Shortly after this interview, Senator Durbin declined Cardinal Cupich’s desire to honor him with a Catholic award. I think that after these comments by Pope Leo, Cardinal Cupich knew he was in deep do-do and had to save face on the international level where even the pope was weighing in on a damn award! So he talked Durbin into withdrawing. That’s my most humble opinion with no evidence other than the evidence at hand to prove it.
My astute comments, of course, always most humble:
Just so you know, I fully embrace the “seamless garment” which in my mind includes not giving Catholic honors to politicians who do not hold this position. If a politician is a rabid pro-execution politician, but very much aligned with the Church’s teachings on abortion, he should not receive an honor.
If I am responsible for creating the General Intercessions for Mass, I always include a pro-life petition that all people respect human life from conception through natural death.
Now, if I were a reporter, I would have had to ask Pope Leo to clarify his interview answer that if someone if in favor of the death penalty, that that isn’t pro-life. And what about just war, defending yourself with lethal force, if necessary, and other “exceptions” to this, that or the other in terms of life-issues?
If I am not mistaken, there are no exceptions in Catholic moral law/teachings when it comes to ending the life of an innocent unborn child. If you want to call it an exception, one could make a case for “indirect” abortion being allowable, but not dogmatically taught. It’s a pastoral solution to a difficult physical situation for the mother.
As far as I know, there has only been talk of developing the moral teaching concerning the death penalty to exclude any exceptions. St. John Paul II began that ball to roll, but there is no definitive teaching, as far as I know, in this regard.
As it concerns using lethal force that kills, in a just war, in self defense and even suicide to save others in an extreme situation, such as placing one’s body over a bomb device to save others, that is still permitted no?
And when it comes to immigration, governments have a right to create laws to manage it and can deport those who break laws, either by illegally entering a country, or committing crimes once in the country, even if legally entering. Government laws and respect for just laws is a part of the 4th Commandment, btw. Look it up in the CCC!
But the bottom line is to develop the doctrine of NO CATHOLIC AWARDS TO POLITICIANS, UNLESS THEY UPHOLD ALL THE “IDEALS” OF OUR PRO-LIFE TEACHINGS. JUST DO AWAY WITH AWARDS. WHY GIVE THEM?
Holy Father, please use the casual synodality of first consulting with your theological experts to answer questions which are well thought out, not a form of babel, and then placed into writing, with your theological experts reading over and endorsing what is written.
Please, Holy Father, no more magisterium by interviews. It is embarrassing to say the least!
38 comments:
So what if the pope excuses a pro-abort politician and enables a cardinal to honor him...isn't his altar arrangement beautiful? Isn't it great that he's wearing a mozetta?
I’m starting to think we have
Another lemon in the
Vatican. This isn’t rocket science. The Pope was mixing apples (abortion is always wrong) with oranges (death penalty, sometimes justified).
Has to be said, what a mess of an answer.
"I’m not terribly familiar with the particular case." -> proceeds to opine off-the-cuff on the particulars of the case. Really??
Moreover, this answer will be exploited heavily by leftists, secularists, modernists, etc. to say, "Catholics can't vote for Republicans, according to the Pope!" Oh, for a day when we have a pope who addresses such questions carefully--or even not at all. He's under no obligation in cases like this.
Nick
The policy of pleasing all and offending none has got us precisely nowhere.
He needs to avoid interviews, or at least, know ahead of time what is going to be asked so he can organize his thoughts and not make mistakes in an off-the-cuff interview. He needed not to wade into this hornets’ nest that Cardinal Cupich created. Cupich not only embarrassed himself in this, but now he dragged Pope Leo into it and in the process, Pope Leo said some things that can’t be upheld by Catholic moral teachings. Pope Leo and all popes need to be aware of the danger of these off-the-cuff remarks. Pope Leo needs to be aware of it more so, because he keeps using that silly preface of “I think” which then reduces everything he says to an opinion among a million others. UGH! But he is still new at this and I’ll give him a year to clean up his act in this regard.
Worth noting that the award is no longer being given--supposedly, Durbin withdrew. I wonder what was going on behind the scenes of this.
