Showing posts with label Martin Mosebach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martin Mosebach. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 21, 2022

Consistorium 2022: A Missed Opportunity


 Cardinal Walter Brandmüller laments Pope Francis' gag order for the cardinals who are supposed to advise him.

By Roberto de Mattei*


There is a relationship between grace and nature analogous to that between faith and reason. There is an imbalance when there is faith without reason or grace without nature and vice versa, but the perfect balance is not in putting these realities on an equal footing. On the contrary, it consists in bringing them into their legitimate order, subordinating nature to grace, of which the former is the premise, just as the premise of faith is the reason, but which is subordinate to faith.


This helps us understand what "spirit of faith" or "supernatural spirit" means, depending on whether we are referring to the primacy of faith over reason or grace over nature. It means not renouncing the indispensable role of reason and nature, but seeing everything through the eyes of faith and expecting even the impossible from the work of grace.


Today that spirit of faith has been lost in the Christian people, beginning with their church leaders. The spirit of faith and the supernatural has been replaced by the political spirit with which Christians claim to understand and intervene in reality through reason alone, without resorting to the decisive action of grace.

Pope Francis has repeatedly recalled that the true reformers of the Church are the saints, yet his approach to the world's great issues always appears political and therefore "worldly" rather than "supernatural" and moved by a spirit of faith. This “political” approach dominated the recent consistory, held August 29-30th in the Vatican in the presence of some 180 cardinals, which missed a great opportunity to address the serious problems afflicting the Church today. The focus of the meeting of the cardinals was officially the reform of the Curia, which is contained in the new Apostolic Constitution Praedicate Evangelium being proposed, but the Pope has prevented the cardinals from expressing themselves in joint session on this and other subjects, as it were, he muzzled them.


The consistory is a meeting of the pope with the cardinals, who according to the code of canon law (canons 349-359) are his first advisers. For at least seven years, Pope Francis has not allowed the cardinals to speak and express their opinions at this solemn gathering. Everyone had expected this to happen at the end of the August meeting, but the consistory was fragmented into language groups at the behest of the pope, paralyzing the cardinals and preventing the open and direct dialogue that last took place in February 2014.


We are reminded of this truth by an important cardinal and great historian, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, whose voice, which was not allowed to be heard in the consistory hall, echoes outside the hall. The Vaticanist Sandro Magister has allowed us to get to know them by publishing the speech that the cardinal had prepared but was not allowed to deliver.


Cardinal Brandmüller recalls in his document the function of cardinals anchored in canon law, which in ancient times found its symbolic expression in the rite of the "aperitio oris", the opening of the mouth. A rite, the cardinal explained, which “meant the duty to speak openly one's convictions, one's advice, especially in consistory. This openness – Pope Francis speaks of 'parrhesía' – was particularly important to the Apostle Paul. At the moment, unfortunately, that openness has been replaced by a strange silence. The other ceremony of closing the mouth, which followed the 'aperitio oris', referred not to truths of faith and morals, but to official secrets”.


"Today, however," Cardinal Brandmüller added, "we should emphasize the right, indeed the duty, of cardinals to speak clearly and frankly, especially when dealing with the truths of faith and morals, the 'bonum commune' of the Church. The experiences of the last few years have been very different. In the consistories - which were convened almost exclusively for the canonization processes - cards were distributed to ask for the floor and of course spontaneous interventions followed on any subject, and that was it. There was never a debate, an exchange of arguments on any particular subject. Apparently a completely useless procedure", although the primacy of the Successor of Peter in no way "precludes a fraternal dialogue with the cardinals, who are obliged to cooperate conscientiously with the pope” (can. 356). The more serious and urgent the problems of pastoral leadership, the more necessary is the involvement of the College of Cardinals”.

 

The cardinal, who is a Church historian, continues:


“When Celestine V wanted to renounce the papacy in 1294, recognizing the special circumstances of his election, he did so after intensive discussions and with the consent of his electors. A completely different view of the relationship between pope and cardinals was represented by Benedict XVI, who - a unique case in history - renounced the papal office for personal reasons without the knowledge of the college of cardinals that elected him. There were only 70 electors until Paul VI, who increased the number of electors to 120. This increase in the size of the electoral college, almost doubling it, was motivated by an intention to conform to the hierarchy of lands far from Rome and to honor those churches with the Roman purple. The inevitable consequence was that cardinals were installed who had no experience with the Roman Curia and thus with the problems of the pastoral leadership of the universal Church. All of this has serious consequences when these cardinals from the periphery are called to elect a new pope.”


