Saturday, October 18, 2014


The Synod's final message a dud?
 The more worrisome document will be the one the bishops are also preparing that is a more detailed final report, which will be published (or not) at the discretion of the pope. Let us pray that Pope Francis will not be a Pharisee and keep the document out of the light of day. Those who are not Pharisees want transparency! The pope said it himself at Friday's homily: 'Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.' 'Pretending': I pretend to be a Christian, but am not. I am not transparent, I say one thing - 'yes, yes I am a Christian' - but I do another, something that is not Christian"
But after all the controversy this week concerning the Synod on the Family, the final message just released is, well, boring! It tells even a 2nd grader what we already know! But, and I could have missed it, there isn't one word about homosexuals or divorced and remarried couples receiving Holy Communion or anything like that. It is a bunch of pious thoughts put together that I could have written in one hour.

You can read the message at the Deacons Bench by PRESSING HERE. Let me know if you see something in it that I am not seeing through my smudgy rose-colored glasses.


MR said...

Given the present circumstances, I think "boring" could be good news. The message could have been all about how we need to have the courage to be open to new possibilities and surprises and blah blah blah. But, thankfully, it isn't.

Anonymous said...

What went on at that synod was heartbreaking and scandalous.

Let's not be naive about things. It is becoming clearer by the day that the first relatio that was released, the one that caused the scandal, was engendered by the pope. That report, which was given to the press before the bishops, could not have been published without his knowledge. And if it was he has a duty to state publicly that he, the Vicar of Christ, didn't know anything about it.

When an majority of bishops at a synod openly revolt in the presence of the pope, there is a problem. And now we have a cardinal (Burke) publicly, PUBLICLY, stating that this was orchestrated by the pope himself to weaken the Faith. That is major.

The time is longgggggggg over due for Pope Francis to stop with the careless, scandalous speech and actions are start upholding the Faith. If he believes in his heart that sacrilegious communions, divorce and adultery and sex outside marriage is permissible and has value then I question the validity of his election. I will not give the time of day to any bishop, let alone a pope who does not teach the Catholic Faith.

Silence gives consent. Pope Francis has been silent far to long. I don't see how this can continue. His own cardinals, Pell and Muller in particular, have stood up publicly against him. He can't send everyone to Malta. He needs to either protect and preach the Faith or resign. It's that serious. The press can remain silent regarding the revolt in the synod. Then can remain silent in the face of Cardinal Kasper ( the pope's hand picked person to lay the ground work for altering the Church's teaching) being exposed as a racist and a liar. But every bishop and priest in the world sees that the pope is behind everything. It's clear as crystal. Even if there isn't a formal schism Francis will just be ignored by every faithful bishop and priest. He can say homosexual couples are fine and have merit all he wants, but he is wrong and I'm not listening to him.

And the back breaking lengths that people have been doing to rationalize the nonsense that has been going on for a year and a half needs to stops. Because it makes them look foolish. And it also makes them culpable in the scandal that is being caused.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I think that it is quite possible that the pope knew that this first relatio was released to the press and before it was to the bishops.

However, the relatio itself while certainly containing errors cannot be said to have been written by the pope or approved as a formal teaching. It isn't; it is given as a document highlighting what was discussed. Yes, there was a sinful manipuation here of the bishops and this in and of itself is cause for alarm especially if this is the pope's intention to get what he wants. But why the heck have a synod when all the pope needs to do is to teach on his own authority as pope and he can do so independent of the bishops. Is the synod a charade for a pope that is a dictator but wants everyone to think he is collegial? That is certainly serious too.

We have to pray for Pope Francis. Unless it is proven that he is leading the Church into apostasy and I'm not sure how one does this with the Supreme Pontiff, then we are in big, big trouble and a schism the likes we haven't seen in over a 1000 years looms.

The most peaceful solution isn't to depose the pope but to find out if Pope Benedict was manipulated by progressive, liberal, post-Catholic forces in the Church to resign but he resigned under the impression a younger pope but of Benedict's school and orthodoxy would be elected and then the conclave was hijacked by Baldaserri and a grand manipulation took place.

It that is the case, we have an anti-pope in office now. But this is just conjecture on my part. I am sure Pope Benedict knows the full story of all this Vatican intrigue, the smoke of Satan and why he resigned to get someone stronger and younger to defend the faith but it backfired! Pope Benedict can save the day.

Julian Barkin said...

Fr. With all due respect, how can Benedict save the church? He gave up the papacy, point blank. He cannot do anything even if your conjecture was true. The only way we get a new pope is either Francis resigns or dies. Unless there's some antiquated church law that never got the light of day that has never been used in the 21st century, it won't happen. You might as well pray to Christ heavily with mortifications if you ever think anything will change with regards to the papacy.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

If his resignation is invalid he is still the pope and he could remain until he dies and a new conclave elects his successor! All Benedict has to do is say his resignation was pressured, he was weakened by depression and thus it was invalid! This is all conjecture for the sake of discussion, theoretical!

John Nolan said...

Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. (Horace)

George said...

We are taught and accept as faith and The Pope cannot err in matters of Faith and morals. I would say to those who conjecture that this could happen that if a Pope were to proclaim or approve a formal teaching which was heretical, he would de facto no longer be Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman church because by such an action he would have placed himself and those who agree with him outside of her.

Julian Barkin said...

Father, again with due respect, how can that work? What are the objective written rules and/or Mind of the Church with regards to conclave papal elections in this regard? If you have a book or weblink with this regard from a reputable source, I'd like to know this.

Unless there is something concrete here, I cannot give credence to such things as a layman. A layman who has read and seen a lot of bull on the Catholic blogospehere from Radical Catholic Reactionaries about Pope Francis being falsely elected and the resignation of Benedict XVI was false because of faulty Latin translation/grammar.

Just understand, there's so much darkness and anger online. So when I want to, as a young man, want to not be blind, who am I to trust when they are no different from their liberal contemporaries, sharing the same protestant mentality? Further I gotta keep my spiritual soul intact and not fall to Sloth's spiritual sister: Despair.

Joe Potillor said...

Now it's clear as water what side Pope Francis is on (some of us have been saying it for a while)...and Deo Gratias there was public resistance to this.

Let us keep praying.

Anonymous said...

John....splendorum tuum prehensa spiritus absentis.

If you can't understand, I'll help you...

Anonymous said...


When you read Church history you will see a situation similar to that which Father McDonald is describing.

In the late 14th to early 15th (ending 1417 I believe) there were at times 3 "popes". One in Rome, one in Avignon and one in Pisa. All elected by Cardinals and all having support of various political leaders and the laity.

If I remember correctly it was called the Western Schism.

The confusing and sad situation was eventually cleaned up by the Church.

So can Pope Benedict come back if politics forced him out? Yes as history bears witness to similar situations.

I pray he does.

The Anglican Priest