I’ve been, as much as possible ignoring the Synod’s (“walking together”) document. First, I’ve wanted a pleasant day. Was the Synod really about producing a document? Or was it about creating smokescreens and providing cover for the placement of poison pills and landmines?
25000 words.
The document, with the voting tallies for the paragraphs, is HERE in Italian only. Gosh, I’ll bet that was helpful for the non-Italians. Let’s rush through voting on paragraph after paragraph – there are, after all, only 167 – how long could that take? what could go wrong? – in a language that not everyone is able to grasp in its subtleties. And, as the old phrase goes, “The Devil speaks Italian”.
My friend Fr. De Souza wrote:
The inability or unwillingness of the synod secretariat to provide translations of texts — despite repeated requests from the English-speaking bishops at least — was a point of friction. Multiple sources said that Cardinal Lorenzo Baldiserri, [Sssssssssssss] secretary general of the synod, was so annoyed during one meeting about requests for translations that he stormed out of the room, threatening to run the next synod entirely in Latin.
As if he were competent to do so.
Notice how this prelate derides every Catholic indirectly by deriding Latin, your patrimony.
Remember, the Devil also always tells you what he is doing.
Abandon Latin, and this, folks is what we get: Babel. The Synod is a sort of “bearded Spock Pentecost”, where everyone who ought to understand each other, are suddenly made unable to. But without the cooler clothes.
Here are a couple paragraphs that pooped out… ooooops …popped out at me. My o key stuck. Notice the number. By this point, the members’ brains are oozing out of their noses.
146. The Synod hopes that in the Church Offices and organisms for digital culture and evangelization are established at appropriate levels, which, with the indispensable contribution of young people, promote ecclesial action and reflection in that environment. Among their functions, apart from promoting the exchange and diffusion of good practices at the personal and the communal level, and to develop adequate tools for digital education and evangelization, they could also manage systems of certification of Catholic sites, to counteract the spread of fake news about the Church, or to seek ways to persuade public authorities to promote ever more stringent political positions and tools for the protection of minors on the web.
Certify Catholic sites? BWAHHHHAHAHAH!
Yeah, that’ll happen. And guess who would be in charge of something like that.
If they want to know the meaning of total, unrestricted and asymetrical warfare just try that. They won’t know what hit them.
In par. 150 – again, now the voting members’ brains are leaking out their elbows – we get the SEX landmine. Trans. Lifesite. VOTE: NO 65. 248 total.
150. There are questions concerning the body, affectivity and sexuality which require a deepened anthropological, theological and pastoral elaboration, [Oh… yes. We are so profound. We will study more and than have “pastoral elaborations!”] to be carried out in the most appropriate ways and at the most appropriate levels, [Which are…..?] from the local to the universal. [AH! THAT cleared that up.] Among these, those relating in particular to the difference and harmony between male and female identity [Wait for iiiiiiit….] and to sexual inclinations emerge. [There it is.] In this regard the Synod reaffirms that God loves every person and so does the Church, renewing its commitment against all discrimination and violence on a sexual basis. It also reaffirms the decisive anthropological relevance of the difference and reciprocity between man and woman and considers it reductive to define the identity of persons solely on the basis of their “sexual orientation” (CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF FAITH, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, October 1, 1986, no. 16). [Do you feel a “but” coming? Sorry, bad image. Do you sense a hedge down the line?]
In many Christian communities there are already paths of accompaniment in the faith of homosexual persons: the Synod recommends that these paths be encouraged. In these paths people are helped to understand their own [personal] history; to adhere freely and responsibly to their own baptismal call; to recognize the desire to belong to and contribute to the life of the community; [What does that mean?] and to discern the best ways of achieving it. In this way we help every young person, no one excluded, to integrate the sexual dimension more and more into their personality, [leave it to a committee to produce word salad] growing in the quality of relationships and walking towards [“walking together”!] the gift of self.
The problem is, early in the document, we read that this must be read in conjunction with the awful Instrumentum Laboris which had all the “gay” stuff, you know, the LGBTQSJ stuff.
To give you an idea of how shallow, how bereft of value this document is, liturgy was lumped together with sport. Now, don’t get me wrong. There are other mentions of liturgy, especially with the word “accompagnare”.
A form of the word “accompagnare”, a brilliant example of an Italian word that means everything and nothing, sort of like the vaguely comforting, “I’m there for you”, appears 117 times in the document.
The word “anime”, souls, as in “salvation of souls” or “Give me souls and keep the rest!” appears ZERO times.
I thought, “No, it must be there. Maybe they said, “salus animarum”. Nada. Nope. Not there. “Salvazione”. ZERO. “Redenzione” and “Santificazione” 1 each.
25000 words.
Friends, I don’t know what’s next.
On the other hand, celebrated Mass this morning for the traditional Feast of Christ The King. I had a great lunch with friends. I went back to church and heard the Act of Consecration. Now I’m having a quiet supper of good wine, pasta, veg and cheeses.
