The following comes from a Sept. 19 column by Carl Olson on Catholic World Report.
In the weeks to come, the spinning of the [Oct. 5-19] Synod—why it has been convened, what it seeks to accomplish, what it may or may not do—will be in full force. Here are five spins that are rotating at high speed and will likely be twirling about for some time to come, regardless of how inaccurate or misleading they are.
- Francis polled ordinary Catholics worldwide in order to gauge, by democratic fashion, what changes need to be made at the Synod: When the Vatican sent out questionnaires to bishops around the world requesting data and information, some interpreted it—or presented it—as a poll from the pope, meant to guide his doctrinal decisions. In fact, various countries handled the gathering of information differently, and some did use parish-level surveys. But the questions and answers were not about dogma or doctrine, but about attitudes, perceptions, concerns, and “pastoral realities”. As the National Catholic Registerexplainedlast November, “the Vatican’s survey is being handled at the diocesan level, and the aim is to collect raw data, not opinions on Church doctrine or discipline, in advance of the 2014 synod. The data will help inform the bishops as they develop pastoral solutions for the challenges faced by modern families.”
Still, the generally poor understanding of the nature of Church doctrine and authority, coupled with headlines such as “Vatican surveys worldwide Catholic Church on family issues including gay marriage” and “Vatican polls Catholics on birth control, gay marriage”, gave the impression that Church teaching was up for a democratic poll or vote, and thus destined to change. Of course, that’s what many people want. But it’s not what they likely will get.
- The Synod will be a total failure unless it changes Church teaching about remarriage and much more:In July, I received an e-mail from Catholic Church Reform Int’l that expressed its disappointment with “the Vatican’s agenda for next fall’s Synod of Bishops in Rome”, noting that it had “provided each of the bishop delegates with a copy of its recommendations, urging the Synod take a more pastoral approach to issues facing the world’s families – among others, remarriage in the Church after divorce, cohabitation before marriage, and contraception.” The group’s Board of Consultorsincludes dissenting and leftie luminaries such as Joan Chittister and Hans Küng, as well as others from radical groups We Are Church, Future Church, and Catholics For Renewal. The group, which wishes to do away with Humanae Vitae, makes a dubious appeal to the Second Vatican “Council’s progressive 16 documents,” apparently unaware that Gaudium et spes states, “sons of the Church may not undertake methods of birth control which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law” (par 51). Of course, texts and facts aren’t usually of much interest to such groups.
Reporting from a more mainstream position, veteran Vatican reporter John Allen, Jr., recently wrote on the Crux site, with apparent frustration, that Synods are of little consequence in the long run because everything is rubber-stamped beforehand, saying that “the impression of high drama was always a little fake, because everyone knew that no synod was ever going to alter Catholic teaching or practice unless the pope wanted it to, and in that case he didn’t really need a synod to do it.” But now, Allen argues, that has changed, since “Francis has signaled that he’s open to relaxing the ban [on remarried Catholics receiving Communion], but wants to hear from the world’s bishops first. As a result, there’s genuine uncertainty about what might happen.” He then adds: “The tug-of-war over divorced and remarried Catholics won’t be the only issue; others range from contraception and gay marriage to cohabitation and the church’s practice of granting annulments, as well as how to support couples in difficulty and how to express a positive vision of married life.”
The main spin here is that change—even change in Church doctrine—is imperative. Otherwise the Synod is just more of the same. Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, summed it up in rather snide fashion earlier this month, writing in the National Catholic Reporter:
We will have to wait and see whether the auditors will represent to the bishops the views of lay Catholics, but it is hard to argue that they are representative of Catholics at large. Certainly any who think natural family planning is the church’s great gift to the laity will not. And those who are church employees could fear losing their jobs if they spoke the truth. At the 1980 synod on the family, the lay participants were remarkable for how totally out of touch they were with the views of average Catholics. I fear this is a rerun.
This reminds me of how football coaches will sometimes lament that their team lacks an “identity” and is too focused on either wanting to be like another team or ignoring what the coaches are saying. In fact, Catholics in the West have, by and large, lost their true identity and are now, in many cases, either lashing out at what they perceive to be meaningless beliefs and merciless rules, or they are longing to be more like they other team—in this case, the secularised, post-modern world. Or both. The Synod will indeed be a failure if it gives in to either perspective; it must seek to address the lack of authentic identity and ways in which it can be recovered, embraced, nurtured, encouraged, defended, and lived.
