A thought about Card. Burke and the Fishwrap

I had a thought about what Card. Burke said. In his interview with a French TV station, His Eminence said, in answer to a question about the possibility that the Pope might persist (quite an assumption) in driving forward Communion for the divorced and remarried:

“Resisterò.  Non posso fare altro….  I shall resist. I can do no other.”

As a happy ex-Lutheran, that had a familiar ring for about a nanosecond. “Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders.”

Anyway… here’s the thought.

Will the National Schismatic Reporter (aka Fishwrap) now take Card. Burke to their bosom? Embrace him as their new hero?

After all, the Fishwrap‘s entire income and raison d’être has come from resisting every Pope since Paul VI.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Lighter fare and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to A thought about Card. Burke and the Fishwrap

  1. Iacobus M says:

    Ah, but they believe that this Pope is their man. As in politics, for folks like the Fishwrappers “Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism” only when the powers that be aren’t pushing the agenda they are.

  2. Landless Laborer says:

    As exactly in politics, because that’s all it is to them, an ideological agenda, an administration, a press office, and a legacy. Which of course de-legitimatizes their power.
    The Vatican is a supernatural power, treated like a political power. But political power is only as large as the people bound to its central bank, and the Vatican doesn’t have one.

  3. Robbie says:

    It really does feel as though a powder keg is about to explode. I wasn’t alive during the Second Vatican Council era, but it’s hard not to get the sense things are as tenuous as they’ve been since that time. The Pope seems determined to push the normal bounds of commentary (Pope on a plane), certain Cardinals have espoused a position that seems to be in conflict with doctrine, Cardinals are publicly sniping at each other, and now Cardinal Burke, in responding to a hypothetical, suggests a position of resistance might be necessary. On top of that, Rorate has a piece suggesting a “pre-Conclave mood” exists already in Rome with the liberal and conservative factions jockeying for position to be Francis’ successor.

    My first thought is this won’t end well. That’s the pessimistic/realist in me though. And if the Synod goes anything like the last one, we could have a terrible situation on our hands. We could see a real split on an order larger than Lefebvre. No one wants that. And if the Synod goes badly, does that serve, essentially, as a vote of no confidence for the Pope? That’s an issue I don’t think anyone wants to contemplate.

    I’m just left to wonder if we’d be in the same position had February 11, 2013 not happened?

  4. Alba says:

    “Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders.”

    I thought that it was now accepted, even by Protestant scholars, that Luther never said those words. [So what? If he didn’t say it, he said something exactly like it. There is an Italian proverb about this.]

  5. Jackie L says:

    Francis is to the Papacy what Vatican II is to councils, despite the fact that neither says what the NSR would like, they are easier to spin than anything else.

  6. Gerard Plourde says:

    Speculation about possible decisions of Pope Francis concerning the pastoral issue of care for Catholics in irregular relationships is premature, as the history surrounding the drafting of Humnae Vitae makes clear. Further, I doubt that Cardinal Burke, as a faithful Catholic and as a Prince of the Church, is likely to deny the supreme legislative authority granted by Our Lord to Pope Francis as Vicar of Christ and successor to St. Peter, who was duly elected by a Conclave convened in accordance with Church Law upon the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and in which Cardinal Burke participated. Finally, although Pope Emeritus Benedict was the first to do so since Celestine V, the provision officially recognizing resignation from the papacy was decreed by Celestine’s successor and has been carried down to this day. Accordingly, both the Code of Canon Law of 1983 promulgated by St. John Paul and the Code of Canon Law of 1917 of Pope Benedict XV made provision for it. Our task is to recognize the Pope’s authority and conform our wills in obedience.

  7. CharlesG says:

    Gerard,

    The powers of the Pope as spelled out in Vatican I do not include overturning the Deposit of Faith. The indissolubility of marriage and the duty not to partake of the Body of Christ unworthily are explicit New Testament teachings, for Heaven’s sake! Baldisseri has already ruled out any discussion of doctrine in connection with the “pastoral” solutions in responses for the Synod. The cards are stacked. Let’s hope in the end, the Pope will have a Paul VI Humanae Vitae moment — the Holy Spirit will have been shown to have protected the Church from dangerous error. Prayers and supplications are in order here. Our hope is in God and not sinful modern men.

