The liberal Lord of the Flies dance has begun with the appointment of Card. Burke to the Knights of Malta.
What better way to see what the extreme Left is doing than to see how HuffPo provides us with AP’s report:
AP – not exactly Catholic friendly unless its hard-left liberal – is what all the local outlets will pick up. Watch for the distortions.
This is an exercise in yellow journalism.
Cardinal Burke Loses Another Vatican Job [LOSES? Every single move before this has been an obvious PROMOTION!]
AP By FRANCES D’EMILIOVATICAN CITY (AP) — American Cardinal Raymond Burke, a fervent opponent of abortion and gay marriage, was removed by Pope Francis from another top Vatican post on Saturday. [Which makes it sound as if Francis (and AP) is a fervent supporter.]
The removal of Burke as head of the Holy See’s supreme court was widely expected in church circles. [There’s some amazing reporting for you, considering that Card. Burke publicly confirmed that it was going to happen.]
While he was archbishop of St. Louis, from 2003-2008, Burke led fellow American bishops in campaigns to deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support legalized abortion. He has also questioned some of the pontiff’s pronouncements and approaches. [First, what does “question” mean? And what would those pronouncements be?]
Last year Francis took Burke off the Vatican’s powerful Congregation for Bishops, dealing with appointments of bishops worldwide. [Actually, he didn’t reappoint him. Burke’s five year term was up. Furthermore, his “job” was Prefect. He didn’t lose his “job”.]
On Saturday he transferred Burke from the Vatican court job to the largely ceremonial post of Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a charity whose activities include hospitals and residences for the elderly around the world.
Burke, at 66, would have still had a good decade to continue serving in high-profile Vatican posts. [And, should Francis resign at 80, which is likely, Card. Burke will still be around.]
[Now the sharpened stick and face paint comes out…] His strident discourse and preference of fancy, old-fashioned vestments contrast starkly with the informal, chatty tone and simple, almost Spartan style Francis has established for his papacy. [I wonder if AP has done a story about how much more it costs for Pope Francis to live in the Casa Santa Marta than in the Apostolic Palace.]
Last month, Burke marshaled conservative criticism against the possibility the Vatican may loosen up rules that ban Communion for divorced, remarried Catholics. [“The Vatican”… sigh. What really happened is that Card. Burke defended the Church’s perennial teachings.]
Francis has said that church hierarchy should not focus so much on abortion and same-sex marriage but instead concentrate on making the church a more welcoming place. [Which doesn’t mean changing the Church’s doctrine.] Meanwhile, Burke has said to a Catholic broadcaster that “we can never talk enough” against abortion and same-sex marriage. [Which puts him in agreement with St. John Paul II, who wrote: ” It is difficult to imagine a more unjust situation, and it is very difficult to speak of obsession in a matter such as this,…”]
He has also questioned Francis’ denunciation of excesses of capitalism. [I don’t know when he did that. Could it be when Card. affirmed what Francis said, namely, that Evangelii gaudium, (with its odd comments about capitalism), is not intended to be magisterial?]
Watch for media bias and be prepared to respond.
Loading ...
My continued prayers for Cardinal Burke as he begins this new position. One day, possibly as soon as there is a new Pope, I predict that Cardinal Burke will be viewed as a prophet for the stands he has taken this past
Will Cardinal Burke continue to live in Rome as the Patron of the Sovereign Order of Malta, or must he reside in Malta, “in exile”? Since he is still a member of several Congregations, I would think the former would be much more convenient, although nothing would surprise me at this point. Pope Francis may insist that he live in an obscure rectory somewhere in Malta.
The Sovereign Military Order of Malta, as the name suggests, possesses a degree of international sovereignty (mainly as a holdover from the Middle Ages). They issue their own passports, their own postage stamps, and they even have a presence at the United Nations. Might we see Cardinal Burke, as Cardinal Patron, insert himself into discussions at the UN?
If this weren’t a more serious situation, I think I would be laughing at this article. Right you are, Father: yellow journalism it is. Prayers for Cardinal Burke.
Personally I think that there is a 0% chance that Pope Francis would resign while healthy. I know he has put out the notion that he might resign but I think that is just a head fake designed to lull his opponents into a false sense of security.
In 1931 Ven. Fulton Sheen wrote the very prophetic, A Plea for Intolerance. It applies equally well to the situation in the world today as it did to America, back then. In part, he wrote:
“America, it is said, is suffering from intolerance-it is not. It is suffering from tolerance. Tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos. Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded…
There are some minds that believe that intolerance is always wrong, because they make “intolerance? mean hate, narrow?mindedness, and bigotry. These same minds believe that tolerance is always right because, for them, it means charity, broad?mindedness, American good nature.
What is tolerance? Tolerance is an attitude of reasoned patience toward evil … a forbearance that restrains us from showing anger or inflicting punishment. Tolerance applies only to persons … never to truth. Tolerance applies to the erring, intolerance to the error … Architects are as intolerant about sand as foundations for skyscrapers as doctors are intolerant about germs in the laboratory.
Thus far tolerance, but no farther. Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles. About these things we must be intolerant, and for this kind of intolerance, so much needed to rouse us from sentimental gush, I make a plea. Intolerance of this kind is the foundation of all stability.
Now, if it is right – and it is right – for governments to be intolerable about the principles of government, and the bridge builder to be intolerant about the laws of stress and strain, and the physicist to be intolerant about the principles of gravitation, why should it not be the right of Christ, the right of His Church, and the right of thinking men to be intolerant about the truths of Christ, the doctrines of the Church, and the principles of reason? Can the truths of God be less exacting than the truths of mathematics? Can the laws of the mind be less binding than the laws of science, which are known only through the laws of the mind? Shall man, gifted with natural truth, who refuses to look with an equally tolerant eye on the mathematician who says two and two make five and the one who says two and two make four, be called a wise man, and shall God, who refuses to look with an equally tolerant eye on all religions, be denied the name of “Wisdom,” and be called an “intolerant” God?”
