November 8, 2025 • 52 mins
Has the Church turned global politics into dogma? In this charged episode, Raymond Arroyo convenes the Prayerful Posse—Father Gerald Murray and Robert Royal—to tackle whether climate change activism and immigration policy have become new “articles of faith” within the Catholic Church. From the Pope’s remarks on immigration and U.S. border enforcement to his global appeals on climate change, the Posse questions whether Rome’s moral focus has drifted from salvation toward social ideology.
They also weigh in on the Vatican’s new rejection of the title Co-Redemptrix for Mary, the ongoing confusion over synodality, and the uproar surrounding bishops restricting traditional liturgical practices—kneeling at Communion, ad orientem Mass, and altar rails. Plus, analysis of the Pope’s comments on Venezuela, the latest on the Marko Rupnik scandal, and whispers of a new Vatican document on monogamy.
It’s an unflinching, fast-moving discussion on the Church’s direction—faith versus fashion, doctrine versus diplomacy—and what Catholics should make of the shifting priorities in Rome.
🔔 Subscribe for more inspiring conversations: Arroyo Grande, available on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, iHeart, and everywhere you listen, watch & stream.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Have climate change and immigration policies become new articles of
faith in the Catholic Church. And is marry a co
redemn tricks with Jesus in salvation the Prayerful Posse. We'll
explore it all next. Welcome to an important Prayerful Posse.
(00:23):
Be sure to go subscribe to the show. It's a
wonderful way to support our work and it's totally free.
Or visit Raymondroyo dot com. Let's convene the Prayerful Posse.
Canon lawyer and priests to the Archdiocese of New York,
Father Gerald Murray, an editor in chief of The Catholic
Thing dot org.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Robert Royal joining us from Europe a.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Very mysterious Europe. It looks like Bob Gens. Pope Leo
has been making a lot of headlines this week. During
one of his press gaggles outside of Costo Gondolfo, the
Pope offered up a very pointed commentary on what appeared
to be US immigration policy, role.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Of the churches to preach the Gospel, And just a
couple of days ago, we heard Matthew's Gospel Chapter twenty five,
which says Jesus says very clearly at the end of
the world, we're going to be asked, you know, how
did you receive the foreigner? Did you receive him and
welcome him or not? And I think that many people
(01:21):
who have lived for years and years and years, never
causing problems, have been deeply affected by what's going on
right now, and I would certainly invite the authorities to
allow pastoral workers to attend to the needs of those people,
many times have been separated from their families for good
(01:43):
amount of time. No one knows what's happening, but their
own spiritual needs should be attended to it.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Father, your thoughts on the pope waiting into immigration policy,
particularly at the time when Europe is literally convulsing over
this issue of unfettered immigration.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
Well, I'll start with the second half of that comment.
I agree with the Pope that chaplain's priest should be
allowed in to visit those being held in detention centers
by Ice and Border Patrol. The question is though they
have to be qualified, they have to be there, knowing
who they are, what their reason for being there, because
this is a prime time for political activism grant standing.
(02:22):
So that's not why chaplain goes in to see people
are being detained. On the other part, yes, we do
have to greet foreigners and do what we can to
help them, but that doesn't mean foreigners have a right
to illegally enter the country or overstay their visa. And
the fact that they've been here a long time, Yeah,
that's not a good thing because that means the previous
(02:44):
governments have been lax and enforcing the law. But when
you begin to enforce the law, there's no offense there.
And in fact, the government, as we know, is offering
people here illegally the chance to voluntarily repatriate to their
home countries and then an opportunity to come in legally.
So I think the American government is only doing what
(03:05):
you know is according to the law and the will
of the American people, which is, if you want to
be in the United States, you have to be here legally.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Bob, your thoughts on this and why has immigration policy
been so elevated. I mean, the energy and effort expended
on this from Rome and really throughout the church is
something remarkable. President Obama, by the way, deported about two
million people. I don't remember this kind of organized Catholic
resistance if you will, to that policy.
Speaker 5 (03:35):
Well, I mean, we know the part of the reason
is that the media plays at this point because they
just they shared a detestation of Donald Trump. They detest
him for everything that he absolutely does. I mean, Obama
locked up children inside chaining fences, but when Trump did
it in his previous administration, this is apparently something new
(03:56):
that had never happened on the face of the earth.
I've got to say that I don't know entirely why
the Church is doing this, clearly, as you say, Raymond,
in Europe in particular, because the large majority of those
illegals are Muslims, and we're seeing all sorts of cultural classes.
It just makes no sense. And I think that when
(04:17):
Pope Francis, early in his papacy, went to Lampaduza, which
is an Italian i am very close to the coast
of Africa, that he thought he was opening up a
mode of charity and mercy, but in fact he was
opening up a series of problems for people in Europe.
Now Here in the United States. Fortunately, for the most part,
(04:37):
the people who have come in are either Evangelicals or
Christians or Catholics, although there are a lot of criminals
that have come in as well. Now I'm going to
take a little bit of a perhaps controversial position about this,
because I really do think that our government has a
moral responsibility. If you've left, let someone live here five
(04:59):
or ten year, they put down roots and they have
a family and whatnot. I'm not saying that they should
automatically be allowed into the country or regularized, but we
have allowed our government has allowed this situation to fester,
and it's happened for many years. Now we don't have
to this day. We don't have proper legislation about illegal immigration.
(05:22):
We've got Trump who's been able to shut down the border,
and thank god that he did, but our Congress still
needs to do, you know, complete ad a thorough look
at what our immigration policies should be. But look that said,
that's a political debate that has to be If you've
(05:43):
been here five years and if ten years or whatever,
you haven't been a problem, maybe we can find out
some way that you can stay longer, you go back
and you come in. But what I want to say
is this, I don't see why it is that the
church talks about this sort of thing when I think
everybody he understands this. Here in America. We understand immigration.
Speaker 4 (06:03):
We like it.
Speaker 5 (06:03):
We like legal immigrants, our family or immigrants, yours raiment
and yours trying too. Yeah, we all like this, and
we all know it contributes to the country. But this
illegal there's welcoming of illegals. It just seems to me,
it almost sounds like the Church doesn't have anything better
to do at this point. I already to say that,
but it's like picking a moral question, and I think
(06:24):
climate change participates somewhat in that as well.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
Yeah, we're going to get to that in the moment.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
But you know, a week when we learned, Father and Bob,
that a German festival, that outdoor festival where they had
that terrible tragedy those people were killed by Islamic extremists.
That Christmas festival canceled this year. The Christmas Lights in Sheffield,
England canceled this year. There's a cultural aggression underway that
(06:51):
I think the Church, for whatever reason, is unwilling to
examine or look at with clear eyes.
Speaker 4 (06:57):
Father, Well, this is an issue has to do with
unassimilated Muslims, Muslim people in Europe who have come primarily
for the economic benefits of being in Europe, as opposed
to their home countries. They have displayed little intention to
integrate and we had you know, just last month, we
(07:18):
had a man, an Islamic man with a knife, trying
to attack in a synagogue and he had to be
neutralized by the police. This is horrendous because there is
a hostility to Jews in Europe that has not been
seen since the Nazi period. And the only possible reasonable
(07:40):
explanation for it is to identify with this influx of
Islamic people who don't like Jews and become violent. And
this is really a problem. You know, the Jewish soccer
team was playing in England and there were all kinds
of problems outside the stadium, so you know, we have
seen this. And the Israelis were attacked by Hamas on
(08:03):
October seven, two years ago. The following weekend there was
a huge march in London in support of Hamas. This
is unthinkable if there had been a Nazi attack on people,
and then the following weekend a million people got in
favor of the Nazis. I think the governments would have
acted more.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Yeah, no, no, there seems again an unwillingness if you're
worried about religious freedom and the flourishing of religions in countries.
You've got to, as a religious leader, focus on this
in some way. Pab Leo also said, Bob, I weren't
your comments on this. He said, the US military's actions
against Venezuela, the Narco terrorists. There, here's the quote. I
(08:42):
believe violence never brings victory. The key is to seek dialogue,
to find fairways, ways to resolve the problems that may
exist within countries.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Bob, dialogue with the terrorists.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Yeah, I'm sorry to say. That's the kind of language
that I think during his period of formation in this
seminary and in graduate school, it's the kind of language
that people were encouraged to use to begin with. I mean,
let's make a Catholic distinction in language. There's a difference
between a use of force, which may be just, and violence.
(09:14):
I mean, violence is when I stabbed somebody, you know,
I want to rob him or whatever, I may to
use force to prevent somebody from from robbing another person. So,
first of all, he's got to be clear about what
that is. Otherwise, we're in a pacifism where everybody's supposed
to be, you know, getting along very well with everybody,
and that's simply not the case. And look, in the
case event asulla, we're dealing with one of those nasty
(09:37):
regimes that pops up every now in Latin America. Venezuela
used to be a very vibrant, democratic, prosperous country. It
has a lot of oil, It was well organized, and
it went down the wrong path and went down the
wrong path, and in a similar fashion to what Argentina
did in the past and Nicaragua and some other countries
(09:57):
like this. So like, we're not just talking about a
random lashing out with violence. We're looking at trying to
prevent some pretty bad actors from harming their own people
to begin with, but secondarily the effects that they have
when they bring drugs into this country and criminals, etc.
So he's partly right if he focuses the language a
(10:21):
little bit better. But I don't think that this is
a pope who yet has a grip on these kinds
of international situations. And I often help whenever I'm criticized
by some foreign diplomat, I often say, look, you guys,
aren't the ones that have to send in the troops
if something goes drastically wrong in a place like Venezuela,
we do. We have to send our guys, so we
(10:43):
need to deal with things far ahead of their getting
into an utterly possible situation.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
And Father, in this case, you had these narco drug
dealers and terrorists coming in and bringing drugs meant to kill,
and they do kill swaths of our population. So there
is a national security interest here is my question. Is
this a little out of the purview and perhaps terroism
of the papacy to weigh in on something so granular
(11:12):
and encourage dialogue in this situation.
Speaker 4 (11:14):
No, I think it's proper for the pope to talk
about things issues of foreign policy which have a moral
aspect to it. And so there's a legitimate debate going on.
Are narco terrorists appropriate targets for the military, And that's
a good debate to have. But we've already had in
the United States because those groups have been deemed to
be nonstate actors of hostile to the United States, posing
(11:36):
a real threat to it. And these people, by the way,
they know what this is happening, so they should stop
their activities. They're the ones taking the risk of getting
killed by the US military. Let's forget, let's not forget that.
