| | | OFFLINE | | Post: 31.990
Post: 14.076 | Registrato il: 28/08/2005
Registrato il: 20/01/2009 | Administratore | Utente Gold | |
|
If I could, I would repeat this post, which I first made on the previous page, as many times as I can to call attention to Cardinal Eijk's courageous words to
describe what is happening in the church of Bergoglio - which in effect, is what he has caused to happen to the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church that
he was elected to lead. The Dutch cardinal's words, unfortunately, have so far has met with far less interest than the Four Cardinals' DUBIA when these were first
made known. The silence so far from the Bergoglio camp is ominous - who knows what the totalitarian tyrant in Casa Santa Marta has in mind for Cardinal Eijk? -
but the silence from the Catholic commentators who must share the cardinal's views is very disheartening.
Nevertheless, read Cardinal Eijk again and again - and weep for the Church and what Bergoglio has done to her. But take heart, too, that there is still someone
in the Church like Cardinal Eijk who sees and says things for what they are. And pray that many more like him will break their unholy silence to speak out
and denounce every chance they can the various apostasies from truth that are taking place in this pontificate and led by the pope himself.
Felicitations to Cardinal Eijk for this most unexpected intervention, in which he goes straight to the point and does not bother with pro forma courtesies
towards the pope when enunciating what he sees as a clear error on the part of the reigning pope. He gets my vote for the first badge of courage - for being as
straightforward as he is orthodox - earned by a cardinal since the start of this pontificate. He does not frame his conclusion as a DUBIUM, but as a clear
assertion that Bergoglio's shirking from making a decision on inter-communion is a form of 'apostasy' (the term I myself have always favored over 'heresy'
to characterize Bergoglio's anti-Catholic words and actions)... Will there be more like him? And what retribution might he expect from Casa Santa Marta for
his laudable parrhesia?
Pope ought to have given
clarity on inter-communion
Failure to give German bishops proper directives based on the clear doctrine
and practice of the Church, points to a drift from the truth towards apostasy
by Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk
Archbishop of Utrecht
The Netherlands
May 7, 2018
The German bishops’ conference voted by a large majority in favor of directives which entail that a Protestant married to a Catholic may receive the Eucharist after meeting a number of conditions:
- he must have carried out an examination of conscience with a priest or with another person with pastoral responsibilities;
- he must have affirmed the faith of the Catholic Church, as well as having wished to put an end to “serious spiritual distress” and to have a “desire to satisfy a longing for the Eucharist.”
Seven members of the German bishops’ conference voted against these directives and sought the opinion of some dicasteries of the Roman Curia. The consequence was that a delegation from the German bishops’ conference spoke in Rome with a delegation from the Roman Curia, including the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The response of the Holy Father, given through the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to the delegation of the German Conference, that the Conference should discuss the drafts again and try to achieve a unanimous result, if possible, is completely incomprehensible. The Church’s doctrine and practice regarding the administration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist to Protestants is perfectly clear. The Code of Canon Law says about this:
“If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.” C.I.C./1983, can. 844 § 4 (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) no. 1400).
This therefore applies only to emergencies, especially where there is a risk of death.
Inter-communion is, in principle, only possible with Orthodox Christians, because the Eastern Churches, although not in full communion with the Catholic Church, have true sacraments and above all, by virtue of their apostolic succession, a valid priesthood and a valid Eucharist (CCC no 1400, C.I.C./1983 can. 844, § 3). Their faith in the priesthood, in the Eucharist, and also in the Sacrament of Penance is equal to that of the Catholic Church.
However, Protestants do not share faith in the priesthood and the Eucharist. Most German Protestants are Lutheran. Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, which implies the conviction that, in addition to the Body or Blood of Christ, bread and wine are also present when someone receives them. If someone receives the bread and wine without believing this, the Body and Blood of Christ are not really present. Outside this moment of receiving them, there remains only the bread and wine, and the body and blood of Christ are not present.
Obviously, the Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation differs essentially from the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which implies the faith that what is received under the figures of bread and wine, even if administered to someone who does not believe in transubstantiation and even outside the moment of administration, remains the Body or Blood of Christ and that it is no longer the substances of bread and wine.
Because of these essential differences, communion should not be administered to a Protestant, even if married to a Catholic, because the Protestant does not live in full communion with the Catholic Church and, therefore, does not explicitly share faith in her Eucharist.
The differences between faith in consubstantiation and that of transubstantiation are so great that one must really demand that someone who wishes to receive Communion explicitly and formally enters into full communion with the Catholic Church (except in case of danger of death) and in this way explicitly confirms his acceptance of the faith of the Catholic Church, including the Eucharist.
A private examination of conscience with a priest or with another person with pastoral responsibilities does not give sufficient guarantees that the person involved really accepts the faith of the Church. By accepting it [the Eucharist], the person can, however, do only one thing: enter into full communion with the Catholic Church.
