Cardinal Schönborn

  • Thread starter Thread starter Batfink
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Batfink

Guest
Hi all,

I recently heard Cardinal Schönborn speak and he was absolutely AMAZING! I loved it (and him!). However, some of the people I told issued vague warnings that he isn’t considered quite sound/orthodox.

This would surprise me given his standing in the Church, and my (internet) research hasn’t managed to find much negative (I know of his statements regarding clerical celibacy and evolution and they seem IMO to be entirely in line with official doctrine), but I was wondering whether anyone else could offer any insights?

Anyone know anthing about him - good or bad? All help appreciated.

P.S. - wasn’t really sure where to post this as it doesn’t fit anything particularly but is a bit too ‘serious’ for water cooler. Move if necessary.
 
Hes a promoter of Medjugorje; and even went there on a "private" (!) visit which the whole world knew about! :eek: He preached a sermon there, praising the whole thing. He ended up apologizing via fax to Bishop Peric. (He hadnt even informed the bishop that he was going there.)
Plus, hes had one or more of the "visionaries" at the Cathedral in Vienna: again, undermining Bishop Perics legitimate authority.

im pretty sure he more or less led the Austrian bishops to kill an attempt by Rome to appoint an orthodox bishop to a liberal diocese; but im prepared to stand corrected on that one.

He was involved in a so-called “balloon” Mass for young people… BUT: the Mass was totally valid!

One good thing: he threatened excommunication to a large group of rebellious (Austrian) priests. 👍
 
I’m pretty sure its against forum rules to gossip about specific bishops, priests, or parishes.

Schönborn was entrusted with overseeing the work of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I think he did a pretty good job with that one.
 
I’ve spoken with His Excellency by phone on CA Live some years back and I have his excellent book “Chance or Purpose”, which I really enjoyed.

His remarks on evolution (in the NY Times I think) caused some controversy which was mostly media shenanigans as usual.

I like him very much and deeply respect him. If he made a gaff Medjugorje, that surprises me a little, but I’m sure that ultimately it will all work out. I trust the church.

I agree that he did a very good job on the Catechism and he put together YouCat recently as well. I intend to get that for my Kindle for PC when I have the $$$.

He is a very kind and charitable person and very clear on what he says and means.
I praise God for him. :crossrc:
 
Joe_5859 said:
I’m pretty sure its against forum rules to gossip about specific bishops, priests, or parishes.
Click to expand...
I don’t think discussing well-verified and public information is “gossip”. If we cannot discuss the Bishops of our Church and what they do and believe and how their careers are going, on a Catholic blog, for heaven’s sake where would be a better place?

Try doing this on an open blog and you’ll spend 90% of the time fighting the Catholic bashing.
 
Thanks guys for all the info and advice. I think I wil start buying a few of his books and see what I think - they can go next to Timothy Radcliffe on the shelf to make a whole Dominican line 😃

I feel kinda sorry for him over the balloon Mass, I saw it on YouTube and he looks really uncomfortable. The Medjugorje thing worries me more but I guess we all make mistakes 🤷
 
Batfink,

There are always two sides to every story, and the media’s presentations are usually not reliable. Here’s a statement that was sent to Fr. Z from Erich Leitenberger, the spokesman for His Eminence Christoph Card. Schonborn. Note also, that when a celebrant is invited to these liturgies, they generally have NO (name removed by moderator)UT for the planning, which is done ahead of time by others. It is seriously wrong to judge him for something beyond our knowledge.

wdtprs.com

A Mass in Wolfsthal in the Archd. of Vienna

UPDATE 19 Nov. 1948: GMTI received this statement from Erich Leitenberger, the spokesman for His Eminence Christoph Card. Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna. This regards the entry below, where a video of the Mass in question is posted. Dear Father Zuhlsdorf, regarding Your blog on the celeb
wdtprs.com wdtprs.com

Some people have taken serious offense in the Holy Mass for young people which was celebrated by the Viennese Cardinal Christoph Schönborn on the 16th of November in Wolfsthal, a village close to the Austrian-Slovakian border.
In contrast to the presumption, due to the in many ways amateurish und unrealistic recorded broadcasting by Gloria TV, it must be clearly stated that in this celebration in no way any kind of liturgical specifications have been violated.
The Eucharistic bread was unleavened and its shape strictly followed the shape which has been used in the Middle East since the 1st century. The “flat cake” is similar to that form used in Mossul in these days – this is the metropolis located at river Tigris where Christians still testify the truth of Jesus with their own blood.
Werner Pirkner, the spiritual councilor for the Holy Mass in Wolfsthal, and Stephan Bazalka, coordinator of the Catholic Youth, paid highest attention to the fact that when breaking the bread no tiny little piece of bread ever touched the floor.
Those who have dared, tempted by a fragmentary news coverage, to bring forward accusations against the archbishop of Vienna, may contemplate, repent and ask God for his forgiveness. Let us pray all together for the Holy Church!
 
