Posted on 09/17/2014 12:30:31 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
A new book with articles by prominent churchmen is about to be released worldwide in severak kanguages (in English by Ignatius Press, under the title "Remaining in the Truth of Christ"), with important articles strongly defending all aspects related to the traditional Catholic doctrine on family and marriage, and the integrity of Blessed Sacrament, words that come from Our Lord Himself. This is how Ignatius Press describes it:
In this volume five Cardinals of the Church, and four other scholars, respond to the call issued by Cardinal Walter Kasper for the Church to harmonize “fidelity and mercy in its pastoral practice with civilly remarried, divorced people”. Contributors include Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, Cardinal Velasio De Paolis, C.S., Robert Dodaro, O.S.A., Paul Mankowski, S.J., Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, John M. Rist, and Archbishop Cyril Vasil, S.J.
(Excerpt) Read more at rorate-caeli.blogspot.com ...
“would be irritated ... according to a high-placed source close to the Argentine Pope.”
Shaky.
I’ve seen many positive statements about Medjugorje attributed to John Paul over the years. I’ve even seen one or two attributed to Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict. When asked directly about these statements about Medjugorje attributed to him and John Paul, then Cardinal Ratzinger said all the statements were a total fabrication.
Ordinarily I would agree, but in this case the circumstantial evidence is hard to ignore. His actions against Burke have demonstrated that the Cardinal and his teachings are non grata.
Giving Communion to a pro-abortion politician is a political act, since the NON-political act would be to follow the moral law, which says that it is a mortal sin.
In Wuerl's case, it is motivated in part by the desire not to have photos of Wuerl in gay bars published. In Chaput's case, it seems to be fear of controversy, which gets in the way of getting a red hat. In Dolan and O'Malley's case, it's the desire to avoid doing anything that might hurt a Democrat, plus obvious affinity for the gay rights movement.
Modernists such as Pope Francis can't change Truth, but they can change practice and ultimately change belief by ostentatiously ignoring Church teaching and appointing others who follow their lead, while punishing those who uphold orthodoxy. Don't you think the tranny marriage parody and baptism last week in Argentina (http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/argentina-freak-show-just-in-time-for.html) constitutes a radical change?
Of course not. There is no excuse for active homosexuals, nor abusers. Those behaviors are wrong, per se, and can’t have mitigating circumstances.
However, there are some issues that may be matters of judgement, and that is where motive and intention come into play. I don’t judge motive, as I am not a mind reader.
I never really gave this a lot of thought before, but now that I have thought about it. I have witnessed this not "noticed" it. Of course that's because I try to focus on what I am doing.
Chaput is officially in favor of giving Communion to pro-aborts. Whether every priest in the archdiocese actually is able to recognize each one, and deny Communion to them all is an entirely different issue.
As to all those various sinners you mentioned—Their sins are not public. It is not sinful to give them Communion, even though it is sinful for them to receive Communion.
Most of the bishops in the U.S. are in the state of mortal sin because they are officially in favor of the commission of mortal sin—giving Communion to manifest grave sinners.
“Don’t you think the tranny marriage parody and baptism last week in Argentina (http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/argentina-freak-show-just-in-time-for.html) constitutes a radical change”.
That was not sanctioned or approved by the Vatican and the priest who conducted the so-called homosexual “blessing” is already in hot water with the Vatican and is not allowed to perform any type of weddings. He’s a fruitcake and hopefully will be sent packing.
“Unfortunately, at this point there is a great deal of fire to go along with the smoke. Banishing Cardinal Burke is only the latest move in Pope Francis’ ongoing offensive against traditional orthodox belief and practice”.
Agree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Leo_Burke
If he replaces this Cardinal and sends him to the outer reaches of Mongolia there is no way anyone can spin it. And you are exactly right in your assessment. And the first sentence here says it all......
On December 16, 2013 Pope Francis removed Burke from the Congregation for Bishops, the church body that selects new bishops, and replaced Burke with Cardinal Donald Wuerl.[35][36]
Notable actions and statements
Politics, politicians, and abortion
During the 2004 presidential election, Burke stated that he would not give the Eucharist to John Kerry or other Catholic politicians who publicly support legalized abortion.[37] He also wrote a pastoral letter saying Catholics should not vote for politicians who support abortion or other “anti-life” practices.[37] Burke later clarified his position, stating that one could vote for a pro-choice politician and not commit a mortal sin, if one believed there was a more significant moral issue than abortion at hand, but he also stated that he could not think of any sort of issue that would qualify.[38][citation needed]
In March 2009, Burke called on American bishops to withhold Communion from Catholic politicians who support legalized abortion.[39] The bishops’ failure to do so, Burke said, “is weakening the faith of everyone. It’s giving the impression that it must be morally correct to support procured abortion.”[39] He also said that any president who promotes and implements “anti-life” legislation could be an “agent of death”.[39] Burke later said that he made his remarks not as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, head of the Vatican’s highest court, but simply as an American bishop.[40]
In February 2013 Burke commented on the Irish abortion debate, stating that, in accordance with canon law, priests should exclude politicians who support abortion from receiving communion.[41]
In a September 2008 interview, Burke said that “the Democratic Party risks transforming itself definitively into a ‘party of death,’ because of its choices on bioethical questions”, especially elective abortion.[42]
In May 2009, he stated, “Since President Obama clearly announced, during the election campaign, his anti-life and anti-family agenda, a Catholic who knew his agenda regarding, for example, procured abortion, embryonic-stem-cell research, and same-sex marriage, could not have voted for him with a clear conscience.”[43]
Sheryl Crow concert
When Sheryl Crow, an abortion rights supporter, was scheduled to perform at a benefit concert for the Cardinal Glennon Children’s Hospital, Burke stated that to have the hospital host Crow would give “the impression that the Church is somehow inconsistent in its teaching.”[44] He asked that her invitation be privately removed, and resigned from the board on April 25, 2007 when Crow’s performance was confirmed.[45]
Apparently green lighted from the top down. This occurred on Pope Francis’ watch, so he owns it. Will he be exiling Bishop Vicente Bokalic Iglic, C.M. for permitting these public sacrileges in his diocese? Silence on the part of Francis in regard to this matter implies tacit approval. There can be no CATHOLIC excuse on his part for allowing such sacrileges to stand.
