Pope’s deputy urges dialogue after Francis accused of heresy
- Associated PressSeptember 28, 2017
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican secretary of state, is seen at the Vatican May 26. (Credit: Paul Haring/CNS.)
Cardinal Pietro Parolin said Thursday that those who don't agree with the pope are free to express themselves, "but on these things one must reason and find ways to understand one another." His remarks were in response to a so-called "filial correction," prepared by a few dozen traditionalist academics and clergy, accusing Pope Francis of propagating seven heretical positions concerning marriage, moral life and the sacraments with his 2016 document 'Amoris Laetitia
22 comments:
Not being an insider, I have no idea how well candidates for the papacy are screened. In this day and age and given the power of the internet, social media etc. it seems to me that if not already, this should be of paramount importance going forward. Certainly, past performance and opinions/attitudes are not necessarily an indicator of how one might act in the future but, I would think that despite the maturation that should accompany aging, they wouldn't change that much.
His Holiness who rightly finds humility to be an admirable trait should, for the good of the Church and his Office, work to answer questions, correct inaccuracies and provide reassurance to the concerned faithful. To do otherwise demonstrates arrogance and an indifference to being a good shepherd of the people.
Mark Thomas: "The 'correction has z-e-r-o chance of being taken seriously throughout the Church."
The "filial correction" is a piece of trash. The charges in question leveled against the Vicar of Christ, Pope Francis, are garbage. The overwhelming amount of God's Holy People love, respect, and view Pope Francis favorably.
Even Pope Francis' most fanatical haters have acknowledged that the vast majority of Catholics love Pope Francis and view him as a holy man.
Pope Francis' fanatical haters portray themselves as the "remnant" who assit at the "true" Mass. They dismiss the vast majority of Catholics as "Novus Ordo Catholics" who are ignorant of the Faith...who are Catholics-in-name-only...who are virtual Protestants.
Again, even Pope Francis' most fanatical haters who support the "filial correction" acknowledge that stand alone virtually as the overwhelming majority of (Novus Ordo) Catholics support Pope Francis.
The charge of heresy against Pope Francis is trash. The "correction" is not to be taken seriously in itself.
However, that doesn't mean that Catholics should not discuss the "correction" in that God compels His Holy People to rally around Pope Francis...to defend His Holiness...to defend Pope Francis' good name.
Nobody should take the "correction's" charges seriously. But what should be taken seriously is that the "correction" not only attacks Pope Francis, but attacks Holy Mother Church.
Holy Mother Catholic produced then proposed Amoris Laetitia to Her children.
Ordinaries throughout the world have accepted Amoris Laetitia as orthodox Catholic teaching.
Cardinal Müller, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Sarah, Cardinal DiNardo...the bishops in Poland, Costa Rica...Archbishop Chaput...have made it clear that Amoris Laetitia is orthodox. Everywhere a Catholic turns, he or she finds an Ordinary who has made it clear that Amoris Laetitia is orthodox.
By extension, the authors of the "filial correction" have attacked each Catholic who, in union with the Apostolic See, has accepted Amoris Laetitia as orthodox.
The "correction's" charges are not limited to Pope Francis. The reality is that the "correction" has attacked each Catholic who is in communion with and submits humbly to Pope Francis' authority to teach, govern, and sanctify God's Holy People.
Even more to the point, the "correction" is an assault against Jesus Christ. That is, Jesus has assured that "in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate.
The "correction," in reality, attacks Jesus Christ. That is why Catholics must correct the "correction."
Also involved is the fact that there are Pope Francis-haters who have insisted that the "correction," which for some bizarre reason referenced the preposterous, embarrassing Pope-Benedict-XVI-Is-The-Real-Pope conspiracy theory, supports said conspiracy theory.
The "correction" is a piece of trash. The "correction's" charges are preposterous. Nevertheless, the "correct" could serve to lead Catholics from communion with Pope Francis. In that regard, the "correct" endangers the Faith.
For many reasons, I, in my lowly and inarticulate way, will rally around Pope Francis and God's Holy Church to defend against the "correction."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Bishop Fellay, who since at least 1988 A.D., has not been in full-communion with Holy Mother Church, is keen to "correct" Pope Francis. But since at least 1988 A.D., Holy Mother Church has, in merciful fashion, offered correction to Bishop Fellay to return him to full-communion with Holy Mother Church. Pray that Bishop Fellay accepts Holy Mother Church's merciful correction in question.