  8. Gerard Plourde says:

    CharlesG,

    I agree totally with your comment, which is why I caution people not to speculate based on press reports (which in truth always more resemble gossip than fact). Having lived through the run-up to the promulgation of Humanae Vitae I can say with certainty that the common knowledge was that it was a certainty that Bl. Paul VI was going to approve of artificial birth control, since that was the recommendation of the Papal Commission. We know what actually happened.

  9. Gerard Plourde says:

    As a supplement to my response I should point out that the Code of Canon Law speaks of “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin” as a bar to admission to the Eucharist. The Church has consistently taught that an individual may commit a grave sin yet not be in a state of Mortal Sin. To commit a Mortal Sin three conditions must be present- that it be a grave matter, that the individual apprehend the gravity of the matter and that the individual give full consent of the will to commit the sin. Absence of any one of these conditions makes the sin a Veneal Sin. An individual may be known to have committed a grave sin yet not be in a state of Mortal Sin but because of the community’s knowledge of the act but not the state of mind, the individual’s admission to the Eucharist would cause scandal.

  10. Gratias says:

    The Pope will get his way in the Synod. So much seems to be these days about acceptance of homosexuals, which is the reason to bring the communion issue for remarried up. It seems the Church has forgotten the devastation this perversion brought upon us only a few years ago. Monsignor Ricca would have been fired in any parish in the US in 2013, yet he is still in charge of Domus Sanctae Martae and perhaps still a delegate in the Vatican bank. This shows lack of judgement using our God-given reason.

    This permanent Synod idea, as well as the rejection of protocol, gives me cause for great concern about Pope Francis.

  11. Tim in Dixie says:

    Let us not forget that the Fishwrap has been resisting the Bishops of Kansas City-St. Josep on dropping “Catholic” from their title since Oct 16, 1968. Guess it takes a resistor to know one

  12. iamlucky13 says:

    “The Pope seems determined to push the normal bounds of commentary (Pope on a plane), certain Cardinals have espoused a position that seems to be in conflict with doctrine, Cardinals are publicly sniping at each other, and now Cardinal Burke, in responding to a hypothetical, suggests a position of resistance might be necessary. On top of that, Rorate has a piece suggesting a “pre-Conclave mood” exists already in Rome with the liberal and conservative factions jockeying for position to be Francis’ successor.”

    It seems Screwtape has had some fast learners recently. Sowing discord is always a productive tactic for weakening the Church.

    For our part, aside from praying and living our lives faithfully, we should never be hasty to assume ill from our leaders.

  13. Landless Laborer says:

    People see an impossible situation. But all we need is one hero. If the Holy Ghost would send us one firebreathing, thundering, steel eyed champion who comes out of nowhere, maybe he is not even a bishop at this time. A firebrand, a raving zealot, who will call for reparations first, and galvanize the good bishops, shake them out of their catatonic trance, and strike fear into the heart of the enemies.
    ….okay, i’ll go to bed.

  14. Oh Landless Laborer. You want a Savonarola, when what we need right now is more of a Robert Bellarmine. And a Philip Neri. And maybe also a Thomas More.

    But we can dream.

  15. Netmilsmom says:

    I suspect that a final document will not be so blatant as to cause a schism. Cardinal Burke is a brave man but no one is going to give people enough fuel to start that fire.
    Just like Humanae Vitae, the dogma will remain. If anything the praxis will change and the Bishops will continue to ignore the teachings. People point to Humanae Vitae as the example of Rome holding the Dogma in check, though unpopular. Yet, how many Catholics today are on artificial birth control?

    The dogma doesn’t have to change to change the Church.

  16. Athelstan says:

    Just like Humanae Vitae, the dogma will remain. If anything the praxis will change and the Bishops will continue to ignore the teachings.

    Think of Cardinal O’Boyle of Washington, who disciplined 41 of his priests for open dissent over Humanae Vitae in 1968 – only to find his penalties overturned by the Holy See.

