Cardinal Thomas Collins defends his faithful and just Synod actions in manipulative story by the Toronto Star. Will the Basilians have him STFU too?

Cardinal Collins is one of the thirteen or whatever number it was that signed and sent a letter to Pope Francis at the beginning of the Synod. A few days ago, Cardinal Donald Wuerl lashed out in a Jesuitical periodical that some people, insinuating the thirteen, "just don't like the Pope." According to a Toronto Star reporter, Father Thomas J. Rosica sent the article to journalists allegedly stating, "I fully share Cardinal Wuerl's assessment."

The Toronto Star, contacted Cardinal Collins in Rome to explain himself, as if he answers to the Holy See Press Office or that anti-Catholic use for bird-cages and fish. Cardinal Collins stated, “I don’t know where they’re coming from, either Cardinal Wuerl or Fr. Rosica.” He went on to say that, “The Holy Father has been really clear: If you’ve got some concerns you express them."

In a post on LifeSiteNews, John-Henry Weston writes that "As for the Canadians, there are three who have garnered much attention.  The heroic act of Toronto Cardinal Thomas Collins as one of the thirteen Cardinals to sign on to the letter to the Pope expressing grave concern about manipulation at the Synod caused him much suffering. I met him at a restaurant and he looked very tired. I expressed a simple thanks and offered him prayers on behalf of life and family activists.  Archbishop Paul-Andre Durocher planted himself firmly in the progressive camp along with Fr. Thomas Rosica early on in the proceedings."

Cardinal Collins has remained clear on doctrine and has paid a personal price for it. Durocher was an embarrassment out of the gate with a snide comment on doctrine and his call for "deaconesses." There are no vocations in Gatineau and less than 50 priests left. Let it die.

Manwhile, Father Thomas J. Rosica, of the Congregation of St. Basil and based in Toronto with Salt + Light Television of which he is Executive Produce, had much to say at the Synod. Little needs to be said here. Thousands of Catholics on blogs and social media around the world have discovered for themselves what some of us already knew.

As for that Basilian Congregation, they have been hit with millions of dollars in lawsuits and settlements due to the now old and perverted sodomite priests in their Congregation who raped and abused so many boys dating back sixty years to the 1950's. This past July, after a nearly a century, they vacated the historic Holy Rosary parish in a joint decision with Diocesan officials. We have been given information which indicates that there was an extensive and unauthorised "kitchen renovation" which occurred within the year or two preceding their departure. Holy Rosary now has the former Seminary Rector and Monsignor appointed as Pastor.  

Still with these Toronto Basilians, Tim Scott and allegedly ordained priest made quite effective use of Twitter in exposing the kind of holiness is sought after within the Congregation of St. Basil. During the Extraordinary Synod on the family last October 2014, Scott Tweeted, "Just a little advice to #CardinalBurke to STFU." Scott, pictured at the left, was found out in February and promptly deleted the Tweet, then removed his Twitter account after it all became public by the good people at ChurchMilitant.com.  He had been public spokesman for the Basilian Congregation. Basilians have much to say, it seems. They seem to think that nobody else should.  

Cardinal Collins went on to state that sending the Pope a letter expressing certain concerns is, "Hardly opposing the Pope," adding that it is "ridiculous" to think that it would follow that one would not "like the Pope," in Wuerl's words for sending a letter. The Cardinal then asked the Star reporter rhetorically, "What do we want, everyone to say nothing?”

Yes, Your Eminence, that is exactly what they want.

Thank you for not giving it to them and by not giving it to them, you actually gave it to them good!

...

John-Henry Westen's editorial can be found at:

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/popes-encouragement-of-airing-formal-heresy-is-severing-the-church


The Toronto Star story is below:

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/10/22/do-some-cardinals-dislike-pope-francis.html

Do some cardinals dislike Pope Francis?

In a dispatch this week from Rome, Rev. Tom Reese, a close Vatican observer, put it bluntly: “Never in my lifetime have I heard of bishops and cardinals being so disrespectful of a pope, challenging his organization of this synod, even a few referring to him as a Protestant and threatening a fractured church if he goes against their wishes.”The public sniping was triggered by a letter to the Pope, leaked to an Italian journalist on Oct. 12. The letter was signed by 13 cardinals, including Toronto’s Thomas Collins, New York’s Timothy Dolan and the Vatican’s enforcer of Catholic doctrine, Germany’s Gerhard Muller.

