Eighteen years ago, a College of Cardinals largely appointed by the pope whose reign had just ended wanted continuity, and so they elected the man who’d been the intellectual architect of the previous administration. Thus it was that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI, as the natural heir to the doctrinal and spiritual legacy of Pope John Paul II.
After yesterday, one has to ask: Is Pope Francis trying to align the stars for history to repeat itself by naming his own theological right hand, Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández, to the same post once held by Ratzinger as the Vatican’s doctrinal czar?…
If anything, the bond between Francis and Fernández, both Argentines, runs even deeper than that which linked the Polish John Paul and the German Ratzinger.
The connection goes back at least to 2007, when the future pontiff was still Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires and Fernández was a professor at the Catholic university in the Argentine capital. He acted as Bergoglio’s peritus, or theological advisor, during the conference of Latin American bishops in Aparecida, Brazil, which produced a document that proved to be a blueprint for Francis’s papacy.
A primary contributor to Francis’s 2013 apostolic exhortation Evangelii gaudium, Fernández has been an informal advisor and sounding board for Francis on every important doctrinal question he’s faced.
Textual analysis in 2016, when Francis issued his controversial document Amoris Laetita opening the door to reception of communion by civilly divorced and remarried Catholics, showed striking similarities with articles Fernández had written on the same subject in 2005 and 2006.
Fernández went on to become one of the most prominent defenders of Amoris Laetitia, at one point arguing that critics citing Scripture to oppose the pope’s position were engaged in a “death trap” intended to force others to “assume a particular logic.”
During the ten years under Francis that German Cardinal Gerhard Müller, generally seen as a conservative, and then Spanish Cardinal Luis Ladaria Ferrer, perceived as more of a moderate, both headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, most observers regarded them as less influential than Fernández in shaping the pontiff’s own theological stances.
By now naming Fernández to the post, Francis essentially has brought a key member of his “kitchen cabinet” into his administration, giving him the formal powers that many observers believed he already wielded behind the scenes. It also sets up Fernández to be a major force in the pope’s looming Synods of Bishops on synodality, set for this October and October 2024.
It’s widely expected that Francis will also make Fernández a cardinal whenever he next holds a consistory….
From CruxNow
For more background, read Monday, July 3 posting, Pope Francis and the race to secure his legacy.
Look up and read about “Heal Me with Your Mouth” by Archbishop Fernandez. That’s the church’s new doctrinal chief. The hierarchy is fast becoming a joke. What will be next? Fr. James Martin appointed to a newly created Rainbow Dicastery for Everything Fabulous and Gay in Catholicism?
I long for the decades of the 80s through 2012, when sobriety and gravitas characterized the magisterium. Not the flimflam and cotton candy doctrine we have now.
Christ, where are you? Holy Spirit, where are you? Father, help your people.
Fernandez recently defended the kissing manual as writing targeted at teens as part of’ sex education catechesis’. The few passages i have seen seem to be of the level that Hugh Hefner could have carried in his magazine. the press has noted that the book has been deleted from the 300- book listing originally supplied in an attempt to portray him as a theological heavyweight.
“Christ, where are you? Holy Spirit, where are you? Father, help your people.” A good prayer, a sincere cry to God in difficult times. I believe such prayers are the best way for us laity to proceed during the synodal process and in general during this pontificate. I feel in my heart such a need to get on my knees and leave the matter in the hands of Almighty God– to let Him have His way. He knows the future and I don’t, and I don’t want to know because my understanding of matters is inadequate and I will most likely miss a deeper Wisdom at work. It is not as if I don’t have preferences as to what I would like to see unfold; but my preferences may or may not conform to God’s, so it is incumbent on me to follow the inspiration in my heart to pray, but meanwhile always standing fast on the Truth given us by Jesus and through His Church, and in particular, always knowing that the Church is needing to grow in its fidelity to our Lord.
Can’t stand that erotic “Kissing” book. It’s online, in an English translation– complete with pictures.. ugh!! This man is too weird. No, I do not think this will be Pope Francis’ Ratzinger to perhaps even replace him, eventually. I think many other Vatican prelates may be very skeptical of him. And he is already in trouble for disrespecting victims of a pedophile priest whose crimes he wrongfully covered-up and protected, in Argentina.
There are now about three or four (or more) online sites, with the full text of Abp. Fernandez’s erotic “Kissing” book. It is erotic material. There is nothing holy, innocent, beautiful, uplifting and spiritual, poetically telling of a young Catholic boy and girl– perhaps falling rapturously in love for the first time– sharing a first, joyful kiss– brought together spiritually, by God. And perhaps later, preparing for a beautiful wedding, the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, at God’s holy altar. There are many Spanish poets of the past, who have previously written of such holy, beautiful, spiritual love stories, inspired by God.
I know some Catholic couples (Franciscan grads) who decided not to kiss until they were married.
But those are extremely modest.
I think kissing is overrated myself.
But it was 33 years ago.
Where were you 33 years ago?
Here is a link to one easy-to-read online English translation of Abp. Fernandez’ “Kissing ” book.
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/09/full-text-of-archbishop-tucho.html?m=1
A priest or prelate should never write such a book, and state erroneously, that it is a kind of “catechesis” for young people. Catholic parents need excellent guidance for their children, when they enter adolescence. And that guidance must be clear Catholic teaching. Young people need and deserve good catechesis, to help them to date and find the right spouse, and prepare well, for the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. St. Gianna Beretta Molla described her experiences, of dating and finding her spouse, Pietro Molla, and preparing well for the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, with him. Very inspiring!
Thanks for the link.
Good work. Looking forward to reading.
People, those who are putting that book online are enemies of the Church and of Christ.
Don’t you know the smoke of Satan when you see it.
Is anybody faithful putting that book online?
It does not matter what he or Ratzinger or Levada or Mueller did before they got this job.
Everything that is being said about Fernandez was said about them.
The devil wants you to doubt.
The job is the job. It is not a unilateral position. There is a dicastery.
Stop freaking people out.
Stop serving the devil.
Nobody cares which organization put the book online. I just found this easy-to-read version of the “Kissing” book online, to show what the book is about, so people can see for themselves. No worries. That book itself is bad enough. Especially as it was written as a very poor “catechesis” for Catholic youth, by a Catholic priest who becane a high-ranking Church prelate.
Yes, they are birds of a feather and that is not a good thing for the Church. Watch what they get up to, and recognize their true characters with honest discernment (jon).
What did Jesus say? Did he say “Only the perfect can be in My Church?”
Did he say “Anybody you judge not good enough can not be in My Church?”
What did He tell you?
This has nothing to do with “perfectionism.” A Catholic priest or prelate has a big responsibility, as a religious leader, for Christ.
Dear What Jesus,
The prefect of the Dicastery of Doctrine of Faith is not just “anybody.” He is, in fact, the guardian of the guardian of the official teachings of the Church, making sure they don’t get sullied, bent, or mutilated. He is the Pope’s right-hand man in the Pope’s office as supreme legislator on matters of faith and morals.
What did Jesus say to the Pope? He said, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Mt. 16:19) Pretty heavy stuff, don’t you think? That’s why the Pope needs the Dicastery for Doctrine of the Faith, of which Abp. Fernandez is now the head.
Fox in the hen house. A classic!
What will the foxes do when they run out of hens?
Firstly, Fernandez wrote the book “Saname Con Tu Boca. El Arte De Besar” when he was a young priest, not as an archbishop. He wrote it to reach out to the young people of his parish. He was inspired by the image from the ancient Fathers of the Church describing the Incarnation as the kiss from God to humanity. It was a book of catechesis for the young people in his parish who contributed poems, images, phrases for the book.
Fernandez has responded to the unjust attacks against him concerning his book. He wrote: “Well, what these extreme groups do is to say: ‘Look at the low quality of this theologian, look at the nonsense he wrote, look at the low ability he has.’ They have been ridiculing me for years with quotes from that book. But a catechesis for teenagers is not a book of Theology, there is a great difference in literary genre. A catechesis of a parish priest for teenagers cannot be asked to be a manual of Theology.”
