Synod 2015: A predetermined outcome - Louie Verrecchio

Synod 2015: A predetermined outcome

Pope Francis mean face 2

An op-ed by Ross Douthat published in the September 5th edition of the N.Y. Times, The Pope’s Marriage Endgame, is getting a good bit of attention.

In it, Douthat suggests that Pope Francis “wanted a big internal argument over marriage and communion, [and] that he deliberately started this civil war;” the same that will come to a head at the upcoming Synod in October.

As for how the conflict between the Kasperians and the defenders of tradition might end, Douthat says that “annulment reform,” such as the recent changes made to the process by Pope Francis motu proprio, “has long been seen as a possible compromise between the two sides of this Catholic civil war.”

As such, he states:

Perhaps, as the veteran Vaticanista John Allen suggests, he wants to dial down the synod’s temperature, avoid more pitched battles over Kasper’s proposal, and create “space for other issues to emerge.” This seems plausible, especially since the new rules address many of the cases that presumably made the Kasper proposal appealing in the first place

There’s no telling exactly what “other issues” either man has in mind, but the possibilities are outlined in the Lineamenta (or guidelines) for the Synod that were published toward the end of 2014.

In addition to the hot button issues concerning the so-called “pastoral care” of the civilly divorced and remarried, cohabitating couples and homosexuals, the list of issues up for discussion includes such pressing matters as:

  • The Socio-Cultural Context of the Family
  • The Importance of Affectivity in Life
  • Looking at Jesus and the Divine Pedagogy in the History of Salvation
  • Proclaiming the Gospel of the Family Today in Various Contexts
  • Upbringing and the Role of the Family in Evangelization

The overwhelming majority of the items on this list of “issues” represent nothing more than yet another opportunity for bishopcrats to spin new verses of pseudosacral homopoetic prose relative to matters that have long since been settled in the Church while fooling themselves (and perhaps, God forbid, others) into believing that they’re actually engaging in some meaningful evangelical activity.

Consider, for example, this utterly meaningless gem found in the interim relatio that came out of last year’s Extraordinary Synod:

The Gospel of the family, while it shines in the witness of many families who live coherently their fidelity to the sacrament, with their mature fruits of authentic daily sanctity must also nurture those seeds that are yet to mature, and must care for those trees that have dried up and wish not to be neglected.

If the Synod fathers are truly interested in examining dried up trees, they need look no further than their confrere, Cardinal Donald Wuerl:

I digress…

In any case, let’s be honest, there are precious few “other issues” of import for the Synod to take up apart from those that are near and dear to the hearts of the revolutionaries; Pope Francis and his faithful sidekick Walter chief among them.

Far from “creating space” for other matters to come to the fore, by issuing his motu proprio revising the annulment process in advance of the Synod, Pope Francis has effectively established as the “new normal” what some considered to be a potential via media between the extremes.

In other words, I suggested last year that one might see the Hegelian Dialectic in action:

Kasper, in his proposed “reforms” has provided the thesis, Cardinal Burke, in his defense of tradition as upheld by the status quo has provided the antithesis, and all that remains is for the Synod to deliver the synthesis.

As things stand today, however, the antithesis has been bullied (to employ the vernacular of the current culture) to the left; i.e., Francis has forced the status quo party to accept unilateral concessions even before the “negotiating” has begun.

As such, I would expect that whatever room was created on the Synod agenda by preemptively granting an easier row to hoe for those seeking a decree of nullity (as I argued in a previous post), will more likely be filled with efforts to establish a consensus for new “pastoral approaches,” not just with respect to the civilly divorced and remarried, but for all of those “devout” homosexuals who are just clamoring for the Sacraments for themselves and their unfortunate children.

Ross Douthat, for his part, seems largely to foresee as much as well, saying:

From the liberal perspective, the new annulment rules may simply move the goal posts farther in their direction, setting up a future settlement that’s even more favorable to their ambitions.

I would agree; provided, however, that we are clear in understanding that the future is now.

