...and a story that collapsed.
Some media reports said that a letter had come come from leading Catholic academics, addressing the H. Father and suggesting that they were giving him some sort of formal reprimand.. But it turned out to be a bit of a damp squib.
The signatories aren't leading figures in Catholic academia. Many aren't active academics at all, none are bishops in communion with the Church, none are leaders of religious communities, colleges, seminaries or universities.The thing wasn't at all as had been advertised.
Papal statements don't have to be beyond criticism. But making a public campaign denouncing various Papal statements is not the way to help him in his pastoral office. And getting together an assorted group of people to do such public campaigning is a rather dreadful way to spend time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
On your blog on 18th January you wrote, "The Maltese Bishops now need to be corrected." Do you still think the Holy Father should correct them? God Bless you
It would be better done by the CDF, but they certainly do need to be corrected.
Logically, Joanna, if the Maltese bishops need to be corrected, so does the current Roman Pontiff, who is encouraging them in their error. Francis asked for parrhesia. Now he's getting it.
It sounds terribly compassionate to allow the divorced and remarried into communion. In fact the underlying sin is the divorce, not so much the remarriage. But in exceptional circumstances a Catholic can file for a civil divorce whilst remaining in communion with the Church. So all practising Catholics who are divorced are in such an exceptional situation. That pass has been sold. Exceptional provision for a few practicing Catholics where the original divorce is long ago and all children grown up will soon turn into communion for every divorced and remarried person. Mum's boyfriend is a difficult enough relationship as it is, the child should not additionally be told that it is approved by the Church.
Dear Michael: No, he is not getting it. The signatories to the letter include people who are not in full communion with the Catholic Church. They are in no position to correct the Pope.
The people who are in the best position to help and correct him are the Bishops, and Cardinals of the Church and they will not, and should not, do it by an internet publicity campaign.
As indicated, the project described on my blog is not about correction and numbers of the people involved are not academics as has been claimed, nor do they hold leadership positions in the Church, nor are they acting in a way calculated to gain a hearing from the Pope. Nor, for that matter, are they behaving entirely truthfully, as they have allowed and encouraged publicity suggesting inaccurate information about themselves.
Don't be fooled and led astray. Pray for the Pope and for the Church, for those advising him and for those who should advise him.
I do think that you are right to indicate that the correction as published does not carry an authoritative status. I happen to feel that Amoris Laetitia - read carefully for what it says, rather than what one might think others will think it says - is fine. I would have thought that the analogy of the manner of publication of the correction to the uproar in the media that followed Humanae Vitae would have given pause for thought on the part of participants ..... As you say, it is not the way to support the Successor of Peter in the exercise of his office.
So should Catherine of Sienna have refrained from correcting the Pope in Avignon? She wasn't a bishop nor an academic, but an illiterate 20-something, the daughter of a cloth-dyer.
Clare Underwood
Catherine of Sienna was a practising Catholic in full communion with the Church. Some of these signatories are not. Catherine of Sienna never joined, or encouraged others to join, or led, or in any way supported, any group that split from the Church and ordained its own bishops. Some of these signatories have done these things. Catherine of Sienna never announced herself as a leader or an academic because she wasn't a leader or an academic. These signatories have been announced as a group of leaders or academics when many are neither of these things.
It really won't do. Truth matters. It is simply not possible to announce a "filial correction" when you are not a son or daughter of the Church.
Catherine was a loyal daughter of the Church. She did not link herself with those who had broken away. She never made a great public call or claimed to be anything she was not.
Invoke Catherine to pray for the Holy Father.
Well reasoned and stated, Ms. Bogle. As an American who is desperately trying to educate herself after having been poorly catechized, I read a lot of Catholic blogs and websites every day. I want to keep up on Church business, and to learn the logic and beauty of the Faith (which is why I have added your blog to my daily reading list.)
You are quite right. We cannot be mislead by those not in Communion with the Church. And our good Pope Francis may not always be completely clear when he communicates, but we must remember he is the pope selected for us by the Holy Spirit. I am appalled by the disrespect shown by some writers who claim to be loyal Catholics.
God's blessings and peace to all here - Susan, ofs
This 'correction' is I believe the sixth such issued since the start of Pope Francis's papacy. This number is I have read unprecedented in the history of the Church. The most famous of them is the Dubia issued by four cardinals. What is frustrating to many Catholics (I am sixty and have never witnessed this level of frustration) is the seeming need to redefine teachings about which there is absolutely no doubt. Where there is already certainty, why sow doubt? And the doubt is being sown from the top. If Pope Francis does not have the theological ability to negotiate all this, he surely is duty-bound to surround himself with people who do. The papacy is no place for busking.
Surely the involvement of two members of the Society of St. Pius X in the Correctio Filialis should be welcomed as a further sign of their genuine desire to be reintegrated in the life of the Church.
You belittle the number of signatories and note that none ‘hold leadership positions in the Church’. In response to this two observations may be made. Firstly there have been several testimonies that priests and professors have held back from signing for fear of reprisals. Secondly, as Bishop Fellay has noted in a recent interview, ‘it is not so much the names of those who signed the Correctio Filialis as the objective value of the arguments presented that must be taken into account’. There is merit in Cardinal Müller’s eirenic proposal of a public disputation of recent papal pronouncements that are capable of a heretical interpretation.
No, Nicholas. If some one wants to come into full communion with the Catholic church he starts by humbly asking for this. He doesn't start with announcing that he will give advice on anything.
Poor Dr Fellay is in no position to announce the "objective value" of his own - or indeed of others' - opinions on Catholic topics at the moment, and he knows it.
HE Cardinal Muller, with whom I had the privilege of a lengthy conversation a little while back, has much to say that is very important, and we must listen to him. You can find out a bit more by getting the latest FAITH magazine: send me a note of your postal address (I will not publish it) and I will arrange for you to be sent a copy of the magazine.
Very sad that you are censoring posts you don't agree with, Joanna. Surely Catholics can debate things openly, can't they? We have nothing to fear from the truth. All truth comes from God.
Post a Comment