Thursday, 25 June 2015

I Will Pray for The Synod and Will Try Not To Worry

According to NewsVA, the official Vatican network, when presenting the Instrumentum Laboris for the 2015 Synod, ‘The general secretary of the Synod of Bishops noted that it makes reference to “the family and ecclesial accompaniment, the streamlining of procedures for causes for annulment, the integration of faithful in irregular situations, the eventual introduction of a penitential route, the pastoral problems regarding mixed marriages and disparities of worship, as well as questions related to responsible procreation, reduction of births, adoption and fostering, respect for life from conception to natural end, and education of future generations.’

If the General Secretary is quoted correctly (and I have no reason to think he is not), and if he is relating the Instrumentum Laboris correctly, we are courting both a division within the Church of today, and a division of the Church of today from her sacred Tradition and previous Popes. In effect, we would have two schisms in one.

Take just one problematic clause in the General Secretary’s statement: “The eventual introduction of a penitential route”. I know priests already tell people in Confession to feel at ease about coming to Holy Communion because they “were the innocent party” or simply “made a mistake and now have new obligations”. These penitents come to me intuitively uncomfortable with the direction they have been given. Since a number of priests are already acting contrary to the good of souls and to Divine law, I wonder who the penitential path is for? If it is for the “innocent party” to the marriage breakdown, are they undergoing penance for a situation in which they did not sin? They must be, because they are not undergoing penance for their second, actively-chosen, irregular situation, since that would have to include leaving that situation behind. And what is to be said to the abandoned spouse of those who marry others? “Sorry, but we are ignoring your Sacramental Marriage for the sake of supporting yours spouse’s adulterous relationship with its new responsibilities?” Where is the mercy and justice in any of this?

The whole idea of a penitential path that does not include giving up the sin is not a penitential path but a path by which Holy Communion can be purchased: “if I do six months of a certain penance I will be allowed to return to the sacraments.” This is simony of a very dangerous kind: no money changes hands to be sure, but the sacraments are definitely ‘purchased’ by a period of ‘penance’ because the ‘penance’ is not real penance since it will not include the giving up sinful situations and/or acts. maybe we can all go to Confession without a firm purpose of amendment but in order to allow us to continue sinning with the Church’s approval?

I think there is may be some scope for streamlining annulment procedures, but I can see no way to integrate ‘irregular situations’ with the Body of the Lord, at least not beyond what is already available: attendance at Mass, use of Spiritual Direction, a life of prayer, charity etc. The reception of Holy Communion being allowed for those in public and formal adultery is in fact, a nonsense, since a penitential route must include repentance, and repentance includes the giving up of the sin. The General Secretary’s words clearly indicate finding some way to unite a sinful situation to the Body of Christ. This is dangerous to souls; it is gravely wrong and reprehensible since it will give persons in irregular unions a feeling that “all is well” when making sacrilegious Communions, something the Church cannot eradicate by majority vote or even by papal decree: it is divine law that teaches us second unions are adulterous (Mk.10v10-11) and adultery is contrary to Divine Law (Ex.20v14). The Church (by Synod, Council or Papal act) absolutely cannot alter Divine Law any more than they can overrule the law of gravity. Those who think the Church can so alter Divine Law have an exaggerated belief in their own importance and of their power as Bishops or Pope.

Let us remind ourselves of the very real limits of Papal Infallibility/Authority as defined by Vatican I: “The holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.” thus, there can be no change in doctrine or in the praxis by which we live-out that doctrine. Should the Synod and the Apostolic Exhortation which )normally) follows a synod contradict Casti Connubii, Humanae Viate, Familiaris Consortio and the post-Vatican II Catechism in any way, they go against infallible teaching in view of its constant repetition by the Magisterium, and as inconsistent with to that teaching it and ought to be summarily rejected. The Faith is a given -indeed it is given by God, and no power on earth has the right to reject the word of God in order to give the Church a ‘merciful face’ by accommodating the sexual irregularities of the day.

Such a merciful face would be a lie (and the father of lies is Satan, whose smoke has entered the Church according to Pope Paul VI); it would imply that all kinds of sexual irregularities and social groupings (which are wrongly labelled ‘family’ by liberals) are acceptable to God, and thus give false hope and a false sense of security to souls who have rejected Truth (Christ) for a lifestyle pleasing to their emotional needs. Since not even a Pope can change infallible teaching, we could legitimately quote the words of Our Lord in John 8v44 to those who seek to make changes to Catholic teaching and practice, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires; he was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” 

Since no Pope, Council or Synod can give us new doctrine on marriage and sexuality, I deep down think we need not worry too much. What has been taught by scripture and held in Tradition from the beginning must be held and transmitted to the end of time and the Synod has no choice about that. For the synod, a Council or a Pope to allow for those in adulterous relationships (irregular situations) to approach the Lord in Holy Communion and they would be guilty not only of a dereliction of duty but a betrayal of the Gospel and of Christ. As such, we should not worry too much that the Synod will seek to alter either pastoral practice or doctrine on marriage and the family. Unless the Bishops and Pope are very dim or so arrogant that they think they can overrule God and sacred scripture, the Synod will try it, since they know that by doing so they place their own souls -and the souls of those they seek to help- in danger of hell. Can anyone say our current Pope and Bishops are that dim or that arrogant? I hope we can give them credence for being men of faith and humility, a faith and humility they can demonstrate (or not) at the Synod.


