The Vatican's Francis Revolution gains pace

If I understand him at all, Cardinal Burke does acknowledge a "hierarchy of truths". He would agree, I'm sure, that the doctrine of Original Sin is more "important" that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, if we mean by that just that the former is logically and theologically prior to the latter. But of course Cardinal Burke and all authentic Catholics would reject the notion that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is in any way less certain, more dispensable, than the doctrine of Original Sin. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is a solemnly defined dogma and to deliberately reject it places oneself outside the Church, the Ark of salvation. The notion that some defined Catholic "truths" are more able to be dispensed with than others with is a liberal fantasy concocted in recent decades. It has no authority either in history or theology. No matter how humble his new role is in the Church on earth, Cardinal Burke is on solid ground. When I met him recently, he knew what was coming. Fully cognizant of the significance of what is a humiliating demotion (in worldly eyes) as Paul Collins rightly notes, he was as serene as ever. Who knows: perhaps His Eminence views all things sub specie aeternitatis?

Mr Collins, history suggests exile can be a ticket to promotion both Saint John XX111 and Blessed Paul vi were 'exiled' [thus 'demotion before promotion].Be that as it may-with a new pope soon, Burke joins Pell and CDF Müller as front-runner papabili ["Onboard the Papal plane: The Pope has publicly broached the prospect of his own death for the first time, giving himself "two or three years", but not ruling out retirement before then"[SMH: April 12/2014] Then the return of the cappa magna!!

What happened to the Gospel truths that we should all love each other and not downgrade any of God's creation?

I think Micael Shermer's interview of the pope was very good. http://tinyurl.com/q2yhcs4

Thank you, Paul, once again another insightful and informative article. Good to see someone from the English Catholic heartland of the North, with down-to-earth people skills, who knows Australia well, going to such an important post. Given the agony Australian Catholics and the Church have gone through with the degrading, debilitating and destructive paedophilia scandals - often made more painful due to the ostrich-like and inept conduct of our generally lacklustre episcopate - any wise and informed counsel on their future selection in Rome is to be heartily welcomed.

I thought this article was about the appointment of Archbishop Paul Gallagher rather than the extensive description of Cardinal Burke an all his 'mea culpas' that anyone who likes accusing him of being overly conservative love to point out!

Thank you for this encouraging article. At the ground level, Catholic families like mine will be very pleased to read of this appointment. In responding to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit change is clearly called for by the highest authority, Pope Francis. Humility and Hubris stand at opposite ends of the spectrum. If the Pope sees fit to use his informed judgement to open a window of opportunity for fresh insight and experience we should all be respectful. and welcome the change.

A trusted source on such matters suggests that sadly Archbishop Gallagher has already failed to influence in a positive way Australian Bishop appointments .It seems he disagreed with appointing of a Pell clone to the Sydney position ,but Pell exerted more pressure within the Vatican .God forbid that Father John George is nominating the most despised cleric in the history of our Australian Church ,as a Papal candidate . On second thought maybe a great idea as it would surely accelerate the inevitable demise of the current Church ,so it may resurrect itself to become again a union of true followers of Christ .Father Michael Whelan suggested that as the only outcome ,quite some years , back during a visit to North Qld

As papal nuncio to Australia, Archbishop Paul Gallagher listened to the people of the Church. In that regard, his move to the role of Vatican Secretary for Relations with States again shows that this Pope recognises that all leaders, particularly leaders in Christ's Church, should recognise the importance of listening carefully to the people. Decision making in the Church needs to be influenced by the people of God throughout the world, that is, informed by the sensus fidelium. Listening carefully to the people of God did not seem to be one of Cardinal Raymond Burke's strong points.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, wonderful news about the workings of the Holy Spirit,,,and thanks for the pleas of St Francis of Assisi and Pope Francis and all who long for the joy of the Gospel , Pauline Kennedy

HH, whoever he or she might, behind that cloak of anonymity, might well pause to reflect on the logic of his/her hostility to as "hierarchy of truth". Some truths about life and the world ARE more significant than others, just as some "dogmas" and "laws" are more important than others -- otherwise we'd still be abstaining from meat on Fridays (the rule to "send Catholic children to Catholic schools" is in the same category). But it is the implicit implacable confidence that the Church is always right and has always been so which is so troubling in the comments of HH. Much the same triumphalist adherence to mediaeval practice (hardly the years of the Church's moral glory) is to be discerned in Fr George's yearning for the absurdity of the "Cappa magna". Whilst Bishops and Cardinals aspired to be Princes, that was inappropriate and unworthy and any nostalgia for it is both distasteful and harmful for the effort and work of a 21st-century Church.

Archbishop Gallagher certainly seems to be a man with the "smell of the sheep" about him. Considering the circumstances of Bishop Morris removal, and the apparent inability of the Vatican to understand the effect of the Australian 'tyranny of distance" on access to the sacraments, Bishop Gallagher's offer to help out in Wilcannia-Forbes at Easter must have provided valuable learning for everyone. Nice one, Pope Francis - keep it up!

