Crisis: Where Will the Synod Lead Us?

There's nothing like a strong cup of coffee and an equally strong shot of Catholic doctrine to wake you up in the morning. I just enjoyed both simultaneously.

Portal PCh24.pl released a video yesterday entitled Crisis: Where Will the Synod Lead Us? (Original: Kryzys: Dokąd zaprowadzi nas synod?) which contains strong words from three prominent prelates - Cardinal Raymond Burke, Archbishop Jan Lenga and Bishop Athanasius Schneider - on the issues surrounding the upcoming 2015 Synod. It's well worth your time, so pour yourself a cup and enjoy:

You might think - as do I, gentle reader - that the real coup d'état has already taken place in the recently released marriage annulment reform (can there remain any doubt as to why Cardinal Burke was removed from his post as Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura?), and that the Synod, while it will offer certain factions the opportunity to push for the approval of their perverted views on human sexuality, has been orchestrated to divert attention away from the structural and legal reforms currently being undertaken and to ultimately result in a widespread sigh of relief to the tune of "Crisis averted!" So, seeing as it speaks to eventualities which, in all likelihood, will never materialize, why draw your attention to this video?

To remind you to thank God for the holy priests and bishops who have demonstrated the courage and conviction to stand up for the teachings of Our Lord, Jesus Christ (miserere nobis), in the face of a pernicious heresy, the threat of schism and even apostasy. To remind you that the battle is not lost, and that the situation is not hopeless. To remind you that, come what may, Christ has not and will never abandon His Church.

Of course, you know these things. But it doesn't hurt to be reminded of them now and again.

Emergency Call: Something Creepy Afoot

The following call to 110 (the German version of 911/999) was made in Aachen, Germany. Via katholisch.de:

• Police: "Police Hotline."
• Caller: "Hello, my name is [...] I'd like to report a large group of people who are walking down the street with a bullhorn. One of them recited some biblical saying, and the people were repeating the same saying. It's pretty creepy."
• Police: "Which saying?"
• Caller: "Something biblical, like ... that they are leaving this world ... something about a shepherd and stuff."
• Police: "How many people are there?"
• Caller: "Unfortunately, I couldn't tell. My husband was watching them ... wait a second ..."
• Caller's Husband (shouting in the background): "20 people!"
• Caller: "He says 20 people."
• Police: "They are just walking through the area?"
• Caller: "At the moment they haven't done anything, but it seems strange. Just in case something were to happen."
• Police: "What, exactly, were they saying?"
• Caller's Husband (background): "... 'holy Mary, Mother of God' ..."
• Caller: "You know, that saying ... 'and the fruit of thy womb' ... that saying people are always repeating ... I'm not a church person."
• Police: "That's probably a procession which is passing through the area."
• Caller: "A what?"
• Police: "A procession. It's nothing to be afraid of."
• Caller: "That they are wandering around here saying these things?"
• Police: "Yes, it's a solemn church parade. That's called a 'procession' around here."
• Caller: "Oh, I see. I'm not familiar with that. I just thought, because they were saying these things..."
• Police: "Right. It's a procession."

***

Remember, Aachen is the home of the beautiful Aachen Cathedral:

Where strange people do creepy things

Swiss Bishop to be Charged with Public Incitement of Violence

His Excellence Vitus Bishop Huonder
(Photo: Bistum Chur)

On Friday, 31. July, Bishop Vitus Huonder of Chur (Switzerland) delivered a speech to a group of faithful German Catholics (yes, they do exist) on the topic of marriage, sexuality and family entitled "Marriage: Gift, Sacrament and Commission" (Original: Die Ehe: Geschenk, Sakrament und Auftrag). In that speech, the good Bishop quoted several relevant passages from Sacred Scripture, including the following:

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22)

"If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death: their blood be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)

Bishop Huonder went on to describe the passages as continuing to exert influence upon the Christian understanding of sexual morality. He said:

