6 Oct – Synod notes

A couple interesting points:

Yesterday, at the opening of the Synod, the General Relator (“president”) of the gathering, Hungarian Peter Card. Erdö of Esztergom-Budapest gave a speech (English HERE) to put the participants on their course for the gathering.  He effectively defended the Church’s teachings and said that Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried and issues of homosexual sex were off the table.

The speech was a good one.  A good sign that it was a good speech was the displeasure of the German Reinhard Card. Marx of Munich and Freising, President of the German Bishops’ Conference.  When the German’s are unhappy, it is probably a good thing.  It means that someone, somewhere is doctrinally sound.

Card. Erdö quoted Familiaris consortio!  He mentioned Humanae vitae!  Can you imagine?

That was yesterday.

Today the Holy Father jumped in with a rare intervention (a fancy word for “speech”).  At Catholic World Report we find:

It seems as though Cardinal Péter Erdö’s presentation on the first day of the Synod, in which he reiterated the clear doctrinal content of the “Instrumentum Laboris,” struck a raw nerve among certain Synod Fathers, as well as among other participants, priests and laity alike, who favor a more progressive (and, dare I say, a more revolutionary!) approach to the fundamental teachings of the Catholic Church regarding marriage and the family, especially as concerns divorce and remarriage and homosexuality.

Consequently, Pope Francis probably felt pressured to make his first direct intervention at the Synod in the course of the past two years.

In doing so, Pope Francis made clear two key points: the “continuity” between the work of the Extraordinary Synod and that of the Ordinary Synod; that thus far the only official Synod documents which enjoy full ecclesiastical approval are the two discourses he himself delivered at the opening and closing of the Extraordinary Synod last October, as well as the “Relatio Synodi” or final document of the Extraordinary Synod which he approved.

So… the Holy Father underscored the fact that only his involvement with anything having to do with any aspect of the Synod makes it weighty.  His own speeches and any document he formally accepts have some standing.  For the rest…. pffft.

In other words, Pope Francis thumped his chest like a little like he did at the end of last year’s Synod. And then he threw Card. Erdö under the bus.

I suspect that didn’t bother Card. Erdö.

Meanwhile (HERE):

Furthermore, this tension came to the fore when at the conclusion of the “Briefing” in the Sala Stampa? when a reporter from The Tablet (a left-leaning Catholic periodical published in England) asked if divorce and remarriage were still a firm doctrine for the Synod Fathers or just a matter of mutable discipline.  In response to this pointed question, Archbishop Paul-André Durocher, President of the Canadian Episcopal Conference, ?astonished many in the room by proffering a very snide and imprudent remark that those interested in doctrine should consult Denzinger-Schönmetzer (a well-known and highly respected compendium of Catholic doctrine/dogma) while the Synod Fathers would continue to treat divorce and remarriage as an issue open to discussion, and—therefore—possibly open to change.

I wonder. When was the last time the Archbishop even saw a copy of Danziger, much less consulted one?

How was this spun in the official summary of the briefing?

Asked if the reception of the Eucharist by divorced and remarried persons was a “doctrine or a discipline” Archbishop Paul-Andre Durocher of Gatineau, Quebec, replied saying that different people may see this differently and that it was part of the work of the Synod to discuss this.

Archbishop Durocher went on to say that the bishops were all united in acknowledging that there is a gap between contemporary culture and church teaching.

Here is the video of the briefing. Note about 1:16:00:

Also, apparently the issue of relaxing conditions for “General Absolution” came up in the context of the Year of Mercy.  A ridiculous proposal, since it has nothing to do with the theme of the Synod.  I doubt anything will happen with that.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Synod and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to 6 Oct – Synod notes

  1. juergensen says:

    So Pope Francis did not like Cardinal Erdo’s Catholic presentation?

  2. iamlucky13 says:

    “a reporter from The Tablet asked if divorce and remarriage were still a firm doctrine for the Synod Fathers or just a matter of mutable discipline. “

    Where did that come from? In the first place, he framed his question to imply that doctrine is changeable.

