Evidently, the new nuncio compared to the old is like the difference between night and day and reflects the comparison between Pope Francis and Pope Leo, a night and day difference too.
Press the title for the excellent and hopeful change in regime and mentality, especially concerning the USA, between the nuncio of the night and the nuncio of the day!
Press the title for the Pillar’s great commentary:
‘I’m happy to be here’: The new nuncio’s new message
But beyond appearances of personal style, perhaps the most striking difference between the new and old nuncios was the substance of his ecclesiastical vision.
And his final address in November was remarkable for its characterization of the Francis pontificate as a kind of year-zero event in the Church, a point of irrevocable departure in a new, unalterable direction.
Well known for his insistence on synodality as the new, preeminent, perhaps exclusive ecclesial paradigm, Pierre signed off his term in Baltimore last November by telling the bishops that “the synod on synodality invites us to a different way.”
“Even if some are inclined to pursue a path that diverges from the pastoral vision of Francis, we know that the way forward is one that does not diverge but advances on the path of Francis is the way of moving forward in the Church,” Pierre said.
Archbishop Caccia’s first address to the conference was, in this context, received as something of a night-and-day contrast. Apart from not mentioning synodality at all, while Pierre was known to season his speeches with quotes from Gaudium et Spes, the pastoral constitution of the Second Vatican Council, Caccia offered the bishops the gift of a pocket edition of Lumen Gentium and Dei Verbum, the council’s dogmatic constitutions to, he said, “remind us who the Church is, and how the Church listens to the Word of God. They bring us back to the sources of our communion and mission.”
5 comments:
Numerous comments from various folks on this blog for years have portrayed the bishops of the United States as an overall useless lot.
Our bishops in the United States have been portrayed as having driven then Church into the ground.
Therefore, if the bishops of the United States are as rotten as has been portrayed here by various commenters, then the prior Papal Nuncio's supposed difficult relationship with our bishops is easy to comprehend.
He had to deal with a Church within the United States that had been governed by supposed hack bishops who had permitted supposedly rampant liturgical abuses...bishops connected to the homosexual lobby supposedly who protected, as well as promoted, sexually deviant priests.
That is just for starters in regard to the supposed rotten bishops of the Church in America.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Wow MT, speak your own mind—great and no links to something else! But, but, but, there is a big difference, what you highlight as complaints lodged at many American bishops are in fact true abuses. The previous papal nuncio disliked America and the American Bishops for not getting on board with Pope Francis’ synodal way of being Church, offering Communion freely to people in a public state of mortal sin and not getting on board with creating a different church a synodal church and doing so as if 2000 years of organic development in the Church could be shelved in favor of starting all over again at ground Zero! The hubris in the nuncio’s statement is laughable if not so tragic and it mirrored some of the things Pope Francis had said off-the-cuff.
MT Suit, when you go from 80% Mass attendance to 13% and Catholics (including bishops and priests) supporting a political party whose platform is abortion on demand, there is a problem. It doesn't help that ill-informed Catholics like you keep posting bilge.
Of note, Abp. Caccia does not seem to think it is more important than anything else to lecture the bishops about synodality and the true spirit of Vatican II.
According to what I’ve seen, the nuncio didn’t mention the former a single time.
Anyway, anyone with a scintilla of intellectual honesty understands that Leo’s predecessor detested most of the American episcopate because they weren’t sufficiently on-board with his program for reinventing the Church, not because they “protected, as well as promoted, sexually deviant priests.” Leo’s predecessor wrote the book on that.
Nick
I guess MT forgot former "Cardinal" McCarrick and his merry band.
Post a Comment