The death of Carlo Caffarra, the beloved dubia Cardinal, has left an additional empty place in the group of the original four who presented their concerns to the pope concerning Amoris Laetitia. So much so, in fact, that one of the pro-papal apologists, Dr. Austen Ivereigh, even put on Twitter this somewhat breezy comment: “Only two of the four dubia cardinals alive.” (I will leave out here Dr. Ivereigh’s more explicitly demeaning comment about Cardinal Caffarra himself on the very day of his death.)
One could well imagine (but I do not claim any intimate knowledge here) that these two deaths might have left Cardinals Raymond L. Burke and Walter Brandmüller so discouraged that they doubt whether they would even be able to proceed with the final step of their promised public procedure – namely, the fraternal, public correction of Pope Francis – perhaps along with asking him to make an explicit Papal Profession of Faith. However, this moment of understandable discouragement could actually turn out to be a moment of Grace.
Let us now remember, for example, St. Joan of Arc. When, during the military battles for the political freedom of France, she thought that she was losing her battle, something happened that almost miraculously turned things around. Therefore, she has been for me, for quite a while now, an inspiration. As I wrote in May of 2016 about St. Joan of Arc:
She is our saint. She will help us continue this combat against the siege and occupation of Rome and against this seeming occupation of the Seat of Peter itself by a man who now even seems to contradict God’s Laws. Saint Joan will give us the spirit to try the impossible, to be forceful and strong when God’s truth is undermined, and, yet, to keep true charity. She will give us the strength to fight when all seems to be against us, when the Powers That Be seem to have all that they need to accomplish their maneuvers. She will teach us that he will finally win who is with God, and not against Him. She will teach us that the saints are with us, and, most of all, the Heavenly Mother.
So, if now the four dubia Cardinals seemingly are losing their own battle, if they are deeply discouraged and disheartened by the loss of two of their comrades-in-arms, what if God were to send them two new comrades? What if that painful event of the loss of two devout and loyal cardinals now unexpectedly inspired others to follow in their footsteps?
Not long ago, after Cardinal Joachim Meisner had died, we published our story about the (now widely-contested) “Müller Conversation in Mainz” concerning word we had received that Müller was dismissed for resisting the ongoing papal agenda of reform. Following this article, I wrote Cardinal Gerhard Müller a personal note. In this personal note, I told him that additional sources who claimed knowledge of the events described in our story had come to our attention, sources who were almost immediately hindered by a lawsuit meant to intimidate and to silence them. (Just this week, another person, Thomas Shirrmacher, a Protestant philosopher and theologian who knows Francis well, said that he believes Müller was dismissed in large part because of his public opposition to female deacons – one of the key points of contention mentioned in our story.) I also said that we trusted that the fuller truth would come out at some point in the near future. (There is more to say about this story, but not now.) And then I said:
We can assure you that we only wish to know the truth. The only reason why we published the now quite contested story was that we considered these “five points” of your dismissal [by Pope Francis] as being so important for the whole Church. Should there be truth in these five points [to include the ordination of female priests] – in whatever concrete context they then appeared – whether during the last audience or at another time – then you yourself would be duty-bound to inform the whole Catholic world about it and to warn us about it. Female priests and married priests mean a protestantization of the Catholic Church.
After asking Cardinal Müller whether he should not also tell Catholics that Amoris Laetitia does indeed contain statements – such as the novel claim that, sometimes for the good of the children, intimate relations (more uxorio) might have to be allowed and maintained, even though the couple is “remarried” and divorced; or that “no one is condemned forever” – that are also heretical and thus detrimental to the salvation of souls, I came to a concluding invitation to Cardinal Müller:
Therefore, I call upon you – in honor of Cardinal Meisner – clearly to assist the three dubia cardinals and to request from Pope Francis to clarify the dubia, and, yes, to sign the dubia yourself.
I never received a reply from Cardinal Müller or his secretary concerning this personal request, although I had received correspondence and even telephone calls from them on more than one occasion in the past.
But perhaps others will be more successful in this matter. For example, I recently felt inspired to see that Professor Ettore Gotti Tedeschi – the former President of the Vatican Bank and an eloquent defender of Catholic truth – just gave a small interview (concerning the sudden death of Cardinal Caffarra) in which he seems to go into that same direction, even though he did not mention, much less propose, any specific names. Here is the important portion – to include some beautiful words about Cardinal Caffarra himself – of that 6 September Italian report, as it was translated by OnePeterFive‘s generous contributor, Mr. Andrew Guernsey:
[Question:] Do you have a personal memory to tell about Cardinal Caffarra?
[Ettore Gotti Tedeschi:] “I have more than one, but many are private and I do not have the right to share them. I will try to remember something about him that honors his memory, without any indiscretions. Caffarra was appointed at the end of 2003 to replace the great Cardinal Biffi. A few months after Biffi’s retirement, in his hermitage above Bologna, I went to see him [Biffi] with my wife and two daughters. We stayed with him for almost three hours, and asked him what he thought of his successor. He told me not only that he himself had named him, but also that no one could be better or more appropriate than Caffarra to lead the Diocese of Bologna. He also told me that he wanted to abstain from any kind of presence in Bologna in order to avoid the risk of misunderstandings of interfering with a person of whom he had absolute esteem and consideration. Since then, I have encountered Cardinal Caffarra several times after the publication of the dubia, [and] the only sentiment that I can make public was his enormous suffering, his love of the Church and the figure of the Pope. Caffarra was a holy man, when he talked about serious things, which made him suffer, he talked about them as someone who has confidence in God, who speaks to God, and above all, listens to him. I do not want to say more.”