They alleged the synod had been rigged to achieve “a predetermined conclusion.” They challenged the 10-member committee drafting the final document as appointed by the Pope “without consultation.” They also feared the synod would be dominated by attempts to lift the ban on divorced Catholics receiving communion after they remarry in a civil ceremony.

Pope Francis distressed some conservatives when he recently made it easier to annul marriages. Once annulled — if a spouse did not freely consent to it, for example — the couple is free to marry again and receive communion. Francis’s next step, conservatives fear, is to lift the communion ban on those who remarry without an annulment.

The Pope tried to ease conservative concerns during an address to the synod. But he also warned against giving in to conspiracy theories.

As debate heated up, German Cardinal Donald Wuerl lashed out at critics in an interview Sunday in the Jesuit magazine, America. Rev. Thomas Rosica, a Toronto priest and the Vatican’s English-language media attaché, emailed it to journalists with this message: “I fully share Cardinal Wuerl’s assessment.” “I wonder if these people who are speaking,” Wuerl said, “sometimes surreptitiously, sometimes halfway implying, then backing off and then twisting around, I wonder if it is really that they find they just don’t like this pope.” 

Cardinal Collins, Catholic archbishop of Toronto, dismissed Wuerl’s comments.

“I don’t know where they’re coming from, either Cardinal Wuerl or Fr. Rosica,” Collins said in a phone interview from Rome. “The Holy Father has been really clear: If you’ve got some concerns you express them. That’s hardly opposing the Pope or something; that’s ridiculous. What do we want, everyone to say nothing?”

Collins would not discuss the details of the letter. He described it as fulfilling a cardinal’s duty to give “candid and honest advice to the Pope.”

The synod’s 253 participants, most of them bishops, have presented hundreds of amendments to 147 sections contained in a draft working document to be voted on Saturday, Collins said. The synod is an advisory body; the Pope has the final say.

Collins said he could not imagine the synod recommending that remarried Catholics be allowed communion. But on Wednesday, German bishops — progressives and conservatives — proposed a compromise. The church ban on communion remains, but remarried Catholics could get it lifted privately by a priest or bishop after a period of penance. The proposal was backed by Cardinal Muller. 

Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, our latest heresiarch and homosexualist

Here's another. Oswald Gracias of Mumbai.

DANGER AHEAD. Synod document drafting committee member: Familiaris Consortio? "Circumstances have changed!" Divorced-and-remarried, "decentralization" still on the agenda

Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, one of ten mostly-liberal prelates assigned by Pope Francis to the drafting committee for the final Synod relation, has unexpectedly emerged in recent days as a champion for greater "openness" to homosexuals. His comments in today's Vatican press conference are true to form, and given his role in drafting the Synod document hints at something that can be manipulated in favor of Kasperite and liberal concerns.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/danger-ahead-signs-emerging-of-liberal.html

The deception from the Vatican continues - They will throw out the work of the Saint they just proclaimed

Updated!

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/danger-ahead-signs-emerging-of-liberal.html#more

Father Z reports that:

Regarding the Kasperite Proposal (to allow civilly divorced and remarried Catholics to go to confession and Holy Communion without requiring of them sexual continence), the breakdown is more or less as follows:

• 4 groups in favor of Kasperitism (of which, 2 groups want the matter decided in the internal forum, i.e., by the penitent, but in conversation with a priest in Confession).
• 1 group sort of in favor of Kaspertism
• 3 groups opposed to Kaspertism
• 1 group divided on Kasperism
• 1 group with no recommendation on Kaspertism
• 1 group asking Pope to establish a commission to study the Kasper Proposal
• 2 groups asking the Pope himself to decide about the Kasper Proposal.

So, the Kasper Proposal has not been completely defeated.

This Synod is a sham. It is a blatant disgrace. Committees  of liars in clerics. The manipulation continues.

Schism is in the offing.

It can be no other way.

But I'm not leaving, are you?

Rise up - the battle is not done!

Are you tired yet friend? How are you sleeping? How is the Synod to destroy the family affecting you? Take some time and write about it and let us know, it will be helpful to all.

