Vatican City, Sep 18, 2017 / 01:57 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Nearly four years after the Pope established his Council of Cardinal advisers to help him in the task of reforming the Roman Curia, one member of the group said their work is wrapping up, and that it could take only a few more meetings to finish what they set out to do.
The ongoing process of reform “is being done at various stages of development, and I hope we’ll come to an end in all of these matters soon,” Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Bombay told CNA Sept. 14.
“It will take two or three more meetings more,” he said, adding that “by June perhaps we’ll be seeing the end of the tunnel.”
Cardinal Gracias is also President of the Asian Bishops Conference and in 2013 was chosen by the Pope along with eight other prelates from around the world to advise him in matters of Church governance and reform.
He spoke to CNA in a lengthy, sit-down interview after the council – also called the “C9” – concluded their latest round of meetings last week.
As far as the reform goes, Cardinal Gracias said “there won’t be very major changes; it’s the governance of the Church, we can’t just turn everything upside down.” Rather, it will be “a gradual change, a change of mentality, a change of approach, restructuring a bit of the departments so that they are more logically suited to the needs of today.”
He said a key goal of the C9 is to implement the vision of the Second Vatican Council, specifically when it comes to the importance of the role of the laity and women, and incorporating greater synodality and collegiality into the Church’s structures.
From the beginning Pope Francis “had very clear what he wanted this group to do,” the cardinal said. “He had no hesitation, he’s a good leader. He had a clear vision.”
Cardinal Gracias admitted that in the beginning he had doubts as to whether or not they were going in the right direction, and had started to worry what people on the outside might say, since many fruits of the meetings weren’t and likely won’t be immediately visible. He said he also struggled with doubts about the pace at which they were moving, and believed that things were going “too slow.”
“I will confess that once at the beginning I was wondering, ‘are we going in the right direction?’ I asked myself. But now I can see it is,” he said, explaining that Pope Francis’ Christmas speech to the Roman Curia last year was a “tipping point” for him.
More than anything, there is a change in mentality that’s needed, which will take longer than simply reforming the Vatican’s structures, he said, but said the group is “rather confident that it will happen because the Pope is giving very effective leadership.”
In addition to the ongoing curial reform, Cardinal Gracias also spoke about the recent release of Indian priest Fr. Tom Uzhunnalil 18 months after he was abducted in Yemen. He also spoke about the Pope’s upcoming trip to Myanmar and Bangladesh, and when a possible papal trip to India might take place.
Below are excerpts from CNA’s interview with Cardinal Gracias:
You’ve seen Fr. Tom and you were at his meeting with Pope Francis. How is he doing?
I was pleasantly surprised with calmness with which he came out, because he did not know, to my knowledge, that he was being released. But he said I know people have prayed for me, I’m grateful for the people who were praying for me, but he kept on saying ‘Jesus is great, Jesus is great.’ And then he told the Holy Father. It was a very moving moment. As soon as the Holy Father came he prostrated in front of the Holy Father and kissed his feet, and he said, ‘thank you, thank you, thank you. Thank you Holy Father, but just one message I want to give you: Jesus Christ is great. Jesus was with me right through, I could sense the presence of God with me’…And once I thought the Holy Father had tears in his eyes. When Tom kept on speaking about Jesus, this is what he told the Holy Father: please tell the people that Jesus is great! I would say that he’s come out of it with an experience of the presence of the Lord, and I think at that moment the Holy Father had tears in his eyes…I met the Holy Father later that afternoon, and he was telling me how impressed he was. He was also surprised with the calmness of the man, with Tom…He was a man who is perhaps strengthened in the faith after this experience, and not bitter about anything. Particularly about his captors, he was very understanding. It was a special experience, very edifying. He needs rest, certainly, he’ll have a medical exam and he’ll be with his superiors, but eventually he’ll go back (to India). So thank God really. It was an anxious moment for the whole Church in India. We didn’t know what was happening, but we understood that putting more pressure, in the perspective of the government, could make things more difficult for him. (But) he’s not really stressed in any way you can make out. Physically weak, but spiritually strong. When he met the Holy Father, he was weeping right through it. And the Holy Father was very touched, he kissed his hand and blessed him…He felt the comfort and strength of the entire Church. As he said, there was never a moment when he felt abandoned, either by the Church or by God. He kept saying, ‘Jesus is great.’ So he came out spiritually strengthened in that sense. It was a big relief, a big blessing, and the Holy Father was overjoyed. I think the government of Oman did a very splendid job of helping out…they even brought a Salesian to accompany him on the last plane. It was very human of them, so had the comfort of a spiritual companion.
What role did the Holy See play in working out his release?
They only offered help, they kept the issue open and kept sharing. The Holy See was told he was alive, and the Holy See communicated with the Indian government. In Yemen, the political situation is very fragile, and one doesn’t know who is in charge. There are bombardments and all sorts of groups are taking over, so there was always a risk I suppose, that if you tried to liberate him you could have harmed him. But they were always interested, they kept it alive. Every time I came to Rome somebody from the Secretariat of State updated me. The Vatican made sure there was interest. Any information the Holy See had, they shared it with the Indian government, the Omani government, so that was good.
It’s interesting that there is still no word on who is responsible…
It’s not a terrorist attack, it’s a kidnapping. They wouldn’t glory in taking him. That has not come out. I spent about half an hour with him before the Holy Father, and he was speaking continuously. I did not at any point attempt to ask him questions, because I think that would be a stress for him. He has got to share…he wants to share it and then I imagine you feel lighter. He’s probably just got to rest, and rest and rest, physically and then mentally too, he’s got to get it out of his mind. He’s not come out of it a broken man at all. I was afraid of that, that he would come out a broken man, but no…It’s a moment of grace, a moment of faith, a special experience. The high point was when he told the Holy Father, ‘just tell everybody that Jesus is great, Jesus is great.’ Just three simple words. That was like the sum of his whole experience, what he meant and why he meant it…he felt not abandoned, I suppose. I hope recovers. I imagine he needs a couple of months really, or maybe more than a couple of months, to really rest. He needs time with the family also, natural circumstances…I’m not sure about this, but I have a feeling that the Omani government decided to bring him to Rome, because they (wanted) to hand him over to the Vatican. I think it was better for him, because I think if he had gone to India he would have been mobbed by everybody. He just needs space to recover, and for doctors to examine him. Physically to see if he’s alright, and psychologically also, to be investigated. I think it was a wise decision, but I think it was a decision more of the Omani government.
