The Secret Synod Does What We Expected: Evil

As if we didn’t know it before, today we learned why the Secret Synod was conducted in secret, with the faithful not being permitted to see the texts of the participants’ addresses or even to know which bishop or cardinal was advancing which position. The Secret Synod was conducted in secret because evil advances in shadows.

Many others, and not just traditionalists, have already expressed outrage over the disastrous “Relatio post disceptationem,” which appeared on the Vatican website today, October 13. This is the anniversary of Pope Leo’s vision of Satan’s attack on the Church (leading to his composition of the Leonine prayer suddenly abandoned after Vatican II), the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, and the derailing of the Second Vatican Council by Cardinal Liénart’s violation of the procedural rules in seizing the microphone in order to demand new drafting committees for the conciliar documents.

By way of the comments of others, suffice it to note, as reported by Vatican Radio, that no less than the President of the Polish Episcopal Conference, Archbishop Stanislaw Gądecki, “did not hesitate to say that this documentdeparts from the teaching of John Paul II [meaning the entire Magisterium regarding marriage and procreation], and even that in it can be noticed traces of the anti-marriage ideology. According to Archbishop Gądecki, this text also highlights the lack of a clear vision for the synodal assembly.”

I must disagree with the final sentence of the report. The Synod had a very clear vision: nullification of the Church’s censures of sexual immorality of all kinds, including sodomy, and with this nothing less than an effective decommissioning of the Church as moral preceptor of humanity. This is what the aged Modernist cabal Pope Francis put in charge of this sham of a Synod has in view.

I say sham because the entire event was nothing but elaborate camouflage for the advancement of a predetermined position: that the Church would be seen to adapt herself, at long last, to the “reality” of “modern” sexual relations and conjugal arrangements—formerly known as sins of the flesh—and thereby complete her adaptation to “the modern world” in keeping with the conciliar “opening to the world.” As the alarmed President of the Polish Episcopal Conference put it, the Secret Synod’s relatio “should be an incentive to fidelity, family values, but instead seems to accept everything as it is.” Or, as I put it four days ago, the real theme of the Secret Synod is: “Let us compromise on everything.”

In an application of Vatican II as preposterous as it is diabolical, the Secret Synod proposes to legitimate civil marriage, cohabitation, adultery, and even homosexual “unions” by focusing on “constructive elements” in these evils in the same manner as the Council, in Lumen gentium, purported to find “many elements of sanctification and truth” in non-Catholic religions. The Secret Synod suggests, in all seriousness, that just as there are “positive elements in other religions” so must the Church now recognize “seeds of the Word” at work in “cohabitation, civil marriages and divorced and remarried persons.” Hence, says the Secret Synod, “a new dimension of today’s family pastoral [sic] consists in accepting the reality of civil marriage and cohabitation,” which are now to be viewed as “a germ to be accompanied in development toward the sacrament of marriage…” As the Secret Synod would have it, therefore, the concept of living in sin would simply be abolished. Rather, “[a] new sensitivity in today’s pastoral [sic] consists in grasping the positive reality in civil weddings and, having pointed out our differences [!], in cohabitation.”

Cardinal Kasper’s proposal to admit public adulterers to Holy Communion in “some” cases—Pope Francis’s proposal from the very beginning, let us face it—is also enshrined in this wicked document. “It is not wise to think of unique solutions or those inspired by a logic of ‘all or nothing,” says the Secret Synod before noting that “some argued in favor of the present regulations because of their theological foundation,” while “others were in favor of a greater opening on precise conditions…” Then the bomb is detonated: “For some, partaking of the sacraments might occur were it preceded by a penitential path—under the responsibility of the diocesan bishop—and with a clear undertaking in favor of the children. This would not be a general possibility, but the fruit of a discernment applied on a case-by-case basis, according to the law of gradualness…”