[Question:] He [Caffarra] had signed the dubia precisely about Amoris Laetitia. He dies after [Cardinal] Meisner, who was also a signatory to the letter to the Pope. But does the Church, which asks for greater clarity about the Apostolic Exhortation, remain alive?
“In this sense and in this regard, Cardinal Caffarra will remain an example of ‘priestly responsibility,’ an example of virtue worthy of a possible process of future beatification. But I can answer a “trick” question. Now, as I see it, Cardinals Burke and Brandmüller ought to devote more efforts, with superior commitment, to Meisner and Caffarra’s memory. And I hope that two other well-known holy Cardinals (living and working) are available to make up for the work of the two deceased cardinals, replacing them with the commitment to ask for clarity for the good of souls. But now I would like to ask IntelligoNews readers to remember Caffarra with a Requiem. Needless to say, he will protect us from where he is, as he did until yesterday here on earth.” [emphasis added]
Here, Professor Gotti Tedeschi may be suggesting that he has two specific cardinals in mind who, in his opinion, should now fill the empty lots of Cardinals Joachim Meisner and Carlo Caffarra. However, he does not specifically name these names. It is interesting to note, in this context, that Gotti Tedeschi will soon, on 14 September, participate at a Summorum Pontificum conference in Rome with exactly those same two cardinals whom I have had in mind: Cardinals Robert Sarah and Gerhard Müller. Is it hoping for too much that he might now use this occasion to ask them whether they would not actually do that: join ranks with the now possibly discouraged, remaining two dubia cardinals, and to do it especially for the sake of Catholic truth and for the salvation of souls?
What do these cardinals still have to fear if, at this point, nearly everything seems to be lost? When those who try to uphold the traditional moral teaching of the Catholic Church – not only about marriage, but also about contraception, homosexuality, abortion and much more, as Professor Josef Seifert has just pointed out – are being increasingly punished and humiliated? For what are we still truly waiting? Until no one is left to come forth and speak up?
Therefore, I ask our dear readers to send many prayers to heaven that God may inspire two cardinals – whoever they be – to give new courage to the faithful Catholic world and especially to the two remaining dubia cardinals, so that finally a public fraternal correction of Pope Francis may take place, for his own greater good, and the good of the Catholic Church.
Our Catholic Faith is filled with miracles and great surprises. Let us just think of Lepanto in 1571! Let us not forget the 1920 Miracle of the Vistula! Our Lady surely will help us in this moment of distress. And St. Joan of Arc, too.
We don’t need the ranks of the dubia Cardinals to be swelled if it means a mere return to the status quo ante: we need the two remaining Cardinals to ACT.
Not so. Two Cardinals stepping forward would indicate that, far from an insignificant clique of cranks, more will step forward, and more still. Behind countless red hats, mitres, pectoral crosses, birettas, tunics, kitchen aprons, 3 piece suits, hard hats, is a Catholic Spartacus longing for Truth. And we are legion.
That’s along the lines of what I’ve been calling for.
The death of Cdl. Caffera so soon after Meisner makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up. Given the demonic occupation of the vatican, in my mind these deaths raise questions.
I agree with you. These deaths are caused by the structural abuse and violence that runs within the Catholic Church. They are the consequences of the strong negative influences on the authentic Catholic faithful that became an unbearable impact to more (highly) sensitive souls.
I was implying the deaths of Cdls. Caffera and Meisner, like many believe happened to Pope John Paul I, were assasinations.
Cardinal Velasio De Paolis has dead, in the exact day of Caffarra burial.
He wrote a book on marriage with 4 other cardinals: their names are Caffarra, Muller, Brandmuller and Burke.
He was one of them, and now he’s dead.
Another questionable death. If sonething happens to one of the remsining dubia cardinals, I think the evidence will be in that the demon is eliminating the last vestiges of courageous outspoken defenders of the faith and opposers to his remaking the Church.
“Weeping she hath wept in the night, and her tears are on her cheeks: there is none to comfort her among all them that were dear to her: all her friends have despised her, and are become her enemies.”
How about we need Pope Benedict XVI to step up to the plate — and finally release the entire contents of the 3rd Secret of Fatima in order to call the whole Church to repentance! “Amoris Laetitia” is just a symptom of the deeper disease, total Apostasy and loss of the Faith, prophesied by Our Lady of Fatima – in the wake of a “bad council and a bad Mass.”
Indeed it is almost certain that the 3rd secret speaks directly about this situation. We know it speaks of the great apostasy beginning “at the top”.
