Formal Public Response and Canonical Defense of Lumen Christi Academy

I. Introduction

In light of the sudden closure of The Atonement Catholic Academy and the recent reiteration of concerns from the Archdiocese of San Antonio regarding Lumen Christi Academy and Sanctus Ranch, we offer this statement to clarify the mission, status, and canonical integrity of Lumen Christi Academy. Our aim is to foster transparency, uphold fidelity to the Catholic faith, and serve families seeking a robust Catholic education rooted in truth and tradition.

II. Our Identity and Mission

Lumen Christi Academy is an independent educational institution operating in the Catholic tradition. We joyfully profess the full teachings of the Catholic Church, affirm the Magisterium, and center our liturgical and spiritual life on reverence, beauty, and orthodoxy. While we do not claim the official endorsement of the Archdiocese of San Antonio, we do claim our identity as a faithful, Catholic community committed to the formation of students in truth, goodness, and beauty.

III. Canonical Clarification

Lumen Christi Academy has never represented itself as an institution operating under diocesan jurisdiction. As per Canon 300, institutions must not use the name "Catholic" without consent if they are claiming to act in the name of the Church. Lumen Christi Academy acts as a community of Catholic families and educators—not as an organ of the institutional hierarchy.

According to Canon 803 §3, "even if it is in fact Catholic, no school is to bear the name Catholic without the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority." However, Canon Law does not prohibit faithful Catholics from founding independent initiatives in fidelity to the Church. The burden of proof lies with ecclesiastical authority to demonstrate that such initiatives misrepresent Catholic identity or doctrine.

Canon 215 guarantees the faithful the right to "found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world," while Canon 216 confirms that while claiming to be Catholic requires consent for official representation, it does not nullify the Catholic nature of lay-founded efforts.

IV. Canonical Violations by the Archdiocese’s Actions

The Archdiocese’s June 2, 2025 statement recycles vague, unproven allegations and violates multiple canons of ecclesial justice:

1. Canon 220 protects the faithful's right to a good reputation and privacy. Publicly accusing a private institution of misleading the faithful without due process violates this canon.
   
   

2. Canon 50 mandates that all singular administrative acts must be preceded by appropriate investigation and consultation. There is no evidence of such canonical process. The lack of honest investigation on the part of the Archdiocese is laughable.
   
   

3. Canon 223 §2 requires that any restriction of the rights of the faithful be done within the bounds of justice, considering the common good and individual rights. This standard has not been met.
   
   

4. Canon 1319 §1 allows precepts to be imposed only if necessary and proportionate. Sweeping bans and public denunciations without tribunal proceedings or cause do not meet this bar.
   
   

5. Canon 1341 obliges pastors to correct only after pastoral warnings, fraternal correction, and dialogue. Summary punishment contradicts canonical charity.
   
   

6. Canon 1400 establishes the tribunal system for resolving disputes over rights and offenses. The Archbishop’s actions sidestep judicial procedure entirely.
   
   

7. Canon 1373 prohibits inciting animosity against the Apostolic See or ecclesiastical authority—a canon the Archbishop himself risks violating by delegitimizing a faithful institution without cause.
   
   

V. Response to Specific Claims

The renewed public statement from the Archdiocese repeats concerns issued in January 2024:

●      No new evidence has been presented.

●      Claims of “unauthorized” priests have been clarified.

●      The Academy complies with robust child protection policies and best practices in personnel oversight, including background checks and accountability standards.

To accuse the Academy of misleading the faithful is not only unjust—it constitutes defamation under Canon 1390 §2 if no canonical trial or investigation has been conducted.

VI. Canonical and Moral Foundation for Operation

The supreme law of the Church is the salvation of souls (salus animarum suprema lex est). This principle overrides procedural norms when they obstruct urgent pastoral needs.

The laity are not second-class citizens in the Church. According to Canon 204 §1, the Christian faithful—both clergy and laity—are “called to exercise the mission which God entrusted to the Church to fulfill in the world.” This is echoed in Canon 225 §1, which affirms the laity’s right and duty to “work so that the divine message of salvation may be known and accepted by all persons everywhere in the world.”

According to Canon 212 §3, the faithful not only have the right but at times the duty “to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church” and to do so “with reverence... and integrity.” This canon presumes freedom of conscience and the presence of legitimate disagreement—not schism or rebellion.

●      Canon 215 affirms the right of the faithful to “found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world,” which includes educational efforts such as Lumen Christi Academy.

●      Canon 216 recognizes that while official use of the title “Catholic” requires ecclesiastical approval, lay-founded initiatives acting in fidelity to the Church remain authentically Catholic in identity and mission, so long as they do not falsely claim jurisdictional authority.

●      Canon 226 §2 states that parents have the “right and duty of choosing those means and institutions through which they can provide more suitably for the Catholic education of their children.” In the absence of suitable diocesan options, parents may justly turn to alternatives.

The classical canonical principle of epikeia—affirmed by St. Thomas Aquinas and deeply rooted in Roman legal tradition—permits divergence from strict positive law when its application would frustrate justice, violate charity, or do harm to souls. In extraordinary times of confusion or episcopal dereliction, it is not merely permissible but morally necessary for the faithful to safeguard what the hierarchy may abandon or obstruct.

The faithful do not require episcopal permission to gather, to raise their children in the faith, or to teach the doctrine handed down by the Apostles. Nor can a bishop validly suppress what he has no jurisdiction over, particularly when done without cause, trial, or due canonical process.

VII. Final Appeal

To families seeking stability, orthodoxy, and a vibrant Catholic community for their children: we welcome you.

To clergy and lay leaders concerned about our operations: we invite you to visit, ask questions, and witness the fruit borne by the Holy Spirit in our work.

To ecclesiastical authorities: we extend filial respect—but also insist on justice. Unfounded accusations, uncanonical decrees, and reputational attacks harm the Body of Christ and wound the Church’s witness. Lumen Christi Academy stands ready to dialogue, but equally ready to defend our rights under the law of the Church.

We take our stand as faithful sons and daughters of the Church. This response, imbued with reverence for the sacred canons and shaped by minds trained in the discipline of the Church's legal tradition and nourished on the sapientia of her Latin tongue, is offered not in defiance, but in fidelity—fidelity that is intelligent, zealous, and prepared to suffer for the sake of the truth.

Lumen Christi Academy stands as a light amid uncertainty—faithful, free, and firmly rooted in Christ and His Church.

This statement is issued on behalf of the leadership of Lumen Christi Academy, with the counsel of canonical advisors and in the spirit of filial respect for the Church and her shepherds.

Appendix: Canonical Citations

●       CIC 1983 Can. 50, 204 §1, 212 §3, 215, 216, 220, 223 §2, 225 §1, 226 §2, 300, 803 §3, 966, 1319 §1, 1335, 1341, 1373, 1390 §2, 1400

Suggested Further Reading

●       Code of Canon Law Annotated (Institutum Iuridicum Claretianum)

●       Epikeia in the Canonical Tradition – Germain Grisez, The Way of the Lord Jesus

●       Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, Q. 96, Art. 6

●       Caparros, Thériault, Thorn, Code of Canon Law Annotated, Montreal

●       Roman Rota jurisprudence on parental rights in education

○       Rota Sentence Coram Pompedda (1985)

○       Rota Sentence Coram Ewers (1973)

○       Rota Sentence Coram Wynen (1996)

○       Rota Sentence Coram Stankiewicz (2001)

○      Rota Sentence Coram Burke (2003)