But then secondly, the answer to a criminal terrorist organization
is not dialogue as regards So that's regards to people
(11:59):
selling the drugs. In regards to Maduro government, when have
they gotten into a serious dialegue with anybody? The Maduro's
an illegitimate president. He wasn't elected. The other person was
elected in the last election, but the votes were counted fraudulently,
and who got the Nobel priest pies the other candidate,
So we should remember he's an illegitimate pres president. He's
(12:21):
using narco terrorists to continue to gain money for himself
and to put down the United States. So I welcome
papal commentary when it's based on the set of facts
and the moral equatment. There's no moral equivalency between a
military trying to defend the country and terrorists trying to
kill people.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
We all saw the Vatican hosting that climate conference, you
know where the Pope was there and the Arnold Schwarzenegger
and the famous Iceberg. Now the US Bishop's Conference and
other Catholic leaders are offering prayer and support and solidarity
for the participants at the thirtieth Annual Nations Climate Change Conference,
(13:02):
which begins. On November tenth, Secretary of State Cardinal Powerline
delivered an address by the Pope which urged more global
action on climate change and said, quote, peace is also
threatened by a lack of due respect for creation, by
the plundering of natural resources, and by a progressive decline
in the quality of life because of climate change. Father,
(13:25):
your reaction about the message in this eleven day conference?
Is this the most pressing problem in the church right now?
Speaker 4 (13:34):
It's not a specifically Catholic issue. Climate change. That's a
question at first about science, because climate has changed many
times over the course of the century. Is it man caused?
Speaker 5 (13:46):
You know?
Speaker 4 (13:47):
Is the genesis of activities that man has undertaken in
the last fifty to one hundred years that had never
been undertaken before. That's a legitimate area of study. And
from what I've seen, Bob knows more about this than I,
so I'll see to himity of opinion. But then secondly,
the question is what are the priorities that the Holy
See is stressing. And basically, in the first six months
(14:09):
of the Pontific, we've heard a lot about immigration, and
we've heard a lot about climate change, but there are
more pressing problems of particularly religious freedom. Now the Pope
has spoken about it, so I'm not saying yes, but
it's not the headlines being made by the Holy see
by and large.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
Yeah, Bob, your thoughts on the optics of these gatherings
when people are being thrown out of their parishes, which
we'll talk about later, for just wanting to practice their
faith and there's such deep confusion about what the church
itself teaches, is this the best use of the moral
clarity and standing of the Vatican at this moment.
Speaker 5 (14:47):
Yeah, well, look, it is good to talk about the
care for creation. There's nothing wrong with that at all.
As father was saying, it's not even so much that
there's I think a debate about climate change. As I'm
sorry to say this because I actually started out in
the university studying science. I think science has been corruption
corrupted to a good degree because of the money that's
made available through certain types of studies and not available
(15:10):
for other types of studies. I think we're starting to
see that a little bit about what's happening in terms
of climate change, to use that term. You know. Bill
Gates came out the other day and he's been a
massive supporter of population control and climate change activity, and
he's saying, well, you know, climate change probably isn't going
(15:32):
to destroy the human race, and we'll be able to
manage it. And I've been hearing this for years. You know,
I wrote a book about climate and religion years ago,
and I've been hearing for years that mitigation and research
really are much more important than these kind of grand
standing of these international conferences where people promise that they
won't use fossil fuels five years from that, which is
(15:52):
not utter impossibility. You know, those sorts of things. When
it gets up, it gets to become a kind of
a crusade. I think we're in trouble. And look, as
father rightly says that there are other things. Elon Musk
has stepped forward to quote another billionaire and that he's
prominent in the world, saying that our problem now is
not population over population, it's demographic collapse around the world.
(16:17):
So we have two of the most influential tech savvy
people in the world who are kind of contradicting a
thing that it has been carried on by the media
and the universities in Hollywood and whatnot. And I think
we're at a sea change point where people are going
to recognize, Look, you know, we need to use the
world in order to provide for people.
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Yeah, we don't have used the world.
Speaker 5 (16:40):
We use it. We try to mitigate any harm we
may cause. But that's just part and parcel of being
the beings that we are, that God put us on
this planet.
Speaker 1 (16:50):
Yeah, it just it kind of boggles the mind that
so much attention is spent. The Vatican uses so much
of its platform to advance this climate change, both science
and activism, which, as you said, you see a sea
change on a turning in the culture, and among those
who have been the most voracious supporters of this. I
(17:11):
don't know why the Vatican isn't having that self reflection
and at least saying, you know what, maybe we should
stick to moral issues right now and really focus on
what humans do to destroy each other and the world,
rather than worrying about the environment and its natural changes
and shifts. But speaking of confusion, the Vatican's Doctrinal Office
(17:34):
released a doctrinal note to clarify titles attributed to the
Blessed Virgin Mary. This week, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez released
this document, Mater popular fidalis which condemns the use of
the title coridemptrics for Mary. Now we should say the
document was initially prepared under Pope Francis, but it was
signed off by Pope Leo with some revisions.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
Father, why is this needed now?
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Was there some outcry about Mary is co redemtrics that
we didn't hear about.
Speaker 5 (18:05):
Ah?
Speaker 4 (18:05):
Well, I'll say I don't think the documents needed now,
because I don't think this was a problem. Now, there
were two titles of our lady in particular, which were
addressed co redemtrics and then Mediatrix of all Graces. Co
Redemptrics means that Mary participated in the highest possible way
as a human being in the redemption obtained for us
(18:27):
by Christ to his God made man. The Church is
not saying that Christ is not the redeemer. There's only
one redeemer. But as Saint Paul said, I fill up
what is lacking in the suffering of Christ. So we
participate with Christ. Because remember we're part of the mystical body.
We're united to Christ and through grace we cooperate with Christ.
(18:49):
So co redemptrics is a cooperator in bringing forward the
fruits of the redemption to others. There is no thought
that Mary died and then gained grace. That way know,
Christ died and gained all graces for us. So that
now this has been debated, and this has been going
back to the reign of Pius the twelfth and even earlier,
(19:10):
and it's a controversial point in some ways, but it
was tranquility left to the realm of discussion. Now the
other titles Mediatrix of all graces and the mediator, as
you know, as someone who brings one thing from one
person and gives it to another and then back and forth.
And the idea that Mary's the mediatoral grace. The Holy
(19:30):
See has embraced that, and so have Pope's over the years,
saints and theologians and Benedict the fifteenth authorized a mass
in honor of Mediatrix of all Graces for the people
of Belgium. So that the idea there is Christ came
into the world through Mary, and then Christ goes back
(19:51):
to the world through her also, which makes a lot
of sense because in the mystical body we talk about
the sharing of spiritual gifts. Well, who's the one who's
got the most gifts?
Speaker 5 (20:00):
Mary?
Speaker 4 (20:01):
So again these are titles that you can embrace. I
don't think it was useful for the Vatican to get
into this debate now. And I'll just say one last thing,
because it's very serious. Cardinal Fernandez said, terms which need
constant explaining over the course of time should not be used,
because this is an indication they're not useful. Well, if
(20:22):
that's the case, we should re examine almost everything he's
issued as the head of the Doctor of the Faith
because cinidality, we need an explanation every time the word
is said, you do just suplicns not We're gonna bless
couples but not unions. What does this mean? Divorce and
remarry can receive communion ofmortis the TITSI well, wait a minute,
what about the teaching of the church that remarriages immortal sin. So,
(20:46):
in other words, they should apply their own criteria to
what they've done. Then we could have a serious discussion
of well, which really conforms to the Gospel and which doesn't.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
Yeah, father jumped the gun a little bit on me, Bob.
I'm just gonna ask you that, Cardinal Fernandez. The excuse
here for not using these terms is they could cause confusion. Well,
if that's the new barometer of doctrine, sinidality, transubstantiation, celibacy,
and his father mentioned, you know, the blessing of these couples.
(21:17):
They've got a lot of explaining to do. I love
also how Pope Benedict is quoted in this document because
apparently he was not in favor of the Codemtrics title.
But then he's utterly ignored when he speaks about worship
of Jesus in the Latin mass.
Speaker 5 (21:31):
Bob your reaction, Yeah, I mean this was really a quint.
I mean, I leave the technical part of this to
the theologians. They can argue this out. But you know,
I go back to the point I made about use
of force and of use of violence. There used to
be a time. I'm old enough. You guys are still
young wipersnappers, but I'm old enough to remember when people
used to say, at least you Catholics know what you believe.
(21:55):
And it's true we did. We had our language that
we used. You know, they were verious elements of the
just war theory. There are various elements of this and
that in the question of Mary. I was thinking about this,
but I saw that, you know, the terms when I
was growing up, we didn't worry about these terms, which
are kind of metaphorical anyway. We always used to talk
about there are three types of worship that people you
(22:17):
worship God with Latria, that's this Latin term, and then
other beings who are worthy of our respect and our attention.
They are There's a Latin term Dulia, which is you know,
saints and angels and what and Mary is Hyperdulia, so
she's between Julia and she's in Latria. But there's no
(22:39):
confusion possible there. When you're using terms that people can understand,
you can go and look them up any in any book.
And instead, what we've been doing more and more is
we're kind of promoting the idea that ambiguity and then
discussions about things that can seem never to be able
to be resolved are the way forward in the church.
And we pasted this name sinidelity on it. So look,
(23:03):
I like definitions not everything, And I mean, there are
mysteries that go beyond what we can define, but we
don't need to keep adding unnecessary mysteries that don't really
help us. The mystery of the Trinity helps us. They
ministry the mystery of the transfiguration helps us in many
other mysteries in the church.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Yeah, Father, any last words on this? Do we need
that title co redemtrics? Does it add anything that the
church needs? These are the Mary and her relationship to
salvation and the Lord himself.
Speaker 4 (23:38):
Well, Cardinal Ratzinger and the rat Singer report. You remember
that break groundbreaking book issued early in podicton Pall the second.
He embraced a Latin saying which is nom quam de
Maria satis. There's never enough about Maria, which is the
attitude of the saints, the praise the knowledge. So if
this helps people to understand how how blessed the Virgin
(24:01):
Mary is and how connected we are of our salvation,
and so be it. Since the Holy See mediatrix of
all graces, that's already been approved, it's very disturbing that
they would disapprove it. Covidemtrics has been allowed as a term,
and you know different saints have used it jump all
the second. I believe even could preach homilies on this.
(24:22):
So I would say this is this is not a
debate stopper. This is going to continue. And why the
Holy See when they ignore other things, is issuing documents
about Mary and piety. Where is a document, you know,
refuting some of the primary heresies of our time, including
the transgender fraud. We need something of the same seriousness
(24:44):
from the doctrine of the faith to explain to people
that God made male and female and nothing else. That's
what we need.
Speaker 1 (24:51):
A couple of stories brewing in the ongoing liturgy wars
that I want to bring to everybody's attention.
Speaker 2 (24:56):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (24:57):
After banning the traditional Latin Mass and parishes across the
Diocese of Charlotte, the Bishop Michael Martin is now requesting
that the Charlotte faithful stop using altar rails in their parishes.
According to reports from the Charlotte Latin Mass community, the
bishop made the request at a contentious three hour presbyteral
(25:18):
meeting of his priests.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
Father.
Speaker 1 (25:20):
Canonically, can the bishop forbid the faithful from kneeling at
an altar rail to receive communion?
Speaker 4 (25:28):
I would say technically he could refuse. He could make
a dioscent legislation outlawing altar rails. Now I'm willing to
defend that, but I could also be wrong on that.
