[Catholic Herald] In a book coming out just before October’s extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the family, Cardinal George Pell rules out proposed changes to church practice that would allow divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Communion.
“Doctrine and pastoral practice cannot be contradictory,” writes Cardinal Pell, a former archbishop of Sydney who now serves as prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy. “One cannot maintain the indissolubility of marriage by allowing the ‘remarried’ to receive Communion.”
The cardinal calls for a clear restatement of traditional teaching, to avoid the sort of widespread protests that greeted Pope Paul VI’s affirmation of Catholic teaching against contraception in 1968.
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/09/18/cardinal-pell-rules-out-change-on-communion-for-divorced-remarried/
Edit: but there are still prelates who want to erode Catholic dogma with false compassion, like Tobin who thinks something needs to be done, anything but teach the faith, it seems.
http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20140918-bishop-tobin-divorced-and-remarried-catholics--weve-got-to-do-something-poll.ece
AMDG
16 comments:
Countdown to demotion...
They make you laugh with irony the neo-post-conciliar lib-mods: they protest plenty of orthodox sounding sentiments but on the ground they are subverting every aspect of The Traditional Faith: the Bishop Rome being the most notable among them, except he only speaks to confuse still further. I wouldn't put too much credence in Pell's utterances, either.
Frankly speaking too, a lot of baloney has been uttered by neo-cons in support of Cardinal Burke whose traditionalist credentials were suspect to say the least, looking at his career. Ah well! everything is relative, I suppose, all things being equal, of course.
Pell and Muller sounding orthodox; Tobin caving to the heterodox; Peter persecuting the Church.....jeeeze, the masks are coming off and lines being clearly drawn. Choose well my friends; eternity is riding on it.
...aaaaand I spoke too soon; Muller reverting back to type. sigh.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/papal-irritation-with-ignatius-press.html
The Deposit of Faith is unchangeable. Ditto for the Natural Law. What can and has changed is the popes', cardinals', bishops', priests', religious' and lay people's fidelity to the Deposit of Faith and Natural Law.
LeonG, I do not know what "traditionalist credentials" means or find relevance in it. What I do know is Cardinal Burke is a true Shepard of Christ who cares deeply about his flock whether they celebrate the Eucharist in the "Extra-ordinary Form" or the "Ordinary Form". The confusion from poor catechisis is bad enough these days and you want to discredit a true catechist and faithful son of the Faith.
Pell will back down just like Muller did. Viva El Caudillo!
Cardinal Burke's time prior to being Archbishop at St Louis was hardly as an exemplary traditionalist, neither at St Louis. He has compromised with liberal modernism all the way along until just recently when it appeared "safe" to be more traditional under Benedict XVI. However, the hybridist Benedict was only paving the way for a more serious liberal modernist purge once all the neo-cons and the pseudo-traditionalists came out from the woodwork. Bishop Fellay still imagines he can flirt with it but it will be costly indeed - 100 priests lost last time but more if he carries on his dangerous visits to Rome.
On the question of marriage matters and indissolubility together with related issues, Ratzinger made significant liberal innuendos in 1972 which fit into the direction Francis is taking now. Remember Ratzinger told us he never changed his views - read all his works and you can see this for the fact it is. It is only naive and ignorant neo-cons who insist he is traditional. Cardinal Burke may defend some orthodox values but as a compromiser with the nefarious toxic NO Rite of Ecumenical liturgy and its Lex Provendi he flocks together with the vultures who pick away at the rotting corpse of neo-conciliar pantheism.
Our Blessed Lady, we know, is at enmity with ecumenism according to St Maximilien Kolbe and She dislikes compromise according to Her admonitions at Akita.
Play with he devil and you get severely burnt. Cardinal Burke is learning one such lesson now. There is no compromise - the choice is between pure unadulterated Sacred Tradition or what Pope St Pius X wisely exposed as the enemy within the church - liberal modernism. Now, Cardinal Burke really does have to chose.
Indeed Susan, you have it at the very core - masks. They are all wearing them like the deceitful liberals they all are. Only Ratzinger has had the guts to stick at his true liberal modernism which is to press on with it but to attempt to drag traditionalists into the revolution through the Trojan Horse that is The Latin Mass. All his associates want to persecute us and drive us out - he wanted to draw us in and then hybridise us all.
Lynda - understand liberal modernists - phenomenologically - "deposit" is a categorisation of several inner consciousnesses construing it from different points-of-view which, therefore, reduces it to a subjective idea. Deposits evolve, change their form and even become something quite different over time and space. For a liberal, nothing remains unchanged...ever....except of course the imperative of change itself.
Current state of neo-conciliar ecumenical church = Pell-Mele
Many of the priests who left the SSPX don't pray for Francis in the Canon, especially those in South America. Many of them are now sedevacantists (e.g. Fr. Trinh) or treading down that path, or conspiracy nuts accusing Benedict XVI of sacrificing children to Satan (i.e. Fr. Pfieffer).
Also you don't know what intentions Bishop Fellay had in his visits to Rome, and what you accuse him of wanting to do is contradictory to his own words. You are committing blatant calumny. If you presented this as evidence in an academic setting you would be stripped of all your credentials.
Wasn't this the Cardinal that got absolutely wrecked by Richard Dawkins in a debate on God? Funny how Dawkins was a complete coward and didn't want to debate Raphael Waters but when it comes to modernist prelates like Pell, he can smell blood from thousands of miles away.
Francis can do as he pleases. He has thus far. Really, what good are rules when they can be manipulated. Goodness knows, Americans know that with the current administration which abuses the constitution as the clergy abuse, scripture, tradition and the catechism. My guess is those in charge would get along famously. We are nothing to any of them, secular or religious.
Certainly, that is EXACTLY, how I perceive things
Yes. This is the very same theologically challenged person.
BINGO! My thoughts exactly. You made the comparison between the two perfectly.
Post a Comment