Tuesday 27 May 2014

To Safeguard Pope Francis’ Reputation...

A parishioner who is open to and who attends both the Traditional Mass and the Novus Ordo, said recently that looking at the situation with the Franciscans of the Immaculate (FFI and FSI) the Church under Francis appears to be staffed by destroyers. I pointed out that Francis is not responsible for every act of every individual he employs to undertake a task, but I understand my friend’s point. Taking Francis at his word (that he is a loyal son of the Church) we have to say that he respects and adherences to Tradition as a vehicle of Divine Revelation; similarly that he holds to the Church’s doctrinal and moral teaching on marriage and sexuality. Assertions that he is a ‘bad pope’ must therefore be wrong.

Sadly, his statement about not judging a homosexual person (which is correct in that we judge orientations, acts and situations but not persons) gave many the impression that he does not hold to the Church’s moral teaching; that we do not judge the homosexual orientation to be intrinsically disordered (which we do) or homosexual acts to be evil (which we do). Meanwhile the severity of the sanctions placed upon the FFI/FSI has brought many folk to consider the Church’s spiritual and liturgical tradition to be under attack from the Church herself. Taken together, Francis’ comments on homosexuality and the treatment of the FFI, have brought folk to the point of being scandalised in the theological sense (confronted by a stumbling block to faith). This is clear by many of the comments found on the internet. That is why the forthcoming Synod must uphold Traditional Doctrine on the family without fudging the issues, and why the situation with the FFI needs to be brought to an end quickly, justly -and in today’s parlance, ‘transparently’. For the sake of his reputation Francis needs to call his Synod to orthodoxy and his investigators to act with fairness and transparency.

Concerned Catholics have a right according to Vatican II to call their Popes and Bishops to account; many Catholics are exercising that right on the Internet, saying to their pastors, “You are but temporary caretakers; you are required by the Lord to ensure that what you received from your predecessors throughout history (and not just those of the last fifty years) you hand on to your successors whole, entire and uncorrupted.” Indeed, even the Papacy’s most prestigious gift –infallibility- is a negative gift; one which prevents a sincere Pope from damaging Divine Revelation; one which allows him to clarify what has always been believed in doctrine and morality, but not to alter or abandon it.

I write this post only so as to highlight the fact that the impression being received by many is that of a Rome intolerant of its own Tradition and of those who honour it; a Rome that is positively geared towards the destruction of her liturgical, spiritual and moral Tradition. If this impression is to be proved wrong the Synod must uphold the Truth in its texts and any suggestions is proposes for pastoral care, while true transparency and genuine justice must be seen as soon as possible in regard to the FFI –not only to safeguard the reputation of Francis and the Church, but to safeguard endangered souls who are scandalised by what they see and hear. After all, it was a very tiny minority who were unhappy in the FFI, and their proper response ought to have been to seek release from the FFI and admission to another Order, and Rome should have told them so. Simply put, the Friars ought not to have set out to destroy that which they no longer loved: a man unhappy with his wife divorces her; he does not set out to destroy her.

The traditional, charity-active religious life of these Friars and Sisters has the authority of history behind it; Rome may see it as “old-fashioned” religious life and not useful in evangelising today’s world, but it cannot judge it to be wrong or bad since it is her own patrimony and what sustained her down through the centuries to today. And since it cannot be judged as wrong or bad, it cannot legitimately be condemned, because the Church has all authority to forbid what is evil but no authority to forbid what is good: her authority is limited “unto edification and not unto destruction” (2.Cor.10v8; 13v10). In fact, since the FFI are (were?) flourishing and attractive to many young folk there is no evidence that their religious charism is not useful in today’s Church; indeed the growth of the Order is evidence that the opposite is true. The same can be said about the use of the Usus Antiquior which attracts many young families.