Oh come on jon, you carry your notion of loyalty much too far. The book is an embarrassment, defending it is just silly.
The book is not important.
Shiny ball.
Jon, I read most of it, and it is not a book suitable for teenagers. Its only saving grace is some of its advice for married couples. A Song of Solomon (Canticles of Canticles) it is not, Teenagers need to be encouraged to be chaste, or they, and often the innocent, will suffer greatly later. No fornication, no regrets, no comparisons of past lovers with any future spouses and a clear conscience make for happier marriages. I hope Apb. Fernandez has learned his lesson.
Well, I have read it too, and the book is acceptable. “Anne TE”, the book was not written for you. It was written for the young people in Fernandez’s parish in Argentina where he was serving as a young priest, ok? In Argentina. the culture there is very tactile. For instance, kissing in Argentinian society is an acceptable way to greet friends and even acquaintances.
And the book upholds chastity and marriage. Read this from the book: “Sex is not just the satisfaction of a primal necessity; it is also the expression of a love and a total surrender to the other, which requires exclusivity and mutual belonging.” That speaks of marriage.
What is important to understand with this book and Fernandez’ appointment is that the Holy Father has chosen a man as the new prefect of the DDF who reaches out to the wider culture with the Catholic faith, who has used creativity to reach out to the young without compromising the faith, who will not kow-tow to the errors of false traditionalists.
“who will not kow-tow to the errors of false traditionalists.” Interesting that you single this out, jon, right after the phrase “without compromising the faith.” In your thinking, jon, are false traditionalist those most compromising the faith?
Many of those who comment here are false traditionalists and therefore compromise the faith. So, yeah.
Additionally, “Dan”, in addition to false traditionalists, non-Catholics also comment here, such as the virulent Protestant-types. Also, there are those who comment here who are mere political junkies, such as political right-wingers and some left-wingers too. They are more interested in “evangelizing” their own political ideology rather than the true Catholic Faith Atheists and other non-believers hostile to the Church also comment here.
These folks have no real love for the Church, nor do they adhere to the teachings of the Church. They just want to bash the Pope, the Church, and her institutions.
Tell me about the Latin culture, Jon. I have been in the middle of it all my life. People can promise to live with each other until death, but in the Church it must be sacramental. There are rules for annulments, and I have read tons about that in the past. I avoid going to weddings and receptions if I know the person has had two or more “marriages” and “remarriages” as has happened in my husband’s and my extended families. It only gets worse. Hard to remember the names of all the exes and their children.
jon – “That speaks of marriage” – Wow. Thanks for injecting your sanitized version of Fernandez’s profane treatise on sex. Did he mention that the sacrament of marriage is a gift from God and a response to His call of holiness, and that sex should be between man and woman in a sacramental union? If he did not, then he compromised the faith and is absolutaly unfaithful to the Magisterium.
Now it’s a treatise on sex?
This is what happens.
If you are not a strictly honest person, it goes from detraction to slander.
Stop.
You can tu quoque me all you want but i still think it is an act of mercy to remind people that what they are doing has eternal consequences.
Revelation 21:8
But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers, idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is in the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
Jon, you aren’t the audience this book was written for either and turning yourself into a pretzel trying to be loyal to Francis continues to be silly. It’s ok to admit the pope makes mistakes and that this personnel choice is deeply problematic. That you can’t/won’t see this says lots about you, and it’s not good.
No Explanation needed — I sense that there are perhaps three clergy members who post on this site. One is obviously a hierarchical toady.
Folks, just listen to yourselves. Neither “Axiom” nor “No” has really offered any proof why Fernandez should not be the new prefect of the DDF. Nothing. For instance, they have not even quoted anything from the book that is objectionable. I have stepped up by quoting from the book itself. The fact that they haven’t is very telling folks. Very telling. All they have it seems is hatred for the Holy Father and ridicule for him. How sad for them.
And additionally in my estimation the Holy Father has not made a mistake by appointing Fernandez. You see folks, the Holy Father knows your number. He knows what buttons to push in order to trigger the extremist, Neo-Pelagian, Neo-gnostic, narcissistic and elitist false ‘holier-than-thou’ traditionalists out there who shut the door to the Spirit and the transformative power of the Gospel in their heart. You see people, by appointing Fernandez, the Holy Father again has succeeded to trigger you all. I rather think that it is people like “No” who turn themselves into a pretzel at every brilliant move of Pope Francis. God bless Pope Francis.
Do you realize how “old biddy-ish” to judge someone on a book on Kissing that they wrote 33 Years ago?
Oh, maybe the 33 is significant.
Really jon, you read this book? When, and where did you get it. Not an easy find.
Yes, Ewww, jon needs to upgrade his reading list and consider banning trash like this.
jon, I know it’s poetic, and you’ve read the book. But what exactly does “Heal me with your mouth” mean? And how do Argentinian teenagers heal each other with their mouths? Where do they put their mouths to heal each other? Just asking.
Then you should read the book. You might learn something.
Have you actually read the book “El Arte de Besar?” Kinda hard when it has been expunged from his corpus, and, in Fernandez’s words “no longer exists.” It still exists all right, gathering dust, and some Argentinian priest likely has a copy lying around. If it is, as you say, simply a catechesis for young people, then why worry? The subject of the kiss as described in Hebrew Scriptures, for example, the Kiss of Isaac and Jacob in Gen 26, or conversely, the kiss of Judas and Jesus just before he betrays him is actually a very beautiful and rich subject. Why is Fernandez going on-line (on Facebook, no less) to defend a book he now disavows and why is he employing the standard tactics of accused liberal when challenged for his positions, i.e. “extremists and hate groups are going after me?” I will tell you why…there is most likely something untoward in the book, or an element of heterodoxy on sexuality, procreation, the meaning of the kiss, or similar. So, instead of taking ownership, and perhaps explaining some of the details more openly, he wants to hide his past. In priestly formation, this would be grounds for removal from the seminary. In the episcopacy these days, it is evidently grounds for promotion. Fernandez’s superior attitude immediately prior to taking the position as head of CDF/DDF sets a bad precedent, as in: “Well, fellow bishops and theologians, you may NOT read or analyze the catechesis I wrote some years ago as you dunces will likely misinterpret what I meant to convey…” Isn’t that what the Index Librorum Prohibitorum was? What is the saying, “The more things change, the more they stay the same…”
Not a great choice. Reminds me of the appointment of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, who jumped over dozens of more qualified judges to gain the position because she “fit the optics.” By the way, the entire name of Fernandez’ 1995 book is: Sáname con tu Boca: El Arte de Besar” which translates as “Heal me with your mouth: the Art of Kissing.” The fact that it was written for “young people” and that it – according to AB Fernandez “no longer exists” makes it all the more suspect. Fernandez recently defended the work on Facebook (another yellow flag) instead of at a press conference or the like. You can read his defense here at the “Pope Francis Defense” website, http://www.wherepeteris.com
https://wherepeteris.com/new-ddf-chief-responds-to-kissing-book-internet-outrage/
I get it. He wrote something for which he is now probably a little ashamed and embarrassed. But, the rest of his corpus of works and his past leadership is unremarkable. Contrast this with the appointment of then Cardinal Ratzinger or even Cardinals Levada, or Mueller. It is concerning that Pope Francis seems to be packing his house with friends and sycophants (First Cardinal Ferrer, SJ and now this fellow) instead of finding the single best theologian for the job, which is centered on “guarding the deposit of the faith.”
When he was a young priest…he wrote this book.
Ratzinger wrote stuff when he was young, too.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2006/02/from-ratzinger-to-benedict
Archbishop Fernandez certainly got his analysis correct.
First that the attack on him, such as “El Padre’s”, is an attack on the Holy Father. And if it’s an attack on the Holy Father, they’re attacking the Church as a consequence.
Secondly, that the attack on him is coming largely from extremists (ahem, we know who they are).
