If a burglar is about to enter your house he will not knock down your front door with a sledgehammer. Rather he will go into the dark at the rear of your house and enter with stealth through the rear door or windows. There was never, in my mind at least, the least question that Satan would attempt to enter the front door through outright and open changes to matters of long held Doctrine. He was always going for the back and in this case I fear it is through De Facto changes in Doctrine through, .'Pastoral Concerns'. Thus he hopes like any good burglars he will not make any noise and we will all snore on. I for one am not sleeping on , I am awake, bright eyed , bushy tailed and growling, I hear the gentle screech of the back door been forced. .
‘If I were founding a Church, I’d love to have women priests’ Cardinal O’Malley http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...nding-a-church-id-love-to-have-women-priests/
(Kasper)" said there will not be a change in Church doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage" DUH!!! They can't change the doctrine, it is written in stone, they can ONLY CHANGE the "pastoral" approach. Thee ole "do whatever you feel like in your own parish" approach. Oye Vay.
I don't think that was the right way for Cdl. O'Malley to phrase it, but I wouldn't be too hard on him. I think what he was trying to say is that, in human wisdom, it's easy to say that either women or men should be able to be priests. But we are followers of the God-Man, Jesus Christ, and in His Divine Wisdom, He had better plans..
That video makes me wanna smack my brothers upside the head for disrespecting my father that way. I've heard some trying to explain the video with "well it's not customary for them to shake the Holy Father's hand when they're greeting someone else" BS. Pope B16 HAS HIS HAND OUT TO SHAKE HANDS. What kind of man doesn't shake another man's hand when it's extended???
If I were founding a church, I'd love to do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what Jesus chose to do. Niiiiiice. Wow.
I just sense the Church is in huge danger, threatened on all sides. I wouldn't write this simply because of what I read or watch from different sources, for what really do I know? I feel it in my heart from prayer. Mary has said this herself at several Church approved apparition sites in the past, including Fatima and Akita, 'That bishop will oppose Bishop, Cardinal against Cardinal.'If this is not what is happening now what is happening?..... and of it is not happening now when do people think it will happen and what do they think the signs will be when it does occur? Of course the time is now! This is the moment Mary warned us about! I am sorry, this is not my imagination. The Church is in great danger.
I wonder if this will have an effect on the next Synod in 2015 ??? It's official! Pope Francis announces 2015 visit to US Vatican City, Nov 17, 2014 / 01:11 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Updated November 17, 2014 at 6:25a.m. MST. Adds comments from Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi SJ at paragraphs 9-10. Pope Francis on Monday officially announced that he will visit the U.S. in September 2015, including a visit to the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia. “I wish to confirm, if God wills it, that in September of 2015 I will go to Philadelphia for the Eighth World Meeting of Families,” he announced at Vatican City's Synod Hall Nov. 17 during his remarks at an international colloquium on the complementarity of man and woman. The Philadelphia World Meeting of Families will take place from Sept. 22-27. Even before the Pope's announcement, the meeting was expected to draw tens of thousands of people. Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Philadelphia had told a gathering of Catholic bishops last week that a papal visit would likely result in crowds of about 1 million. A global Catholic event, the world meeting seeks to support and strengthen families. St. John Paul II founded the event in 1994, and it takes place every three years. Archbishop Chaput had previously hinted that Pope Francis would attend the 2015 meeting, although he cautioned that the visit had not been officially confirmed. In March 2014, a Pennsylvania delegation including Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett and Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter visited the Vatican to help encourage the Pope to visit the U.S. On Thursday, Archbishop Bernardito Auza, the head of the Holy See’s permanent observer mission to the United Nations, told the Associated Press “if he comes to Philadelphia, he will come to New York.” The 70th anniversary of the U.N.’s founding would be “the ideal time” for a papal visit, the archbishop said Nov. 13. Next year also marks the 50th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s 1965 visit to the U.N., the first such visit from a Pope. In August, on his return flight from South Korea, Pope Francis said he wanted to visit the U.S. in 2015 for the Philadelphia gathering. He also noted