Posted on 01/19/2020 10:09:42 AM PST by ebb tide
January 16, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — “Let’s hope that Pope Francis will destroy the final document, but hopes are truly slim. Lord, have mercy.” With these words, the Dutch bishop Robert Mutsaerts voiced his concern over the Amazon Synod. Its final document () is steeped with cultural relativism, calls for revolutionizing priesthood and suggestions to introduce “Amazonian” elements into the Catholic liturgy.
In an interview published on Wednesday , Mutsaerts, auxiliary bishop of Den Bosch in the Netherlands (see here the interview he gave to LifeSiteNews on the theme of priestly celibacy), spoke about his own vision of the Amazon Synod that took place in Rome last October.
According to Bishop Mutsaerts, the real objective of this “already written synod” was to introduce the ordination of married men, female deacons, and a new “Amazonian” rite into the Catholic Church. He went even farther in his reflections: “It seems ... that the synod brought Amazonian idolatry to Rome,” Mutsaerts told Serena Sartini of Il Giornale.
He also said the Amazon Synod had opened “Pandora’s box” of innovations for the whole Church, starting with Germany, whose official “Synodal Path” will open in less than two weeks. A majority of German bishops are openly lobbying for the revolutionizing of a woman’s role in the Church, the scrapping of the rule of celibacy for priests in the Latin Church, and the liberalization of sexual morality.
Among the strong words used by Bishop Mutsaerts are “deception” and “mockery”: he sees the Amazon Synod as marking a clear “break” with tradition.
Below is LifeSite’s full translation of Mutsaerts’s interview with Il Giornale.
* * *
Il Giornale (IG): Is the problem really the drop in vocations?
Bishop Robert Mutsaerts (BRM): Eighty percent of the Amazonian population lives in large cities, and the problem of the lack of priests is not at all different there from that of many other areas of the world. The problem is rather a lack of faith. This is not solved by accepting married priests. It is enough to see what is happening in the Anglican church, where married priests are already a common practice. The crisis in other churches is even greater than in the Catholic Church: the collapse of faith is dramatic.
IG: Why then such an orientation for the Synod?
BRM: The key words in the final document of the synod were not “Mother Earth” and “the ecosystem,” but “viri probati,” “deaconesses,” and “the Amazonian rite.” It was Cardinal Hummes who pushed the outcome in that direction. Of course, now the results will not be limited to the Amazon region. Pandora’s box is open, and there will be implications for the whole Church. The local bishops, starting with Germany, will ask the same thing. It was a synod that deceived the faithful. That is the sad conclusion: it was a mockery of our glorious faith, a break with tradition.
IG: What will happen now?
BRM: Let’s hope Pope Francis will destroy the final document, but hopes are truly slim. Lord, have mercy.
IG: What do you think of the conclusions of the synod on married priests?
BRM: It is a synod already written, with a predetermined outcome. The 180 synod fathers were carefully selected by Pope Francis, and those who opposed the proposals were never invited. All the speeches on the environment, climate change, ecology, and Mother Earth were a cover for the final proposals, on married priests and deaconesses.
IG: What would you have expected from the synod?
BRM: The Amazon Synod did not offer clear solutions, which are the purpose of synods. It was rather a mix of confusion and controversy. It has nothing to do with Revelation, redemption, or anything remotely related to what is essential in Catholic teaching. Even Jesus is hardly mentioned. It all began with the instrumentum laboris, which mentions religious peoples and their vision of the cosmos. Shouldn’t we bring Christ to the Amazon? It seems on the contrary that the synod brought Amazonian idolatry to Rome.
IG: Why are you so concerned about the conclusion of the synod?