Not that I'm into some kind of "sharing" a word that my good friend Tom Rosica likes to use, but it is helpful to know how others are reacting to this mess.

Think about it. Our parents and grandparents sat by at Vatican II because they could do nothing else. They didn't know what was going on until it was too late and even if they did, they had nothing in their knowledge base or toolbelt in order to respond.

These modernists, these sodomites - hidden as they were, these heresiarchs tore out the churches and destroyed the work of pennies from the faithful, they destroyed the Mass, the devotions, the music, the feasts, the liturgical cycle of time, the catechism, the religious orders, the faith.

There wasn't one stone they left unturned. Well one actually. The rosary, because that weak and incompetent man named, Giovanni Montini, didn't have the guts to go that far, notwithstanding the urgings of Bugnini. 

We will not let them to this again.

We will not abide another Pope doing it again.

I am tired. I am angry. I won't put up with it again.

Rise thou that sleepest and read this by  Matthew Karmel the nom de plume of a teacher, freelance writer and translator living in Zurich, Switzerland with his wife and three children. A lifelong Catholic, he is also the author of the blog The Radical Catholic.

It's all up to one man

THE SYNOD: The decentralization of the Church offends the Faith and common sense

22 October 2015

   

(by Roberto de Mattei IL FOGLIO October 20, 2015)


On October 17th 2015, Pope Francis announced how the Synod on the Family is going to conclude. Just a few days before the end of the work by the assembly of bishops, they have reached an impasse, and the way out of it, according to the Pope would be the decentralization of the Church.


This impasse is due to the division among those in the hall, who refer with firmness to the perennial Magisterium on marriage and those “innovators” who want to overturn two thousand years of Church teaching, but above all – the Truth of the Gospel. It is, in fact, the Word of Christ, the natural and Divine law, that a valid marriage – celebrated and consummated [ratum et consummatum] – by the baptized, cannot, under any circumstances, be dissolved by anyone.


A single exception [to this] would annul the absolute, universal value of this law and if it were to fall, the entire moral edifice of the Church would collapse. Marriage is either indissoluble or it isn’t and a disassociation between the principle and its practical application cannot be admitted. Between thoughts and words and between words and facts, the Church insists on a radical coherence, the coherence the Martyrs have borne witness to throughout history.


The principle that doctrine doesn’t change, but its pastoral application does, introduces a wedge between two inseparable dimensions of Christianity: the Truth and Life. The separation of doctrine and praxis is not of Catholic doctrine, but of Hegelian and Marxist philosophy, which turns upside down the traditional axiom according to which agere sequitur esse. Action, in the perspective of the innovators, precedes being and conditions it; experience does not live the truth but creates it.


Read the rest at: http://www.robertodemattei.it/en/2015/10/22/the-synod-the-decentralization-of-the-church-offends-the-faith-and-common-sense/

Heresiarch Cupich persecutes traditional Latin Mass. Does he believe Confession is about "forgiveness" - Bring it on baby, we'll out you all!

Thanks to Ann Barnhardt for digging up this little gem. If you want to read what Heresiarch Cupich thinks about the Sacrament of Non-Confession, read it all here.

“We use that word “reconciliation” all the time.  It doesn’t mean about giving people forgiveness. It comes from an anatomical root, namely the eyelash, it is called a cilia. So you begin to see eye-to-eye with people.”

Who appointed this heretic to Chicago anyway? 

Speaking of Chicago, the perhaps the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest and Canons of St. John Cantius might wish to Canon lawyer up. 

Trouble will come from this heresiarch.


http://rapidcityjournal.com/bishop-bans-latin-services/article_b37a5c37-b5a4-5af6-8014-48d9f5ef9da7.html

Bishop bans Latin services

March 27, 2002 11:00 pm  •  Mary Garrigan, Journal Staff Writer

RAPID CITY - A standoff between Latin-rite Catholics in Rapid City and their bishop has left the Latin Mass congregation of St. Michael's choosing to celebrate Good Friday services on the sidewalk instead of in church.

Members of the Latin Mass community, which has met in Rapid City for the past 12 years at Immaculate Conception Church on Fifth Street, say Bishop Blase Cupich has barred them from celebrating Good Friday and Easter vigil services at the church in an attempt to mainstream them into the English-language Mass.

