Thursday, October 2, 2014

Cardinal Kasper vs. Cardinal Burke

Cardinal Kasper vs. Cardinal Burke

"Cardinal Kasper defended his arguments in an interview with La Nación"


Asked about his statement that he is not “the target of the controversy,” but rather that the Pope “probably is.”

“Maybe I was imprudent. But many people are saying so, you can hear it in the streets every day. I don't want to judge anyone, but it is obvious that there are people who are not totally in agreement with this Pope, something that is not new and already happened during the Second Vatican Council, when many where against the aggiornamento of John XXIII and Paul VI.”

Regarding the upcoming publication of the five cardinals' book right before the synod:

“Yes it is a problem. I don't remember a similar situation, in which in such organized manner five cardinals would write such a book. That's the way politicians operate, but in the Church we should not behave like that.”


"Cardinal Burke rebuts ‘outrageous’ claim that Cardinal Kasper speaks for Pope"


Cardinal Raymond Burke strongly defended his criticism of the “Kasper proposal,” and said it was “outrageous” for Cardinal Walter Kasper to suggest that such criticism was actually aimed at Pope Francis, during a teleconference with reporters on September 30.

“I find it amazing that the cardinal [Kasper] claims that he speaks for the Pope,” Cardinal Burke said. “The Pope doesn’t have laryngitis.”

Cardinal Burke said that he finds the books—and particularly Remaining in the Truth of Christ, to which he contributed—an “effective response” to Cardinal Kasper’s proposal that the Church might allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive the Eucharist. These works, the American cardinal said, reflect the “firm conviction of the authors and the firm conviction of the Church” that the Catholic understanding of the indissolubility of marriage is based on the clear words of Jesus Christ and cannot be altered. Saying that Cardinal Kasper “erred” in his proposal, Cardinal Burke said that the new works were “a positive contribution to get the discussion back on the right track.”

No comments:

Post a Comment