Posted on 02/27/2026 10:52:34 AM PST by ebb tide
Editor’s note: After having analyzed Pope Leo’s October 26, 2025, homily at a Jubilee Mass for synodal teams, Father Enoch now critiques the Interim Report of the synodal teams, focusing on the report of Study Group 9 and the topic of homosexuality. Click here for Part 1, here for Part 2, and here for Part 3.
To purchase his book The Trojan Horse, click here.
(LifeSiteNews) — On November 17, 2025, the General Secretariat of the Synod in Rome, which is currently focused on implementing the Final Document (FD) of the Synod on Synodality (which, again, was held in two sessions, in October 2023 and 2024, and which published its FD in on October 26, 2024), released an Interim Report based on the meetings of various synodal study groups which are dealing with different topics.
Interim Report of Study Group 9 is titled “Theological criteria and synodal methodologies for shared discernment of controversial doctrinal, pastoral, and ethical issues.”[1] The very title should give us cause for grave concern; for here we have a “study group” composed of hand-picked participants who are assigned to engage in “shared discernment” regarding “controversial doctrinal, pastoral, and ethical issues” that will likely impact the Church universal. In this report we learn that this study group relied on the advice of Professor Vincenzo Rosito, whom we are told is “a philosopher with particular expertise in the human sciences concerning deliberative processes and cultural resources related to synodality”; and that, “Due to his specialized knowledge” (as an “expert” in the new field of “synodality”) he was “a regular participant” in their meetings.
In dealing with these “controversial issues,” the Interim Report makes clear that the “synodal methodologies” being used by these Study Groups for arriving at decisions and making recommendations is basically the same as that used during both sessions of the Synod: a “process of deepening reflection” and “shared discernment,” in order to “reach consensus” on the issues under consideration. Hence, methodologies more in line with a modernist democratic dialogue than with Catholic teaching and practice.
“Homosexuality” appears first on the list of “controversial issues” to be dealt with.[2] (Are we surprised?) Interestingly, the Report (in no. 5) states that it prefers “emerging issues” as a “more appropriate” way to designate the issues Study Group 9 was assigned to address. Perhaps the thought is to downplay the very notion that homosexuality is a controversial issue, and (I suspect) a tactic to make it easier for the homosexual agenda to gain even greater widespread acceptance.
The Interim Report explains that
The goal will not be to provide solutions that apply to all cases, but rather to offer reference criteria that must nonetheless be borne in mind (and enriched) in the discernment that the different subjects involved will need to undertake in the multiple settings and contexts where it will take place.
Let us parse this bureaucratic gibberish to get a better grasp of what is really being said in these lines, especially in treating the issue of homosexuality.
The stated “goal” of Study Group 9 “will not be to provide solutions that apply to all cases, but rather to offer reference criteria that must be borne in mind (and enriched) in the discernment” process when considering “different subjects” (read here: homosexuality) in “multiple settings and contexts.”
Is the Interim Report suggesting that Study Group 9 will prepare “solutions” in some, or even in many cases, on various aspects of homosexuality – such as the active practice thereof (sodomy), or its societal ramifications such as same-sex “marriage” and adoption of children, that are (allegedly) compatible with Scripture and Church teaching? To even suggest that acceptable “solutions” to these issues linked homosexuality will be “provided” by a “study group” using a “discernment” process assisted by “reference criteria” is tantamount to conceding that the gay agenda has legitimate goals that are consistent with the teaching of Christ and His Church. This is pure blasphemy and a formula for moral anarchy.
