Father Edward L. Beck, can you tell us a little more...about optics, I mean?

Oh the Facebook priests and their obvious narcissism. I mean, who has so many profile pictures anyway? Well, I can think of another, but let's not go there, yet.

So, perusing Father CNN's page I came across this.

Tell us Father Edward L. Beck of the Passionist Fathers, Exactly what is it that you are trying to tell us?

Because you're right -- "Optics" really do, "speak volumes."

VATICAN FIRES SODOMITE MONSIGNOR - DEMANDED CHANGES TO DOCTRINE, CATECHISM AND HOLY SCRIPTURE! - How many others in the Francis entourage?

Sodomite priest and theologian Monsignor Krzystof Charmsa has been dismissed today by the Vatican from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and put under the authority of his bishop.

Late last evening, reports of Charamsa's Gay manifesto demanding changes to Church doctrine, the Catechesm and even Holy Scripture broke wide open. In a clear attempt to undermine his Prefect, Cardinal Muller, the Congregation and put undue pressure and influence on the Synod on the Family, Charamsa diclosed his activist homosexual beliefs and an agenda that is opposed to the Catholic faith. A theologian and professor at two Pontifical Universities, Father Federico Lombardi indicated that he would lose his positions.

The world's media has now caught on to this. They will pour out their venom upon the Church. They will use Kim Davis and the two sodomites the Pope met with in Washington against him and the Church. A short peruse of any combox shows the hatred that the world has towards the Catholic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ for the salvation of souls. The world prefers sodomy with all its practices, they are all caught in the grip of the Father of Lies, Satan himself. This priest is now at least, honest. The devil has him and his sodomite friend by the throat and he will drag them down to Hell. 

This priest has created a grave scandal, yet, is it not good to bring it all out into the light?

Sandro Magister states today that Charamasa's was "a coming-out that might be expected even by many homosexual priests who populate the entourage of Pope Francis, playing leading roles and in unprecedented numbers."

Charamasa is just one example of the boldness of these sodomites and how deep the penetration by these filthy degenerates is in the Holy Catholic Church.

As Adfero at Rorate Caeli states:

And, one other nugget: According to the pope's spokesman, this priest being an active homosexual, that was not what got him fired from his numerous posts. No, that merits "respect," according to the Vatican. The only reason they fired him is because he held a press conference before the start of the Synod of Sex which would put the Synod fathers through "undue media pressure."

Exactly!

Who else in the CDF or other curial offices know of this filthy sodomite who committed sacrilidge (asuming he was not celibate and chaste) every time he celebrated the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? Why is Lombardi only concernede about the media firestorm and not the fact that this priest was subverting the faith and in grave pyschological, moral and spiritual crisis? Where were was the concern for this priest's immortal soul? Where is it now?

I ask again, how many others? 

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/15_ottobre_03/vatican-theologian-confesses-m-happy-to-be-gay-and-have-partner-53aef384-69b2-11e5-b67f-8dc132718e33.shtml

“I want the Church and my community to know who I am: a gay priest who is happy, and proud of his identity. I’m prepared to pay the consequences, but it’s time the Church opened its eyes, and realised that offering gay believers total abstinence from a life of love is inhuman”. Monsignor Krzysztof Charamsa, 43 and Polish, who has been living in Rome for 17 years, speaks with a calm smile on his face. He is not just any priest, but has been a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith since 2003, is assistant secretary of the International Theological Commission of the Vatican, and teaches theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University and the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum in Rome. Never before has a priest with such a high-profile role in the Vatican made a similar statement. Today, on the eve of the Synod on the family, Monsignor Charamsa will be in Rome at the LGBT Catholic International Meeting organized by the Global Network of Rainbow Catholics, to support the discussion on gay Catholics.

“The rule was introduced in 2005 when I was already a priest, and only applies to new ordinations. For me it was a shock. It didn't use to be like this, and I think this is a mistake that needs to be corrected”. Have you always known you are gay? “Yes, but at first I didn't accept the fact; I submitted zealously to the teaching of the Church and to the life it forced upon me, according to the principle that ‘homosexuality does not exist (and if it does, it needs to be destroyed)’”.

Why did you decide to come out?
“There comes a day when something inside you snaps, and you can’t go on. If I had been alone I would have lived the nightmare of a denied homosexuality, but God never leaves us alone. And I think He has helped me take this important existential step. It’s important because of its consequences, but it’s also the premise for living honestly, which should be natural for every homosexual. The Church is already behind in tackling the issue, and we can't wait another 50 years, which is why I've decided to tell the Church who I am. I'm doing it for myself, for my community, and for the Church. It is also my duty towards the community of sexual minorities”.
What do you think you will achieve?“It seems to me that in the Church we are ignorant about homosexuality because we don't really know any homosexuals. We have them all around us, of course, but we never look them in the eye, because they seldom say who they are. I hope that my personal experience will help stir the Church’s consciousness in some way. I will personally reveal my identity to the Holy Father in a letter. And I will tell the universities in Rome where I teach who I am; to my great sorrow I will probably no longer be allowed to work in Catholic education”.
You are making this announcement on the eve of the Synod on the Family, which begins tomorrow at the Vatican. 

