ebia
Senior Contributor
- Jul 6, 2004
- 41,711
- 2,142
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- AU-Greens
thereselittleflower said:Regarding Brother Roger:
(The Remnant Newspaper: Traditional Catholic News - Welcome!) Editor's Note: Since the following article was recently sent to us by Yves Chiron directly, it seems fair to assume that the respected French author may have had The Remnant in mind when he lamented the fact that certain American and French reviews had criticized Cardinal Ratzinger for having given Holy Communion to "a Protestant"--the late Brother Roger Schutz. In the following article, Mr. Chiron sets out to prove that Brother Roger--the founder of the Taizé Community in France--had, in fact, made a profession of Catholic Faith some years ago and wasn't Protestant at all. According to Mr. Chiron, this conversion was "discreet," and was not generally known until after Brother Roger's controversial reception of Holy Communion at Pope John Paul's April 2005 funeral, after which even Cardinal Kasper, when questioned directly, reportedly had to admit that Brother Roger was "formally Catholic."
We are publishing the following report (from ALETHEIA Lettre d'informations religieuses VIIe année - n° 95 1er August 2006) for two reasons: 1) It contains a most encouraging account of the recent conversion and profession of Catholic Faith by a Lutheran pastor that took place in the Society of St. Pius X's magnificent Saint-Nicholas-du-Chardonnet in Paris and 2) the account of Brother Roger's alleged conversion, while less than completely convincing in our opinion, is nevertheless something readers should carefully consider. Mr. Chiron is, after all, a highly acclaimed author with a sound reputation for accuracy in his research.
If Brother Roger did convert then the fact that that conversion was kept more or less secret (presumably because it might upset the ecumenical apple cart) is still an unnerving sign of the times in which we live. Since when does the Catholic Church cover up conversions of high-profile Protestants? After Brother Roger's reception of Communion at Pope John Paul's funeral even Vatican spokesmen seemed unaware of this alleged conversion, insisting as they did that the incident had been an unfortunate mistake and that "the Catholic rule against shared Communion still holds, and inter-Communion is not practiced at Taizé." Is it any wonder that Bishop Tissier de Mallerais would recently suggest that conversion is something of which the "conciliar Church is embarrassed"? Indeed, if the following report is accurate, it would seem that the "conciliar Church" is practically hiding it these days.
Still, if it is true--and we pray that it is-- this is good news indeed, not only because of the obvious benefits for the man's immortal soul, but also because it places Pope Benedict's controversial eulogy of Brother Roger in a slightly different light. On August 24, 2005, L'Osservatore Romano quoted Pope Benedict XVI as saying the following of the founder of Taizé: "Brother Roger Schutz is in the hands of eternal goodness, of eternal love; he has arrived at eternal joy." It is our hope and prayer that these words referred in fact to a Catholic...not a Protestant...for obvious reasons. Finally, when taking into account the bizarre secrecy surrounding the alleged conversion of the late Brother Roger we believe one can be forgiven for having raised objection to what looked to all the world like a scandalous case of a Protestant receiving Holy Communion at the Pope's funeral.
Did Brother Roger Schutz Convert
The examination of the evidence and arguments for his conversion to Catholicism follow at the link above.
Now two things are clear here. .. if he did convert, and it seems very likely that he did, it was not made public knowledge and gave rise to the appearance of scandal .
If he did not convert, then what I have been saying is backed up by the Church Herself by Her official spokesmen, who having had no knowledge of such conversion if he did, reiterating the Church's teaching on interfaith shared communion. Again:
Vatican spokesmen seemed unaware of this alleged conversion, insisting as they did that the incident had been an unfortunate mistake and that "the Catholic rule against shared Communion still holds, and inter-Communion is not practiced at Taizé." I
So here we see that the proper understanding of Cardinal Ratzinger's words is as I portrayed. . ..
For more than a decade, Taize has been, without a doubt, the leading example of an ecumenical inspiration, emanating from a local center inspired by a particular 'charism'. Similar communities of faith and of shared living should be formed elsewhere in which the foregoing of a communal reception of the Eucharist would, without ceasing to be a hardship, become comprehensible and in which its necessity would be understood by a prayer community that cannot answer its own prayer but is, nevertheless, calmly certain it will be answered.
Again:
FOREGO:
waive: do without or cease to hold or adhere to; "We are dispensing with formalities"; "relinquish the old ideas"
forfeit: lose (s.th.) or lose the right to (s.th.) by some error, offense, or crime; "you've forfeited your right to name your successor"; "forfeited property"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Notice he said:
the foregoing of a communal reception of the Eucharist
which means communal reception of the eucharist in that context, that of mixed faith communities, is not to, and does not, occur.
That this is clearly the proper understanding of his words in context is made even more clear by his immediate statement about this foregoing continuing to be a hardship . . . if forego referred to what was said before, as was alledged earlier, then how is there a continuing hardship of something that was said?
A hardship is the result of an act or absence of an act .. . the prohibition against shared communion to Catholics participating in the Taize community was a hardship to them . .and Cardinal Ratzinger acknowledged this hardship in his statement:
Similar communities of faith and of shared living should be formed elsewhere in which the foregoing of a communal reception of the Eucharist would, without ceasing to be a hardship, become comprehensible and in which its necessity would be understood by a prayer community that cannot answer its own prayer but is, nevertheless, calmly certain it will be answered.
It is very clear Cardinal Ratzinger was saying that it is a necessity that Catholics in the Taize community do not and cannot share communion with non catholics in that communty and the he recognized the hardship that necessity created for them, but encouraged them that this necessity would become comprehensible and understood.
This reinforces, and is reinforced by, the Vatican spokesmen who affirmed that this sharing of communion does not happen in the Taize community and that the Catholic RULE against shared communion still holds.
There really is no logical room for argument to the contrary here .. .
So I'm supposed to believe Cardinal Kasper is lying on the basis of an article in the Remnant?
Upvote
0
