Cardinal Burke says statement from Pope Francis defending Catholic teaching is ‘long overdue’

[PTL]

I certainly didn’t hear anything mean in his words, but maybe you are a better judge of his heart and intent than I am. Your last sentence is a poor paraphrase, even false. He said the synod could not solve *Africa’*s problem, not that their experience or believe are worth nothing to the West.

Let read the interview:

Africa is totally different from the West. Also Asian and Muslim countries, they’re very different, especially about gays. You can’t speak about this with Africans and people of Muslim countries. It’s not possible. It’s a taboo. For us, we say we ought not to discriminate, we don’t want to discriminate in certain respects.

But are African participants listened to in this regard?

No, the majority of them [who hold these views won’t speak about them].

They’re not listened to?

In Africa of course [their views are listened to], where it’s a taboo.

What has changed for you, regarding the methodology of this synod?

I think in the end there must be a general line in the Church, general criteria, but then the questions of Africa we cannot solve. There must be space also for the local bishops’ conferences to solve their problems but I’d say with Africa it’s impossible [for us to solve]. But they should not tell us too much what we have to do.

In other words, the Africans do not allow sodomy is their problem, don’t tell us their principle of sticking to the Gospel teaching.! As for us, we don’t discriminate, we welcome the communion of the people of sodomy! In a sense, African bishops don’t need to attend,Their problem of not welcoming sodomy is their lical problem. They are not suppose to express their faithfulness to God. We are Westerners. Why do they attend?

No one need to judge anyone’s heart but simply listen what was explicitly said.

 

[McCall1981]

Let read the interview:

In other words, the Africans do not allow sodomy is their problem, don’t tell us their principle of sticking to the Gospel teaching.! As for us, we don’t discriminate, we welcome the communion of the people of sodomy! In a sense, African bishops don’t need to attend,Their problem of not welcoming sodomy is their lical problem. They are not suppose to express their faithfulness to God. We are Westerners. Why do they attend?

No one need to judge anyone’s heart but simply listen what was explicitly said.

Card Kasper denied having given this interview about the African Bishops, and told Zenit to take it down:

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=22944

Then Edward Pentin said the interview did happen, and posted the audio on his website:

edwardpentin.co.uk/statement-on-cardinal-kasper-interview/

 

[PTL]

Pentin said that he had identified himself to the cardinal as a** reporter for the National Catholic Register**, but eventually posted the interview with Zenit. Pentin has posted both a transcript and a recording of the interview, confirming that Cardinal Kasper made the provocative remarks.

National Catholic Register is by EWTN , the trustworthy Catholic Network by Mother Angelica. And Pentin has posted a recording of the interview.

 

[pnewton]

Let read the interview:

In other words, the Africans do not allow sodomy is their problem, don’t tell us their principle of sticking to the Gospel teaching.! …
No one need to judge anyone’s heart but simply listen what was explicitly said.

No, that is not “in other words”. One does not have to be a rocket science to know that your paraphrase is false. Such sloppiness in swapping the words of one of the bishops for one’s personal opinion of what the bishop “really meant” leads to far more confusion that anything any of the bishops actually say.

Which bishop has used the word “sodomy”, by the way?

 

[PTL]

No, that is not “in other words”. One does not have to be a rocket science to know that your paraphrase is false. Such sloppiness in swapping the words of one of the bishops for one’s personal opinion of what the bishop “really meant” leads to far more confusion that anything any of the bishops actually say.

Which bishop has used the word “sodomy”, by the way?

Sodomy is the Bible word for homo behavior between man and man. Check your Bible.
The bishop does not have to use the word “sodomy” to mean the same thing.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Sowing discord? I liken Kasper’s very brief 43-page book without any public fanfare using a bb-gun, while his five angry opponents entered the arena with a canon, writing well over 200 pages, and authoring 3 additional books. Fighting fair, huh? The particular chapter that incensed these authors is only about ten pages long, at best. More on that later.

Cardinal Burke can hardly be described as “angry.” He is always calm and collected, slow to speak, choosy and subtle in his words and phraseology. I have never seen him in any manner other than what can be described as angelic in patience.

I am so tired of the “‘progressives’ are innocent lambs white as snow and ‘conservatives’ are angry hateful party-poopers” trope. We know from the history of recent centuries that “progressives” in all stations of life can be every bit as blood-thirsty and teeth-gnashingly vicious as their counterparts. Although I’m not quite sure what any of this has to do with this discussion. Rather than making insinuations about the character and affect of certain ecclesiastics without the slightest evidence, I think it would profit us more to look at their ideas, which are, I think, totally up for discussion. I seriously just don’t get this. Who’s angry here? I mean, where do people get this stuff?

(PS: I don’t accept the idea that we should all just shut up and wait. Of course, we will accept what the Pope says when he finally says something definitive–by the way, I fully believe that the Pope cannot but say things which are ultimately in line with Revelation, but don’t take that as me saying that I think you believe the opposite–but these books, Burke’s et al., and yes, Kasper’s as well, have been published for a reason, which is to engender conversation and, yes, I’d also say debate. They are not dumb and they know that people are going to talk, otherwise they wouldn’t have published literature on the pertinent issues in the first place and, had the Pope really not wanted talk at the popular level of the Church, he would have told the good Cardinals and the rest to keep their Eminent thoughts off bookshelves. Of course, our mutual participation in this thread proves that both of us basically believe that.)

 

[McCall1981]

Potentially big news here:

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1404281.htm

“Cardinal Pell said only three of the synod’s 10 small groups had supported a controversial proposal by German Cardinal Walter Kasper to make it easier for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Communion, even without an annulment of their first, sacramental marriages.”