The full article can be downloaded, here:
http://www.northamericanmartyrs.org/pdf/Plea-for-Intolerance.pdf
It seems obvious that a stubborn intolerance for any variance from the plain teachings of the Church is anathema to anyone who wants to promote sin. I find it hard to reconcile this media attitude with Christ’s clear saying [Matt 5: 19- 20]:
“Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
The Chicken
Well of course abortionists and contraceptors and practising homosexuals, and oppressors of the poor, and so on should be welcomed into the Church provided it is made clear to them that they are in a state of Mortal Sin*, that the parish priest does his level best to convince them of the iniquity of their ways, and lastly but perhaps most importantly, they do not receive Holy Communion until they have repented, made a good Confession with a firm purpose of amendment, (as appropriate to their particular Mortal Sins of course), carried out the set penance, and that they do not do so out of routine, or habit, or for public acclaim.
It’s all quite simple really. But yes, it would be nice if the Tall Man in white with the peaked cap turned up and put an end to all this current savagery , or mess, or whatever..
* Yes, yes, objectively speaking of course, I know!
Cardinal Burke is at his best when he’s preaching and teaching, and we need to hear more from him.
His new job will give him (a relatively young, energetic guy, as Cardinals go) a chance to fly around the world, preaching and teaching.
I think this may be a case where the pope is moving someone into a position where his talents can be better used in the long run- Francis is a missionary pope– and he’s moving Burke into a role where he’ll be less a bureaucrat and more a missionary.
Could this just be a case of a pope assigning his most competent men to the things he values most? Benedict valued scholarship and paperwork, Francis values missionary work and preaching. Both have put Burke in positions that align with what they see as most important.
“[I wonder if AP has done a story about how much more it costs for Pope Francis to live in the Casa Santa Marta than in the Apostolic Palace.]”
Fr. Z, I’ve thought that the case for awhile, but I don’t have access to the facts. Can you provide a cite?
Thanks and God Bless you and Cardinal Burke
Haven’t read the entire article, but am going to put my two cents in anyway.
Let Us Pray that when the next Papal Conclave is called, Cardinal Burke is Elected Pope. As We need an orthodox Pope….
I know This is a pipe dream but one can only hope. Speranza!
Remaining in the Truth of Christ is absolutely essential reading. I urge all to read it, and to begin sharing, teaching, discussing it in your parish, your vicariate, your diocese. We have one year to prepare for the culmination to the synod. Witnessing 2014 as the year that homosexual “unions” became accepted from coast to coast (beginning in my Hawaii), and of course grappling with ever more attacks on marriage from an increasingly secularized population, no subject is more worthy of our attention than marriage.
I said, repeatedly, that if Francis fires Burke, it’s war. I said that we slumbered while Francis re-militarized the Rhineland, we shrugged while he invaded Czechoslovakia, and that a line in the sand must now be drawn: If Francis invades Poland, if he fires Burke, he will have made his intentions unambiguously-clear, that is, he will in fact have declared war on the Catholic faith.
I consequently insisted that we must not accept vague half-formed reports, rumors, or innuendo. The Buzzfeed interview would not suffice. There must be a clear statement from the Vatican that Burke has been removed. We now have such a clear statement.
So it’s war.
You may now consider me in schism. I will not honor his requests. I will not follow his orders. I encourage any bishop approaching retirement to withhold their resignation until the election of a new pope, and demand the immediate resignation of Jorge Bergoglio from the See of Rome.
May God have mercy on all of us.
“You can imagine what a bitter blow it is to me that all my long struggle to win peace has failed. Yet I cannot believe that there is anything more or anything different I could have done and that would have been more successful. Up to the very last it would have been quite possible to have arranged a peaceful and honourable settlement between Germany and Poland, but Francis would not have it. He had evidently made up his mind to attack Poland whatever happened; and although he now says he has put forward reasonable proposals which were rejected by the Poles, that is not a true statement.”
We should not be consumed with bitterness at events such as Cdl. Burke’s “demotion.” We should not forget that the Church belongs to the Lord, and that He is in charge. We should read, and re-read, 1 Cor. 3, which reminds us that only Christ is the foundation of the Church. “Rejoice always, pray constantly, give thanks in all circumstances, for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.” (1 Thess. 5:16.)
I hope Cardinal Burke can move to his new post with utter hope and trust that the Holy Spirit will use him as needed–many blessings with him!
I do struggle with the notion of withholding Communion from politicians who are Pro-Choice. (And I am very much Pro-Life, which explains the next questions.) But I wonder, will politicians who support capital punishment also be targeted? Those who oppress the poor by their policies? Generals who order bombings? Then, what about pedophiles? Adulterers? Couples using birth control? The list is loooong. One may or may not know what sin a communicant is carrying within them when they approach the altar. I understand that a priest would feel “protective” of the Eucharist; but ultimately, it seems this is a matter of conscience for the communicant. Otherwise, there are going to be a lot of “scenes” in the Communion line, should a priest be privy to know the sins of his people–public servants or others–and try to send them away without Communion. It doesn’t seem right to single out a few, even to make a statement to the public. Communion isn’t the place for that, either. This judging feels like God’s work.
I look forward to reading others’ thoughts and insights on this. Please try not to attack.
Many thanks to Raymond Cardinal Burke for keeping the Faith.
I pray the Kights of Malta will be amenable to bringing the TLM to their hospitals. Cardinal Burke may still have a role to play.
Francisco seems unforgiving of any opposition. First thing this Pope said was that too much emphasis was given to abortion; then came out with a socialist tickle-up economic program that would be ruinous for the poor.
Cardinal Burke leaves at a high point of his career. He was the leading voice for heterosexual marriage and against cohabitation at this Pope’s rubber-stamp Synod. He also offered the Pontifical Mass for the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage at St. Peter’s last month, which Father Z attended. Mrs. Gratias was there and found it very moving, full of fervor, and with hundreds of priests willing to risk their careers to keep the treasure of the traditional mass.
