Robert Cardinal Sarah: Don’t expect God to pour out his #DivineMercy on us should we choose to remain in sin


Dives in Misericordia (30 November 1980) | John Paul II
Dives in Misericordia (30 November 1980) | John Paul II

13. The Church Professes the Mercy of God and Proclaims It

[…]

Mercy in itself, as a perfection of the infinite God, is also infinite. Also infinite therefore and inexhaustible is the Father’s readiness to receive the prodigal children who return to His home. Infinite are the readiness and power of forgiveness which flow continually from the marvelous value of the sacrifice of the Son. No human sin can prevail over this power or even limit it. On the part of man only a lack of good will can limit it, a lack of readiness to be converted and to repent, in other words persistence in obstinacy, opposing grace and truth, especially in the face of the witness of the cross and resurrection of Christ.

Therefore, the Church professes and proclaims conversion. Conversion to God always consists in discovering His mercy, that is, in discovering that love which is patient and kind as only the Creator and Father can be; the love to which the “God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” is faithful to the uttermost consequences in the history of His covenant with man; even to the cross and to the death and resurrection of the Son. Conversion to God is always the fruit of the” rediscovery of this Father, who is rich in mercy.

[…]

Robert Cardinal Sarah: Sacrosanctum concilium betrayed when not considering that “Nothing should be preferred to the work of God”

God or Nothing, Cardinal Robert Sarah with Nicolas Diat


Robert Cardinal Sarah
Robert Cardinal Sarah

NICHOLAS DIAT: At the end his pontificate, in 2012, Benedict XVI insisted on celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of the opening of Vatican II. Why are there so many divisions over the last Council, even today?

[…]

In order to help us see that everything at the heart of the conciliar documents was centered on and oriented toward God, Benedict XVI invited us to focus our attention on the way in which the are ordered. He says that the architecture of these documents has an essentially theocentric orientation. Let us begin with the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum concilium. The fact that it is the first document to be published indicates that there were dogmatic and pastoral reasons of the utmost importance. Before all else, in the Church, there is adoration; and therefore God. This beginning, says Benedict XVI, corresponds to the first and chief concern of the Rule of Saint Benedict: “Nihil operi Dei praeponatur” (Nothing should be preferred to the work of God). Now, if there is one reality too often left out of consideration, it is certainly the consubstantial relation between the liturgy and God. The foundation of the liturgy must remain the search for God. We can only be dismayed by the fact that this intention of Popes John XXIII and Paul VI, and of the Council Fathers as well, is often obscured and , worse yet, betrayed…

Robert Cardinal Sarah attests to how botched preparation for the liturgical reform had devastating effects on the Catholic population

God or Nothing, Cardinal Robert Sarah with Nicolas Diat


Robert Cardinal Sarah
Robert Cardinal Sarah

In 1958, therefore, you were at the seminary when John XXIII was elected pope?

[…]

On the other hand, I stilled lacked the maturity needed to understand the scope of the council desired by that pope. I knew, however, that Archbishop Tchidimbo represented my country and that he traveled regularly to Rome for discussions with the bishops from the other countries of the world. Although he did not really speak to us about the content of debates, I nevertheless relate an event that impressed the Catholic faithful of Conakry.

The cathedral in Conakry had an elegant, ornate choir, with a beautiful replica of the Bernini baldachin, surrounded by very beautiful angels. At the time of the first discussions about liturgical reform, archbishop Tchidimbo returned to Conakry and ordered the destruction of the baldachin and the main altar. We were angry, incredulous at this hasty decision. Rather violently, we passed without any preparation from one liturgy to another. I can attest to the fact that the botched preparation for the liturgical reform had devastating effects on the Catholic population, particularly on the simpler people, who scarcely understood the swiftness of these changes or even the reason for them.

[…]


The solution?

Where to begin “liturgical movement” that so many priests and faithful have awaited for so long? Cardinal Sarah proposes the following three paths, which he sum up in the three letters SAF: silence-adoration-formation in English and French, and in German: SAA, Stille-Anbetung-Ausbildung. Please see:

Cardinal Sarah’s Address on the 10th Anniversary of “Summorum Pontificum”, March 31, 2017 | CWR

The exclusive English translation of the message sent by the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to the Colloquium “The Source of the Future” by Robert Cardinal Sarah

Pope Francis: “extraordinary” form must not take the place of the “ordinary” one.

Home > Bulletin > Pubblico > 2016 > 07: Holy See Press Office Communiqué: some clarifications on the celebration of Mass, 11.07.2016


Holy See Press Office Communiqué, 11.07.2016


Pope Francis, for his part, on the occasion of his visit to the Dicastery for Divine Worship, expressly mentioned that the “ordinary” form of the celebration of the Mass is that expressed in the Missal promulgated by Paul VI, while the “extraordinary” form, which was permitted by Pope Benedict XVI for the purposes and in the ways explained in his Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, must not take the place of the “ordinary” one.