I don’t want to exploit your time, but I wanted to ask a few questions about the process of reform and the C9. You just finished your latest round of meetings…
Yes, we just finished the latest round, the 21st meeting. I can’t imagine we’ve had 21. I didn’t realize it’s 21 already. I think we are working hard. What’s nice is that we’re a cohesive group now. In the beginning we were all (gestures). Now we know each other so well and we work together, and of course trying to implement the Holy Father’s vision of the Church. Also, one of the things we always say, and it’s very clear, before the conclave the cardinals had spoken a lot of their vision of the Church, and we have the texts of what all of the cardinals said, and all the cardinals gave their vision. We picked up from that, the Holy Father picked up from that, his own vision. We’ve focused so far … it’s for a dual purpose that the group was formed: one is to help him help him in the governance of the universal Church, and the second is to revise Pastor bonus, the papal document of St. John Paul II for establishing the Curia and giving the job descriptions and the vision of each dicastery. It’s to revitalize, I suppose that’s what Pope Francis wants us to do, and to have a new mentality which is applying Vatican II also; how to make the Roman Curia at the service of the Holy Father more effectively, but the Churches at the local level, the Churches in the dioceses, how to make the Roman Curia assist the local Churches to be more effective pastorally, so they can be more vibrant in that sense. So I think the holy Father is satisfied with what’s happening. I’m satisfied too with the way we are going ahead. We come for three days and work intensely, we work from 9:00 on the first day to 7:00 (pm) on the last day trying to wrap things up, but lots of work has been done. But it’s coming to the end. I think it will take maybe two or three more meetings until we wrap up our conclusions about the dicasteries. Then of course the Holy Father will study the thing and decide. So we’re going well. The feedback we receive is the Holy Father is happy, he is satisfied, and he has been using the Christmas messages sometimes to give an indication, a little progress report, so this year’s Christmas message (2016). I didn’t realize it, but when I read it I realized it’s practically giving a progress report of what this group has been doing. I hope that it will make an impact. There won’t be very major changes; it’s the governance of the Church, we can’t just turn everything upside down. But a gradual change, a change of mentality, a change of approach, restructuring a bit of the departments so that they are more logically suited to the needs of today, and also of answering the vision of the Second Vatican Council: the importance of lay people, synodality, collegiality, then concern about women, getting more women involved, then giving importance to the local Churches. Then reflecting on the role of episcopal conferences in all this, because that’s another big issue. So all of this is being done at various stages of development, and I hope we’ll come to an end in all of these matters soon. It will take two or three more meetings more, I foresee at least February, June…by June perhaps we’ll be seeing the end of the tunnel.
It’s been a long process…
It’s been a really long process, really, but it’s good. I’ve been in other committees of this sort, in which at the beginning we don’t what we’re doing, where to begin, and they you find your way and you find your vision. But here it was very clear, the Holy Father had very clear what he wanted this group to do…we were not clear in why we were called and what he wanted to do, but gradually we understood his mind. He had no hesitation, he’s a good leader. He had a clear vision and he had his people with him. He’s there with us, he genuinely doesn’t take any other appointments. He’s there except the general audience. There are emergencies of course, this time there were lots of things happening, but he participates and he listens to discussion, and every now and then he raises his hand when he wants to speak. It’s very odd, but now we’re accustomed to it, the Pope raising his hand (laughs) … it’s very valuable, he’s part of the discussion all the way through, completely inserted right in the thick of it. Certainly he doesn’t speak that much, because I think we would feel inhibited and want to go in his direction. So it’s just the right amount and at the right time.
Well he’s very much about the process, isn’t he? He doesn’t want to interrupt the process that’s happening…
Yes, absolutely. And he’s happy. And everybody speaks their mind. We know each other so well, and we know that the Holy Father wants us to speak our minds, so no one is at any stage (overly) conscious that the Pope is there with us, no…but it’s going well, I think it’s going well. I will confess that once at the beginning I was wondering, ‘are we going in the right direction?’ I asked myself. But now I can see it is. He’s a man of deep faith, the Pope. I remember having spoken to him once about the synod, I was sharing him my anxieties on whether the synods were going well, and he told me, ‘Cardinal, I am not worried.’ He told me that. I told him I was worried, I don’t know what direction we’re taking, whether we’ll be able in two synods to give your vision. (He said) ‘I’m not worried. It’ll work out.’ He knows what he wants, he’s a good Jesuit, and the Jesuits know exactly what they want.
At what point were you convinced that things were going in the right direction?
After about seven or eight or nine meetings, I was beginning to wonder. My worry was what will the world say? Everybody knows we’re meeting over here, but we are very limited in what we say are the fruits. What are these eight men – nine, we became nine after the Secretary (of State) joined – the nine cardinals are coming and discussing here, what’s happening? They’re not just coming here for debate. I was worried about the fruits not being seen, and the process being too slow. But then, especially after I heard the Holy Father’s speech (at Christmas 2016), for me that was it. I was like, wow, there has been a lot done. That was absolutely…this past Christmas, it was like a progress report of this group. I’m in the group, right, but I never realized the number of things we had really discussed. Besides modifying the document, the protection of minors, the economy, updates on these things, general principles of collegiality, synodality, we’re thinking about these things. Care of the Curia personnel. It’s everything that the Holy Father…he isn’t like us, who when we go back home we’re fully in the diocese, he has this in mind and he keeps working on this fully afterwards. We go back to our dioceses and are concerned about the local Church, but he certainly follows up with what we say. I’ve seen it several times. He takes the group very seriously. Every now and then he would ask us to take up some point on the agenda to discuss it a bit, which he wants advice on. I think it’s a new system he has started in which he gets feedback from all over the world, and he gets it from the grassroots. I think, anyway, I hope. We come from different continents and we bring in our own experiences. But it is going well. In fact I really, really think there has been a contribution to the Holy Father, and then the Holy Father takes decisions. I have a feeling this is shared by all now. I have no doubt, this would be the general feeling of all about it. The tipping point was really his speech, but already before that, say about six or seven months before that, we began to see really when we reflected that…perhaps the Holy Father knew that that was in our minds. It was in my mind, and maybe I expressed it indirectly. And the Holy Father once commented also, he said ‘we have done this much, so don’t get discouraged.’ So at one stage he sort of answered that doubt in my mind.