According to Fernandez: “Well, what these extreme groups do is to say: ‘Look at the low quality of this theologian, look at the nonsense he wrote, look at the low ability he has.’….Worse still, since these attacks come from Catholics in the United States, and they do not know Spanish, they mistranslate one of the poems in the book…Anyway, they will continue to say many things, and they will ally with whomever they can in order to attack Francis for having named me. But those who have known me closely know who I am. Thank you for the trust and affection you have always shown me. I am not doing this to defend myself. I have already endured these things many times and the storm will pass. But I am making this clear so that some of you do not feel confused or suffer because of these and other accusations, but above, all I am doing it so that you will not try to harm Francis.”
And so what if Francis appoints people he knows like his fellow Argentinian? Are there other clerics he could have appointed? Perhaps. But he chose Fernandez because he trusts him to guard the deposit of faith. “El Padre” has zero proof that Fernandez cannot do the job.
As long as the pope speaks and acts ambiguously instead of clearly, and as long as he proceeds slowly, people like Jon will have a plausible case that they aren’t undermining Catholic faith. What people like Jon don’t factor into consideration is that theirs isn’t the only plausible case to be made about how to understand his teachings. They also don’t factor into consideration the trajectory and the mounting circumstantial evidence that the pope is trying to get gay sex and gay unions blessed in the church before he dies. The synod is the chief vehicle for that. He will claim that the synod has expressed the sensus fidelium in desiring gay sex and gay unions, even though the pope stacked the deck with gays voting, and then he’ll issue an apostolic exhortation teaching that now we must welcome everyone, especially LGBT, by blessing gay sex and gay unions and trans shemales and hewomen.
Well at least you are honest about what the hate is all about.
“shemales” is flat wrong. Concerning faith and morals, the Church Magisterium’s interpretation is indeed the only “plausible case.” “shemales’s” point about “gay blessings” is all about fear, conjecture and guess-work. The Church has already said such unions cannot be blessed. “shambles” is either too obsessed with this issue, lacks faith in the Holy Spirit protecting the Church from error on faith and morals, or is virulently anti-homosexual. Repent, “shamales.”
Jon is wrong, way wrong. Today there is a story at The Pillar that quotes Archbishop Fernandez as being in favor of blessing gay relationships as long as it doesn’t cause confusion about Catholic teaching about marriage.
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/new-ddf-prefect-addresses-confusion
Any blessing of a gay relationship by the church would cause confusion because it would appear to be approving of their sexual relationship and pretend union.
But you know what their goal is. They want to find a way to bless gay unions and gay sex. They’re going to force it. They will probably call it a friendship blessing or a blessing of people who love each other. Everyone will know the two men are boinking each other and living as married, and might even be civilly married, but the church will say they are “just friends” and bless their “friendship” of “love”.
The magisterium is showing signs of being corrupt. In this case, where the church should be absolutely clear and say no to gay unions and to gay sex, the magisterium is instead saying, “Let’s find a way to approve it that won’t cause confusion.”
It’s the work of Satan. Gayness is of Satan.
Apparently the root of the fear is that the Pope will do or say something that will make them leave the Church. Or that will make them believe that the Church is not really the one true Church and then they have no where to go. They have devoted their life and sacrificed (maybe a little, maybe much) for something that is not real.
That is what the devil is doing here.
Anytime you start thinking like that it is the devil working on you.
Maybe you have never been challenged in the Faith. (Hard to believe in these last 50 years.)
You have to go back over it and learn at a deeper level than you have up to now.
If you do not believe that the Pope is infallible in Faith and Morals, and that the Church cannot err in matters of Faith and Morals, please go back over why Catholics believe that.
If you do not believe that everything Christ said in Holy Scripture is true, including the keys given to Peter, go back over it.
Thanks for the link.
First line:
The new head of the Vatican’s doctrinal office has said that he is opposed to same-sex blessings that feed “confusion” over the nature of marriage.
He should be opposed to all same-sex blessings, full stop. Opposing them only if they cause confusion is saying that you want to find a way to approve them somehow, that you’re not absolutely opposed to them.
The church is going to have a doctrinal chief who doesn’t care about upholding and defending doctrine. He wants to find ways to weasel around doctrinal restrictions. He’s looking for gay loopholes.
Sorry, but it is “gay blessings” who is wrong. Dead wrong.
The Magisterium of the Church does not show signs of being “corrupt.” That’s hogwash and a lie.
Firstly, why “gay” needs to go to the Pillar is beyond me. Why don’t you go straight to the horse’s mouth? Why not go straight to the CDF?
The CDF published on February 22, 2021 a “Responsum” which reads: “…it is not licit to impart a blessing on relationships, or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage (i.e., outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open in itself to the transmission of life), as is the case of the unions between persons of the same sex. The presence in such relationships of positive elements, which are in themselves to be valued and appreciated, cannot justify these relationships and render them legitimate objects of an ecclesial blessing, since the positive elements exist within the context of a union not ordered to the Creator’s plan.”
I therefore severely and gravely reprimand “gay blessings” for her unfounded and unjust accusations about the Holy Catholic Church and her teaching office. Disgraceful comment from “gay blessing.”
Repent, “gay.” Repent when there’s still time.
confusion- I think you are misreading that. He opposes all same sex blessing. They feed confusion over the nature of marriage. He agrees with the dicastery’s rebuke of the German same sex blessing.
He probably should have just stopped there but he did not. What he said was that if they come up with a blessing for a non-sexual couple it was have to be analyzed and confirmed (Not that it must be confirmed but that non one should do it unless they have the dicastery’s OK.”
This was translated from Spanish.
He is not looking for gay loopholes. He does care about upholding and defending doctrine. He just did it.
You, with your suspicious mind, read things into it that are not there. Then lead to false accusation and false witness.
jon thinks popes and prelates are all perfect saints, who never sin, never err in judgment, never make mistakes… jon is in for a big, nasty shock, someday!
None of the saints were perfect saints when they were living on earth. they all sinned, they all erred in judgement, they all made mistakes. St. Thomas Aquinas, after all his writing, had a vision toward the end of his life and then said that everything he wrote was straw.
We are dealing with the Infinite, the Ineffable, the Eternal, the Transcendent, the Incomprehensible.
The Pope does not make mistakes on faith and morals only because of a special grace given by God to the Pope.
He is the Visible Head of the Church. He is the Vicar of Christ.
No, the saints repented of their sins, and started new lives, following Christ. And I think that St. Thomas Aquinas was overcome with joy and wonder, by the glories of Heaven, so great, compared to our poor life on earth, when he had that famous vision. No book can possibly compare to what he was blessed to see, in that heavenly vision. His works are very important, nevertheless.
Only Mary was sinless.
So this is a red-herring from “erroneous”. The Magisterium cannot err when teaching about faith and morals because the Church is protected by the Holy Spirit. This is Catholic dogma.
All humans beings are prone to sin, errors of judgment, and make mistakes. The Magisterium of the Catholic Church is certainly not a human being.
The Magisterium must avoid the near occasion of sin which Fernandez’s interpretation most certainly is. By the way jon, did you enjoy Pope Francis entertaining the “artist” of Piss Christ?
He was modeling the love and forgiveness of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
Jesus knew and the Pope does too that he would be criticized but the salvation of a soul is worth it.
Although the artist is a Christian.
We all must be strong against the Satanic forces that want the Church to hate others instead of offer salvation.
But this guy doesn’t fit the optics, he fits the gay.
Because this is the level of maturity there is in the US Catholic Church.
You mean to say, the level of maturity in the Vatican today, has hit extreme lows. A true Catholic priest or prelate who has honestly given his life for Christ, loves Christ deeply, preaches His teachings exactly– and is never, never ambiguous.
Nope.
Just because you don’t understand something does not mean it is ambiguous. If you know the Faith, it will be clear.
As for the maturity in the Vatican, the Pope is very advanced and you have to be conformed to Christ to understand him properly.
The Pope has given his life for Christ and to Christ, loves Christ and Mary deeply and preaches His teachings exactly.
