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:
Sure, he's seen as controversial by the media. But he sure as hell better not viewed as controversial to Catholics and Catholic bishops.
The bishops have a chance to make history by taking a forthright stand against the abortion holocaust. Or they can be quislings. The choice is theirs.
True, but isn't this an advisory document? What would be the harm in making a strong general recommendation?
The good news about this article is that the number of good bishops is up to 40%. The bad news is that we still need to weed out the other 60%.
Theoretically, at least, Catholic politicians who identify themselves as Catholic could be ignorant of the issue, and thus not culpable morally. That's a pretty slim reed. But even if that is the case, the bishop has erred just as egregiously by not informing these politicians of the gravity of their position. Either way, the bishops have failed.
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."
An "expert" from a university controlled by anti-Catholic secret societies...
This is a joke.
"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."
In the future it would help if the people appointed to head task forces for the USCCB are themselves believing Catholics and that the "experts" appointed to write about these things are also believing Catholics with Catholic educations. They are not going to solve the problem of liberal pro-abortion "Catholics" until they start teaching the Catholic faith to Catholics at Catholic institutions. Why is that so hard for them to understand and face up to?
Let's tear the mask off this problem and call it for what it is.
John Kerry is a Skull and Bones member from Yale who participates in cabals that promote genocidal population control which is an article of faith for all Democrats. Acting like this is all just a matter of "Catholics" who simply are having trouble understanding their faith is dishonest. There are enemies of the faith parading around pretending to be Catholics even in the board rooms and faculties of Catholic colleges and universities. Until they address that problem, they can forget about solving the abortion controversy.
They should start with kicking the secret societies off of consecrated ground.
McCarrick was old enough to know better and attended Fordham when, ironically, it was a university still under the control of Catholics and teaching the Catholic faith. Something else explains their treason and apostasy but they don't want to talk about it.
"Ladies and gentlemen, there is an elephant in the room!"
That is the elephant in the room, isn't it? Maybe it reduces to the desire to be popular. Anyway, we should pray for them and demand orthodoxy when opportunities arise.
When fruitcake bishops help to make political accomodations for pro-abortion secret society members, sealed with a secret handshake, posed for media cameras and staged for lukewarm Catholics, if they can’t see the elephant in the room, God help them.
Divorced and remarried Catholics without an annulment cannot receive Communion either.
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.