Yes, the Secret Synod has invented a new moral law: “the law of gradualness,” a perversion of the legitimate principle that spiritual progress is gradual, not the bare avoidance of sin, the break from which must be decisive before spiritual progress can be made (Cf. John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio 34 and Vademecum for Confessors, Pontifical Council for Family [1997] 3:9) . With the help of this abuse of terminology, a mere verbal trick, objective mortal sinners would be allowed to receive the Blessed Sacrament without a firm purpose of amendment so long as they could be said to be moving “gradually” toward acceptance of the Church’s moral teaching—in other words, thinking it over while they continue to commit precisely the same sins, receiving absolution and Holy Communion nonetheless. Here the entire moral edifice of the Church, the sanctity of the Blessed Sacrament, the integrity of Confession, and the Faith as a whole are under direct attack.

But the Secret Synod saved the worst for last. In a section entitled “Welcoming Homosexual Persons,” the Modernist coven responsible for this travesty gives a diabolical nod to sodomy:

“Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?”

How does one “accept and value” the intrinsic disorder of homosexuality without compromising Catholic doctrine? One does not, of course. One simply accepts that it is no longer an intrinsic disorder and that the Church was wrong ever to say so. That is the aim of the Secret Synod. But there is more:

“Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.”

Notice that the Secret Synod does not stop at characterizing sodomitical unions as “precious support”—oh, but only sometimes! Hiding a vice that cries out to heaven for retribution behind a vague reference to “moral problems,” it also simply assumes that innocent children will be raised by sodomite “couples” and that the Church will now accept this development while it tends to “the needs and rights of the little ones”—as if the rights of children did not include, first and foremost, their natural right not to be subjected to the horror of being adopted by sodomites. The Secret Synod has effectively dispensed with the entire teaching of the Church against homosexual conduct in general and “gay marriage” and “gay adoption” in particular, which Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo, speaking during the reign of Pope Benedict, called “a crime which represents the destruction of the world.”

The document just produced by the Secret Synod is another crime that represents the destruction of the world, in which members of the upper hierarchy are now openly participating. Even though, of course, the judgments of the Synod will bind no one—this being yet another addition to the pseudo-Magisterium of the post-conciliar epoch—the damage it has inflicted is already catastrophic. In effect, the Secret Synod has proposed, and the whole world will now hail incessantly, a practical abolition of the consequences of sin, including even habitual sodomy, with respect to standing in the Church. Indeed, the relatio dispenses with the very concept of the impediment of mortal sin in favor of an unheard-of continuum of moral behavior representing what the Secret Synod likens to the “levels of communion formulated by Vatican II” in its view of Protestants. Under the newly invented “law of graduality,” everyone on the continuum would have access to the Sacraments without regard to the objective immorality of his conduct. The pernicious nebulosity of Vatican II now finds its ultimate application: all sinners are more or less confirmed in their sins in the name of “mercy,” just as all of the Protestant sects are more or less confirmed in their theological errors. There is no need to elaborate the apocalyptic implications.

In yet another of his bizarre sermons, clearly in support of this repulsive document, Francis today introduced us to a new deity: “the God of surprises.” According to Francis, “God is always new; he never denies himself, he never says that what he had said is wrong, but he always surprises us.” Always! In case we failed to get the message, Francis reprised yet again his by now obsessive theme that Catholics committed to defending the Church’s traditional teaching and discipline against compromise are like the Pharisees: “The scholars of the law had forgotten how many times God surprised his people, like when he freed them from slavery in Egypt… They were too wrapped up in their perfect system of laws…. Am I attached to my things, my ideas. Am I closed? Am I able to understand the signs of the times and be faithful to the voice of the Lord that is manifested in them?”

Francis would have us believe that the Secret Synod speaks with the voice of the Lord; and with disgusting audacity and brazen blasphemy the drafters of this devilish piece of trash have dared to profess that they maintain “a fixed gaze on Jesus Christ, to pause in contemplation and in adoration of His Face.” But we know who this “God of surprises” really is. His name is legion, and that legion is at work in the Hall of the Secret Synod.

