Showing posts with label Pope Emeritus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pope Emeritus. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Cardinal Turkson: "The Exit Door of Benedict is Always Avalilable for Francis"

(Lisbon) The Portuguese daily Sol published an interview with Cardinal Peter Turkson on 3 June. The cardinal from Ghana also entertained the possibility of Pope Francis' resignation.
The Cardinal was President of the Pontifical Council Iustitia et Pax and since 2016 has been the first prefect of the new Pontifical Council for the Holistic Development of People, in which he had formerly acted as an advisor.

Excerpt from the interview

The daily newspaper Sol, in the words of Cardinal Turkson, mentions in a meaningful way: "The exit door of Benedict is always there for Francis."
Sol: Is it possible that Francis should follow the example of Benedict XVI. and resigns?
Cardinal Turkson: I do not know if he will. This is a matter between him and God. But it is also true that what Benedict has done has become a part of the institution. This means that the freedom to do so is always given.
Sol: You mean, even if he does not open the door, the door is always there?
Cardinal Turkson: Definitely. This can happen.

Controversial figure of an "emeritus pope"

This continuing "development" of the institution of the papacy by the office of Benedict XVI. and the unusual way he continued to dress himself as a pope, to keep his pope's name and to be an "emeritus pope" is very controversial. Cardinal Walter Brandmüller described the figure of an emeritus pope as a "great danger " for the unity of the Church.
Against the attempted institutionalization of an "emeritus pope," Church lawyers even vehemently raised their voices. For the renowned Church lawyer Giuseppe Sciacca, curial bishop and secretary of the apostolic signatura, the figure of a emeritus pope is " theologically and legally untenable." On the other hand, in May 2016, Archbishop Georg Gänswein spoke in a lecture, which triggered violent reactions ( see also ).

Resignation signals from Pope Francis?

In the past half-year the discussion about a possible resignation of Pope Francis, which he himself has suggested as such, has intensified. The historian Roberto de Mattei, on the occasion of the 80th birthday of Francis, and in connection with the unaddressed Dubia (doubts) of prominent cardinals, wrote on the controversial post-synodal letter Amoris laetitia that in the course of 2017 it can not be ruled out that Francis  may take the bull by the horns and resign 
The Argentine weekly magazine Perfil interpreted the words of Francis from 30th May as resignation signals . The Pope had said in the morning sermon in Santa Marta:
"We shepherds must all say farewell. There comes a moment when the Lord tells us, "Go somewhere else, go there, go there, come to me.""
Perfil wrote:
"Francis today nurtured the idea, like his predecessor, to resign his office before his death."
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Photo: Sol (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Is Benedict XVI the Last Pope? "Everything is Possible," says Benedict himself.

Is Benedict XVI the Last Pope?
(Rome) "Who is Pope today and how many are there exactly?"  Italian journalist Antonio Socci, who is known by his accentuated criticism of Pope Francis asked on Saturday in his publication for the daily  Libero. General confusion reigns in the Church, and the new interview book by Benedict XVI., "The Last Conversations,"  instead of clearing away the fog, adds to it.
Socci had questioned 2014/2015 the validity of the election of Pope Francis. He has more recently distanced himself from this thesis though, yet he doesn't seem to have given it up so completely. The still surprising resignation of Benedict XVI, still disturbs him and other Catholics too.  It's an inner restlessness that is constantly fueled  anew by the pontificate of Francis.
In the new article, Socci has occupied himself once more with the validity of the official renunciation of Benedict and its even more surprising step, to introduce a previously completely unknown figure of "emeritus pope."  Is Benedict still Pope? How can there be two popes? These questions not only arise to Socci, as leading canonists have warned of the introduction of this figure. Such things were raised by Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, a close confidant of Benedict XVI., who does not approve of the step in the "retirement." Therefore, the cardinal warned last July against the institutionalization of a "papa emeritus", also because there are groups in the Church, who still hold Benedict for the legitimate pope, and thus is a dangerously explosive force with the risk of schism in the air  (see Cardinal Brandmüller: Figure of an "Emeritus" Pope poses "Serious Risks" for Unity of the Church in German).

