Saturday, February 28, 2015

The silence is telling

Guy Noir - Private Eye emailed me the following (must have borrowed a computer) :   

D. G. Hart, "Church Reformed" (Old Life, February 27, 2015)

The archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone (gotta love that name), is kicking up a lot of dust in Roman Catholic and California circles for the policies he has initiated within his parochial schools.  Here‘s an example of what Cordileone has in mind:
We, the Archdiocesan High Schools, Acknowledge that some of our administrators, faculty or staff may not be Catholics and some may be Catholics who are struggling to achieve fidelity to some of the teachings of the Church, but we are all nevertheless called and required to stand as effective and visible professional participants and proponents of truly Catholic Education. As effective professionals in a Catholic School setting, we all – administrators, faculty and staff – are required and expected to avoid fostering confusion among the faithful and any dilution of the schools’ primary Catholic mission. Therefore, administrators, faculty and staff of any faith or of no faith, are expected to arrange and conduct their lives so as not to visibly contradict, undermine or deny these truths. To that end, further, we all must refrain from public support of any cause or issue that is explicitly or implicitly contrary to that which the Catholic Church holds to be true, both those truths known from revelation and those from the natural law. Those of us who consider themselves to be Catholics but who are not in a state of full assent to the teachings of the Church, moreover, must refrain from participation in organizations that call themselves “Catholic” but support or advocate issues or causes contrary to the teachings of the Church.
Some Roman Catholics wonder if Cordileone is in line with Pope France:
Cordileone suggests that he is in line with Pope Francis. In one way, he may be correct: It doesn’t appear that Francis is going to be changing any doctrine in the near future. But the whole world knows we have a pope who is focusing on Jesus’ message of love and inclusiveness and who has told Cordileone and his fellow culture warrior bishops to quit being obsessed with the sexuality issues. Our archbishop doesn’t even appear to be listening to his boss.
And if Pope Francis wants the church to come along side people who struggle with Roman Catholic teaching on marriage and sex, how is Cordileone helping the cause:
Cordileone stated that Catholics who endorse contrary views “create toxic confusion about our fundamental values.” But if Catholic couples, in the spirit of the pope’s recent comments, limit the number of children they have, is that toxic? If you are a little girl who is only here because science helped her mom and dad conceive her, is that toxic? If you are a 10 year old abused child and the only adoptive parents who want you are a loving, qualified gay couple, is that toxic? If you think that the civil rights of gays and lesbians should be protected, is that toxic?
Meanwhile, eight California legislators, mainly Democrat, are challenging the archbishop’s policies even as they raise questions about separation of church and state. In response, Cordileone wonders if the politicians would HIRE as campaign managers people who side with their political adversary in an election.
What may be the most provocative aspect of this controversy is what the archbishop’s reforms mean for the capacity of the Roman Catholic Church to achieve discipline. Isn’t this a case of an archbishop actually laying out policy in line with church teaching? If he can do it, why can’t others? And if others don’t follow Cordileone’s lead, why don’t Jason and the Callers reflect more on what this says about their communion where truth with a capital-T prevails (at least in theory)?


Raider Fan


Absent discipline, Doctrine dissolves.

Here is an excerpt of the opening speech of Vatican Two, delivered by Pope Saint John 23rd but written by the then Abp of Milano, AKA soon-to-canonised Pope Blessed Pau Vl:


... And often errors vanish as quickly as they arise, like fog before the sun. The Church has always opposed these errors. Frequently she has condemned them with the greatest severity. Nowadays however, the Spouse of Christ prefers to make use of the medicine of mercy rather than that of severity. She consider that she meets the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations. Not, certainly, that there is a lack of fallacious teaching, opinions, and dangerous concepts to be guarded against an dissipated. But these are so obviously in contrast with the right norm of honesty, and have produced such lethal fruits that by now it would seem that men of themselves are inclined to condemn them, particularly those ways of life which despise God and His law or place excessive confidence in technical progress and a well-being based exclusively on the comforts of life. They are ever more deeply convinced of the paramount dignity of the human person and of his perfection as well as of the duties which that implies. Even more important, experience has taught men that violence inflicted on others, the might of arms, and political domination, are of no help at all in finding a happy solution to the grave problems which afflict them.
That being so, the Catholic Church, raising the torch of religious truth by means of this Ecumenical Council, desires to show herself to be the loving mother of all, benign, patient, full of mercy and goodness toward the brethren who are separated from her. To mankind, oppressed by so many difficulties, the Church says, as Peter said to the poor who begged alms from him: "I have neither gold nor silver, but what I have I give you; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise and walk" (Acts 3:6). In other words, the Church does not offer to the men of today riches that pass, nor does she promise them merely earthly happiness. But she distributes to them the goods of divine grace which, raising men to the dignity of sons of God, are the most efficacious safeguards and aids toward a more human life. She opens the fountain of her life-giving doctrine which allows men, enlightened by the light of Christ, to understand well what they really are, what their lofty dignity and their purpose are, and, finally, through her children, she spreads everywhere the fullness of Christian charity, than which nothing is more effective in eradicating the seeds of discord, nothing more efficacious in promoting concord, just peace, and the brotherly unity of all.

