Open Thread for the Synod on the Family

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gilliam said:
Synod of Bishops 2014: The drama is back

A view from John Allen

cruxnow.com/church/2014/10/15/synod-of-bishops-2014-the-drama-is-back/
Click to expand...
One should note that Crux is a questionable source Crux – Fr. Z’s initial observations
…
Happily, it seems to me that *Crux *has the potential to make the National catholic Fishwrap irrelevant. Sadly, it could be that Crux will make the National catholic Fishwrap irrelevant. That is to say, *Crux *might be a slicker, smarter Fishwrap on steroids. [UPDATE: To be nicknamed, if it proves to be subversive, “Horcrux”? In the Harry Potter world: “A Horcrux is a powerful object in which a Dark wizard or witch has hidden a fragment of his or her soul for the purpose of attaining immortality.”]
Now for a few more concrete observations.
Crux‘s ”spirituality editor” is former Boston Globe wrote Margery Eagan.
Back in January 2014 Eagan wrote in the Boston Herald that
“a birth control ban has never been central to Catholic doctrine. The church says family planning is fine, as long as it’s done by the natural rhythm method. A commission made up of bishops, cardinals, and theologians did vote to end the ban on artificial birth control in the mid-1960s, but then Pope Paul VI overruled them, mainly for political reasons. Pope Francis, whose politics are clearly different, could actually lift the ban.”…
Click to expand...
 
John Allen has been a reliable reporter on activities in the Vatican for decades. His are normally moderate and factual reports of what is happening there. Allen strives to just report what is happening.

On the other hand, Fr. Z leans hard right and is very proud of his strong ‘conservative’ views on religion, economics and politics. When he writes he usually strives for humor, and political influence. He and Allen have two different agendas. Neither is necessarily ‘bad’ but it is good to know that they are different.

I can’t vouch for the rest of Cruxnow, and some do seem to lean one way or another, but Allen tries to be a straight shooter and he tries to avoid an agenda. That is a bit unusual in the religious news business. Cruxnow is owned and operated by the Boston Globe, so it is a secular publication. Cardinal O’Malley has some influence on it though.
 
ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/good-news-from-the-synod-of-bishops-12-things-to-know-and-share

Good news from the Synod of Bishops! 12 things to know and share

by Jimmy Akin Wednesday, October 15, 2014

The last couple of days have brought signs of hope from the Synod of Bishops on the family. Here are 12 things to know and share . . .
The last couple of days have brought some good news from the current synod of bishops on the family.
Where things are going is still far from certain and there is still reason for concern, but there have been a number of welcoming signs.
Here are 12 things to know and share . . .
  1. If you had to boil it down, what’s the single most important piece of good news?
    That there has been widespread pushback among the synod fathers against the document issued Monday, called the relatio post disceptationem.
(Read the rest there)
 
McCall1981 said:
ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/evidence-emerges-of-an-engineered-synod

Evidence Emerges of an Engineered Synod

"More and more there is talk in Rome that this synod is being engineered by groups intent on steering the Church in a heterodox direction, and increasingly evidence is coming to light that points to it… "

“…whoever was behind the release of the document most probably knew the impact it would have, and effectively sent it over the heads of everyone, including the Pope. When I asked Father Lombardi today if the Holy Father had seen it before it was published, he returned to the fact that it is standard procedure to send out the report – remarkably for such a sensitive document – without even the Pope or the synod presidents having to see it.”

