Pope Francis - Closing Address To Synod

[HisChildForever]

I read a brief snippet that the Synod discussed artificial contraception. One remark sounded conservative and another liberal. Unfortunately I can't remember specific quotes. Does anyone have any details on this?

[BarbTherese]

...............edit................

 

It's usually much better to teach things are black and white, and leave the discussion of the grey to the well catechized (those in the heirarchy) and to one's confessor.

 

I am all for absolutely teaching that things are black and white if that is the truth of the matter.  If there are areas of grey then that should be taught too since it is the truth of the matter and certainly, Pope John Paul II in his Apostolic Exhortation "Reconciliation and Penance" went into grey areas.

 

We can be well assured that if The Church proclaimed that things are absolutely black and white, the media (for one only for absolutely sure) would jump right on it and start yelling that it is untrue and that The Church is preaching untruths and yelling about the grey areas.  In a way I am in favour of this should it ever occur and most unlikely to totally impossible as more like it.  I used to call media "the watchdog of truth" .............. in the long ago now.

 

Certainly, The Church can and does state that areas of grey can be sorted out in the Confessional - but then I for one have received incorrect information in the Confessional.  Insofar as I am aware, Father is not infallible in the Confessional, although one can never go astray by in good faith taking up his advice.....another subject.

Edited October 25, 2014 by BarbaraTherese

[truthfinder]

I agree with the points you're making; I guess I'm saying that their needs to be a balance.  It's not exactly best to tell children about mental reservation; it's a moral teaching which is saved for when they know more. Or else you'll get told lies all the time.  Same goes for teachings on marriage or anything else.  A balance between the spiritual good of all and the subtle understandings of the rules.

[Maggyie]

Change can present a threat to some and their sense of security, meaning that their investment is possibly not in Christ and His Promise that He would be with His Church until the end of time and not to fear on that score.

This is sort of the ultimate trump card, which most recently I've personally seen deployed in abuse situations. Basically whatever Father/Sister/bishop says is right and best, because Veni Creator Spiritus, so shut up. You, the ordinary baptized Christian with only half as much access to the Holy Spirit as these others, just have to fold your hands, close your eyes and dooooo the trust fall.

Like this is basically when Babe Ruth said he was going to hit a home run and then followed through. It's a guarantee. Like the warranty on my used car (actual comparisons that have been made to me when questioning some parish politics)

Don't raise objections because you're starting to make me think you're disloyal and squirrel-like, with your memory of how we used to do it and what your grandma always believed and what you learned as a child was right and wrong. The grown ups are talking now.

Somehow I don't think that's how Christ meant it but hey now my hysteria may be getting to me and addling my brains.

If it's a matter of doctrine it can't be changed and the fact it's now on the table to potentially be changed (put there by the pope) should make all sphincters tighten and cold sweats break out upon every brow.

If it's a matter of discipline the "guarantee" doesn't apply. Discipline can and has been royally caboosed in the past and certainly will be in the future.

Don't get me wrong I'm still going to Mass and using my envelopes (esp the envelopes) but you can't blame me for side eyeing the whole thing.

[BarbTherese]

I agree with the points you're making; I guess I'm saying that their needs to be a balance.  It's not exactly best to tell children about mental reservation; it's a moral teaching which is saved for when they know more. Or else you'll get told lies all the time.  Same goes for teachings on marriage or anything else.  A balance between the spiritual good of all and the subtle understandings of the rules.

 

Certainly, a serious moral evil can be presented as grave matter morally.  This just might be (MIGHT BE) what some in the Synod may have been reflecting on from a pastoral viewpoint.  Invalid marriage, homosexuality and receiving Holy Communion in the state of mortal sin are all subjects of grave matter morally.   Mortal sin is another subject of its own in which grave matter features.   This is where perhaps many in-the-pew ordinary quite adult Catholics can misunderstand in that grave matter to them is immediately mortal sin and without any further qualification whatsoever.

Teaching children is a very delicate and sometimes 'sweat of the brow and seat of the pants' type of matter indeed - and they need to be informed on each level that hopefully they can grasp without complicating things - despite which, it can be amazing just how children can complicate what one had thought was quite simply presented and a straightforward matter.  I have two now adult and independent sons.
 

[BarbTherese]

This is sort of the ultimate trump card, which most recently I've personally seen deployed in abuse situations. Basically whatever Father/Sister/bishop says is right and best, because Veni Creator Spiritus, so shut up. You, the ordinary baptized Christian with only half as much access to the Holy Spirit as these others, just have to fold your hands, close your eyes and dooooo the trust fall.