He's not able, though, to forbid the faithful from kneeling
down to receive communion, because that's an option provided for
in the Roman legislation. So it's an active charity to
(25:48):
give people a place to kneel if they have a
right to receive communion that way. So this is a
heavy handed approach, and this is really where things get very,
very upsetting to people. We have liturgical chaos in the
Catholic Church with priests doing all kinds of things. You
and I have seen videos over the years. We've talked
about it. Priest riding bicycles down the main aisle, Priests
(26:11):
throwing rugby balls, kicking soccer balls. We had a priest
dressed up as a rapper recently at a miss Yes, okay,
so what are they trying to stop that? No, all
of that activity seemingly continues. Now, they're trying to stop
people from kneeling down to receive communion. This makes absolutely
no sense. What is the purpose of receiving communion? It's
(26:32):
the bread of eternal life. Why would you get interfered
with someone's piety. They're trying to come closer to God.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
Now, Bob, I mean, look, we say this often, and
everybody watches this and watch us over the years knows.
My motto is the practice is as important or more
important than the state of doctrine, because that's the lived
doctrine of the people. And if they want to kneel
and show that sign of reverence to the reality of
Christ in the Eucharus, why deny them? That these are
(27:01):
the tactics, and father mentioned heavy handed tactics that you wonder,
where is the sinidality for these people? Where is the
listening and accompaniment for these people who were just thrown
out of their parishes. Now they can't even kneel at
the altar rail for communion any longer.
Speaker 5 (27:17):
Well, Look, if you're willing to ban the language of
the mass of the ages to pick up a few fences,
you know, it's kind of a minor I think from
a certain person's understanding, it feels like, you know, a
minor thing, just as it appears that he's ready to
ban all sorts of other things at the altar. Look,
(27:38):
we know what this is. What this is is it's
a kind of a progressive attempt to damp down the
kind of vertical worship that was so prominent in the past,
perhaps even excessively. I mean, I think we can have
a debate about liturgy that would maybe even bring in
that point, but not throw it out entirely. Right, But
(27:59):
there is this, this this vertical dimension of the faith,
and we see in these kind of progressive changes in
liturgy that it's always being attempted to kind of make
it more of a you know, a meeting, to make
it more synotal in that certain sense of everybody's got
to you know, nobody can impose anything on anybody else.
(28:19):
Everybody gets to have a voice and this and they're
doing this even as they're declaring that they're not moving
toward a more democratic churches. This is just a conversation,
so part of that confusion that we just talked about
them a minute ago. You're quite right, it embodies itself
in these little changes that little by little, small as
(28:39):
in a way, you could say it is little by little.
The cumulative effect is intended to play down that vertical
dimension and kind of make us just, you know, all
one on the on the face of the earth. Right,
I'm sorry to put it that way. Maybe it's a
little too simplistic to put it that way, but what
other explanation is there.
Speaker 1 (28:58):
In a related story, it reported earlier this week that
Bishop Larry Kullick of the Diocese of Greensburg, Pennsylvania, intended
to ban the oud Orientum Novasorto masses in his diocese.
Now that means the English masses where the priest is
facing away from the people to the high altar, so
they're all facing the same direction. As of Friday, November seventh,
(29:20):
the Catholic Herald reports that the Diocese of Greenberg is
not in fact banning those masses of people facing away
from the people. The Mason Dixon Latins Mass Society first
reported the news of a ban.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
The story went viral.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
According to the diocesan communications director, quote, no, this information
is not accurate. No directives at the diocesan level have
been issued on the celebration of the no O Orientum.
Now here's the question, father, your thoughts on the environment
that has developed now in the parish communities in the
(29:55):
United States. I think what we're seeing is they're so
shell shop this point, in the wake of this assault
on Catholic tradition that any rumor any report, people kind
of go crazy.
Speaker 2 (30:08):
They worry deeply.
Speaker 4 (30:10):
They do worry because there's a trend to restrict rather
than to liberate the forms of liturgical expression that are
traditional in the life of the Church. Now, I'll just
point out the local bishop does not have the power
to ban mass set odd orientum, meaning toward the east,
the liturgical east, meaning that the practice of the church,
(30:31):
the practice of the Orthodox Church, of practice Eastern Catholic churches,
is to face east because the liturgy is an anticipation
and a waiting for the coming of Christ the second time.
Then second coming, the church understands will be from the east,
so that we're looking east because we're looking toward Christ.
So the bishop doesn't have the power to do that. Now,
a number of bishops have done it in their diocese.
(30:54):
This is not allowed. The Roman legislation is clear, the
Congregation for Divine Worship has made this clear and communications
to various people. Now, but the atmosphere again, you have
to say to yourself, what in the world is the
genesis or origin of all of this. And I think
part of it is a fear that people who like
(31:16):
to worship in the traditional form are going to reject
everything that's happened in the church since the Second Vating Council.
I think that's an unfounded fear. They are unhappy with
certain liturgical aberrations, and they're happy with the restore restoration
of tradition. But that doesn't mean these people have to
be treated as if they're attacking the church and the
second Vating Council. That's not the case. I'd be interested with.
(31:39):
Bob thinks about.
Speaker 5 (31:40):
That, Yeah, And I think to go back to some
of the things we were talking about earlier. If we're
really in a church that needs to recover a sense
of the sacred, to refocus on some of these fundamental
moral questions that you raised earlier, reigned, and particularly if
you want to engage the environmental questions, why not use
(32:02):
the you know, the astronomical elements that exist. I mean
to look towards the sun. I mean, we're not worshiping
the sun the way some worshipers would, but we are
connecting ourselves with it, with the nature of God's world,
the way that the stars and the planets and the
moon and the sun move around us. And during the
(32:23):
Middle Ages and or the Early Church, you know, there
were allegories about animals and about other than sisters, not
worshiping creation. It was drawing out meaning from creation, and
that's what really attaches you again, It isn't just kind
of an abstract scientific determination that you can only allow
so much CO two to go up into the air. Now,
(32:44):
You're right, care about the world first. Just like you
have to care about other people to demonstrate charity, you
have to care about people in the womb to understand
the fragility of the human race. If we don't reproduce ourselves,
there's no future for us.
Speaker 2 (33:01):
Yeah, you know, Bob, that's such a great point.
Speaker 5 (33:05):
I think there's just a depth here. And I think
Father is right, and as are U Raymond. That on
one hand, some people are just terrified of any change
now because they just fear that they feel like a
locomotive is coming down the tracks and they're losing everything.
But I think that that's wrong. I think that we
need to be a little bit more flexible. But let's
(33:25):
engage those tools that have existed in the tradition for
years that help us embody, you know, in the way
that we are, postures, the way we face, the way
we talk to one another. Those things too add a
tremendous amount. And our bishops, a lot of our bishops
in the United States know this, by the way, So yeah,
we've got a debate going on, but I think that
(33:48):
those positive elements need to be underscored because we continue
to lose something and we're fighting over things that are
trivial by comparison.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
Yeah, that's a great point though, about the the orientation
of facing east. It's where the sun rises, it's the
way God made our planet move. All of that is
tied together, and it's a pity that they miss the
moral and practical implications of the reverence for tradition and creation,
that's all one. But they miss that we run to
(34:20):
un conferences and accept, you know, debated science and dubious
solutions that now even Bill Gates says, maybe we don't
need to go down this path. On a story we've
been covering now for years, the Vatican Trial of disgrace es,
just what Marco Rupnik is finally getting underway? The Pope
was asked by WTN News at that press gaggle we
(34:41):
mentioned earlier about Rupnik and the case against him.
Speaker 3 (34:45):
Certainly in many places, precisely because of the need to
be sensitive to those who have presented cases of being victims,
the artwork has been covered up, has been removed from websites,
so that issue is certainly something that we're aware of.
(35:06):
A new trial has recently begun, judges were appointed, and
processes for justice take a long time, and I know
it's very difficult for the victims to ask that they
be patient, but the Church needs to respect the rights
of all people. The principle of innocent proving guilty is
(35:29):
also true in the Church, and hopefully this trial that
is just beginning will be able to give some clarity
and justice to all those involved.
Speaker 1 (35:41):
Father, what do you make of the Pope's request for
Rupnik's victims to be patient and his take on the
art saga and whether it should continue to hang in
church installations.
Speaker 4 (35:52):
Yeah, well, they've already been patient. I'm sure the Holy
Father is aware of that. When the Vatican promise to
you know, when they lift the immunity that Rupnik had
for prosecution, and it took almost two years, at least
a year year and a half for the judges to
be named and then another half year for the judges
to convene. So there has been but once the trial's convened,
(36:16):
there should be an orderly process that doesn't take months
and months and months. Now, again, we don't know what's
going to happen in the trial. And this is really
a problem you could say about Vatican jurisprudence and the
way they operate. If you announce that you are going
to have a trial, why didn't they announce the start
date of the trial. Why didn't they tell us who
the judges are? Why didn't they produce a press staven
(36:39):
saying these are the following charges, and then you know,
go from there. Vatican justice is not up to modern
standards of public justice, the administration of trials and investigations
and all the rest. And you know, the victims said
to say, they're kind of like spectators on this because
the accusation is being made by a Vatican process secutor
(37:00):
against this man. So the Vatican is prosecuting on behalf
of the people. So I hope, I hope. For instance,
let's hope every victim who wants to testify is given
the opportunity to do so, and it is also allowed
to make their testimony known to the wider public, because
this is a matter of public interest. We already have
through the media, and let's forget face it, without media pressure,
(37:23):
none of this would have happened. The victims went to
the media, and they gave tremendously personal and tragic stories
of what they claim. I think, truly Rupnik did. It's
now time to resolve this and not simply. The Macarac
trial was a perfect example. That was an administrative process.
They issued like a two or three sentence at the end,
and he was thrown out of the priesthood. There was
(37:44):
no accounting for anything that he did in the public sphere,
and that was I think not in line with the
way modern justice systems work, Bob.
Speaker 1 (37:52):
So let's talk for a moment about the art itself. Look,
there's been a lot of kind of tone deaf behavior
I think from the Vatican rupe Nick art itself, now
the pope reference there. What I think is the removal
of the art from the Vatican website.
Speaker 2 (38:06):
We'll see if that proves true.
Speaker 1 (38:08):
Is there any credibility in the eyes of the victims
at this point, not just a group Nick's art, but
the ongoing presence of it in these churches.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
Should it be taken down? Do you think?
Speaker 5 (38:21):
Well, let me start with from a slightly different point,
as I understand that he is still a priest in
good standing. Yeah right, I mean, so he's still operating,
which is for us in America. It's astonishing because when
a priest is accused here and there seems to be
some credible evidence, he's out, and then the process goes forward.
So already we're starting from a position that is pretty strange,
(38:44):
and then this artwork stays up and there seems to
be there seem to be elements within the Vatican Press
Office and some of the public relations offices that deliberately
include some of his art and continue to do this
in things that they're publishing. So I begin with that
that to me, that is very odd, and I don't
(39:05):
know why a man like this would still be be protected.
He should be I don't know if he should be
sent away or whatever the process should be, but he
should not be doing those two things. Now in terms
of art, you know pretty much. I don't like censoring
art after the fact. I mean, Carravaggio was a terrible man, murderer.
