As Walt told you a few days ago, there's a strong feeling that the fix is in at the 2015 Bishops Synod on the Family, in progress (???) at the Vatican this month. It is clear that, in spite of the opposition of bishops from America, Asia and Africa, the Pope and the Gay Mafia in the highest echelons of the Roman Catholic Church are determined to water down the traditional teachings of the Church on divorce, Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics, homosexuality and same-sex "marriage".
One of those battling for adherence to the Faith of our fathers is Philadelphia's Archbishop Charles Chaput. Earlier this week, in his address to the Pope and the bishops assembled, the prelate said that the Instrumentum Laboris (working document) for the Synod "engenders a subtle hopelessness".
The document, published by the Synod's general secretary, Cardinal Baldisseri, as a "guide" to the bishops' deliberations, has been criticized by many of the prelates. Abp. Chaput told the assembly that it fails to inspire a sense of Christian hope. Moreover, the Instrumentum does not convey confidence that Catholics, with the help of grace, can resist the pressures that are undermining marriage and family life. He continued:
This leads to a spirit of compromise with certain sinful patterns of life and the reduction of Christian truths about marriage and sexuality to a set of beautiful ideals, which then leads to surrendering the redemptive mission of the Church. The work of this synod needs to show much more confidence in the Word of God, the transformative power of grace, and the ability of people to actually live what the Church believes. And it should honor the heroism of abandoned spouses who remain faithful to their vows and the teaching of the Church.
Responding to a question about the demand for a Synod message that will make all people (read: not only divorced Catholics but the LGBT crowd whose lifestyle is objectively disordered) feel welcome in the Church, Abp. Chaput said that the need for attractive language must be balanced against the demand for truth. "We have to be careful with our language so that people don't get hurt, but also we must be faithful to Church doctrine."
Click here to read the full text of Abp. Chaput's address to the Holy Father and the Synod, on RNS (Religion News Service)
Further reading: "Synod. First Shot on Target Comes From the Conservatives", but the "progessive" innovators are already on the counter-attack, and counting on the support of the Pope. Sandro Magister in Chiesa, 8/10/15.
Showing posts with label Archbishop Chaput. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Archbishop Chaput. Show all posts
Friday, October 9, 2015
Saturday, February 7, 2015
VIDEO: "Scary Catholic right-winger" gives Pope Francis a FAIL
John Vennari, editor of Catholic Family News, has been identified by RawStory as one of "5 scary ultra-right wing Catholics who are outraged by the cool Pope".
Seems like Mr. Vennari doesn't agree with the Party Pope's off-the-cuff "pronouncements" which have delighted liberal Catholics, secular humanists and "progressive thinkers" in the world at large. In Catholic Family News, Mr. Vennari has written "[Pope Francis] seems to have a good heart and some good Catholic instincts, but theologically he is a train wreck -- remarkably sloppy." [Walt's emphasis] He goes on to say, "Though this might shock some readers, I must say that I would never allow Pope Francis to teach religion to my children."
John told us, in a recent e-mail, that he's pleased to find himself in good company! The other four "scary Catholic right-wingers" named in the RawStory article are Raymond Cardinal Burke (now in exile in Malta), American pundit Pat Buchanan, Father Dwight Longenecker, and Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia.
Good company indeed! To make his views more accessible, in this age where people would rather watch a video than read, John Vennari recently launched "CFN Media", a series of short videos (10 minutes or so) in which he comments on recent developments in the Catholic Church and what passes for Catholic theology.
Here's the second in the series, published late in January, in which Mr. Vennari contrasts Pope St. Pius X's understanding of Papal duty as opposed to that of Pope Francis. What should Catholics understand from the words and actions of Pope Bergoglio? What should they do? How should they respond? Watch and learn.
Seems like Mr. Vennari doesn't agree with the Party Pope's off-the-cuff "pronouncements" which have delighted liberal Catholics, secular humanists and "progressive thinkers" in the world at large. In Catholic Family News, Mr. Vennari has written "[Pope Francis] seems to have a good heart and some good Catholic instincts, but theologically he is a train wreck -- remarkably sloppy." [Walt's emphasis] He goes on to say, "Though this might shock some readers, I must say that I would never allow Pope Francis to teach religion to my children."
John told us, in a recent e-mail, that he's pleased to find himself in good company! The other four "scary Catholic right-wingers" named in the RawStory article are Raymond Cardinal Burke (now in exile in Malta), American pundit Pat Buchanan, Father Dwight Longenecker, and Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia.
Good company indeed! To make his views more accessible, in this age where people would rather watch a video than read, John Vennari recently launched "CFN Media", a series of short videos (10 minutes or so) in which he comments on recent developments in the Catholic Church and what passes for Catholic theology.
