Thursday, August 09, 2007

English Bishops attack the Pope

Action, please: please protest to the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and the Holy Father. Not only Bishop Budd, but all the Bishops of England and Wales are implicated in the work of the 'agencies' of the Bishops' Conference.

Cardinal Levada
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
11 Palazzo di S. Uffizio
Vatican City State,

A book has been published, ('Catholic Social Justice: Theological and Practical Explorations') 'in association with' 'Caritas Social Action', an organ of the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales. Its main editor, Philomena Cullen, is 'Policy Co-ordinator' at Caritas, and it has a forword by Bishop Budd of Plymouth (pictured), which criticises the Pope in the most severe terms, ridicules his first Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, and uses inverted commas when referring to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 ("the 'terrorist' attacks"). It even has a chapter by the dissident theologian Hans Kung, who was stripped of his licence to teach as a Catholic theologian in 1979, but was given an award by Freemasons in 2007.

From Holy Smoke (Damian Thompson) (see his full post here, and more quotations from the book here): Benedict is accused of taking an ideological position in favour of “the capitalist system and colonialism”.

We are told that the Pope’s views on social justice are “hardly credible” in view of the Church’s historic record of violence, torture and theft. We learn that the Catholic clergy teach that “men are superior to women” because they are more in the image of Christ.

Pope John Paul II is also criticised. According to Fr Tissa Balasuriya, the author of the relevant essay, both John Paul and Benedict lived their lives “in a world dominated by white racism” and therefore could not understand the developing world. ...

Philomena Cullen, one of the editors, attacks “the ideology of the nuclear family” and endorses “the open family ideology rooted in a feminist perspective”.

See here for a good post on this by Fr Finigan, who points out another of the authors was condemned by the CDF in 1997:
"In publishing this Notification, the Congregation is obliged also to declare that Fr. Balasuriya has deviated from the integrity of the truth of the Catholic faith and, therefore, cannot be considered a Catholic theologian; moreover, he has incurred excommunication latae sententiae (can. 1364, ß1)."


Moira said...

I absolutely agree we should complain loudly - but as is so rightly stated, all the bishops of England and Wales are implicated. So while going to the CDF, I intend to respectfully complain also to my own bishop (Cardinal in my case!) and encourage others to do likewise!

Though they are left open to this by entrusting things which they are ultimately responsible for, to delegates of "the Conference..."; we have to assume that it is an error or omission - and bring it to their attention. I don't envy bishops I must say. Particularly those in England and Wales.

Actually it's high time the Conference started restricting itself to the few administrative areas it has genuine authority over, and enabled individual bishops to feel the weight of their positions... perhaps then they would be less "fraternal" in their dealings with and about the Pope, and more "filial"!

Anonymous said...

It's Cardinal Levada, not Lavada, though the bishops do need a good scrub!

Webmaster said...

Thanks, Anonymous, corrected! I thought it looked a bit odd...

And thanks, Moira! Good advice. Although I'd be interested to know what 'few administrative areas' the BCEW has 'genuine authority' over. None, in fact: the Conference has no authority from Canon law; it is merely consultative, a talking shop. If it 'decides' to (say) move feast days to the nearest Sunday, each bishop must use his authority to make it happen in his diocese - or decline to do so.

The Pope and Bishops have authority from Christ: nothing can change that or transfer it to another body.

On the side of the angels said...

I can't believe this - I was at school with Philomena Cullen, a tiny little thing with a pigtail who, coming from a highly devout Irish family, was always first to volunteer/participate in anything religious or 'churchy' - to think that she'd grow up and repudiate the nuclear family she comes from and a Pope who is so dedicated and devoted towards the Corporal and spiritual works of Mercy - I find it incredulous !!! and for her to throw her lot in with the feministas who wish to pervert all that catholicism holds dear and conspire in the genocide of the unborn ? I can't believe it's the same little girl !!!

As for the bishops ?
what do you expect ?
this country has an inept,pragmatic and situationist organ grinder - what else can you expect from the monkeys ?

John L said...

Unfortunately Philomena Cullen was probably led to repudiate Catholic teaching because she was 'churchy' - rather as I expect Ruth Kelly was led to betray Catholic and Christian teaching; association with clerics and religious who all themselves reject Catholic teaching naturally has this effect, I've known other people like that to which it has happened. people need to realize that the sentiments of this book express what English bishops actually think; they aren't letting them be expressed out of weakness.

On the side of the angels said...

ok: well we fight!!!

Enough is enough. We don't let this go away...

Moira said...

With regard to the "few administrative areas" the BCEW do have authority over:

- I don't remember how extensive this may be - but having had a gripe over the existence of this body in the past myself, I and a small group did a little research, and discovered that the national conferences of bishops do actually have some areas of responsibility - in Canon Law at least.
In fact I once ran a website - - where I wanted to house a site named Catholic UK Community, as most Catholic sites at that time(about 1996-9 or so)were American and hadn't really noted the UK existed...I particularly wanted it to serve Catholics in the UK.
So I sought permission from the church. Because my apostolate was not serving a specific area in a diocese - nor was it set up under any specific national law - yet it would be based in the UK - the only appropriate body to grant the permission was the BCEW. Though they didn't refuse - nor did they grant permission (as they were at that time debating the then unfinished, huge site which Fr Peter Jenner was working on). So it died.
Glad this came up: high time I revived it!
You heard it here first!

On the side of the angels said...

Incidentally, have you checked out the link websites for the BCEW ?
practically EVERY one is either a couple of years out of date or defunct - the state of the NCoP site is atrocious - [and I don't mean the 3/4 of the priests finding it impossible to wear a collar] We are being let down big-time by this crowd of well-meaning ineffectuals...I've said it before but we need authority from the top which we are sorely lacking at the moment; because too many are getting away with doing nothing except 'patting each other on the back' exercises...

On the side of the angels said...

ps. How many clerics forget about canon 1329#2 ?
Conspiracy in the actuation of a latae sententiae excommunicable offence? exacting the same penalty ??!!!

Anonymous said...

if you are complaining about a bishop contact Card. Baptista Re, Cong for Bishops.
Levada, Cormac's friend, is concerned with heresy, this is discipline.

Webmaster said...

Anon: a good idea to contact the Cong for Bishops, but an attack on 'the ideology of the nuclear family' is heresy. And the contribution of two theologians already condemned by the CDF should be of interest to Levada.

Pope Leo XIII's Prayer to St Michael

Holy Michael, Archangel, defend us in the day of battle. Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust down to Hell Satan, and all wicked spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen