Do you remember this?
"Will this Pope re-write controversial Church doctrines? No. But that isn't how doctrine changes. Doctrine changes when pastoral contexts shift and new insights emerge such that particularly doctrinal formulations no longer mediate the saving message of God's transforming love. Doctrine changes when the Church has leaders and teachers who are not afraid to take note of new contexts and emerging insights. It changes when the Church has pastors who do what Francis has been insisting: leave the securities of your chanceries, of your rectories, of your safe places, of your episcopal residences go set aside the small minded rules that often keep you locked up and shielded from the world."
With that quote, (originating at the NCReporter) Father Thomas J. Rosica, on numerous occasions, laid out the plan of the upcoming Synod on the Family.
In this breaking report by Sandro Magister, French Dominican theologian Thomas Michelet has written:
This lack of clarity would also end up making the concluding proposals of the synod ambiguous, opening the way to pastoral practices so diversified as to undermine the unity of the doctrine concerning the indissolubility of marriage, even if in words it is reaffirmed as intact.
I was threatened with a lawsuit by Father Thomas Rosica for stating that he and others were attempting to change doctrine through pastoral practice. I quoted his own quote.
Now, others are articulating that same thing -- and people much more educated and qualified than this simple layman.
Now, others are articulating that same thing -- and people much more educated and qualified than this simple layman.
The bishops and priests and theologians who are planning this scam will be held accountable by Our Blessed Lord.
You and I, dear sister and brother, must proclaim that these men, these clerics, no matter what colour their fancy robes, will be challenged by the Catholic faithful no matter how small we become, no matter how ostracised we become, no matter how mocked we become -- we will challenge them, we will call them out, we will hold them accountable in the here and now and let Our Blessed Lord do it for all eternity.
Read Magister's latest at http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351093?eng=y
You and I, dear sister and brother, must proclaim that these men, these clerics, no matter what colour their fancy robes, will be challenged by the Catholic faithful no matter how small we become, no matter how ostracised we become, no matter how mocked we become -- we will challenge them, we will call them out, we will hold them accountable in the here and now and let Our Blessed Lord do it for all eternity.
Read Magister's latest at http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351093?eng=y
Synod. The Preparatory Document’s Arabian Phoenix
Everybody says there is one, what it is nobody knows. It is the “penitential way” to communion for the divorced and remarried. The Dominican theologian Thomas Michelet lays bare the contradictions
by Sandro Magister
by Sandro Magister
8 comments:
Of course, it's not 'rocket science' to conclude that when you change the 'practice' of doctrine, you change the doctrine. It is what is so very infuriating that these heretics are so very arrogant they actually think Catholics are stupid enough to buy into their evil plot. I would hope that none are, only those who are desperate to be confirmed in their own sin.
Of course, since Francis is the false prophet. You will see sin approved during or somewhat after the Synod.
Bless our Holy Father. To whom I am faithful!
OK, I read this hoping to understand better, and maybe I am dense, but I still do not see how the Pope or any bishop in good faith can talk about this penitential 3rd way? If a person is divorced and civilly remarried, and the prior marriage is not annulled, and that prior spouse is living, who would dare to go to Communion?
Why would anyone talk about stepping onto a 3rd path when path #1 is still there, with possibly children on it too? See, if 2 people are "living together" with no matrimony, everyone easily sees this is fornication, that they should not go to Communion. How much more the couple "living together" with a string of spouses and kids behind one or maybe both of them? It is not a matter of penance, but of what is a Sacrament. No? Am I using right logic?
Note, I do not say I, as a layperson, would ever tell any other layperson what to do about Communion. That is for the priest. If 2 young people have shacked up, they must learn their error or be told by their pastor or families. If a married couple has former spouses living, I will not say a word. I concur with the laity not being harsh and judgmental to one another.
However, what I see in my parishes is people in those categories CHOOSE ON THEIR OWN to come to Mass, BUT NOT GO to Communion. Everyone respects them for that, no one is passing judgment on their living arrangements, because who really knows? Hopefully they are going to Confession and getting guidance from a priest. Yes, I agree we cannot judge individuals, right? But we can judge, we do know, from all time, the definitions of sacrament, matrimony, fornication, adultery. Right or not? Where is my flaw in reason?
Margina, there is no flaw in your reasoning. Your problem is the same as mine; we have respect for the Truth and form ourselves, with His grace, to the Truth. They, on the other hand, have no respect for it. They see It as confining, we see it a liberating.
It will soon be like the Eastern Orthodox Church. They allow three marriages in church, hence two divorces. People regularly go to communion without any confession beforehand.
I really think that God will clean the world with fire when Rome apostasies. So many saints and blesseds have talked about the 3 days of darkness. I hope that everyone will prepare for it by keeping at hand pure beeswax blessed candles.
To permit remarriage after separation is clearly a direct contradiction to God's words.
"And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and he who shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery."
Ver. 9. And I say to you. It is worthy of remark, that in the parallel texts, St. Mark x. 2. and St. Luke xvi. 18. and St. Paul to Corinthians vii. 10. omit the exception of fornication; and also that St. Matthew himself omits it in the second part of the verse; and says absolutely, that he who shall marry her that is put away committeth adultery. It perhaps crept in here from chap. v. 32, where it is found in a phrase very similar to this, but which expresses a case widely different. Divorce is in no case admitted but in that of adultery. This is what Christ teaches in chap. v. 32, and to this the exception is referred, marked in the two texts. But in this very case the separated parties cannot contract a second marriage without again committing adultery, as we must infer, from a comparison of this text with the parallel texts of St. Mark and St. Luke. (Bible de Vence) --- If we did not understand it in this manner, the case of the adulteress would be preferable to the case of her who should be put away without any crime of her own; as in this supposition, the former would be allowed to marry again, which the latter would not be allowed. (Tirinus) --- St. Augustine is very explicit on this subject. See lib. 11. de adult conjug. chap. xxi. xxii. xxiv. --- St. Jerome, in his high commendation of the noble matron, Fabiola, says of her: "that though she was the innocent party, for the unlawful act of marrying again, she did public penance." (In Epitaph. Fabiolæ.) --- This universally received doctrine of the Catholic Church was confirmed in the general council of Trent. (Session xxiv. canon 6.)
I do not deny or doubt there are clerics who are cunningly attempting to undermine doctrine in any way possible. However, I do not believe Pope Francis is doing this. I understood "simple minded rules" to be those of 'the world' that seek to silence our shepherds behind a veil of "political correctness" and NOT that he was referring to Church teachings. I also believe the current tasks of our bishops and priests have become too cluttered with many things that take them away from their primary duty to evangelize, tend and feed the flock. Too many administrative, clerical, etc. commitments that have them running around instead of just focusing on their primary duty, the salvation and sanctification of souls.
Post a Comment