Tidings of Great Joy re: Synod

  • Thread starter Thread starter opus101
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
surritter said:
Opus, did you read my post? Or just pick out the ONE word that you wished to correct me on?

Yes, I have heard about that faulty translation. So let’s look at the OTHER word in their sentence:

The relatio wrote of “accepting … their sexual orientation.” (Notice that I deleted the word that caused you to reply.)

So now that your point has been made, my point still stands: I’ve never stated that Church teaching has never been in peril, but the relatio created confusion, even with an accurate translation.
Click to expand...
I am not buying that “inaccurate translation” argument. Has the Church said the translation was faulty? Or any of the many English speaking members of the Synod? If so, I haven’t seen it.
 
Galatians 3:1 6:
O stupid Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?
I want to learn only this from you: did you receive the Spirit from works of the law, or from faith in what you heard?
Are you so stupid? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh?
Did you experience so many things in vain?—if indeed it was in vain.
Does, then, the one who supplies the Spirit to you and works mighty deeds among you do so from works of the law or from faith in what you heard?
Thus Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Click to expand...
I see around me so much needless worry and yes I too got all stirred up in this last week. I started to calm down after I read the Pope’s final speech and then read some of the more calmer catholic blogs. I also remembered the promises of Jesus and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Remember our trust is ultimately based in the Lord and he will not allow us to be put to shame. Also so on the issue of people being confused, remember that the Lord works all things for our good and he will works all things in accordance to his will.
PAX
 
opus101 said:
It has been stated over and over again that the word “evaluate” was mistranslated to “value”. Where are you getting your information? Or are you hearing just want you want to hear?
Click to expand...
Why would we need to evaluate their sexual orientation?
 
TMC said:
Have you considered the possibility that a majority of the bishops accepted the proposals you consider “controversial” because those proposals are right and correct, and that the Spirit is at work guiding the Church in that direction?
Click to expand...
The spirit is guiding? What do you mean by that? Is this synod going to be infallible? I was thinking if was next year that actual decisions will be made. What exactly have they come up with coming out of this? I have heard something about annulments being easier to get. That seems like a drastic change. I think things will be much more of semantics than that. They are speaking about changing “terminology”.

Bill
 
lvcabbie said:
The left is screaming and hollering all over the internet that the Synod retained its homophobia by not accepting “marital equality”.

As usual, they slant everything their way without seeing exactly what conclusions the bishops came to.
Click to expand...
I know, right!!!

I heard one “religious affairs” discussion on the radio yesterday which was seriously ‘spinning’ the idea that Pope Francis didnt really ‘lose’ to his (anti-gay) opponents on this issue but that he had planned and achieved some sort of Machiavellian victory.

This was (supposedly) because the Pope was actually engaging in a clever game in which he was publicly forcing them out into the open so they could be identified…then demoted/removed.

rolls eyes
 
billcu1 said:
The spirit is guiding? What do you mean by that? Is this synod going to be infallible? I was thinking if was next year that actual decisions will be made. What exactly have they come up with coming out of this? I have heard something about annulments being easier to get. That seems like a drastic change. I think things will be much more of semantics than that. They are speaking about changing “terminology”.

Bill
Click to expand...
Yes, any decisions will be made in the synod next year. And the synod does not need to be infallible to be either authoritative or spirit guided.

My point is that many posters here seem to be assuming that the developments in the recent synod, especially the controversial sections on divorce and homosexuality, were somehow wrong or against God. I am asking everyone to consider for a moment the possibility that those sections reflect the guidance of the Spirit as the Church continues to move toward a fuller understanding of the Truth.
 
TMC said:
Have you considered the possibility that a majority of the bishops accepted the proposals you consider “controversial” because those proposals are right and correct, and that the Spirit is at work guiding the Church in that direction?
Click to expand...
TMC said:
Yes, any decisions will be made in the synod next year. And the synod does not need to be infallible to be either authoritative or spirit guided.

