This Fr. Z post made my "fraud radar" go off Fr. Z manipulates the Pope
#11
(03-29-2011, 09:46 AM)Augstine Baker Wrote: MMm, but this sort of thing has been going on in the Vatican for centuries... unfortunately... and this is the way they do business now.  Archbishop Lefebvre was a curial outsider and was easily isolated and discredited.  ++Levada has been put out to pasture and doesn't say much.  What a contrast to the outspoken Cardinal Burke....

But Burke has no power except that which concerns canonical trials that reach him and you think his predecessor (Levada) has less power and influence than Burke does?  Burke gets to say his opinions, but he doesn't have any ability to enforce the teaching of the Church.  Levada has the power to allow all sorts of abuse to continue.  Both Burke and Levada were spirited away from the U.S. Levada because like Cardinal Law, the trail of abuse and his gay agenda friendliness was starting to catch up to him and Burke because he was actually shaking things up with the most basic no-brainer public statements about pro-abort politicians. 
Reply
#12
(03-29-2011, 10:00 AM)Gerard Wrote:
(03-29-2011, 09:46 AM)Augstine Baker Wrote: MMm, but this sort of thing has been going on in the Vatican for centuries... unfortunately... and this is the way they do business now.  Archbishop Lefebvre was a curial outsider and was easily isolated and discredited.  ++Levada has been put out to pasture and doesn't say much.  What a contrast to the outspoken Cardinal Burke....

But Burke has no power except that which concerns canonical trials that reach him and you think his predecessor (Levada) has less power and influence than Burke does?  Burke gets to say his opinions, but he doesn't have any ability to enforce the teaching of the Church.  Levada has the power to allow all sorts of abuse to continue.  Both Burke and Levada were spirited away from the U.S. Levada because like Cardinal Law, the trail of abuse and his gay agenda friendliness was starting to catch up to him and Burke because he was actually shaking things up with the most basic no-brainer public statements about pro-abort politicians. 

Cardinal Ratzinger used to be in the news all the time as head of CDF, very clearly the captain of the ship.  The one time I hear about ++Levada, and it's because he's getting slapped down by his boss for trying to make an end run on him.

And I don't think for a moment that Cardinal Burke would be permitted to be as vociferous as he's being without a nod from the top.  After all, it was Burke who took Cardinal Kasper [another sidestepped curial member] for his irresponsible behavior and attempted sabotage of the Anglican Ordinariate.  I've noticed since then that Cardinal Kasper has been saying many things uncharacteristic of an Old Liberal who was described by one priest in Germany as a cancer of the Church.

I'm mystified by the Beatification of JP II and the new Assisssi debacle as well as the Beatification of the fruity Cardinal Newman, but there it is... there's a lot of other stuff happening too.
Reply
#13
(03-29-2011, 10:13 AM)Augstine Baker Wrote: Cardinal Ratzinger used to be in the news all the time as head of CDF, very clearly the captain of the ship.  The one time I hear about ++Levada, and it's because he's getting slapped down by his boss for trying to make an end run on him.

And I don't think for a moment that Cardinal Burke would be permitted to be as vociferous as he's being without a nod from the top.  After all, it was Burke who took Cardinal Kasper [another sidestepped curial member] for his irresponsible behavior and attempted sabotage of the Anglican Ordinariate.   I've noticed since then that Cardinal Kasper has been saying many things uncharacteristic of an Old Liberal who was described by one priest in Germany as a cancer of the Church.

I'm mystified by the Beatification of JP II and the new Assisssi debacle as well as the Beatification of the fruity Cardinal Newman, but there it is... there's a lot of other stuff happening too.

I'm saying that what you are describing is simply a narrative and not indicative of actual events.  Levada is a liberal playing the role of a heavy for traditionalists.  He is a liberal but he's not a "heavy" because the Holy Father wants him to be portrayed as a heavy getting slapped down by him. 

Just as Burke is considered a firebrand (by conservative standards) but he's basically a lot of talk with no  power to back it up.  If you had Burke as head of CDF and he actually walked the talk, I might think there is some real resistance to the progressive agenda. 

But I think it's more likely that Fr. Z, Levada and the Holy Father are providing form of media relations, and theater in order to manipulate trads and gain more confidence about their plans for the Church than trads would normally be wiling to give. JPII was the liberal Pope that convinced the conservatives that he was conservative,  B16 is the liberal Pope trying to convince trads that he's a trad at heart.  Both of them did it by allowing crazy liberal actions, talking conservative  talk and doing nothing to actually reverse the trends in the Church.
Reply
#14
(03-29-2011, 12:30 PM)Gerard Wrote:
(03-29-2011, 10:13 AM)Augstine Baker Wrote: Cardinal Ratzinger used to be in the news all the time as head of CDF, very clearly the captain of the ship.  The one time I hear about ++Levada, and it's because he's getting slapped down by his boss for trying to make an end run on him.

