Posted on 06/19/2016 1:02:40 PM PDT by ebb tide
The Catholic world was set abuzz a few days ago when, at the opening of the Pastoral Congress of the Diocese of Rome, the local ordinary called into question the validity of most sacramental marriages.
As reported by the Bergoglian News Agency (otherwise, CNA):
Pope Francis said Thursday that the great majority of sacramental marriages today are not valid, because couples do not enter into them with a proper understanding of permanence and commitment. ‘We live in a culture of the provisional,’ the Pope said in impromptu remarks June 16. After addressing the Diocese of Rome’s pastoral congress, he held a question-and-answer session.
Apparently, so outrageous was this assertion that the transcript for the event had to be revised. According to an update from CNA:
When the Vatican released its official transcript of the encounter the following day, they had changed the comment to say that ‘a portion of our sacramental marriages are null.’
In the Vatican blog ‘Il sismografo,’ Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi said that this change is a revision approved by the Pope himself.
‘When they touch on subjects of a certain importance, the revised text is always submitted to the Pope himself,’ Fr. Lombardi said. ‘This is what happened in this case, so the published text was expressly approved by the Pope.’
This was enough to cause Michael Matt over at the Remnant to wonder if Francis is in the initial stages of dementia:
“It may well be time to consider the possibility that Pope Francis is entering his dotage, and is no longer in complete control of his mental faculties,” he wrote.
Perhaps, but I’m not convinced that the man is losing his mind; rather, I tend to believe he’s simply speaking his mind, albeit perhaps a bit too plainly.
I’ll explain…
Recall that Archbishop Bruno Forte, who served as Special Secretary for both Synod sessions, recently acknowledged in a press conference that Francis had advised him heading into the process as follows (thanks to Christopher Ferrara for the translation):
“If we speak explicitly about Communion for the divorced and remarried, you do not know what a terrible mess we will make.” So, Francis told Bruno, “we don’t speak of it plainly; do it in a way that the premises are there, then I will draw out the conclusions.”
From day one, this entire affair has ever been but one big surreptitious maneuver; replete with smoke (courtesy of Satan) and mirrors and predetermined outcomes.
There can be no doubt that Francis has been operating on the premise that the “great majority” of sacramental marriages today are invalid all along.
Cardinal Kasper essentially told us as much over a year ago.
Clearly, this means that Francis has ever likewise imagined that the majority of those who had obtained a civil divorce (or several) and remarried along the way were never really married to those other people in the first place.
As such, he obviously believes that each one is therefore entitled to an annulment, and it was this conviction that gave rise to his controversial motu proprio revising the process for obtaining a decree of nullity.
For Francis, however, annulments are for those who tend toward legalism. If a civil divorcee desires one (or two, or more) fine, let’s make it easy; if not, no big deal.
After all, the confessional isn’t meant to be a torture chamber where a purpose of amendment should be required, and, at the end of the day, the Eucharist is simply the Church’s way of helping such persons attain to an ideal. (cf Amoris Laetitia footnote 351).
As for this most recent dust up over Francis’ comments, don’t kid yourself:
The revised transcript isn’t evidence that Vatican officials are at long last moving to rein-in the loose canon that is Francis; rather, it most likely came about after Team Bergoglio’s senior advisors encouraged the Generalissimo to apply the same strategic plan that he once presented to Bruno Forte:
If we speak explicitly about the great majority of sacramental marriages being invalid, we do not know what a terrible mess we will make. So, let’s not speak of it plainly; rather, do it in a way that the premise is there, then we will draw out the conclusions.
The destruction, in other words, will continue unabated.
If we speak explicitly about the great majority of sacramental marriages being invalid, we do not know what a terrible mess we will make. So, let’s not speak of it plainly; rather, do it in a way that the premise is there, then we will draw out the conclusions.
The destruction, in other words, will continue unabated.
This is what happens when you put the words of man - and the leadership of men - above the Bible. You get interpretations that change with the times as new leaders come and go...
“living, breathing” BIBLE..?
Like Luther and Calvin have done?
You mean like say “go read the plain words of the Bible”?
Yes.
If what you’re being told by your Church leadership doesn’t jibe with the Bible - then the leadership is flat out wrong and should not only be ignored but should be removed.
I wonder if Pope Francis will be removed. No? That says a lot about the institution - how it deals with heretical leadership.
I really don’t care about what heretics claim the Church should and should not do.
This is what happens when the laity stands back and lets the forces of evil destroy the Roman Catholic Church.
Pope Frank is a lot like ObaMao. He puts the interests of Muslims first, those of others next, those of his country/church last.
IMHO, the original statement was poorly phrased
BUT
did contain a very important element of truth
we do indeed live in “provisional” thinking times
and
many “marriages” are far less than the ideal marital sacrament as taught by the Church
anyway, yes indeed the Holy Father certainly could use a speech editor (before he talks....this business about having to edit or explain everything after he says it... is getting on, I think, everybody’s nerves)
This “provisional thinking” times is a bunch of horse hockey.
respectfully, I do not agree
so many people think only for the moment
and do almost no longer-term planning
and enter into almost no genuine, sincere long-term commitments (whether spiritual, marital, or much of anything else)
Really? Yet, Francis, in the same breath, claims cohabitation can be equivalent to marriage?
What is the purpose of this sacrament when a Catholic pope distorts it so much?
“Shack-up and you have a valid marriage. Not happy with a marriage you’re in, I’ll make your “annulment (divorce) easier and more expedient.”
we agree
Perhaps I am being uncharitable, but you seem to be taking the opportunity of a goofy Pope to get a kick in against the Catholic Church and in favor of Protestant Biblical literalism and inerrancy.
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.