On Day One of Synod 2015, conservatives strike first

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Concerns about blurring the distinction between doctrine and discipline are not mine
alone, but are shared by many Catholics and by many of the Cardinals in
Rome.

"Yet according to Cardinal George Pell of Australia, the matter of admitting divorced and remarried Catholics to Holy Communion is not one that can be decided at the level of a bishops’ conference or diocese.

“There are fundamental doctrinal issues at the heart of this which are not negotiable,” he told Aleteia. “The New Testament is not negotiable. The teaching of Christ on adultery and remarriage; the teachings of Paul about the essential prerequisites of Communion are not negotiable.”

During Tuesday’s press briefing a journalist asked the panel if they would confirm whether the question of communion is one of discipline and not doctrine, and can it therefore be explored and developed during this Synod?
… Cardinal Pell replied by saying the doctrine “is spelled out in the criteria for the reception of Communion. The doctrine spells out what is practice. So if you change the practice you change the doctrine.”
**
In 1981, Pope St. John Paul II addressed the matter **in his well known exhortation on the the Christian Family in the Modern World, Familiaris Consortio. The papal text was also written to the 1980 Synod on the Family held in Rome from September 26 – October 25. In paragraph 84 of the document, Pope St. John Paul II cites both doctrinal and pastoral reasons that necessitate upholding the Church’s practice of not admitting divorced and civilly remarried Catholic access to Holy Communion. He states:

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" (n. 84).

John Paul’s words are proving prophetic; there is much confusion already in the air.

read more > aleteia.org/2015/10/08/admitting-divorced-and-remarried-catholics-to-holy-communion-doctrine-or-discipline/
 
sarah_j said:
Good at splitting hairs over what is mortal sin and what is not.
Good at rationalizing that no one but the sinner himself can define sin in regards
to himself.
Muddying the waters so that no one is quite sure what the Catholic Church
teaches in regards to certain sins.

I’ve been a Catholic my whole life and even at times when my lifestyle was
far from what the Church would approve, I at least knew **where the Church
stood. ** The Church needs to be clear in its teachings as it always has been
in the past. Blurring the lines does no one’s immortal souls any good, although
it might make them feel good in the moment.

All this talk about doctrine vs pastoral practices and developing new understandings
of doctrine borders on heresy. IMO. There are some who seek the destruction of the Church.
What better way of destroying the Church than through an appeal for
“mercy for sinners”
as a rationale for weakening the truths that the CHurch has taught for centuries.
Click to expand...
Very well said. Amen and Amen!

Catholic Church is the one true Church. Satan wants to do all he could to destroy her.
Use false “mercy” to appeal is very subtle and cunning But for people who know and obey the Church’s teaching, they know true mercy is to help people be right with God and help them get into heaven. Make the water muddy by blurring the line will lead many souls to destruction. Please pray the Rosary daily for our beloved Church.
 
Corki said:
To the bolded – that sounds very much like accusing the Church of not doing God’s will with the current practice. :mad: A different approach might be presented by the Synod fathers as a new approach, not because there was something faulty with the traditional one.
Click to expand...
If you note… I said ‘reflecting Gods will more fully’. That means that as human beings we are incapable of fully expressing Gods will at any given time but that that from age to age we are able to express it more fully.
 
LongingSoul said:
If you note… I said ‘reflecting Gods will more fully’. That means that as human beings we are incapable of fully expressing Gods will at any given time but that that from age to age we are able to express it more fully.
Click to expand...
But that still would mean that the current discipline reflects God’s will** less** fully. “More fully” would mean better and I don’t think that’s the case at all. None of the proposed changes are “more” or “better,” just different.
 
LongingSoul said:
If you note… I said ‘reflecting Gods will more fully’. That means that as human beings we are incapable of fully expressing Gods will at any given time but that that from age to age we are able to express it more fully.
Click to expand...
We are also able to corrupt and/or undermine doctrine, for that matter.
 