The draft directives of the German bishops' conference suggest there are only a few cases of Protestants, married to Catholics, who would like to receive Communion by making use of these directives. However, experience shows that in practice these numbers will generally increase. Protestants who are married to Catholics and see other Protestants married to Catholics receiving Communion will think they can do the same. And in the end even Protestants unmarried to Catholics will want to receive it. The general experience with this type of adjustment is that the criteria are quickly extended.
Now the Holy Father has informed the delegation of the German episcopal conference that it must discuss again the draft proposals for a pastoral document on, among other things, administering Communion, and try to find unanimity. Unanimity about what?
Assuming that all members of the German bishops’ conference, after having discussed them again, unanimously decide that Communion can be administered to Protestants married to a Catholic (something that will not happen), will this — while being contrary to what the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church say in this regard — become the new practice in the Catholic Church in Germany?
The practice of the Catholic Church, based on her faith, is not determined and does not change statistically when a majority of an episcopal conference votes in favor of it, not even if unanimously.
What the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church say should have been the response of the Holy Father, who is, as the Successor of Saint Peter “the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and of the faithful” (Lumen Gentium no. 23).
- The Holy Father should have given the delegation of the German episcopal conference clear directives, based on the clear doctrine and practice of the Church.
- He should have also responded on this basis to the Lutheran woman who asked him on November 15, 2015 if she could receive Communion with her Catholic spouse, saying that this is not acceptable - instead of suggesting she could receive Communion on the basis of her being baptized, and in accordance with her conscience.
By failing to create clarity, great confusion is created among the faithful and the unity of the Church is endangered.
This is also the case with cardinals who publicly propose to bless homosexual relationships, something which is diametrically opposed to the doctrine of the Church, founded on Sacred Scripture, that marriage, according to the order of creation, exists only between a man and a woman.
Observing that the German bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter, fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“The Church’s ultimate trial
Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”
+Willem Jacobus Cardinal Eijk
Archbishop of Utrecht, Netherlands
Utrecht, 5 May 2018
Not surprisingly, Aldo Maria Valli is one of the few who have reacted strongly to Cardinal Eijk's statement:
Words to shake you up
Translated from
May 10, 2018
Observing that the German bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter, fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“The Church’s ultimate trial
Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”
It’s useless to ignore or hide the fact. The words of Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk, archbishop of Utrecht, should shake up any faithful Catholic. His Eminence speaks openly of apostasy and not on the basis of vague considerations but of a concrete fact. The problem has to do with intercommunion between Protestants and Catholics in Germany.
[Valli goes on to quote substantially from the cardinal's statement.]
His conclusion is dramatic: [Valli goes on to repeat the paragraph with which he opened this commentary.]
The question of intercommunion may seem very technical, reserved only for specialists and far from questions that actually touch the faith. But that is not so. Because it is the Eucharist that is in question – which is the very heart of the faith. And if a cardinal ends up using such strong words, speaking openly of the risk of apostasy, it means that the situation is truly grave.
Indeed, the cardinal asks – and asks it of the entire Church - whether we are not now witnessing the great apostasy which, with persecution, the Catholic faithful must face “on earth... the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth". That any Catholic should ask this is one thing, but if the doubt is publicly expressed by a cardinal, then it assumes the magnitude that it has.
As Cardinal Eijk reminds us, already in November 2015, while visiting the Lutheran Church in Rome, the pope was unable to give a clear answer to a Lutheran woman’s question on inter-communion, using extremely confused and confusing statements which in the end meant “maybe yes, maybe no, but do what you think best”. [Which is the best definition of Bergoglian equivocation, the everything-is-OK indifference of someone totally subject to the dictatorship of relativism.]
There are so many ways to speak of apostasy at the top of the Church hierarchy, such as that of Bruno Cornacciola, the seer of the Tre Fontane visions in Rome (“The entire Church will undergo a tremendous trial in order to cleanse the carname that has infiltrated her priests… Priests and faithful will be at a dangerous turning point in the world of the damned which will use any means in its assault – false ideologies and theologies”) and that of LaSallette (“The Church will undergo a terrible crisis. She will be eclipsed. Rome will lose the faith to the point of becoming the seat of the Anti-Christ”).
Already, the day after AL was published, Cardinal Eijk denounced it in these words: “People are confused, and this is not right. The apostolic exhortation has generated doubts that need to be clarified… (because) on the matter of the possibility of access to the Eucharist by remarried divorcees, what is true in one place cannot be wrong in another”. Yet that’s what has been happening.
What has been called “the practical weakening’ of the sacraments by this pope, “carried out for pastoral reasons of ‘mercy’ and ‘welcoming’ (see Roberto Pertici’s essay on Sandro Magister’s blog [link]) is very much in progress.
But what will this lead to? What else is needed to complete "religious deception that offers men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth”?
Once again, I am truly grateful to Cardinal Eijk and all others who like me have been using the word 'apostasy' rather than 'heresy' to describe what Bergoglio is committing!
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 11/05/2018 12:25] |