 |
| Bishops' Synod: Press Conference of Cardinal Baldisseri and Speaker Lombardi |
(Rome) Behind the walls of the Vatican there is currently an uphill struggle. Pope Francis especially to criticism that there would be little transparency in the forthcoming Synod of Bishops. To allay fears appropriate that were the Pope several times, argued vociferously most recently by some cardinals after the bad experiences of the previous year in Santa Marta, today announced the establishment of a transparency commission was announced. It's an unusual step that reveals the tense atmosphere on all sides.
A ten-member commission whose spokesman for the Synod will be Cardinal Peter Erdo from Hungary, will be "to ensure full transparency" said Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the Secretary General of the Synod of Bishops today in Rome. The Commission will bring together representatives from all five continents. The Commission's appointment is seen as confirmation of the criticism which was put forward last year by cardinals like Raymond Burke and Gerhard Müller,that the Holy See wished to validate a unilateral information policy in a certain direction. What he meant was the direction set by Cardinal Walter Kasper.
Vatican spokesman: Synod Fathers will have no restrictions in dealing with media
"A final text is desired that will be the outcome of the considerations and interventions of various Synod Fathers", said Cardinal Baldisseri that this did not specify whether this is to be a final document of the Synod or a Post-Synodal Letter of the Pope. In recent days, it was reported by well knowns such as Vatcanist Sandro Magister and Edward Pentin, that there would be no final report of the Synod. The reason for this is, so the supposition, is that the pope did not wish to be bound by it.
The criticism for lack of transparency is also being responded to by Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi SJ, who said at today's press conference, that there were no restrictions on the synod in dealing with journalists. The Synod Fathers could talk "responsibly" with media representatives. The Vatican spokesman did not disclose whether the 2014 practice information blackout on the interventions at the synod, is to be repealed.
Ceremony "50 Years of the Synod of Bishops" the Vatican - Pope appoints Cardinal Schönborn to guest speaker
This coming Sunday, the second and final part of the Synod of Bishops on the family begins. Nearly 300 bishops and 120 experts will discuss three weeks in the presence of Pope Francis on Marriage and Family. Controversial topics are the proposal of Cardinal Walter Kasper to allow divorced and remarried to the sacraments under conditions, and the proposal of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia to recognize homosexuality factually.
The prelude just before the start of the Synod will be a prayer vigil on Saturday from 6 O'clock on St. Peter's Square.
On October 17th, a ceremony will be held around the Synod, the Synod of Bishops celebrated 50 years as a Jubilee. The institution of the Synod of Bishops was introduced as an independent, advisory body of the world church at the end of the Second Vatican Council by Pope Paul VI. Pope Francis and the Synod Fathers will participate in the ceremony. For the main speaker, the Pope appointed the Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, a declared Kasperian.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Mil
Image: Mil
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotail.com
Link to Katholisches...
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG
27 comments:
So who is on this "transparency commission"? Can they not be transparent with even that?
It's like watching a soap opera. It's even more exciting than a soap opera!! The Roman Catholic Church is a mess, and this is not an exaggeration. It is truly a mess. This is the consequence of deciding to please the world instead of doing Jesus' will.
I thought that Francis said after his election that he is going to reduce the bureaucracy, not increase it. Another layer of bureaucracy is going to make this circus more transparent?
A synod with a prearranged conclusion. This nod to sin will create a huge schism, which started with V-2, and has only grown in the 50 years since. Domine, misere nobis. +JMJ+
Msgr. Ghost and Cardinal Specter?
What a farcical circus of trying to get sins approved as something holy, there is no holy spirit in this papacy, clearly god,s blessing is not upon this synod on anything but the family.
This heretical papacy is the final act of the spirit of Vatican 2 show, whose chickens have come to roost. We are seeing history unfold before our eyes in the next 3 weeks, as we approach the 98th anniversary of Fatima.
it can't possibly get worse than this, can it?
When the term 'transparency' comes into play, at least in 'office politics', it tends to mean that those on the lower rungs of the ladder, the minions, are going to be watched 'big-brother like' by management. It's never a two-way street. For me at least, any mention of transparency is a roll-eyes moment.
Perhaps this Transparency Commission will be a good thing. Especially as the 'in your face' control of all information from the previous Synod was on par with anything the Soviets could have pulled off.
I believe the Second Vatican Council should be revisited. Did the Council actually cause this mess? Or was it the doing of hell? The Church is in fact a mess and the Church needs to get to the root of the problem. St. John XXlll along with Cardinal Ottaviani drafted 9 schemas for the Council (very traditional). The Modernist Council Fathers eliminated 8 of those powerful schemas. And now we have this Synod of Bishops trying to decide on whether to change God's laws. This seems to be straight from hell. May the Holy Ghost be with the good Cardinals and Bishops in resisting the gates of hell.
