Translate

Thursday, October 20, 2022

WE ARE SEEING A POLARIZATION IN THE CHURCH THAT COULD EASILY LEAD TO A SCHISM: THIS SITUATION BEGAN IN 2013 AND IS NOW ON STEROIDS: WHO IS THE BLAME FOR THIS SITUATION AND WHEN WILL THE PERSON TO BLAME TAKE SOME OF THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT?

 



Sean Michael Winters who writes about his opinions for the National Catholic Reporter, writes this in this morning’s on-line edition. It has a link to another article in a French Progressive Catholic journal, La Croix International written by another progressive, theologian Massimo Faggioli,  longing for the collapse of the Catholic Church as it was known on the eve of Pope Benedict’s abdication in order to rebuild a Church that is on a death walk similar to what is happening to The Anglican Communion and all liberal forms of Protestantism. 

Here is Sean Michael Winter’s commentary. Press La Croix International  for Massimo Faggioli’s commentary which is a must-read:

In La Croix International, Villanova University theology professor Massimo Faggioli analyzes both the recent Ross Douthat article about the Second Vatican Council and The New York Times' penchant for highlighting only conservative Catholic voices, most of whom do not know much about the Catholic Church or its teachings. The money quote: "I do not know if this is also happening to other Christian denominations and religious traditions, but it's clear that, if one does not know anything about Catholicism and happens upon these columns in the New York Times, they will find a very eccentric and idiosyncratic view of the Francis pontificate and the Church he leads as Bishop of Rome."

My comments: Theologian Faggioli laments that the “bible” of liberal America, The New York Times, delights in printing stories about the Catholic Church and the current pontificate which are negative to the different Church Pope Francis is trying to create. 

What Faggioli fails to acknowledge is that in all polarizations, there is a cause and effect. 

I would say we can place the cause of this rather unusual effect of severe polarization at the feet of Pope Francis and his advisors who have hijacked his papacy with the pope willing it to be:

1. Pope Francis portrayed himself as the anti-Benedict starting the very moment of his appearance on the loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica—this began the polarization immediately

2. After Pope Francis’ near death experience under anesthesia, His Holiness has realized that time is short for him and thus he recognizes that waiting for Benedict to die before he undoes that papacy altogether will thwart his desire for a different Church. Thus Pope Francis abrogates entirely Pope Benedict’s magisterial teachings and allowances for the liturgy of the Church and does so in an authoritarian way. Pope Francis completely disavows Pope Benedict’s request that Vatican II be viewed through the lens of continuity rather than rupture. All this while the emeritus pope is still living to see it happen. 

3. Pope Francis touts a listening Church but he has refused to meet with cardinals concerned about his ambiguous and idiosyncratic papacy. He has never met with the dubia cardinals nor responded to them privately or publicly but rather marginalized them.

4. Pope Francis’ idiosyncrasies includes his latest appointment to the Vatican’s Commission on Life. He names an atheist who is pro-choice and in a most vicious way. 

Pope Francis has done nothing to throw an olive branch to the young Catholics who were formed under the papacies of Pope St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Rather he is erasing these papacies and the millions of young Catholics who are John Paul II’s Catholics. Pope Francis has emboldened the old guard, those in their 60’s and older, most of whom are on life-support themselves but invigorated by the return of the Church to the divisiveness of the 1970’s, but now a divisiveness on steroids, not even experienced in the 1970’s. 

19 comments:

rcg said...

It will be far worse when Pope Francis is gone. The hierarchy is packed with men holding the same views and yearning to implement them.

TJM said...

Pope Francis and his like minded minions are to be blame for the present divisiveness and the rise of heterodoxy. I have never been so ashamed of my Church. At least the Borgia popes were orthodox

John said...


Pope Francis is the Pope of the Catholic Church, he was duly elected. The electors could have picked any other Catholic man to fill the post but they picked Cardinal Bergoglio. The supreme question becomes, as the Dubia Cardinals implied with their letter to the Holy Father, was Cardinal Bergoglio when elected and afterwards truly Catholic?

Pope Francis refused to respond, did not provide the proof the Cardinals were seeking. He did not have to answer because he has the power of the Office. He is the Captain of Peter's barque no matter what.

