Interview With Cardinal Burke - In Two Parts

Thanks to Una Voce Austria and Gloria.tv

Part 1

Post by Una Voce Austria.

Part 2

Post by Una Voce Austria.

Father Marcel Guarnizo Interviewed Regarding The Extraordinary Synod

Last week an online publication interviewed Father Marcel Guarnizo for his thoughts on the synod that had just concluded.  I have been permitted to publish it on this site.  Father Guarnizo has many excellent points to make of the synod and its ramifications for the future of the Church, drawing on Catholic theology and philosophy.

He voices many of the same concerns as do other Catholics.  Rather than try to rehash the interview here, I urge its study.  It is here in pdf format, meaning that you can download it to your own computers and perhaps circulate it electronically, either on your own blogs or Facebook, etc.

Why Did Pope Francis Make A Joke Out Of The Creation Of Eve?

I've said it before and I'll say it now.  The Holy Father's attempts at spontaneous interviews often yield disastrous results.  He gave an interview to Il Messagero, and the reporter seems to have been a feminist.  She was implying that there's misogyny in the Church.  He attempted to reply in the form of a joke: "the fact is that woman was taken from a rib..(laughes)... I'm kidding, that's a joke."

Really?  The Genesis account of the creation of man and woman is a joke?  Since when is Holy Scripture a joke?  There has been some discussion about the creation of the universe and other animal species, but the Church has always taught that Adam and Eve were real people who were created immediately by God and infused with souls.  See Humani Generis by Pope Pius XII.   Pope Francis' lame attempt at humor (presuming it's that innocent) undermines the teaching of the Church in that matter.  I only hope and pray that he did not deny the Genesis account of the creation of Adam and Eve.

When Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio accepted the papal election last year, he accepted a calling that is his 24/7/365.  There is no "punching the clock", as it were.  In the eyes of so many, every deed and utterance is taken as God's holy will for the Church.  Most of his deeds and utterances will not happen ex cathedra but he will bear immense responsibility for any scandal caused by any carelessness.

These interviews should cease immediately.  What we are seeing is a key reason why his predecessors never granted these.  Why does he not learn from their wise practices?

Announcing The "Did He Really Say That?" Department

Regrettably Pope Francis' "off-the-cuff" remarks convey ideas that are not too terribly helpful.  I cannot divine what he really intended, and perhaps that is irrelevant anyway.

In an address to Italian priests yesterday to start off Lent, he elaborated on what he believes the priesthood should be in order to meet the needs of people.  One remark he made caused me to raise my eyebrows: "Ascetic priests do not help the Church."

Really?  That's quite a blanket statement.  Right away, St. John Vianney, also known as the Cure of Ars, comes to mind.  The fastings and sleep deprivations he undertook would cause many of today's soft and flabby generation to faint and cower.  Yet people came from all over France so that he could hear their confessions.  When he first arrived in Ars, the place was quite the moral cesspool.  Within a few years, many conversions there turned that place around dramatically.  Many of the people who came to Ars experienced dramatic conversions (he could read hearts).

Even other priests came to him.  Often they would tell him that they were troubled about the lack of fruit in their own priestly ministries.  He challenged them to increase their own penances and fastings if they wanted to see greater fruitfulness in their priesthoods.  It bears mentioning that the Cure of Ars is regarded as the patron saint of parish priests.

He did make one statement that "mercy involves not being too rigid nor too lax".  But right afterwards he lit right back into those deemed "rigid"; nowhere did I see any admonishment towards those priests who do go easy on themselves.  Curious.  What's not said is just as important as what is said, considering context.

My Lenten suggestion of a few days ago stands.  And I pray that we all have a blessed Lent.

UPDATE - A Facebook friend alerted me to this article from Father Zuhlsdorf, shedding some additional light on the Holy Father's remarks.  Please read it.

Another Papal Interview Ushering A New Debacle?

The Catholic News Agency published the English-translated transcript of the interview that Pope Francis had with Corriere Della Sera earlier today.  The questions seem to be only loosely related to each other.  What has raised the eyebrows of many in the blogosphere and elsewhere is this exchange:

"(CDS) Many nations have regulated civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?"

"(PF) Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. It is about pacts of cohabitating of various natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety." (end snippet)

The real head-scratcher for me is the last sentence.  "Evaluate them"??  Anybody with two brain neurons that fire in syncopation understands what is meant by the term "civil union".  Whether heterosexual or homosexual, the crux of these unions is sexual relations outside of marriage.  We are talking of acts that are, objectively speaking, mortal sins.  Any "evaluation" of these is a fait-accompli in light of the Sixth Commandment.  Ladies and gentlemen, this is not rocket science.  Under no circumstances can the Church support, or even just tolerate, these situations for they will endanger the souls of those embroiled in these situations and cause great scandal for countless others who will be swayed by the bad example.   Here are true words of wisdom from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI detailing why homosexual unions can never be tolerated, much less recognized by the Church.

LifesiteNews has an analysis of this interview.  It calls this response of the Pope's "carefully guarded".  Perhaps this is a question that required only a plain, simple answer.  Of course the question was worded disingenuously.  His Holiness could have taken the question "is it a path the Church can understand?" and restated it to say "when will the nations understand the path that Jesus Christ, through His Church, has indicated to be the only path?"  Instead, we get convoluted gobblygook where a simple, truthful response would have brought crystalline clarity.