"We've been prohibited by the bishop from celebrating the Easter Triduum liturgies and locked out of our church from noon on Holy Thursday until 8 a.m. on Easter morning," Dan Carda, 58, of Piedmont, said. Carda is a Latin Mass adherent who refuses to participate in the new-order English-language Mass that was mandated by the Second Vatican Council.

Instead, Carda and some of the other 220 members of St. Michael's congregation will gather at 3 p.m. today for Good Friday services on the sidewalk in front of the church.

Cupich sees his decision to not allow Good Friday Latin services at ICC as an invitation to unity, not a denial.

"We're just looking for an opportunity on an annual basis for us to all worship together, for one moment of unity as a Catholic church," Cupich said. "I'm looking for one time each year to do that, and it seems the day the Lord died for us all would be a good day to do it. That's all that this is about."

He said he would like the Latin Mass community to recognize unity with the wider Catholic church. "There has to be some occasion on a yearly basis to reflect the fact that we are one church under one bishop," Cupich said. "I would ask them, 'Why do they find it so difficult, on the day of the Lord's death, to celebrate with their bishop, who is the sign of the Lord's unity?'"

Carda sees it differently.

"This is his most-effective time to crack down, during Holy Week," Carda said, noting that Catholics such as he expect the elaborate pomp and circumstance of the Latin rite during Holy Week.

"I'm quite upset. It's disappointing and very disheartening," Carda, who has drafted a letter of complaint to Pope John Paul II, said. "I don't know why he feels like we are such a danger to him."

Carda and the Rev. Valentine Young, pastor of the St. Michael's community, say celebrating Holy Week in Latin is their right. They have a different understanding of the pope's position on the continuation of the Latin-rite Mass than does Cupich. The bishop's decision to prohibit some Holy Week services, as well as his recent decision to not allow children to make their First Communion or to be confirmed in the Latin rite, is contrary to the pope's wishes, Carda said.

"As long as the pope authorizes the Latin rite, I don't feel like I'm in violation of any of the legitimate authority of the church," Carda said.

After Vatican II, Carda stayed away from the Catholic Church for 30 years, returning only when the Latin rite started being celebrated again in a Sturgis congregation. "To me, the Latin rite is the real church. When you attend, you feel something very special that you do not when you attend a Novus Ordo (New Order) Mass," he said.

Young has said that the Ecclesia Dei document (the papal document allowing for the continuation of the Latin rite for people having trouble making the transition to English) ensures the right to worship in Latin. The document says, "Great respect should be shown to people still attached to the former Latin Liturgical Tradition." Cupich, he said, "is not showing these people respect by what he is doing."

Cupich says he's sorry the Latin Mass community is having trouble with his invitation to worship with him at the main Cathedral of Our Lady of Perpetual Help during Holy Week instead of at Immaculate Conception. "I'm supportive of their desire to have Sunday Mass there, and I'm going to be very patient with them," he said.

But his understanding of Ecclesia Dei is that "… eventually, Catholics have to understand that the reform of the Second Vatican Council is, in fact, an improvement and is important to our spiritual life."

Rome, Cupich said, has made it clear that any celebration of the Latin tradition is at the discretion of the local bishop. "And I've made my decision," he said.

Complaining about him to the Vatican and worshipping on the sidewalk probably won't help the Latin-rite cause, Cupich said. "My impression is that it will not help their standing with the wider church."

Subtitles

• subtitles off

Captions

• captions off

Chapters

• Chapters

What will Francis do?

It is clear that the Kasperites and sodomite supporting manipulators, such as Cupich, at the Synod are on the run. They kept telling us to trust the "Holy Spirit." We did, it was they that betrayed Him.

Yet, this is not over. The desperation of these malefactors knows no bounds. Their allies inside the Vatican and the radical "catholic" media will not stop. They will now go after and demand of Pope Francis that he ignore the bishops and do what they want. At least seven of the ten appointed by Francis to write the final report (it has already been written) are heterodox. This manipulation is not over.

Michael Voris lays it all on the table today how these rotten men, this boil on the Body of Christ, His Church; have manipulated this Pope from the very beginning and taken advantage of him.