There have been other artists who were less than saints,
(39:27):
but their art was good. Rythnik presents a strange case
because there was sacrileges.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
Involved, right and with the art itself.
Speaker 5 (39:36):
Bob abuses of the sacrament at the altar of confession.
So just if you're a serious Catholic er takes seriously
the theology of the sacraments, there's that element that's thrown
on top of it. So all this, to me, it
just militates against that stuff continuing. I don't like censoring art,
(40:00):
but I think in this case, the violations were so
awful and involved sacred objects and sacred matters that you
simply can't leave them around and continue to think of
yourself as a serious Christian church. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (40:15):
Father, I don't even want to get into the details
because they're so diabolical, frankly, but I mean when you're
putting human fluids and mixing them in paint and using
them in the mosaics in your art, there's something profoundly
disordered in all of that and wicked, and I think
that has to be part of the consideration as to
(40:35):
whether this should still hang in these churches and institutions
all over the United States, the world, even in the Vatican.
Speaker 2 (40:43):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (40:43):
I mean, let's by analogy, if he has committed, if any,
acues of committing other types of crimes rather than sexual
abuse of nuns, which is the main accusation. Vatican had
been so passive on this. Let's say he had let's
say he had taken to gun and tried to shoot
Pope Francis. Would any of his art be allowed to
stay anywhere? Of course not, because it would have been recognized.
Speaker 2 (41:05):
This is a.
Speaker 4 (41:06):
Malicious man who did evil. We should have nothing to
do with his artwork. On the other hand, he's reliably
accused of sex abuse. He's thrown out of the Jesuits,
he had been excommunicated by the Vatican because he gave
absolution to one of the people that he raped or
sexually abused. So he's already approven by his record to
(41:27):
have been found guilty of crime. And yet we're waiting,
we're tiptoeing around saying we got to keep his art
because we don't want to. No, no, no, we don't
do this. We have to be serious. Is the purpose
of a church to give an art is an opportunity
to display his work? Of course not. Is the house
of God?
Speaker 2 (41:44):
Yeah, and the work should draw you to worship of God.
Speaker 1 (41:48):
And with all of the competing agendas and material in
that particular art, I agree with you. I think it's
a particular case where you have to say cover it
up or move it out.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
Jence.
Speaker 1 (41:58):
The German sonatal way rolls on as we report it
and continue to report. The Italian Church seem seems to
have caught sonatyl fever. It's embracing the recognition of gender
ideology and homosexuality. For example, uh Pope Leo, since his election,
has repeatedly affirmed sinnidality and following in the footsteps of
(42:19):
Pope Francis, America magazine has just published a piece, an
article called sinnidality fatigue. What's their cure? Just get good
at it?
Speaker 6 (42:31):
They suggest, Bob, your reaction to this idea that the reason,
the way to cure sinnidality fatigue is get more sonodyl
whatever that means.
Speaker 5 (42:44):
Yeah, And of course that's just the problem. We've been
saying this for the last ten years. And the answers
you get from people is, well, it's a process and
as it goes along, you know, we'll define what it
is as we go along. But yet it's it's the
most urgent thing that I ought to be had everywhere
around the world in the church. Look, you can say
(43:06):
conversations are good, but I have to say, when I
looked at the pictures that accompanied that article in America Magazine.
It reminded me of some of these sad you know,
confessional circles that you used to see back in the
sixties when people thought that they were letting it all
hang out and they were being honest with one another.
I mean, it almost looks more like an AA meeting
than it is something about, you know, putting together a
(43:29):
way of understanding the church and doing better Evangelisa. So
you know, all that's just indicates that it is. For
all the talk about how well it's doing is breaking
out all over the world.
Speaker 1 (43:41):
It's in crisis, right, Yeah, it's in crisis. And as
you said, it looks like a sterile gathering. I would
argue AA meetings have far more impacted there are far
more impactful and positive than anything coming out of this
sonodyl Way and Father, I guess the solution is keep
doing the Sonadyl shop. Are we any closer to what
a real understanding is or definition of sinidality?
Speaker 2 (44:05):
Do we actually know what it is?
Speaker 4 (44:08):
Well, we know what real cinidality is because it was
given to us by the Second Vatican Council and Pope Paul.
The six Cinidality is a meeting of bishops to consider
matters of importance in the life of the Church and
provide advice to the Roman pontiff. That's what cinidality is.
Those that the bishops seek as experts can be anybody,
(44:28):
but only the bishops are involved in sinods. Pope Francis
changed that and then made it, you know, a process
such that you know. The message of this article is,
if you're tired of having been on the treadmill for
three years, just get used to it and keep going
for as many more years as is necessary. This is ridiculous,
(44:49):
and I should also throw this in they when the
people who like sinidality admit that people are tired of it,
it's not a good sign that they have confidence that
this thing is doing its job. And you can't do
its job, because what sinidality means is whatever they tell
us from the Vatican. It means when they issue their
next document, and of course, as you may know, they
(45:10):
canceled in advanced the next Senate. It's going to be
replaced by an ecclesial assembly in which we're told that
it'll be at least fifty percent non bishop's present. So
even the Senate is not synadel enough. Even after all
the changes. This is a perfect formula for an academic
type revolution where the faculty gets rid of the president
(45:32):
and says, Okay, tomorrow the next decree, we'll tell the
students what we're going to teach them. But by the way,
it could change next week.
Speaker 2 (45:38):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (45:39):
No, it's all very confusing, and the reality is it
never caught the zeitgeist in the church at large. Let's
face it, you go to a local parish, you go
to your parish or my parish or Bob's parish. Nobody's
talking about cinidality or wanting to be more sonoontylal.
Speaker 2 (45:55):
They don't even know what this means.
Speaker 1 (45:57):
A Catholic philosopher Ed Fesser wrote something this week that
speaks a bit to this sonatal question and the idea
that some are waiting for another pope to undo the
rigid traditions of the past.
Speaker 2 (46:12):
He says, the thesis.
Speaker 1 (46:14):
That a pope can contradict what has always been understood
to be the consistent teaching of scripture and tradition is not,
and never has been, the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
It is a diabolical distortion of the magisterium into Orwell's
Ministry of Truth, Bob your reaction. He underlines the example
(46:35):
of the death penalty, that a good Catholic can oppose
it in practice, but that it can never be intrinsically evil,
because that would contradict scripture and tradition. Doctors of the Church,
two thousand years of papal teaching your thoughts, Bob, Yeah.
Speaker 5 (46:49):
Ed Fezer is a very very fine philosopher. He's a
very careful thinker. He's very loyal to the tradition. He
knows the tradition. So when he speaks about these things,
he isn't used speaking off the top of his head
the kind of thing that he would like to be true.
He's in the very center of the tradition. I read
his book. I think I even endorsed it when he
came out and he quotes from Avery Dulles, the Jesuit
(47:12):
Theologian was made a cardinal about John Paul Second, and
Dulles pointed out that if let's say, Hope Raymond Royo
today contradicts Pope Robert Royal of yesterday, well, everybody can
look at that and say, oh, yeah, that was great,
that was a great change that he made. But that
introduces the principle that any pope can overthrow the teaching
(47:37):
of his predecessor. And so, yeah, you're writing high today, Raymond,
you're the boss. You're on Royal Grande. But the next
guy comes along and he contradicts you, and now we're
off to the races. There is no stable doctrine, there's
no stable truth that exists within the church. And it's
not just over the death penalty. It has ramifications for
(47:58):
all the doctrinal and moral teachings.
Speaker 2 (48:01):
Of the church. Yeah, it undermines and weakens the whole foundation. Father,
you want to say anything on.
Speaker 4 (48:06):
That, Yeah, no, this is absolutely true. We send people
to seminary to train to be priests. And the first
lesson is not the Catholic faith consists of whatever the
pope tells us today.
Speaker 2 (48:18):
It means no.
Speaker 4 (48:20):
The Catholic faith consists of the memorial teaching based on
the scriptures and the tradition of the Church, which has
been enunciated over the course of the centuries in councils,
in theologians of good repute, and orthodoxy. In other words,
there's a whole body of teaching. Bob wrote a great
book about the twentieth century theological tradition and what was
(48:43):
that based on the nineteenth centuries that came before it.
It wasn't based on the fact that a pope woke
up and said, well, today we're going to take five
out of ten of teachings and then five are no
longer applicable. No, this is a say it's unfortunately, it's
the politicization of the papacy and religion where the thought is,
just like a new president has a new set of priorities,
(49:06):
is you know platform a new pope can do that?
He can't, He cannot do that. And this is why
we've said this. I've said this before, we've said it here.
We can't sit by and say what Pope Francis did
about divorce and remarried, communion, blessing of homosexual couples, and
capital punishment. This is now definitive Catholic teaching that cannot
be contradicted. No, these were innovations which contradicted what previous
(49:29):
popes taught. These have to be cast aside if we're
going to be consistent, because otherwise everything's subject to question.
And there are some people who want that in the church.
We know that, so we have to fight that that's
the good fight of faith.
Speaker 2 (49:43):
Yeah, it's a bad trend.
Speaker 1 (49:44):
It's a bad idea because you do undermine and weaken
everything that preceded you. And then, as Bob was saying earlier,
Catholics were always regarded as knowing what they believe. Well,
then everything's up for grabs, and that's a very bad
place to be. I want to ask her before we go, Well,
there is a new document on monogamy that the Doctrinal
Office of the Vatican is allegedly working on to be
(50:06):
released soon. Bob, your thoughts on this and why do
you think this is coming now?
Speaker 5 (50:14):
Oh? I could have some thoughts that I'd rather not
express about this. They're little dark and perhaps a little cynical. Okay,
you know, we all kind of thought that monogamy was
a pretty much settled in, perfectly clear concept. Yeah, and
we'll see what. We'll see what. We'll see what it
is when they get through it, We're going to have
(50:38):
more questions than.
Speaker 4 (50:40):
I'm wondering if this is going to be a document
on polygamy. And the reason I wonder about it because
in the Senate some African bishops said that the sentinel
concern has to be you know, finding a place for
polygamous people in the church, and that reminds me that
we're still waiting for the tense study groups, you know,
the tense particular study groups and for controversial questions, and
(51:01):
polygamy was one of them. So I don't know if
this is going to be related to those study group teachings.
And by the way, if it's still understudy, why is
the Vatican in isitiing teachings and not waiting for the
Cenindal process to accomplish itself. But the real story here
is monogamy is threatened by all those sexual licensed practices
(51:25):
in the modern world, including so called same sex marriage.
So hopefully the document monogamy is going to be rejection
of pseudo marriages, which are these blessings of homosexual couples
who already civilly married and view the blessing as a
confirmation by the Church that they are in fact married.
That's the reality on the ground. If they don't deal
with that, then this is just going to be further confusion.
Speaker 2 (51:49):
Posse.
Speaker 1 (51:49):
We could go on for an hour more, but I'm
going to let you all rest for now. Grateful to
you for always as always, and if you want more
of the oil Grande prayerful Posse, subscribe to the Arroyo
Grande Show on YouTube or the Arroyo Grande Podcast wherever
you get yours on behalf of Robert Royal, Father Gerald Murray.
