The Earth's Axis Has Shifted

Cardinal Burke corrects Jesuit dissenter's errors about Synod

ROME (ChurchMilitant.com) - Last week, Jesuit priest Fr. Antonio Spadaro wrote an essay for La Civilta Cattolica saying the 2015 Synod opened the door to Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics — and now Cdl. Raymond Burke is calling him out for it.

In an article written Tuesday for the National Catholic Register, his Eminence addresses Fr. Spadaro's claim that the 2015 Synod opened a new door, saying it requires an "immediate comment" to clarify what the Synod taught. Spadaro claims the Synod introduced a new teaching on the role of conscience and the "internal forum."

In response, Cdl. Burke wrote that "several Synod Fathers affirm the opposite, that is, they affirm that the Synod upheld the constant practice of the Church." His Eminence said that despite the "lack of clarity" in paragraphs 84 and 86 of the Final Relatio, Church teaching was not contradicted. The "public declarations of the Synod Fathers" are responsible for the widespread confusion about the Synod, says Cdl. Burke.

Creating the "expectation that the Roman pontiff can saction a practice which is in conflict with the truths of the Faith" does a "most serious harm" to the Church, His Eminence explained. "The Synod of Bishops ... cannot be the instrument of such an expectation."

The orthodox prelate emphasized that the question of admiting adulterers to Holy Communion is not something the Synod has the ability to address:

The fact is that the Synod could not open a door which does not exist and cannot exist, namely a discernment in conscience which contradicts the truth about the supreme sanctity of the Most Holy Eucharist and the indissolubility of the marriage bond.

His Eminence continued, saying the idea that "conscience can be in conflict with the truth of the faith" gives a false impression, because priests can't "open a door" for the divorced and remarried. Such a door, says Cdl. Burke, "does not and cannot exist." He clarified that honest conscience and true discernment work in harmony with the truths of the Faith, not in contradiction to them:

The way of discernment upon which the priest accompanies the penitent who is living in an irregular union assists the penitent to conform his conscience once again to the truth of the Holy Eucharist and to to the truth of marriage to which he is bound. As the Church has consistently taught and practiced, the penitent is led in the "internal forum" to live chastely in fidelity to the existing marriage bond ... to be able to have access to the sacraments in a way which does not give scandal.

True to academic form, Cdl. Burke noted that Fr. Spadaro's essay requires "critical comment in longer study" to fully address its theological problems. The faithful may perhaps expect a more in-depth response in the future from the orthodox canon law expert.

To learn more about the Church's teaching on marriage, watch ChurchMilitant.com's "Remaining in the Truth of Christ: The Church on Matrimony." 

57 Prophetic Earthquakes in 24 Hours

How Much Jesus Loves

Our Lady Dishonored

Vatican, World Bank partner to launch Year of Mercy with St. Peter’s ‘climate change’ light show

ROME, December 4, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) — The Catholic Church, founded to shed the light of Christ on the world, has quite literally invited the world to shed its light on her. On December 8, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception as well as the opening of the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy, Pope Francis has invited climate-change partisans and population-control advocates to project a light show onto the façade and cupola of Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome — the most important church in the Catholic world — so as to “inspire change around the climate crisis.”

The show titled “Illuminating Our Common Home” will project onto St. Peter’s “images of our shared natural world” in order to “educate and inspire change around the climate crisis across generations, cultures, languages, religions and class,” states a press release about the event put out by one of the sponsors.

The Vatican’s spokesperson for the event, Archbishop Rino Fisichella, the president of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization, called the event “unique…for its genre and for the fact that it is being displayed for the first time on such a significant backdrop.”

“These illuminations will present images inspired of Mercy, of humanity, of the natural world, and of climate changes,” Fisichella said.

Fisichella said that the light show on the Vatican is meant to link Pope Francis’ environment encyclical Laudato si’ with the United Nations Climate Change Conference (Cop21) currently underway in Paris. The Vatican has shown strong support for the conference.  Having the show conclude the opening Year of Mercy celebrations also links the pope’s message about “mercy” to fighting “climate change.”

