Monday, June 4, 2012

THE SHIP OF PETER MAY SEEM TO FALTER BUT IT IS LORD WHO GOVERNS THE WORLD; AND NOTIFICATION FROM THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH


This is the most direct statement of our Holy Father's distress over the events at the Vatican and the press's relentless leaking of confidential papal correspondence stolen from his desk.

THE SHIP OF PETER MAY SEEM TO FALTER BUT IT IS LORD WHO GOVERNS THE WORLD

Vatican City, 4 June 2012 (VIS) - The Holy Father yesterday had lunch with Church leaders in the archbishopric of Milan. He had been staying at the archbishopric during his three-day visit to that northern Italian city for the seventh World Meeting of Families, the closure of which he had presided that morning at an open-air Mass. At the end of the meal the Pope made some brief off-the-cuff remarks.

"I simply want to say thank you for everything I have been able to experience over these days, for this experience of the living Church. If from time to time we may think that the Ship of Peter is at the mercy of ruthless adversaries, it is also true that we see that the Lord is present, He is alive, He truly rose again and holds the government of the world and the heart of mankind in His hand. This experience of the living Church, which lives from the love of God, which lives for the risen Christ has been, let us say, the gift of these days. Thus let us give thanks to the Lord".


My comments: Just who has betrayed the pope beyond the butler? Who are these "ruthless adversaries" who are very much Judas-like in what is happening. The closest associates of the pope betraying him.

Or are the ruthless adversaries those who hate the Church and her prophetic message against the new and emerging pagan religion of secularism and its dictatorship of shoving down the throats of Christians their anti-Christian agenda? This group is far more sinister. It is, as I have written before, a conspiracy of the Mass media, especially the entertainment and news industry, the dictatorship of far left politics and academia.

Keep in mind that Peter himself and almost all the disciples except for John denied our Lord and Judas betrayed Him. All of them, except for Judas, were forgiven and reconciled by our Lord and went on to become great figures in the Church and many were martyred for the Faith. Judas could have experienced this grace and legacy too if not for his definitive decision not to seek forgiveness and reconciliation through suicide.

Those in the highest places of the pope's "cabinet" who are betraying Peter in the person of Pope Benedict have the same grace available to them which includes forgiveness and reconciliation and a chance at redemption as they continue to work for the ministry of the Holy Father.

The other sinister adversaries of godless secularism already have their condemnation but mercy and redemption is available to them too.

Somehow, I wonder how the SSPX controversy and the LCWR controversy are related to all of this and in terms of LCWR and the very real concerns the Vatican has about some aspects of the leadership of this group tie into "ruthless adversaries?"

Read this which is included in the very same communique I post above from the Vatican. Just coincidence or a sign and symbol? I report, you decide!

NOTIFICATION FROM THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Vatican City, 4 June 2012 (VIS) - The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith today published a "Notification Regarding the Book 'Just Love. A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics' by Sister Margaret A. Farley R.S.M". The document warns the faithful that the work in question "is not in conformity with the teaching of the Church. Consequently it cannot be used as a valid expression of Catholic teaching, either in counselling and formation, or in ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue". The English-language Notification is signed by Cardinal William Joseph Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and has been approved by the Holy Father.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith wrote to Sr. Farley in 2010 enclosing a preliminary evaluation of her book and indicating the doctrinal problems it contained, however her answer failed to clarify those issues in a satisfactory manner. The Congregation therefore proceeded to examine the volume following the procedure for "examination in cases of urgency". In June 2011 a commission of experts confirmed that the "book contained erroneous propositions, the dissemination of which risks grave harm to the faithful". Sr. Farley was sent a list of the erroneous propositions and invited to correct them, but her response "did not adequately clarify the grave problems contained in her book" and the Congregation decided to proceed with the publication of this Notification, extracts of which are given below.

"The author does not present a correct understanding of the role of the Church’s Magisterium as the teaching authority of the bishops united with the Successor of Peter, which guides the Church’s ever deeper understanding of the Word of God as found in Holy Scripture. ... In addressing various moral issues, Sr. Farley either ignores the constant teaching of the Magisterium or, where it is occasionally mentioned, treats it as one opinion among others. ... Sr. Farley also manifests a defective understanding of the objective nature of the natural moral law".

