First, the CDF told the world, especially the Germans, only priests could be pastors or head parishes. Of course only coloring book Catholics need to have this reiterated to them.
Second, the CDF said, only “I baptize you in the Name....” constitutes a valid baptism. Two priests thus far, baptized by deacons, have discovered they were not baptized because the deacons used “we” instead of I. I wonder how many poor souls out there are invalidly baptized and how many priests and deacons, maybe a bishop or two, may go to hell if they don’t repent of their liturgical aberrations that are illicit at least and at worse makes their celebrations of the sacraments invalid!
But now this bombshell from Pope Francis’ CDF! Wow: Of course, it is a no-brainer, but the heterodox emboldened by a papacy that allows for dialogue forgot that after the dialogue heretics can still be crushed:
This is from the National Chismatic Reporter (NCR) who supports this priest and his heretical ideologies. Is it possible that the CDF could demand that publications that call themselves “Catholic” and clearly aren’t could be told to remove the name “Catholic” from their publication. That’s not too much to ask. At least the bishop where this paper is published should demand it.
ROME — A popular Irish priest suspended from public ministry in 2012 primarily over his support for women's ordination is now being threatened by the Vatican that his suspension will remain indefinite unless he signs four strict oaths of fidelity to Catholic teachings.
Redemptorist Fr. Tony Flannery revealed to NCR Sept. 15 that he had received a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith over the summer. It asks him to affirm the church's official positions on a male-only priesthood, gay relationships, civil unions and gender identity.
The document, sent on congregational letterhead and signed by the office's second-in-command, Archbishop Giacomo Morandi, informs the Redemptorist leadership in Rome that Flannery "should not return to public ministry" if the priest does not sign the four attached oaths.
Flannery told NCR he believes he cannot sign the materials in good conscience, and expects this may be "the end of the road" for him in terms of public ministry.
"To sign that document would be utterly ridiculous for me," said the priest. "That document is so far removed from where I am at now, and it is phrased in such a way that there is no possibility of dialogue of any nature."
Flannery is a popular Irish writer, retreat giver and, formerly, pastor. He was removed from public ministry in February 2012 after the Vatican congregation expressed concern over a number of columns he had written for Reality, a Redemptorist-run magazine in Ireland.
The priest's continued suspension appears at odds with Pope Francis' frequent calls for a church that is more open to dialogue and debate. During the four Synods of Bishops Francis has hosted over his seven-year papacy, for example, the pontiff has frequently exhorted the prelates attending those events that no topic should be off the table.
The first oath Flannery is asked to sign concerns women's ordination. The text presents a "doctrinal proposition" that "a baptized male alone receives sacred ordination validly." It then asks the priest to sign that he has decided to "submit" to that proposition.
The other three oaths ask Flannery to affirm that "homosexual practices are contrary to the natural law;" that forms of union between partners outside marriage "do not correspond to God's plan for marriage and family;" and that "gender theory is not accepted by Catholic teaching."
Flannery said that while he has written and spoken with regard to issues around the first three oaths, the inclusion of the last one confused him.
"I don't think I have ever written a line on gender theory," said the priest, joking: "I'd want to study up and know what exactly it was before I'd even begin to."
The letter from the Vatican congregation, which is addressed to the head of the Redemptorist order, Fr. Michael Brehl, references a previous February 2020 letter from Brehl. The Congregation says the previous letter proposed "permitting Fr. Tony Flannery to return to public ministry."
Brehl did not immediately respond to a request for comment on this story. The Vatican congregation, which is led by Cardinal Luis Ladaria, also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Vatican's letter does not indicate that Flannery would be immediately returned to ministry should he sign the four oaths. Instead, it promises that after the priest's signing, "a gradual readmission of Fr. Flannery to the exercise of public ministry will be made possible by way of an agreement with this congregation."
The letter also suggests that if Flannery were to return to ministry, "he should be asked to not speak publicly" on the four matters covered by the provided oaths.
Flannery said he had not sought canonical advice on the latest letter.