The thing is that Vatican and the faithful already know the Truth. “Bad Mass” is the one that is called the “Neocathecumenal Mass”, while the Novus Ordo Mass supposed to be a transitional liturgical form (but still valid) from the TLM (focused on the real presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist) to the “Neocathechumenal Mass” (there is no Holy Eucharist, thus Jesus is eliminated from the “Mass”). It is no more secret. Why do people keep asking for more?
While we probably do know the contents of the 3rd Secret, what we need is PUBLIC recognition of such — via a FULL, Official Announcement — to the Faithful and the Clergy — by someone in authority, such as Pope Benedict XVI! This is required to make reparation to Our Lady for the failure to release the 3rd Secret on the part of the hierarchy. It is also required to usher in the Grace needed for repentance and the consequent Consecration of Russia. Nothing is going to change until these two requests of Our Lady have been complied with, namely, the release of the full contents of the 3rd Secret of Fatima and the Public Consecration of Russia by the Holy Father, in union with the Bishops of the universal Church. We will continue to have disaster after disaster – both in the Church and the world. Our Lady has given us the remedy. And, She waits~~~~.
I do not foresee this happening because he already said everything was published.
Of course, Pope Benedict’s words in this regard do not mean he doesn’t know the full 3rd Secret — and that the dire nature of events might not serve as a trigger for him to release what has been hidden –. We should pray for him to have the courage to release the full 3rd Secret. Our Lady told us to pray for the Holy Father. Speaking personally, I pray diligently for Pope Benedict XVI, daily, to release the full 3rd Secret. Nothing is going to improve until Our Lady is completely obeyed. See my reply to Kora on this below.
Pope Francis is horrible – Vatican II is worse.
Horrible like his dark master?
Joan of Arc
lyrics of Warrior of light
Milites lucis parati sunt – Ecce bellum Agni
Riding again on the wings of pure love
To free my people in this time
Shadows are over them darkness is trying to rule
False kings are longing for their souls
Saints and Angels are following me
Burning in Love for God and Mankind
To take the chains away of the bloody history
And errors from all times
Warrior of light are on their way to make the despot go away
Revealing the prince of our hearts
Offering to rule inside turning darkness into light
Opening the door of a new time
I pray Cardinal Sarah steps forward. The fact that he hasn’t been sacked or discarded tells me that the Pope and his buddies are afraid of him. I think Sarah would have an overwhelming majority of the Church in Africa with him and that means much more than Germany, Italy, Austria or France.
Excellent, Brian! I, too, think Bergoglio and his stooges are afraid of Cardinal Sarah. I pray he comes to realize that and is emboldened by it. Then Kasper will get a real dose of instruction from Africa.
One minor correction, and I realise I’m probably being unnecessarily pedantic: Lepanto was 1571. And digressing from there: I wonder if the many glorious victories which our invincible Commander-in-Chief has gained for us over the centuries, including those against expansionist Islam at Lepanto in 1571, and Vienna in 1683, are now about to be overturned because of our outright apostasy? The objective of the Ottoman Turks was the conquest of Rome and the establishment of a caliphate stretching all the way to the Atlantic coast of Europe. It would be more than fitting if Islam will now be used as an instrument of punishment and correction for the post-Christian West. Let there be no doubt that they now have Rome firmly fixed in their sights.
Thank you so much, I will correct it!
Dear dr. Hickson, maybe you should also correct (or at least rethink) your statement that the marriage of the priests means the protestantization of the Catholic Church. Not only because such a simplified and naïve approach to the celibacy doesn’t match with someone who seems to have a doctoral degree, but also because it doesn’t stand in line with the Catholic truth that you pretend to defend. As much as I appreciate your commitment to the Catholic thing and your hard work on 1P5, it is hard not to notice that you sometimes difend your own vision of the Catholic Church and the Catholic truth, that is stronly influenced by Western Catholic Church and mostly ignorant of any experience of the Oriental faithful who are and always were members of the very same Catholic Church. In their tradition, there were always married priests the same as there were the hermits, and each of them was serving to the Lord according his vocation and mission that God gave them. And they have menaged to perserve their faith and fidelity to the Church in spite of all the chalenges that Catholics (and Christians) meet in the Middle East. Some of these priests also make a great example of the Catholic husbands and fathers, whose whole family serves to the Church, a precious example that in today’s crises of the marriage and family in the Western world is completely underestimated and misunderstood. Moreover, these same priests are to be thanked to for the fact that the Oriental Catholic have much stronger faith than the Western Catholics, and that in their everyday life they are able to put up
There is no need to be insulting. You are, however, both correct and incirrect regardibg celibacy. It is true that celibacy has been most strictly enforced in the Latin rite. However, the rule of the Church for all the other rites is that celibacy is preferred and once a candidate for the priesthood has been ordained to the transitional deaconate celibacy is required and marriage is not permitted.
It is easy for members of the Church to forget or overlook, without malice, the other rights simply because the Latin rite is so much larger. In fact, almost all of the true “orient” are members of the Latin rite because they were converted by Latin rite missionaries. I believe Maike was referring to the wholesale elimination of celibacy rather than the restriction of married priests as in the non-Latin rites of the Church. The elimination of celibacy eould mean Catholic priests could marry at any time unless there were other constraints such as a previous valid marriage. This, then, would be the same as the protestant practice and would undoubtedly lead to the “freedom” to divorce abd remarry without the need for an annulment and many other practices which are contrary to God’s Law. Yet Maike is inaccurate in saying the removal of the celibacy requirement woukd be the protestantization of the Church because that has been an ongoing process since Vatican II.