And in implementing any such “solutions,” the Interim Report acknowledges that Study Group 9 must take to take into consideration “multiple settings and contexts”; i.e., different countries with their specific cultural contexts. So, in “culturally backward” African nations whose bishops strongly object to bestowing blessings on homosexual couples as proposed by Fiducia Supplicans, very different “solutions” will implemented in contradistinction to more “culturally advanced” countries like Germany, Belgium and the United States which have laws that recognize same-sex “marriage”? So, in classic modernist fashion, different “solutions” will be proposed to accommodate the cultural consciousness of the people in different regions and nations? Say good-bye to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith, and welcome to an Anglican-style communion, a Protestantization of the Catholic Faith. As Cardinal Joseph Zen has said of the synodal process, it is an attempt “to overthrow the hierarchical class of the Church and implement a democratic system.”[3]
On this point, one must keep in mind Cardinal Gerhard Müller’s sage observation in his interview with Edward Pentin (quoted at the beginning of Part One of this essay). Müller, who attended all the meetings of both the 2023 and 2024 sessions of the Synod, was able to see through the proverbial fog concerning synodality. In speaking about the “discernment process” that went on in both sessions, the former head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith said: “In the end, all of these so-called synodal reflections are aimed at preparing us to accept homosexuality.” Müller went on to say that participants in the Synod
want to revitalize old modernism … St. Paul, for example, spoke against homosexuality, but they say, “We have our new insights, revealed by the Holy Spirit,” and so from now on homosexual acts or the blessing of homosexual acts are a good thing. That is their idea. It’s abusing the Holy Spirit in order to introduce doctrines that are openly against Holy Scripture.[4]
As I note in The Trojan Horse, in a February 2022 interview, Jesuit Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich of Luxembourg, who at that time was the Relator General of the Synod on Synodality, when asked about the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, said, “I believe that the sociological-scientific foundation of this teaching is no longer correct”; he then added: “I believe it is time for us to make a revision in the basic foundation of the teaching.”[5]
Curiously, the November 17 Interim Report from Study Group 9 makes no mention of faithfully adhering to what God has revealed through Sacred Scripture and the Church’s 2,000-year Tradition in treating “controversial/emerging issues”; nor does it make any reference to having recourse to the Natural Law – a most important consideration when dealing with homosexual activity. Instead, Study Group 9 gives lip service to the teaching of Jesus, but in a convoluted manner: It speaks of “the urgent need” to undergo “a conversion of thought and a transformation of practices in contextual fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus”; and the need for a “paradigm shift in continuity with Vatican II and the new phase of evangelization” called for by Pope Francis in Evangelii Gaudium.
Now just ponder these statements. On the issue of homosexuality, the only persons who insist that there is an “urgent need” to convert people’s thinking and transform their practices – supposedly “in contextual fidelity” to Christ’s Gospel (whatever that means!) – are those who actively promote the gay agenda. The most well-known priest-advocate for normalizing homosexual sodomy, Fr. James Martin, S.J., maintains that the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s teaching that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to the natural law” (CCC 2357) should be “updated, given what we know now about homosexuality”; and that the phrase “differently ordered” should be used in its place.[6] Moreover, it’s likely Fr. Martin would argue that the Church could make such a change in its teaching in cases of “committed love and fidelity” between two persons of the same sex, and still be faithful to the Gospel.
“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who change darkness into light, and light into darkness, who change bitter to sweet and sweet into bitter!”(Is 5:20).
And like the Final Document issued after both sessions of the Synod, this Interim Report by Study Group 9 conveniently never specifies the issues or topics over which people “urgently need” a “conversion of thought,” or what “practices” must undergo a “transformation.” Though we do get a hint that the central issue alluded to here is homosexual sodomy; for in the very next line we read: “This transformation intimately affects both the theological dimension and the anthropological-cultural sphere in a closely related manner.” Those promoting the homosexualist agenda argue that in the context of today’s culture, and in light of “new insights” from anthropological studies and the psychological sciences, the Church should abandon a Natural Law approach when considering homosexual acts and instead adopt a “relational” approach; i.e., assess whether the sexual actions engaged in are based on genuine affective “love” and are expressions of friendship, fidelity, etc.[7]
From the supposed need for a “paradigm shift in continuity with Vatican II and the new phase of evangelization” called for by Pope Francis, emerges another tactic used by these promoters of the gay agenda: the attempt to erect a false opposition between love (read here: homosexual “love”) and truth. In reality, no opposition exists, or can exist, between the two. The truth must be lived in love; and love – authentic human love expressed in the sexual realm – must be practiced according to the truth of the meaning and purpose of the sexual act as revealed by God and made known by the Natural Law. But you see, there’s the rub. Promoters of the gay agenda like Fr. James Martin, who argue for allowing homosexual sodomy as a “differently ordered” way of expressing love in a sexual manner, are promoting a wicked and ugly lie.