Originall posted by KSU (#308)
In an earlier post I mentioned the galactically ignorant news media.

video.foxnews.com/v/454613031…#sp=show-clips
LongingSoul said:
I’m not sure what aspect you are referring to as ignorant? Do you mean they think there is division in the Church?
Click to expand...
No, of course I don’t mean it’s ignorant to believe there is division in the Church; everyone knows that’s a fact, and this thread confirms it. What I mean is just what I said in my post #210, viz:
" The problem, of course, is that, as far as many modern Catholics are concerned, what mortal sin is seems to be like what treason is, as captured in the old poem:

"Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.

"There is a reason why the world’s galactically ignorant media is glued to the Synod: to see whether the ‘Liberal Pope’ finally will change a teaching; i.e.,will become ‘enlightened’ and approve ways to redefine the state of mortal sin for remarried people and gays by ‘pastoral practice’.

“The secularists and haters know that by joining the rest of the world in the 21st century, the Church of Rome soon would be no more. Francis will disappoint them.”

So, first, LS, the above video is a perfect example of the secular media waiting to see what doctrine Pope Francis via the Synod will change regarding remarried people and gays. Twice in the video, the Fox News Religion Director, Lauren Greene, said exactly that, thereby misleading the viewing audience of the largest cable news channel on TV.

Second, one most certainly does not ask the National Catholic Reporter to educate viewers about complex Catholic issues, especially not regarding remarried and active gay Catholics and the Eucharist.

The NCR’s Fr. Thomas J. Reese, SJ out of Berkeley, and an Obama appointee to a religious freedom commission (who BTW is too unorthodox even for the Jesuit magazine America), “corrected” Miss Greene. It’s not doctrine the Synod may change, it’s practice;).
 
LongingSoul said:
Just to note that Church has not approved the apparitions from the youtube link…

"On April 1990, the Apostolic Nuncio in Japan, Bishop William Aquin Carew in an interview with the Catholic magazine 30 DAYS, noted of Cardinal Ratzinger that: “His Eminence did not give any judgment on the reliability or credibility of the ‘messages of the Virgin’.”
Click to expand...
I suggest you go beyond looking up what Wikipedia says next time, Akita has been approved by the local Ordinary (bishop) who, according to The Church, is the one who has the authority to approve the apparition.
campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/akita_apparition.html
APRIL, 1984 – Most. Rev. John Shojiro Ito, Bishop of Niigata, Japan, after years of extensive investigation, declares the events of Akita, Japan to be of supernatural origin, and authorizes throughout the entire diocese the veneration of the Holy Mother of Akita.
Click to expand...
Also see this link to EWTN…
ewtn.com/library/mary/akita.htm
Click to expand...
History of Ecclesiastical Approval
Click to expand...
February 27, 1978 — Pope Paul VI approves the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Norms of the Congregation for Proceeding in Judging Alleged Apparitions and Revelations. These norms provide the criteria for evaluating such phenomenon and establish the local Ordinary as the competent authority to do so. They also provide that regional or national episcopal conferences may intervene (as has occured with regards to Medjugorje) if warranted, as may the Holy See.
Click to expand...
April 22, 1984 — After eight years of investigations, Rev. John Shojiro Ito, Bishop of Niigata, Japan, recognizes “the supernatural character of a series of mysterious events concerning the statue of the Holy Mother Mary” and authorizes “throughout the entire diocese, the veneration of the Holy Mother of Akita, while awaiting that the Holy See publishes definitive judgment on this matter.”
Click to expand...
Cardinal Ratzinger, at that time, may not have given any formal judgement, but that does not mean he disapproved of the apparitions.

From the** approved** Akita apparitions:
The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate Me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres… churches and altars sacked: the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord. The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will no longer be pardon for them…
Click to expand...
 