“Yes, I would like to tell the Synod that homosexual love is a kind of family love, a love that needs the family. Everyone – gays, lesbians and transsexuals included – foster in their hearts a desire for love and family. Everyone has the right to love, and that love must be protected by society and law. But above all it must be nourished by the Church. Christianity is the religion of love, and love is central to the figure of Jesus we bring to the world. A lesbian or gay couple should be able to openly say to their Church: ‘we love each other according to our nature, and offer this gift of our love to others, because it is a public matter, not just a private one; we are not merely engaged in some extreme pursuit of pleasure’”.
But this is not how the Church sees things.
“No, this is not the position of current Church doctrine, but similar views have been aired in theological scholarship. Above all in Protestant scholarship, but we also have excellent Catholic theologians who have given important contributions in the field”.
Catholic Catechism based on the Bible defines homosexuality as an “intrinsically disordered” tendency... 
“The Bible says nothing on the subject of homosexuality. It instead speaks of acts that I would call “homogenital”. Even heterosexual people may perform such acts, as happens in many prisons, but in that case they are acting against their nature and therefore committing a sin. When a gay person engages in those same acts, they are instead expressing their nature. The biblical sodomite has nothing to do with two gays that love each other in modern-day Italy and want to marry. I am unable to find a single passage, even in St Paul, that may be seen as referring to homosexual persons asking to be respected as such, since at the time the concept was unknown”.
Catholic doctrine excludes gays from the priesthood: how did you manage to become a priest?
How did you go from denial to being happy about being gay? 
“Through study, prayer and reflection. A dialogue with God and the study of theology, philosophy and science were crucial. Moreover, I now have a partner who has helped me transform my fears into the power of love”.
A partner? Is that not even more irreconcilable with being a Catholic priest?
“I know that the Church will see me as someone who has failed to keep a promise, who has lost his way, and what’s worse, not with a woman, but a man! I also know that I will have to give up the ministry, even though it is my whole life. But I'm not doing this so that I can live with my partner. The reasons are much wider-ranging and based on a reflection on Church doctrine”.
Could you explain?
“If I failed to be open, if I didn't accept myself, I couldn't be a good priest in any case, because I couldn't act as an intermediary for the joy of God. Humanity has made great progress in its understanding of these issues, but the Church is lagging behind. This is not the first time, of course, but when you are slow to understand astronomy the consequences are not as serious as when the delay regards people's most intimate being. The Church needs to realise that it is failing to rise to the challenge of our times”. English translation by Simon Tanner www.simontanner.com

Sodomite Priest buried in the Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith seeks to undermine Prefect Müller, the Polish Bishops and the Synod on the Family - Demands changes to Catechism and the Holy Bible!

The sodomite mafia that we've long suspected in the Vatican is raising its filthy head on the eve of the Synod to detroy the family. Father Oko's work on the infiltration of the priesthood in Rome and in Poland must be held up as a warning of what was to come. The dossier of three hundred pages handed over by Benedict XVI to Jorge Bergoglio gathers dust but the truth will come out along with coming out of these sodomite moles into the light where they can no longer hide.

A vile and satanic attempt by numerous priests, bishops and cardinals is underway to subvert the doctrine of the Catholic Church. The Christian people must wake up to this evil and diabolical crisis which we face under the very nose of the Bishop of Rome himself!

Polonia Cristiana is reporting on a priest working in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Krzyztof Charamsa who has reported, "I am a gay priest. I am a happy and proud gay priest. My joy and freedom is dedicated to a man whom I love, Eduard, my boyfriend, who able to bring out my best energies and also convert the remnant of fear on the strength of love."

This priest even demands the rewriting of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church and the Holy Bible!

According to Edward Pentin on Twitter, Charamsa's "self-'outing' is seen as an attack against Cardinal Muller, the CDF and the Polish bishops ahead of the Synod." Pentin reports that the Doctor of Theology intends to hold a press conference at noon, Rome time on Saturday.

Charamsa has issued his "new manifesto of liberation." It is only right to give it the widest possible distribution to expose this man and others for the evil work they do in the Bride of Christ for the Father of Lies, Satan himself.

1. Disposal of homophobia and anti-gay discrimination

We demand that the Catholic Church divest itself of activities, the mentality and language of homophobia, hate speech, humiliation and depreciating, marginalization, stigmatization and rejection of LGBT people. We demand the cessation of the Church of discrimination and soft persecution of these people so within it as well as beyond its borders.

2. Condemnation punishment for homosexuality

We demand that the Church unequivocally speak out against punishment for sexual orientation and against the death penalty or imprisonment, against any acts of cruelty against any discrimination against people based on sexual orientation, as well as against attempts to undergo "reorganizational therapies" of persons belonging to sexual minorities.
3. Abandonment by the Church to interfere in guaranteeing human rights by democratic states
We demand that the Church revise its past behavior to states and nations which, through democratic development of civilization seek to guarantee human rights, including the right to love and to civil marriage, persons belonging to sexual minorities . Civilized countries should respect their autonomy for the sake of the common good of all, not just Catholics.

4. Canceling incompetent and prejudicial documents

We demand from the pope revise the catechism and appeal all the documents, cruel and incompetent regarding homosexual persons who are the object of the Church's compassion and stigmatization. In particular, the documents of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the heir to the Holy Inquisition. Not acceptable documents are: a) the declaration "Persona Humana" from 1975, saying among others about "pathological constitution" of homosexual persons, which by their nature are supposedly "difficult to adjust socially" and carry the "anomaly" that "without the necessary and significant order" is "depravity"; b) "Letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons" of 1986, which calls for "compassion" for homosexuals, "sufferers", accepts the existence of a "fair discrimination" homosexuals, and rejects only the "unjust discrimination"; c) outrageous "considerations concerning the response to legislative proposals on the non-discrimination of homosexual persons" in 1992 r .; d) 'Considerations Regarding Proposals to legalize Unions Between Homosexual Persons "from 2003, according to which homosexuality is" devoid of any genuine affective, "and homosexual relationships are devoid of" human and ordered form of sexual relations "e)" Catechism of the Church Catholic ", points 2357-2359, teaches that not only works, but also homosexual orientation is" objectively disordered ". He also emphasizes that the nature of homosexual people, there is no emotional complementarity with other human persons that they love. And he adds that for most of us orientation is difficult experience requires compassion neighbor, but not without a just avoiding discrimination. How does he know what is our suffering and difficulty? Well, it is not sexual orientation, but homophobia of the Church. Learning by catechism is offensive, apart from the fact that the very definition of homosexuality is deficient, if at all not quite false. Cheaper is also analysis of the situation of homosexual persons.

5. Immediate cancellation of discriminatory instructions about avoiding the priesthood of homosexual persons

We demand that the pope immediately abolished regrettable instructions about avoiding the ordination of homosexuals, endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI in 2005.                                