Currently, it is like this:


“(...) many, if not the majority, of the voters do not know each other. Yet they are there to elect the Pope, one of them. It is obvious that this situation makes it easier for operations of cardinal groups or classes to favor one of their candidates. In this situation one cannot rule out the danger of simony in its various forms.”


The Cardinal's document concludes with a suggestion:


"Finally, it seems to me that the idea of restricting voting rights in the conclave, for example, to cardinals resident in Rome deserves serious consideration, while the other cardinals could share the 'status' of cardinals above octogenarian."

 

These are clear, unmistakable words that should make the entire College of Cardinals think.

Pope Francis' refusal to give the floor to the cardinals stems from the political and secular perspective of his pontificate. He fears that free and open discussion will weaken the exercise of his power, unaware that the truth can never harm the Church and the souls subject to Her. The spirit of faith, which is opposed to the spirit of politics, consists precisely in seeking in all things what is highest and most sublime, what is best for the glory of God and the good of souls, always looking to the commandments of the Gospel.

The alternative is between the truth of the Gospel and the power of the world. Proclaiming the truth of the Gospel does not mean talking about immigration or the climate emergency, but about the novissima- Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell - and the divine providence that governs all events of the created universe. Preaching the Gospel means using the voice of the Church to condemn sin, especially public sin, foremostly abortion and LGBT doctrines, which the world considers “civil rights achievements”. It means speaking of holiness and not of synodality, because it is from holiness and not from political mechanisms that the necessary reform (renewal) proceeds within the Church: a renewal of the people who form Her and not of Her divine ones and immutable constitution.


A cloak of silence has now fallen over the consistory. And the silence of those who should speak is the greatest punishment our Lord can inflict on His Church.


Roberto de Mattei , historian, father of five children, professor of modern history and history of Christianity at the European University of Rome, chairman of the Lepanto Foundation, author of numerous books, most recently in German [Possibly English] translation:  Defense of Tradition: The Insurmountable Truth of Christ, with a foreword by Martin Mosebach, Altötting 2017 and  The Second Vatican Council. A Hitherto Unwritten Story, 2nd ext. Edition, Bobingen 2011.


Books by  Prof. Roberto de Mattei in German translation and books by  Martin Mosebach are from our partner bookshop..


Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Image : Corrispondenza Romana

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com


AMDG

Friday, June 14, 2019

Francis Actually Reads Blogs He Fears For His “Mental Hygiene”

 Pope Francis yesterday warned the apostolic nuncios (ambassadors) with an unusual footnote.

(Rome) "Because of the mental health", so Pope Francis assured, he does not read internet pages and blogs that criticize his administration. Yesterday, he warned the apostolic nuncios from "blogging" or "even joining groups," who are critical of him. In the same speech, however, Francis quoted just one of those websites that he says he does not read at all. Such as?

On January 16, 2018, Pope Francis met in Santiago de Chile with the Jesuits of that South American country. The main reason for the trip to Chile and Peru was the imminent Amazon Synod  as his confidant, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, explained. That was only a few days before the storm of homosexual abuse scandal in the Church began to break over Francis.

Francis also approached his confreres of the Society of Jesus SJ) about heresy allegations that had been made to him indirectly a short time before in connection with the controversial post-synodal letter Amoris laetitia. Contentwise, he did not respond to the criticism, but demanded “not to read” such websites and blogs for reasons of "mental hygiene.”

Yesterday, the Pope received in audience all the Apostolic Nuncios who are doing their diplomatic service in different countries worldwide. Their meeting, to which he called them to Rome, ends tomorrow.

In his speech  which was published only in Italian, Francis warned the ambassadors of the Holy See against criticism of his person. The head of the Church said:

"It is therefore incompatible to be a Pontifical Representative and to criticize the Pope behind his back, to have a blog or even to join groups hostile to Him, the Curia and the Church of Rome." 
The third person in which Francis spoke of himself is capitalized in the original Vatican publication. The speech was published on the official website of the Holy See and in today's edition of Osservatore Romano. It should not be forgotten that Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, a retired apostolic nuncio, criticized the current pontificate with the greatest publicity so far and called for the resignation of Francis.