Here's the second in the series, published late in January, in which Mr. Vennari contrasts Pope St. Pius X's understanding of Papal duty as opposed to that of Pope Francis. What should Catholics understand from the words and actions of Pope Bergoglio? What should they do? How should they respond? Watch and learn.
Friday, October 31, 2014
Is the Catholic Church about to disintegrate?
The handwriting may not yet be on the walls of the Vatican, but it's surely all over the media. Not just the Catholic or other religious media, but the secular lamestream media. They're having a field day predicting a massive schism which (they say) will divide the mainstream Roman Catholic Church into liberal and "conservative" factions.
"Conservative", in the context of the Church in the 21st century, should not be taken to mean "Traditionalist". The traditionalists have already left, gone to the Society of St. Pius X and beyond. Even the conservative and traditionalist Catholics who have remained within the "new and improved" Church of Pope Francis have become more and more disillusioned with him.
Now commentators on both sides of the Atlantic are talking of the possibility of a schism. That such a thing should even be mooted is by itself evidence of the discord sown by the policies and pronouncements [doubtless well-meaning! Ed.] of the most liberal pope of modern times. Here's a sampling of what's being said.
Andrew Brown writes in The Guardian (30/10) A Catholic church schism under Pope Francis isn’t out of the question. Walt takes responsibility for the emphasis in these excerpts.
Until this weekend, I had largely believed in the liberal narrative which holds that Pope Francis’s reforms of the Catholic church are unstoppable. But the conservative backlash has been so fierce and so far-reaching that for the first time a split looks a real, if distant, possibility.
One leading conservative, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, published over the weekend a homily he had prepared for the traditional Latin mass at which he started ruminating on papal authority. Pope Francis, he said, was the 266th pope, "and history has seen 37 false or antipopes".
Why mention them, except to raise the possibility that Francis might turn out to be the 38th false pope, rather than the 266th real one?
This is a fascinating nudge in the direction of an established strain of conservative...belief: that liberalising popes are not in fact real popes, but imposters, sent by the devil. ...if the pope is always right, as traditionalists would like to believe, and if this particular pope is clearly wrong, as traditionalists also believe, then obviously this pope is not the real pope.
I don’t think that’s what Pell meant, but it was odd and threatening to bring the subject up at all.
Less than a week previously, Ross Douthet penned (or typed) The Pope and the Precipice for the op-ed page of the New York Times. He suggests that:
If [Pope Francis] seems to be choosing the more dangerous path — if he moves to reassign potential critics in the hierarchy, if he seems to be stacking the next synod’s ranks with supporters of a sweeping change — then conservative Catholics will need a clear-eyed understanding of the situation.
They can certainly persist in the belief that God protects the church from self-contradiction. But they might want to consider the possibility that they have a role to play, and that this pope may be preserved from error only if the church itself resists him.
Hmmm... "potential critics in the hierarchy"... like whom? Like Cardinal Raymond Burke, who, as Walt told you on October 16th, is being demoted from head of the Apostolic Signatura to the largely ceremonial role as head of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.
Cardinal Burke refuses to go quietly into that good exile. According to “There is a strong sense that the Church is like a ship without a helm”, the prelate told the Spanish publication Vida Nueva that "Many Catholics today have 'a strong sense that the Church is like a ship without a helm'." The report continues:
The American cardinal, who has become a focal point for the concerns of conservative Catholics, told Vida Nueva that many people have spoken to him about their fears for the direction of the Church. "They are feeling a bit seasick because they feel the Church’s ship has lost its bearings," he said.
Cardinal Burke stressed that "I do not wish it to seem like I am speaking out against the Pope." Rather, he said, he wanted to express a concern that many people now feel. The cardinal observed that Pope Francis has roused enthusiasm with his call for Catholics to go out to the peripheries to preach the faith. "But we cannot go to the peripheries empty-handed," he said.
"Faith cannot adapt to culture, but must call it to convert,” Cardinal Burke said. “We are a countercultural movement, not a popular one."
Finally (for the moment) we have commentary from Candida Moss [Really. A professor in the Theology department at Notre Dame. Ed.] who, in A Coming American Schism Over Pope Francis? compared "Bergoglio fever" to the worship of idols.
There have already been murmurings of discontent from US Catholic leaders. Bishop Thomas Tobin stated that he was slightly “disappointed” that the pope had yet to speak out about the abortion. And Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia acknowledged that some more conservative Catholics “generally have not been really happy” with Francis and that the pope will have to find a way “to care for them too.”