6. Initiate a serious scientific reflection interdisciplinary over the morality of human sexuality                                                                         

We demand that the Church initiate a serious and objective scientific reflection on sexual morality, taking note of the development - which so far sees as ideologically - science and reproductive health services, medical, psychological, psychiatric, biological, sociological, anthropological, Gender studies etc.

7. Revision of the interpretation of biblical texts on homosexuality.

We demand that the Church has treated seriously question their own interpretation of the Bible, freeing themselves from fundamentalism, spotting letters when they talk about homosexual people, they never condemning, and kontekstualizując biblical texts that address homogenital acts.

8. Adoption of ecumenical dialogue with our brothers Lutherans and Anglicans about homosexuality

We demand that the Church has taken a serious ecumenical dialogue on the issue of homosexuality with Christians, Protestants and Anglicans who, in an open and transparent process of maturation have developed their own beliefs on this subject, which may help the Catholic Church understand the reality.

9. The need to ask for forgiveness wines past and present church toward homosexuals

We demand that the Church went the way of request for pardon him wine age, neglect and silence, persecution and crimes against homosexuals and to cease committing similar acts from now.

10. Respect for believers, homosexuals and change distorted position of the Church on the issue of how it should look like their Christian life

We demand that the Church finally open up to believing homosexuals, for baptized persons belonging to sexual minorities who do not have the right to propose a total disposing of love and resignation with a healthy sex life, which expresses their nature and in accordance with their sexual orientation.

Text "Gazeta Wyborcza" received from the Father. Christopher Charamsy

This doesn't mean that the Pope supports so-called "same-sex marriage!"

On the same day that Kim Davis is thrown under the bus for thinking that Catholics were, well Catholic; we find these two gems being carressed by Jorge Bergoglio, himself. The photos are courtesy of Rorate Caeli with the post titled, Back to Normal. 

Indeed.

The old guy on the left is the Pope Bergoglio's old buddy from Argentina and a man who engages suffers from same-sex attraction. The one in the middle is his young lover by nearly twenty-two years. His old friend has used him for the gay agenda.

Good grief, this would be bad if they were heterosexual.

This storyline is played over and over, the older successful and well-to-do grooms the little pet from the Third World, in this case Indonesia. 

Look how happy Jorge is to meet him. 

Do you want to vomit now as I did when he came out that night on the loggia?

O LORD, deliver us.

Live Blogging the Apocalypse, er...Synod

Hilary White has come out of retirement and created a Blog in partnership with a few others which will include frequent live blogging during the Synod, called What's Up With The Synod. I've added it to the list on the left. It looks like there are going to be frequent posts and comments, seven already today.

You may wish to begin with this erudite commentary by the same Miss White on the Remnant.

Father Rosica CSB, Father Spadaro, SJ! Where do the views of Kim Davis conflict with the Pope's?

What absurdity.

These priests Tweet that the Pope's meeting with Kim Davis does not mean an endorsement of her views.

What views?

That marriage between two men or two women is not marriage?

Logically then it would follow that they or the Pope must think that it is.

Does it mean that her views are wrong? That marriage between the same-sex is okay?

It is notable that they did not walk back the Pope's meeting with a sodomite.

An apology to Kim Davis

J.M.J.

Dear Mrs. Davis,

First, I wish to thank you for your witness to the truth against the abomination of what has been called "same-sex marriage" something which is simply not possible. May you find strength and consolation in Our Lord Jesus Christ. May you cherish the few minutes you had with the Vicar of Christ. May it be a continuing grace for you.

Second, I wish to apologise to you for the uncharitable Catholics who are not acting as Christ or even in modelling Pope Francis in his meeting with you.

It is my understanding that you did not seek out this meeting, but in fact, it was Pope Francis himself. This is based on the information given to us by Dr. Robert Moynihan who contacted your lawyers on behalf of the Vatican to arrange a meeting at the Nunciature in Washington.

Rather than rejoice in what Pope Francis did, to greet you in Christ, to build you up and encourage you, many media savvy Catholics have insulted you on Facebook, Twitter and blogs and in cable and main-stream media. Many question the Pope's actions, doubt them, think he was duped and more. They drag your name through the mud and some of these are priests.

Father CNN, also known as Father Edward Beck whose hair and teeth are the same colour and offset by his beautiful tan writes. Salt + Light, Canada's Catholic Channel of No Hope wonders what it means. Various priests of the Society of something other than Jesus make excuses. The secular media who hate all things Catholic tell the Pope what to do. 

Now, Federico Lombardi, S.J., who has no doubt received pressure from the embedded homosexuals in the Catholic Church intent on destroying the family in the same manner as the sodomites worldwide, has tried to distance the Pope from what was no doubt, a beautiful meeting between the two of you. Father Thomas J. Rosica continues to Tweet that the visit should not mean that the Pope supports her position. Should one assume then that the Pope should support so-called, same-sex marriage?

Is it any wonder Evangelical Christians want nothing to with "the whore of Babylon? These malefactors are trying to turn the Bride of Christ into that "whore." This is not the Catholic Church that Our Lord Jesus Christ willed to be under Peter. They are building a false church, a church of man, a church that is rich and corrupt, a church that is a against Christ and His Truth.

The Vatican says that the visit is not an endorsement of your views on so-called "same-sex marriage." The Vatican has clearly been taken over by a bunch of sodomites. What this really shows is that Pope Francis is not his own man. It was Pope Francis the man who desired to meet with you, to console and encourage you; this we must assume. It is the evil, corrupted and manipulative and deceitful clerics surrounding him who, when he stepped out of this stage-managed papacy, have come out now to back-track on his goodwill and insult you in the process.

For this, as a Catholic, I am sorry that they have used you.

May the LORD confound these malefactors and may the same LORD comfort you.

Please do not let these haughty and arrogant Catholics bother you, but let it be another cross which you must bear that will lead you to the fullness of faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church.

Thank you for your witness.

Vox Cantoris

Has the Synod finished before its even begun?

Breaking at Rorate Caeli blog is a report from Italian journalist Marco Tossati. The opening and closing paragraphs are below, Please visit Rorate to read the rest. 

We are in for a rough ride.

