Over at Chiesa, the well-informed Sandro Magister is reporting that Pope Francis is about to remove Cardinal Burke from the Roman curia and exile him to Malta.
Since this is a liturgy blog, let’s limit our comments to the liturgical implications of this move. What do you think? Be nice, everyone. Charity! Stay on topic.
awr
I am struggling to think of the liturgical implications. I don’t know anyone who really models themselves after the Cardinal’s style of celebration. Anyone who does would have done so without him.
I suppose one could infer that the Pope might not care for ‘high’ liturgy or even the Traditional Pontifical liturgy, especially in that very elaborate style – which one might infer from his own style – but I’d be surprised if that were the basis for any kind of action he took. There are plenty of people still around with differing styles of celebration.
I don’t suppose many liturgical questions get all the way up to the Signatura either, aside from issues that could have a bearing on liturgical matters like marriage cases . It doesn’t seem, wherever he’s moved, that it’ll change anything about his opinions or how he celebrates or where he celebrates. In short, very little change liturgically around the world.
@Joshua Vas – comment #1:
Joshua – I think you probably have it right. I suppose the most that can be said is that it doesn’t help the cause of the 1962 missal any, or a liturgical style with cappae magnae. Like so much under Pope Francis so far, it seems that liturgical issues are treated rather indirectly, if at all. But the CDW appointment will be interesting.
Pax,
awr
One can pray that his eminence is made prefect of CDW! That would be big liturgical news!
@Anthony Ruff, OSB – comment #6:
Hope springs eternal! Welcome back, Father!
The likely story is the downsizing of the curia, and Cardinal Burke is a convenient casualty of that. How will the CDWDS emerge from this restructuring? What will be added to its plate? Saints? Ecclesia Dei?
It seems Cardinal Burke might be available for more liturgy workshops, if these rumors are true. We could be seeing a bit more of him stateside.
Long term readers might be surprised, but I support the Pope’s decision. I suspect that there are pragmatic reasons for the Pope to reform the Curia. After all, although curial positions aren’t elected, there must be an unofficial term limit especially under a new Pope. I wouldn’t necessarily see this as a vote of no-confidence on Francis’s behalf but merely a changing of the guard.
I am likely in a distinct traditionalist minority, but Cdl. Burke’s style of celebration might be off-putting to some. Yes, I am biased because I prefer low Mass in both forms, with simple vestments and an austerity of ornamentation. However, Burke’s style might communicate to Catholics in general that the EF is more theater than a rite of worship. I would think that traditionalists would seek to avoid this characterization, but indeed many traditionalists like Burke’s presiding style quite a bit. I would maintain that this style actually hurts the EF movement by alienating those who are not impressed by a full vestment set whose sticker price rivals that of a compact car.
One wonders what this transfer/demotion/whatever we will call it means for Card. Burke’s unofficial global chaplaincy to the TLM movement. If it does continue, will he still have access to the extravagant vesture he is known for?
Actually, this move would free up Cardinal Burke to travel more widely, supporting and promoting the traditional liturgical usage. He might even welcome it as an opportunity to be outside of the Renaissance princedom of the Vatican and its cutthroat politics. He could breathe freely the incense in a thousand cities.
@Peter Kwasniewski – comment #8:
That is a possibility. Perhaps his travels will result in a new website titled something like “The New Rayturgical Movement” that chronicles him going about the globe and presiding at (saying..? idk what to call it) TLMs.
@David Wesson – comment #10:
That seems rather uncharitable (snarky, at best), given AWR’s request above.
Fr. Ruff, could you elaborate on filing this under “CDW”? I’m of a similar mind that the rumored impending dismissal of Burke from the Signatura likely will not be followed by an appointment to CDW, so I’m curious as to your connection of the two.
Jordan Zarembo makes an interesting point but I wonder to what extent it will be shared by those attached to the preconciliar Mass. If one takes acceptance of the TLM to be the objective, certainly Burke’s style invites no compromise or approachability to the unconvinced. But given that he does prefer to celebrate with maximum elaboration, could this apparent move be seen to hem in or restrict what is tolerable from TLM attendees (i.e., “Low Mass might be OK, but we’ll have none of that bling from you lot”)?