AnnTherese: this discussion is about Cardinal Burke’s ostracism, not your personal struggles.
Someday the MSM will realize that the more they speak against the church them more society will suffer. There is evil all around, we see it in politics, we will see it in the church-we are humans after all. One thing is sure, the Spirit of the Church is God himself and we know what happens when God is not pleased with his people.
I have taken to saying, “Our help is in the Name of the Lord, who made heaven and earth.”
He is the strength of the faithful. He is the life of the Saints.
I think a call should go out to priest, deacons, and religious on this feast of the Dedication of the Lateran Basilica, “Go to confession.” The evil one is in the door, we must put him and his evil spirits out.
I’m beginning to get the idea that Pope Francis would be more comfortable around Nancy Pelosi and the staff of the National catholic Reporter than he would around Cardinal Burke and those who post on this blog.
I do not know the mind of the Pope, so I must, in good conscience, refuse to comment on why Card. Burke was moved (circumstantial evidence, notwithstanding), but I hope some wag in the press doesn’t notice the following odd curiosity and pounce on it: when Judge Bork’s nomination to the U. S. Supreme Court was withdrawn because he was too orthodox, he gave rise the the verb, to be borked. If someone is removed from office for being too orthodox, I hope they don’t start saying that, “he was burked.” Before appointment or after, Bork and Burke are the two bookends (or is it the borkends or maybe the burkends?) supporting the volumes of Truth the shelf of orthodoxy.
The Chicken
Dear AnnTherese,
Being pro-Capital Punishment is not against the teachings of the Church, so not punishable by withholding Communion (see CCC 2267). Canon 915 says:
“Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”
The key word is manifest. Adultery, while grounds for the person not to receive Communion, cannot be normally known by the pastor administering Communion. It is a secret grave sin, not a manifest (or on display) grace sin. Politicians who publicly state that they are pro-choice and worse vote for abortion rights are manifesting their sin in the public arena for all to see. These are the people the pastor can know to be committing sin in the public view. These are the people targeted for prohibition against Communion in Canon 915.
The Chicken
P. S.
I sincerely hope I don’t come off as attacking you. It looks like we might disagree on a few things from the last few comment exchanges we have had and I hope that is okay. We need to have a relationship like G. K. Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw – they fought like cat and dog arguing in debates in the early 1900’s England and then went out to dinner, together. I am not an attack chicken. I am a masked chicken specifically to remind me that in my remarks I need not only to be clear, but also a coward when it comes to attacking others in comments and not only a chicken, but a chicken who is even too chicken to be recognized as a chicken so I wear a mask. So, let me know if I ever give offense.
Ann Therese: A politician supporting abortion or passing laws permitting it is publicly opposing a teaching of the Church, and giving scandal by presenting him or herself for Communion. A couple practicing birth control shouldn’t be going to Communion, but they do – however, it’s not publicly known, publicly announced and they are not public figures promoting it. Somebody working for Planned Parenthood, on the other hand, should be refused Communion, regardless of their personal life, because they are publicly opposing Church teaching and encouraging others to do the same.
The refusal of Communion – unless the priest knows something about the person privately that makes him demand that this person go to Confession first – is a public act aimed at public sins, particularly those influencing the “little ones,” that is, the faithful in the pews.
Now, getting back to Burke, the Order of Malta has done many great things and perhaps this time once again it will ride to the rescue of the Church. Malta is also a wonderful place (although unfortunately, leftist politics, brought mainly by the many resident Brits who vote there, introduced some seriously bad things in its law recently). But Pope Francis’ spiteful little insult might come back to bite him. The Knights are very wealthy, for one thing, and now I’m sure all that money will be going to Burke’s causes.
I’m stunned and disappointed by Card. Burke’s removal as Chief Justice of Church. His brilliant juridical intellect is just what the Holy Father needs to anchor his Pontificate in canonical and scriptural integrity.. especially in terms of balancing this with Pope Francis’ undeniable gifts of charism and outreach to the disenfranchised, and somewhat indifferent attitude to protocol.
I was especially disappointed by the way it was done. Every new administration puts its own face on its organization. The remarks surrounding this, though, of condemning “the temptations of the zealous, scrupulous, solicitous.. of the traditionalists and intellectuals”.. although not directly addressed to Card. Burke, in the context of his removal and relegation to a post of near invisibility, could mean no one else. I don’t know what to expect next.
SimonDodd: Would Card. Burke want you to be in schism at this point in time?
The Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of Malta is an independent state, with its government living in exile since invasion by France, but it is only recognized by the Holy See and the Republic of Italy; it therefore has no recognition at the U.N.O. or anywhere else.
As a convert this growing confusion over orthodoxy in the Church is troubling. This is the same road the CofE went down. Ah, but we have the Pope as I was taught when considering conversion. But, on the surface, the Pope seems to be confusing things himself with what he says.
This AP article tells of orthodox US bishops feeling the Vatican no longer has their back. After years of putting resources into life issues the sense is the Pope wants a new reality in the US to come forward. Given in part the acceptance of gay marriage by many in the US.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_REL_CATHOLIC_BISHOPS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-11-08-12-50-58
It seems political to me. Maybe I was naïve in my understanding of this when I entered the Church. The demotion of Burke the elevation to a prominent archdiocese in the US of a bishop who is very progressive. He broke with most of the other bishops and supported Obamacare and has discouraged some public pro-life activity by priests in the past.
Rod Dreher recently wrote that to deny the Fathers and their teaching is to lose the moorings of the faith. Not that that has happened yet but that seems to be the general direction.
The unity promised by the Church seems to have collapsed and a long Pontificate will allow Pope Francis to re-make the world episcopacy in light of his vision. Much as President Obama is remaking the US courts in his vision.
There is exactly one man responsible for the public tarring and feathering of Cardinal Burke and his name is Pope Francis. As you said, Father, “Every single move before this has been a promotion”. The operative word is “before”.
