www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Synod: Testimony of Metropolitan Job (Getcha) of Pisidia

Brief, informative and to the point: Synod: Testimony of Metropolitan Job (Getcha) of Pisidia [vaticannews.va]. I would nuance 2) and 3) a bit differently otherwise, a very nice summary giving an Eastern appraisal.

From the link:

Note, the phrase is repeated.

Compare: Synodality versus True Identity of the Church as Hierarchical Communion [cardinalburke.com] Oct 05, 2023. Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke

I offer this reflection of mine in response to the above; and beyond this, pray that subsequent threads return to those topics more critical to our eastern traditions:

The Man Who Would be Pope

Raymond Cardinal Burke is a bishop without a diocese and a Cardinal without a country; such are exiles. And His Eminence has, in great measure, exiled himself - all in the name of what he sees as the Truth. I find it strange that this cardinal-at-large even has his own website, and speaks with an authority that belies that of the Bishop of Rome who is in possession of his own diocese. Odd that he should hold in opposition a man more than twenty years his elder and who was elected at a conclave that he attended; but that’s getting a little too ad hominem.

But more to the point: How can this man so limit the authority of the man who holds the very office he so extols, quoting Council documents etc. to affirm his staunch orthodoxy? Does not the Bishop of Rome have a right to reform, and realign the Roman Curia which is at his service and more broadly at the service of the Church universal? Does he not also have the right to broaden the Synod of Bishops that grew out of the II Vatican Council to reflect on what it means to be synodal; and to have consecrated religious sisters and brothers as well as plain old male and female laics participate? Of voting members of this present and on-going Synod the vast majority are, and will be bishops, so that it does not and will not betray its episcopal character. Bishops in collaboration with the Bishop of Rome will have the final say, for certain. Lord, it's not an Ecumenical Council; but reading the cardinal's letter one would think it is. And how can Cardinal Burke so cynically deny that such a gathering cannot breathe with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Or is the clevage of a female African participant too much for his prudish ecclesial tastes? Pope Francis has been quite emphatic in saying that the Synod is not a Parliament. For one who does not like ambiguity and abstraction, I find that the exiled Cardinal engages in both to suit his own purposes.

As far as the eastern Orthodox tradition of synodality is concerned; they certainly have kept it alive, and while it can serve as an inspiration for the west, so to speak, there is no reason, as is the present case, why this cannot be expanded to include the participation of a broad spectrum of the laity, both consecrated religious men and women as well as others of the faithful. I have no specific historical data, but I am quite certain that there have been times when the laity, both regal and pedestrian, have been at a synod or two in the east.

I submit that the nature of the "Synod" is critical to Catholic theology, that what is critical to Catholic theology comprises Eastern Catholic theology, thus, of even greater importance than "traditions"; that the understanding, the the voice of the Orthodox -- here in the official intervention of the representative of the EP -- is "critical to our eastern traditions," and ... But let me ask, what do YOU have in mind as "those topics more critical to our eastern traditions"?

He could be. Does that scare you? It should. Think about it [a rhetorical statement]. He may even vote in a future Conclave.

He's retired (he was Archbishop of St. Louis, USA, from 2004 to 2008). This is the case for all retired bishops. Pope Benedict was a bishop without a diocese.

He was (probably considered) a citizen of Vatican City until evicted. He must still be a US citizen.

True about "the Truth" and " in great measure, exiled himself" but exiled by Pope Francis even more so by ukase.

"a man more than twenty years his elder." Card.Burke is 75; Pope Francis soon will be 87. ?????????

