Politicising a funeral message

19884123_1597082450303992_1991844372893705580_nPope emeritus Benedict XVI’s message for the funeral of Cardinal Joachim Meisner, read out at said funeral by his personal secretary Archbishop Georg Gänswein (at right), has become the most discussed part of the impressive ceremony at Cologne cathedral. And it is a beautiful text, personal, full of fond memories of the late cardinal, outlining Cardinal Meisner as a prayeful man with a deep love for the sacraments, for the Eucharist Lord and for the Church of eastern Europe, but also as a passionate shepherd who found it hard to leave his office “at a time when the Church had a pressing need for shepherds who would oppose the dictatorship of the zeitgeist, fully resolved to act and think from a faith standpoint.”

The blogging bishop of Lancaster, Michael Campbell, has a good translation of the Pope emeritus’ words. One line that has been highlighted from this has been the following:

“Yet I have been all the more impressed that in this last period of his life he learned to let go, and live increasingly from the conviction that the Lord does not leave his Church, even if at times the ship is almost filled to the point of shipwreck.”

Although it is a line deserving of attention, it has been abused by too many who wanted to see it as a judgement on the current affairs in the Church, and especially as a criticism against Pope Francis. In my opinion, this is does not do justice to either Benedict XVI’s intentions or Cardinal Meisner’s memory.

What should we take away from that line? That the the ship of the Church is about to be shipwrecked (the original German text speaks of ‘Kentern’ – capsizing)? Or is it that God does not leave His Church? Surely it is the last, as that was the conviction of Cardinal Meisner, one he increasingly learned to live from and be inspired by. Yes, in Germany, and Europe as a whole, the future of the Church does not seem rosy. That is a reality that Cardinal Meisner had to live with, but certainly not one that can be attributed to recent events alone. The papacy of Pope Francis hardly stood at the cradly of the decline. In his own papacy, from the very beginning even, Pope Benedict XVI spoke of it as well. No one would read the lines quoted as a criticism against his own papacy. Because it’s not, and neither is it aimed at what Francis does or fails to do. Rather, it serves as a realistic image of what Cardinal Meisner struggled with and how, towards the end of his life, he learned to live with it: by seeing and understanding that, no  matter how bleak things seem, the Lord does not abandon His Church. Not when Francis is Pope, and not when Benedict was.

This is a lesson to be learned from the life of Joachim Meisner, not a tool to put two Popes in opposition against one another.

EDIT: In Italian daily Il Giornale, Archbishop Gänswein commented today on the misuse of Benedict XVI’s words, saying that the Pope emeritus intended no criticism against Pope Francis. “The Pope emeritus was arbitrarily exploited with this sentence which alludes to nothing concrete,” the archbishop said. He also repeated that Pope Benedict XVI’s words were written on the request of Cardinal Woelki, the archbishop of Cologne.

Photo credit: Erzbistum Köln on Facebook

After 5 years, Müller to go? What we know and can expect

Cardinal_Gerhard_Mueller_in_St_Peters_Basilica_at_the_installation_Mass_of_Bishop_Maurizio_Malvestiti_on_Oct_12_2014_Credit_Lauren_Cater_CNA_CNA_10_13_14Suddenly, an increase in rumours that Cardinal Gerhard Müller is to be let go as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith appeared tonight. Should the rumours prove true, what can we say about it now?

To be precise, the cardinal is not so much being let go or fired, but simply completes his five-year term. Cardinal Müller was appointed on 2 July 2012, so his mandate ends on Sunday. Should he not be appointed for a second mandate, it would mean that he is the first prefect to complete only one. Until 1963, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was headed by the Pope himself. After the death of Pope Saint John XXIII, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani was pro-prefect from 1965 to 1968, after which Cardinal Franjo Šeper served until 1981. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger served until his fifth term, when he was elected as Pope Benedict XVI in 2005. He appointed Cardinal William Levada to succeed him: he served until 2012 (1.5 terms ended by his reaching the retirement age of 75). Cardinal Müller was then called from Regensburg to take up what is generally considered to be the first position in  the Curia.

