ROME, December 2, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – The head of the Vatican’s highest appeals court has doubled down on his criticism of the four Cardinals calling for clarification of Amoris Laetitia, telling another news agency that their act amounted to a "slap in the face."
Msgr. Vito Pinto had called the dubia a “very serious scandal” only days ago, in comments reported by Spanish news agency Religión Confidencial.
The “highest appeals court” is, of course, the Roman Rota, the Tribunal Apostolicum Rotae Romanae, and what amounts to a hissy fit coming from such an office does the Office and the Church not the slightest bit of good. Characterising the use of a centuries-old tradition of raising dubia by four eminent members of the Church hierarchy as a slap in the face tells us more about Msgr Pinto’s character than the worth of the dubia. As a lawyer, one would expect a reasoned response rather than hysterical hyperbole.
And in regard to “a very serious scandal”, if scandal can be described as “an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil”, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church defines it, how is it that the attempt by the four Cardinals to clarify those parts of Amoris laetitia that have caused widespread confusion and distress among the Catholic faithful can truly be classed as scandalous? The intention of the Cardinals was very obviously an attempt to lead people away from sin, rather than towards it. Again, as a lawyer, Msgr. Pinto’s loose-to-the-point-of-gross-inaccuracy use of the term “scandal” leaves one wondering whether he is truly suited to the exalted position he holds.
Nope - he got murdered. Of course, it probably had nothing to do with the production of Pecorelli’s List. He probably just had bad breath, or something.
Do you know about Carmine Pecorelli? The article Pecorelli list briefly records him as:
The Pecorelli list alleges the presence of Freemasons in the upper ranks of the Vatican II Church (prohibited and causing excommunication). The list was published by Carmine Pecorelli, a member of Propaganda Due and the Grande Oriente d'Italia, purporting to be a list of 120 masons in or associated with Vatican dicasteries, including cardinals, bishops and priests as well as members of the laity. It included Cardinal Jean Villot and Cardinal Agostino Casaroli who were Secretary of State in the Vatican City. Pecorelli himself was murdered shortly after in March 1979.
Interesting, in the present context is the fact that the list contains the following entry:
Pio Vito Pinto. Monsignor, Attache of Secretary of State and Notare of Second Section of Supreme Tribunal and of Apostolic Signature. 4-2-70; # 3317-42. "PIPIVI."
After there has now come to us a sort of denial concerning the recent words attributed to Monsignor Pio Vito Pinto about the Four Cardinals – namely, that he did not say that the pope would remove the red hats of these Cardinals – the German Catholic website Katholisch.de has published its own interview with Msgr. Pinto where he now redoubles his critique of the four prelates. In this interview, Pinto again uses very harsh language against these Four Cardinals who have expressed their serious concern that Amoris Laetitia could teach the faithful doctrines that go against the traditional Catholic teaching.
Pinto now says about the Four Cardinals:
They have written to the pope and that is correct and legitimate. But, after there did not come [from the pope] an answer after a few weeks, they published the case. That is a slap in the face. The pope can choose to take counsel with his cardinals; but that is something different from imposing upon him a counsel.
Let’s hold it there while we look at the first sentence. The Dean of the Rota, Pinto, acknowledges that the actions of the Cardinals were “correct and legitimate.” Let’s leave aside the long history of the Church that tells us that dubia expressed by respected members of the Episcopate are always answered, and consider it from a purely human perspective – wouldn’t common courtesy demand that the legitimnate concerns of Princes of the Church be properly addressed? It would seem that in Pinto’s Vatican, even common courtesy can be dispensed with quite summarily. However, common courtesy, in this case, is backed up by the long history of the Church I have alluded to. Msgr Pinto therefore has no right to denounce the Cardinals for challenging the Pope’s words and seeking clarification. Had Pinto lived in Apostolic times, would he have chided Saint Paul for challenging Saint Peter at Antioch, as related in Galatians Chapter 2?
The article continues:
When the journalist then says in response that the Four Cardinals would answer that they had no other choice, the Italian prelate further responds: They are not a council with any kind of competences. On the contrary, they as cardinals are bound in a higher degree to be loyal to the pope. He stands for the gift of unity, the charisma of Peter. That is where the cardinals have to support him, and not hinder him. By what authority do the authors of the letter act? On the fact that they are cardinals? That is not sufficient. Please. Of course they can write to the pope and send him their questions, but to oblige him to answer and to publish the case is another matter.
” They are not a council with any kind of competences”? They are Cardinals – Princes of the Church – and thoroughly versed in all areas of theology. How much more competence is required to recognise those parts of Amoris laetitia that conflict markedly with the moral position the Church has held for millennia? Indeed, does one need the level of erudition of those four Cardinals to recognise just that? The answer is NO. Those of us fortunate to receive the good Catholic education given in the 40s, 50s and into the 60s are more than satisfactorily equipped to perceive that the wording of Amoris laetitia is very seriously loose and ambiguous, and is itself a scandal in that those looking for ease, rather than truth, can find an interpretation that appears to justify their sin.
Another excerpt from the article:
When asked about Cardinal Burke’s words that he would present a formal correction of the pope if necessary, Pinto responds once more with vehemence:
This is crazy. Such a council of cardinals does not exist that could hold the pope accountable. The task of the cardinals is to help the pope in the exercise of his office – and not to obstruct him or to give him precepts. And this is a fact: Francis is not only in full accordance with the teaching, but also with all of his predecessors in the 20th century, and that was a Golden Age with excellent popes – starting with Pius X.
As I pointed out above, even tolerably educated laymen can perceive the startling differences between the millennia-old teachings of the Church, right up to the end of the 20th century, and the words of the Apostolic Exhortation.
Further on, Pinto charges the Cardinals with disrupting the unity of the Church:
Pinto closes this interview with some seemingly flippant, if not superficial, words when he answers the question as to what should now be done: “Pray a little more, stay calm, basta. Officially, this action has no value. The Church needs unity, not walls, says the pope. We know how Francis is. He believes that people can convert. I know that he is praying for them.”
To sum up this interview: Pinto claims that the supreme principle of the Church is unity. He does not mention, much less affirm, that the basis of unity is truth.
I suppose the only kind thing one can say about this is that Pinto hasn’t a clue as to what is going on outside his office. In the real world, where unity has been absent for some forty years, as self-styled “progressives” move ever further away from true Catholicism, at least the Popes have continued to support the true Church. With the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia seeming to place the Pope on-side with the “progressives”, unity, which can only come if based in truth, is in very great danger.