Statue of St. Peter in front of St. Peter’s Basilica. / Credit: Vatican Media
National Catholic Register, Oct 2, 2023 / 02:34 am (CNA).
Five cardinals have sent a set of questions to Pope Francis to express their concerns and seek clarification on points of doctrine and discipline ahead of this week’s opening of the Synod on Synodality at the Vatican.
The cardinals said they submitted five questions, called “dubia,” on Aug. 21 requesting clarity on topics relating to doctrinal development, the blessing of same-sex unions, the authority of the Synod on Synodality, women’s ordination, and sacramental absolution.
Dubia are formal questions brought before the pope and the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) aimed at eliciting a “yes” or “no” response, without theological argumentation. The word “dubia” is the plural form of “dubium,” which means “doubt” in Latin. They are typically raised by cardinals or other high-ranking members of the Church and are meant to seek clarification on matters of doctrine or Church teaching.
The dubia were signed by German Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, 94, president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences; American Cardinal Raymond Burke, 75, prefect emeritus of the Apostolic Signatura; Chinese Cardinal Zen Ze-Kiun, 90, bishop emeritus of Hong Kong; Mexican Cardinal Juan Sandoval Íñiguez, 90, archbishop emeritus of Guadalajara; and Guinean Cardinal Robert Sarah, 78, prefect emeritus of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
The same group of senior prelates say they submitted a previous version of the dubia on these topics on July 10 and received a reply from Pope Francis the following day.
But they said that the pope responded in full answers rather than in the customary form of “yes” and “no” replies, which made it necessary to submit a revised request for clarification.
Pope Francis’ responses “have not resolved the doubts we had raised, but have, if anything, deepened them,” they said in a statement to the National Catholic Register, CNA’s partner news outlet. They therefore sent the reformulated dubia on Aug. 21, rephrasing them partly so they would elicit “yes” or “no” replies.
The cardinals declined the Register’s requests to review the pope’s July 11 response, as they say the response was addressed only to them and so not meant for the public.
They say they have not yet received a response to the reformulated dubia sent to the pope on Aug. 21.
The Register sought comment from the Vatican on Sept. 29 and again on Oct. 1 but had not received a response by publication time.
The cardinals explained in a “Notification to Christ’s Faithful” dated Oct. 2 that they decided to submit the dubia “in view of various declarations of highly placed prelates” made in relation to the upcoming synod that have been “openly contrary to the constant doctrine and discipline of the Church.”
Those declarations, they said, “have generated and continue to generate great confusion and the falling into error among the faithful and other persons of goodwill, have manifested our deepest concern to the Roman pontiff.”
The initiative, the cardinals added, was taken in line with canon 212 § 3, which states it is a duty of all the faithful “to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church.”
The practice of issuing dubia has come to the fore during this pontificate. In 2016, Cardinals Burke and Brandmüller along with late Cardinals Carlo Caffarra and Joachim Meisner submitted a set of five dubium to Pope Francis seeking clarification on the interpretation of Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, particularly regarding the admission of divorced and remarried Catholics to the sacraments. They did not receive a direct response to their questions.
In 2021, the DDF issued a “responsa ad dubium” giving a simple “no” to a dubium on whether the Church has “the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex.” That same year, the Dicastery for Divine Worship issued a responsa ad dubia on various questions relating to the implementation of Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis’ motu proprio restricting the Traditional Latin Mass.
Then in January of this year, Jesuit Father James Martin directly sent Pope Francis a set of three dubium seeking clarification of comments the Holy Father had given the Associated Press on the issue of homosexuality. The pope replied to the questions with a handwritten letter two days later.
What both dubia contain
The first dubium (question) concerns development of doctrine and the claim made by some bishops that divine revelation “should be reinterpreted according to the cultural changes of our time and according to the new anthropological vision that these changes promote; or whether divine revelation is binding forever, immutable and therefore not to be contradicted.”
The cardinals said the pope responded July 11 by saying that the Church “can deepen her understanding of the deposit of faith,” which they agreed with, but that the response did “not capture our concern.” They reinstated their concern that many Christians today argue that “cultural and anthropological changes of our time should push the Church to teach the opposite of what it has always taught. This concerns essential, not secondary, questions for our salvation, like the confession of faith, subjective conditions for access to the sacraments, and observance of the moral law,” they said.