You mentioned that there’s also a change of mentality needed. Other than the structural shifts, it seems that the change of mentality will be the more challenging task…
That will take longer. But we hope it will percolate down, because once you have a certain mentality you generally don’t change unless the circumstances change, the ambiance changes. And in a certain sense not changing dramatically. That will I think take longer. But I’m positive that it will happen. We’re very, very hopeful. We’re rather confident that it will happen because the Pope is giving very effective leadership, and every now and then there is a clear message from him. But it will come about and suddenly we’ll realize, oh there has been a change! That’s how it will happen. It won’t come overnight, but at a certain point we’ll realize things have changed. He knows what he wants. And he’s happy. Certainly the indication I can see is this way; the relationship he has with the group and the joy he has in being with the group. He says he feels that it has helped him. Thank God. We do what we can. I don’t know how or why he chose us, but he’s happy. I was very surprised when I got a call from him. I said ‘why me? What have I done?’ I suppose he knows. I don’t know why. I did not know the Holy Father before, we’ve never been in any other committee before. Only at the conclave. I don’t even remember having chatted with him at the conclave, or before the conclave. After the conclave it was true that I was with him. It’s true that after I was with the Pope at Santa Marta for a few days. Then we were having meals together – breakfast, lunch and dinner for four or five days. That’s the time we came to know each other. So we were thrown together for about a week. It struck me that after his election I was at Santa Marta, because there were five or six cardinals. All the American cardinals were there, the European cardinals, all the ones from close by left and came back (for the installation). I stayed for the installation and then went back to India. And then you share, when you speak. He was very comfortable with us, very comfortable with me. But still, he had to make a choice.
Has he mentioned anything about when a visit to India might take place?
He’s very interested. We’re working it out, and I’m very hopeful. He would like to come and we would like to have him, and the government would like to have him. But now we must see his program, the government’s program, but I’m certain he will come. There are no details at all for the moment. I’m rather certainly positive that we will be able to get the Holy Father, he’s interested and I think he’s getting more interested. And the people will be excited…we are looking forward. In the beginning, as soon as he was elected, I asked him, ‘when are you coming to India?’ And he was sort of (disinterested), but gradually he began to like the idea. He’s never been to India before. As a Jesuit I think he was supposed to go to Japan, that’s what he was telling me. He’s going now to Bangladesh and Myanmar. It will be very sensitive. Bangladesh has it’s own problems, I believe they have elections next year, and Myanmar has problems to solve, also the refugee problem at the moment. Of late it is continuously on, I believe yesterday or this morning I saw it on CNN, and BBC is reporting on it. It’s an issue for the world. I’ve been there (Bangladesh) a few times. It’s a nice Church, concentrated mostly in Dhaka, a living faith. I’ve been to Myanmar also, I went as a papal legate there some years back, and I found the Church very vibrant. A simple faith, but I’m happy. I think it will mean a lot to the people. It will also strengthen the people. I think the Church is also very vibrant, it’s not have any specific difficulty, in my impression as a papal legate about two or three years back, but I was very impressed by the faith and the organization. It was vibrant. The Church was small, but strong and alive. It will make a difference for the Churches, and for the governments I expect.
Will you be there?
I plan to go to both places yes. In all of these trips in Asian I’ve come along: Sri Lanka, Korea, the Philippines. At the moment I’m president of the Asian Bishops Conference, so I suppose in that capacity I’ll have to go.
[…]
Extremely well said. The Church has the Courage apostolate. Father James Martin’s recent book should have consisted of three words “Go to Courage”. Nothing more needed to be said on the subject. The fact that he never mentions it, or Catholic doctrine in its fullness, indicates he is part of the gay lobby.
Even with the context of the shorter quote, it’s clear that the Holy Father has some mental deficiencies. It is an utterly rambling string of incoherence.
Deliberate vagueness.
Yup. Jesuit-speak, always deliberately vague.
Reminds me too much of a Jesuit professor I had a State University; he taught ethics. Deliberate fuzzy answers, unclear thinking, mixed with a certain pride in knowing what cannot be explained? Repulsive, especially to an engineer.
This comment is not in disagreement with Deacon R.
Anything Francis says that “sounds” faithful to Catholic teaching about human sexuality means nothing to me, because his actions and the actions of his agents undermine the Christian law of chastity and the sanctity of marriage.
After all, Francis had a opportunity to pick a priest or man from “Courage” and make them a key part of Vatican Communications. Francis chose the unfaithful man desired by “New Ways Ministry” instead.
Francis IS as Francis DOES. His words do not matter.
Thank you, Chris. You are absolutely right. To pretend otherwise contradicts reality
Thanks – facing reality is an essential part of being happy in the Catholic Church.
Well said. On such a controversial issues Francis could have given a more definitive answer as leader of the Catholic Church, but he chose not to. He likes to “make a mess” and this sure created a huge mess.
His actions speak louder than words – see below.
Pope Francis has removed every single member of the Vatican pro-life academy
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-has-removed-every-single-member-of-the-vatican-pro-life-academ
Report: Pope Francis ordered Cardinal Müller to dismiss three priests from doctrinal office
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/francis-boots-three-priests-out-of-cdf.-why-i-am-the-pope-i-do-not-need-to
Climate of fear in Vatican is very real
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/climate-of-fear-in-the-vatican-is-very-real
The New Homophiles – Homosexuality Goes from Disorder to Gift! (1/5)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uZGdl31Fng&t=412s
Yes. As my dear departed mum often said, “actions speak louder than words.” And the actions of the Pope scream support for the gay lobby… Cupich, Farrell, Martin, Tobin… need I go further? OK, Burke, Mueller, gone… Sarah, marginalized… More? OK, no consequences for the many bishops outwardly promoting the gay lobby here in the US and in Europe. Enough.
“I still haven’t found anyone with an identity card in the Vatican with “gay” on it.” – PF.
It may just be me. And i certainly may be wrong. But I read this as a sarcastic statement from someone who takes the gay lobby situation as a joke. And dismisses it.