We are not being bad Catholics by expressing our concerns and raising the alarm of what manipulations and machinations are now under way. Do not let anyone tell you that you have no right to express your concern and fight for the Church!

Can. 209
§1 Christ's faithful are bound to preserve their communion with the Church at all times, even in their external actions.
§2 They are to carry out with great diligence their responsibilities towards both the universal Church and the particular Church to which by law they belong.
Can. 210 All Christ's faithful, each according to his or her own condition, must make a wholehearted effort to lead a holy life, and to promote the growth of the Church and its continual sanctification.
Can. 211 All Christ's faithful have the obligation and the right to strive so that the divine message of salvation may more and more reach all people of all times and all places.
Can. 212 §1 Christ's faithful, conscious of their own responsibility, are bound to show christian obedience to what the sacred Pastors, who represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith and prescribe as rulers of the Church.
§2 Christ's faithful are at liberty to make known their needs, especially their spiritual needs, and their wishes to the Pastors of the Church.
§3 They have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church. They have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ's faithful, but in doing so they must always respect the integrity of faith and morals, show due reverence to the Pastors and take into account both the common good and the dignity of individuals.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/bombshell-secret-parallel-synod-papal.html#more

BOMBSHELL - SECRET PARALLEL SYNOD: Papal Post-Synod Document ALREADY being drafted by Jesuit group to allow communion for divorced and other aberrations

Summary: Italian journalist Marco Tosatti reveals that A SECRET PARALLEL SYNOD has been established in Rome, a cabal composed almost exclusively by Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian presence (easy to guess who), to draft the necessary post-synodal documents to implement whatever the Pope wants to implement. And they will implement it, no matter what, as the secret committee to draft the Annulment reforms has shown; what everyone supposed was true in fact is true: the Synodal process is a sham.

***

In this context [that is, of the procedural changes mentioned by Edward Pentin], news has arrived to us for about twelve days that around thirty people, almost all of them Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian, are working on the themes on the Synod, in a very reserved way, under the coordinatin of Father Antonio Spadaro, the director of Civiltà Cattolica [the official journal of the Holy See], who spends a long time in Santa Marta, in consultation with the Pope.

The discretion in the works extends also to the Jesuits of the same House, the villa of Civiltà Cattolica, Villa Malta, on the Pincio [Hill], where part of the work is done. One possibility is that the "task force" works to provide the Pope the instruments for an eventual post-synodal document on the theme of the Eucharist to the remarried divorced, on cohabiting [couples], and same-sex couples.

With Elizabeth Scalia - Error, sentimentality and emotionalism come before the facts

Let’s just say I usually never read Elizabeth Scalia or any of the Catholic writers at Aleteia or worse, Pathetic, I mean Patheos.

However, this I did read because of a link I came across. It has to do with Scalia’s views on Mo Rocca’s reading of Holy Scripture at Mass on Saturday in the presence of Pope Francis. Rocca, a Catholic, is a quasi-celebrity and out and proud sodomite activist who dissents from Catholic teaching on morality.

Remember that by clicking and reading her whole story you give her another penny. However, if you must, you can read what Scalia writes at this link or you can use Do Not Link to the right. http://www.donotlink.com/framed?786226.

By reprinting this piece in full you are in violation of copyright law, as you never contacted Aleteia or Elizabeth Scalia requesting reprint permission. Please limit your piece to a 300 word excerpt with a link back to the piece -- standard fair use procedure and common internet etiquette -- or remove it from your site entirely. 

Zelda Caldwell, Managing Editor, Aleteia English edition

Encountering Mo Rocca at the Ambo

When openly gay tv-newsman Mo Rocca ... "an unrepentant sodomite” ... papal event, much less a Mass?” That’s right Elizabeth, “an unrepentant sodomite” and a perfectly correct term. Sodomy and “sodomite” are the words used in Scripture and history. The word homosexual is just over a century old and “gay” means happy and joyful. He dissents from Church teaching and he does so publicly which is enough reason to disqualify him from an “official” and certainly a “liturgical” role in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Attending is another matter and receiving Holy Communion is the same for him as the rest of us, after Confession and Penance with a firm purpose of amendment of life! Well, ... “whoever was still holding the rolodex from .. He had emcee’d Benedict’s youth rally ... had not yet “come out” as gay. He had not “come out” and whilst is sexual sins may have been known by some, and thus the same factors would apply, he had not made them public so the public “scandal” did not exist. ...Rocca’s appearance at the ambo – whether by design or happenstance or the arcane workings of the Holy Spirit So, the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Most Holy Trinity picked Mo? Are you serious? A “culture of encounter” demands that we see the whole person before us, not simply an ideology, or a category of social standing, or even as a unit of sin, but as a whole person, Yes, but they don’t take an official liturgical role at Mass! the conversion, the turning of heart and soul, came from meeting Christ.  ... But they were not permitted to enter into the Holy of Holies and sprinkle blood were they, even if they were of the Tribe of Levi! None of that is effective evangelization; none of it begets the encounter. Reading at the Mass is not about evangelisation. That comes with “Ite missa est” Do you even know what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is? ... he refrained from receiving Holy Communion, You don’t know that, nor do I and that is between him and God. ... Nothing prevents a Catholic – any Catholic – from engaging in parish life, or from licitly participating in the Mass; It was "llicit." No, we are also not permitted to engage in official liturgical functions whilst being a public dissenter, there is a difference between this and one’s private sins! Obedience ... What about the obedience to Catholic morality? ... Pharisee. Because everyone that upholds Church teaching is a Pharisee.

Really Elizabeth, you get paid for this bovine excrement?

I believe that I am under 300 words.

Have a great day.

“Unacceptable.” The Base Document of the Synod “Compromises the Truth”

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351141?eng=y&refresh_ce

On the verge of the synod, three theologians with the support of cardinals and bishops critique and reject the “Instrumentum Laboris.” Here is the complete text of their charges of accusation

by Sandro Magister



ROME, September 29, 2015 - The text that is made public here joins the numerous statements of various viewpoints on issues of family, marriage, divorce, homosexuality, that have followed each other with growing intensity with the approach of the opening of the synod.

