Support This Website! Shop Here!

Monday, November 28, 2016

Cardinal Burke's Double Standard

How many people remember the time Pope Benedict said it was alright for a man to use a condom?
The Pope says in the first part of the answer that "[the use of] a condom can be... a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility."
Of course you don't remember that!
After all, Pope Benedict legitimized the use of the TLM! We aren't going to attack anything Benedict says before or after that, because if we did, it might make Benedict look loony tunes, and it might cast doubt on whether he was right to legitimize the TLM!

Take example A: Cardinal Raymond Burke.
Where was the famous Cardinal Burke in questioning Pope Benedict?

Oh, that's right .... he was SILENT AS THE FREAKING GRAVE.


Well, because Benedict legitimized the TLM
Pope Benedict gave Cardinal Burke cushy perqs that made Burke look Really Important (TM).
So, Pope Benedict's insanity was considered FINE by all the Right People (TM).

But, if Burke was silent in regards to Benedict, why is he forcing a public question on Pope Francis?
Why is a "traditionalist" bishop recommending that bishops can invent brand new procedures for dealing with popes? As Ross Douthat notes, that is exactly what Cardinal Burke proposes

Meanwhile one of those four dubia authors, the combative traditionalist, Cardinal Raymond Burke, gave an interview suggesting that papal silence might require a “formal act of correction” from the cardinals — something without obvious precedent in Catholic history.

A "traditionalist" that wants new procedures put in place to circumscribe papal authority - Martin Luther, call your office! And tell them you are Burke's buddy! Because you are. Now.

Again, why is Cardinal Burke doing this?
Well, Burke attacks Pope Francis because Francis took Burke's perqs away.

Cardinal Burke is no Padre Pio, Padre Pio being a man who quietly accepted subordination for ten years, because he understood the value of obedience. Instead, Burke is acting like a whining brat, and the traditionalists (mostly Trump voters) are eating it up! Because "whiny brat" = TLM devotee = Trump voter.

Like calls to like across the deep.


Confitebor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Confitebor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Confitebor said...

Wow. What a deranged rant. You really think this is how to honor our Lord?

What is your big hang-up over the Roman Church's historical rites? And how come you don't mind bashing Pope Benedict for his error on condoms, but you never bash Pope Francis who utters the same and worse errors on that and so many other topics?

News flash (for you, and for Ross Douthat): Francis is not the first pope to utter or promote error, nor the first pope to meet resistance from his cardinals. Or did you forget that John XXII's false opinion about the Beatific Vision which he attempted promote was met not only with a loud outcry from the faithful, including the Church's best theologians, and even with a public accusation of heresy from Cardinal Orsini. It even got to the point where the French king called on the college of cardinals to formally condemn John XXII as a heretic. John wisely backed down and backtracked -- and his successor formally condemned John's former opinion as a heresy.

As for Douthat's "combative" Cardinal Burke: People can pull up videos and articles showing Burke's speech and demeanor. He's anything but combative. But I'd say your post is.

So, four Cardinals humbly, respectfully submit some dubia to the man they rightly acknowledge as their superior, and your reaction is to viciously, hatefully attack one of the four who has honestly -- and accurately -- explained just how serious he thinks these matters are. You should retract this post and apologize, and compose something that substantively and respectfully interacts with the Cardinals' dubia. Follow their example: they show how a Christian addresses important matters with one of great dignity than they. These cardinals by God's grace have a higher dignity than you and I -- show them the same respect and honor they show the Holy Father. Treat this subject with the seriousness it deserves, and then your fellow Catholics might give your commentaries serious consideration.

Steve Kellmeyer said...

The difference, of course, is that Pope Benedict and his spokesmen affirmatively and explicitly stated that the use of contraceptives between a fertile man and a fertile woman could be a step towards morality. That was an EXPLICIT rejection of Catholic teaching.

Pope Francis has NEVER affirmatively said that a couple who are in an irregular marriage situation should receive communion. He has been, both explicitly and - as with Burke and company - implicitly, ACCUSED of saying such a thing, but he has not, in fact, anywhere SAID this.

The traditionalists gave Pope Benedict's EXPLICIT heresy a pass, even defending it as absolutely fine, nothing to see here, his words don't mean what they clearly do.

The traditionalists gave Pope Francis the anti-Christ treatment, pretending that this is a herald of the last days when the papacy goes into apostasy.

Given the available evidence, I can make a MUCH stronger argument that Pope Benedict was a heretic than I can that Pope Francis is a heretic. I loved Benedict, but Benedict was wrong to make those explicit statements on condoms. I love Pope Francis as well; Francis has not said anything explicitly wrong to this point in his papacy.

Cardinal Burke's double standard, and the double standard of the traditionalists in general, is completely unjustified. If you're going to pillory Francis, then at least recognize that Benedict deserves at LEAST as much opprobrium, actually more. Quit treating this situation like some kind of end-of-the-world scenario. It isn't.

Confitebor said...

Your rational faculties seem to have derailed here. You ought to be able to see the huge difference between the erroneous reasoning and conclusion of Pope Benedict on condoms and the erroneous reasoning and conclusions of Pope Francis and his collaborators. The former is a case of a pope seriously garbling Catholic morality in a private capacity, in a single published interview -- pretty bad and truly scandalous and deplorable, which is why traditional Catholics did not, contrary to your false and unsupportable allegation, give Pope Benedict a pass on that matter. But in the case of Amoris Laetitia, we have a papal document being issued after two synods that were called for the purpose of overturning perennial Catholic sacramental discipline, doctrine, and morality. Not only has the pope made private, informal statements in this matter, but he has gone out of his way to give false teachers a platform to mislead the Faithful and has gone to very great trouble to impose his own personal, unlawful practice in Buenos Aires upon the whole Church. Despite Pope Benedict's failing, he at least was carrying on the best of the doctrinal and pastoral legacy of John Paul II, reminding everyone of the Church Fathers, and promoting reverent and authentic liturgy. None of that can be said of Pope Francis, who has not only introduced deviant innovations in discipline and morality, but is in every other respect very much a pre-John Paul II post-Vatican II bishop and thus can't be expected to retain the level of respect or admiration that "conservative" or traditional Catholics had for Benedict or John Paul II.

Given the available evidence, there is simply no way that an argument that Benedict was a heretic is stronger than an argument against Francis. Pope Francis certainly has explicitly affirmed that sometimes people living in adultery and engaging in adulterous sexual relations may receive the sacraments. Sacraments, plural, not just the sacrament of confession, which all the Faithful may receive, and if contrite they receive absolution -- but sacraments, including the Eucharist.

Whether or not the pontificate of Francis is a herald of the last days is irrelevant, and entirely unimportant to me -- though I can understand why some would make such rash speculations. We've had heretical popes before, and the world hasn't ended yet. But eschatological speculations aside, there can be no denying that the Church is in a serious crisis. This goes so much further than Benedict's error on condoms. You seem much more worked up over Benedict's on-off error than you do the systematic demolition of the Church's sacramental discipline and moral teachings. What's wrong you?

Indeed, if you can recognize what is wrong with what Benedict said about condom use, why don't you object at least as strenuously to Amoris Laetitia, which incorporates the exact same erroneous moral reasoning and applies it logically to reach conclusions that the Church has always firmly rejected?