This, in contrast, is a public Demotion. The media knows this and is playing it up for all it’s worth. But it is Pope Francis who has made articles such as this one possible.
The purge has begun – here are 4 more names to add to the list:
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/11/de-ratzingerization-purge-at-divine.html#more
Gratias: I think my comments were appropriate given the text of the article, struggle (personal?? seems like an overreaction) and all. Are you now the moderator of these discussions? But thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts–and, I’m certain you’re more caring than you came across.
Gracie, its hard not to see this as a purge. What is next? I have friends in an FSSP parish who ar worried restrictions will be coming on the EF. They fear, I don’t know how real this fear is, that the Pope will require the stand-alone EF parishes to start offering OF services/orm of worship.
The Anglican Use movement seems to have stalled out too. Not because of any overt action but because some groups of Anglicans who might have been considereing entering the Church see the Church going down the same route the US Episcopal and Cof E did.
It will be interesting to see stats for the CHN in a year or so. This ministry directed to Protestants wanting to convert (particularly Protestant ministers) has as its core argument the unity and unchanging nature of the Catholic church as a reason to convert. Reading many of the Journey’s Home it seems those were the core factor in the conversion. That unity of belief is increasingly hard to see. I think the CHN will find it increasingly difficult to make this argument.
Am I the only one who sees the appointment to the Order as an opportunity? The Order is a military order, and can again become something of its original organization. A warrior, military order – albeit without all the shooting.
Cardinal Burke should throw himself into his new role. Uniformed members of the Order should should become prolific and visible, expand their membership, and “fight” loudly for the true faith, led by their new leader.
Who says the role or organization will continue to be only ceremonial? If you lead a revolt, you need an army. Of sorts.
It seems like none of you have met a member of the “knights of Malta”. Some news reports actually think they are the same as the Island of Malta (whereas their “country” is a house in Rome).
I met several years ago when I worked in Liberia. They were running the country’s program for those with Hanson’s disease (aka Leprosy), supervising clinics which traveled around the country and gave out medicine to poor people (Hanson’s disease responds to antibiotics, and is not very infectious once on treatment).
They are a bit different from other “religious” orders: They are laypeople, and have their own passports. Foreign Policy has this article on them link
So if I were a conspiracy theorist, I’d be worried about Burke heading the order (heh).
Let’s be open to related thoughts. It all adds up to interesting commentary!
Chicken, great quote from the amazing, Venerable Fulton Sheen. What a man. Someone needs to read that aloud before the next Synod.
I’m a bit speechless about Cardinal Burke’s obvious demotion and treatment in general. It is a public humiliation and must be intended to please some quarter, which it is. I hope Cardinal Burke receives many messages of thanks and appreciation from the faithful.
This doesn’t sit well, not what is being done nor how it has been done nor why it may have been done.
It may be a good thing for Cardinal Burke after all. This order has hospitals and clinics all over the world. His Eminence is a huge proponent of the pro-life movement and Catholic medical care which adheres to the teachings of the Church. This may be an opportunity for him to take control of a well-financed group dedicated to offering material and medical care to those in need all over the world, and do so in a manner that shows the efficacy and mercy of Catholic principles regarding human life and the family. Perhaps adding crisis pregnancy centers to the list of charitable outreaches they provide would be a nice first step. Establishing new hospitals and clinics dedicated to family and women’s health in line with Catholic teaching – from Europe to Asia to Africa and to the Americas. It could be the answer to the UN and to Melinda and Bill Gates efforts.
It would also be nice if Pope Francis, should he feel this way, made this clear to the world. Then, as a gesture of good will, not only invited His Eminence to the synod next year, but also celebrated an Extraordinary Form Mass with him at St. Peters.
Imagine that.
These days I fluctuate between “These are the end times!!” and “This too shall pass.” When I’m in my “this too shall pass” frame of mind, I wonder how the modernists will view the next Pope if the pendulum indeed swings the other way. I don’t mean that I look forward to their pain, I mean that when this Pope takes actions that we disagree with, we should be careful how we respond.
Let’s assume that the majority votes that the Synod issues received are proportionately indicative of the views of the larger Western Church. How would close to 2/3 of the people respond to a Pope Burke or a Pope Athanasius? Would they leave in disgust? Would we want them to?
@The Masked Chicken,
“Burke” is already a verb, with a quite unexpected meaning:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burke
Thanks for raising the question.
Actually, he didn’t reappoint him. Burke’s five year term was up.
I hate do dispute this point but Card. Burke’s term at the Congregation for Bishops was not up – he was appointed to that body in October 2009 and removed in December 2013.
I saw a main headline on Drudgereport this afternoon and it linked to an AP story of Cardinal Burke in which they used the “rudderless” church quote again. Of course, the AP went out of their way to point out that the church was being bombarded from the left to change its “rules.” They also rightly pointed out that the American Bishops, after years of supporting the teachings of PPII and BXVII, are now being left out in the dark with Francis’ apparent move to the left. If this rhubarb turns into something serious, say a schism, where will the US Church be? With the exception of Africa and Eurasia, we may be left to ourselves.
It has always bothered me when my liberal friends come up to me as say, “I really like Francis!” I tell them that he has left many questions in my mind and I’m still way out on the patio waiting for dinner to be served to see what is BEING served.
. . . Well, that didn’t take long. Here is the headline from thestar.com :
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2014/11/08/us_cardinal_opposed_to_abortion_gay_marriage_loses_top_job_at_vatican.html
Like, Duhhh! Doesn’t every Cardinal oppose abortion and gay
marriage? Doesn’t even Elton John’s hero oppose abortion and gaymarriage? ( I can just imagine the song they’re singing tonight at the Lord of the Flies Dance : Saturday Night’s Alright For Fightin’ ). ? ?BTW anybody remember how Lord of the Flies ends ? ( I was forced to read it in school)- The grown-ups show up on a ship, all those little huffers do some weeping and reflection/repenting and then the grown-ups take them back home – to safety . [. . . Hope none of us get caught playing the part of the prodigal son’s brother if that metaphorically happens : ) ]
—————————–
@AnnTherese : I believe Traductora and The Masked Chicken have provided the answer. We might add that that Cardinal Burke is a Canon Lawyer par excellence (your question appeared to be centered around Canon 915) . He would instinctively see that trying to change that Canon would require changing Catholic doctrine , even dogma when we consider the killing of a child in the womb. That same Canon in the annotated version of the Code of Canon Law, explicitly includes divorced and remarried Catholics not being permitted to receive Holy Communion too, among others.