Moreover, those who actively engage in sodomy are not living according to the truth; rather, they are living a lie. And deep down inside they know this; for as St. Paul says, “the demands of the law are written on their hearts” (Rom 2:15); and for this reason “they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened” (Rom 1:20-21); and for this reason, “God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie” (Rom 1:24-25): “females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another” (Rom 1:26-27).
Thus, a close reading of the Interim Report produced by Study Group 9 reveals that the same pattern Cardinal Müller observed at both sessions of the Synod on Synodality is being followed now in the implementation process of the Synod’s Final Document – to wit, that normalizing homosexual sodomy and same-sex relationships will be one of the main goals in the process of considering “controversial” topics that are up for discussion.[8]
To be continued…
To purchase Father Enoch’s book The Trojan Horse, click here.
[1] Avail. at https://www.synod.va/en/the-synodal-process/phase-3-the-implementation/the-study-groups/interim-reports/group-9.html.
[2] The other two issues listed are: “Conflicts and the non-violent practice of the Gospel,” and “Violence against women in situations of armed conflict,” which we are told is “an emblematic issue that has come to the Group’s attention during the course of our work.” One wonders how these two latter topics were chosen, given that many more controversial issues of a doctrinal, pastoral or ethical nature could have been addressed. Possibly because doing so allows this Study Group to focus on homosexuality, which is most definitely a controversial issue that touches on doctrine, ethics and pastoral practice?
[3] Michael Haynes, “Cardinal Zen warns Synod aims ‘to overthrow’ Church’s hierarchy for ‘a democratic system’,” LifeSiteNews (Oct. 17, 2024); avail. at https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-cardinal-zen-warns-synod-aims-to-overthrow-churchs-hierarchy-for-a-democratic-system/?utm_source=featured-news&utm_campaign=usa.
[4] Avail. at https://www.ncregister.com/interview/cardinal-mueller-says-synod-on-synodality-is-being-used-by-some-to-prepare-the-church-to-accept-false-teaching; see The Trojan Horse, 78-79.
[5] As quoted by Simon Caldwell, “Church teaching on gay sex is ‘false’ and can be changed,” Catholic Herald (Feb. 3, 2022); avail. at https://catholicherald.co.uk/cardinal-hollerich-church-teaching-on-gay-sex-is-false-and-can-be-changed/. See The Trojan Horse, 77-82, wherein I quote Hollerich along with other high-ranking Church officials who attended the Synod on Synodality, who argue in favor of the Church changing its teaching on homosexual sodomy in order to reflect current cultural mores and recent “advances” in the psychological sciences.
[6] Jonathan Merritt, “This Vatican adviser is moving Catholics toward LGBT inclusion,” Religious News Service (June 6, 2017); avail. at https://religionnews.com/2017/06/06/this-top-vatican-official-is-quietly-moving-catholics-toward-lgbt-inclusion.
[7] See, e.g., proposals made at the German bishops’ Spring Assembly, March 11-14, 2019, as reported in Maike Hickson, “‘Need for change’: Cdl. Marx says German bishops will revisit Catholic sexual teaching,” LifeSiteNews (March 14, 2019); avail. at https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/german-bishops-to-revisit-catholic-sexual-teaching/. See The Trojan Horse, 84-86, wherein I discuss these proposals made by German bishops; and 100-104, wherein I quote Cardinals Christoph Schönborn and Blase Cupich, who echo the views of the German bishops.
[8] Ordaining women to the diaconate is another goal, which is under discussion by another study group: See Interim Report by Study Group 5, on the topic of “Some theological and canonical matters regarding specific ministerial forms,” which states that “the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith is currently engaged in drafting the final report on the specific theme of the participation of women in the life and leadership of the Church”; and which ends by saying: “A special word must be reserved for the question of women’s access to the diaconate. During the Second Session of the 16th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops [i.e., on Synodality], the Holy Father Francis, of venerated memory, reactivated the work of the Second Study Commission on the Female Diaconate, which he had established some years prior. All synodal contributions related to this subject have been forwarded to that Commission for its consideration.”
