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

[gilliam]

As for Kasper, is he kidding? He basically tells the African bishops to shut up. Isn’t that racist?

He didn’t say that, read: commonwealmagazine.org/blog/no-cardinal-kasper-not-racist

 

[unafraid]

We’ll see. Now with Cardinal Dolan also said we need explicit teaching, maybe the Pope will.
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=22927&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CatholicWorldNewsFeatureStories+%28Catholic+World+News+%28on+CatholicCulture.org%29%29

I cannot imagine the Pope ignores his flock’s need of being taught.

This pope is most adept at teaching the more problematic aspects of our religion. The martyrs and their “blood sacrifice” will never make us feel warm and fuzzy. However, without this hard reality, the church loses its mysterious and transcendent essence.

God teaches us through the heart. Not all are gifted to hear at any particular age. Those who do must bow down in thanksgiving, those who do not…they must pray for the grace of understanding. Christ has spoken for the ages. Nothing can ever reach beyond Him.

 

[PTL]

He didn’t say that, read: commonwealmagazine.org/blog/no-cardinal-kasper-not-racist

The article **title **says he didn’t say that. But Kasper’s words toward African bishops are certainly not nice if not mean. He basically said African bishops should say nothing toward us. In other words, their experience and their belief (which is always the church’s belief) worth nothing to the Westerns.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

The article **title **says he didn’t say that. But Kasper’s words toward African bishops are certainly not nice if not mean. He basically said African bishops should say nothing toward us. In other words, their experience and their belief (which is always the church’s belief) worth nothing to the Westerns.

You are absolutely correct. It is so terribly sad to see a man who has risen to such heights in our church be so prejudiced against people who make up a sizeable portion of our church. We’re one big family, even if we’re from Africa!!

 

[PTL]

You are absolutely correct. It is so terribly sad to see a man who has risen to such heights in our church be so prejudiced against people who make up a sizeable portion of our church. We’re one big family, even if we’re from Africa!!

Amen, brother, Amen!!

 

[pnewton]

He didn’t say that, read: commonwealmagazine.org/blog/no-cardinal-kasper-not-racist

Gee, was that ever blown out of proportion. We need to remember rash judgment is also sinful, not just homosexual activity. Thanks for the article.

 

[Sirach2]

Gee, was that ever blown out of proportion. We need to remember rash judgment is also sinful, not just homosexual activity. Thanks for the article.

Nothing new, is there? Wagging tongues, false judgments. Here are his words:

but again Kasper is saying that one local church cannot solve the problems of another. He doesn’t mean we the synod, or we the rest of the church. He means we the Germans, we the Europeans, we the West. In other words, it’s up to the churches of Africa to handle their own pastoral challenges. Just as “they should not tell us too much what we have to do.” That’s hardly dismissive, or xenophobic, or worse. It’s just good theological sense.

 

[One_point]

Nothing new, is there? Wagging tongues, false judgments. Here are his words:

Theological sense? So why do we have synod if local churches should only be concerned about their own problems and “not tell each other what to do” When bishops in the west implicating catholic doctrine in their experiments with modernism they cannot isolate themselves and exclude the rest of the church. our faith is not individualized like that. its the common property of the church and local churches can run off into heresy if church history is anything to go by. this matter implicate catholic doctrine on marriage, sexuality and meaning of communion and penance. no one can say don’t tell me anything because your from x or y places.

 

[pnewton]

The article **title **says he didn’t say that. But Kasper’s words toward African bishops are certainly not nice if not mean. He basically said African bishops should say nothing toward us. In other words, their experience and their belief (which is always the church’s belief) worth nothing to the Westerns.

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.

 

[pnewton]

Nothing new, is there?

I think we did the younger generation a real disservice by failing to teach sentence diagraming. I know it wasn’t until college that I started to draw the lines that connect the words in another language, and it carried over and helps me to break down sentences in English with greater accuracy. Now we have a generation that cannot even punctuate and capitalize. It is no wonder the media is able to spin stories like they do and these threads have so many disagreements rooted in communication skills.

 

[Tigg]

This link has been posted a couple of times and in case no one has yet seen it, we owe a debt of gratitude to Jimmy Akin for this little bit of enlightenment.

ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/good-news-from-the-synod-of-bishops-12-things-to-know-and-share

We will all need to expand our vocabulary by the time the synod recesses. I LOVE the word "bafflegab." Incomprehensible language and bureaucratic jargon.