Life and family leaders around the world remain skeptical about the Paris conference’s alleged agenda of fighting so-called “anthropogenic” global warming, with some warning that “saving the Planet” in climate-speak translates to an anti-human enterprise that targets nations, societies, and families.

The event, billed as “contemporary public art,” is sponsored by organizations named after Greek and Roman pagan gods that push the climate change agenda and by an organization that directly funds abortions in developing countries.

Behind the show

The main financial backer behind the event is the US-led World Bank Group via its Connect4Climate initiative. The World Bank, created in 1945 to rebuild a war-torn Europe, has a long history (here, here, or here) of relentlessly funding abortion and contraception programs in developing nations under the banner of “ending extreme poverty” and “boosting shared prosperity.” Pro-life leaders have denounced the programs time and again as thinly veiled population control programs aimed at reducing populations considered by Western elites to be undesirable. The organization, through its World Bank Spiritual Unfoldment Society (SUS), also has ties to non-Christian religious practices where employees engage in transhumanistic “meditation sessions” that aim at “personal transformation through self-knowledge, understanding, and awakening higher consciousness.”

Vulcan Inc., founded in 1986 by investor and philanthropist Paul G. Allen, is a private company based out of Seattle, Washington, that “strives to create a new kind of future” by “upend[ing] conventional thinking.” The company was deliberately named after the Roman god Vulcan, the deity of destructive fire, whose earliest known shrine existed in Rome at the foot of the Capitoline Hill, close by the Vatican.

Vulcan’s website states that its founder thought the name seemed fitting for a company “whose mission was to find smart solutions for some of the world’s biggest challenges.”

Another partner of the event is Okeanos, an environmentalist foundation begun in 2007 by Dieter Paulmann with the purpose of raising awareness “concerning the various threats our oceans are facing.” The foundation focuses on “planning, financing and implementation of projects that encompass positive change and make a difference.” It rails against what it calls the “sins against climate committed by…the present generation in particular,” which include “man-made environmental pollution (oil slicks, sewage, chemicals, CO2 production)” as well as “noise pollution (overly loud ships’ engines, sonar experiments).”

The foundation is named after the Greek and Roman Titan god “Okeanos” who was held to be the divine personification of the sea whose fish in one hand and serpent in the other signified his gifts of bounty and prophecy.

Obscura Digital, the San Francisco-based organization putting on the actual show, has its name derived from the Latin root meaning “dark.” The company specializes in creating “immersive experiences that will change the way you think about the world around you” using holographic projections, 3D animation, and dynamic visualization.

Obscura’s team of artists, coders, builders, and technologists are masters of manipulation through light and sound. The organization has in the past (here and here) worked on climate change projects with the UN to show the “effect of human enterprise on the environment” and to issue a “call for global solutions.” The organization’s clients include Apple, Google, Disney, Vulcan Productions, Nike, Nasa, Facebook, and UNESCO.

Dark and forbidding symbolism

There is much dark and forbidding symbolism behind the event and the organizations sponsoring it that is bizarrely connected to pagan occult practices, the worship of nature, and human sacrifice through abortion and population control.

The show is titled “Fiat Lux: Illuminating Our Common Home.” “Fiat Lux” is the first command issued by God at the beginning of creation: “Let there be light.” Instead of the Church presenting Jesus Christ as the light of the world, secular organizations named after pagan gods are literally “obscuring” the Church through their own dazzling light show. St. Paul warns the Corinthians to be on guard about Satan who he says “masquerades as an angel of light.” It’s as if through this phrase the organizers are symbolically taking the place of God and creating the world anew according to their own image and likeness.

The light show takes place on the most important Marian feast day for Catholics, the Immaculate Conception, in which Catholics celebrate Mary being conceived in the womb of her mother Anne without the stain of original sin. Mary has always been viewed by Catholics as an archetype of the Church since she carried Christ within her as the first tabernacle and then bore him into the world. The light show will project onto St. Peter’s, a building representative of Mary, images of earth and animals on her most important feast day. It is amounts to a crude dishonoring of Our Lady.

The World Bank with its hands bloodied by abortion and population control has no place working with the Vatican on a show that allegedly will reveal to the world images of what Archbishop Fisichella called “mercy, of humanity.” This is simply sick and twisted.

