Posted on 11/20/2007 6:14:22 AM PST by NYer
Perhaps it should come as no surprise that Archbishop Raymond Burke (St. Louis) lost an election at the annual meeting of the U.S. bishops last week.
Over the past three years, Burke has assumed the mantle of the late Cardinal John O'Connor in pro-life matters, challenging fellow bishops to take stronger stances in the defense of innocent life.
Nominated as chairman for the Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance, 60 percent of his fellow bishops preferred his opponent. As bishops' conference expert Rev. Thomas Reese noted in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, an auxiliary bishop defeating an archbishop for a conference chairmanship is "very unusual."
Archbishop Burke's credentials as a canonist are widely recognized. In fact, he missed the bishops' meeting because he was in Rome as a member of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature, the Vatican's highest judicial authority.
Burke has been a controversial figure since early 2004 when, as bishop of La Crosse, WI, he began to challenge pro-abortion Catholic politicians publicly on their reception of the Eucharist.
Shortly after moving to St. Louis as archbishop, Burke said he would deny Communion to Sen. John Kerry if he presented himself. Although his position has been backed up by 13 other bishops, Archbishop Burke was clearly straining the boundaries of "collegiality."
Father Reese, former editor of America magazine, says the bishops were sending a message: "Most of the bishops don't want communion and Catholic politicians to be a high-profile issue, and he [Burke] is seen as a man who's pushing that issue. . . . Had he been elected, it could have been interpreted as endorsing his position."
Archbishop Elden Curtiss (Omaha), Archbishop Sean O'Malley (Boston), and Cardinal Francis George (Chicago) went on the record denying that there was any message being sent by the bishops to Burke. And supporters of Archbishop Burke have no reason to regret the selection of Bishop Thomas Paprocki, the Chicago auxiliary, whose reputation and credentials are similar to that of Burke's.
The question still in the air after the bishops' meeting, however, is whether Burke is being punished for not backing down after the controversy surrounding him during the 2004 election.
In response to the Kerry and Communion controversy, the bishops formed a task force, headed by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, to study the issue and present a report. That report, "Catholics in Political Life," differed sharply with Burke, finding that each bishop could decide for himself in such cases.
Archbishop Burke did not back down. Early this year, he published an article on Canon 915 in Italian law journal Periodica de Re Canonica arguing that the McCarrick report was incorrect.
Burke said that a bishop's interpretation of what to do in the face of a pro-abortion Catholic politician "would hardly seem to change from place to place." For Burke, enforcing discipline must go hand-in-hand with teaching:
Ping
Ping
In response to the Kerry and Communion controversy, the bishops formed a task force, headed by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, to study the issue and present a report. That report, "Catholics in Political Life," differed sharply with Burke, finding that each bishop could decide for himself in such cases.
Ping for later
American bishops...is there more than one set of balls among them?
Disgusting.
Problem with that theory is that long-time Catholic doctrine -- and St. Paul himself -- make plain that if you eat and drink unworthily, you eat and drink damnation unto yourself. A priest should not be helping a parishioner to damnation.
You may well be absolutely right that that's what some weak-spined clerics may be telling themselves, but what passes for 'reasoning' among liberal and heterodox Catholics is pretty lame.
And of course they'd say so if it were true . . .
The Holy Trinity? Father, Son and Holy Spirit? The ONE true God?
I trust the Holy Spirit, but you are right....there are MANY spirits that are evil. A pro-abortion, career politician may have never known the Holy Spirit as evidenced through his actions.
Let's see -- they don't want to deal with soi-disant Catholic politicians who support abortion, they don't want to deal with enabling bishops and homosexuals in the clergy, they assume papal directives don't apply to them . . .
Of course, they have more important things to do, like having their own commission on Peace and Justice, offering cement-headed economic pomposities and foreign policy inanities. What, do you expect them to do everything?
The Episcopal Church was taken over by pagans, New Agers, homosexualists, and political panderers using precisely that argument.
And that's why I don't want to see it happen in the Catholic Church . . . cause I just escaped the shipwreck of the Episcopalians!
1 Corinthians 11:29
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
Canon 915
"Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion" (can. 915).
"Are not to be admitted" means exactly what it says. It is the duty of the pastor, and/or of the Bishop (chief pastor of the Diocese) to apply this canon. There is really no wiggle room.
(1) Most Bishops are acting in flagrant disobedience of Canon Law.
(2) The Sacrament the Holy Spirit is calling the obstinate public sinner to, is the Sacrament of Confession.
AND.......God is God - He doesn’t change. The TRUTH is the truth....IT doesn’t change. It’s the world that changes...for good and bad.
**Archbishop Elden Curtiss (Omaha), Archbishop Sean O’Malley (Boston), and Cardinal Francis George (Chicago) went on the record denying that there was any message being sent by the bishops to Burke. **
Glad they made this statement. They just need to bring the other bishops around. (Or, perhaps, this is a message to Pope Benedict XVI to do some more housecleaning among the American Bishops.)
Ah yes, let's quote Reese, the ousted apostate/heretic editor of America who no doubt is still throwing a tantrum over the election of Benedict XVI.
I am remembering what an exorcist/priest once said. IF it is the Holy Spirit calling them, who knows what good Communion can play in leading them back to Christ. It would be MY decision to exclude them. AND the Sacrament of Reconciliation is indeed the proper place for them to repent. AND it is against Church teaching to go to Communion while one is NOT reconciled with God.
Possibly - but if so, you don't want to know what they're doing with them.
If +Burke remains strong, his view (incidentally also the Church's traditional view) will prevail.
Also remember that the findings of a 'task force' don't hold any authority, even in Vatican circles. Pope Paul VI went against the Papal Commission that looked at birth control when he wrote Humanae Vitae.
Yeah, it "rings hollow" when they surrender Catholic campuses to anti-Catholic secret societies too. What good are policy statements from the USCCB when Catholic colleges are not even run by Catholics? When they stand by and do nothing about this they are giving the consecrated ground of the Church to the forces of evil.
They need to clean house across the board.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.