    More to the point, is not even Cardinal Kasper diligently avoiding the question of the sinfulness of divorce and remarriage, and instead trying to open a loophole whereby either divorce and remarriage does not entail grave sin, or else whereby in at least some circumstances a person in a state of sin can receive communion, and apparently, we should ignore 1st Corinthians 11:27.

    “Archbishop Durocher went on to say that the bishops were all united in acknowledging that there is a gap between contemporary culture and church teaching.”

    As there almost always has been throughout the history of the Church, even in the Old Testament, which in a way is a series of stories about contemporary culture continuously running amok of Mosaic teaching and being dragged back by a combination of the prophets and the calamities that convinced the chosen people to listen to the prophets.

    Anyways, so what of it? If contemporary culture comes up with ideas that conflict with revealed truth and the doctrinal developments of thousands of years, should we assume it’s the Church that needs to change and not the frequently wrong and incessantly changing contemporary culture?

  3. RichR says:

    They really should just ban all media from the discussions until final papal documents come out. Laws and sausage are not things you want to see being made.

  4. Mitchell G says:

    Archbishop Durocher, accroding to CNS, also talked about ordaining women as deacons, it should be noted he’s the *former* president of the Canadian conference, although that doesn’t improve out lot here by much.

  5. oldcanon2257 says:

    At the end of this synod, the well-respected journalist Edward Pentin will have his chance to write the sequel to his recently released Kindle-only book “The Rigging of a Vatican Synod?” (The title as a question). The sequel might have a tentative title of “The Rigging of a Vatican Synod” (the title as an assertion).

    With sincere apology to real ducks everywhere, our synodal variation of the infamous “Duck Test” inductive reasoning: If it looks like a rigging, sounds like a rigging, smells like a rigging and quacks like a rigging (at media briefing / press conferences), then it probably is a rigging.

    This begs the question: If an elderly prelate could not finish his intervention in 3 minutes, then what is Cardinal Baldisseri going to do, turn off his microphone like Cardinal Lienart did to the blind and limping Cardinal Ottaviani on the third day of the Second Vatican Council?

    That said, any elderly prelate only needs to say a few things to meet the 3-minute quota: Denzinger (as suggested by Archbishop Durocher), Familiaris consortio, Humanae vitae. Mentioning those things will get the Kasperites’ blood boiling instantly.

    I wonder what Cardinal Marx said or will say. But as Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga recently said, “There was Marx, Karl Marx. And if present Marx says similar things, then there is no real difference.”

  6. Royse87 says:

    Certainly it’s a sad day when the anxiety of lay Catholics is exacerbated not from outside the safe haven of the Church, but from within by our own shepherds; Bishops! What a time to be alive…

  7. Elizabeth D says:

    Not only that, Abp Durocher has used the occasion of the Synod on the Family to promote “women deacons”, which now Catholic News Service is promoting. Talk about absurd nonsequitor at a meeting about the family. It really makes me angry.

  8. Robbie says:

    Why do I get the sense the Synod is being conducted on Mt. Doom?

  9. jhayes says:

    Robert Royal had some useful advice in his column, yesterday:
    A synod, as I’ve almost grown tired of repeating to friends, is not a legislature, but a consultation. In spite of all the anguish and upset we’ve seen prior to the opening sessions (which begin today), a synod may tell us nothing — or everything. Ultimately, the pope himself will have to decide what to do with the results. He may even, as Paul VI did when he reaffirmed Church teaching on contraception, simply reject advice offered. It’s one of the perks of the papal office: you may drive a Fiat 500, but you still have ultimate say over faith and morals.

    HERE

  10. Benedict Joseph says:

    This afternoon, regarding the synod, Father Rosica offered that “there must be an end to exclusionary language and a strong emphasis on embracing reality as it is. We should not be afraid of new and complex situations.”
    Ah, we should not be afraid of “new” and “complex” situations…
    There are a lot of fearful Roman Catholics these days. Those who are fearful that their same-sex attractions will hurtle them to hell. Those who are afraid that their second, third, and forth marriages will hurtle them to hell. The one thing I’m afraid of is that there is an insufficient number of men to pin the ears back on anyone who debases Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium – anyone.
    My fear is not groundless.
    What is there to be afraid of, Father Rosica? When you and your crew declare the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ has been in error for millennia, there will be nothing of which to be afraid? Eh?
    I’ve reached the conclusion that such individuals prefer the deconstruction of the Faith rather than admitting they no longer believe. Deconstruct and reconstruct according to their comfort zone and they then maintain the self-aggrandizement, self-regard, privileges and perks. Two birds with one stone, you know. Quite a game.
    Shameless.