Like this is basically when Babe Ruth said he was going to hit a home run and then followed through. It's a guarantee. Like the warranty on my used car (actual comparisons that have been made to me when questioning some parish politics)

Don't raise objections because you're starting to make me think you're disloyal and squirrel-like, with your memory of how we used to do it and what your grandma always believed and what you learned as a child was right and wrong. The grown ups are talking now.

Somehow I don't think that's how Christ meant it but hey now my hysteria may be getting to me and addling my brains.

If it's a matter of doctrine it can't be changed and the fact it's now on the table to potentially be changed (put there by the pope) should make all sphincters tighten and cold sweats break out upon every brow.

If it's a matter of discipline the "guarantee" doesn't apply. Discipline can and has been royally caboosed in the past and certainly will be in the future.

Don't get me wrong I'm still going to Mass and using my envelopes (esp the envelopes) but you can't blame me for side eyeing the whole thing.

 

LOL  :)  Amazing conclusions.

[Lilllabettt]

This is sort of the ultimate trump card, which most recently I've personally seen deployed in abuse situations. Basically whatever Father/Sister/bishop says is right and best, because Veni Creator Spiritus, so shut up. You, the ordinary baptized Christian with only half as much access to the Holy Spirit as these others, just have to fold your hands, close your eyes and dooooo the trust fall.

Like this is basically when Babe Ruth said he was going to hit a home run and then followed through. It's a guarantee. Like the warranty on my used car (actual comparisons that have been made to me when questioning some parish politics)

Don't raise objections because you're starting to make me think you're disloyal and squirrel-like, with your memory of how we used to do it and what your grandma always believed and what you learned as a child was right and wrong. The grown ups are talking now.

Somehow I don't think that's how Christ meant it but hey now my hysteria may be getting to me and addling my brains.

If it's a matter of doctrine it can't be changed and the fact it's now on the table to potentially be changed (put there by the pope) should make all sphincters tighten and cold sweats break out upon every brow.

If it's a matter of discipline the "guarantee" doesn't apply. Discipline can and has been royally caboosed in the past and certainly will be in the future.

Don't get me wrong I'm still going to Mass and using my envelopes (esp the envelopes) but you can't blame me for side eyeing the whole thing.

 

 

girrrrrrlllllll you on a roll. 

 

all thats missing is a set of well-timed finger snaps.

[CatherineM]

From my experience, a truly sacramental marriage NEVER ends in divorce. Make annulments free, make them less complicated, and put ten times as many people on the job in the tribunal to speed up the process, and this problem disappears. Have someone in each parish who handles the process like we do with baptism or confirmation. Take the stigma of failure out if it as if it is a regular process of the parish.

[dUSt]

What if the Church said:

 

- Your second marriage was invalid and a mortal sin

- Confess, repent -- that sin is forgiven

- Now, as for "living in sin" -- for the sake of the healthy family and children, this is somewhat out of your control at this point, therefore, not a mortal sin

 

In other words, the sin has taken place already. Confess, repent, that is done. Now you are at a completely different place in your life and any sin from this point on must be judged based on your current situation. 

 

Is that changing doctrine? Legit question.

 

I personally think the above situation is dangerous as it opens up possibilities of all kinds talk, like, gay couples who've already adopted children, etc. But seriously, what if a gay couple with children really do want to come back to the Church and start living a faithful Catholic lifestyle? Even if they do "live as brothers or sisters", how would them receiving communion be perceived? Isn't it impossible for them not to cause scandal--therefore, impossible for two people who find themselves in that situation to be in full communion with the church?

[dUSt]

From my experience, a truly sacramental marriage NEVER ends in divorce. Make annulments free, make them less complicated, and put ten times as many people on the job in the tribunal to speed up the process, and this problem disappears. Have someone in each parish who handles the process like we do with baptism or confirmation. Take the stigma of failure out if it as if it is a regular process of the parish.

 

What about eliminating the tribunal all together? Each parish has a dedicated priest that handles annulments. After a few hours of talking, a properly trained priest would know whether or not a valid marriage occurred. You change the annulment process from forms and waiting to an actual face-to-face session that takes a day and probably has about 10x more spiritual benefit.

[Maggyie]

LOL  :)  Amazing conclusions.

  

If my conclusions are wrong, which I think they are perfectly reasonable, there's a problem because I would say the vast majority of Catholics and pretty much ALL non-Catholics have the same impressions. That's what happens when you choose to run an organization through press releases and interviews. Surprise, the media gets to create your message. Surprise, they don't do nuance.

