Fr. Z's Blog

For years the Italian (and English) site La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana has been a daily go to. Last night they held a “launch” event at a Roman theatre very near to the place where the “Walking Togetherity” will commence. This was the launch of a new paper monthly. for the launch they had three speakers: my good friend Fr. Gerald Murray (who needs no intro), Stefano Fontana of the Cardinal Van Thuan Observatory, and Raymond Card. Burke (whom I believe you know).

The constant typing of “Walking Together on Walking Togetherity” is a little tedious.  I might start to abbreviate.  “W-T”, perhaps.  The longer form about “walking togetherity” implies a kind of “fraternal” – too sexist? – quality, or direction, which in this case is “forward” – no backwardism here.  It implies the unity of spirit that is found in “friendship”.  Maybe we can sometimes abbreviate the “Walking Together on Walking Togetherity” as “W-T-…”.

There were lots of press.   In the audience I saw all sorts of familiar faces, Joan Lewis, Phil Pullela, Sandro Magister.  I suspect that the smarmy guys from the Pill and Fishwrap were there.

Lots of photo and video media lined up in the back.   Robert Card. Sarah was present.

The conference title was “The Synodal Tower of Babylon”, both because of the confusion of languages and also because of the human-centered nature of the topics and process.

Fr. Murray touched on an important point.   This is supposed to be a Synod (“W-T”) of Bishops, right?   But through some machinations, that do not follow the proper course of liceity, now there are any number of lay people who can VOTE along with bishops.   Fr. Murray talked about how the structure of the Synod (“W-T”) is described by documents.  There were not published any changes that would have altered the structure of the Synod (“W-T”).  It seem that the whole thing could be illegal.

Stefano Fontana, Director of the Cardinal Van Thuan Observatory, addressed the “Hegelian” character of the Synod (“W-T”).  The content of its proceedings can be known only from what it doing.

Card. Burke’s talk in Italian is HERE.

A good point here:

Synodality, an abstract term, is a neologism in the doctrine on the Church. It is well known that the Second Vatican Council wanted to avoid the abstract terms of conciliarity and collegiality, which are not found in the conciliar texts. It is to be assumed that the Council itself would have wanted to avoid an abstract term such as synodality, if it had known it.

In another moment, talking about support structures which assist the Roman Pontiff, especially the Roman Curia, he pointed out that the word “Dicastery” as a generic term, doesn’t sufficiently reflect what should be the hierarchical relationship that the once-“Congregation” should have.  Also, and this was something very serious and noted at the time of the changes to the Curia, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ought to be placed in the FIRST place.  In fact, I add, it was called “La Suprema” for a reason: its critical importance for the stability and good of the people of God and the salvation of souls.

Burke with my emphases:

It is frequently said that the insistence on the synodality of the Church is nothing other than recovering an ecclesial characteristic always observed by the Eastern Church. I have regular contact with Eastern bishops and priests, both Catholic and Orthodox: they all told me that the way the Synod is organized has nothing to do with Eastern synods. This applies not only to the place of lay people in these assemblies, but also more generally to the way they operate and even the issues they address. There is confusion around the term synodality, which is artificially attempted to be linked to an Eastern practice, but which in reality has all the characteristics of a recent invention, especially as regards lay people.

Such a change in the self-understanding of the Church has as a further consequence a weakening of the teaching on morals, as well as discipline in the Church. I won’t dwell much on these points, which are dramatically known to everyone: moral theology has lost all its points of reference. It is urgent to consider the moral act in its totality, and not only in its subjective aspect. The thirtieth anniversary of the publication of Veritatis Splendor can help us with this. I welcome and encourage the initiatives I have seen on this issue. The commandments of the Decalogue are valid and will remain valid as they have always been in every age, simply because they are inherent in human nature.

Toward the end, Card. Burke touched on criticisms of himself and others who have dared to ask any questions.  He mentioned an article in which some member of the “W-T-F” said:

“We are very sorry, the times of the Church are not those of these brothers! They cannot dictate the Pope’s agenda, also causing wounds and undermining unity in the Church. But we’re used to it by now: they just want to hit Francesco.”

This is where Card. Burke showed anger.  What was said by that “W-T” nitwit is as rash as it is blinkered.    The Dubia submitted have to do with the discipline of the Church and with her doctrine, not the person of Francis.   Burke also brought up how Card. Fernandez of “DDF” settled himself in that interview with Edward Pentin on “the doctrine of the Pope” as if the Pope has a “living and active gift” of determining doctrine for the Church, which has never been the Church’s position, as if Popes can make up doctrine and it must therefore be the Church’s from that point onward.

There was a lot more, over the two hours of talks.  Anyway, here are three of my good friends, Fr. Sirico, Robert Royal, and Fr. Murray.  It was a pleasure to see them again.

The walk home on the Via Giulia.