 The Most Curious Detail

"I start with the most curious detail," says Socci. Peter Seewald asked Benedict XVI. if he knew the prophecy of Malachi, who allegedly created a list of all future popes until the end of the world in the Middle Ages. According to this list the papacy, and therefore the Church, would end with Benedict XVI.. Seewald didn't ask the question about the last Pope directly but took a  turn from it: What if Benedict XVI. actually were to be the last pope, who has represented the figure of Peter's successor in the unprecedented form?
"The response from Ratzinger is surprising: 'Alles kann sein.'  Everything is possible? Even that Benedict is the last pope, although for more than three years his successor has ruled? In Seewald's book Benedict adds:  'This prophecy probably arose in the circles around Philip Neri.'"
"He calls them, 'prophecy,' and returns to a great saint and mystic of the Church, and then to loosen up concluding with a joke, but that was his answer," says Socci.

The Break

"Does  Benedict XVI. believe his is the last papacy (at the end of the world or at least the end of the Church)?"  asks Socci. "Probably not. But then does he think  - at least according to the recounting of his interlocutor -- one who has exercised the papacy in the recognizeable form for the last two thousand years? Perhaps. This statement can be heard, because the papacy can not be changed by human will as a divine institution as is well known, of the Church."
But what change will it involved? "Is there a break in the uninterrupted tradition of the Church? Another point in the book points in this direction. Do you see yourself as the last pope of the old or as the first of the new world?'  Benedict XVI's answer to Seewald's question: 'I would say both. '"
"But what does that mean," asks Socci. What does "old" and "new world" mean, especially for someone like Benedict XVI., who always opposed an interpretation of Vatican II as a 'break' with tradition and instead emphasized its continuity?
Seewald ascribes to  Benedict XVI. a "revolutionary"  conduct with which he, "like no other pope of modern times, changed the papacy."  Socci wonders whether this assertion, "clearly alludes to the  introduction of 'emeritus pope,'"  a reference to a concrete statement by Benedict XVI. in the book which he had made and thought to be valuable.

The Detective Story

Socci recalls that the figure of an "emeritus pope"  is completely alien to Church history and emphasizes the canon emphatically that a Pope who waives his office, automatically returns to the status he had prior to his election, because the papacy, in contrast to the episcopal ordination, is not a sacrament. While the bishops, therefore, remain bishops, even if they no longer exert a particular jurisdiction, this was not the case with a Pope.
Nevertheless, Benedict XVI announced in the last days of his pontificate against the opinion of all canonists  that he would become an "emeritus pope"  after his resignation. He did not offer a canonical or theological justification of his unusual step, which was even more unusual than the resignation itself. Rather, he said, during his last general audience on February 27th: "My decision to dispense with the active version of the office, this does not withdraw it back [being a pope]."
He coupled this statement with his announcement of remaining at the Vatican and continuing to wear the robe of a pope and the papal coat of arms and to be introduced with his papal name, including the honorary title "His Holiness".
"That was enough to ask the question of what is happening, and whether he was really withdrawn from the papacy." Therefore, Socci had, as early as 2013, been concerned in numerous articles with the unusual resignation and the subsequent conclave.
Meanwhile, the canon lawyer Stefano Violi, examining the Declaratio,  with which Benedict XVI. announced his resignation, came to the conclusion: "Benedict XVI. agreed to renounce the ministerium [service]:  not the papacy under the provisions of Boniface VIII, nor of the munus [Official] according to Canon 332, paragraph 2, but to the ministerium, or as clarified in his last audience, to the active exercise of the ministry."
After Antonio Socci had pointed the finger at inconsistencies in several articles,  the Vaticanist Andrea Tornielli, very closely linked to Pope Francis,  asked Pope Benedict XVI in February 2014  why he had remained "emeritus pope". The answer was:
"The maintenance of the white robe and the name Benedict is simply a practical matter. At the time of the resignation there were no other garments available. "
There were no other garments available?
"Tornielli broadcast his 'sensational news' in all directions, but on closer inspection, the words must have proven an elegant joke to suggest a question that Benedict XVI. then could not speak on (Who believes that there were no black cassocks in the Vatican?)," says Socci. "But he speaks now about three years later, and explained the reasons for its decision, which have nothing to do with sartorial affairs."