If nothing else, the revolutionaries are clever; they know very well that their Generalissimo is no spring chicken. Surely they are far too wily to simply assume that the window of opportunity that lies before them today will remain as wide open as it is should the current pontificate meet with an untimely end.

They will, no doubt, carpe diem.

All of this said, apart from providing a noteworthy stage for various churchmen to make a name for themselves – some in service to the good, others for evil – one is hard pressed to avoid seeing the Synod itself as a non-event.

In fact, I’d say that we have more reason than not to believe that the outcome has already been determined, and guess what?

It will be precisely what the “God of Surprises,” aka Jorge Bergoglio, wants it to be.

Now Playing

As evidenced by his decision to disseminate and publish that shameful interim relatio from last year’s Extraordinary Synod, without the body of bishops’ foreknowledge, His Humbleness has made it plain as day that he has every intention of getting whatever he wants no matter how the Synod proceedings shake out.

His insistence that the final relatio for the Extraordinary Synod contain even those Kasperian paragraphs that didn’t receive the required two-thirds majority of votes only further verifies as much.

The motu proprio reforming the annulment process, which was reportedly issued without any prior input from senior Vatican officials and dicasteries, including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, only serves to confirm further still that this pope is fully prepared to act unilaterally in enforcing his will, even as he waxes on disingenuously about the importance of synodality.

As for the rules changes concerning the upcoming Synod proceedings (mentioned here), these are mainly but an effort to manage appearances and likewise expectations and the way in which the predetermined outcome will be received.

To a certain extent, the publication of the motu proprio serves the same purpose by affording the faithful some time to grow accustomed to a new, bishop-centered, “pastoral” initiative before even more of them are unveiled.

(I predicted some time ago that the likely result of the Synod will be some hollow re-affirmation of doctrine that simultaneously allows the National Bishops’ Conferences and local bishops to enact “pastoral applications” that effectively undermine it.)

In the end, however, the outcome of the Synod will be whatever Francis wants it to be.

On this note, Ross Douthat appears to be among those who still aren’t quite sure exactly what that is, saying:

The question that remains unanswered, though, is how the pope intends to finish it [the civil war that he deliberately invited].

While the full picture may as yet be a bit murky, what Francis intends is for the Universal Church to adopt as its own a “pastoral approach” that reflects the “profound and serene” theology of Walter Kasper.

The real point of intrigue with this Synod, as I see it, has to do with the fallout that will take place once the “God of Surprises” pronounces his will.

Synod 2015: A predetermined outcome - Louie Verrecchio

Views: 262

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Breaking News; Kasper, Danneels, Schonborn, Cupich, Wuerl and Maradiaga appointed by Pope Francis to 2015 Synod

The finalized, complete list of participants in the Synod of Bishops in 2015 was published in today's Vatican Bollettino: XIV General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (October 4 to 25 2015)....

In addition to the Synod officers (who are all hold-overs from last year's "Extraordinary Synod"), delegates elected by the Bishops' Conferences and the Union of Superior Generals and confirmed by the Pope as Synod members months ago, and ex officio participants (the heads of the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Prefects or Presidents of Curial dicasteries), the final list contains the names of prelates appointed by the Pope (as is his prerogative) as members of the Synod. This is the first time that the list of direct papal appointees to the Synod of 2015 has been officially published, although rumors have been circulating for weeks about the impending appointment of Archbishop Cupich.

(Members of the "Council of Cardinals" are not ex officio members of the Synod, and of its nine members two have not been made members of the Synod either by election or papal appointment - Cardinal O'Malley of Boston, USA and Cardinal Errazuriz Ossa of Chile.)
Among those attending the Synod due solely to papal appointment are the following liberals or "moderates": Cardinals Godfried Danneels, Walter Kasper, Christoph Schonborn OP, Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga SDB, John Dew (a vocal supporter of communion for the "divorced and remarried" long before the current Pontificate), Donald Wuerl, Dionigi Tettamanzi (former Archbishop of Milan who last year emerged as a supporter of Kasper's proposal) and Daniel Sturla SDB (more about him here); Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández, Rector of the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina and one of the Pope's closest advisers and ghostwriters; Archbishop Blase Cupich of Chicago (USA), and Msgr. Pio Vito Pinto (Dean of the Roman Rota and head of the Pope's commission for annulment reform).