The number of times that Cardinal Burke publicly stated an opinion opposed to that of the pope or critical of his statements or initiatives is striking for someone in his position in the Curia. Usually a discrete silence would be observed. Thus, it would seem that either Cardinal Burke is so sure he is right that he does not practice discretion, or he is setting himself up to be “the voice of opposition” in the Curia. The situation promised to be time-consuming, frustrating, and unproductive.
The Pope did the right thing. He has to have people around him who want to carry out his program, not those who will put obstacles in the way.
@Rita Ferrone – comment #9:
I’m not sure I follow the logic of your ending paragraph. Haven’t we become aware of the dangers of a papacy surrounded by yes men? Many were supremely frustrated by BXVI placing his allies in key positions, and desired more resistance. Is there room for some sort of opposition (whatever the contemporary ideological positioning of pope and curia)?
@Michael A. Skaggs – comment #14:
There’s a difference between being surrounded by yes-men and being surrounded by people who have the wit to do what you ask and keep their differences for conversation with you rather than publication to the world. It surely does not help Pope Francis to accomplish his goals if he has a high-ranking loose cannon out there saying to the press how he is wrong on this or that matter.
Clearly, Pope Francis has retained a number of people from Benedict’s era, e.g. Msgr. Marini as master of ceremonies, and Cardinal Mueller as prefect of the CDF, and Ouellet as prefect of the congregation for bishops. I do not think that moving Cardinal Burke to a position outside Rome creates a situation of monochrome uniformity at all.
@Rita Ferrone – comment #27:
Your point is well taken. I think we’d all be well-advised to keep this in mind moving forward, too . There is a fine line between healthy debate and constant public contradiction, a line too often crossed (in both ‘political’ directions) in the Church.
@Rita Ferrone – comment #9:
Under different circumstances, couldn’t surrounding yourself with people who agree with your agenda be considered stacking the deck?
@Jeffrey Pinyan – comment #14:
Allow me to explain.
The Curia is not a parliament. The Pope has a job to do, and he appoints those people who will work with him to accomplish his goals, not those who will obstruct him or issue statements opposed to what he has said.
The proper place of dialogue with opposing views is with the bishops in the Synods.
@Rita Ferrone – comment #15:
Quite right. I also prefer to be surrounded with voices dissenting from mine, but once the Liturgy Commission or staff or parish determines what the direction is, I make sure the person has had their say, then it’s time to get with the collective effort. If I can be a good example of that when I don’t get my way, so much the better.
The real rub is how Cardinal Burke deals with people such as himself in instances where he is the leader. But that’s a question beyond liturgy.
Cardinal Burke will no doubt continue to travel and speak on liturgy and such. I wish him safety, and a fruitful ministry and spiritual life.
@Rita Ferrone – comment #17:
Wonder if we shouldn’t put this in context and look at some history.
Would suggest studying Archbishop John Quinn’s works:
a) his 1980 Synod presentation on the family (rejected and not even responded to by JPII and the Synod results. JPII/Benedict then undid VII’s call for deliberative synods – they made them papal instruments reinforcing papal centrality):http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1129&dat=19801111&id=l6dRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=yG0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=3888,1489623
b) His book on reform of the papacy in reply to JPII’s Et Unum Sint – he personally gave JPII a copy of the book and JPII also outlined curial reforms (but never implemented them – a serious sin of omission)- http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/call-reform
Quote – “…..a change in structures often results in changes of personnel: A more collaborative form of government will, in turn, require that people appointed to positions of authority have the kind of personalities that are capable of collaboration. Princelings would not long survive a more dialogical papacy.” (think Burke)
Thus, today the Vatican announced the results of the just completed G9 meeting that has now begun to write a new constitution on governance and the curia. There are many complex parts, to name a few:
– VII set up dicasteries, tribunals, and committees. 50 years of experience has led us to see that very few of these have lay or female participation; many overlap each other; and too many continue to be treated as *silos* headed up by a bishop or cardinal (which is not what VII called for). Fr. Komonchack on another blog suggests that we continue to be yoked to an old Trentan papal governance model and that we still have an estimated 45% of all bishops who are not assigned to dioceses (but merely administrative positions).