that he had received invitations from President Barack Obama, Congress and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, as well as from Mexico. However, despite the anticipation of the Pope's possible visit to New York and Washington while in the U.S., Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J. told journalists shortly after the announcement that as of now nothing else is confirmed. The Pope, he explained, “didn't say anything about any other steps or moments in his trip to America. He guaranteed his presence to the organizers of the World Day for Families, but as for the rest, I have no concrete information.” Pope Francis has visited the Holy Land and Albania as well as South Korea. He will visit France and Turkey in November, and Sri Lanka and the Philippines in January 2015. He will return to France for a longer visit in 2015. In June, the Pope accepted an invitation to visit Mexico, though a date for the visit was not announced. The World Meeting of Families will take place shortly before the October 2015 meeting of the Synod of Bishops on the Family, which will discuss the mission of the family in the Church and in the world. At the last World Meeting of Families in Milan, Italy, in 2012, more than 1 million people representing 153 nations attended a papal Mass with Pope Benedict XVI. The 2015 meeting's theme is “Love is Our Mission: The Family Fully Alive.” The meeting will include many speakers and breakout sessions. Keynote speakers include Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston, Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle of the Philippines, Cardinal Robert Sarah, professor Helen Alvare, and Dr. Juan Francisco de la Guardia Brin and Gabriela N. de la Guardia. The Philadelphia meeting will mark the first time that the event will be held in the United States. Registration for the 2015 World Meeting of Families began on Nov. 10. The World Meeting of Families website is www.worldmeeting2015.org. It is on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WorldMeeting2015 and on Twitter at https://twitter.com/WMF2015.
Robert Moynihan actually had three "letters" out this weekend. The first is posted above. Here is an excerpt from the second one (I edited out the full text of the Pope's address, which has been posted elsewhere on this site) and I will post the 3rd one below. I post these letters because Moynihan writes with charity and clarity, and because I see the many tensions we are experiencing on this little forum played out in his letters. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners!! Begin Moynihan's letter: November 15, 2014, Saturday — The Third Revelatory Moment (Continued from Letter #33 of November 14) The letter I sent yesterday, on the controversial Kasper-Pentin interview of October 14, which I called the second "revelatory moment" of the October Bishops' Synod, generated more anger and criticism than any letter I have ever written. Dozens of people wrote to me, and a number asked to be taken off of this email list. Most of the commenters felt that I had underestimated the grave danger to Catholic faith and doctrine represented by Cardinal Kasper's proposals on granting communion to divorced and remarried Catholics. And many expressed frustration with Pope Francis for not ending the "confusion" by publicly offering greater clarity about his own intentions. At the same time, Catholics in recent days, on the internet and in publications, have spoken openly about the possibility of a schism in the Church, with more "progressive" Catholics remaining with Pope Francis, and more "traditional" Catholics breaking with him. This would be, obviously, a tragic triumph for those forces which oppose the Church's teaching on a whole range of moral issues. And tendentious press accounts are likely to fuel such a triumph. The Concern: "Change practice, change of doctrine follows" Here is a sampling of the emails I received: "Propaganda," wrote one reader of what I wrote. "Doctrine cannot change, but it can certainly be undermined in practice. This is what the Eastern Orthodox have done with Holy Matrimony, and this is what is being suggested by Kasper and Bergoglio. If you're going to carry water for that line, remove me from your email list. Thanks." "May I ask why your latest article repeatedly assures readers that Kasper said there will be no change in doctrine?" wrote another. "When did he ever say there would be? Everyone knows that is not and never has been the issue. What he (and clearly the Pope) want to change is the related practice so as to allow people living in adultery to receive Holy Communion, as Francis allowed in Buenos Aires. That would empty the doctrine of meaning while maintaining it in principle." "It's clear you really don't understand the damage that has been done," wrote another. "Please unsubscribe me." And, from a priest, "Change practice, change of doctrine follows. I do not share in any way your certainty about the Pope's intentions." ============================= The third "revelatory moment" at the Synod The third "revelatory moment" at the Synod was the moment when Francis read his final remarks to the Synod on October 18. In those final remarks, Francis provided a framework for understanding potential conflicting positions on the issues in question. He suggests that the desire to defend traditional doctrine can lead to a type of “rigorism” and “legalism” which places heavy burdens on consciences. This is why he said there is a temptation in the Church to “hostile inflexibility, that is, wanting to close oneself within the written word (the letter), and not allowing oneself to be surprised by God, by the God of surprises (the spirit)... From the time of Christ, it is the temptation of the zealous, of the scrupulous, of the solicitous and of the so-called — today — ‘traditionalists’ and also of the intellectuals.” But Francis also suggested that the desire to "relieve burdens" can lead to a willingness to alter the truth about man, truth without which men and women cannot find their way to their true happiness. And this is why Francis also highlighted “the temptation to a destructive tendency to goodness [it. buonismo], that in the name of a deceptive mercy binds the wounds without first curing them and treating them; that treats the symptoms and not the causes and the roots. It is the temptation of the 'do-gooders,' of the fearful, and also of the so-called 'progressives and liberals.'" One cannot but interpret them to mean that Francis is well aware that any illness must be fought by going to the roots of it. ============================== Here is a complete text of the Pope's final address to the Synod: Francis’ Final Address to the Synod: Via Media or... Laodicea? [EXCERPT REMOVED BY ME, IN THE INTEREST OF SPACE] ================ The Anthropological Question "You live in a deranged age, more deranged than usual, because, in spite of great scientific and technological advances, man has not the faintest idea of who he is or what he is doing." —Walker Percy (1916-1990), American Catholic convert and writer, author of The Message in the Bottle and Lost in the Cosmos.
And here is the third letter (part one): November 16, 2014, Sunday — The Choice Emails regarding my two most recent letters on the Bishops' Synod on the Family have continued to flood in — some 300 of them, more than on any other letters over the past eight years since I began sending out these reports. Many are very critical. Others are supportive. Here (below) is a sampling of the letters. So what is the bottom line? We are now at a crossroads. We are at a moment of crisis, a moment of decision. We have to choose between Pope Francis and his critics. One critic wrote to me: "You are a relativist. You are more about yourself and your career than the Truth."—Mary I would like to set forth my position clearly and without equivocation. I am not a relativist. I am a writer. I am a person who constructs phrases out of words. My career is of no interest to me. I have no career, just a magazine and a newsletter, in order to write. Why? I have one aim: to convey facts, insights, information and, in so far as possible, truth. How? I write tonight on a laptop computer from a particular place — Rome, or, more precisely, Vatican City — and from a particular time — early in the third millennium following the coming of Christ, about 50 years after the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), almost two years after the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, and nearly two years into the pontificate of Pope Francis. When? I write on a Sunday. The day began standing before the altar of the Chair of St. Peter, in St. Peter's Basilica, next to a choir from Salt Lake City, Utah, about to hear a sermon in Italian about the parable of the talents. I then heard the choir sing "Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus" — the "thrice holy"... Later, I listened to Pope Francis under a blue sky as he prayed his noon Angelus. Later still, I attended vespers at the chapel of the North American College on the Gianicolo, where more than 200 seminarians, all solemn, all serious, sang the great hymn of Thomas Aquinas, "Tantum ergo..." I returned on a drizzly evening in November to read emails, and to think: how can I write something useful? Words are inadequate. They cannot suffice. Silence would be better. But perhaps a few phrases can hint at a mystery. A true mystery. Am I a relativist? No. I hold that there is one truth, one saving truth. And I hold that that truth is Christ. But what does that really mean, in an age when words seem to have worn out, when they skip across the surface of our minds like slender stones skipped across a pond...? Perhaps a different approach... I hold that the secret at the heart of the universe, the secret meaning veiled under all phenomena of space and time, is a divine reality. It is a reality so real that it makes the entire structure, fabric and content of the physical universe — the quasars and dark matter and black holes and supernovas, and even the soil and sand and snow of this beautiful earth, which takes one's