When the pope quotes what he does not read out of "mental hygiene"

Remarkably, Francis quoted yesterday for the nuncios, just one of those websites, of which he - as a directive to the Jesuits (and not just them) - said not to read them. The reference can be found in footnote 14. The source quoted by Pope Francis is Corrispondenza Romana, whose founder and editor, Professor Roberto de Mattei, is one of the intellectual critics of the current pontificate.

Footnote 14: an essay by Prof. Roberto de Mattei on Corrispondenza Romana.

The Bergoglians tried to correct this  "embarrassment" immediately, first of all Il Sismografo, the digital press review hosted somewhere between the Vatican Secretariat of State and the Communications Dicastery, led by Luis Badilla, a former Chilean Minister of Popular Front Government of Salvador Allende. There, in tortuous form, an apology is sought,  cited in Santa Marta for what was considered there a scandalous "Faupax", from such an illustrious and honorable, intellectually outstanding and deeply traditional source as the historian Roberto de Mattei:
"After numerous checks and verifications, we have come to a conclusion and present it to our readers, just as this conviction has formed in our editorial staff in these hours: in all probability the Pope was not adequately informed, without complete information and not consciously aware of the very nature of the source used in footnote 14 of his speech.” 
Luis Badilla must have swept aside this formulation like the  beads of sweat on his forehead. There were "so many" references to this source that Il Sismografo felt compelled to respond in order to protect the image of the Pope. Prof. de Mattei is presented by Badilla as an "anti-Bergoglian Italian intellectual" who "in those years did not spare Pope Francis allegations, epithets, adjectives and criticisms, often morally aggressive and not very polite to the Bishop of Rome.”

Il Sismografo: semi-official press review of the Vatican.

But what did Pope Francis quote from Corrispondenza Romana? At first glance "only" the litany of humility of Cardinal Secretary of State Rafael Merry del Val (1865-1930). Francis recommends it to the apostolic nuncios, stating that it comes from a "colleague," Merry del Val, son of a Spanish diplomat, himself serving many years as a diplomat in the service of the Holy See.

However, the essay by Roberto de Mattei on the Spanish-Irish cardinal cited in the source not only includes the litany, but a tribute to the "true aristocrat" whom St. Pius X, though only 38 years old, made Vatican secretary of state.

The red cape for the close circle of Francis, however, is Roberto de Mattei, the quoted author himself: historian, university professor, like his father and grandfather, descendant of the Sicilian nobility and one of the leading figures in Catholic tradition. It was about them he wrote under the title "Defense of Tradition," a book that was published in 2017 in translation by the theologian and philosopher Wolfram Schrems and with a foreword by the writer Martin Mosebach in German and is to be regarded as a standard reference work in German. 

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Vatican.va (screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Book is available in English.

AMDG

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

"Islam Wants to Take Away Our Porno Videos"


Debate over Values

Martin Mosebach deals in his book "Der Ultramontane - Alle Wege führen nach Rom" [The Ultramonane -- All Paths Lead to Rome] with the question, among others, where the much prized Western values truly lay.

[kreuz.net] That Frankfurt's writer Martin Mosebach "participates in the claims of the Catholic Faith" and publishes "pointed messages to the Church, State and Society" is well known up till now.

That he has discovered the "Old Mass" and learned to treasure it and also otherwise is not inclined to the modernist inclinations of progressive secular theologians,  has distanced him from the progressive political side,  from the progressive "Catholic" side however it has brought him hate.

Nowhere has a conservative encountered  so clearly, open mistrust from Left Catholics, as he has noticed.

Mosebach has experienced the concept "Ultramontane",  which came from the "lapsed Prussian-Catholic conflict" again: "The Ultramontane lives in the conviction that the society of the homeland that he should have the last word in questions of law and morality."  and "The appearances of Catholics conceal the Ultramontane."  He recognizes therefore the Pope in Rome -- the city ultra montes (beyond the mountain) -- as the final authority.  "Ultramontanism is the refusal of anti-totalitarianism".


The Secularistic "Lehman-Church"

The current Catholic Church in Germany is no longer "ultramontanist", loyally bound to the Pope, it "is  not in a decided manner", it seeks "the Sonderweg (special way), which does not shy from being opposed to Rome."

What does "threat to Western Values" mean?

With the concept "Lehmann-Church" ( named after the Mainz Liberal-Cardinal)  the "degeneration of the Church is  bound to the open world consensus".  One is more transfixed by Islam, not to defend Catholicism, but because of the "threat to Western values".

And:  "The evidence is even now now presented, that 'threats to Western values' are described much more in terms of: "Islam will take away our porno videos".