Sirach, yeah that’s what I was getting at when I said I felt sorry for him. I know people should have oversight in these things, but I can totally see how a busy cardinal would leave other people to organise the Mass, prepare a sermon himself and turn up to celebrate. What can one really do by that stage to change what has been planned? Thanks for the info clarifying too.
 
Batfink said:
I feel kinda sorry for him over the balloon Mass, I saw it on YouTube and he looks really uncomfortable. The Medjugorje thing worries me more but I guess we all make mistakes 🤷
Click to expand...
The jury is still out on Medjugorje, though. It’s quite different than if he were openly promoting an apparition that had been condemned.
 
Batfink said:
Hi all,

I recently heard Cardinal Schönborn speak and he was absolutely AMAZING! I loved it (and him!). However, some of the people I told issued vague warnings that he isn’t considered quite sound/orthodox.

.
Click to expand...
He’a a Cardinal, a Prince of the Church.
 
Joe_5859 said:
The jury is still out on Medjugorje, though. It’s quite different than if he were openly promoting an apparition that had been condemned.
Click to expand...
The jury may still be out; but, Bishop Peric has legitimate episcopal authority over that part of the world. Hes made no secret of his convictions; and has more than once issued directives forbidding the promoting of it. For a cardinal to break ranks and disobey a bishop is a betrayal of the bishop: undermining his authority, and giving ammo to the bishops many enemies (ie most Medjugorje promoters, and disobedient Franciscans).
That`s pretty serious.
 
The Cardinal is at least the primary author of the YOUCAT catechism. I’m working on reading through it now.

He seems to have a particular interest in creation/origins, and has a book out on the topic of evolution.

The section on creation in the YOUCAT is technically, within the bounds of Church teaching, but is in my opinion misleading.

It condemns evolutionism as heresy- which it is.

It then sets up “creationism” as an opposing error- but never condemns it as heresy- because it’s not. YOUCAT calls belief in a 6 day creation “naive” but leaves out that belief in a 6 day creation is also a perfectly orthodox Catholic view. It also says that Catholics may believe in “evolution” but fails to define what the term means, and doesn’t make any mention of things a layman might think of as part of “evolution” which a Catholic may not believe, such as polygenism.

Pax and God Bless.
 
Dan Daly:
He seems to have a particular interest in creation/origins, and has a book out on the topic of evolution.
Click to expand...
When you have read his book, perhaps you will be more qualified to express an opinion. Until then …

“is misleading”
“leaves out”
“fails to define”
“doesn’t make any mention”

Sounds like a lot of negative mumbo-jumbo based on what “you” believe* should have been* written. Your private opinion concerning a catechism which has several imprimaturs has no bearing on the integrity of Cardinal Schonborn.
 
Batfink said:
Hi all,

I recently heard Cardinal Schönborn speak and he was absolutely AMAZING! I loved it (and him!). However, some of the people I told issued vague warnings that he isn’t considered quite sound/orthodox.

This would surprise me given his standing in the Church, and my (internet) research hasn’t managed to find much negative (I know of his statements regarding clerical celibacy and evolution and they seem IMO to be entirely in line with official doctrine), but I was wondering whether anyone else could offer any insights?

Anyone know anthing about him - good or bad? All help appreciated.

He is a former student of the Pope and a pretty straight arrow. His problem, like all western primates, is the hyper-liberal nature of the society he pastors. This is evidenced by the rebellious Austrian priests, they are products of their society. The Cardinal is in a tough situation when his society rejects 110% of Church teaching.

P.S. - wasn’t really sure where to post this as it doesn’t fit anything particularly but is a bit too ‘serious’ for water cooler. Move if necessary.
Click to expand...
 
Sirach2 said:
When you have read his book, perhaps you will be more qualified to express an opinion. Until then …

“is misleading”
“leaves out”
“fails to define”
“doesn’t make any mention”

Sounds like a lot of negative mumbo-jumbo based on what “you” believe* should have been* written. Your private opinion concerning a catechism which has several imprimaturs has no bearing on the integrity of Cardinal Schonborn.
Click to expand...
When I have read his other book, I will be qualified to speak on the other book. That is correct. That’s why I didn’t comment on what is in the other book.