Cardinal Cupich than took the opportunity to scold the people who criticized his original decision as unsynodal, etc, etc. More here if you can stomach yet another mumble-headed harangue by the highly-credentialed, highly-sophisticated cardinal: https://www.archchicago.org/statement/-/article/2025/09/30/statement-of-cardinal-blase-j-cupich-archbishop-of-chicago-on-the-keep-hope-alive-awardstatement-of-cardinal-blase-j-cupich-archbishop-of-chicago-on-t
The trouble with this statement is that Cupich obviously believes people who support killing a partially-born baby by sucking out his brains are less of a thoroughgoing moral threat to the community than the priests of the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest.
Nick
Interesting talk on the meaning of synodity and its relationship with V2…
Public lecture to celebrate the centenary of the birth of fr Austin Flannery. Cardinal Mario Grech: From Vatican Council II to a Synodal Church 19:30 25-09-2025
He didn’t do well in this interview. Read the comments:
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/patient-preparation-cardinal-czerny
BS. The pope should be able to teach Catholic morality in a split second. The pope said he wasn’t familiar with the case yet knew the man was a senator for 40 years. The pope was lying. Why can’t we get a Catholic pope. Leo clearly didn’t want to offend Cupich but wasn’t to worried about scandalizing millions of Catholics. Another disaster.
I don’t think we’ve ever seen popes give off the cuff interviews in the way Leo has been doing, with exception Francis responding to spontaneous questions on board papal flights. In contrast Leo has responded directly to reporter’s fielding questions when covering papal events. For example, these recent remarks were given outside Castel Gandolfo. It seems to be a deliberate attempt to appear more accessible and transparent. Certainly no one thinks he is making up his magisterium on the huff.
Tm, Leo was being diplomatic deliberately not wading into the specifics of the case. Although he avoided giving a direct opinion about Durban’s award, he did offer a generalised comment on when they are not appropriate and within a day Durban had declined it. I’d say that suggests an effective intervention.
Really. That’s why I had to listen to a bunch of evangelicals call the pope on the carpet for not clearly teaching the truth. And they were right. What Leo did was cowardly and appalling.
BB, that how is see it too.We do not need to know about any confidential conversation the pope had with Cardinal Cupich. But, I can’t imagine that a conversation with the Archbishop of Chicago, the pope’s home archdiocese, did not take place. And then, Durbin says no to the honor. I understand the need to save face on all parts, but Durbin’s “decision” to say no to the honor happened moments after the pope’s comments. I do think, though, the pope and the bishops in union with him have to reiterate what is already Catholic teaching—with innocent human life, born or unborn, there is no wiggle room about ending life. With the death penalty, and if the person is truly guilty and of heinous crimes, society has the right to use this method of justice and retribution. Catholics are free to be for or against the death penalty as it is currently phrased in the CCC. Just treatment of illegal immigrants is part of our beliefs too, but governments have a right to a variety of responses to this.
“That’s how I see it too.” I need to proof read by comments!
Is an interview (formal or informal) really ‘magisterium’ surely rather opinion
Of course it isn’t magisterium, but most Catholics think everything a pope says is magisterial. And less we forget, this isn’t really about the Seamless garment. It is about giving a damn Catholic award to a politician by a cardinal who did not bother to ask the bishops in his province and beyond about what they thought about an award to this particular politician. That’s the problem, one of episcopal discussion within one’s own province. But since it is a cardinal offering the award, he should have consulted too with the National Conference, or at least the papal nuncio and the President of the National Conference and its own pro-life committee. Now the pope is dragged into an award controversy created solely by Cardinal Cupich. This is his fault, not the popes, not the senator’s and not the bishops who spoke up against it. It’s not about dialogue about getting politicians to be more catholic by being nice to them. The Church of Nice has been an unmitigated disaster and that was in the 1990’s!
With the death penalty, and if the person is truly guilty and of heinous crimes, society has the right to use this method of justice and retribution. Catholics are free to be for or against the death penalty as it is currently phrased in the CCC.
No! As JP2 and Francis made clear the conditions for the death penalty are inadmissible ie they no longer hold.
If you truly believe in the right to life from conception to death then you cannot in conscience support the death penalty. As heinous as murder or multiple murder is, a civilised society has other ways to punish and we must always offer a chance of rehabilitation.
A life is a life, whether an unborn baby or a murderer!
Of course it isn’t magisterium, but most Catholics think everything a pope says is magisterial.