“In his interview with the Register published yesterday, Cardinal Burke said what is being presented to the media does not tally with what’s happening in the assembly. “What is coming out does not reflect the reality, in my judgment,” he said. “I am speaking very openly about it because I think it is my moral obligation.” And he added people “are pushing the agenda” of Cardinal Kasper and his proposal for the divorced and civilly remarried. Some have said this synod reminds them of the methods used to hijack the Second Vatican Council. Veteran Vatican watchers say such engineering is unprecedented in the modern Church.”
Click to expand...
Thanks. God Bless.🙂
 
news.yahoo.com/author-vatican-gay-report-eyes-improvement-154059231.html;_ylt=AwrBJSB3ND9UZhgAbzmamolQ
Hungarian Cardinal Peter Erdo, the main author of the report or “relator,” defended the document Wednesday but acknowledged problems and said there was ample room for improvement.
Click to expand...
He told Vatican Radio that the 16 officials who drafted it struggled to synthesize the positions of 30-40 bishops on any given topic and rushed to finish it on time. He acknowledged that there may have been instances when the report said “many” bishops had proposed a certain position when only “some” had.
Click to expand...
But he said the final paper would provide “greater clarity, that doesn’t leave any doubt in any chapter because the faithful need a clear voice, an encouragement and an instruction.”
Click to expand...
Erdo has already “outed” the official who wrote the section on gays, Monsignor Bruno Forte, appointed by Pope Francis as the special secretary to the synod. Forte is an Italian theologian known for pushing the pastoral envelope on dealing with people in “irregular” unions while staying true to Catholic doctrine.
Click to expand...
Technically speaking, Forte and all the members of the drafting committee had access to far more material than the bishops themselves since they had the lengthy written speeches each synod “father” submitted prior to the meeting. Those written speeches factored into the draft report, even if the bishops didn’t utter them during the four minutes each was allowed to speak.
Click to expand...
In fact, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said he recalled only one speech out of about 265 about gays during the debate.
Click to expand...
So it’s not surprising that bishops didn’t recognize everything in the draft report since these written submissions weren’t made public or distributed to the bishops themselves, and the oral presentations only reflected a summary or particular point that a bishop wanted to make. But at the same time, there is no real way to know which bishop or bishops had proposed such ground-breaking language or whether it was more a reflection of Forte’s view.
Click to expand...
only one out of 265 speeches mentioned gays though report made it seem like it had occupied a substantial part of fathers views. That makes sense. I was wondering why synod about family is made into synod about gay relationships!🤷
 
:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Goodness gracious, there is officially too much Synod drama to even keep up with.

Cardinal Kasper denies giving the Zenit interview about African Bishops:

patheos.com/blogs/deaconsbench/2014/10/i-am-shocked-cardinal-kasper-denies-statements-about-african-bishops/#ixzz3GKOzQpg2

The group documents are out:

press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/16/0763/03042.html

And then there’s THIS from La Stampa (Fr. Z translates):

wdtprs.com/blog/2014/10/synod-bishops-revolt-against-leadership-and-get-their-way/#comments

Synod, more censorship, protests

The General Secretary of the Synod [Card. Balidsseri] announced the decision not to publish the reports of the Circuli Minores [subcommittees by language groups, tasked with contributing elements to the final report]. The announcement provoked the protest of Card. Erdo [the president or chairman for this Synod], and numerous other Synodal Fathers. The Pope, silent and very serious. At last, Fr. Lombardi announced that the reports of the commissions would be made public.

…]

Erdo took the floor, implicitly distancing himself from the report that bore his name, and saying that if that “disceptatio” had been made public, then the others of the Circulo Minores ought to be made public.

His speech was followed by an avalanche from many others along the same line, underscored by thunderous applause.

The Secretary of the Synod, Card. Balidisseri, was watching the Pope, as if in search of advice and lights, and the Pope remained silent and very serious.

Silent also were the Under-secretaries of the Synod, Fabene, Forte, Schoenborn and Maradiaga.

Kasper wasn’t there.

Finally, Fr. Lombardi announced that the reports of the Commission would be made public…

Apparently, Card. Pell was the first one to rise up against Card. Baldisseri. When Baldisseri made the announcement, Card. Pell took the floor and said that the reports had to be published and that they were tired of the manipulation.

From that point, the bishops also rose up. When Baldisseri repeated his position, he was effectively shouted down.

At that point, Card. Baldisseri turned to the Pope and got the nod to publish.
 