This is a criticism but a legit one I think. If Papa was here with us, he doesn't do the whole three genuflections and kiss the ring thing. He'd rather you look in the eye and tell him straight. So let's have some straight talk, the mandate is to feed my sheep, not hold forth to selected writers about the sheep. Who can be blamed with all this hullabaloo, for going to our father and saying, what's the meaning of this?? Stop crafting press releases and start teaching since that's the actual job at hand.

Incidentally this is what bothers a lot of Protestants about Catholics. They think we wake up every morning and check our phones to see if there's any word from Italy about how to order our lives today. Today, x is so but tomorrow, the pope may say y is so. Gotta keep your phone handy! The Bible? Pfffft. Now make sure you don't have it on vibrate.

I've personally spent a lot of time explaining how this doesn't reflect reality to my Protestant friend... Until they catch us doing it in the act. Whoops. Awkward.

From my experience, a truly sacramental marriage NEVER ends in divorce. Make annulments free, make them less complicated, and put ten times as many people on the job in the tribunal to speed up the process, and this problem disappears. Have someone in each parish who handles the process like we do with baptism or confirmation. Take the stigma of failure out if it as if it is a regular process of the parish.

I get what you're saying but I think the church needs a higher standard. If civil divorce = annulment, why have this anullment process to begin with. Why pretend that the church has something special to say about marriage if we basically let the civil authorities determine what is and isn't marriage. Why pretend a failed marriage isn't a failure - it's one of the biggest failures there is. Either the couple messed up or the Church failed to prepare and help them. Somebody failed somewhere.

This is the breakup of a family, not a regular parish process.

#catholicdivorce #nbd #letsjustpretendthisdidnthappenk

[dUSt]

Why pretend a failed marriage isn't a failure - it's one of the biggest failures there is. Either the couple messed up or the Church failed to prepare and help them. Somebody failed somewhere.

 

In today's environment, couples are not prepared for a sacramental marriage. I think what actually needs to happen is for the Church to deny marriages in the first place. How well would that go over? But that is the solution.

 

How far does the church need to go to judge people's hearts--or, you know, maybe the Church can just allow people to keep doing the whole free will thing and remain a hospital for sinners.

[Nihil Obstat]

Sorry, must make a quick post.
 
On whether the reception of Communion is disciplinary or doctrinal:
http://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/is-reception-of-communion-doctrinal-or-disciplinary/
Disciplinary norms (canons) touch all three reception questions (see cc. 919, 844, and 842 respectively) but the mere fact that canons regulate all three activities does not render all three questions disciplinary (or for that matter, doctrinal). What must be appreciated by discussants is whether doctrine underlies the disciplinary norms. Sometimes doctrine is not involved; sometimes doctrine is involved in part; and sometimes doctrine is the fundamental basis of the discipline in question.


Discussion regarding the purpose of diocesan tribunals in the annulment process:
http://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/the-annulment-argument-a-quick-quide-to-the-two-sides/
http://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/23/some-problems-with-cdl-scolas-fourth-suggestion/
http://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/what-to-know-before-asserting-that-a-typical-annulment-makes-no-sense/
[E]very phase of the current annulment process is required by natural law to serve the ends of justice (and, as Pope St. John Paul II repeatedly reminded us, the annulment process is about justice—not mercy, not charity, not warm fuzzy feelings, but justice); to eliminate any of these steps would be to gut the unavoidably juridic nature of the annulment process. Natural law requires that presumptions (here, of validity) be overturned only for specific reasons (here, grounds) demonstrated by objective information (here, declarations and testimony) weighed by independent minds (here, judges) subject to review by superiors (here, appeal). Remove any of these steps and, whatever ‘process’ one is left with, it’s not a legal one.

(though, it must be acknowledged that two aspects of the current annulment process are not required by natural law to achieve justice, namely, the defender of the bond (c. 1432) and mandatory appeal (c. 1682).)

 

[Credo in Deum]

What about eliminating the tribunal all together? Each parish has a dedicated priest that handles annulments. After a few hours of talking, a properly trained priest would know whether or not a valid marriage occurred. You change the annulment process from forms and waiting to an actual face-to-face session that takes a day and probably has about 10x more spiritual benefit.

While this sounds nice I don't believe in can be done accurately and without major abuses happening. Even with the process as it is now the worry of abuse was both felt by St. JPII and Benedict XVI.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900437.htm

[truthfinder]

Although the priest granting annulments suggestion is totally plausible, we have to remember that annulments are not infallible and can be revoked. A tribunal, especially with a defender of the bond, actually helps make sure the process was done right without getting into the terrible "he/she only git annulment because fr x is their friend"