continue at LES FEMMESWell, the White House has confirmed it: Pelosi and Biden went to Communion sacrilegiously at the papal installation Mass. (Huffington Post article.) What I found especially hypocritical, however, was Cardinal Wuerl's statement:
Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, part of the conclave that elected Francis, has said he would offer Pelosi communion despite her views on abortion because he didn't believe communion should be used as a weapon. "We never -– the Church just didn't use Communion this way. It wasn't a part of the way we do things, and it wasn't a way we convinced Catholic politicians to appropriate the faith and live it and apply it; the challenge has always been to convince people," Wuerl said in a 2010 interview. His position would logically extend to Biden. The vice president's bishop, Francis Malooly of Wilmington, Del., has also said he would not deny communion to Biden.
Denying Communion to a heretic (a person who denies at least one doctrine of the Church) is not using the Eucharist as "a weapon." It is exercising Church law articulated in Canon Law 915. It shows concern for the soul of the person who is heaping up mortal sin on mortal sin which does several things to the unfortunate soul, i.e., makes it harder to repent, increases the moral debt of the soul so to speak, creates grave scandal when the heretic is a public figure which merits a "millstone," etc. Biden and Pelosi parade their "Catholic" credentials while they give the finger to Catholic doctrine.
At the end of the day, I don't know how it can be called anything but apathy.
I'll have to be honest, I think it's entirely possible Cardinal Burke is not retained at the Apostolic Signatura. +Wuerl has surprising influence amongst the cardinals. But I'm not sure where else he would be appointed to. .... maybe to Washington DC. Wouldn't THAT be awesome!
9 comments:
Cardinal Wuerl's position drives me nuts, and I'm longing to see him actually address Canon 915, and a) why he thinks his position is consitent with the canon? And b) why he thinks an archbishop who espoused the complete opposite opnion was named Chief Justice of the Vatican Supreme Court and a member of the Congregation for Legislative Texts (Canon Law)?
Per the second comment, I wouldn't be so sure that the Holy Father will more Cardinal Burke. Francis' history as a provincial and an archbishop is pretty clear that he hasn't beaten around the bush on doctrinal clarity, even if his pastoral touch is being highlighted to the extreme right now. I also say this because though I'm sure there are many cases that come across Cardinal Burke's desk that the Holy Father is or will be aware of that we'll never hear about, he has caused no controversy in the position and seems by all accounts to be the ideal person for the job.
I'm not surprised at all and this is why Pope Francis didn't distribute communion at the mass. When Pope Francis talks about a Church that is poor I hope he means poor in spirit where reputation and status aren't put above the truths of the Gospels.
AUTUMN
BLOOD
Fall fall
Fall the leaves
The blood-red Autumn
Sighs and grieves
For in the gentle
Blood-fed womb
Leaves are crushed
An Autumn tomb
"And the Word made Flesh"
For "excommunication"
But flesh wouldn't say...
So exoneration
Nor did flesh demand
Or articulate
Only "morally-bankrupt"
Not "excommunicate!"
So fall fall
Fall the leaves
The blood-red Autumn
Sighs and grieves
In the land of the blind
One-eyed man's king
But on his head
Autumn blood will cling!
Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Wuerl had a dust-up a while back regarding the appiication of Canons 915 and 916. My recollection is that Cardinal Burke's position is very similar to that held of B-16.
I believe that the level of involvement that Cardinal Burke has at the Vatican is going to depend on the contents of the report prepared by the 3 senior cardinals and Archbishop Gaenswein's thoughts and what the Holy Father decides to do.
This is irritating to say the least. A number, maybe most, bishops consider the likes of Pelosi & Biden to be in good standing in the Church whereas certain traditionalists are not. And this is another reason to stop the mass Communions at papal events; the potential (actual, in this recent happening) for scandal and sacrilege is major. What are the logistics for consecrating thousands of hosts? To have even suggested this in pre-VCII times would have provoked the wrath of the Master of Apostolic Ceremonies.
What else would you expect from a posturing creep like Cardinal Wuerl? He gives Communion to anyone with his hand out. But the good Cardinal might wish to reflect upon the point that if he gives the Sacred Species to people like Biden and Pelosi, who are verifiable persecutors of the Catholic Church, and with their stance on abortion self-excommunicated, he is also guilty of the sacrilege. His plaintive cries in his defense aren't going to cut much mustard with God when he faces him (please God that happens soon). And lest we forget it was one year ago this month that Donna Wuerl publicly humiliated a good priest for refusing Holy Communion to a public sinner (and non-Catholic), a lesbian Buddhist.
I only hope that the priest who gave Communion to Biden and Pelosi was unaware of who they were and what they stand for.
Pope Benedict XVI knew Cardinal Wuerl's stance on communion for pro choice politicians and appointed him to Washington anyway. He knew McCarrick's stance before and didn't remove him. I would not have hopes for Pope Francis removing Wuerl for Cardinal Burke. My advice to my fellow traditionalists during theis papacy is hunker down, pray for the Holy Father, but wait for better days
AHHHHHHHHHH! Withholding the Eucharist from people in known grave public sin is seen as a weapon? AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Im going to draw an analogy here that is hard on the good Cardinal Wuerl but I think its just. This is nothing more than straight forward euthanasia committed by a prince of the Church. I know you say its apathy, and maybe Wuerls thinking hes in line with Chestertons idea that "even a bad shot is justified"; but this is insanity. He has a chance to teach what it is that they want to receive, knowing specifically that doing so will not help their souls but condemn them as paul says. Its like the patient coming into the office knowing the doctor has a gun, convincing the doctor thats its ok, that ending his life is the right thing, the doctor not standing for principles and in his lazyness just ends it with the consent of the person. AHHHHHH! As long as cardinals like Wuerl and Dolan sit in their cathedras not condemning evil we are doomed to Americanism becoming a full out heresy without the question of whether it exists. But I could be wrong.... if there was a Need a cigarette button next to the need a drink one I would hit both (note I dont smoke, although everytime I see a Tolkien photo I do think about taking up pipe smoking) +JMJ+
This drives me nuts. I just went to actually read can 916, and +Wuerl's position is 180 degrees away. Read it:
"Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion."
It doesn't say that people should keep themselves back from communion. It says that they are not to be admitted. That assumes there is someone to admit them. Like, for example, the minister of holy communion that the person in question presents him/herself to.
Makes me sad that our bishops are allowing the Holy Eucharist to be profaned in such a way.
Post a Comment