Dramatic move as Synod Fathers set out new pastoral care for gays, cohabiting couples and divorcees

[Sy_Noe]

I’m speechless.
St. John Paul mist be spinning in his grave.
What is Benedict XVI thinking now?

If I understand Catholic belief correctly, the Cardinals were led by Christ to choose Pope Francis to be the successor to St Peter at this time in Church history, just as St JP and Benedict XV1 were in their times. We’ll have to see what Francis is thinking.

 

[FollowChrist34]

While the counter-reformation did restore some things in the Church, it was not a beautiful thing. It destroyed the Church. The Schism between the East and West wasn’t a beautiful thing either. And the post Vatican I and Vatican II schisms are not beautiful either.

Anytime there is schism, it’s a terrible thing. Schism should be mourned, not viewed as a beautiful thing. A future schism would further damage the Church. Even if the Catholic Church becomes “smaller and better,” it would still mean that there are lots more souls without the full Truth of the Catholic Church.

I mean beautiful in the sense the crucifixion was beautiful in what it brought about. I merely mean that the Christian life in truth often involves redemptive suffering, individually and collectively. And, believe me, I mourn schism. But sometimes it’s the will of God. Have you read Schneider? That was the basis of my reference.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Google translation from Polish to English so not perfect probably:

The document summarizing the first week of the synod is not acceptable to many bishops - says Archbishop Stanislaw Gądecki . In an interview with Vatican Radio chairman of the Polish Episcopate did not hesitate to say that this document departs from the teaching of John Paul II , and even that can be seen in the traces antymałżeńskiej ideology. According to Archbishop Gądecki text also reflects the lack of a clear vision for the synodal assembly .

pl.radiovaticana.va/articolo.asp?c=830820

 

[Lormar]

But if you truly believe the Church is Christ’s one and only true Church forever and is the only one with the Eucharist, where would you go?

There isn’t any other place to go.

 

[Sy_Noe]

There isn’t any other place to go.

Ok I just was confused I guess on what you meant by it’s about the end for you. Peace.

 

[Pronger1]

If they are, it would be heresy, not apostasy. But they aren’t. They are saying that homosexuals should be valued as everyone should be valued. There are things homosexuals could contribute to the community regardless of their sin. Same could be said for the rest of us, by the way. Read the document again. It is here:

Welcoming homosexual persons

 50.        Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

 51.        The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

 52.        Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.

zenit.org/en/articles/synod14-full-text-of-relatio-post-disceptationem

How about reading what the Bible says?

2 Timothy 2

2 But false prophets also arose among the people,** just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies,** even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.

4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a [a]preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; 7 and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men 8 (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by their lawless deeds), 9 then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, 10 and especially those who [c]indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority.

God has no need for touchy feely acceptance of gays in hopes they will turn from sin. It says it clear as day that the “Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation”.

This is just leaving the door open for Satan, inviting him on in. For homosexuals to walk in through the door, slowly pollute the church as many if not most will not be there for repentance and truth. Instead it will be for a movement towards accepting the sin as something good under the guise of “tolerance”.

Perhaps certain Bishops should spend more time reading the letters to the Christian congregations than worrying about what liberal left idiology says it should be.

 

[FollowChrist34]

There isn’t any other place to go.

God will never abandon you and you will always be a Catholic. You are stuck with his love and the Church in your heart and soul forever - no matter what happens, whether you like it or not. You’re sealed.

 

[CatholicLife]

I really don’t know what to think…
May Our Lady of Fatima protect us during these strange times!

 

[FollowChrist34]

Google translation from Polish to English so not perfect probably:

pl.radiovaticana.va/articolo.asp?c=830820

You have a wonderful day, Abyssinia!

 

[AllSeasons]

A major shift in the Church’s pastoral care for gay Catholics was put forward today at the Vatican’s Synod on the Family on Monday.

A document released at the halfway point of the gathering said that gay Catholics’ orientation should be valued and that they have “gifts and qualities” to offer parishes. The document also praised elements of same-sex partnerships.