- The Synod is a clash between mercy and tradition. According to Allen, the “Synod is a key test of whether the new tone being set by a maverick pope may reposition Catholicism vis-a-vis some of the most divisive issues of the early 21st century.” Allen, like many other Catholic commentators, lapses easily into the politicised language of Left vs. Right, saying that when it comes to Communion for remarried Catholics, “for the left, it’s an issue of mercy,” while for “the right, it’s about fidelity to tradition, with the political benefit of not showing weakness at a time when they believe traditional marriage is under secular assault.” (It’s worth asking, as an aside: is there really a question about whether or not marriage is under secular assault? Really?)
There are a number of problems with this division, not least that it simply takes up what Cardinal Kasper has asserted without much in the way of argument, including the ironical fact that one of the greatest voices of mercy in recent decades was also a vigorous defender of the Church’s teaching about the indissoluble nature of sacramental marriage: Saint John Paul II. The late pontiff wrote some of the greatest papal works on mercy, notably Dives in misericordia, his 1980 encyclical on God and mercy (which includes a statement on the necessity of “respect for marriage in its indissoluble unity”) and he established Divine Mercy Sunday. In his 1981 Apostolic Exhortation, Familiaris consortio, John Paul II reflected on the difficult situations faced by many who are divorced and remarried, calling “upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church, for as baptized persons they can, and indeed must, share in her life. … Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.” He then stated:
However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.
And those, really, are the three essential issues: the objective nature of the sacrament of marriage, the objective nature of what a second marriage is or is not (regardless of the good will or emotions of those involved), and the confusion that would be caused if the Church allowed remarried Catholics to receive the Eucharist.
- The bishops need to allow the sensus fidei to run its course, accepting the wisdom of the laity. The Tablet, in its recent pieceon Cardinal Kasper, reported:
“I do not know. I am not a prophet! I hope that bishops will listen to the voice of people who live as divorced and remarried – the sensus fidei. They should listen and then next year they should decide what is possible and what is not possible,” he said, adding that his “impression” is that the Pope also wants an “opening”.
In his address to the cardinals in February, he cited Cardinal Newman’s essay “On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Faith”, which argued it was the faithful, not bishops, who preserved the faith during the controversies of the fourth and fifth centuries. This emphasised a teaching that each Catholic has a sense of faith by virtue of their Baptism. This sense of faith, the cardinal argues, must be taken seriously.
Kasper plays fast and easy with at least three facts here. First, although he often asserts that he is “not abandoning the indissolubility of marriage” (“….we cannot do that! But a Christian can fail”), he never makes clear how one can speak of and recognise a second marriage as a real marriage while the first, sacramental marriage exists. (This point is taken up in great detail in the forthcoming book, Remaining in the Truth of Christ: Marriage and Communion in the Catholic Church, from Ignatius Press.)
Secondly, the sensus fidei is not limited to, say, 21st-century German Catholics, but involves all of the faithful throughout all time.
Closely related is the third point: the sensus fidei encompasses all of the Catholic faithful, not just laity: “The whole body of the faithful… cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when, ‘from the bishops to the last of the faithful,’ they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 92). Kasper’s appeal is brilliantly populist, but quite woeful both historically and theologically.
- Those upholding Church teaching are “targeting” Pope Francis.This final point is made necessary because Cardinal Kasper advanced the claim this past week that those cardinals who uphold the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church about the sacrament of marriage are somehow, in making their views public, targeting or attacking Pope Francis. The ridiculous nature of such an accusation or suggestion should be obvious, as it was Kasper who published his speech and who has been on a media blitz in support of his position. Apparently, however, it is not obvious. The sorry nature of these and other comments were addressed in pithy form by Fr. Joseph Fessio, SJ, founder and editor of ignatius Press, in a CNA piece published earlier today.
While e-mailing with colleagues this week about some of these matters, the following quote from G.K. Chesterton was passed along. It was fitting when written many decades ago; it fits even better today:
“We do not really want a religion that is right where we are right. What we want is a religion that is right where we are wrong. In these current fashions it is not really a question of the religion allowing us liberty; but (at the best) of the liberty of allowing us a religion. These people merely take the modern mood, with much in it that is amiable and much that is anarchical and much that is merely dull and obvious, and then require any creed to be cut down to fit that mood….”
To read the entire story, click here.
From the VATICAN web site –
(you may want to save these links for future use / accuracy)
“INSTRUMENTUM LABORIS” – AGENDA for the Synod – Oct 2014
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20140626_instrumentum-laboris-familia_en.html
Synod PARTICIPANTS –
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/09/09/0620/01369.html
Pope Francis is clearly a fan of Cardinal Kasper–referring to Cdl. Kasper as a “clever” and “good” theologian here:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/angelus/2013/documents/papa-francesco_angelus_20130317.html
Maybe Pope Francis equates “good” with “clever”. The two could easily be working in tandem.
Sadly, the prior two popes have appointed men to positions of power who are by and large unworthy of their offices. We are now reaping the whirlwind of these egregious errors.