Hyperbole! I doubt very few catholics do so.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2025/09/28/trump-mental-decline-tylenol-rant/86369679007/
When is somebody going to have the courage to speak up, Trump obviously isn’t well! Just listen to his sentence construction.
He just recalled all the Pentagon Generals at short notice for a ranting speech in which he urged them to use US cities as military training grounds.
Cardinal Cupich did not drag Pope Leo XIV into the so-called "controversy" in question. Nobody had forced His Holiness to have interacted with reporters yesterday. Nobody forced His Holiness to have answered this, or, that question.
=======
There are countless folks who find pro-life declarations, such as those offered by Pope Leo XIV, controversial/polarizing.
To certain folks, Pope Leo XIV's definition of marriage (one man, one woman together in Holy Matrimony) is controversial/polarizing).
To offer Holy Mass ad orientem is controversial/polarizing, according to certain folks.
Pope Leo XIV's support of Vatican II has enraged certain folks.
Jesus Christ is controversial/polarizing, according to certain folks.
Cardinal Cupich's belief in Transubstantiation offends certain folks.
There is not a shortage of folks who label as "controversial" anybody who utters that with which said folks disagree.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
This commentator nailed it! You need only to harken back to Pope Benedict for moral clarity on these issues:
"Needless to say, it’s worrisome that the Holy Father’s first instinct was to parrot the leftist talking points that relativize abortion as just one of countless issues that implicate Catholic moral teaching. With all due respect, the man needs to be informed of the words of his 2nd most recent predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger: “Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.”
LOL! Look lefty, Trump can out think and out work you any day of the week. I bet you were fine with the human vegetable, Biden!
From the pillar:
Pope Francis, for example, might have given the same answer as Leo to a similar question, but it would have been framed by his having repeatedly described abortion as murder, abortionists as contract killers, and the abortion agenda as Nazi-like eugenics.
Leo, as yet, has not set the rhetorical levels for how he thinks and speaks about many moral issues. Until he has, Catholics will impute his words with their own expectations and assumptions, and at least some with their prejudices, too.
big benny,
I think Nancy Pelosi is really gone mentally, blowing up in public like this:
https://www.dailyfetched.com/nancy-pelosi-explodes-on-gop-i-tell-them-to-go-fk-themselves-in-nbc-interview-watch/
nasty language for a so-called "good Catholic!"
Sophia here: l already pointed out in a previous post that Pope Leo, Pope Francis (Rip ), and Cardinal Cupich ( as well as many others eg Cardinals Mc Elroy and Tobin) share similar Modernist/ Relativist approaches to Biblical and Perennial Church Teaching! This is not the first time Pope Leo ( Cardinal Prevost) has publicly acknowledged that he too subscribes to the “ consistent ethic of life”/ “seamless garment” interpretation of Catholic Social Teaching meaning that they are equivalent, when obviously, Theologically, logically and from the perspective of Natural Law they cannot be! ILLEGAL immigration is not even equivalent to LEGAL immigration let alone how that is addressed , to the killing of INNOCENT preborn children ( the most innocent of humans)! Nor can the States’ execution of a person convicted of murdering one or more individuals be compared with the killing of a preborn child. Get the picture? That’s precisely why abortion is preeminent - NOTHING is equivalent to that! Physician Assisted suicide/ Euthanasia - stands right next to abortion!
In an address he gave when he was given an honorary degree at a University in Chiclayo, Peru in 2023, it is said that Cardinal Prevost “ draws on the legacy of two other churchmen who, like him, have links to Chicago, Cardinals Joseph Bernadin and Blaise Cupich, to promote a consistent ethic of life….”
As you so accurately pointed out shortly after Pope Leo’s Election,
Fr. Mc Donald, Pope Leo is very smart, highly educated , and highly experienced in administration! He was not only Prefect of the Dicastery of Bishops after a few years of membership along with his buddy Cardinal Cupich, which means of course that he knew the Bishops throughout the world much, much better than Pope Francis but he was also Prior General of the Augustinians then Bishop of Chiclayo, Peru. Nonetheless, we are to believe that when he reveals where he stands in interviews, that is not actually where he stands but is due to his ineptitude/discomfort during interviews? I can assure you that if I were to be asked first thing in the morning, any question on DEI, Gender Confusion, Perennial Church Teaching on Death Penalty, Abortion, Physician Assisted Suicide/ Euthanasia, you would not be left scratching your head about what I meant ! Some of you may not like the responses, especially if you think that each of us is “entitled to our own truths” on these matters- which of course would be just another fallacy- but you would know my position! Similarly, Pope Leo was quite clear about where he stands!
