Dignitatus Humanae Institute Clarifies Buzz Feed Interview With Cardinal Burke

From Aleteia we read that Dignitatus Humanae Institute, the organization that arranged Cardinal Burke's interview with Buzzfeed took the latter to task for rearrangement of words - a rearrangement that misquoted Cdl Burke as saying the "pope was harming the Church".

Rather, what Cardinal Burke said was "that in his opinion a general lack of clarity regarding the Pope’s position had caused harm to the Church."  In brief, he did not fault the Pope, but the "general lack of clarity" for harming the Church.  Buzz Feed has reprinted the entire text of the interview.  I appreciate Cardinal Burke's statement to set things right and to get his exact wording out there.  But now new questions are raised.

• Why, oh why, would there be any lack of clarity about the Pope's positions regarding divorced/remarried/adulterous relationships and sodomite situations?  The Magisterium has spoken on these things for 1000+ years.  Somehow I think that Pope Benedict XVI would have made his own positions crystal clear.
• Cardinal Burke asked the Pope to issue defense of the Church's teachings in light of the flim-flam that was called the interim relatio.  I do not believe that defense ever came.
• Let me elaborate on my previous sentence.  Here is the Pope's closing address.  In it, he states 
 "And this always – we have said it here, in the Hall – without ever putting into question the fundamental truths of the Sacrament of marriage: the indissolubility, the unity, the faithfulness, the fruitfulness, that openness to life."  That is not a definitive defense of the Church's teachings.  All he claimed here is that these teachings were not called into question during the SinNod; the interim relatio contradicts the Holy Father here.

So that little bit was cleared up.  Cardinal Burke did not attack the pope - as if I ever believed he did.  Will these other questions be answered?

Father Marcel Guarnizo On Economic Thought And Postmodernism - And Other Implications That I See

The Dignitatis Huamae Institute recently held a conference.  One of the speakers at that conference was Father Marcel Guarnizo - the priest who was ousted from the Archdiocese of Washington because he withheld Holy Communion from a flagrant lesbian at my parish two years ago. I wrote copiously about that travesty; you may read some of these links to refresh your memories.

I post below the video of Father's talk at that conference.  He touches upon many topics, although the main theme is the underlying philosophies (many of them contradicting) of economic thought in today's situations.  Between 2:46 and 4:20 he speaks of the destructive influences of postmodernism.  I hold that postmodernism has corroded the thinking of many people - including faithful Catholics - not only on specific matters, but their very ability to think rationally.

I won't go into a whole treatise of the problem, but I think we can see that today people would rather emote than think.  We hear homilies at Mass that could well be auditions for a stand-up comedy show rather than the solemn proclamation of truths that the Mass-goers need to attain their eternal salvation.  Too often these clerics defend their routines as "new evangelism".

Case in point - Recently Father Dwight Longenecker posted a piece called "The Laughing Evangelist".  It's both pathetic and erroneous.  He opines that "humor is one of the signs of a saint".  Well, that might be his opinion but I'd hardly call that infallible dogma.

Now look at this paragraph: "When Jesse and Dr Ray made people laugh their defenses went down. They did feel good about their religion and their God and they did feel uplifted and that means they went away charged up in their faith and wanting to serve and love God more."  The problems are obvious.  Father Longnecker is opining that people are "wanting to serve and love God more", but why?  Because they "feel uplifted and charged up"?  Ladies and gentlemen, we know human nature just by observing ourselves.  That "charged up" feeling will eventually wane.  What will stand in its stead?  Father Longenecker doesn't seem to elaborate on that.  Where is the teaching of the Truths of the Church, the formation of the intellect and the will, the two faculties that distinguish us as being in the image and likeness of God?  Is such teaching "too serious and boring"?  Well guess what?  It is that formation of intellect and will that fortified the martyrs of whom Longnecker spoke.

I also take exception with Longenecker's de facto equating of "hilarity" with the Fruit of the Spirit known as joy (toward the end of his article).  While the two are not diametrically opposed, neither can we hold them to be equivalent.

I certainly am no expert on postmodernism, but I do believe that mental paradigm has impacted Longenecker's criteria for evaluating evangelism.  Sadly. Longnecker is not alone.

I'll now post Father Guarnizo's video.  I think there's much to learn from it.