After reading the Vatican links posted by MIKE, it seems to me that many Cardinals and Bishops want to change Church teaching because they no longer believe,
and due to their own horrible teaching / catechesis of those within their own Diocese.
They do not teach, correct, and when necessary discipline – like a good Father should.
They no longer believe Holy Scripture, and want to pick and choose the tidbits they will throw to the lambs.
Should we just throw out the Bible while we are at it? Is that next?
Saints Peter and Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John must be crying buckets of tears because their beloved Church which was founded by Christ our Lord
has fallen to leaders who stray from God’s Commandments / Christ’s teachings in the name of being “pastoral”.
Jesus warned us to watch for wolves in sheep’s clothing.
I pray that it’s true that the Pope cannot err in matters of faith and morals. It appears to me that Pope Francis and the liberals in the Vatican are preparing a Vatican III. God help us. It’s no wonder that the media is so fond of Francis.
Hell is at the gates. What will the gatekeepers do?
Ava – the Apostles were Men, with all the Human Failings We All Share.
Peter, as you well know, Denied the Lord Three Times before the rooster reminded him of what Jesus had told him earlier – of how his own Human frailty would play out at the Hour of Reckoning – which Peter said would Never Come True – before his own Testing, and Failing.
The Important thing is that after Peter’s Failure, he repented and resolved not to repeat it; although it appears that all of them had doubts – which Thomas voiced aloud… Before he too was shown his failure and offered his Redemption, along with an invitation to put his hand in the wounds just in case there was any doubt remaining.
We Too are being Tested, and so are the ‘leaders’ of the Church – who (as with the Homosex Ephebophile Abuse disgrace) often themselves fail – if not by actually sharing the Sin (only a small number actually did such great harm), but by turning a blind eye away from it and like Peter denying it could ever be true.
We Fall as Man has always Fallen – and we get back up again because We Believe as the Lord has Promised – that there can be Redemption.
So Yes – The Apostles & Saints Weep for the many failings of Humanity; but they do so with the knowledge of their own past and that their Tears are not always shed in vain; and if Ordinary Men such as They can be saved ultimately, then We ought not to give up on ourselves or others.
That Said – Until the Lord Returns, it remains for All of Us to watch over the Flock, which Includes keeping an watch over Our Priests – none of whom is beyond error – Or Correction – as Christians Ought.
May the Lord have Mercy on us All – Amen.
Michael, your best post! Thank you!
Michael, I second Dana’s thoughts. Excellent post and so very true.
They aren’t true bishops, only counterfiet. Many are heretics, automatically excommunicating themselves by default. Many were never validly ordained nor consecrated as the Sacrament of Holy Orders was changed back in 1968 losing its efficacy. Today’s Vatican II Church is nothing more than Luther’s worship service. Check it out for yourself gather, sum up, and look at all the unholy things they have done, be courageous, face the truth, call a spade a spade, you’ll see, and the no less guilty Luther was excommunicated for his heresey. You are not obliged to follow counterfiters. You will know them by their fruits says the Lord. We’ve seen their fruits, and lack thereof.
Lumping Allen in with Kasper and Reese is plain silly. Kaspar and Reese are partisans, whereas Allen is simply a reporter.
Fr. Reese is still banging the same drum: dissent from (or, at least, raise serious challenges to) Magisterial teaching at every opportunity. It’s that which got him dismissed as editor of “America” magazine.
Food 4 Thought – or Just Deserts?
“Time-out for Truth By Hadley Arkes
It is Fall… But what if the rumors are true that Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, that expert on canon law, is about to be shifted out of the curia, as Sandro Magisterand others report, and transferred to become the Cardinal Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta? That one does baffle me.
I don’t know if we are drifting into a state of schism, as some friends seriously worry. There may be reasons, personal and professional, to account for the curious paths of Cardinal Burke, caught in the corridors of the Vatican.
But we may at least be forgiven for wondering just what is being taught at the highest levels in moves of this kind.
The question would not arise as quickly if we didn’t encounter, every week, some offhand statements, coming from on high, sounding more like “feel-good” sentiments, more suited to fortune cookies than Catholic teaching…
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2014/time-out-for-truth.html
Good debate here, fleshing out some key issues.
The Synod has to come up with some kind of agenda for action for family issues. To simply meet and say everything is fine is to ignore the obvious would be a setback for the Church. 40% of Catholic marriages fail, and 85% of US Catholic couple contracept. Those numbers are the huge “pastoral realities” that the Church is dealing with. May God bless the efforts of the Synod to arrive at solutions to the very real problems of the Catholic family.
Conforming to Mortal Sin of any kind is not the answer.
Confirming someone in Mortal sin is not pastoral, not is it love. In fact, it condemns those who aid and abet in the Mortal Sin (CCC #1868, and 2326, and 2285).