Four days ago I wrote: “the Secret Synod is in the grip of madness.” I never imagined that that assessment would border on an understatement. Even if the final document of the Secret Synod somehow retreats from what we have seen today, there is little doubt that we have entered into the time of the Great Apostasy foretold in Scripture. With a strange Pope in command of the Church and another claiming to be a Pope Emeritus for the first time in history, it seems only a miracle can deliver the Church from a situation she has never before witnessed. Our Lady of Fatima, intercede for us!

“What happened to “the gates of hell shall not” blah blah blah? “

And I say also unto you, That you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hades shall not prevail against it.

...Matthew 16-18, the Word of our Lord Jesus Christ

There is no blah blah blah in what Jesus Christ Himself, says.

50. Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

51. The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge. The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

52. Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners. Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.

51) does say that the homosexual relationship is not on the same level as marriage, but 52) seems to give the homosexual couple the right to adopt, have children by artificial means, etc. Of course I’m glad they singled out the innocent children of these relationships as having rights that must be met. But it doesn’t mention that is is wrong to bring children into this type of union in the first place. Doesn’t a child have a fundamental right to a mother and a father? The Church doesn’t seem to be addressing this issue and the homosexuals will not see anything wrong with bringing children into their union. This union mentioned in 51) is not a marriage, but no criticism is given by the Church of homosexuals who treat it as a marriage and bring children into the unit. I agree that we have to worry about the children already in this type of union, but if they want to join the Church, you would think the homosexuals would need to follow Church teachings on marriage and become celebrate.

Other people's opinions are more real than God for a lot of people.

I liked things better when Churches were the anchors holding fast against the strong currents of history and the ebb and flow of popular society's ever changing norms.

Too bad many have cut that Cord that ties and binds each of us to safety to go with the flow instead.

Note how we are picking up speed...exciting, huh?

People should read this. Most of the cardinals didn’t want any discussion of homosexuality in the report. It was barely mentioned. It was put in by a liberal asst to the head of the committee that drafted the report. This is big news. No way in the world the Catholic Church flips 180 degrees on the act of sodomy and starts “valuing” positive aspects of depravity. Because there is none. And mentions children being raised by homosexuals, but Francis has called homosexual adoption the “work of the devil”. The Catholic Church is against homosexual adoption. This is the story is the liberal press should be reporting and the ass that put the language in the report should be sent packing. But he got the report out for all the world to see, packed for full lies about homosexuality that was barely mentioned in the first week of the Synod.

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/magister-pitched-battle-on-mad-monday.html

“The passage on homosexuality and homosexual “couples” of the Synod relatio is just so scandalous and absurdly opposed to everything the Church has always taught that its sole rational purpose must have been taking attention away from the main artificial debate, on communion for individuals in public state of mortal sin for adulterous relationships without valid confession (the so-called “communion for remarried divorcees”). Most interventions in the Synod Hall this Monday have reportedly been against this repulsive passage”

Most of the cardinals didn’t want any discussion of homosexuality in the report. It was barely mentioned. It was put in by a liberal asst to the head of the committee that drafted the report. This is big news. No way in the world the Catholic Church flips 180 degrees on the act of sodomy and starts “valuing” positive aspects of depravity.

Well, if that is indeed big news, this should be even bigger news. Fr. Z says this same liberal asst to the head of the committee could be Pope Francis' choice to replace Mueller at CDF:

“The truly bizarre document that the Vatican released Monday”
...Similarly, an American journalist [Michael Voris!] raised a question about the absurd phrase in section 50: “Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community.” In one way, of course, this is true, since all people have gifts and qualities. The journalist wanted to know, however, whether the Synod fathers were saying that homosexuals have gifts to offer precisely because of their homosexuality? That seemed to be implied.
Sadly, more inconsequential commentary followed. [From Bruno Forte... who, under this Pope, will probably be the next Prefect of CDF if Müller is exiled.] The Synod has been talking a great deal about its respect for the intelligence of the Catholic laity. [Is that why they put a media quarantine around the Synod?] But no Catholic layperson of any intelligence left the press conference yesterday thinking that this subject – and several others – was anything other than more confused than ever and perhaps inclining towards things gay activists have been seeking that cannot be squared with the Gospel.