These two passages, taken together with several others in Sacred Scripture - particularly in the Book of Leviticus - demonstrate the divine order which governs our understanding of sexuality. In the present case, same-sex practices are dealt with. The quoted passages alone would be enough to answer the question of homosexuality from the perspective of our Faith. Their import thus has meaning for the definition of marriage and the family. There is no plurality of models for marriage and family. To even speak of such is already an attack on the Creator, as well as on the Savior and Sanctifier, that is, on the trinitarian God. Pastoral care must orient itself according to the divine order. It's mission, undertaken in awareness of the salvation of souls, that is, in pastoral love - and in contradistinction to pure Humanism -  is to free mankind from the condition of a fallen nature and raise it to life as children of light (Eph. 5:8). The Faith is to everyone, even to those with homophile tendencies, a source of comfort and can lead to a redirection of such an orientation, to a governing of sexual urges, and to a ordering of one's own life according to the divine command.

As was to be expected, the progressive elements in the Church were not pleased with Bishop Huonder's statement. Almost on cue, Twitter exploded with horrified denouncements. Theologians felt obliged to respond. Bishop Markus Büchel of St. Gallen even felt the need to demonstrate to the world how pleased he is to see sodomites in stable relationships, arguing that "our present knowledge of homosexuality as a trait and not as a freely chosen sexual orientation was unknown in biblical times." All par for the course, really.

However, now things have been taken to a new level. The Swiss pro-sodomy activism group Pink Cross has announced that it will be filing criminal charges against Bishop Huonder on Monday. Apparently, they plan to charge the good Bishop with a violation of Swiss Penal Code Article 259: Public incitement to commit a felony or act of violence. In other words, by quoting Leviticus, Bishop Huonder was approving of the killing of homosexuals, and indirectly encouraging others to do so. If found guilty, the good Bishop could face up to three years in prison.

The case is, of course, frivolous and without legal merit. But even if this case fails, we can already imagine the day when quoting certain parts of Sacred Scripture will be classified as hate speech.

Persecution is coming, folks. Get prepared.

Pope Francis, Evo Morales and Comrade Jesus

(Photo: L'Osservatore Romano/Pool Photo via AP)

What the hell is going on in this picture?

Bolivian President Evo Morales is handing a crucifix in the form of a hammer and sickle to a smiling Pope Francis, that's what.

Could we be any further down the rabbit hole?

Let the amelioration begin.

**UPDATE**

And so it has:

The German-language Katholisches Medienzentrum is reporting that Pope Francis' initial reaction was "skeptical", but softened once the history behind the bizarre symbol - which also graced the neck-bling given to him moments before - was explained to him. You see, gentle reader, this symbol was very dear to Fr. Luis Espinal, S.J., a Spanish-born Bolivian Jesuit who vociferously promoted a synthesis of Marxism and Catholicism - so vociferously, in fact, that the Bolivian government had him arrested and executed as a political agitator. Never mind that Pope John Paul II denounced the movement as irreconcilable with the Christian conception of man. Never mind that Evo Morales has declared himself a Marxist and a Communist, and has undertaken drastic steps to isolate the Catholic Church - the traditional foe of Communism - in Bolivia. We're dealing with someone who exploited was very close to the poor in order to bring them to the brink of a Socialist revolution the message of the Gospel. Yes, yes, I know it looks like the symbol of the most murderous socio-political theory ever to be vomited upon the earth, but appearances can be deceiving: it's a symbol of liberation and love.

Welcome to Room 101.

**UPDATE**

The amelioration continues:

RomeReports has come out with a partial transcript - consisting of one short statement - of the meeting between President Evo Morales and Pope Francis. The statement in question: "That's not right" - uttered by the Pope as Morales began explaining what the symbol meant.

First, I'd like to read a complete transcript of the exchange.

Second, I'd like to know why, if the Pope knows not only what the sculpture symbolizes but also that it's "not right," does he proceed to smile and accept the hideous thing before the flash of a hundred cameras? If it's wrong, refuse it. Don't give the socialists of the world the very thing they want: a picture of the Catholic Pope accepting a symbol of the perversion of Christianity with a silly grin on his face.

And we thought "Who am I to judge?" was bad. This picture should never have happened, regardless of what the Pope intended to express by accepting the 'gift'.