"Among the many errors and ambiguities of this book are its positions on masturbation, homosexual acts, homosexual unions, the indissolubility of marriage and the problem of divorce and remarriage".

"Sr. Farley writes: 'Masturbation… usually does not raise any moral questions at all'. ... This statement does not conform to Catholic teaching: “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action. ... For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved".

"Sr. Farley writes: 'My own view ... is that same-sex relationships and activities can be justified according to the same sexual ethic as heterosexual relationships and activities'. ... This opinion is not acceptable. The Catholic Church, in fact, distinguishes between persons with homosexual tendencies and homosexual acts. Concerning persons with homosexual tendencies, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “they must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided” . Concerning homosexual acts, however, the Catechism affirms: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved”".

"The Church teaches that the respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of ... homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognise, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. ... The denial of the social and legal status of marriage to forms of cohabitation that are not and cannot be marital is not opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires it".

"Sr. Farley writes: 'My own position is that a marriage commitment is subject to release'. ... This opinion is in contradiction to Catholic teaching on the indissolubility of marriage: “By its very nature conjugal love requires the inviolable fidelity of the spouses. This is the consequence of the gift of themselves which they make to each other. Love seeks to be definitive; it cannot be an arrangement ‘until further notice’. The intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the children, demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable union between them. ... The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble. He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law".

The Notification also assesses Sr. Farley's opinion that divorced people may remarry, saying: "This view contradicts Catholic teaching that excludes the possibility of remarriage after divorce. ... In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ, ... the Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognised as valid, if the first marriage was'".

"With this Notification, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith expresses profound regret that a member of an institute of consecrated life, Sr. Margaret A. Farley R.S.M., affirms positions that are in direct contradiction with Catholic teaching in the field of sexual morality. ... Furthermore the Congregation wishes to encourage theologians to pursue the task of studying and teaching moral theology in full concord with the principles of Catholic doctrine".




8 comments:

ytc said...

Nutty nuns who teach at Yale obviously think they have their own magisterium.

Gene W. (formerly Pin) said...

Better find out where Ignotus has been during all this...LOL!

rcg said...

When your house is on fire, you know immediately what are the most important things and merely regret the loss of lesser things. That includes the expensive antique lamp that started the fire.

Henry said...

I suspect that chaos in the Vatican in the Vatican is being fomented in an attempt to forestall Pope Benedict's SSPX initiative. Perhaps not solely because of concern about the SSPX in itself, but because it may be seen as a lynchpin for the Pope's broader goal of liturgical reform and, more generally, reassessing Vatican II in the light of Catholic tradition.

Anonymous said...

The Holy Father is absolutely right, isn’t he, especially if we understand “from time to time” as embracing the entire history of the Catholic Church?

While we should certainly not minimize recent or current travails or threats, surely it is good to keep some historical perspective. Judging from all the jumping up and down and foaming at the mouth on the part of some observers of the relevant recent and current events, especially those who seek to capitalize on the Church’s difficulties to harm Her, one might get the impression that problems in the Church and in the Vatican were something new.

To pursue rcg’s apt analogy, then, perhaps the house is not on fire so much as it is in need of some serious maintenance.

rcg said...

Henry, I concur, but think it goes farther back than the SSPX issue. It takes a while even for the enemies to coordinate this well. I think it went back to AT LEAST 2007 with Summorum Pontificum. Maybe even farther back when B-XVI started correcting some highly visible bishops.

Templar said...

It could just as easily be that the attackers are not whom the press would have you believe. The attackers instead are the ones whose actions are being revealed by the "accussed attackers" who instead are the trur defenders of the Faith. Even a great man like Pope Benedict can be blinded by misplaced trust, as is the case with Bertone.

It's a shame the Albino Monk Assassins of the Da Vinci Code don't really exist. Bertone and Farley would be less bold, maybe just less in general.

Joseph Johnson said...

Go to Rorate Caeli under the post "Vatican Leaker and Accomplices" and read the 36th comment by GQ Rep re Sodano et al. I just have gut feeling he may be right.