They therefore rephrased their dubium to say: “Is it possible for the Church today to teach doctrines contrary to those she has previously taught in matters of faith and morals, whether by the pope ex cathedra, or in the definitions of an Ecumenical Council, or in the ordinary universal magisterium of the bishops dispersed throughout the world (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25)?”
In the second dubium on blessing same-sex unions, they underscored the Church’s teaching based on divine revelation and Scripture that “God created man in his own image, male and female he created them and blessed them, that they might be fruitful” (Gen 1:27-28), and St. Paul’s teaching that to deny sexual difference is the consequence of the denial of the Creator (Rom 1:24-32). They then asked the pope if the Church can deviate from such teaching and accept “as a ‘possible good’ objectively sinful situations, such as same-sex unions, without betraying revealed doctrine?”
The pope responded July 11, the cardinals said, by saying that equating marriage to blessing same-sex couples would give rise to confusion and so should be avoided. But the cardinals said their concern is different, namely “that the blessing of same-sex couples might create confusion in any case, not only in that it might make them seem analogous to marriage, but also in that homosexual acts would be presented practically as a good, or at least as the possible good that God asks of people in their journey toward him.”
They therefore rephrased their dubium to ask if it were possible in “some circumstances” for a priest to bless same-sex unions “thus suggesting that homosexual behavior as such would not be contrary to God’s law and the person’s journey toward God?” Linked to that dubium, they asked if the Church’s teaching continues to be valid that “every sexual act outside of marriage, and in particular homosexual acts, constitutes an objectively grave sin against God’s law, regardless of the circumstances in which it takes place and the intention with which it is carried out.”
Question about synodality
In the third dubium, the cardinals asked whether synodality can be the highest criterion of Church governance without jeopardizing “her constitutive order willed by her Founder,” given that the Synod of Bishops does not represent the college of bishops but is “merely a consultative organ of the pope.” They stressed: “The supreme and full authority of the Church is exercised both by the pope by virtue of his office and by the college of bishops together with its head the Roman pontiff (Lumen Gentium, 22).”
The cardinals said Pope Francis responded by insisting on a “synodal dimension to the Church” that includes all the lay faithful, but the cardinals said they are concerned that “synodality” is being presented as if it “represents the supreme authority of the Church” in communion with the pope. They therefore sought clarity on whether the synod can act as the supreme authority on crucial issues. Their reformulated dubium asked: “Will the Synod of Bishops to be held in Rome, and which includes only a chosen representation of pastors and faithful, exercise, in the doctrinal or pastoral matters on which it will be called to express itself, the supreme authority of the Church, which belongs exclusively to the Roman pontiff and, una cum capite suo, to the college of bishops (cf. can. 336 C.I.C.)?”
Holy Orders and forgiveness
In the fourth dubium, the cardinals addressed statements from some prelates, again “neither corrected nor retracted,” which say that as the “theology of the Church has changed,” so therefore women can be ordained priests. They therefore asked the pope if the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and St. John Paul II’s apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, which “definitively held the impossibility of conferring priestly ordination on women, is still valid.” They also sought clarification on whether or not this teaching “is no longer subject to change nor to the free discussion of pastors or theologians.”
In their reformulated dubium, the cardinals said the pope reiterated that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is to be held definitively and “that it is necessary to understand the priesthood, not in terms of power, but in terms of service, in order to understand correctly Our Lord’s decision to reserve holy orders to men only.” But they took issue with his response that said the question “can still be further explored.”
“We are concerned that some may interpret this statement to mean that the matter has not yet been decided in a definitive manner,” they said, adding that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis belongs to the deposit of faith. Their reformulated dubium therefore comprised: “Could the Church in the future have the faculty to confer priestly ordination on women, thus contradicting that the exclusive reservation of this sacrament to baptized males belongs to the very substance of the sacrament of orders, which the Church cannot change?”
Their final dubium concerned the Holy Father’s frequent insistence that there’s a duty to absolve everyone and always, so that repentance would not be a necessary condition for sacramental absolution. The cardinals asked whether the contrition of the penitent remains necessary for the validity of sacramental confession, “so that the priest must postpone absolution when it is clear that this condition is not fulfilled.”
