When Cardinals Seek to Mislead...

It is striking to note who is supporting Amoris Laetitia. In the face of growing confusion about the document, it seems that only those with a reputation for contradicting established Church teaching are still suggesting there is no problem with the document. This is true on both a macro-cosmic and a microcosmic basis, as demonstrated by this anthology of "progressive" interpretation posted by a priest in my own Diocese.

One of biggest supporters of the document is the incredibly worrying Cardinal Blase Cupich, head of Chicago arch-diocese in the USA. Cupich has a terrifying record of supporting the homosexual agenda, pushing a radical agenda at the synod, and, in August 2015, equating the evil of Planned Parenthood's sale of aborted babies' body parts with 'joblessness' and a 'broken immigration system.' You can watch some more about him here.

++Cupich came under fire by the faithful on the 14th Feb for publishing the above tweet, suggesting Amoris Laetitia expresses doctrine with "absolute clarity". The shocking response from the faithful is documented by Church Militant here.

"How can a Catholic accept a declaration of 'absolute clarity' from a Cardinal who has spent his career in the moral gray?" asked one individual, referring to Cupich's reputation for pushing Holy Communion for those in "irregular unions," as well as his promotion of the seamless garment and other liberal positions.

"This is the single most compactly contrary-to-fact statement I have ever seen attributed to a bishop. Congratulations," responded another.

I have to shake my head and wonder for what reason this man was made a Cardinal of the Church. But he is. And what can we do?

It has long been understood that an attempt at "balance" between tradition and progressive elements has formed part of the policy when appointing bishops, but someone like Cupich seems way too extreme to be in this role. When a prince of the Church makes comments that are so clearly misleading, the faithful start to lose all credibility they had for those who are appointed to lead them.