, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sobieski at Vienna 2

Today Deus Ex Machina has a Polish theme. But first a few introductory comments are in order.

We start with Cardinal George’s interview, sections of the interview appear on the Rorate Caeli blog (see here). I would have written about it earlier, however I try not to visit nor promote blogs that are propagandistic in nature, whose political editorial line promote Error. Therefore, I have a deep appreciation for the RC blog since they sift through the manure so that I do not have to.

Next and incidentally, how does cd. George fit into the Polish theme, you may ask dear reader? It’s simple. Cardinal George is archbishop of Chicago. Chicago historically has been known as Poland’s “second city”, also. Historically, more individuals of Polish descent lived in Chicago than any other city outside of Warsaw. So that is the explanation.

Now let’s go to the subject at hand. There were a couple of interesting features in the cd. George interview that need to be pointed out. On a ‘bigger picture’ level, here are the key points starting from lesser importance: (reproduced with emphasis and [comments])

Creating Expectation:

Cd. George states:
It’s [the Who am I to judge? faux pas] created expectations around him that he can’t possibly meet. That’s what worries me. At a certain moment, people who have painted him as a bit player in their scenarios about changes in the Church will discover that’s not who he is. He’s not going in that direction. Then he’ll perhaps get not only disillusionment, but opposition that could be harmful to the effectiveness of his magisterium.

This paragraph is interesting in that it sends a clear message to Francis, namely “you can be as innovative as you like”, but the risk is that your body of “teaching” (and I use the term loosely) will be thrown onto the trash heap of history. Now cd. George suggests that the ‘throwers’ could be the special interests that Francis is promoting, but the implication is that he or his novelties will be terminated once a non-ideological successor ascends to the Throne of St. Peter. In a similar fashion as Francis is doing with the “teachings” of JP II and B XVI. Please keep in mind dear reader that cd. Burke still in not quite sure what Evangelii Gaudium is.

In support of the above contention, the interviewer notices the following:

You’ve now mentioned twice things you’d like to ask the pope. It sounds to me as if you’d really like to have some face time with him.

I bet the good cardinal would like to have a friendly chat with the bishop of Rome. Here cd. George is offering fraternal “help”, which is what a cardinal is appointed for in the first place.

Truth and Error:

Cd. George states:
The differences are becoming so wide within the Church, the division so stark, we are not talking anymore about “liberals” or “conservatives” or left and right, but about what is true and what is false, about those who are faithful or unfaithful to the Magisterium.

Even though cd. George did not use the word “Error”, the word “false” is as close as it gets. With this statement, cd. George is sending a message to Francis that he could be “interpreted” as teaching Error. And if this is the case, then please refer to the above point.

Furthermore, we can add this statement to the list of maxims that will underpin the upcoming struggle for the Church as we know it. These words spoken by cd. George were just as clear as were cd. Burke’s Twelve Words spoken in Limrick.(see here)

Calling out Francis to clarify:

Cd. George states:
The question is raised, why doesn’t he himself clarify these things? Why is it necessary that apologists have to bear that burden of trying to put the best possible face on it? Does he not realize the consequences of some of his statements, or even some of his actions? Does he not realize the repercussions? Perhaps he doesn’t. I don’t know whether he’s conscious of all the consequences of some of the things he’s said and done that raise these doubts in people’s minds.

The importance of this paragraph is that another cardinal-elector has called out Francis to clarify. Please bear in mind that cd. George is only 77 years old, and has a 50/50 chance of surviving his illness. If the good Lord allows, he will be a cardinal elector at the next conclave.

And now to Poland proper.

Archbishop Gadecki, President of the Polish Episcopal Conference gave an interview recently that Rorate Caeli also has reproduced, with translation on its blog (see here). Before I go into what the good bishop said, it must be pointed out that the issue of aberro-sexual unions was never mentioned directly. The only reference to them was in what bp. Gadecki called the “controversial points discussed at the Synod”. The reason that I mention this is to demonstrate just how low priority this issue is in the Polish reality.

But let’s get back to what bishop Gadecki did say. The key points raised are these:

Germany is the problem

Bp Gadecki states:
Abp. Gądecki explained that the postulate of allowing Communion for divorced and living in new relationships was raised by the Synod mainly on the initiative of German and South American circles. In Germany, in practice, nobody goes to confession any more, yet everybody (including divorced) proceeds to receive Holy Communion.
In South America, on the other hand, the problem is that people who are divorced and living in new relationships often join sects, where they receive communion and blessing. This is one of the important reasons of such strong development of sects on this continent. Such situation creates a pressure on South American bishops to somewhat oppose this process. [Way too simplistic of an explanation and made to order for the German hierarchy.]