This pope surrounds himself with clerics very sympathetic to the gay lifestyle. His very close advisor, Spadaro, maintains a website in honor of a deceased (AIDS) Italian writer specializing in the homo erotic topics. Need anything more be said about the hyper gay friendly, Fr. Martin, SJ?
I would respectfully take the opposite view. Pope Francis has no problem with the American gay lobby. He is, in fact, quite sympathetic to their view of the Church and world.
Logical conclusion.
It is quite surprising that the article, among its useful compilation of “Catholic” organizations promoting homosexuality, completely ignores the actions of Pope Francis promoting homosexuality in the Church with consequences far beyond what all of the other organizations together are doing. The catalogue of these actions is lengthy, public, and incontrovertible, as a simple Google search reveals. To mention only one instance that the article itself cites. The article and a number of others before it by Mr. Russell document in great detail the horrendous scandal and heterodoxy of gay lobbyist and advocate Fr. James Martin, Jesuit priest “in good standing” with the Church and editor-at-large of Jesuit magazine America. Despite this, Pope Francis personally appointed this notorious wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing to the Vatican’s Secretariat for Communications as recently as April 12 of this year! To claim, as Mr. Russell does, that Pope Francis wills is against aiding and supporting the gay lobby is not merely naive and myopic but absolutely false and is directly contradicted by the repeated actions of Pope Francis. As Our Lord Himself has infallibly noted, it is by their actions that men are judged, not their words.
Or maybe guys like Fr Martin are just sufficiently ambiguous to slip under the radar?
Also this “Secretariat for Communications” what does it do? Nothing as far as I can tell.
“‘The pope did not enter into the details of the situation of Mrs. Davis and his meeting with her should not be considered a form of support of her position in all of its particular and complex aspects,’ Lombardi said.”
—-
“The Vatican is confirming that the only ‘audience’ the pope had while he was in Washington was with a former student and his family: Yayo Grassi, an openly gay Argentine who visited Francis with his longtime partner and some friends.”
—-
“Astorga had written to the pope to inform him that the city had given her a plot of public land where she planned to build 15 one-room homes for the transgender women she works with. ‘I have you and the convent close to my heart, as well as the people with whom you work; yoou can tell them that,’ Francis wrote in his message.”
—-
“Yes, says Diego Neria Lejarraga, a transgender man who says he had a private audience with the Pope in late January, reportedly a first for the pontiff. Neria was born as a girl in Spain and raised as a devout Catholic.”
—-
“The message of hope reportedly bowled over Lejarraga. He (sic, or should it be “sick”?) was even more surprised when Francis invited him (sic) to come to the Vatican for a personal meeting and offered to pay for it.”
And the “dubia cardinals” have been waiting how long for a meeting with the pope? Perhaps if one of them were of the same persuasion as any of the above, they would have received an audience a long time ago?
How many people engaged in the fight against abortion or the fight against “gay marriage” get private audiences with Pope Francis?
Why do I get the feeling with the anti-Francis reactionary crowd it’s heads we win but tales he looses?
Kim Davis is herself divorced and remarried(thus objectively living in adultery. Also her fringe sect denies the Trinity). If the Pope publicly proclaimed his meeting with her you can bet the usual suspects here would proclaim it a Pro Amoris Laetitia stunt to condone divorce. Also Ms. Davis(by what logic does DJR conclude her current marriage is valid? Mrs? Seriously?) enemies point out she is divorced and remarried and that is against Holy Writ so she is not for us a reliable poster child for opposition to immoral marriages and or pseudo-marriages.
I don’t see how merely meeting with gays is a problem? If anything complaining about it seems to me a problem.
“When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”Matt 9:11
“The healthy don’t need a doctor but the sick”.
Sister Astorga isn’t so much working with “Trans-women” but with “Lady-Boy” prostitutes.
https://cruxnow.com/global-church/2017/07/25/nun-ministering-transgender-women-gets-thumbs-pope/
The problem with the Dubia Cardinals is well as sympathetic as I am to their concerns (and I think Pope Francis should answer the Dubia)
the claim to be able to “correct the Pope” looks like a challenge to Papal Authority. A reasonable case can be made this could have been handled differently.
Anyway Deacon Russell’s article here should be non-controversial. Taken at face value the Pope isn’t the “Rainbow Pope” the media has imagined him to be.
Ironically anti-Catholic gays seem to get that more then some anti-Francis extremists who post here.
Pope Francis passes up chance to condemn Uganda’s anti-gays
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/29/uganda-gays-pope-francis
Did the Pope Just Say Our ‘Lifestyles’ Are ‘Irresponsible?
https://www.advocate.com/religion/2015/9/25/did-pope-just-say-our-lifestyles-are-irresponsible
Of course Fr. Martin should just come out of the closet ;-)and tell us explicitly where he stands on the morality of homosexuality. Cause in spite of his other alleged ambiguities Pope Francis is, on this issue, clear enough.
“Male and female God created them” (Genesis 1:28)
“The young need to be helped to accept their own body as it was created, for thinking that we enjoy absolute power over our own bodies turns, often subtly, into thinking that we enjoy absolute power over creation.” (Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia)
Amoris has it’s problems. Being “pro-gay” isn’t any of them.
The Francis pontificate selected the outlaw priest preferred by the outlawed New Ways Ministry for its Communications team, instead of a faithful priest from Courage.
For that same “Secretariat for Communications” nonsense he also selected the CEO of EWTN.
Again what does it do? Nothing as far as I can tell.
“Also Ms. Davis(by what logic does DJR conclude her current marriage is valid? Mrs? Seriously?”
Those are merely quotes from news articles.
Father Lombardi is the one who called Kim Davis “Mrs.,” so perhaps you should direct your question to him. Seriously.
Not sure where you got the idea that DJR concluded Ms. Davis’ current marriage is valid. How was that conclusion arrived at, exactly?
Catholics can be excused for being anti-Francis, no? After all, the pope has demonstrated ample ability to insult, and freely does, many of his co-religionists.
Not sure why people think that, merely because a person is pope, he can publicly insult others freely.
To miss the forest for the trees is my take on a well intended article.
Deacon ask whether Homosexual practice and life style was far less accepted during the Pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, or far more accepted by the Catholic Church during the Pontificate of Francis I.
