Synod 8 - Final Document: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly | 18Jan2016 11:26:52


(Vennari) Hello and welcome to Fatima TV. I’m John Vennari from Catholic Family News. I’m here with my friend and colleague Chris Ferrara. We are under the lamp lights in Rome, we’re doing this at night because it was tonight, in October 24th, when the Synod released its final document.

Now anh… these… the hot button issues that were in the spot light, the Kasper Proposal that was going to allow divorced and remarried people to receive the Eucharist, and also the very soft troublesome approach to homosexuality, those two hot button issues it seems there has been a bit of a retreat, it seems like they are taking a different approach, a more cautious approach, but there are other things in this document that you need to know about that can work tremendous mischief in the future. And Chris is gonna, Chris is gonna lay it out for us.

(Chris) Well, first of all when you read tomorrow the conservative normalist (1:07) commentators telling you that traditionalist commentators were alarmed about this document and the sky is not falling and everything is hunky dory, don’t listen to them, they haven’t read the document. We have it here, it’s available only in Italian, to read the key passages in this document, most of which occur in the 3rd section, which is the most problematic. Let’s try to understand what happened here.

Divorced and remarried must be better integrated (par. 84)
The enemy – the progressivists – who tried to control this Synod from beginning to end have taken two steps forward but only one step back. So this is definitely a net and very significant advance for the progressivist agenda. Let’s begin with paragraph 84 which passed by vote of 187 to 72. 180 votes were needed for passage. And in this paragraph there’s talk of how the divorced and remarried people, living in adultery, MUST BE better integrated into parish life. And in discussing what they mean by integration, the majority that passed this provision speak of forms of exclusion, “oh the Church is just so mean!”

(Vennari) Well, that’s the type of terminology that’s used. “Exclusion” is a rhetorical term that makes the Church look like it is unjust in its treatment of divorced and remarried people.

(Chris) And the forms of exclusion that they’re referring to are in the field of liturgy, doctrine and education. Those three areas. Meaning they want divorced and remarried people to read the Scriptures at Mass – that’s the field of liturgy. In the field of doctrine they want divorced and remarried people to be religion teachers, and in the field of liturgy they want the divorced and remarried people to be godparents.

So they want divorced and remarried people, people living in adultery as Christ Himself said, as the church has always taught for 2.000 years, to be there standing at the baptismal font and saying "Oh yes, we renounce Satan and all his works” and then they go home and resume their adulterous relations. Absolutely obscene!

But this is exactly what Francis wanted. Before the Synod he was saying, “Why can’t they be godparents? Why can’t they be religion instructors? Why can’t they read the Gospel at mass?” In other words, why can’t they be everything? As if they had no problem! As if they weren’t living in a state of adultery, except for Holy Communion.

(Vennari) And, and it legitimizes the lifestyle, it legitimizes the adulterous union to a point, but also as we see in this document there is no mention of sinful behavior, there’s no talk about sexual sins or sinful behavior. Sin is mentioned in passing, that Christ has saved men from sin, that type of thing, but homosexuality, cohabitation, adultery - no mention of sin whatsoever.

(Chris) No, but just various forms of behavior and whether the divorced and remarried are concerned, well they had this unfortunate incident in their lives but certainly can’t call them adulterous any longer because if they were, then how could they stand at the baptismal font and say “We renounce Satan”. They’re living just the way Satan wants them to live, that’s the absurdity of this.

(Vennari: Well, this is, this is what  shows this document is basically a modernist document because one of the things you have to know about modernism is not what is said but what they fail to say. What they purposely leave out. And they have purposely left out, as we said, is any reference to sinful behavior, mortal sins that send souls to hell.

Discernment for different situations  (par. 85)

(Chris) Then in paragraph 85, in this paragraph they did what Cardinal Schonborn did, and others have done during the press conferences they twisted, beyond its proper interpretation paragraph 84 of Familiaris Consortio, where John Paul II speaks of discernment of different situations, some spouses are the victims of abuse, of husbands who have dumped them and left them for another woman or so on and so forth, but that discernment is not for the purpose of admitting anyone to the sacraments because in the same paragraph he says they cannot be admitted to the sacraments no matter what because their situation objectively contradicts the relationship between Christ and His Church, and to allow it would throw the faithful into confusion and error. You shut the door on that but they pretend that he opened the door to it,

(Vennari) Yeah, yeah

(Chris) and they continue to twist paragraph 84 of Familiaris Consortio into a discernment that would suggest that somewhere down the line the people who are divorced and remarried, living in adultery, could receive Holy Communion.

(Vennari) Yes, and they’re determined to do it too.
The Synod is not over, the issues are not over, they’re gonna keep going. So they…

(Chris) There will be a continuous Synod because now we have the Synodal Church,

(Vennari) We have the Synodal Church, yes

Internal forum (par. 86)
(Chris) as Francis said – announced to us last week.
Then this paragraph 86 that passed by 190 to 64 and this paragraph introduces that insidious concept of the internal forum, clearly suggesting that somehow in the internal forum one could be blameless for living in an adulterous relationship. Because it was just oh so difficult! Of course, there are difficult situations. But the objective reality is difficult situations do not justify immoral behavior. If that were the case then the Church could excuse all sins of any kind.