 

[pnewton]

Sodomy is the Bible word for homo behavior between man and man. Check your Bible.
The bishop does not have to use the word “sodomy” to mean the same thing.

LOL Maybe you need to check. The Bible was not written in English. If you want to read what the Bible says about Sodom, then note it does not define the sin that cause her to be punished. Ezekiel (16) wrote:

“Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.”

There is a reason the Catholic Church does not use this term and remains in the realm of the fundamentalists and the uncharitable.

And homo? Really? Are we in junior high school now?

The Catechism is our source of teaching and does not use these words. None of the bishops are using nasty language like this.

 

[Seamus_L]

Many of the Church Fathers used the word Sodomite to describe homosexuals. To stop using such a term entirely is a victory for politcal correctness.

 

[Sirach2]

Cardinal Burke can hardly be described as “angry.” He is always calm and collected, slow to speak, choosy and subtle in his words and phraseology. I have never seen him in any manner other than what can be described as angelic in patience.

I think you misunderstood my post. I never said that Kasper was angry. I said his writing incensed the five authors who decided to rebut him in four separate books.
My quote: The particular chapter [of Kasper’s] that incensed these [5] authors is only about ten pages long, at best.

In all the interviews I watched with Burke, his countenance demonstrates anger. I agree with you that I have never seen anger in Kasper.

 

[YoungTradCath]

I think you misunderstood my post. I never said that Kasper was angry. I said his writing incensed the five authors who decided to rebut him in four separate books.
My quote: The particular chapter [of Kasper’s] that incensed these [5] authors is only about ten pages long, at best.

In all the interviews I watched with Burke, his countenance demonstrates anger. I agree with you that I have never seen anger in Kasper.

No, I’m not saying that about Cardinal Kasper, I said that about Cardinal Burke. I said that I have never seen anger in Burke. This is about as angry as he gets:

 

[phil19034]

Many of the Church Fathers used the word Sodomite to describe homosexuals. To stop using such a term entirely is a victory for politcal correctness.

A sodomite meant is anyone who commits sodomy.

Sodomy (according to dictionary.com) means:

1. anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex.

1. copulation with a member of the same sex.

1. bestiality (def 4).

dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy

 

[PTL]

LOL Maybe you need to check. The Bible was not written in English. If you want to read what the Bible says about Sodom, then note it does not define the sin that cause her to be punished. Ezekiel (16) wrote:

“Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.”

There is a reason the Catholic Church does not use this term and remains in the realm of the fundamentalists and the uncharitable.

And homo? Really? Are we in junior high school now?

The Catechism is our source of teaching and does not use these words. None of the bishops are using nasty language like this.

Ezekiel mentioned many sins of Sodom, not only one sin of homosexuality. But go read entire Genesis 19, read the whole story. It cannot be more clear about their grave sin of homosexuality. That is the gravest sin among all their sins, the abomination!

 

[CrossofChrist]

Now that I read the book and know the truth, it is time to rebut this nonsense.

Does Cardinal Kasper say that the divorced/remarried people who would be allowed to receive Communion would have to live as brother or sister, or does he say that they could have an intimate relationship with the non-spouse?

 

[Sirach2]

Does Cardinal Kasper say that the divorced/remarried people who would be allowed to receive Communion would have to live as brother or sister, or does he say that they could have an intimate relationship with the non-spouse?

Neither. He doesn’t even touch on that. Read the book, please.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Neither. He doesn’t even touch on that. Read the book, please.

What does he propose?

 

[Sirach2]

What does he propose?

I could have given excerpts from his book when I gave a brief summary, but I am fully cognizant that I would be casting my pearls where they ought not to be shared.

Let me think and pray about it for a bit. I may have to answer you by PM, lest I meet with a shark attack here.

 

[Sirach2]

I could have given excerpts from his book when I gave a brief summary, but I am fully cognizant that I would be casting my pearls where they ought not to be shared.

Let me think and pray about it for a bit. I may have to answer you by PM, lest I meet with a shark attack here.

To reiterate, as I reviewed the chapter 5 (about 10 pages at most) that the Burke consistory have objected so strongly to, there are no positive statements that I can put my finger on. He merely raised questions on some facets that trouble divorced and remarried Catholics, so that others may – on their own initiative – come to a consensus on some of the points he raised, and a viable pastoral solution.

I dare not publish them here, but would prefer that if anyone is interested to learn the facts and not the biased innuendo of reporters, please buy the book. It is under $6 on Kindle [no shipping!] and only 43 pages long in paperback.

 

[Sirach2]

To reiterate, as I reviewed the chapter 5 (about 10 pages at most) that the Burke consistory have objected so strongly to, there are no positive statements that I can put my finger on. He merely raised questions on some facets that trouble divorced and remarried Catholics, so that others may – on their own initiative – come to a consensus on some of the points he raised, and a viable pastoral solution.

Well, it was edifying to see that another Cardinal confirmed my conclusion above. Gilliam posted this on another thread, but it follows perfectly with what I have noticed, as well.

Cardinal Marx responded to one question about the apparent rejection of Kasper’s proposal by saying there was no proposal — just a need to raise the question.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Well, it was edifying to see that another Cardinal confirmed my conclusion above. Gilliam posted this on another thread, but it follows perfectly with what I have noticed, as well.

Ok, so a question was raised as to whether or not something is possible.

We’ll have to wait on what the synod officially says, but as of now it seems as if most bishops have said it isn’t possible. So in theory, it should be all over, right?