Dear Fr.–thank you for your comment. Regarding the forest and the trees, my hope was to present an “agnostic” view of whether and how our Holy Father is personally engaging these issues at a practical level. Why? Because people will bring their views on that issue to the article, whether I express a particular view, not.
My more direct intention here was to illustrate that we need to disarm the existing “who am I to judge” narrative by being able to express the full narrative from that fateful press conference. The full context of what Pope Francis said on that day–regardless of the rest of the data we have–can serve to provide needed “pushback” against the gay-lobby narrative embraced by all too many in the Church who think they can “weaponize” Francis’ “who am I to judge” quote in favor of laxity on “LGBT” issues.
Thus, I wasn’t writing with the intent to capture Pope Francis’ personal track record on these issues but rather writing to offer a stronger “apologetic” against those who twist what Francis said–the twisting of “who am I to judge” has done immense harm, and my thought is that we need to “untwist” that, if only in hopes of silencing some of the gay-lobby folks who depend so much on those five words of Francis.
I didn’t really make that clear in the piece, but that was my modest intention.
Thanks for reading and commenting!
I trusted that was your point Deacon. My intent was to make clear to those who read my comments where I stand regards the Pontiff’s overall policy.
I think the pope is the only one who can disarm “who am I to judge?”
And he hasn’t shown any interest in doing so.
It sounded at the time like pope Francis making what we would come to recognize as his usual nasty type remark belittling traditional sense. He has had 4 years to clarify the impression. He has not done so. He owns “who am I to judge?”. In its most libertine light and I expect that that suits him just fine.
The “gay lobby” is in charge now. Coccopalmerio: pro-gay remarks, pro-gay book, protected gay-orgy secretary. Paglia: gay mural in cathedral, pro-gay sex-ed books. Ricca: got stuck with rent boy in elevator, etc. Bergoglio: James Martin and too many other pro-gay priests to count have been promoted, photographed with Bergoglio, etc. Can’t get enough hugs from gay couples, trannies, and abortionists.
Deacon Russell seems stuck in June of 2013. The rest of us have seen a lot since then.
It would be fine if he met with these people as a show that the church cares about them, and does not reject them. That could actually be a good thing. But he never says a thing about the sinfulness of their acts, or the position of the church, nor does he attempt to convince anyone of the correctness of the church’s stance on these things. He gives the impression, as always, that he wants to ignore or downplay Catholic doctrine, not defend it.
Why does he have to say it? It seems obvious he assumes it otherwise he wouldn’t have called gay marriage and gay adoption the work of the Devil. He wouldn’t harshly condemn gender ideology. The Advocate wouldn’t have had a conniption of his condemnation of transgender ideology in the Philippines.
Francis for his faults is not pro-homosexuality. He is for people who just happen to be gay.
I have heard that before and it is not persuasive. Does it not occur to him or others that today, after 50 years of peace and love that maybe some don’t know the church’s position. But, more to the point, that those in question don’t accept the church’s position and it is his job to convince them of it, and to defend it. It is easy to be convinced that he just doesn’t see any urgency because in his world of rainbows, unicorns and lollipops – the only real evil for which someone may suffer eternal loss is not being a modern globalist social justice lover.
Francis wants the world’s respect and love. Francis wants to be the man who ‘cured’ the church. If he is not the most pro-gay pope ever, then he’s doing a good job of hiding it.
I don’t believe Pope Francis sees any problem in the Gay Lobby. And that, to my view, is the real problem.
Logical conclusion.
The problem is that Pope Francis’ actions lend support for the gay lobby. He meets with a transsexual couple at the Vatican and says, “He that was her but is he.” He meets with his former student Yayo Grassi and his homosexual boyfriend and happily takes photos with them while forbidding photos to be taken with pro-family advocate Kim Davis. Mr. Grassi said in an interview shortly after the meeting that in all the years he has know Pope Francis he has never had the sense that the pope disapproved of his gay lifestyle. Pope Francis was notable for his silence in the face of evil campaigns to introduce gay civil unions to Italy and gay marriage in Ireland. Faithful Catholics in these two countries were desperately disappointed that they did not get any clear statements condemning the proposed changes from the Holy Father. On his visit to Paraguay the pope arranged to meet a leading “married” gay rights advocate who opposes church teaching on human sexuality. Former Master General of the Dominicans Fr. Timothy Radcliffe who was sidelined under the papacy of Pope Benedict for his controversial views on homosexuality and enthusiastic support of gay civil unions was appointed by Pope Francis to the appointed as a Vatican consultant last year. This is just one of many examples of Pope Francis appointing, promoting and favoring priests and prelates such as Cardinals Cupich, Danneels and Coccopalmeiro who in their public statements are supportive of the gay agenda. Who appointed Fr. James Martin to his current position? To say that the pope is against the gay lobby is disingenuous.
Francis IS what Francis does.
When JP2 or B16 served as pontiff, what they said and what they did were consistent and faithful.
Unfortunately, we must accept that this is not so since 2013…
Just to be clear, Courage ministry to Catholics who experience same-sex attractions, does not promise a change of sexual orientation. In fact, they are candid that is not the norm. They simply insist on lifelong celibacy. They do not explain why that would work for all LGBT people on the planet when supposedly celibate clergy numbers are depleted in much of the world, and the scandals over cover-ups of pedophilia scandals continue, as evidenced by George Pell, the Pope’s senior adviser, left to answer criminal charges last month.
There is no burden of proof on Courage–as you imply there is.
Courage’s position is that the Sixth Commandment is to be obeyed. Which is to say, God is to be obeyed.
Actually, this has absolutely nothing to do with the clergy or with “celibacy.” It has to do with the obligation of every unmarried human being to be continent.
Good answer.
Rusty, you do realize that celibate mean not being married? It is assumed that those who are celibate are ALSO chaste.
“They simply insist on lifelong celibacy.” and probably chasity.
There is not and was never a pedophilia scandal. There is and was instead a homo-sexual predator scandal.
That is the reality.
Case in point: Cdl. Danneels – who was caught on tape covering up for his friend Bishop Vanderweighe, a “bishop” who sodomized his own nephew.