In their reformulated dubium, they note that the pope confirmed the teaching of the Council of Trent on this issue, that absolution requires the sinner’s repentance, which includes the resolve not to sin again. “And you invited us not to doubt God’s infinite mercy,” they noted, but added: “We would like to reiterate that our question does not arise from doubting the greatness of God’s mercy, but, on the contrary, it arises from our awareness that this mercy is so great that we are able to convert to him, to confess our guilt, and to live as he has taught us. In turn, some might interpret your answer as meaning that merely approaching confession is a sufficient condition for receiving absolution, inasmuch as it could implicitly include confession of sins and repentance.” They therefore rephrased their dubium to read: “Can a penitent who, while admitting a sin, refuses to make, in any way, the intention not to commit it again, validly receive sacramental absolution?”
Vatican context
The public release of the documents, obtained by the Register and other news outlets, comes two days before the opening of the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, a pivotal and highly controversial event in the Catholic Church.
The gathering in Rome marks a historic moment for the Church because for the first time in its history, laypeople, women, and other non-bishops will participate as full voting synod delegates, though the pope will ultimately decide whether to accept any of the assembly’s recommendations.
Pope Francis, either directly or through the Roman Curia, has previously addressed the topics brought up by the five cardinals and their dubia.
On the issue of the development of doctrine and possible contradictions, Pope Francis has frequently described a vision of doctrinal expansion grounded in a particular understanding of St. Vincent of Lerins’ maxim that Christian dogma “progresses, consolidating over the years, developing with time, deepening with age.” The pope has said doctrine expands “upward” from the roots of the faith as “our understanding of the human person changes with time, and our consciousness deepens.”
For instance, the Holy Father has said that while the death penalty was accepted and even called for by previous Catholic doctrine, it is “now a sin.” “The other sciences and their evolution also help the Church in this growth of understanding,” the pope said. In Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis said that this kind of approach might be considered “imperfect” by those who “dream of a monolithic doctrine defended by all without nuance,” but “the reality is that such variety helps us to better manifest and develop the different aspects of the inexhaustible richness of the Gospel.”
On the topic of blessing same-sex unions, which have been pushed for in places like Germany, the Vatican’s chief doctrinal office, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, weighed in on the matter in 2021, clarifying that “the Church does not have, and cannot have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex.” However, some have speculated that, in spite of the DDF text referencing his approval, Pope Francis was displeased by the document. Relatedly, Antwerp’s Bishop Johan Bonny claimed in March that the pope did not disapprove of the Flemish-speaking Belgian bishops plan to introduce a related blessing, although this claim has not been substantiated and it is not clear that the Flemish blessing is, in fact, the kind explicitly disapproved by the DDF guidance.
Regarding the DDF text, Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin cited it in his criticism of the German Synodal Way’s decision to move forward with attempted blessings of same-sex unions, but he also added that the topic would require further discussion at the upcoming universal synod. More significantly, new DDF prefect Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, a close confidant of Pope Francis, stated in July that while he was opposed to any blessing that would confuse same-sex unions with marriage, the 2021 DDF guidance “lacked the smell of Francisco” and could be revisited during his tenure.
Regarding the authority of the forthcoming synod, although Pope Francis has expanded voting rights in the Synod of Bishops beyond the episcopacy, he has also repeatedly emphasized that the synod “is not a parliament” but a consultative, spiritual gathering meant to advise the pope. The pope did adjust canon law in 2018 to allow for the final document approved by a Synod of Bishops to “participate in the ordinary magisterium of the successor of Peter,” though only if “expressly approved by the Roman pontiff.”
On the possibility of the sacramental ordination of women, Pope Francis reaffirmed in 2016 that St. John Paul II’s clear “no” via Ordinato Sacederdotalis (1994) was the “final word” on the subject. In 2018, then-DDF prefect Cardinal Luis Ladaria confirmed that the male-only priesthood is “definitive.” In a 2022 interview with America magazine, Pope Francis again affirmed that women cannot enter ordained ministry and said that this should not be seen as a “deprivation.”
The pope has established two separate commissions to consider the question of a female diaconate, but the first, historically-based commission did not come to any definitive consensus and the second, focusing on the issue from a theological perspective, seems similarly unlikely to offer univocal support for a female diaconate. However, the synod’s Instrumentum Laboris does ask if “it is possible to envisage” women’s inclusion in the diaconate “and in what way?”
