"It is madness.
Finally these people came out in the open, in the light, after many years in hiding.
But it is a good madness because Evil is exposed.
Evil exposed itself. How Stupid!
And when exposed, eventually, Good will come out of it.
Because, unless you noticed like me, this is the Harvest Time.
It is coming, my friend."
The pope's bombshell speech just a few moments ago seems to be as clear as mud, par for the course. However, as I put on my reading glasses for mud, it seems to me to indicate that the Successor of Saint Peter, no matter the man, speaks infallibly when, to quote Pope Francis, just moments ago: “the synodal process culminates in listening to the Bishop of Rome, called upon to speak authoritatively [It. pronunciare] as ‘Shepherd and Teacher of all Christians’: not on the basis of his personal beliefs, but as the supreme witness of the Faith of the whole Church, the guarantor of the Church’s conformity with and obedience to the will of God, to the Gospel of Christ and the Tradition of the Church.”
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis on Saturday morning marked the 50th anniversary of the institution of the Synod of Bishops as a permanent body. Gathered with the Fathers of the XIV Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops – who are currently meeting in Rome to discuss the vocation and mission of the family in the Church and in contemporary society – Pope Francis spoke of both the process and the substance of the Synod as constitutive and expressive of the Church’s own nature and mission.
“Journeying together,” said Pope Francis in an enlargement on the Greek words from which the English word 'synod' is derived, “laity, pastors, and the Bishop of Rome, is an easy concept to put into words, but not so easy to put into practice.”
The Holy Father went on to say that each and everyone has a place in the Church, and that the key to journeying well together is listening. “A synodal Church is a Church of listening,” said Pope Francis.
“It is a mutual listening in which everyone has something to learn: the faithful, the College of Bishops, [and the] Bishop of Rome; each listening to the others; and all listening to the Holy Spirit, the ‘Spirit of truth’ (Jn 14, 17), to know what he ‘says to the Churches’ (Rev 2: 7).”
“The Synod of Bishops,” continued Pope Francis, “is the convergence point of this dynamism – this listening conducted at all levels of Church life,” starting with the people, who “also participate in Christ’s prophetic office” and who have a right and a duty to be heard on topics that touch the common life of the Church.
Then come the Synod Fathers, through whom, “[T]he bishops act as true stewards, interpreters and witnesses of the faith of the whole Church, which [they] must be able carefully to distinguish from often shifting public opinion.”
In all this, the Successor to Peter is fundamental. “Finally,” explained Pope Francis, “the synodal process culminates in listening to the Bishop of Rome, called upon to speak authoritatively [It. pronunciare] as ‘Shepherd and Teacher of all Christians’: not on the basis of his personal beliefs, but as the supreme witness of the Faith of the whole Church, the guarantor of the Church’s conformity with and obedience to the will of God, to the Gospel of Christ and the Tradition of the Church.” (MY COMMENT: I think this sums it up, personal opinions of the pope will be set aside. Does anyone else read it this way or in some other way. This is clearer than mud, but crystal clear to me! How about you? And thus I wonder if Pope Francis will teach from the Chair in an infallible way in the area of doctrine to elevate something to dogma not done since Pope Pius XII's 1950's infallible teaching raising the doctrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, body and soul, into heaven?)
The Holy Father went on to explain that the Synod always always acts cum Petro et sub Petro – with Peter and under Peter – a fact that does not constitute a restriction of freedom, but a guarantee of unity. “In fact,” he said, “the Pope is, by the will of the Lord, ‘the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and of the faithful’.”
32 comments:
We won't know how to read it until it is written, and probably not then.
Well, he'd better be very careful because they could be the last words he speaks as Pope because if he isn't, either the Holy Spirit will strike him dead or we will have to denounce him as an antipope.
I don't trust a word he says. He will find a way to twist the truth and condemn as pharisaical those faithful few who live heroic Catholic lives in spite of the confusion he is causing. I will not believe he will clearly uphold the truths of the Catholic Faith until I actually see him do it. He has got something nefarious up his sleeve.
The fact that he has not deposed Mr. Cupich in who is occupying the Archepiscopal Throne in Chicago places Pope Francis on the level of Pope Honorius (of unhappy memory), in my view. Both are complicit in grave error and fail to take steps to prevent its spread.
I do not think this news of a possible declaration is good news for the Church.
The Pope cannot decide 'in favour of orthodoxy'. It's not his decision to make. He is sworn to defend and uphold orthodoxy. The Roman Canon, after praying for the Pope and the local ordinary, has the phrase 'et omnibus othodoxis atque catholicae, et apostolicae fidei cultoribus'. When I was a child I assumed that it meant that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches were both apostolic, which of course they are. In my childish ignorance I missed the point, which is brought out clearly in the current translation: 'and all those who, holding on to the truth, hand on the Catholic and Apostolic faith'. That includes the Pope. And your local bishop. Provided they do just that.