As Lord Acton, speaking about politics, remarked: 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely'. Power should never be exercised in religion also because it leads to factionalism, schism as we say. Another cliche is the Emperor does not have clothes. So the parade continues on lead by a naked Emperor because we have not the means to stop it until the Leader decides to stop the masquerade. In Church speak he would have to repent. Do not hold your breath!


Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

John, excellent observations!

TJM said...

John,

This papacy may be the high water mark of hyper papalism.

Jerome Merwick said...

rcg--those are my thoughts exactly. If you think THIS pope is bad, just wait until his successor hits.

Father McDonald, after heaping all the blame on Traditionalists last week, it's kind of confusing to watch you agree with us, but I'm glad to see you on board anyway.

Now everyone will think you are mean and intolerant. You're not.


But I am!

William said...

Every day I pray the Memorare for deliverance from the Francis scourge...and you should, too.

Mark said...

John quotes Lord Acton’s famous saying. Interestingly, it seems that Lord Acton, who was Catholic, very much had the papacy in view. After recounting a litany of alleged malfeasance by various popes, he says:

“I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way against holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility [that is, the later judgment of historians] has to make up for the want of legal responsibility [that is, legal consequences during the rulers' lifetimes]. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. That is the point at which . . . the end learns to justify the means. You would hang a man of no position, . . . but if what one hears is true, then Elizabeth asked the gaoler to murder Mary, and William III ordered his Scots minister to extirpate a clan. Here are the greater names coupled with the greater crimes. You would spare these criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them, higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice; still more, still higher, for the sake of historical science. . . .”

See https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/165acton.html

The contemporary relevance of such observations is striking, including its relevance to current goings-on in U.S. politics, no?

Drew said...

It's an interesting time to say the least. A few weeks ago my young pastor spoke about the questions he has received about the chaos in the Church during the Sunday Mass homily. As this pontificate continues down its wayward path, the questions will only grow. Lastly my parish is in the mold of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI and our bishop is aware of its continued growth following their leadership. In the end, we just have to hold to the faith and always have Jesus Christ at the center of our lives.

Jerome Merwick said...

Exactly Drew. The Catholic faith IS available to us. We have the Catechism of the Council of Trent. We have the testimony of the saints. We have the Rosary.

As apostate Rome continues its path of protestantization and ecclesial doublespeak, we must concern ourselves with saving our souls. Popes come and go. The truths of the faith remain.

monkmcg said...

I remember when the conventional wisdom was that, because JPII and Benedict had created almost all the Cardinal Electors we were guaranteed more of the same. So don't put too much stock in that line of thinking now. The efforts of the St. Gallen Mafia (violation of Canon Law IF McCarrick can be believed) resulted in Bergoglio. Perhaps the Holy Spirit has another surprise in store - hopefully soon.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Certainly under John Paul II and Benedict, polarization existed in the Church due to the manner in which Vatican II was implemented for better or worse. However, Benedict did not exacerbate the polarization. He proposed did not impose. He, along with John Paul II, named cardinals of differing theological perspectives to placate a bubbling polarization. They both dialogued with the other, Benedict more so, as he was considered a progressive during and after the Council until about 1968. When he became pope he met with both liberal and conservatives and met in person with Hans Kung, who was his contemporary. The pope invited Kung to the Vatican to meet and discuss.
Francis on the other hand has not been willing to listen or dialogue with those on the right, not even his cardinals. I think even progressive cardinals that Francis has chosen, and Francis himself now seems to see it, is that polarization in the Church is being exacerbated under the climate of this current papacy. We won’t get Sarah or Muller as the next pope, but I think it will be someone at the center, tending both left to right.

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald said..."We won’t get Sarah or Muller as the next pope, but I think it will be someone at the center, tending both left to right."

The important thing...the bottom line is that thanks to the promise of Jesus Christ, we will be blessed with a Pope who will promote the holy, orthodox Faith.

Our next Pope, as well as his successor, as well as his successor, as well as his successor, etc., will deliver unto us the True Religion.

As Holy Mother Church has guaranteed,"the Catholic religion has been preserved ever immaculate in the Apostolic See."

Today, everything from the correct interpretation of Vatican II (teachings related to said Council), to that which we must believe to remain in communion with Holy Mother Church, flows from God, then through Pope Francis.

God has raised Pope Francis to teach, govern, and sanctify us.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Jerome Merwick said...

Oh, if only the candy-coated fairy tale Church described above were true! But it's not.

