James Martin, S.J. - distorts and manipulates Synod document on Facebook and CNN

Jesuit priest James Martin of America Magazine has become infamous on Twitter. Calling out people as "haters" and learning from Tom Rosica how to block critics to the point where the #RosicaBlockParty has been joined by the #JamesMartinSJBlockParty. Silly boys, did you not know that a second browser or account solves that problem and a copy and paste of the tweet does the trick?

James Martin is a "homosexualists" and an "adulterist." He has pushed these agendas before and during the Synod and he continues to do so and in ways dangerous to souls, in spite of what he says about, "haters."

You, my dear Catholic, have a duty - to call out malefactors such as this Jesuitical heresiarch. He, who would be beaten out the Society by Saints such as Ignatius, Francis Xavier, Jean de Brebeuf and Paul Miki for his heterodoxy and his lies, can not be allowed to confuse and distort. When men such as these take this Synod and its mediocre and ambiguous texts and twist them for their own advantage and those whose bidding they undertake, they must be called out and challenged.

Note very carefully. The Synod has not changed one thing. 

A synod is an advisory body. The Pope can do something or everything with the advice he has been given. He can do all or he can do nothing. No Law has changed. No Doctrine has changed. What has changed is how the document will be used to manipulate an agenda, as this Jesuit is doing and which we must confront everywhere. Unlike our parents and grandparents after Vatican II who had little knowledge and no tools, we are different.

What has also changed is that we have a Pope who seems to relish in calling people names giving a clue of how he thinks and how he might act in terms of the Synod report, but that is for another post.

Martin writes about "change" and asks why some Catholics are so 'afraid of it." The matter of change was dealt with quite well by the prolific hymn-writer (Faith of Our Fathers is one), Rev. F.W. Faber, Cong. Orat. This convert from Anglicanism and Blessed John Newman contemporary, said:

"All change is bad from its very nature. It is full of evil: it unsettles and disturbs, it is full of the world, it is the very spirit of the world and nothing worse can be said of it. Whenever we are tempted to change any thing, we must not only be quite sure that the old system contained evils, but also that those evils were more numerous and more important, than the ones we must inevitably bring to change. ... but change in religion is of all things most perilous." 

Let's take a look at Martin's words and rebuke him, shall we? 

Why are some Catholic so afraid of change?

The Rev. James Martin is a Jesuit priest, editor at large of America and author of the new novel "The Abbey." The views expressed in this column belong to Martin.

 
Father James Martin(CNN)
The Synod on the Family, the gathering of bishops from around the world that just concluded, changed no Catholic doctrine. None. Yet, Martin on Facebook was telling the divorced and remarried that they could now, after searching their "conscience" in the internal forum, receive Holy Communion. Martin knows that that is a discipline but it based on Scripture, but the reader, catholic or otherwise, does not. Martin is twisting the language so that the problem is with those who oppose it. But you wouldn't know that from the fierce reactions the synod evoked. Even the possibility that the church might deal more openly with, for example, divorced and remarried Catholics or the LGBT community, sent some Catholics into a near frenzy. The Church has always been open with people. Those in adultery and those suffering from same-sex attraction have the same opportunity as you and I. Go for spiritual direction, confess your sins, amend your life and you're good to go. Martin also uses the homosexualist language, without stating that anyone who thinks that they are "trans-gendered" is suffering from mental illness. He would rather leave them in their pathological state than even give them the medical and psychiatric help they need to say nothing of the spiritual. It seemed out of proportion to the synod's discussions as well as the final document, a rather workaday overview of issues related to the family. The final report did not, for example, say that divorced and remarried could return to Communion. But you did. Instead it talked about possible avenues of reconciliation that already existed. Nor did it approve same-sex marriage. Instead it spoke of respecting LGBT Catholics. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church has always stated - again, a manipulation of the truth. Overall, the document stressed two concepts: "accompaniment" and "discernment." The church must accompany families in the complexity of their lives and use discernment, a form of prayerful decision-making, to help people arrive at good decisions based on church teaching. The final document is not even the final word. Pope Francis will most likely issue his own document within a few months, summing up the synod's findings and perhaps moving the discussion farther. Or he may do nothing at all. Catholic bishops conclude 'spicy' meeting with compromise Nice word choice, Padre,  But even the hint of change prompted outrage -- which was directed not only at Pope Francis, but also the bishops at the synod, Catholic commentators, and from time to time, me. At times, the level of sheer spite was astounding. Martin is clearly shocked that he can't get away with Clericalism! Why? First, let's give the benefit of the doubt to people upset by Pope Francis and some of the synod's discussions. Those disturbed by the possibility of change are usually devout Catholics who believe that the law is an important part of Catholic tradition. And it is. Make no mistake: Jesus himself said he came to "fulfill the law." Many of the church's rules flow directly from the Gospels. Just consider divorce, the synod topic that captured much of the attention in the West. It is unequivocally stated by Jesus to be wrong. Laws also are part of tradition, which Catholics believe is guided by the Holy Spirit. Even if certain rules do not come from the lips of Jesus, but rather from popes or other councils like Vatican II, they are considered to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. Thus, another reason to oppose change: Why would we change something that either comes from Jesus or is safeguarded by the Holy Spirit? Martin knows well what scripture says, he is playing a game here and blaming it on God the Holy Spirit Himself:

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you. let that one be accursed!" 