He does not conform to lay people with little understanding of faith, hope and love and humility.
Please save yourself from this wicked generation.
No, we always have to be careful, because not all priests, prelates and popes are “advanced” in religious knowledge and practice of the Faith, not all are dedicated to Christ. There has always been a great deal of politics with the Catholic Church, unfortunately. It was established as the State religion of Rome, and later, it also became the State religion of many countries. At one time in history, the Church had aristocrats and princes (some were non-believers and atheists) ordained as prelates, to govern dioceses– and at the same time, to politically govern certain regions in Europe. The Church also had a bad pope, centuries ago, who had mistresses, and fathered illegitimate children. You have to use your head, keep your eyes open, be careful, you cannot just blindly trust any priest or prelate, in clerical robes. Some are also dangerous criminal pedophiles, like the former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. Use your head, be careful.
Reply to: None of that is relevant.
The catholic Faith holds the Pope to be infallible in matters of Faith and Morals.
If you do not believe that, you are a heretic.
“The catholic Faith holds the Pope to be infallible in matters of Faith and Morals. If you do not believe that, you are a heretic.” Forgive me but I was under the impression that the Pope’s infallibility applies only to Ex Cathedra pronouncements, of which there has been exactly 0 from P. Francis. If I am mistaken, please advise.
Yes, you’re wrong about ex cathedra statements alone as being infallible. Educate yourself. Don’t rely on us to educate you.
The last time a Pope spoke infallibly was in 1950 when he proclaimed the assumption of Mary as doctrine.
889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, “unfailingly adheres to this faith.”
890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:
891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful – who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine “for belief as being divinely revealed,” and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.” This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.
892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful “are to adhere to it with religious assent” which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_1998_professio-fidei_en.html
The Church teaches that “[Jesus Christ] bestowed on [The Church’s Pastors] the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals,” (Donum Veritatis, 15).
“Yes, you’re wrong about ex cathedra statements alone as being infallible. Educate yourself. Don’t rely on us to educate you.”
I am well aware of the 889-992 Catechism, and I’m sorry to differ with Educate yourself July 6, 2023 at 10:35 pm, but my comment pertained to the Pope alone, irrespective of the body of bishops. Notice I said “Pope’s infallibility.” I assure you, Educate yourself, I do not need to rely on you to educate me, at least in this matter. However, there may be future matters where correction is required, and I invite you to do so, provided you read carefully what I have written.
The famous St. Thomas a Becket of England, martyred in 1170, started out as a clerk for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Theobald of Bec. Becket’s father had a sudden financial collapse, and couldn’t finish financing his son’s university education. Becket did well as an employee for the Archbishop, and rose through the ranks to finally be recommended by the Archbishop as Lord Chancellor of England, for King Henry II. He did well in that position, and when Abp. Theobald died, the King’s advisors and bishops recommended that Becket be ordained to replace Abp. Theobald as Archbishop of Canterbury– the primary Church prelate of England. It was said that perhaps King Henry sought a political ally in the Church, by having his excellent and loyal Lord Chancellor ordained to this position. But the appointment backfired totally, on Henry II! Becket was ordained a priest, and the next day, he was consecreted a bishop, and was made Archbishop of Canterbury. Then, suddenly, he began to have a big religious conversion, became an ascetic, and a true Catholic believer, and a real Church leader, seeking solely the interests of the Church above the secular interests of the King. A mighty clash followed! We all know the rest of the story. Well, in most cases, political appointments of non-religious or even atheist European aristocrats and princes to be consecrated as bishops, were sadly for the interests of the monarchy, in European countries, in past historical eras.
St. Thomas Becket died for the Catholic Faith, the Catholic Church and the Pope. He was loyal to the Church and the Pope.
Yes. Becket was a great surprise to the King, when he had a sudden religioys conversion, and changed his life and his loyalties to Christ and His Church. But not all aristocrats and princes who were appointed to religious, clerical roles, had conversions. Most were non-religious, though saying Mass and performing the Sacraments, and carried out orders of their monarchs. These were not true priests and prelates, they were all political, and secular, underneath their faked clerical robes. All the popes went along with this situation, all through the centuries. Many times, they had to go along, to keep order, when there was no other way to govern a region. Pope Alexander III approved of King Henry II’s plan for his Lord Chancellor, Thomas Becket, to be ordained as Archbishop of Canterbury. This, of course, is a terrible ecclesiastical abuse. But these abuses were common, for centuries.
I am certainly not a heretic. The whole point is that down through the centuries, there have been men dressed in clerical garb as popes and prelates, who have sinned and have committed many surprising abuses. It is not unusual for men of power and prestige, to get into bad trouble, morally. The Magisterium and Deposit of Faith is holy, it is of Christ — it is not of unworthy, sinful human beings. Former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was once one of the highest senior Cardinals of the Church. Look how badly he fell.
Actually, the Prince-Bishops of long ago, who were both Church and civil authorities, did a lot of good, and tried to help their people in their region. They did charity work, fed the people in times of famine, raised armies and protected the people, and even minted coins for use in their region. They were primarily secular, however, not very religious.
Today, in the UK, there are a great number of senior Anglican Bishops and Archbishops who sit in the House of Lords, in Parliament. They are called the “Lords Spiritual.” Their secular counterparts are called the “Lords Temporal.” But the clerics do not hold any civil as well as religious authority. However, they are very much intertwined with the UK Government. The Prime Minister has a role in the choice of whom to consecrate as bishops and archbishops, as well as the Church of England. The Prime Minister chooses a candidate from a list given to him by the Crown Nominations Commission, which includes Church of England representatives. It is a convoluted process, with the Church of England (called CofE) and Government involved. We sure aren’t used to such things, in America!
I promise you in the excessive mercy of my Heart that my all-powerful love will grant to all those who receive Holy Communion on the First Fridays in nine consecutive months the grace of final perseverance; they shall not die in my disgrace, nor without receiving their sacraments. My divine Heart shall be their safe refuge in this last moment.”
To the person who wrote this: Amoris Letitia did not open the door to communion to divorced and remarried Catholics.
It affirmed a long standing practice of the Church known as the internal forum.
I do not like it but I have heard stories of it going on before Vatican II.
It did not seem that any pope endorsed it before, though. St. Pope John Paul II certainly did not.
I heard about it when Pope Benedict was Pope and I complained about it being done. I was told by a very traditional Catholic that it had gone on for as long as he knew. Individual confessors have the authority to do that, even if a tribunal has declined their annulment petition. There are various things that can fail in the process of annulment and it gives the people another chance. The confessor needs to be very sure that the marriage was not sacramental.
You must be talking about such things as the Pauline Privilege, which is found in the New Testament. Also, St. Pope John Paul II allowed certain divorced and remarried couples who had children to stay together without an annulment, but only if they promised to remain celibate as they were still in an adulterous situation. Every circumstance is different.
No. The Pauline privilege is for unbaptized people.
. In inviting pastors to distinguish carefully the various situations of the divorced and remarried, the Exhortation Familiaris Consortio recalls the case of those who are subjectively certain in conscience that their previous marriage, irreparably broken, had never been valid. It must be discerned with certainty by means of the external forum established by the Church whether there is objectively such a nullity of marriage. The discipline of the Church, while it confirms the exclusive competence of ecclesiastical tribunals with respect to the examination of the validity of the marriage of Catholics, also offers new ways to demonstrate the nullity of a previous marriage, in order to exclude as far as possible every divergence between the truth verifiable in the judicial process and the objective truth known by a correct conscience.
I think what this is referring to is when an annulment is not given when you yourself have declared yourself guilty of entering the marriage in a manner that would invalidate the marriage (like you never wanted kids, or you did not intend to be exclusive or you did or you did not intend to stay in the marriage for life but you never told anybody so there are no witnesses. But I am guessing.
Anne TE, I want to say that I do not like the internal forum solution. I think it is very open to the potential for abuse. Most serious Catholics do not like it.