Fernando
Oh God! Save us from Pope Francis!
Pope John XXIII (I can't bring myself to call him Saint John XXIII because he really wasn't), wanted Vatican II to be extremely hardline, orthodox and traditional...basically a reaffirmation of everything of Trent, but with mor emphasis.
Little know to most of the Church, John XXIII was ill when he was elected in 1958...quite ill in fact. He had the first stirrings of the stomach cancer that would eventually kill him. But it was not diagnosed properly in the late 1950's. Unfortunatly, it became extremely serious right when Vatican II was about to open. John XXIII did not have the energy by Fall,1962 to either oust or counter the radicals who were changing the Council to their own design (Suenens in Belgium, the French, the Germans, and even some American Cardinals and Bishops.). John XXIII died actually regretting even thinking of the Council, and wanted the next Pope to close it down.
UNfortunatly, this did not happen. Paul VI, a wimpish Pope, allowed the radicals even more power, and the rest is history.
John Paul II, and even more so Benedict XVI saw the mistakes of Vatican II and wanted to correct them....btu the aged radicals are still too entrenched and in control, and now one of their own, Bergoglio is Pope.
The Church is collapsing even more under Francis. He must go.
I believe that the coming Synod, expecially after the cirsus and fiasco of the gay Monsignor form Poland yesterday, will expose the sinister designs of Francis and his cohorts.....they will be violently opposed in the Synod, and in in the end, either we have a schism,(in which I'd follow people like Burke), or Francis will emerge so defeated that he will be a :lame duck" Pope and either die or resign in a year or two.
The next Pope we get will, guaranteeded after all these scandals, be the total opposite of Francis.
I have already read, that many Cardinals, even those not to conservative, have had enough of Francis.
Damian Malliapalli
There are plenty of stories suggesting there is a great amount of "buyer's remorse" with Francis, but my sense of that is so what. Short of publicly rebuking him as heretical and challenging unity (schism), there's not a lot the Cardinals and Bishops can do. They just have to grin and bear it, essentially.
I do tend to agree, though, that a raucous and embarrassing Synod could render Francis impotent. And I could also imagine a result like that leading him to slink away when he turns 80 next year. However, nothing about Francis and his cohorts suggests they would ever go quietly into the night. If anything, it would probably mean a new batch of Cardinals even more liberal than what we've already seen. He'll just try and stack the deck so someone like Tagle can follow him.
If a new Conclave is called in the next couple of years though, I can easily see the Cardinals swinging wildly back in the other direction from Bergoglio. The rot that has come to light in this papacy may be just enough to get us a Pius XIII. I could easily envision Cardinal Ranjith or some other traditionalist being elect as a direct reaction to Bergoglio. Same goes for Bagnasco, Piacenza, and Sarah. No doubt, Burke is already planning.
All that said, the Cardinals have no one to blame but themselves for this. Even a brief review of Bergoglio's record showed he was a wild eyed progressive. They should have known better.
Interesting.
However there is a question how the secular media would react. Remember, the secular media panned pope Benedict XVI. They mocked him, said he was too old, too conservative, too reactionary. For the modern, progressive, secular West that is.
I don't think of Pope Francis as a bad pope. I think he has good intentins of showing that Catholicism needs to be pastoral. I think that it is good how he reaches out to the destitute, the forgotten - prisoners, the sick etc. I just think he ist 1) too naive - he is not used to the Western secular media making a spin on his off-the-cuff remarks and 2) he projects his Argentinian and Latin American background that is quite ideologically hardline left-social onto the rest of the world. That makes him vulnerable to further misinterpretations in the West - a.ka. "Francis is the new, socially-liberal pope that we all wanted!"
However I do have some serious worries about the effect secular media have on portraying the popes. This will especially get worse in the future. We know how they portrayed BXVI. We know that among the last time's papabili they panned Scola for example. I'm personally hoping for a whether 1) African pope (cardinal Sarah or some nigerian carinals; keep in mind Arinze had some chances in 2005) or 2) pope that is Estern-Carholic (they are more liturgically and dogmatically strong and ready to oppose. Options here are an Indian pope, or a pope from ranks of Maronites/Chaldean-Catholics/Catholic Coptic etc).
Your truly,
A worried catholic from a thoroughly secular European country
Not all the Cardinals Francis has appointed are radical liberals , or like Francis associates, such as Mariadiaga and Tagle.
The new Cardinal from India of the Malankara Rite who was appointed by Francis actually came out against much of Francis agenda, and the liberal bent of the Synod.....and he's a young man.....I don't think he's much past 50.
