We begin to see most clearly how much of a loose cannon his Eminence is, very early in Section 3.2 of his Address :
" Even Christ did not proclaim or preach Himself, but the Kingdom."
Eminence? Is that the same Christ Who said : " I Am the Way, the Truth and the Life" John 14:6? Did not preach Himself??
Saying that the Church is called "to serve, not to rule" His Eminence says " She must do this service living in the world " . His " hang up" with Marxist Liberation Theology seems to be anchored in this approach. But where is this straw man Church that has wanted "to rule"?
In truth it is a figment of His Eminence's fevered imagination. And his imagination has not been shy in the past at conjuring up some other fevered ideas. Some years ago, when the Boston Globe (owned by the New York Times which is Jewish owned) broke the horrendous stories of clergy abuse of children in Boston decades before, His Eminence was clear in public statements that it was a Jewish conspiracy to distract world attention from the problems of the Palestinians and their then leader Yasser Arafat who had several times been received by the Holy Father. So His Eminence is not new to saying wild things.
And, in the Cardinal's mind, the Church is to be there among the lowest of the low..."without anathemas"? Pardon? What does this mean? That in her service of the poor the Church will disregard contradiction of revealed truth, will countenance gross evils such as Abortion, Contraception etc.?
But wait, there is more : Speaking of the Church :" Her foremost goal is to care for the penultimate ( hunger, housing, clothing, shoes, health, education...) ! Really?
Surely her foremost goal is the salvation of souls ! The Mission she is to preach is repentance, conversion and salvation through the loving care of our God. After that come the works of mercy.
" Too many times , she gives the impression of having too much certitude, too little doubt, freedom dissension, dialogue.No more excommunicating the world, then, or trying to solve the world's problems by returning to authoritarianism, rigidity and moralism, but instead keeping always the message of Jesus as her sole source of inspiration."says His Eminence.
When did the Church NOT " keep always the message of Jesus as her sole source of inspiration"?
Once we see that this last rhetorical fling is nothing but a flourish to cover the attack that has preceded it, we may begin to understand how far this man is from "thinking with the Church" . What in fact has he been ranting about? It is no doubt the concerted and successful effort of Blessed Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI to reveal Liberation Theology for the gross error it is and the sinister infestation of the Church that it had become!"Too much certitude.....too little doubt" You people dared to disagree with my Marxist thinking Liberation Theologians! Why , you caused Guttierez to stop his teaching , and Boff likewise.
But as he rants on, the rhetoric becomes increasingly unhinged from the remotest connection to reality : "No more excommunicating the world, then, or trying to solve the world's problems by returning to authoritarianism, rigidity and moralism". It is the stuff of delusion..the Church has never sought to "excommunicate the world" whatever that fevered phrase might intend. And she can NEVER forsake her Authority - Divinely given, nor can she bend the Truths entrusted to her by God nor fail to propound the moral teaching entrusted to her. But His Eminence wants all that to happen to accommodate his Marxist sympathies!
In addressing the subject of the Church as Communion His Eminence attacks the concept of hierarchy, asserting the idea of a " privileged and exclusive "Ministerial Order "in the way it appeared to be configured, with absolute power concentrated at the apex and delegated down to the rest of the tiers of the hierarchy"
But Eminence? What of the words of Our Divine Lord: " Thou art Peter.....I will give to thee the Keys to the Kingdom...Whatsoever you shall bind....whatsoever you shall loose....." Oh! Sorry! Is that inconvenient for the Marxist Liberation Theology point of view? Well, He is only God!
There follows a passage somewhat calmer in tone, but not without its errors. In a an attempt to present a scriptural clothing for what has just passed, His Eminence tells us about the Life of Jesus : " Jesus' entire life was a priestly life, in the sense that He became man, was poor, fought for justice, criticized the vices of power, identified Himself with the most oppressed and defended them, treated women without discrimination, clashed with the ones who had a different image of God and of religion....".
But is all this what made Jesus' Life Priestly? What is a Priest? He is one who offers sacrifice and is a bridge between God and man. Yes, Jesus' Life was a Priestly one - He became Incarnate in order to die on the Cross,to achieve our salvation by being the Lamb of God, in His very being He bridged the gap between God and Man -Jesus Christ - God made Man.
NO Eminence, it was not all the rest that you list, that made Jesus a Priest.
The attempt to build up an image of Jesus as one who might be identified with the Marxist Liberation Theologians is pathetically shallow and immature.
In part III we will see the Cardinal in full Marxist flight - don't miss it!