Act of Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus
Most Sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thine altar. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but to be more surely united to Thee, behold each one of us freely consecrates ourselves today to Thy Most Sacred Heart.
Many indeed have never known Thee; Many too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy Sacred Heart. Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful children, who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children, who have abandoned Thee; Grant that they may quickly return to their Father’s house lest they die of wretchedness and hunger.
Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and unity of faith, so that there may be but one flock and one Shepherd.
Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of the race, once Thy chosen people: of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life.
Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry; praise to the Divine Heart that wrought our salvation; To it be glory and honor forever. R. Amen.
Loading ...
Undoubtedly our new alliance with Chinese Communism will facilitate the development of systems of certification of Catholic sites.
Acthtung baby.
Oh, that’s Geman.
At least the refusal to provide translations to voting members establishes the illegitimacy of this synod’s outcome. How can whatever comes of this be legitimate if members are either voting for things they don’t understand, or are prevented from voting at all because they don’t understand?
You can’t have people voting on something they don’t understand. If I were trying a case, and somebody who doesn’t speak any English makes it onto my jury, and this fact doesn’t emerge until after the jury is sworn, the whole thing would need to end in a mistrial. And if the court let the trial go forward anyway, that would be reversible error.
Just what I was thinking, Benedict Joseph. Of course, that would make it easier for real Catholics to find one another.
A blessed birthday to you, Father. (And from the sound of it, you had one.)
This reminds me of a video I saw some time ago in which an Evangelical clergyman said that he would never think of becoming a Catholic, because it is difficult enough to be in control of what is in the Bible, but all the documents that the Church keeps putting out would simply be overwhelming. He could never be in command of them.
I’ll admit to being sympathetic.
In the time of St. John Paul II, a priest mentioned to me that this was the first pope who could write faster than he, the priest, could read.
So, what’s another 25,000 words?
Perhaps the Lord is permitting this unending inundation of words so that we will give it all up, go to the adoration chapel and pray. Surely the saints would have said that a fervent Hail Mary said for our youth weighs more in their favor than the entire wordy, spiritually empty synod.
So now Italian is the de jure language of the Church as well as de facto?
Of course, we need clear teaching and there are many, many things that need to be addressed, but at this point we need miracles, not words. It’s been a while, hasn’t it, since we had a spectacular conversion? We need one. President Trump comes to mind, of course. If only Portland would make like Nineveh and repent. That would be helpful. But yet another document? Not so much.
Yeah, based on the English translation excerpts that I read and the account of its length and voting process, I concluded that this final document is a joke. A monstrous bureaucratic verbosity of the sort that ineffectual administrators like to produce because it gives the illusion of accomplishment and work. What a waste of time. Who will be the first courageous bishop to decry this document as vacuous? Christ founded the Church to do this? I don’t think so.
Ambiguous language just waiting to be exploited later (i.e., timebombs). Sounds vaguely familiar of what happened at a little bigger assembly of bishops in Rome circa 1960s. I for one had the privilege of the Mass of All Ages this morning followed by the litany of the Sacred Heart, consecration to the same, and Benediction. Christus vincit, regnat, imperat: ab omni malo plemem suam defendat.
Keep the Faith!
And I take it we can assume that under the new apostolic constitution for synods the final document will soon have magisterial authority? Once the pope declares it so. Do you think there is any chance he won’t?
Does “We’ve got to pass the bill to see what’s in it” ring a bell? This is what this SINodd is doing. Also, do they think they can control all the sites on the internet?? Good Luck! You guys couldn’t even stop Communion in the hand when it was starting…
I am more convinced than ever that all Catholics — clerics in particular — need to learn to read Italian well and to understand at least enough of it to know when a “translation” of a comment is fictitious. It’s a matter of self-defense now. This is sad. I started studying it in 2013 after seeing plainly that we were being lied to regarding certain off-the-cuff comments. This whole business of refusing translations in a Synod, of all places, makes me sick. During this pontificate, Italian and Spanish are well worth studying.
By the way … “A plenary indulgence is granted to the faithful who on the solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe, publicly recite the act of dedication of the human race to Christ the King
(Iesu dulcissime, Redemptor); a partial indulgence is granted for its use in other circumstances”.
From here.
I assume though that the plenary indulgence above is only granted on November 25 the date of the Feast in the new calendar.
If they were to run the next Synod in Latin, it might inspire some more of the English-speaking bishops to ensure that their seminaries adhere to canon 249.
“The word “anime”, souls, as in “salvation of souls” or “Give me souls and keep the rest!” appears ZERO times.”
That is because they wrongly believe in the heresy that everyone is saved already; as they wrote in Amoris: “No one can be condemned forever, that is contrary to the Gospel!”
Instead of talking about the fact that one can think (presume) one is going to heaven but may instead end up in hell, they imply that everyone goes to heaven. They then falsify and apparently re-name Jesus Himself. They re-name Jesus (and God) to be “Encounter”.