Until the Posse rides again, stay the course and follow
(52:10):
the light.
Speaker 2 (52:11):
I'm Raymond Arroyo. We'll see you next time.
Speaker 1 (52:14):
Arroyo Grande is produced in partnership with iHeart Podcasts and
DP Studios, and is available on the iHeartRadio, Apple wherever
you get your podcasts
Have climate change and immigration policies become new articles of
faith in the Catholic Church. And is marry a co
redemn tricks with Jesus in salvation the Prayerful Posse. We'll
explore it all next. Welcome to an important Prayerful Posse.
(00:23):
Be sure to go subscribe to the show. It's a
wonderful way to support our work and it's totally free.
Or visit Raymondroyo dot com. Let's convene the Prayerful Posse.
Canon lawyer and priests to the Archdiocese of New York,
Father Gerald Murray, an editor in chief of The Catholic
Thing dot org.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Robert Royal joining us from Europe a.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Very mysterious Europe. It looks like Bob Gens. Pope Leo
has been making a lot of headlines this week. During
one of his press gaggles outside of Costo Gondolfo, the
Pope offered up a very pointed commentary on what appeared
to be US immigration policy, role.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Of the churches to preach the Gospel, And just a
couple of days ago, we heard Matthew's Gospel Chapter twenty five,
which says Jesus says very clearly at the end of
the world, we're going to be asked, you know, how
did you receive the foreigner? Did you receive him and
welcome him or not? And I think that many people
(01:21):
who have lived for years and years and years, never
causing problems, have been deeply affected by what's going on
right now, and I would certainly invite the authorities to
allow pastoral workers to attend to the needs of those people,
many times have been separated from their families for good
(01:43):
amount of time. No one knows what's happening, but their
own spiritual needs should be attended to it.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Father, your thoughts on the pope waiting into immigration policy,
particularly at the time when Europe is literally convulsing over
this issue of unfettered immigration.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
Well, I'll start with the second half of that comment.
I agree with the Pope that chaplain's priest should be
allowed in to visit those being held in detention centers
by Ice and Border Patrol. The question is though they
have to be qualified, they have to be there, knowing
who they are, what their reason for being there, because
this is a prime time for political activism grant standing.
(02:22):
So that's not why chaplain goes in to see people
are being detained. On the other part, yes, we do
have to greet foreigners and do what we can to
help them, but that doesn't mean foreigners have a right
to illegally enter the country or overstay their visa. And
the fact that they've been here a long time, Yeah,
that's not a good thing because that means the previous
(02:44):
governments have been lax and enforcing the law. But when
you begin to enforce the law, there's no offense there.
And in fact, the government, as we know, is offering
people here illegally the chance to voluntarily repatriate to their
home countries and then an opportunity to come in legally.
So I think the American government is only doing what
(03:05):
you know is according to the law and the will
of the American people, which is, if you want to
be in the United States, you have to be here legally.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Bob, your thoughts on this and why has immigration policy
been so elevated. I mean, the energy and effort expended
on this from Rome and really throughout the church is
something remarkable. President Obama, by the way, deported about two
million people. I don't remember this kind of organized Catholic
resistance if you will, to that policy.
Speaker 5 (03:35):
Well, I mean, we know the part of the reason
is that the media plays at this point because they
just they shared a detestation of Donald Trump. They detest
him for everything that he absolutely does. I mean, Obama
locked up children inside chaining fences, but when Trump did
it in his previous administration, this is apparently something new
(03:56):
that had never happened on the face of the earth.
I've got to say that I don't know entirely why
the Church is doing this, clearly, as you say, Raymond,
in Europe in particular, because the large majority of those
illegals are Muslims, and we're seeing all sorts of cultural classes.
It just makes no sense. And I think that when
(04:17):
Pope Francis, early in his papacy, went to Lampaduza, which
is an Italian i am very close to the coast
of Africa, that he thought he was opening up a
mode of charity and mercy, but in fact he was
opening up a series of problems for people in Europe.
Now Here in the United States. Fortunately, for the most part,
(04:37):
the people who have come in are either Evangelicals or
Christians or Catholics, although there are a lot of criminals
that have come in as well. Now I'm going to
take a little bit of a perhaps controversial position about this,
because I really do think that our government has a
moral responsibility. If you've left, let someone live here five
(04:59):
or ten year, they put down roots and they have
a family and whatnot. I'm not saying that they should
automatically be allowed into the country or regularized, but we
have allowed our government has allowed this situation to fester,
and it's happened for many years. Now we don't have
to this day. We don't have proper legislation about illegal immigration.
(05:22):
We've got Trump who's been able to shut down the border,
and thank god that he did, but our Congress still
needs to do, you know, complete ad a thorough look
at what our immigration policies should be. But look that said,
that's a political debate that has to be If you've
(05:43):
been here five years and if ten years or whatever,
you haven't been a problem, maybe we can find out
some way that you can stay longer, you go back
and you come in. But what I want to say
is this, I don't see why it is that the
church talks about this sort of thing when I think
everybody he understands this. Here in America. We understand immigration.
Speaker 4 (06:03):
We like it.
Speaker 5 (06:03):
We like legal immigrants, our family or immigrants, yours raiment
and yours trying too. Yeah, we all like this, and
we all know it contributes to the country. But this
illegal there's welcoming of illegals. It just seems to me,
it almost sounds like the Church doesn't have anything better
to do at this point. I already to say that,
but it's like picking a moral question, and I think
(06:24):
climate change participates somewhat in that as well.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
Yeah, we're going to get to that in the moment.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
But you know, a week when we learned, Father and Bob,
that a German festival, that outdoor festival where they had
that terrible tragedy those people were killed by Islamic extremists.
That Christmas festival canceled this year. The Christmas Lights in Sheffield,
England canceled this year. There's a cultural aggression underway that
(06:51):
I think the Church, for whatever reason, is unwilling to
examine or look at with clear eyes.
Speaker 4 (06:57):
Father, Well, this is an issue has to do with
unassimilated Muslims, Muslim people in Europe who have come primarily
for the economic benefits of being in Europe, as opposed
to their home countries. They have displayed little intention to
integrate and we had you know, just last month, we
(07:18):
had a man, an Islamic man with a knife, trying
to attack in a synagogue and he had to be
neutralized by the police. This is horrendous because there is
a hostility to Jews in Europe that has not been
seen since the Nazi period. And the only possible reasonable
(07:40):
explanation for it is to identify with this influx of
Islamic people who don't like Jews and become violent. And
this is really a problem. You know, the Jewish soccer
team was playing in England and there were all kinds
of problems outside the stadium, so you know, we have
seen this. And the Israelis were attacked by Hamas on
(08:03):
October seven, two years ago. The following weekend there was
a huge march in London in support of Hamas. This
is unthinkable if there had been a Nazi attack on people,
and then the following weekend a million people got in
favor of the Nazis. I think the governments would have
acted more.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
Yeah, no, no, there seems again an unwillingness if you're
worried about religious freedom and the flourishing of religions in countries.
You've got to, as a religious leader, focus on this
in some way. Pab Leo also said, Bob, I weren't
your comments on this. He said, the US military's actions
against Venezuela, the Narco terrorists. There, here's the quote. I
(08:42):
believe violence never brings victory. The key is to seek dialogue,
to find fairways, ways to resolve the problems that may
exist within countries.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Bob, dialogue with the terrorists.
Speaker 5 (08:54):
Yeah, I'm sorry to say. That's the kind of language
that I think during his period of formation in this
seminary and in graduate school, it's the kind of language
that people were encouraged to use to begin with. I mean,
let's make a Catholic distinction in language. There's a difference
between a use of force, which may be just, and violence.
(09:14):
I mean, violence is when I stabbed somebody, you know,
I want to rob him or whatever, I may to
use force to prevent somebody from from robbing another person. So,
first of all, he's got to be clear about what
that is. Otherwise, we're in a pacifism where everybody's supposed
to be, you know, getting along very well with everybody,
and that's simply not the case. And look, in the
case event asulla, we're dealing with one of those nasty
(09:37):
regimes that pops up every now in Latin America. Venezuela
used to be a very vibrant, democratic, prosperous country. It
has a lot of oil, It was well organized, and
it went down the wrong path and went down the
wrong path, and in a similar fashion to what Argentina
did in the past and Nicaragua and some other countries
(09:57):
like this. So like, we're not just talking about a
random lashing out with violence. We're looking at trying to
prevent some pretty bad actors from harming their own people
to begin with, but secondarily the effects that they have
when they bring drugs into this country and criminals, etc.
So he's partly right if he focuses the language a
(10:21):
little bit better. But I don't think that this is
a pope who yet has a grip on these kinds
of international situations. And I often help whenever I'm criticized
by some foreign diplomat, I often say, look, you guys,
aren't the ones that have to send in the troops
if something goes drastically wrong in a place like Venezuela,
we do. We have to send our guys, so we
(10:43):
need to deal with things far ahead of their getting
into an utterly possible situation.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
And Father, in this case, you had these narco drug
dealers and terrorists coming in and bringing drugs meant to kill,
and they do kill swaths of our population. So there
is a national security interest here is my question. Is
this a little out of the purview and perhaps terroism
of the papacy to weigh in on something so granular
(11:12):
and encourage dialogue in this situation.
Speaker 4 (11:14):
No, I think it's proper for the pope to talk
about things issues of foreign policy which have a moral
aspect to it. And so there's a legitimate debate going on.
Are narco terrorists appropriate targets for the military, And that's
a good debate to have. But we've already had in
the United States because those groups have been deemed to
be nonstate actors of hostile to the United States, posing
(11:36):
a real threat to it. And these people, by the way,
they know what this is happening, so they should stop
their activities. They're the ones taking the risk of getting
killed by the US military. Let's forget, let's not forget that.
But then secondly, the answer to a criminal terrorist organization
is not dialogue as regards So that's regards to people
(11:59):
selling the drugs. In regards to Maduro government, when have
they gotten into a serious dialegue with anybody? The Maduro's
an illegitimate president. He wasn't elected. The other person was
elected in the last election, but the votes were counted fraudulently,
and who got the Nobel priest pies the other candidate,
So we should remember he's an illegitimate pres president. He's
(12:21):
using narco terrorists to continue to gain money for himself
and to put down the United States. So I welcome
papal commentary when it's based on the set of facts
and the moral equatment. There's no moral equivalency between a
military trying to defend the country and terrorists trying to
kill people.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
We all saw the Vatican hosting that climate conference, you
know where the Pope was there and the Arnold Schwarzenegger
and the famous Iceberg. Now the US Bishop's Conference and
other Catholic leaders are offering prayer and support and solidarity
for the participants at the thirtieth Annual Nations Climate Change Conference,
(13:02):
which begins. On November tenth, Secretary of State Cardinal Powerline
delivered an address by the Pope which urged more global
action on climate change and said, quote, peace is also
threatened by a lack of due respect for creation, by
the plundering of natural resources, and by a progressive decline
in the quality of life because of climate change. Father,
(13:25):
your reaction about the message in this eleven day conference?
