Am I on the same team as Cardinal Robert McElroy? I recently had to ask myself this question because he wrote an article for the Jesuit (go figure) magazine America, in which he enlightens the world about what to expect at the upcoming abomination known as the Synod on Synodality.
I suspect the answer to my question is a big fat NO. No, I have nothing in common with him other than, perhaps, we are both American citizens. We certainly do not share the same faith or practice the same religion.
This is somewhat disconcerting, however, because Cardinal McElroy holds himself out to be a Roman Catholic, and asserts a tremendous amount of authority and control over other people’s lives and eternal souls as the Bishop of San Diego, California.
Rather than dissect Cardinal McElroy’s opinions and ideas—I am sure plenty of others have done that already—I would like to focus on another important topic: what is the Roman Catholic Church, and does it have anything to do with what McElroy is talking about?
The answer is quite simple. Whatever it is McElroy blathers on about in this piece, while no doubt inspires false hope and excitement to people who do not like what the Church stands for, it has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church. None of what he talks about impacts, affects, or in anyway threatens the Church founded by Jesus Christ—so long as faithful Catholics respond accordingly.
Let’s just consider a couple paragraphs to get a flavor of what McElroy is serving up on a false-gold plated platter. He says:
“The proposal [as part of the synodal process] to ordain women to the permanent diaconate had widespread support in the global dialogues. While there is historical debate about precisely how women carried out a quasi-diaconal ministry in the life of the early church, the theological examination of this issue tends to support the conclusion that the ordination of women to the diaconate is not doctrinally precluded. Thus, the church should move toward admitting women to the diaconate, not only for reasons of inclusion but because women permanent deacons could provide critically important ministries, talents and perspectives.”
Yikes, okay, well this must make so many people happy. There is only one problem: it is not remotely Catholic.
Let’s look at another profound bit of (non) Catholic wisdom from McElroy:
“The Eucharist is a central element of God’s grace- filled transformation of all the baptized. For this reason, the church must embrace a eucharistic theology that effectively invites all of the baptized to the table of the Lord, rather than a theology of eucharistic coherence that multiplies barriers to the grace and gift of the eucharist. Unworthiness cannot be the prism of accompaniment for disciples of the God of grace and mercy (emphasis added).”
Huh…Let’s check in with St. Paul to see how he describes the “prism of accompaniment for disciples” when it comes to worthy reception of Holy Eucharist. St. Paul wrote:
“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.” 1 Corinthians 11:27.
Clearly, unworthiness was, if not the prism of accompaniment, at minimum a factor to consider when receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in the sacrament of Holy Communion. Cardinal McElroy may subscribe to a religion, but whatever it is, it is not Roman Catholicism.
Let’s get down to brass tacks. There is a major, and I mean major, blow up on the horizon coming for what the world considers the visible Roman Catholic Church. This blow up should have happened in the 1960’s. A lot of really smart good Catholics saw it back then. Some stood up and said something, others did not.
Regardless, the blow up is coming and we are all going to have to take sides. That’s right my friends…DIVISION is coming, and it is not only necessary but absolutely vital that when it happens you pick a side. Stop straddling the fence trying to manage your risk of eternal damnation. God sees through all of this. If you are legitimately not certain about how to process what is happening in the Church, that is fine, but do your research! It is your duty! (See Canon 748 §1).
Here is my thought process. We all accept and recognize that there is only ONE, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. And yet Christ also tells us:
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household.” Matthew 10: 34-36.
So, is division really something that can and—at all costs—be avoided? How do we reconcile this need for ONE Church, while Christ brings division?
The reality is we cannot fake (i.e. lie) our way through our life in order to maintain peace and avoid division. This is one of the biggest errors those in mainstream Catholic media are making today. They are talking themselves, using astonishing feats of mental gymnastics, into believing 2+2=5 in order to maintain the illusion of unity in the Church.
The ONE Church necessarily requires its members to have the same faith, in all its aspects. The same faith, in all its aspects, is part of the “oneness.” We must not deceive ourselves into accepting beyond the bounds of all reason that all bishops and Vatican officials believe in Catholicism. We know they don’t because they tell us what they believe, and it is not Catholic.
To look at this from a different angle: If you happened to be a person that does not accept or believe the faith as it has been handed down to us in Sacred Tradition and Holy Scripture, your personal rejection of such faith does not affect the “oneness” of the Church in the slightest. The Church is still one, the faith is still one, you are just choosing not to be a part of it.
Cardinal McElroy is at a minimum an objective, material heretic. I am not judging his internal forum, this conclusion is simply based on what he says and writes. He is no better than Father Luther when he rejected the Church’s teachings. The only difference is McElroy was promoted within the Church’s hierarchy, and Luther was excommunicated as a formal heretic. Should I listen and be obedient to the teachings of either one?
The Evil One will always accuse the faithful of sins for which he is guilty. When Modernists accuse you of being a heretic or schismatic for simply accepting by faith the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church as handed down to us in Tradition, rest assured, they are playing the role of Martin Luther, not you. Luther rejected all of that too, except he didn’t have his name listed on the property title deed at his local cathedral.
And that, my friends, is the heart of the battle we face right now. Are we being faithful to Jesus Christ, His Church, and the deposit of faith? Or, will we succumb to the temptation and deny the faith in order to appear obedient and avoid division?
Yes, my friends, there is division. You do not have to be happy about it, but the reality of it is that the current state of division cannot be denied. The days of pounding a square peg into a circle hole are over. God bless him, and may his soul rest in peace, but Pope Benedict (I believe with the best of intentions) tried to make 2+2=5 his entire career with a hermeneutic of continuity. It just simply cannot be done. It is impossible.
Truth and the heresy of Modernism cannot coexist in any meaningful way over the long run. There are two sides, and we all must pick one. This is a battle for the heart AND the heritage of the Roman Catholic Church.
The future hinges on our decisions, here and now. What side are you on?