Posted on 10/24/2011 10:01:03 AM PDT by KOZ.
In a scenario which will surely strike some as deja vu, the liberal jesuit Fr. Tom Reese previewed the contents of the document last week, in much the same way that the liberal jesuit Fr. Charles Curran “previewed” Humanae Vitae for the mainstream media before the document was actually released (the pope overruled Fr. Curran’s claims that the Church would endorse contraception — but the media had already made up its mind and few bothered to actually read what the pope had to say).
Here’s Fr. Reese on MSNBC “explaining” the news:
Notice that Fr. Reese does NOT correct the news anchor that this document comes from a vatican congregation — not the pope! Fr. Reese seems perfectly happy to help the mainstream media fundamentally misunderstand the authority of teaching this document enjoys. He claims that the pope has “more in common with the people at occupy wallstreet” than the tea party, even though he has to immediately walk back that claim when it is pointed out to him how violent (and anti-Catholic!) the Occupy Rome demonstrations were (as I blogged about last week). I think it’s no surprise that Fr. Reese spends so much time talking about the 60′s — that’s still his cultural frame of reference.
Rather than get into the nitty-gritty of the 18-page document (which I may do at a later point), let me focus on the most important point: framing. Here’s how Cardinal Turkson, President of the Congregation for Justice and Peace, and Bishop Toso, the secretary, explained how the document should be received and read (underlining mine):
>> …It is in this spirit of discernment that the Holy See, with the note of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, wishes to make a contribution which might be useful to the deliberations of the G-20 meeting”.
>> Bishop Toso explained that the aim of the note is “suggest possible paths to follow, in line with the most recent social Magisterium, for the implementation of financial and monetary policies…”
>> The Church does not wish to enter into the technical issues behind the current economic crisis, but remains within the ambit of her religious and ethical functions…
I have nothing to immediately add to that, because the very authors of the document make clear how it should be evaluated: namely, as a “contribution” (as opposed to a mandate), as a “possible path” (as opposed to a moral proscription), in line with the Magisterium’s social teaching (as opposed to introducing a new teaching), without getting into the technical issues (because the Church is an expert in humanity, not economics) while fully staying within the Church’s religious and ethical functions.
Liberal Catholic routinely (and in this case) try to read the Church’s social teaching as dogmatic while choosing to view the Church’s moral and religious teaching as optional. In fact, the Church herself is always careful to make clear that her moral and religious teaching is dogmatic and binding while her social teaching –and particularly her economic teaching– is exhortative and prudential.
With those extremely important guidelines in mind, we can more fruitfully read the text.
That said, I am absolutely sure the media cycle for the coming days and weeks will totally miss all these key points and distill this document down to misleading statements such as “Pope Benedict Endorses Central World Bank.” But as I explain above, he didn’t.
Fr. Reese and his liberal Catholic friends would be better served acting as messengers of the Church’s teaching as opposed to creators of it.
The Pope appoints each individual within this group. And accordingly speak on his behalf.
As an organism 'of the Holy See', the Council is first and foremost at the service of the Holy Father and also collaborates with other departments of the 'Roman Curia.' (see below)
Because of the interest of the Holy See in the work of the United Nations, the Pontifical Council, in collaboration with the Secretariat of State, has frequent contacts with ‘the United Nations’ and its ‘specialized agencies’, especially at the time of the major international conferences.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_pro_20011004_en.html THE ROMAN CURIA In exercising supreme, full, and immediate power in the ‘universal Church’, the Roman pontiff makes use of the departments of the Roman Curia which,... therefore,... perform their duties ‘in his name’ and ‘with his authority’ for the good of the churches and in the service of the sacred pastors. CHRISTUS DOMINUS, 9 http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/index.htm
What???? Think your mistaken they have no authority...look again from the Vatican site...
The Pope appoints each individual within this group. And accordingly speak on his behalf.
