Posted on 05/06/2026 5:51:53 PM PDT by ebb tide
On May 5, 2026, Cardinal Mario Grech introduced the Synod on Synodality’s publication of the Final Reports of Study Groups No. 7 and No. 9:
“These two reports touch the very heart of ecclesial life. The first reminds us that the selection of a bishop is a moment of authentic discernment for the Christian community: there is no shepherd without a flock, nor a flock without a shepherd. The second offers concrete tools for addressing the most difficult questions without fleeing from complexity: listening to those concerned, reading reality, and bringing together different forms of knowledge. It is the synodal method applied to the most demanding situations.”
Although most serious Catholics have a healthy aversion to everything related to the Synod on Synodality, the Final Report of Study Group No. 9 deserves serious attention because it reveals an extent of diabolical rot that may alarm even the most adamant critics of the Synodal Church.
The ‘paradigm shift’ demands abandoning centuries of moral clarity.Tweet this quote
A core message of the new study is that the Synodal Church must undertake a fundamental paradigm shift to move toward a more liberating experience of encountering Christianity:
“In the wake of the historical and dialogical understanding of Revelation proposed by Vatican II in Dei Verbum, the commitment to practising the synodal nature of the Church implies the implementation of a ‘paradigm shift’ (cf. VG 3) from the prevalent paradigms of past centuries as regards the way of interpreting and expressing the proclamation of the Gospel and the mission of the Church. This is a shift which, in reality, is a return to the liberating experience of encountering the saving truth of the Gospel as originally presented in Jesus: the reliable testimony of the agape of God, who is Abbà, present here today for all his sons and daughters, each and every one.”
Practicing the “synodal nature of the Church” requires an abandonment of the “prevalent paradigms of past centuries as regards the way of interpreting and expressing the proclamation of the Gospel and the mission of the Church.” The document rejects the old paradigm and introduces the new as follows:
“The Church’s mission is not a matter of abstractly proclaiming and deductively applying principles that are set out in an immutable and rigid manner, but of fostering a living encounter with the person of the risen Lord Jesus, by engaging with the lived experience of faith of the People of God in its personal and social relevance, in relation to the diverse situations of life and the many cultural contexts.”
As we can see, the new Synodal document tells us that we must abandon the antiquated manner of “proclaiming and deductively applying principles that are set out in an immutable and rigid manner.” In one sense, this is not new because Traditional Catholics have been opposed by Rome since Vatican II for adhering to this “old paradigm.” At the same time, though, it is nonetheless surprising to see the new Synodal document make it so clear that we must abandon the old paradigm.
The document continued by elaborating on the new paradigm:
“Only the fruitful tension between what has been established in the Church’s doctrine and Her pastoral practice and the practices of life in which what has been established is verified, in the exercise of personal and communal life in the light of the Gospel, expresses the generative dynamism of Tradition: against the temptation of the sterile and regressive ossification of principles and statements, of norms and rules, regardless of the experience of individuals and communities. As Jesus taught, ‘the Sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the Sabbath’ (Mk. 2:27).”
The new paradigm does not entirely disregard established doctrine but seeks to modify the application of that doctrine to “better” account for the experience of individuals and communities. There is an implicit argument that the “traditional” way of applying doctrine was ineffective in helping souls, such that the “new paradigm” is presented as a way to bridge the gap between rules and the proper application of those rules to concrete situations. Thus, the new paradigm will require a dynamic view of Tradition that, in effect, demands that established doctrine is modified to fit the “experience of individuals and communities.”
The entire purpose is to shift thinking so that we no longer view problematic situations as problematic.Tweet this quote
The new study elaborated on what implementing this paradigm shift means in practice:
“A fundamental aspect for bringing about this paradigm shift is a hermeneutics of the human that embraces its historical, experiential, practical, and contextual nature. This was demonstrated in practice, in an inceptive but decisive manner, by the teaching of Vatican II, particularly in Gaudium et spes and Ad gentes. This focus is required by the Gospel, since the human is constitutive to the Gospel. The indissoluble relationship between what is human and what is Christian must be conceived and lived by interpreting the human as the anticipation of God’s gift that Jesus brought to fulfilment, making it available to each and every person through the boundless outpouring of the Holy Spirit.”
