This sham of a Synod takes a deadly turn

First, I have been quietly trying to brace people that this Synod would go well beyond mere “pastoral” approaches and into redefinitions of Doctrine.  I felt that clearly the case because, for starters, it is impossible to separate Doctrine – law – from practice.  Saying otherwise is like saying we can continue to hold the common definition of murder in criminal courts while excusing all those who commit murder out of a false sense of charity.  And what we have going on right now is attempted soul-murder in the first degree.   In addition, in reading the tea leaves with the dim eyes of faith possessed by this manifest sinner, it seemed obvious to me the progressives, advanced in age and with 50 years of history showing the utter folly, the evil, of their errors, would go for broke, attempting to finish what they started in the 60s.  This is their last, best chance to inflict as much destruction as possible.

Secondly, I say this Synod is a sham because if it does, for whatever reason (the true disposition of the majority of the bishops, or the heavy influence of the Bishop of Rome moving men to unprecedented disassociation with the Gospel and the Inspiration of the Blessed Trinity) try to foist a new “gospel” on the Church, that in and of itself will be……well, I think we know it will be very, very bad, but as the Voice of the Family has apparently already declared, it could also mean this Synod is some false body that does not merit obedience to its declarations.  We are entering most frightening and terrible times.  I do not know what to counsel but this is just unbelievably bad.  You can know how bad it is by observing how the leftists pretending to be Catholics are just wetting themselves with excitement.

For those who do not know what I am talking about, an interim report of the Synod was released this morning, and it was every bit as bad as many feared, going beyond nebulous or poorly worded “pastoral” statements and coming very close to straight up redefinitions of Doctrine.  Some excerpts from the “Relatio post disceptationem,” the official name of the interim report, first from Rorate and then from CMR (emphasis in both cases via the respective blogs, my comments):

Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?  [This is so utterly contrary to the Gospel and ALL the Fathers that it is simply staggering]

The question of homosexuality leads to a serious reflection on how to elaborate realistic paths of affective growth and human and evangelical maturity integrating the sexual dimension: it appears therefore as an important educative challenge.  [Yes, but the Church has utterly failed at catechesis at ALL levels going back decades.  Now it’s suddenly going to get better?]  The Church furthermore affirms that unions between people of the same sex cannot be considered on the same footing as matrimony between man and woman. Nor is it acceptable that pressure be brought to bear on pastors or that international bodies make financial aid dependent on the introduction of regulations inspired by gender ideology.

Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners.Furthermore, the Church pays special attention to the children who live with couples of the same sex, emphasizing that the needs and rights of the little ones must always be given priority.

Please.  Whited sepulchers, you speak out of both sides of your mouths!  How can the children be given “special attention” and “priority” when they are raised in such a profoundly disordered and perverse environment?!  What is this?  Do the Synod “fathers” not know, or do they just not care, that a child raised in this environment is several times more likely to suffer sex abuse and orders of magnitude more likely to become lost in this sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance themselves?

As Rorate notes, throughout almost the entire Relatio there is a paucity of references to Scripture and/or Tradition, because support for these novelties are utterly lacking in both.

Via CMR, much of the text seems to be nothing but Kasper’s heretical rantings presented at the pre-Synodal meeting early this year transferred into “draft” form for the Synod itself:

In the same way the situation of the divorced who have remarried demands a careful discernment and an accompaniment full of respect, avoiding any language or behavior that might make them feel discriminated against.  [Many sinners feel discriminated against. It is a fundamental aspect of our fallen natures to seek justification for our sin, and it appears these men mean to provide adulterer’s with manifold justifications]  For the Christian community looking after them is not a weakening of its faith and its testimony to the indissolubility of marriage, but rather it expresses precisely its charity in its caring.  [Nothing but a naked assertion, completely unsupported by Scripture, Tradition, or even reason.  In other words, whoever wrote this is saying “it is so because I say it is so,” and nothing else.]

As regards the possibility of partaking of the sacraments of Penance  [THIS IS BULL!  There is nothing, at all, that stops anyone at anytime from partaking of the Sacrament of Penance.  That doesn’t mean absolution is guaranteed, you have to show contrition and amendment, but the Sacrament is always available to anyone at anytime – provided they can find a parish that offers it more than one half hour a week.]  and the Eucharist, some argued in favor of the present regulations because of their theological foundation, others were in favor of a greater opening on very precise conditions when dealing with situations that cannot be resolved without creating new injustices and suffering. For some, partaking of the sacraments might occur were it preceded by a penitential path – under the responsibility of the diocesan bishop –, and with a clear undertaking in favor of the children. This would not be a general possibility, but the fruit of a discernment applied on a case-by-case basis, according to a law of gradualness, that takes into consideration the distinction between state of sin, state of grace and the attenuating circumstances. [It is impossible to be penitent while the sin is still ongoing, unrepentant-like.  See that – unrepentant and “penitent” do not go together!]

It will be most interesting to see how many in the Catholic media will respond as this Synod develops.  Should this “relatio” be a firm indication of what comes forth as a final document, I think there will be a very quick and clear division made evident.

Not that that matters in the least, save for how it relates to the salvation of the souls involved.  And that is my great concern here, no matter what this Synod says, sin will remain sin and evil will remain evil.  All the “tolerant” and “non-discriminatory” language will do is lead more souls to perdition by convincing them that their grave sin really isn’t a sin after all.  There could be some exculpatory avenues opened up for a few souls, who convince themselves that because “the Church” says their adultery is not, they can now receive the Blessed Sacrament. But the natural law remains and there are more than a few Bibles laying around.  I think trusting that because some Synod says adulterers or sodomites can receive the Blessed Sacrament, that will wipe out the blasphemy and sacrilege of those few lured back to the Blessed Sacrament in the eyes of God, is a very far reach.

As with so much the left does, the stated motives and the true motivations are at 180 degrees from each other.  The stated motive is “charity” for those in “irregular” situations, but encouraging those lost in grave sin to add sin upon sin by receiving the Blessed Sacrament is no charity, it is in fact an intolerable cruelty.  One does the addict no favors by covering for them, giving them money, making excuses, and permitting them to continue to maintain their habit.  Addiction is the sin of intemperance taken to the Nth degree…..but the same reasoning applies to all sins. Simply because a sin has become so popular it is now a veritable cultural monument doesn’t change its ugly, satanic reality.  But the German bishops, who apparently still run the entire Church in spite of the collapse of the Faith in their own country, need money, no matter how many souls have to be damned for eternity.

Which brings me to the last point – if you have any question who is driving this Synod and in which direction, I think this report from over the weekend by Rorate makes the matter clear.  When it appeared the orthodox elements at the Synod might gain control of many of the national committees who will revise this disaster of a Relatio and turn it into the final report, Pope Francis proceeded to name another committee of 6 reliably progressive cardinals who will now oversee the overseers!

So now bishops and cardinals will know what it is like to have a boss, and a straw boss:

The only thing that can affect the matter now is prayer and penance.