De Mattei: Friendly Criticism of Rocco Buttiglione’s Theses

Roberto de Mattei
Corrispondenza Romana
November 15, 2017

[Rorate Caeli] I have known Rocco Buttiglione for more than forty years. Both of us were assistants to Professor Augusto Del Noce (1910-1989) at the Faculty of Political Science at La Sapienza University in Rome, but since then our positions have diverged, mainly regarding our judgment on modernity. Buttiglione believed that the historical process inaugurated by the French Revolution was compatible  with Christianity, but I believed it incompatible.  Despite these differences, I appreciated Buttiglione’s work as Minster of National Cultural Heritage in Berlusconi’s government (2005-2006) and expressed my solidarity with him in 2004 when he didn’t attain the nomination as European Commissioner as a result of having called homosexuality “a sin”.  I refer to all this in order to show my sincerity in my “friendly criticism” of his theses, just as Buttiglione is truly sincere when he argues with Professor Seifert, his “life-long friend” in his most recent book (Friendly Responses to the Critics of Amoris Laetitia, which included an essay introduction by Cardinal Gerard Ludwig Müller, Ares, Milan 2017, p. 41).


The volume recently published has 200 pages, divided into four chapters. There is nothing in it that Buttiglione’s readers don’t know.  The chapters are in fact made up of essays previously published in several places, between 2016 and 2017. This explains the numerous repetitions, which, nonetheless, aid in a better understanding of his basic thesis: the possibility of admitting the divorced and remarried to Communion, since  in certain cases, “even if the acts are illegitimate” , people “may not fall into mortal sin because of the absence of full knowledge and deliberate consent” (p.172).

I have already had the occasion to criticize this position (see here: https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/11/de-mattei-increasing-confusion-cardinal.html)  Additionally, in order to justify it, Buttiglione introduces a fallacious distinction between “grave sin”, “specified by the object (by grave matter)” and “mortal sin”, “specified by the effects on the subject (it kills the soul)”. He writes “ all mortal sins are also grave sins, but not all grave sins are also mortal. It may happen in fact that in some cases grave matter has not been accompanied by full awareness and deliberate consent.” (p. 173).

Is a Fraternal Correction Being Planned for a Papal Audience?

(Rome) "The words of the Cardinals are full of respect. It may be assumed that it is their intention, through a direct conversation in a personal audience, to better "distinguish" the intentions and plans of Pope Francis, and possibly to make a fraternal correction in camera caritatis."

These words of the historian Roberto de Mattei confirm that the four cardinals were to confront Pope Francis in an audience about the situation of the Church and, if need be, more fraternally. This is probably the reason why Francis has denied them an audience and thus exacerbates the scarcely more tolerable state which he provoked by his post-synodal letter Amoris laetitia. The Cardinals had presented their Dubia (doubts) to him in September of the previous year . They asked him to clarify ambiguous passages in the papal document. Francis has refused to answer the questions of the Cardinals for nine months.

Cardinal Raymond Burke had said last March :

"We will continue to insist that these serious questions be answered."

Already in January he had confirmed :

"Fraternal correction will come if the refusal of St. Francis continues," because it would be "devastating" not to clarify the questions.

In the middle of April, the Cardinal said in an interview with InfoVaticana that the ruling confusion was "very dangerous," because "with the confusion are the divisions: priests against priests" because of disagreements about whether those who are in a non-valid marriage or another irrational relationship that can receive sacraments.

On this occasion he also took a stand on the fraternal punishment. Whether it would be a public and formal punishment of the Pope "is not yet clear," the Cardinal said at the time. Before such a step, the Pope would be "personally confronted" and he would say to the public that "the situation is so serious that we must correct it". The Cardinal expressed the assumption that the Holy Father would react "at this moment" at the latest.

With the request for an audience, an attempt was made to enter into conversation about the Dubia with t silent pope. As de Mattei suggests, the intentions of the pope should be clarified and, if necessary, a fraternal correction of the Church's head should take place.

Pope Francis withdrew from this confrontation by not giving an audience to the cardinals or responding to their audience's request at all. How long will Francis be able to continue this refusal?