Is this the most pressing problem in the church right now?
Speaker 4 (13:34):
It's not a specifically Catholic issue. Climate change. That's a
question at first about science, because climate has changed many
times over the course of the century. Is it man caused?
Speaker 5 (13:46):
You know?
Speaker 4 (13:47):
Is the genesis of activities that man has undertaken in
the last fifty to one hundred years that had never
been undertaken before. That's a legitimate area of study. And
from what I've seen, Bob knows more about this than I,
so I'll see to himity of opinion. But then secondly,
the question is what are the priorities that the Holy
See is stressing. And basically, in the first six months
(14:09):
of the Pontific, we've heard a lot about immigration, and
we've heard a lot about climate change, but there are
more pressing problems of particularly religious freedom. Now the Pope
has spoken about it, so I'm not saying yes, but
it's not the headlines being made by the Holy see
by and large.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
Yeah, Bob, your thoughts on the optics of these gatherings
when people are being thrown out of their parishes, which
we'll talk about later, for just wanting to practice their
faith and there's such deep confusion about what the church
itself teaches, is this the best use of the moral
clarity and standing of the Vatican at this moment.
Speaker 5 (14:47):
Yeah, well, look, it is good to talk about the
care for creation. There's nothing wrong with that at all.
As father was saying, it's not even so much that
there's I think a debate about climate change. As I'm
sorry to say this because I actually started out in
the university studying science. I think science has been corruption
corrupted to a good degree because of the money that's
made available through certain types of studies and not available
(15:10):
for other types of studies. I think we're starting to
see that a little bit about what's happening in terms
of climate change, to use that term. You know. Bill
Gates came out the other day and he's been a
massive supporter of population control and climate change activity, and
he's saying, well, you know, climate change probably isn't going
(15:32):
to destroy the human race, and we'll be able to
manage it. And I've been hearing this for years. You know,
I wrote a book about climate and religion years ago,
and I've been hearing for years that mitigation and research
really are much more important than these kind of grand
standing of these international conferences where people promise that they
won't use fossil fuels five years from that, which is
(15:52):
not utter impossibility. You know, those sorts of things. When
it gets up, it gets to become a kind of
a crusade. I think we're in trouble. And look, as
father rightly says that there are other things. Elon Musk
has stepped forward to quote another billionaire and that he's
prominent in the world, saying that our problem now is
not population over population, it's demographic collapse around the world.
(16:17):
So we have two of the most influential tech savvy
people in the world who are kind of contradicting a
thing that it has been carried on by the media
and the universities in Hollywood and whatnot. And I think
we're at a sea change point where people are going
to recognize, Look, you know, we need to use the
world in order to provide for people.
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Yeah, we don't have used the world.
Speaker 5 (16:40):
We use it. We try to mitigate any harm we
may cause. But that's just part and parcel of being
the beings that we are, that God put us on
this planet.
Speaker 1 (16:50):
Yeah, it just it kind of boggles the mind that
so much attention is spent. The Vatican uses so much
of its platform to advance this climate change, both science
and activism, which, as you said, you see a sea
change on a turning in the culture, and among those
who have been the most voracious supporters of this. I
(17:11):
don't know why the Vatican isn't having that self reflection
and at least saying, you know what, maybe we should
stick to moral issues right now and really focus on
what humans do to destroy each other and the world,
rather than worrying about the environment and its natural changes
and shifts. But speaking of confusion, the Vatican's Doctrinal Office
(17:34):
released a doctrinal note to clarify titles attributed to the
Blessed Virgin Mary. This week, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez released
this document, Mater popular fidalis which condemns the use of
the title coridemptrics for Mary. Now we should say the
document was initially prepared under Pope Francis, but it was
signed off by Pope Leo with some revisions.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
Father, why is this needed now?
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Was there some outcry about Mary is co redemtrics that
we didn't hear about.
Speaker 5 (18:05):
Ah?
Speaker 4 (18:05):
Well, I'll say I don't think the documents needed now,
because I don't think this was a problem. Now, there
were two titles of our lady in particular, which were
addressed co redemtrics and then Mediatrix of all Graces. Co
Redemptrics means that Mary participated in the highest possible way
as a human being in the redemption obtained for us
(18:27):
by Christ to his God made man. The Church is
not saying that Christ is not the redeemer. There's only
one redeemer. But as Saint Paul said, I fill up
what is lacking in the suffering of Christ. So we
participate with Christ. Because remember we're part of the mystical body.
We're united to Christ and through grace we cooperate with Christ.
(18:49):
So co redemptrics is a cooperator in bringing forward the
fruits of the redemption to others. There is no thought
that Mary died and then gained grace. That way know,
Christ died and gained all graces for us. So that
now this has been debated, and this has been going
back to the reign of Pius the twelfth and even earlier,
(19:10):
and it's a controversial point in some ways, but it
was tranquility left to the realm of discussion. Now the
other titles Mediatrix of all graces and the mediator, as
you know, as someone who brings one thing from one
person and gives it to another and then back and forth.
And the idea that Mary's the mediatoral grace. The Holy
(19:30):
See has embraced that, and so have Pope's over the years,
saints and theologians and Benedict the fifteenth authorized a mass
in honor of Mediatrix of all Graces for the people
of Belgium. So that the idea there is Christ came
into the world through Mary, and then Christ goes back
(19:51):
to the world through her also, which makes a lot
of sense because in the mystical body we talk about
the sharing of spiritual gifts. Well, who's the one who's
got the most gifts?
Speaker 5 (20:00):
Mary?
Speaker 4 (20:01):
So again these are titles that you can embrace. I
don't think it was useful for the Vatican to get
into this debate now. And I'll just say one last thing,
because it's very serious. Cardinal Fernandez said, terms which need
constant explaining over the course of time should not be used,
because this is an indication they're not useful. Well, if
(20:22):
that's the case, we should re examine almost everything he's
issued as the head of the Doctor of the Faith
because cinidality, we need an explanation every time the word
is said, you do just suplicns not We're gonna bless
couples but not unions. What does this mean? Divorce and
remarry can receive communion ofmortis the TITSI well, wait a minute,
what about the teaching of the church that remarriages immortal sin. So,
(20:46):
in other words, they should apply their own criteria to
what they've done. Then we could have a serious discussion
of well, which really conforms to the Gospel and which doesn't.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
Yeah, father jumped the gun a little bit on me, Bob.
I'm just gonna ask you that, Cardinal Fernandez. The excuse
here for not using these terms is they could cause confusion. Well,
if that's the new barometer of doctrine, sinidality, transubstantiation, celibacy,
and his father mentioned, you know, the blessing of these couples.
(21:17):
They've got a lot of explaining to do. I love
also how Pope Benedict is quoted in this document because
apparently he was not in favor of the Codemtrics title.
But then he's utterly ignored when he speaks about worship
of Jesus in the Latin mass.
Speaker 5 (21:31):
Bob your reaction, Yeah, I mean this was really a quint.
I mean, I leave the technical part of this to
the theologians. They can argue this out. But you know,
I go back to the point I made about use
of force and of use of violence. There used to
be a time. I'm old enough. You guys are still
young wipersnappers, but I'm old enough to remember when people
used to say, at least you Catholics know what you believe.
(21:55):
And it's true we did. We had our language that
we used. You know, they were verious elements of the
just war theory. There are various elements of this and
that in the question of Mary. I was thinking about this,
but I saw that, you know, the terms when I
was growing up, we didn't worry about these terms, which
are kind of metaphorical anyway. We always used to talk
about there are three types of worship that people you
(22:17):
worship God with Latria, that's this Latin term, and then
other beings who are worthy of our respect and our attention.
They are There's a Latin term Dulia, which is you know,
saints and angels and what and Mary is Hyperdulia, so
she's between Julia and she's in Latria. But there's no
(22:39):
confusion possible there. When you're using terms that people can understand,
you can go and look them up any in any book.
And instead, what we've been doing more and more is
we're kind of promoting the idea that ambiguity and then
discussions about things that can seem never to be able
to be resolved are the way forward in the church.
And we pasted this name sinidelity on it. So look,
(23:03):
I like definitions not everything, And I mean, there are
mysteries that go beyond what we can define, but we
don't need to keep adding unnecessary mysteries that don't really
help us. The mystery of the Trinity helps us. They
ministry the mystery of the transfiguration helps us in many
other mysteries in the church.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Yeah, Father, any last words on this? Do we need
that title co redemtrics? Does it add anything that the
church needs? These are the Mary and her relationship to
salvation and the Lord himself.
Speaker 4 (23:38):
Well, Cardinal Ratzinger and the rat Singer report. You remember
that break groundbreaking book issued early in podicton Pall the second.
He embraced a Latin saying which is nom quam de
Maria satis. There's never enough about Maria, which is the
attitude of the saints, the praise the knowledge. So if
this helps people to understand how how blessed the Virgin
(24:01):
Mary is and how connected we are of our salvation,
and so be it. Since the Holy See mediatrix of
all graces, that's already been approved, it's very disturbing that
they would disapprove it. Covidemtrics has been allowed as a term,
and you know different saints have used it jump all
the second. I believe even could preach homilies on this.
(24:22):
So I would say this is this is not a
debate stopper. This is going to continue. And why the
Holy See when they ignore other things, is issuing documents
about Mary and piety. Where is a document, you know,
refuting some of the primary heresies of our time, including
the transgender fraud. We need something of the same seriousness
(24:44):
from the doctrine of the faith to explain to people
that God made male and female and nothing else. That's
what we need.
Speaker 1 (24:51):
A couple of stories brewing in the ongoing liturgy wars
that I want to bring to everybody's attention.
Speaker 2 (24:56):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (24:57):
After banning the traditional Latin Mass and parishes across the
Diocese of Charlotte, the Bishop Michael Martin is now requesting
that the Charlotte faithful stop using altar rails in their parishes.
According to reports from the Charlotte Latin Mass community, the
bishop made the request at a contentious three hour presbyteral
(25:18):
meeting of his priests.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
Father.
Speaker 1 (25:20):
Canonically, can the bishop forbid the faithful from kneeling at
an altar rail to receive communion?
Speaker 4 (25:28):
I would say technically he could refuse. He could make
a dioscent legislation outlawing altar rails. Now I'm willing to
defend that, but I could also be wrong on that.
He's not able, though, to forbid the faithful from kneeling
down to receive communion, because that's an option provided for
in the Roman legislation. So it's an active charity to
(25:48):
give people a place to kneel if they have a
right to receive communion that way. So this is a
heavy handed approach, and this is really where things get very,
very upsetting to people. We have liturgical chaos in the
Catholic Church with priests doing all kinds of things. You
and I have seen videos over the years. We've talked
about it. Priest riding bicycles down the main aisle, Priests
(26:11):
throwing rugby balls, kicking soccer balls. We had a priest
dressed up as a rapper recently at a miss Yes, okay,
so what are they trying to stop that? No, all
of that activity seemingly continues. Now, they're trying to stop
people from kneeling down to receive communion. This makes absolutely
no sense. What is the purpose of receiving communion? It's
(26:32):
the bread of eternal life. Why would you get interfered
with someone's piety. They're trying to come closer to God.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
Now, Bob, I mean, look, we say this often, and
everybody watches this and watch us over the years knows.
