Let us be clear! To be Catholic one must respect the pope even if one disagrees with this, that or the other. Public Dissent to papal teachings can be silenced and has been frequently done in the past.
LET US ALSO BE CLEAR THAT THIS IS A SEVERE PENALTY USUALLY CARRIED OUT IN MORE CONSERVATIVE CIRCLES OF THE HIERARCHY:
This is copied from Rorate Caeli:
DECREE no.1977Of January 16, 2017By which a priest is suspended
THE BISHOP OF PEREIRA
1st. That Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina has expressed publicly and privately his rejection of the doctrinal and pastoral teachings of the Holy Father Francis, mainly regarding Marriage and the Eucharist.2nd. That today, January 16, 2017, His Excellency the Bishop summoned Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina to explain his doctrinal position regarding the teachings of the Holy Father. This act included the presence of four priests of the diocesan clergy.3rd. That Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina, in this meeting, persisted in his posture against the Holy Father Francis. Therefore, for His Excellency the Bishop and the priests there present, it was concluded in a decisive manner that the aforementioned priest separated himself publicly from the communion with the Pope and the Church.4th. That Canon 1364 paragraph 1 of the Code of Canon Law states that, "an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication." Paragraph 2 states that, "if contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state." Moreover, considering Canon 194, par. 1, n. 2, he for is removed by virtue of law from the ecclesiastical position. Likewise, Canon 751 defines schism as, "the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."5th. That on January 2, 2017, Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina, without notifying his Bishop or any diocesan authority, abandoned the Parish of Santa Cecilia, in Pueblo Rico, [Department of] Risaralda.
ARTICLE THE FIRST:Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina is suspended from the exercise of the priestly ministry.ARTICLE THE SECOND:Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina is prohibited from diffusing his ideas contrary to the Catholic faith and the ecclesiastical discipline.ARTICLE THE THIRD:The faithful of the Catholic Church are asked not to follow the teachings of the aforementioned priest as long as he does not accept the doctrine and teachings of the Vicar of Christ.ARTICLE THE FOURTH:The faithful are exhorted to pray for Father Luis Carlos Uribe Medina so that he may return to the Unity of the Church.
Be it thus notified and ordered.
Given in Pereira, Risaralda, on the sixteenth day of January of the year two thousand and seventeen.
+ RIGOBERTO CORREDOR BERMÚDEZBishop of PereiraFather Alirio Raigosa CastañoChancellor
My question would be what exactly does he reject?
If the question is over pastoral practice, this may be a bit much.
Has Pope Francis actually taught anything that would enable someone to dissent from it? Evangelii Gaudium is diffuse and overlong, and we are STILL awaiting the official Latin version, presumably because it defies rendition in a precise language. Laudato Si is even longer, and I suspect that even the tree-huggers who were so fulsome in its praises didn't get round to actually reading it. Amoris Laetitia was referred to by Cardinal Burke as a 'personal reflection' which was non-magisterial, and it transpires that these are in fact the reflections of the narcissistic Victor Fernandez.
Deus adjuva nos!
One problem is that we've got to the state where the pope "appoints" bishops world-wide and we don't even bat an eye at it. That's not the way it should be, but it is consistent with the ultramontane Vatican One view of the pope as the boss of the whole church instead of the bishop of Rome. We end up with bishops who are mere creatures of the pope and rush to curry favour with him.
I don't really know about this particular issue either, but I do think this particular bishop should worry less about people being obedient to him and worry more about making sure that he remains obedient--to Scripture and Tradition, that is. If bishops had done that in the 1960-70s we wouldn't have experienced the disastrous results of Paul VI's liturgy--a mistake the hierarchy refuses to acknowledge, however much the evidence continues to stare them in the face.
It's reassuring to to see this confirmation that all those priests who reject papal teachings, such as Humanae Vitae and Summorum Pontificum, are deserving of excommunication resulting from their schismatic behavior.
He certainly has. Those of us in warmer climates who use air conditioning are clearly schismatics for doing so. Given my status, I'm thinking of starting my own religion in which activation of an air conditioner will summon the divine spiritus of Mother Earth.
It is not clear at all what the priest actually did. If he denied the Divinity of Christ, the Bishop would likely have promoted him. The Pope and most bishops have a tin ear and will only realize what they are teaching people aren't buying as the last Church empties. Fabulous job!
The Holy Father's view of mercy (as being in the realm of feelings, not law) regarding "pastoral" matters has been spreading and will continue to spread to other moral areas. So far, a little discussed topic for this has been euthenasia or "mercy killing". It seems that some bishops's assemblies in Canada (eg in Nova Scotia) have recently become cozy with this idea.
In other words, if you follow the law, you are a rigid Pharisee and not really a Catholic/Christian. You have to always look at the New Horizons that the Holy Spirit brings to each person, the way Luther thought by the way. You must not live your life in a refrigerator.
The only transgression that is explicitly listed here is that Father Father Medina abandoned the his parish "without notifying his Bishop or any diocesan authority". Certainly that is serious enough to warrant a strong disciplinary response from the bishop. As far as the 1st, that Father Medina "expressed publicly and privately his rejection of the doctrinal and pastoral teachings of the Holy Father Francis, mainly regarding Marriage and the Eucharist", we are left in the dark as to what Father Medina did or said about these Sacraments that was contrary to Church teaching. I'm not aware that Pope Francis has promulgated new doctrine. In this I concur with John Nolan. As far as the Holy Father's pastoral initiatives, they,being pastoral and absent anything specific and binding, are subject to differing interpretation and application. Pastoral sensitivity and the application of mercy toward penitents, while certainly mentioned in Scripture an Church teaching, have to do with how others are approached and served by the pastor, who should exercise his ministry staying within the realm of doctrine.
Tony V says "One problem is that we've got to the state where the pope "appoints" bishops world-wide and we don't even bat an eye at it. That's not the way it should be, but it is consistent with the ultramontane Vatican One view of the pope as the boss of the whole church instead of the bishop of Rome. We end up with bishops who are mere creatures of the pope and rush to curry favour with him."
I too have a major problem with the centralization of appointing bishops...the only place i don't have a problem with it is the US which does not have cathedral canons. As I've said before a number of problems go back to Vatican I.
Post a Comment