I also love the expression “turgid ecclesiastical bafflegab.” Let’s shorten it to TEB because I think we might be frequently using it before the sessions close.

 

[Sirach2]

McCall1981:

Sirach2:

You mean, in accord with Burke’s personal opinion? And not listen to the (name removed by moderator)ut from others? Writing a book and scheduling multiple interviews with the media, is not sowing discord?

Card Kasper wrote a book, and scheduled multiple interviews with the media. Was he sowing discord?

Now that I read the book and know the truth, it is time to rebut this nonsense.
Kasper published his speech that he made to the consistory in February this year, and if you look at Amazon where it is sold, there is absolutely no way to look into the book for a sampling.

OTOH, Burke et al published their book and arranged with Ignatius Press that the public can view large samplings of the content without making a purchase. Megan7 has taken it upon herself here to make sure our members do not fail to see what’s inside.

To make sure the public is also well informed, the authors collaborated with the publisher to bring attention to their main book via a teleconference, and made certain its release coincided just prior to the Synod. Here

Cardinal Burke joined several other participants in a teleconference on preparations for the Synod of Bishops. The teleconference was arranged by Ignatius Press, which will release four books on October 1 presenting arguments against the Kasper proposal and in defense of Church teaching on marriage.

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.

 

[pnewton]

This link has been posted a couple of times and in case no one has yet seen it, we owe a debt of gratitude to Jimmy Akin for this little bit of enlightenment.

ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/good-news-from-the-synod-of-bishops-12-things-to-know-and-share

We will all need to expand our vocabulary by the time the synod recesses. I LOVE the word "bafflegab." Incomprehensible language and bureaucratic jargon.

I also love the expression “turgid ecclesiastical bafflegab.” Let’s shorten it to TEB because I think we might be frequently using it before the sessions close.

Thank you. Great article. I would only note that the six cardinals he quotes are one side of the debate, just like the article. In the end, we must bear in mind that all we hear is a work in progress and there are many opinions grinding against each other to produce the flour, which is the final product.

 

[Sirach2]

In the words of the prophet Daniel (13:48), "Are you such fools, you Israelites, that without examination or knowledge of the truth, you have condemned a daughter [son] of Israel [the Church]?

This vicious slander against Cardinal Kasper is utterly without truth or merit, and I do not understand why these other Cardinals brought in their heavy artillery, based on what I have read in Kasper’s speech. There not is a single forceful word suggesting that the questions Kasper raised should be considered as a firm proposal that he wishes his colleagues to adopt.

What can the Church do in such situations [of second marriages]? It cannot propose a solution apart from or contrary to Jesus’ words. The indissolubility of a sacramental marriage and the impossibility of contracting a second sacramental marriage during the lifetime of the other partner is a binding part of the Church’s faith tradition, which one cannot repeal or water down by appealing to a superficially understood and cheapened sense of mercy. God’s fidelity is ultimately the fidelity of God to himself and to his love. Because God is faithful, he is also merciful and, in his mercy, he is faithful, even when we are unfaithful (2 Tim 2:1) Mercy and fidelity belong together.

Therefore, there can be no human situation that is absolutely desperate and hopeless. However far a human being may fail, he or she never fails deeper than Gods mercy can reach.

The question, therefore, is how the Church can conform to this indissoluble cohesiveness of fidelity and mercy in its pastoral practice with civilly remarried, divorced people. For this reason, there cannot be a general solution for all cases. The synod will have to give the definitive answer itself.

The path in question would not be a general solution.** It is not a broad path for the great masses**, but a narrow path for the indeed smaller segment of divorced and remarried individuals who are honestly interested in the sacraments.

On the part of the Church, this path presupposes discretio, spiritual discrimination, pastoral prudence and wisdom. Such discretio is no cheap compromise between the extremes of rigorism and laxity, but rather–like every virtue–the path of the responsible middle and the right measure.

I hope that on the path of such discretio in the course of the synodal process, we find an answer so that we can credible bear witness to the word of God in difficult human situations as a message of fidelity, but equally as a message of mercy, life, and joy.

• As I have previously pointed out, he reaffirms indissolubility of marriage.
• He stresses that the Synod will need to seek solutions, more than once!
• Discretion considers only a narrow path for certain individuals, not the masses.
• Between the excerpts above, he raised some questions for synodal considerations. THAT’S ALL! Period.
• These questions were a stepping stone for further (name removed by moderator)ut of the participants to find solutions, which is typical of many speakers to enable their audiences to evaluate and explore criteria for discussion.

