If there are bad and evil things going on in the Vatican then its better that they brought out into the open ..as it is better that they brought out into the open everywhere. I have a natural liking for whistle blowers. John 8:32 'Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." Big organisations have a natural tendency to close ranks to protect themselves and if this means covering up the truth they're happy to do it. It must be like a very cold shower for Pope Francis turning stones and finding some of the things he does. But he must find many good things too. I am sure there are many saints in Rome, the same as there are saints everywhere we look. Though maybe in some places we have to look a little harder. Jesus was maybe the biggest whistleblower of them all..and that's why they killed him. God bless our Pope, he has his hands full; I don't envy him.
I'm bumping up this thread as a secular report suggests that the Pope is going to call an extraordinary Synod on the Family & Marriage in the context of evangelization: http://world.time.com/2013/10/08/pope-francis-calls-extraordinary-synod-on-family-and-marriage/ Calling an Extraordinary Synod versus a regular Synod means that the issues are even more urgent. The participants are more select, and the heads of the Eastern Churches attend, as well as presidents of bishops conferences and heads of curia offices. Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/10/08/pope-francis-calls-extraordinary-synod-on-family-and-marriage/#ixzz2hFLAnP6T
Pope Francis convenes an extraordinary synod on the family under threat from secularism By Deacon Nick Donnelly, on October 8th, 2013 Pope Francis has announced his convening of an extraordinary synod on the family to be held in the Holy See in October 2014, under the title, ‘The Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelisation.’ This is only the third extraordinary synod to be held since 1967. The Holy Father’s decision follows a discussion of the theme of the next synod with his council of eight cardinals a week ago, when Pope Francis gave his consent to ‘an anthropological theme which will concern the human person and the family in the light of the gospel.’ During the meeting Pope Francis and the cardinals ‘reflected about how to deal with the theme of pastoral care of families and who should be entrusted with the study of this concern which has been voiced on previous occasions by the Holy Father himself.’ The Holy See press office announced: ‘The Holy See Press Office today announced that Holy Father Francis has convened the Third Extraordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, to be held in the Vatican from 5 to 19 October 2014, on the theme “The pastoral challenges of the family in the context of evangelisation”. In the Chapter of the Code of Canon Law relating to synodal assemblies, the Synod of Bishops meets in an extraordinary general assembly when the matter under consideration, while related to the good of the universal Church, requires rapid definition. “It is very important that an extraordinary Synod has been convoked on the theme of the pastoral of the family”, said the director of the Holy See Press Office, Fr. Federico Lombardi, S.J. “This is the way in which the Pope intends to promote reflection and to guide the path of the community of the Church, with the responsible participation of the episcopate from different parts of the world”. “It is right”, he added, “that the Church should move as a community in reflection and prayer, and that she takes common pastoral directions in relation to the most important points – such as the pastoral of the family – under the guidance of the Pope and the bishops. The convocation of the extraordinary Synod clearly indicates this path. In this context, the proposal of particular pastoral solutions by local persons or offices carries the risk of engendering confusion. It is opportune to emphasise the importance of following a path in full communion with the ecclesial community”. Protect the Pope comment: It is to be earnestly hoped that this extraordinary synod on the pastoral care of the family will highlight the importance of upholding the Church’s teaching on contraception for the well-being of families, and also the fundamental importance of defending the anthropological foundations of the family in the union of man and woman in the sacrament of marriage open to life as the Church’s answer to the threat from so called gay ‘marriage’. What would be a radical departure for the Church would be to set out the devastating harm caused to marriage and the family by killing babies through abortion. As Bishop O’Donoghue wrote in Fit for Mission? Church, why are we surprised that there is an epidemic of violence among the young when they have often grown up in families knowing that their parents have killed one or more of their siblings? The killing of children by families is a cancer that is eating away at countless families. The Church needs to bring healing to this hidden wound at the heart of our society. http://www.news.va/en/news/francis-convenes-extraordinary-synod-on-the-family
At least one German Archbishop appears to have already made a decision in this matter (without Vatican permission). This has been going on unofficially in Germany, Austria (and I assume Holland and Belgium) in many (most?) parishes for years. I expect the Extraordinary Synod to follow this lead, it would not have been called in order to support the status quo, there would be no need. From Gloria TV 7 Oct 2013 "Freiburg Archbishop Robert Zollitsch, the president of the German Bishops’ Conference, has abolished the indissolubility of marriage. From now on he admits divorced and remarried people to the sacraments. The new regulation was published on Monday in a document of his pastoral office. This is in contradiction to the Gospel and the teachings of Jesus Christ. The other German dioceses will follow Zollitsch in lockstep. In February Zollitsch and the other bishops unanimously agreed to the introduction of abortion through the morning-after-pill in Catholic hospitals." (It is understood that the Vatican has recorded its disapproval citing the need to await the findings of the Extraordinary Synod - so I think we can guess which way the 'wind is blowing')
If that turns out to be the case then it will be a major faith crisis for me. If it happens I think I will stop paying any further attention to news about the church. I'll just have to trust that Jesus is still in charge of his church although I can't see how such a change could be consistent with 2000 years of Catholic teaching on marriage.