Danneels somehow couldn’t find a way to hold Vanderweighe
accountable, or report the case to the pope. He instead asked the victim to shut up and blame himself.
At the Catholic Monitor we detail with repect, but implicit humor how Pope Francis is strolling hand in hand with the gay mafia.
The most important part of the Pope Francis and Gay Mafia post is a call for prayer for Francis especially that he answer the dubia and for the dubia Cardinals to issue the correction if he doesn’t answer soon. Eternal souls are at stake.
May Cardinal Burke be given the grace of courage to correct Francis as Paul corrected Peter.
Amen.
From a Crux article dated 1/15/2016 by John Allen.
“Yet when Italians say there’s a “gay lobby” in the Vatican, they don’t mean an organized faction with the aim of changing Church teaching on homosexuality or same-sex marriage.
Instead, what they have in mind is an informal, loosely organized network of clergy who support one another, keep one another’s secrets, and help one another move up the ladder. The group is perceived to have a vested interest in thwarting attempts at reform, since they benefit from secrecy and old-guard ways.
It’s called “gay” because, the theory goes, a Vatican official’s homosexuality can be a very powerful secret, especially if he’s sexually active, and threatening to expose him can be an effective way of keeping him in line. It’s hardly the only such possibility, however, and, in any event, the emphasis is not on sex but secrecy, as well as the related impression of people getting promoted or decisions being made on the basis of personal quid pro quos.”
Is John Allen a balanced Catholic who supports faithful/orthodox Catholics and rejects dissent from infallible Church teachings?
Spadaro’s recent attack on “value voters” or pro-life & pro-family Catholics is only a rehash of Allen’s 2006 speech where he called pro-life Catholics “Taliban Catholicism” according to lifesitenewscom.
Allen called the National Catholic Reporter “balanced” and a ” precious gift.” NCR is pro homosexual “marriage” and has columnist who “rejects the Church’s condemnation of sodomy” according to lifesitenews.com. (“John Allen’s strategy for legitimating Catholic dissent,” lifesitenews.com, May 19, 2011)
Yeah, right.
We don’t believe you, John Allen. It’s just so very obvious, it is what it is.
The problem is the pope, not the media.
Correct.
Thank you for this very interesting post. I have found New Ways Ministry, FAN, Catholics United, and other pseudo “catholic” organizations are attempting to infiltrate and create upheaval in faithful Catholic organizations, such as the Franciscans and the Knights of Columbus, with varying degrees of success. When I clicked on the link in the article from New Ways Ministry (which has been condemned by the Church), I found my own parish listed as “gay-friendly”. I assume this is because there is a yearly Mass celebrated for the families of gay people, to support and comfort them, and to pray for them all. That is the only ministry offered by my parish that is in any way specifically aimed at homosexuality. Personally, I do not see that this makes my parish gay-friendly, although NWM seems to. Perhaps we should take anything NWM says or claims with a hearty grain of salt. They seem to manipulate many good Catholic people to support their agenda. The only way to fight this is to let the light in and speak the truth of the Church. God bless all here – Susan, ofs
Wake up people. Amoris Laetitia was never really about communion for adulterers; it was about communion for actively practicing homosexuals. Because if unrepentant adulterers can receive the Eucharist then so can unrepentant homosexuals. The logic is inexorable and unavoidable. This has been the agenda from the beginning. It was a plan germinated by the St. Gallen’s Mafia long ago and it has now been implemented. They understood that the plight of the remarried mom of five who would be left destitute by her “husband” if she followed the Lord’s Commandment against adultery was the more sympathetic case. Note how, while some of us are still insisting that communion for unrepentant adulterers is impossible, they’ve already moved on with lightning speed to the integration of active homosexuals. While we are saying “What just happened?” they are driving home their victory.
Agree.
“Who am I to judge” was his “new sheriff in town” pronouncement. And the new sheriff didn’t care much about all that abortion and sex stuff, and has no patience for anyone who does.
“Who am I to judge” means – “look at me, see how wonderful and up to date and liberal and tolerant and warm and fuzzy I am, not like all those mean old paranoid guys who came before me, give me your love and respect.”
Since I have great respect for DCN Russell, it is painful to watch the mental gymnastics he uses to defend the worst Pope since the Renaissance. Francis called Emma Bonino – the Italian abortionist who has boasted of performing 10,000 abortions, who promoted divorce and homosexual “marriage” – one of the “greats of the Italian political scene.” At every turn, he surrounds himself with apologists for perversion, sodomites and heretics, he persecutes faithful Cardinals, he mocks traditional Catholics and traditional devotions, and praises those historic figures who have destroyed the fabric of Christian society. Bergoglio is doing the work of Satan, pure and simple.
I don’t think the worst of the renaissance popes were as dangerous.
Apologies for any pain inflicted. 🙂 But, truth be told, I don’t view my piece at all as a “defense” of Pope Francis. That’s just not the intent of the piece. Rather, I’m seeking to illustrate just how his *actual* words from that 2013 press conference can be employed as a real antidote against the false narrative of the gay lobby, which uses “who am I to judge” as a bludgeon.
If “who am I to judge” is an effective blunt instrument for the opposition, simply because those are five words uttered by a pope, we need to keep in mind that the words uttered by the pope against the concept of the “gay lobby” during the *same* press conference provide an effective antidote against every last person who misuses “who am I to judge.”
I kind of wish I’d said as much in the piece, but I didn’t, so I hope this gives better context. God bless and thanks for reading!
Deacon –
I read that message btw the lines when I first read your essay. I know what you were saying.
And thanks for helping me to fight the good fight.
Two things. Nothing wrong with defending out pope. Next, I thought your story cleared up the misunderstanding beautifully. I think gay groups and also, be fair, anti-Francis Catholics butchered his true meaning. Pox on both of them.
Well said Timothy.
The weirder Pope Francis gets, the harder is is to take him seriously. After reading the recent Spadaro Figuero nonsense article, I doubt the Pope and his friends have enough brains to be dangerous. They are increasingly like an episode of Benny Hill.
Professor French teacher,
It is a historic fact Pope Alexander VI condemned the slave trade. That Alexander VI was at least one of the top three worst Popes would not change that fact especially if one is confronted with anti-Catholic propagandists who want to claim the Church condones slavery.