Finally, regarding withholding absolution in the confessional, the pope has previously referred to priests who refrain from offering absolution for certain moral sins without the bishop’s permission as “criminals” and told the Congolese bishops in February that they must “always forgive in the sacrament of reconciliation,” going beyond the Code of Canon Law to “risk on the side of forgiveness.”
Jonathan Liedl, senior editor of the National Catholic Register, contributed to this story.
[…]
With all due respect, if I cared for the protestant opinion, I would be protestant. The self inflicted damage that the Church is going through is due to a greater concern for feelings then doctrine. A greater concern for opinion then sacrament.
God gave us one Church, all other are fallen away. Once we embrace that Truth then others will follow and desire Catholicism.
Exactly!!! I converted from protestant and have never regretted it, but now this all so sad the sad lonely road the church seems bent on going down when mass attendees have been dropping like flies!!!! The answer is not to be like everyone else trying to blend in with the culture and the times of the day!!!! The Church is to be what Jesus called it to be 2,000 years ago, not embraced homosexuality, transgenderism and now people outside the faith!!! Wow!!
If I gave a flying rip what Protestants think I would never have converted and go through the shunning from my family!!!
The Catholic Church is the Catholic Church and is to suppose to strive to be what is suppose to be and has been for 2000 years!!!!
I trust the 2000 year old Church over a 500 year breakaway!!!!
“Indeed, both synodality and ecumenism are processes of ‘walking together.’”
This “language” is exhausting. It seems to me that they are trying to end Catholicism by making it Protestant. Is anybody at the Vatican Catholic? Is anybody at the Vatican praying to Our Lord, Jesus? If so, we would like to hear your voices, loud and clear.
Heidi, you will be glad to know that the Vatican has many Catholics -priests, nuns, bishops, workers and, of course, our Pope. And our Pope is a very strong believer in the power and beauty of prayer.
“Each time we join our hands and open our hearts to God, we find ourselves in the company of anonymous saints and recognized saints who pray with us and who intercede for us as older brothers and sisters who have preceded us on this same human adventure.”
“Pope Francis tells us to make prayer a daily habit. He says, “Every day God passes and sows a seed in the soil of our lives” (22). If we are not in the habit of regular prayer, we will miss that seed.” Read more here: https://www.osvnews.com/amp/2021/05/28/lessons-on-prayer-from-pope-francis/
A simple observation and a simpler question…
First, from an alleged pyramidal Church to a proposed inverted pyramid, this sleight of hand rather than real collegiality as the relationship between the college of bishops and the papacy (Lumen Gentium, Chapter 3, and the Prefatory Note)–better described not as a pyramid at all but as an ellipse with two centers. Then, flippantly, from the false pyramid to an equally false inverted pyramid resembling little more than a block party.
Second, how is anyone to tell the difference between the “universal call to holiness” as allegedly identical to the sensus fidei, and fluid synodality as spreading out into a flat-earth plebiscite?
Hopefully, spreading out taking the Holy Spirit of God with it. This is what many good Catholics all over the world are praying for.
I did say elsewhere that it was heavily in his favor that Pope Francis would eventually get something right. This is not one.
Don’t, uh…., hold your breath, Father.
Please read “within 2 years”. That is the video declaration from Poland’s Vigano: Holy Archbishop Lenga. I say Goly, because he has not spent the last 9 years as a fugitive from Argentina.
Is this so we can learn that women priests are nice and cordial so that we will accept them? Is this so we can learn that the woman priest marries homosexuals and that the weddings are delightful? Therefore so shall we? As for the transgender pastors of other denomination, they are also acceptable and work hard so we must also now accept them too.
And I thought that the synod process was to hear the voice of the lowly ones in the Church–not the voice of those outside the church. Clever the ways of those who want great changes in the church.
“Oh, the pathos of it! – haggard, drawn into fixed lines of unutterable sadness, with a look of loneliness, as of a soul whose depth of sorrow and bitterness no human sympathy could ever reach. The impression I carried away was that I had seen, not so much the President of the United States, as the saddest man in the world” (George Saunders, Lincoln in the Bardo).
