Author Topic: The Upcoming Burke-Bergoglio Battle over the Knights of Malta (Read 7228 times)

Geremia · « **on:** December 24, 2016, 04:34:39 PM »

The recent Rorate Cæli post[/url] confirms that Cdl. Burke concurred with the council's dismissal of Albrecht von Boesinger:

Quote

It is no secret that Pope Francis’s removal of Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke from the tribunal of the Apostolic Signature and his installation as “Patron” of the Knights of Malta was intended to consign the trad-friendly Ur-canonist to an ecclesiastical backwater. No “promoveatur,” just “amoveatur,” and don’t let the door slam on your cappa magna on your way out.

How much trouble, Bergoglio and his entourage probably figured, could Burke possibly cause heading a charitable organization that now specializes in disaster relief?

Well plenty, it seems. Rorate readers are well aware of the cardinal’s strenuous efforts to defend the traditional Catholic teachings on marriage and the reception of the sacraments, especially in the affair of the “dubia,” which has yet to play out completely.

Apart from this, though, readers should be ready to watch how Francis’ plan to neutralize the cardinal is about to blow up in his face.

On Tuesday, December 22, the Knights of Malta’s council, with the concurrence of Cardinal Burke, dismissed the Order’s Grand Chancellor (and as Health superior, responsible for the Malteser charity activities), Albrecht von Boesinger, in connection with the distribution of condoms under the aegis of the Order in Burma.

One can see why this would cause agitation in the buffet line at the Casa S. Marta. If every case of divorce, remarriage and reception of the sacraments is somehow “unique” and requires “accompaniment,” if morality is not “black and white,” and if nothing is now “malum in se,” why fire a religious who adopts a “merciful” approach towards condoms?

Pope Bergoglio immediately established a five-man Vatican commission to investigate whether the Order’s council had acted correctly with regard to Boesinger’s dismissal – the hidden goal of the inquiry being, of course, to discredit or remove Burke.

The method is a variant on the one Francis employed in order to destroy the traditionally-oriented Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.

But the Sovereign Order of Malta cannot be so easily picked off. It is an ancient religious order whose members profess solemn vows, its government is regulated by a thicket of previous papal legislation and it is, to boot, a sovereign entity.

The Order’s response[/url] to Pope Bergoglio’s appointment of the five-man commission was curt and to the point:

Quote
“The Grand Magistry of the Sovereign Order of Malta has learnt of the decision made by the Holy See to appoint a group of five persons to shed light on the replacement of the former Grand Chancellor.

“The replacement of the former Grand Chancellor is an act of internal governmental administration of the Sovereign Order of Malta and consequently falls solely within its competence.”
"Drop dead," in other words. None of your business.

You can be sure that before the council of the Order issued this response, His Eminence Cardinal Burke did his canonical homework.

So if Francis decides to pursue his vendetta, he will have a real battle on his hands with a formidable, intelligent and articulate opponent.

And we can savor the irony of how Francis, as a result of his attempt to neutralize Burke, will have brought all this mischief down upon himself: Convertetur dolor ejus in caput ejus, et in verticem ipsius iniquitas ejus descendet!

Geremia · « **Reply #1 on:** December 24, 2016, 04:56:14 PM »

Another:

Quote

Has the Pope appointed an external commissioner to the Order of Malta? Pope Francis undeniably likes the strategy of appointing external commissioners as he has already adopted this draconian measure against two religious communities considered too “traditional”: the Franciscans of the Immaculate and the religious of the Incarnate Word. Further, it is not by chance that the announcement of a commission to “gather suitable elements to inform the Holy See thoroughly and swiftly with regard to the matter which has recently involved the Grand Chancellor of the Order of Malta, Mr. Albrecht Freiherr von Boeselager”, was given by the Vatican Press Office on December 22^nd, precisely while Pope Bergoglio was transforming his traditional Christmas greetings to the Curia into a bitter chiding against those who are resistant to his project of radical change in the Church, with implicit reference to Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, Patron of the Order of Malta. However, in this case, the appointing of an external commissioner is not at all possible.

As Don Fabrizio Turriziani Colonna explains in a docuмented study dedicated to the Sovereignty and independence of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (Libreria Editrice Vaticana 2006), the Order of Malta and the Holy See are placed one in front of the other as subjects of International Law and thus are in a position of reciprocal independence. The Order of Malta, has in fact a twofold juridical character; at the level of Canon Law, it is subordinate to the Holy See, but at the level of International Law it is guaranteed independence from it. The fact that the Order of Malta maintains diplomatic relations with 94 states and has an ambassador to the Holy See, confirms that, in a certain sphere, their relations are as equals. The Sovereign Military Order of Malta, is, in short, a sovereign State, even if it has no territory, jealous of its autonomy and privileges. Throughout nine centuries of history, the Knights of Malta have been covered in glory, shedding their blood for the Church, but there have been no want of conflicts between them and the Holy See.

The last one, narrated by Roger Peyrefitte (Chevaliers de Malte, Flammarion, Paris 1957), was after the Second World War, when the Order was able to thwart an attempt to fuse them with the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre. This struggle came to a halt in 1953 with the sentence by a Tribunal of cardinals which recognized the sovereignty of the Order of Malta, but nonetheless affirming its dependence on the Holy See as far as concerned the religious life of the knights. The Order of Malta accepted the sentence, conditioning it on some points: 1) the recognition of the rights due to it as subject of international law; 2) the limitation of religious independence of the Order only to professed knights and Chaplains; 3) the exclusion of subjection to the Vatican Secretary of State.