I have read the section in the YOUCAT regarding creation. I am also familiar with what the Church teaches regarding creation.

The Church teaches that the “days” of the Creation account in genesis may be interpreted as either (A) an unknown period of time or (B) 24 hour days. So belief that the world was created in 6 days is an orthodox Catholic opinion.

Stating that belief that the world was created in 6 days “crosses a line” and is “naive” while failing to mention that is an orthodox Catholic position, is in my opinion misleading.

Let look at another example where a Catholic has options- a married couple with grave reasons to be concerned about conceiving a child. The couple may use NFP or abstain from relations entirely- both in accordance with Church teaching. If a Catechism said:

Contraception is evil. A couple may use NFP. Abstaining completely also crosses a line like contraception, and some people naively do so.

That would be misleading. It makes a false comparision of abstaining and contraception. Although abstaining is not called evil expressly it leaves the reader with the impression that it is- just as “creationism” is compared with the heretical position of evolutionism in the YOUCAT. Describing abstaining as “naive” doesn’t tell the reader if it is moral or not. It is simply intellectual bullying. In both cases, what to believe about the days of Creation and marital relations, faithful Catholics have a choice in which each option is in within Church teaching. Promoting one option because it is the one the author personally likes and denegrating the other without even making a reasoned argument against it or advising the reader that it even IS a valid option, is not a good way to write a Catechism in my opinion.

Pax and God Bless.
 
Describing abstaining as “naive” doesn’t tell the reader if it is moral or not.
Click to expand...
No worry, since the book is written for youth. They will be catechised properly when the time comes to marry. And yes, I believe abstinence is naive, if some couples wrongly believe that this is the only option permitted by the Church. How sad to be uninformed (naive).

Look, Dan, I know from your past posts that you abhor this catechism. Please restrict your comments for the sake of the many who do not share your opinion in the least, and have found it to be a good teaching resource for youth. Amazon’s reviews have 14 five-star ratings, and only 1 negative. Guess who authored the negative one? Your buddy from champion blogspot. :rolleyes:
 
Sirach,

I didn’t make any general statements about the YOUCAT in this thread. I’m working on reading through the rest of the YOUCAT in order to be able to speak fairly and intelligently on the whole work. I’m also planning on picking up the Cardinals other book on evolution to get a better idea of where he is coming from.

I made what I think is a fair criticism of one particular section of YOUCAT:

The YOUCAT says that belief in a 6 day Creation, which is an orthodox Catholic position, is:

“Crossing a line” and “naive”. It fails to mention that it is an orthodox Catholic position.
Do you think that is misleading?

Pax and God Bless.
 
Another good example would be the Apparition at Fatima. The Church allows Catholics to believe in it. It also allows Catholics not to believe in it. Imagine a Catechism like this:

Q: May a person not believe in Our Lady’s appearance at Fatima and still be a good Catholic?

A: Yes, a person may not believe in Our Lady’s appearance at Fatima and be a good Catholic, as long as one does not fall into the Heresy of not believing in Our Lady at all. Believing in Fatima crosses a line like not believing in Our Lady at all. Some people do naively believe in Fatima.

-No mention that belief in Fatima is a perfectly orthodox thing for a Catholic to do.
-No actual condemnation of believing in Fatima as heresy (because it’s not), but from the context of the answer, a reader can very easily take that meaning.

Pax and God Bless
 
No point in my discussing this with you, for you are reading the Youcat with an eagle eye to find fault. Of course, with that motive, a reader WILL find fault - no doubt. 😉

Just keep in mind the young audience for whom it was written. It was not meant to be an all-inclusive detailed presentation of every catholic doctrinal belief, with theological elaboration on every point. That’s why, as I understand it, there are many references to the CCC for further study.

Also keep in mind that the catechism was given three imprimaturs, and a fourth from the Abp. of San Francisco for the English version. I would not be surprised to see a second edition at some point in the future, just as there was for the CCC. Refining, better word structure, clarity - yes. One can always improve when there is leisure time afterwards to do so. In this case, there was pressure to complete the work in time for WYD to have a good reference copy for those who attended.

If you want to continue critiquing it, you will be one of a minority, for generally, the parents and youth are overwhelmingly accepting of it. Amazon has sold out - very telling, yes?
 
Arguing a theological position because of popularity is a very dangerous thing to do. The vast majorit of Catholic couples use artificial contraception. You have yet to respond to my critique that the YOUCAT calls an orthodox Catholic belief “crossing a line” and “naive”. I don’t think taking issue with that requires an eagle eye.

Pax and God Bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top