"It means that he is pope"

In the new interview the considerations on the bishops come out. When it was stipulated there would be a limit of their tenure at 75 years, the "Bishop Emeritus" was created because it was said that a father always remains father.
Benedict XVI. now says that also about himself. Even if the children are already grown, the father remains father, even if he no longer bears the whole responsibility connected to fatherhood.  He remained a father in a deeper, more intimate sense, said Benedict XVI.
Socci speaks of a "poetic idea", others speak of a transfigured representation. but on the theological level it was "explosive", because "it means that he is pope."
His personal secretary, Archbishop Curia Georg Gänswein, announced last May in his speech at the Gregoriana   at what Benedict XVI. now sets forth in his interview book. Gänswein went even further and in detail.
Gänsweins speech, which was concealed by most media, "struck the Roman Curia like a nuclear bomb", according to Socci. Gänswein said the papal service hasn't been the same as before, since February 11, 2013. The papacy has in fact been the foundation of the Catholic Church, but it was altered by Benedict XVI. through his "exception pontificate" fundamentally and permanently.
His resignation and the creation of the figure of "emeritus pope" was a "weighty step of a millennially historic proportions."  It's a step that had never happened before, because Benedict XVI. never gave up his Petrine ministry, but "renewed" it.
The novelty lies in the "extension" of the papacy from a "collegial and synodal dimension" to an office exerted "quasi communally."  Although there really are not two popes, it's  a de facto "expanded" papacy with an "active and contemplative" Pope.
One of two people effecting a common Office? One wonders seriously, what the situation is and rubs his eyes in disbelief. Paul Badde had already asked Gänswein a few days after his Gregorian speech about the Malachy prophecy. Such things might be add a little spice to an interview or an article by a journalist, but it hardly helps the Church much in its current situation.  Gänswein gave the impression in his Gregorian speech and  Badde interview for EWTN  that he wanted to ultimately transfigure the incomprehensible step of Benedict XVI.  and subsequently charge through a constructed meaning, which actually made all rather worse. Especially Gänswein's response to Badde, he would have "no problem"  with four or five popes emeritus, lacks of seriousness. The whole situation of Benedict's resignation  is problematic enough, without the need for sloppy swaggering.

Torpedo against Benedict

Socci does not stop till he reaches his next goal. Until the Gänswein speech "Bergoglio must have already heard these things by Benedict XVI  without understanding them, as the emeritus papacy was explained:" The Resignation of Benedict XVI. was a "government action" comparable to a bishop who renounces and retires his jurisdiction.
Since the Gänswein speech of May "the Court of Bergoglio has only just become aware of the scale of the problem," says Socci, hence as Francis issued upon returning from Armenia, the clear rejection of the notion of a "common Petrine ministry."
In August Tornielli ( "The Thermometer of the Curia") published an interview with the eminent canonists and representatives of the Roman Curia, Titular Bishop Giuseppe Sciacca, who unreservedly shredded the figure of an "emeritus pope." "The uniqueness of Peter's successor does not allow further discrimination or duplication of the Office" or even the nominal service as an honorary title. There is especially  no distinction between the office and its exercise (see New Broadside Against "Emeritus Pope" - Canonist Sciacca: "Legally and Theologically Untenable" in German).
So Socci gets in the core of his column to a question which is quite legitimate, but at the same time, of which Cardinal Brandmüller recently warned:
"Benedict XVI. had decided to retain the authority of the Pope and to dispense only with the active exercise of the office. If this  decision of his is inadmissible and void, does it mean that even his resignation is null and void?"
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: MiL
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