“Oh I had to murder my mother-in-law, she was driving me crazy!” I mean, what can’t you excuse or at least diminish in terms of culpability, so there is a discussion here in paragraph 86 about discussions with local pastorates according to the orientation of the bishop about the further integration of the divorced and remarried into the life of the Church, stopping short of saying that they would receive Holy Communion as a result of these discussions.

But there’s good news in this paragraph, at least it cites John Paul II’s teachings in paragraph 34 of Familiaris Consortio, that where the moral law is concerned this idea that there can be graduality, you gradually come to accept the law while you’re receiving Holy Communion, you’ll gradually consider whether you’re going to stop committing mortal sin while you receive Holy Communion, that was rejected emphatically by John Paul II in paragraph 34 of Familiaris Consortio, and here in paragraph 86 the Synod majority at least says that there is no graduality of the moral law, but that would contradict the rest of the document. And so we have another “pig’s breakfast” on our hands, a document that says yes and no at the same time.

(Vennari) Yes, what it affirms in one place it denies in another.

Moral ecumenism
(Chris) Then there’s the issue of this ridiculous moral ecumenism which was introduced in the Instrumentum Laboris – “Well, we no longer say that people are living in sin, we no longer say that they’re living immoral because they’re shacked up, to use the vulgar colloquialism, or because they’re divorced and remarried and living in adultery, no, we no longer use that language, now we practice moral ecumenism. Just as all religions are more or less good - see all the good elements in Hinduism, hottentot worship and so forth - now we see the good elements in these irregular relationships.

The phrase is even used in paragraph 69, that these people living in these irregular relations “do not possess the fullness of the sacrament”. What sort of nonsense is that? You either have a sacramental marriage or you don’t. It is impossible to possess part of the sacrament!

(Vennari) Yes, they were talking about cohabitation here.

(Chris) Cohabitation. So now we’re expected to believe that people living in sin really aren’t living in sin, they’re just living in an imperfect arrangement which possesses part of the sacrament, the way other religions possess part of the truth. Absolutely ridiculous!

(Vennari) Yeah.

Sex education (par. 58)
(Chris) And yet this is going to be the new language, going forward.
And then there’s the opening to sex education in paragraph 58. Just as we see in the Instrumentum Laboris, this document passed overwhelmingly 247 to 14. And paragraph 58 says that the family while having a privileged place, for pedagogy, cannot be the only place for sex education. This is not an option, according to the majority. It can’t be the only place. There must now be sex education outside of the family, meaning classroom sex education. As we know, the Catholic classroom sex education courses, we’ve all had experience…

(Vennari) Oh, parents have been fighting this through the 80s, through the 90s –

(Chris) They’re filth!

(Vennari) They’re filth. The dioceses and the monseigneurs they just run the parents through the shredder, and now Francis’ Vatican has given them more ammunition to fight parents.

(Chris) Well, I was involved in a case in Florida where parents tried to opt their children out of sex education class in Catholic School and they were expelled. The case went to court, there was TV coverage of it. The news reporter had some of the material in front of her. It was so filthy she could not read this Catholic sex education material on the camera, she had to stop short on certain passages. She could not read them aloud. That’s how disgusting it was. And this paragraph 58 says children, meaning adolescents and those in puberty, must now be educated about the beauty of sexuality in love. In other words, taught about sexuality, sexual activity.

(Vennari) The mechanics of it all and at a time too when they need to avoid the occasions of sin, not have these images and not have these temptations thrown at them, because we know that the sense object stimulates the sense appetite.

(Chris) What Pious XI condemned when he said they dared to suggest there should be classroom sex education is now no longer a suggestion. Now they dare to say it’s essential and mandatory and the family cannot be the only place where this is conducted. Absolutely revolutionary.

(Vennari) Yes, yes, and this is what we have here. So anyway we’d better wrap this up cause it’s getting late. There’s more to talk about. One of the things that we have to keep in mind too is that the purpose of the synods is to keep the continuous aggiornamento alive. Uuh, I have a book, the biography of John Paul 2nd and he says that is the purpose of the Synod, to continue the work of Vatican II into the future.

(Chris) The liberals are not…

(Vennari) And that’s what we’re seeing here. The synodal church, the continuous adjournment and the constant, really, evolution of doctrine and evolution of pastoral practice.

(Chris) Yeah, it’s definitely 2 steps forward and another one step back, so another step forward for the post-Concillium revolutionaries. They’ve made a gain here, and when you look at press conference tomorrow, they will be saying that. It won’t just be spin, they’ll have a reason to believe that.

(Vennari) So anyway, that’s all for tonight and we hope to do another video for you tomorrow. John Vennari and Chris Ferrara for Fatima TV signing off, from Rome.


Related Articles

Email address (will not be published):

Bible Verses
New Bible Verses
RSS feed



From the NWO




Quran - kill and subdue




Abortion Counter

©2018, | Plataforma xSite. Tecnologia Nacional