"After even the most cursory of a first glance at [the letter], it was obvious to me there was no way that I was going to sign any of that," said the priest. "I would assume … they would have known well that I wasn't going to sign it.
Flannery, whose latest book, From the Outside: Rethinking Church Doctrine, is being published in October, said the idea of returning to ministry but being barred from speaking on certain subjects was not appealing.
"I'm 73 years of age, and going through that process — there'd be no life in it," he said.
"I suppose what I'm doing now, going public on this, is saying, 'Look, forget it. I don't want to have any more to do with the CDF,' " said the priest, using an acronym for the Vatican congregation. "I just want to live what I have left of my life."
[Joshua J. McElwee is NCR Vatican correspondent. His email address is jmcelwee@ncronline.org. Follow him on Twitter: @joshjmac.]
7 comments:
seems that PF is now trying to plug holes in the Barque of Peter, after kicking holes in it. There is an old saying, be careful what you ask for, you may get it!
Yes indeed it does appear to be so. That Pope Francis is mad at what he unleashed in terms of the heterodox thinking they would rule the day comes from our Holy Father’s ambiguities. You reap what you sow. But it is interesting that the NCR reports this on the Optional Memorial of Saint Robert Bellarmine, bishop and doctor of the Church and HAMMER OF HERETICS.
The priest appears of an age where he would have been malformed in theology. I am not certain if he could be trusted at this point. He might well conform "officially" but continue, sub rosa, in his errant ways. I wonder if his Religious Order is still supporting him.
Father McDonald said...Yes indeed it does appear to be so. That Pope Francis is mad at what he unleashed in terms of the heterodox thinking they would rule the day comes from our Holy Father’s ambiguities. You reap what you sow."
But Father, the article noted that it was in 2012 A.D. that Rome had taken action against Father Tony Flannery.
That was during Pope Benedict XVI's reign.
This doesn't have anything to do with Pope Francis.
In fact, I just read that Father Flannery first published unorthodox statements in a 2010 A.D. magazine article that Rome had monitored.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
That's not the point MT. Yes Pope Benedict suspended him and he has indeed remained suspended throughout Pope Francis' papacy. Evidently there must have been a move to have the priest reinstated, perhaps by his religious superior or even bishop of the area. It is Pope Francis' CDF which has responded in such a clear, unambiguous way as to what lifting the suspension would mean.
This has everything to do with Pope Francis, what it take now to have the Pope Benedict's suspension lifted!
Redemptorist Fr. Tony Flannery revealed to NCR Sept. 15 that he had received a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith over the summer. It asks him to affirm the church's official positions on a male-only priesthood, gay relationships, civil unions and gender identity.
Yes, Father, his religious superior asked to have him reinstated. The article states the following:
The letter from the Vatican congregation, which is addressed to the head of the Redemptorist order, Fr. Michael Brehl, references a previous February 2020 letter from Brehl. The Congregation says the previous letter proposed "permitting Fr. Tony Flannery to return to public ministry."
Is this the CDF letter (or one similar) that, in January 2013 A.D., Father Flannery refused to sign?
On January 19, 2013 A.D., Father Flannery said that CDF demanded that he sign a letter so as to "be allowed to return to ministry only if he agreed to write, sign and publish a statement agreeing, among other things, that women should never be ordained as priests and that he would adhere to church orthodoxy on matters like contraception and homosexuality.”
Father Flannery declared: "How can I put my name to such a document when it goes against everything I believe in. If I signed this, it would be a betrayal not only of myself but of my fellow priests and lay Catholics who want change. I refuse to be terrified into submission.”
Father Flannery rebelled against Pope Benedict XVI. Father Flannery refused seven years ago to sign the CDF's letter question.
I find it difficult to believe that he will sign the letter in question.
Nevertheless, I must pray that Father Flannery will consign to history his mutiny against God and Holy Mother Church.
Perhaps Father Flannery will respond to God's call to accept in docile fashion Pope Francis' right to teach, govern, and sanctify him (Father Flannery).
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Post a Comment