Thursday, February 26, 2015

The Case of the Vanishing Preface of Benedict XVI

Where's the Preface?
(Rome) The defenders of the Catholic doctrine of marriage and family are currently facing a bitter wind of late. Pressure  is exerted on publishers who have published their books in defense of the marriage sacrament. Books for the defense of the Catholic marriage and morality, on the way to the synod at the Vatican disappear . Public attacks against the Cardinals, who oppose the Kasper proposal approved by Pope Francis to damage their reputation. Law suits and dismissals.
How much of this is anticipatory obedience, and how much  is a direct order from above, can not be said easily. There is much to indicate a firm command center around Pope Francis. You have a goal in mind and wants to achieve in October 2015. In the background is the rich German church has increased its pressure on Rome. Cardinal Reinhard Marx sent word that Germany can change church practice by itself, should Rome buck the synod again as in October 2014. Marx is a shadow Pope in Munich? In argentinian Rome one wants, were it not for the annoying "conservatives", who do not want to comply to progress.
Among them is the African Cardinal Robert Sarah. The French publisher Fayard submitted a conversation book by Cardinal Sarah in recent days. In it we find the statement: "The idea to leave the profession of doctrine in a pretty box and thus detaching it  pastoral practice, and then, depending on the circumstances,  may develop according to the fashions and passions, is a form of heresy, of pathological schizophrenia. I solemnly affirms that the Church of Africa will oppose any form of rebellion against the Magisterium of Christ and the Church."

A book with a mystery

A book that provides a mystery. The publisher announced it with a "Letter to Pope Benedict XVI Emeritus." And already the front page of the book is published (see picture). Benedict XVI. but is now gone. The book was published without the preface by him. "In all likelihood, Benedict XVI had. written the preface, which was provided for the book, the title page otherwise would not have been designed with the book notice and may have been used for advertising," said Benoit et moi . Why the preface was withdrawn, remains a mystery. "What politically correct ideas gained the upper hand in the publishing house of Fayard to consider the publication of a preface to the Pope Emeritus in the new book unwise?" asked Benoit et moi with the hope that Cardinal Sarah would make public the preface written by Benedict XVI.
The reasons for the missing preface must of course not lie with the French publisher. What remains for the time being, is the suspicion that pressure and intimidation to school those whose defense of Catholic doctrine and order are denounced as "attacks" against the Pope.
Cardinal Sarah has worked 22 years as archbishop of Conakry in Guinea. He knows how to deal with difficult situations without immediately losing his nerve. His predecessor had been imprisoned by the then ruling Guinea Communists for nine years. In 2001 he was appointed by Pope John Paul II. to Rome, who then made ​​him Secretary of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples . In 2010 Pope Benedict XVI appointed him President of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum and  created him the same year a cardinal. Pope Francis at the end of 2014 appointed him as the new Prefect of the Roman Congregation for Divine Worship . As he was seeking for a successor to Cardinal Canizares,  the Ratzingerianer in origin, and for to be of use in the context of the Church's need for the black African with a serious expression. The determinant seems that after the verbal gaffe by Cardinal Walter Kasper at the synod, Pope Francis endeavored  gestures of good will towards black Africa. The Presidency of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum has since been vacant, which is foreseen in the proposed amalgamation of the Pontifical Councils as part of the reform of the Curia.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: Benoit et moi (montage)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Expressive Photos -- The Anomaly Since February 28, 2013