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Photo: MiL
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Archbishop Forte Lashes Out at Cardinals: "The Dubia Cast Doubt on Those Who Raised Them"

Symposium on Amoris laetitia, 9 March, 2017, San Salvatore in Lauro
(Msgr. Forte, 2nd from the left, Alberto Melloni, 2nd from the right.)

(Rome) Archbishop Bruno Forte, Pope-Servant during the two episcopal synods over the family, has attacked the four cardinals: Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra and Meisner because of the Dubia (Doubts) they have submitted to the pope for the disputed post-synodal letter Amoris laetitia.

The Archbishop of Chieti-Vasto had been appointed by the Pope as the Special Secretary of the Synod. As such he played the little praiseworthy role in the preparation of the individual reports. In the first bishop's synod in the autumn of 2014, the controversial passages on homosexuality came from his pen in the interim report. At the beginning of May 2016 he revealed that he had received a special commission from Pope Francis for the preparation of the final report of the second bishop's synod in autumn 2015. The mission was to obscure the aims of the Pope with the Synod. For this reason, Forte would not mention the remarried divorced in the final report because it could arouse strong resistance. According to the papal commission, the resistance should remain as low as possible. He, the Pope, would then set the course for the remarried divorced.

On May 2, 2016, Forte, in the town theater of Vasto, explained  Pope Francis' order as follows:

"If we expressly speak of Communion for remarried divorced couples, who knows what kind of a casino [a whirlwind] this will make for us. We therefore do not talk directly about it. Make it so if the premises are given, I will draw the conclusions."

Forte was enthusiastic about the papal tactics. This is "typical of a Jesuit," commented Forte, jokingly, his revelation, praising the "wisdom" of Pope Francis, who had allowed us to reach Amoris Laetitia.

The Symposium on Amoris laetitia was in the Church of San Salvatore in Lauro

The Symposium was entitled, "The power of love in a society of indifference." This took place on Thursday in the Roman church of San Salvatore in Lauro, opposite the Castel Sant'Angelo. One of the speakers was Archbishop Bruno Forte, in his capacity as Special Secretary of the Bishops' Synod, whose "accomplishment" is the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. Another speaker was the historian Alberto Melloni, head of the progressive "Bologna School."

Forte used his allotted time to attack the four reputable cardinals who expressed doubts (Dubia) and gave the Pope five questions on September 19, 2016, which the latter has refused to answer. According to Romasette, the online diocesan blog of the diocese of Rome, Archbishop Forte declared that the criticism of Amoris laetitia, "has no right to exist". Romasette reported:

A faithful interpreter of Amoris laetitia, who had experienced it at the Synod at close quarters, from which the apostolic letter came, namely, Monsignor Forte said: "The doubts raised (Dubia) raise doubts about those who raised them because they were present and experienced the collegial spirit for themselves. Amoris laetitia focuses on the crisis of the real family. The message is that despite the wounds and the failure, it is worthwhile support the family. So what is to be done? Love as God does. And how shall this attention be expressed for the wounded? With forgiveness, which is the great power of love."  Then Forte presented the proposals of apostolic writing: accept, accompany, discern and integrate. "The way of accompanyment has its summit in the Communion for the remarried divorced, which is a sign of obedience toward the mercy of God."

Archbishop Forte no longer knows in 2017 what he said in May 2016 

According to Archbishop Forte, Pope Francis implicitly did not have to answer the questions of the four cardinals because their concerns had "no right of existence". The failure to answer the questions and the lack of response to the concerns of the four cardinals was justified by Forte, because they had been synodalists, and had witnessed the "collegial spirit" of the Synod. The whole was garnished by Forte with polemical wordplay.

On the basis of the revelations of May 2, 2016, made by himself, Forte knew that the Synod had not made a statement with which the controversial passages of Amoris laetitia can be justified. The "collegial spirit" of the Synod is, therefore, unrelated to Amoris laetitia, and certainly not with the Dubia, which consists of five questions, which were asked to be answered by Pope Francis in order to end the ensuing confusion. "Only a blind man can deny that because of Amoris laetitia there is great confusion in the Church," said Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, one of the four signatories of Dubia.