Jesus promised that he would not permit the gates of Hell to prevail against His Church. He didn't promise to custom choose wonderful popes in every conclave as our history clearly proves. We've had lousy popes. We have a horrible pope now. A worse one may follow.

"God has raised Pope Francis to teach, govern, and sanctify us."

I cannot help but think about when Malachi Martin was on the Art Bell Show and callers were attempting to guess the hidden part of the third secret of Fatima. Finally, one man said, 'Are we going to have a pope under the control of Satan?" Martin replied, "It sounds like someone read you the third secret."

Padre Pio knew what the third secret was and the part that concerned him the most--that drove him to tears--was apostasy in the Church, from the highest levels. THE HIGHEST.

A "correct" interpretation of Vatican II would be wonderful, except there is no universal consensus among Catholic leaders about either the validity or the "correct" interpretation of the council.

The Church is in chaos. The chaos is going to get worse. Fatima warns us, La Salette warns us, Akita warns us, Garabandal warns us, Padre Pio warned us. I put far more stock in the warnings and the "plain-as-the-nose-on-your-face" mess I refuse to close my eyes to than the sugar plum fairy platitudes that assure us all is well.

rcg said...

The only problem I have with schism is that the heterodox have squatted in the Church institution and can’t be excised.

Jerome Merwick said...

RCG

As Athanasius said, "They have the buildings. We have the faith,"

rcg said...

@Jerome - awsome!

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald said..."Francis on the other hand has not been willing to listen or dialogue with those on the right, not even his cardinals."

Here are just a few examples of Pope Francis, and "right-wingers," having enjoyed positive interactions with each other.

-- Early during his reign, the right-wing criticized Pope Francis for his supposed refusal to have spoken against abortion. Pope Francis recognized said criticism publicly. From that time to date, Pope Francis has condemned abortion repeatedly.

=============================================================================

Cardinal Burke has insisted that he has a positive relationship with Pope Francis. He has characterized his interactions with Pope Francis as friendly and productive.

Cardinal Burke said in regard to one conversation with Pope Francis: "I told him, ‘Holy Father, the only way I can serve you is by speaking the truth in the best and clearest way possible.’ His response to me is: ‘That’s what I want.'"
'
================================================================================

Pope Francis last year elevated in rank from cardinal deacons to cardinal priests:
Cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, and Sarah.

=================================================================================

Cardinal Sarah has insisted that despite claims otherwise, he enjoyed an excellent relationship with Pope Francis.

Cardinal Sarah added that despite claims otherwise, Pope Francis welcomed his (Cardinal Sarah's) book about priestly celibacy.

==================================================================================

Pope Francis several months ago met with priests of the FSSP. He heard their concerns in regard to Traditionis Custodes. In turn, Pope Francis responded favorably to the FSSP priests' desires to continue the FSSP's TLM-related mission.

=================================================================================

Pope Francis has been a tremendous spiritual Father/friend to the SSPX...and has resisted anti-SSPX sentiments issued by such "right-wingers" as Cardinals Burke, Pell, Müller...etc.

======================================================================================

Bishop Schneider, in regard to his ad limina interactions with Pope Francis:

"Regarding our meeting with the Pope, he is the Vicar of Christ on earth in this time, and he was very fraternal and kind to us. It was a very kind atmosphere."

"Our meeting with him lasted two hours. I consider this an act of great generosity on the part of the Pope..."

"During the meeting, the Pope invited us to freely express our concerns and even our criticisms. He stressed that he likes a very free conversation."

"Some bishops were able to raise concerns about the life of the Church in our days. For example, the issue of Communion for divorced and civilly “remarried” Catholics; the issue of Communion for Protestant spouses in mixed marriages; and the issue of the practical spread of homosexuality in the Church. These points were discussed."

"Then I also asked the Holy Father to clarify the statement in the Abu Dhabi document on the diversity of religions being “willed” by God."

"The Pope was very benevolent in his response to our questions and sought to answer us from his own perspective on these problems."

There are additional examples of Pope Francis' positive interactions with the "right-wing."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

TJM said...

Mark Thomas,

You truly live in a fairlyland. Tell us again how Traditiones Crudeles (Custodes) is benevolent, pastoral, and charitible? By the way, are you happy with the pro abortion, atheist that PF has allowed to sit on the Pontificul Academy. Think about it before you besiege us with your non sequiturs.