I am sorry if my open and direct speach equals with insults. It comes out of frustration due to the fact that people in the Western Church are not aware of the hypocrisy with which they represent themselves as “perfect Catholic faithful” or “perfect Catholic prelat”. That phenomenon is also connected with a dangerous trap of falling into exclusivism and elitism for the both. Gaining exclusive interviews from important Western prelats doesn’t mean that one can ignore the contributions of the Oriental faithful to the Catholic Church while defending the truth and tradition(s). Yet, the Western Catholic scholars tends to do that very often. It is a kind of Western hypocrisy that truly bothers me.
I understand the value of the celibacy, but in the Western Church it is considered almost as a “guarantee of validity” of the priesthood, though the current reality of the Church says in many ways that it overestimated as the “measure of commitment” to the Church and faithfulness to Jesus. Some priests are called to be hermets, some will live in celibacy, some serve through both familial and pastoral way. It is not the celibacy that defines whether they are the Protestants or the Catholics, or whether they are faithful to the Lord or not; what they teach and how they live their life defines their Catholicism. I believe it is God who decides how are we supposed to serve to the Church, not the people who impose their own cultural and religiois visions on others. It is what St. Paul was also said to St. Peter. On the other hand, by such rigide attitude (“the true or perfect Catholic priests are those who live in celibacy) the Western Church makes no differentiation when it comes to the possible service and practically rejects good men who could be faithful and great priests, though having their own family. And again, the Western Catholis fall into hipocrisy while speaking how family and marriage are important, but considering them unacceptable for their priests. The final result is the corrupted Church who lacks of faithful and bold Catholic priests, but has in aboundance those who “swear on celibacy” yet who should never be ordained for various reasons.
Actually, we in the Latin rite see celibacy as a mark of the priesthood because it has been required for so long. Those of us who know there are other rites besides the Latin rite (and the majority of the laity do not know this) do not equate the importance we place on celibacy with the lesser rites. Celibacy is actually a less important issue than most of the other deviations from orthodoxy that face the Church today and was a very minor part of Maike’s article.
You appear to be very angry. Anger is destructive and an occasion for sin. I would urge you to pray for understanding. I would also suggest that you write to Steve and request that he build relationships with well informed truly orthodox Catholics in the other rites. They need to be involved and contribute comments and articles here as well. That would helo all of us avoid excluding our eastern brothers and sisters. But again, please bear in mind that the Latin rite comprises roughly 99% of all Catholics worldwide.
You have it right! I am extremely angry when I see traditional Catholics who can’t see further from their nose and don’t dare to come out of their “comfort (safe) zone”, though it is necessary for the benefit of the Universal Church. Thank you to notice this.
The thing is, I live in the Middle East and see the Universal Church from different angle than an average Western Catholic faithful. The more I observe, the more I am frustrated with betrayal of our brothers and sisters from Oriental Churches, and self-centerdness of the Western Catholics who only want to impose their own thoughts and have no interest for learning from others. Westerns are unaware how much they still have to learn, and even in whole this panic about immigrants (which is reasonable!) they can’t realize their own weakness and start to more appreciate Catholics around the world (China, Africa, Middle East, even Eastern Europe). They only condemn everyone having different opinion or experience!
Then I come here and see that people have transformed the Traditional Latin Mass into some kind of “sole passport to Heaven”, and only those who make part of this “exclusive TLM club” are the “true Catholics” and “defenders of the Catholic Truth”. Yet, they don’t see how arogant they are and how disrespectful they are towards the Universal Church, who has also other rites they have never heard of! I was talking about traditions of the Oriental Catholics that is extremely important and can’t be ignored by someone who claimes that cares about Catholic Church, and than few messages above Winslow has told me that I should “convert”. How come that “true and perfect Catholics”, braging around with their attendance of the Traditional Latin Mess, can be so self-absorbed and so ignorant of the totality of the Catholic heritage? Oriental Catholics, though fewer in number, carry a heavy cross for all of us and the Universal Church, and they still pray in Jesus’s language… but they are not good enough because they don’t pray in Latin and they have married priests which Westerns see as an “unwanted children” in the Catholicism? Something is very wrong here!
The vast majority of orthodox Latin rite Catholics I have met do NOT have the attitudes you describe. If they serm too centered on the Latin rite it is because that is all they know. I myself was unaware there are other rites in the Church until I entered the Franciscan order as a postulant and vecame more aware after I started my theology studies. Furthermore, as I said, approximately 99% or more of all Catholics in the world belong to the Latin rite, including those in the far east such as Japsn, China and the Vietnamese. It was Latin rite missionaries who did the vast vast majority of the evangelization of the rest of the wotld. You are angry and criticize and belittle us because we unintentionally overlook the much smaller rites. Yet, the issues that cincern us most are those that affect the whole Church and not just the Latin rite; the distortion, dismissal and denial of authentic, orthodox, perennial doctrine and the very eord of God. Speaking if which, Jesus confirms that the Law of God is a law of love (“Locmve one another as I have loved you”). Yet, in your angry criticism, you ignore His words. Where is your understanding of the fact that the very issues of which you complain affect only the Latin rite and, thus, the huge majority of Catholics. Where is your sympathy for our concerns? You sin by these failures and by redorting to snger and negative comments rather than finding a way to present the isdues of concern to you and other eastern rite Catholics in a positive manner. Rather than lamenting our seeming self-centeredness educate and inform us with love, understanding and gentleness while at the same time having compassion regarding our concerns. Jesus orayed for unity. Your anger invites division.