breath away with its unutterable splendor — seem unreal, fragile as a soap bubble, passing away as in a dream. In other words, there is something real, truly, and it is at the heart and source and end of all "things," below and above and beneath and within all things. And that divine reality is... holy. That is the best word we have, to express what it's "is-ness" is. We have another word: sacred. The essence, the nature, the being, of reality is holiness. Sacredness. I would dare to say that it's "holiness" precedes it's "being-ness." Holiness is the essential reality, deeper even than being itself. But the "news" — ! — is that this reality, this holiness, has, in fact, a face. This hidden reality, this "hidden divinity" ("Deus absconditus"), can, therefore, be seen, and known, and conversed with, and questioned, and contemplated, gazed upon — as a mother gazes into the eyes of her child, as a child gazes into the eyes of his mother — communed with. And here is core of the matter: that face is the face of one person, a person who actually lived, in space and time, in a certain space and at a certain time: the carpenter of Nazareth, Jesus. And yet, and yet... that face is not simply the face of Jesus, for, as we have been told, that face can be glimpsed in the faces of others, of children, of old people, of sinners, of saints — especially of those saints who have passed through the sad and painful crucible of their own hated-yet-desired sin. That is to say, the ultimate reality — I would almost say, the only reality, but this world is so close and alluring that I cannot completely discount its existence, though no thing perceived by the senses remains over time (Chronos consumes all his children) — is personal. Personal, and holy. The personal is a higher category than the electric, or magnetic, or radioactive, deeper than weight, or size, or number, or measure, or time. In other words, all that seems real to our senses and to our highly refined instruments — through which we look out upon the universe — is of an order of reality that is less profound, less real, than what is personal. The personal is the essential, underlying reality. And being personal, it has a name, an identity: the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob. And all things that are were made through the Logos, the Word, of this holy being. And the Logos, the Word of God, became flesh, walked among us, and then... was executed. And then rose. And we can be in communion with this Logos, this source and mediator of all being, this end of all our longing, through... the Church. His body. And so I hold, with the Fathers of the Church, with St. Ambrose of Milan, "ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia." This means: "Where Peter is, there is the Church." And so I hold that we should stand with Peter, that is, with Pope Francis, as the shadows lengthen...
Moynihan's "third letter" (Part 2): Letters received in the last 24 hours "I would like to thank you for all your objective services, always the best ones on the issues of the Vatican and now on the Family Synod." —Jesuit priest "So the Pope says that the desire to defend traditional doctrine can lead to a type of 'rigorism' and 'legalism' which 'places heavy burdens on consciences.' Now I understand. We don't want to be rigorists or legalists or place heavy burdens on consciences, so let's not defend traditional doctrine. Mind you, we are not going to change traditional doctrine, just not defend it or advert to it. I don't want to speak rudely or uncharitably to you, especially on Sunday. God bless you, but if you cannot see what is going on in front of you, take me off your mailing list." —Alan "I did like your letter. Never imagined that it would arouse controversy, and least of all, Pope Francis' words at the end of the Synod. What I really believe is that the devil is working among the faithful, confusing, being skeptical, tempting. I see prudence in Francis, and people are on edge hurrying answers." —María (Buenos Aires, Argentina) "Robert, Don’t take me off the list. I thank God for the work you are doing. I was especially encouraged by your suggestion that the Holy Father’s listening and demeanor and his closing remarks bespeaks an approach to conciliarity and sobornost that might help bring Orthodox and Catholics together. May it be blessed. "It seems that the traditionalist Catholics (and I am strongly committed to Tradition) might be less insistent on their narrow interpretation of our Lord’s teaching on marriage and divorce... The idea that remarriage after (civil) divorce (without an annulment) amounts to serial adultery may be too rigorous and not implied by Christ’s teaching. One may infer His teaching to say this; but one may be wrong... I do think the priest who warned that changes in discipline evince inchoate changes in doctrine is worth hearing: Lex orandi, lex credendi. "What has concerns me more, however, is the careless language used by some in the Synod to speak of the special gifts of homosexual persons. This is dangerous language. One should not speak