The Holy See’s competence does not involve then the internal and international governing of the Order, but limits itself to the strictly religious sphere. At this point one could imagine that the Pope, having identified deviations of a moral and doctrinal order among the knights, had thought of intervening to straighten out the situation. What happened instead? It was brought to light that Albrecht von Boeselager, during his time as Grand Hospitaller of the Order, had abused his power. promoting the distribution of tens of thousands of condoms and contraceptives, also abortifacients, (so the reports related to the United Nations’ programme against HIV/AIDS in Myanmar docuмent), [so] the Grand Master Matthew Festing intervened to bring an end to the scandal and asked Boeselager to resign, appealing to the vow of obedience made to him.

The Grand Chancellor, strong in his friendship with the Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin and of his brother George’s recent appointment to the board of the IOR (Institute for the Works of Religion -the Vatican Bank) rejected the request arrogantly, laying claim to his "liberal" Catholic stance. The creation on the part of the Secretary of State of an investigative group of five members, all of them more or less connected to Boeselager, constitutes a serious case of interference in the governing of the Order. The Holy See should limit itself to watching over the religious life through its Cardinal Patron, Cardinal Burke, appointed by Pope Francis himself. The Pope has every right to be informed with regard to the Order’s internal affairs, but it is irregular for this to take place through a commission which bypasses the pontifical representative, unless there is the desire to accuse the latter.

A Cardinal, however, can be judged only by his peers and not by Vatican bureaucrats. Equally improper is entrusting a Vatican Commission with the judgement of matters regarding not the religious life, but the governing of the Order, accusing, in this case, the Grand Master. The latter has done well to reject the bogus actions by the commission. Unfortunately not only is the procedure bogus, but the judgment in particular coming from the Vatican Authorities regarding it. Whoever favours contraception and abortion, disdaining the Church’s Magisterium, and violates their own vows, merits rehabilitation nowadays. Whoever defends the Church’s teachings and the moral integrity of the institutions he belongs to, is, on the other hand, accused of “malevolent resistance” to the Holy Father and ends up in the dock. Let us hope that the Knights react. The sovereignty of the Order of Malta is at stake as well as its uninterrupted tradition in defense of the faith and Catholic morality.

Incredulous · « **Reply #2 on:** December 28, 2016, 07:37:06 PM »

Bump... this story is incredible!

Bergy is taking-on the governance of the "Knights of Malta" to try and undo Cardinal Burke.

Geremia · « **Reply #3 on:** December 28, 2016, 08:45:47 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous

Bump... this story is incredible!

I thought the part about "The Sovereign Military Order of Malta" being "a sovereign State, even if it has no territory" and that "the Order of Malta and the Holy See are placed one in front of the other as subjects of International Law and thus are in a position of reciprocal independence" is interesting. It shows that if there is a formal schism, the material property of the orthodox Catholics might go with the Sovereign Military Order (really: State) of Malta and that of the Modernists with the Vatican City State. All schisms (from domestic divorces to the Protestant revolt) involve an reappropriation (or expropriation, stealing) of property. Cdl. Burke is probably thinking about the practical details of this schism of Modernist Rome.

mw2016 · « **Reply #4 on:** December 28, 2016, 09:21:18 PM »

Bergoglio did this because he knows Burke is about to begin open war by beginning the official reprimand process after the Epiphany.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/dubia-cardinal-anyone-who-opens-communion-to-adulterers-is-a-heretic-and-pr

Quote

In a new interview with the German newspaper Der Spiegel, one of the four Cardinals of the dubia has said, “Whoever thinks that persistent adultery and the reception of Holy Communion are compatible is a heretic and promotes schism.”

Cardinal Walter Brandmuller made the remark while speaking with Der Spiegel reporter Walter Mayr about the dubia...

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-cardinal-burke-suggests-timeline-for-formal-correction-of-pope-fr

Quote

December 19, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews, Cardinal Raymond Burke has given an indication of the possible timeline of a “formal correction” of Pope Francis should the Pope not respond to the five dubia seeking clarity on Amoris Laetitia, presented to the Pope by four Cardinals, including Cardinal Burke.

When the Pope did not issue a response after two months, the cardinals released the dubia publicly. It was after this that Cardinal Burke disclosed that a formal act of correction would be necessary, if the Pope refused to clarify the meaning of his exhortation.

While such an act of formal correction is something rare in the life of the Church, it is not without precedent.

Pope John XXII in the 14th century was publicly challenged by cardinals, bishops, and lay theologians after denying the doctrine that the souls of the just are admitted to the beatific vision after death, teaching instead that heaven is delayed until the general resurrection at the end of time. Pope John eventually recanted his position, due in part to a joint letter from theologians from the University of Paris that professed total obedience to the pope while making it clear to him that his teaching contradicted the Catholic faith.

Burke called the procedure of correcting the error of a pontiff a “way of safeguarding that office and its exercise.”

“It’s carried out with the absolute respect for the office of the Successor of Saint Peter,” he said.

“Now of course we are in the last days, days of strong grace, before the Solemnity of the Nativity of Our Lord, and then we have the Octave of the Solemnity and the celebrations at the beginning of the New Year - the whole mystery of Our Lord’s Birth and His Epiphany - so it would probably take place sometime after that.”