As I have said, the sin is never your but someone elses and it is the Western Catholics that suffers the most so we need to be careful how to address to them no matter how disrespectful they are towards others. Wonderful! Shame on me and my sin of being angry with the righteous ones ☺
I understand your frustration, but you appear not to understand that our sins, as you call them, are more out of ignorance of other rites and cultures than because of indifference or lack of caring. This is why I’ve said you need to gently educate and inform us rather than condemning us. By condemning “traditionalists” you condemn yourself. I will say it one last time, all the members of the eastern rites comprise less than 1% of the total number of Catholics. Even the vatican has and does focus most of its attention on the Latin rite. If you were as good a Catholic as you seem to claim, why is it that you yourself fail to obey God’s word? Jesus says, “Remove the the plank from your oen eye before trying to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye” and “if you are going to offer your gifts at the altar and have a grievance with your brother, leave your gifts at the altar and go and be reconciled with your brother, then come back and offer your gifts” and “blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called sons of God” and we pray in the Lord’s prayer, “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” I see no evidence in this entire discussion that you follow any of these things. Until you do and practice the humility and gentleness of Christ, why should we listen to you?
Don’t bother with me. Rather become aware that no matter how one speaks to you, your are listening mostly yourself, thinking that you are the only ones who know how to worship God.
Excellent points, Mike, but Kora has many good points too. I’m Ukrainian Greek Catholic. When people see my Byzantine cross, sometimes they ask me: “Are you Orthodox?” I often reply: “No, I’m Ukrainian Catholic.” “Ukrainian Catholic? What’s that?”
Then I have to explain about the Eastern Catholic Churches.
Re the 1%: 1 Corinthians 12: 25-26
Mike, we are not from yesterday. People have right to be angry with what’s wrong, especially if it is presented as the truthful and righteous. They are not bad because of being angry with reason. Furthermore, we know how the usual discussion among the Traditionalists goes and what the topics are, how angry most of you usually are (many time also with reason) and what language is used when people are in such state. You can’t defend the (constantly) wrong attitude of the Traditionalist when it comes to the Oriental Catholics (the attitude that we see it is adopted even among well educated Western Catholics) by pointing out on my angry speak; like if I have speaked nicely they wouldn’t have such attitude. The Traditionalists are CONSTANTLY (over and over again) forgeting that the Universal Church is larger than them and differentiated even only for 1%, and that those who are not attached to the TLM or who have different expression of the faith within the Catholic Church are still true Catholics and not ones to be converted. That is the only thing that matters here.
When it comes to my wrongdoings, yes… I have them. You have focused your critics on the way I express myself in stead of what I am talking about, while most Traditionalist treat other people who are “out of the TLM club” even worse. Over and above, you don’t see the way they express themselves on this website, how they don’t know to deal with critics on their account and how they are not ready to correct themselves. From my point of view, this story about my eye and the plank is just a confirmation of the nature of your discours in which you are always pointng out on other Catholic groups, never on yourself. I can say it calmly or angry, but this is not good for the Universal Church.
Celibacy is a gift and can be the means of an undivided heart that serves God in a special and total way.
The same as the marriage or any other gift from God is.
Be careful what you wish for, Mike. Have you ever interacted with an Orthodox? They are the most arrogant, opinionated, insulting group of individuals I’ve ever encountered. My maternal aunts were over the top for arrogance. One of them was a dedicated anti-Catholic bigot. Getting any Orthodox on this site would be tantamount to throwing a hand grenade into a crowded room.
IMO.
Winslow, you are pointing your finger out on wrong people. Know first who the Oriental Churches are before doing so.
As I said, I’m Ukrainian Greek Catholic. I have relatives who are Russian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Byzantine Catholic, Maronite Catholic, Jewish and non-denominational.
True story:
In the fall of 2007, my parents and I visited my paternal uncle and aunt. Somehow the conversation came to the Good Friday prayer. I tried to explain that PB was pressured to change it. My aunt (a *devout* Russian Orthodox woman) pounded the table and shouted: “He had NO RIGHT to do that!!!” The way she talked, you’d think that she was a traditional Catholic because she gave all the arguments *against* changing the Good Friday prayer that +John Vennari (RIP) would write about in CFN.
She got that angry over ONE prayer. I guarantee you that if she was living, she’d go straight to the Pope and give him $ 10.00 worth of her mind instead of two cents. (And he’d probably listen to her since he’s favorable towards the RO.)