Cardinal Müller is 69, reaching the mandatory age of retirement on New Year’s Eve 2022. What is in store for him in the meantime? His name was mentioned in relation to recent vacant dioceses in Germany, especially Mainz. But the Church in Germany is currently in the luxurious position of having all its dioceses filled, and only three dioceses, Hildesheim, Fulda and Würzburg, are expected to need a new bishop within the next year. None of these are traditional cardinalatial sees, and an appointment to one of them, no matter how worthy, will be seen as a demotion of sorts. That said, to many Pope Francis is no stranger to demoting cardinals: one need only look at Cardinal Raymond Burke, who went from leading the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura to the largely ceremonial position of Patron of the Order of Malta. As someone on social media joked: we need more orders for all the cardinals that are being sacked… That said, the Grand Master of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre, Cardinal Edwin O’Brien, is 78 and thus overdue for retirement…

The most interesting question of all, though, is: who has Pope Francis picked to succeed Cardinal Müller? Who will be the Holy Father’s choice to have the final say on all matters doctrinal in the Church (on behalf of the Pope, though)? Will he even pick a new prefect, or is it too far-fetched to think he may return to the pre-1963 practice of leading the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith himself? Stranger things have happened, after all.

 

When will the rumours make way for facts? It could be as early as tomorrow, so keep an eye on that Holy See press bulletin shortly after noon.

Photo credit: Lauren Cater/CNA

For five new cardinals, one new and four old title churches

The five cardinals created in Pope Francis’ fourth consistory, yesterday, received, in addition to their red birettas and a papal reminder to be servants rather than princes, a title church each. Even Cardinal Rosa Chavéz, not being an ordinary, received a title church rather than a deanery. This most likely since he has pastoral duties over a local flock rather than in the Roman curia, albeit under an archbishop with final authority.

Cardinal Gregorio Rosa Chavéz is also the only cardinal of the five to receive a new title church, that is a church that has never been a title church before. Santissimo Sacramento a Tor de’ Schiavi was built in the 1960s and consecrated in 1968.

The other four title churches all have a history – some long, some short – as cardinal title churches.

Cardinal Jean Zerbo is the cardinal-priest of Sant’Antonio da Padova a Via Tuscolana. Consecrated in 1965 and managed by the Rogationists, the church was held by one cardinal before. He was Brazilian Paulo Arns, who passed away in December and had this title since his creation in 1973.

Cardinal Juan Omella Omella has an ancient title. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme has been a title church since the 7th century. Its most recent cardinal-protector was Czech Miloslav Vlk, and others include four popes, as well as the first Dutch cardinal ever, Willem van Rossum.

19466255_10154488200545723_3516304724638275644_o

Cardinal Anders Arborelius (pictured above) was given the church of Santa Maria degli Angeli, a 16th century church previously held by American Cardinal William Keeler. The church became a title church in 1565.

Cardinal Louis-Marie Ling Mangkhanekhoun, then, hold the title of San Silvestro in Capite. Its three previous protectors all hailed from the British Isles, the most recent of whom was Irish Cardinal Desmond Connell. Among its earlier cardinal-protectors was the later Pope Clement XI.

The title churches of cardinals serve to tie them into the church of Rome. Originally, the cardinals were the priests of Rome working with their bishop, the pope. As the Church grew and cardinals resided sometimes very far from Rome, they were still appointed to a church in the city, as if to say that that was their position from which to work with the Holy Father. In reality, a cardinal has little to no influence in his title church beyond the presence of their coat of arms after they have taken possession of the church. That possession is usually taken within about a year after a cardinal’s creation, although there are exceptions: Chicago’s Cardinal Cupich took possession of San Bartolomeo all’Isola a day after his creation, while Cardial Kutwa of Abidjan waited a full three years to make Sant’Emerenziana a Tor Fiorenza his own.

The new cardinals will be appointed to serve on the various congregations and councils in the Curia wiuthin the coming months.

Photo credit: CNS photo/Paul Haring

Consistory dawning – Amid controversy, one cardinal-to-be stays at home

collegeofcardinalsTomorrow, Pope Francis will create his fourth batch of cardinals. A small group of five this time (the smallest since Blessed Paul VI’s creation of four cardinals in 1977), but one unique in its variety, both in the places the new cardinals call home and in their hierarchical positions among the world’s bishops: One is an archbishop of a major metropolitan see, the other an auxiliary bishop; one runs a diocese covering an entire country, the other a sparsely-populated stretch of mountains and jungle, while another resides in a mostly Muslim society.