By pointing the finger at Germany, and their vassal bishops’ conferences in South America, he is highlighting that the problem with the orthodox Catholic moral teaching is very restricted to a narrow “special interest group” who are promoting these positions. And the support of these positions leads directly to the Kirchensteuer (see here) which funds the German church and by extension the churches in the South American countries. A German re-conquista in all intents and purposes.

Modern Times do not excuse changing moral teaching

Bp. Gadecki states:
This prohibition was transmitted to us by Christ in conditions equally difficult as today, perhaps even more difficult, because pagans converting to Christianity had even more irregular marital situations, also with respect to marriages between close relatives.

Therefore, stressed Abp. Gądecki, holding onto the Tradition of the Church, also clearly explained in the Catechism, there is no possibility of absolution and Holy Communion for a person who is in a situation of divorce and who remains in a new relationship. There is no possibility of such a change of the doctrine of the Church which would admit other solutions, even restricting them to specific cases. This is especially true if one is aware that exceptions would soon become a rule. The Archbishop of Poznań informed [journalists] that in the eyes of bishops from many regions of the world, e.g. from central and eastern Europe, this [such change] would be absolutely unthinkable.

Abp. Gądecki explained that one cannot be guided only by sociological categories, because the Church does not come to the truth by consensus, one or another, but [the Church] is obliged to be faithful to the doctrine. Any “positive” solution to this problem would only serve as a “smoothing down” of the sociological situation existing in some countries, for example in Germany. [Called out by name. And this is from an Episcopate that has taken advantage of the German church’s generosity on more than one occasion in the past.]

This argument directly undercuts the Kasperian “theology of mercy done on the knees.” Bp. Gadecki says that if divorced and remarried want to receive communion, they should abstain from conjugal relations. But changing teaching is a dead end, as is clear from the phenomenon that we have highlighted here, that goes by the euphemism “the new springtime”. Besides, this is a show stopper because for the Poles and “many regions of the world, e.g. from central and eastern Europe”, this solution is VERBOTEN.

Protect the Children.

Bp. Gadecki states:
This survey [pre-Shameful Secret Synod survey], he added, demonstrated that the crisis of marriage and family is not only a Polish issue, but it is something extensive and affecting all continents. The percentage of divorces and the number of children harmed by this are frightening.

Abp. Gądecki also stressed that if we put the main emphasis on the mercy to divorced parents, then the welfare of their children will be ignored. One cannot pursue happiness at the expense of the child. He added that the rights of children should be placed first, according to the principle that we are obliged to defend in the first place the rights of the weak, and such are the children.

Here the bishop is not so much highlighting the hypocrisy of Francis’s “theology of mercy done on the knees” (loves the pew sitter who throws the Euro’s into the collection plate, but ignore the consequences on the children) but is instead playing to the domestic audience. Poland in general and the Polish Catholic Church in particular are presently under assault from “genderology”. The present government is promoting ‘gender’ programs now even at the level of elementary education. Funding for these initiatives come from European Union and United Nations funding as well as the private foundations of the George Soros variety. Given the situation on the ground, “child welfare” message is one that resonates in Poland and could resonate well in the wider Church.

Truth and Error Again!:

Bp. Gadecki
Answering a question of one of the journalists asking if he has changed his line, because in the past he seemed to be a representative of the liberal part of the Episcopate, Abp. Gądecki answered that the categories of “liberal” and “conservative” have been borrowed from the political domain, yet when transferred to the religious domain they do not describe the reality of the Church correctly. In the ecclesiastical order there is no such things as “liberal” or “conservative” approach to the faithfulness to the Magisterium of the Church. At most, one can be faithful to the Tradition of the Church or one can be unfaithful.

And here we see the convergence of messages of the Polish Episcopate and the US Episcopate. And as we know from Sandro Magister’s interview, the US bishops’ positions are “coherent and combative” (see here). So with these words, bishop Gadecki, speaking on behalf of the entire Polish Episcopate is giving a strong signal to Francis that his actions could fall into Error.

And on a final note of interest is the phenomenon whereby “liberal” bishops like Gadecki have had a real eye opening experience with the advent of the church of Francis. This is something that is an observable phenomenon presently not only in Poland but in other national churches. Think Italy and the Italian Bishops’ Conference abuse of Bruno ‘slippery as an eel’ Forte. (see here)

And finally, I will end this post with some more good news from Poland.

Wroclaw 3

On October 25th, a Pontifical Mass was offered by His Grace Marian Gołębiewski, Archbishop Emeritus of Wroclaw, at the Sanctuary of St Hedwig in Trzebnica, Poland. Wroclaw (pre-war Breslau) and the Lower Silesia region of Poland is turning into quite a hotbed of the Restoration movement in Poland. But that’s for a future post. Below is the link to the event courtesy of the New Liturgical Movement blog. Enjoy (see here)