The current bishop of the diocese of Santiago del Estero is Bishop Vicente Bokalic Iglic, C.M. He was installed in that position on December 23, 2013.
His principal consecrator, in 2010, was Jorge Mario Bergoglio, S.J., then Archbishop of Buenos Aires.
I think Pope Franics would say, “Well done faithful servant; just in time for my synod.”
5 posted on 9/17/2014 10:59:17 PM by ebb tide (Francis has mentioned abdication, the sooner the better.)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3205194/posts?page=3#3
In my limited, personal experience, Chaput will give a rip-roaring, orthodox talk in front of an orthodox audience.
He is in favor of giving Communion to pro-abortion politicians, which is a mortal sin.
It comes down to manifest evil, doesn't?
We can't judge anyone's soul. But we CAN call someone "wicked" who publicly commits manifest evil.
As Arthur McGowan states, it's one thing for a priest to say, “I can't know the internal state of each soul as he comes for communion,” it's another for a bishop to declare AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE that he will give communion to someone guilty of publicly manifest, evil.
As a three-time Past Grand Knight of my council, I've seen in the trenches the effects of this episcopal attitude. In trying to rally laity of my own council to the cause of life, I've encountered the direct effects of the official attitudes and actions of many in the episcopacy. Their publicly-announced attitudes and actions lead large number of pew-sitting, church-going Catholics into the pit of complete acceptance of the Culture of Death. I've actually known Catholics who, when confronted with the Church's teachings on life, especially abortion, say, “The Church SAYS those things, but they don't really MEAN them. After all, if the bishops were serious about the teaching on abortion, they wouldn't let pro-choice politicians receive communion.”
Folks like Donna Wuerl are leading many Catholics directly into objectively, gravely evil attitudes and actions. And he's doing it as a matter of principle. Is that manifestly evil enough for you?
sitetest
How DARE those people draw the necessary logical conclusion from the bishops' actions? It's so uncharitable and judgmental to draw logical conclusions! We must pray instead!
In many respects, your comments are dead-on.
I agree that pro-abortion politicians and other public figures should be denied Holy Communion. Those individuals should be receiving very clear instruction from their pastors and bishops about what they are doing, and how it jeopardizes their immortal souls.
However, bishops must make prudential judgements. While their actions on this particular matter appear objectively wrong, we don’t know their interior motives or intentions.
Please continue to pray for them. Please continue to pray for all Christians, especially those susceptible to scandal.
We can never completely know the intentions and motivations of any other person. In fact, we cannot even fully know our own. That's why St. John tells us that not even our own conscience can adequately judge own selves.
You're hung up on the wrong issue. The question is, are the actions of the cleric manifest, that is to say, done publicly, and are they objectively gravely evil? Are they leading many, many Catholics, the sheep of the flock which bishops are called to tend, into objective, grave evil?
The answers here are “yes,” and emphatically so. Colloquially speaking, these men are wicked.
For too long, because we try to be docile, we Catholics have made excuses for our hierarchs. Those excuses gave wide room for pervert priests and bishops to rape their way through Catholic lay children. We layfolks are not generally guilty of their great crimes, like the perverts are, but if we do not learn from that error and become less reticent to name evil when we see it, then we become guilty of the next crimes committed by these men.
It is not judging their souls to say that they are wicked men doing wicked deeds when they do what is manifestly, gravely evil.
And recall basic moral theology: subjective conditions can mitigate moral culpability on the part of a moral actor, but it cannot make an intrinsically evil action not evil. Prudence can never justify mortal sin. It is possible that this or that bishop may be subjectively less culpable for his crimes against God, the Church, and His people, but the bishop has still committed wicked deeds.
sitetest
The first time this happened to me, it was a revelatory experience. It was like being kicked in the head.
Kicks in the head are a good thing. It makes one think much clearer.
Not really. Kicks in the head readily cause concussions. Not so good for you.
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.