Let's be clear, when a Catholic or a group of Catholics break with the pope and say to the Supreme Pontiff, you are no longer the head of the Church, this is what is called schism. The biggest group to declare this to a pope was the Eastern Church. When they became schismatic, they called themselves Eastern Orthodox and became very national. But there were other schisms some big and some small.
Not all schismatic groups lose apostolic succession or the Sacraments of the Church, i.e the Orthodox and the Polish National Catholic Church.
But some do lose these things, like the Protestant Reformation sects and the Old Catholics after Vatican I who today ordain women and are quite liberal.
So what Robert Cardinal Sarah has to write about this is extremely important for those tempted to throw in the towel and think things have never been this bad with the Church in general and this papacy in particular. Yes, things have been worse and faithful Catholics stuck with the Church.
The danger that "traditionalists" have brought to the table and they should not have been the ones doing it as it undermines otherwise good intentions, is all the horrible things they say about "Pope Bergolio" which in this country is an insult to the person of the Pope. How in the name of God and all that is holy could anyone call themselves a traditional Catholic and insult the person of the pope? Pre-Vatican II Catholics would be mortified.
Cardinal Sarah: Those who oppose the pope are outside the Church
10.9.2019 9:20 AM ET
"The truth is that the church is represented on earth by the vicar of Christ, that is by the pope. And whoever is against the pope is, ipso facto, outside the church," the cardinal said in an interview published Oct. 7 in Corriere della Sera, an Italian daily.
The 74-year-old cardinal, who Pope Francis appointed in 2014 as head of the office overseeing liturgical matters, often is portrayed as a critic of Pope Francis, especially because of the cardinal's cautious attitude toward welcoming Muslim migrants to Europe, his concern about the church acting more like a social-service agency than a missionary church and his traditional approach to the liturgy.
The Corriere piece was published to coincide with the release of a new book-length interview with Cardinal Sarah, "The Day is Now Far Spent." The English edition was released Sept. 22 by Ignatius Press in the United States.
The cardinal's book dedication reads: "For Benedict XVI, peerless architect of the rebuilding of the church. For Francis, faithful and devoted son of St. Ignatius. For the priests throughout the world in thanksgiving on the occasion of my golden jubilee of priesthood," which was July 20.
In the Corriere interview, the cardinal was asked what the "truth" was about his relationship with Pope Francis.
"The truth is that many people write not to give witness to the truth, but to place people against one another, to damage human relationships," he said. "The truth doesn't matter to them."
"Those who place me in opposition to the Holy Father cannot present a single word of mine, a single phrase or a single attitude of mine to support their absurd -- and I would say, diabolical -- affirmations," Cardinal Sarah said. "The devil divides, sets people against each other."
Cardinal Sarah said it is normal for the church to experience difficulties and divisions, but every Christian is called "to seek unity in Christ."
"I would add that every pope is right for his time," the cardinal said. "Providence looks after us very well, you know."
However, Cardinal Sarah's new book is filled with warnings about how a lack of faith, trust in God and adherence to tradition is threatening the Catholic Church, particularly in Europe and the wealthy West. But he especially focuses on clerical sexual abuse and how that has meant "the mystery of betrayal oozes from the walls of the church."
Still, in the chapter, "The Crisis of the Church," the book includes the cardinal saying, "I would like to remind everyone about Jesus' words to St. Peter, 'You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church' (Mt 16:18). We have the assurance that this saying of Jesus is realized in what we call the infallibility of the church. The spouse of Christ, headed by the successor of Peter, can live through crises and storms."
Noting that some Catholics "are quick to hurl anathemas at those who do not follow their line of thought," the cardinal said that it is time "to rediscover a bit of peace and benevolence. Only faith, confidence in the magisterium and its continuity down through the centuries can give us unity."
Catholics today must ask themselves if they truly believe the faith the church always has taught, the faith of their ancestors, is still valid today, Cardinal Sarah told Corriere. "We are called to rediscover the truth of these (teachings) both with the incomparable analysis of Benedict's thought and with great and sunny industriousness of Francis."
