Author Topic: Synod (Read 5308 times)

Viva Cristo Rey · « **on:** October 05, 2015, 02:27:46 PM »

Why can't any traditional Catholics go to Rome and protest it?
Can't some one who is truly Catholic break through to defend God and the true teachings of the Catholic faith???

Is my anger and disgust justified?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #1 on:** October 05, 2015, 03:27:08 PM »

Protest what? We don't even know what they're going to say yet.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #2 on:** October 05, 2015, 03:28:37 PM »

My best hope is actually that Francis DOES declare that adulterers can receive Holy Communion. That might actually start a mini-revolt and possible SV movement in the more conservative wings of the Conciliar establishment, and wake some people of good will up. So, for the long-term good of the Church, I hope that Bergoglio does his worst.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #3 on:** October 05, 2015, 03:39:52 PM »

Why do "traditional Catholics" have to go to Rome for the Synod? Can't we count on folks like Michael Matt ,John Vennari, and Chris Ferrara representing us there? :shocked:

Henry101 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 05, 2015, 03:41:13 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

My best hope is actually that Francis DOES declare that adulterers can receive Holy Communion. That might actually start a mini-revolt and possible SV movement in the more conservative wings of the Conciliar establishment, and wake some people of good will up. So, for the long-term good of the Church, I hope that Bergoglio does his worst.

SHAME ON YOU!
That is disgraceful!
The entire Catholic world is praying their rosary beads off for a miracle to stop the loud minority from getting their way! And you here want your church to fail. You literally said that you want to lead people to sin, for people to accept sin. Repent and may God have mercy on your soul!

Quasimodo · « **Reply #5 on:** October 05, 2015, 03:54:17 PM »

I don't hope Francis declares adulterers can receive Communion. I do understand where ladislaus is coming from though. Nothing good is going to come from this synod. Adulterers will be admitted to receive either way. More harm could be done with ambiguous statements than with clear pronouncements.

I think if adulterers will be allowed communion either way it would be better for the pope to declare it.

TKGS · « **Reply #6 on:** October 05, 2015, 04:30:13 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

My best hope is actually that Francis DOES declare that adulterers can receive Holy Communion. That might actually start a mini-revolt and possible SV movement in the more conservative wings of the Conciliar establishment, and wake some people of good will up. So, for the long-term good of the Church, I hope that Bergoglio does his worst.

Of course, if there's a mini-revolt, Ladislaus will "prove" that those evil conservative wings are just using their private judgment:

Quote from: Ladislaus

Yes, the Magisterium then becomes subject to a convalidation feedback loop. Pope teaches dogma. Is dogma Traditional? If yes, then accept. If not, then reject pope. Rinse. Repeat. Ultimate arbiter of dogma then becomes the individual's private judgment. SVism completely misses the ingredient of authority guaranteeing the dogma a priori.

What happened to that authority that you value so much?

Honestly. Do you even know what you think?

TKGS · « **Reply #7 on:** October 05, 2015, 04:33:05 PM »

Quote from: Henry101

Quote from: Ladislaus
My best hope is actually that Francis DOES declare that adulterers can receive Holy Communion. That might actually start a mini-revolt and possible SV movement in the more conservative wings of the Conciliar establishment, and wake some people of good will up. So, for the long-term good of the Church, I hope that Bergoglio does his worst.

SHAME ON YOU!
That is disgraceful!
The entire Catholic world is praying their rosary beads off for a miracle to stop the loud minority from getting their way! And you here want your church to fail. You literally said that you want to lead people to sin, for people to accept sin. Repent and may God have mercy on your soul!

I hate to break the news to you, but last year's synod had a majority of bishops voting in favor of the "questionable" resolution. It just didn't make the two-thirds threshold.

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #8 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:03:18 PM »

Quote from: hollingsworth

Why do "traditional Catholics" have to go to Rome for the Synod? Can't we count on folks like Michael Matt ,John Vennari, and Chris Ferrara representing us there? :shocked:

That's good that they are there in Rome.

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #9 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:08:57 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Protest what? We don't even know what they're going to say yet.

We already know that there are bishops pushing for sodomy and same sex marriage and divorce under pastoral care. Where is the outrage from laity?

TKGS · « **Reply #10 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:18:16 PM »

Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey

Quote from: Ladislaus
Protest what? We don't even know what they're going to say yet.

We already know that there are bishops pushing for sodomy and same sex marriage and divorce under pastoral care. Where is the outrage from laity?

The Conciliar laity is clamoring for the same thing.

Nickolas · « **Reply #11 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:31:18 PM »

Is not the real problem of the Synod the Synod itself? It is my understanding that it evolved from the precepts of Vatican II and the whole discussion of collegiality which puts into motion Bishops establishing a consultative authority to meet, decide on issues, and communicate them to the Pope for his consideration. In essence, collegiality establishes Church politics and popular vote as a measure of consideration the Pope is asked to consider in his authority in the Church.

By submitting petitions to the Pope or other communications that try to sway his mind on issues, is not this also buying into the whole collegiality Vatican II changes that Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX for years fought against?

Perhaps the trap of the Synod is to gain such acceptance of collegiality authority by not only the Bishops but third parties also, such as the SSPX. I think it is a devious trap.

Yes, we should pray evils do not come about, but becoming part of the lobbying effort to effect the outcome is a contradiction for those who oppose Vatican II. Am I mistaken here?

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #12 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:38:05 PM »

Usually, synods lead change to doctrine.

Henry101 · « **Reply #13 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:38:38 PM »

Well, I think, and this is just my small hypothesis, many conservative Catholics will be jumping ship and flocking SSPX mass centers if the conciliar church makes any heretical announcements after this synod.

Nickolas · « **Reply #14 on:** October 05, 2015, 05:46:51 PM »

Quote from: Henry101

Well, I think, and this is just my small hypothesis, many conservative Catholics will be jumping ship and flocking SSPX mass centers if the conciliar church makes any heretical announcements after this synod.

Heretical announcements fade with time into a "new normal" especially when collegiality gives others an opportunity to effect the outcome with a "seat at the table".

My point is that the SSPX has taken advantage of the opportunity with their "seat at the table", such as it is, to petition the Pope of what he is to do and in doing so, does this not erase the arguments against collegiality formulated post Vatican II in part as a reason to form the SSPX by Archbishop Lefebvre based in part on the entire collegiality issue?