While the "filial correction's" claims of heresy are nonsense, I understand the need to enter into charitable discussions with Pope Francis' "honest" critics.
Pope Francis accepts honest criticism. Example: During his first months as Pope, His Holiness acknowledged that he hadn't spoken often about abortion. He had made clear his opposition to abortion, but not frequently.
In, I believe, September 2013 A.D., Pope Francis noted that fact. He accepted charitable criticism in that regard. From that time to date, Pope Francis has, time and again, condemned abortion.
Beyond the need to dialogue with Pope Francis' "honest" critics is the following: The Holy People of God need to discuss charitably the radical reforms that, from Pope Venerable Pius XII's Pontificate to date, our holy Popes have implemented to "modernize" the Church.
But back to the topic at hand. While a charitable dialogue between Rome and Pope Francis' honest critics is fine...good luck with a "dialogue" between vicious right-wing "critcs" — Rorate Caeli/The Remnant-types — well, good luck with that.
But I appreciate Churchmen who are open to discussions between Rome and Pope Francis' honest, rational conservative critics.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas (self described as "lowly and inarticulate," with no official standing in the true Church of Jesus Christ):
"The 'filial correction' is a piece of trash" and "satanic."
Bishop Rene Henry Gracida (a successor to the apostles and a Catholic in good standing who possesses the fullness of the true priesthood of Jesus Christ and is a member of Christ's One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, in communion with His Holiness Pope Francis):
"The filial correction is so well-written, so respectful, so comprehensive, so detailed in explaining the basis for objecting to the seven areas of heterodoxy bordering on heresy, that I would expect many of my brother bishops to be happy to sign it."
Hmmm.... I wonder who's right.
DJR said..."Mark Thomas: "The 'correction has z-e-r-o chance of being taken seriously throughout the Church."
Right. Nobody in his right mind believes the preposterous charges leveled against His Holiness Pope Francis.
Do you believe that Rome believes the charges in question?
Besides, the right-wing will characterize the desire among certain Churchmen to dialogue with Pope Francis' honest critics in the same fashion as Pope Benedict XVI's, and currently, Pope Francis' discussions with the SSPX...
..."it's a trap, it's a trick."
Nobody in his right mind believed that via Rome-SSPX discussions that the SSPX would "convert" "modernist Rome" to the "True Faith."
Everybody knows that at the end of the day, the point of Rome-SSPX discussions is to bring the SSPX into full-communion with the True Church so as to avoid the SSPX's collapse into schism.
Pope Benedict made that clear when he launched Rome-SSPX discussions.
As to the "correction's" charges against Pope Francis/Amoris Laetitia, right-wing bloggers have declared that Rome will refuse to accept said charges...that "dialogue" with Rome won't change Pope Francis' stance on Amoris Laetitia.
DJR, I hope that you don't believe for a second that the Apostolic See will say..."yep, the "correction" is correct. Pope Francis is linked to heresy. The Apostolic See is liked to heresy. Amoris Laetitia is filled with heresies."
The purpose behind possible dialogue between Rome and Pope Francis honest critics is to prevent folks from falling into schism/heresy.
Not one leading right-wing blogger believes that a dialogue with Rome would result in Pope Francis declaring himself a heretic.
DJR, do you believe that Rome will accept charges of heresy against the Pope/Amoris Laetitia?
Thank you.
Anyway, bring on the dialogue between Rome and rational...rational...conservatives.
Also...brace yourself for more..."it's a trap, it's a trick" talk in regard to any dialogue that Rome would establish with Pope Francis' critics.
"It's a trap, it's a trick...it's a trap, it's a trick...akin to Pope's Francis' 'dialogue' with the SSPX."
It's a trap, it's a trick. It's a trap, it's a trick.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
mark thomas,
Your golden cafe is Pope Francis. Sad
I hope that the dialogue in question occurs.
1. The hope would be that Rome, in merciful fashion, would prevent rational right-wingers from falling into schism/heresy.
