As reported in the Catholic Herald, on the eve of the first anniversary of Carlo Maria Cardinal Martini's death, September 2, 2013, Pope Francis publicly praised Martini as "a father for the whole Church," a “prophetic” figure and a “man of discernment and peace.”
I know Martini was a fellow Jesuit, like Francis. I know the Holy Father must have searched for something kindly to say about him. But why would he say precisely these things?
Cardinal Martini was notoriously one of the most revisionist liberal prelates of his generation, and a Cardinal to boot. From his writings and interviews, one easily gathers the nature of his perspective and the kinds of things he favored and promoted. He
- encouraged opening up the reception of communion to divorced and remarried Catholics
- favored homosexual civil unions
- called for a more collegial and synodal approach to church government
- insisted that you can't make God a "Catholic" God
- claimed that the Catholic Church is 200 years behind the times
- declared that our liturgical rites and vestments are pompous
- favored the dissent of the German and Austrian bishops against Humanae Vitae
- promoted widespread ill-defined ecumenism and inter-religious relations.
[Hat tip to J.V. - Advisory: Rules 7-9]]
11 comments:
>But why would he say precisely these things?
Maybe for these reasons stated in the Article?
Quote"During the brief meeting, the Pope told the group that the late cardinal played an important role during the general congregation of the Society of Jesus in 1974 in discussions about the relationship between faith and justice.....The cardinal was a prolific author whose books were best-sellers in Italy and included everything from scholarly biblical exegesis to poetry and prayer guides."END QUOTE
Lefebvre was a formal schismatic & yet does that mean there was nothing about him that was laudable? Same with Martini.
additionally I went threw a list of mostly spiritual books he wrote and read the reviews on amazon.
He got good reviews and even an orthodox Catholic who condemned his liberal views gave one of his books four stars and said he couldn't find anything heretical in them.
You list eight concepts that Cardinal Martini promoted , four of which are heretical, the other four being potentially so.
What is more worrying in a sense is that anyone could describe this man as a father of the Church and, if he is prophetic, well then we Catholics might just as well jack it in and go down to the pub, which we still have, in spite of ever increasing drinking laws, on this side of the pond.
B.Y.
Abp Lefebvre was excommunicated because he was disobedient. Unlike Martini, who probably rejected over 50% of what one finds in the Vatican II documents as "200 years behind the times," Lefebvre probably accepted over 95% of what's in the documents.
There have probably been little more than 20 formal excommunications since Vatican II, but which is the one we all remember? Lefebvre. Yet there continue to be large numbers of heretics in Cardinal's hats strutting their stuff in good standing in the Church today, like Cardinal Marx & Co.
Where are Rome's encomiums for Lefebvre? Why THIS encomium for Martini? The language will lead the world to look to the likes of him and his dissenting revisionism as approved by the Church. I disagree with you.
Ben: you stretch credibility to the level of Captain Fantastic. If you really believe what you write, then All is Well and Pope Francis is God's Man of the Hour. I for one think you have to be drinking the Kool-aid to buy that, but I do trait your motives, so am mystified.
Finally, Lefebvre was a Catholic. Martini was either a Modernist or a theologian heavily influenced by Modernism's essential notes.
As for the 1974 Society of Jesus, it was pagan, and Christian in name only. Which is why I still suspect anyone who is a Jesuit, even Francis or Schall. How can you maintain credibility when you swear alliance to a bad organization and pretend it remains good. Messengers of false doctrine are not good guys. And "justice"... don't make me spit out my drink.
@Charles
I don't care who was worst(Lefebvre vs Martini). I really don't. Both have done severely questionable things. One formally went into schism and the other promotes at best questionable views while flying under the radar.
My point is neither is so bad that regardless of their severe failings that they cannot be praised for the good they have done.
> you stretch credibility to the level of Captain Fantastic. If you really believe what you write, then All is Well and Pope Francis is God's Man of the Hour. I for one think you have to be drinking the Kool-aid to buy that, but I do trait your motives, so am mystified.
Charles I gave a plausible explanation as to why the Pope might praise Martini and call him a"Father
for the whole Church".
His spiritual writings seem good.
I am not defending Francis(thought I will if I perceive he is being unfairly attacked).
I am explaining.
You need to give it a rest my brother and not over react to me.
Peace be with you & God Bless.
B.Y.,
Good things can be said about bad men? Well of course: Stalin memorized the New Testament and Hitler made the trains run on time. But I wouldn't call either one of THEM a "father of the whole Church."
And while Lefebvre was declared formally an excommunicant, he was so much more Catholic than our current pope that the idea is materially laughable.
The "Captain Fantastic" remark was not mine. (You must be tired and confused.) But I agreed with it.
JMF,
Damn skippy Lefebre was a Catholic, and I'm glad to hear you say it, unlike the neoCath priest who called the SSPX protesters outside the Oklahoma satanic mass, something worse than the devil.
I'm just as happy to see you contrast Martini and his heretical version of religion, with Catholicism. Most neoCaths, again, willingly give him and his ilk credible standing in the Catholic Church, which turns my stomach.
Thank you!
>Good things can be said about bad men? Well of course: Stalin memorized the New Testament and Hitler made the trains run on time. But I wouldn't call either one of THEM a "father of the whole Church."
You are comparing Cardinal Martini to two mass murdering dictators?
I don't know how to respond to that other then to say that is a bit over the top & this is coming from me.
>And while Lefebvre was declared formally an excommunicant, he was so much more Catholic than our current pope that the idea is materially laughable.
Augustine said there is no excuse for Schism. The Pope who excommunicated him was a Saint.
just saying...
But his antinomian actions did bring about the revival of the Latin Mass(which is very good)...the irony.
>The "Captain Fantastic" remark was not mine. (You must be tired and confused.) But I agreed with it.
Yes I confused you with JM. Sorry about that but if you agreed with it my response also applies to you.
Cheers.
"Pasadena"???
Take this guy to the loony bin. I'm outta here.
C'mon you guys. BY's game is to nettle traditionalists. He will rustle up any argument on any subject, no matter how seemingly hackneyed, naive or nonsensical it may be, in order to ruffle trad and conservative (not neo-) feathers. He will shoot three or four scatterbrained posts to your every one. He will sink every blog topic neck deep in his deliberately obnoxious verbiage. That is what he has done on numerous blogs in the past (some of which have blocked him), that is what he is doing here. Anyone who responds to him becomes his little ball of yarn.
PP keeps him on a short leash, thankfully. I am not advocating that he be blocked, although I would shed no tears over a decision to do so. But I do think that those of you who seek to engage him in serious dialogue are dealing with someone whose primary goal is to provoke you.
Post a Comment