of heterosexual persons any more than homosexual ones. Human beings are sexual persons, male and female... We should not speak of the gift of homosexual persons, but the gifts of every person whomsoever..." —Leo "I suppose you don't really want to read another letter critical of Letter #33, but here are my thoughts. I hope they will help you. I pray for you. "First, I was extremely disappointed in your slant on the story and totally unimpressed that Cardinal Kasper means anything besides what he has been pushing for, for the last who knows how long. "He, and possibly Pope Francis, will keep pushing for change in practice instead of change in doctrine. It takes no imagination to see that this has been the modus operandi of both centrist and especially progressive (liberal) thinkers since Vatican II. "This camel's nose under the tent approach is quite effective in accomplishing whatever deviance is desired. It is the Evil One's favorite tool, or the one he uses the most often at least. "Pope Francis is very shrewd in using this approach. It seems he was not at all disturbed by the relatio, but let the chips fall where they may. [My note: We do not know that this was the case.] The cardinals involved were allowed to take the brunt of the resistance, while Pope Francis, very much the Jesuit, sat back and 'listened.' "I suspect he was not surprised in the least, but expected to happen exactly what happened, but this way he can appear personally, not to be controlling or demanding of the change he seems to desire. [Note: Again, we do not know this.]... "Letter #33, I am afraid, made us all painfully aware that you are no longer an insider, but trying very much to regain that ground. Your problem is, that the audience you have played to so admirably in the past, has been confused and pushed away by this Pope who seems to be allergic to making himself clear on anything, and now it seems that you are desperately trying to be his apologist, but unsuccessfully. "I am embarrassed for you, and hope you will consider what your true role should be. "We look to a few people who we hope are on the 'inside,' to either straighten things out for us, or to confirm what we suspect, that Pope Francis is a master of getting things done the way he wants them done, with as little of the dirt on his hands as possible.... "The only question we must each answer, from Pope to peon, is: Which 'side' am I on? Will I be a champion of Truth (Christ) or of Anti-Truth (the Evil One)? "St. John Paul II once said: 'We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of the American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel and the anti-Gospel. This confrontation lies within the plans of divine providence. It is a trial which the whole Church… must take up” (Cardinal Karol Wojtyla (St. John Paul II) to the American bishops in 1976, quoted in the Wall Street Journal, Nov. 9, 1978 (three weeks after his election as Pope)... "You left us wondering, man — just where do you stand? And why?" —June "Pope Francis, Cardinal Kasper and their liberal, modernist, minions, are not fooling anyone about their Agenda, especially traditional Roman Catholics. Vatican II damaged the authentic traditional apostolic Church enough, but not enough for them. They, led and encouraged by this Pope, are damaging the Church more than it already has been. Cardinal Kasper and those associated with him, are heretics. If this Pope and the Kasper types keep it up, there most definitely will be a Schism. Traditional Catholics, both laity and clergy worldwide, are infuriated with recent events in the Vatican." —Victor from Florida "Thank you for taking the time to explain the current controversy in Rome. I support the Vicar of Christ Pope Francis fully and also you in your analysis." —Jeffrey "Perhaps you should remind the people who unsubscribed that Jesus himself said he came to call sinners! Maybe they should ask themselves what would Jesus do? I think he would show mercy which is exactly what Pope Francis is asking us to do! Looking forward to your next letter." —Paula "I am certain that you understand the frustration of so many Catholics who have seen their religion under attack from within as well as from outside forces. It is hard to discern just what is happening. This uncertainty is heightened by a faction within the Church that, in concert with a media that not only heightens conflict but willfully misrepresents the stories it covers, and a Pope who either does not realize or care about the way things look to the public at large. "It would be a massive victory for the forces arrayed against the Church if the leadership was to alter in any way the core teaching. They would not report that each and every Catholic would have not only the right but the duty to correct the Holy Father, cardinals, bishops, priests and laity regarding their error. Instead, they would stoke the fires, play up the differences, and push the Church closer toward open schism. Sadly, the synod on the family showed that there are those inside the Church who are more than willing to play this