2. Please...please...may said dialogue lead to Bishop Fellay finally, finally, finally, accepting his, as well as the SSPX's, correction that, in mercy, Holy Mother Church has, since at least 1988 A.D., offered to Bishop Fellay/SSPX to bring Bishop Fellay/SSPX into full-communion with the True Church.
A regularized SSPX would unleash many graces throughout the world. May Bishop Fellay and the SSPX please God via acceptance of the Church's merciful correction in question.
3. May the dialogue in question (I hope that it occurs) lead to the far more important dialogue in regard to the radical reforms that our Popes, from Venerable Pius XII to Francis have instituted/continued to "modernize" the Church.
May the initial dialogue (proposal, as of now) lead to the following vital discussion:
http://cardinaldolan.org/index.php/external-markers-of-our-faith/
The news in question that Father McDonald posted is very exciting. Very exciting.
Let us, through Rome's merciful dialogue, prevent right-wingers from breaking communion with His Holiness Pope Francis...from falling to schism/heresy.
From there, let the discussion in regard to the modernization of the Church that, in earnest, was launched during Pope Venerable Pius XII's Pontificate, follow.
The news in question is terrific.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Oh, well...depressing...but expected from embittered right-wingers.
Via a twitter, here are some immediate responses from right-wingers to the notion that Rome and Pope Francis honest critics would dialogue with each other:
-- "Doubletalk."
-- "Am I the only one to see a tactic to delay the correction from Card. Burke? Keep the number of signatories from growing? Classic Peronism."
-- "Too late to stop the dike from breaking my friend."
-- In regard to Cardinal Parolin's supposed "real" purpose:
"He knows that if he's elected Pope next, he will have to deal with it."
-- "Good news, but backers of #FilialCorrection shouldn't let guard down. This pontificate plays double games, to disarm defenders of orthodoxy."
-- "Will you walk into my parlour?” said the Spider to the Fly, 'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy..."
==============================================================================
Depressing...but expected responses from various right-wingers.
It is the continuation of the right-wing's "it's a trap, it's a trick" theme in regard to Rome's dialogue with the SSPX.
Big, bad "modernist" Rome is always out to "trick and trap" right-wingers.
What an unfortunate, but, again, expected right-wing response to uplifting news about charitable discussions between Rome and sober conservatives.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas, relax! You sound like Kim Jong-Un's copy editor. (These charges against Great Leader are GARBAGE!! The running dogs of reactionary Catholicism are risking the righteous wrath of angels! The majority of faithful seek to touch the ground where his humble non-red shoe wearing foot has trod in hopes of finding a venerable depression to place their foreheads.)
If anything, this is a big help for rational discussion within the Church. Something we sorely need.
In the unlikely event of Francis being deposed for heresy, he would not be listed as an antipope since he was canonically elected. The list would read:
Benedict XVI 2005-2013 (abdicated)
Francis 2013-2018 (deposed)
Leo XIV 2018 (now gloriously reigning)
There are reports that the atmosphere in Rome is 'positively toxic' and Cardinal Burke has spoken of 'apostasy' in the Church and suggested that a 'formal correction' is the likely next step. Things are approaching crisis point.
Mark Thomas:
Let me offer a paternal correction: "A.D." belongs before the date, not after. "In the year of our Lord 2017," not "2017 in the year of our Lord."
John -
I like your roster...particularly "gloriously reigning". Haven't heard that moniker in a long time.
Perhaps a crisis is needed here. Enough with the fluffy nice-nice social justice. We need a pastor on that throne. Maybe a crisis will sweep through the Hotel St. Marta and end this and the Spirit of VII once and for all. Shame that it has come to this but, what are we to do for, unfortunately, we did not have a vote. Time is being wasted, souls are being lost, Christ's church is shrinking, we are at the threshold of a post-Christian world. We need a pastor to address that crisis before it is too late.
Mark Thomas. You need to calm down.
It matters not that "Even Pope Francis' most fanatical haters have acknowledged that the vast majority of Catholics love Pope Francis and view him as a holy man."
I was say most people in America believe gay "marriage" is fine.....they would be wrong. I would bet most Catholics believe in having women "priests".... they would be wrong. A pope believes that communion can be given to an active adulterer without sacramental confession and conversion of life.....he would be wrong. No pope has the authority to say that an evil act can be performed for a good outcome. Sorry he doesn't have that power.