  11. Auggie says:

    I think it’s time to redouble our efforts–two bricks by two bricks.

  12. Lin says:

    “The smoke of satan has entered the temple of God.” It feels like that has never been more true than now. We are living in dangerous times. Eternal salvation is at stake. Pray the Rosary! Sister Lucia said it is never too late to entrust oneself to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary! Much prayer and fasting is required!

  13. MikeM says:

    We heard a lot more from the liberals today, but I’m not sure that that makes it a good day for them.

    We had Durocher bringing up the totally irrelevant issue of women deacons. Throwing a bunch of irrelevant proposals out there to distract people seems like a tactic for people who know that they have neither arguments or support to back what they’re trying to get.

    We had his attempt at a snarky remark about Denzinger. And, I thought that looking at Denzinger was a fine proposal! [That’s the spirit.] I only had the Loreto publications version (from 1953, with the old numbering) handy, so I had to go with that. I found a lot of interesting things, for example… From the Council of Illiberi, ca. 300 (52a): “Likewise, let the faithful woman, who has left an adulterous husband and attracts another faithful one, be forbidden to marry; if she should marry, let her not receive communion unless he whom she has left has previously departed this world; unless by chance the exigency of illness should compel the giving.” I also discovered that Pope Pius IX taught that “… any other union of man and woman among Christians, except the sacramental union, even if contracted under the power of any civil law, is nothing else than a disgraceful and death-bringing concubinage very frequently condemned by the Church…” (emphasis mine). I could provide more, but I’ll spare you. My intention isn’t to be mean, and I certainly wouldn’t want to be “closed,” but it seems that if Durocher had any interest in looking through the history of Church documents, he would find that his question hardly requires a synod for an answer.

    Then, we had joy of hearing that Cardinal Kasper believes that it would be beneficial for the “treatment” of certain marriage issues, including not only civil remarriage but polygamy, to be handled on a “local, regional or even continental” basis. Surely he isn’t so ridiculous as to think that the promise of polygamy will be so exciting to the African bishops as to win them over to his side. He must have intended to help us Americans in our outreach to FLDS groups.

    Fr. Z's Gold Star Award

  14. jfk03 says:

    There is no hope of union with Orthodoxy so long as progressivism holds sway and the Synod is manipulated by forces which reject scripture and tradition. The Orthodox will never submit to a Pope empowered to make autocratic decisions contrary to the faith handed down from the Apostles. Time will Expose the reality of the situation. In the meanwhile, fast and pray.

  15. TNCath says:

    “Asked if the reception of the Eucharist by divorced and remarried persons was a ‘doctrine or a discipline’ Archbishop Paul-Andre Durocher of Gatineau, Quebec, replied saying that different people may see this differently and that it was part of the work of the Synod to discuss this.”

    I seem to remember way back in history about a certain prophet named Moses who was given 10 non-negotiable commandments by God, the sixth of which said, “You shall not commit adultery.” Last I heard (as in last Sunday’s Gospel from St. Mark), a certain Jesus Christ told us that a man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. And then, a number of years later, the Roman Catholic Church put out this book called The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which said, “Adultery is marital infidelity. A married person who has sexual relations with anyone but their lawful spouse, even transient sexual relations, commits adultery” (CCC 2380). The Catechism goes on to say that “the grave sin of divorce condemns those who divorce and remarry (Matthew 5:32) and those who divorce in the civil sense (except by grave dispensation). Hence divorce between two baptized Christians is a mortal sin” (CCC 2384).

    Are these doctrines or disciplines, Archbishop Durocher?

  16. Nan says:

    @jfk03, I had lunch today with my Orthodox priest friend as I’m taking a workshop at his parish. He said that Pope Francis is making headway in becoming closer to the Orthodox; note also that the Orthodox have different views of divorce/remarriage and receiving of communion after divorce and remarriage that we do.

