declaration of the
Church without any valid, factual grounds? In the Gospel, we read that
even Our Lord was accused of performing miracles with the power of Satan.
Making accusations without any substantiating evidence does not belong to
the proper agenda of any committee in the Church.
e.
Your Excellency has stated several times in writing that our
salvation comes from believing what is in the Creed and not from chasing
after miracles. We never believe that messages and miracles are new
truths from the Lord. The only purpose of God's giving us messages and
miracles is to help us deepen our faith and move away from moral laxity,
especially in times of massive erosion of the faith and moral decays. In
the Gospels, we read that Our Lord performed countless miracles to
strengthen people's faith. He did not perform a single miracle when
people asked for a miracle out of curiosity and frivolity, but worked many
miracles before those with childlike minds to help them believe more
strongly that He was truly the Son of God who became incarnate to be their
Savior. Even after His Ascension, He continued to work miracles through
His Apostles and disciples as they were spreading the Good News of
Salvation (Mark 16:20). Also, in the lives of the Saints, we can easily
find records of miracles, which were signs of God's omnipotence and love.
Even though miracles are not revelations of any new teachings, they are
works of the Lord intended to prod us to repent of our sins and reform our
lives according to His teachings already entrusted to the Church. This is
why we can never ignore or belittle the genuine miracles from God. In
these times of advanced science and technology, there is a widespread
tendency to despise the supernatural works of the Lord, but this thinking
does not conform to the 2,000-year Catholic tradition that urges us to
accept the Lord's teachings and works with simple and humble minds and
hearts. Regarding the significance of miracles, the Church teaches as
follows:
"So that the submission
of our faith might nevertheless be in accordance with reason, God willed
that external proofs of his Revelation should be joined to the internal
helps of the Holy Spirit." Thus the miracles of Christ and the saints,
prophecies, the Church's growth and holiness, and her fruitfulness and
stability "are the most certain signs of divine Revelation, adapted to the
intelligence of all"; they are "motives of credibility" (motive
credibilitantis), which show that the assent of faith is "by no means a
blind impulse of the mind." (Catechism of the Catholic Church,
#156)
In the light of the above
teaching, has the Kwangju Archdiocese not been taking miracles too lightly
and negligently and guiding the faithful to do so as well? The First
Vatican Council gave a stern warning to those with a modernist mindset
that despises miracles: "If anyone shall have said that miracles are
not possible, and hence that all accounts of them, even those contained in
Sacred Scripture, are to be banished among the fables and myths; or, that
miracles can never be known with certitude, and that the divine origin of
the Christian religion cannot be correctly proved by them: let him be
anathema." (DS #3034)
f.
Many times already we have indicated that some doctrinal errors
seem to be contained in Archbishop Youn's declaration and subsequent
documents on Naju issued by the Kwangju Archdiocese. For example,
Archbishop Youn's declaration stated that the species of the Eucharist
must remain unchanged even after the consecration by a priest, and
thus condemned the Eucharistic miracles in Naju and, by implication,
condemned all the previous Eucharistic miracles in Church history, many of
which were officially approved by the Church. Until now, we have heard
nothing from the Kwangju Archdiocese on this issue. A misrepresentation
or distortion of a Church doctrine is an extremely serious
matter—especially when it was publicly presented by a bishop. It may be a
case of misusing the teaching authority. Also, if no swift and complete
correction is made even after it becomes clear that a doctrinal error has
indeed occurred, there is a possibility of heresy. We anxiously await a
reply from Your Excellency.
g.
We have indicated the possibility of several additional doctrinal
errors in the documents issued by the Kwangju Archdiocese. For example,
it was stated that the Eucharist could begin to exist only through the
consecration by a validly-ordained priest, and, based on this, the
miraculous descents of the Eucharist from above in Naju were condemned.
Of course, normally, there is no question that the existence of the
Eucharist requires the consecration by a priest during Mass. But does
this mean that even Our Lord Himself cannot come to us in the form of the
Eucharist? Is the Eucharist not Our Lord Himself? What about the many
cases of the Saints in Church history having received Communion directly
from the Lord or an angel without requiring consecration by a priest?
h.
Rev. Soon-Sung Ri, who participated in the Naju investigating
committee of the Kwangju Archdiocese as a dogmatic theologian, contributed
an article to the Pastoral Care magazine (the March 1998 issue)
published by the Korean Bishops' Conference, two months after the
pronouncement of Archbishop Youn's negative declaration on Naju on January
1, 1998. In it, Father Ri proudly stated that the real reason for the
negative decision on the Eucharistic phenomena in Naju was to pursue
the grand proposition of unity with the Protestant brethren. In other
words, the Eucharistic miracles in Naju, which attest the Real Presence of
Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, could not be accepted, because they
might hurt the feelings of our separated brethren, who can only recognize
the symbolic presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, and thus reduce the
prospect for reconciliation with them. We believe that sacrificing the
truth in seeking unity will only lead to false unity and represents an
outright betrayal of God, Who is the truth itself and wills that we live a
life of truth. The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council warned us
against this dangerous idea of unity at all costs: Nothing is so
foreign to the spirit of ecumenism as a false irenicism which harms the
purity of catholic doctrine and obscures its genuine and certain meaning
(Unitatis Redintegratio, November 21, 1964).
During one of the
interviews with Julia and Julio Kim a few years ago, Your Excellency
mentioned that the purpose of Archbishop Youn's investigation was not to
determine if the miracles were genuine but to see if they harmed unity in
the church community. In our opinion, the focus of this investigation was
totally misplaced. How can the unity among humans be the standard in
discerning the divine messages and works? Must we accept compromise of
the truth and abandonment of the facts so as to achieve an external and
superficial unity?
We believe that the serious current conflicts in the
Church in Korea concerning Naju are not a question limited to Naju or the
Kwangju Archdiocese only but a surfacing of a much wider problem in the
Church in general with deep roots that began spreading a long time ago.
Especially since the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council, the
precious teachings of the Council have been interpreted and applied by
many progressively-minded theologians and their followers in their own
prejudiced context that has lacked respect for and loyalty to the Catholic
Faith and Tradition and has promoted new ways of accommodating to the
secular ideas and values and placing human agenda ahead of God's. We have
already seen the emergence of many heretical teachings and reforms
proposed and implemented by the progressive forces in the Church. The
authentic Catholic teachings on Christ Himself and His Church, the Holy
Eucharist, the Blessed Mother, the importance of the Sacrament of
Confession, the need for our self-denial and participation in the Lord's
work of atonement for human sins, the importance of liturgical discipline
as well as moral discipline, the need for unity with and obedience to the
Pope, the value and dignity of priesthood, the sanctity of marriage and
family, and so on have been under constant attacks by the liberal members
of the Church. The supernatural messages and miraculous signs in Naju, as
those in other Marian manifestations of the past centuries, must be stern
and urgent responses from Heaven. They are warnings that urge us to
reform our lives and also are encouragements and offers of special help
for us to overcome the present crisis. Defeating the deep-rooted errors,
pride, apathy, and abuse of power will not be easy, and the devil and his
forces will continue interfering and inflicting harms. We can be
successful, however, if we realize the seriousness of our times and offer
up our entire lives to the realization of the Lord's Will, totally relying
on the Blessed Mother's immaculate power which God has entrusted to her
for the purpose of achieving victory in this spiritual war.
May the Lord and the Blessed Mother bless Your
Excellency and everyone who works with Your Excellency.
Sincerely yours,
Witnesses of Our Lady in Naju
|