I won't get excited till I see it happen. My blood pressure wouldn't take it. ...and I thought Martin Luther was dead. I'll wait and see. If it ever did, I think I'd close down the forum, throw my computer in the bin and retreat to private prayer. . No more news, especially about the Church.
According to Vatican Insider http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/e...divorzio-divorce-chiesa-iglesia-church-28418/, the Archbishop (who is about to reach retirement age) has denied issuing the instruction attributed to him. It has been issued from his office but is unsigned apparently. Several German and Austrian bishops have previously been subject to Vatican reminders for the same sort of instruction. The Pope made his position fairly clear (for him) during the in-flight press conference from Rio to Rome: "Regarding communion for divorced Catholics who remarry without an annulment, Pope Francis said he would make pastoral response a high priority. He suggested the Orthodox Church as a model. Orthodox tradition allows up to three marriages, arguing that human frailty can prevent people from living up to Jesus' ideal of one marriage." I THINK THAT THIS IS WHERE WE MIGHT SEE 'BISHOP OPPOSING BISHOP AND CARDINAL OPPOSING CARDINAL' as prophesied at Akita. " The Synod on the family will discuss the annulment of marriages, remarried divorcees, cohabiting couples and their position in the Church." God help us!
I think that we would need each other if the situation really became difficult for traditional Catholics.
Lets take deep breaths on this. This thread has already discussed how difficult it is for a Pope to communicate to his People via secular media due to inevitable beat-ups. We all know this. And this quote from Gloria TV is no different when it comes to the Archbishop. Lets give it some context: (1) The Pope "accepted" his offer to resign as archbishop late last year (he hits 75 this year). He is due to be replaced early 2014 and will also step down as head of the Bishops Conference. (2) The archbishop opposed "political action" from priests in his Diocese who put up a somewhat blunt "Frieburg Declaration" in June 2012 on this issue in a formal letter. (3) Communion for the allegedly re-married (like ordination of married men) is not a set-in-stone Doctrinal issue but one of "Positive Church Law" (ie an ancient Discipline). (4) The indisolubility of the marriage bond is indeed a set-in-stone Dogma of the Church. However in many cases it can be formally shown (Anullments) to have never formed - even many years later after "marriage". There are also many cases where formal/legal evidence of such an unformed bond is impossible to formally obtain for a great variety of reasons. Such persons may in fact be truly free (in the eyes of God) to marry again even if, officially, this cannot be recognised. It is by no means then, automatic that all re-married persons are regularly sinning mortally. They may officially be in a "state of sin", that is quite a different matter. The real question then it seems to me is this: Should we change the ancient practice of teaching persons in an official "state of sin" (due to possible "re"-marriage) that they may not come to Communion for the rest of their otherwise virtuous and religious married lives? Or may the Church decide something along the lines: "If you have attempted to seek an Anullment and the Marriage Tribunal Declares you have broadly reasonable grounds but evidence cannot be supplied for good reasons...then you are allowed to make this decision for yourself in the forum of private conscience." Such a change in Discipline like this would of course require granting Marriage Tribunals authority to make Declarations of this type which at present they are not entitled to do. Nothing above of course changes Church Teaching on the Indisolubility of a valid and consummated marriage. The Archbishop's letter against his rebel priests (in German unfortunately) is attached.
Cohabiting without an annulment and valid remarriage is currently fornication (mortal sin) to take the Blessed Sacrament in this state is not merely a matter of discipline but of sacrilege. If the tribunal were to give individuals the right to decide for themselves, we should be in very 'muddy waters' indeed. It all sounds very Anglican and those in this state who feel justified would do themselves less harm by joining that body to avoid sacrilege. You might be able to live happily with this scenario if it arose, I would know that the smoke of Satan was truly obscuring the ancient accepted truths of Catholicism.
