La codardia degli oppositori di papa Francesco
Article by Michael Sean Winters published on the website of the weekly National Catholic Reporter (United States) on 12 July 2016, freely translated by Giacomo Tessaro
A group of 45 “scholars, prelates and priests” sent an appeal to all Catholic cardinals to implore Pope Francis to correct what the group considers “erroneous statements” contained in Amoris Laetitia, as reported by Edward Pentin of the biweekly National Catholic Register: “'We are not accusing the Pope of heresy' states Joseph Shaw, signatory of the appeal and spokesperson for the group, 'but we think that numerous statements of Amoris Laetitia can be considered heretical on a first reading of the text. Other statements would be theologically considered differently: scandalous, erroneous or ambiguous, among others.'”
That's better! I am relieved that the group does not consider Francis a heretic, at least not necessarily, and in any case with the condition that he retracts the aforementioned statements. And then, only some parts of his apostolic exhortation would be “scandalous, erroneous or ambiguous”, not the entire document. It would be correct to read the entire text, not just the sentences reported by Edward Pentin. For example, are these scholars, prelates and priests unaware that Pope Francis' apostolic exhortation closely follows the document produced by the Synod, of which every single paragraph was approved by two-thirds of the synod fathers?
According to Pentin, the appeal asks the cardinals “to present a request to the Holy Father to definitively repudiate the errors that appear in the document and to authoritatively declare that Amoris Laetitia does not require us to believe or consider such errors to be true”. I wonder how the Pope, who issued the document a few months ago, can think that the statements being discussed are not true “true”. He certainly won't take them back. Do the scholars, prelates and priests who drafted the appeal think he should lie? Isn't lying intrinsically evil? They are inviting the Pope to commit a sin, the sin of scandal.
These people didn't even publish their names. One of the organizers told Pentin that they chose to remain anonymous because “they fear reprisals and worry about the repercussions on their religious community, their academic career, their work and their family”. This is an enormity. The people who lose their jobs in Catholic institutions in this period are not those who have memorized the speeches of Saint John Paul II on the "theology of the body". Noteworthy is the fact that Pentin does not criticize the statement. Only last week, when asked why he had not removed the cardinals most hostile to him, the Pope replied that it is not his intention to cut off heads: beyond metaphor, Francis recognizes that even those who oppose him, but who have served the Church throughout life, he can still contribute and should not get the sack just because he is not loyal to his person. I would have liked to see him sharpen the blade of the proverbial ax better.
I have sympathy for Catholics who struggle with what a Pope says or does, especially when it constitutes change. If their conscience pushes them to write an open letter that gives voice to their discomfort, they have every right to do so. It's also fine if they prefer private communication. What I don't approve of is when “you ring the bell and then you run away”, as a conservative friend of mine said, when you don't want to sign the letter and you leave Edward Pentin to publicize your grievances. This is cowardice, no more, no less. If I were a cardinal, and it is better for everyone that I am not, and I received such an unsigned letter the day after reading it in the newspapers, I would immediately have it end up in the wastepaper basket.
But why did Pentin bring it back? He is a reporter, after all, and a reporter's job is to dig up the news and provide some rough analysis, but I'm not sure this is news. In a Church that has more than a billion souls, the fact that there are 45 discontented people should not be disconcerting. I would also like to point out that Pentin doesn't do much to quote anyone willing to defend the Holy Father. No comments from anyone who thinks the appeal is a bad idea. The journalist reports a difference of opinion between Cardinal Christoph Schönborn and Cardinal Raymond Burke, but nothing that concerns the appeal. Of course, Pentin works for the convenience of the management of the EWTN Global Catholic Network, which owns the National Catholic Register. Key question: EWTN management and Register, which constantly tells its viewers and readers that it provides “authentic” Catholic news, whose commentators often complain about alleged distortions in the secular media, does this leadership approve of the biased articles with which Pentin attacks the Pope, or not? Is this opposition to Francis an expression of an "authentic" Catholic faith?
During the 1952 presidential election, the Rev. Norman Vincent Peale, pastor of the Marble Collegiate Church in New York and known for his preaching focused on the “power of positive thinking,” declared that Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson was unfit to become president of the United States . The ironic Stevenson, pressed to comment, replied: “From a Christian point of view, I find the Apostle Paul appealing and the Apostle Peale appalling.”. This unsigned appeal, trumpeted by Pentin, is terrifying.
Original text: Cowardice in the anti-Francis brigade