The Pope has the authority. Pope Francis has, though I say exactly because of his excesses, provoked a needed demystification of the Petrine Office. It is those who would have been labeled Ultramontanists [en.wikipedia.org] who are raising the concerns. The irony is that it is those who would have most aligned with the Papacy -- not one particular Pope -- are raising the questions and sounding the alarm. Those advocating an adolescent, sophomoric theology of the Papacy are the ones shouting, obey the Magisterium, period. It is the questioning of Pope Francis that is furthering the Church's understanding of the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, in relation to the entire Church, especially the episcopate. Many believed that after Pastor aeternus [en.wikipedia.org] there would be no need for (Ecumenical) Councils. Pope St. John XXIII demonstrated that to be incorrect. Now we see those appealing to Tradition adding a needed nuance and limit to the Papacy in relation to the body of the episcopate and demonstrating the collegiality that VCII reinvigorated. This is the natural process of Tradition, the Church acting as it is: Agere Sequitur Esse [morallife602038257.wordpress.com]. The Pope is Peter and also and of necessity a member of the body, the college of bishops. And like Christ and His body the Church, the Pope as Peter without the body of which he is a member is no Pope at all but an individual of the worse kind.

Met Job, explicitly with historical references, in his intervention, refers to this and its context in the Eastern understanding.

Christ is in our midst!!

Utroque,

Cardinal Burke and Bishop Strickland have "sounded the alarm" at the excesses of Pope Francis in relation to his decrees relating to the blessing of same-sex unions, which the Catechism of the Catholic, condemns. There are also other recent decrees that seem to go against the Faith. It is the responsibility of a bishop to do do this. This pope's inability to listen to other voices that do not agree with him is the problem.

The president of the Catholic League also raised questions about the pope's shift in a letter to Rome in which he asked if the condemnation of the LGBTQ movement and lifestyle by many members of the United States Catholic Conference over the past ten years was wrong or if the pope's recent decrees were wrong. He received no reply. He asked why organizations that have been condemned and person's affiliated with them have had the pope's attention in such open and public fashion. He received no answer.

These are serious issues.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church was conceived, written, and promulgated to set the record straight about what the Catholic Church actually teaches. It was a response by Pope St John Paul 2 to the confusion that had become so rampant between the end of Vatican 2 and his election. I remember that time vividly. It seemed that every priest had his own take on every issue and there were as many answers to the same question as there were members of the clergy and processional theologians. Cardinal Burke and Bishop Strickland made their points in a heightened fashion because there was no response from Rome. (BTW, more than one canon lawyer has pointed out that Pope Francis' removal of both are serious breaches of the same canon law that outlines his authority. As Pope St John Paul 2 explained when he promulgated the Code, it was meant to give everyone in the Church the rules needed for order and to protect the rights of each person.) There have been suggestions Pope Francis wants to rewrite this tome.

I, too, am disturbed that as short a time as six to nine months ago transgenderism and the LGBTQ agenda were condemned only to be reversed in this latter short period. My questions is whether we are still in the business of saving souls or are we accommodating the spirit of the age. Christians stand on the shoulders of the Old Testament which calls homosexual acts "an abomination." Leviticus also commands God's people not to alter their bodies by cutting. I assume that this prohibition would also apply to chemical and surgical alterations of God's creation of each of us. Calling homosexual relationships "Holy Love" seems to confuse what we used to call "perverted lust" with normal human caring for another person. It certainly is not in the same league as the normal relationship between a man and a woman.

That the German Catholic Church is promoting and doing all the things that the two bishops in question raise as serious issues should not entre into the discussion. What the MSM does not tell you is that there are more conservatives in the Church than just the United States. There have been harsh criticisms of these changing praxis from Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa, but the MSM chooses not to mention that. The drumbeat has been only the pope's criticism of the Church in the United States.

Perhaps I was a bit overly dramatic and flippant in my characterization of Cardinal Burke. What I am trying to say is that, retired or not, he’s a loner; and, what is more, along with two or three other Cardinals, has been an active critic of the very person of the pope he and they themselves pledge to uphold. He has done this not only on his website, but in interviews with Raymond Arroyo of EWTN, and most recently in Rome at an event (“Synodal Babel”) that was set up as a foil for the Synod taking place simultaneously. The very title of his presentation, “Synodality versus True Identity of the Church as Hierarchical Communion” stands itself as an affront not only to the pope, but to the bishops gathered in the Synod in communion across town trying with the aid of faithful Catholics in their midst to more deeply understand what synodality means. In short, who does he think he is?

