In a comment to my Sept 2nd post regarding the Standard article, I reminded one and all about an address Cardinal McCarrick gave in 2005 in which he invoked "allah" three times without so much as mentioning the name of Jesus Christ once. Here is the text of that address.
Well, he did it again, so to speak. He was a featured speaker at a press conference put on by the Islamic Society of North America, joining the parade of progressives who are denouncing opponents of the Ground Zero mosque as engaging in "derision" and "bigotry".
Those of us who have heard the Cardinal know that he is a master at the usage of double negatives in his verbal discourses. From elementary school grammar lessons, we know that double negatives cancel out the "negative" meaning of the sentence in which they're embedded. It's a way to say something while leaving enough verbal "wiggle room" to deny responsibility for the statement. He gave an example of this rather devious technique at this press conference. To wit:
Cardinal McCarrick: “As an American, I believe that we all have a right to practice what God tells us is his message to us and if therefore, if someone – if someone sees the Gospel as the truth of God’s presence in our world, that person should embrace the Gospel. If a person sees the Qu’ran as proof of God’s presence in the world, then I cannot say, ‘don’t embrace the Qu’ran’ so that I think we – we should always be willing to talk to people and we should always be willing to love them and we should always be willing to allow them that freedom of conscience which comes from God.”
Your Eminence, what do you mean with this "I cannot say don't embrace the Qu'ran"? For you, by virtue of your Sacrament of Holy Orders and of being a Prince of the Church, you must proclaim the Gospel and its supreme truth. That is not optional, that is your solemn obligation!
What is also amazing is that this statement is made in response to a rather straight-forward question. He was asked if he believed a Muslim born in Mecca should have the right to convert to Catholicism. The Cardinal never gave a clear answer to that question. Please visit the link to the press conference; on that page is a video of the interview with Cardinal McCarrick (I can't embed that here).
The New Advent website gives a concise definition of religious indifferentism. I think we saw His Eminence openly proclaiming that at the press conference. Pope Gregory XVI, in his encyclical Mirari Vos, condemned this indifferentism as a heresy (see section 13).
Do you think we'll see this in the next Catholic Standard? We've seen more stupid things therein now, haven't we?
By the way - I thank Pewsitter for alerting me to this.
IT NOW SEEMS TO BE EVIDENT THAT THE BOOK BY Pope Benedict IV AND Cardinal Sarah FORCED FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL TO REWRITE HIS AMAZON SYNOD DOCUMENT AND TO ELIMINATE HIS MORE HERETICAL PROPOSALS THAT HIS SUPPORTERS IN THE VATICAN WERE LEAKING, e.g. THE ORDINATION OF MARRIED MEN TO THE PRIESTHOOD IN THE AMAZON. CLUE AS TO THE PRESSURE THE BOOK PUT ON FRANCIS WAS HIS SUBSEQUENT SACKING OF ARCHBISHOP GANSWEIN, THE PRISON GUARD FRANCIS HAD PLACED OVER Pope Benedict. PUBLIC PRESSURE WORKS !!!
56 minutes ago