game... Stir in the demotion of Cardinal Raymond Burke — a strong voice against the sexually disordered life — and you have a recipe for widespread fear and anger. He spoke for many when he characterized the Pope’s leadership as 'a ship without a rudder.' If his demotion came as a result of his public questioning of the Pope’s motives, the demotion is somewhat understandable, though a stern reprimand would have been just as effective. Cardinal Burke, like any Catholic, has the duty to point out the Pope’s errors. Doing so to the media first, however, is neither constructive nor proper. It is a move that comes only after all other avenues have been blocked, and all previous attempts ignored. Even then, it must be done with humility and respect, as well as firmness. In this, the cardinal erred... "Pope Francis needs our prayers and fortitude to overcome the spirit of the world... The Holy Spirit is in charge of the life of the Holy Church, not men. I am waiting prayerfully on the Lord." —Joseph "I appreciate your work of writing to us, giving us the most important discussions that occurred at the Bishops' Synod. To hear all sides of a situation is the only way to ascertain what is true. Please keep writing the letters." —Elaine
Moynihan's "third letter" (Part 3): Final Note: Pope Francis on Abortion and Euthanasia Yesterday, Pope Francis gave one of the most powerful, clear, unequivocal "pro-life" talks of his pontificate. The talk was covered in the press, but was not given the headlines that were given to the mid-term relatio at the Synod. So, the major media often do not give a balanced coverage to news about or concerning Pope Francis. So, it is fair, to note this talk and to remember it. Here are excerpts from a Catholic News Agency report by Elise Harris on the Pope's dramatic talk. (Link: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/n...bortion-euthanasia-as-sins-against-god-70913/) Pope blasts abortion, euthanasia as 'sins against God' by Elise Harris Vatican City, Nov 15, 2014 (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Francis has told a group of Catholic doctors that “playing with life” in ways like abortion and euthanasia is sinful, and he stressed that each human life, no matter the condition, is sacred. “We're are living in a time of experimentation with life. But a bad experiment… (we’re) playing with life,” the Pope told an audience of 4,000 Catholic doctors gathered in the Vatican’s Paul VI Hall on Nov. 15. “Be careful, because this is a sin against the Creator: against God the Creator.” Pope Francis offered his words in an address given to members of the Italian Catholic Doctors Association in celebration of their 70th anniversary. He recalled that many times in his years as a priest he heard people object to the Church’s position on life issues, specifically asking why the Church is against abortion. After explaining to the inquirer that the Church is not against abortion because it is simply a religious or philosophical issue, he said it’s also because abortion “is a scientific problem, because there is a human life and it's not lawful to take a human life to solve a problem.” Regardless of the many objections he has heard saying that modern thought has evolved on the issue, the Pope stressed that “in ancient thought and in modern thought, the word ‘kill’ means the same!” “(And) the same goes for euthanasia,” he explained, observing that as a result of “this culture of waste, a hidden euthanasia is practiced on the elderly.” This, he said, is like telling God: “‘at the end of life I do it, like I want.’ It's a sin against God. Think well about this.” The belief that abortion is helpful for women, that euthanasia is “an act of dignity,” or that it’s “a scientific breakthrough to ‘produce’ a child (who is) considered a right instead of accepted as a gift” are all part of conventional wisdom that offers a false sense of compassion, he said. And this includes “(the) use of human life as laboratory mice supposedly to save others,” the Pope continued, saying that on the contrary, the Gospel provides a true image of compassion in the figure of the Good Samaritan, who sees a man suffering, has mercy on him, goes close and offers concrete help... “In reality, in the light of faith and of right reason, human life is always sacred and always ‘of quality’,” he said. “No human life exists that is more sacred that the other, just like there is no human life qualitatively more significant than another solely in virtue of resources, rights, economic opportunities and higher social status.” Pope Francis told the group that as Catholic doctors, it is their mission to affirm the sacredness and inviolability of human life, which “must be loved, defended and cared for,” through word and example, each in their own personal style... By remaining faithful to the Gospel of Life and respecting life as a gift, difficult decisions will come up that at times require courageous choices that go against the popular current, the pontiff noted, saying that this faithfulness can also lead “to conscientious objection"...
