A “binding” German synod… What could possibly go wrong?

The German Church continues its imitation of the Body of Christ’s theological and disciplinary Necrotizing fascitis, more commonly known as “flesh-eating disease”.

From the Catholic Herald comes news about a synod which the Germans want to hold.

What could possibly go wrong?

German bishops announce ‘synodal process’ on celibacy, sexual morality

The German bishops will discuss priestly celibacy and sexual morality, leading to an as yet undetermined ‘binding’ outcome

Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich and Freising has announced that the Catholic Church in Germany is embarking on a “binding synodal process” to tackle what he says are the three key issues arising from the clerical abuse crisis: priestly celibacy, the Church’s teaching on sexual morality, and a reduction of clerical power.

Speaking at the conclusion of the plenary session of the German bishops’ conference on Thursday, Marx told reporters that the bishops had unanimously decided these three topics would be subject to a process of “synodal progression” that could lead to a binding, but as yet undetermined, outcome.

“The Church needs synodal progress,” the president of the German bishops’ conference asserted. “Pope Francis encourages this.”  [Right.  Put it on him.  Maybe he does, but these guys don’t need any encouraging.  They do whatever they want anyway.]

The German bishops held their plenary session in the German town of Lingen from March 11 to 14.

[NB] Addressing journalists on the final day, Marx said the Church’s teaching on sexual morality has yet to account for significant recent discoveries from theology and the humanities. Also, he said, the significance of sexuality to personhood has not yet received sufficient attention from the Church.  [Get that?  They’ll drag in all sorts of B as in B S as in S from “experts” in various pseudo-sciences and obtain a pre-determined conclusion.]

Bishops “feel we often are unable to speak on questions of present-day sexual behavior,” Marx said. [That’s because you are COWARDS who don’t want to give up your Church-Tax money.]

The cardinal also said that the German bishops appreciate priestly celibacy as an “expression of the religious bond to God” and do not simply want to give up on it. [Here it comes.] But to what extent celibacy should always be an element of priestly witness is a question “we will determine” through the “synodal process,” Marx told the press.  [It’s always nuance this and nuance that.  They sound so smart!]

Furthermore, Marx said clerical abuse of power constitutes a betrayal of the trust of people in need of stability and religious orientation. Therefore, the “synodal process” would be charged with identifying what measures must be taken to achieve “the necessary reduction of [clerical] power.”  [Anything to avoid the real problem: queer bishops and priests and seminaries dominated by their vile influence.]

The establishment of ecclesiastical administrative courts is one such step for which the bishops will in the near future draft a proposal.

As a first step on the proposed synodal path, Marx announced that the German bishops have decided to set up three preparatory working groups. The working group on “clerical power” is headed by Bishop Karl-Heinz Wiesemann of Speyer, the working group on “sexual morality” will be headed by Bishop Franz-Josef Bode of Osnabrück. [THAT guy!] The working group on “the priest’s way of life,” which will focus on celibacy, will be moderated by Bishop Felix Genn of Münster.

Interim reports are expected from all three by September 13.

Referring to the German bishops’ four year “Würzburg Synod” from 1971 to 1975, which was charged with an implementation of the decisions of the Second Vatican Council, Marx affirmed that the Church in Germany is “not starting at zero” in a synodal process, given the Würzburg experience, and various consultation processes undertaken by the German bishops in recent years.

The “synodal process” will involve consultations with the “Central Committee of German Catholics,” a lay organization that closely cooperates with the bishops’ conference, and will draw on outside experts.

As I said.  What could possibly go wrong?

Pray for the poor Catholics of Germany.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, Pò sì jiù, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. AndyMo says:

    When a German bishop says, “the significance of sexuality to personhood has not yet received sufficient attention from the Church,” what I really hear is:

    “We are already sexually active bishops and are trying to change the teaching to justify our own immorality.” They should be investigated.

  2. TonyO says:

    Marx said the Church’s teaching on sexual morality has yet to account for significant recent discoveries from theology and the humanities.

    Because, you know, sex wasn’t really “discovered” until the 20th century. It’s this new thing. Christ didn’t really “get” the whole sex thing. Nor St. Paul, and certainly not St. Augustine. The Greeks, on the other hand, with their tolerance of older men “leading” (read: abusing) younger men, and Spartan fostering of homosexuality, they had the beginnings of some insight.

    Also, he said, the significance of sexuality to personhood has not yet received sufficient attention from the Church.

    Take, for example, the discovery from the 1990’s that a person’s sexual “orientation” is “innate” and present from birth, and cannot be altered.

    Oh, wait, that’s the OLD “new discovery”. The NEW knowledge is that sexual orientation, along with gender and gender expression, are subject to personal choice and may be revised at will. No longer must a person live with their past assertions about their orientation or gender as if they fixed everything in stone: it’s all fluid, y’know?

    It galls me to see supposedly intelligent men, those who should have been picked for being the BEST among us, falling prey to claptrap, fake “science”, and media memes. (That’s for the ones that are well-meaning but just befuddled. For the wolves in bishop’s zucchetto, we (and they) should shake in terror at the coming punishment.) How is it that the men picked to lead the Church are not well-enough educated to (a) already have a sure and firm sense of the truth of personhood and sexuality, and (b) have enough intellectual maturity to stand up against the blowing winds of fads and nonsense? The answer is, must be, that the people in charge of the process of picking bishops HAVE NOT been trying to choose the best among us, they are TRYING to get weak-minded, weak-willed, fawning imitators and lackeys.

    As for the synod’s results being “binding”: we have seen for 70 years now how this works: when the destructovators get their way, the orders go out with a fascist boot ready to stomp on the neck of those who might not want to comply. When the orthodox and holy prelates make the rules, the rules are “really more like guidelines”, and are to be ignored into oblivion. I suggest that if Germany retains any ordinaries with sense, they either form a large enough bloc beforehand to stop any definite results coming out as binding, or they (en bloc) refuse to participate at the outset and announce at the outset that no results will be binding on them, period. Then, for good measure, when results of the Synod are announced, they hold a public media event in which they denounce the Synod and declare the results are not binding on ANYONE and certainly not for their own dioceses. (Read the history of heretic synods during the Arian crisis for examples of same.) This may require that they grow a pair. Better that, than falling in with Athanasius’s comment on skulls, paving, etc.

  3. Bellarmino Vianney says:

    “Therefore, the ‘synodal process’ would be charged with identifying what measures must be taken to achieve ‘the necessary reduction of [clerical] power.’ [Anything to avoid the real problem: queer bishops and priests and seminaries dominated by their vile influence.]”

    Fr. Z – your comment is only partially accurate. [My comment is exactly accurate… and telegraphic.] The problem is also false Christian “churches”, anti-Catholic, pseudo-religious political sects, and several other entities that are anti-Catholic. These entities are all pro-“gay” (even if they claim otherwise) and are trying to harm God’s Church through promoting heresies like “synodalism”.

    And then you also have the false Catholic laity that are pro-“gay”, pro-liberal, etc. that are trying to influence the destruction of God’s Church, even their intentions are “good”. They are not.

    Many people will be surprised when they stand before God to see just how many false “Catholics” there are out there – up to and including in the “very conservative” “Traditionalist” “Catholic” media.

    This commentator has mentioned before: the U.S. government has infiltrated several entities, including “religious” entities in the past. Why wouldn’t they infiltrate the “Traditionalist” “Catholic” media? That would have been one of there first targets many years ago.

    Anyway, the problem is indeed homosexual bishops, priests, seminaries, etc., but it is also the international Gaystapo in general and those allied with the Gaystapo through having a common enemy, which is God’s Church.

  4. dans0622 says:

    I thought for sure that the title of the post was “A Blinding German Synod…” Could be an apt description, in more ways than one.

  5. monstrance says:

    The fact that these German Shepherds are highly educated is irrelevant, and probably a detriment.
    My own mother barely possesses a 9th Grade education, but she is more in tuned with the will of God than these prelates will ever live to be.

  6. Sawyer says:

    What they seem to be describing isn’t a synod but a German episcopal conference. Decisions made by episcopal conferences aren’t authoritative nor binding unless 100% of the conference’s bishops approve, and the confirmation of the Holy See is still required. I think it’s all laid out in “Apostolos Suos.” Besides, nothing stated by any bishop, conference, Pope or council can be authoritative or binding if it contradicts Catholic Faith, and what they appear to want to promote would contradict Catholic Faith.

  7. eamonob says:

    I could get behind that synod if it was headed by Müller and Brandmüller. They could just present the other bishops with copies of Humanae Vitae and Theology of the Body. Synod closed.

  8. Hidden One says:

    Cardinal Mueller would make an excellent papal legate to this synod.

  9. Matt Robare says:

    As in “One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them/ One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them”?

  10. DeGaulle says:

    Threats of a ‘synod’ being binding are perfect examples of clericalism in action.

  11. Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda says:

    Schism in action.

  12. MrsAnchor says:

    Another pre determined conclusion and use it for the Pan Amazon get together among other items they’re seeking to change … all seemless collusion

    Looks like they’ll be self defeating and the Laity will get Red Pilled once again. Not bad for Church Militant (high five)

  13. RJBennett says:

    I’m an American, a faithful Catholic, and I’ve lived in Germany for nearly thirty years. Maybe I’m fooling myself, but I really think that there’s hardly any need to worry about Cardinal Marx and his “binding synodal process.” The good cardinal’s Vatican II Church is disappearing in Germany, as it has all but disappeared in the nearby Netherlands and Belgium. And as it disappears, its lavish church-tax-support will disappear along with it (which is what Marx is really afraid of).

    And what will replace the Marx-Church? The traditionalist Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), approved by the Vatican and receiving no church-tax-support, is thriving here in the Archdiocese of Cologne, and elsewhere in the country.

Comments are closed.