 

[gilliam]

Cardinal Burke facilitated one of the English break out groups. Here are their recommendations:

Relatio - Circulus Anglicus “A”

Moderator: Em.mo Card. Raymond Leo BURKE
Relator: S.E. Mons. John Atcherley DEW

I present this report of behalf of the English speaking group Anglicus “A”. The group has suggested a number of amendments to the RELATIO POST DISCEPTATIONEM, some are major amendments and others quite small, nevertheless they have significant meaning attached to them. In proposing amendments we have shifted the focus from particular situations described in the Relatio to the people involved in the situations, concentrating on the goodness to be found in them.

We believed that there needed to be a new introduction to the Relatio. Our proposed Introduction is placed within the context of the great gift of the Sacrament of Matrimony and the grace of God freely given through the sacraments. It also provides a theological anthropological foundation, which we believe is needed in order to address serious issues spoken on in the Synod. We have addressed these issues within the context of Scripture and the remarkably rich Magisterium of the Church. We want the final Synod document to speak of human life, marriage and family life, as we know it to be revealed to us by God through reason and faith, both aided by the grace of God. The Relatio Synodi must proclaim the truth of the Gospel, the truth of human life and sexuality as revealed by Christ. The Word of Christ illuminates our knowledge of human nature and the intrinsic sexuality of man and woman through the natural law.

We agreed that this is to be a pastoral document, as has been expressed as the wish of the Synod, a document which speaks to people about the often critical issues which confront families today. Those issues cannot be separated from Church teaching found in the treasury of her documentation. We are aware that the final Relatio Synodi will be discussed and debated over the next year; therefore as we proposed amendments we indicated appropriate references to the Sacred Scriptures and Magisterial documents

We referred to the methodology used as appearing to be based on the SEE, JUDGE, ACT principles, but in this case it was LISTEN, JUDGE, ACT.

LISTEN and observe what others are saying and what the situation is regarding marriage and family life in the world today.

JUDGE according to what we have been gifted with through the Deposit of Faith.

ACT through our pastoral accompanying of all God’s people entrusted to our care.

W e have attempted to show in our amendments that the “Listening” or “seeing” must always be through the lens of the Gospel. Our Proposals have stressed God’s love and our pastoral love and care for individuals, while at the same time honestly recognizing and acknowledging sinful situations, and searching for ways to invite conversion of heart.

In our amendments we see suggest a return to the SEE, Judge, Act formula.

We know that the final Synod document gives us a wonderful opportunity to influence the prevailing culture and for the Church to present the way of Jesus Christ who is “The Way, the Truth and the Life” (John 14). Our amendments have tried to show that living as disciples of Jesus Christ, with all the challenges that brings is the life that leads to true joy and human happiness.

For example, where the Relatio appeared to be suggesting that sex outside of marriage may be permissible, or that cohabitation may be permissible, we have attempted to show why such lifestyles do not lead to human fulfillment. At the same time, we want to acknowledge that there are seeds of truth and goodness found in the persons involved, and through dedicated pastoral care these can be appreciated and developed. We believe that if we imply that certain life-styles are acceptable, then concerned and worried parents could very easily say “Why are we trying so hard to encourage our sons and daughters to live the Gospel and embrace Church teaching?”

(to be continued)

 

[gilliam]

(continued)
We did not recommend the admission to the sacraments of divorced and re-married people, but we included a very positive and much –needed appreciation of union with Christ through other means.

The group recognizes and favors the concern and compassion the Relatio shows for those who face difficult pastoral situations in their lives. However our amendments suggest that we express these carefully so as not to create confusion in the minds and hearts of our people.

We had serious questions about the presentation of the principle of GRADUALITY. We wished to show in our amendments that we are not speaking of the GRADUALITY of DOCTRINE of faith and morals, but rather the gradual moral growth of the individual in his or her actions.

We also believe that in the Relatio Synodi we need to express words of encouragement and support to those who are faithfully living out their marriage vows and bringing up their families according to the teaching of the Church. We are grateful to those married couples who gave their witness in the Synod Hall and thank them sincerely. We also wish to address words of encouragement to grandparents and extended family members who support their families often at great expense to themselves.

There is agreement that the Relatio Synodi needs to be a pastoral document in which we use language which does not hurt people but which encourages them and helps them in their journey to God. It must speak the Truth of the Gospel clearly and directly, using language that cannot be interpreted by some to be condemning them, but rather expressing the Church’s deep interest and care for them.