Jean_ZerboThis consistory, like others before it, comes with its own developments. This time, it is Archbishop Jean Zerbo of Bamako, Mali, who is at the centre of attention. Yesterday, the news broke that he will skip tomorrow’s ceremony because of health reasons, it is claimed. A valid reason for a 73-year-old man, certainly, but one made all the more interesting by the recent discovery of several Swiss bank accounts in the name of the bishops’ conference of Mali, totalling some 12 million euros in 2007. The bishops deny any misappropriation and claim full transparency about the existence of this extensive funds. Regardless of this, questions remain about the origin and purpose of this money, as journalist Marco Politi outlines, and Archbishop Zerbo, being one of three men with access to these accounts, is the subject of scrutiny, especially now that he is to be a cardinal.

Archbishop Zerbo’s absence from the consistory also influences the ceremony. Being the first-named among the new cardinals, it was his task to address a few words of gratitude to the Pope on behalf of himself and the other cardinals. It would be logical to assume that this now falls to the second name on the list, that of Archbishop Juan Omella Omella of Barcelona.

All in all, the consistory will be an intimate affair, with the four cardinals-elect, Juan Omella Omella, Anders Arborelius, Louis-Marie Ling Mangkhanekhoun and Gregorio Rosa Chavéz, seated before the Holy Father, dressed in the cardinal red that signifies the servitude unto death as described by Jesus to his disciples in the reading from the Gospel of Mark, always used in consistories: “Whoever wishes to be great among you will be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you will be the slave of all. For the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (10:43-45)

palliumOn Thursday, the traditional first Mass of the new cardinals with the Pope will be combined with the Mass for the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, after which the pallia for the past year’s new metropolitan archbishops will be distributed. Under Pope Francis’ new rules, the actual imposition of the pallia will take place in the archbishops home dioceses. It is not mandatory for the new archbishops to attend and collect their pallia themselves, but it is expected that most of this year’s 34 will do so.

EDIT: Yesterday, it was revealed that Cardinal-designate Jean Zerbo will attend the consistory, having recovered enough from a stomach ailment that would have prevented his travelling to Rome.

A cordial first – Dutch king and queen on state visit to the Holy See

While previous visits of Dutch royals to the Pope (and, once, vice versa) were usually perfectly cordial, yesterday saw the first official state visit of the King and Queen to the Pope. Perhaps the time of Dutch political unease with full-blooded Catholicism is now finally completely behind us.

19388379_1567303419961252_5208717965966549068_o

King Willem-Alexander and Queen Máxima spoke with Pope Francis for 35 minutes about, according to the Holy See press release,  “certain issues of shared interest, such as the protection of the environment and the fight against poverty, as well as […] the specific contribution of the Holy See and the Catholic Church in these fields.” Migration, peace and security were also discussed. The Holy Father also enquered after the couple’s three daughters. As a family, they had already visited him in April of last year.

Another topic, which may have been discussed in the subsequent meeting with Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, was the ongoing kidnapping of Dutch television presenter Derk Bolt and his driver in Colombia. Foreign Secretary Bert Koenders, who also takes part in the state visit to Italy and the Holy See, has been in constant communication with his staff in The Hague and the Colombian government, and the local Catholic Church has also been involved in negotiations to free the two men from rebel movement ELN. Bolt was working to find the biological parents of a woman who was adopted by a Dutch couple, and was kidnapped earlier this week near the border with Venezuela.*

Back in Rome, meanwhile, the meeting between the Pope and the royal couple was noted for its cordiality. Like Pope Francis, Queen Máxima hails from Argentina and thus the three conversed in Spanish. It was noted how the conversation continued for a few more minutes at the doors of the audience chamber, after the official conclusion of the meeting. Pope Francis gifted the king and queen with a medal depicting Saint Martin of Tours and copies of Laudato si’, Evangelii gaudium and Amoris laetitia, and his 2017 Message for the World Day of Peace, while he received white and yellow tulips for the Vatican gardens.

