Skip to main content

Amazon.com Synod

+
JMJ

While the amazon.com synod will soon be a thing of the past.

While the smell lingers, here's some articles on the topic!

P^3

New Discordant Notes in the Synodal Symphony

August 29, 2019
Source: fsspx.news


The bishop of Regensburg, Germany, has once again publicly questioned the synodal process launched by the German bishops. For the prelate, it is neither more nor less a question of aligning the Catholic Church with Protestantism.
Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer does not intend to be dictated to by the president of the German Bishops’ Conference (DBK), Cardinal Reinhardt Marx, who, at the last plenary meeting of the DBK, announced his intention to undertake, “a compelling synodal route for the Church in Germany.”
A “constraining” process, if any since it involves questioning priestly celibacy, the teachings of the Church in matters of morals, and adopting measures limiting ecclesial power.

These are all subjects that illustrate a stated desire to “liberalize sexual morality, recognize homosexual unions, and dilute the authority of the Church in the synod, in order to get closer to and align with the Protestant communities” denounced the bishop of Regensburg in a homily on August 15, 2019 in Rohr Abbey, Bavaria.

For the prelate, a faithful Christian community that “invokes the New Testament” cannot “openly question” certain non-negotiable principles of faith.

Already, on May 11, 2019, Bishop Voderholzer had—in Austria this time—denounced a “synodal process which aims to invent a new Church” and which, according to him, would constitute “a path of destruction.” We cannot say it any better. However, it is important not to neglect the origin of the destruction of the bishops’ power, which began with the Second Vatican Council and its doctrine on collegiality.
Further Reading:
A Study of Collegiality at the Second Vatican Council

https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/new-discordant-notes-synodal-symphony-50176


Rome Stubbornly Supports the Working Document for the Amazon Synod

August 20, 2019
Source: fsspx.news
After the denunciation of the working document for the forthcoming Synod on the Amazon by Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, three new criticisms have been drawn up in July by Cardinal Müller, Bishop Schneider, and Bishop Nicola Bux. But in Rome several cardinals are supporting Instrumentum laboris come hell or high water, even if it means taking on a revolutionary appearance.
On July 3, 2019, in an interview granted to the Catholic site Settimana News, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, General Secretary of the Synod, fully accepts the unprecedented, if not revolutionary, character of the next synod: “the synodal assembly of next October is characterized precisely by this ecclesial and ecological ‘double dimension,’ which distinguishes it from previous synods. We are living in a historic moment where we are more aware of the need to take care of Creation,” he insists.
In an article published on July18, by the Jesuit journal La Civiltà Cattolica, Cardinal Pedro Barreto, Archbishop of Huancayo, Peru, points out that the Instrumentum laboris “is a working document...that amply expresses the sentiments and desires of many representatives of the people of Amazonia.”

This prelate, who is one of the founders of the Pan-Amazonian Ecclesial Network (REPAM), responds thusly—without daring to name them directly—to the criticisms from Cardinals Müller and Brandmüller. But his answer is only talk, because Cardinal Barreto does not consider the theological questions raised by the two German prelates. He wants to focus only on the pastoral and economic needs of people living in the Amazon region.

This cardinal is a Jesuit, a long-time friend of Fr. Jorge Bergoglio, before he became Pope; he is even considered the “prophet of integral ecology.” In this way he has worked with about sixty other organizations to solve pollution problems in La Oroya, in the Rio Mantaro Valley, a river in central Peru.

A militant activist, Cardinal Barreto points out in his article that “the majority of states, including a part of the territory that is in the Amazon, are signatories to the principal international human rights conventions and their respective amendments concerning the rights of indigenous peoples and environmental protection.” While most of these conventions are not being honored, the Peruvian prelate assures that “the Church wishes to be a bridge and collaborate so that this objective [i.e., the protection of the Amazon and its people] is achieved for the good of each of the countries represented in this territory, for the dignified and full life of the peoples who inhabit this region, and for the protection of an ecosystem essential for the present and the future of the planet,” he says in detail.
“As a Church, following the Pope’s appeals and desiring communion with and in the societies in which we live, we want to live a “culture of encounter” in the Amazon with the indigenous peoples, the communities that live on the shores of the rivers, the descendants of the Africans, peasants, city dwellers, and religious communities, and pursue a respectful and constructive dialogue with other religions and political and social entities,” says the Jesuit cardinal.