My position is, l know enough about Pope Leo via his substantive, relevant statements and appointments he has made, but also that he has all the Graces he needs to teach and govern as a Vicar of Christ rather than according to “ new gospels” and so I continue to pray that he will begin to do that!
https://wherepeteris.com/pope-leo-xiv-on-cardinals-bernardin-and-cupich-and-the-value-of-life/
MT, if not for the controversy that Cardinal Cupich created, the question would never have been asked. That is what I mean about the pope being dragged into this—the question had to be asked as Cardinal Cupich had created a firestorm among other bishops and of course the laity in the USA and in the pope’s home archdiocese.
Sophia,
Murder is murder whether an unborn child or capital punishment of a murderer. You are falling into the relativism which Benedict warned about.
Leo didn’t condemn immigration laws but the inhuman treatment of immigrants.
Glad to hear you’re more Catholic than the pope!
Given Prlosi’s husband was violently attacked with a hammer by a MAGAZINE supporter you can forgive her rant towards Trump’s inhuman treatment of immigrants.
Nice canard.
It's the equivalent of lawyers pounding the table.
Nick
Didn’t the Catholic Church teach the death penalty as a matter of natural law? Can your pope overturn what you consider to be natural law?
The conditions which may have justified capital punishment are no longer admissible. It’s not the teaching that changed but societal advancements which make it unnecessary.
I doubt that this is universal, BB. Think about some of your former colonies in Africa and other 3rd world countries—have societal advancements affected them? Or think of terrorists guilty of horrible mass murders who can still direct his/her terrorists from their jail cells with a smuggled iPhone. But making all pro-life issues equal begs credulity. Church law does not excommunicate judges or juries who sentence a guilty person to death. Nor are the executioners excommunicated or those who lead the guilty to the electric chair, guillotine, firing squad or gas chamber, or those who give the deadly drugs intravenously to some. Abortion gets the mother and those who assisted her excommunicated.
Father AJM,
Add to that the unfortunate occurrence of violence in prisons, up to and including murder. I suppose prison staff and other inmates must be at the mercy of those who kill while in prison. We'll also have to see if Pope Leo takes up the odd thread of life sentences being another form of the death penalty...
Nick
That’s a good point, the safety of other prisoners. Solitary confinement for life is unrealistic too.
The issue of prison violence also reminds me of the weirdly pacifistic line some high churchmen have been pushing over the last ten years, namely that "all violence is contrary to the Gospel." Now, the perennial teaching of the Church doesn't say this, but it's relatively in vogue to say. But it is seemingly far out of contact with the messy reality of human interactions especially involving the inveterate criminals and bloodthirsty among us, whether it involves a prison-murderer or the use of violence in reasonable self-defense (as individuals or as countries, cf. Ukraine).
Nick
There can’t be any or many developing countries that don’t have prisons. Having worked in prisons i know they can be dangerous places which is why proper supervision and security measures are paramount to reduce the opportunity for violence.
As Christians we also believe in redemption so prisons should not just be orientated towards punishment but rehabilitation.
Big Benny,
As a Catholic, I am opposed to abortion and wish that the number of abortions was zero. This said, what you need to understand about those who are so strident about abortion and yet admit capital punishment and the inhumane treatment of immigrants (just check out the conditions in detention centers, run by private corporations for profit—ah, our wonderful capitalist system), is that for many it is soooo much easier to defend the lives of innocent unborn children by agitating for changes in the law than it is to actually DO something to help rehabilitate prisoners or defend against the cruel treatment of immigrants. It has to do with skin off nose. However, I will certainly concede that many “pro-life” activists do take steps to help pregnant women and unwed mothers.
As to Father McDonald’s point about Africa etc., see CCC 2267:
“Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.
Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.
Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that 'the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person', and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”
This is the new 2017/18 text. The previous 1992 version may have been more realistic:
“Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity 'are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.'"
Mark J.
One also has to consider that the justice system is not perfect. How many people suffered the death penalty, only for their innocence to be established afterwards?
Post a Comment