In conclusion, we need to avoid ascribing an attitude of destruction to Francis and his appointees, because only the devil is wicked enough to use the Church to attack herself in her own heritage –aware of my own shortcomings I for one would not like to accuse Francis of such wickedness. In his turn, Francis must ensure the Synod is orthodox and the FI situation concluded justly, transparently and swiftly.

To those who have some suspicion of (or even hostility toward) Tradition, I repeat what scripture counsels: “if this work is from men, it will dissolve and pass away. But if it is from God, you have no power to destroy it, and may be found to be opposing God." (Acts 5v38-39).

9 comments:

  1. I refuse to believe Pope Francis is unaware of the plight of the FFI and think it's legitimate to be a bit cynical about what's going on considering the rejection and wreckovation of Catholicism over the last 50 years or so at the hands of the Popes and bishops. Francis has the power to save the FFI but thus far he does nothing. The papally led wreckovation of Tradition for the last 50 plus years has many of us radically skeptical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Justin.
      I think Francis is aware too, which is why I say he needs to bring the situation to an end swiftly and justly. His reputation will be sullied if he does not because the measures taken seem draconian to many.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  2. Father, the destruction is plain for all to see, and Francis is permitting it. He may have no one to answer to in this word, but he will in the next. If our Bishops and priests want to blindly follow him because he has earthly popularity, then they will face the same judge whose truth does not change, no matter what the Pope and Bishops think or desire.
    BJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, BJ.
      I don't think Bishops and priests should be too swayed by the current popularity of Francis, because it is the Faith they must follow, not whoever sits in the papal throne. It would be a new kind of ultramontanism, I think.
      God Bless.

      Delete
  3. "After all, it was a very tiny minority who were unhappy in the FFI, and their proper response ought to have been to seek release from the FFI and admission to another Order, and Rome should have told them so. Simply put, the Friars ought not to have set out to destroy that which they no longer loved:"

    Strange that the above reminds me of Lefebvre when he was Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers and his unhappiness with radical reforms. The twist though is that his departure destroyed the order. Not the other way around. All the same, Father, there is something about the intervention with FFI that reminds me of the early days of SSPX.

    God bless
    Sonia

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Sonia.
      I think many people are concerned that since Tradition cannot be overridden without denying the catholic faith, that the current situation may push the FFI/FSI into the arms of the SSPX. If that happens, Rome will only have itself to blame. Tradition is to be preserved, protected and fostered, not attacked and outlawed. I think this is going over the heads of many who, without realising it, do seem to see Vatican II as a new beginning, which it cannot be.
      God Bless.

      Delete
    2. Sonia,
      Archbishop Lefebvre had resigned from the Holy Ghost Fathers well before he began the SSPX. He was living in Rome as a retired Bishop helping out in the Curia when he was asked by several young seminarians to take them under his wing. The Holy Ghost fathers are still going.
      JB

      Delete
  4. Father,

    My first reaction on hearing that “who am I to judge” statement is that it could hardly have been worse and it will be quoted back at us by our enemies a hundred years hence. A year has passed and there is no cause to change that view.

    The Holy Father has a problem with how he communicates. We have heard the expression” a riddle within an enigma” or whatever, applied to him. I would say that he tries to be all things to all men and ends up puzzling everyone.

    As for the FFI, both St Pius V and Benedict XVI confirmed the Vetus Ordo (Ongoing Mass) as the standard mass of the Church “in perpetuity” although clearly other forms such as the Novus Ordo can be permitted. That is all that has to be said.

    As for the Synod it is, as was Vat II unnecessary. And unnecessary things often cause trouble.

    All that is needed is a statement from the Holy Father to the Church that marriage is indissoluble, the family is the basis of Christian life, and that divorce, remarriage and receiving Holy Communion, constitute a mortal sin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Jacobi.
      You are not alone in your reaction or thoughts.
      God Bless.

      Delete

Please comment using a pseudonym, not as 'anonymous'.
If you challenge the Magisterium, please do so respectfully.
We reserve the right to delete from comments any inflammatory remarks.
If we do not reply to your comment it is through lack of time rather than interest.