It is not an official position of the Church. Even Amoris Laetitia did not endorse it.
The truth is this: If you are aware of having committed grave sin, do not approach to receive communion.
That includes being divorced and remarried without an annulment.
Pastors are supposed to help these people (see Familiaris Consortia and Amoris Laetitia).
You and all of us are to accept these things with docility.
Sorry I forgot the citation.
Given at Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 14 September 1994, Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_14091994_rec-holy-comm-by-divorced_en.html
Signed by Cardinal Ratzinger
I want to make sure that people know that the external forum (marriage tribunal and annulment) is the ordinary way that one would receive the clear conscience to remarry after a divorce.
do not presume on your own conscience. You must seek the help of your pastor.
You are right, but the point I was trying to make is that there are rare exceptions to having to get an annulment. As I mentioned before, Pope John Paul II did allow certain couples who were in adulterous relationships and had children together to stay in the same place with each other for the sake of the children if they promised to refrain from marital relations. Never the less, that does cause scandal for some people who might not know how to treat such a situation.
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/2005/march/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20050308_penitenzieria.html
I do not think that he endorsed it. If you are interested in it as a subject there are these things online:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-the-internal-forum-a-gambit-to-change-church-teaching
https://insidethevatican.com/magazine/editorial/dossier/understanding-francis-internal-forum/
El Padre-Sorry but your link didn’t clarify anything for me.There was no meat there,only the theologan trying to protect his writing.It did not list any eggregious examples from his book.Thanks anyway,John
When young, my mother told me, that in many European countries, boys and girls in their early teens, dated in groups, not alone together. By their late teens, young people were thought to be mature enough for dating alone, but with family close by, and good rules. Typically, at that time, most young people quickly found spouses in their late teens and early twenties, got married, and settled down to raise a family. I think that is good advice for young people of any country.
If Ratzinger was the pope’s rottweiler, Fernandez will be the pope’s poodle.
The haters who called Cardinal Ratzinger “the Pope’s Rottweiler” just did not like some precepts of the Church.
The haters who are picking on Cardinal Fernandez are people who are making false accusations. It is personal because they hate Pope Francis.
He hasn’t even started yet.
The job is the same.
If Cardinal Ratzinger had a different job, he would not have been known as the Pope’s Rottweiller.
“The job is the same.”….are all workers the same?
Quote from a future apostolic letter or doctrinal note from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith under soon to be Cardinal Fernandez: “Christian marriage has its own proper nature and ends, which the Church’s Magisterium has clearly articulated. But God’s plan for love among human beings is not exhausted by marriage alone. Therefore, in our day the Church has been led by the Holy Spirit to see fit to provide a liturgical rite by which two people may solemnize their love and support for each other, having their love blessed by the Church and recognized as part of God’s plan for them and as part of God’s plan for building up the Church and human society in a community of love. It takes nothing away from God’s plan for marriage and it does not alter the Church’s teaching about marriage for the Church to recognize and bless a stable and hopeful commitment of love and mutual support between two people. Such a formalized and sanctified commitment of love between two people is a further expression of the Christian call to love our neighbor as ourselves and is an effective sign of Christian faith to the world by proclaiming God’s love for us. It will enrich the Church to have additional forms of love between people solemnly recognized. The Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has been charged with drafting a suitable liturgical rite for this new blessing of the love between two persons, which will provisionally be called The Rite of Blessing Two People Who Love Each Other.”
If you don’t believe something like that is being prepared, you are either not paying attention or you are terribly naive.
Highly irresponsible and dishonest.
Pray
We’ve been told repeatedly that you can’t pray the gay away.
Holy Mother of God, dispel the smoke of Satan.
That would be something a Catholic would not even imagine.
It’s happening in the German church. Plenty of American Catholics and bishops want it to happen here too.
Remember, the German Church was admonished and Archbishop Fernandez agrred with the admonishment.
Sorry, archbishop Frenandez agreed with the rebuke.
New rite: Thank you for the information. Ugh. Does it say what kinds of other “love” they are that will be blessed by the Church? Does it give examples? I’m guessing they will have to be platonic. Can you give us the link to that proposed document? Thank you and God bless you.
Margartita, he made that up.
Fault finding is a symptom of several disorders.
Put simply, fault-finders are people who obsessively find fault in others and criticize. They often complain and harshly judge others based on trivial issues. Fault-finders are constantly telling others what they are doing wrong and or what they should be doing.
Adult children of alcoholics, narcissists, anxiety, insecurity plus also just being human.
It is what Jesus told us not to do.
Matthew 7:1-5
“Stop judging,* that you may not be judged.
For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.
Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?
How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye?
You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.
This is pearl clutching in the extreme, chill out dude.
If you find fault with so-called fault-finders, aren’t you then a fault-finder yourself?
I am.
Excellent “tu quoque” rejoinder.
Yes, but not Christian.
Can you only admonish sinners whose sins you have not committed?
You don’t understand what a “tu quoque” logical fallacy is. It’s not the pot calling the kettle black; it’s not mere hypocrisy. To commit the “tu quoque” logical fallacy is to invalidate your own argument because your argument or your stance has the same defect or weakness that you accuse others of having. So, if the others’ argument or stance is wrong, then your argument purporting to demonstrate that they are wrong is also wrong since you have committed the very thing in your accusation that you accuse others of having done. Therefore, your accusation has no merit due to a self-defeating logical flaw.
The tu quoque is a form of an ad hominem attack. It means someone cannot refute the argument but can only say “You do it, too” thus validating and acknowledging the other person is right.
You are confusing it with hypocrisy.
When Jesus found fault with some Pharisees, he was not a fault-finder, but an illuminator
Okay. That’s what I am too.
In case anyone does not know, the Christian response is “mea culpa.” And a thank you for the admonishment.
https://www.catalystproject.net/world/fault-finding
Forgot source for fault finding.
Sorry.
My fault.
Jon. I am tired of your diatribes against what you perceive as “narcissistic and elitist, holier-than-thou traditionalists”. You, jon, are the definition of a dogmatic, theological liberalist.
There’s nothing more obnoxious than a clericalist who sets himself apart from and above others in the Church. We have all been warned that having unquestioned authority to speak on so many matters also means that priests and bishops are expected to have answers beyond their competence. You are of the ilk that their word is not to be questioned. You are wrong. Clericalism and cronyism in the Church are abuses of power. I recall the words of devout Irish parents whose son was abused by the parish priest to “never question the good Father because you’ll upset him”. If only those parents had upset the living hell out of that priest and his bishop.
He’ll learn that anything he says to defend himself will be twisted by this evil brood of vipers.
Sorry to say, but “Axiom” got so many things wrong.
Firstly, the teaching office of the Church indeed has unquestioned authority to teach on matter of faith and morals. And all Catholics are obligated to assent to its teachings. Misusing clergy abuse in order to question the Church’s moral authority is dead wrong.
Secondly, “Axiom” speaks about “competence”. She is reminded that the Pope has all competence and authority to appoint the next prefect of the DDF. The Pope knows what the job entails and who is suited for it. “Axiom” and the rest of the commentators here have no competence in this. Zero.
Thirdly, “Axiom” contradicts herself, because usually “clericalists” are not liberalists. It’s the false traditionalist types who are usually clericalists. I am a regular Catholic who went to a good school where the nuns solidly taught us the Catholic catechism. These superb nuns taught us how to think for ourselves and, among other things, how to see right through the dissent, the disobedience, the unfaithfulness that we may find out there in the world. That’s dissent both from the left and the right.
And no, I am not a liberalist. I am perhaps the only true traditionalist Catholic who regularly comments here, because dissent and thrashing the Church’s ministers are certainly not the traditional way that a Catholic behaves. Certainly not during the pre-Conciliar era.
You did a good defense. You were blessed to be taught the Faith before it went into the “doctrine free catechesis.”