    Others in my workshop don’t think it’ll happen because the Orthodox bishops like having power.

  17. donato2 says:

    Before today, the only Durocher I had ever heard of was former Chicago Cubs manager Leo Durocher (“nice guys finish last”). Is it just me, or have others wondered if there is any relation between the late great Leo (named after Leo XIII?) and the not so great Canadian Archbishop from Quebec? In investigating the issue, I found on Wikipedia a tantalizing clue: Leo was “married” four times! Small wonder then that his present day namesake would favor communion for the divorced and civilly remarried….

  18. pseudomodo says:

    The Church has not only survived but flourished and produced many saints, before, during and after the reign of Rodrigo Borgia (Alexander VI). We will survive this also.

  19. amont says:

    Father Z
    The comments by the Canadian Archbishop are only a further example of what we have been enduring in Canada since circa 1968; the infamous Winnipeg Statement (the formulation of individual conscience vs Church teaching- Humanitae Vitae- being the clarion call of the rebels.The last 40 or more years have seen little change in the push to formulate a “Canadian Church” that is Roman in name only, and is much closer to the Anglican/Episcopal view of things.The talent pond from which bishops are selected continues to shrink annually. They do not know what the Church teaches, nor are they bound either to teaching or tradition.Truly open to the world and their times-modernists to the core!

  20. AvantiBev says:

    I feel like I am captive in a ship on the wrong heading, going with the stream even as the falls loom ahead.
    After 20 years working for attorneys I would rather see my Church COUNTER the nonstop no-fault divorce culture. So tired of hearing “pray to end abortion” but silence on another evil fruit of the Sex Revolt tree, divorce. Now our bishops want to give their imprimatur to family break-ups. Would like to lock these foolish men in a “synod” with the millions of kids of divorce.

  21. kay says:

    I understand that its hard to get an annulment and the speed of these needs to be addressed and maybe the conditions expanded under which an annulment can be granted. That I’m ok with. Having no spiritual church to lean on and participate fully in when one is suddenly alone needs to be addressed.

    2000 years ago there were polygamists and homosexuals but Christ showed the way. If science weren’t advanced enough then transsexuals wouldn’t be having sex change operations so again, the Gospel of Man is overcoming the Gospel of God. We should be happy with how God made us. Again, there were gays 2000 years ago in Rome and in Judea who heard the Gospel and must have wanted to be Saved. Today, the gays and polygamists want the Rock of Peter to be the spokesman for the new changed Gospel.

    I’m glad to know what’s happening on a daily basis and to know that the Pope has chimed in to let them all know its going to be his way no matter what, including the new confession. This is a 1 shot moment so the Pope is going to cram everything into the final paper that he writes w/out anyone’s real input. Everything we see now is theater imo.

  22. The Cobbler says:

    “Everything we see now is theater imo.”
    Ah yes. The sequel to “Your patient should be dead” is “They can’t stop the signal.” Of course, after that is “Do you believe that? Are you willing to die for that belief?”

    Just to keep things interesting, somewhere in there is: “Do you know what your sin is?”

  23. PhilMartin73 says:

    The first elements transpiring from the Synod are distressing and confirm the darkest guesses we could have made. Those who hope that the Pope will save the day at the end of the circus show are sympathics wishful thinkers. He want it and he will have it. Remaining doctrinally impeccable, that is, he can’t do otherwise, but he remain free, halas, to let the roots being poisoned with the venom of pastoral modernism. Please prove me wrong, I’d like to be convinced that I am wrong. let’s pray.

  24. Clinton R. says:

    I agree with Abp. Durocher. On the notion of women’s diaconate? Heavens no. I agree with him we should consult Denzinger. The things he and the liberal/progressive/heretical bishops are proposing at the Synod are all condemned in Denzinger. Anyone who wishes to read it can find it here: http://web.archive.org/web/20110724134019/http://www.catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma.php

  25. TWF says:

    Amont:
    Not all of Canada. Vancouver has and had solid archbishops and remains a bastion of orthodoxy. Do you know our cathedral (where confessions with long lines are heard 6 days a week) still uses the altar rail for distribution of holy communion? Those sorts of signs of traditional piety in the heart of a diocese are reflections of spiritual health. Don’t despair – there is always hope. The diocese of Prince george was a complete mess but now our former vicar general is bishop up there…and we have a good number of young, faithful men entering the seminary, under the guidance of the Benedictine monks; who hopefully can help purify the Canadian Church in the years to come.