For a church that moves at a glacial pace, the murmurings of Bishops like Tobin are lightning fast and boldly subversive. The pro-hierarchy Catholics who criticized American nuns for not supporting the Vatican line are now attacking the hierarchy they once championed. Remarkable stuff, considering that Francis has not changed the Church’s teaching, only its emphasis and tone.
So far, those who feel disaffected by Francis’s papacy have responded by reassuring themselves that nothing has changed. But real divisions start with grumbling and there’s a subtly schismatic quality to those who have called Francis a "questionable example"....
For traditionalists..., "Is the Pope Catholic?" is a real question.
Indeed. What Walt finds significant about Prof. Moss's piece is not her credentials -- I'm not sure she's even Catholic -- but the dissenting voices she quotes. Neither Archbishop Chaput nor Bishop Tobin has ever been accused of being anything other than "mainstream". If their "murmurings" represent the sentiments of more than a few members of the Church hierarchy, a major upheaval could be imminent.
The bishops and priests who the Vatican today calls "schismatic" and those who it calls "popes" may well exchange positions, when God makes the Final Judgement.
"Conservative", in the context of the Church in the 21st century, should not be taken to mean "Traditionalist". The traditionalists have already left, gone to the Society of St. Pius X and beyond. Even the conservative and traditionalist Catholics who have remained within the "new and improved" Church of Pope Francis have become more and more disillusioned with him.
Now commentators on both sides of the Atlantic are talking of the possibility of a schism. That such a thing should even be mooted is by itself evidence of the discord sown by the policies and pronouncements [doubtless well-meaning! Ed.] of the most liberal pope of modern times. Here's a sampling of what's being said.
Andrew Brown writes in The Guardian (30/10) A Catholic church schism under Pope Francis isn’t out of the question. Walt takes responsibility for the emphasis in these excerpts.
Until this weekend, I had largely believed in the liberal narrative which holds that Pope Francis’s reforms of the Catholic church are unstoppable. But the conservative backlash has been so fierce and so far-reaching that for the first time a split looks a real, if distant, possibility.
One leading conservative, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, published over the weekend a homily he had prepared for the traditional Latin mass at which he started ruminating on papal authority. Pope Francis, he said, was the 266th pope, "and history has seen 37 false or antipopes".
Why mention them, except to raise the possibility that Francis might turn out to be the 38th false pope, rather than the 266th real one?
This is a fascinating nudge in the direction of an established strain of conservative...belief: that liberalising popes are not in fact real popes, but imposters, sent by the devil. ...if the pope is always right, as traditionalists would like to believe, and if this particular pope is clearly wrong, as traditionalists also believe, then obviously this pope is not the real pope.
I don’t think that’s what Pell meant, but it was odd and threatening to bring the subject up at all.
Less than a week previously, Ross Douthet penned (or typed) The Pope and the Precipice for the op-ed page of the New York Times. He suggests that:
If [Pope Francis] seems to be choosing the more dangerous path — if he moves to reassign potential critics in the hierarchy, if he seems to be stacking the next synod’s ranks with supporters of a sweeping change — then conservative Catholics will need a clear-eyed understanding of the situation.
They can certainly persist in the belief that God protects the church from self-contradiction. But they might want to consider the possibility that they have a role to play, and that this pope may be preserved from error only if the church itself resists him.
Hmmm... "potential critics in the hierarchy"... like whom? Like Cardinal Raymond Burke, who, as Walt told you on October 16th, is being demoted from head of the Apostolic Signatura to the largely ceremonial role as head of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.
Cardinal Burke refuses to go quietly into that good exile. According to “There is a strong sense that the Church is like a ship without a helm”, the prelate told the Spanish publication Vida Nueva that "Many Catholics today have 'a strong sense that the Church is like a ship without a helm'." The report continues:
The American cardinal, who has become a focal point for the concerns of conservative Catholics, told Vida Nueva that many people have spoken to him about their fears for the direction of the Church. "They are feeling a bit seasick because they feel the Church’s ship has lost its bearings," he said.
Cardinal Burke stressed that "I do not wish it to seem like I am speaking out against the Pope." Rather, he said, he wanted to express a concern that many people now feel. The cardinal observed that Pope Francis has roused enthusiasm with his call for Catholics to go out to the peripheries to preach the faith. "But we cannot go to the peripheries empty-handed," he said.
"Faith cannot adapt to culture, but must call it to convert,” Cardinal Burke said. “We are a countercultural movement, not a popular one."
Finally (for the moment) we have commentary from Candida Moss [Really. A professor in the Theology department at Notre Dame. Ed.] who, in A Coming American Schism Over Pope Francis? compared "Bergoglio fever" to the worship of idols.