Taken his words at face value. Pope Francis is hardly “pro-gay” whatever his alleged views on communion for the divorced and invalidly married.
Of course if I adopt your mentality and turn it against Traditionalism what should I conclude? Well Traditonalism is associated with Schism(SSPX), heresy (since in the 19th century persons who espoused Fideist heresy called themselves “Traditionalists”), holocaust denial (Bishop Williamson), fringe pseudo-scientific theories (geocentracism), Sedevicantism, Antisemitism (Williamson & Fr. Scott/no relation), and a host of fringe lunacy political theories involving reviving monarchies.
Sounds Devilish to me. If I didn’t know any sane Trads like my buddy Pete Vere or Edward Feser I would never have become a Traditional Thomist.
Why are you under the delusion you people have a good reputation?
No wonder the Pope is suspicious of you.
That doesn’t make sense. Why are you comparing what the people think about the pope, one man, with what they might think about a group of people because of what one man said? We can conclude that Williamson is a lot of things, anti-Semite etc. that would be a valid deduction, because he is.
How do we know that about him? by what he says and does. Same thing with the pope. We know that at the least he doesn’t care very much for people who think that the 6th commandment is important. By your argument, we must only refrain from concluding that the rest of the church shares his lack of concern… And with that I agree.
Well I am trying to be as unfair as possible to Traditionalists and read them in the worst possible light on purpose just like Williams is doing to Pope Francis and those who justly defend his justly defensible actions.
(btw it’s not just Williamson who is the sole villain in Traditionalism. To paraphrase Chris from Maryland Lefebvre choose this lunatic to be a bishop and Fellay kept him on. He could have chosen someone who doesn’t deny the holocaust. So I think I am on solid ground suspecting the whole movement. If I choose to be unfair. Which is my point.)
But, nobody is making the argument that the whole modern church is soft on gay issues because the pope mocked the idea of gay mafia in the Vatican. What he is saying is that the pope seems to be found wanting in areas concerning, among things, gays.
Pointing out that Williamson is anti-Semitic or that you think some other traditional themes are kooky, doesn’t help the pope’s reputation even if he is right to be suspicious.
additional:
Oh I forgot Traditionalist sex abuse.
https://cruxnow.com/global-church/2017/04/05/report-charges-cover-traditionalist-society/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/05/catholic-sspx-resistance-uk-harbours-clergy-accused-sexual-abuse-richard-williamson
BTW Pope Francis is in spite of this trying to get the SSPX back into the church. He is bending over father then St JP2 or B16 did.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/05/catholic-sspx-resistance-uk-harbours-clergy-accused-sexual-abuse-richard-williamson
Just saying.
Fr. Edmundus Waldstein, O. Cist., at sancrucensis.wordpress.com, reported why Pope Francis praised dissent Bernhard Häring who promoted allowing intrinsically evil acts :
“In a discussion with the General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, the Holy Father praised Fr. Bernhard Häring for having helped overcome a decadent scholastic moral theology that had been fixated on negative commandments, and opened up a way for moral theology to flourish. Now, Häring’s moral theology is a great example of what it might mean to begin processes as opposed to occupying spaces.” (Dubia and Initiating Processes, December 7, 2017, sancrucensis.wordpress.com)
Amoris Laetitia supporter Jeff Mirus in a March 7, 2017 article for Catholic Culture.com said anyone who would praise Haring “as one of the first to give Catholic moral theology new life in the twentieth century must be ignorant, confused, or subversive.”
In the beginning of the post, titled “Pope Francis and Bernard Haring: The literally infernal cheek of dissent,” Mirus said:
“Pope Francis praised…Fr. Bernard Haring, for being one of the first to try to revive an ailing moral theology following the Second Vatican Council.”
The article presented some of the moral theologian’s dissenting heretical teachings:
“In his 1973 book Medical Ethics Haring defended sterilization, contraception and artificial insemination…According to Haring, under difficult circumstances, we may engage in a process of discernment which leads to the commission of intrinsically evil acts.”
The Kasper proposal agenda which became Amoris Laetitia is all about allowing intrinsically evil acts such as adultery and homosexuality. Fr. Z said at his website on April 16, 2016:
“‘Homosexuality’ was the bigger issue with the Kasperites… This is still the Kasperite strategy.”
The Kasper agenda and Amoris Laetitia’s unavoidable logic is:
It follows that if unrepentant adulterers can receive Holy Communion, then unrepentant homosexuals can receive the Eucharist, too.
The bigger agenda of Cardinal Kasper and Häring (besides allowing intrinsically evil acts), which Francis probably doesn’t understand, is a Hegelian philosophic idealistic subjective metaphysics of historical becoming which denies the eternal and/or objective truths of the Classical Greek/Thomistic metaphysics of being.
Waldstein, O. Cist., explains:
“This is a soft version of certain strands of modern historicism, indebted to Hegel. Having abandoned nature, and an objective teleological order, Hegel and some of his followers give to history a role analogous to that played by nature in classical philosophy…. Häring is proposing something similar for the life of the Church.”
“I call this sort of historicism “soft” since its proponents would not all be willing to affirm the dark core of Hegel’s account of the good. But by adopting historicist terms they tend to draw conclusions that imply the basically subjectivist, modern account of the good, and the account of freedom that follows from it. Thomas Stark has shown how these problems play out in the theology of Cardinal Kasper.” [https://sancrucensis.wordpress.com/2016/12/07/dubia-and-initiating-processes/#more-5361]
The Classical Greek/Thomistic philosophy of being or objective truth and Revelation is the basis of all Catholic infallible doctrinal and moral teachings as well as the basis of Western Civilization and offshoots of it such as charity, objective intrinsic human rights and science.
If intrinsically evil acts are allowed through a denial of objective truth and objective Revelation, then not only does Catholic doctrinal and moral teachings collapse, but Western Civilization, also, collapses.
Prayer for Conversion of Pope Francis
Jesus said to St. Faustina:
“When you say this prayer with a contrite heart and with faith… I will give the grace of conversion.”
This is the prayer:
“O Blood and Water, which gushed forth from the Heart of Jesus as a fount of Mercy for us, I trust in You.” (Divine Mercy Diary 186, 187)
Say this prayer every day for the general intention of the conversion of Pope Francis and that the courage of St. Paul be given to the dubia Cardinals.