Too many intrigues! I am glad the truth is coming out an our Bishops are resisting manipulation to push heresy! Praise be to God!!!🙂
 
A synod is a discussion. If everyone agreed, there would not be a need for a synod.

Also La Stampa likes to sensationalize. That’s how it sells newspapers.

my 2-cents
 
Here’s a summary/commentary on the groups’ reports from Vatican Insider:

vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/sinodo-famiglia-36974/

Regarding the subject of “difficult family situations”, the possibility of allowing remarried divorcees to take communion after a period of penance – a solution inspired by the Orthodox Church – “requires careful thought, no conflicting views and a common, shared solution,” one of the Italian groups said. Another Italian group suggested using John Paul II’s Familiaris consortio as a reference point. In the third Italian group a majority voted in favour of a proposal that would give remarried divorcees access to the Eucharist “in certain conditions and in particular moments of Church and family life”. Meanwhile, some fathers believe the current rules are binding. The first English group states very frankly: “We did not recommend the admission to the sacraments of divorced and re-married people.” The second English group recommended the examination of possible paths of repentance and discernment by which, in particular circumstances, a divorced and remarried person might participate in the sacraments.” The third English group simply reiterates the Church’s traditional doctrine with regard to this subject. The first Spanish group praised those who abstained from remarrying, describing them as “heroic witnesses of indissolubility and faithfulness”. The second group made a general reference to the ordinary Synod in 2015. The first French group said the rules should not change. In the second group “some fathers” argued in favour of the rules currently in force, while “others” called for remarried divorcees to be admitted to communion.
 
McCall1981 said:
… Another Italian group suggested using John Paul II’s Familiaris consortio as a reference point. …
Click to expand...
I am frequently wondering what has changed in the past 30 years to make (St.) John Paul II and *Familiaris consortio *merciless, unpastoral (or whatever the word would be), hardline, outmoded, etc. It’s not like we’re re-examining problems after the passage of 500 years.

And, if we operate under the principle that the Holy Spirit “guides” Synods and Popes, did the Holy Spirit take time off in 1980-1981 when that Synod and Pope addressed issues related to the family, including the whole Communion for the divorced/remarried topic?

I don’t know how *Familiaris consortio * can **not **be a reference point.

But, there are others who have never been in agreement with *Familiaris consortio *or subsequent statements from the CDF (e.g., 1994 letter re: Communion for divorced/remarried). And yet, it is those who agree with these past statements who are accused of holding to their own opinions, against the wishes of the Pope or the Church.

Dan
 
dans0622 said:
I am frequently wondering what has changed in the past 30 years to make (St.) John Paul II and *Familiaris consortio *merciless, unpastoral (or whatever the word would be), hardline, outmoded, etc. It’s not like we’re re-examining problems after the passage of 500 years.

And, if we operate under the principle that the Holy Spirit “guides” Synods and Popes, did the Holy Spirit take time off in 1980-1981 when that Synod and Pope addressed issues related to the family, including the whole Communion for the divorced/remarried topic?

I don’t know how *Familiaris consortio * can **not **be a reference point.

But, there are others who have never been in agreement with *Familiaris consortio *or subsequent statements from the CDF (e.g., 1994 letter re: Communion for divorced/remarried). And yet, it is those who agree with these past statements who are accused of holding to their own opinions, against the wishes of the Pope or the Church.

Dan
Click to expand...
Get with the times man, Familiaris consortio is sooo 1980’s 😉
 
catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1404281.htm

“Cardinal Pell said only three of the synod’s 10 small groups had supported a controversial proposal by German Cardinal Walter Kasper to make it easier for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to receive Communion, even without an annulment of their first, sacramental marriages.”
 
This Synod has been nothing but debates on remarried divorcees receiving communion, homosexuality, and cohabitating couples – things which many posters on here kept assuring would only be a small part of this Synod. Turns out thats all this Synod was about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top