  26. Mariana2 says:

    Robbie says:

    “Why do I get the sense the Synod is being conducted on Mt. Doom?”

    Maybe rings have been forged and given?

  27. Aegidius says:

    “When the German’s [sic] are unhappy, it is probably a good thing. It means that someone, somewhere is doctrinally sound.”

    I am repeating myself, but His Holiness Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, Cardinals Cordes, Müller, Brandmüller, Meisner, Archbishop Gänswein, Bishops Hanke, Voderholzer and Oster should be reason and theological weight enough to relable the international conspiration of modernist European bishops conferences and theologians, probably as “The Kasperites”, rather than “The Germans”. It would at least do some more justice.

  28. (X)MCCLXIII says:

    pseudomodo says:

    The Church has not only survived but flourished and produced many saints, before, during and after the reign of Rodrigo Borgia (Alexander VI). We will survive this also.

    That’s true, of course, but misses the point by a mile. The point is that souls will be lost. And the point is very close to home – our children’s souls are at risk. And this from a synod which is supposed to be on the family! The direction of this synod, and last year’s, seems to be directly to undermine the family, and to scandalise our children. Woe to those unfaithful prelates!

  29. DonL says:

    General absolution, “A ridiculous proposal, since it has nothing to do with the theme of the Synod.”
    I would respectfully disagree Father. IMO, this is the very method by which gays, and divorced will achieve a state of grace (that conscience is superior thing) and thus, be permitted to desecrate the Eucharist officially.

  30. LarryW2LJ says:

    The subject of women deacons? A diversionary tactic. Smoke and mirrors. Get everyone’s eyes on the magic wand so they won’t see the rabbit being put into the hat.

  31. robtbrown says:

    Archbishop Durocher obviously thinks that the churches, seminaries, and religious houses are not emptying fast enough.

    The Archdiocese of Gatineau began as the diocese of Hull.

    In 1966 the Diocese of Hull had 128,000 Catholics with 129 diocesan priests. In 2013 there were 266,000 Catholics and 40 diocesan priests in the Archdiocese of Gatineau.

    Well done, good and faithful servant

  32. robtbrown says:

    “Archbishop Durocher went on to say that the bishops were all united in acknowledging that there is a gap between contemporary culture and church teaching

    I completely agree. And that reality should cause those in authority to question the whether the strategy of Inculturation should come to an end. Joseph Ratzinger understood this situation well–he said that detente with secularism has not worked.

    I mentioned a few days ago that John Courtney Murray’s supposition that secular government would be neutral toward Christian life is a major error. The same problem exists with secular culture.

  33. Sonshine135 says:

    We shall wait and see the final Synod document. One of the biggest disappointments from last year’s synod was the total lack of mention of the second most important thing. Our Lord being the most important, the second being that little thing known as chastity. All human beings are called to live lives in Christ- lives of chastity and self-mastery. That is what being Catholic is all about Charlie Brown. Chastity is the weapon that defeats all of these situations. Catholics in general have a horrible understanding of the call to chastity. They don’t know what it means to be chaste. This is an ample opportunity to educate people. Failure to do so would be a great disservice to the church.

  34. Pingback: Some interesting posts on latest developments at the synod | Foolishness to the world

  35. Cradle Catholic says:

    Sonshine135 says “We shall wait and see the final Synod document” – It depends on what you mean by waiting. Right now, to use the analogy of a train heading off the rails, do we wait to warn the conductor that we see a problem? (Bad analogy, in a way, as in this case, we can’t get off the train i.e. jump off the train as we cannot abandon the Barque of Peter. ). However, in addition to praying the rosary and fasting, I am of the very strong opinion that we should ‘call our prelates out’ on things they recommend that are not aligned with the doctrine of the Catholic Church – it just may avoid the train wreck. If not, at least we have done all we could possibly do. By the way, I do also think that if we can the social media we have today, the abuses of Vatican II would not have happened. We need to use this to let our prelates know that we are watching and are informed.