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Ping
Do these homos think the vast majority of Catholics are just gonna say “okay, I guess the Bible is wrong”?
At some point they need to be purged.
For all the obfuscation that vocabular combined with volume creat, the solution to the ‘problem’ is one word:
Repentence.
Every last sodomite needs to be purged from the Catholic Church. Their activities can never be normalized because to do so is a mark of a false church.
A good start would be not using exits as entrances or pretending to be a sex that you are not and then forcing others to believe and say it.
That’ll leave a few job openings in the priesthood...
This continuing promotion of sodomy by clerics and hierarchy is tell-tale.
how can any man of God somehow justify sodomy? You only have to read the fricking first book of the bible to see clearly what God thinks of sodomites.
Just disgusting - the old Catholic Church is no more. Dead to millions of Catholics.
“Hence, methodologies more in line with a modernist democratic dialogue than with Catholic teaching and practice.” I call horse shit padre...are you even catholic?
Just disgusting - the old Catholic Church is no more. Dead to millions of Catholics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>..
Soon as I became convinced the end was getting near, I left that Whore and now worship with the Greeks.
No..Just no.
Father Bryan Massingale, a theology professor at Fordham University in New York City, is seen here in a 2017 panel discussion in New York.
I have always admired Father Bryan Massingale, a Catholic theologian at Fordham University. A few years ago, at the Ignatian Family Teach-In for Justice, he delivered one of the best lectures I’ve ever heard, on any topic. His focus was on racism in the Catholic Church. Bryan has the ability to focus attention on problematic areas in the church in a way that is both challenging and undeniable. He is an enormous asset in our church.
Another reason I admire him is that he is a Black Catholic priest in a country where there are proportionately fewer Black men in the priesthood. Even rarer, Bryan is also an openly gay man. Now, before we go any further, this means that he is a celibate gay man who is a Catholic priest. (There is always the tendency in some more critical circles to assume that talking about a “gay priest” means someone talking about someone who is sexually active. That is not the case.) So, he is something of, as he says, a “unicorn.” Or what we might have called in earlier times a rara avis.
But as Bryan said in our moving conversation on “The Spiritual Life,” he sees those parts of himself as integrated into a single whole. And, in a sense, aren’t we all “unicorns” in that way, all of us with our own unique constellation of family background, sexuality, emotional makeup, as well as our gifts and blessings, challenges and struggles? Each of us is unique. Nonetheless, Bryan is a rare priest these days.
This rarity has helped Bryan to advocate for those who are marginalized, excluded or ignored in both the church and the broader society. In terms of racism, he tells the shocking story of being rejected in his own church as he was about to celebrate Mass. One parishioner wanted to know why he wasn’t an “ordinary” priest—that is, white. Bryan points out, as he did in the talk that I heard, that whiteness in the church in the United States is normative, with other races, cultures and ethnic makeups seen as extrinsic to the church’s identity.
His experiences shocked me (even though I’ve known him for some time). But as he noted calmly, they shouldn’t surprise us: There is still a great deal of racism in the Catholic Church.
Ralph McCloud, for example, served for 16 years as the director of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, the anti-poverty program of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Once, Mr. McCloud visited an unfamiliar town as part of a business trip. On Sunday, staying in a hotel, he looked up a list of local churches to see where he might attend Mass. Upon entering a church filled with white Catholics, a priest approached him at the door and said: “Excuse me. You do know that this is a Catholic church, right?”
“Yes,” said Ralph. “I do know that this is a Catholic church. Do you?”
I’m grateful to my friend Bryan Massingale for living with integrity, for being willing to be a “unicorn” and for turning our eyes to those in the church who are on the margins, including our Black and L.G.B.T.Q. brothers and sisters. We need him, and I was grateful to speak to him this week.
The Rev. James Martin, S.J., is a Jesuit priest, author, editor at large at America and founder of Outreach.
N.B. James Martin is a Jesuit. Massingale is a theology professor at Fordhan University, which is run by Jesuits. Pope Francis was a Jesuit.
It doesn't take a genius to connect the dots.
By all means, ebby, let’s play connect the dots! How many articles has ebby posted this week about the frociaggine? The dots sure do seem to lead to a frociaggine fetish, don’t they ebby?
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.