I doubt if it is possble to overestimate the disaster inherent in the appointment of PF's long-time crony Tucho Fernandez to the ministry once discharged, with such distinction, by Joseph Ratzinger. PF's crudely critical words about how this dicastery had operated in its Ratzingerian past, speak for themselves.
Together with the demolition of Summorum Pontificum, this appointment signifies not only the rubbishing of the entire two-and-a-half-decades collaborazione of S John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger; it indicates the definitive ending of the Petrine Ministry, as a service to the Church, as we have known it.
Instead of providing a check against error, the now-called DDF is to be ... PF has made this clear ... an engine of on-going theological and moral corruption within the Church. If the last decade has seemed like a chilly winter for Catholics, well, we aint seen nuffin yet.
We must not be blind to the extent of the harm this man will be able, and willing, to do. He will be on the governing boards of dicasteries other than his own. Think round that ...
As a member of one of the Ordinariates, writing as an individual and only in my own name, I have particular concerns. The creation of Catholic entities out of communities dating from the Reformation was one of the most striking achievements of the last pontificate ... how terrible it would be if it ended in chaos or acrimony. It was, of course, Archbishop Bergoglio who, the day after the Ordinariates were announced by Pope Benedict, said how unnecessary they were; who deplored their inauguration.
The Prefect of the DDF is 'line manager' for the three Ordinariates.
Our best hope is that, given the smallness of the Ordinariates, they will be a long way down the queue of priorities for Remedial Treatment. Tucho may have bigger victims to hunt down first.
But, not long ago, the Ordinary of the American Ordinariate, Bishop Stephen Lopes, was elected, by the entire USA episcopate, to be their Mr Liturgy. Bishop Stephen is a good Catholic and a fine Liturgist, both theoretical and practical. It will probably be best if I do not load too much more detail onto this dangerous analysis.
I doubt whether this election went unnoticed by the Bergoglian delatores in North America ... Cupich ... the McCarrick gang ...
Then there is the question of Appointments. Pope Benedict drafted Anglicanorum coetibus specifically so that the question of the nomination of candidates to be Ordinary was protected from interference by local episcopates. The Nuncio is supposed to send to Rome a terna of names generated within an Ordinariate itself. But, once that list gets to Rome, anything can happen.
In conclusion: in addition to all rhis, there is the question of paedophile priests, which comes within the remit of the DDF.
Oh dear.
18 comments:
Relax, Father. As long as the paedos do their kissing in the way approved by Tucho "Heal me with your mouth" Fernandez, all should be well. Just be grateful that he's not a Jesuit.
As I see it, we had a CDF in May responsible to the Holy Father Pope Francis, and we are having a CDF now responsible to the Holy Father Pope Francis. Which is why I am not disturbed by this. - Alas, it is not because I would be confident that the Holy Father, being in charge anyway, would sort things out. I do not trust him (I may trust God not to allow the most terrible things to happen, but that doesn't mean He won't let things happen much too terrible for my liking) - but the Pope is in charge anyway; so what difference does the subordinate make?
And at least we have learnt how to combine the respectful submission to one's shepherd with distrust, suspicion and a readiness to disagree. So, if we have to do to the head of the CDF now what we are - let's be honest - already doing to the Pope, what difference does it make?
Quid hoc ad aeternitatem?
As a Catholic, I must confess that my life has been a series of distressing moments since the 1960's. Each outrage has been accompanied by the background noise of an amen chorus, telling me to give thanks for the gift of "renewal".
However, since the successful coup d'etat deposing Benedict XVI and the installation of George the Toad as Francis The Humblest TM, life has become an ongoing festival of emotional assaults.
There are even financial reasons to believe that the loathsome Autarch is an agent of the Communist Chinese.
But, this too shall pass, and my tears will give way to funerial rejoicing- perhaps sooner than we think.
While the appointment of Kissy-Kissy Fernandez is everything you say, the one thing you don't have to worry about too much is his responsibility for 'the question of paedophile priests, which comes within the remit of the DDF', as the Pope's letter to him makes it clear: the translation I've seen reads: 'Given that for disciplinary matters — especially related to the abuse of minors — a specific Section has recently been created with very competent professionals, I ask you as prefect to dedicate your personal commitment more directly to the main purpose of the Dicastery, which is “keeping the faith".'
Very well said.
And that has been the Bergoglian project all along: to demoralize the laity and lower clergy into despair, schism, and apostasy. And some pretend, scandalously and on this very blog, that there is not much to worry about. I have my sins to worry about, for sure, but I tremble to think of what the Savior Who said quite forcefully "The lukewarm I vomit out of my mouth" will say to those who excused or whitewashed the horrors we are all witnessing as, "well, Francis is bad, we all know, so why worry about this Tucho appointment. As if the grave public scandal of a public heretic heading the congregation for the purity of the doctrine were not mockery enough of the Very One Who said: "I am the way, the life, and the truth."
Dear Father. It was Joseph Ratzinger who wrote the mendacious speech attacking the Holy Office delivered by Cardinal Frings at the beginning of The 60s Synod.