  36. Stephanus83 says:

    “They really should just ban all media from the discussions until final papal documents come out. Laws and sausage are not things you want to see being made.”

    @RichR: If I was allowed to give out gold stars, I would give you one. Sausage making is an ugly and nasty process. The end result though is a different story.

  37. mburn16 says:

    I strongly disagree with the idea of keeping the media away until the final document. For one, we have no guarantee that there will be a final document. For two, the daily reports help keep people honest. The greater the degree of disagreement over any softening, the less likely any undesirable changes.

  38. Wryman says:

    I disagree on the sausages. When someone is trying to put poison in the meat I want a camera on them!

  39. pseudomodo says:

    (X)MCCLXIII ,

    Nope, not missed.

    People will go to heaven or hell regardless. Loss of souls is not a guarantee.

    The church did survive and bishops did remain faithful. Catholics in other countries remained faithful. Even now, Cardinal Burke urges the faithful to remain so – FAITHFUL!

    Yes, our children’s souls are at risk but a risk can be mitigated by our faithful teaching as parents – even when the pope or a bishop or a priest is unclear or muddies the waters.

    “In 954, Pope Agapetus II administered an oath to the Roman nobles in St. Peter’s, that on the next vacancy of the papal chair his only son, Octavius, should be elected pope. After his death, Octavius, then eighteen years of age, was actually chosen his successor on 16 December, 955, and took the name of John XII. The temporal and spiritual authority in Rome were thus again united in one person — a coarse, immoral man, whose life was such that the Lateran was spoken of as a brothel, and the moral corruption in Rome became the subject of general odium.” (Catholic Encyclopedia)

    “In 1492, Rodrigo Borgia was elected Pope Alexander VI by a bare two-thirds majority secured by his own vote. He brought to the Papacy the intrigues of the Borgia and he had at least four illegitimate children by a Roman Lady, Vanozza Catanei. They were Juan, Caesar, Lucrezia and Jofre.” (Ibid.)

    Infallibility is not to be confused with impeccability. Christ did not guarantee that the Popes or Bishops would not sin. All Christians understand that Popes could sin.

    “There was a Pope who at one time denied he was a Christian and during his tenure as Pope didn’t even follow his own disciplinary matters. For this he was rebuked by one of his own Bishops. Even after this the Pope went on to write two encyclical letters, which all Christians accept as infallible. You can find these two infallible letters near the end of your bible. They are called 1 and 2 Peter.

    We need not fear that some future Pope may not be all that we want him to be for the church as a whole cannot fail and the Pope as an individual, even in sin, is prevented by God from teaching us error. As Father J. D. Conway says, “the Holy Spirit probably hovers even closer when the helm [of the church] is in wobbly hands”.

    What has changed now in 2015 is that the CDF will not have to do what was done in the golden age of the Holy Inquisition. They will not have spend precious resources and manpower to investigate and inquire into whether some bishop or priest or theologian or layperson is a heretic or not.

    The heretics have emerged from the shadowy world they have formerly inhabited and are now out in the open, running around wildly, like shrieking harpies waving one hand above thier heads like winnowing fans fanning the flames with thier hair on fire and with the other hand tearing thier cloths off so as to get as much attention as possible.

  40. Athelstan says:

    When was the last time the Archbishop even saw a copy of Denziger, much less consulted one?

    Judging by the vanishingly small data sets on the Archdiocese of Gatineau – only 40 diocesan priests(!), most of them rather elderly, 53 parishes, and an Mass attendance rate you would need a microscope to detect – one wonders when was the last time the Archbishop even had a Catholic marriage to preside over?

  41. The Masked Chicken says:

    I can’t decide if this Synod is actually the undiscovered season 8 of Breaking Bad, the Sopranos, or You Bet Your Life (with a touch of Divorce Court and My So-called Life thrown in for seasoning).

    In any case, it is excellent theater. It could be called, Of Mice and Monseigneurs. It could even be an opera, in disguise – Rigged-a-letto.