Although the two popes have obvious differences, Cardinal Sarah said, "there is a great harmony and great continuity between them as everyone has been able to see these last few years."
"The history of the church is beautiful," he said, and reducing it to a political battle "typical of a television talk show is a marketing ploy, not a search for truth."
My comments:
Those traditionalists who have completely undermined orthodox traditionalism, have also politicized the clergy, deacons, priests, bishops and the pope. They act as if they are a political party and are on CNN's side or Fox's side and they can win adherents in the most crass political way as we see what is happening with those who oppose or support President Trump.
The pope is not elected by the people and His Holiness only answers to God. That's why His Holiness is called the Supreme Pontiff.
14 comments:
I have the greatest respect for Cardinal Sarah but surely he does not mean that if the Pope makes an error, he cannot be admonished as the 4 dubia cardinals did? Applying the Cardinal's standard most of the European hierarchy would have been out of the Church by the late 1960s
Now I don't know how reliable this friend of PF's is, but Cardinal Sarah may want to look into this:
https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/scalfari-pope-francis-told-me-jesus-incarnate-was-man-not-all-god
In the latest edition of La Repubblica, Pope Francis' longtime atheist friend and interviewer, Eugenio Scalfari, claims that the Pope told him that once Jesus Christ became incarnate, he was a man, a "man of exceptional virtues" but "not at all a God."
Bee here:
Per TJM's link to the article by Eugenio Scalfari: can't wait to see Mark Thomas' spin on this...
:-)
God bless.
Bee
Deo gratias for Cardinal Sarah.
He has confirmed that which I've maintained for years on Father McDonald's great and important blog:
-- Cardinal Sarah has not opposed in any way to His Holiness Pope Francis. Never, never, never has Cardinal Sarah portrayed himself opposed in any way to Pope Francis.
-- Those who've pretended that Cardinal Sarah opposed Pope Francis have performed Satan's work.
Satan is behind the vile, vicious, unrelenting attacks against our holy, God-fearing, and great Pope Francis.
Cardinal Burke has insisted that he enjoys a wonderful relationship with Pope Francis.
Cardinal Müller has defended Pope Francis against vicious attacks...and has made it clear that he does not stand in opposition to Pope Francis.
Bishop Schneider has maintained that he doesn't stand in opposition to Pope Francis.
===========================================================================
Anyway...Deo gratias for Cardinal Sarah. He has shattered the claims of those who have misrepresented his attitude toward, and relationship with, Pope Francis.
I stand with Cardinal Sarah in unwavering communion with His Holiness Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
I have scanned the leading "traditionalist" — those who hate Pope Francis — blogs/twitter pages. None has promoted the Cardinal Sarah interview in question.
Had Cardinal Sarah said "X" during an interview that the Pope Francis haters could have twisted into a supposed dig at His Holiness, then said interview would have been promoted to the hilt.
But Cardinal Sarah has destroyed, in holy fashion, "traditionalists" who had pitted him against Pope Francis.
That false narrative is history.
It is time to join Cardinal Sarah in standing with, rather than attacking daily, Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Because whether you like it or not politics is part of spiritual warfare. The battle lines are pretty clear. The liberal left political ideology lays waste to the life teachings of Jesus as depicted in the five Catholic non negotiables. Our Lady said the final battle will be the attack on marriage and the family.
Interesting that you don't mention liberal dissent from the teachings of Jesus as being a problem. And how in the name of God and all that is holy can a Pope insult Faithful Catholics?
MT, where will you stand when Cardinal Sarah joins other Cardinals in a condemnation of the election of Francis?
As much as I respect Cardinal Sarah, he's absolutely wrong with this, and it kind of brings up something that Marc brought up in another post, blind obedience/not ever questioning what the pope does. There's so much wrong with this attitude I don't even know where to begin directing.
To take this to its logical conclusion Since remember, opposing the pope is being outside of the Church. When Pope John XXII promoted a false teaching on the beatific vision, it's outside of the Church to oppose that? When Peter wanted everyone to go through the Jewish rituals, and St Paul had other ideas, was he outside of the Church?