Capital Punishment is not intrinsically evil per se ; abortion is. I’m including a link below at the end, to an EWTN article which addresses almost all your questions in a Q& A format.
I think you’re right that we could cut down on abuse with a little more mention from the pulpit, but regardless, a lot of the faithful are kind of fickle today.Understanding “that a priest would feel ‘protective’ of the Eucharist”, is only half of it . The Catechism says that the judging – which you feel is God’s work -is a direct consequence of the act ; it’s something which the individual brings upon him or herself.
The priest is acting in the interest of the well-being of that person’s soul.
EWTN Q & A on Catholic Politicians And Abortion link :
http://www.ewtn.com/vote/Catholic_Politicians/Questions1.asp
Fie, Simon Dodd, fie! Schism is a sin. Unless the Holy Father formally and unambiguously starts teaching moral heresy, let’s hear no talk of schism. Most irresponsible. Loyal opposition mode with Cardinal Burke is better.
Toan, war is upon you whether you want it or not. This isn’t about Burke, any more than it was about Poland; it is about waking up and realizing that they are coming for you, and our choice is that we can either fight back or be put down in our sleep like ailing pets. As Rob22 said above,this is a purge—a slow-motion purge, but a purge none-the-less. Francis has made that clear today. He had every opportunity to back off; he had every opportunity to change his mind. he has instead declared open war on us. If you won’t believe that today, you may look back when you reach your breaking point, as you will, and say, as I now do, “why didn’t I see it sooner?”
sourdough says: “I’m stunned and disappointed by Card. Burke’s removal as Chief Justice of Church. His brilliant juridical intellect is just what the Holy Father needs to anchor his Pontificate in canonical and scriptural integrity.” Respectfully, if you think that Francis intends or wants “to anchor his Pontificate in canonical and scriptural integrity,” I think you and I have very different measures of the man.
I fear the smoke is getting thicker.
The Masked Chicken was citing Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen on tolerance earlier in the thread.
Women for Faith and Family have a nice terse piece written by Dr. James Hitchcock entitled LIMITS OF TOLERANCE .
Dr. Hitchcock explains how and why tolerance fails as a virtue.
http://www.wf-f.org/JFH-LimitsTolerance.html
Well you must come to terms with the fact that,no mattter how right or wrong the good Cardinal was, come monday morning, it will be a fact, Francis will be around for a long time, I just do not see him quitting in the neart future, Crdl Burke will settle in his new appointment and the Pope will still be Francis, In two weeks, honestly the world will be talking about the Pope’s trip to Turkey or something else.
I was thinking whe BXVIwas elected, here in Argentina, it took months for the public to know that Crdl Bergoglio had nbeen a candidate.. He never said a word about it in the words of his sister.Until some months later a colombian Cardinal whose name escapes my memory, leaked it to the press and told what happened,. Cardl Bergoglio getting some 35 votes in the 2nd ballot and the rest is known. Until he waved his finger stating “no” at that point the votes went to Benedict and that was that. It was also made public by the same Colombian and later on confirmed by Argentinian bishops ad others that there was a express wish and desire from St. JP2 that Ratzinger should be elected,. Therefore Bergoglio put a stop to what he thought was a strange happening,. Him getting votes. As a matter of fact, nobody here back in 2005 nor 2013 thought of him as a candidate, not even himself. So I believe when and if he quits , which I seriously doubt unles his physical abilities begin to fail him or so, and it is not likely, he I suppose will make sure, some of his men, whoever they may turn out to be,to leave a likely candidate with his endorsement.
From what I’ve read the differences aren’t about dogma but about discipline.
There’s quite a bit of hyperbole going around about “truth,” but the disagreements here are really about table etiquette, i.e., the invitation list.
From what I’ve read the differences aren’t about dogma but about discipline.
There’s quite a bit of hyperbole going around about “truth,” but the disagreements here are really about table etiquette, i.e., the invitation list.
Oh nuts, sorry about the double post.
I have no idea how that happened.
Pray that Fr. Hunwicke is correct in his repost about Cardinal Burke.
http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/cardinal-burke.html
Two bits of doctrine: (1) divorce and remarriage is adultery; and (2) one should not partake of the Eucharist unworthily, i.e., in a state of mortal sin. I don’t see Kasper’s proposal as only disciplinary.
Cardinal Burke is a most loyal and obedient son of the Holy Mother Church. It is pretty clear by this time by all involved (including his enemies inside and outside the Church, whether they really want to admit it or not) that His Eminence will serve Our Lord and the Church and preach the unchangeable truth of the Catholic Faith wherever he is assigned, even if it’s “Welcome to Amundsen–Scott Station, Your Eminence! We would like to extend our warmest (pun intended) welcome to you.”
Still, whenever I brought up the subject of the new “Great Purge”, people thought I was crazy.
Who will be next on the chopping block between now and October 2015? They are certainly not happy with the Africans. Certain African cardinals spoke up at the 2014 synod and consequently had been identified as embracing theological orthodoxy (as they should, being princes of the Church); the same Synod Fathers also made their voice heard and their view clear outside the synod hall when granting interviews to journalists. I wonder what they will do to Wilfrid Fox Cardinal Napier and to Robert Cardinal Sarah since both of them haven’t reached the age of 75 yet. And what will become of George Cardinal Pell once he’s completed his assignment as their interim CFO?