They add to the liberal-leaning representatives elected by their respective bishops' conferences to be Synod members and already confirmed by Pope Francis (as we reported in June): Bishop Johan Bonny of Antwerp (Belgium), Bishop Jean-Paul Vesco OP of Oran (Algeria), "Shadow Synod" participants Bishop Jean-Marie Lovey of Sion (Switzerland), Archbishop Georges Pontier and Bishop Jean-Luc Brunin of France; the three German delegates and "Shadow Synod" participants Cardinal Marx, Archbishop Koch and Bishop Bode; Cardinal Mario Poli of Buenos Aires (Argentina), Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin (Ireland), and Cardinal Vincent Nichols of Westminster (England & Wales). 
Notable as well among the attendees are Rev. Fr. François-Xavier Dumortier SJ (Rector of the Pontifical Gregorian University, which played host to the "Shadow Synods" of May and September) and Rev. Fr. Antonio Spadaro SJ, Director of the La Civilta Cattolica and a leading proponent of the new pastoral direction of the current Pontificate. Fr. Dumortier is the only Rector of a Pontifical University among the delegates. 


Among the more conservative-leaning papal appointees (at least when it comes to the Kasper proposal) are Cardinals Carlo Caffarra of Bologna, Timothy Dolan of New York, Gualtiero Bassetti (Archbishop of Perugia-Città della Pieve), and Elio Sgreccia, president emeritus of the Pontifical Academy for Life and one of the most prominent members of the Wojtylian old guard in the fight against the "culture of death". Cardinals Philippe Ouédraogo (Archbishop of Ouagadougou in Burkina Faso) and Alberto Suárez Inda (Archbishop of Morelia, Mexico) are also reckoned among the conservatives.

Adviser to francis:

"Mary is not a suitable reference point for the advancement of women in the church"

How much longer O Lord? 

It is clear that the "fix" is in.  This synod will follow the direction that the pope desires.  Also for the article to call Cardinal Dolan conservative leaning is laughable.  As for the statement of the papal consultor, I prefer the opinion of a Doctor of the Church:  

"In dangers, in doubts, in difficulties, think of Mary, call upon Mary. Let not her name depart from your lips, never suffer it to leave your heart. And that you may obtain the assistance of her prayer, neglect not to walk in her footsteps. With her for guide, you shall never go astray; while invoking her, you shall never lose heart; so long as she is in your mind, you are safe from deception; while she holds your hand, you cannot fall; under her protection you have nothing to fear; if she walks before you, you shall not grow weary; if she shows you favor, you shall reach the goal."
--Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, Father and Doctor of the Church

The sin-odd will follow the will of Francis, a clear enemy of the Church. 

Father Paul Kramer Writes: 

"The thing that really makes my mouth drop is the incredible lack of foresight on the part of semi-trad indult types. They watch the great pendulum swing in one direction for so long, that they are clueless that it is about to change direction (and smack them in the back of their heads).

The great schism & apostasy will be triggered by events that will begin next month. The pope (not Jorge) will reverse the direction of the Church when it will be almost too late; while Jorge's Newchurch will stampede into full blown apostasy.

I knew this was coming 40 years ago from Catholic prophecy, and I see it unfolding now. No true Catholic, no matter how ignorant, will identify with Jorge's Newchurch, which will be as outlandish as the most liberal of Anglican fringe communities. The majority of bishops & priests will go along and follow their leader into apostasy.
 
