Thursday, November 6, 2014

Final Relatio Synodi's Serious Errors

Yesterday LifeSiteNews published a piece in which Cardinal Reinhard Marx, president of the German Conference of Catholic Bishops, said that Pope Francis ordered the rejected paragraph on homosexuality to be published in the final SinNod report.  He is referring to the ones asking the Church to "learn to accept homosexual orientations".

Please see this link to the English translation of the final SinNod report; it is on the Vatican site.  I've read through this thing carefully; at least I think I did.  I do not see those paragraphs about "valuing the homosexual orientation" at all.  If I'm missing something, would a reader please be so kind as to cite the paragraph number?

It is quite possible that the heretical paragraphs are included in translations other than English. This example is not the only one in which the English translation differs from that of other translations.  Catholic Culture has an article stating that the Italian translation is quite different.  The difference is at the end of paragraph 4 of the introduction.  Notice that the English states "to discern how the Church and society can renew their commitment to the family."  Period.  However, the Italian version appends a significant phrase to the end of that sentence.  It reads "to the family founded on marriage between a man and a woman."  Rather telling, isn't it?  Catholic Culture, with tongue-in-cheek humor, quips that it's "an oversight".  Of course it isn't.  That was a deliberated omission, most likely done with the intention of muddying the true definition of marriage.  By the way - here's the Italian translation, again from the Vatican site.

Now here's the question of the hour.  Is there an English translation of the final "Relatio Synodi" that accurately reflects the original?  Obviously the one that's on the Vatican website leaves a lot to be desired.


  1. My understanding is that the rejected paragraphs were kept in the official Relatio in Italian and also in other languages but were removed for the English language version.

    1. Annie, I'm sure you're correct. So now we ask, "WHY???"

    2. That's what I would like to know.................WHY? Would they be arrogant enough to claim it was only an 'oversight'? And why isn't someone holding their feet to the fire on this one??? IF they claim it was an oversight, shouldn't they 'correct the oversight'?

  2. My gut feeling is that it was kept out of the English version to stop the vocal opposition of Cardinals Burke and Pell. However, Pope Francis kept it in the official version to get it back on the table at next year's Synod when Burke is gone and hopefully Pell too and he's stacked the meeting with even more of his cronies - then hopefully for him: slam, dunk.


Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.