Posted on 10/05/2015 6:35:36 PM PDT by marshmallow
A key official of the Synod of Bishops set a strongly conservative tone, unambiguously supporting the traditional teachings of the Church on marriage and sexuality, in the opening session of the October meeting.
Cardinal Peter Erdo of Budapest—who, as relator general, was responsible for summarizing the main themes of the working document to be discussed by the bishops— tackled some of the most contentious issues directly during his Monday-morning address. The Hungarian cardinal stated that Catholics who are divorced and remarried cannot be admitted to Communion as long as they remain in a second conjugal union. He also rejected the idea that homosexual relationships can be treated as similar to marriages.
Cardinal Erdo’s lengthy opening speech set a surprising tone for the October meeting, in light of the widespread expectation that the Synod will endorse the “Kasper proposal,” offering a means of admitting divorced and remarried Catholics to Communion; and will take a more positive attitude toward homosexual unions.
The first session of the 2015 Synod meeting opened with a short meditation offered by Honduran Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga. Then Pope Francis spoke to the participants, explaining his expectations for the Synod.
The Synod, the Pope reminded the bishops, “is neither a convention, nor a salon, nor a parliament, nor a senate, where people make deals and reach compromises.” Rather, he said, the Synod is the means by which the Church “interrogates herself with regard to her fidelity to the deposit of faith.”
That deposit of faith, the Pope continued, is not a “museum to visit, nor even something merely to safeguard, but is a living source from which the Church shall drink, to satisfy the thirst of, and illuminate, the deposit of life.”
The Pope asked the bishops to work with “apostolic courage, which refuses to be intimidated.....
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...
Thank God for good men. It gives me hope to know that all was not lost when Cardinal Burke was sent out to pasture in Malta.
Blatant heresy. Bergoglio has made his evil intentions known to all.
It is the pope's duty to safeguard the deposit of faith. Who's thirst is he trying to satisfy? Luther's?
I am always a bit bemused and perplexed by how many threads there are on my church on FR.
If you’re not Catholic, then butt put.
I am always a bit bemused and perplexed by how many threads there are on my church on FR.
If you’re not Catholic, then butt put.
There, I said it twice! (Sorry about that…)
Butt put. Awesome.
Do you mean like Francis did at the White House and before Congress? He didn't mention Christ's name once.
I expect that sort of commentary from CBS News.
He is quite clearly saying that “merely” (his word, which you chose to omit) “safeguard[ing]” the “deposit of faith” is not enough. He is clearly saying that the “deposit of faith” must be USED: to “satisfy thirst”, and to “illuminate”. This darkened world desperately thirsts for TRUTH ... that marriage is a lifelong union, that marriage is a union of one Man and one Woman.
Now you’re making things up.
P.S. This world has known the Truth ever since Christ’s Ascension. Why, then, is Francis convening a synod to put that Truth to question?
The two of you have a vocabulary as filthy as Bergoglio’s. Terms I had never heard of before the likes of all three of you.
Show me where I omitted, “merely”.
Well, we will see. The “good men”, however, placed in the Vatican posts by Pope Benedict, were all sent out to pasture, or elsewhere out of the sphere of influence for tradition, replaced with those basically inclined to schmooze with modernism in the world. imho, only.
You appear to have IGNORED it. That's even worse.
"Don't do 'X'" is an entirely different command from "Don't merely do 'X'". Anyone who can comprehend the English language knows this.
Your comment: "Blatant heresy. Bergoglio has made his evil intentions known to all." is pure insanity. To equate both safeguarding and applying the "deposit of faith" with "heresy" and "evil intentions" is the height of absurdity.
Then we have this gem, from you: "Now you’re making things up." Quit acting like an idiot. I'm reading and comprehending the English language, and explaining its plain meaning to you. I'm quite certain that you, too, can comprehend the English language. Implying evil intentions where none exist is a bad habit.
You write: "Why, then, is Francis convening a synod to put that Truth to question?" That's what we call "begging the question". It's another bad habit.
These days, the world needs Captain Obvious to tell it the Truth about marriage (among other things). Is he calling the synod to "put the Truth to question" or is he calling the synod to proclaim the Truth?
The answer is obviously the former.
Next question?
On the contrary. Your conclusion is far from obvious.
In fact, I think it's false.
Then why call a synod to question Christ’s teachings?
The Pope does not need to convene a synod to countermand what all former popes have taught. What makes him smarter or holier or “humbler” than his predecessors?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.