Before their private audience with the Pope, the king and queen visited the Church of the Frisians near St. Peter’s Square. There, they were received by Bishop Antoon Hurkmans, rector of the Dutch national church in Rome.

Concluding the one-day state visit, the king and queen received a commander’s baton which is claimed to have belonged to William of Orange. Won by the Spanish in the Battle of Mookerheide in 1574, it now belongs to a Jesuit monastery in Spain. It is now on loan to the National Military Museum, where it will be displayed next year. Jesuit Superiro General, Fr. Arturo Sosa officially handed the baton to King Willem-Alexander in the Apostolic Library.

download (1)

Photo credit: ANP

  • Mr. Bolt and his driver were released on Friday the 23rd of June.

Four Cardinals continue their quest for clarity

The four ‘dubia’ cardinals – Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Joachim Meisner – after not receiving any official response from either Pope Francis or Cardinal Gerhard Müller on the questions they submitted to the Holy Father regarding the interpretation of specific doctrinal points in Amoris laetitia, have requested an audience with the Pope. They did so in April but, just like their original dubia, have received no response to their request. Mirroring previous actions, they have now made their audience request public. Sandro Magister has the full text, which I share below.

4cardinals

The letter was written by Cardinal Caffarra on behalf of himself and the other three cardinals.

Most Holy Father,

It is with a certain trepidation that I address myself to Your Holiness, during these days of the Easter season. I do so on behalf of the Most Eminent Cardinals: Walter Brandmüller, Raymond L. Burke, Joachim Meisner, and myself.

We wish to begin by renewing our absolute dedication and our unconditional love for the Chair of Peter and for Your august person, in whom we recognize the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Jesus: the “sweet Christ on earth,” as Saint Catherine of Siena was fond of saying. We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant, nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine “munus.” We are moved solely by the awareness of the grave responsibility arising from the “munus” of cardinals: to be advisers of the Successor of Peter in his sovereign ministry. And from the Sacrament of the Episcopate, which “has placed us as bishops to pasture the Church, which He has acquired with his blood” (Acts 20:28).

On September 19, 2016 we delivered to Your Holiness and to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith five “dubia,” asking You to resolve uncertainties and to bring clarity on some points of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation, “Amoris Laetitia.”

Not having received any response from Your Holiness, we have reached the decision to ask You, respectfully and humbly, for an Audience, together if Your Holiness would like. We attach, as is the practice, an Audience Sheet in which we present the two points we wish to discuss with you.

Most Holy Father,

A year has now gone by since the publication of “Amoris Laetitia.” During this time, interpretations of some objectively ambiguous passages of the post-synodal Exhortation have publicly been given that are not divergent from but contrary to the permanent Magisterium of the Church. Despite the fact that the Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith has repeatedly declared that the doctrine of the Church has not changed, numerous statements have appeared from individual Bishops, Cardinals, and even Episcopal Conferences, approving what the Magisterium of the Church has never approved. Not only access to the Holy Eucharist for those who objectively and publicly live in a situation of grave sin, and intend to remain in it, but also a conception of moral conscience contrary to the Tradition of the Church. And so it is happening – how painful it is to see this! – that what is sin in Poland is good in Germany, that what is prohibited in the archdiocese of Philadelphia is permitted in Malta. And so on. One is reminded of the bitter observation of B. Pascal: “Justice on this side of the Pyrenees, injustice on the other; justice on the left bank of the river, injustice on the right bank.”

Numerous competent lay faithful, who are deeply in love with the Church and staunchly loyal to the Apostolic See, have turned to their Pastors and to Your Holiness in order to be confirmed in the Holy Doctrine concerning the three sacraments of Marriage, Confession, and the Eucharist. And in these very days, in Rome, six lay faithful, from every Continent, have presented a very well-attended study seminar with the meaningful title: “Bringing clarity.”

Faced with this grave situation, in which many Christian communities are being divided, we feel the weight of our responsibility, and our conscience impels us to ask humbly and respectfully for an Audience.

May Your Holiness remember us in Your prayers, as we pledge to remember You in ours. And we ask for the gift of Your Apostolic Blessing.

