Yesterday I received a copy of George Weigel’s new book
The Next Pope: The Office of Peter and a Church in Mission
The College of Cardinals, as the official titular clergy of Rome, has the mandate to elect the Bishop of the See of Rome.
Traditionally the office of the Bishop of Rome and the Petrine Ministry go hand in hand, although it seems that Romanitas is not necessarily inextricably bound exclusively with the See of Rome. I digress.
Were there to be a conclave in the near future, what might happen? That depends on the make up of the College.
At Crux, I read a piece about something stupidly incoherent.
Spanish cardinals offer their red hats to women, calling the zucchetto an ‘illusion’
Three Spanish-born cardinals on Wednesday offered up their “red hats and cardinal rings” to any woman who wants to be a member of the Catholic Church’s most exclusive club.
[…]
Grandstanding.
Cardinal … Cristobal Lopez, Archbishop of Rabat, Morocco
Cardinal … Juan Jose Omella, Archbishop of Barcelona, Spain
Cardinal … Pedro Barreto, Archbishop of Huancayo, Peru
All three born in Spain. All three appointed by Francis.
The only response to these three blatteroons is:
RESIGN the College of Cardinals.
Just. Get. Out.
Loading ...
I wonder how to understand the “zucchetto won’t make a difference” comment.
It’s true that when the Cardinals surrender their rings and zucchetti, they won’t be less cardinals, nor will the women be more able to vote in the conclave, I think, because these are symbols of office, not the office themselves. An actor, on stage, doesn’t become pope (think, Sir John Guilgud in The Scarlet and the Black) just because he wears papal robes.
On the other hand, perhaps the cardinals mean that they aren’t actually cardinals, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, and the ring and zucchetto don’t change this reality? They apparently don’t behave like cardinals with any great regularity — which can also be said of the man who gave them those symbols of office, but (to paraphrase our host) I digress.
If they mean to denigrate the ontological change which takes place at ordination, then we would have a denial of doctrine, I think.
If they mean to imply that there are no differences between men and women, this would also be problematic.
Mind you, in the era when the death penalty can be declared “inadmissible”, confusion is evidently the order of the day.
If I understood this article correctly, the cardinal was saying that women do not need to be priests or cardinals in order to serve the Church. He was praising them for their current service and seemed to suggest that wearing a cardinal’s clothing would mean nothing. My interpretation is that he was saying that the simple act of putting on a cardinal’s robe would not make them a cardinal.
More vacuous sophistry from the clerical chattering class – a personal feature which seems to be a prerequisite for elevation in recent times.
Do they realize how much it denigrates themselves, their office and the Church, as a whole? Of course not.
But like a photo-op, these sound bites get them attention – applause from the left, denouncement from the right – which is the main thing they seek.
When they talk about women cardinals, they never contemplate Mother Mary Cardinal Angelica of the Annunciation Rizzo.
Just sayin’.
Crazy!!!
In an hommage to Asterix:
sono pazzi questi cardinali!
Whew! Those three better start packing for a HOT CLIMATE!
God have mercy on us and on the whole world. As we know, you will keep you Catholic Church Holy and the way You intended it to be when You established Her. Lord PLEASE grant all of your Clergy, Seminarians, Consecrated Religious and all of us laity in Your Catholic Church the grace needed to do Your will and bring as many souls to heaven as possible. Keep the Church focused on You Lord and not on secular things. Help us all Lord to be the Sons and Daughters and Shepherds that You have called us to be. Amen.
I agree that the part about offering the zuchetto and ring to any woman who wants it is incoherent, and some of the other comments raised my eyebrows, but it does not appear from further reading that the intended message is what the first paragraph of the article suggested – I for a moment was alarmed they might be speaking in favor of women’s ordination, but it seems to be about other roles of serving God.
Later on:
“‘Do not base your feeling of fulfilment on believing that you are not complete if you do not have the priestly order,’ [Cardinal Lopez said].
….
Omella agreed with the other two prelates, saying that today, ‘we have a mistaken concept of the priestly, episcopal or cardinal ministries being about power,’ he said. ‘They’re not power, they are service.'”
They should have offered one to Monsignor Fellay
Pingback: FRIDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
They won’t resign. These are our bishops now. The leaders of God’s church don’t believe in the Church anymore, and these people are the ones that are going to pick the pope from now on. Francis appointed a majority that supports this ideology. The only hope now is divine intervention.
They should have offered one to Monsignor Fellay
Not given his abysmal and vile record when it comes to handling sexual abuse and homosexual pederasty in his fraternity.
Some decades ago when I was in graduate school and before PStJPII settled the issue definitively (and even after, for that matter), several of the members of the parish choir I sang in at the time argued that women should be ordained priests so that they could have access to power in the Church. My reply was that the pursuit of power wasn’t a just reason to seek ordination, and that as long as that was the motivation behind the push for the ordination of women, it wasn’t even worth considering. I also pointed out that the even-by-then mostly disappeared religious sisters teaching in Catholic schools, for instance, used to have untold ‘power’ resulting from that service. Neither was a popular reply, but they couldn’t really rebut them, either.
.
Based on my lifetime of experience of translating University-babble into English (which isn’t always possible in my experience, such translations can be quite difficult — and Church-babble is different), my reading of these comments is that they are (at least in part) saying that the trappings (ring, zucchetto, robes) of ‘power’ don’t actually confer power. Such power is illusory (though the authority is not), but what is real is service, whether for clerics or laity, men or women. It’s enough for women to be Christians, and ordination isn’t necessary.
.
Anyway, that’s my take on it. You can decide for yourself if it makes sense.
The headline of the article certainly is sensationalized. They aren’t saying that women should be made cardinals. Instead, they’re saying that cardinals should “‘submit'” to women such as the secretaries working in the Vatican. Reads to me like a patronizing pat on the head to such women.
What about the comments at the end of the article though? “Omella noted that through the pandemic he’s seen a ‘growth in the desire many have of praying, of receiving Communion, of being heard by a priest.'”
Maybe that’s because so many bishops denied those things to us for months, even beyond any dictates of the secular governments. And yet, we may find a steep decline in that desire when and if the dispensations are finally lifted. How many people will bother to come back? How many Catholics will say, “I don’t think we’re required to go to Mass anymore”?
And then: “’There’s a hunger for God and for encountering others,’ he said. ‘This spiritual bread has been offered from the great response given by priests and catechists.’” Honestly, most members of the Catholic Church in the US found that no response at all was been given by priests during the pandemic. And what about the pandemic has caused anyone to turn to catechists of all people? Cardinal Omella’s comments don’t reflect reality.
If I could add, here in the US bishops seem oblivious to the fact that 79% of young adult Catholics cease considering themselves Catholic by the time they’re 23, according to Brian Williams at the Liturgy Guy blog. In Spain, according to a Pew study, only 11.9% of Spaniards attend Mass every Sunday and holy day. Yet somehow, Cardinal Omella sees a “growth in desire”. Is delusional too strong a word to use for his claim? It’s breathtaking how out of touch the bishops and cardinals in our world are.
Antonin says:
They should have offered one to Monsignor Fellay
Not given his abysmal and vile record when it comes to handling sexual abuse and homosexual pederasty in his fraternity.
OK–then to Abp Vigano’