My point is that many posters here seem to be assuming that the developments in the recent synod, especially the controversial sections on divorce and homosexuality, were somehow wrong or against God. I am asking everyone to consider for a moment the possibility that those sections reflect the guidance of the Spirit as the Church continues to move toward a fuller understanding of the Truth.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight. Are you suggesting that if somehow the Church would ever reconsider her position on homosexuality and so-called gay marriage and do a 180, that this would reflect the guidance of the Spirit?

Peace, Mark
 
Mark121359 said:
Let me get this straight. Are you suggesting that if somehow the Church would ever reconsider her position on homosexuality and so-called gay marriage and do a 180, that this would reflect the guidance of the Spirit?

Peace, Mark
Click to expand...
That is not what was discussed at the Synod. But to directly answer your question, yes, I would not rule that out.

Do you think the developments actually discussed at the Synod were not of the Spirit? If so, why do you think that?
 
TMC said:
That is not what was discussed at the Synod. But to directly answer your question, yes, I would not rule that out.

Do you think the developments actually discussed at the Synod were not of the Spirit? If so, why do you think that?
Click to expand...
No, I’m of the opinion that some of the proposals put forth in this synod were not of the Spirit…and I’m not alone with this thinking. And as far as your suggestion that the Church doing a 180 on so-called gay marriage would be under the guidance of the Spirit. Impossible! It would be under the guidance of Satan…the father of lies and confusion.

***Peace, Mark ***
 
TMC said:
Yes, any decisions will be made in the synod next year. And the synod does not need to be infallible to be either authoritative or spirit guided.

My point is that many posters here seem to be assuming that the developments in the recent synod, especially the controversial sections on divorce and homosexuality, were somehow wrong or against God. I am asking everyone to consider for a moment the possibility that those sections reflect the guidance of the Spirit as the Church continues to move toward a fuller understanding of the Truth.
Click to expand...
Then how do you explain prior teaching? Was the Holy Spirit not leading before but is now? Did God change their mind on these issues? If the Church says we have been wrong for nearly 2000 years then why would any one trust them again?

This all looks like a case of “You can’t get there from here”
 
TMC said:
Yes, any decisions will be made in the synod next year. And the synod does not need to be infallible to be either authoritative or spirit guided.

My point is that many posters here seem to be assuming that the developments in the recent synod, especially the controversial sections on divorce and homosexuality, were somehow wrong or against God. I am asking everyone to consider for a moment the possibility that those sections reflect the guidance of the Spirit as the Church continues to move toward a fuller understanding of the Truth.
Click to expand...
What developments are you talking about? The only development that matters is the final document, which doesn’t diverge from traditional teaching.
 
Lormar said:
It’s true that the Church has been divided and a mess from the beginning. What else can anyone expect with human beings in charge of it? 😃
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is because I have been around as long as I have, but I find the situation to be near normal; there are divisions in terms of directions; divisions in terms of theological and/or moral perspective; divisions in terms of emphasis; and sometimes, divisions in terms of truth.

Ever was it thus.

And occasionally, I get the feeling that some people view the work of the Holy Spirit as if the Spirit would come along spreading something akin to fairy dust.

Life is messy. Seeking to follow Christ is messy. And the more information (correct or otherwise) is thrown at us, the messier it gets. And the faster it is thrown, it seems the slower we are to sort it out and move on.

The Holy Spirit still protects the Church, but those who should have a firm grasp on that reality seem to be among the least able to grasp and hold on to that concept.
 
I know the only thing I heard and read was this idea of “getting annulments easier”. How can that even be possible? Your marriage is either valid or it isn’t. Is the non-catholic or even catholic public possibly expecting something different there? 🤷

Bill
 
billcu1 said:
I know the only thing I heard and read was this idea of “getting annulments easier”. How can that even be possible? Your marriage is either valid or it isn’t. Is the non-catholic or even catholic public possibly expecting something different there? 🤷

Bill
Click to expand...
Anyone paying attention knows that there have been criticisms of tribunal decisions - both John Paul 2 and Benedict 16 have had comments. The general critique seems to have been an overuse of the issue of immaturity; but as I don’t know what they actually looked at (as in, actual case records) or what their source of information was, I cannot say (and they did not say, if my reading was correct) what percentage should not have been granted.