The show will certainly contain many “signs and wonders,” but Catholics must decide for themselves how to interpret them.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/vatican-partners-with-world-bank-to-launch-year-of-mercy-with-climate-chang

My Comment : So now a light show in patnership with the world bank on the most important Marian feast day for Catholics, the Immaculate Conception and this onto the façade and cupola of Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome — the most important church in the Catholic world and some still ask from us more evidence ? nobody can say he did not know and the famous ! this is out of context or misinterpreted by the Church’s enemies as by medias, thank you to keep it for you, once and for all.

For your information, I am not a Fundamentalist, I am not a Traditionalist or whatever, I am not against any Pope, I have not been converted to became all that, I am a Catholic only and love my Church but mocking our Holy Mother “between the lines and de facto the most evil”, the Mother of the Church on her most important feast day, I am sorry but I can no longer remain silent and who is able of doing this ? probably the one whose head will be crushed soon.

Source: Garabandal News

The Eucharist

Pearls of Wisdom From Archbishop Fulton Sheen

“Once I surrender the tinsel to have the jewel, then I enter into the mystery of love. I see that I do not love anyone unless he has some goodness in him, or is lovable in some way. But, I see also that God did not love me because I am lovable. I became lovable because God poured some of His goodness and love into me. I then began to apply this charity to my neighbor. If I do not find him lovable, I have to put love into him as God puts love into me, and thereby I provoke the response of love. Now, my personality is restored and I make the great discovery that no one is happy until he loves both God and neighbor.” 
(Excerpt from Simple Truths)

“The story of every human life begins with birth and ends with death. In the person of Christ, however, it was his death that was first and his life that was last. The Scripture describes him as the Lamb slain as it were, from the beginning of the world. He was slain in intention by the first sin and rebellion against God. It was not so much that His birth cast a shadow on His life and thus led to his death; it was rather that the Cross was first, and cast its shadow back to His birth.” 
(Excerpt from Life of Christ)

“Holiness is like salt; its usefulness to others must begin with self. As only the wise man can impart wisdom to others, so only the saintly can communicate sanctity. A man can bring forth to others only those treasures which he already has in his own heart.” 
(Excerpt from On Being Human)

“You might say that it was very unjust of God to deprive us of friendship with Him, and of these other gifts, simply because Adam sinned. There would have been injustice if God deprived you of your due, but you are no more entitled to be a child of God than a razor has a right to bloom, or a rose has the right to bark, or a dog has the right to quote Dante. What Adam lost was gifts, not a heritage. On Christmas Day, when you distribute gifts to your friends, would I have a right to say to you: Why do you not give me a gift? You would answer: I am not doing you an injustice, because I owe you nothing. I am not obliged to give these gifts to my friends. If I had not given them gifts, I would not have deprived them of anything I owed them, So, neither did God owe us anything beyond our nature as a creature of his handiwork.” 

(Excerpt from Preface to Religion)

“If Christmas were just the birthday of a great teacher, like Socrates or Buddha, it would never have split time into two, so that all history before the advent of Christ is called B.C. and all history after, A.D.” 

(Excerpt On Being Human)

26 perfect tips for living life to the full

Take a look at these 26 simple pieces of advice. True, some of them you may not agree with, but we promise you there’s a lot here that will help you find piece of mind, food for thought, and above all, the potential to find the path to happiness.

1. Money is never wasted if you use it to have fun.
2. If you like someone, just tell them about it. What have you got to lose?
3. Live your life today, because yesterday’s gone, and there may not be a tomorrow.
4. If something isn’t clear, ask for an explanation.
5. If you want company, send an invitation.
6. If you want something, ask for it.
7. Avoid arguments when agreement can be reached.
8. If you want to be understood, explain.
9. If you’re guilty, own up and don’t look for excuses.
10. Always remember that everyone has their own truth, and it often doesn’t coincide with yours.
11. Avoid contact with fools.
12. The main thing in life is love, everything else is vanity.
13. Your problems are only in your head.
14. The world around us is neither good nor bad, it doesn’t care whether you’re there or not.
15. Try to take pleasure in everything that happens to you during your life.
16. Always remember that you won’t have another life.
17. Don’t be a pain in the neck!
18. Don’t waste your time watching TV, it’s essentially a box invented for idiots.
19. Remember that you owe no one anything.
20. Remember that no one owes you anything.
21. Don’t waste your time on politics, it will only make you bitter.
22. There’s only one person you can rely on in this life — yourself.
23. Believe not in promises but your own feelings.
24. Always be patient and a little indulgent towards children.
25. If you’re in a bad mood, think about the fact that when you leave this world, you won’t be in any mood at all.
26. Always remember that today could be the best day of your life.