PTL said:
It is no secret that gay agenda is promoted big time right now. And you can find lot of information on this website.

churchmilitant.com/video/episode/the-vortexgay-press-conferences

There are lot of sessions you can click.
Click to expand...
We need the actual leafets distributed to make any comment. I don’t even think that it would be site policy to allow someones blog to be a news source, especially one that seems so biased and hostile as that one.
 
An interview: What a divorced and remarried Catholic wants from the Synod.

“As a divorced and remarried Catholic mother who wishes to bring up her children in the faith, do you think that the Church could make things easier for your family by changing the doctrine of marriage?”

continued here
 
I_trust said:
I suggest you go beyond looking up what Wikipedia says next time, Akita has been approved by the local Ordinary (bishop) who, according to The Church, is the one who has the authority to approve the apparition.

Also see this link to EWTN…

Cardinal Ratzinger, at that time, may not have given any formal judgement, but that does not mean he disapproved of the apparitions.

From the** approved** Akita apparitions:
Click to expand...
I, in fact did read your ewtn link. I scrolled to the bottom where it was amended with the following…

[EWTN: Despite claims that Cardinal Ratzinger gave definitive approval to Akita in 1988, no ecclesiastical decree appears to exist, as certainly would in such a case. However, some individuals, such as former Ambassador of the Phillipines to the Holy See, Mr. Howard Dee, have stated that they were given private assurances by Cardinal Ratzinger of the authenticity of Akita. In any case, in keeping with the current norms, given the absence of a repudiation of Bp. Ito’s decision by his successors, or by higher authority, the events of Akita continue to have ecclesiastical approval.]

Revised: November 2011

As for its reference to Medjugorje, in a letter to the Church in America 2 years ago regarding a touring Medjugorje person, the Apostolic Nuncio said this…

“On the basis of the research that has been done, it is not possible to state that there were apparitions or supernatural revelations”. It follows therefore, that clerics and the faithful are not permitted to participate in meetings, conferences or public celebrations during which the credibility of such “apparitions” would be taken for granted.

In essence, the apparitions at Akita are not approved.
 
Corki said:
But that still would mean that the current discipline reflects God’s will** less** fully. “More fully” would mean better and I don’t think that’s the case at all. None of the proposed changes are “more” or “better,” just different.
Click to expand...
This issue made me curious about the Churchs transition away from the norms of the Inquisition to the modern norms of the CDF and so I found an Apostolic Letter by Pope Paul VI on the changes where the Church further refined its approach to authentic doctrine.

In 1908, as the name Universal Roman Inquisition was not best suited to the conditions of the time, Saint Pius X with the Constitution Sapienti Consilio changed it to the “Congregation of the Holy Office”.

But, because there is no fear in love (1 Jn 4:18), the defense of the faith is now better served by promoting doctrine, in such a way that, while errors stand corrected and those who err are gently called back to the truth, heralds of the Gospel may find new strength. Moreover, the advance of human culture, whose the importance the religious field must not overlook, is that the faithful follow the directives of the Church with greater adhesion and love, if, insofar as in matters of faith and morals it is possible to make clear to them the reasons for definitions and laws.

So, that from now on this Sacred Congregation may more perfectly fulfill its role in promoting the sound doctrine and efficacy of the Church in the most important works of apostolate, in virtue of Our Supreme Apostolic Authority we have established the following norms to alter its name and its regulation: etc Integrae servandae (December 7, 1965) | Paul VI

It’s not to denounce the past to claim to ‘better serve’ or ‘more perfectly fulfil’ the work of God through the Church. It’s just a fact of the evolving relationship between God and man.
 
I_trust said:
I suggest you go beyond looking up what Wikipedia says next time, Akita has been approved by the local Ordinary (bishop) who, according to The Church, is the one who has the authority to approve the apparition.

Also see this link to EWTN…

Cardinal Ratzinger, at that time, may not have given any formal judgement, but that does not mean he disapproved of the apparitions.

From the** approved** Akita apparitions:
Click to expand...
Could you link me to some evidence of the approval?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top