From The Maturation Department: New Annulment Procedures - Weakening Of Marriage

Yesterday we received the texts of the pope's revision of the annulment procedures.  I am not a canon lawyer so my reflections will draw heavily on those who are canon lawyers.  Now consider that many progressives and others not friendly to the Church's perennial teachings on family life are waxing bubbly and giddy over this news, ever gushing about the "mercy" that is now newly-infused into this situation.  Mercy??  New???  Since when has mercy - real mercy, that is, been "new to the Church?  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that they are effusing over the perceived laxity that has been introduced into the annulment process.  I have to agree with them that laxity has been introduced.  Unlike them I do not find much cause for celebration, for what they call "mercy" is nothing more than sloppy sentimentality and disregard for wisdom acquired over the centuries.

Last October, Cardinals Burke, Muller and others published a book, "Remaining in the Truth of Christ", intending that it be "food for thought" during last October's sin-nod.  Recall that this is the book that Cardinal Baldiserri had stolen from the mailboxes of the attending synod fathers.  Cardinal Burke's essay outlined the development of the Church's annulment process over the centuries and cautioned against a radical overhaul.  I point out that Cardinal Burke is a canon lawyer.  He spoke on September 8th at the Franciscan University at Steubenville and voiced concerns over the provisions that are found in Pope Francis' Moto Proprio.  Follow this link to Fr Z's post with video embedded; Father gives pointers regarding the location of Cardinal Burke's talk on the video.

Consider two of the provision in conjunction with one another.  One provision allows the local bishop to pass judgment regarding certain annulment cases.  It's worth noting that most bishops are not canon lawyers, and marriage has juridical considerations that need to be carefully and knowledgeably weighed.  Now consider that in many cases, these decisions do not have to be evaluated by a second tribunal court.  A crucial provision for "checks and balances" has been eliminated in the name of "expediency and mercy" - a provision that in actuality is necessitated all the more since the first decisions will fall into the purview of those not trained to evaluate nullity petitions.  They might wind up declaring null a marriage that is, in actually, canonically and sacramentally binding.  Even more disconcerting is the expedition of those cases where both parties are in agreement as to the alleged invalidity of marriage.  Do we see the danger of collusion here in the denial of a valid marriage?  Dr. Peter's two posts are here and here.  As I said earlier, I'm not a canon lawyer, but some dangers are apparent just by dint of common sense.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am also troubled by the timing of these Moto Proprios.  This happened just a few weeks prior to the onslaught beginning of the Ordinary Synod on the Family.  I believe this is done to condition us for some real disasters that are on progressives' agendas.

From The Maturation Department - Rabbitgate And Rotagate?

You might remember that at the close of last October's sin-nod that Pope Francis gave an address.  In it he said we had a year to be brainwashed into swallowing the undermining of Tradition regarding marriage and family "mature".  Almost immediately the "maturation efforts" began in earnest and the bile continues to spill.  The rabbitgate incident is just one of the latest installments in our "maturation lessons".

It cannot be difficult to discern what is meant by "rabbitgate".  We all recall the interview during the trip from the Philippines to Rome last week.  When I put my post onto facebook I got all sorts of scolding, with folks claiming that I was just going with mainstream media and that the pope really didn't rebuke the poor expectant mother.  I was also remonstrated for not considering the sources.  Well, guess what, "first-hand sources" indicate that he rebuked her for being pregnant.

I link now to commentary from Mundabor.  He in turn links to a video produced by Louis Verrecchio; the latter shows video of the actual interview, with the Pope speaking Italian.  Both Mundabor and Verrecchio are Italians who speak the language.  Both verify the Italian verb for "rebuke".  So now irrefutable proof exists that the pope rebuked a pregnant woman for - being pregnant.  Just what good did he expect that rebuke to accomplish?  If the woman was already under stress owing to previous c-sections, the last thing she needed was more stress as she tries to carry the pregnancy through to birth.  For all the yap and yammer about being "pastoral", I cannot see how that papal behavior filled that bill.

Vatican damage control has leaped into action (they're getting a lot of practice these days).  We heard yesterday from the Vatican's State Department that "Pope Francis was surprised that his words on responsible parenthood were not widely taken in the sense that he intended them."  The rest of the article is just as ridiculous.  NEWS FLASH!  When millions of people, all from widely differing perspectives and languages, are gleaning very similar, if not identical messages, perhaps the fault for that lies not with the listeners, but the delivery and/or content of the message itself!  Got that??  I would ask why they haven't learned from confusion caused by previous disastrous interviews, but I think I know the answer.  Confusion is precisely what they want - confusion regarding God's first command to mankind to "be fruitful and multiply", confusion regarding marriage and sexuality, confusion regarding the transmission of life.  In other words, we're supposed to "mature", a la "sin-nod" style.

Now onto rotagate  Recall that a few months ago, Cardinal Burke was relieved of his post as head of the Roman Rota and shuffled to the Knights of Malta.  The bulk of duties of the Roman Rota is to hear cases for marriage nullity.  Shortly before the October sin-nod, Cardinal Burke co-authored a book called "Remaining In The Truth Of Christ".  I have a copy and urge all to get their own.  Cardinal Burke's piece is entitled "The Canonical Nullity Of The Marriage Process As The Search For Truth".  In a nutshell, Cardinal Burke cautions against tampering with a process that has developed over hundreds of years: a process developed to rigorously search for the truth behind individual cases.  What he wrote flies in the face of the tinkering that was proposed at the sin-nod.  My strong suspicion is that the Cardinal was removed from all positions of real influence at the Vatican owing to his standing for truth in the face of the progressive juggernaut underway there.

This past Friday the pope met with the Rota (sans Burke) as they begin a new year.  Among other things, he urged Rota member to "have great care and sensitivity to the importance of a formed conscience – or lack thereof – in regard to the nature and purpose of marriage, and the ways in which conscience can affect the very validity of marital unions.."  Whether he intended to do so or not, he just gave divorcing couples a Mack-truck-sized loophole to have any kind of marriage declared null.  Would that statement have been made if Cardinal Burke had been in the room?  Did we hear more "maturation" going on?