The Pope must act and he must act as a Pope ought to act in the situation where the sheep are being abused by the shepherds.

The Pope needs to rid the Church, of these malefactors that set this up. We know their names and so do you, does he? We don't need to repeat them here, they are already outed on this blog. Will he? If he does not, then will he accept their pressure and betray Christ and His Church? 

What is the role of the Freemasonic Lodge at the Synod?

Last week, I wrote a post about Masonic commentary on the death of Cardinal Martini, Danneels presence at Lodge and the praising of the election of Jorge Bergoglio as Pope by the Grand Master of the Orient Lodge of Italy.

Did you get that?

Now, we have a comment by this heroic bishop that some at the Synod are promoting the interests of various "international organisations."

Now, if you follow the link above, you will find a video of Theodore McCarrick the former Cardinal Archbishop of Washington wherein he states that a "powerful and influential man" lobbied him to organise and elect Jorge Bergoglio.

Wake up people! 

You bishops and other Vatican minions reading this, and I know you are because vatican.va has been dropping by more than frequently, fear Christ or get out!

http://torontocatholicwitness.blogspot.ca/2015/10/breaking-bishop-biaasik-cardinals-and.html

(translation: Toronto Catholic Witness. You may use, but you must credit us). 

21.10.2015 

Bishop Białasik: At the Synod there were certain topics that should not have been discussed

The Synod of Bishops was a wonderful experience of the universality of the Church, but it also had its weak side. Many important family matters were not taken up, said Polish bishop missionary from Bolivia, Krzysztof Białasik. He claimed that many beautiful words were expressed at the Synod, it was a valuable witness, but family issues were not exhausted. In the opinion of  Bishop Białasik, there was an unnecessary preoccupation with issues not associated with the gathering. 

Bishop Białasik: 

"In my opinion it is sad that we consumed so much time on issues that the Synod should not have been touching, because those issues are of a different nature. It surprised me that there is a particular group of cardinals and bishops who have spoken out not always properly on issues of the family, interjecting issues that should  be considered in another situation; especially Communion for the divorced and homosexualism. These are other problems, problems that are either doctrinal, or [problems] that have been artificially conceived to destroy the family. These are exactly the matters promoted by various international organizations, in the first place from the USA and Western Europe. But it is surprising that they also have an influence on certain bishops. I do not know what is behind all this; but, if there is such a group of cardinals or bishops, and there is, it means that something is standing behind all of this. This is what pains me the most, that there can exist such people amongst the bishops". 

BREAKING: Circulus Angelicus "D" Cardinal Collins and Archbishop Chaput "Deo Gratias" for such faith and wisdom in the darkness or scandal and dissent!

The Church in Toronto and Philadelphia can be assured that they have true Shepherds in Thomas Cardinal Collins. and Archbishop Charles Chaput. 

A few years ago, I attended a Mass concelebrated by these two prelates followed by a breakfast, speech and book-signing whilst Archbishop Chaput was still at the See of Denver. It was obvious that they were more than just colleagues, but friends. The Church has been served well by these two faithful men. May God bless them for their faith and wisdom amidst such darkness and chaos.

Clearly, these two Shepherds are Catholic!

Relatio – Circulus Anglicus “D”

Moderator: Thomas Christopher Card. COLLINS 

Relator: S.E. Mons. Charles Joseph CHAPUT, O.F.M. Cap. 

Members of English circle D again stressed the need to support the many families that already live the Catholic understanding of marriage and family life joyfully.

Members of our group revisited the importance of the Church acknowledging the role of women and mothers and men and fathers. Our ecumenical representative felt the document should address the whole Christian community and not simply the Catholic Church. Much discussion took place about the importance of funerals in the lives of families. Members felt this matter deserves far more attention, along with the role of the family in situations of illness and death.

Members felt that when the document talks about the Word of God, it needs to more fully convey the meaning of that term in the tradition of the Church. The Word of God refers to Jesus personally, to the written word of Scriptures, but also to the word proclaimed in the community.

Bishops said that the text paid inadequate attention to chastity formation. This work should begin very early in life and should not be delayed until marriage preparation. The danger of government authorities doing sex education caused great concern for many group members.

