By JEANNE SMITS
Part 2
(Editor’s Note: Below is part 2 of an interview with Raymond Cardinal Burke by Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent for LifeSiteNews, dated May 18. Part 1 was published in last week’s issue.
(LifeSiteNews graciously granted reprint permission to The Wanderer for this exclusive interview. All rights reserved.)
+ + +
Q. Many Catholics are troubled by the text but are reluctant about expressing their doubts and even misgivings because its author is the Pope. What would you advise them to do?
A. My own thought is that we haven’t been accustomed to this kind of writing on the part of the Holy Father. In the past the Holy Father spoke very seldom, or wrote very seldom, and it was always with a great attention to the fact that he is the Vicar of Christ on Earth and therefore, that every expression of the Faith had to be faithful to the truth of her Magisterium.
I was recently talking with a cardinal who worked very intimately with Blessed Pope Paul VI, and he told me how even in his homilies, he would go over them and over them before their publication because, as he openly acknowledged, his responsibility was very grave.
Pope Francis has chosen to write and speak in a way in which there is a kind of mixture between presenting the Church’s teaching and also giving his own thoughts, and many times in a very colloquial language, where it isn’t so easy at times even to know exactly what it means.
And so I think that we have to realize that we have a different kind of papal writing here, and we have all the tools in our faith to understand correctly this kind of writing, but it is not familiar to us. But to take the position, for instance, that this document which is not written in the same way as documents like the encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae, or Familiaris Consortio which was also a post-synodal apostolic exhortation, is part of the Magisterium in the same way as they were is simply not true. It is written in a very different way.
In that regard too, I think the important thing is that when one reads critically the document, one is always respectful of the person of the Pope. To engage in a lack of charity with regard to any fellow Christian, and in a preeminent way toward the Roman Pontiff, is completely inappropriate and wrong.
Q. In particular, the question of eternal damnation appears to have been set aside: “No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!” Even if God’s mercy wants to reach out to every man, is it not possible for man to refuse grace and to choose Hell?
A. Of course. The Church has always taught that. God respects our freedom and so people can be hard of heart, even at the moment of death. Christ Himself spoke about it in the Gospel. The logic of the Gospel is: God wants to save all men, there is no question about that. He sent His only Son to save all men. But men remain free and some of them reject salvation, and if they do so, they merit eternal damnation: If you reject salvation, how can you be saved?
Q. Speaking about the divorced and remarried, some priests are saying that in certain concrete situations it is hard to say they are living “in sin.” The exhortation says: “Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any ‘irregular’ situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.” How should we interpret this?
A. The only way to interpret it is the following: If they are living in what appears to be a state of sin but in fact are not sinning, in other words if they are living as brother and sister, then it is true. But if they’re engaging in marital relations, that objectively is sinful and it cannot be any other way. It cannot not be sin and be sin at the same time. Objectively, to have sexual relations with a person who is not your spouse is either fornication or adultery.
Q. In any case it would require a blessing of the union.
A. Of course! And for the same reason cohabiting outside of marriage is greatly wrong and denies people the sacraments.
Q. And if “moral culpability” is indeed attenuated, is this a sufficient reason to allow these couples to receive Communion? Or to put it differently: While God’s mercy can operate their eternal salvation, is it wise on the ecclesiastical level to allow them to receive Communion?
A. First of all, I return to the distinction between attenuating circumstances with regard to an individual act and attenuating circumstances with regard to living in a state of sin: The attenuating circumstances are applied to individual acts, and that remains true, that for an individual act there can be some circumstances which diminish the degree of culpability.
But with regard to living publicly in the state of sin, given that our Lord provides to every person who is married the grace to live in fidelity to that marriage, we can say that, yes, they can live in fidelity in the marriage because they have the grace to do so. While there may be all kinds of serious considerations, children to be educated and for whom to provide a home, they can all be respected while remaining faithful to the marriage union.
Q. Has contemporary ignorance about the rules and goods of marriage reached such a level that many marriages are invalid?
A. I think that the confusion that is in the world, and now is also entering into the Church, has an influence on a person who is contemplating marriage. But I think also that we have to recall that the good of marriage is taught to us by nature itself, and so to say that, for instance, widespread divorce, sexual promiscuity, and so forth condition people so that they cannot enter a valid marriage, is incorrect. The young person knows within his or her heart what marriage is, and is even helped in that by good preparation, and therefore even though in the society there are all sorts of pressures contrary to a marriage the young person can well choose marriage as it truly is.
The only way to say a marriage is invalid is to show that a particular individual applied to his marriage consent the right to divorce or infidelity. In other words: in giving consent to marry a person reserved the right to divorce or reserved the right to have sexual relations with another partner.
Q. From childhood I was taught in Catechism that the virginal calling is objectively superior to marriage, which is man’s ordinary state. Has this changed?
A. No, not at all. That has been the Church’s constant teaching. It is in the Gospel, it is in the fathers of the Church. There is no change regarding the fact that the perfect continence of the virgin represents the perfection of love and is, therefore, a source of inspiration and also strength for the married to live chastity in their relationship with each other. That is the meaning of our Lord too when He tells us that in the life which is to come, we will neither marry nor be given to each other in marriage because there will be that perfection of love. No, that teaching has not changed.
Q. In these times of confusion, are we not paying too much attention to the accomplishment of self and the fact of “being part” of a community instead of realizing that our ultimate goal and happiness is in Christ?
A. Exactly. Our attention should be completely on Christ-like goodness, our fidelity, our cooperation with His grace in order to grow in His likeness, and in that way we are then bound in charity to all our brothers and sisters. But if we don’t concentrate our attention on grace, viewing all things in the perspective of eternity, then we would descend into a worldly way of thinking, and so our life in the Church becomes a kind of a political reality, associationism and so forth. But our bond in the Church, the bond between us which is of course the most profound bond possible, is the life of the Holy Spirit within us, it is the love of Christ within us.
I am very disturbed today by an increasing ecclesial language which is completely mundane, referring to members of the Church as more “conservative” or more “liberal,” and all this kind of thing, as if we were a body made up of political parties. There is one faith, we all share it, and that binds us together.
Q. You have been calling Catholics to pray the rosary for the family. Would you like to call on my French-speaking readers to do this also?
A. I urge you to do so! There is no question that we are living in very difficult times in the Church today, and we as members of Christ’s Body must pray fervently for the Church in our time. And one of the most powerful prayers which our Lord has given us is the rosary. That is why I have been so supportive of “Operation Storm Heaven,” as we call it in English, asking people to pray a rosary every month for the Church, and of course urging them to pray even more frequently, but one hopes that that monthly, so to speak, “solemn” praying of the rosary also informs a daily attitude of prayer for the Church, which is so needed.
Q. And you yourself are celebrating Mass. . . .
A. Yes, every first day of the month, I celebrate the Holy Mass for all the intentions of those who are part of “Operation Storm Heaven.”
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress