Expert: Synod Cardinal who supposedly wanted major change in doctrine asserts there is no such intention

[LongingSoul]

I was in it longer than that, in fact from the inception of the internet, and the only doctrine I know concerning binary computers is that they recognize ones and zeros. So compile and change all you want to keep up with the times.

Point is it all goes back to clearly established definitions.

Yet we are already near technology where computer chips are based on probability rather than binary. Of all the industries, computer technology profoundly demonstrates how development of ‘doctrines’ works.

 

[Brendan]

Yet we are already near technology where computer chips are based on probability rather than binary. Of all the industries, computer technology profoundly demonstrates how development of ‘doctrines’ works.

Being a computer engineer myself, I see the advantage that theology has over computer science is that while technology undergoes change, God Himself is unchanging.

This means, that once a theological truth is known, it will always be known as truth or anything less than truth.

(and even in quantum computing, the examination of the state of a qbit will result in either a 1 or a 0. The difference is that they represent a superposition of states, not a definitive state), the measurement still produces a binary output digit., so that ‘doctrine’ still holds)

 

[Ender]

I simply don’t get it. Before, many times during and after the synod, the message was broadcast loudly and clearly (except by the secular media) that there would be no change in doctrine. The synod was to look at ways to reach out to people.

I think it is very likely true that there will be no attempt to change doctrine. I say this because the doctrines involved appear about as unchangeable as any the church has. It seems more likely that the attempt will be made not to change them but to circumvent them. That at least appears to be the approach Kasper’s proposal would take.

Ender

 

[ProVobis]

Yet we are already near technology where computer chips are based on probability rather than binary.

I only gave the definition of a binary computer. Analog computers/instruments, cloud technology, built-in fuzzy logic, etc, have their own definitions.

The definitions we’re really talking about, though, are Matrimony, adultery, scandal, and the sacraments. Are we satisfied with the 2000-yr old definitions of them or do we redefine them to suit our ever-changing needs?

Of all the industries, computer technology profoundly demonstrates how development of ‘doctrines’ works.

I think so too.

 

[LongingSoul]

Being a computer engineer myself, I see the advantage that theology has over computer science is that while technology undergoes change, God Himself is unchanging.

This means, that once a theological truth is known, it will always be known as truth or anything less than truth.

(and even in quantum computing, the examination of the state of a qbit will result in either a 1 or a 0. The difference is that they represent a superposition of states, not a definitive state), the measurement still produces a binary output digit., so that ‘doctrine’ still holds)

We know that God is unchanging, but our expressions of Him and His will can never fully reveal Him. We have a very limited capacity to articulate the fullness of God. What is doctrine? From docere the Latin, it means to teach. It is the vessel of man to encapsulate what we know of God for the benefit of man. Doctrine is a vessel of Truth… it is not the Truth. It serves truth. From Fr Hardons explanation of doctrine which is worth a good read…

"There are few aspects of Catholic education that are more important than what we have come to call “development of doctrine,” I would go so far as to affirm that failure to take account of this fact is near the root cause of the widespread confusion in catechetics and evangelization in our day."

therealpresence.org/archives/Church_Dogma/Church_Dogma_039.htm

 

[Brendan]

We know that God is unchanging, but our expressions of Him and His will can never fully reveal Him. We have a very limited capacity to articulate the fullness of God. What is doctrine? From docere the Latin, it means to teach. It is the vessel of man to encapsulate what we know of God for the benefit of man. Doctrine is a vessel of Truth… it is not the Truth. It serves truth. From Fr Hardons explanation of doctrine which is worth a good read…

"There are few aspects of Catholic education that are more important than what we have come to call “development of doctrine,” I would go so far as to affirm that failure to take account of this fact is near the root cause of the widespread confusion in catechetics and evangelization in our day."

therealpresence.org/archives/Church_Dogma/Church_Dogma_039.htm

Yes, I am very familiar with Fr Hardon ( met him on a very occasions actually)

Part of the development of doctrine is that we will refine our understanding, but it will never contradict itself.

For example, we can learn more about the extent of which a reception of Holy Communion while in an adulterous state damages the soul, but no development of doctrine will change what is already known, that such a reception does not aid the soul, but instead does damage to it.

Any statement that it does no harm to the soul is not a development of the doctrine, but a repudiation of it.

These are not our expressions of Him, but rather what He has chosen to reveal to us.

 

[Transformer]

Why do people insist on knocking down this straw man over and over again? No one thinks that the Kasper proposal involves changing doctrine, in the simplistic sense of the Church declaring “marriages can be dissolved.”

The issue is the adoption of a practice that is irreconcilable with the divine law as laid down by Christ. Circumventing and acting contrary to the divine law isn’t any better than outright contradicting it.

 

[FollowChrist34]

Why do people insist on knocking down this straw man over and over again? No one thinks that the Kasper proposal involves changing doctrine, in the simplistic sense of the Church declaring “marriages can be dissolved.”

The issue is the adoption of a practice that is irreconcilable with the divine law as laid down by Christ. Circumventing and acting contrary to the divine law isn’t any better than outright contradicting it.

Yep, it’s just a tactic, nothing more - not even a particularly inspired one. Obscure, digress, restate, restructure, evolve. What else can they do. But mind you, this meandering will be endless.

 

[McCall1981]

Why do people insist on knocking down this straw man over and over again? No one thinks that the Kasper proposal involves changing doctrine, in the simplistic sense of the Church declaring “marriages can be dissolved.”

The issue is the adoption of a practice that is irreconcilable with the divine law as laid down by Christ. Circumventing and acting contrary to the divine law isn’t any better than outright contradicting it.

 

[LongingSoul]

Yes, I am very familiar with Fr Hardon ( met him on a very occasions actually)

Part of the development of doctrine is that we will refine our understanding, but it will never contradict itself.

For example, we can learn more about the extent of which a reception of Holy Communion while in an adulterous state damages the soul, but no development of doctrine will change what is already known, that such a reception does not aid the soul, but instead does damage to it.

Any statement that it does no harm to the soul is not a development of the doctrine, but a repudiation of it.

These are not our expressions of Him, but rather what He has chosen to reveal to us.

But you keep stating a scenario and adamantly stating ‘this is what God said. It can’t be changed’. The words that are written down are the Churchs words for expressing our knowledge of God. If we put great faith in the words written down by the Church, why would we not be equally trusting of that very same Church expressing what they have previously written, more fully in light of human growth and development. This has happened throughout Church history and unfortunately with every tweak, there is the same force of rejection of any authority of todays Popes and theologians. What makes me at peace with it though is that with all the developments, the protestors fade away and the teachings are embraced for the betterment of our world and our faith.

This is the same problem that is happening on the death penalty threads which I can’t be bothered with anymore. They go as far as to say that the modern Popes are ignorant or naive and the Catechism is wrong. I have to say that is a solely American thing though because the rest of the world has no problem with the teachings whatsoever.

I’ve no doubt that the world will eventually dispense with the death penalty altogether. Because as Pope St JPII says it is “cruel and unnecessary”. I guess same with the current synod issues. The Church will explore them despite the hysterics of clamouring crowds and she will either drop the issue having a clearer view of the basics or she will adopt some pastoral changes in the spirit of Gods mercy.

 

[Brendan]

But you keep stating a scenario and adamantly stating ‘this is what God said. It can’t be changed’. The words that are written down are the Churchs words for expressing our knowledge of God. If we put great faith in the words written down by the Church, why would we not be equally trusting of that very same Church expressing what they have previously written, more fully in light of human growth and development. .

When the knowledge of God that we have comes from His own words, those inspired by the Holy Spirit, they cannot be changed.

The Church has never done that, even with the death penalty. There is no change in human growth that can ever change the DP to be always unjust, nor can there be any change in human growth that will render a reception of Holy Communion while in the state of adultery to be beneficial to the soul.

 

[FollowChrist34]

When the knowledge of God that we have comes from His own words, those inspired by the Holy Spirit, they cannot be changed.

The Church has never done that, even with the death penalty. There is no change in human growth that can ever change the DP to be always unjust, nor can there be any change in human growth that will render a reception of Holy Communion while in the state of adultery to be beneficial to the soul.

Yes, I agree. I think this is the imposition of human will on the divine will.

 

[LongingSoul]

When the knowledge of God that we have comes from His own words, those inspired by the Holy Spirit, they cannot be changed.

The Church has never done that, even with the death penalty. There is no change in human growth that can ever change the DP to be always unjust, nor can there be any change in human growth that will render a reception of Holy Communion while in the state of adultery to be beneficial to the soul.

Let me understand your bottom line. What is your opinion of why Pope Francis raised this issue and expressly invited Cardinal Kasper to present his thoughts at the Synod? What does that say about Pope Francis to you?

 

[Brendan]

Let me understand your bottom line. What is your opinion of why Pope Francis raised this issue and expressly invited Cardinal Kasper to present his thoughts at the Synod? What does that say about Pope Francis to you?

Do you mean the same Pope Francis who encouraged Cardinal Burke to do the same? In fact, for all participants to express their thoughts? He desired to encourage dialoge in the search for truth.

Cardinal Kasper asked questions, Cardinal Burke gave answers. Goal achieved

 

[KSU]

We know that God is unchanging, but our expressions of Him and His will can. From Fr Hardons explanation of doctrine which is worth a good read…

"There are few aspects of Catholic education that are more important than what we have come to call “development of doctrine,” I would go so far as to affirm that failure to take account of this fact is near the root cause of the widespread confusion in catechetics and evangelization in our day."

therealpresence.org/archives/Church_Dogma/Church_Dogma_039.htm

You should have read the whole thing:

QUOTE There are voices which claim to be Catholic who speak of what they call “discontinuous development” in the Church’s teaching. By this they mean that doctrines of faith or morals, taught by the Church, may now contradict what the Church’s authority had taught in previous centuries. This is absolutely false. When we speak of development of doctrine, we must identify this progress as continuous development. There must be continuity, which means no shadow of contradiction, between what the Church, as Mother of Truth, has taught in the past two millennia and what she teaches now. END QUOTE

 

[LongingSoul]

Do you mean the same Pope Francis who encouraged Cardinal Burke to do the same? In fact, for all participants to express their thoughts? He desired to encourage dialoge in the search for truth.

Cardinal Kasper asked questions, Cardinal Burke gave answers. Goal achieved

Woohoo. You seem to have seen the light. The only reason that myself and others jumped into this debate, was to defend dialogue and Pope Francis’ desire for synodality. We are on the same page.

 

[LongingSoul]

You should have read the whole thing:

QUOTE There are voices which claim to be Catholic who speak of what they call “discontinuous development” in the Church’s teaching. By this they mean that doctrines of faith or morals, taught by the Church, may now contradict what the Church’s authority had taught in previous centuries. This is absolutely false. When we speak of development of doctrine, we must identify this progress as continuous development. There must be continuity, which means no shadow of contradiction, between what the Church, as Mother of Truth, has taught in the past two millennia and what she teaches now. END QUOTE

I did read the whole thing. I don’t know why you posted that quote against yourselves?? Pope Francis has asked for the examination of an issue but there are those who instantly claim this is “discontinuous development”.

 

[Tigg]

Let me understand your bottom line. What is your opinion of why Pope Francis raised this issue and expressly invited Cardinal Kasper to present his thoughts at the Synod? What does that say about Pope Francis to you?

I personally need to believe the reason was first, to let the world know that the Church is not insensitive to the monumental problems facing families and to capture this time to pastorally explore further *legitimate *means to care for the flock. This pastoral love and care would include, of course, a pronouncement of perennial church teaching as it pertains to irregular situations. In all honesty, Pope Francis can do nothing else and those who continually chant he’s going to dramatically change doctrine know nothing of the spiritual nature of the office of the Vicar of Christ nor the fidelity that binds the office.

But a secondary reason is not hard to imagine when we realize for a long time that certain attitudes within the Church have been troublesome; indeed, volumes have been written on these problems for decades. (Think back to the Winnipeg Statement as just one example .) We now see the resultant negative consequences in terms of fidelity and obedience. Card Kasper’s theorem, obviously being outside orthodox norms according to most other bishops, was perhaps the most effective vehicle to bring this debate to light. Faith in an indefectible Church tells me I must believe that the synodal process will bring the conflicting ecclesiastical camps together to contain deleterious elements from further harming the souls they are entrusted with. The bishops have not spoken with a unified voice for a very long time. I do not find it amazing that God has started a purification process within their ranks. I must personally believe (as a Catholic in love with her Church) that unity and solidarity among the prelates is a secondary consideration that the pope hopes to accomplish in his Apostolic Exhortation when he clarifies and safeguards the faith.

