Sunday, July 12, 2015


Those of us who remember 1968 which 2015 is very, very similar in a "Twilight Zone" sort of very scary way, remember well the false expectations of progressives that Pope Blessed Paul VI would vanquish natural law to the hall of shame that was labeled "Oh so pre-Vatican II". But His Holiness didn't do that but prophetically upheld natural law and condemned artificial birth control.

It seems this progressive German Cardinal is exercising damage control now to save face. I report and you discuss!

Catholic World News - July 10, 2015
Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich has cautioned German Catholics that they should not expect dramatic change in Church policy as a result of the October meeting of the Synod of Bishops. 

Cardinal Marx-- who has been an outspoken proponent of allowing divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion-- said that it "will not be simple" to bring about such a change. He suggested that the Synod may not be ready to approve the policy, which has already won endorsement from the German bishops' conference, which Cardinal Marx heads. 

The cautionary statement from Cardinal Marx, made in a meeting in Munich, may indicate that the German prelate is recognizing the strength of opposition to the "Kasper proposal" among the world's bishops.


John Nolan said...

What the synod may or may not approve is immaterial; it is not a legislative body and cannot alter Church doctrine which is rooted in Scripture and Tradition. Neither, for that matter, can the Pope.

Anonymous said...

Of course Church doctrine CAN'T be changed.........the damage allowing the debate which gives people the impression that it can be changed. Paul VI knew he couldn't change a thing, but for 3 years he let debate happen which caused scandal and confusion. In the end Church teaching was upheld AND disregarded, and look where that situation has brought the Church today. 99% of "Catholics" don't believe what the Church, what Christ, teaches. Thanks Paul VI.

It is a scandal that sacraligious communion is even being mentioned as something that the Church could allow. There is nothing to discuss. People living in adultery can receive communion if they repent and stop committing that sin. Just like everybody else on the planet. We all have to stop committing sin. But no we have a synod to "discuss" options. It's not open for debate. Christ Himself told the woman in adultrey to stop committing that sin. Would we have a synod discuss whet here or not racism is always bad? Would we have a synod to discuss whether or not the gospel should be preached. Francis has allowed the world and everyday Catholcs to believe that Church doctrine on marriage could be changed. THAT IS THE SCANDAL. THAT is what is evil.

Unknown said...

It is definitely a good sign. I would just hold off a bit on reading too much into this. In the original German article, Cardinal Marx is quoted as saying that "it will not be simple and a long path to saying something that will be binding on the whole Church [literally "globally binding"] on the subject of marriage, family and sexuality." The German headline does indeed say, "Marx Dampens Expectations on the Synod of Bishops," but that seems to be the editor's choice. Nowhere does the German article mention communion for remarried/divorcees but, of course, that is part of their agenda, so it is a reasonable deduction that this is part of what he was talking about. The Germans have some other wacky proposals, too, in regard to homosexuality.

The rest of the article makes Card. Marx sound like a mad Hegelian - "the Spirit speaks not only through the bishops, but also through history" and he also calls on Pope Francis to be a bridge builder "between real life and [Church moral] teachings."

I say, let him keep talking like this. This is not going to persuade conservatives, it is not going to persuade moderates.

SueT said...

The German bishops sans 2, some Belgians, a few French, a few curial Italians close to the pope, and a few Americans (who have quietly deferred) support the so-called Kasper proposal. Virtually every other bishop in the world, except of course the Bishop of Rome, is opposed to it. It lines up on similar lines for the homosexual stuff.

Since the pope himself by fiat forced these 2 topics into the now-infamous "3 paragraphs" at the last Synod, and has also had them included in the Instrumentem (note the unprecedented use of the term "orientation" for gays), it's crystal clear what the Holy Father wishes would happen. His words of the past, before and after his election, also endorse that.

However, he did not expect such real opposition. He triumphed last time only by a last-ditch iron fist effort so severe one would almost doubt his sincerity about "collegiality"! He has gathered his forces and about a month ago we saw the back-pedaling start. His words a few days ago about God making a miracle from something impure and scandalous reveal his still high hopes. But he knows that THIS ROUND it the war will not be won, but the battle is still worth fighting. Some incremental gain, barely noticeable to the "typical" Catholic will occur, just like last time.

When Marx says "don't look for changes at this time" we pretty much know he and Team Bergoglio are hoping for a future time. After all, that is why Bergoglio was put in the Chair of Peter.

Anonymous said...

I am waiting to be sure until after the synod to see what occurs there because I don't want to be lulled into a false sense of security. Not forgetting the secret meeting Card Kasper and his cohorts held a few weeks ago. The laity needs to continue to speak out against any change to the Church's traditional teaching on marriage.

News today is that scientists in England are expecting that we are headed for a mini-ice age in the next 15 years because of the positioning of the sun. (And global warming enthusiasts have jumped in and said this will possibly help global warming.) I think this should alert people that we are being duped big time because global warming figures have been fiddled with in most countries, as several UK papers point out. So, global warming is caused by man (or should I say women just to keep the feminists happy?) but a new model of the sun is going to lead to an iceage:

"A new study claims to have cracked predicting solar cycles - and says that between 2020 and 2030 solar cycles will cancel each other out.
This, they say, will lead to a phenomenon known as the 'Maunder minimum' - which has previously been known as a mini ice age when it hit between 1646 and 1715, even causing London's River Thames to freeze over."

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook such as that in the

Opps, looks as if THAT encyclical will have to be regigged as we're going to be freezing amidst global warming. But I am sure they will be able to come up with a good story to cover that. And of course that is going to further delay the Himalayan icecap melt ...


JusadBellum said...

The Pope is not the Prime Minister. Synods help assemble a sense of what the global Church's leadership happen to think about a given topic but ultimately the Pope can produce his own final document with or without their consent.

So even IF there's a sudden and dramatic 180 away from the Kasperite position (that changing morals among elite opinion makers mean the Church must change praxis in order to placate their feelings or risk being put in their "unpopular" bracket), the Pope could still come out and declare that while doctrine is not changed, for all practical purposes the "discipline" is and what will start as a special loop hole for some really tightly defined exceptional circumstances will then become a floodgate justifying every and any local spin on matters sexual and metaphysical.

He might say 'hey, I'm personally opposed to X excess but what are you gonna do? Oh well, better make best of a bad situation as we can" - knowing that most will choose the easy path to perdition vs. the hard path to fidelity to Christ.

Unless "bind on earth = bound in heaven" is indeed a power to square any circle.

George said...


No acceptable interpretation of Matthew 16-19 from the standpoint of Catholic revelation, understanding, and exigesis would determine it to mean that the objective reality of what is sinful can be re-defined to be something other than what it is. So no-"bind on earth = bound in heaven" is not a power to square any circle.

From the Catechism:
In imparting to his apostles his own power to forgive sins, the Lord also gives them the authority to reconcile sinners with the Church.
(CCC 1445)
The words bind and loose mean: Whomever you exclude from your communion, will be excluded from communion with God; whomever you receive anew into your communion, God will welcome back into his. Reconciliation with the Church is inseparable from reconciliation with God. (CCC 1445)