It is presented as a collective work. Not only because the text has three authors, but even more because it was born and raised, over the span of almost a year, at the initiative and with the contribution of numerous other Catholics, priests and laymen, from various nations of Europe, with the attention and support of bishops and cardinals, some of whom will be fathers at the upcoming synod.

The text takes aim at the most controversial paragraphs of the final “Relatio” of the 2014 synod, which were later incorporated into the “Lineamenta” and the “Instrumentum Laboris,” concerning communion for the divorced and remarried, “spiritual communion,” and homosexuals.

In the judgment of the text’s promoters, these paragraphs contradict here and there the doctrine taught to all the faithful by the magisterium of the Church and by the Catechism of the Catholic Church itself, to the point of “compromising the Truth” and therefore making the entire “Instrumentum Laboris” “unacceptable,” as well as any “other document that may reiterate its contents and be put to the vote at the end of the next synodal assembly.”

The three priests and theologians who byline the text are:

- Claude Barthe, 68, of Paris, cofounder of the magazine “Catholica,” an expert in canon law and liturgy, promoter of pilgrimages in support of “Summorum Pontificum,” author of works such as “The Mass, a forest of symbols,” “Novelists and Catholicism,” “Thinking differently about ecumenism.”

- Antonio Livi, 77, of Rome, dean emeritus of the faculty of philosophy of the Pontifical Lateran University, ordinary member of the Pontifical Academy of Saint Thomas, and president of the apostolic union “Fides et Ratio” for the defense of Catholic truth. His most recent work, from 2012, is entitled: “True and false theology.”

- Alfredo Morselli, 57, of Bologna, pastor, confessor, and preacher of spiritual exercises according to the method of Saint Ignatius. A graduate of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, he is the author of works such as “The negation of the historicity of the Gospels. History, causes, remedies” (2006), and “Then all Israel will be saved” (2010). His archbishop is Cardinal Carlo Caffarra.

The text can be read in its entirety, in the original Italian, on this other page of www,chiesa:

> Osservazioni sull'"Instrumentum Laboris"

Reproduced below are the introduction and two of the four chapters into which the text is divided: the first, on communion for the divorced and remarried and the third, on homosexuality.


______________



OBSERVATIONS ON THE “INSTRUMENTUM LABORIS”

by Claude Barthe, Antonio Livi, Alfredo Morselli



This document presents in a detailed manner, in the light of the Catechism of the Catholic Church anf of the “depositum fidei” in general, some difficulties concerning the “Relatio Synodi” of the last extraordinary synod, incorporated and expanded in the “Instrumentum Laboris” for the 14th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops.

It is even apt to observe how the “Instrumentum” goes further than the “Relatio” itself, expanding its scope, going beyond the intentions of the synod fathers themselves. In effect, this document has taken care to pick up and rework even those propositions which, not having been approved by a qualified majority of the last assembly of the extraordinary synod, should not and could not have been included in the final document of that synod and which therefore should have been viewed as rejected.

Therefore, even where the “Instrumentum” appears to be in keeping with Revelation and the Tradition of the Church, the overall result is a compromising of the Truth such as to make the document unacceptable on the whole, unless its contents were to be presented again and put to a vote at the end of the next synodal assembly.

Pastoral care is not the art of compromise and concession: it is the art of caring for souls in the truth. So the warning of the prophet Isaiah applies to all the synod fathers: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter” (Isaiah 5:20).

Last but not least it must be noted how the “Instrumentum” has to a great extent been stripped of theological significance and superseded, from the canonical point of view, by the two motu proprio of last August 15, released the following September 8.


SUMMARY


1 - Observations on § 122 (52)

A. - An hypothesis incompatible with dogma
B. - An improper use of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, erroneously drawing arguments from it to support a form of situational ethics
C. - An argument not to the point


2 - Observations on §§ 124-125 (53)

The non-univocal character of the term “spiritual communion” for those who are in God’s grace and those who are not.


3 - Observations on §§ 130-132 (55-56)

“Instrumentum Laboris” and pastoral attention for persons with homosexual tendencies: omissions and silences

4 - Spiritual communion and the divorced and remarried

A more in-depth study on spiritual communion

__________



OBSERVATIONS ON § 122 (52)


Introduction

The next assembly of the Synod of Bishops is intended to deal with many problems concerning the family. Nevertheless, thanks in part to the media uproar and to the pope’s great attentiveness toward the divorced and remarried, the next assembly is considered as the de facto synod of communion for the divorced and remarried. One of the issues that will be addressed seems to be, in fact and for most, the issue of the discussion.

It is well known that in order to resolve a problem it is essential to frame it properly. Unfortunately we have grounds for maintaining that the document that should furnish the correct framing of the whole question - meaning the “Instrumentum Laboris” - is instead misleading and dangerous for our faith.

We present a few observations on the most problematic paragraph, concerning the question of admission to Holy Communion for those who live “more uxorio” in spite of not being canonically married; this is § 122, which reproduces § 52 of the definitive version of the “Relatio finalis” of the 2014 assembly.


The text in question, § 122 (52):

“122. (52) The synod fathers also considered the possibility of giving the divorced and remarried access to the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist. Various synod fathers insisted on maintaining the present discipline, because of the constitutive relationship between participation in the Eucharist and communion with the Church as well as her teaching on the indissoluble character of marriage. Others proposed a more individualized approach, permitting access in certain situations and with certain well-defined conditions, primarily in irreversible situations and those involving moral obligations towards children who would have to endure unjust suffering. Access to the sacraments might take place if preceded by a penitential practice, determined by the diocesan bishop. The subject needs to be thoroughly examined, bearing in mind the distinction between an objective sinful situation and extenuating circumstances, given that ‘imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors’ (CCC, 1735).”

There are reasons to maintain that § 122 contains:

A. - An hypothesis incompatible with dogma
B. - An improper use of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, erroneously drawing arguments from it to support a form of situational ethics
C. - An argument not to the point


A. - An hypothesis incompatible with dogma, such as to present itself as deliberate doubt in a matter of faith


“The synod fathers also considered the possibility of giving the divorced and remarried access to the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist.”