Besides the “big” news of Cardinal Burke being reassigned, they have just made a bunch of under-the-radar changes at the Congregation for Divine Worship (CDW). I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop with an announcement that (God forbid) Archbishop Piero Marini has been hand-picked by the Holy Father to be the new Prefect of CDW (stranger things have happened…) If that were to happen, he would be given a red hat in a future consistory as typical of Prefect of a major Congregation, meaning there would be a possibility of him ascending to the Chair of Peter someday. That is the scariest prospect of all. May Almighty God have mercy on us all!!!
While this has nothing to do with the recent synod, I am pretty surprised that they have not sent Monsignor Guido Marini back to the (once) liturgically orthodox Siri-land yet.
When Franciscus P.P. is finishedwith the purge the Vatican will be the new Argentina.
As tioedong says, he isn’t being sent to the island of Malta, he’s become the chaplain of a ancient quasi-military (at leastin modern times) order with really odd international status (Liberia has diplomatic relations with the Order. The Liberian ambassador to Rome is also accredited to the Holy See and to the Knights of Malta). He’ll still be in Rome.
If he wanted to visit some of the Order’s missions, I’d be happy to host him in Liberia.
I have a serious question I hope will be answered:
Since the Church cannot err when She teaches officially on Faith and morals, then what is the status of the teachings of a synod? What if the synod next year actually does come out and promulgate what we know to be wrong, and the pope concurs and promotes it, as is very possible? Will people say ” the pope has spoken so it must be right”, or will there be a battle? Or is it not possible for these falsehoods to be promulgated officially from a synod?
If a split in the Church comes from it, who would be in the Church and who would not?
A scary thought, but so is that which is happening already.
If the Huffing and p***ing post was a spoken blog, its voice would be John Cleese, about chapter 30 from Screwtape.
CharlesG – as to a Pope eventually theoretically teaching moral heresy the operative word then would not be schism. As a convert I would say it would end the Church’s claim to be specially guided by the Spirit into no error. Some might go into “schism” then but for what. The Pope and office of the papacy are what they claim to be or they are not. The Spirit does not guide the office at certain times on issues of dogma and not at other times.
I don’t know how aware the Pope and bishops are that core changes will end their credibility and claims to the “true” church. Not that many claim that openly anymore. Maybe some don’t believe it.
If the Pope and bishops try to finesse this by not formally teaching say communion for divorced and remarried Catholics or created “new” church ceremony for blessing gay unions that is where the turmoil will come. Debates over that if error is not formally taught but de-facto embraced pastorally what that says about the nature of the church. This has been Ross Douthat’s point.
For converts such as myself I think many will take direction from the Scott Hahns who gave up everything in order to convert. Out of integrity. If they again, out of integrity, say in this hypothetical future that the teaching on the office of Peter or the Church has been compromised that will be pivotal. Again, a hypothetical future.
kat,
Synods do not teach (1). They send recommendations to the pope. He then sifts through them and promulgates an Apostolic Exhortation, which, one supposes is protected by Infallibility.
My guess is that the AE will affirm moral doctrine, then recommend mercy and pastoral sensitivity in dealing with with particular situations.
(1) And that shows the double dishonesty of making the preliminary relatio public. Not only are Synods not capable of teaching, but that preliminary relatio didn’t even indicate the what was decided at the Syod.
Rob22,
Refer to the fact that the Third Ecunemical Council of Constantinople condemned Pope Honorius I posthumously as a heretic for “maintaining” (indirectly?) the heresy of Monothelism (in what sense he “maintained” is still debatable.) The Council excommunicated and athanematized Honorius, and the documents of the Council were ratified to some extent by Pope Saint Leo II.
This is a controversial debate until this day about how Honorius erred and what exactly the Council condemned and what exactly Leo II agreed to censure and what he did not agree. Questions still rage to this day whether Honorius was ever an apparent Monothelite nor had he ever taught Monothelism explicitly ex-cathedra.
Yes, but you raised a valid point. Hypothetically speaking, if sometime in his pontificate Pope Francis declared ex-cathedra something clearly heretical and against the deposit of faith of the Church and make it binding on the entire Church, it would be formidably difficult to reconcile that with papal infallability as defined by the First Vatican Council. Unless it could be proven that he was under duress and did not do so willingly.
The Dogmatic Constitution “Pater aeternus” stated, “For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by His revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.” That might be the way out because it clearly affirmed that the Pope could not come up with new doctrine but only expressly/explicitly confirm/re-affirm in a manner binding the entire Universal Church some dogma of the Faith which had already been revealed and transmitted over the ages. This is delving into theological ground which I’m not familiar with, so perhaps somebody else could clarify it further for you because I don’t want to go down this rabbit hole in this thread (even though the concerns you raised are quite valid.)
Those who are wildly celebrating Burke’s so-called demotion are destined to be cast into despair at some not too distant future time. The Holy Spirit will continue to work through him to proclaim the truth of Church teachings clearly and unequivocally as He has done up till now. Burke’s knowledge of Church law is a formidable weapon the modernists cannot overcome, no matter how much they try to smear him. Added to that his pastoral gentleness, obscured by the media, and put into a position that permits a great deal of freedom of movement and you have enormous potential for victory in the combat with modernism. We ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Pray for Burke and watch what happens. The possibilities are endless and he is giving us a saintly example of obedience to lawful authority, the Pope. One which we all would do well to imitate I might add.
Robtbrown, I hope you are right, but this seems an extraordinary amount of kerfuffle just to end up only recommending mercy and pastoral sensitivity, which surely could already be found.
Cardinal Burke’s exile, the manner in which he has been demoted without a different appointment with corresponding responsibilities, would possibly serve a few purposes.
It gets him out of the way for the next Synod.
It sends a definite message to other dissenters. “Get on board or this could be you.” (No one could say there has been any finesse to how Cardinal Burke has been dismissed, also that there is no other reason to do it other than a “political” disagreement. The word that comes to mind about the “how” it has unfolded is “brutal”.) Hell’s bells, it’s not even subtle.