Source: Brightside

How to keep your Family focused on the true meaning of Christmas

Knowing that “Advent Wreath” is the vital cardinal point to direct all thoughts to the true spirituality attached to christmas, depending on the nature and tradition of your family, the following will also be of great influence towards bringing members of your family closely knitted into one another and into the glory of Christmas. Because it seems these days like Advent becomes more and more just about shopping, decorating, partying, etc.

Let us consider the examples of various saints and how they made Christmas special and significant spiritual to uplift the glorious born Christ.

Of course, we will exchange gifts this Christmas. Consider the Magi (who are recognized as saints): Caspar, who gave the gift of gold for a king; Melchior, the gift of frankincense for a priest; and Balthasar, the gift of myrrh (a burial ointment) for the victim of sacrifice. Each gift had significance.

Also, the example of St. Nicholas (i.e. Santa Claus) (d. 352) comes to mind. One story tells of a widower who had three daughters. He was going to sell them into prostitution since he could not afford the necessary dowries for their marriages. St. Nicholas heard of the daughters’ plight and decided to help. During the night, he went to their home and tossed a bag of gold coins through an open window, thereby supplying the money for a proper dowry for the oldest daughter. For the next two nights, he did the same. The gift was needed and had benefit.

So, when thinking of gift giving, limit the number of gifts, maybe to three, like the Magi. Some children receive so much they are overwhelmed. They neither appreciate all that they have received nor remember who even gave the gift. Give a gift that has significance: For example, consider the lasting value and memory of a crucifix or a children’s Bible. Give a gift that is needed: Who really needs a Chia Pet? Give a gift that has benefit. Also, parents need to teach children about giving to others; for example, buying a toy for the poor or sending a donation.

Then at some point, the family will decorate the tree. Recall the story of St. Boniface (d. 754), a Benedictine from England who was a missionary to the German people. He had heard about the people of Geismar: They would gather on what would be for Christians Christmas Eve at the sacred oak tree of their god, Thor. They believed the blood of a sacrificed child would nourish the tree, and Thor would bless them with an abundant harvest and fertile livestock. So, St. Boniface made his way to the village of Geismar and the sacred oak. He arrived as the sacrifice was about to take place. As the pagan priest was offering his incantations and was about to bring the hammer of Thor on the poor child’s head, St. Boniface stepped forward and with his bishop’s crozier whacked the priest. He then said, “Tonight there will be no shedding of blood. Instead, tonight Jesus, the true God, was born, who shed His blood so that we might live.” St. Boniface then took an ax and struck the sacred oak, splitting it in two. Behind it, was a fir tree. St. Boniface said, “Here is our sacred tree — its leaves are evergreen to remind us of the everlasting life Christ has promised us; the branches point toward heaven, reminding us that our hearts should also be pointed toward heaven.” They then cut down the fir tree, took it to the village, and decorated it with lit candles to remind them of the stars that shone so brightly that first Christmas Eve. Recount this story, and look upon the Christmas tree at home as a symbol of the everlasting life we hope to share through our faith in Jesus Christ.

Then, a creche will be placed under the Christmas tree. Here one can recall the beautiful story of St. Francis of Assisi (d. 1225). In 1223, St. Francis, a deacon, was visiting the town of Grecio to celebrate Christmas. To make midnight Mass special, St. Francis borrowed an ox, an ass, and sheep from a farmer and set up a manger; he also included statues of St. Joseph and the Blessed Mother along with a borrowed baby doll to serve as Jesus.