This reflection is illicit and falls under the category of deliberate doubt in a matter of faith, on the basis of what Vatican Council I solemnly declares: “Catholics may never have just cause for calling in doubt, by suspending their assent, the faith which they have already received from the teaching of the Church.” In full conformity with the whole Tradition of the Church, the Catechism of the Catholic Church also places doubt among the sins against faith:

CCC 2088: “There are various ways of sinning against faith: Voluntary doubt about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. […] If deliberately cultivated, doubt can lead to spiritual blindness”.

That the statement “the civilly divorced and remarried cohabiting ‘more uxorio’ cannot receive Eucharistic communion” belongs to that which is presented for belief as revealed by the Church - and therefore can no longer be brought into question - is proven by:

John Paul II, Apost. Exort. "Familiaris Consortio", November 22, 1981, § 84:

“However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist.”

Congregation for the Doctrine of the faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church Concerning the Reception of Holy Communion by the Divorced and Remarried Members of the Faithful, September 14, 1994:

“5. The doctrine and discipline of the Church in this matter are amply presented in the post-conciliar period in the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. The Exhortation, among other things, reminds pastors that out of love for the truth they are obliged to discern carefully the different situations and exhorts them to encourage the participation of the divorced and remarried in the various events in the life of the Church. At the same time it confirms and indicates the reasons for the constant and universal practice, ‘founded on Sacred Scripture, of not admitting the divorced and remarried to Holy Communion’ (Apost. Exort. Familiaris Consortio, no. 84: AAS 74 (1982) 185). The structure of the Exhortation and the tenor of its words give clearly to understand that this practice, which is presented as binding, cannot be modified because of different situations.

6. Members of the faithful who live together as husband and wife with persons other than their legitimate spouses may not receive Holy Communion. Should they judge it possible to do so, pastors and confessors, given the gravity of the matter and the spiritual good of these persons (cf. 1 Cor 11:27-29) as well as the common good of the Church, have the serious duty to admonish them that such a judgment of conscience openly contradicts the Church's teaching (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 978 § 2). Pastors in their teaching must also remind the faithful entrusted to their care of this doctrine.”

Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration Concerning the Admission to Holy Communion of Faithful Who Are Divorced and Remarried, June 24, 2000:

“The Code of Canon Law establishes that ‘Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion’ (can. 915). In recent years some authors have sustained, using a variety of arguments, that this canon would not be applicable to faithful who are divorced and remarried. […]

“Given this alleged contrast between the discipline of the 1983 Code and the constant teachings of the Church in this area, this Pontifical Council, in agreement with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments declares the following:

“1. The prohibition found in the cited canon, by its nature, is derived from divine law and transcends the domain of positive ecclesiastical laws: the latter cannot introduce legislative changes which would oppose the doctrine of the Church. The scriptural text on which the ecclesial tradition has always relied is that of St. Paul: ‘This means that whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily sins against the body and blood of the Lord. A man should examine himself first only then should he eat of the bread and drink of the cup. He who eats and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks a judgment on himself.’ (1 Cor 11: 27-29. cf. Council of Trent, Decree on the Sacrament of the Eucharist: DH 1646-1647, 1661).”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church also “confirms and indicates the reasons for the constant and universal practice, ‘founded on Sacred Scripture, of not admitting the divorced and remarried to Holy Communion’” and “the constant teachings of the Church in this area”:

CCC 1650: “Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ - ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery’ (Mk 10:11-12). The Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God's law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists. For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence”.


Conclusions of § A.

§ 122 of the “Instrumentum Laboris” admits the possibility of that which, for a Catholic, is completely impossible. Access to sacramental communion for the divorced and remarried is presented as a legitimate possibility, when instead this possibility has already been defined as illicit by the previous magisterium (FC, CdF 1994, CCC, Pont. C. Legislative Texts); it is presented as a possibility that is not only completely theoretical (reasoning “by the impossible”), but real, when instead the only real possibility for a Catholic consistent with the revealed Truth is to affirm the impossibility that the divorced and remarried can licitly receive sacramental communion. The question is presented as theologically open, when in doctrinal and pastoral terms it has been closed (ibid.); it is presented as if beginning from a vacuum in the preceding magisterium, when instead the preceding magisterium has spoken with such authoritativeness as not to admit any more discussion on the matter (ibid.).

If anyone were to insist on discussing again that which is presented for belief as revealed by the Church, formulating hypotheses that turn out to be incompatible with dogma, he would lead the faithful to deliberate doubt in a matter of faith.


B. - An improper use of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, erroneously drawing arguments from it to support a form of situational ethics


“The subject needs to be thoroughly examined, bearing in mind the distinction between an objective sinful situation and extenuating circumstances, given that ‘imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors’ (CCC, 1735).”

These last lines of § 122 of the Instrumentum Laboris refer to § 1735 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to support “the distinction between the objective situation of sin and attenuating circumstances,” in view of a possible admission to the sacraments of the “divorced and remarried.” What does § 1735 of the Catechism really say? Let’s read it again:

“Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.”

And now let’s try to explain this text: take the hypothetical case of a poor young woman in India or China who is sterilized under pressure, or a young woman in Italy today who is led to get an abortion by her relatives and boyfriend… In this case imputability is diminished or eliminated, however not directly (simpliciter) by the sad circumstances, but by the imperfection of the act: a morally judicable act - a human act, in more precise terms - must be free and intentional.

Today, even in Italy, with the bad education that is received starting in kindergarten, a young woman may very well not realize that abortion is murder: moreover she might be psychologically fragile and not have the natural grit to go against everyone and everything. It is clear that the moral responsibility of this young woman is attenuated.