It sends an intended message to Kasper-ites and other liberal types to just hang on, the tide is in their favor now. Change is indeed coming.
If the intention is also to send a message to FFI’ers, SSPX, and all we crazies who clamor about TLM, abortion, and all those other inconvenient things, I don’t know. It certainly doesn’t seem to say anything encouraging, but then, what has of late?
oldcanon2257,
“For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter . . . that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.”
We talk a lot about apostolic succession. Maybe it’s time we called on the intercession of those 12 to protect and defend us from some of their fellow apostles.
“Since the Church cannot err when She teaches officially on Faith and morals, then what is the status of the teachings of a synod?”
Kat,
Your statement is not entirely correct, nor is robtbrown’s response that “synods can’t teach.” What is correct to say is that the Church cannot err when She teaches *definitively* on Faith and morals. A definitive teaching ends the debate on a matter. So an infallible teaching act is more than just an official teaching of the Church, it is one intentionally made in order clarify a limit of acceptable opinion within the Church.
The right word to describe “teaching-that-is-official” is “magisterial”. For a teaching to be “magisterial”, it only needs to be an exercise of a legitimate teaching office in the Church. In this case, a synod of bishops operating in union with the Pope most certainly *can* teach magisterially. But they don’t have to. In the case of the “relatio” of the synod, this was a record of the deliberations of the synod made public for the sake of transparency. It wasn’t a question of “here, this is the teachings of Christ we are handing down to you”. Rather, it was presented in the context of “here, this is what we pastors have been discussing amongst ourselves.”
I think the distinction between “magisterial” and “infallible” is one that needs to be more understood by the faithful.
robtbrown- So if synods only make suggestions to the Pope, what is the point of this particular synod if all of the voices of dissent are silenced? Is the Pope a fan of collegiality or not? Was this synod orchestrated to tell the Pope what he already wants to do? To an ignorant outsider, it looks like the synod was a manufactured echo chamber, a façade of collegiality.
Also, how many bishops/archbishops/cardinals have to be present or weigh in before any decisions can be representative of the magisterium?
oldcanon – yes, Honorius is one case and there are two others where it is argued, honestly by both sides, that the Pope did or did not teach error.
Before I entered the church I weighed this a lot. Many evangelicals who convert to Orthodoxy instead of Catholicism are influenced by Honorius and what they see is proof the Pope is not specially guided/protected by the HS. Others like me go the other way but, to be honest, it is not clear. I am going to go back and review the Orthodox and Catholic positions again and Honorious as well as the other debatable cases.
One thing that is troubling is if the Pope does not defacto teach error but allows it to exist in the church (divorce/communion for instance) is it not a difference without a distinction? Ross Douthat and others are arguing this.
In any case, I am sure this controversial and complex issue will be hotly debated in the Church now. Is it possible that Vatican 1 was misinterpreted on this?
It is not just we self absorbed neo-pelagians who are having tremendous qualms about what has happened at the synod and the demotion of Burke. I had breakfast after Mass this morning with some folks of several nationalities, all who are actively engaged in the peripheries and they are quite upset. Unfortunately some of them are seeking answers from what sound like heretical websites on the internet.
I appreciate those who have attempted to answer my question. I have been “here” reading this blog a long time, and am aware of the knowledgeable readers and writers.
I am concerned and sad that there are converts watching these events who are so concerned with what could happen they may even question the Truth of the Catholic Church being the One True Church and their choice of conversion. The devil must be clapping his hands at the confusion being spread in souls.
Let’s say Card Kasper gets his way and Pope Francis approves of a penitential path by which divorced and remarried Catholics could be admitted to Communion, all the while insisting that no doctrine is being changed. I don’t think it will happen, but let’s say it does. Would that do damage? Sure, maybe a lot of damage. Would the practice change doctrine because it involves doctrinal matters, though? In other words, if Pope Francis says, “this is not a doctrinal teaching but a pastoral practice” and then contradicts himself by going on to give a doctrinal teaching, or a teaching with definite doctrinal implications, would his statement be infallible?
No, it would not be infallible because in saying he is not intending to define doctrine, so he is explicitly saying that one of the conditions for infallibility is lacking. Am I off base here?
“He then sifts through them and promulgates an Apostolic Exhortation, which, one supposes is protected by Infallibility.”
Why should one suppose any such thing? If it is not an ex cathedra definition, promulgated as such by the pope, then it is merely a pious thought to make such a supposition, and one for which there is no basis in history, or the Vatican I definitions.
About the condemnation of Pope Honorius one could write a great deal. He certainly did not teach “monothelitism,” since that particular theological view arose subsequent to his death in 638. The issue in his lifetime was the question of whether Christ had “one operation” or “two;” and it is far from clear that Honorius, in approving of “one operation” was speaking strictly (in which case he would be approving error), or simply stating that the divine and human operations/energies in Christ always worked together and never in opposition to one another. In any case, Rome itself accepted Honorius’ condemnation on the grounds that “he failed to defend the faith against error,” rather than on the grounds that he taught heresy.
(The decree of Constantinople III is peculiar in another respect: Honorius’ name is slipped in in the midst of the names of a number of Patriarchs of Constantinople condemned for upholding and defending “monothelitism,” without naming him as “Pope of Rome.”)
Eriugenia says: …The Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of Malta is an independent state, with its government living in exile since invasion by France, but it is only recognized by the Holy See and the Republic of Italy; it therefore has no recognition at the U.N.O. or anywhere else….