Bishop Egan would like Catholics to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation before their wedding day

Bishop Egan
Bishop Egan

Press release from the Diocese of Portsmouth Friday 8 July: Bishop of Portsmouth announces action plan to support married couples

[…]

Bishop Egan also said that ordinarily he would like Catholics to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation before their wedding day:

“I would like Catholics getting married in church to receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, which completes our Christian initiation and is the foundation of our lives as disciples of Jesus. After all, marriage is a vocation to service like the priesthood, and so just as the priesthood and the promise of celibacy ‘for the sake of the Kingdom’ needs the help of the Holy Spirit and His gifts, so too does married life.”

Cardinal Caffarra: “Your Holiness, how I wish to tell you to clarify #AmorisLaetitia”

carlo_caffarra1
Cardinal Carlo Caffarra

Cardinal Caffarra on Marriage, Family, Amoris Laetitia, & Confusion in the Church, BY MAIKE HICKSON ON JULY 11, 2016 | 1P5

Cardinal Caffarra (CC): In Amoris Laetitia [308] the Holy Father Francis writes: “I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion.” I infer from these words that His Holiness realizes that the teachings of the Exhortation could give rise to confusion in the Church. Personally, I wish – and that is how so many of my brothers in Christ (cardinals, bishops, and the lay faithful alike) also think – that the confusion should be removed, but not because I prefer a more rigorous pastoral care, but because, rather, I simply prefer a clearer and less ambiguous pastoral care. That said –  with all due respect, affection, and devotion that I feel the need to nourish toward the Holy Father –  I would tell him: “Your Holiness, please clarify these points. a) How much of what Your Holiness has said in footnote 351 of paragraph 305 is also applicable to the divorced and remarried couples who wish still anyway to continue to live as husband and wife; and thus how much of what was taught by Familiaris Consortio No. 84, byReconciliatio Poenitentia No. 34, by Sacramenttum unitatis No. 29, by the Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 1650, and by the common theological doctrine, is to be considered now to be abrogated? b) The constant teaching of the Church – as it has also been recently reiterated in Veritatis splendor, No. 79 – is that there are negative moral norms which allow of no exceptions, because they prohibit acts which are intrinsically dishonorable and dishonest – such as, for example, adultery. Is this traditional teaching still believed to be true, even after Amoris Laetitia?” This is what I would say to the Holy Father.

If the Holy Father, in his supreme judgment, would have the intention to intervene publicly in order to remove this confusion, he has at his disposition many different means to do so.

Cardinal Caffarra: Bishops and many theologians faithful to the Church and to the Magisterium argue that there is not a continuity, but, rather, an opposition between #AmorisLaetitia and the previous Magisterium.

carlo_caffarra1
Cardinal Carlo Caffarra

Cardinal Caffarra on Marriage, Family, Amoris Laetitia, & Confusion in the Church BY MAIKE HICKSON ON JULY 11, 2016 | 1P5

MH: Would you like to make a comment about Cardinal Christoph Schönborn’s recent remark that Amoris Laetitia is binding doctrine and that all the previous magisterial documents concerning marriage and the family have now to be read in the light of Amoris Laetitia?

CC: I reply with two simple observations. The first observation is: one should not only read the previous Magisterium on marriage in the light of Amoris laetitia (AL), but one should also read Amoris laetitia in the light of the previous Magisterium. The logic of the Living Tradition of the Church is bipolar: it has two directions, not one. The second part is more important. In his [recent] interview with Corriere della Sera, my dear friend Cardinal Schönborn does not take into account what has happened in the Church since the publication of Amoris Laetitia. Bishops and many theologians faithful to the Church and to the Magisterium argue that, especially on one specific – but very important – point, there is not a continuity, but, rather, an opposition between AL and the previous Magisterium. Moreover, these theologians and philosophers do not say this with a demeaning or revolting spirit toward the Holy Father himself. And the point is, as follows: AL says that, under some circumstances, sexual intercourse between the divorced and civilly remarried is morally legitimate. Even moreso, it says that, what the Second Vatican Council has said about spouses – with regard to sexual intimacy – also applies to them (see footnote 329). Therefore: when one says that a sexual relationship outside of marriage is legitimate, it is therefore a claim contrary to the Church’s doctrine on sexuality; and when one says that adultery is not an intrinsically dishonest act – and that therefore there might be circumstances which render it not to be dishonest – that, too, is a claim contrary to the Tradition and Doctrine of the Church. In such a situation like this, the Holy Father, in my opinion – and as I have already written – thus has to clarify the matter. For, when I say “S is P,” and then say “S is not P,” the second proposition is not a development of the first proposition, rather, but its negation. When someone says: the doctrine remains, but it is only about taking care of some few cases, I answer: the moral norm “Do not commit adultery” is an ABSOLUTELY NEGATIVE norm which does not allow of any exceptions. There are many ways to do good, but there is only one way not to do evil: not to do evil.