My only question is that when the apostasy is consummated, will all these pseudo-trads still feel the need to be in communion with (apostate) "Rome"? Will they still think their leader is (as one of them calls him), "a silly man", but still the "pope"? Or will the penny finally drop, so that they will be able to see plainly that their "Holy Father" is not a "silly man", but a ravenous wolf. If they still refuse to admit the obvious, even after their "silly" "Holy Father" destroys the last vestiges of the Catholicism of tradition, then these pseudo-trads will have become pseudo-Catholics -- and apostates as well."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting....I can't help but think the same for the SSPX in their journey to Rome.

Socci: With Papally-Mandated "Catholic Divorce" destroying a Sacrament, Schism Looms Large on the Catholic Horizon

After 2000 years, Divorce is Enforced in the Church -- and a Schism Looms Larger than Ever

Antonio Socci
Libero
September 12, 2015
"Newsweek" recently had a photo of Pope Francis on their front-cover with the headline: “Is the Pope Catholic?”. Subtitle: “Of course he is. You just wouldn’t know it from his press clips.”
Indeed, it is a legitimate question, seeing that the Argentine Pope has prayed in a Mosque and said in an interview to Scalfari: “There is no Catholic God.” The anxiety in the Church is now becoming enormous after the 8th of September. In fact with two Motu Proprios on the nullity of marriage, we have an official act by Bergoglio where we are going off the rails – according to authoritative opinions - by the institution of a sort of “Catholic divorce”.
This would mean the negation of Christ’s commandment on the indissolubility of marriage and the cancellation of two thousand years of Church teaching. So as to understand the gravity of the issue it is enough to remember that the Church suffered the very grave Anglican Schism in the XVI century and lost England completely, simply because the Pope did not recognize King Henry VIII’s divorce, based on a flimsy reason for the nullity of the first marriage. 
Could Bergoglio’s Motu Proprio create a new schism? It may.
Yet, if Cardinal Muller himself, Head of the former Holy Office, spoke recently of a possible schism referring to the Synod, there is fear of it even more so after the 8th of September. There have already been signs of some very strident quarrels with some important cardinals at Santa Marta over the past few days. And the Synod promises to be explosive. 
Bergoglio, in spite of “collegiality”, which he proclaims in words, decided everything before the Synod he convoked specifically on this issue; not to accomplish what the bishops asked for in October 2014, since the Commission which drew up the Motu Proprio was instituted by him with that mandate, two months earlier on 27th August 2014. 
In practical terms, why will the Motu Proprio be contested from the Catholic point of view?
MILLIONS OF ANULLMENTS