As far as I know, Theophan, Pope Francis has issued no decree that allows the blessing of same sex unions. He may have hinted at the possiblity of blessing a gay couple who have pledged to live chaste lives. Could you give me a reference where he has made such a decree and just what he states? Whether we're single or in a union, if we have any labido left, we struggle with our sexuality. I think all anyone wants is honesty in the Church. Repentance is a constant beckoning, is it not? Speaking of excesses; I think the Cardinal's "Capa Magna" is. There's an old story that good St Pope John XXIII steped on Cardinal Spellman's when he descended the altar steps of St Peter's after he made his obeisance.

I have become aware of a 2019 book, In the Closet of the Vatican: Power, Homosexuality, Hypocrisy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Closet_of_the_Vatican

"A central thesis of his book is that cardinals and bishops who make the strongest condemnations of homosexuality are more likely to be gay themselves; he describes this as part of their attempt to cover up who they really are."
From Jesuit, America Magazine

            Has anyone read this book?

Cardinal Burke plays a role in the book...I found the following:

https://nihilobstat.info/2019/03/26/did-frederic-martel-just-out-cardinal-raymond-burke/


I have been reading many reviews, both positive and negative. Not one review seems to unequivocally refute the main premise, basic concepts, or charges.  If there is even a few ounces of truth to this book, we are all being mislead..... If any of it is true, the moral concerns that we rally around, are put forth as a giant smokescreen.

How does one feel about relating this to the Forum? Sad. It is upsetting, and I considered not mentioning it. But, I would rather be sad than debate with good people over a ruse. I don't like being mislead.

Theophan, if there is another thread that deals with this book, please refer me to it, I tried to find one but couldn't.

I generally don’t like these “tell all” books; in their zeal to tell it all they often incriminate the innocent and leave one wondering if there is any good left on earth. My faith and experience leads me to believe that, indeed, there is a lot; it just gets hidden behind the headlines.

That said, I will make this my last statement on this thread.

From the time I watched this humble Italo-Argentinian bishop walk, limping a bit, through the streets of Rome behind the Corpus Christi monstrance of his Lord’s presence, I knew we had a saintly Bishop of Rome. He has visited the parishes of his diocese; traveled the world, visited refugees and shared food with the destitute homeless. God bless him for sharing lunch with transvestites. I view every effort to malign, nit-pick and disparage the words and gestures of this good papa (the English word “pope” just doesn’t cut it) a “sin against the Holy Spirit”! He has NOT made any statement that contradicts the doctrine or moral teaching of the Church and I defy anyone to specifically show me otherwise. I know personally that his humble example has brought people to the Faith, and it has strengthened mine.

Utroque,

The fact that Pope Francis has hinted at this possibility and called these relationships "holy love" is itself a sin of scandal. Anyone can call him out on this issue. No one assumes or is naive enough to call these relationships that he says may be blessed, going forward, "chaste." Several articles with comments have called this a "non-starter." Holiness does not encompass everything, every practice, and every opinion. It still remains that, as with the human body, a healthy body cannot tolerate everything that comes along. Some things are toxic and some things are contrary to what they body has been designed for.

I still go back decades ago when I was taught with no ambiguity that practicing homosexuals would never enter the Kingdom. Of course, the same was true for those who made it a lifetime practice to commit adultery and fornication. God has called us to purity. He gives us the ascetic practices of our Churches and Mystery of Confession so that we have time and time again a chance to pull our lives back on track. But a lifetime of practice with refusal to repent is a losing proposition. It think the damage is to the young--already inundated with the secular culture, its denial of God or any ultimate accountability for one's behavior, and calls for freedom that is license--that these two bishops have called attention to. The tragedy is that the Latin portion of the Catholic Church has abandoned its ascetic tradition and the tools we had to fight the good fight in so many areas. The fact that no one wants to call a sin a sin is troubling. It goes to a big error that has overtaken the Catholic Church since the Vatican Council that says everyone goes to Heaven no matter what they have done and no matter if they ever repented anything they did.