I know people are trying but they honestly don’t know but it is no excuse because the Catechism is online.
jon, Axiom is concerned with the moral turpitude of some prelates, some of whom may comprise the teaching office of the Church. A legitimate question in such a circumstance is how far do immoral clerics contribute to disgraceful actions which sully the reputation of Holy Church? And is their any possibility of such clerics weakening the teaching office of Holy Church owing to the disorder in their personal lives? It is not dissent to ask such questions; you may however consider it impudence, or imprudence. I consider it honesty.
So “Dan’s” defense of “Axiom’s” comment is mesmerizing for its self-contradiction, judgmentalism, lack of faith, and flirtation with Protestantism.
First if “Axiom” were genuinely concerned for the reputation of the Church she should not participate in slandering its ministers. For example, notice how some commentators here are close to impugning the moral character of Archbishop Fernandez for writing a perfectly acceptable book for young people. That’s wrong. Did “Axiom” correct those unjust comments if “Axiom” were indeed concerned for “the reputation of the Holy Church”? No she didn’t.
Secondly, “Axiom” commits the fallacy of red-herring by falsely portraying our position as: “their word [the clergy’s] is not to be questioned.” False. Nobody said that. What I am saying is that the teachings of the Magisterium on matters of faith and morals must be adhered to by all Catholics because all Catholics must assent to the Church’s teachings on these issues. The Holy Spirit guards the teaching office of the Church on these matters. This is Catholic dogma, people.
However, if Archbishop Fernandez were to tell “Axiom” to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, she should question that. That is not a matter of faith and morals. I hope people like “Axiom” have the mature ability to distinguish between a teaching on faith and morals versus a “command” that isn’t.
Thirdly, the impeccability of the Church’s ministers does not affect the legitimacy of the Magisterium’s teachings on faith and morals. Their teachings on Church discipline as well as on faith and morals, are to be obeyed NOT because of their moral impeccability, but because of their “office”, because of the power of the Holy Spirit that has been given to them at their anointing at ordination.
Read what St. John Henry Newman wrote about this to Lady Simeon:
“No good can come from disobedience. [The pope’s] facts and his warnings may be all wrong; his deliberations may be biased. [The pope] may have been misled. Imperiousness and craft, tyranny and cruelty, may be patent in the conduct of his advisers and instruments. But when the pope speaks formally and authoritatively he speaks as our Lord would have him speak, and all those imperfections and sins of individuals are overruled for that result which our Lord intends (just as the action of the wicked and of enemies to the Church are overruled) and therefore the Pope’s word stands, and a blessing goes with obedience to it, and no blessing with disobedience.” (November 10, 1867).
“So “Dan’s” defense of “Axiom’s” comment is mesmerizing for its self-contradiction, judgmentalism, lack of faith, and flirtation with Protestantism.” jon, all this for simply asking questions? You read too much into the post, and as a result judge harshly and rashly. However, I found your citation from Newman most edifying, and thank you for it.
Dan … I never knew you were a mesmerizing Protestant. You could have fooled me. Wink.
“Dan … I never knew you were a mesmerizing Protestant. You could have fooled me. Wink.” To Axiom: Until jon’s post, I never thought of myself as a mesmerizing anything, but let us define our terms. A dictionary definition of mesmerize: “hold the attention of (someone) to the exclusion of all else or so as to transfix them.”
jon, if I transfixed you it was not my intention. My intention was to ask two honest questions based on Axiom’s post. You didn’t speak to either question; indeed, you spoke of “impeccability” when my concern was “peccability.” In the sentence: “Thirdly, the impeccability of the Church’s ministers does not affect the legitimacy of the Magisterium’s teachings on faith and morals.” did you mean to write:
” Thirdly, the peccability of the Church’s ministers does not affect the legitimacy of the Magisterium’s teachings on faith and morals?” That would begin an idea answering to my second question. Please advise, and thanks in advance.
jon, thanks for your posts.
Calm down, jon. I don’t think Axiom is a girl.
Rather like appointing one Fr. Martin Luther, OSA, to head the Inquisition. What could possibly go wrong?
Right you are, Greg!
Were he not DEAD,
Francis would appoint Luther
in a HEARTBEAT
CCC 163 Faith is already the beginning of eternal life.
Faith is like an embryo. Watch out for abortionists. Watch out for those who would kill your faith by telling you to distrust those who God sends to help your embryo grow.
For those who are complaining about gay sex or gay couples being approved or blessed-stop crying before you are hurt.
Some people have already made the decision that if this happens they will abort the embryo.
Don’t do it.
Have confidence in Jesus. Jesus is the head of the Church.
The Holy See has published the full list of the participants in the upcoming synod. It’s a stacked deck to rubber-stamp the outcome predetermined. That outcome will be church approval of gay unions and gay copulation. When Fr. Jimmy Martin is invited to be a synod participant and voter, you know what the result will be.
The whole thing will be a disaster. It can only be prevented by God himself acting in history to stop the synod from meeting.
For one thing popes are only infallible when they speak Ex Cathedra. For another thing, some people, including priests have been brought into the Church under false pretenses — being told that things were going to change on divorce, the sexual tabus, etc. when it is impossible to change them.
So “Anne TE” is wrong. The Church teaches that “Jesus Christ promised the assistance of the Holy Spirit to the Church’s Pastors so that they could fulfill their assigned task of teaching the Gospel and authentically interpreting Revelation. In particular, He bestowed on them the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals.” (Donum Veritatis, 15).
But the charism of infallibility is not exercised in every magisterial statement; not every statement or teaching by the magisterium is infallible. So Jon is wrong, again. So tiresome.
The pope may exercise his charism of infallibility, and his dogmatic definitions would be infallible if the proper and required conditions are all met. But the pope is not always and everywhere making infallible statements.
Jon, you’re wrong. Anne TE is right. Score: Anne TE 1, Jon 0.
No you have it backwards.
Every statement of the Pope in not infallible, you are correct but it is not only when he teaches ex cathedra that he exercises infallibility.
We do not keep score.
The point is to know the truth.
We grow in knowledge, wisdom, understanding in the Holy Spirit.
Sometimes you think you are right and you find out you are wrong and that is a gift from the Lord.
Us living stones sometimes have to grind the edges of each other in order to make the Lord’s dwelling more secure, more true.
It should not be anything that offends, but we all wrestle with pride.
You should thank the Lord that there is someone who loves you enough to correct you.
It is not true that the Pope only is infallible when teaching ex cathedra.
An example: Pope John Paul II declared in union with the Bishops that abortion is immoral.
Evangelium Vitae 62
Given such unanimity in the doctrinal and disciplinary tradition of the Church, Paul VI was able to declare that this tradition is unchanged and unchangeable. Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. 7
Au contraire, that is not an exercise of papal infallibility; it is an exercise of the infallibility that the college of bishops possesses in union with the pope. The pope teaches infallibly as pope himself, not from the consent of the church, only when he speaks ex cathedra. In the example you provided, he’s not exercising papal infallibility as an individual, he’s confirming and exercising the infallibility of the entire college of bishops.
Pope JPII made an ex cathedra infallible statement in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis when he taught as firmly to be held that the Church does not have the authority to ordain women to priesthood.
Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.
I do not think this is ex cathedra. It is infallible.
When he was prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI), under John Paul II’s authority, stated in a formal response (responsum) to an inquiry (dubium) that John Paul II’s decision on the ordination of women into the Catholic priesthood in his apostolic letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis was part of the “ordinary and infallible” magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church.[68] This was restated three years later in a commentary by the same Congregation.[64]
Pope John Paul II was only passing down Church Tradition, with a capital “T”, what has always been taught in that case. One of the things that cannot be changed, just like how the laws (Ten Commandments) against fornication, adultery, incest, sodomy and bestiality cannot be changed. they are part of the Natural Law also. No pope can change those laws. They WERE written in stone.
You should look up the 10 Commandments.
I have just one question that I think people should answer. If the pope and the DDF promulgate as official Catholic doctrine that same sex unions are good and they create and defend a blessing of same-sex unions in and for the Catholic Church, would they be correct or wrong to do so? Simple question, and the possibility is not out of the question. My answer is that they would be wrong to do so. So let’s start by answering that question.