Glenn, if this America visit does take place it will no doubt have some effect on the synod less than a month later. There will be so much taking place between now and then that I don't think we can grasp how our lives will be changed and if the synod takes place it will be in very turbulant times. The visit to Russia is the one that I am waiting for.
The holy and brilliant Cardinal George: ALL THINGS CATHOLIC What ‘America’s Ratzinger’ would like to ask Pope Francis Plus: Ireland returns to the Vatican, and a rift in Iraq’s Church John L. Allen Jr. Associate editor @JohnLAllenJr John L. Allen Jr., associate editor, specializes in coverage of the Vatican. FULL BIO More John L. Allen Jr. stories Cardinal Francis George of Chicago has a few questions he could like to ask Pope Francis. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune/MCT via Getty Images) Share on TwitterShare on Facebookcomment on this story 433 By John L. Allen Jr. Associate editor November 16, 2014 Cardinal Francis George of Chicago will turn over the reins to his successor, Archbishop Blase Cupich, on Tuesday. George has long been seen as a leading intellectual light among America’s Catholic bishops, and even now, as he fights for his life, his mind remains remarkably nimble. As it turns out, one thing occupying his mind these days is Pope Francis. Now 77, George is currently undergoing experimental treatment intended to stimulate his immune system to fight off the cancer spreading from his bladder, liver, and kidneys through the rest of his body. If it fails, he’ll likely be looking at palliative care ahead of the inevitable. I’ve described George before as the “American Ratzinger” for his blend of intellectual chops and tenacious commitment to Catholic tradition, in the spirit of the former Joseph Ratzinger, the man who became Pope Benedict XVI. (For the record, George shuns the label, insisting he’s not of Benedict’s intellectual caliber. He is, in any event, the closest thing to it on these shores.) George sat down for an exclusive interview on Friday. A fuller account will appear Monday on Crux, but for now, one fascinating element is this: If time and health allow, George would really, really like to have a heart-to-heart with Francis. Aside from the sheer fun of knowing what one of America’s best Catholic minds wants to ask the pope, George’s dream Q&A has political relevance because he remains a point of reference to the Church’s conservative wing. These aren’t just his questions, in other words, but what a large and influential Catholic constituency would like to know. ADVERTISEMENT So, what’s on his mind? To begin, George said he’d like to ask Francis if he fully grasps that in some quarters, he’s created the impression Catholic doctrine is up for grabs. Does Francis realize, for example, “what has happened just by that phrase, ‘Who am I to judge?’ ” Francis’ signature sound-bite, George said, “has been very misused … because he was talking about someone who has already asked for mercy and been given absolution, whom he knows well,” George said. (Francis uttered the line in 2013, in response to a question about a Vatican cleric accused of gay relationships earlier in his career.) “That’s entirely different than talking to somebody who demands acceptance rather than asking for forgiveness,” George said. Cardinal George to Chicago Catholics: 'You are my legacy' What the Pope could do to defend religious freedom The perils of weak-kneed ecumenism with Russia More “Does he not realize the repercussions? Perhaps he doesn’t,” George said. “I don’t know whether he’s conscious of all the consequences of some of the things he’s said and done that raise doubts in people’s minds.” “The question is why he doesn’t he clarify” these ambiguous statements, George said. “Why is it necessary that apologists have to bear the burden of trying to put the best possible face on it?” He said he also wonders if Francis realizes how his rhetoric has created expectations “he can’t possibly meet.” The Lord of the World” by Robert Hugh Benson, a converted Catholic priest and son of a former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury. It’s an apocalyptic fantasy, written in 1907, culminating in a showdown between the Church and a charismatic anti-Christ figure. George said he’d like to ask Francis a simple question: “Do you really believe that?” “I hope before I die I’ll have the chance to ask him how you want us to understand what you’re doing, when you put [the end-times] before us as a key to it all,” he said. Perhaps, George said, the sense that the end is near explains why Francis “seems to be in a hurry.” So far, George said, he hasn’t been able to talk these things out with the new boss. “I didn’t know him well before he was elected, and since then I haven’t had a chance to go over [to Rome] for any meetings because I’ve been in treatment,” he said. Getting some quality time, as George describes it, wouldn’t be just about indulging his personal curiosity, but also being a good bishop. “You’re supposed to govern in communion with the successor of Peter, so it’s important to have some meeting of minds,” he said. “I certainly respect [Francis] as pope, but I don’t yet really have an understanding of, ‘What are we doing here?’ ” Here’s hoping America’s Ratzinger eventually gets that heart-to-heart with Pope Francis … and, for the record, I’d pay serious money to be a fly on the wall if he does.