True love is helping Souls get to Heaven, – – – – – not changing the definition of Mortal Sin to the desires of the sinners.
The Catholic Church must teach according to Bible and the CCC – otherwise it will have no basis upon which to stand, causing destruction of the Church/Faith and the loss of many Souls;
and like some Protestant Faiths will be able to continually change their teachings at whim according to societal norms and relativism. Those Churches with no principles have lost members at the fastest rate.
The SIZE of the Church does NOT matter.
Only TRUTH matters.
Those Bishops who look to size, money, power, and prestige to get to Heaven, may end up in Hell.
Jesus already told us that those who get to Heaven will be few. – Mt 7:13-14; and Lk 13:22-28.
Pope Benedict in his book “Faith and the Future” has stated that the Church will become small.
https://lifeondoverbeach.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/benedict-xvi-the-church-will-become-small/
Anomynous
Only 40% try again, its closer to the US average, but whether its 55% or 40% shouldn’t be the focus on this discussion, the fact that there is widespread divorce at all is a travesty. Whatever happened to the promise until death do us part? Many don’t keep that promise, why so? That is what the real focus should be. Marriage in the Catholic Church is one of the 7 Holy Sacraments where graces are provided to each couple to get them through the hard times and hold on together. The Sacraments of the Eucharist and Penance supply these married couples graces also to live holy lives so they aren’t add odds with each other. If couples raise their children in the Church the Sacraments of Baptism, the Eucharist, Penance, and Confirmation, they bring the whole family together and closer to God to help get through the hard times. Apparently failing marriage couples and their children aren’t either accepting those sanctifying and actual graces any longer, or the modernized sacraments haven’t the power they once had to strengthen our souls, uphold our morals and values, and keep us holy so that we do all get along better together in a family than divided and fall.
Maybe the Synod should reflect on these sources of failed marriage and a fallen decline in the faith rather than seek modern secular band aid approaches. Hopefully the Synod will start out with a good example with a contrite and humble prayer that the attendees will be open minded and really seek God’s help and leadership, not have some already conceived worldly man-contrived secular answer.
Excellent response, Jeanie.
Because BISHOP Johan BONNY of Antwerp and his fellow Bishops of Belgium have utterly FAILED to teach the Faith
in entirety according to the Bible and the approved “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” (of 1997).
These heretics now wants the Synod to CHANGE the dogma teaching of the Church – regarding cohabitation before marriage, contraception, homosexual marriage, etc..
HOSEA 4:6 – “My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me.”
Instead of changing Church teaching, why don’t these Bishops have a re-training for themselves and all Priests in accord with the Bible and CCC ?
Have their homilies accurately reflect all Church teaching not merely mush.
Mush will not get us to Heaven.
The other option is merely to join the Satanists – and start black Masses in Belgium Churches.
One does not “Love” his neighbor if he tolerates mortal sin, or sinful lifestyles.
If you love your neighbor you will want him to get to Heaven, This is true love.
3 of the Spiritual Works of Mercy include: admonish sinners; Instruct the uniformed; and Counsel the Doubtful.
It is not pastoral to confirm someone in Mortal Sin.
So the Belgians and some others merely want to redefine Mortal Sin.
Forget the Bible and the CCC.
Then there will be no basis for Church teaching at all.
There is no dogma of the church about same sex marriage. Sorry. Even contraception is a doctrine, not a dogma.
Anonymous: Even if it isn’t a dogma, it is Church doctrine and we are to live according to Church doctrine. We may not agree with the Church doctrine, but we HAVE TO live by it for the good of our souls. We are to be submissive to Christ’s Church doctrines and dogmas! I don’t like to fast and abstain from meat during lent, BUT it is Church doctrine that I HAVE TO fast and abstain during lent. Get it? We don’t always like it, but the Church has spoken!!
RR, the Church requires submission to one’s own conscience above all else, even when it contradicts Church doctrine.
Anonymous: Wrong!
From The Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct
We are to form our conscience through the teachings of the Church and the Divine Law! If this is not done our consciences could be wrong.
If one reads the questionnaire that was sent to the Bishops and the summary of responses https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20140626_instrumentum-laboris-familia_en.htm you can see quickly that it is not about changing church teachings, but about how to approach them from a pastoral point of view. If 40 percent of married people get divorced, what should the church do to reduce that number? Telling hasn’t worked, so what else? If 90% of Catholics have not heard about or understand natural law, what is the local pastor to do? How should he approach couples who want to practice family planning? Whatever were doing no isn’t working, so what else? The Synod is taking a big step in trying to find a way to improve church teaching and family life. We should be praying for them and wishing them well in their work, don’t you think?