Lets look at the 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” [158] 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. Your sentiments are understandable but lets get a few of the facts straightened out. The issue is really one concerning adultery not fornication. [OK, if you accept that none of the pre-ceeding "marriages" were really marriages then it would not be adultery...however you do not seem to accept that position. Even if you accept that the pre-ceeding cohabitations were not marriage that does not mean the present marriage can easily be called even technical fornication. The present marriage may well be defective in Catholic form (a deriment impediment I believe) but if the person in the 2nd marriage was now mature enough to validly consent then a bond before God may well be present regardless]. The Pope seems to be signalling it is time to distinguish between "technical adultery" (not a mortal sin) and malicious adultery (a mortal sin). If your 16 yr old virginal nephew had a good romp with an experienced and willing 14 year old girl who in fact seduced him it would be called "rape" regardless. Yet it is really only a technical, statutory rape on your nephew's part. Some otherwise loyal Catholics find themselves in similar straights wrt such an accusation of adultery. In many cases it is fairly obvious to wise and compassionate pastors only statutory adultery ("objectively contravenes God's law.") is in play. Should they all be refused Communion or forced to live a possibly valid 2nd marriage in continence? The Church can validly decide either way and the Doctrine of Indisolubility will remain inviolate as it should. Obviously some of the Codes in Canon Law (and the Catechism articles that reflect them such as above) will have to be revised. That does happen regularly when practice rather than doctrine is involved. The Marriage Tribunal solution I have suggested above is one practical possibility that no more "muddies the waters" than does the legitimate practice of Annulment. I presume you are OK with the muddy practice of Annulments by Catholic Marriage Tribunals? I have seen no Magisterial documents that say persons caught up in this situation must be considered sacrilgious as well if they decide to unobtrusively receive Communion having made a decision of conscience on the matter. Perhaps I am wrong on this point.
Look if mortal sin today becomes no sin at all tomorrow, I should be astounded. Otherwise I can see that there is going to be no 'meeting of minds' here and so would rather preserve my time and peace by doing other things than debate to no point.
Are you able to share what you understand "mortal sin" to be Steve? Maybe that is the root of the difficulty.
Well, personally I believe what locutions.org is saying.... The Holy Father will go to Jerusalem in November 2013 and call all JEWS, CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS to UNITE to bring about a special era of peace of religious unity and world wide evangelism BASED ON THE SYNOD HE WILL BE HAVING IN 2014 ON THE FAMILY.... this will not be the time the Holy Father will be martyred. That will come later. In doing this 'call to unite' in truth for life...he will get the attention of all three of these faiths. (LTTW-) 15. Jerusalem is the center of God’s plan. He will use that city venerated by Israel, Catholicism and Protestantism, to unite all three faiths and initiate a special era of religious unity and worldwide evangelism.
Maybe it's time to stop paying attention to commentary about news about the church. All this speculation about "which way the wind is blowing" is not helpful, and actually quite harmful. (Remember all the recent talk about the end to priestly celibacy, then Pope Francis came out and said the opposite?) This is the way the world churns over news, which is the reason I don't watch the news anymore!!! We are not the world, and need to remember that. Those who feel free to speculate and disparage the intentions of the holy father without any actual facts will have to answer for it one day. What's needed now is prayer, and lots of it, for our dear Pope Francis. Bad times are coming; I believe the seat of Peter will be invalidly assumed, or stolen, at some point, but we'll know it when it happens, and we'll still have the Church, and we'll still have Peter.
I don't have any 'difficulty'. If you do, then ask an orthodox Catholic priest, he will be much more qualified than I am to explain why some sins are mortal to the soul and some are not. My personal definition is irrelevant as is your own. End of discussion for reasons explained.
Who's not praying for the Church and the Pope? Those of us who are most concerned are probably praying hardest, those who see nothing to worry about are the ones who should be receiving messages to do so (and quickly).
Members of this forum, I assume, are all serious pray-ers. Here's what we know for sure: We've got a new Papa, he's not happy with the way things are (thank God!), and there will be changes. Pondering the future makes us all anxious, but Jesus commanded us not to worry. Prayer, prayer and more prayer is the antidote to our fretfulness. I also think that, prior to getting completely worked up over the Holy Father's specific intentions and possible future actions, which are unknown to us (and also unknown to disobedient archbishops and chattering media types), it would be a great idea to pray a rosary first; then, perhaps the temptation to rash judgment would pass. Jumping to conclusions is a terrible way to exercise, and robs us of peace.
Steve I really do not understand where all your anger and black and white dismissiveness of difficult public moral scenarios comes from. OK you clearly have difficulties with change and I can see you do not seem to trust the new Pope. But the same happened wrt Vatican II Council - many practices that seemed eternal were not. They were, in good conscience by our leaders, changed for what they considered good prudential reasons. In hindsight whether or not they needed to be is a completely different matter. It wasn't the end of the world or Church as we know it. But the fact is many practices can be changed. If it be done by our legitimate leaders then validly so and God expects us to follow graciously. I do not see much grace in any other approach. So if the Pope and his 8 Cardinals eventually decide that we should lovingly accept some of the remarried to the Communion Rail (whoops, that is gone now thanks to VatII?) I will do so. In fact I will rejoice that a personal friend who has been in this situation for the last 10 years (has been coming to Church on Sundays without Communion and who is a loyal Catholic in every respect other than his 2nd marriage) may feel it is now correct to decide to publicly receive. As our Dux et Lux said, "what is bound on earth is considered bound in heaven." He wished to be received by the Sick not the Healthy, the sincere, ritually sinful and not the ritually virtuous. And if the status quo is to remain I will also gladly accept. It isn't my job to clearly identify mortal sinners....just to welcome them regardless.