Archbishop Forte obviously does not belong to the blind. On March 9, 2017, he does not even know anymore what he proudly proclaimed on May 2, 2016.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Photo: Romasette (Screenshot) in the Church of San Salvatore in Lauro
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches..
AMDG

The Archbishop of Bologna Puts the Christ Child in Rainbow Flag

Christ Child in Rainbow Flag

 (Rome) Matteo Maria Zuppi of the Community of Sant'Egidio was appointed Archbishop of Bologna in late October 2015 by Pope Francis as the successor to Cardinal Carlo Caffarra. He has been in office for 13 months. He is the opposite of his predecessor, one of the signatories of the Dubia (doubts) to Pope Francis on the controversial post-synodal Letter Amoris laetitia .

Upon taking up his position in Bologna, Msgr. Zuppi, committed himself to build mosques. The anger of the well-known Spanish Catholic columnist and blogger, Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña, the Archbishop moved himself to do  a "stupid" gesture for Christmas.

Zuppi, together with other appointees, is reckoned, among the shepherds "with the smell of the sheep," which Pope Francis several times suggested of model shepherds.

De la Cigoña, well-known for his blunt language, described Msgr. Zuppi as "a fool who we shall soon see as a cardinal." De la Cigoña's anger was aroused by a Holy Mass celebrated by Archbishop Zuppi with the Jesus Child in a crib on a rainbow flag.

"Symbols are not meant to be playthings. The crib for the Jesus child can also not be adorned with a swastika or a communist flag or a Coca-Cola flag. It can't even be a gay flag, or the flag of a soccer club.  

Perhaps in the future we will also see a Jesus child with a condom, or with the portrait of Donald Trump. With such 'original' bishops, everything is possible."

When De la Cigoña was made aware that in Italy the rainbow flag, is almost identical to the aberrosexual flag, is a symbol of the Christian peace movement, he took it into his "foolish head" and apologized to Archbishop Zuppi.

However, what de la Cigoña has written also applies to the peace movement: the crib of the Jesus child should not be draped with the flag of a peace movement.

The jury is still out on the use of a symbol that is similar to the other. There is no doubt that the aberro-movement has for the time being has carried through with the flag conflict and has usurped the rainbow, symbolizing the "covenant" with God in the Old Testament. That the Christian peace movement in Italy has  continued to use the rainbow colors, although it could be confused with the gay movement, as De la Cigoña did, gives proof that has to do with the fact that this peace movement is supported mainly by the left Catholic circles who usually have no problems with the aberrosexual flag. The potential confusion is obviously accepted.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: InfoVaticana

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Feast of St. Thomas Becket: A Possible Response to Non-Response to the Dubia

Edit: could this scene be enacted someplace near Rome against no less a figure than the Pope himself? Imagine the journalists showing up for it, tens of thousands of the laity thronging a Church somewhere near Rome...

Statement by Rota Dean "Corrected": "Francis Will Not Take Away Cardinal's Rank"

Interview of Dean of Roman Rota was "Revised"

(Madrid) Last Tuesday, 29 November,  a report by Religion Confidencial struck like a bomb - and led to a significant image problem for Pope Francis. Now a "corrected position" has appeared, with which the image problem was corrected.The criticism by the four cardinals, on the other hand, was not withdrawn.

Msgr. Pius Vito Pinto, Dean of the Roman Rota , one of the supreme courts of the Catholic Church, was took part the day before in a conference on the new marriage tribunal process in Madrid. On this occasion he gave an interview to the Spanish news site, Religion Confidencial.  He was quoted as saying that Pope Francis would strip the four cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra and Meisner of their dignity as cardinals,  because by posting their Dubia (doubts) to the controversial post-synodal Letter Amoris laetitia, they had given "serious offense".

The words of the Rota Dean, coupled with further criticism of the four Dubia presenters was understood as threat and intimidation.

The old and the new version

Meanwhile a "correction" was made in the publication Religion Confidencial, which is more of a clarification (RC). RC said that Msgr. Pinto had answered the questions in Italian and that the translation into Spanish was "incorrect". The new title of the RC interviews is now: "Under another pope, the four cardinals who wrote him could lose their cardinalatial dignity."