Francis said "finally listening to the Bishop of Rome...." Does that mean Pope Benedict is going to finally speak?
It's just a joke. Don't have a hizzy tizz everybody. Well I assume it's a joke barring any future judgement on the validity of a certain person's election that is.
I think that the pope's talk today is in response to the worries so many orthodox Catholics have about his pontificate. He knows there are Catholics who believe he is an anti-pope and he said that explicitly on his flight to Washington, DC last month.
I think this synod and the fracture between bishops has been eye-opening as well as the scandals that have happened in Rome prior to and during the synod, the least of which is the gay cabal in the Vatican and Rome trying to reorient the Church. It seems to have backfired.
Mercy that lead to license is heresy. Certainly Pope Francis is being warned by his advisers and the world's bishops and cardinals in Rome who must be voicing their alarm to him.
The Holy Father has made clear what John Nolan just wrote. His Holiness has opened the door which he has now shut to any other authority which pope simply don't have. Their authority is limited, curtailed and controlled. No pope is an absolute monarch or dictator or despot.
We shall see what happens, Father. I don't necessarily buy your take on these statements from the pope. This statement is all about his authority, which he could just as soon use to push these errors.
I certainly hope you're right, though. Still, I have an uneasy feeling about what might take place next week. As I said a few days ago, I don't think anyone should want a situation where there is an anti-pope, despite one's view on the current pope. But I fear that something big is going to happen...
Father you say the pope acknowledged that their authority is limited. Are you talking about the same pope who made the absurd statement that the pope "can make that which is white, black and that which is black, white"? Because Francis actually made that incredible, not Catholic statement in the first months of his papacy. The complete lack of understanding of the Catholic faith is mind blowing.
Marc, if this isn't a crystal clear repudiation that the Holy Father isn't going to follow his personal opinion about this, that or the other, that I don't know what is. He is making clear His Holiness will uphold the Deposit of Faith:
The pope "...not on the basis of his personal beliefs, but as the supreme witness of the Faith of the whole Church, the guarantor of the Church’s conformity with and obedience to the will of God, to the Gospel of Christ and the Tradition of the Church.”
It is wrong for you to state this as fact when you don't point out the context, the talk or the humor of it. Please show us where it was said by Pope Francis and what the context was.
Father, my response to that (not an argument, just expressing why I'm uneasy) is this: If he were going to just issue a statement upholding the traditional practice, he wouldn't have called a synod. He would have used this authority he speaks about to silence those seeking change.
"Mr." Cupich?
"Any comment that is vitriolic and disrespectful of lay people, as well as Pope Francis, bishops, priests and religious will not be posted."
The FARCE continues.
Which category does my comment fall into, Anonymous? Is it vitriolic or disrespectful?
If you called an archbishop "Mr." and don't know why, you have more issues than can be imagined.
I think just "Cupich" would have been most appropriate. Why coddle heretics and enemies of the Church, even if they have high and mighty sounding titles?
Anonymous @9:31
Are you sure that Pope Francis (in what he said,if he indeed said something anything like that) was not referring or alluding to Matthew 5:36:
"Do not swear by your head, for you cannot make a single hair white or black. Let your ‘Yes’ mean ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No’ mean ‘No.’ Anything more is from the evil one."
Of course, neither Pope Francis, nor any other pope "can make that which is white, black and that which is black, white".
Perhaps it would have been more respectful for me to refer to His Excellency Archbishop Cupich, heresiarch of Chicago, as a "low-information whiner." Right, Anonymous?
I do not respect Mr. Cupich. I hold him in contempt. I'd say worse things about him if I didn't respect Fr. McDonald enough to attempt to abide by the rules he has set up for these comments. For his sake, I hope one day Mr. Cupich will convert to the Catholic Faith. Until then, he should stop parading his apostasy in front of the whole world.
I've noticed that the only people among my varied acquaintances speaking hopefully about this synod are those who doubt the Apostolic Tradition. The title "On the New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith" is certainly a hopeful one, but I don't hear anyone I know discussing this issue.
As it is hoped one day you will convert to a decent, respectful, and humble human being.
Thank you, Anonymous. I hope so too.
Oh for heaven's sake Father Allan! Go ahead and keep burying your head in the sand! Such blind "obedience" to the "sneaky" "Successor of Peter" (whenever he feels it convenient and potent to his whims to invoke such a title) is a sign that some so-called "faithful Catholics" are stupid or outright foolish to admit plainly what is right before them plain and clear, all because they deify a human pope. When are you going to call a spade, a spade? For more than two years, you have been justifying the catholic credentials of this pope. Just because he uses orthodox language, or keeps mentioning about the devil and hell, doesn't mean he is not up to something radically different from what you as a "conservative" "faithful" Catholic believe.