Margaret, there are no “Roman Catholics”. That is a misnomer. And all of us, regardless of the rite, who are members of the Catholic Church are simply “Catholics”. Distinguishing ourselves by rite is a sign of still imperfect unity. 🙂
I understand what you’re saying; however, the reference to 1 Corinthians 12 was meant to clarify what you just said:
Distinguishing ourselves by rite is a sign of still imperfect unity. 🙂
1 Corinthians 12:
Of the diversity of spiritual gifts. The members of the mystical body, like those of the natural body, must mutually cherish one another.
[1] Now concerning spiritual things, my brethren, I would not have you ignorant. [2] You know that when you were heathens, you went to dumb idols, according as you were led. [3] Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man, speaking by the Spirit of God, saith Anathema to Jesus. And no man can say the Lord Jesus, but by the Holy Ghost. [4] Now there are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit; [5] And there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord;
[6] And there are diversities of operations, but the same God, who worketh all in all. [7] And the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man unto profit. [8] To one indeed, by the Spirit, is given the word of wisdom: and to another, the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit; [9] To another, faith in the same spirit; to another, the grace of healing in one Spirit; [10] To another, the working of miracles; to another, prophecy; to another, the discerning of spirits; to another, diverse kinds of tongues; to another, interpretation of speeches.
[11] But all these things one and the same Spirit worketh, dividing to every one according as he will. [12] For as the body is one, and hath many members; and all the members of the body, whereas they are many, yet are one body, so also is Christ. [13] For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink. [14] For the body also is not one member, but many. [15] If the foot should say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
[16] And if the ear should say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? [17] If the whole body were the eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? [18] But now God hath set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him. [19] And if they all were one member, where would be the body? [20] But now there are many members indeed, yet one body.
[21] And the eye cannot say to the hand: I need not thy help; nor again the head to the feet: I have no need of you. [22] Yea, much more those that seem to be the more feeble members of the body, are more necessary. [23] And such as we think to be the less honourable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts, have more abundant comeliness. [24] But our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, giving to that which wanted the more abundant honour, [25] That there might be no schism in the body; but the members might be mutually careful one for another.
[26] And if one member suffer any thing, all the members suffer with it; or if one member glory, all the members rejoice with it. [
St. Paul distinguishes the eye, ear etc. but says in v. 20: But now there are many members indeed, yet one body.
So imo we are Catholics but can still distinguish between rites, just as I can distinguish persons in the members of my family. My sister is not me and I’m definitely not her (she can make leftovers look like something from the Food network while I can screw up scrambled eggs).
That’s what I was trying to say. Please don’t take it the wrong way. You’re a nice guy.
I wasn’t taking what you said the wrong way — and thank you for the compliment. What my comment was in reference to is the mistake that, I think, most people make, including me. We, especially in the Latin rite, and particularly when the media and everyone else makes the error, wr have a tendency to call ourselves Roman Catholic, as if tgat were the name of our Church. Your reference to yourself as Ukraniun Catholic identifies you, in my mind, as a Catholic whose ancestry is from the Ukrain — a particular geographical region. Likewise, if I say I’m Irish Catholic the same identification is made, but with a different geographical location. But to say we are Roman Catholic means either we are Catholics from the city of Rome or we are nembers of a church called by that name. Only catholic citizens of Rome would be able to apply the first zmeaning to themselves and to use the secind neaning woukd be technically incorrect vecause there is no “Roman Catholic Church”. The only correct and proper name for the church whose members are in communion with the pope and which was founded by Hesus Christ is the “Catholic Church”. That’s all I was getting at. It was intended as a mild correction.
Your quotes from Paul are quite appropriate, but even more importantly Jesus said, “…I pray, Father, that they may be one as You and I are one.” And, I forget where, Paul says something to the effect of ‘maintain the bond of unity or you will be grieving the Holy Spirit.’ Much of this conversation with Kora has been aimed at the opposite.
I was “shouting” beacuse I have figured it out that people in the West usually don’t hear those voice messages coming from the Middle East. Just jocking! ???? Seriously speaking, I was upset because there is obviously bottom line for everything (and so it exists for the religious things that are simply not true), so I replyed as I did. Howevet, you have totally misinterpretated me, running from your own responsibility. There is no “hate” or “anymosity” towards Traditionalist for if there were, I surely wouldn’t follow up with 1P5. But there is a huge disapontment with some attitudes the Traditionalists have and that are not correct.
Otherwise, I have never treatend to people with Satan because they are speaking the truth that I don’t want to hear or in the way that I don’t like. Not only because it is not what Catholics do in such banal situation as our discussion was, but also because you attribute to anger something that doesn’t (always) goes with it. As a feeling, anger can also come from man himself as well as from the Holy Spirit; Catholics can be angry because of someone grave sin, as well as some wrong thing or unjustice, the same as Our Lord was. I see you like when people give.you quotes from the Bible; I am sure thay you can search for those that will reasure you so next time when you wish to lean on Satan because you disagre with something that is honest and true, rethink about it.
And to understand better what can occure within diffrent discours, try with this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrhesia.
God bless you!
Thank you, Margaret, for your effort.
You’re welcome. I tried.