It is a different matter with a divorced, civilly remarried person who has come back to the faith after the fact: let’s say that his wife has left him, he has remarried with the mistaken idea of making another family, and he can no longer go back to his first, true, only wife (perhaps she has taken up with another man and had children with him); this brother, in spite of praying and actively participating in the life of the parish, being admired by the pastor and by all the faithful, being aware of his state of sin and not stubborn in wanting to justify it, is living more uxorio with the wife he married civilly, not being able to live with her as brother and sister. In this case, the decision to approach the new wife is a perfectly free and intentional act, and what § 1735 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church says absolutely cannot be applied.

The Catechism itself in fact teaches, at § 1754:

"Circumstances of themselves cannot change the moral quality of acts themselves; they can make neither good nor right an action that is in itself evil".

And John Paul II, in the encyclical "Veritatis Splendor,” at § 115, affirmed:

“This is the first time, in fact, that the Magisterium of the Church has set forth in detail the fundamental elements of this teaching, and presented the principles for the pastoral discernment necessary in practical and cultural situations which are complex and even crucial.

“In the light of Revelation and of the Church's constant teaching, especially that of the Second Vatican Council, I have briefly recalled the essential characteristics of freedom, as well as the fundamental values connected with the dignity of the person and the truth of his acts, so as to be able to discern in obedience to the moral law a grace and a sign of our adoption in the one Son (cf. Eph 1:4-6). Specifically, this Encyclical has evaluated certain trends in moral theology today. I now pass this evaluation on to you, in obedience to the word of the Lord who entrusted to Peter the task of strengthening his brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), in order to clarify and aid our common discernment.

“Each of us knows how important is the teaching which represents the central theme of this Encyclical and which is today being restated with the authority of the Successor of Peter. Each of us can see the seriousness of what is involved, not only for individuals but also for the whole of society, with the reaffirmation of the universality and immutability of the moral commandments, particularly those which prohibit always and without exception intrinsically evil acts.”


Conclusions of § B.

The words of Saint John Paul II are unmistakable: with the authority of the successor of Peter he reaffirms the universality and immutability of the moral commandments, and in particular of those that always and without exception prohibit intrinsically evil acts. He also refutes the artificial and false separation of those who presume to leave the immutable doctrine unaltered but then reconcile the unreconcilable, meaning that they act pastorally in a way not in keeping with the same doctrine.

In fact the same holy pontiff did not write the encyclical as a speculative exercise apart from the world, but wanted to present the reasons for the pastoral discernment necessary in complex and sometimes critical practical and cultural situations.

Certainly a divorced and remarried person like the one described in the preceding example (absolutely not a rare case) must be loved, followed, accompanied toward complete conversion, and only then will be able to receive the Most Holy Eucharist. This conversion must be proclaimed as really possible with the help of grace, with the patience and mercy of God, without contravening an unquestionable truth of our faith, according to which one cannot receive Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin.


C. - An argument not to the point


“… irreversible situations and those involving moral obligations towards children who would have to endure unjust suffering.”

Admission to the sacraments has nothing to do with irreversible situations, in which it is no longer possible to reconstitute the first and true marriage.

In these situations, the main moral obligation that the divorced and remarried have toward their children is that of living in the grace of God, in order to be better able to raise them; admitting or not admitting them to the sacraments has nothing to do with their obligations toward their offspring. Unless one wants to deny that the Church “with firm confidence believes that those who have rejected the Lord's command and are still living in this state will be able to obtain from God the grace of conversion and salvation, provided that they have persevered in prayer, penance and charity” (Familiaris Consortio, 84).


[…]


“INSTRUMENTUM LABORIS” AND PASTORAL ATTENTION FOR PERSONS WITH HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES: OMISSIONS AND SILENCES“


Pastoral attention for persons with homosexual tendencies is certainly nothing new in the Church’s magisterium. The “Instrumentum Laboris,” with respect to the “Relatio finalis” of 2014, compensates for the most serious omission of this latter document, giving more attention to the families of homosexual persons (families that are almost completely forgotten in the “Relatio”). As just as it may be, urging the avoidance of unjust discrimination against persons with homosexual tendencies while only barely referring to their families is almost off-topic in a synod on the family.

In the composition of the “Instrumentum Laboris,” a paragraph has indeed been added (§ 131) that advises attention for these family units, and yet there is still no trace of important and fundamental indications reiterated by the ordinary magisterium on the matter.

We maintain that at a synod on the family, addressing the issue of homosexuality by saying only that homosexuals must not be treated badly and their families not be left alone, is a sin of omission.

Here is the text in question:

“Pastoral Attention towards Persons with Homosexual Tendencies

“130. (55) Some families have members who have a homosexual tendency. In this regard, the synod fathers asked themselves what pastoral attention might be appropriate for them in accordance with Church teaching: ‘There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family.’ Nevertheless, men and women with a homosexual tendency ought to be received with respect and sensitivity. ‘Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided’ (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, 4).

“131. The following point needs to be reiterated: every person, regardless of his/her sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his/her human dignity and received with sensitivity and great care in both the Church and society. It would be desirable that dioceses devote special attention in their pastoral programmes to the accompaniment of families where a member has a homosexual tendency and of homosexual persons themselves.

“132. (56) Exerting pressure in this regard on the Pastors of the Church is totally unacceptable: it is equally unacceptable for international organizations to link their financial assistance to poorer countries with the introduction of laws that establish ‘marriage’ between persons of the same sex.”

It seems to us that the following observations can be made on this text.


Omissions and silences


Seeing that we are piously urged to put ourselves in the “condition of a field hospital that is so beneficial for the proclamation of God’s mercy,” it is opportune to recall that, in every self-respecting hospital, the doctors do their duty when: 1) they diagnose the illness, 2) administer treatment, 3) follow the patient all the way to recovery; moreover the Church is like “a physician who realizes the danger of disease, protects himself and others from it, but at the same time he strives to cure those who have contracted it.”

To reduce the work of the Church to welcoming persons with homosexual tendencies with “respect and delicacy” (or to silence the rest entirely) can at most be likened - still following the metaphor of the field hospital - to palliative care.