**UPDATE**

The spin on this story has reached full throttle:

Catholic World News is reporting that Pope Francis "rebuked" President Morales for his gift of the hammer and sickle 'crucifix'.

By smiling and accepting the gift.

Harsh, Pope Francis. Harsh.

Meanwhile, Catholic News Agency is in full damage-control mode:

#PopeFrancis reacts to controversial gift of a crucifix in shape of a hammer&sickel. Translation: "That is not good" https://t.co/BCeCa0GMqI

— Catholic News Agency (@cnalive) 9. Juli 2015

Who knows? Given the impressive size of that font and the gnat-sized attention span of the average viewer, they might actually be able to get the genie back in the bottle. The way things are looking, however, this seems to be shaping up into a battle of two captioned images:

In any event, when Jimmy Akin finds out about this, we will be sure to get 10 things to know and share about how there is absolutely nothing to see here.

**UPDATE**

Just when it seemed as though the fix was in: enter Holy See press officer Fr. Frederico Lombardi. According to the latest from Catholic News Agency, Fr. Lombardi commented on the encounter by opining that "Pope Francis' remark  likely expressed a sentiment of 'I didn't know' ['No sabía eso'], rather than 'This is not right' ['Non está bien eso']."

How's that for setting the record straight?

On the up-side, it seems that at least one prelate recognized the utter depravity of the object. Bishop Jose Munilla Aguirre of San Sebastián tweeted:

El culmen de la soberbia es manipular a Dios al servicio de ideologías ateas... Hoy, una vez más: #CristoCrucificado pic.twitter.com/uLbPPQDAGj

— Jose Ignacio Munilla (@ObispoMunilla) 9. Juli 2015

The height of arrogance is to manipulate God in the service of atheistic ideologies. Today, once again: #ChristCrucified.

Cardinal Marx Gives Master Class in Subversion

His Eminence Reinhard Cardinal Marx
(Photo: Allessia Giuliani/CPP/Ciric)

Last week, the Central Committee of German Catholics (Zentralkomitee der deutschen Katholiken, ZdK) published a document which demands, among other things, sacramental blessings of same-sex unions and adulterous relationships as well as the "unconditional acceptance" of the cohabitation of people living in such unions. To anyone even remotely aware of the current moral condition of the German Catholic laity, the report was cause for little more than a deep if thoroughly unsatisfying yawn. It was only a few weeks ago that the Confederation of German Catholic Youth (Bund der deutschen katholischen Jugend, BDKJ) made much the same demands, and it was largely due to the BDKJ's inflexibility that the ZdK included them in the final draft of its paper. Today, however, the German Catholic press is awash with reports of Cardinal Reinhard Marx's critical - some would even say "harsh" - response to the ZdK document:

The document includes some demands which are theologically unacceptable. The demand for the blessing of same-sex partnerships and second marriages which remain unrecognized by the Church is incompatible with the teaching and tradition of the Church. The demand for "unconditional acceptance" of the communal life of committed same-sex relationships also contradicts the teaching and tradition of the Church.

What's this? Cardinal 'Moneybags' Marx suddenly develops an appreciation for fidelity to Church teaching and tradition? Before anyone begins singing Te Deum in thanks for the miraculous conversion of the current head of the German Bishops Conference, however, observe the demands included in the ZdK document which did not receive the same public deprecation:

• more respect for cohabitation outside of marriage, i.e. concubinage
• a re-evaluation of artificial methods of contraception
• more liturgical "development"
• admittance of divorced and "remarried" Catholics to Holy Communion

It doesn't take much insight to surmise that these demands were passed over in silence precisely because Cardinal Marx and the German faction he represents support them.

But at least he has categorically rejected something, right? I mean, he's demonstrated that he has something resembling conviction on a point of doctrine. That has to count for something, doesn't it? Well, it might - if it were true. Observe the words of the Cardinal which follow immediately upon the heels of his "condemnation":

Both issues [i.e. sacramental blessings of same-sex unions and adulterous relationships and "unconditional acceptance" of life in such states] require further theological clarification and not rash, bold demands, which do nothing to encourage what is certainly necessary theological debate and dialogue within the Church.