They may have been dead-square on; or they may have been interpreting information from a certain viewpoint, or they may have been relying on information from others who had a personal agenda. The fact is, the criticisms were made (and I am not so naïve as to think there was no evidence whatsoever).

Having said that, the process we have should not be presumed to be perfect just because the Church set it forth. It is entirely possible that there may be circumstances where tribunals can be far more efficient. There have been many tribunals (including the Rota, if I remember correctly one of the criticisms) which have been way, way too slow. The saying in civil/criminal law of Justice delayed is justice denied can also apply to tribunal decisions.

We also need to remember that many countries lack staffing, efficient means of communication, and that some don’t even have a tribunal for a hearing to be had. so any comments made need to be taken in light of the world, not necessarily just the US.

So it is not that something different is necessarily expected, but rather that the process itself may need some (or for some countries, a great deal) of cleaning up.

And it is not just decrees of nullity or the tribunal process which are on the table; the Church is looking to see what needs to be done to stem the issue of so many marriages going to divorce. What catechesis, what process, what changes need to be made before the couple ever gets to the altar? How can marriages be supported so that at least some which go to divorce can get onto the right path? What works? What needs fine-tuning? What else can be done?
 
Seems to me the majority of confusion abounding is the fact that so many news outlets are interpreting what they want to hear and disseminating information upon the masses along with the obvious issue with translation of words and then digesting the true meaning beyond that. I will follow my Faith that the Holy Spirit will ultimately be victorious in these matters. There are too many armchair quarterbacks out there and would akin my intellect on theology to that of me being a lowly computer tech to attempting a complicated surgery. As a lifelong Catholic I will continue to do my part for the Church and be loyal to the magisterium as I realize my role to be disciplined and open to what the Church asks of me. Submission to God’s Bride, even if it not seem prudent, will always be the right path. I will be judged on my heart and will. Woe to those laity that mislead the body for they will pay for both themselves and those mislead.
 
dciavarella said:
Seems to me the majority of confusion abounding is the fact that so many news outlets are interpreting what they want to hear and disseminating information upon the masses along with the obvious issue with translation of words and then digesting the true meaning beyond that. I will follow my Faith that the Holy Spirit will ultimately be victorious in these matters. There are too many armchair quarterbacks out there and would akin my intellect on theology to that of me being a lowly computer tech to attempting a complicated surgery. As a lifelong Catholic I will continue to do my part for the Church and be loyal to the magisterium as I realize my role to be disciplined and open to what the Church asks of me. Submission to God’s Bride, even if it not seem prudent, will always be the right path. I will be judged on my heart and will. Woe to those laity that mislead the body for they will pay for both themselves and those mislead.
Click to expand...
Never trust the press. This country (US) was built on a lie, (or bad communication) the “Boston Massacre” riled everyone up. A small problem became a “massacre”.

Bill
 
Brandall said:
Then how do you explain prior teaching? Was the Holy Spirit not leading before but is now? Did God change their mind on these issues? If the Church says we have been wrong for nearly 2000 years then why would any one trust them again?

This all looks like a case of “You can’t get there from here”
Click to expand...
It will be explained in the same way that previous changes in Church teaching have been explained. The Church has certainly had more significant developments in its teaching over the centuries.
 
TMC said:
It will be explained in the same way that previous changes in Church teaching have been explained. The Church has certainly had more significant developments in its teaching over the centuries.
Click to expand...
Do you realize that you are equating the development of a teaching (which of course has happened) with the change of a teaching (which is impossible)?

There is a big difference, which is why Brandall and Mark have challenged your earlier posts.
 
surritter said:
Do you realize that you are equating the development of a teaching (which of course has happened) with the change of a teaching (which is impossible)?

There is a big difference, which is why Brandall and Mark have challenged your earlier posts.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe that I am. I believe that current Catholic doctrine can develop in a direction that is more welcoming and accepting of divorced people and gay people. It seems to me that the majority of the bishops agree. How far the Church will go in that acceptance remains to be seen, but I am hopeful that the Church will make big strides in that direction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top