Against Walter Kasper (II)

The New York Times ^ | 7/25/14 | Ross Douthat

[marshmallow]

Back in May, I offered some general comments on the question of communion for divorced and remarried Catholics — which looms over the Synod on the Family scheduled for this autumn in Rome, and may represent one of the defining controversies of Pope Francis’s pontificate — and then wrote what was intended to be the first of two posts addressing Cardinal Walter Kasper’s high-profile case for admitting the remarried to the sacrament. That post offered theological and sociological reasons to be skeptical of Kasper’s broad suggestion, offered in an interview with the editors of Commonweal, that Catholic marriage generally is in a crisis more severe even than divorce statistics would suggest, in which (he argued) possibly as many as half of all Catholic marriages are actually invalid. The second post, which I promised and then didn’t deliver, was supposed to be a detailed response to his specific proposal on communion, which he first presented in remarks to his fellow cardinals in the winter and then elaborated again in the Commonweal interview this spring.

Now I’m going to try to finally deliver that response — but in a slightly different form than I originally envisioned, because there’s a new critical assessment of Kasper’s argument, written by a group of American Dominicans, that covers the theological and historical issues in much greater detail and with a far deeper grounding in the relevant material than anything I’m likely to write here. Readers interested in the the subject — whether as Catholics or Christians or simply because they want to understand why the adoption of Kasper’s proposal could lead to an internal crisis in the life of the planet’s largest religious body — should really turn to that assessment first. Readers interested in my.........

[Nifster]

Factually falls in the beginning so I lost interest

there are estimated to be 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and only 1.3 billion Roman Catholics.....Hence the Roman Catholic church is not the largest religion on the planet

[Arthur McGowan]

Walter Kasper—a favorite of the Pope—is pushing for the reception of Communion for those who are publicly living in the state of mortal sin.

Most American bishops ALREADY approve of the reception of Communion by people living publicly in the state of mortal sin.

By encouraging this controversy to flourish, the Pope has already provided proof that he is unfit to be Pope. But if the Pope ever actually approves of Kasper’s position, then he is an anti-Pope.

[piusv]

By encouraging this controversy to flourish, the Pope has already provided proof that he is unfit to be Pope. But if the Pope ever actually approves of Kasper’s position, then he is an anti-Pope.

But what will it take for him to clearly be an anti-pope in this matter? Couldn't the Synod just approve it by taking the all-too-famous "pastoral" route like the post-VII Church has already done with allowing communion to pro-aborts and non-Catholics (you know, as long as the bishop says it's aok)? Who is to say that this will pass through as no big deal from most Catholics? And we'll be further along the road to perdition....with the help of "the Church".

[CTrent1564]

Nifster:

Are there not several divergent sects among the Mohammedans. For example, the Shia and the Sunni are clearly different sects. Syria is led by the Assad who is from a sect that is an offshoot of Shia Mohammedans, etc. So, if you divide the Mohammedan sects, I think the Catholic Church might be the largest Religion on the planet.

[cothrige]

Hence the Roman Catholic church is not the largest religion on the planet

Your post factually falls as the article never says that Catholicism is the "largest religion on the planet." It references it as "the planet's largest religious body" which is accurate. You are treating Muslims as all being members of one body, which is not so. They are divided into many specific sects and camps.

[Arthur McGowan]

I wouldn’t accuse him of being an anti-Pope unless he himself uttered words that purport to authorize reception of Communion in the state of mortal sin—or to deny that adultery is a mortal sin.

If the Synod comes up with something heretical, and the Pope is just too weak, or befuddled, or liberal to repudiate the whole thing, that’s not quite the same thing as explicitly teaching error.

The USCCB is OFFICIALLY on record, since 2004, with a policy that a bishop may “legitimately” commit the mortal sin of giving Communion to abortionists. No Pope has seen fit to do anything about it—not Saint JPII, not Benedict, and certainly not Francis.

The American Cardinals and Archbishops get their influence in Rome from the fact that American Catholics inundate them with money for the Church’s “good works.” American Catholics should stop giving ANYTHING to the Church that might find its way to Rome, and demand that Rome send us bishops who do not support abortion and abortionists in public office, and open borders, and treason, etc.

It is American money that induced Rome decades ago to give American bishops the privilege of naming their own successors. Thus, sodomites and Communists have named sodomites and Communists as their successors for 40 years. The flow of money to Rome must stop.

[Nifster]

And the muslims while having sects that fight amongst themselves indeed rally together to slaughter those who’re not muslim, then they go back to fighting each other

[Nifster]

” Readers interested in the the subject — whether as Catholics or Christians or simply because they want to understand why the adoption of Kasper’s proposal could lead to an internal crisis in the life of the planet’s largest religious body “

I treat muslims as an entity because they act that way when dealing with non-muslims. Once the rid the world of the ‘nonbelievers’ they turn on each other.

[CTrent1564]

Nifster:

I don’t disagree.

[ebb tide]

“Another thing: yesterday, before sleeping – although not in order to go to sleep! – I read and reread Cardinal Walter Kasper's document and I would like to thank him, as I found it to be a work of profound theology, and also a serene theological reflection. It is pleasant to read serene theology. And I also found what St. Ignacius described as the 'sensus Ecclesiae', love for the Mother Church. ... It did me good, and an idea came to mind – please excuse me, Eminence, if I embarrass you – but my idea was that this is what we call “doing theology on one's knees”. Thank you, thank you”.

Pope Francis

[piusv]

So his approval of Kasper must be explicit? It seems to me that he already did that.

[piusv]

The USCCB is OFFICIALLY on record, since 2004, with a policy that a bishop may “legitimately” commit the mortal sin of giving Communion to abortionists. No Pope has seen fit to do anything about it—not Saint JPII, not Benedict, and certainly not Francis.

"Saint" JPII allowed others to receive communion in a state of mortal sin and did nothing about it. Has any pope named a saint ever done anything of the sort? The inconsistencies in the Vatican II Church boggles the mind. For anyone to ignore said inconsistencies, boggles the mind even further.

[Arthur McGowan]

I didn’t say that.

I said I wouldn’t go so far as to say he’s an anti-Pope unless he himself enunciates Kasper’s position as his own.

It’s true that Kasper is one of his favorites, along with that slimy Uriah Heep, Donald Wuerl, and that Democratic Party hack, Sean O’Malley. This Pope has no judgment when it comes to character. But that is not enough to convict him of being an anti-Pope.

No sin, no amount of bad taste, no lack of good judgment, is enough to prove a man is an anti-Pope. Only explicitly and obstinately teaching heresy is.