At moments like this I can translate Saunders Lincoln as Christ peering down at the shambles made of his Church.
This is sheer lunacy. The main line Protestant communions are dead and they are the only ones who would participate in this idiocy. Does some kook in the Vatican think that an evangelical church (all of which have underlying disgust with Catholicism and it’s dogmas is willing to participate? We’re not on the same planet. Goof balls
Precisely.
Vatican III by another name.
I think I’d call it “Open Vatican” or “Agile Papacy”.
Dominus flevit… Further down the road to full acceptance of all things protestant..
A mode of ecclesial suicide. What interest does any convicted Protestant have in authentic Roman Catholicism? Be honest. If such concern was present they would be in the process of conversion.
This is simply sinful.
it occurs to me that we should be looking inward – at our own awareness as a faith community, of the faith we profess. Our whole experience in this regard has been tarnished in recent years the reference to which need not be added here. It’s difficult for me to see how an exchange with protestant religious leaders is going to help us or for that matter, the church itself and its mission. When I see young people passed the first communion and confirmation stage offer a glazed look about basic principles of our faith I feel handing them a Baltimore Catechism would be a proper act, that’s my concern – we don’t know who we are! I pray the Holy Spirit is indeed with us in this synodal effort but Im not so sure He
is yet on board if we inject such outside influence as criteria for conducting the synod…..perhaps someone else might express this concern better than I.
Well, from Bergoglio’s point of view, at least he can be sure that the Protestants in attendance will not be frequenters of the Latin Mass.
Or, as Forrest Gump’s Mama used to say, “Synod is as synod does.”
If by dialogue we invite the protestants to climb higher on the ladder of the totality of faith, sure, but if by dialogue the result is Catholics climbing down the ladder to the the point where there are no longer differences…no.
brineyman, your salt has flavor.
Bugnini lives.
True.
Erasing Catholic identity.
Every opinion expressed by these CATHOLICS resound with the truth truth truth that has been denied by the CATHOLIC hierarchy for more then 50 years, We are Roman Catholics not protestant. OUR ANCESTORS WERE MARTYRED TO KEEP US CATHOLIC! let the protestants return to the true faith. AMEN!
Interfaith/intercommunion dialogue on matters pertaining to natural law from an Aristotelian (i.e., reason-based) perspective — the area of the Church’s social teaching — is laudatory and even at times essential. Discussions of doctrine and internal administrative affairs of the Church with other faiths and sects is pointless and harmful in the extreme as it can lead to confusing the natural and the supernatural orders, the essence of modernism.
Yes, such “interfaith/intercommunion dialogue” does occur. We laity know it by better by banter, making nice, being friendly, helping neighbors, becoming friends while musing at the water cooler, shopping at the grocery store, or celebrating the Fourth at the suburban block party.
At the Synod of all Synods? Modernist. Stupid. Deadly.
When is the Requiem?
Pope Francis is not a big fan of Catholicism,
It would be great if for once our Catholic leaders would clearly state their intentions regarding this “synodal way”. Frankly, it appears and from the Pope’s own mouth and that of his leadership, to be a way to change the Catholic Church and its teachings, principles and tradition. None of them are clearly stating their objective, rather,they “leave the objective open ended” so that anything goes as far as results. All one has to do is look at the German synodal process where those who do not want today’s Catholic Church to survive but change it to meet secular societal “wokeisms”. Remember Pope Benedicts prediction, it is coming true and will forever change the one, Holy and Catholic Church through the “synodal path”.
Pope Benedict XVI had already started us down this path. He knew what Vatican 2 was all about. There is an incident reported by Luke (4:25-27). “Indeed, I tell you, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah when the sky was closed for three and a half years and a severe famine spread over the entire land. It was to none of these that Elijah was sent, but only to a widow in Zarephathp in the land of Sidon. Again, there were many lepers in Israel during the time of Elisha the prophet; yet not one of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian.” When the people in the synagogue heard this, they were all filled with fury. They rose up, drove him out of the town, and led him to the brow of the hill on which their town had been built, to hurl him down headlong. But he passed through the midst of them and went away.”
This is an exciting time for us. Let us ask the Holy Spirit to enrich us during this journey. In my diocese, every week in every Church prayers are said for it success.