Dare I suggest that His Holiness give up these interviews for Lent?

Polyannas Are NOT Helping!

There's a fair amount of "damage control" occurring in regards to the La Repubblica interview.  Last week Raymond Arroyo hosted Robert Royal and Father Joseph Fessio; the latter two had different perspectives on the Holy Father's words.  Father Fessio is himself a Jesuit so he brings that perspective to the table.  The discussion revolves around the Pope's previous interview, but I find the comments apropos.

In the video below the relevant section starts at 18:46.  At around the 24:00 mark, Father brings up the example of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4) and illustrates how Our Lord engaged the woman in conversation.  He seems to imply that is the strategy of Pope Francis with these interviews.  If such is the case, I think that's flawed.  Our Lord was engaged in a one-on-one conversation.  These broadcast interviews, by dint of the intended promulgation of these, cannot be likened to the one-on-one conversation. Rather we're talking of a one-to-millions proclamation, with these "millions" coming from a myriad of cultures, perspectives, etc.  One size does not fit all.  Isn't it rather ironic that in his attempt to address the interviewer "where he's at" that the Holy Father loses sight of all the other millions of people and their situations?   Does the phrase "can't see the forest for the sake of one tree" have relevance here?

A Troubling Interview With Pope Francis

Thanks to Rorate Caeli, I was directed to another interview given by Pope Francis.  This is more recent than that other "well-known" interview of his.  His Holiness interviewed with Eugenio Scalfari of La Repubblica.  The context makes clear that Scalfari is a fallen-away Catholic.  I link now to the interview as it was rendered in English.

While I realize that there might have been some loss of meaning in the translation process, there couldn't have been that much.  That said, the proceeds of this interview are most troubling.  Many of His Holiness' replies seem to fly in the face of Sacred Tradition and Scripture.  Of course Our Lord Himself guarantees that the Pope cannot teach error, presuming that he is speaking solemnly "ex cathedra".  By no stretch of the imagination is this "ex cathedra". But there's no way to put a positive spin, a "happy face" if you will, on this.

Pope Francis - "Not Necessary To Talk Of Abortion All The Time"

The Catholic blogosphere is all aghast and atwitter about remarks attributed to Pope Francis made during interviews he gave to certain Jesuit publications - America being one of them.  From that article, here is the key phrase in question, in what I believe is proper context (from America):  "We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time."

I think the operative phrase here is "in a context".  What is this context of not the entirety of Christ's teaching through His Church?  There is the mystery of the Trinity.  There are the truths of the Sacraments, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments, Our Lord's Crucifixion and Resurrection.  Of course there are also what we call the Last Four Things: Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell.  Of course there is more to consider.  Quite frankly, I think a lot of pro-life efforts fall short of their goals because the leaders don't proclaim the eternal realities that are the underpinnings behind our pro-life beliefs.  The Apostle Paul said so much himself in 1 Corinthians 15, when he stated that our belief and hope in the resurrection of the dead is our prime motivator for living as Christians and not as amoral heathens.

Perhaps the Holy Father didn't state things in a concise manner, but this is what I've gleaned from that quote in the interview.  I also hope that our clergy understand that comprehensive catechesis needs to be happening in the pulpit and in the classrooms.  For too many of them, the problem is not talking of these matters too much, but not all.

More On Condom Flap

As I posted a few days ago, the Holy Father, in an interview, remarked that a male prostitute's usage of condoms might be a sign of some awakening sense of awareness of the harm of his lifestyle.  Naturally, the mainstream media, dominated by atheistic progressives, glommed onto this tiny excerpt from his interview and distorted its meaning, to extrapolate from it the notion that the Holy Father favors condom use in the act of sodomy.  Common sense rules against such extrapolation of meaning.  In all fairness to the mainstream media, though, some well-meaning Catholics have been likewise hoodwinked.  Author Randy Engel appears to be one of those so deceived.  My friend at Les Femmes published Engel's statement, so I need not reproduce it here.  I will quote the opening sentence, "Having woken this morning, as if from a bad dream, to the reality of Benedict XVI's remarks in favor of condom use for male prostitutes engaging in sodomy,"   Where, oh where, in that interview did the Holy Father ever say that he's "in favor of condom use"?  I can't find it either.  He simply stated a possibility of what said usage might signify in the mind of the hypothetical male prostitute. 

To take that simple statement and misinterpret that as approval of condom usage is, quite frankly, ridiculous.  I realize there's lament that this statement is fodder for misinterpretation.  However, in the eyes of the mainstream media, anything the Holy Father says is fair game for misconstruing.  So what???  That's where we of the alternative media come in!  The mainstream media, in making these wild-eyed statements, have effectively slandered the Holy Father.  No big surprise there, as such is par for the course with them.  But - will we fall into the same trap by believing the Holy Father is making allowances for condom usage?  Read the interview again, because the context clearly indicates that he isn't!

I'd like now to profide some additional input from some other.  Here is Judie Brown's statement.  The article that I cited yesterday, published by Renew America, was by HLI America's executive director, Jenn Giroux.  Today Michael Voris of the Vortex weighed in.  Click here if you can't see embedded video.