The specific intention of the prayer is for Francis to answer the dubia questions of the four Cardinals. If he doesn’t answer soon then may a torrent of grace give the dubia Cardinals the courage to issue the correction.
In no way do I mean this request for prayer to dishonor Pope Francis. I do not want to commit the sin of railing.
I honor the Office of Peter that he holds.
St. Paul honored St. Peter, but when he clearly witnessed Peter manifesting error and confusion on the infallible teachings of the Church by his actions & words, he “rebuked” or corrected him for the good of the first Pope and the Church.
As in the time of Paul, it is now very clear that Francis is manifesting error and confusion on the infallible teachings of the Church by his actions & words.
In the Catholic Monitor, I have tried to present the evidence in a straight forward manner without polemics although sometimes I implicitly used humor.
I may have used and I have quoted others who used a tone that could be considered harsh, but not, I believe, different from the tone Paul used on Peter.
Please read the posts in this website for clear evidence of Pope Francis’s errors.
Please remember what a great priest in our present troubled time said:
We get the leaders we deserve. What have we done to preserve the Catholic faith? Have we prayed and practiced our Catholic life? Or do we just talk about it? In that case we get what we deserve.
Please pray and practice your Catholic faith for your sake, for your family and friends sake and for the Church.
Pray especially for Francis and Cardinal Burke & the dubia Cardinals.
The most reliable Vatican expert in the world Edward Pentin reported on why it is of the upmost importance to pray for the Pope:
“Whatever the exact truth behind the lurid and disturbing story, it has further exposed such gravely sinful behavior taking place in the Vatican that one senior member of the curia says has ‘never been worse.’”
“According to reports in the mainstream media, Vatican police broke up a drug-fueled homosexual debauched party in an apartment of the Holy Office, but how true is it?”
“The news first broke in a June 28 article in Il Fatto Quotidiano…”
“The article’s author, Francesco Antonio Grana, says Pope Francis, whose Santa Marta residence is just 500 yards from the Holy Office, was aware of the raid and knew of the monsignor’s capture…”
“In the meantime, a reliable senior member of the curia has told the Register that he has heard from “multiple sources” that the story is true, including from another senior curial figure.”
“He said the extent of homosexual practice in the Vatican has ‘never been worse…’”
“The precise details of the reported events in the CDF therefore remain open to question, but the substance of the story appears to be true. If so, many would find such behavior taking place in the Holy Office not only unconscionable but also highly sacrilegious…”
“In light of the latest scandal and the current situation, one former official urged readers to recall the warnings of the Lord on homosexual acts, especially between priests, as explained by St. Catherine of Siena in her Dialogues written as if dictated by God Himself.”
“The medieval mystic, co-patron of Rome and Doctor of the Church, relayed the words at a time when a number of clergy had fallen into grave sin.”
“Such priests, the Lord told St. Catherine, not only fail from resisting their fallen nature, ‘but do even worse as they commit the cursed sin against nature [homosexual acts].’”
“’Like the blind and stupid having dimmed the light of the understanding, they do not recognize the disease and misery in which they find themselves,’ the Lord continued, adding that it not only causes God ‘nausea, but displeases even the demons themselves, whom these miserable creatures have chosen as their lords.’”
“He added that ‘this sin against nature is so abominable that, for it alone, five cities were submersed, by virtue of the judgement of My Divine Justice, which could no longer bear them.’ The Lord told St. Catherine that even the demons are ‘repulsed upon seeing such an enormous sin being committed.’”
“As a remedy, St. Catherine recounted the Lord saying:
‘Never cease offering me the incense of fragrant prayers for the salvation of souls, for I want to be merciful to the world. With your prayers and sweat and tears, I will wash the face of my bride, Holy Church. I showed her to you earlier as a maiden whose face was all dirtied as if she were a leper. The clergy and the whole of Christianity are to blame for this because of their sins, though they receive their nourishment at the breast of this bride.’”
(Click for complete July 8th, 2017 National Catholic Register article by Edward Pentin: http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/the-drug-fueled-homosexual-scandal-allegations-at-the-holy-office#.WWELJXNlAwi)
Jesus have mercy on the Church.
Mary and Joseph pray for the Church.
Francis, Cupich, James Martin…. we already all know, right? Knaves, fools, sops, or sellouts. Done with the faux respect. These men further evil. Much like 80% of the Jesuits.
There is just reason to be angry because of the undeniable distorting of Church teachings by Pope Francis and his appointees.
You can use that anger to motivate you to trust God and do good.
Or you can make your anger the center of the universe not trusting that God is allowing this crisis and is in total control allowing Francis’s and your free will in the mix.
St. Thomas said of Paul’s rebuke of Peter:
“The manner of the rebuke was fitting, i.e., public and plain… the Apostle opposed Peter in the exercise of authority, not in his authority of ruling.”
Pray and ask others to pray for Pope Francis and the Dubia Cardinals specifically that the dubia questions be answered soon or a correction be issued.
Pray the rosary and do penance as Our Lady of Fatima requested.
Has anyone else heard the when St. Pope John Paul ii was about to make our Pope an Archbishop a leader of the Jesuit Order, warned him not to? “You can not do this. This man changes his mind; he says one thing then another. He is unstable” It would explain his strange behaviour
John Paul replied : ” I need him as he is one not promoting Liberation theology. “
The story sounds apocryphal to me, but the fact that it is circulating and believable says just as much about Bergoglio.
The well-meaning Deacon is trying so hard to make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear; a good example of normalcy bias…..the street term would be “ostrich effect”
All this hype about someone else’s sexuality, someone else’s sin. Why,,,, YOUR mortal sin is WAY worse than OUR mortal sin. Seeing how homosexuality is approximately 8-10% of the population, much ado is always made about this minority’s actions. Magazines, newspapers, movies, internet, what have you ,promote the immorality of the majority sexuality. Adultery, promiscuity, pornography, or what licentiousness you may have. etc. etc. are much a part of everyday life for the 90-92% heterosexuals, yet so little is made concerning their own immorality. Where is the cry for celibacy, faithfulness to their partners, etc. ? All this talk about what someone else should do with their lives, not your own.
” Thank God I’m not a sinner like them” prayed the Pharisee.