Carlo Card. Caffarra

Rome, April 25, 2017
Feast of Saint Mark the Evangelist

*

AUDIENCE SHEET

1. Request for clarification of the five points indicated by the “dubia;” reasons for this request.

2. Situation of confusion and disorientation, especially among pastors of souls, in primis parish priests.

The cardinals, like before, go out of their way to express their respect for and unity with the Pope, even noting that they are in no way sedevacantist or intent on assuming some part of the Petrine ministry. Of course, too often we see anyone daring to disagree with Pope Francis being accused of undermining what the Pope wants to do, and even of being his enemies. This sort of blind and simplistic behaviour prevents honest discussion and sharing of thoughts, which, it must be repeated, was exactly what Pope Francis asked for in the runup to the two Synod of Bishops assemblies which produced Amoris laetitia.

Cardinal Caffarra and his three brother cardinals are no enemies of the Pope, nor are they rebels. They do, however, take seriously their duty as cardinals: “to be advisers of the Successor of Peter in his sovereign ministry.” And for advisers to do their work, they must first be heard…

There are many who claim that Amoris laetitia has not led to confusion, and was not intended to do so. The latter part may well be true, as has been emphasised several times by the Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Müller: the Exhortation must be read within the broader tradition of the Catholic Church. It is clear however, that confusion exists in or is being caused by the interpretations of Amoris laetitia. Another cardinal who acknowledged this, in December of 2016, was Cardinal Willem Eijk.

The letter also states that conflicting interpretations exist. The bishops of Poland and the Archdiocese of Philadelphia promote interpretations that are closer to the traditional teachings than the bishops of Germany and Malta do, just to stick with the examples mentioned. They can’t all be correct, simply because they diverge too much, and sometimes even contradict established doctrine.

A papal declaration of clarity, which, in response to the dubia, would be either a confirmation of existing doctrine or a denial or refutation thereof (and would do nothing to undermine Pope Francis’ focus on mercy, charity and pastoral care in difficult situations), would at least indicate whether individual interpretations from bishops and bishops’ conferences are in line with the intent of Amoris laetitia. Would all confusion be removed immediately? Probably not. People, Catholics included, can be a stubborn lot and individual agendas hard to let go of.

And, as an added bonus, perhaps the entirety of Amoris laetitia would then deserve its due attention, and not just those parts of it which discuss the headline topics of divorce and Communion, which have led to different interpretations.

60 years a priest – Cardinal Simonis looks back and ahead

Simonis 60 jaar kardinaal Simonis klCongratulations to Cardinal Adrianus Johannes Simonis, who yesterday celebrated the 60th anniversary of his ordination in Utrecht’s cathedral of St. Catherine. The 85 year-old cardinal was archbishop of Utrecht from 1983 to 2007 and his successor, Cardinal Willem Eijk, invited him to mark the milestone in his former cathedral, the mother church, in a way, of the entire Dutch Church province.

The fact that Cardinal Eijk had invited Cardinal Simonis, and spoke words of praise about the jubilarian’s life and work in one of the most turbulent periods in recent history for the Church in the Netherlands, may well be seen as some evidence of reconciliation between the two prelates. Following Cardinal Eijk’s arrival in Utrecht in 2008 there had been ruffled feathers because of major changes enforced by Cardinal Eijk in the running of the archdiocese and differences in style and personality between both cardinals. Yesterday, however, Cardinal Eijk concluded his address as follows:

Simonis 60 jaar receptie toespraak kl“In all these developments you always remained true to your motto, which you also quoted in your homily in this morning’s Eucharist: “Ut cognoscant te,” “That they may know you.” The goal of your entire priestly life was and still is that people will get to know and meet Christ, the Good Shepherd, who calls himself “the way, the truth and the life” (John 14:6). Through Him we come to the Father. In imitation of Jesus you sacrificed much to bring the people entrusted to your pastoral care to the full truth in the Risen Lord. We are and remain very grateful to you for that. Now that we are celebration the 60th anniversary of your ordination to the priesthood, we pray that the Lord may bless you abundantly.”