This is not an easy passage to read, but the notion is that we cannot understand the Christian religion without considering the “historical, experiential, practical, and contextual nature.” The meaning is not that we ought to consider the historical circumstances encountered by Our Lord to better understand the context of the Gospels; rather, the idea is that the meaning of the Gospels needs to adapt in each age to fit the historical circumstances of the individuals hearing the Gospel message.
The new document elaborates on this theme as follows:
“In fidelity to this commitment, the experience of the synodal Church demands that we listen to one another, opening ourselves to ‘welcome every person and all people.’ Particular attention must be paid to those ‘who are most vulnerable, or those who are ‘out of the game’ or ‘outside the box,’ with a view to gathering their unique experiences (including those who are sick, people in poverty, those who are civilly divorced and remarried, people with same-sex attractions, people facing discrimination, victims of abuse and injustice, etc.).’ This corresponds to an anthropological approach whose fundamental characteristics can be summarized as follows: every person is a singularity, whose wholeness and uniqueness is constituted in relation to the other, to society and to culture, according to a profile that is both temporal and narrative. It is within all these relationships that each person decides for themselves in their original and foundational relationship with God, whether they are aware of it or not.”
The parenthetical statement in this passage exposes the entire game with its identification of two categories of “unique experiences”: those who are civilly divorced and remarried, and people with same-sex attractions. Putting it all together, the Synodal Church tells us that we cannot merely look at Church doctrine and rigidly conclude that men and women should follow Catholic teaching. No, we must look at the reality in 2026 and modify Catholic teaching so that individuals can build their personal relationships with God (while keeping their sinful lifestyles).
The Synodal Church listens—while doctrine bends.Tweet this quote
To effectuate this change in paradigms, the Synodal Church needs us to change the terminology we use to describe those in problematic situations:
“Particular care must be given to those who find themselves living on the existential, social, and cultural ‘peripheries.’ It is in this perspective that we consider it more appropriate to describe the issues in question as ‘emerging’ rather than ‘controversial.’ This shift in terminology is not merely superficial, but expresses a proposal for a reformulation linked to a paradigm shift: whilst the phrase ‘controversial issues’ refers primarily to the theoretical level and the need for ‘problem-solving,’ the expression ‘emerging issues’ highlights the holistic nature of the commitment concerning the whole of the ecclesial community and the wholeness of the person, while at the same time pointing to a potential resource to be discerned in ‘conversation in the Spirit’ and ‘relational conversion,’ as indicated in the Final Document of the Synod (cf. FD, 45; 105; and Part II). Listening to these experiences, in order to be authentic and fruitful, requires careful integration and appreciation of what we are able to learn about them thanks to the contribution of the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences.”
The entire purpose is to shift thinking so that we no longer view problematic situations as problematic. And, instead of looking to Catholic teaching to guide us on how to interpret these “emerging” issues, the new document speaks of the need to focus on the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences.
With a shift in focus to the secular “experts,” one may reasonably ask about what happens to the authorities of the Synodal Church. The new document provides the answer:
“[A]uthority certainly has a specific role to play: first and foremost, that of listening, setting the discernment process in motion, and accompanying it to reach the expression of a consensus – even one that is differentiated – when this contributes to furthering the common good (cf. Acts 15). Thus, the exercise of authority, thanks to its proper character in the mission of the Church, shows itself as a participant in a unitary and plural process (cf. FD 93), taking particular responsibility for guarding and safeguarding the identity and contribution of each person, especially those who are less visible or less able to express their voice. Authority must not sin by omission: in a synodal Church, pastors and those who exercise any form of authority cannot evade the responsibility of ‘initiating processes’ and governing them in fidelity to the Word of God and in rigorous listening to the voice of the Spirit.”
So authority in the Synodal Church has the role of listening, and safeguarding the individual identities of those who would have been marginalized by the rigid paradigm still held by Traditional Catholics.