– Curia – not elected but appointed. Nothing but an administrative support for the papacy and the world’s bishops (this has yet to happen). Curial positions need not be for life; do not require ordination as a bishop (in fact, could be led by a lay person); are still overly filled by western/European clerics rather than participation by the worldwide church; need to benefit from pastors (thus, time limited) rather than seen as some professional, lifelong position
– need to distinguish between curial positions – leadership that can be time limited and then those who may have purely administrative/support positions that do the work
– key movement (some suggest that Francis sees this Family Synod as a way and template to implement change – he declares the synod as *deliberative* vs. consultative; he invites and empowers episcopal conferences to become the heart of the synod vs. curial officials; he involves recognized lay (male and female) experts….not unlike a mini-version of Vatican II). This effectively begins to reform and shift the governance to the bishop of Rome with his worldwide episcopal conferences; his significant advisors are the G9 (doubt that this is a group of Yes men e.g. Pell) and this moves the curia to being a support; rather than the center.
– thus, the announcement today suggests that we will see an effort to consolidate committees to be more efficient in addressing common needs; an effort to broaden leadership and import pastoral leaders with worldwide experience.
It is funny – per O’Malley’s book, Trent, the most significant concern initially at Trent was the reality that Rome/Pope had hundreds of bishops supported by benefices (these bishops rarely, if ever, were present in their dioceses) and yet this gave the Pope power and authority and income – he taxed these bishops using the threat of appointment). In some ways esp. Benedict’s curia, you see the same dynamic as the Trentan popes surrounded by their own curia (bishops) that are completely disconnected from pastoring and the worldwide church. History does appear to be repeating itself.
It’s unlikely this move is about downsizing the curia as there will still need to be a head canon lawyer – no doubt we can now expect someone in that position as willing to ignore particular law as everyone else nowadays – most relevant liturgically in the question of who may receive or be denied communion. But in the spirit of non-trolling for which this blog is so notable – if there is no real liturgical implication to Burke’s move perhaps it will be more interesting to essay opinions about the apparent bombshell dropped from the grave by Fr Bouyer.
http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2014/09/16/le-fiammeggianti-memorie-del-convertito-che-paolo-vi-voleva-far-cardinale/
Once upon a time, I had a rather long private conversation about liturgy with Cardinal Burke, before he was promoted to his present position. I was interviewing for a job in liturgy, which I was offered and declined. I did not refuse the job because of Burke. But I did notice at the time a somewhat choloric approach to liturgical practices with which he did not agree. My impression was that he would not be, istm, an easy person to work with, or someone who sympathetically enters into someone else’s point of view. He would not be skilled at the art of persuasion or compromise; he seems a jurist more than a pastor. His subsequent career proved that initial impression to be true.
Pope Francis is looking for moderates in his appointments.
My father’s cousin went from being a founder of Stonehill College to being the chaplain for the Medical Mission Sisters. My father thought that was a terrible thing, but he told my father that it was proper because order priests should be humble lest they lose their souls.
The Holy Father is an order priest and he may very well wish His Eminence to experience the virtue of humility.
I know the idea came from Magister, but Burke is not being sent in “exile to Malta”, but has been appointed as the cardinal patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a descendant of the medieval Knights Hospitaller. This group once ruled Malta but were exiled from Malta by Napoleon. They continue as an humanitarian organization based in Rome and recently in Malta.
Nothing to do with liturgy, or even with Burke’s ‘demotion’ but it seemed like it was worth noting.
Could not Rome established an archdiocese in Tierra del Fuego as a suitable retirement patch where little further damage can be done?
Cappae Magnae at Cape Horn by the Straits of Magellan. Perfect.
In some ways, one could argue that Cardinal Burke’s liturgical legacy on these shores will be felt for some time to come. Devotees of the 1962 missal such as Archbishop Cordelone and Archbishop Sample are relatively young and will be (at a minimum) the metropolitans of their regions for some time to come.
