I suppose they hoped that with passage of time, the interest of many Catholics might have waned. Well, some of us do have attention spans longer than those of ants. Recall that the synod fathers voted two weeks ago to remove particularly heretical paragraphs. The announcement came that they would remain, with the vote counts next to each. The votes appear at the bottom of the document. I share Father Z's disappointment that we don't know who voted which way. Why the big secret?
Well, that last part didn't happen on this English version from the website of the Vatican Press Office. I see no tally; that absence gives the distinct (and I believe deliberated) impression that the heretical elements passed through the synod vote with flying colors. You'll have to look closely, as it appears that the paragraph numbering was revamped.
One of the heretical suggestions is now paragraph 52, talking of giving divorced/remarried (e.g. adulterous) Catholics "access to the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist". Later it goes into some blather about "penitential practice". Here are some problems with this. If one goes to Confession, they must confess all mortal sins; else they've just made a sacrilegious Confession, adding to their charge yet another mortal sin. If they confess their adultery, proper contrition demands that they quit their adulterous situations, not remain in them. Otherwise, they are not properly disposed to receive absolution. Of course if they aren't properly absolved through a worthy Confession, they are in no way eligible to receive Holy Communion as they will still be in a state of mortal sin. If we're going to talk about "penitential practice" there is absolutely no substitute for those that have been promulgated by the Church since her founding by Jesus Christ; anything else is an illusory pipe-dream, a false consolation that will probably lead to eternal perdition for those so duped into embracing it.
Paragraph 53 reiterates paragraph 52, with the difference being a focus on coddling the mortal sin of fornication as opposed to adultery. Again, what's being proposed by this SinNod here is nothing short of spiritual poison inspired by the evil one.
Paragraphs 55 and 56 touch upon those who suffer from homosexual tendencies. I am happy to see that the cr*p that extolled "sacrificial love" between two partners in sodomite sin was expunged. Let us pray that it stays expunged. I am wary of some elements within the hierarchy. In a saner time. that nonsense would never have been allowed to see the light of day, coming from the Vatican.
I don't know how this squares against other translations. I do know that the Pope said, in the SinNod's closing address, that we have one year to "mature". If that "maturation" means a return to understanding that we follow Jesus Christ and not the whims of the world, so be it. But given the cabal that de facto wrote that interim relatio without regard for the other synod fathers, I rather doubt it.
Friday, October 31, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This 'translation' is extremely troubling. I thought the paragraphs that were in such opposition (the ones that appeared in the midterm relatio) were to be omitted? There they were in all their glory. Should have been no surprise to me because I thought that's what Raymond Arroyo asked Fr. Murray (a cannon lawyer) on EWTN's 'World Over' this week: 'Why did those paragraphs show up in the final relatio?' Fr. Murray's answer: I would suppose they are still up for discussion according to the wishes of Francis.' This interview BTW was one of the best I've seen on EWTN. They (in the past) have been very careful about controversy within the Synod. Raymond Arroyo however has been pushing the envelope on the issue. His viewers no doubt have been quite upset by Synod craziness and I'm sure the emails have been coming in fast and furious.
ReplyDeleteActually, the paragraphs were changed but still voted down with less than 2/3 of a majority. They are still problematic as are many other paragraphs.
DeleteOh yes, BTW........Pope Francis' statment about having one year to 'mature' is common lingo for Jesuits. They like to say that Catholics need to 'grow up' or 'mature' in their spirituality. I've heard it before at a few retreats from Jesuits. It's modernist speak.
ReplyDeletenot sure if my previous comment went through, what we need to do is show a united front, paper letters must be written to world bishops (africa especially) urging them to form alliances with each other to defeat the people who wish to change our divine religion. this marriage thing will simply be a stepping stone.
ReplyDeletethe gnostics or whatever wont be able to change our church when confronted by a unifed front of african, east european, asian, and conservative westerner bishops
actually "orthodox westerners", we cannot allow the gnostics to brandish us as conservatives as if the debate is political, we have to lay down hard that this is heterodoxy vs orthodoxy
ReplyDeleteIndeed Sybok..........the 'True Church vs. The False Church. Or maybe 'The Catholics vs. The Heretics'. They brand us 'Conservatives', but I'd rather think we are just 'Catholics'.
Delete