Same sex sexual relations and all sexual relations outside of the Sacrament of Matrimony are gravely immoral. And sexual acts, even with oneself are gravely immoral.
The Church has already said no to same sex blessings.
That hasn’t stopped some bishops, priests and laity from teaching that gay unions should be allowed and blessed by the church.
The church has said no to communion for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics too unless they are sexually continent, but that didn’t stop the Pope (actually his ghostwriter Fernandez) from including a footnote in Amoris Laetitia that walked that teaching back to permit communion for divorced and remarried Catholics without an annulment.
The church formerly taught that capital punishment was permissible and legitimate, Now it teaches that it is inadmissible. That’s a complete reversal.
So just because the church has said one thing previously doesn’t mean it won’t be watered down or reversed. Gay union advocates are counting on the church’s teachings about gay sex and marriage being reversed.
It is not permitted for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Holy Communion without an annulment.
Do not cause people to sin by giving false information.
Amoris Laetitia allows it. Yes.
Ok this is as bad as those who after Vatican II thought they could do whatever they wanted because the Church changed its mind on hats on women and fish on Fridays-which it really did not but people thought it did.
jon said that “[Jesus Christ] bestowed on [The Church’s Pastors] the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals”. The Church’s Pastors??
That does not mean the parish pastors (although when they teach in union with the Church the teaching is infallible.)
It means the Bishops in union with the Pope.
The capitalized Pastors is first used in the document jon referred to in section one and refers to the Bishops.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19900524_theologian-vocation_en.html
This charism is manifested when the Pastors propose a doctrine as contained in Revelation and can be exercised in various ways. Thus it is exercised particularly when the bishops in union with their visible head proclaim a doctrine by a collegial act, as is the case in an ecumenical council, or when the Roman Pontiff, fulfilling his mission as supreme Pastor and Teacher of all Christians, proclaims a doctrine “ex cathedra”. (13)
Sorry that uploaded before I finished. The quote is the rest of the paragraph which jon began.
This is really sad.
People don’t know what they don’t know and they don’t understand what they don’t understand.
But when people are in error and they insist they are correct.
I know there are a lot of poorly catechized people in the Church.
A lot of people don’t have a clear knowledge of the Catholic Faith.
You can get on to the catechism in a year podcasts.
They are usually 20 minutes or less.
You can just read the Catechism online or in book form.
It is a thick book but the last fourth of it is reference material so It is really 688 pages so 2 pages a day and you will have it done in year.
One needs the Holy Spirit to understand the Catholic Faith.
If you don’t know something or don’t understand something, ask Jesus and Mary.
This is a little advanced but there are a couple people here who might be ready for it:
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/four-levels-of-the-churchs-teaching-12242
Matthew 18:1-4At that time the disciples approached Jesus and said, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
He called a child over, placed it in their midst, and said, “Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Once you start thinking that you cannot trust the Pope, you are going to go down so many wrong paths it isn’t funny.
Just because something is not defined as infallible does not mean that you do not have to believe it or obey it.
Just because something is not defined as infallible does not mean it is wrong or questionable.
You can trust God and you can trust the Pope.
There are many people lying about him.
Do not listen again to what is said about him on the Internet.
His writings and Angelus messages and homilies are on the Vatican website.
It all started going downhill with “Who am I to judge?”
So far, an orthodox interpretation can be given to whatever Pope Francis has said. So far. But it’s sometimes hard to get the right interpretation because Pope Francis seldom speaks clearly. What he says is frequently open to multiple and sometimes contradictory interpretations. That’s not helpful. Not at all. It gives ammunition and hope to the Church’s enemies, and it demoralizes the faithful.
Sub tuum praesidium
confugimus,
Sancta Dei Genetrix.
Nostras deprecationes ne despicias
in necessitatibus,
sed a periculis cunctis
libera nos semper,
Virgo gloriosa et benedicta
We fly to thy protection,
O Holy Mother of God;
Do not despise our petitions
in our necessities,
but deliver us always
from all dangers,
O Glorious and Blessed Virgin
If you do not trust the Pope, then you are not a Catholic anymore. Even if you have not entirely left the Church, you have left the Church-the unity of the Faith.
Well, we have had many bad popes and bad prelates, at times, all through the centuries. Abp. Fernandez sounds like a bad choice for Prefect of the DDF. He will have to be made a Cardinal, too, for that position. And then, he will probably be Dean of the College of Cardinals. But things could be much worse. What if former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick had been elected Pope– and had continued to evilly molest boys and young seminarians?
Pray the Litany of the Precious Blood.
Stop picking on jon. He is trying to help you. He is seeking the glory of God.
Overlook his sometime offensive portrayal of people who post here.
I understand if the schismatics don’t like what he has to say but if you are still in union with the Church, you should not have a problem with it.
Evil bloggers have undermined confidence in the Pope.
You can have confidence in the Pope.
You should know the faith well enough to know that.
If you do not, then please pray to Mary, pray for faith. You will obtain it because it is God’s Will for all to have faith.
“Stop picking on jon?” You’ve got that one totally wrong! Jon is quite a malicious, extremely defensive, self-centered, “know-it-all,” pompous poster, who cannot integrate his Catholic book-reading with how the Catholic Church actually operates. He needs to really have a good talk with a priest, who can correctly explain things to him. Maybe he also needs psychiatric help. I bet he does not have much of a deep, truly religious Catholic life— with things like daily Mass, hours of prayer, Scripture reading, Divine Office, religious devotions, Adoration, Rosary, etc.– that is what a true, devout Catholic does. Then, a true, devout Catholic next goes out, to compassionately help others. A true Catholic desires to help others, and help save souls too, for love of Christ. He does not waste time on stupid intellectual religious arguments, maliciously insulting prople. And a devout Catholic never, never lies about sin, and uses phony intellectual religious arguments, to support sinful men of the clergy, including the papacy. Former “Father” Martin Luther correctly told the pope and Vatican, that their scheme of selling fake indulgences, to finance their new building of St. Peter’s Basilica– was totally wrong, deceptive, immoral– a horrible, fraudulent scam! He was right!
You should educate yourself on that whole Martin Luther thing.
Read intelligently. No one is “praising” Martin Luther. The scam of selling indulgences was wrong. And that’s all.
You tell us how to be good Catholics but then you turn around and praise Martin Luther, a heretic, and who caused division in the Church? Why? What?
That was very “naughty,” the sale of indulgences! You simply cannot buy your way into Heaven, for deceased loved ones– or for yourself– by giving money to the Catholic Church, for an indulgence! That bad practice was finally outlawed by the Church.
You’re missing the forest for the trees. Dividing the Church which Luther did resulting in wars and death is the bigger outrage. Luther died excommunicated.
You fail to read correctly. I noted that Martin Luther pointed out a terrible Church abuse– the sale of indulgences– to the Pope and Vatican. And then, they agreed– and finally outlawed this terrible abuse.
I did not fail to read you correctly. There was no reason for you to mention Luther at all. Why berate Catholics? Why pick on them by holding up as some sort of hero someone who caused division? Many of us are tired of this.
it is best to see a church from a realistic viewpoint.
We Catholics already see the Church realistically. You don’t think we read and listen to the news? Don’t you think we are saddened by some of the things we hear?
You are the one who is unrealistic. Your solutions do not make sense. We don’t need people like you to put down what we love, God’s one and true Catholic Church.
Go away.
The Catholic Church does not now nor has it ever approved the sale of indulgences. This is to be distinguished from the undeniable fact that individual Catholics (perhaps the best known of them being the German Dominican Johann Tetzel [1465-1519]) did sell indulgences–but in doing so they acted contrary to explicit Church regulations. This practice is utterly opposed to the Catholic Church’s teaching on indulgences, and it cannot be regarded as a teaching or practice of the Church.