  1. Thank you Father for this analysis and guidance. You are right. We should not worry but pray for the Pope and the bishops .If it goes pear shaped there are plenty of traditional Catholics around who will keep the Faith alive and on the right track.

  2. Good observations until the very end. The modernists are not dimwitted but very clever and deliberate, especially using diabolical ambiguity to sell the lies. Check out Rorate Caeli's translation of parts of the Instrument Laboris. The leaders are the same lot that gave us that "neo-pagan" (Bishop Schneider word) interim document last year. You will see how sin is approved whether during or somewhat after the Synod. Know that you will be ultimately demanded to sign an oath to Francis, so get to know your faithful lay friends who can provide food and housing when faithful priests such as yourself are tossed out. Penal times come again.

    1. Thank you, RC.
      The ‘very end’ of the post expresses my trust in God, but I have to admit not my faith in the forthcoming synod. I think it is likely that the Church will, under the veil of mercy but in fact a door of paganism, abandon orthopraxis in order to accommodate the moral irregularities of today. I just hope it does not happen, and that the Pope and the Synod Fathers will have the humility and courage to bow down before the Lord and Tradition they received, which they are duty bound to pass on undefiled. I agree that the times are coming, if they are not yet here, when orthodox clergy will be prosecuted by the State for ‘hate speech’ and persecuted by the Church for failing to give way to an ultramontanism that ascribes to a Pope power over the word of God he does not have. That would be the arrogance, dim wittedness or lack of faith on which I hope and pray the Synod will prove us wrong.
      God Bless..

    2. This second session continues to be a problem. The continued hint of a “penitential route” will be, if it comes about, a disaster.

      The Church as you say cannot add or deduct doctrine. It cannot “develop” doctrine. The doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage is settle and is quite clear. Adulterers, for whatever reason are adulterers. They can return to a state of grace, but only if they Confess, make a sincere promise with intent never to commit that sin again and carry out their penance, and thereafter live chaste lives.

      In the event that rule is broken then we will have a heretical schism in the Church. The heretic faction will no longer be part of the Catholic Church. End of story.

      The One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church will carry on possibly reduced but still existing.

      In the event that bishops still declare the doctrine but advise adulterers to just carry on with their adultery then those bishops will be complicit in i.e., they too will be guilty of the resultant mortal sin.

      This will also be so if the the so-called “streamlining of the annulment process” is used to allow continuing adultery. Any bishop using such a way out will be guilty of the resulting mortal sin.

    3. Thank you, Jacobi.
      I agree the penitential route would be a disaster, and would go further and say it would be a victory for the enemy. That is altogether different from the development of Doctrine which is I suggest, possible, along the lines of greater precision; there cannot be an evolution (change) in doctrine, however.
      As for streamlining the annulment procedure, I am not sure how this can be done and it does not need to be by the excision of the Court of the Second Instance or simply by a bishop overseeing the process in his own Diocese; that is not what I would regard as streamlining : it would a replacing of the annulment investigation as we now have it with something far less precise and much more open to manipulation and error...
      God Bless.

  3. Dear Father Dickson
    Do you offer the Traditional Latin Mass?

    1. Yes; we have it here every Sunday morning at 9.30am.
      God Bless.

  4. "Unless the Bishops and Pope are very dim or so arrogant that they think they can overrule God and sacred scripture,..."

    The problem we have with many of the bishops, Fr., is that they are modernists or post-modernists and their approach to sacred scripture is coloured by that fact. Both Kasper and Schonborn are already on record as saying that we can't be sure that the scriptural accounts of Jesus' teaching on divorce are really His words, and therefore they think we shouldn't take them too seriously. They will attempt to paint these ideas in a very subtle way in order to ensnare the unwary and you can be sure that many in the synod will be taken in by them: "A culturally-conditioned, rigourous interpretation of Jesus' words from the first century can legitimately be replaced by our modern emphasis on mercy, which is better suited to the age in which we live."

    Their heretical beliefs about marriage are built on even more fundamental heresies, and all of them are inspired by Satan. For too long, the Church has tolerated prelates who in any other age would have been denounced as formal heretics and excommunicated. The danger for the synod is that there will be too many of these people there who are just not Catholics. They have no moral right to be there in the first place.

    We are about to pay the price for all the recent pontificates' failure to root out heresy and deal with it properly in accordance with Canon Law.

    1. Thank you, D.A.,
      What can i say other tha i agree with you 100%. We have tolerated poor prelates for too long, and because they are now in the majority, they have a closed, self-affirming dynamic which makes them arrogant and oppressive of Truth and of those who hold to it.
      God Bless


Please comment using a pseudonym, not as 'anonymous'.
If you challenge the Magisterium, please do so respectfully.
We reserve the right to delete from comments any inflammatory remarks.
If we do not reply to your comment it is through lack of time rather than interest.