Here is a good article on this subject. https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/what-is-the-synodal-journey-the-thought-of-pope-francis/
Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI supported the Reform of the Reform. Pope Francis is taking us backward to degenerate 1970s Jesuit formation but imposing it upon the rest of the Church. It’s your ultramontanism that keeps you from seeing that. We’ve gone from Ita Missa Est to Let’s Go Make a Mess.
In May 2021, the majority of priests in the Germany Synodal Way voted to abolish the priesthood. If that wasn’t worthy of the Most Pathetic Asininity Award, what else should we call it?
An open-ended Synod (Mother) of all Synods, searching for amorphous meaning among the world’s peripheral trash-heaps could bring about a large-scale ‘suicide of the Catholic collective soul.’ Self-directed, self-administered. Who are we to judge whether this outcome has not been set (?unwittingly?) from the get-go?
The Catholic Church – its foundation and its Head – needs no reform. Jesus’ perfect salvific way involved penitential, sacrificial service to His Father first and neighbor next. Rejecting His Way as it was, is, and always will be, has always led to man’s regret and sorrow. We surely must pray for fools and unwise Church leaders led by diabolic illusion.
This is a great idea! If we cannot water down the faith by ourselves, we can ask for assistance from the Protestants who have almost 500 years of experience in eliminating tenets of the faith and forming their own “churches.”
Exactly
If the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church and its Orthodox Church want to join in a Synodal Way, then they should do so with the objective to improve catechisis for all in simple terms. Not in the terms they use when they speak,for the words they and theologians use on regular basis are”empty” to 95% of Catholics. Our catachesis is poor and has been for years,their pronouncements about everything from abortion to vaccines to marriage to LGBQT+ to sin to virtually everying that is the basis of Jesus Christ Church is tearing our church apart. Now we are to “invite” non-Catholic’s into the “synodal path”, for what purpose to tell us why it is wrong to pray the Rosary, why we fail to read the Bible as they do?, so that we can “change” to be more ecumenical? Sadly, we have enough Cardinals and Bishops already undertaking that task by suspending and removing priests from their parishes. Now we are to “move together in the synodal path” with our brethren in other religions (or non-religions) who “supposedly worship the same God”. Seriously, wonder why the Catholic faithful are confused, fail to return to the sacraments and Holy Mass,wonder why so manyleave….it is not about not being Synodal, meaning giving “Power to the laity”, rather it is because our Catholic leaders have failed to lead us in the Spirit of Christ.
Amen. You’ve proven my above comment extraneous.
David writes: “Our catachesis is poor and has been for years, their pronouncements about everything from abortion to vaccines to marriage to LGBQT+ to sin to virtually everything that is the basis of Jesus Christ Church is tearing our church apart.”
“…tearing our Church apart?” Not at all! Instead, ambiguous/duplicitous catechesis, with mutually contradictory synods (?), would render the Bride of Christ an up-to-date, time-share condo! Ecclesial open marriage! Or, old-time polygamy! A half-way house to the cosmopolitan model offered by very sectarian Islam–which fancies itself still united, as a “[very] congregational theocracy.”
A congregational catholicism (lower case), rather than the Eucharistic Church?
Mention should also have been made of the need to involve commissars from the CCP. That was probably considered so obvious that there was no need to state it. The main thing, though, is to exclude those nasty Traditionalists, who all have cooties.
The church hierarchy has done enough damage trying to make the church modern and relevant and appealing to non-catholics. The church was at the height of it’s influence on the public and it’s OWN adherents during the 1940’s and 50’s. Ask yourself what has changed? And has it been a change for the better, with non-attendance at Mass soaring, revenues falling and too many Priests accused of sexual misconduct, a terrible sin and a cause of many a diocese going bankrupt.” Anything goes” does not work and it is not true church teaching. Now we want to know what Protestants think about us and our operation of the church? I dont think so. Have the ugly and non-inspirational stripped down churches attracted more believers? NO. I have Protestant family and friends and I love them dearly. But I have no interest in how they view our church beliefs. I already know what they think. In general, one need only go online to see the nasty and accusatory statements made by some “Christians” against the Catholic church ( and Mary) . The fact that most of their accusations are in error has nothing to do with the dislike behind it. Too many Catholic Priests want to pretend they are Protestants, for reasons of their own.Let’s not encourage the trend.