There have already been murmurings of discontent from US Catholic leaders. Bishop Thomas Tobin stated that he was slightly “disappointed” that the pope had yet to speak out about the abortion. And Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia acknowledged that some more conservative Catholics “generally have not been really happy” with Francis and that the pope will have to find a way “to care for them too.”
For a church that moves at a glacial pace, the murmurings of Bishops like Tobin are lightning fast and boldly subversive. The pro-hierarchy Catholics who criticized American nuns for not supporting the Vatican line are now attacking the hierarchy they once championed. Remarkable stuff, considering that Francis has not changed the Church’s teaching, only its emphasis and tone.
So far, those who feel disaffected by Francis’s papacy have responded by reassuring themselves that nothing has changed. But real divisions start with grumbling and there’s a subtly schismatic quality to those who have called Francis a "questionable example"....
For traditionalists..., "Is the Pope Catholic?" is a real question.
Indeed. What Walt finds significant about Prof. Moss's piece is not her credentials -- I'm not sure she's even Catholic -- but the dissenting voices she quotes. Neither Archbishop Chaput nor Bishop Tobin has ever been accused of being anything other than "mainstream". If their "murmurings" represent the sentiments of more than a few members of the Church hierarchy, a major upheaval could be imminent.
The bishops and priests who the Vatican today calls "schismatic" and those who it calls "popes" may well exchange positions, when God makes the Final Judgement.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Unborn children treated "like trash" in America: Archbishop of Philadelphia
It is not difficult to anticipate or understand the reaction of the Church to the trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, aka "Kermit the Babykiller". Now the Archbishop of Philadelphia, site of the atrocities, has spoken out very clearly in an interview with Vatican Radio.
Most Rev. Charles Chaput of Philadelphia said that “after a while we begin to disrespect human life in ways that are just shockingly coarse. And that’s what happened here. They were treating the babies from the womb as though they were pieces of trash.”
The horrific case “is clearly a result of cultural change in the United States, where unborn children are treated carelessly, and cruelly, and in a horribly disrespectful kind of way,” the prelate continued.
“If we can treat unborn children this way, it means we’re capable of treating born children this way, and the elderly this way,” Archbishop Chaput added. “Unless there’s a deep profound respect for human life at all levels, people will see a gradual disintegration of respect for human life at all.”
Further reading: "The Gosnell story and its lessons" on the CatholicPhilly website.
Most Rev. Charles Chaput of Philadelphia said that “after a while we begin to disrespect human life in ways that are just shockingly coarse. And that’s what happened here. They were treating the babies from the womb as though they were pieces of trash.”
The horrific case “is clearly a result of cultural change in the United States, where unborn children are treated carelessly, and cruelly, and in a horribly disrespectful kind of way,” the prelate continued.
“If we can treat unborn children this way, it means we’re capable of treating born children this way, and the elderly this way,” Archbishop Chaput added. “Unless there’s a deep profound respect for human life at all levels, people will see a gradual disintegration of respect for human life at all.”
Further reading: "The Gosnell story and its lessons" on the CatholicPhilly website.
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Catholic voters must put Church teachings ahead of politics, say US bishops
The Church ordinarily tries not to interfere in "the democratic process", we are told, but these are extraordinary times, and America faces an extraordinary crisis -- not just a political crisis and/or an economic crisis, but a moral crisis. That being so, good Catholics should pay close attention to statements made by three American bishops this weekend.
Most Rev. Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Philadelphia, called on Catholic voters to "stand united" on the issue of abortion. The killing of innocent children before they have a chance to take their first breath outside the womb is "a big issue today," the prelate said, "and I think what it requires of Catholics is a loyalty to the Church prior to their political party. We’re Catholics before we’re Democrats. We’re Catholics before we’re Republicans. We’re even Catholics before we’re Americans, because we know that God has a demand on us prior to any government demand on us. And this has been the story of the martyrs through the centuries.
"If we don't stand united on this issue, we're bound to failure," Abp. Chaput continued, "not only in the area of protecting unborn human life but in maintaining our religious freedom."
Bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo, who also serves as apostolic administrator of his former Diocese of Portland (Maine), issued a statement on the upcoming election, in which Maine voters will be asked to permit same-sex marriage.
"Maine citizens have the right and obligation to cast their votes for federal, state and local candidates for office, as well as to make decisions on various referendum issues, including the referendum that would attempt to redefine marriage as something other than the union of one man and one woman open to children,” the bishop said.
