http://buchanan.org/blog/is-the-pope-toying-with-heresy-124205

Are Catholic truths immutable? Or can they change with the changing times?

This is the deeper question behind the issues that convulsed the three-week synod on the family of the 250 Catholic bishops in Rome that ended Saturday.

A year ago, German Cardinal Walter Kasper called on the church to change — to welcome ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ couples, and to permit cohabiting and divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Communion.

Retorted traditionalists: This is heresy.

Had the pope followed his friend Cardinal Kasper and ordered Catholic teaching and diocesan practice changed, he could have provoked a schism inside the Church.

Such a change in doctrine would have called into question papal infallibility. Defined at the Vatican Council of 1869-70, that doctrine declares that when the pope teaches ex cathedra, on matters of faith and morals, he is protected from error by the Holy Ghost. Doctrinal truths, taught by popes in communion with the bishops, down through the ages, cannot change.

But if Catholic truths about the indissolubility of marriage and intrinsic immorality of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ unions can be changed, then, either the Church has been in grave error in the past, or the Church is toying with heresy today.

Saturday, The Washington Post described the synod as a “brawl over Francis’ vision of inclusion.”

Reporter Anthony Faiola compared the synod deliberations to a Tea Party rebellion in John Boehner’s House caucus, and the pope to a change agent like Barack Obama who finds himself blocked and frustrated by conservatives.

Saturday’s docuмent from the synod ignored the call for a new Church stance toward ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ unions. And it did not approve of giving Communion to divorced and remarried Catholics, whom the Church considers to be living in adultery.

Yet, in Sunday’s sermon the pope seemed angered by both the defiance of the resisting bishops and the conclusions the synod reached. To Pope Francis, the traditionalists appear to be placing the strictures of moral law above the Gospel command of mercy.

“None of the disciples stopped, as Jesus did” said Francis of the blind man. “If Bartimaeus was blind, they were deaf. His problem was not their problem.

“This can be a danger to us. … A faith that does not know how to grow roots into the lives of people remains arid and, rather than oases, creates other deserts.”

The pope seems to be saying that the dissenting bishops, no matter their command of moral law, are lacking in charity, the greatest of the three theological virtues.

Where does the bishops’ synod on the family leave the Church?

In confusion, and at risk of going the way of the Protestant churches that continue to hemorrhage congregants.

Recall.

With its acceptance of birth control at the Lambeth conference of 1930, the Church of England started down this road, as did its sister, the Episcopal Church. The process led to the decline of both.

From birth control, to divorce and remarriage, women priests, gαy clergy, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ bishops, same-sex marriage, the Episcopal Church first broke apart, and now appears to be going gentle into that good night.

Indeed the Church of England began in schism, when Henry VIII broke with Rome after Pope Clement VII refused to approve his divorce from Catherine of Aragon and his marriage to Anne Boleyn. According to Cardinal Kasper, Clement should have cut Henry some slack.

In this battle between traditionalists in the synod and the bishops who favor acceptance of some or all of Kasper’s recommendations, the pope seems to stand squarely on the side of the reformers.

Yet, it was the Protestant Reformation that destroyed the unity of Catholicism, five centuries ago, as it divided nations and led to conflicts of religion and nationalism, such as the Thirty Years War.

How the Catholic Church can avoid greater confusion among the faithful — after the pope’s virtual blessing of the Kasper recommendations, and the synod’s rejection of them — escapes me.

What does the pope do now?

If he ignores the synod’s dissent and moves the Church toward the Kasper position, he could cause a traditionalist break, a schism. Third World bishops might well refuse to change.

If he does nothing, he will disappoint Western bishops, priests and secularists who have seen in his papacy hope for an historic change in Catholic teaching and practice.

If he permits the bishops to follow their consciences in their dioceses, he will advance the disintegration of the Church.

The inevitable result of any of these courses that the pope chooses will be, it seems, to deepen the confusion of the faithful.

As for Pope Francis himself, he, too, must choose.

He can emulate Cardinal Wolsey — or Thomas More.

Good piece.  Thanks for posting.

You are very welcome.  I have always admired his writing, not just what he writes but also how he writes it.  Very clear and concise.  

In this battle between traditionalists in the synod and the bishops who favor acceptance of some or all of Kasper’s recommendations, the pope seems to stand squarely on the side of the reformers.


Too bad the "traditionalists in the synod" aren't truly traditional.

Toying, yes he is toying with it. But the problem with modernism is that a Modernist will not flat out DENY the faith, but he will do everything he can to undermine it.

I don't think he's toying at all.  He has embraced heresy and apostasy 100%.

Poor Bergoglio. Isn't collegiality a b----?

Saturday’s docuмent ... did not approve of giving Communion to divorced and remarried Catholics, whom the Church considers to be living in adultery.

False.  As we have seen, the Relatio completely subjectivizes the decision about whether Catholics living in a bad marriage can approach the Sacraments, allowing them to make their own decision based on subjective criteria regarding "culpability" and/or because they themselves have decided that their previous marriage was invalid.

The major mistakes people make is to presume Francis is a "poor guy who is heretic but he's good in intention"

Have you ever considered that he may know exactly what he's doing? Have you ever considered that he may be a freemanson or someone who thinks that the Church is the most evil thing on this earth?

Is there a coincidence that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis are doing exactly the same thing over and over?

Can someone in his right mind say that all these Popes are good men but only "mistaken" ?
Is it possible for 5 Popes make the same exact mistakes over and over and their omissions on the same issues?

Tell it to Bishop Williamson and Bishop Fellay.......................

Quote from: LucasL

The major mistakes people make is to presume Francis is a "poor guy who is heretic but he's good in intention"

Have you ever considered that he may know exactly what he's doing? Have you ever considered that he may be a freemanson or someone who thinks that the Church is the most evil thing on this earth?

Is there a coincidence that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis are doing exactly the same thing over and over?

Can someone in his right mind say that all these Popes are good men but only "mistaken" ?
Is it possible for 5 Popes make the same exact mistakes over and over and their omissions on the same issues?

Tell it to Bishop Williamson and Bishop Fellay.......................

I don't think +Williamson would agree that Francis is mistaken. On the other hand +Fellay loves Ratzinger more than he loves Jesus.

I'm sure 99,9% people here never considered that Vatican II has a plan... and their Popes work precisely functions with the precision of a Swiss clock.
Also their public acts are just clockwork. You had a smiling Pope, a Pope that ran from communist and was shot in public so by this fact could not be criticized for drinking pagan's fluids, you had the German Master of Theology who would appeal to the more intelligent Catholic, now you have the "Who am I to judge?" to appeal to the marxists and effeminate ...

I always think about Vatican II in the way +Lefebvre described it: A protestant and freemanson takeover.

I go further: Vatican II is a mix of Masonic Lodge organization (The Rites and structure ) and Aleister Crowley doctrine based on French Revolution "Liberté, égalité, fraternité"

What do you think the following quote is from: A freemason or "Pope" Francis?

"All citizens, being equal in its eyes, shall be equally eligible to all ... public positions and employments, according to their ability, and without other distinction than that of their virtues and talents."