At the start of the Mass Cardinal Simonis already referred to Cardinal Eijk’s kind words, and played them a bit down, saying:

I must, however, admit that I have been far from a perfect priest, let alone a perfect bishop in the 47 years of those 60. We are only reconciled if we ask God for forgiveness and continuously return to Him. More than even, I want to pray today for this forgiveness. God has been wonderfully merciful to me for sixty years, but I want to admit to Him and you how much I have failed in even fulfilling this grace. May God be merciful to me and may he grant that we will be together in this hour, in His Spirit, who is the Spirit of truth, of love and of peace.”

In his homily, which, he says, he was advised to make more like a witness than a speech, Cardinal Simonis looked back on his life, often comparing the past with the present.

“The tragedy of my life – if I am allowed to put it like that – is the fact that [religious knowledge among the people] is extremely lacking. […] Roughly half of the Dutch population considers themselves irreligious, while the other half includes many ‘somethingists’. You often hear, “I believe there is something”. That’s it for our Good Lord! The Father and the Son reduced to ‘something’! Sadly, we live in a time of radical secularisation, which in essence means ‘getting rid of God’. There is barely room for God, let alone a personal God. Many have traded faith for indifference, despite the tireless warnings from Pope Francis at the Wednesday audiences. And if there is anything that is clear from the Gospel, from Jesus’ preaching, it is that God is a personal God. The boundless secret of God, simply described by Jesus as “Our God, who art in heaven.”

He continues on a more personal note on this topic:

“How am I under all this? Well, it is the great dark side of my life as priest and bishop. In a manner of speaking, I get up with it in the morning and go to bed with it at night. The only thing I can do now is pray that the Holy Spirit perform the miracle of conversion and true religious renewal.

Isn’t all this too pessimistic? Msgr. Jansen [first bishop of Rotterdam, who Cardinal Simonis succeeded as bishop in 1970] one told me, “You are a pessimist”. I answered him, “No, monsignor, I am a realist”. Upon which he said, “That’s what all pessimists say”. Now, I must admit that the virtue of hope is not my strongest virtue. Which is a disgrace for a Christian, to be honest! That is why I pray multiple times a day for strengthening of faith, hope and love, both for myself and for the more than 400,000 faithful I was able to pass on the Spirit to.”

It being Corpus Christi, and the Eucharist being the heart of the priestly life, Cardinal Simonis unavoidably spoke about the first and foremost of sacraments.

When, in the 1960s, the focus rather one-sidedly shifted from the Eucharist as sacrifice to the Eucharist as meal, Cardinal Alfrink [Archbishop of Utrecht from 1955 to 1975] wrote an article that I have always rememberd: “The Eucharist is, in the first place, a sacrifice in the form of a meal.” That is how I still celebrate the Eucharist, primarily as a sacrfice, sacrifice of reconciliation, of adoration, of supplication and of gratitude; the sacrifice of the new covenant for the forgiveness of all sins. We no longer need to sacrifice bulls, sheep or lambs to God. The one sacrifice of Jesus on the cross, of He who Paul so strikingly calls “the self-giving”, is enough for God. In Him, God’s love was fulfilled completely. That sacrifice was made one, but it is hidden in God’s eternal ‘now’, from which it is made present among us ever anew, so that we people who live some 2,000 years later, can join in that sacrifice and take part in its fruits.”

The cardinal concludes with an earnest desire for the future:

“I have no greater wish than that those who call themselves believers will sanctify the Day of the Lord again by celebrating, if possible, the Eucharist. There will be little future for the Church in the Netherlands when our faith is not continuously nourished by the proclamation of the Word of the God and the reception of the Lord Himself as nourishment for our lives.”

Simonis 60 jaar Mis kl

Concelebrating the Mass with Cardinal Simonis were Cardinal Eijk and his two auxiliary bishop, Msgrs. Hoogenboom and Woorts, as well as Bishops Gerard de Korte of ‘s-Hertogenbosch, Ron van den Hout of Groningen-Leeuwarden and Wiertz of Roermond. From Germany came Cardinal Joachim Meisner, emeritus of Cologne, and from Rome Msgr. Karel Kasteel, former secretary of the Pontifical Council “Cor Unum”. Bishops de Jong and Hendriks attended the reception.

Photo credit: Archdiocese of Utrecht