One supposes that, in theory, one could have had a worse misreading of the times... but, hey, so what if heresy and insanity and perversion is preached within the Church, what harm could come from that?

Raider Fan


And the he was Pope, he really went the full ,whatever, Monty:


Having proclaimed Religious Liberty to be a sacred and inalienable right of man, you are no longer able – indeed you do not wish to do so – to exercise any legislative, judicial or coercive power even inside the Church. You would rather be loved than obeyed, and to charm rather than command.
You do not see anything which requires to be suppressed ; you are not concerned about “  removing any specific heresies concerning the Church, or… remedying any public disorders – for disorders of this sort have not, thank God, raised their head in our midst.  ” (Ecclesiam Suam, No. 44) But they exist, surely, within secular society  ? Admittedly. “  The Church … might content itself with conducting an inquiry into the evils current in secular society, condemning them publicly, and fighting a crusade against them… But it seems to Us that the sort of relationship for the Church to establish with the world should be more in the nature of a dialogue, though theoretically other methods are not excluded.  ” (Ecclesiam Suam, No. 78)

On February 17, 1969 you admitted that grave errors and serious disorders were indeed widespread in the Church. But even then, you preferred to let things take their course : “  It would be easy, and even perhaps our duty to rectify…but…  ” But… you would let “  the good people of God do it themselves  ” ; and why  ? “  You will have noticed, my dear friends,  ” you were to say, “  to what extent the style of Our government of the Church seeks to be pastoral, fraternal, humble in spirit and form. It is on this account that, with the help of God, We hope to be loved.  ” (Address to the Roman Clergy)
On 9th July of that year you announced a further stage in the liberalisation of ecclesiastical discipline : “  We are about to see a period of greater freedom in the life of the Church and, therefore, in that of each of her children. This freedom will mean fewer formal obligations, and fewer inward inhibitions. Formal discipline will be reduced, all tyranny will be abolished… Every form of intolerance and absolutism will similarly be abolished.  ” And so, at a time of the gravest crisis of Faith and Morals, you inaugurate the anarchy of a “  permissive society  ” where all are free to follow the desires and promptings of their private conscience  !
It was for the same reason that you decided, very early on, to reform the Curia, the Holy Office in particular. (Discourse to the Council on November 18, 1965) On June 15, 1966 the Index was abolished. Soon the Holy Office changed its name and its function ; it would no longer condemn but devote itself to constructive research  ! The time of interdicts and excommunications had passed. That was why I had all the difficulty in the world in obtaining my request to be “  judged  ” by Rome, because “  that was no longer done  ”, as Cardinal Lefebvre explained to me.

And now we have a Pope who is the child of Pope Blessed Paul VI and a most robust one at that

Raider Fan


Catholic Encyclopedia.


Object of discipline


There still remain the obligations incumbent on the faithful considered individually, either on the members of different groups or classes of ecclesiastical society, or, finally, on those who are to any extent whatever depositaries of a portion of the authority. This is discipline properly so called, exterior discipline, established by the free legislation of the Church (not, of course, in a way absolutely independent of natural or Divine law, but outside of, yet akin to this law) for the good government of society and the sanctification of individuals. ..

Disciplinary power of the Church

.. Disciplinary power is proved by the very fact of its exercise; it is an organic necessity in every society whose members it guides to their end by providing them with rules of action...

... In fact, we need only to recall the numerous laws enacted by the Church in the course of centuries for the maintenance, development, or restoration of the moral and spiritual life of Christians.

++ end quote ++++++

However, in this new dispensation in the springtime of the new pentecost in the civilisation of love, our Popes desire to be loved, and they are not interested in disciplining its heretical prelates and priests - only the traditional orders are verboten- nor are they interested in our sanctification.

The Catholic Church is a perfect society that refuses to defend itself from its internal and external enemies and so that perfect society continues to shrink.

Sure, it is madness, but that is the way it has officially been since that opening statement of V2 so no wonder Bishop Cordileone is under such fire.

He is acting like a Bishop (Teach, Rule Sanctify) and he is out of step with nearly all other Bishops so of course the average politician is flummoxed



But Raider Fan, are you not dissing the Pope? And his newly appointed Doctor?

Granted, I was already confused. But now I am very confused. Perhaps I should invoke the intercession of any postconciliar Pope/Saint[PCPS] for guidance here, if, that is, they are kept abreat of doctrinal developments that see of the Celestial Divide! ("Gay sex *was* a mortal sin, but that was because you were Very Uptight, Bro' Bellarmine! No offense, Dude!, but we need to check it out wont the Church's latest Doc, Peter Maurin!" Ya know?!

Raider Fan


Dear JM. Raider Fan can both name-drop and claim to have passing contact with sanctity because back in Vermont, he was friends with a guy name, Eric, whose Mom was the daughter of Maurin's confederate, Dorothy Day.

As to the newly appointed Doctor of the Church, how is that to be understood seeing as how the new Doctor was not a Catholic?