Regarding the formation of future priests, mention was made that the text lacks any focus on the Eastern tradition of married clergy. Reflections on that should also be included.

On the formation of Christians in the virtue of chastity, members noted a natural sequence:

First, formation in chastity within the family provides a needed foundation for later life;

Next, formation in chastity for those preparing for marriage builds on that earlier foundation,

Finally, formation in chastity for married men and women continues couples’ growth in the Christian life and sets the stage for the next generation.

In addition:

Formation in chastity for those preparing to be priests is key to their own vocation, and vital to their ability to help those they serve.

Group members insisted that the main educators of the laity in terms of marriage preparation should be married couples themselves because of their experience and credibility. Priests obviously have a key role as well, but married couples and families should take the lead.

Members discussed the place of priests in marriage counseling. Some strongly supported priests doing what they can to heal troubled marriages because the priest is often the most trusted and educated person available, and people are unable to afford professional counselors. The Church needs to be prudent, but not so prudent that she avoids helping people in great need.

The group had a long exchange on pastoral approaches to divorced people who had not remarried, and also divorced people who have married again without an annulment. Members voiced significant concern that whatever is done should not lead to greater confusion among our people. One bishop said that the issue of admitting divorced and remarried persons without an annulment to Communion was such a vital matter of doctrinal substance that it could only be handled at an ecumenical council and not at a synod.

One of the synod fathers stressed the importance of using appropriate language. Instead of referring to people in difficult situations as being “excluded” from the Eucharist, we should say that they “abstain” from the Eucharist. That word is more accurate and not as negative. One father mentioned that bishops cannot be more merciful than Jesus’s words. The Lord is not bound by Church rules, but the Church is very much bound by the words of Jesus.

Some thought that the current text lacks an understanding of the Eucharistic foundation of Christian marriage, which says we cannot reduce marriage to a sexual relationship. Likewise, we can’t reduce life in the Church to receiving Communion. In the history of the Church huge segments of the faithful did not receive Holy Communion and yet were clearly considered members of the Church, beginning with the Catechumens. For those who are on a penitential path, they are not excluded from the Church even though they abstain from Communion. Other fathers thought that the number of people who are divorced or remarried without an annulment has grown in such a big way that we need to deal with this question in a new and different manner.

Members spent quite a bit of time talking about the beauty and comprehensiveness of No. 84 of Familiaris Consortio.Some suggested that FC 84 ought to be put directly into the text. One father spoke about the power of the keys and the Holy Father’s ability to change things. He said that the Pope can, in effect, twist the hands of God. Others responded that the power of the keys does not give the Church the ability to change Revelation and the faith of the Church.

One member of the group felt that the Church has forgotten Jesus in all this discussion and that the bishops and many laypeople may be perceived as Pharisees. There was a call for a commission to study the issue of Communion for the divorced and remarried over a longer period of time with greater theological precision.

There was a suggestion that the Church ought to study the notion of spiritual communion more thoroughly. Just as Protestant communities participate in the reality of the Church, those who don’t receive Holy Communion can take part in the reality of the Eucharist.

Members spent some time talking about mixed marriages and marriages of disparate cult. The practice of the Orthodox Church also featured in the discussion. Some saw this as a good pastoral path for the Roman Church. Others felt there was little clarity in the Orthodox approach because several different practices among the Orthodox actually exist.

The section on the pastoral care of persons with homosexual tendencies sparked much discussion. Some members thought that this issue should be removed from discussion in the Synod on the Family. They felt that it’s important enough to have a specific synodal meeting on the topic itself. Some suggested that the wording of the Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 2357-2359 should be used. Others saw that option as possibly damaging the credibility of the Church in Western Europe and North America.

In the section on the transmission of life and the challenges of a declining birthrate, members offered both positive and negative comments. Most members felt that No. 137 should be removed from the text or completely rewritten, because the way one forms one’s conscience is handled poorly in the current document.

In the section on adoption, some discussion ensued about the right of a child to have both a mother and a father. Members noted the difficulty of some Churches in the western world continuing to offer adoption services in the face of government pressure to support adoption by same-sex couples.

Members said the text doesn’t speak clearly enough about palliative care, and the responsibility of the Church to help families in times of illness and when dealing with the confusion around modern medical/moral problems.

