N.B. Are certain parties in the Church attempting to recast an obligatory witness of Faith as a mere “culture war” toto be avoided as unnecessary?
From the article:
“The external profession of the faith is not just a condition of membership of the Church (and thus of holding office or being elected to any office). It is also a strict obligation on all Catholics “whenever their silence, evasiveness, or manner of acting encompasses an implied denial of the faith, contempt for religion, injury to God, or scandal for a neighbor.”8”
Could Cardinal Prevost be the first American pope?
Original report, published 6 May 2025 (TWO DAYS before the election)—Seemingly out of nowhere, Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost is being discussed as a serious candidate in the upcoming conclave.
Original report, published 6 May 2025 (TWO DAYS before the election)—Seemingly out of nowhere, Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost is being discussed as a serious candidate in the upcoming conclave.
Could Cardinal Prevost be the first American pope?
Why this piece is important:
Prevost is being seriously considered as a papal candidate—but questions surround his silence and his actions as Prefect for the Dicastery of Bishops.The big picture:
Prevost has cooperated in advancing Francis’ agenda, facilitated the appointment of heterodox bishops throughout the world, and tacitly denied the traditional teaching on the episcopate.Flashpoint:
He oversaw the deposition of the most conservative U.S. bishop (Strickland) and the appointment of a notorious liberal to one of the most prominent diocesan see(McElroy).Takeaway:
Prevost has remained silent in the face of the great doctrinal questions of our day, and facilitated the longest-lasting legacy of Francis’ reign.
Introduction
(WM Review)—Prevost, born in Chicago and having spent decades in Peru, has risen through the ranks without attracting public prominence—until now. He is currently the Prefect of the Dicastery of Bishops: The Pillar claims that “Prevost saw his task as that of identifying men who embodied Pope Francis’ ideals for bishops.”
He is being lauded as a candidate of discretion, administrative experience, and balance. La Croix International has described him as “a bridge between factions,” noting that “Prevost has avoided the ideological battles that have flared during the final years of Francis’ pontificate.”1
Because of this, he might seem to represent a “clean image” and a new start.
But who is Prevost, and could he be elected as the first American Pope?
Prevost’s formation
Prevost was born in 1955, and entered the Order of St. Augustine in 1977 (taking his solemn vows in 1981). Soon after ordination in 1982, he joined the Peruvian Mission, and began a decades-long career in Latin American ecclesial affairs.
In 2014, Francis made him the Apostolic Administrator of the Peruvian Diocese of Chiclayo, and he received his episcopal ordination at the hands of Bishop James Green soon after.2 In 2015 he was made the bishop of Chiclayo.
In 2020, Francis named him as a member of the congregation of bishops,3 and in January 2023, he made him the Prefect of this congregation (now a dicastery).4 Francis made him a cardinal nine months later. In addition to the dicastery of bishops, he is a member of seven other dicasteries,5including that of Evangelization and of the Doctrine of the Faith—indicating the trust and appreciation Francis had in Prevost, according to Pentin and Montagna.6
Silence and ambiguity on grave issues
Prevost is praised by many parties for his discretion. John L. Allen Jr describes his appearance as “a moderate, balanced figure, known for solid judgment and a keen capacity to listen, and someone who doesn’t need to pound his chest to be heard.”7
While this may be valued by the other American prelates to whom Allen refers—and even by Cardinal Electors—such “discretion” comes at the cost of having remained silent when there was a grave duty to profess the faith.
The external profession of the faith is not just a condition of membership of the Church (and thus of holding office or being elected to any office). It is also a strict obligation on all Catholics “whenever their silence, evasiveness, or manner of acting encompasses an implied denial of the faith, contempt for religion, injury to God, or scandal for a neighbor.”8
This is an established principle, expressed by Canon Law, St. Thomas Aquinas, saints, doctors, theologians and moralists, and the duty only increases the higher one’s rank in the Church.
Another basic principle is that “silence implies consent”—in other words, if one is silent in the face of doctrinal error, one is presumed to accept it. This is why Pope Felix III wrote:
An error which is not resisted is approved; a truth which is not defended is suppressed… He who does not oppose an evident crime is open to the suspicion of secret complicity.9
Regarding the great controversies of Francis’ pontificate, Prevost has no known responseon the issues raised by Fiducia Supplicans or Amoris Laetitia. Thus, the “discretion” that might attract votes from other cardinals seems rather to be a failure to witness to Christ, and even a tacit endorsement of the errors in question.
This is why, in this context, cowardice and imprudent discretion would not just constitute moral faults, but would have wider and more serious implications on Prevost’s membership of the Church and eligibility for the papacy.
This tacit endorsement necessarily continues unless and until Prevost counteracts it through professing the faith clearly on the disputed questions.
More: https://x.com/thewmreview/status/2006493874014011614?s=46&t=IydJ-X8H6c0NM044nYKQ0w
No comments:
Post a Comment