for centuries. Faithful Catholics somehow survived evil prelates like Cardinal Gibbons and Archbishop Ireland, and they will certainly survive Kasper and his lackies.
UPDATE: 26 Oct 11:00 AM ROME (CET)
From a different friend who is a canonist. I’ll leave his name out of this for now:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2015/10/what-did-the-synod-really-say-some-analysis-of-the-final-report/What Did The Synod Really Say? Some analysis of the Final Report.“[IF] If the Pope decides to publish this section of the Final Report in whatever document he issues, and if he, too, leaves out that section of FC 84 that bars civilly divorced and remarried from Communion, then this section will become magisterial teaching. [Get it?] Will that mean that the civilly divorced and remarried can be admitted to Holy Communion without promising to live “as brother and sister”? In my view, …without the benefit of much time for reflection, it could very well mean that. IN OTHER WORDS the Kasper Proposal has come into the Final Report through the back door.”Concedo: you could give a Kasperian interpretation of this document.Distinguo: a Kasperian interpretation of this document does not mean that the document itself supports the Kasper Proposal.Of course Cardinal Kasper also interprets the Scriptures in an “interesting” way to support his thesis.That does not mean that Scriptures support the Kasper Proposal.And a Kasperian interpretation of this document cannot become a “Magisterial” teaching when the Kasper Proposal is clearly not guided by the Holy Spirit – because1. It would be in contradiction to the Teaching of Christ on the Indissolubility of Marriage.2. It would be in contradiction to the Teaching of the Council of Trent on the Indissolubility of Marriage.3. It would be in contradiction to the Teaching of St John Paul II on the Indissolubility of Marriage.4. It would be in contradiction to Sacred Tradition on the Indissolubility of Marriage.The Pope cannot make a Magisterial declaration that is clearly false. He cannot solemnly define that 1 + 1 + 3. But that is what he is trying to do. It is totally illogical and crazy.He would be very unwise to plunge half the Church into schism.I think even he realises this – which is why he threw his toys out of the pram again the other day.Hopefully that the letter of the 13 Cardinals will have given him a wake-up call.If Pope Francis does issue false doctrine, please God the next Pope will revoke the false teaching.I think that the whole of this document needs a Hermeneutic of Continuity – especially as it claims to be building on the Magisterium of Vatican II, Paul VI, John Paul II & Benedict XVI.And furthermore in Chapter II the second section is entitled “Indissolubilita e fecondita dell’unione sponsale” begins “I’irrevocabile fedelta di Dio all’alleanza e il fondamento dell’indisolubilita del matrimonio.” (48)A pity Ed Peters was not part of the Synod to introduce some logic. [Amen.]
https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/lets-understand-whats-at-stake/
And Father Ray Blake admires Cardinal Pell:
To my mind the only question is: Can and ought God be expected to bear this present state of affairs?
ReplyDeleteexactly. I truly don't see how we 'won' anything on this. It is a further compromise with error and evil. They needed to walk out and finally force the confrontation. To stay and actually 'vote on' doctrine was objective mortal sin; they are tasked solely with defending it! They gave evil and error credibility by their continued presence and discussion on points that are not up for discussion. They have all become protestant bishops and clerical Chamberlains, bartering peace at any price. It's a false, deadly, rotting, stinking false peace, and until the boil is burst this will only get worse and worse, with more souls lost for eternity....but then again, the eternal salvation of souls doesn't appear to be the mission of the Catholic Church any longer; it's all about making people feel 'included', 'welcome' and comfortable in their sin (especially the sexual ones...the very ones Our Lady said send more souls to hell than any other). Francis and his minions would appear to be putting the penultimate touches on the earthly utopia of man that was begun centuries ago.
DeleteI see nothing, NOTHING good in this outcome. The bad paragraphs are extremely bad, and open the door wide. They should have walked out....instead, their names, their souls are forever attached to the cowardice that this decisive moment was. They could have been the stone wall....they were the weak gate.
"There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" Encyclical on Unity of the Church by Pope Leo XIII, 1896
They should have walked out.
This tremendous confusion and disorientation occasioned by Bergolio's ¡Vaya lío! theology and governance is frightening at best. Such dissembling, Jesuitical mental reservations, half-truths and the like are creating a Tower of Babel within the Church.
DeleteSo different from Our Lord's counsel:
"Let your word be Yes for Yes, and No for No; whatever goes beyond this, comes of evil." Matthew 5:37
Liam, after berGOGlio signs on the dotted line of whatever post synod document is no doubt coming, then I suspect we will all see visible signs of God's disapproval.
DeleteCould you elaborate on how Cardinal Gibbons and Archbishop Ireland were evil? Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThey were both Americanists in the worst sense of the word.
DeleteI seem to recall that Gibbons somehow slandered his fellow anti-war American bishops during the Spanish-American War or WWI. If WWI then the slandering was a slap in the face to the Pope.
DeletePope Francis stated at the beginning of his papacy that he was a great advocate of the goals of John 23rd..
ReplyDelete"...I think that the whole of this document needs a Hermeneutic of Continuity – especially as it claims to be building on the Magisterium of Vatican II, Paul VI, John Paul II & Benedict XVI....."
ReplyDeleteIndeed, a "hermeneutic" of rampant indifferentist ecumenism; relativist interconfessionalism and flat-lining abusive feminised protestant liturgy. A continuity of 50 years which stretches a mere two generations. Who does this phoney priest think he's kidding?