And actually AB Chaput, in a way, echoes my personal thoughts in a recent interview when speaking of the synod although he used much stronger words:

“We also need to thank God for the gift of this present, difficult moment,” Chaput said. “Because conflict always does two things: It purifies the church, and it clarifies the character of the enemies who hate her.”

 

[LongingSoul]

I personally need to believe the reason was first, to let the world know that the Church is not insensitive to the monumental problems facing families and to capture this time to pastorally explore further *legitimate *means to care for the flock. This pastoral love and care would include, of course, a pronouncement of perennial church teaching as it pertains to irregular situations. In all honesty, Pope Francis can do nothing else and those who continually chant he’s going to dramatically change doctrine know nothing of the spiritual nature of the office of the Vicar of Christ nor the fidelity that binds the office.

If you take an honest look back at all the Synod related threads, you’ll notice that they are not full of people chanting that the Pope is going to dramatically change doctrine. They are full of people talking about leaving the church if even one word or one comma of teaching is changed and those who think Pope Francis is shaping up to be an heretical Pope … and then those of us who are trying to inject proper balance. I’ve been raised in a Catholic way where you might not always understand the ways of the Magisterium, but in faith and the spirit of obedience, you obey and pray for wisdom and humility to stay the course. There was emphasis put on the Church as ‘pilgrim’ and not rooted to any temporal loyalties, but loyal only to Christ through the Church whom He inspires. The Catholic faith is a journey, a Camino so that the teachings conveyed to us by the Magisterium of today can be accepted as timeless reformulations of Gospel truths and interpretations. I’m shocked at how many people actually think they are more Catholic than the Pope.

But a secondary reason is not hard to imagine when we realize for a long time that certain attitudes within the Church have been troublesome; indeed, volumes have been written on these problems for decades. (Think back to the Winnipeg Statement as just one example .) We now see the resultant negative consequences in terms of fidelity and obedience. Card Kasper’s theorem, obviously being outside orthodox norms according to most other bishops, was perhaps the most effective vehicle to bring this debate to light. Faith in an indefectible Church tells me I must believe that the synodal process will bring the conflicting ecclesiastical camps together to contain deleterious elements from further harming the souls they are entrusted with. The bishops have not spoken with a unified voice for a very long time. I do not find it amazing that God has started a purification process within their ranks. I must personally believe (as a Catholic in love with her Church) that unity and solidarity among the prelates is a secondary consideration that the pope hopes to accomplish in his Apostolic Exhortation when he clarifies and safeguards the faith.

I had already mentioned earlier in the thread the Pontifical council on birth control called by Pope JohnXXXIII as an example of synodality and its fruits. We have a clear teaching regarding the evils of contraception through HV and the Catechism. It may very well be that after the Synod, we again have some Bishops and people dissenting against any new reformulations because they disagree with the Pope and reject that his authority is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Myself, I am firmly a Pope follower and will endeavour to ‘think with the Church’ whatever comes out of the Family Synod.

 

[Sirach2]

If you take an honest look back at all the Synod related threads, you’ll notice that they are not full of people chanting that the Pope is going to dramatically change doctrine. They are full of people talking about leaving the church if even one word or one comma of teaching is changed and those who think Pope Francis is shaping up to be an heretical Pope … and then those of us who are trying to inject proper balance. I’ve been raised in a Catholic way where you might not always understand the ways of the Magisterium, but in faith and the spirit of obedience, you obey and pray for wisdom and humility to stay the course. There was emphasis put on the Church as ‘pilgrim’ and not rooted to any temporal loyalties, but loyal only to Christ through the Church whom He inspires. The Catholic faith is a journey, a Camino so that the teachings conveyed to us by the Magisterium of today can be accepted as timeless reformulations of Gospel truths and interpretations. I’m shocked at how many people actually think they are more Catholic than the Pope.

Well said, LongingSoul! Have you noticed that it is hard-line traditionalists who are the most vociferous ones? Nothing new under the sun.