When Pope Honorious had a certain sympathy towards the heretics, it's outside of the Church to oppose that?
The list of course, goes on and on, and these are just a few examples. In which case it was right of the Church to persecute St Athanasius for standing up for the Faith? On what planet does this make any sense? None at all!
Surely, one does realize that the pope is not the head of the Church, but Christ God is head of the Church. the pope Is the first amongst equals, not first without equals. Rome is first in the pentarchy and it'd take an ecumenical council to change that order. Function and responsibility does not place one above another in terms of episcopal dignity. I'd certainly hope that the Church wouldn't be subject to the personality of one person. We'd be screwed in that case. I'd certainly hope that one would remember that St Peter was also in Antioch, as well as through his secratary St Mark in Alexandria as well ;) (The 3 successors of St Peter as the Fathers of the Church speak of). Even Rome does not (nor can they really) call the Orthodox schismatic. (Good luck finding an official Vatican statement on such, hint, if the Orthodox were schismatic, attending their Divine Liturgies wouldn't count for Sunday, nor would it be allowed in Eastern Catholic law either ;)) ( And no, 1054 doesn't count because the Pope was dead thus making the excommunication null and void, the actual separation was much more gradual and wasn't formalized until the 1800's)
Man is not God, and this is a good thing, let us keep remembrance of that point. One is Hoy, One is Lord, Jesus Christ to the Glory of God the Father, Amen.
"His holiness answers only to God."
Yes, and therein lies the problem....from the perspective of the Eastern Orthodox and others in "schism." From the Eastern Orthodox view, there cannot be two bishops over a local church (diocese) in terms of jurisdiction. And as various books I have read make clear, the ecclesiology of Rome and the Eastern Orthodox really is vastly different, so much so it is hard to see any scenario where the two could unite. How do you reconcile one side where absolute authority rests with one person versus the other where church government is synodical (more legislative)? The Orthodox might also point out that they did not "leave" the undivided Church; Rome initiated the action thru excommunication. The Orthodox view as well was while the pope could have absolute authority in the West (western side of the Church), such was anathema in the eastern side.
But both sides would agree that Anglicanism has its issues in seeking common ground with Catholics and the Orthodox---the ordination of women priests, the breakdown of sexual morality, and the comprehensiveness of Anglicanism (the tolerance of both "high" and "low" wings, which are not just differences in style but also of substance) all make it hard to see any path for reunion with Canterbury. Instead, many Anglican priests have gone to Rome, and smaller numbers to Constantinople.
The Catholic Church does not in fact stigmatize the Orthodox as schismatic. Nor is the SSPX schismatic; they pray for the Pope in every Mass they celebrate.
It is easy to mock MT for his naive belief that all popes are great and holy, and are oracles of God. History shows otherwise. But he is right in maintaining that those who criticize the Pope do not put themselves in opposition to him.
John Nolan said..."It is easy to mock MT for his naive belief that all popes are great and holy, and are oracles of God."
Mister Nolan, I believe that which the True Church teaches. Therefore, I believe that he who hears Pope Francis, hears Jesus Christ. He who hears our bishops who are in communion with Pope Francis hears Jesus Christ.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, does this also apply when PF makes comments which are uncharitable and/or insulting, for which he has gained a certain notoriety? Or do you simply stop your ears when this happens?
If Mark Thomas is correct, he should explain why the bishops seem to have different ideas concerning Amoris Laetitia.
I await your explanation Mark.
Mark Thomas said..."He who hears our bishops who are in communion with Pope Francis hears Jesus Christ."
Cardinal Ratzinger (a bishop in communion with the pope), upon being asked whether the Holy Spirit directly chooses popes:
“I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope. . . . I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined. . . . There are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit obviously would not have picked!”
Mark Thomas (who is supposed to be hearing Jesus Christ in the words of Cardinal Ratzinger): "I don't agree with Cardinal Ratzinger, no."
Post a Comment