Ah, there it is: Modernism's penchant for duplicity. With one side of your mouth, condemn a proposition as contrary to Church teaching; with the other, open it up to debate and "dialogue". You know you're doing it right if you can accomplish the feat in a single breath.

Cardinal Marx is condemning, therefore, not so much the propositions of the ZdK, but rather their sophomorically blunt tactics. Any Modernist deserving of the name knows that open revolution is deadly to the cause. The name of the game is slow and steady subversion, and Cardinal Marx is a world-class player. So, take heart, fledgling subverters of the Confederation of German Catholic Youth: You just got schooled by the best.

Encyclicus Maculatus: Eco-Encyclical To Undergo Revision

(Photo: CNS / Paul Hering)

According to Vaticanist Sandro Magister, Pope Francis has decided to postpone the publication of his long-awaited encyclical on the environment. The reason, according to Magister, is that the Pope realized that the document in its current state had no chance of receiving the approval of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith under the leadership of Cardinal Gerhard Müller. If it seems somewhat improper for a Cardinal to be telling a Pope what he can and can't write, don't fret, gentle reader: the text wasn't written by Pope Francis at all.

The ghostwriter behind the heavily discussed encyclical is one Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández of Tiburnia, a native of Buenos Aires. Archbishop Fernández, who belongs to Pope Francis' inner circle in the position of most trusted theological adviser, was already heavily involved in the writing of Evangelii gaudium, and spent the Summer of 2013 in Rome for that purpose. Last March, as Pope Francis set about to compose his Eco-Encyclical, Archbishop Fernández was again flown in to do the heavy lifting. The close working relationship apparently stretches back to the time when Pope Francis was still Archbishop Jorge Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, with Fernández working largely behind the scenes, drafting the future Pontiff's important speeches and letters.

Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández
(Notice the pectoral cross. Look familiar?)

However, it seems that Archbishop Fernández has let the influence he enjoyed over papal affairs go to his head. In an interview published in Corriere della Sera last Sunday, he took the current wave of Ultramontanism to new heights, implying that the Curia and the entire body of Cardinals are non-essential to the government of the Church - which, while technically true, is Vaticanese for "we will push ahead, with or without the Cardinals' blessing." He also felt safe enough to criticize Cardinal Müller's recent comments that his job as Prefect of the CDF is to give the Pope's magisterium theological structure:

I have read that some say that the Roman Curia is an essential part of the mission of the Church, or that a Prefect in the Vatican is the sure compass preventing the Church from falling into ignominy, or that this Prefect guarantees the unity of the Faith and facilitates serious theology from the Pope. But Catholics know from reading the Gospel that it was to the Pope and the Bishops that Christ granted a special governance and enlightenment - and not to a Prefect or some other structure. When one hears such things, one could almost get the impression that the Pope is merely their representative, or one who has come to disturb and must, therefore, be monitored. [...] The Pope is convinced that what he has written or said cannot be treated as an error. Therefore, all these things can be repeated in the future, without having to fear receiving a sanction for it.

We don't know how Cardinal Müller reacted to these sharp words, or whether, as Giuseppe Nardi surmises, he spoke directly with Pope Francis regarding the encylical, but Magister relates that sources inside Santa Marta are reporting that the Pope will not be publishing Archbishop Fernández' already completed text, and has - for the time being - tabled the entire project. It's clear that he can't let it disappear entirely without a tremendous loss of face in the public arena; UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, apparently moonlighting as a Vatican spokesman, has announced that the encyclical is set to appear in June of this year. But who will be behind the next incarnation of the encyclicus maculatus is anybody's guess.

(NB: I would like to acknowledge the work of the tireless Giuseppe Nardi, without which this article could not have been written. See his treatment, in German, here.)

***UPDATE***

Edward Pentin has written an excellent followup article which includes something of a démenti on the part of Fr. Frederico Lombardi. In it, Fr. Lombardi contradicts what Sandro Magister's unnamed sources inside Santa Marta reported regarding the abandonment of Archbishop Fernández' draft of the upcoming eco-encyclical, saying that the encyclical will appear as planned, i.e. "probably in June." I'll happily overlook the contradictory tinge of that assessment, and wait patiently with the rest of you to see exactly what the future holds for what will, in all likelihood, remain the encyclicus maculatus.