I think that the next Pope might be someone who Francis has rejected for the red hat. I;n not naming names because I don't want to jinx the very idea, but I would not be surprised if the Cardinals are so disgusted with/after Francis, that they find their own group to old and wiith too many Francis followers that they pick someone that Francis snubbed.
I think the next conclave outcome will be sooner than we think, and the man elected will be a hardliner, fairly young to guarantee the time to clean up the Church and bring back much of tradition, and to bring us back to God. The media might not like him for what he stands for, but he will be such a surprise that he will be newsworthy and a media star for years. Not because of travels, but by his actions to restore the Church. They might be against him....but he'll be all over the news.
Damian Malliapalli
Here's a rather good secular introduction to the Family Synod from AP. It always embarrassing when such a news outlet can summarise Catholic teaching better than the Catholics can. The article nails it.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_REL_VATICAN_FAMILY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-10-04-05-15-57
With regards to Robbie and Anonymous at 10:04 comments, I would say that the Cardinals new exactly what they were doing electing this Pope. Francis will never go quietly or recede into the background after a 'possible' defeat at this Synod. He'll bring things in through the back door, ie, the recent Annulment changes.
"I think he has good intentions of showing that Catholicism needs to be pastoral. I think that it is good how he reaches out to the destitute, the forgotten - prisoners, the sick etc."
The Catholic Church has always been pastoral. We have a direct mandate from God, Jesus Christ, to feed the poor, look after sick, visit the prisoners. It's called the Social Kingship of Christ. And throughout the centuries the people of God have fulfilled this mandate.
The problem today is that 'people' don't want the Kingship. A King implies obedience to him and a Kingship isn't really a democracy. The Church cannot or never will be a democratic institution because Heaven is a Hierarchy and Peter is Caesar on Earth.
The issue is that 'people' do not want the King's edicts pertaining to this Kingship. They've set up a democratic 'Justice and Peace' parliament in lieu of the King's social mandates and are throwing muck on the King's laws.
As far as the media criticising the Papacy is concerned, I couldn't care less. At least if it is criticising the Pope, I then know I have a Catholic Pope.
Someone rejected for a red hat? Maybe Patriarch Francesco Moraglia of Venice? I would definitely cheer that. His coat of arms is like that of Pope St. Pius X. And being so youthful, he would have 20 to 30 years fumigate the Church all over the world.
That said, I would be shocked if the Cardinals chose someone other than a brother Cardinal. In 1958, Cardinal Siri broke his ring slamming it on the table when the suggestion was made that Montini be chosen. Montini was not a Cardinal at the time.
I appreciate your thoughts.
I can't tell you how relieved and glad I am that this wretched Synod has finally started. It's been one helluva year waiting for it. Can't wait for the Bishops and Cardinals to slug it out and defend chastity... finally. Clean house time.
St Philomena, pray for us.
St Thomas More, pray for us.
St John Vianney, pray for us.
Fr Edmund Arrowsmith SJ, pray for us.
Blessed Bernardo Francisco de Hoyos Seña SJ, pray for us.
Let the games begin.
...
Dammit, why does Msgr (recently sacked gay) Charamsa have to look like Face from the A-Team? Honestly, we could do with hiring the A-Team to give a little backing to Cardinal Muller.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MVonyVSQoM
Hey, 'transparency', that's good, right? Just like the Obama administration was going to be the most transparent presidency of all time! I feel better already.
I've already read that many Cardinals, Bishops and priests either working in the Vatican or coming to the Synod are appalled and disgusted by the Polish gay ex-monsignor, ex-professor, ex-Vatican employee and probably ex-priest Charamsa. And by extension, many are disgusted with Francis and company.
That actually is a good thing. The Charasma affair can do nothing but badly hurt the image of Francis and his Vatican...and that's worth applauding.
Damian Malliapalli
I am not getting my daily e-mail from Eponymous Flower.
... as transparent as the smoke of satan
Thanks for that! Are you able to reload it?
I think that you are all dreaming. From Anonymous 6:01 who put forward the wishful urban legend about John XXIII being so traditional that he wanted V2 to affirm Trent and affirm it more strongly, to all of these speculative posts about the next conclave and the Trad knight in shining armor cardinal coming in to be elected and save the day.
It's all in the toilet folks. The rot goes back even farther than V2 and the cancer of the past 50 years has never been in remission, even with the good points of JP2 and B16.
Get comfortable with being a part of a remnant Catholicism while the structures of the institutional Church continue to collapse around us.
Includes the anti-Catholic Baldisseri and Forte who will supervise themselves as they continue their wicked machinations.
First look up on the Internet the 5 schemas discarded by the Modernist Council Fathers of St. John XXlll for Vatican council 2 that have been translated into English (reading them of course). Then decide whether it is an "urban legend". The facts stand right in our faces. If we don't take a good look at them then we have created our own "urban legends" to our own detriment.
Anonymous October 4, 2015 at 4:22 PM, I have decided to do some homework for you. This is what you termed "urban legend"
From the original schemas of St. John XXlll for V2 (which was eliminated by the Modernists).
"On the Christian Moral Order" Paragraph #6
"[The Church] grieves, however, that many people are transgressing the divine law, more from weakness than from wickedness, though rarely without grave guilt. It notes with great horror that errors are being spread everywhere, errors that open the way to perdition and close the gate of salvation. There are those who deny a personal God and so deprive the natural law of its foundation; there are those who, repudiating the mission of Christ, reject the law of the Gospel; there are those who rely only on human principles in explaining the moral order and therefore rob it of its genuine and ultimate obligation and sanction... Their impiety and imprudence reach such a point that they attempt to assault heaven and to remove God himself from their midst. With notorious wickedness and equal foolishness they are not afraid to state that there is no supreme, most wise and provident God distinct from the universe; there are those who maintain that the moral law is subject to changes and evolution even in fundamental matters..."
Doesn't this sound like the Council of Trent? Its not, it is the Vatican Council two called for by St. John XXlll, the Council hijacked by the Modernists. This here was supposed to have been a main topic to be discussed at the Council but as is well known it was eliminated by the modernists as it was a direct condemnation of one of their errors.. Anonymous I ask, "urban legend"?
Some very good comments.
I have to say I have discovered the traditionalist scene just recently ago, maybe two years ago.
This came well as quite a huge SHOCK to me due to the fact that we practically have only NO masses available in my country. We have an EF TL mass once every three months (just started one year ago) in one place and that's it. In Europe we are actually among the lowest ranking countries regarding the presence of EF mass.
Although the NO Masses are pretty reverend (no abominations as those in the US seen seen on Youtube, thank God!), with rosaries being prayed before the Mass, with quite decent and orthodox homilies (although there is an always present "mercy&compassion" bent - but this was long long before Francis), with traditional folk songs being sung plus sometimes good baroque masses (or even Mozart, Bach), and with the congregation following the mass reverently (kneeling, taking its time for silence) there is something lacking; a deeper meaning, deeper bond, deeper bond with tradition, timelessness of the Church.
The catholic media does not cover the fraditionalist scene. The pro-life movement is very strong, there is lots of parish organization, Biblical groups, but well somethng deeper is missing. The cultural layers are all still there but I think that the secularization is taking its toll on the Catholics here. And some things in the mass are irritating me - such as 'the peace sign', eucharistic ministers, taking the host in the hands, cultural caffeteria catholisicm etc.
I have some other important questions:
1.) HOW BIG IS THE TRADITIONALIST MOVEMENT GLOBALLY ACTUALLY?
Wikipedia was I believe giving some info o Church estimates of 1.000.000 FSSP+ICKSP+IBP+FSSPX. Then there were some trads' estimates of 10 million. But in a sea of 1 billion catholics we can see that this is very small. Can that have an effect at all?????
2. WHAT CAN WE EXPECT IN THE FUTURE? It's soon going to be 10 years from the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. The FSSP and ICKSP numbers have been growing quite neatly and will probably even pick up steam but that is still only 15 new ordinations for FSSP per year and, how much - 5 for ICKSP and 2 for IBP annually???????
How can the traditionalist cardinals, bishops and priests turn the things around? There were some estimates that there are around 15-20% of traditionalist cardinals at this year's Synod. How can these people hold any sway back home at their own dioceses?
Plus: some major political Catholic strongholds are crumbling FAST (!!!): Germany and Austria especially, France in the last 15 yrs is pretty bad (with the exception of le Manif pour tous movement), and traditional and highly devotional strongholds such as Spain and Italy also lagging recently quite bad. Some 2-Tier catholic outposts such as the US are also shedding numbers. Africa on the other hand does not have the political and economic power and Latin America is also up for grabs for Pentecostals. Asia has some strong catholics but numbers are relativelly small.
How would you solve the issue globally?
Is the solution more "travelling" cardinals (in positive sense, not 'plane bishops' as Francis called them) - such as bishop Althanasius Schneider? Should some orders go global and mobile with work in the field (as a mobile field hospital - according to Francis): change the Franciscans of the Immaculate or the Transalpine redemptorists from a resident order to a travelling order of preachers? Is the alternative to gain some footholds in Africa - ICKSP plans in Gabon and FSSP plans in Nigeria - and spread from there?
What are your thoughts?
Sincerely yours,
A worried catholic from a thoroughly secular European country
http://argentina-airline-news.blogspot.com/2015/09/fleet-update-was-air-class-727-227f-cx.html?showComment=1444437571637#c7625904930611941084
Post a Comment