Cardinal Burke is not "a loner." I know clergy who will privately admit that they agree with his public statements but are afraid to go public because they don't want to be on the wrong side of what may become the "party line." The Catholic League president has also called attention to this and catalogued the condemnations of the groups and individuals that Pope Francis has embraced at his recent Synod. He addressed them to Rome, with no response, with the question whether the majority of senior Catholic bishops in the United States have been wrong in the last couple decades or is the new position that seems to be evolving wrong. He says that they both cannot be true.

Here it is; Ipsissima Verba (In English translation) -

Pope Francis's Response to the Second Dubium

a) The Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called "marriage." Other forms of union realize it only in "a partial and analogous way" (Amoris Laetitia 292), so they cannot be strictly called "marriage."
b) It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere "ideal."
c) For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.
d) However, in our relationships with people, we must not lose the pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defence of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.
e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.
f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as "sinners" other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).
g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops' Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that "is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule" as this "would lead to an intolerable casuistry" (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.

This is quoted in full for proper context.

Please provide the links to the "many reviews" of this guilty by innuendo until proven innocent beyond ANY doubt approach.

I'd expect this from those Jesuit scoundrels. Then I read the article that concludes: See attached New book~ 'In the Closet of' the Vatican~~ produces a toxic cloud of'suspicion
For a fast-food, throw-away culture accustomed to paper plates and napkins and plastic utensils, an elegant meal on fine china with silverware, tablecloth & napkins might seem odd to ridiculous. Or maybe just "retro"? At the time, the Tridentine Liturgy was a complete and integral use of the one rite. Those who co-opt the Franciscan ethos to their singular viewpoint need to open their eyes quite a bit wider.

Card. Burke pontificates with the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate [wdtprs.com]
Posted on 28 December 2010.

I believe that on a forum, this forum, it is proper to post on the content of a post and engage that content with facts and questions, and that in contrast to posting a judgement or feeling about the post itself. Here I make an exception, how I "feel" about it, my judgement about the post itself: Unworthy.

I sincerely hope that the info on this book is unworthy of posting. It would be an awful thing for some in the hierarchy to discredit Pope Francis while having ulterior motives, and drag others into the sham. There are many reviews that the book contains too much heresay and unproven assumptions, that's for sure..

It is difficult to find any official response to the book's thrust.

 However, along the way I noticed this 2020 statement by Cardinal Burke:

https://www.catholicaction.org/cardinal_burke_addresses_the_clergy_scandal

In this statement, he concedes......." Now it seems clear in light of these recent terrible scandals that indeed there is a homosexual culture, not only among the clergy but even within the hierarchy, which needs to be purified at the root. "

Also this one by Bishop Morlino, Madison, Wisconsin:

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...ure-is-source-of-devastation-in-the-chur

He states: "It is time to admit that there is a homosexual subculture within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church that is wreaking great devastation in the vineyard of the Lord. 


Now, both of these statements are from the train of thinking that homosexuality is the cause of clerical sexual abuses. ( that is what they were in reference to) And that is another important (and debatable) issue, and leads to the assumption that homosexuality causes abuse, including pedophilia. It also ignores the cover- ups that were enabled by clericalism. But let's no go there, that's fodder for a whole other debate....

I don't like talking about any of this. I find it very foreign to my 67 year old mind. I only brought this book to the surface here because of the disdain for Pope Francis' perceived lax on moral issues. Before we proceed to dismantle his reputation, we better be sure of the motivations and situations of his detractors. It is not out of the realm of possibility that it is the Pope who actually carries the standard for morals here. I find that his comments and actions toward the hierarchy betray a knowledge that's more than meets the eye.

Thanks for being patient with me. 

I will now rest my case, I promise.

Christ is in our midst!!

I think this thread has strayed beyond its original purpose. I also think we have embarked on damaging the reputations of bishops, a practice we have never allowed on this forum.

I am, therefore, closing this thread.

Bob
Moderator