On the one hand, it’s easy to think “what’s good for the goose” as I think of many good churchmen who were perceived as liturgically ‘liberal’ that found themselves called on the carpet often for their practices during the pontificates of JPII and B16.
On the other hand, I think liturgy requires a responsible ‘liberal’ and a responsible ‘conservative’ voice. I’m not sure Cardinal Burke was ever all that responsible with his voice.
I struggle with this…is the demotion of Cardinal Burke and his cappa magna really any better than the forced retirement of someone like Bishop Gumbleton a few years back?
I’m starting to think our definition of collegiality in the church is whether or not the pope agrees with me. And that’s not collegial at all.
@Matt Herek – comment #20:
I’m not sure Bishop Gumbleton’s “forced” retirement was all that unusual. Every bishop must submit a resignation at age 75. Have Popes Benedict and Francis done a loyal churchman like Cardinal George any good by leaving him in office to struggle with health issues two years past the letter? Seems more like a purgatory to me. We do know that in the case of Matt Clark of Rochester, they had their priorities straight: take their August siestas, then kick the bum to the side of the road.
Maybe the challenge for those of us who comment on it all is to be inspired to advocate for fairness and practice it ourselves with our colleagues, volunteers, and other sisters and brothers.
@Todd Flowerday – comment #21:
Honestly, at the time, he was pastoring a parish that needed him. It was a Roman edict that he not only retire, but surrender all offices such as pastor.
I guess my point is that while I don’t share much of Cardinal Burke’s sensibilities on just about anything, that in his current office there was little he could do other than be a ‘role model’ for the extraordinary form. He no longer has membership on the congregation of bishops.
Now–in fairness, he is working as a member of the curial ‘cabinet’ more or less. So that’s different that being a diocesan ordinary. Still–I’d just caution against too much of a dance of joy thinking he’s getting what he deserved.
Having grown up in a diocese where the bishop was often misrepresented by his friends and enemies, it sucks to watch that happen.
Has Cardinal Burke retained his position on the Congregation for Divine Worship?
If only the Pope would now demote all the bishops in this country whose Roman patrono was the soon-to-be former Prefect. The damage this man’s ecclesiastical acolytes will continue to do in dioceses like Rochester — apparently the last one to have inflicted on it a Burke clone — is apparent to all who now live under their repressive regimes.
We ought not to underestimate the strategic importance of this move in advance of the Synod on the Family. Should the Synod go in the direction of making annulments easier to obtain, the Pope will need someone in the Apostolic Signatura who is going to go along, and not obstruct the plan because he thinks it’s too liberal.
Also, let’s not forget that the Knights and Dames of Malta are well-off (generally very conservative) persons who devote themselves to charitable works. Might not the immersion in a group devoted to charitable works be a good thing for Cardinal Burke’s soul, and not a disgrace as Sandro Magister would have it? Pope Francis clearly thinks that charitable works are NOT to be despised.
Thanks, Rita – comparing Gumbleton to Burke is comparing apples to oranges. He is local (yes, well known) and had reached retirement age; Burke has a completely different position and impact….thus, would suggest that this is not just a tit for tat decision. In addition, Burke failed as archbishop of STL and in typical Roman fashion, was promoted to Rome. Agree – this probably means that he will be able to travel and support his ideological desires (but, OTOH, it appears that this decision has little to do with liturgy/TLM and more to do with leadership; governing; and focusing on issues such as the Family Synod; Missionary activity; supporting the poor and disadvantaged…it is a reorientation from internal, navel gazing to external needs and service.
@Bill deHaas – comment #29:
I guess I didn’t mean to say they were exactly the same. Just saying that I get the feeling like there may be a lot of “progressives” who are taking a little bit of joy in this happening.
I just worry that instead of having a church with many viewpoints where one-ness doesn’t mean same-ness, instead this could become overly political. That would be sad to me.
Again, I don’t agree with a lot of Cardinal Burke’s theories on the world but to me it reminds me of a parish in my home diocese.
After about 12 years, the pastor neared retirement. During his pastorate he did not allow women to serve in any role on the altar except to clean it, communion under one kind, no sign of peace, etc. He was replaced by someone who undid all of these things in week one. To no small bit of consternation on the part of the assembly. The pastor emeritus lived nearby and never really had a role with the parish other than to say daily mass.