Considerable discussion took place about what is missing from the text in general. Among the items mentioned were:

1. The place of Catholic schools.

2. Mary, the mother of Jesus, should have greater mention and more significance.

3. Nothing in the text expresses gratitude to consecrated women who care for the sick and the elderly.

5. Not enough attention is paid to the role of single parents and ways to support them.

6. Not enough positive discussion takes place about the value of the extended family.

7. No mention is made of the role of godparents.

8. No clarity is offered on the roles of mother and father.

9. Many thousands of people help parents educate their children, but religious teachers aren’t mentioned, and even babysitters should get at least some brief attention because they can be very helpful to parents who need to work outside the home.

10. The text avoids dealing with the issue of sexual abuse and incest within families.

11. No significant emphasis is placed on the importance of family prayer, meditation and popular religiosity.

12. Something positive should be said about migrants who leave their home countries in order to send back money to support their families.

13. Finally, some members felt that something in the document should be said about the importance of praying for our deceased family members and the significance of those family members praying for us in the Communion of Saints.

Other bonds of love and interdependency may be "good" and why the language needs to be even "harsher"

There has been much talk of language at the Synod and how it needs to change to conform with the world. Consider then this:

We must never forget that other bonds of love and interdependency, of commitment and mutual responsibility exist in society. They may be good; they may even be recognized in law. They are clearly not the same as marriage; they are something else. No extension of terminology for legal purposes will change the observable reality that only the committed union of a man and a woman carries, not only the bond of interdependency between the two adults, but the capacity to bring forth children. Let us recommit ourselves to building up the human family, to strengthening marriage, to blessing and nurturing children, and to making our homes, families and parish communities holy, welcoming places for women and men of every race, language, orientation and way of life.

http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/marriage-and-the-family-humanity-s-future

http://saltandlighttv.org/blog/rosicareflections/marriage-and-the-family-humanitys-future-2

How can they be "good" if they are based on sodomy?

If they are "something else" what are they?

The "law" allows "two adults" to adopt children, regardless of whether the adults are one man and one woman. Is this rightly ordered based upon the teachings of the Church?

People are always "welcome" no matter their "orientation." What we must each struggle to purge from our lives is sin and some sins are harder to purge than others. Is this something we must continue to do or do we not call an "orientation" that is based on an "objective disorder" which can manifest as "intrinsically disordered," sin?  Do we leave people oriented towards their sin?

So, it is all about changing the Catechism and the Truth for the sake of language in a false idea that this will bring millions back to the Church. It will not. It will ease the pain of a guilty conscience in some and leave others to suffer dreadful sickness, early death and eternal Hell.

You see friends, the people in the Church think and advocate for what really is a "sodomy synod" are simply wrong. They are in charity misinformed or deluded. They may be advocates of the change in language for a variety of reasons. They may be blackmailed. They may be evil. Whatever the reason, they are wrong and they are not doing the work of Our Lord; they are not working to save souls, they may think that they are, but they are not. 

How can any of hold this opinion and belief? Because it is what the Church has taught through Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition for two-thousand years and She has not been wrong. But these men in clerics are and we know who they are, there is no need to name them. If this Synod has been good for anything it has unmasked them for all to see.

Let us consider what this man who was once a practicing homosexual, pornographic performer and occultist who was saved from all of it by Our Lord Jesus Christ think? How must this man, who has struggled to overcome a life of hell on earth because of God's grace and the Sacraments, feel? The Synodal Fathers seem to be all about "feelings," well, what about the suffering that Joseph Sciambra must endure as he sees what these bishops and cardinals, whatever their reasoning or motivation are out to do?

When Pope Francis and the rest of these men in clerical towers want to go to the peripheries and smell like the sheep, here is a man that can take them there.

God bless him; for he has more faith than some of our shepherds.

A Call for Even Harsher Language on Homosexuality from the Synod

Embracing “intrinsically disordered” - Why “less condemnatory” language hides the Truth of homosexuality

The real reason why “gay” men leave the Catholic Church…

Synod Father calls out “gay” for what it is - ABNORMAL!

Archbishop Blase Cupich wants to “accompany” “gays…”

Synod Fathers: “gays” do not need you to “accompany” them, but to be there when they return...