And I don't think for a moment that Cardinal Burke would be permitted to be as vociferous as he's being without a nod from the top.  After all, it was Burke who took Cardinal Kasper [another sidestepped curial member] for his irresponsible behavior and attempted sabotage of the Anglican Ordinariate.   I've noticed since then that Cardinal Kasper has been saying many things uncharacteristic of an Old Liberal who was described by one priest in Germany as a cancer of the Church.

I'm mystified by the Beatification of JP II and the new Assisssi debacle as well as the Beatification of the fruity Cardinal Newman, but there it is... there's a lot of other stuff happening too.

I'm saying that what you are describing is simply a narrative and not indicative of actual events.   Levada is a liberal playing the role of a heavy for traditionalists.  He is a liberal but he's not a "heavy" because the Holy Father wants him to be portrayed as a heavy getting slapped down by him. 

Just as Burke is considered a firebrand (by conservative standards) but he's basically a lot of talk with no  power to back it up.   If you had Burke as head of CDF and he actually walked the talk, I might think there is some real resistance to the progressive agenda. 

But I think it's more likely that Fr. Z, Levada and the Holy Father are providing form of media relations, and theater in order to manipulate trads and gain more confidence about their plans for the Church than trads would normally be wiling to give. JPII was the liberal Pope that convinced the conservatives that he was conservative,  B16 is the liberal Pope trying to convince trads that he's a trad at heart.  Both of them did it by allowing crazy liberal actions, talking conservative  talk and doing nothing to actually reverse the trends in the Church.

I guess after forty years of crying out in the wilderness while the church tried to ignore them, they're realizing the "problem" isn't going away.

Can you at least appreciate that we're in a strangely dissonant position of having to believe in the Church while assuming that Churchmen are acting in bad faith?

Reply
#15
(03-29-2011, 12:53 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: I guess after forty years of crying out in the wilderness while the church tried to ignore them, they're realizing the "problem" isn't going away.

Can you at least appreciate that we're in a strangely dissonant position of having to believe in the Church while assuming that Churchmen are acting in bad faith?

Yep.  I think we're in a very precarious situation.  We have the potential of being coerced into accepting Vatican II in a bad way for the Church and setting the stage for a further dismantlement. 

I remember a few months ago Bishop Fellay did an interview for the Remnant where he was pointing out that the Pope was stymied about saying the truth about trads but was acting in a way that was beneficial to trads. 

Bishop Fellay seems to view that as a political reality that he's willing to accept, but I view it as a lack of integrity.  When your words say one thing and your actions another, I don't trust the person even if the actions are in my favor. 

And it seems with the recent Assissi issue and the beatification and the book mucking up the evangelization of jews, it shows the Pope is not integrated in his actions and words.  And that is trouble for us because he seems to be operation on foundational principles that are relativistic and not based on absolute truth.
Reply
#16
I've thought the rumors about the letter have been fishy from the start which is why I didn't promote the petition without more information.  I don't necessarily agree with Gerald, but there's something not right about them that I can't put my finger on....

Eh, I'm probably just imagining things.
Reply
#17
(03-29-2011, 08:41 AM)Augstine Baker Wrote:
(03-29-2011, 08:35 AM)Gerard Wrote:
(03-29-2011, 01:50 AM)SaintRafael Wrote: Fr. Z was only reacting and summarizing very briefly the news the broke out on the Rorate Caeli blog.

It was Rorate Caeli who had the big news and article about Cardinal Levada and Canizares undermining the instruction. There is a thread on FE about it:
http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...846.0.html

But why the unwillingness to address Fr. Corapi's very public situation directly without naming him and name the names of Cardinals in a series of rumors?  Taking it on face value, it's at the very least detraction against the Cardinals. 

Fr. Z claims to have the information from a French site and an Italian site.

My point is, that the whole thing sounds like a trial balloon and an effort to play on the emotions of "trads." 

Fr. Z is the "hero" who drops the hint to the Pope to thwart the plans of the rascally Cardinals.  But these Cardinals are the hand-picked associates of the Holy Father whom Fr. Z trumpeted as people he knows how to work with. 
It doesn't make sense. 

Take it for what it's worth.  This is what I heard and I believe it's true.  Seriously, Lavender Levada?

++Levada was promoted out of the way.  Most of the work is done by the Holy Father himself who works long days like an Enlightenment despot.