Later, after reading the Gospel at midnight Mass, St. Francis knelt at the Nativity scene. He picked up the baby doll, as the choir sang “Puer Natus,” (The Child is Born). Everyone said a miracle occurred — the baby doll came alive, and St. Francis actually held Baby Jesus. The miracle lasted only a few moments; when St. Francis placed Baby Jesus back in the crib, only the baby doll remained.

Would it not be wonderful to hold Baby Jesus at Christmas? Here is a suggestion: Set up the creche (except waiting to place Baby Jesus there until Christmas). After dinner, gather around the creche. Each member of the family can then recall a good deed or sacrifice done that day, and then place a piece of straw in the creche; or write the good deed on a piece of paper and place it in the creche. Then, on Christmas Day, Baby Jesus will have a home filled with the love of our good works and sacrifices, and we in turn will have hearts filled with His love. Remember, too, one of the best “good deeds” would be to make a good confession and to receive absolution.

Lastly, decorate a window with one or three candles (electric ones for safety). This practice arose during the British persecution in Ireland, especially during the Tudor and Stuart periods. The British conquerors were Protestant, and the Irish people were Catholic; therefore, to subjugate the Irish people, the British had to crush their religion and their church. Mass was outlawed. Catholic children were forbidden to receive an education. Priests were exiled and, if caught ministering in Ireland, were executed.

Nevertheless, the faithful persevered. The Catholic faith kept the Irish strong. Priests secretly ministered to the people, traveling circuits and offering Mass on “Mass rocks” in open fields. Hiding behind hedges, which provided easy lookout and escape, schoolmasters educated the children. And so, the Irish people held true to their faith and culture. Many died as martyrs.

During Christmas, every faithful Irish Catholic family hoped to have a priest visit their home so that they could receive the sacraments and, in return, offer him hospitality. So, they would leave their doors unlocked and place candles in the windows to signal a priest that he was welcome and would be safe. Sometimes, a single candle would appear, for the Holy Family, or three candles in one window, one each for Jesus, Mary and Joseph. If the British soldiers asked about the candles, the faithful responded, “Our doors are unlocked and candles burn in our windows at Christmas, so that our Blessed Mother Mary, St. Joseph, and Baby Jesus, looking for a place to lodge, will find their way to our homes and be welcomed with open hearts.” The British would just scoff, considering this display just another sign of superstitious popery.

Here is a great opportunity to evangelize. Place a single candle or three candles in one window. Someone will ask, “Why?” Tell that person the story. Keep in mind our persecution comes not only from the commercialization of Christmas, but also from the anti-Christian “political correctness” that surrounds us. We need to be the light that penetrates the darkness. Pray also for our brothers and sisters who are terribly persecuted in Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, and other countries; they need our support.

So, a few ways to prepare this Advent looking to the example of the saints. May the presence of the newborn Savior be in all our hearts and homes this Christmas.

Source: Straight Answers about the Catholic Faith by Father William P. Saunders

Ave Maria

Avé María, grátia pléna, Dóminus técum. 

Benedícta tu in muliéribus, et benedíctus frúctus véntris túi, Iésus.

Sáncta María, Máter Déi, óra pro nóbis peccatóribus, 

nunc et in hóra mórtis nóstrae. 

Ámen.

Papal critics threatened with excommunication as "Year of Mercy" begins

Archbishop Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, has stirred controversy by suggesting that some criticisms of Pope Francis might result in automatic excommunication.

Archbishop Fisichella made his remarks while explaining how Pope Francis’s new “Missionaries of Mercy” will operate. The 800 “missionaries” will have the power to absolve from penalties previously reserved to the Holy See.

In reference to Canon 1370, which imposes automatic excommunication for “physical violence” against the Roman Pontiff, Archbishop Fisichella said:

“I would say that we need to understand well ‘physical violence,’ because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.”