Catholic Answers
Here are the actual facts, from history: In 1517, Pope Leo X authorized the sale of indulgences, to help finance the rebuilding of St. Peter’s Basilica. In 1567, 50 years later, Pope Pius V outlawed this abusive, exploitative practice.
Leo X authorized the granting of indulgences to those who donated to reconstruct the Basilica. These were technically donations not purchases. The indulgence itself wasn’t for sale. Even today people donate to their parish for baptisms, weddings or funerals. But these sacraments are not for sale. Get your facts right.
Reply to, try to learn from people who know more than you do. Don’t be so quick to reject what they are telling you.
I do not know if you are Catholic but you seem to have a very Protestant view of the Church.
What you need to understand is that the teachings of the Catholic Church belong only to Jesus Christ. He is in Heaven, not on earth. Your one and only pathway to Heaven, resides in your conversion to Christ, and daily relationship with Him, and willingness to follow Him in your daily life– though you cannot see Him. It has always been a rugged, difficult path, for only mature people, willing to shun the false world, and shun the deceptive wolves– and follow Him. There are a great many false men in clerical robes, who pretend to love Christ– but really love themselves, and preach their own ideas about religion. From childhood, you need to be taught to beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing. And to shun those “wolves” — and follow only Jesus, as a pilgrim on earth. A true Catholic cleric stands only for Jesus Christ, and is ordained to be our “alter Christus” only, for us, on earth– until Christ comes again, for us, at the end of Time.
Why do you always come here to tell us what’s wrong with Catholics and our priests? Go away.
You are called out on your lack of conformity to Catholic teaching and you respond by saying “Jesus Christ is not on earth..”
Reply to-you ARE a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
No, you miss a simple point. At the Last Supper, Jesus Christ instituted His priesthood with His Apostles, to carry on His work after His earthly death. And wolf– stop being so ridiculous. I am not a wolf.
True Catholics here are pushing back “Reply’s” repeated unjust attacks. I love it.
To Go away– No, I will not “go away.” Best to see a church’s problems from a realistic viewpoint– and deal with it, realistically.
LOL– go to church, jon. Be your usual, funny self.
You’re not realistic. You come here and harass us with repeated exaggerations and falsehoods about the Church and priests. Go away. Please.
I agree with the comments that say they’re fed up with the constant picking of the Church. We already know the Church is not perfect and that the Church has problems. We are already realistic. But do we need to read about it in an unhelpful way that you write? Nag nag nag. It Should stop.
Sorry, but as adult Catholics, we all have to learn about serious problems in our Church, and for our part, try to resolve or end these serious problems. Many decades ago, I attended the installation Mass of a new Pastor at a Catholic church, far away– who gave a great sermon. Two years later, I heard from a friend at that parish, that their Pastor was in jail– and was soon laicized. He had embezzled millions, spent it all in Las Vegas on a gambling habit, a serious alcohol problem, and Nevada brothels. Their beautiful church and parish school was now– totally penniless, destitute. A group of parents gathered solemnly in their church to pray, and figure out what to do. 10 years prior to that, I attended a Mass and reception for a young Archbishop, who was sent to lead an Archdiocese, also far away. A few years later, I was told of a horrible, unthinkable scandal. It was all over the news. This Archbishop had gotten seven young Eucharistic Ministers and youth leaders pregnant. This was when the role of Eucharistic Ministers started, and girls and women were allowed to serve in that role. The Archbishop got defrocked and laicized. He didn’t live much longer– he died of a heart attack. Catholic laymen enrolled in a parish, taking their kids to Mass and maybe a parish school, enrolling them to prepare for church Sacraments, etc. etc.– have big responsibilities, and must be mature enough to handle them all. Including disastrous circumstances and horrific scandals.
But you are not trying to resolve or to end these serious problems because the solutions you want are unrealistic. You’re just interested in throwing mud. So please stop or go away. Do not harass us Catholics.
Stop the anti-Catholic trolling. We love our priests. We love our bishops. There is absolutely no need to keep throwing at our face what we already know too well. You are no prophet of doom.
Stop it, this is a Catholic website. We live in a dark world of sin. Faithful Christians must be strong and courageous daily, in life’s battles with sin, for Christ. We must be warriors for Christ, to fight sin and corruption. There was just a news report, that an 83-year-old lady— a courageous prayer warrior, in Maryland— was badly beaten by a nasty young girl, for quietly praying outside an abortion facility. God bless this angelic, elderly prayer warrior, for Christ’s helpless unborn children. Hope she will not die.– hope she will soon recover, in the hospital.
I agree with all the posters calling for an end to this non-stop picking on the Catholic Church. You sin by picking on us. By picking on something we love, you are hurting us!
Reply to- Jesus instituted the priesthood :to carry on His work?”
Are you a Jehovah’s Witness?
The Catholic priesthood was instituted by Christ on Holy Thursday, the night before Christ died. His Apostles were to carry on His work on earth. The priest stands for Christ as our “alter Christus.”
I am horrified by the anti Catholic attitude of that poster.
Frankie, you, priesthood, You are hurting us, agrees with Stop it, Stop it, Please leave us alone, It should stop, Go away– etc. etc.– are all a bunch of phony-balonies, writing a bunch of babbling nonsense. Nothing better to do. Why don’t you go get a good book to read– maybe one written by a good recent pope, like Pope Benedict or St. John Paul II? Educate your minds.
Do not dismiss us Catholics who are fed up with the mudslinging against our Church. You tear down the Church with words, then you hurt all of us who love the Church. You tear down the Church then you are tearing down Christ.
Is Anti-Catholicism. It is not nonsense to tell commentators here like Reply that what they are doing is wrong. It is wrong to have prejudice against Catholics. It is wrong to persecute us. Throwing at our face Martin Luther as if he’s some hero is an insult. Many Catholics love Pope Francis. Respect that. I may not be as well-educated as you, or as knowledgeable as you, but you should know better not to dismiss what many are saying here.
Your message is not very helpful to us Catholic laypeople because we are already handling in our own way whatever scandals and bad news we hear in the media. You offer no real solutions. You only repeat what we are already doing, like a hectoring nagger. You only throw mud at Catholic priests, bishops, and our Pope. Stop persecuting the Catholic Church. Stop persecuting Christ.
I find Jon’s portrayal of some people who post here funny, like the groups he calls beloved.
Funny? No– you mean, sadistic! Ignorant!
No, I meant funny.
We have had 8 to 10 bad popes out of 266 or 267.
Pope Francis is not a bad pope.
We also had a pope and two antipopes at the same time in the past with saints on different sides. Explain that one to me. Gheesh! Oh well! I am just going to following the Ten Commandments as much as possible and be careful what confessor I use and leave it at that.
But thank God, former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick was not elected as Pope. Yes, Pope Francis is not a bad pope, in terms of immorality– like McCarrick. If Pope Francis was just Fr. Bergoglio — just a parish priest, maybe a pastor of our local parish– we would change to a good parish church, with faithful, orthodox priests, and a good pastor. For example– change to San Francisco’s Star of the Sea, with Fr. Illo, as pastor, and good assistant parish priests. Much better.
I hope you people have realized by now that your “objections” to the book that Fernandez wrote many years ago do not hold water, and that your objections to the Pope’s appointment is all smoke and mirrors.
Most of you I am sure will have read the book by now (I mean, the false ultra-traditionalist blogs just couldn’t wait to post online versions of it). By the lack of negative commentary on the book, I sense that some of you whose objections were over-the-top have had to experience egg on their face.
And this whole diversion about “infallibility,” “impeccability,””mesmerize” and other side issues? An attempt to distract from your false assessment of Fernandez and from your yet-another unjust criticism of the Pope.
God save the Pope from his detractors.
I hope the people here are more faithful than they appear.
Some people just want to stir things up.
We know there are infiltrators from the schismatics who love to do that.
God save Cal-Catholic from the self Appointed Dr. of the Church. Who would have defended the Arian bishops for the fact they wore miters
LOL.
Catholic insults.
Haha. I don’t ever remember anyone appointing himself or herself as a Dr. of the Church.
i guess you missed it