ByzRC
Maybe a fire or an earthquake will sweep through the Hotel St Marta and end this and the spirit of VII once and for all.
We can but hope and pray.
But as laity we are not disempowered. Many more priests would have subscribed to the 'correctio' but for the all-pervading climate of fear. Those who signed a much milder letter last year were subject to gross intimidation. Fr Ray Blake's blog makes this clear.
We can write to our bishops in support of our priests. We can withhold financial support from priests/parishes which support heresy, and refuse to attend their services. The idea of a 'territorial' parish is now outmoded since we have the motor-car.
I have long advocated this regarding abusive liturgy. Avoid it like the plague. Don't pretend that it mortifies the flesh - the Mass isn't about that. If it's not practical to travel to avoid it, stay at home; make a spiritual Communion and read through the authentic liturgy. Put on a CD of Gregorian Chant or Palestrina. Find a decent Mass on the internet.
You will maintain your sanity and reap genuine spiritual benefit thereby.
Yes, we are going to have to take sides. I already have.
Anonymous said..."Mark Thomas. You need to calm down."
I am calm. I am at peace. I am blessed to hold the True Religion. Via His Holiness Pope Francis, I hear the voice of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Saint Peter speaks through His Holiness Pope Francis.
Given all of the above, I have every reason to be calm. That is what I am...calm...at peace, as the Vicar of Christ, His Holiness Pope Francis, leads me to God's Truth.
"In the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate."
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
John Nolan said... In the unlikely event of Francis being deposed for heresy, he would not be listed as an antipope since he was canonically elected. The list would read:
Benedict XVI 2005-2013 (abdicated)
Francis 2013-2018 (deposed)
Leo XIV 2018 (now gloriously reigning)
John, that brings up an interesting question. What would be your take on what I call "the Pope Formosus episode"?
To quote Mark, "Holy Mother Church teaches that 'religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra.'"
But how does that work out in some of the more odd concrete historical circumstances?
I know you're already aware, but just to reiterate the history of the matter, in the late 9th century, a bishop named Formosus was excommunicated and reduced to the lay state. Subsequently, he was rehabilitated by Pope Marinus and, later, he himself was duly elected pope... allegedly (891 AD).
Two pontificates later, Stephen VI held the famous cadaver trial and declared Formosus to be an antipope.
(Does Mark assent to that ruling, I wonder?)
Then some subsequent popes, duly elected (Theodore II and John IX), reversed Stephen and declared Formosus to be a valid pope.
(Does Mark also assent to those rulings, I wonder? How does he manage to assent to both sets of rulings?)
Yet again, a succeeding pope, Sergius III, reversed those two popes and re-declared Formosus to be an antipope.
Not sure how Mark would react to such a scenario, but now that we could possibly witness something similar in our day, what does one do, I wonder.
Stephen and Sergius ruled that Formosus was an antipope, but, as far as I know, Formosus was duly elected.
I have never seen anything where the Church clarified this issue. Do you know of anything in that regard?
I find it rather remarkable that we could be witnessing a repeat of such historical significance.
anonymous said..."It matters not that "Even Pope Francis' most fanatical haters have acknowledged that the vast majority of Catholics love Pope Francis and view him as a holy man."
Sure it does. Pope Francis' fanatical haters (at least many such haters) believe that they are on course to have Pope Francis condemned, then disposed as a heretic.
They believe that they have the right to rip Pope Francis from the arms of the overwhelming amount of the Holy People of God who, recognize Pope Francis as a valid Pope. In turn, they love and respect Pope Francis.
Who are Pope Francis' fanatical haters to trample the sensus fidelium?
The overwhelming amount of God's Holy People view Pope Francis in favorable, holy light. That matters greatly as a microscopic amount of people who hate Pope Francis attempt to foment a revolution against Pope Francis — a revolution that would drive him from the Papacy.
The overwhelming amount of God's Holy People stand with His Holiness Pope Francis. They don't stand with people who attempt to "correct" Pope Francis in regard to "heresies" that certain "filial correction" critics have linked to him.