My motto is the practice is as important or more
important than the state of doctrine, because that's the lived
doctrine of the people. And if they want to kneel
and show that sign of reverence to the reality of
Christ in the Eucharus, why deny them? That these are
(27:01):
the tactics, and father mentioned heavy handed tactics that you wonder,
where is the sinidality for these people? Where is the
listening and accompaniment for these people who were just thrown
out of their parishes. Now they can't even kneel at
the altar rail for communion any longer.
Speaker 5 (27:17):
Well, Look, if you're willing to ban the language of
the mass of the ages to pick up a few fences,
you know, it's kind of a minor I think from
a certain person's understanding, it feels like, you know, a
minor thing, just as it appears that he's ready to
ban all sorts of other things at the altar. Look,
(27:38):
we know what this is. What this is is it's
a kind of a progressive attempt to damp down the
kind of vertical worship that was so prominent in the past,
perhaps even excessively. I mean, I think we can have
a debate about liturgy that would maybe even bring in
that point, but not throw it out entirely. Right, But
(27:59):
there is this, this this vertical dimension of the faith,
and we see in these kind of progressive changes in
liturgy that it's always being attempted to kind of make
it more of a you know, a meeting, to make
it more synotal in that certain sense of everybody's got
to you know, nobody can impose anything on anybody else.
(28:19):
Everybody gets to have a voice and this and they're
doing this even as they're declaring that they're not moving
toward a more democratic churches. This is just a conversation,
so part of that confusion that we just talked about
them a minute ago. You're quite right, it embodies itself
in these little changes that little by little, small as
(28:39):
in a way, you could say it is little by little.
The cumulative effect is intended to play down that vertical
dimension and kind of make us just, you know, all
one on the on the face of the earth. Right,
I'm sorry to put it that way. Maybe it's a
little too simplistic to put it that way, but what
other explanation is there.
Speaker 1 (28:58):
In a related story, it reported earlier this week that
Bishop Larry Kullick of the Diocese of Greensburg, Pennsylvania, intended
to ban the oud Orientum Novasorto masses in his diocese.
Now that means the English masses where the priest is
facing away from the people to the high altar, so
they're all facing the same direction. As of Friday, November seventh,
(29:20):
the Catholic Herald reports that the Diocese of Greenberg is
not in fact banning those masses of people facing away
from the people. The Mason Dixon Latins Mass Society first
reported the news of a ban.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
The story went viral.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
According to the diocesan communications director, quote, no, this information
is not accurate. No directives at the diocesan level have
been issued on the celebration of the no O Orientum.
Now here's the question, father, your thoughts on the environment
that has developed now in the parish communities in the
(29:55):
United States. I think what we're seeing is they're so
shell shop this point, in the wake of this assault
on Catholic tradition that any rumor any report, people kind
of go crazy.
Speaker 2 (30:08):
They worry deeply.
Speaker 4 (30:10):
They do worry because there's a trend to restrict rather
than to liberate the forms of liturgical expression that are
traditional in the life of the Church. Now, I'll just
point out the local bishop does not have the power
to ban mass set odd orientum, meaning toward the east,
the liturgical east, meaning that the practice of the church,
(30:31):
the practice of the Orthodox Church, of practice Eastern Catholic churches,
is to face east because the liturgy is an anticipation
and a waiting for the coming of Christ the second time.
Then second coming, the church understands will be from the east,
so that we're looking east because we're looking toward Christ.
So the bishop doesn't have the power to do that. Now,
a number of bishops have done it in their diocese.
(30:54):
This is not allowed. The Roman legislation is clear, the
Congregation for Divine Worship has made this clear and communications
to various people. Now, but the atmosphere again, you have
to say to yourself, what in the world is the
genesis or origin of all of this. And I think
part of it is a fear that people who like
(31:16):
to worship in the traditional form are going to reject
everything that's happened in the church since the Second Vating Council.
I think that's an unfounded fear. They are unhappy with
certain liturgical aberrations, and they're happy with the restore restoration
of tradition. But that doesn't mean these people have to
be treated as if they're attacking the church and the
second Vating Council. That's not the case. I'd be interested with.
(31:39):
Bob thinks about.
Speaker 5 (31:40):
That, Yeah, And I think to go back to some
of the things we were talking about earlier. If we're
really in a church that needs to recover a sense
of the sacred, to refocus on some of these fundamental
moral questions that you raised earlier, reigned, and particularly if
you want to engage the environmental questions, why not use
(32:02):
the you know, the astronomical elements that exist. I mean
to look towards the sun. I mean, we're not worshiping
the sun the way some worshipers would, but we are
connecting ourselves with it, with the nature of God's world,
the way that the stars and the planets and the
moon and the sun move around us. And during the
(32:23):
Middle Ages and or the Early Church, you know, there
were allegories about animals and about other than sisters, not
worshiping creation. It was drawing out meaning from creation, and
that's what really attaches you again, It isn't just kind
of an abstract scientific determination that you can only allow
so much CO two to go up into the air. Now,
(32:44):
You're right, care about the world first. Just like you
have to care about other people to demonstrate charity, you
have to care about people in the womb to understand
the fragility of the human race. If we don't reproduce ourselves,
there's no future for us.
Speaker 2 (33:01):
Yeah, you know, Bob, that's such a great point.
Speaker 5 (33:05):
I think there's just a depth here. And I think
Father is right, and as are U Raymond. That on
one hand, some people are just terrified of any change
now because they just fear that they feel like a
locomotive is coming down the tracks and they're losing everything.
But I think that that's wrong. I think that we
need to be a little bit more flexible. But let's
(33:25):
engage those tools that have existed in the tradition for
years that help us embody, you know, in the way
that we are, postures, the way we face, the way
we talk to one another. Those things too add a
tremendous amount. And our bishops, a lot of our bishops
in the United States know this, by the way, So yeah,
we've got a debate going on, but I think that
(33:48):
those positive elements need to be underscored because we continue
to lose something and we're fighting over things that are
trivial by comparison.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
Yeah, that's a great point though, about the the orientation
of facing east. It's where the sun rises, it's the
way God made our planet move. All of that is
tied together, and it's a pity that they miss the
moral and practical implications of the reverence for tradition and creation,
that's all one. But they miss that we run to
(34:20):
un conferences and accept, you know, debated science and dubious
solutions that now even Bill Gates says, maybe we don't
need to go down this path. On a story we've
been covering now for years, the Vatican Trial of disgrace es,
just what Marco Rupnik is finally getting underway? The Pope
was asked by WTN News at that press gaggle we
(34:41):
mentioned earlier about Rupnik and the case against him.
Speaker 3 (34:45):
Certainly in many places, precisely because of the need to
be sensitive to those who have presented cases of being victims,
the artwork has been covered up, has been removed from websites,
so that issue is certainly something that we're aware of.
(35:06):
A new trial has recently begun, judges were appointed, and
processes for justice take a long time, and I know
it's very difficult for the victims to ask that they
be patient, but the Church needs to respect the rights
of all people. The principle of innocent proving guilty is
(35:29):
also true in the Church, and hopefully this trial that
is just beginning will be able to give some clarity
and justice to all those involved.
Speaker 1 (35:41):
Father, what do you make of the Pope's request for
Rupnik's victims to be patient and his take on the
art saga and whether it should continue to hang in
church installations.
Speaker 4 (35:52):
Yeah, well, they've already been patient. I'm sure the Holy
Father is aware of that. When the Vatican promise to
you know, when they lift the immunity that Rupnik had
for prosecution, and it took almost two years, at least
a year year and a half for the judges to
be named and then another half year for the judges
to convene. So there has been but once the trial's convened,
(36:16):
there should be an orderly process that doesn't take months
and months and months. Now, again, we don't know what's
going to happen in the trial. And this is really
a problem you could say about Vatican jurisprudence and the
way they operate. If you announce that you are going
to have a trial, why didn't they announce the start
date of the trial. Why didn't they tell us who
the judges are? Why didn't they produce a press staven
(36:39):
saying these are the following charges, and then you know,
go from there. Vatican justice is not up to modern
standards of public justice, the administration of trials and investigations
and all the rest. And you know, the victims said
to say, they're kind of like spectators on this because
the accusation is being made by a Vatican process secutor
(37:00):
against this man. So the Vatican is prosecuting on behalf
of the people. So I hope, I hope. For instance,
let's hope every victim who wants to testify is given
the opportunity to do so, and it is also allowed
to make their testimony known to the wider public, because
this is a matter of public interest. We already have
through the media, and let's forget face it, without media pressure,
(37:23):
none of this would have happened. The victims went to
the media, and they gave tremendously personal and tragic stories
of what they claim. I think, truly Rupnik did. It's
now time to resolve this and not simply. The Macarac
trial was a perfect example. That was an administrative process.
They issued like a two or three sentence at the end,
and he was thrown out of the priesthood. There was
(37:44):
no accounting for anything that he did in the public sphere,
and that was I think not in line with the
way modern justice systems work, Bob.
Speaker 1 (37:52):
So let's talk for a moment about the art itself. Look,
there's been a lot of kind of tone deaf behavior
I think from the Vatican rupe Nick art itself, now
the pope reference there. What I think is the removal
of the art from the Vatican website.
Speaker 2 (38:06):
We'll see if that proves true.
Speaker 1 (38:08):
Is there any credibility in the eyes of the victims
at this point, not just a group Nick's art, but
the ongoing presence of it in these churches.
Speaker 2 (38:19):
Should it be taken down? Do you think?
Speaker 5 (38:21):
Well, let me start with from a slightly different point,
as I understand that he is still a priest in
good standing. Yeah right, I mean, so he's still operating,
which is for us in America. It's astonishing because when
a priest is accused here and there seems to be
some credible evidence, he's out, and then the process goes forward.
So already we're starting from a position that is pretty strange,
(38:44):
and then this artwork stays up and there seems to
be there seem to be elements within the Vatican Press
Office and some of the public relations offices that deliberately
include some of his art and continue to do this
in things that they're publishing. So I begin with that
that to me, that is very odd, and I don't
(39:05):
know why a man like this would still be be protected.
He should be I don't know if he should be
sent away or whatever the process should be, but he
should not be doing those two things. Now in terms
of art, you know pretty much. I don't like censoring
art after the fact. I mean, Carravaggio was a terrible man, murderer.
There have been other artists who were less than saints,
(39:27):
but their art was good. Rythnik presents a strange case
because there was sacrileges.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
Involved, right and with the art itself.
Speaker 5 (39:36):
Bob abuses of the sacrament at the altar of confession.