This “imperfect unity” exists since Paul and Peter’s discussion, meaning that is was put out of the question from the begining of the Church. In other words, using your terms, the Universal Church was “imperfect” from its very begining and such “imperfection” is one of its pilars. Whoever speaks opposite of what Peter and Paul were saying, doesn’t preach the Gospel at all, e. i. goes against the Word of God.
I can’t understand why the TLM goers can’t correct themselves and accept that the TLM belongs to the depositum fidei but that it is no mean of “unification” of the Catholics for our unity lays in our belonging to the Universal Church, the ecclesiastical teaching we share, the faith in Our Lord truly present in the Holy Eucharist, etc. Thus the “true and perfect Church” as well as “unity” is not what you (and unfortuanately many TLM goers) think and promote. I am not saying this because I “don’t like you” or have “anymosity” towards Traditionalists, but because you are very confident in making and spreading seriouse mistake that I can’t ignore. I hope you can understand my point.
Oh, you are so very perfect, kniwledgeable and full of wisdom. Are we supposed to bow down and worship you? You certsinly write like it. I am surprised you would even stoop to speak to us mere mortsls. Go away. Your arrogance annoys me and is an occasion for my own sin.
You see, whatever I have tried to say to you, whatever approach I took, your answer is always the same and it is always refusal to correct what is not good.
You don’t believe me, but I am writing this with complete peace in my hart and no hard feelings, trying to make you see the trap into which you fall and that can have the consequences that non of us want. And what is your reaction to that? “Are we suppose to bow and worship you?” – I don’t see any good intention in this nor how did you end up with such conclusion. However, I wish you all the best and show of God’s blessing.
Period.
Your aunt was a special woman. I know of no Orthodox who would take her position.
I’m afraid this entire discussion has gone off the rails. The hatred coming from Kora Neferovic has poisoned the thread. The sheer length of her rants tells me she has a chronic inferiority complex. I’d like to see her either tone it down and learn to respect her neighbors of get out of the conversation. I apologize for my part in it.
When I say orthodix (first letter in lower case) I’m speaking of the opposite of modernism; adherence to the Holy Spirut guided and perennial doctrines and teachings of the Church. When I soeak about non-Catholics of the eastern Christians I use “Orthodox”.
Kora nay have some good points, but the anger is not justified, is contrary to God’s commands and solves nothing. No one has the “right” to be angry. Anger is a companion of hatred and an expression of pride and arrogance and a ploy by Satan to ensnare souls (this is said by someone who has a very strong and volatile Irish temper). Were the points presented in a non-angry manner with humility and concilliatory, I would be willing to listen further. As it is, however, I’m done with this conversation.
Mike, I’m well aware of all the points you make and especially thank you for your remarks about ‘Roman Catholic.’ The ‘Roman distinction has always bothered me and I never use it.
I’m also aware of the Eastern Catholic members of the Church. There is a Melkite parish not far from where I live and I’ve attended the Divine Liturgy there. I think it was the St. Chrysostom Mass. They have a rich heritage which is a treasure for the Church.
I agree with Margaret and will add to it; you’re not only a nice guy, you’re a good and faithful servant of the Lord. God bless you.
It would appear from your comments in this particular discussion that you continue to confuse the Oriental Catholics who are in union with the Pope and the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church with the Orthodox who are in schism. Those who have commented here in defense of Oriental Catholics, however they my express themselves or whatever their criticism of western Latin Rite traditionalist Catholics, are not in need of conversion. They are as Catholic as you and I are. I may be misrepresenting you in this and if so I apologize, but your capitalization of the word “Orthodox” seems to indicate some confusion.
Most Western Catholics don’t even know the Eastern rites exist and mistake them or Orthodox. Unfortunately many of the Eastern rites Catholics that I’ve come across are so angry that it’s not pleasant dealing with them.
Funny thing, I live for few years already in the Middle East and I didn’t meet “unpleasant Eastern rites Catholics”. I only met very realistic persons who have deep faith and put up whit lot of “strange things” that are sent on their address by the Westerns (be it Catholics or not), and who are to certain point disapointed but keep their faith and move ahead as they can. And to be totaly honest here, since living on that part of the world I have become so too. I can understand better what is going on here and see clearly how rotten and hypocritical Western society is. It has nothing to do with hate but with pure facts.
[Miake Hickson is] “mostly ignorant of any experience of the Oriental faithful who are and always were members of that same Catholic Church. In their tradition, there were always married priests.”
Yes, and there is now the allowance of divorce and remarriage even to the second instance. The Orthodox are, like Pope Bergoglio, is schism from the Catholic Church. Priestly celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine. Your remark about “priests who (pretend to) live in celibacy!” is unfortunate and lacks substance. Sinful Catholic priests, like sinful Orthodox priests, and indeed all sinners, are traitors to Jesus Christ. We condemn them as you do and pray for them to repent.
Marriage is a dogma and a Sacrament. The Orthodox position on divorce and remarriage is a refutation of the words of Jesus Christ and is Protestant in origin and intent. You may congratulate yourself on your faith all you wish, but, in light of your position on the indissolubility of marriage, it is misplaced.