From the SMOM website:
–ghp
Only time will tell what this really means for the traditional movement. I personnally think there is alot of opportunity for Cardinal Burke as head of this worldwide organization. I pray the Holy Ghost is able to continue to use him and possibly even in a greater roll. I’m optomistic. The way Rome is going as a tradtitional minded Cardinal he should appreciate getting out of there and get some fresh air for a while. With all the pro homosexual, moderist, and liberal cardinals, bishops and priests it would make me sick to my stomach and angry all the time so get me out of there, I would be thanking the Holy Father for the move. For me it would be like when I was attending a progressive Novus Ordo parish all the time it can cause insanity. It is so much more peaceful being around like minded faithful. When Rome is burning it is a good time to head to the islands, once it has burned go back and rebuild. I recall a passage written in Matthew I believe about the signs and when it is time to head to the hills. Lets see what happens, like I said I think these maybe a good move for the traditional movement.
Chuck and Chantgirl,
1. Synods do not exist to resolve questions or issue decrees C 343.
2. Opinions were not silenced during this past Extraordinary Synod. Rather, a sly trick was used to release a phony relatio post disceptationem (which actually was a relatio sine disceptationem) to manipulate public opinion and, one assumes, pressure participants at the Synod.
Chuck and Chantgirl,
1. Synods do not exist to resolve questions or issue decrees C 343.
2. Opinions were not silenced during this past Extraordinary Synod. Rather, a sly trick was used to release a phony relatio post disceptationem (which actually was a relatio sine disceptationem) to manipulate public opinion and, one assumes, pressure participants at the Synod.
William Tighe says:
“He then sifts through them and promulgates an Apostolic Exhortation, which, one supposes is protected by Infallibility.”
Why should one suppose any such thing? If it is not an ex cathedra definition, promulgated as such by the pope, then it is merely a pious thought to make such a supposition, and one for which there is no basis in history, or the Vatican I definitions.
Not really. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is infallible but is not an ex cathedra definition.
Vat I extends Papal Infallibility beyond primary objects (ex cathedra definitions–credenda) to secondary objects (tenenda). Then in Vat II Lumen Gentium extended infallibility of secondary objects to the Ordinary Universal Magisterium.
nb: should be relatio sine disceptatione (ablative)
Kathleen10 says:
Robtbrown, I hope you are right, but this seems an extraordinary amount of kerfuffle just to end up only recommending mercy and pastoral sensitivity, which surely could already be found.
Cardinal Burke’s exile, the manner in which he has been demoted without a different appointment with corresponding responsibilities, would possibly serve a few purposes.
I’ll restate what I wrote some time ago. My concern is not any doctrinal mitigation that some might fear would emerge. Rather, it would be referring certain matters (e.g., Communion to Divorced/Remarried) to Regional or National Episcopal Conferences.
robtbrown says: “I’ll restate what I wrote some time ago. My concern is not any doctrinal mitigation that some might fear would emerge. Rather, it would be referring certain matters (e.g., Communion to Divorced/Remarried) to Regional or National Episcopal Conferences.”
Indeed, there has been a long running ‘debate’ between Kasper and Ratzinger on which comes first: the universal church or the local church. Kasper wanted and still wants to have the local church decide on these issues. But ‘heavy-weight’ theologians like Ratzinger and Cardinal Avery Dulles responded in favour of the universal Church. Here are two links about this: (if Fr Z allows, ofcourse)
First Cardinal Dulles response:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/ZRTZKSP.HTM
and Ratzinger’s response:
https://web.archive.org/web/20050206040418/http://www.americamagazine.org/gettext.cfm?textID=1250&articleTypeID=1&issueID=351
I think if Pope Francis decides that it is the local churches that ‘interpret’ how to apply doctrine, the Church is in even more tumultuous times than even now.
St. JPII pray for us.
robtbrown says: “I’ll restate what I wrote some time ago. My concern is not any doctrinal mitigation that some might fear would emerge. Rather, it would be referring certain matters (e.g., Communion to Divorced/Remarried) to Regional or National Episcopal Conferences.”
Indeed, there has been a long running ‘debate’ between Kasper and Ratzinger on which comes first: the universal church or the local church. Kasper wanted and still wants to have the local church decide on these issues. But ‘heavy-weight’ theologians like Ratzinger and Cardinal Avery Dulles responded in favour of the universal Church. Here are two links about this: (if Fr Z allows, ofcourse)
First Cardinal Dulles response:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/ZRTZKSP.HTM
and Ratzinger’s response:
https://web.archive.org/web/20050206040418/http://www.americamagazine.org/gettext.cfm?textID=1250&articleTypeID=1&issueID=351
I think if Pope Francis decides that it is the local churches that ‘interpret’ how to apply doctrine, the Church is in even more tumultuous times than even now.
St. JPII pray for us.
In all of the brouhaha over Card. Burke’s re-assignment, one must wonder what, if anything, the Synod actually accomplished with regards to the family. If they just re-affirmed prior doctrine, why bother? One could, conceivably, just read a good Catechism. I was hoping for concrete suggestions on the causes and treatment of the malaise affecting the family. Did I miss this? Simply put, the primary cause for the disintegration of the modern family is moral relativism and a lack of demanding that pursuing the classical Catholic virtues is the sign of the Christian. All of the problems of poverty, loneliness, self-control, communication subsist in this. Indeed, it would be irony, itself, if the supposedly teachings of the Synod, as interpreted through the lens of the media, were to increase the permission to be even more morally relative.
The Chicken
N.B. Mercy for adulterers and sodomites, but not for faithful successors of the Apostles.
oldcanon2257 says: “I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop with an announcement that (God forbid) Archbishop Piero Marini has been hand-picked by the Holy Father to be the new Prefect of CDW….” That has been rumored for almost as long as Card. Burke’s exile, and after this weekend, it would seem that no rumor can be deemed too outlandish to be believed.
The Masked Chicken says: “one must wonder what, if anything, the Synod actually accomplished with regards to the family.” It created a climate. It sent abroad a spirit. Its fruits are not in what it says but for the propositions that, in the world, the event itself will be taken to affirm.
An online petition thanking Card Burke for his service:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/petitions/thank-you-cardinal-burke-for-your-vatican-service
We need to hold both Cardinal Burke and Pope Francis in our prayers. Both are being maligned. Let’s not lose our humility or hope– the Holy Spirit is not resting…