But he reminded Catholics that "we do not scrutinize a candidate’s positions or other issues within a vacuum, but within the context of an educated conscience formed through scripture and the teachings of the faith. For us, the sanctity of life from conception to natural death is non-negotiable; euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are never to be sanctioned; embryonic stem cell research and experimentation are considered nothing short of the taking of human life; marriage between a man and a woman must be valued and protected as the foundation of family and society; religious freedom must always be protected, and the care and nurturing of the poor is not simply a kind act, but a societal obligation…
"A Catholic whose conscience has been properly formed by scripture and Church teaching cannot justify a vote for a candidate or referendum question that opposes the teachings of the Church. The definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, open to the birth of children, is a matter of established Catholic doctrine. Any Catholic who supports a redefinition of marriage -- or so called “same-sex marriage” -- is unfaithful to Catholic doctrine."
A third bishop, Most Rev. Thomas Paprocki of Springfield IL, has explained his recent statement that "a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy."
"Some who try to navigate this labyrinth of moral analysis simply rationalize their way to a desired conclusion, for example, by saying that voting for a pro-choice candidate is justified by their support for other 'social justice' causes," said Bishop Paprocki. "But such people should apply the Golden Rule by placing themselves in the shoes of the people who are going to be killed by abortions. Would these voters really think it is more 'just' to vote for the 'pro-choice' candidate if they or their own children or their brothers and sisters were going to be deliberately killed -- along with 1.3 million others?"
Good Catholics, as we are so often told by the President who wants to destroy our Faith and our freedom, let us be clear! As these three American bishops have told us, the key question is whether we love God more than a political party or candidates that promote intrinsic evils and serious sins. The First Commandment is that we not worship false idols. That means God comes first and his moral law trumps politics. Vote your faith on November 6th!
This post is an adaptation of articles in CatholicCulture, for which Walt and Ed. thank God.
Most Rev. Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Philadelphia, called on Catholic voters to "stand united" on the issue of abortion. The killing of innocent children before they have a chance to take their first breath outside the womb is "a big issue today," the prelate said, "and I think what it requires of Catholics is a loyalty to the Church prior to their political party. We’re Catholics before we’re Democrats. We’re Catholics before we’re Republicans. We’re even Catholics before we’re Americans, because we know that God has a demand on us prior to any government demand on us. And this has been the story of the martyrs through the centuries.
"If we don't stand united on this issue, we're bound to failure," Abp. Chaput continued, "not only in the area of protecting unborn human life but in maintaining our religious freedom."
Bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo, who also serves as apostolic administrator of his former Diocese of Portland (Maine), issued a statement on the upcoming election, in which Maine voters will be asked to permit same-sex marriage.
"Maine citizens have the right and obligation to cast their votes for federal, state and local candidates for office, as well as to make decisions on various referendum issues, including the referendum that would attempt to redefine marriage as something other than the union of one man and one woman open to children,” the bishop said.
But he reminded Catholics that "we do not scrutinize a candidate’s positions or other issues within a vacuum, but within the context of an educated conscience formed through scripture and the teachings of the faith. For us, the sanctity of life from conception to natural death is non-negotiable; euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are never to be sanctioned; embryonic stem cell research and experimentation are considered nothing short of the taking of human life; marriage between a man and a woman must be valued and protected as the foundation of family and society; religious freedom must always be protected, and the care and nurturing of the poor is not simply a kind act, but a societal obligation…
"A Catholic whose conscience has been properly formed by scripture and Church teaching cannot justify a vote for a candidate or referendum question that opposes the teachings of the Church. The definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, open to the birth of children, is a matter of established Catholic doctrine. Any Catholic who supports a redefinition of marriage -- or so called “same-sex marriage” -- is unfaithful to Catholic doctrine."
A third bishop, Most Rev. Thomas Paprocki of Springfield IL, has explained his recent statement that "a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy."
"Some who try to navigate this labyrinth of moral analysis simply rationalize their way to a desired conclusion, for example, by saying that voting for a pro-choice candidate is justified by their support for other 'social justice' causes," said Bishop Paprocki. "But such people should apply the Golden Rule by placing themselves in the shoes of the people who are going to be killed by abortions. Would these voters really think it is more 'just' to vote for the 'pro-choice' candidate if they or their own children or their brothers and sisters were going to be deliberately killed -- along with 1.3 million others?"
Good Catholics, as we are so often told by the President who wants to destroy our Faith and our freedom, let us be clear! As these three American bishops have told us, the key question is whether we love God more than a political party or candidates that promote intrinsic evils and serious sins. The First Commandment is that we not worship false idols. That means God comes first and his moral law trumps politics. Vote your faith on November 6th!
This post is an adaptation of articles in CatholicCulture, for which Walt and Ed. thank God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)