Cardinal Marx: We Won't Wait For Rome

His Eminence Reinhard Cardinal Marx
(Photo: Erzbistum München)

In a meeting reported in the German press yesterday, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, President of the German Bishop's Conference, made a rather unambiguous statement regarding how he and his fellow bishops see the upcoming 2015 Synod in relation to their plans for the Catholic Church in Germany:

We are not subsidiaries of Rome. Each Bishop's Conference is responsible for the pastoral care in its own cultural sphere and has its unique mission to preach the Gospel. We can't wait for a Synod to tell us how we here have to go about the pastoral care of families and married persons.

It was Cardinal Marx who made headlines during the 2014 Synod by speaking out in favor of applying the so-called "pastoral law of graduality" to the question of admittance of public adulterers to Holy Communion, telling reporters:

I think it is very important to see that we have ways or that there is a graduality also in the way to the sacrament.

Readers will recall that several Cardinals present at the 2014 Synod, most notably His Eminence Cardinal Raymond Burke, rejected such an approach as it requires the introduction of a hitherto unheard-of separation of pastoral practice from doctrine - a separation both Cardinal Gerhard Müller of Germany, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, have described as smacking of heresy. 

Decidedly unfazed by the clear warning contained in such declarations, Cardinal Marx and the other members of the German Bishop's Conference appear determined to charge ahead, regardless of the actual results of the Synod scheduled to take place in Rome this Fall.

Fr. Timothy Scott Removed as Basilian Spokesperson

Fr. Timothy Scott, C.S.B.

According to information delivered to The Radical Catholic by a loyal reader (Gordon D.), Fr. Timothy Scott, C.S.B., Executive Director of the Canadian Religious Conference, has been removed from his position as spokesman for the Basilian Fathers. The letter, received earlier today and signed by one Fr. David Katulski, reads as follows:

Thank you for your concern about the misconduct of Fr. Scott. I assure you that he is no longer spokesperson for the Basilian Fathers.

The dismissal comes swiftly on the heels of the faithful Catholic outcry after it became known that Fr. Scott tweeted an obscene acronym to His Eminence Raymond Cardinal Burke, reported here as well as across the Catholic internet yesterday. While it remains uncertain what role, if any, the response of the faithful played in the decision to remove Fr. Scott - the offence was clearly great enough in and of itself to warrant such punitive action - we can hope that this signals a turn for the better for the Congregation of St. Basil.

***

UPDATE: In an interesting turn of events... oh, I'll let Michael Voris explain:

Sarahque adversus Haereticos

His Eminence Robert Cardinal Sarah
(Photo: CNS/Paul Haring)

Readers may recall an article published here on December 4, 2014 entitled Müller adversus Haereticos in which it was reported that Cardinal Gerhard Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stated the following:

Any separation of the theory and the practice of the faith would, in its formulation, represent a subtle christological heresy.

It was the strongest, most unambiguous statement made to date by any high-ranking prelate on the matter.

The Radical Catholic is pleased to report that Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, has come forward in defense of the integral relationship of doctrine to practice using exactly the same terms. As reported by Rorate Caeli, the good Cardinal's new book, Either God or Nothing (Original: Dieu ou rien), contains the following equally unambiguous statement:

The idea that would consist in placing the Magisterium in a nice box by detaching it from pastoral practice - which could evolve according to the circumstances, fads, and passions - is a form of heresy, a dangerous schizophrenic pathology. I affirm solemnly that the Church of Africa will firmly oppose every rebellion against the teaching of Christ and the Magisterium.

Some in the Catholic blogging community had wondered aloud as to whether Cardinal Sarah's appointment to the position of Prefect was made in an attempt to bind him more closely to the Curia and, thus, make him more reluctant to openly criticize members of the same. Regardless as to the motives behind the appointment, it seems that Cardinal Sarah is not about to bow down to those who are suggesting to divorce doctrine from praxis. On the contrary, he's coming out with the some of the strongest language in the Church's vocabulary: it's heresy.