Oriental Catholic faithful were members of the Catholic Church until the 11th Century, when they broke from the Catholic Church over the filioque, which originated in the Syrian Church of the East and came to the West via Spain. Since then you have slowly drifted away from the orthodox faith and have isolated yourselves from Rome and from each other. A few years ago your prelates tried to organize a council, but were so arrogant and contentious they couldn’t even get that done. That speaks for itself.
Maike doesn’t need lectures from Orthodox cheerleaders, but I’m sure she prays for your conversion and your return to the true faith, as do I. God bless you.
You have no clue what you are talking about yet you are trying to teach others about what you don’t know. Oriental Catholic Churches were never in Schism with Rome! That is the problem of Western Catholics: we don’t know so much as we think we know, and not only that we lack of respect for our brothers in the Middle East but we don’t even know them!
Kora Neferovic said “Oriental Catholic Churches were never in Schism with Rome!”
Prove it. They are in schism today.
I was introduced to the Church in a Greek Orthodox parish. My mother and her family are Orthodox. I have studied Orthodox history. I’m pretty sure I know what I’m talking about. I stand by and repeat every word I wrote to you.
Again, I am telling you that you don’t know who your brother is. At least check the list of Congregations in the Roman Curia before you start to elaborate the Schism of the Oriental Churches, being “pretty sure what you are talking about” and thus misleading readers who are unaware of your mistake the same as you do.
Kora, by using “Oriental Churches” and “Oriental Catholics” you are using terms with which most Latin rite Catholics are unfamiliar — as I said in another post, we typically use another term, nanely “eastern Catholics” and “eastern rites”. You claim somewhere in this thread that you live in the Middle East. I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that English is not your native language. Every language and culture has its own paricular terms, forms.idioms, expressions and so forth. Even differrnt dialects of the same language have differences. It is unreasonable for anyone to expect another person to know all or even any of the differences in another person’s native language, especially when we don’t even know what that language is. What you have been exhibiting throughout this entire string of comments is the same level of animosity (hatred) for westerners as many of your Isamic neighbors. If it continues I will be forced to request you be barred from this site. Your oen arrogance, disrespect and apparent hatred is much too disrupting
Hey, both of you! We are supposed to be brothers and sisters. Let’s keep the discussion on a respectful level. Renember the admonishions in Scripture to return an insult with a blessing. I believe tgere is a misunderstanding if terms here. See my post above.
Excuse me, but I’m Ukrainian Greek Catholic. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church is the largest Oriental (Eastern) Catholic Church in full communion with the Holy See.
There are 25 Particular Churches which make up the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church under Her visible Head, the Roman Pontiff.
The RO are NOT in full communion with the Holy See.
Thanks much for this Margaret! I was thinking the same reading the above remarks.
BTW, I’ve been researching what I mentioned to you earlier in another thread about angels, and I found this in Jean Danielou’s The Angels and Their Mission, wherein he quotes Chrysostom, and then details how Origen first expressed it. Chrysostom wrote that “The Virtues of heaven are always with those who are charge with such offices.” (I.e., high offices in the Church.)
I’ve other resources to check, such as Fr. Pascale Parente’s The Angels In Catholic Teaching and Tradition. And of course Aquinas. 😀
RC
Winslow, in your post you appear to either have confused or unintentionally intermixed what Kora calls “oriental Catholics” and those of Orthodox (Christianity). The Orthodox indeed are and have been in schism from the Catholic Church since 1054. Kora is referring to what Latin rite Catholics, including prelates, usually refer to as eastern rite Catholics (see Margaret’s post below where she names some of these much smaller, but not insignificant, rites). Also, Kora claims to be a Latin rite Catholic who, apparently, has strong sympathies with the eastern rites of the Church. In fact, were it permitted, I imagine he (she?) would transfer to one of the eastern rites given the expressed animosity toward and dislike for traditional Latin rite Catholics.
You’re right, Mike. My mistake. It was made because the Orthodox think they are the original Catholic Church and Kora was so combative in her discourse it made be think she was Orthodox. I’ll try to pay closer attention. And thanks to the others who corrected me.
Their should be no married priests or bishops in any of the Rites. Including Eastern Rites. All should follow the same disciplines of the Roman Latin Rite.
“an additional empty place” ?? We still have four Cardinals who signed the dubia; the only change is that two of them are now Saints in Heaven and will therefore have more clout. Yes let the number increase to six but why stop there?
I BELIEVE THAT CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE WOULD MAKE A GOOD AND HOLY POPE PLEASE ALLOW MY FULL NAME AND MY E-MAIL TO REMAIN HERE AT MY OWN REQUEST.. FROM — Michael Emerson Long. ( My E-mail is—– [email protected]
Oh Lord, save us from Pope Francis!
It must annoy this pope no end that Benedict is still breathing.
That Benedict might someday speak in defense of what is true and sacred verses what he sees being dismantled must not sit well with the current bishop of Rome.
I’ll call Blase Cupich, see if he might come forward..!
Unfortunately, Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia was passed over for Cardinal by Francis. Not surprising. But he would have been an excellent replacement for one of the deceased Dubia cardinals.
We need to pray that all the Cardinals get a backbone and speak out against Pope Francis.