First of all -  as Professor De Mattei explains – the totality of the reforms (of apparent facilitation and speeding up) go in the opposite direction from what the Church has always taken. It is a complete overturning of perspective: the defense of the Sacrament is no longer the priority (for the salvation of souls), but primarily the easiness and the speediness of obtaining an annulment. The abolition of the double-sentence is in itself, sufficient [cause] to think this. De Mattei writes: “Cardinal Burke recalled a catastrophic experience. In the United States from July 1971, the so-called Provisional Norms came into effect, which eliminated de facto the obligatory double conforming sentences. The result was that the Episcopal Conference did not negate one single request for dispensation among the hundreds of thousands received, and, in the common perception, this process began to be called “Catholic Divorce”.
Then again, Monsignor Pinto, Dean of the Roman Rota and President of the Commission which drew up the Motu Proprio, openly declared the purpose of this reform. He wrote in the “Osservatore Romano” that Pope Bergoglio has asked “the bishops for a true and proper “conversion”, a change in mentality which convinces them to follow the invitation of Christ”. According to Monsignor Pinto “the invitation of Christ, present in their brother, the Bishop of Rome”, would be that of “passing from the restricted number of a few thousand annulments to that immeasurable [number] of unfortunates who might have a declaration of nullity”. 
That Christ wanted an “immeasurable” number of annulments is completely unheard of. Yet it is now clear that the goal of the Motu Proprio is large-scale divorce - much quicker, cheaper and easier than State divorce (there are already those who are trying to figure out whether divorce is [more] convenient through priests).
Up to now, until Benedict XVI, the ecclesiastical tribunals had always been reproached by popes because they were too indulgent in recognizing annulments. With Bergoglio everything has been overturned, and they are [now] attacked for the opposite reason: large-scale annulment “factories” are to be set up. 
The Honorable Alessandra Moretti is right then when she says triumphantly that “this epoch-making reform” by the Pope” follows closely the law on quick Divorce which I proposed to the Chamber”. And she underlines “the common vision of the Church and State on this issue”. But there is more.
DIVORCE
With this Motu Proprio, new reasons for nullity – without any magisterial and theological base – are being formulated, which could overturn de facto the role of the Church Herself: it would no longer be the Church Herself which must verify the original nullity of sacramental marriage in the eyes of God, but [She] risks becoming an entity that de facto “dissolves” sacramentally valid marriages, for today’s invented reasons. In fact, in the Motu Proprio, de Mattei writes: “The theoretical affirmation of indissolubility of marriage, is accompanied in practice with the right to a declaration of nullity for every failed marriage bond. It will be enough, in conscience, to deem one’s own marriage invalid, in order to have it recognized as null by the Church”.
The explosive charge that changes the “Rules of Procedure” is found mainly in article 14 where “ the lack of faith” of the parties is suggested as a possible cause of simulation or error in consent, and hence of the nullity of the marriage. Up to now, lack of faith as cause for the invalidity of a marriage has always been excluded by the Church, who limits Herself in elevating natural marriage to that of a Sacrament. Benedict XVI explained: “The indissoluble pact between a man and woman, does not require the personal faith of the contracting parties for the aims of sacramentality; what is required, as a necessary minimal condition, is the intention to do what the Church does”. That is to say, [to have] the intention of getting married.
This is so true that the Church also recognizes mixed marriages as sacramental , even when an atheist spouse or one of another religion is involved: all that is required is the desire for natural marriage.
Now everything is being overturned. And in conformity with Bergoglio’s style, an ambiguous form is being used to make the Catholic world believe that doctrine has not been changed. 
On September 9th in [the official newspaper of the Italian Bishops' Conference] “Avvenire”, canon lawyer Paolo Moneta sustained that “lack of faith was not a cause for nullity before and it is not a cause today either”. Yet, at the same time, Monsignor Pinto, in presenting the Motu Proprio, praised “the innovation of Pope Francis’ pontificate “ and spoke of “the sacrament celebrated with no faith” which will bring an “immeasurable” number of annulments “because of evident absence of faith as a bridge to knowledge and thus to the free will [necessary] to give sacramental consent”. 
This will open the door, without a doubt, for millions of annulments. Millions! Since when did you need to be a saint or have a university degree in theology from the Gregorian to get married?
The Church, in order to recognize a sacramental marriage, has always simply asked for the free decision to marry, according to the characteristics of natural marriage. Further, She has always taught that the spiritual disposition of the spouses (their personal holiness) influences the fruits of the sacrament but certainly not its validity.
Now everything has changed. And among the circumstances that have opened wide the possibility of a super-fast divorce is “the brevity of conjugal cohabitation” or the fact that the couple were married “because of the woman’s unexpected pregnancy”. And what does that have to do with consent?

The unbelievable list actually ends with an “et cetera”. Does it mean that one can amplify at will? What kind of law is this? It will be the weaker parties (the women and children) who will pay the price for this revolution in destabilizing the family, which is already under heavy attack from the secular world.
Sister Lucia, the Fatima visionary, one day said to Cardinal Caffarra: “Father, there will come a time when Satan’s decisive battle with Christ will be over marriage and the family”.
This is it. 
If this is the hour of “the bishop dressed in white” there will be sufferings for everyone (remember the vision of the city in ruins?). 
[Translation: Contributor Francesca Romana]

Don't despair. There's still Our Lord's promise of the Church's indefectibility. The Church is going through its Passion.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2025   Created by Dawn Marie.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service