“Are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing them fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home,” the document, presented this morning by Cardinal Peter Erdo, the relator general of the synod, stated. “Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on family and matrimony?”

It goes on to explain that while there are “moral problems” with homosexual unions, “there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners”.

The text also calls for the Church to recognise the “seeds of the Word that have spread beyond its visible and sacramental boundaries” to cohabiting couples, civil marriages and to Catholics who are divorced and remarried.

It adds that civil marriages and cohabiting relationships that have stability and deep affection and the responsibility of children, should be seen as “a germ to be accompanied in development towards the sacrament of marriage”.

This point reflects the law of graduality – the notion that an individual can come to the fullness of church teaching over the course of their lives – which has emerged as a theme at the synod.

thetablet.co.uk/news/1272/0/dramatic-move-as-synod-fathers-set-out-new-pastoral-care-for-gays-cohabiting-couples-and-divorcees

I find this report very disturbing. Yes, we should be charitable to sinners, as we’re all sinners, but we should call homosexuality for what it is - a grave sin. This document adds a lot of ambiguity and seems to condone sin.

 

[Justin_Swanton]

Official translation is here:
press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/13/0751/03037.html

Paragraph 50ff reads:

Welcoming homosexual persons

 50.        ***Homosexuals have gifts and qualities*** [as homosexuals?] to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of ***welcoming these people*** [as couples?], guaranteeing to them a*** fraternal space in our communities***? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, ***accepting and valuing their sexual orientation*** [eh?], ***without compromising Catholic doctrine*** on the family and matrimony [how do you square that circle?]?

 51.        The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of ***affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension***: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge [how? homosexuality has a lot of good stuff to tell us about affective growth?]. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

 52.        Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which ***mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support*** in the life of the partners [the point of this? You'll find the same thing in the Mafia]. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the ***needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority*** [like getting them *away from these couples?].

Ta for this, gilliam.

No need now to jump to conclusions, just draw them.

 

[manualman]

Anyone care to take a shot at explaining exactly what is meant by " gay Catholics’ orientation should be valued " ?

As already discussed, there is a translation issue here whereby the original appears to mean evaluating said relationships and honoring that which is indeed good and virtuous rather than just dismissing the entirety of the relationship as an abomination.

I described this above already as well. Take two gay men in a relationship.

1. If there is Agape in their relationship, that should be affirmed.
2. If there is Filia in their relationship, that should be affirmed.
3. If there is erotic sexual contact in their relationship, that should be confronted as sinful and without any basis or standing in the actual meaning of human sexuality.

But the presence of #3 doesn’t obliterate the goodness of #s 1 and 2. It’s messy, but what isn’t?

 

[Lormar]

God will never abandon you and you will always be a Catholic. You are stuck with his love and the Church in your heart and soul forever - no matter what happens, whether you like it or not. You’re sealed.

Your post actually made me laugh because you don’t know how right you are in that I am “stuck”. You could sooner take my identity from me than my Catholicism which is so deeply ingrained in me.

 

[ringil]

Yes, they may find they have a widespread revolt on their hands. Push back - isn’t that what the liberals did to Benedict? Here we go. I need the Church to come to ME, right where I am at, stuck in the truth of the Gospel. Where is Bishop Schneider? He better not sign this thing. I seriously believe we need to split like Lutherans - into separate sects. I don’t want to go to a parish like this and I am not alone - we need to speak with our feet. I need my Church leaders to speak up. I suspect there are those who don’t want to run parishes like this either - it will be a natural sifting.

You follow the Pope. Period.

Otherwise join the SSPX.

Thoughts of “breaking up” the Church are of Satan.

 

[JackVk]

Welcoming homosexual persons

 50.        ***Homosexuals have gifts and qualities*** [as homosexuals?] to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of ***welcoming these people*** [as couples?], guaranteeing to them a*** fraternal space in our communities***? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, ***accepting and valuing their sexual orientation*** [eh?], ***without compromising Catholic doctrine*** on the family and matrimony [how do you square that circle?]?