Hence, the Jesuit said after the synod, “Faith has to do with encounter, not theory. In encounter, Jesus passes by; in encounter, the heart of the Church beats. Then, not our preaching, but our witness of life will prove effective”.
Not that it really matters (because these people will push forward with their gravely evil pro-LGBT agenda whether it is written in a synod document or not) here is another major red flag in paragraph 150:
“There are questions concerning the body, affectivity and sexuality which require a deepened anthropological, theological and pastoral elaboration, to be carried out in the most appropriate ways and at the most appropriate levels, from the local to the universal. Among these, those relating in particular to the difference and harmony between male and female identity and to sexual inclinations emerge.”
Among the many problematic words/statements/nonsensical combinations of letters in that paragraph, the word “identity” is also problematic.
“Deepened…anthropological…elaboration…carried out…[at the local level]”… in regards to male and female “identity”….
Just like Amoris Laetitia, the document is actually not ambiguous; instead, it is clear that they are pushing/promoting/supporting the pro-LGBT agenda. They are also clearly attempting to divide God’s Church so that a future Pope cannot attempt to correct the evils that they are promoting at the present time.
Not many people noticed, but one of the “youth” that attended the synod and was publicized was the transgender looking female “priestess” from the “Czechoslovak Hussite Church”.
And then their was the “dance” and the “light show” at the end of the synod. And Pope Francis’ ambiguous rainbow cross and stang. One could go on for a while but there is no need to.
Pingback: Synod of Doom — Special Insanity & Doom Update – William M. Briggs
The breadth of language regarding sexuality is stunning and even worse than LGBTQSJ because it is unlimited in its scope speaking of “male and female identity” and sexual inclinations”. Worse – so much worse – it covers the entire darn alphabet and – it can be read as giving cover for child molestors!
Perhaps I am mistaken but the use of the term “homosexual persons” in an official document of the Catholic Church is a novelty, and a deviation from Catholic truth. We believe, I believe, that there are homosexual ACTS, but not homosexual PERSONS. So doctrine has in fact been changed implicitly if not explicitly in one swell foop. It’s no longer a case of “same sex attraction,” it’s a case of “how God made you.”
I agree with Eric, this document, Like most others that have been generated during this Pontificate is deliberately ambiguous and reeks of relativism.
This section
“In these paths people are helped to understand their own [personal] history; to adhere freely and responsibly to their own baptismal call; to recognize the desire to belong to and contribute to the life of the community; [What does that mean?] and to discern the best ways of achieving it”
1. Their journey is personal and we cannot intrude on it by calling anything they feel is right for them wrong.
2. They need to adheir to their baptismal call. Again generated internally. Theirs not God’s for them.
3. They can only be a part of the community if they are wholly accepted as they are. And the community cannot ask them to be something they are not.
4. It is up to them, and only them, to discern how to best be part of the community. It is relative for each person.
This might have been partly written by parishioners of “St. Dowhateveryouplease catholic Community”.
I was very concerned about the use of the phrase “homnosexual person” to descxribe people who have hoomosexual urges or inclinations. Many such people have or had heterosexual urges or inclinations as well, so using “homosexual” to modify “person” is inaccurate.
It implies that the person was made homosexual and is homosexual, a dangerous change from what the Church believes.
We may have won the battle not to inlude LGBTQ but lost a more important battle.
Pope Francis is using a rare technique, plagiarized from the Nancy Pelosi text on getting documents passed that would otherwise not have been passed. See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU
LGBTQSJ <- SJ … LOL!!
This pontificate has strengthened my resolve to prepare my children for spiritual battle. I'm thankful that I can homeschool. I'm learning the Baltimore Catechism right along with my children …. because my CCD classes were all about how much Jesus loves me. Yeah, thanks Church for not teaching me about mortal and venial sin or virtues.
This focus on the homosexual person seems very unfair to larcenous persons, adulterous persons, murderous persons, possessed persons, nymphomaniacal persons and so forth. Where is our inclusivity? Have we no heart? It seems very judgmental.
Or, seriously, could it be that the synod is making a rookie mistake in identifying persons made in the image and likeness of God with their proclivity to a particular sin?
“In many Christian communities there are already paths of accompaniment in the faith of homosexual persons: the Synod recommends that these paths be encouraged.”
Oh, great. Now we are supposed to copy programs of Protestants who have tossed out Christian sexual morality and encourage those with homosexual inclinations to engage in sinful behavior rather than live lives of holy chastity.
“Certify Catholic sites? BWAHHHHAHAHAH!
Yeah, that’ll happen. And guess who would be in charge of something like that.”
Is it the notion of some sort of central/remote authority attempting to police such things instead of a bishop in his own territory that’s so disturbing?
Other than that, how is it different from, say… a bishop wanting a free-wheeling newspaper in his territory to stop calling itself Catholic?