It's hard to change the Catholic Church -- even if you're the Pope So some of the consternation is understandable. Some, however, is harder to understand. For if you're a devout Catholic who believes in the guidance of the Spirit, then you should also trust that the same Spirit is guiding Pope Francis and the synod. Sadly, in some corners that trust seems to have evaporated after the Pope's election, to be replaced with doubt, suspicion and anger. The Holy Spirit brings wisdom, He brings coolness, He brings refreshment. The continual resort to the Holy Spirit is blasphemy, He does not bring confusion. The spirit Martin writes of is not of God, it is from a different place. Again why? First, Catholics today often conflate dogma, doctrine and practice. In the most basic (and simplified) theological terms dogma refers to our core beliefs. For example, beliefs like the Resurrection: That's foundational. Doctrine encompasses the overall teachings of the church. For example, the teaching on birth control. A Jesuit mentioned "birth control?" Hell has frozen over and pigs can fly! Every doctrine is important, but not every doctrine is dogma. Finally, pastoral practice refers to how those doctrines are applied in real life. For example, how does a priest counsel a person who uses birth control? That it is a mortal sin and they must stop using artificial birth control and must conform their thinking to the mind of the Church as expressed in Casti conubbii and Humanae vitae and Familiaris Consortio. In the past few decades, we have seen these three categories collapsed together, at least in the popular Catholic imagination. It is as if every teaching is seen as dogma. And this has had disastrous effects. Because a change in one is seen as an attack on everything. In this view, changing the way that the church treats divorced and remarried Catholics is not simply an attack on pastoral practice, but on doctrine and perhaps even dogma. This is not to diminish important teachings, but rather to put them in their perspective. Traditionally, we believe in a "hierarchy of truths," in which some teachings are simply more important than others. Obviously, the Resurrection is more important than what your pastor says about a local political candidate. The collapse of these three categories, then, means that even the hint of change is a threat. Thus some of the anger. Second, change itself may be difficult for some Catholics because it threaten one's idea of a stable church. Yet the church has always changed. Not in its essentials, but in some important practices, as it responds to what Jesus called the "signs of the times." The Church, it seems in Martin's view, must take on the stench of the world. Nobody is rejecting the divorced and remarried, nobody is rejecting those who suffer with same-sex attraction. It is a lie to say they do. We don't want to treat them any differently but they cannot receive Holy Communion without Confession, penance and amendment of life. Just like me. They can come to Mass, sing in the choir perhaps, be a part of the community and be respected and loved. They cannot serve at the Altar, Ambo or be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, period! What Martin and his ilk want is a complete destruction of three sacraments in some idea of false mercy - Matrimony, Penance and the Holy Eucharist. Think of the changes wrought by the Second Vatican Council: The church's relations with the Jewish people changed utterly. The translation of the Mass from the Latin into vernacular languages changed the way we worship. Both were immense changes -- and necessary changes. No Council needed to be called to change relations with our Jewish brethren, any Pope could have done that. His ignorance on liturgy, he is a Jesuit after all, and the Council is great. The language of the Mass was not to be changed completely but that is another debate and more than language changed along with it, the Rite itself was drastically altered, right Voxers? Third, a darker reason for the anger: a crushing sense of legalism of the kind that Jesus warned against. Sadly, I see this evident in our church, and it is ironic to find this in those who hew to the Gospels because this is one of the clearest things that Jesus opposed: "You load people with burdens hard to bear and you yourselves do not lift a finger to ease them!" he said in the Gospel of Luke. Here we go, We are the legalists. We are the Pharisees. The legalist and Pharisees wanted to burden people with the impossible. This is not what we are talking about. Holy Communion is the issue. Not kindness. Martin is twisting, he is engaging in polemics and manipulations. We have a Jewish senior's building in Toronto where the elevator stops at every floor on the Sabbath because pushing the button would break Sabbath laws. THAT is what Jesus was talking about when he said "loading people with burdens" such as two refrigerators in the kitchen as is done today!  As the Pope said in his closing remarks to the synod, the person who truly follows the doctrine is not the one who follows the letter of the law, but its spirit. The Pope is wrong. Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments," the Law. He also said, "I have not come to destroy the Law but to fulfill it." Law keeps peace. Law keeps order. Law provides justice. What Martin wants is spiritual anarchy. Fourth, even darker reasons for the anger: a hatred of LGBT Catholics that masks itself as a concern for their souls, a desire to shut out divorced and remarried because they are "sinful" and should be shut out of the church's communion, and a self-righteousness and arrogance that closes one off to the need for mercy. Also, a mere dislike of change because it threatens the black-and-white worldview. I hate no man. I hate no one with same-sex attraction. That is not what this is about. Martin is a deceiver. He is a liar. This is about people in states of mortal sin committing another mortal sin of sacrilege. This is about leaving people in their sin of adultery and sodomy. Martin wants to leave them there, we want to call them out and to Christ. Who gave this man his first Holy Communion? But change began in the church almost as soon as the church began. St. Paul prevailed over St. Peter -- the "rock" upon which Jesus built his church -- over the question of whether the non-circumcised could be accepted into the faith. Without change early on, the church would have never moved beyond the Jewish community. St. Paul understood the need for change, even if it went against some cherished practices. Paul confronted the Pope and the Pope backed down because he was wrong. It will happen again. So did Jesus. He did not hesitate to bend or even set aside the rules if it meant applying more mercy. When he healed an infirm woman, painfully stooped over from arthritis or scoliosis, in the Gospel of Luke, on the Sabbath, he was critiqued for not following the rules. In response, he excoriates those who sought to lock him into unchanging legalisms: "Hypocrites!" They were hypocrites because they preached one thing and did another. Jesus told them "do as they say but not as they do." In other words. OBEY THE LAW but don't act as them. Who ordained this man? Fear of change holds the church back. And it does something worse. It removes love from the equation. In the past few weeks I have seen this fear lead to suspicion, mistrust and hate. And at the heart of this, I believe, is fear. As St. Paul said, perfect love drives out fear. But perfect fear drives out love.

What follows is from James Martin, S.J.'s facebook page from Saturday, October 26, 2015.