Of course he was. He didn't even ALLOW the TLM. to be prayed in his archdiocese under the Indult of JPII. When he was "called" to the Vatican, I remember thinking, "Keep your friends close & your enemies even closer". It's amazing to me that people who dream up very detailed conspiracy theories didn't pick up on that.

http://www.sffaith.com/ed/articles/1999/0399gm2.htm

An excerpt:
Forbidding Tradition
WHY WON'T THE POPE'S MAN GRANT THE POPE'S INDULT?
By George Neumayr, 1999.
Pope John Paul II asked bishops again this last year to show "pastoral attention" to Catholics attached to the Latin Mass. But in San Francisco the Latin Mass is forbidden. The reason: San Francisco Archbishop William Levada refuses to grant the Pope's indult.

It reminds me of those who kept asking why Cardinal Law was "called to Rome". Did no one realize that his life wasn't worth a plug nickel in the states & that the Cardinal was receiving some serious death threats.

As for Father Corapi, I don't think that the temporary suspension of a Televangelist is of the same import as tampering with a Papal document. 
Reply
#18
[[/quote]

But Burke has no power except that which concerns canonical trials that reach him and you think his predecessor (Levada) has less power and influence than Burke does?  Burke gets to say his opinions, but he doesn't have any ability to enforce the teaching of the Church.  Levada has the power to allow all sorts of abuse to continue.  Both Burke and Levada were spirited away from the U.S. Levada because like Cardinal Law, the trail of abuse and his gay agenda friendliness was starting to catch up to him and Burke because he was actually shaking things up with the most basic no-brainer public statements about pro-abort politicians. 
[/quote]

How in the world did Cardinal BURKE get into this conversation??? ??? ???
Reply
#19
(03-29-2011, 03:18 PM)JoniCath Wrote: Of course he was. He didn't even ALLOW the TLM. to be prayed in his archdiocese under the Indult of JPII. When he was "called" to the Vatican, I remember thinking, "Keep your friends close & your enemies even closer". It's amazing to me that people who dream up very detailed conspiracy theories didn't pick up on that.

Here's the difference, You seem to think that Levada is an enemy of the Pope,  I think Levada is an enemy of the Papacy but not the Pope himself.  And I think the Pope does not consider Levada a personal enemy. 

Quote: It reminds me of those who kept asking why Cardinal Law was "called to Rome". Did no one realize that his life wasn't worth a plug nickel in the states & that the Cardinal was receiving some serious death threats.

So, the reason Rome gave for moving him, allowing him to keep his congregational appointments and put him in charge of  a Basilica was because he was threatened?  C'mon. 

Quote: As for Father Corapi, I don't think that the temporary suspension of a Televangelist is of the same import as tampering with a Papal document.   

So why was Fr. Z more prudent and hush hush about how he dealt with Fr. Corapi's public situation and Fr. Corapi's public statement? And if rumors about tampering with a Papal document are so much more important why engage in gossip and name the Cardinals? 

Reply
#20
(03-29-2011, 12:42 AM)Gerard Wrote: 5) I've reproduced the whole entry and interestingly look at the comments in particular of "Centristian" who is rather savagely attacked for either questioning the veracity of the rumors and disagreeing with the necessity of the rumored document.   I'm copying the first of his comments with Fr. Z's editorializing and frankly browbeating for study and posterity.

Ok, this jumped at me. I really dislike Fr. Z's habit of dissing people in red, inside their own comments; I think it's the height of rudeness. BUT, this "Centristian" poster is completely unbearable. He prefers the NO to the TLM, but does not say it outright, instead choosing to cloak this message in knowledgeable-seeming posts. The most clear statement I've seen from him went something like this: "I am all for celebrating the Traditional Mass... I only wish the Paul VI Mass were the 'traditional' Mass." It is outrageous. I'll bet Father Z doesn't like him much either.

I did read the post in question, and found nothing questionable about it. Father Z named the cardinals everyone else had been naming. I think the post is made in response to the people who think that there was never any threat to the TLM in the revised Instruction. I do believe there was a real threat, and completely understand the frustration with people who insist on denying it.

If Father Z is so hyper-connected to the Vatican, then he knows whether the rumors were true; and if he knew they were false, why would he have asked for prayers for the pope? And why would he keep on making pro-Summorum Pontificum posts? I don't understand this particular conspiracy theory.

Regarding Fr. Corapi, it should be obvious why Father Z won't mention him by name: the accusations against him concern his private life, and in polite company you only discuss such things by indirection. The rumors on the cardinals, however, do not concern their private lives, but rather their professional lives, if you will.

edit:
(03-29-2011, 12:30 PM)Gerard Wrote: But I think it's more likely that Fr. Z, Levada and the Holy Father are providing form of media relations, and theater in order to manipulate trads and gain more confidence about their plans for the Church than trads would normally be wiling to give. JPII was the liberal Pope that convinced the conservatives that he was conservative,  B16 is the liberal Pope trying to convince trads that he's a trad at heart.  Both of them did it by allowing crazy liberal actions, talking conservative  talk and doing nothing to actually reverse the trends in the Church.

Ah, there it is.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)