As the Conclusion of the Relatio Post Disceptationem states the Synodal dialogue took place in freedom and a spirit of reciprocal listening. It has certainly raised questions that will have to be seriously considered and clarified by reflection in the Particular Churches of the world over the next year. Our prayer too is that all God’s people under the guidance of the Holy Spirit will find roads of truth and mercy for all. We thank Pope Francis for the invitation to us to live the courage of faith and the humble and honest welcome of the truth in charity.

[03042-02.01] [Original text: English]
press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/16/0763/03042.html#Relatio - Circulus Anglicus “A”

 

[Teelynn]

It’s already happening major news outlets and the media are all ready declaring that the church has changed its teaching and I can guarantee you there are many who get their catholic theology from cnn etc. the problem is unless this is clearified soon, I’m afraid many will run with this the wrong way and not even read what was said. This really needs to be cleared up. Hopefully by the end of the week, I’d hate to wait a whole year just to hear the church reaffirm what it always taught as truths from the beginning.

This is what I have been saying since the beginning inklings of this Synod when Cardinal Kasper was given front stage in the media with his ‘communion for divorced and civilly remarried’. If anyone here is as old as I am. they will remember that this happened after Vat ll. A ton of people got their ‘directives’ on the ‘Spirit of Vat ll’ from the media. And now we have the ‘relatio’. My big fear was that regardless of what the Church declared after this, the media would spin it and it would be ‘1962 all over again’. True the saying ‘Perception is 9/10 of the law’. **Pray **that the end report that the Cardinals come up with is more concise with Catholic Doctrine. Otherwise…WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.

 

[Sirach2]

This is what I have been saying since the beginning inklings of this Synod when Cardinal Kasper was given front stage in the media with his ‘communion for divorced and civilly remarried’.

You may have missed my post #94 where the truth of Kasper’s words was shown to be different than the media presented it. I blame Burke, who all but took out a public megaphone to dispute a simple matter of Kasper’s* questioning* in the speech he gave to the consortium. It was so overblown with overkill that they created a monster in the media. They will have to answer for that, as we know. It was a complete failure in listening to what he said. Pope Francis surely did not misunderstand, right? How so?

[Equally as bad, is the perpetuation of that misinformation by people here who have not read the book and rely on Burke’s public outcry.]

 

[PTL]

Cardinal Burke facilitated one of the English break out groups. Here are their recommendations:

Relatio - Circulus Anglicus “A”

Moderator: Em.mo Card. Raymond Leo BURKE
Relator: S.E. Mons. John Atcherley DEW

I present this report of behalf of the English speaking group Anglicus “A”.

For example, where the Relatio appeared to be suggesting that sex outside of marriage may be permissible, or that cohabitation may be permissible, we have attempted to show why such lifestyles do not lead to human fulfillment. At the same time, we want to acknowledge that there are seeds of truth and goodness found in the persons involved, and through dedicated pastoral care these can be appreciated and developed. We believe that if we imply that certain life-styles are acceptable, then concerned and worried parents could very easily say “Why are we trying so hard to encourage our sons and daughters to live the Gospel and embrace Church teaching?”

(to be continued)

Statements of the English break out groups led by Cardinal Burke is very clear and fair.
It clearly follows the Church’s teaching that sinful life style do not lead to human fulfillment.
But we do not deny there are still goodness in the sinners and the Church encourages them for the change of hearts.

 

[Teelynn]

You may have missed my post #94 where the truth of Kasper’s words was shown to be different than the media presented it. I blame Burke, who all but took out a public megaphone to dispute a simple matter of Kasper’s* questioning* in the speech he gave to the consortium. It was so overblown with overkill that they created a monster in the media. They will have to answer for that, as we know. It was a complete failure in listening to what he said. Pope Francis surely did not misunderstand, right? How so?

[Equally as bad, is the perpetuation of that misinformation by people here who have not read the book and rely on Burke’s public outcry.]

You may be correct, it may be ‘all the media’s fault’ for spinning information. Even if so, you really think damage has not already been done and there’s no need to refute bad Catholicism out there in print? What the Cardinals, including Burke are trying to do now is trying to recoup bad press and clarify. They KNOW how media information is taken as ‘gospel’ to a ton of people. Sit there and say nothing and you get…‘The Church now condones Sodomy’.