 51.        The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of ***affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension***: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge [how? homosexuality has a lot of good stuff to tell us about affective growth?]. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

 52.        Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which ***mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support*** in the life of the partners [the point of this? You'll find the same thing in the Mafia]. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the ***needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority*** [like getting them *away

from these couples?].

Ta for this, gilliam.

No need now to jump to conclusions, just draw them.

I have said this once and I’ll say it again:

I have a friend who was an active lesbian once. She had a profound conversion while on a retreat with a Catholic campus group. She now uses her SSA as a witness to a chaste life in Christ. This could arguably be one of their “gifts and qualities”.

None of this condones homosexual actions. the catechism even says that same-sex attraction, in and of itself, is not sinful, simply disordered.

Honestly, I feel like people don’t want to try pastoral care for people with SSA not because of orthodoxy, but because of laziness. It’s much easier to say “get lost, fudge packer” or “it’s sinful, end of story”, than it is to help lead them to Christ.

 

[ringil]

I mean beautiful in the sense the crucifixion was beautiful in what it brought about. I merely mean that the Christian life in truth often involves redemptive suffering, individually and collectively. And, believe me, I mourn schism. But sometimes it’s the will of God. Have you read Schneider? That was the basis of my reference.

Schism in Christ’s Church is never the Will of God.

That is a foul assertion.

 

[Pronger1]

As already discussed, there is a translation issue here whereby the original appears to mean evaluating said relationships and honoring that which is indeed good and virtuous rather than just dismissing the entirety of the relationship as an abomination.

I described this above already as well. Take two gay men in a relationship.

1. If there is Agape in their relationship, that should be affirmed.
2. If there is Filia in their relationship, that should be affirmed.
3. If there is erotic sexual contact in their relationship, that should be confronted as sinful and without any basis or standing in the actual meaning of human sexuality.

But the presence of #3 doesn’t obliterate the goodness of #s 1 and 2. It’s messy, but what isn’t?

Except in the presence of #3 there CANNOT BE #1 and #2. How can two homosexuals in a relationship show Agape “Christian love” when they lead and seduce each other into mortal sin. Same with Philia. Would a true friend actively partake and aid another friend in doing something that could ultimately bring judgment down on them?

 

[gilliam]

As already discussed, there is a translation issue here whereby the original appears to mean evaluating said relationships and honoring that which is indeed good and virtuous rather than just dismissing the entirety of the relationship as an abomination.

I described this above already as well. Take two gay men in a relationship.

1. If there is Agape in their relationship, that should be affirmed.
2. If there is Filia in their relationship, that should be affirmed.
3. If there is erotic sexual contact in their relationship, that should be confronted as sinful and without any basis or standing in the actual meaning of human sexuality.

But the presence of #3 doesn’t obliterate the goodness of #s 1 and 2. It’s messy, but what isn’t?

My guess is that this section will be rewritten before the final vote on Saturday

 

[JackVk]

Except in the presence of #3 there CANNOT BE #1 and #2. How can two homosexuals in a relationship show Agape “Christian love” when they lead and seduce each other into mortal sin. Same with Philia. Would a true friend actively partake and aid another friend in doing something that could ultimately bring judgment down on them?

No, they wouldn’t. And he is not saying that. In the short film “The Third Way” from Ascension Press, on testimony is from a guy who started going to a Catholic church with his partner. They eventually realized the error of their ways, and decided to break up and live chastely. That’s what the synod is advocating.

 

[EIF5A]

Except in the presence of #3 there CANNOT BE #1 and #2. How can two homosexuals in a relationship show Agape “Christian love” when they lead and seduce each other into mortal sin. Same with Philia. Would a true friend actively partake and aid another friend in doing something that could ultimately bring judgment down on them?

So only Christians are capable of love?