BRM: Because nothing was as it should have been. During a press conference, the prefect of the Department of Communication, Paolo Ruffini, denied that the faithful had prostrated themselves before a wooden statue in the presence of the pope. But there is a video, on the web, that shows exactly the opposite: a dozen people, including a Franciscan friar, bowing to the ground in front of a wooden statue, with the pope watching. Is the wooden statue a representation of the fertility goddess Pachamama, or does the statue represent the Amazonian version of Our Lady? The pope himself called it a statue of Pachamama, while the Vatican denied that it represented an idol. In short, it was a synod-mockery of our faith, a rupture with the Christian tradition.
Ping
Let US pray that our misguided; immigration, Islam, and climate bridge builder Pope Francis gets a Colonel Boggie moment ( the lead character in the movie Bridge On The River Qwai played by Alex Guinness) and does a mea culpa and finally decides to question the results what he’s done and falls on the detonator which destroys the bridges he built) and resigns.
Francis is himself a rupture with Christian tradition. Somehow he this Marxist bullied his way into the papacy.
Maybe he had help: “An Italian archbishop close to Pope Benedict XVI has claimed that the Obama administration may have been complicit in the “tremendous pressures” that led the former pope to resign in 2013.”
Thanks, ealgeone, that’s the perfect answer. Down with Pachamama, down the Tiber and down to the bottom of the deep blue sea. Mother of God, pray for us!
The picture illustrates Rome has already gone for idol worship.
It is strange that you cannot distinguish between prostrating to a Amazonian nature idol, and blessing the beloved Mother who bends her knee to Jesus, and whom God’s Ambassador from His throne in Heaven calls holy and blessed.
No, the sad part is the Roman Catholic cannot tell it's the same action.
*****
John did.
8I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. 9But he said to me, “Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God.”Revelation 22:8-9 NASB
Peter understood the difference:
25When Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him. 26But Peter raised him up, saying, “Stand up; I too am just a man.” Acts 10:25-26 NASB
*****
Gabriel never addressed Mary as Holy in any of the translations.
*****
I don't think you object to Holy Bible, Holy Cross, Holy Scripture?
Holy Land of Israel, Holy City of Jerusalem? Holy Sabbath, Holy Name? Holy Day, Holy Commandments, Holy priesthood, Holy prophet? A people holy to the Lord?
Holy vows, Holy Covenant, holy promises, Holy man of God?
Or perhaps you do.
"This was the oath He swore to our father Abraham: To set us free from the hands of our enemies, free to worship Him without fear, holy and righteous in His sight all the days of our lives."
I don't suppose you think this holiness is meant for every one of God's holy people... except holy Mary?
I don't suppose you think this holiness is meant for every one of God's holy people... except holy Mary?
Nope.
My point is that no where does Gabriel call Mary holy and blessed which was your assertion.
It is Mary who recognizes that she is blessed from God because of what is happening.
Is Mary holy? Yes, but only because of Christ.
Are believers in Christ holy? Yes, but only because of Christ.
You continue to labor in using outdated translation of the Scriptures.
I don't think you object to Holy Bible, Holy Cross, Holy Scripture? Holy Land of Israel, Holy City of Jerusalem? Holy Sabbath, Holy Name? Holy Day, Holy Commandments, Holy priesthood, Holy prophet? A people holy to the Lord? Holy vows, Holy Covenant, holy promises, Holy man of God? Or perhaps you do.
If used properly and in context there are no problems with identifying the people of God or the things of God as being Holy.
However, in your post you had asserted something otherwise.
Are believers in Christ holy? Yes, but only because of Christ.
If used properly and in context there are no problems with identifying the people of God or the things of God as being Holy.
Thank you, dear brother in Christ, for repeatedly making my point.
I hope you can tolerate being agreed with. Myself, I find it a delightful way to start my morning.
Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.
Amen.
That is clearly not the case.
And I see you continue a non-Biblical practice of praying to the created vs the Creator....aka IDOLATRY.
I pray you, have a nice day.
The Synod is going to deliver up precisely what Francis designed it do deliver.
Does the author really think he will exercise a last minute veto?
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.