Archbishop Fisichella’s comments will be interpreted by many as an attempt to silence faithful Catholics who are deeply concerned by the direction currently being taken by those who hold offices at the highest levels of the Church. Serious concerns have been raised over the last two and half years concerning:

• The alleged manipulation of the 2014 Extraordinary Synod and the 2015 Ordinary Synod 
• The publication of a heterodox Relatio Synodi of the Extraordinary Synod
• The publication of a heterodox Instrumentum Laboris for the Ordinary Synod
• The publication of a heterodox Relazione Finale of the Ordinary Synod
• The radical reforms to the canonical procedures governing declaration of nullity of marriage
• The open collaboration between the Holy See and leading global advocates of population control
• The confusing remarks made by the Holy Father about who is able to receive Holy Communion
• The confusing remarks made by the Holy Father about the relationship between condoms and AIDS
• The confusing remarks and actions of the Holy Father on the subject of homosexuality
• The endorsement, by official bodies of the Holy See, of pro-abortion, pro-contraception UN Sustainable Development Goals
• The endorsement of the environmental agenda in the encyclical letter Laudato Si, without sufficient recognition of the profound connection between environmentalism and the population control movement
• The public association of Laudato Si with the most radical elements of the environmental/population control movement and dissent from the doctrine of Humanae Vitae
• The appointment, promotion or elevation to ecclesiastical offices or to positions of influence, by the Holy Father, of many openly heterodox prelates including, but not limited to: Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, Archbishop Blaise Cupich, Godfried Cardinal Danneels, John Cardinal Dew, Walter Cardinal Kasper, Bishop Heiner Koch, Reinhard Cardinal Marx, Vincent Cardinal Nichols, Christoph Cardinal Schönborn and Donald Cardinal Wuerl.

In the face of these and other scandals Catholics have not only the right but also the duty to offer respectful, but forceful, criticism. This grave duty is outlined in Canons 211 and 212 of the Code of Canon Law:

Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.

Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

Voice of the Family is confident that Catholics at every level of the Church will continue to fulfil their duty of defending the Catholic faith throughout the “Year of Mercy” and during the years ahead.

Canonist to Vatican archbishop: No, Church law doesn’t excommunicate papal critics

December 7, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – A controversy launched by Vatican Archbishop Rino Fisichella over the possibility of automatic excommunication for those who, the archbishop claims, use words as “physical violence” against the pope, has been answered by well-known canonist Edward Peters.

In a blog post today, Peters says Fisichella “was speaking in the context of faculties to absolve from automatic excommunications, and as there is an automatic excommunication against those who employ physical force against the pope (1983 CIC 1370 § 1), I am guessing that Fisichella might be thinking that ‘harsh language’ against the pope is a canonical crime that makes one liable to excommunication. If so, he is mistaken.”

STORY: Papal critics threatened with excommunication as Year of Mercy begins

Archbishop Fisichella made his remarks at a Vatican press briefing while explaining how Pope Francis’s new “Missionaries of Mercy” will have the power to forgive penalties previously reserved to the Holy See.  In reference to Canon 1370, which imposes automatic excommunication for “physical violence” against the Roman Pontiff, Archbishop Fisichella said: “I would say that we need to understand well ‘physical violence,’ because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.”

Peters points out that Canon 18 “requires penal canons to be read strictly (i.e., as narrowly as reasonably possible).” He notes that  Canon 1370 criminalizes ‘vim physicam’ against the pope, not ‘verba aspera’ or variants thereon, and I know of no canonical commentary that includes ‘words’ as a species of ‘physical force’ in this context.” Rather, Peters points to four canon law commentaries which all “expressly exclude ‘verbal violence’ from the range of actions penalized under Canon 1370.”

See Dr. Ed Peters' full blog post here or see below.

Most words are not crimes

December 7, 2015

I am not sure what Archbishop Rino Fisichella meant when he saidthat “we need to understand well ‘physical violence’ [against the pope] because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.” Yes, we do need to understand the terms of law well but, as the prelate was speaking in the context of faculties to absolve from automatic excommunications, and as there is an automatic excommunication against those who employ physical force against the pope (1983 CIC 1370 § 1), I am guessing that Fisichella might be thinking that ‘harsh language’ against the pope is a canonical crime that makes one liable to excommunication. If so, he is mistaken.

Besides Canon 17 that requires canons to be understood in accord with the proper meaning of their words, and Canon 18 that requires penal canons to be read strictly (i.e., as narrowly as reasonably possible), and Canon 221 § 3 that protects the faithful against canonical penalties notauthorized by law, the whole of Book Six of the 1983 Code is redolent with an emphasis (some might say, to an exaggerated degree) on benignity in the application of penalties in the Church.