    The teaching remained. But those attempting to uphold it were put in their place, and those who dissented from it allowed their liberty. the likelihood is that past will find itself repeated. And in Germany, it is already being repeated. The bishops there are not waiting for the Synod or the Pope to give communion to those in adulterous relationships.

  17. Imrahil says:

    Just like Humanae Vitae, the dogma will remain.

    Let me give my fondness for precision its due and say that in neither case we are speaking of a dogma. And while in Humanae Vitae’s case, one might argue about universal ordinary Magisterium and the like, that isn’t the case with the highly secondary (in the structural sense, not in the sense of “unimportant”) and thus difficult (the basic principles are easy, the first derivatives are more difficult, etc.) question presently under discussion. (Which is, “is a circumstance thinkable when one who contracted a pseudo-marriage invalid due to existing marriage bond can remain in it without committing subjective grave sin, and if so, is it licit in some circumstance to admit him to Holy Communion?”). “It has always been done that way” does not amount to universal ordinary Magisterium.

    Note that I do think I remember that Trent dogmatised the marriage bond. But an “in practical consequence this would render moot, etc.” is surely an argument of much weight in Church policy, in the care of souls, etc.,, but what it is not is a direct proof in the area of theory.

  18. Imrahil says:

    Think of Cardinal O’Boyle of Washington, who disciplined 41 of his priests for open dissent over Humanae Vitae in 1968 – only to find his penalties overturned by the Holy See.

    I didn’t know that. I always supposed the problem was with bishops reluctant to implement.

    Good grief.

  19. Charles E Flynn says:

    This article has details about the disciplining of the priests by Cardinal Patrick O’Boyle , as well as an analysis by George Weigel that explains much of what we see today. The phrase “The Truce of 1968” is memorable:

    The Campaign for Humanae Vitae, by Charles E. Rice.

  20. Geoffrey says:

    During all of this turmoil, I try to think of what His Holiness the Pope Emeritus might be thinking. I then recall what he said in his last address to the Sacred College of Cardinals: “And among you, in the College of Cardinals, there is also the future pope to whom today I promise my unconditional reverence and obedience” (28 February 2013).

    Sancte Ioannes Paule Magne, ora pro Ecclesia!

  21. gjmartonick says:

    I know this is a time of great difficulty for the church as it has been through out the ages.
    The problem of divorced and remarried Catholics receiving communion is a difficult question.
    My question is why did Our Lord give Judas the Holy Mysteries at the Last Supper? Was it to punish Judas for awful sin or was to help him to repent? We need God’s graces that comes through the sacraments including the Holy Eucharist. If we are denied those graces how can we repent and turn back to God and lead a life pleasing to God? We need God’s help.

    To me it is as patient goes to the doctor with high blood pressure or some other disease. And the
    doctor tells the patient I will give you some blood pressure pills to lower your blood pressure
    but he makes one stipulation. You wouldn’t get the blood pressure pills until your blood pressure
    returns to normal. We would think that is crazy. Our Lord is the Divine Physician. The Church is
    the hospital. We are the patients both good and bad and we are in need of His help.

    Just food for thought.

  22. JPK says:

    Doctrine may have been upheld; but, in practice that particular piece of dogma had become a dead letter. The Synod will not attempt to change doctrine on marriage. But, it will formulate a process that will undermine it in the long run

  23. The Cobbler says:

    gjmartonick, on the other hand, what doctor would tell a patient he can compromise by taking blood pressure pills while continuing to eat everything that raises the blood pressure?

  24. ACatholicGuy says:

    Hmmm. I’m a physician, and in general the medicine doesn’t really work unless some attempt is made by the patient to “mend his ways.” Bad lifestyle trumps any medicine I can give. (I tell patients that they if they want to thwart me they need only eat doughnuts faster than I can give insulin.) I do have patients who try to leave the lifestyle unchanged, (“I ate ribs and fries last night, but it’s ok, doc, I took an extra Lipitor!”) Needless to say, it doesn’t work very well.