“This synod is an opportunity to consider the identity of these peoples and their capacity to protect these ecosystems, in keeping with their culture and their vision of the world,” according to Cardinal Barreto who adds: “It can allow our non-Amazonian societies to create suitable conditions in order to appreciate, respect, and learn from them. Thus, we may one day go beyond the idea that this territory is an uninhabited or backward space. More than that, we will derive from it useful guidelines for determining the causes of our own failures as societies in the care of our common home.”
These explicit statements by Cardinal Barreto, who will be one of the central personalities of the Synod on the Amazon, show, if needs be, the validity of the theological criticisms of the Instrumentum laboris. According to this Peruvian prelate’s pen, it is already the October Synod which is expressing itself through an eco-ecumenical vocabulary: “for the protection of an essential ecosystem,” in order to “live a culture of encounter,” to “pursue a respectful and constructive dialogue with other religions and political and social entities,” etc.

Nevertheless, there’s a drop of bitterness in this ocean of ecological felicity. Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State of the Holy See, admitted—fleetingly—the existence of some disagreement. During a conference titled, “The prophecy of Pope Francis in the era of the globalization of indifference,” he told Buongiorno, the local newspaper in Rimini, Italy, on July 16, that he was very worried about the manifestations of hostility towards the teachings of Pope Francis, adding that this hostility “endangers the unity of the Church whose center of visible unity is precisely the pope.”
 
Editor's Note: By dint of calling for “unity in diversity,” it is not surprising today to see this unity-in-adversity being dissolved by doctrinal and moral pluralism. Who sows the conciliar wind reaps the post-conciliar whirlwind.
 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Count Capponi - RIP

+ JMJ I had heard of Count Capponi over the years and was happy to hear a voice crying in the wilderness. I suspect that his conscience was clearer than many. This part of the article caught my attention: Capponi defended the right of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to continue his work without the label “schismatic,” which term Capponi rejected, saying: “You cannot apply the standards of the new code of canon law and the mentality of the old code. According to the new code, Lefebvre could do what he did with a Catholic intention, and he did what he did in ‘sincerity’ and invoked the ‘state of emergency’ argument, which the new code permits. You might not like the new code, but it’s what governs the Church.” I know a few people who tried to stir up a fuss when the SSPX cited the New Code in one of the documents with Rome.  Yet, the truth is what it is --- the New Code was promulgated by a reigning Pope and flawed as it is ... there are some benefits to its liberality. ...

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized ma...

Those who return to the past are not outside the Church - Rorate Caeli

+ JMJ I had been thinking about putting together a post explaining some of the history of how the SSPX has arrived at its current position. Now I see that Rorate has posted a translated editorial that shows the roots of the SSPX principles. In reading these words, I see patterns and themes that were put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre decades ago. Perhaps his sight was clearer than most. P^3

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him...

SSPX Transfers

+ JMJ Eponymous flow posted the following list of transfers etc. Source: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2020/04/castling-of-leadership-at-sspx.html The departures Bishop Bernard Fellay, the third Superior General until 2018, leaves the General House in Menzingen and moves to the Seminary of St. Thomas Aquinas in the USA. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, suffering from ill health, is being referred to the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecene as a retreat. Fr. Christian Thouvenot, until now Secretary General of the General House, becomes a professor at the seminary in Ecene. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, until now Rector at the Seminary of the Heart of Jesus in Zaitzkofen, moves to the district of Germany. Fr. Jürgen Wegner, until now district superior of the DISTRICT USA, moves to the district of Austria. Fr. Philippe Brunet, until now Superior of the Autonomous House of Spain-Portugal, becomes professor at the Seminary U.L.F. and co-saviour of La Reja in...