The overwhelming amount of God's Holy People will not permit "filial correction" folks to trample the Vicar of Christ, Pope Francis. Armed with holy, spiritual weapons, the majority of God's Holy People will defend Pope Francis in peaceful, Catholic fashion.
The fact that the majority of God's Holy People stand with Pope Francis counts for a lot...a whole lot.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
DJR said..."To quote Mark, "Holy Mother Church teaches that 'religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra.'"
1. I quoted simply Holy Mother Church's teaching.
2. We must submit to "the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra."
The above teaching is either true or false.
I have childlike faith. I accept Holy Mother Church's teachings. I submit to Pope Francis' authority to teach, govern, and sanctify me.
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark says, "In the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate."
The way you are interpreting this is positivistic, which is an incorrect reading. The True Faith is an objective reality, existing independently from the Apostolic See. The True Faith is not a creation of the Apostolic See such that, as you're asserting, when the Apostolic See says something, it is necessarily the True Faith. If that were the case, there would be no reason for the limitations placed on papal infallibility at Vatican I.
An example: If the Apostolic See declared 2 + 2 = 4, the Apostolic See has preserved the faith immaculate. That the Apostolic See has made the declaration does not make it true. Instead, it is true and the Apostolic See has affirmed its truth.
Conversely, if the Apostolic See declared 2 + 2 = 5, the Apostolic See has erred. Yet, according to you, in such a case, the Apostolic See must be correct because it is the Apostolic See. That is positivism, and it is an error.
The papacy does not exist to create new "truths." The papacy exists to uphold the truths that have been handed down. You do violence to the papacy with your ideas. They are dangerously erroneous since they turn the pope into some sort of oracle. Your ideas are more aligned with Mormonism and their "prophets" than they are with Catholicism. An entire council was called to declare your ideas to be erroneous, yet you have not gotten the message.
DJR
The Church's official list of popes, the Annuario Pontifico, lists Formosus and his successors Boniface VI and Stephen VI (VII) as valid popes. There were two antipopes in the ninth century - John (844) and Anastasius (855). Formosus was elected on 6 October 891. Theodore II and John IX, who died in the last year of the century, are listed as valid popes.
No-one has set up an antipope to Francis. If Benedict were to announce that his abdication was not not of his own will (which would expose him as a liar) then it is just possible that Francis's election could be ruled uncanonical and that Benedict is therefore still Pope. On his death the See would be declared vacant and his successor chosen in the usual manner.
Francis would then be listed as an antipope.
Anonymous said..."Mark says, "In the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate."
"The way you are interpreting this is positivistic, which is an incorrect reading. The True Faith is an objective reality, existing independently from the Apostolic See. The True Faith is not a creation of the Apostolic See such that, as you're asserting, when the Apostolic See says something, it is necessarily the True Faith. If that were the case, there would be no reason for the limitations placed on papal infallibility at Vatican I.
"Conversely, if the Apostolic See declared 2 + 2 = 5, the Apostolic See has erred. Yet, according to you, in such a case, the Apostolic See must be correct because it is the Apostolic See. That is positivism, and it is an error."
Hello. I wish you and your family peace and good health.
I don't place any interpretation upon the Formula of Pope Saint Hormisdas. I adhere simply to that which Holy Mother Church teaches. In turn, Holy Mother Church, via Jesus Christ's protection of the Apostolic See, guarantees that the Church of Rome does not promulgate false teachings to the Faithful.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church, #834:
"Particular Churches are fully catholic through their communion with one of them, the Church of Rome "which presides in charity."
"For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord."
"Indeed, 'from the incarnate Word's descent to us, all Christian churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior's promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her.' "
If the Church of Rome can promulgate false, heretical teachings, then it is absurd to believe that "the faithful everywhere must necessarily be in accord" with the Church of Rome.
If the Church of Rome has taught that 2 + 2 = 5, then the Catholic Church is a false Church.
If Catholicism is false, then it's time for us to move on...but it would be pointless to enter into Eastern Orthodoxy or Protestantism as Christianity would be false.
If the Church of Rome has taught that 2 + 2 = 5, then Christianity is false.
Fortunately, thanks to Jesus Christ, who has always guided Rome to the truth, the Church of Rome teaches that 2 + 2 = 4.
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Post a Comment