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).
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).
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.
ReplyDeleteThank you Justin.
DeleteI 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.
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.
ReplyDeleteBJ
Thanks, BJ.
DeleteI 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.
"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:"
ReplyDeleteStrange 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
Thank you, Sonia.
DeleteI 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.
Sonia,
DeleteArchbishop 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
Father,
ReplyDeleteMy 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.
Thank you, Jacobi.
DeleteYou are not alone in your reaction or thoughts.
God Bless.