Now, Canon 1370 criminalizes “vim physicam” against the pope, not “verba aspera” or variants thereon, and I know of no canonical commentary that includes “words” as a species of “physical force” in this context. Indeed, the CLSA New Commentary, the Exegetical Commentary, the Ancora Commentary, and the Urbaniana Commentary—at which point I stopped looking—expressly exclude‘verbal violence’ from the range of actions penalized under Canon 1370.

To be sure, hateful speech directed against any one is objectively sinful, and if directed against a man of God, let alone a pope, it is especially wrong. Occasionally, speech might rise to level of crime (see e.g., Canon 1369 on expressing insults against the Church or Canon 1373 on inciting animosity against the Apostolic See) but the penalties in such cases are not automatic and do not extend to excommunication. Usually, verbal hate is just a sin (if I may put it that way) not a crime.

Priests may be assured, then, that if penitents confess uttering hateful words against the Holy Father, they may reconcile such sinners in the normal course of the sacrament and need invoke no special faculties or powers to absolve of sin or (non-existent) crime.

Et poenae latae sententiae delendae sunt.

Source: Canon Law Blog

The Pope is only infallible when speaking on faith and morals, ex cathedra

Anyone who speaks critically of the Pope is not risking their immortal soul

Some years ago now, I used to sit in the aula of the Gregorian University and listen to the lectures of Don Rino Fisichella, a Roman priest, who lectured on the credibility of Revelation. He was a stimulating lecturer, though he sometimes got carried away, I seem to remember.

He is now an Archbishop and in charge of the New Evangelisation, and he seems to have got carried away again, suggesting that to criticise the Pope is the equivalent of a physical attack on him, which carries the penalty of automatic excommunication. In fact, a distinguished canon lawyer explains that this is simply not the case.

The Church has been here before. In the period of the Italian Risorgimento, the Piedmontese state made war on the Papal States, eventually driving the Pope out of Rome and making him the prisoner in the Vatican.

This act of unprovoked aggression (which was supported by Britain, sadly) led to a canonical debate: was this an assault on the person of the Holy Father, and if so, by whom, and who was excommunicated as a result? Minimalists thought that King Victor Emmanuel and Camillo Cavour, who had led the war on the Pope, were excommunicated; maximalists took the view that anyone who made common purpose with them, which included the common soldiers and most of the Italian population, were also excommunicated.

One thing is for sure: Cavour and Victor Emmanuel were both reconciled to the Church on their deathbeds. They both knew that to die excommunicated from the Catholic Church was to imperil their immortal souls, and so were taking no chances. It is said (at least Augustus Hare reports it in his Walks in Rome) that the Blessed Pius IX himself wished to rush to the deathbed of King Victor Emmanuel, to reconcile him personally, but was forcibly prevented by the Jesuits from doing so. It may not be true, but it is certainly a good story.

So, it is nice to know that anyone who speaks critically of the Pope is not risking their immortal soul and excommunication latae sententiae. But perhaps Archbishop Fisichella’s remarks are a defensive reaction to the rising tide of criticism directed at the Holy Father. If so, this anxiety is surely misdirected. The Pope has asked for bold speaking, or parrhesia. Moreover, the Pope is a Jesuit, that is a member of a religious order, in which fraternal correction is quite usual. It is surely in this light that matters like this open letter to the Holy Father should be read.

But how can someone who is infallible be subject to fraternal correction, you might well ask? But to ask that is to presuppose a maximalist position on Papal infallibility that many attribute to the Church, but which the Church has never held. The Pope is only infallible when speaking on faith and morals, ex cathedra. He is not infallible when speaking, for example, on economic matters, or scientific matters such as climate change.

It is perfectly acceptable for a good Catholic to interrogate the words of the Pope that are uttered in non-ex cathedra situations, whether it be mid-air press conferences, or unrecorded interviews published by nonagenarian journalists, as well as that now notorious Christmas address to the Roman Curia.

Source: Catholic Herald