If there is anything I have learned from modernistic priests preaching in most pulpits nowadays, they still speak about resurrection, about grace, about revelation, about judgment, etc. etc. but when you come to them close and hear them out specifically what they mean regarding these things off the record, you'll be surprised they don't seem to be catholic anymore. Ah the heresy of Modernism as St. Pius X tried slaying it! It garbs itself in orthodox language, but lurking within is a different beast. It is as scripture says, a wolf in sheep's clothing. I think you should start admitting to yourself that this Pope is not orthodox as you would fantasize him to be.
PBS
Father, as the doctrine the synod has been discussing is already an infallible teaching this statement from Pope Francis makes me concerned that he, in saying what he has said, is signalling that he may be making a change to the doctrine, which change he is saying must be accepted by the Church, in which case as others state here, bingo, we are in the situation stated by Vox Cantoris above.
I can't see any other reason for Pope Francis restating his authority - which is known to everyone - if it didn't include some sort of statement that attempts to create a new doctrine. The only other thing to conclude is that he has made this statement for the benefit of Kasper, the German bishops and the other liberals at the synod saying they must accept what he says about the already defined doctrine on marriage and homosexuality. Hope springs eternal!
Jan
An interesting article in the New Yorker:
"The honeymoon for Pope Francis is over—at least in Rome. The first two weeks of the Synod on the Family have been characterized by open rebellion, corridor intrigue, leaked documents, accusations of lack of transparency, and sharp divisions among the bishops and cardinals. In the first real crisis of his papacy, Francis finds himself in the position of enjoying a rare degree of popularity among the public but facing an unusual degree of dissent within an institution generally so respectful of hierarchy.
There was some inkling of this during the Pope’s triumphant visit to the U.S. “If a conclave were to be held today, Francis would be lucky to get ten votes,” a Vatican source told me at the time. “He gets an A-plus on public relations, but an F on all the rest.” This statement was certainly an exaggeration, but it reflected genuine unease within the Roman curia. ...
The synod is a purely advisory body meant to provide useful input to the Pope. But it is hard to image the Pope issuing a concluding report at radical variance to the views of so many prominent cardinals and bishops. The risk of having held the synod at all is that, after raising the hopes of so many, Francis will be forced to issue a final statement with a lot of vague rhetoric about openness and inclusion but no substantive doctrinal change: an elephant giving birth to a mouse. The alternative would be a document that risks provoking open revolt. ...
There are those who would say that, when it comes to doctrinal matters, Francis is a closet conservative—and others who would claim that reigniting the cultural wars within the Church was what he meant when he urged his followers to “hacer lío,” make some noise." http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/conflict-at-the-vatican
The last sentence really sums up how most posting here feel - up in the air and uncertain.
Jan
...
As its been said before, the issue is not dogma changing, but rather praxis that will undermine dogma, that issue was not addressed in this message by the pope in my opinion. I will believe this pope will not undermine dogma when it actually happens.
Marc, it starts with you. God's grace is always there, like the horizon, available to one and all. That is the only power you need to become what you were called to be at Baptism. Only your fear and your ego keep you from sanctity.
Dear Anonymous... With your advice, all my spiritual struggles have ceased! Who knew that anonymous internet commenters could come up with such pious platitudes. You should be a bishop. There's an opening in Chicago... I understand they recently found out their bishop wasn't Catholic.
Anonymous 9.58 when you say to Marc "Only your fear and your ego keep you from sanctity" seems to me that you are not exactly practising what you are preaching and being a tad smug or holier than thou ...
Jan
Jan, what keeps you from sanctity? Is it not your fear and your love of self?
This is my own struggle and, since the Fall, the struggle of all humans. They hid in the garden because they were afraid - they feared God. They had already set their own desire above the commands of the Lord - ego.
These are not pious platitudes.
For whatever reason, I seriously doubt God cares about whether or not we call a bishop 'mister'. No, I'd be far more worried for those bishops (and--I guess for y'all Λατινοι--cardinals) who treat their dioceses as personal fiefs, and, in the case of certain prelates, those who behave like monarchs.
We learned recently that marriages can be annulled on the basis of a lack of faith. Extending that logic to the other sacraments, calling him Mr. Cupich would be the most accurate description.
One of the worst novelties in Roman Catholicism is the pope's assigning to himself all power to name and depose bishops. At this point, though, are there enough Catholics in Chicago to depose Cupich? Or has any semblance of the faith there completely died thanks to those of his ilk?
Post a Comment