Hopefully Fr. Z's comment was just tongue in cheek gallows humor. I hope its not really a rumor in Rome. Too many of these nightmare rumors have come to pass in the last year and a half.

Yes, it can be abused , and is being abused. I did a little looking and saw that temperance, or moderation, is one of the “four Cardinal virtues.” And the danger of them is precisely how, once they’re so established as guideposts, they can invoked against God’s Word. There is the voice of “moderation” in what this Catholic synod is doing. What has laid the groundwork for it has been previous work to cast the ideas of “moderation equals good,” while “’extremism’ equals bad.” That’s what Patrick Madrid, who is the Catholic radio host I mentioned, did when he said for Catholics to be careful to avoid the “extremes” of atheism and fundamentalism.

What is atheism about? Well, it’s already getting us to the point of infanticide for sick children and “philosophers” considering that infanticide of healthy infants is all right since it’s not much different from abortion.

And what is fundamentalism about? For evangelical Christians, it’s meant the Bible is God’s inspired, inerrant Word; the Virgin (Cont’d)

Even Dolan said para 48 (the one about homosexuals), was put in the document after everyone had reviewed the report. They had no type to offer criticism. The sorry SOB Forte should be fired.............but............

“On Monday, 14 October 2013, the Archbishop was appointed by Pope Francis to serve as the Special Secretary of the Third Extraordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on “The challenges of the family in the context of evangelization”, scheduled from 5 October – 19 October 2014.”

He’s a liberal, therefore he’s a favorite of liberal Francis. Francis probably told him to put in the blasphamy
about homosexuals in the report. Francis will turn out to be the worst Pope in the last 500 years. Hopefully after this debacle on the family the rest of the bishops will accuse him of heresy and get rid of him.

birth of Christ; Christ’s death as atonement for our sins; His bodily resurrection; and the literal truth of His miracles.

So both “extremes” are to be rejected because they’re “extremes” and “moderation” is the way? No, moderation was never taught about in the Bible as the Catholic Church has taught about it. There is nothing in the Bible about “four Cardinal virtues.” The Bible also commands much extremism.

It doesn’t leave us without answers, either, on for example, the question of food. Like everything else in life, we’re to do all for God’s glory. What should His saints, His own children, be doing? The Gospel is “good news,” God no longer counting our sins against us. So if we’re assured of God’s mercy towards us, what joy and devotion should that relief produce, especially since we know that God’s ways are truly best for us? Even atheists embrace “moderation,” but these other are infinitely better, and Heavenly, guiding thoughts.

"More importantly, why bother going to church?"

Sounds like a test of personal faith in the Eucharist to me.

Are you going to answer for the Bishops or for yourself? If you don't believe, don't go.

That's your answer.

JMHo

I’ve read the ridiculous notion many times that your religion is God, or that Jesus and your Church is one and the same...This ought to be some kind of proof...God never changes, religions do...It is foolish to trust in a church...Even yours...

One thing that people seem to miss is that while your religion is doing what it can to be the One World Church, inviting all religions to join with Rome, it again would be foolish to think that the rules and laws of your religion appeal to everyone...
I have no doubt that your religious leaders recognize that they will have to bend and give on some issues to be attractive...
Another thing you guys may not consider is that conservative American Catholics are a minority of American Catholics...American Catholics represent about 14% of Catholics world wide...How many of those 86% majority are in line with the liberal leadership of the Catholic religion???

The only thing outside of God that you can be certain of is that you can’t be certain of anything...

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.