John Allen at Crux makes some bold statements about schismatic heterodox liberals, who, let’s face it, are really heterodox Catholics, as it applies in Germany, but also everywhere else, that if the liberal and heterodox Catholics go into schism, which seems so very likely, that leaves only traditional and thus orthodox Catholics in union with Rome. Under this pope, that would be a true miracle, no?
I’VE KNOWN AND LOVED LIBERAL HETERODOX CATHOLICS SINCE MY SEMINARY DAYS IN THE 1970’S. THOSE VERY SAME PEOPLE, TODAY RELIVING THEIR HETERODOX LIBERAL THEOLOGY OF THE 1970’S INSPIRED BY POPE FRANCIS, NEED TO GO AND FORM THEIR OWN SCHISMATIC CHURCH AND THROUGH POPE FRANCIS’ SYNODAL WAY THEY ARE FINALLY ACCOMPLISHING IT AND WHEN THEY GO, WE ORTHODOX CAN SLEEP IN PEACE AFTER OUR TLMS! GOD IS GREAT!
Here’s a small part of what Allen writes in Crux:
Where things get truly interesting is the political (heterodox) impact of a German schism. Seemingly, the most probable net effect would be to drive Catholicism to (orthodoxy) the right.
For one thing, Germany has been a strong source of support for the progressive reforms associated with the Francis papacy, from an opening to communion for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to lay empowerment, outreach to gay and lesbian Catholics and points beyond. Although there certainly are strong conservative (orthodox) voices in German Catholicism, including the circles around the late Pope Benedict XVI, its center of gravity nevertheless leans left (heterodox).
Moreover, should Germany break away, it likely would be read by the rest of the church as a cautionary tale about allowing liberal (heterodox) demands for change to get out of hand. Conservative (orthodox) voices who’ve been warning of just such an outcome in Germany, including some figures in the American episcopacy, would feel vindicated. (Not just feel vindicated, they are vindicated by the Truth! The Truth will set you free!!!!)
Read Allen’s fascinating commentary HERE.
6 comments:
John Allen is here pleading the status quo. Things just as they are suit the progressives just fine; they're getting exactly what they want incrementally, so why rock the Barque? Allen is singling to his buddies to cool it.
Interesting … very interesting ….but stupid!
I don’t think the article is entirely stupid. Allen is calling it as it is. Germany, for all practical purposes, has long been in an informal schism with the pope and Catholic teaching. I think being is schism with Catholic teaching is better described as heresy at best and apostasy at worse. I think the head of the Bishop’s conference in Germany, Bishop Baitzing is the one to break with Rome in a way that Archbishop Lefebrev never did. Lefebrev did not reject the Catholic Church and the Deposit of Faith and Morals. He did not reject Vatican II in its entirety, just the reform of the liturgy and some political aspects of Vatican II in terms of dialogue with the world, the flesh and the devil as well as religious freedom. These later two are clearly non dogmatic and thus non binding except from a disciplinary or canonical point of view.
Pope Francis, either wittingly or unwittingly, and more than likely through his magic circle of inept advisors, all of whom are stuck in the backwardism of the 1970’s, have created this mess which will likely effect the Church for centuries as the Great Schism did, as did the Protestant Reformation did as well as King Henry VIII’s schism in England.
Father McDonald,
I was referring to the German Church and Synodality!
Your comments will elicit non stop non sequiturs with a lot of holies!
In the TV series "I Claudius" there is a scene Claudius is wondering what to do about the tremendous corruption everywhere in Roman Society. He recognizes that the prevailing order is so demaged turning it around is beyond his means. Then he decides to do nothing He muses the best thing to do is jut let everything collaps and trust that whatever emerges out of the chaos will be better. D.H. Lawrence had a similar idea when he said "every breakdown is a breakthrough."
Perhaps the HF thinks like Claudius and D.H. Lawrence.
At the War College we were taught to consider two futures: the mostly likely course of action by an enemy and the most dangerous. John Allen’s extensive analysis of the financial concerns coming from a break with the German Catholics shows that the main concern of the Church hierarchy is money. I have long been impressed that the decisions and actions, and lack of action, were driven by money concerns. I am also growing more convinced that Pope Francis wants a schism but that his goal is for the orthodox to get angry enough to leave. This would have the effect of disenfranchising the Traditionalists who acknowledge that the Pope leads the Church and that there is only one Church. So for the orthodox there is no legitimate way to found a new Church. Essentially, the orthodox would declare themselves illegitimate. This passive-aggressive nonsense won’t work and he doesn’t seem to have the guts to excommunicate the orthodox factions. So he is manufacturing points of friction to incite responses that draw corrections and punishment from the Church, or highlight the orthodox in conflict with the broader society that eagerly attacks them. So the most likely course of action by the heterodox as led by the Pope is to continue to Balkanise the Church until the Germans and their brethren are the relatively largest and most powerful group remaining in the Church (Peronism). The most dangerous course of action is for the Vatican to press for the broader society to persecute (cancel for views on homosexuality, e.g.) the orthodox factions with the mistaken belief that persecution will limit its focus ad orientem.
Post a Comment