Well put, Paul, but heaven help us if the comments are a reflection of where we are in the church. Citing original sin and the Immaculate Conception as examples of "important" doctrines brings us back 200 years. Do we really need to accept a doctrine that is based on the creation story of bellicose nomads? The gentle indigenous people of this country have much better stories.

If by questioning, "The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception as a solemnly defined dogma and deliberately rejecting it places me outside the Church, the Ark of salvation." as HH says, then Alleluia I am well and truly lost forever. Thanks be to God.

John Carmody, how does your example of a changeable ecclesiastical LAW refute the notion of "hierarchy of truths" held by Cardinal Burke, myself and the Catechism with respect to defined DOGMAS which every Catholic is bound to believe? Tom, while there's life, there's hope. But just to help you: here is what Pius IX decreed with respect to the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception: "Hence, if anyone shall dare -- which God forbid! -- to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church..." And Frank, remember: much as you might wish, you can't logically reject both the doctrines of Original Sin AND the Immaculate Conception. For if you reject the doctrine of Original Sin then you logically must think that EVERYONE is immaculately conceived.

Many 'traditional' Church doctrines are simply interpretations of past events or situations. They were formulated by men who did not have sufficient information or awareness of the limitations of their data or of the limits of the human mind. Despite these limitations, they build a structure that was a great help to former generations. Many assumptions, such as original sin, were in fact not true, but were beneficial in the way a placebo is helpful in many cases. Care is needed in challenging the value of placebos until those who are helped by the 'milk' of placebos can be prepared to receive and benefit from the reception of the spiritual 'meat' of reality. Thus Pope Francis has a precarious and delicate path to follow to bring the Church from the out-dated suppositions of past generations and replace them with more spiritual and relevant clarifications.

Well said, Robert Liddy! You have captured the nitty gritty of the need for revision of many long-standing Church teachings derived at a time when knowledge and understanding of the world and human life was sadly lacking. The thing that is amazing to me is that many of the longstanding teachings have indeed been vindicated by the progression and definition of the physical and human sciences. Perhaps this is an indication that the Spirit was indeed guiding the Church through the dark days of ignorance. Sometimes I doubt that the same spirit guides the clamour of the modern renewalists and reformers even though they claim absolute ownership of the understanding of the Spirit. Ignatius of Loyola might caution that not all Spirit is good Spirit.

HH should think more clearly and carefully. A "dogma" is not a "truth": it is, indeed (see the OED), in its origins and meaning, an "opinion or belief". It is not unreasonable, therefore, to speak of a scale of dogma. "Truth" is even more slippery. As Francis Bacon observed in the opening sentence of his essay, "On Truth": "'What is truth?' said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer." Thus enduring truth is extraordinarily difficult to define and (self-evidently) not all such "truths" are of equal power or significance. It is "true" that the Melbourne Cup is run on the first Tuesday of November, but that is hardly as important as the fact of the function of DNA, or of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Truths about the intangible -- beauty, love, the "meaning" of life -- are far more difficult. History teaches that, in the face of such questions, too many people resort to dogma, often prescriptive (even punitive and aggressive) dogma in the face of the profundity of those questions and the elusiveness of the answers. So, HH: more humility and less prescriptiveness might be more edifying.

Its disappointing that ES would publish a comment like John Kersh's which prefaces its content with a 'trusted source'.. told me. Is this the "Daily Mail" or "New Idea"!? We all know that a 'trust source' means its MUST be true (*sarcasm*) Honestly, what credibility does that give Mr Kersh's comment. Secondly, describing Bishop Anthony Fisher as a Cardinal Pell 'clone' would be strongly contended by those who know these servants of the Church. Have a listen to the ABC Religious Affairs Editor Scott Stephens - he came to a completely opposite conclusion.

Is it possible to dismiss original sin as 'not true' in the almost casual manner of Robert Liddy? Of course the Adam and Eve story is a myth - but don't myths evolve as a response to questions that human beings ask about their lived experience? Didn't the story of the Fall post-date human observation that we seem naturally less disposed to choose what is life giving than what is death-dealing? Can we really deny, even today, that this is the case? Surely the term 'original sin' doesn't refer to an historic act by one couple, but to a condition we all seem subject to, and from which we need a Way out? Just asking...

Fortunately, Cath, John Kersh is right ... or so another trusted source has told me: Fr Gallagher was, as I hear, very opposed to Bishop Fisher, and lobbied hard to have his promotion reversed. But now we in Australia are rid of Fr Gallagher, so beloved of the liberals, and have Archbishop Fisher in Sydney. Win win, I say!

Cath , I have absolutely no idea what "truths " the Daily Mail or New Idea ,espouse .It would appear you are well versed on their subjects . It would be unthinkable for me to Name my 'trusted source ' but I assure you it is a person of extraordinary intellect, impeccable integrity& boundless compassion ,constantly applied throughout his life's work for benefit of many people .Thus has connection with Church identities of equal calibre .It is disappointing that you care to diminish them to your 'New Idea ' status . Regards John

John Carmody, just to clarify: whatever the OED or others may hold about dogma not being a truth, the religion I'm a humble member of says this: "The Church's Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these." CCC 88.