Robert de Mattei
Corrispondenza Romana
September 27, 2017
The “filial correction” addressed to Pope Francis by more than 60
priests and scholars of the Church, has had an extraordinary impact all over
the world. There was no lack of those who tried to minimize the initiative,
declaring the number of signatories “to
be limited and marginal”. Yet if the initiative is irrelevant, why have its repercussions
been so widespread in all the media outlets of the five continents, including countries
like Russia and China? Steve Skojec on Onepeterfive
reports that research on Google News resulted in more than 5,000 news
articles, while there were 100,000 visits on the site www.correctiofilialis.org in a space of 48 hours. The adhesion
on this site is still open, even if only some signatures will be made visible.
It is essential to acknowledge that the reason for this world-wide echo is one
only: the truth can be ignored or repressed, but when it is made manifest with
clarity it has its own intrinsic power and is destined to spread by itself. The main enemy of truth is not error, but
ambiguity. The cause of the diffusion of errors and heresies in the Church is
not due to the strength of these errors, but the culpable silence of those who
should openly defend the truth of the Gospel.
The truth asserted by the “filial correction” is that Pope Francis,
through a long series of words, acts and omissions “has upheld, by direct or indirect means (whether being aware or not, we
do not know, neither do we want to judge him ) at least “seven false and heretical propositions, propagated in the Church through
his public office as well as through private action.” The signatories
insist respectfully that the Pope “condemn these propositions publically, thus carrying out the mandate of Our Lord Jesus Christ given to Peter and through him to all his successors until the end of time: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren”.
No reply regarding the correction has yet arrived; only clumsy attempts at disqualifying or
singling out the signatories, with particular aim at some of the most
well-known, like the former President of the Vatican Bank, Ettore Gotti
Tedeschi. In reality, as Gotti Tedeschi
himself said in an interview to Marco Tosatti on September 24th, the
authors of the Correctio, have acted
out of love for the Church and the Papacy. Gotti Tedeschi and another well-known
signatory, the German writer, Martin Mosebach, were both applauded last
September 14th at the Angelicum by a public of over 400 priests and
laypeople, comprising three cardinals and several bishops, on the occasion of
the convention celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum.
Other two signatories, Professors Claudio Pierantoni
and Anna Silva, expressed the same ideas in the Correctio at a meeting on the theme “Let’s Clarify”, organized on April 23rd of this year by
the Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, supported
by other prelates, among whom was the late Cardinal Carlo Caffara. Many other
signatories of the document occupy or have occupied, prominent positions in
ecclesiastic institutions. Others again are distinguished university professors.
If the authors of the Correctio were
isolated in the Catholic world, their document would not have had the resonance
it attained.
A Filial Appeal to Pope Francis in 2015
was signed by around 900,000 people from all over the world and a Declaration of fidelity to the unchangeable
teaching of the Church on matrimony, presented in 2015 by 80 Catholic
personalities, gathered 35,000 signatures. A year ago, four Cardinals
formulated their Dubia on the
Exhortation Amoris laetitia. In the
meantime, scandals of an economic and moral nature are undermining Pope
Francis’ pontificate. The American vaticanist, John Allen, certainly not of a
traditional bent, revealed on Crux of September 25th, how difficult
his position has become these days.
Among the most ridiculous accusations that are being made about the
signatories of the document, is that of being “Lefebvrians” on account of Bishop Bernard Fellay’s
signature, the Superior of the Fraternity of St. Pius X. Monsignor Fellay’s adhesion to a document of
this type is a historical act, which clarifies without the shadow of a doubt,
the Fraternity’s position in regard to the new pontificate. However,
“Lefebvrianism” is a verbal locution which has for the progressives the same
role the word “fascism” had for the Communists in the 1970s: discredit the
adversary, without discussing the reasons. The presence of Monsignor Fellay is
moreover, reassuring for all the signatories of the Correctio. How can the Pope not have the same comprehension and
benevolence regarding them, that he has shown over the last two years towards
the Fraternity of St. Pius X?
The Archbishop of Chieti, Bruno Forte, previously special secretary to
the Bishops’ Synod on the Family, declared that the Correctio represents “a
prejudicially closed stance towards the spirit of the Second Vatican Council
which Pope Francis is incarnating so profoundly” (Avvenire, September 26th, 2015). The spirit of Vatican
II, incarnated by Pope Francis, writes Monsignor Lorizio, in turn, in the same
Italian Bishops’ newspaper, consists in the primacy of the pastoral over
theology; in other words, in the subordination of the natural law to life
experience, since, as he explains, “the
pastoral comprises and includes theology” and not vice-versa. Monsignor
Lorizio teaches theology at the same Faculty of the Lateran University in which
the Dean used to be Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, who died on September 22nd
, on the eve of the Correctio he was unable to sign because of his
precarious health conditions.
The great exponent of the Roman Theological School demonstrated in his
most recent books what a deplorable landing-place we have been brought to by
the primacy of the pastoral announced at Vatican II and propagated by its
ultra-progressive hermeneuts, among whom the same Forte and the makeshift theologian
Massimo Faggioli, along with Alberto Melloni, who are all distinguishing themselves
with their flimsy attacks on the Correctio.
Monsignor Forte in Avvenire added
that the document is an operation which cannot be shared by “those who are faithful to the successor of Peter in
whom they recognize as the Pastor the Lord has given to the Church as the guide
of universal communion. Fidelity should always be directed to the living God,
Who speaks to the Church today through the Pope.”
Now then, we have come to the point of defining Pope Francis a “living
God”, forgetting that the Church is founded on Jesus Christ, for Whom the Pope
is representative on earth, not the divine owner. As Antonio Socci correctly wrote, the Pope is
not a “second Jesus” (Libero, September 24th 2017) but the 266th
successor to Peter. His mandate is not that of changing or “improving” the
words of Our Lord, but of guarding and transmitting them in the most faithful
manner. If this doesn’t happen, Catholics have the duty to reprove him in a
filial way, following the example of St. Paul in regard to the Prince of the
Apostles, Peter. (Gal. II, 11).
Lastly, there are those surprised that Cardinals Walter Brandmüller
and Raymomd Leo Burke didn’t sign the document, ignoring, as Rorate Caeli underlined, that the Correctio of the Sixty is of a purely
theological nature, whereas the one of the Cardinals, when it comes, will have
much more authority and importance, also on the canonical level. The correction
of a fellowman, foreseen by the Gospel and current Canon Law, in art. 212, par.
3, can have different forms. “This
principle of fraternal correction inside the Church – declared Monsignor Athanasius
Schneider in a recent interview to Maike Hickson – has been valid for all time, even with regard to the Pope, and so it
should be valid also in our times. Unfortunately, these days anyone who dares
speak the truth – even if he does so respectfully with regard to the Shepherds
of the Church – is classified as an enemy of unity, as happened to St. Paul;
when he declared: ‘Am I then become
your enemy , because I tell you the truth?’” (Gal. 4, 16).
Translation: Contributor, Francesca Romana