Just another way of turning the Catholic Church completely Protestant. Women priest’s. Soon we will have to go underground.
The Mother of All Synods! What a Crock!
Sounds like the Vatican is working towards a one world, very generic church. Will we recognize the Catholic Church when the synod is over?
Have faith, colene. Many more Catholics are praying for its success than those who would want it to fail.
Succeed in what? Water down the faith? Give a platform for the heterodox to publicly promote their errors? In that, it would be better for this trainwreck Synod to fail miserably and be forgotten as the waste of time and resources it is.
Succeed in its mission to keep the living Church moving, growing, responding to the times and sill nourishing itself with the fruits provided by the Hoily Spirit. Is this not what living things do – as against non-living things?
Those must be the fruits provided by the “protagonist” spirit. Wonder if they are seedless———–
As a sign of the times, a dangerous choice of words: “the fruits provided by the Holy Spirit.”
Believe me, Mal, I had faith in plenty Parish Council mini synods with small group discussions. As G Raff in post above states –“What a Crock!” 25 years later things have only deteriorated. When the BASICS are relegated to the basement and environmentalists, Luther, liturgical dancers, latent population controllers and immodestly dressed people are let lose in the sanctuary, it takes a lot of faith to hang on.
Just a question—-how many of the pastors still pray the Liturgy of the Hours?
This proposed Synod is slated to bring the rotten fruit that the infamous RENEW
program brought. Glad I ignored that one!
And the children make bracelets in CCD classes.
Let us water down Catholicism until there is nothing left but a memory, Homeopathic Catholic.
Post conciliar ecumenism is Luther’s curse.
Effectively, the Holy Roman Catholic Church has ceased to proselytize. The other reformation ecclesial communities have not. The Church is now fair game for protestant and neo protestant «poachers», as their exponential growth in Latin America and East Asia attests. The post Vat2 decline in Europe set that ecumenical juggernaut on its course.
Orthodoxy is also also troubled by the phenomenon albeit in the Moscow Patriarchate the attitude is markedly less indulgent than in the once extensive domains of the onetime Patriarch of the West.
A united world religion? Like global empire the dream of many troubled soul.
This synodallying or synodal-lying or synodal Eing or syno-dallying around really is a puzzle.
-What can we discover that we weren’t instructed to do by Our Lord?
-What can we turn up, new, that isn’t already laid down in the Deposit of Faith, in Tradition, in the Holy Mysteries, in scripture?
-What can we learn, that is so momentous by holding synods around the world, with small group discussions following such an icy format?
-Is taking time away from being faithful to our own vocations justified, just so that we can bat around ideas that have already been instilled in our hearts as is written in Veritatis Splendor, as is expounded by our Blessed Lord in the Sermon on the Mount, as is given to the children at Fatima (prayer, sacrifice, penance) etc.
OR
Is this entire synod dallying thing a year of practiced distraction from carrying out our own calling, which is sacrificial if lived faithfully?
It seems reasonable that embracing our own vocation fervently, practicing the theological virtues sincerely, is the most powerful, fruitful means by which we can be the salt of the earth, the light of evangelization.
Being called to the ordained ministry, consecrated life, single dedication or the married state each have unique hallmarks, graces for building the Body of Christ.
Do we not, in fulfilling our calling, faithfully, working together, work out our own salvation and aid in the salvation of others?
-What actually do we gain for The Kingdom if we distract ourselves from our calling?
-Doesn’t living our vocation faithfully, produce the greatest fruit for the salvation of souls?
-Isn’t the living out of our own vocation faithfully the greatest example that we can give to our immediate surroundings and the world at large?
USCCB
1 Corinthians
Chapter 2
1
When I came to you, brothers, proclaiming the mystery of God,* I did not come with sublimity of words or of wisdom.a
2
For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified.b
3
I came to you in weakness* and fear and much trembling,
4
and my message and my proclamation were not with persuasive (words of) wisdom,* but with a demonstration of spirit and power,c
5
so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God.d
Amen.
A couple weeks ago, at the Prayers of the Faithful Intercessions we were invited to pray for the “peace” of which Luther dreamed. Howdya like dem apples for a lead-in to the parish synodal discussions?