So just if you're a serious Catholic er takes seriously
the theology of the sacraments, there's that element that's thrown
on top of it. So all this, to me, it
just militates against that stuff continuing. I don't like censoring art,
(40:00):
but I think in this case, the violations were so
awful and involved sacred objects and sacred matters that you
simply can't leave them around and continue to think of
yourself as a serious Christian church. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (40:15):
Father, I don't even want to get into the details
because they're so diabolical, frankly, but I mean when you're
putting human fluids and mixing them in paint and using
them in the mosaics in your art, there's something profoundly
disordered in all of that and wicked, and I think
that has to be part of the consideration as to
(40:35):
whether this should still hang in these churches and institutions
all over the United States, the world, even in the Vatican.
Speaker 2 (40:43):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (40:43):
I mean, let's by analogy, if he has committed, if any,
acues of committing other types of crimes rather than sexual
abuse of nuns, which is the main accusation. Vatican had
been so passive on this. Let's say he had let's
say he had taken to gun and tried to shoot
Pope Francis. Would any of his art be allowed to
stay anywhere? Of course not, because it would have been recognized.
Speaker 2 (41:05):
This is a.
Speaker 4 (41:06):
Malicious man who did evil. We should have nothing to
do with his artwork. On the other hand, he's reliably
accused of sex abuse. He's thrown out of the Jesuits,
he had been excommunicated by the Vatican because he gave
absolution to one of the people that he raped or
sexually abused. So he's already approven by his record to
(41:27):
have been found guilty of crime. And yet we're waiting,
we're tiptoeing around saying we got to keep his art
because we don't want to. No, no, no, we don't
do this. We have to be serious. Is the purpose
of a church to give an art is an opportunity
to display his work? Of course not. Is the house
of God?
Speaker 2 (41:44):
Yeah, and the work should draw you to worship of God.
Speaker 1 (41:48):
And with all of the competing agendas and material in
that particular art, I agree with you. I think it's
a particular case where you have to say cover it
up or move it out.
Speaker 2 (41:58):
Jence.
Speaker 1 (41:58):
The German sonatal way rolls on as we report it
and continue to report. The Italian Church seem seems to
have caught sonatyl fever. It's embracing the recognition of gender
ideology and homosexuality. For example, uh Pope Leo, since his election,
has repeatedly affirmed sinnidality and following in the footsteps of
(42:19):
Pope Francis, America magazine has just published a piece, an
article called sinnidality fatigue. What's their cure? Just get good
at it?
Speaker 6 (42:31):
They suggest, Bob, your reaction to this idea that the reason,
the way to cure sinnidality fatigue is get more sonodyl
whatever that means.
Speaker 5 (42:44):
Yeah, And of course that's just the problem. We've been
saying this for the last ten years. And the answers
you get from people is, well, it's a process and
as it goes along, you know, we'll define what it
is as we go along. But yet it's it's the
most urgent thing that I ought to be had everywhere
around the world in the church. Look, you can say
(43:06):
conversations are good, but I have to say, when I
looked at the pictures that accompanied that article in America Magazine.
It reminded me of some of these sad you know,
confessional circles that you used to see back in the
sixties when people thought that they were letting it all
hang out and they were being honest with one another.
I mean, it almost looks more like an AA meeting
than it is something about, you know, putting together a
(43:29):
way of understanding the church and doing better Evangelisa. So
you know, all that's just indicates that it is. For
all the talk about how well it's doing is breaking
out all over the world.
Speaker 1 (43:41):
It's in crisis, right, Yeah, it's in crisis. And as
you said, it looks like a sterile gathering. I would
argue AA meetings have far more impacted there are far
more impactful and positive than anything coming out of this
sonodyl Way and Father, I guess the solution is keep
doing the Sonadyl shop. Are we any closer to what
a real understanding is or definition of sinidality?
Speaker 2 (44:05):
Do we actually know what it is?
Speaker 4 (44:08):
Well, we know what real cinidality is because it was
given to us by the Second Vatican Council and Pope Paul.
The six Cinidality is a meeting of bishops to consider
matters of importance in the life of the Church and
provide advice to the Roman pontiff. That's what cinidality is.
Those that the bishops seek as experts can be anybody,
(44:28):
but only the bishops are involved in sinods. Pope Francis
changed that and then made it, you know, a process
such that you know. The message of this article is,
if you're tired of having been on the treadmill for
three years, just get used to it and keep going
for as many more years as is necessary. This is ridiculous,
(44:49):
and I should also throw this in they when the
people who like sinidality admit that people are tired of it,
it's not a good sign that they have confidence that
this thing is doing its job. And you can't do
its job, because what sinidality means is whatever they tell
us from the Vatican. It means when they issue their
next document, and of course, as you may know, they
(45:10):
canceled in advanced the next Senate. It's going to be
replaced by an ecclesial assembly in which we're told that
it'll be at least fifty percent non bishop's present. So
even the Senate is not synadel enough. Even after all
the changes. This is a perfect formula for an academic
type revolution where the faculty gets rid of the president
(45:32):
and says, Okay, tomorrow the next decree, we'll tell the
students what we're going to teach them. But by the way,
it could change next week.
Speaker 2 (45:38):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (45:39):
No, it's all very confusing, and the reality is it
never caught the zeitgeist in the church at large. Let's
face it, you go to a local parish, you go
to your parish or my parish or Bob's parish. Nobody's
talking about cinidality or wanting to be more sonoontylal.
Speaker 2 (45:55):
They don't even know what this means.
Speaker 1 (45:57):
A Catholic philosopher Ed Fesser wrote something this week that
speaks a bit to this sonatal question and the idea
that some are waiting for another pope to undo the
rigid traditions of the past.
Speaker 2 (46:12):
He says, the thesis.
Speaker 1 (46:14):
That a pope can contradict what has always been understood
to be the consistent teaching of scripture and tradition is not,
and never has been, the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
It is a diabolical distortion of the magisterium into Orwell's
Ministry of Truth, Bob your reaction. He underlines the example
(46:35):
of the death penalty, that a good Catholic can oppose
it in practice, but that it can never be intrinsically evil,
because that would contradict scripture and tradition. Doctors of the Church,
two thousand years of papal teaching your thoughts, Bob, Yeah.
Speaker 5 (46:49):
Ed Fezer is a very very fine philosopher. He's a
very careful thinker. He's very loyal to the tradition. He
knows the tradition. So when he speaks about these things,
he isn't used speaking off the top of his head
the kind of thing that he would like to be true.
He's in the very center of the tradition. I read
his book. I think I even endorsed it when he
came out and he quotes from Avery Dulles, the Jesuit
(47:12):
Theologian was made a cardinal about John Paul Second, and
Dulles pointed out that if let's say, Hope Raymond Royo
today contradicts Pope Robert Royal of yesterday, well, everybody can
look at that and say, oh, yeah, that was great,
that was a great change that he made. But that
introduces the principle that any pope can overthrow the teaching
(47:37):
of his predecessor. And so, yeah, you're writing high today, Raymond,
you're the boss. You're on Royal Grande. But the next
guy comes along and he contradicts you, and now we're
off to the races. There is no stable doctrine, there's
no stable truth that exists within the church. And it's
not just over the death penalty. It has ramifications for
(47:58):
all the doctrinal and moral teachings.
Speaker 2 (48:01):
Of the church. Yeah, it undermines and weakens the whole foundation. Father,
you want to say anything on.
Speaker 4 (48:06):
That, Yeah, no, this is absolutely true. We send people
to seminary to train to be priests. And the first
lesson is not the Catholic faith consists of whatever the
pope tells us today.
Speaker 2 (48:18):
It means no.
Speaker 4 (48:20):
The Catholic faith consists of the memorial teaching based on
the scriptures and the tradition of the Church, which has
been enunciated over the course of the centuries in councils,
in theologians of good repute, and orthodoxy. In other words,
there's a whole body of teaching. Bob wrote a great
book about the twentieth century theological tradition and what was
(48:43):
that based on the nineteenth centuries that came before it.
It wasn't based on the fact that a pope woke
up and said, well, today we're going to take five
out of ten of teachings and then five are no
longer applicable. No, this is a say it's unfortunately, it's
the politicization of the papacy and religion where the thought is,
just like a new president has a new set of priorities,
(49:06):
is you know platform a new pope can do that?
He can't, He cannot do that. And this is why
we've said this. I've said this before, we've said it here.
We can't sit by and say what Pope Francis did
about divorce and remarried, communion, blessing of homosexual couples, and
capital punishment. This is now definitive Catholic teaching that cannot
be contradicted. No, these were innovations which contradicted what previous
(49:29):
popes taught. These have to be cast aside if we're
going to be consistent, because otherwise everything's subject to question.
And there are some people who want that in the church.
We know that, so we have to fight that that's
the good fight of faith.
Speaker 2 (49:43):
Yeah, it's a bad trend.
Speaker 1 (49:44):
It's a bad idea because you do undermine and weaken
everything that preceded you. And then, as Bob was saying earlier,
Catholics were always regarded as knowing what they believe. Well,
then everything's up for grabs, and that's a very bad
place to be. I want to ask her before we go, Well,
there is a new document on monogamy that the Doctrinal
Office of the Vatican is allegedly working on to be
(50:06):
released soon. Bob, your thoughts on this and why do
you think this is coming now?
Speaker 5 (50:14):
Oh? I could have some thoughts that I'd rather not
express about this. They're little dark and perhaps a little cynical. Okay,
you know, we all kind of thought that monogamy was
a pretty much settled in, perfectly clear concept. Yeah, and
we'll see what. We'll see what. We'll see what it
is when they get through it, We're going to have
(50:38):
more questions than.
Speaker 4 (50:40):
I'm wondering if this is going to be a document
on polygamy. And the reason I wonder about it because
in the Senate some African bishops said that the sentinel
concern has to be you know, finding a place for
polygamous people in the church, and that reminds me that
we're still waiting for the tense study groups, you know,
the tense particular study groups and for controversial questions, and
(51:01):
polygamy was one of them. So I don't know if
this is going to be related to those study group teachings.
And by the way, if it's still understudy, why is
the Vatican in isitiing teachings and not waiting for the
Cenindal process to accomplish itself. But the real story here
is monogamy is threatened by all those sexual licensed practices
(51:25):
in the modern world, including so called same sex marriage.
So hopefully the document monogamy is going to be rejection
of pseudo marriages, which are these blessings of homosexual couples
who already civilly married and view the blessing as a
confirmation by the Church that they are in fact married.
That's the reality on the ground. If they don't deal
with that, then this is just going to be further confusion.
Speaker 2 (51:49):
Posse.
Speaker 1 (51:49):
We could go on for an hour more, but I'm
going to let you all rest for now. Grateful to
you for always as always, and if you want more
of the oil Grande prayerful Posse, subscribe to the Arroyo
Grande Show on YouTube or the Arroyo Grande Podcast wherever
you get yours on behalf of Robert Royal, Father Gerald Murray.
Until the Posse rides again, stay the course and follow
(52:10):
the light.
Speaker 2 (52:11):
I'm Raymond Arroyo. We'll see you next time.
Speaker 1 (52:14):
Arroyo Grande is produced in partnership with iHeart Podcasts and
DP Studios, and is available on the iHeartRadio, Apple wherever
you get your podcasts
Host
Raymond Arroyo
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.