July 17, 2017
Canon212.com
PewSitter.com
Phil Lawler certainly grasped immediately the obvious implication of Cardinal Schoenborn’s most recent comment on AL – and the fact that
the smarmy Schoenborn himself and the equally smarmy Ivereigh who reports his statement appear to recount this with great pride shows
both are too blinded by their Bergoglidolatry to even realize that what they are proclaiming so proudly is actually quite incredible to any
thinking Catholic!
Did Pope Francis himself wonder
whether Amoris Laetitia was orthodox?
By Phil Lawler
catholicculture.org
July 17, 2017
Pope Francis has referred to Cardinal Christoph Schönborn as the “authoritative interpreter” of Amoris Laetitia. So when the Austrian cardinal spoke to an Irish audience about the controversial papal document, people naturally paid careful attention.
According to Austen Ivereigh’s account:
Schönborn revealed that when he met the Pope shortly after the presentation of Amoris, Francis thanked him, and asked him if the document was orthodox.
“I said, ‘Holy Father, it is fully orthodox’,” Schönborn told us he told the pope, adding that a few days later he received from Francis a little note that said: “Thank you for that word. That gave me comfort.”
Assuming that it is accurate — and we have no reason to doubt that it is — Cardinal Schönborn’s anecdote presents us with an astonishing picture:
The successor to St. Peter — the man whose solemn duty it is to guard the deposit of the faith — is asking another prelate whether his own teaching is orthodox. And he is comforted to hear an affirmative answer.
More: Pope Francis consults with Cardinal Schönborn — one of his close advisers, and
a respected theologian [Is he still respected?] — and looks for assurance that his teaching is orthodox,
after the document has been issued.
[Apparently Bergoglio did not see fit to send the AL 'draft' to be reviewed by Schoenborn, whom he would then ask to present the finished product!What chutzpah on the part of Bergoglio, and what smarmy subservience on the part of Schoenborn!]
It is ordinary procedure for a Pope to draft a document and then circulate it privately among respected cardinals and theologians, asking them if they could detect any difficulties, so that inaccuracies can be corrected before promulgating the document. According to a rumor that is too widespread to be dismissed, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith submitted dozens of suggested amendments to Amoris Laetitia
[‘About 200’, it has been reported again and again, without any denial from the Vatican, whose spinmeisters do not seem to care - so they never bothered to spin it - about the implicit confirmation thereby that this pope actually ignored what the CDF had to say about AL, even he had sent them a ‘draft’ to review, i.e., this was merely pro forma and not intended to mean that whatever the CDF had to say would amount to anything more than a bucket of spit to this pope ] and they were all ignored. Of course the Holy Father has every right to accept or reject suggestions from his staff.
[His right to do that does not make it right that he totally ignores what the CDF has to say on doctrine, yet the Vatican seems to take perverse pride in this. ]
Cardinal Schönborn’s account leads toward the stunning possibility that Pope Francis was not entirely sure about the orthodoxy of Amoris Laetitia even after he released it. At the very least the fact that he could take “comfort” in Cardinal Schönborn’s reassurance tells us the Pope knew some influential prelates would find the document unsound.
JULY 18, 2017
P.S.
And you thought Schoenborn
was done with his shockers?
It turns out Cardinal Schoenborn committed an even greater offense in his Ireland talk than the one commented upon above by Phil Lawler –
which is bad enough, as it is in the same category as the literal “Is the pope Catholic?” answer that he gives in the first tweet below,
even if he may have said it ‘tongue in cheek’. Until March 13, 2013, it was simply unthinkable to ever think questions like these would be
asked about a pope.
Steve Skojec, in his commentary at 1Peter5,
onepeterfive.com/cardinal-schonborn-dubia-questions-can-answe...
shared two tweets by Greg Daly, a reported for Irish Catholic, who was present for Schoenborn’s appalling performance on July 13.
If Schoenborn says all 5 DUBIA can be answered YES, then either 1) he was not thinking when he said it, or 2) he really believes that
the answer to the first DUBIUM is really YES, completely in keeping with the Bergoglian intention all along to loosen all restrictions
on receiving the Eucharist for adulterous couples who continue to have conjugal relations and do not intend to stop doing so.
Look at the five DUBIA again, and tell me how any orthodox Catholic can answer #1 with a Yes:
1. Can the divorced and remarried who are still engaged in a sexual relationship receive absolution and communion without a change of life?
2. Do absolute moral norms still exist?
3. Does objective grave sin still exist?
4. Is the teaching still valid that however much circumstances may lessen an individual’s guilt, those circumstances cannot change an intrinsically evil act into a subjectively good act?
5. Does the Church’s teaching that an appeal to conscience cannot overcome absolute moral norms still hold true?
And yet, Schoenborn remains president of the Foundation established by the Ratzinger Schuelerkreis! If he were an honest man, he ought to have resigned from about 2012, when he first openly endorsed the homosexual lifestyle by opposing a decision by one of his parish priests to reject the election of a man in open cohabitation with another man as president of the parish council. Worse, he declared after having lunch with the ‘couple’ that he saw nothing wrong with their relationship.
Since then, of course, he has gone farther and farther afield, visiting Medjugorje with high-profile media coverage and celebrating Mass there without informing the local bishop. (Benedict XVI had to ask him to write out his apology by hand and fax it from the Vatican to the Bishop of Mostar.) And right after March 13, 2013, he completely turned his coat and became a Bergoglio sycophant, claiming to have experienced a ‘miracle’ in the Sistine Chapel at the election of the Argentine.
I do not have the words to describe the contempt I have for his insincerity and his utter dishonesty – and I came by this early enough, as I instinctively mistrusted the smarminess which comes through in all of his photographs. But this mistrust was cemented when I discovered from a book by Fr. Vincent Twomey, a genuine doctoral student of Prof Ratzinger, that Schoenborn was never really a student of Prof Ratzinger in Regensburg but had attended a semester ‘auditing’ his lectures (many universities allow persons who are not enrolled in a course to sit in and ‘audit’ or listen), as he already had his doctorate in theology from the Sorbonne at the time.
Yet all the while, since Joseph Ratzinger became pope, the news media unanimously referred to him as the new pope’s ‘most outstanding student’, not to mention ‘protégé’, without any correction issued by Schoenborn... On second thought, Schoenborn’s smarmy look and his deceptively soft manner of speaking recalls the same characteristics in his new lord and master. Whatever excellences he may have as a person, priest and pastor, I would not wish him as a pastor for anyone.
[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 19/07/2017 02:59]