I guess to me, there is a sadness there, because you have to honor and respect the man’s priesthood. That’s all. We should remember that.
@Matt Herek – comment #31:
It’s a difficult spot for a lot of people. I suspect some Catholics are feeling “relief,” at least in the sense I do. In my own life, transgressing canon law is not a staple of my diet. But I do recognize how polarizing situations can tear at the fabric of church life. Cardinal Burke’s experience in St Louis is illustrative. He was certainly within the bounds of canon law to progress with that parish that ended up in schism. But it seemed to me that given the result, his approach lacked prudence. Does such a person make a good leader? In situations, perhaps, when prudence isn’t called for, I suppose.
Prudence is an often overlooked virtue in the contemporary church. I would venture to say that except for love, it is the most necessary quality for ministry. When prudence is lacking, sadness is the inevitable result.
As for your other comment about Cardinal Burke “getting what he deserved,” I wouldn’t dare to go there. It’s not my place, nor any mortal’s, to dole out “deserved” or any other punishments.
But I would certainly say that a good dollop of prudence is needed in many quarters as we ponder this alleged move. Every person, even a cardinal, deserves to work for the Reign of God in such a way so as to fulfill the Mission of Christ with the best and ablest offering of their talents and gifts as they can muster. And with all the sacramental grace the Lord offers in the sacraments. When this doesn’t happen, even for one person, the Church is impoverished.
@Todd Flowerday – comment #34:
Amen, and well stated brother Todd.
Don’t we often drift into I Cor. 1:12 undertow (Now this I say, that every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas; and I of Christ. DouayRheims) in these discussions? I find that disabling, not empowering towards fellowship in Christian witness.
And could someone address Fr. Joncas’ inquiry?
IMO, this isn’t primarily about liturgy. Pell wears the cappa and has one of the most powerful jobs in the Vatican.
After Fr. Joncas posed the question at #25 about Cardinal Burke’s membership on the CDW, I was surprised to see how hard it has been to ascertain who the current members are. Looks like Burke along with:
Amato (Causes of Saints)
Gracias (Bombay)
Lopez Martin (Leon)
Maryadi Sutrisnaatmaka (Palangkaraya)
Neary (Tuam)
Ricard (Bordeaux)
Robu (Bucharest)
were added to the CDW on July 6, 2010. (This is a mixture of cardinals, archbishops, and bishops.) The Vatican website doesn’t even seem to list the members.
As much as I support the use of the extraordinary form, I am very happy to see Cardinal Burke go, he’s a poster boy for the phrase “traditionalists are often their own worst enemies.”
At the same time, I think that a much more noteworthy item this week is that the pope has named Anthony Fisher (Pell’s protégé) as the new Archbishop of Sydney. I think that this shows Pell’s current influence on the Vatican, and the fact that he is still the head of the Vox Clara committee as well as a member of the Congregation of Bishops means that the reform of the reform is far from finished.
The Argentine newspaper La Nacion interviewed Pope Francis in Dec 2014, and he gave his version of the Burke appointment:
– A conservative sector in the US thinks that you removed the North American cardinal Raymond Leo Burke from the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura because he was the leader of a group that resisted changes of any type in the synod of bishops.. Is it true?
– One day Cardinal Burke asked me what he would be doing as he had still not been confirmed in his position, in the legal sector, but rather had been confirmed “donec alitur provideatur”. And I answered “Give me some time because we are thinking of a legal restructuring of the G9”. I told him nothing had been done about it yet and that it was being considered. After that the issue of the Order of Malta cropped up and we needed a smart American who would know how to get around and I thought of him for that position. I suggested this to him long before the synod. I said to him “This will take place after the synod because I want you to participate in the synod as Dicastery Head”. As the chaplain of Malta he wouldn´t have been able to be present. He thanked me in very good terms and accepted my offer, I even think he liked it. Because he is a man that gets around a lot, he does a lot of travelling and would surely be busy there. It is therefore not true that I removed him because of how he had behaved in the synod.
by
Tags:
Please leave a reply.