All of this is meant to promote homosexuality and show us that efforts to change the inclinations toward same-sex attraction are misguided.Tweet this quote
In order to apply the concepts of the paradigm shift to concrete issues within the Synodal Church, the authors of the new document chose two cases: the “experiences of people of faith with same-sex attractions” and the “experience of active non-violence.” Limiting our attention to the former category, the new document presents testimonies of two homosexual men. A few passages help us grasp the lessons the Synodal experts want us to learn:
* “This testimony, after highlighting the initial difficulty of finding groups – even at a social and civil level – that did not cause further isolation, describes the joyful discovery of a Christian community centered on Ignatian spirituality (Christian Life Community, or CLC). Yet, the positivity of this journey coexists with significant difficulties, as seen in the devastating effects of reparative therapies aimed at recovering heterosexuality, and in the contradictory advice received: from those who suggest marriage to a woman in order to ‘find peace’ to those who instead invite the person not to leave ‘dark or hidden areas’ in their relationship with Christ.”
* “Within this struggle, yet simultaneously as a path toward its resolution, the account bears witness to the discovery that sin, at its root, does not consist in the (same-sex) couple relationship, but in a lack of faith in a God who desires our fulfillment. This new awareness becomes the starting point for moving beyond a conception of the Christian community merely as a place of welcome and compassion, to arriving at the experience of the Christian community as a place where we are all loved.”
* “The testimony first describes the problematic membership in a Catholic group (Courage) which, by pushing for ‘reparative therapy,’ had the effect of separating faith and sexuality. On the other hand, it recounts how the study of theology allowed for the opening of new horizons for a contextual interpretation of the Bible, moving beyond traditionalist or even fundamentalist readings.”
Sin is no longer the act—but disbelief in ‘personal fulfillment.’Tweet this quote
All of this is meant to promote homosexuality and show us that efforts to change the inclinations toward same-sex attraction are misguided. This allows us to better understand why the Synodal paradigm shift is so important: we must abandon the rigid readings of the Bible to focus on what the Synodal architects consider to be the real positive aspects of homosexuality. The new document identifies a few of the reasons why the Synodal architects promote homosexuality:
“Turning to some of the positive points that foreshadow a shift in perspective and establish themselves as initial stages, capable of fostering further developments in both practices and expertise. Here, we would like to emphasize the following key aspects: the stability of a healthy affective relationship, which allows for the sharing of life perspectives, ethical convictions, and faith; the recognition of the importance of sexuality, which nevertheless does not justify considering it the sole aspect of life; the liberating power of a personal encounter with Christ, who loves us just as we are; self-acceptance linked to the deepening of faith and to active participation and service within the life of the Christian community; and the specific contribution of a theology capable of opening up a contextual and hermeneutic reading of the Bible.”
This is not merely accepting same-attractions — it is championing homosexual sex. Moreover, as the last words of this passage indicate, we are to re-read the Bible to find ways to support this view. The new document elaborates on how we are to do that:
“Recognizing the centrality of the Word of God in the life of the Church, it is important first of all to dedicate time to deepening our understanding of the biblical passages that – directly or indirectly – are proposed in interpreting the meaning of homosexuality from the perspective of biblical anthropology. It is necessary to go beyond a mere repetition of their current presentation and take into account the insights gained from diverse exegetical readings.”
We cannot simply repeat the same rigid ideas that the Catholic Church had for centuries with the old paradigm. Homosexual men need us to find a new meaning; one which will confirm that God loves them as they are; and one, preferably, that condemns those who do not support them. Thanks be to Satan and the Church’s other enemies, they now have the Synodal Church for that. Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
|
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
Are they going to change what happened in Sodom and Gomorrah too? Come Lord Jesus!
I don’t even have to look to know that it doesn’t. Endless rage bait for the clicks and views. Nasty way to generate an income stream.
Aha! Babylon Bee! you ain’t foolin me!.............
This is a catholic caucus.
Why choose salvation when you can choose sin?
“Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!” Please.
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.