{"id":3473,"date":"2015-06-23T14:49:38","date_gmt":"2015-06-23T18:49:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/66.147.242.160\/~stumbli4\/?p=3473"},"modified":"2015-06-24T15:23:52","modified_gmt":"2015-06-24T19:23:52","slug":"synod-theres-a-working-tool-in-the-vatican-and-it-hates-the-faith","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/?p=3473","title":{"rendered":"Synod: There’s a Working Tool in the Vatican And It Hates the Faith"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"I<\/a>

I prescribe a penitential path to sacrilege precisely in these cases?<\/p><\/div>\n

John Vennari has the scoop <\/a>on the latest Synod abomination – the just-released compilation of a worldwide ‘listening’ crusade, the Instrumentum Laboris.\u00a0 Doesn’t that just mean ‘Working Tool?’<\/p>\n

If you have to remind everybody that you’re busy working with tools, you’re not really getting anything done, are you?<\/p>\n

And after a second round of global consultation<\/a>, here it is \u2013 at Roman Noon, the instrumentum laboris<\/em> (baseline text) for October’s climactic Synod on the Family was released… for now, however \u2013 much like last year’s first volume<\/a> \u2013 the full\u00a0sequel is\u00a0only available in Italian.<\/a><\/p>\n

Stacking out at 147 paragraphs \u2013 some 20,000 words \u2013 the text is arranged around three pillars: the challenges families face, the “discernment of the family’s vocation,” and “the mission of the family today,” each of them slated to take up a week of the discussions at the 4-25 October assembly.<\/p>\n

Among other highlights, the final portion of the framework deals with the proposed changes of practice cited by their supporters as necessary for the church to better respond to families in challenging situations amid current pastoral practice.<\/p>\n

On the assembly’s most hot-button issue of all, the instrumentum <\/em>speaks of a “common accord” among the world’s bishops toward “eventual access” to the sacraments for divorced and civilly remarried couples, but only following “an itinerary of reconciliation or a penitential path under the authority of the [diocesan] bishop,” and only “in situations of irreversible cohabitation.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

If I remember last October, that ‘accord’ wasn’t all that common; and just like gay sex habits, if ‘cohabiting situations’ were irreversible, they wouldn’t be sins.\u00a0 Who do these irreversible FrancisVatican fools think we are, and how many could find their way down a ‘penitential path?’<\/p>\n

The text cautions that the proposal is only envisioned “in some particular situations, and according to well-precise conditions,” citing the interest of children born in a second union.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Well, I’m satisfied.\u00a0 They’ve promised to be precise, like the gears of a Porsche flying down the Autobahn to Hell.<\/p>\n

On a related front, ample treatment was given to the state of marriage tribunals, with calls for a “decentralization” of the annulment courts and the floating of the “relevance of the personal faith” of spouses in terms of their understanding of the marital bond as a means for declaring the nullity of a marriage.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We could see that one coming.\u00a0 His Holiness has been inclined to ramble about the impossibility of making an informed and binding marriage vow these days.\u00a0 Maybe if we have online auto-annulments then the Sensus Fidei will really start to understand marriage is forever! Ever-forward and pedal to the metal.<\/p>\n

In particular, the latter point echoes a longstanding line of the Pope’s \u2013 having quoted the impression of his predecessor in Buenos Aires, the late Cardinal Antonio Quarracino, that “half” of failed Catholic marriages there “are null” solely on the grounds of unformed faith, a papal commission formed quietly by Francis last summer is studying possible changes to the annulment process independent of the Synod itself. No timeline is set for its work.<\/p>\n

Elsewhere, three paragraphs were devoted to pastoral ministry to families “having within them a person of homosexual orientation.” While reaffirming the 2003 CDF declaration<\/a> that “there exists no foundation whatsoever to integrate or compare, not even remotely, homosexual unions and the design of God for the family,” the text urges that “independent of their sexual tendency,” gays “be respected in their dignity and welcomed with sensibility and delicateness, whether in the church or society.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Haven’t most self-professed gay people already been subjected to enough ‘tenderness,’ so much so that they imagine an outsized ‘dignity’ in their rejection of marriage and true parenthood?<\/p>\n

Perhaps most boldly \u2013 reflecting a key emphasis of one of the gathering’s three presidents, Cardinal Chito Tagle of Manila \u2013 the text emphasizes that “The Christian message must be announced in a language that sustains hope.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Watch out for these liberals like Cardinal Tagle, the future Pope of Hope and FrancisMercy.\u00a0 They’re always ‘bold’ and courageous.<\/p>\n

Stuff your evil old language, Catholic!\u00a0 We’ll tell you what to say.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

John Vennari has the scoop on the latest Synod abomination – the just-released compilation of a worldwide ‘listening’ crusade, the Instrumentum Laboris.\u00a0 Doesn’t that just mean ‘Working Tool?’ If you have to remind everybody that you’re busy working with tools, you’re not really getting anything done, are you? And after a second round of global …<\/span> Read More →<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[494,493,495,19,96],"class_list":["post-3473","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-communion-for-remarried","tag-instrumentum-laboris","tag-penitential-path","tag-pope-francis","tag-synod"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3473","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3473"}],"version-history":[{"count":25,"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3473\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3504,"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3473\/revisions\/3504"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3473"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3473"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stumblingblock.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3473"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}