As an organism ‘of the Holy See’, the Council is first and foremost at the service of the Holy Father and also collaborates with other departments of the ‘Roman Curia.’ (see below)
Because of the interest of the Holy See in the work of the United Nations, the Pontifical Council, in collaboration with the Secretariat of State, has frequent contacts with ‘the United Nations’ and its ‘specialized agencies’, especially at the time of the major international conferences.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_pro_20011004_en.html THE ROMAN CURIA In exercising supreme, full, and immediate power in the ‘universal Church’, the Roman pontiff makes use of the departments of the Roman Curia which,... therefore,... perform their duties ‘in his name’ and ‘with his authority’ for the good of the churches and in the service of the sacred pastors. CHRISTUS DOMINUS, 9 http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/index.htm
DmanA....I just visited the Vatican site today on reading about this...you are correct they do indeed speak for the Pope...and He appoints each individual to that council.
I also found that link interesting even into it’s formation and the authority it’s given.
However I do think we’re going to see many catholics excusing or defending the Pope and this council as well...they will most assurredly claim “victimhood” and the world is out to ge them. Unfortunately doing so because it is sooo difficult for them to see what they’re church is actually doing.
Don’t understand why catholics are always claiming they are “victims” when their leadership clearly and without question have established ‘a document’ by those the Vatican appoints to speak on it’s behalf, and make it public for it’s members to see.
Then there’s a mad rush to say that it’s not true...and the gibberish and confoggled attempts to protect themselves from the truth begins.
It isn’t people are catholic bashing, though they’d like us all to believe that, it’s what the leadership is doing and stating that people are objecting to.....it’s really not as confusing as it most assuredly will become.
I’m just confused. Who are these people. They get paid a salary by the Roman Church right? Why do we listen to any Catholic authority? Does random junk come out of this Church? How is anyone to know what to take seriously and what to toss in the dumpster?
Ok, just ignore anything that comes out of Rome. I can do that.
Well we shouldn't but many do without checking it out to see if what's being said is so according to the source of Gods standards....ya check with the Lord and then with the scriptures and He'll tell you the truth.
I got fed up with all the "messages" and finally went to the source of all truth. I was not disappointed... and neither will anyone else be if they just take the time, ask, and read. I think God knows when we get fed up and we finally go to Him.
Placemark.
Ok, just ignore anything that comes out of Rome. I can do that.
It seems to me that it's non-Catholics who are claiming to be the victims here. On the one hand, you're outraged that the Pope claims to stand for the truth. How dictatorial, how arrogant. Yet you're also outraged that he doesn't enforce a unified line of academic thought. The institution the Pope heads, like any college of intellectuals, contains some mild (by European or Obama Administration standards) Lefty nuttiness. Christ Himself did His work happily surrounded by men who had a lot of mistaken opinions to start with, most of whom turned out all right. The Church has never been eager to yank up the tares and damage the wheat in the process.
You've had more than 2,000 years to get used to this idea, keep trying: The Pope is the Vicar of Christ. When he speaks on what really matters, which is faith and morals, he is authoritative and—Catholics believe—infallible. For the other stuff, you're on your own. I remind you that Christ Himself stayed out of policy questions ("Render unto Caesar . . .") I'm sure you can handle that.
The inference intended was man's fallen state and our propensity to shape worship to our sensibility.
I have no doubts regarding the Holy Trinity and scripture.
I do however have a bit of a hiccup with the deification of man.
We see this so much in our society these days. Marginalizing the deity and deification of humans. Kinda makes me cringe.
I recognize the potentialfor becoming victims. Our Catholic FRfriends assure us the people behind this are a tiny group of radical nuts. Ok, I am reassured. But a nasty, virulent idea IS moving around the halls of the Vatican. If, God forbid, it was embraced and the great influence of the Vatican thrown placed behind it, it would be very very bad.
I recognize the potential for becoming victims. Our Catholic FRfriends assure us the people behind this are a tiny group of radical nuts. Ok, I am reassured.
But a nasty, virulent idea IS moving around the halls of the Vatican. If, God forbid, it was embraced and the great influence of the Vatican thrown placed behind it, it would be very very bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.