Bishops of the Ukraine Before the Pope (emeritus) 2015
(Vatican) The Catholic Church had entered into a state of anomaly  on the evening of 28 February 2013 at * o'clock.  The pictures of the end of a pontificate are unforgettable. The departure of a revered Pope. The gates of Castel Gandolfo   close with a haunting sense of loss. But death was not what had  occurred. The pontificate which began on 13 March 2013 is only the second part of the same anomaly. The Church has since lived on successive waves of a rollercoaster of emotions.
Chiesa e postconcilio has published images of two recent scenes documenting this anomaly two years after its commencement. Both show the homage of bishops and cardinals, as are owed to a pope. What is not true: it is not, this is not the Pope, but an entity not existing ecclesiastical law, which is the theologically unexplained figure of a pope emeritus.
Consistory 2015: Homage to the Cardinals before the Pope (emeritus)

Obeisances to the Pope (emeritus) in 2015

In the first place, the Pope,  all seem to agree,  is not Benedict XVI anymore. After offering their homage  the Pope blesses the Ukrainian bishops in the Vatican Gardens. They just came straight from their ad limina visit to the Pope, but to another Pope. 
The  Cardinals bow in homage at the Consistory in St. Peter's Basilica before the Pope. While he stood several meters away and just created new cardinals.
One  anomaly follows another. When this condition will have an end is not in sight. What seems certain is that the "emeritus" Benedict XVI. as under normal circumstances is still Pope, while the reigning Pope would be the Emeritus Archbishop of Buenos Aires. He still could indeed take part in a conclave until December 2016  to elect a new Pope . But when he retires he would not be papabile any more.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: Chiesa e postconcilio
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

Sunday, March 2, 2014

Benedict XVI: Resignation Was Valid -- End of "Confusion Game" or New Media Hoax?

(Rome) The Vatican expert Andrea Tornielli published two sentences by Pope Benedict XVI., which were allegedly from a reply to a correspondence.  In it he declared that his resignation was "valid", it had been for no other reason than his age. "Speculation  about this is "absurd."  He also confirmed the authenticity of statements attributed to him, that was written to the heretical theologian Hans Küng.  Does the Church have two popes? Benedict XVI. signed himself as pope and used paper with the letterhead “Pope Emeritus".  Francis describes himself as "Bishop of Rome" and signs only with "Franciscus". The traditional blog "Chiesa e post concilio”   looks beyond the alleged letter of Benedict XVI. and sees a transparent maneuver by  the ruling Church leadership, to cause widespread doubts and discomfort  and to silence the faithful. Tornielli has not printed the alleged the letter.  Above all, it does not come to him to deny or correct the place of the Holy See. Least of all with things of such magnitude. But above all Tornielli is not to be confused with the Acta Apostolica Sedis. In short, the message is reminiscent of another media  hoax  last summer, reported as a great  mystery"  of an alleged visit to Benedict XVI. and the fact that he was supposed to have said, the Holy Spirit  advised him to resign (see separate report Benedict's resignation: "God told me" - Media Hoax of the “Great Mystery"? ). Tornielli was merely instrumental in this action, probably even  the misused tool of others, said "Chiesa e post concilio". We document the comment as a contribution to the current debate in the Church.
.

Tornielli quotes Some Sentences of Benedict XVI., Which Belong to "a Letter"


Chiesa e post concilio
The news has already made the rounds around the world. Tornielli published a "letter" of Benedict XVI., in which the "Pope Emeritus" explains and confirms his resignation's validity  that there is no other reason than "advanced age." He is also to have  confirmed Hans Küng (!) with the oft-quoted words about the "identity of perception" and his wish to want to be until the end of his days nothing more than a "worshiper".