    This is certainly like The New Math of marriage, where, to paraphrase Tom Lehrer, the important thing is to understand what you are doing rather than to get the right answer.

    This is comedy gold, I tell ya…

    (If it weren’t so darn a matter of life and death, that is).

    The Chicken

  42. oldcanon2257 says:

    The Masked Chicken says:

    I can’t decide if this Synod is actually the undiscovered season 8 of Breaking Bad, the Sopranos, or You Bet Your Life (with a touch of Divorce Court and My So-called Life thrown in for seasoning).

    Actually, my Chicken Friend, with the sheer amount of staging, rigging, scheming, tricking, manipulating, orchestrating, factionalizing, backstabbing, character assassinating, truth suppressing, spinning, propagandizing, intrigues, unholy alliances, shadow entities, shadow activities, disinformation, misinformation, half-truth, etc., I would say that the show to which this synod most resembles is probably “The Shield” (used to be on FX, with Michael Chiklis). The theme song for that show was titled “Just Another Day”, aptly applicable to this synod too.

    Our Holy Mother Church is the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church. The enemies within are vying for the destruction of those 4 marks. Whoever (probably the Kasperite Germans and their allies in the Western church) suggested the regionalized and localized “solutions” to these perceived so-called “pastoral issues” (whatever the issues they might imagine them to be) are trying to destroy the catholicity/universality of the Church and decentralize her into a loose confederation of a bunch of local corporation-type entities, each would be run by a bunch of moral relativists of their choosing. Ironically their real intention is to use a false notion of collegiality (which is nothing more than a cheap imitation of imperfect political forms of government in the secular world) to take away the local ordinary’s authority, then impose their ideology on all the particular Churches. “Brave New (Ecclesiastical) World”, anybody? Where there are no moral repercussions and the concepts of parents / families are considered disgusting.

    And the Sala Stampa della Santa Sede (the Holy See Press Office) these days reminds me not only of the Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” but also of Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, Saddam Hussein’s last Iraqi Information Minister whose briefings were so both shamelessly spinned (to support total state censorship) and ridiculously comical at the same time (to those people who knew some facts).

    As Father Z is fond to say:

    Our Lord promised that Hell would not prevail against the Church. He did NOT promise that Hell would not prevail over the Church where you live.

    to which I add: And that includes Rome.

  43. Son of Trypho says:

    The major problem is that these progressives have the (not entirely unrealistic) expectation that neo-conservatives (not the traditionalists who they absolutely abhor) will still turn up and support the Church irrespective of whatever they come up with and expound. They take the faithful for granted and play upon their piety for their own personal benefit.

  44. oldcanon2257 says:

    pseudomodo says:

    What has changed now in 2015 is that the CDF will not have to do what was done in the golden age of the Holy Inquisition. They will not have spend precious resources and manpower to investigate and inquire into whether some bishop or priest or theologian or layperson is a heretic or not.

    The only problem is that the CDF is increasingly being sidelined under this pontificate. And their power seems to diminish greatly after their powerful then-Prefect Cardinal Ratzinger left the Congregation in 2005 after running it for 24 years straight.

    I would not be surprised if this successor of Saint Peter decides at some point during his reign that he would have no need for the CDF and decide to abolish the Holy Office altogether by merging it into some other congregation. The duties of the CDF are to judge (mostly published works) to ensure they’re doctrinally sound, that they’re free from doctrinal errors. In other words the CDF act as the doctrinal watchdog (and I mean that in the most respectful sense) guarding orthodoxy for Holy Mother Church. But, “Who am I to judge?”

    Nothing to do with the CDF, but I miss those old days when Pope Saint John Paul II publicly visibly admonished (gesturing with his finger at) the liberation theology leftist (Marxist, Sandinista) Nicaraguan priest Ernesto Cardenal right on the airport tarmac. One of the good memorable things JPII did to prevent secular politics from creeping in, but those disobedient clerics ignored him anyway.

  45. MikeM says:

    I got Fr. Z’s gold star of the day?!?! Nice!

    It kind of validates everything!

    But seriously, I have secretly wanted one of those for years.