First, RC had published the following reply from Msgr. Pinto:

"What church are these Cardinals defending? The Pope is faithful to the teaching of Christ. What they have done is a very serious offence which could cause the Holy Father to deny them the Cardinal's hat, as has happened in other times in the Church. "

The revised body is now:

"What church defend these cardinals? The Pope is faithful to the teaching of Christ. What they have done is a very serious offence. He continued, that Pope Francis, however, is not a pope of the past, who would take away the Cardinal's hat, as Pius XI. did with the famous French Jesuit theologian Louis Billot. 'Francis will not do that,' he said." 

The tarnished image that was feared has been left behind - but criticism of the four cardinals remains

After Msgr. Pinto's statement, which was first distributed by RC, caused worldwide attention, there seems to have been a corresponding intervention to reduce the position. The original statement conveyed a very bad impression of not very "merciful" administration by Pope Francis. The image of a pontificate in which even the highest dignitaries are heavily punished just because they ask questions, could be an image shredder.

It is striking that the first version was consistently indicated as a statement by Monsignor Pinto, whereas in the revised version, the controversial passage is only indirectly reproduced. RC reported a translation error.  We are more closely acquainted with the fact that the results obtained by Mgsr. Pinto last Monday, reveals a threat posture in Rome some because active imagination went too far. Still the criticism of the four cardinals was not weakened by the "correct position".

According to Pinto, the attitude of the four cardinals is so serious that they would deserve to lose the cardinalatial dignity, but it is just their good luck that it is Pope Francis who is reacting and not "another pope."

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Religion Confidencial (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

Amoris Laetitia: New Jesuit General Defends Pope on "Dubia" of the Four Cardinals

While Pope Francis continues his silence, the Jesuit General has commented on the Dubia (doubts), the controversial post-synodal Letter Amoris laetitia of four cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra and Meisner.

On 14 October, Arturo Sosa Abascal was selected 31 Superior General of the Jesuits. The Venezuelan Jesuit has now entered into the public for the first time and does so with a defense of Pope Francis, who also belongs to the Jesuit Order.

So far, the new "Black General", as the Father General of the Jesuits is also called, has  only been known for statements from the distant past. This includes primarily an essay on "the Marxist mediation of the Christian faith" from 1978. Whether he meant, or perhaps still thinks that the Communists "think as Christians think" is not known. At least it resembles Pope Francis, according to the recent interview with Eugenio Scalfari, on November 11 published by La Repubblica.

The Superior General of the Jesuits was interviewed by the Vaticanist Luigi Accattoli for the weekly supplement La Lettura the Corriere della Sera which appeared yesterday. "We can not resign ourselves to this world of injustice," the title says, referring to a quotation from the 31st Jesuit General. In the interview, the 68-year-old Venezuelan also explains "the roots of the new mission of the Church".

The Cardinals have either not understood the pope, or ...

Iinterview with P. Sosa Abascal (Corriere della Sera)

The new Superior General has entered the dispute about the confusion surrounding Amoris laetitia to help the beleaguered pope. The support is doubly anchored. The reigning pope himself is Jesuit. His Order is also bound by a fourth, special vow of loyalty and obedience to the Pope. The Jesuits form a kind of praetorian guard of the first Jesuit of the Church's history, who sits on the papal throne.

What the Jesuit General Sosa Abascal says of the Dubia of the four cardinals, should reflect on the matter, should reflect what the Pope thinks about it. Father Sosa admits only three possibilities of which there is no room for papal self-criticism: the Cardinals either did not understand the pope, or they were playing an evil game. If there is "ambiguity" in some passages of the Pontifical Letter Amoris laetitia,  which could be the reason for the confusion and conflicting interpretations of the past few months, Sosa Absacal can not detect it.

Luigi Accatoli: What do you think of the letter of the four cardinals, including the Italian Carlo Caffarra, who asked the Pope to clarify  five "doubts" on the letter Amoris laetitia? Francis has not yet replied, and they have published the letter. Are you concerned about these developments?

Arturo Sosa Abascal: I'm not worried. These four have taken the liberty of the word to which the Pope had invited them to do. I like this happening. In our language, as Jesuits, it is said that it is necessary to know the opinions of all in order to make a real distinction. Of course, the game must be loyal, if someone asks for clarification, because he has not understood, we move within the framework of loyalty. It would be different if someone used the criticism as a tool for an advantage, or asking questions cause trouble."

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Corriere della Sera / Wikicommons (screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholishes...
AMDG