I'm Sorry for Orwellian Despotism

I'm really sorry. Sorry to be treated by the so-called "Catholic journalists", but above all by the hierarchy as an imbecile (in the literal sense of the word). I'm tired of being mistreated, judged to be (with "Mercy") and sentenced and to be impeded in the utterance of doubt by arrogant and constant aggression. I am  sorry for this kind of "Orwellian despotism," in which only "war galleys" are included, that  "dominate". For the "nice words" about "service and humility," they just sound like hot air.
Some believers, it may be that they are a minority, are simply ignored or attacked mercilessly. To them it seems to be permitted, what the "Pope Emeritus" said of himself to the reactions when he offered the bishops of the SSPX an act of justice: total and unjustified hatred. The hatred manifests itself in very different forms: one of these is the indifference (the highest form of detestation) compared to the spiritual life and the soul of the faithful. Whether it is a believer or a lot, does not matter. Shameful is the sound, the disgust and aggression are treated with the those who "doubt". The allegations go far beyond a normal judgment and generalizations  about the exalted letters from "the despot" . Each argument is minimized, delegitimized, no matter who it submits. Arbitrary labels are missed, sometimes vile, just as it suits.

To Refresh The Memory: The Works of Mercy

Obviously, this "humble servant" have forgotten that in the church not important WHO says something, but WHAT he says. In addition, they seem to have forgotten just what the spiritual works of fashionably acclaimed mercy are:
  • Teach the ignorant
  • Encourage the doubtful
  • Comfort the afflicted
  • Rebuke the sinner
  • Bear wrongs patiently
  • To those who insult us, sincerely forgive
  • To pray for the living and the dead
So if justified criticism and legitimate doubts are expressed, then this must be clearly and unambiguously be clarified and resolved. When the believers are in the confusion, it is really to serve the duty of the holy shepherds their salvation, and to restore the right path. Chatter is not enough.
What do the articles of Tornielli  change in current situation? Nothing. The "Pope Emeritus" wrote him two lines that we do not want to call into question, from which he creates a message. The problem does not dissolve  with a simple denial. The "Pope Emeritus" should clarify the doubts with the facts. In this sense, I make a pressing appeal to him.

Why did not Benedict XVI  Pass the Papal Dignity?

If his resignation is valid, then he would do it again without any form of error which are sufficient to make him canonically invalid, then he renounces the papacy and the papal symbols and insignia, then it was abandoning but especially on being Pope , then he has resigned really and completely. If he really is in "full compliance" with Francis, then he officially denies his teaching position in relation to  Tradition, including the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum , which has already proven to have done so much good in the Church and which is now being  so openly rejected.
It's time to stop with the dictation. This seems to be a realm of chaos, instead of the Church. The despotism of the "galleys",  the "you do not know who I am" and "you must blindly obey" is over. The shepherds shall feed the sheep entrusted to them. They must do them  justice.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: Chiesa e post concilio
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to katholisches...
AMGD

Monday, September 30, 2013

Roberto de Mattei: "I Have Strong Reservations About the Communication Strategy of Pope Francis"



(Rome) Since the extensive interview with Pope Francis by the Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica, new confusion reigns in the Catholic camp. While the mass media cheer and celebrate Pope Francis as "revolutionary", some Catholics defended the Pope with the formula, that the mass media is attempting to misunderstand Francis consciously and intentionally twisting his remarks, because the Pope did not alter the Catholic doctrine, while he only has his own very special style. Pope Francis did not speak as an academic, but as a preacher to the people, as the U.S. Catholic writer George Weigel has said. Another part of the Catholics observed the way the world communicates with Pope Francis with increasing concern. Not least because of the applause from the wrong side.

There are doubts about the usefulness of a form of communication expressed, which is obviously prone to misunderstandings. What's more, some have doubts whether it is the Pope just communicating a new form with the people that is controversial, or even to changes in content. It's not an open break with parts of doctrine, but perhaps an indirect softening by ambiguity. Officially, nothing would be changed, but in practice in the minds of the people very much. Just as, say some critics, is already the case, like the "hot buttons", such as abortion and homosexuality. The Pope emphasizes that the teaching of the Church is to be clearly defined, but they do not speak out, or at least among the general public, but only in certain circles.

