Thursday, October 2, 2014


I have to say that cardinals dueling it out publicly seems untoward to me. I sympathize with Cardinal Burke's side of the story and yes, I have been challenged by those who think that Cardinal Kasper's liberality in terms of Communion to those who are in an unrecognized marriage can receive Holy Communion is a done deal. This confusion is not good for the Church, clergy or laity and I hope the synod's preparation for the ultimate synod will clarify things and make things less divisive then they already are! If we follow Cardinal Kasper's "bleeding heart" then we might as well do away with any mortal sin being an impediment to Holy Communion and thus fling wide open the acceptance of same sex marriage (performed outside the Church) and those living together without the benefit of marriage and allow everyone to go to Holy Communion in whatever state they are in as long as their individualism and fiercely so says it is good in one way or another. 


Anonymous said...

I do indeed, Father. These aren't the days of Pius XI (yes, that's 11), when we could be more than reasonably certain that all our shepherds were Catholic.

Without the transparency the internet provides, who do you think would win this war of wills and Truth?

MR said...

I agree that it is a bit unseemly, but is was the Pope himself that chose to organize it this way. It's not like this situation was forced on the Church from the outside.

JusadBellum said...

The entire liturgy is premised on the Christian rejecting sin and asking for God's if you are in a state of permanent sin, with no desire to repent and change course, how can one honestly say the prayers of the Mass? Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa.... or "and to you my brothers and sisters that I have sinned before the Lord my God"?

Cardinal Kasper's "pastoral" approach turns the concept of mercy upside down. If you are not sorry and not 'repentant' then you're not looking for mercy at all.

We all struggle with vice and life long tendencies towards selfishness and sin... the whole point of going to confession is to grow in holiness, to put away idols and take up the worship of God.... but if in the name of 'mercy' we claim people need not abandon their idols in order to be in communion with God, what are we really doing that's 'merciful'?

Did not St. Paul warn us about prostitution and how sex with one makes us 'one' with her and thus we can't simultaneously be one with God else we'd be joining God with our sin? Is this not the reasoning behind refraining from communion until we're objectively restored to a state of friendship and worship with God?

If I am a habitual bank robber with no intention of ceasing to rob banks...or a habitual polluter of the environment, a habitual gun runner, drug pusher, or abuser of employees.... with zero intention of stopping, and I present myself to communion how am I not committing sacrilege and thus compounding my sin?

I may very well FEED BAD about not going to communion -but apparently not bad enough to stop sin. The good cardinal values peoples' physical presence in Church more than their spiritual, actual union!

To have a fake unity is worse than anything. It's not mercy he's proposing.

Keyser Soze said...

No, I don't like to see Cardinal dueling in the media, but as MR observed, this rather fell upon them, especially upon Cardinal Burke.

Cardinal Burke, as much as anyone, with his background in canon law, is devoted to the truth. At this point, what does he have to lose? His removal from the Signatura is a fait accompli and he is slated to a ceremonial position that leaves him free from the worry of demotion--as if he ever cared anyway. No one else seems to be taking up the challenge of Cardinal Kasper's unhinged press remarks, so why not Burke? Frankly, with no disrespect intended, Kasper's increasingly energetic defense of an untenable position coupled with his public blaming game suggests that he might benefit from a psychiatric evaluation.

While we are under no obligation to believe private revelations, the APPROVED apparitions at Akita warned that we would see bishop against bishop and cardinal against cardinal. There is a diabolical disorientation that is seeking to take over the Church. Thanks be to God there is an intrepid cardinal willing to stand up to the disoriented bullying of those who sneer at what the Church has always taught.

John said...

Church history is full of public controversies among bishops and cardinals. Pelagious and Augustine argued theology, Arius and Athanasius ditto. Although, the current situation is somewhat different in that Cardinal Kasper's advocates a secular, existential position only partially wrapped in theological language. This is why Catholics hearing his arguments are so incensed. (Fifth column is a descriptor that comes to mind.)

The Holy Father could stop the spectacle any time with one of his famous telephone calls. The fact that he has not done it so far means to me that he sees Cardinals' debate as an appropriate prelude to the coming synod "dialogue."

Anonymous said...

I can see the very deep concern in Cardinal Burke's eyes and voice. His last statement made me shudder. I don't know how I would take it either if the Church betrayed the words of Christ.

My reaction to Cardinal Kasper was frankly disgust. The Lord's words are clear. This situation is nonsense and is needlessly being aloud to fester by this pope. Either the Church upholds the teachings of Our Lord or she doesn't. And just because Francis is pope does not give him the power to change divine truth. He can't make that which is black white, nor can he make that which is white black.

Anonymous said...

Personally, I think that Cardinal Burke needs to learn some tolerance.He seems to be going around very angry at any kind of discussion. He must be insecure in his position.

Anonymous said...

"Personally, I think that Cardinal Burke needs to learn some tolerance.He seems to be going around very angry at any kind of discussion. He must be insecure in his position"

No cardinal, bishop, pope or priest or faithful lay Catholic should "tolerate" sin. A man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. PERIOD. Christ Himself said that. Not me, not Pope Benedict, not Cardinal Burke. Christ said that. Should St. John the Baptist have shown more tolerance to Herod? Was St. John the Baptist insecure because he spoke the truth? Cardinal Burke is speaking the truth. "Tolerating" sin is evil. Would you call a KKK member who burns a cross on the lawn of a black family a racist or is that not being tolerant of the position of the cross burner? Is slavery wrong or are we just not tolerant to the beliefs of the slave owner? Stop trying to justify sin. Was Christ angry when He made a whip and kicked over the tables in the temple? You bet He was angry. He had reason to be angry. The Church cannot give the impression in any way that sin is acceptable. And if you don't like that go and become an Episcopalian.