As far as his being the acting head of the Congregation that replaced the Holy Office he destroyed, his record was as pacific as it was progressive:
In a New Oxford Review editorial, Mr. Dale Vree, noted:
In Karl Keating’s E-Letter (March 8, 2005), he noted that for 26 years of the John Paul papacy, of which Ratzinger was the doctrinal watchdog for 24 years, only 24 people were disciplined.
Keating comments: “That is fewer than one per year!… The Catholic Church boasts 1.1 billion members. This means that, on average, over the last quarter century, the Vatican has disciplined only one out of a billion members per year. This is about as close to zero as you can get.
Is there any social, commercial, or governmental organization that disciplines such a small percentage of its people?…
If the Church had the kind of inquisitorial bureaucracy that its critics imagine, the Vatican would be disciplining 24 people each week…. However you look at it, 24 cases in 26 years is…laughable.”
There are many examples of his progressivism, from The Rosmimi rehabilitation to the Fatima debacle in which Ratzinger's dismissal of what happened as an internal psychological process in the seers is embarrassing to read.
Once, he publicly said that nobody can resign the Papacy - about five years before he did because he was too tired to go to Youth Days to say nothing about his claim that what Pope's previous to him had taught as binding was no such thing.
O, and he said he continued to wear the Papal white he wore before abdicating because he could find no black vestments...
The sad part is that he did not apparently realise he was a sapper of his authority and the authority of all subsequent Popes for if he, as merely the head of the CDF, could vacate what previous Popes has taught some other authority could vacate what he and other Popes taught.
Why did he do such a thing if he did not think Doctrine was socially conditioned?
I was recently reading a blog that observed that Ratzinger opposed everything Ottaviani backed during the 60s synod.
Raztinger confronted the Holy Office and Ottaviani. Ratzinger won. And we all lost
"Bishop Stephen is a good Catholic and a fine Liturgist, both theoretical and practical."
I would guess that Fr. Vaughn Treco begs to differ.
Be not afraid. Let us hold on to the example and words of St John Paul the Great. Be not afraid.
I used to joke about the CDF/DDF one day being renamed DDR in honour of Cardinal Rhino Marx.
Now it looks like we're getting DDT: Dicastery for the Doctrine of Tucho, wiping out the whole Catholic ecosystem by poisoning the Bread of Life.
David.
"Tucho" reminds me irresistibly of Tuco in "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly." I've never liked either one.
Bergoglio had already betrayed the Faith in Argentina. And many Hispanic Catholics have been repeating it, because we have given ourselves the task of investigating Bergoglio's heretical past.
BERGOGLIO´S HERETICAL PAST IS FRANCIS PRESENT – gloria.tv
RORATE CÆLI: Leonardo Boff: "Pope Francis is much more liberal than what is supposed."
In the leaked audio, the Argentine priest Rodrigo Vázquez mentioned that Jorge García Cuerva and Víctor Manuel Fernández were left-wing anti-Catholic homosexuals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1U7pIiSowrg
http://caminante-wanderer.blogspot.com/2023/03/el-silencio-ante-la-herejia-de-mons.html
https://laicosunidosencristo.blogspot.com/2022/06/quien-no-es-miembro-de-la-iglesia-no.html
https://laicosunidosencristo.blogspot.com/2022/06/evidencia-de-que-bergoglio-en-argentina.html
Back in my Anglican days I would read materials urging me to swim the Tiber, arguing that the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church is the One True and original church founded by Our Lord. Then to dissuade me, there were other materials, arguing that Papalism or Romanism was a corrupt, deviant and unbiblical version of Christianity.
In retrospect, it seems that both parties were right.
The Papacy has moved to New York and it might be charitable to suggest that it's been run out of there since 2013 if not before. (The UK government similarly went into administration last October at the hands of Black Rock in circumstances similar to Anthony Eden in 1956.) Comparisons with '56 inevitably invites a Cardinal Ottaviani reference. He evidently began to be alarmed at this and other developments of the period and in the two subsequent years questionable decisions were taken. In truth, restraint of pen and tongue are sometimes the best options. This was the path not taken.
The promotion of old Smoocho-Tucho
To Dottrina delighted him mucho:
“But why this advance, ah?” –
From the throne came the answer:
“I could think of no worse place to pucho.”
I would say to Mick J. here that his analysis leaves out the actual history of Ratzinger's theological opinions. Like many, the man matured over many decades. To leave this out is hardly fair or helpful.
Also, if the staff of the old CDF was actually responsible for most heresies in the RCC, they would need a staff five times the size of the STASI from East Germany in the mid-1980s. I mean, don't bishops have a role here? Of course they do.
"Bishop Stephen is a good Catholic and a fine Liturgist, both theoretical and practical."
"I would guess that Fr. Vaughn Treco begs to differ."
The removal of Father Christopher Phillips and the subsequent hollowing-out of his parish was also questionable and hurtful. I avoid Bishop Lopes.
@coradcorloquitur when Our Lord made that statement about the lukewarm I suspect he had in mind those who were lukewarm in their faith, not those who were so about the various political goings on at the Vatican. I suspect He himself was too busy preaching about the Kingdom to worry about the latest high priest appointment at the Sanhedrin. Perhaps we should do the same.
Post a Comment