Moreover, recalling only the duty of avoiding any display of unjust discrimination, without saying anything else, can seem like conformity to the propaganda against so-called “homophobia,” which we know very well to be a wedge for introducing disastrous norms into legislation and the acceptance of “gender” theory into consciences.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was wise in observing, in 1986, that “one tactic used is to protest that any and all criticism of or reservations about homosexual people, their activity and lifestyle, are simply diverse forms of unjust discrimination.”

When one speaks of unjust discrimination against homosexual persons, it is therefore opportune also to explain clearly what is truly unjust discrimination and what is instead the dutiful denunciation of evil.

The same congregation also reiterated that “departure from the Church's teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral.”

1 - We maintain that the illness must be diagnosed clearly, as for example the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith did in 2003; let’s see how the question of unjust discrimination is treated in a fairly clear context:

“Homosexual acts ‘close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved’ (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2357).

"Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts ‘as a serious depravity...’ (cf. Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10). This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered’ (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, declaration ‘Persona Humana,’ December 29, 1975, no. 8). This same moral judgment is found in many Christian writers of the first centuries (cf. for example St. Policarp, Letter to the Philippians, V, 3; St. Justin, First Apologia, 27, 1-4; Athenagoras, Plea for the Christians, 34) and is unanimously accepted by Catholic Tradition.

“Nonetheless, according to the teaching of the Church, men and women with homosexual tendencies ‘must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided’ (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2358; cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, October 1, 1986, no. 10). They are called, like other Christians, to live the virtue of chastity (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2359; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, October 1, 1986, no. 12). The homosexual inclination is however ‘objectively disordered’ (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2358) and homosexual practices are ‘sins gravely contrary to chastity’ (Ibid., no. 2396)”.

Moreover, the possibility of sin on the part of persons with homosexual tendencies must be admitted, not excluding confession as a sometimes necessary supernatural aid:

“What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God's liberating grace.”

Love shows itself also by unveiling prospects of false happiness:

“As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood.”


2 - In the second place, it is necessary to prescribe treatment:

a) preventing the infections of the spirit of the world…

“… Special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option.”

“[The Church] is really concerned about the many who are not represented by the pro-homosexual movement and about those who may have been tempted to believe its deceitful propaganda.”

b) … having recourse also to the human sciences. The treatment prescribed must not be only of a moral character: just as the Church, in order to foster the correct use of marriage, promotes the creation of clinics where natural methods are taught, so also it is opportune that the Church should foster all those forms of psychological support which have been provided in recent years, with encouraging results:

“In a particular way, we would ask the Bishops to support, with the means at their disposal, the development of appropriate forms of pastoral care for homosexual persons. These would include the assistance of the psychological, sociological and medical sciences, in full accord with the teaching of the Church.”

c) … and instilling hope: persons of homosexual orientation must be accompanied on a cultural journey as well, intended to unmask all homosexualist theories (such as “gender” theory) and slogans such as “homosexuals are born that way”; this slogan soothes the consciences of those who want to stay like this, and suppresses the hope of those would would like to get out.


3 - In the third place, the patient must be followed all the way to recovery, which is the life of grace and holiness itself; anything whatsoever not in keeping with faith that is called hardship is - for the believer - a providential occasion of sanctification: “Diligentibus Deum, omnia cooperantur in bonum" (Rm 8, 28). Under this aspect as well, we find no words better than those of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

“What, then, are homosexual persons to do who seek to follow the Lord? Fundamentally, they are called to enact the will of God in their life by joining whatever sufferings and difficulties they experience in virtue of their condition to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross. That Cross, for the believer, is a fruitful sacrifice since from that death come life and redemption. While any call to carry the cross or to understand a Christian's suffering in this way will predictably be met with bitter ridicule by some, it should be remembered that this is the way to eternal life for all who follow Christ.

“It is, in effect, none other than the teaching of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians when he says that the Spirit produces in the lives of the faithful ‘love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, trustfulness, gentleness and self-control’ (5:22) and further (v. 24), ‘You cannot belong to Christ unless you crucify all self-indulgent passions and desires.’

“It is easily misunderstood, however, if it is merely seen as a pointless effort at self-denial. The Cross is a denial of self, but in service to the will of God himself who makes life come from death and empowers those who trust in him to practise virtue in place of vice.

“To celebrate the Paschal Mystery, it is necessary to let that Mystery become imprinted in the fabric of daily life. To refuse to sacrifice one's own will in obedience to the will of the Lord is effectively to prevent salvation. Just as the Cross was central to the expression of God's redemptive love for us in Jesus, so the conformity of the self-denial of homosexual men and women with the sacrifice of the Lord will constitute for them a source of self-giving which will save them from a way of life which constantly threatens to destroy them.

“Christians who are homosexual are called, as all of us are, to a chaste life. As they dedicate their lives to understanding the nature of God's personal call to them, they will be able to celebrate the Sacrament of Penance more faithfully and receive the Lord's grace so freely offered there in order to convert their lives more fully to his Way.”


4 - Finally, seeking to protect oneself and others from such infection:

“Moral conscience requires that, in every occasion, Christians give witness to the whole moral truth, which is contradicted both by approval of homosexual acts and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons. Therefore, discreet and prudent actions can be effective; these might involve: unmasking the way in which such tolerance might be exploited or used in the service of ideology; stating clearly the immoral nature of these unions; reminding the government of the need to contain the phenomenon within certain limits so as to safeguard public morality and, above all, to avoid exposing young people to erroneous ideas about sexuality and marriage that would deprive them of their necessary defences and contribute to the spread of the phenomenon.”


Conclusions


Recalling the issue of helping families with children of homosexual tendencies offers an occasion to ask ourselves the reason for this mention to the detriment of all the other much more widespread hardships that families experience; moreover the issue is presented in such a way as to blur it from being a family problem into a problem of homosexual persons alone, off-topic with respect to the proper object of the synod.

Moreover, the paragraph in question, albeit while having to stay within the space of a few lines, omits any reference to the true issues connected to the pastoral care of homosexual persons; this silence is all the more culpable given the appalling advance of “gender” ideology today.

[...]

_____________


The base document of the synod, object of the “Observations”:

> Instrumentum Laboris

__________


English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.