This happened about abortion, which is a matter of life or death. In the Civiltà Cattolica interview which went around the world, the Pope used a painful diction that was "hurtful" even for Pro-Lifers, like the American, Catholic philosopher, Michael Novak complained. During the interview, the Pope declared that he will not say too much about it in the future and thus the abortion advocates could rejoice, yet he was found the next day in front of the Catholic doctors giving very clear words for the protection of life. Words, however, were only made known in Catholic circles.

The famous Catholic historian, Roberto de Mattei criticized the communication of Pope Francis in an interview for Fomiche.net by Francesco de Palo.

The press has exploited, but the Pope has helped them: This is the opinion of the traditional Roberto de Mattei, professor of modern history and Christianity at the European University of Rome until 2011 and Vice Chairman of the National Research Council of the Republic of Italy. De Mattei is the publisher and editor of the monthly magazine Radici Cristiane, Nova Historia and the Catholic Information Service Corrispondenza Romana. In an interview with Formiche.net he analyzed the first semester of the new pontificate, and expresses strong reservations about the communication strategy of Pope Francis.

How does a 'Catholic without compromise', as you call yourself, survive the public statements of Pope Francis about homosexuals and divorced?

My opinion is that there is significant exploitation of the words of the Pope, in the sense that I do not see these large openings. At least from the perspective of doctrine, also because Pope Francis himself has stressed that his attitude in these subjects did not differ from that of the catechism.

How do you parse Berglio's manifesto similar interview in Cività Cattolica?

Just because the Pope stressed that he stood with regard to the doctrine of faith in the continuity of the Church's teaching, and intended no doctrinal innovations, is the level to which he goes with this interview, pastoral or strategic in nature. That is, what he is proposing is not a new doctrine, but a new way to approach these problems.

What kind of repercussions?

Since Bergoglio has to go according to his own words, from the level of doctrine to those of the communication strategy, it is lawful for every Catholic to discuss this approach. And viewed from this perspective, it is in my opinion an unfortunate approach, because it makes the exploitation of his words possible. But this is not solely responsible for this manipulation by the press, if we like, it's doing its job, but also who makes it possible with a language that is completely ambiguous in some points.

What is the result of this new language?

I think that it can be very dangerous, because the world of communication is not controlled by the Pope, and  even less of  Catholics, but of lobbies and  powers antagonistic to the Church that are capable of distorting its use. Personally, I have strong reservations about the communication strategy of the Pope.

Is Giuliano Ferrara's the daily newspaper Il Foglio justified in its assertion that non-negotiable principles are more of a dead letter now?

That seems excessive. These are principles that can experience moments of blackout due to their nature. It seems to me that the Pope has said, without denying them, that he prefers other points in his communication because he, in his own words, is starting from the premise that the right to life and family are already well-known principles. The real problem is that the positions of the Church to the general public are simply not known, and there is also great confusion in the Catholic world. The only two popes who opposed this were John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Bergoglio, although he doctrinally presents with his predecessors in continuity seems to want to express a strategic discontinuity.

How do you assess this decision?

I prefer the previous communication strategy, but of course the time will tell and you will see that the tree bears fruit. I hope that the consequences of this approach will not be destructive.

And the letter from Ratzinger Odifreddi is a way to set the milestones?

It is a letter that has already in my opinion made more of the already reigning confusion, because although he is representing clear principles, it conveys the impression that it could be at the level of a private Magisterium, two phases that intervene at the same time on the same stage [Francis and Pope Benedict XVI.], in this particular case in the newspaper La Repubblica. I have had many thoughts that Benedict XVI. wanted to withdraw completely from public life, to lead a life of prayer and silence. By this I do not mean to say that he has done something wrong, because his criticism of Odifreddi are precise and to the point. So I do not question the content in question, but have doubts about whether it was opportune.

Do you think that now the reform of the Curia will come?

It has not started yet. So we wait before we judge. For now, there were normal operations, but no sign of reform. In October, the Pope will meet with the group of cardinals, to whom he entrusted the task to submit proposals. We will see in the coming months and assess.

Introduction / Translation: Giuseppe Nardi Image: Formiche.net
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...