I feel like the future is an onion, slowly being peeled back one layer at a time ,right in front of us ,if we are paying attention. It should prove to be quite an interesting few years head of us.
All fair questions that Cardinal George presents. There isn't a faithfull Catholic who hasn't asked themselves the same questions. Perhaps it is a heavenly test of our fidelity to the Vicar of Christ? Or is he still speaking like the progressive he was as a Jesuit Cardinal? Perhaps we will never know, but I trust he will be guided by the Holy Spirit when what he does or say's is essential to our faith.
Apparently according to Charlie Johnston , Cardinal O'Malley was taken up wrong in this by the media. He meant his remarks as a gentle pointing in the direction of, 'Jesus wanted it this way ..who am I say different?' Which puts things a whole different perspective. Thanks to Marti, ('Mother Superior) and Charlie Johnston for pointing this out. Apologies to the Cardinal for taking him up wrong! I was still a little miffed that he had not put things a little better, but then it occurred to me if they were interviewing anyone but a professional media savvy politician who was well coached they could tie us all up in knots too. Poor Cardinal O'Malley it looks like he was hog tied.
I have always loved Dr, Moynihan's letters from the Vatican. He is so knowledgeable and I have been a subscriber for several years. I read with interest these recent letters. I am afraid I am rushing about so much I rarely get a chance to read right through them all. My abiding impression of Robert is that he is a very good and holy Catholic. Highly intelligent , wise, measured, knowledgeable and thoughtful. He reminds me so much of Mark Mallet and Charlie Johnston in this. I am reminded of the stolidity of the Rocky Mountains. Such slow, measured thoughtful steps. I am jealous. Two or three things occur in reading through these letters. Firstly the great humility and honesty of Dr Moynihan in printing in full and commenting on emails and letters that were highly critical of him. I admire this honesty greatly. I admire even more his moderation in relying. It is so clear he is not getting flustered, uncharitable of flying of the cuff. Like I say, like the Rocky Mountains , solid and humble. Secondly I had no idea that divisions in the Church were so intense and deep on this subject, including amongst the clergy them selves. Or for that matter that feelings were running quite so high. Yes we have had disagreements on the forum, but Robert comments that folks seem to have left his subscription list in droves. This has not happened here, nor have I really had a hundreds of emails attacking me for my own stance, in fact I have not had any really. So I guess I am living in a kind of glass dome over all this. I think one thing Robert reminds me so much of is that one can be on one side or the other of this debate and still be a very good and holy person. It is not a question of black hats and white hats like some cowboy film , it is a difference of opinions rather than sheep on one side and goats on the other. There is one thing I would disagree with Dr Robert about. That is that matters do not simply boil down to, 'Either I am with ope Francis or I am against him, I stand by Peter of I oppose him' . If only things were so simple. I would argue that it is quite possible to have misgivings about the Synod without having the hatchet out for the Holy Father. Still I found his letters a real eye opener. A real eye opener.
