Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Ky., the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, was recently named to be one of four U.S. delegates to the Ordinary Synod of Bishops on the Family, which will meet at the Vatican in October.
On March 16, he discussed the issues and questions related to the synod in the context of the Church’s New Evangelization at a public forum with John Grabowski, an associate professor and director of moral theology/ethics at The Catholic University of America and a member of the Pontifical Council for the Family.
Archbishop Kurtz, who has presented his synod views in other forums, spoke with Register senior editor Joan Frawley Desmond in advance of today’s event about the message he will bring to the synod, the criteria for changing Church discipline on reception of the Eucharist and the lessons he learned from media coverage of last year’s extraordinary synod.
What did you want to accomplish at today’s public forum at The Catholic University of America on the synods?
The synods are a movement of the New Evangelization, and we look for opportunities in the public square to speak about the good news of the Gospel and Pope Francis’ vision of family life.
I was grateful to see that people want to learn more about both synods on the family and the idea of synods in general. This is part of the New Evangelization — to announce the good news of the Gospel in and out of season.
I was also grateful that there would be time for questions and answers. Sometimes it is best to hear what is on people’s minds and address the questions they have going into the event.
While many Catholics think of Pope St. John Paul II as “The Pope of the Family,” Pope Francis has called for two synods on the family. What has been the current pope’s message?
Over and over, he has repeated that he is a son of the Church, and he wants to be true to the legacy that is founded on the very words of Jesus and a concept of the family that is written on the hearts of each one of us — what we would call natural law.
Pope Francis wishes to bring a new dimension to the whole notion of synodality. There has been far more consultation and far more discussion than there was in any synod in the past. That was intentional on the part of Pope Francis. Bishops are called to participate in the process of synodality and of collegiality.
He also brings a beautiful sense of the parish as a family of the families.
He speaks often of seeing the person first and of accompanying people when they are hurting and in need. Isn’t this the very nature of the intimacy that we identify with the family?
As one of four delegates to the upcoming ordinary synod, what message will you carry to Rome?
The dimension that I would bring is the unity and integrity of how we worship, how we believe and how we provide pastoral care. It will be very important that there is not a gap between the way we worship, believe and provide pastoral care.
Some lay Catholics are anxious as they watch this synodal process. They fear that something grave could happen, and they don’t seem to be satisfied with the answers that are being given. How have you tried to address such concerns in your own archdiocese?
I can’t say that I am hearing a great deal of anxiety. I sense that, in general, people are eager to reach out to those in need.
Of course, they also want assurance that we will not depart from the time-honored teachings of the Church. There is a rightful concern that we remain true to the teaching of the Church, and that is an attitude I will take to the synod.
People have raised two other issues. First, they want to hear encouragement for faithful witness to fidelity in marriage and family, both in daily life and in specific programs, such as marriage preparation.
Everyone needs to be inspired to the good.
Second, as we look at challenges of married life, we cannot forget the sacrifices spouses make. People mentioned families in which a child might have a disability or there is an unexpected illness. We need to make sure we are reaching out with pastoral care to people who live out their vows under great stress. This is a form of accompaniment.
At the same time, other Catholics are impatient for signs that the Church is responding to their concerns. Are there elements of our pastoral care that can be changed in a way that deeply affirms the doctrine and mission of the Church?
I hope that the process itself will highlight the beauty of the teaching of our Church. The final document [of the ordinary synod] used the word “beauty” a great deal, and appropriately so.
As a bishop, I am aware of the challenges of family life, but I am most aware of the great beauty of this vocation.
Our Holy Father talked about us being very open to new opportunities to reach out to people. I am reminded that in the seminary this principle was given to us, “Sacraments are for people.” So we do have a responsibility as bishops to first ensure the integrity of the sacrament, but also to ensure that we are looking at ways to reach out to others.
One example is the Holy Father’s effort to form a committee to explore how the process of granting annulments might be streamlined and how unnecessary roadblocks might be removed, without doing violence to Church teaching.
What concerns have Catholics raised in public forums about the synods?
Many have talked about the pastoral need for patience from the Church and that it can be difficult for people, day to day, to live a good and faithful life. The Church, in addition to upholding our teaching, needs to offer patience.
A number of people also said they appreciated the opportunity to be listened to.
One common point is the fact that many people had directly experienced the suffering of a failed marriage or knew someone who had. They were sympathetic to the need to reach out to people.
Media reports on the synods have suggested that the Church may change its teaching on same-sex “marriage” and related issues. What concerns have people expressed to you about this subject?
There is a great sense of compassion for people [with same-sex attraction]. They also want to be true to the teachings of the Church that are in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And they want to make sure these teachings are put into practice; first, that every individual, regardless of orientation, be treated with dignity.
Second, many are also aware [of political] advocacy [on this issue] and want to make sure the Church’s definition of marriage as a union of one man and one woman is cherished and maintained.
Some members of episcopal conferences abroad have signaled that they want to provide Communion for Catholics who have divorced and civilly remarried but have not received annulments. What principles must be applied to evaluate such proposals so that there isn’t a break in the unity of doctrine, worship and pastoral practice?
The overall question is: How do we accompany people who are in irregular situations — separation and divorce, failed marriages — and have sought to marry outside the Church? In those cases, it will be the task of the synod to look at many opportunities to provide pastoral care.
The delegates to the synod will have to evaluate each one of the proposals based on theological guidance [regarding its] effect on the theology of the Eucharist and on our need to be in grace as we approach the sacrament.
One president of a bishops’ conference abroad stated that the conference was not just a “subsidiary of Rome” and that it might seek a course of action independent of the synod. What is the relationship between episcopal conferences and the Holy Father?
The document that gives the most authoritative description of the relation between the pope and the episcopal conferences is Apostolos Suos [The Theological Nature of Episcopal Conferences].
Issued by Pope St. John Paul II in 1998, it clearly says that episcopal conferences are very important in the life of the Church. It also states that they are to be in union with the Holy Father and that they should support individual bishops, address vital issues in the nation in which the conference is based and collaborate with other episcopal conferences.
In Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis talked about exploring the further involvement of episcopal conferences, but he didn’t give any specifics.
Is there any precedent for the Church allowing individual bishops’ conferences to depart from the general approach to pastoral practice on key issues?
There have been approved adaptations to a local culture. In those cases, most have been in the area of liturgy, and, in all cases, a special permission is required so there will continue to be unity within the Church.
These adaptations, however, are not in the area of doctrine. Instead, they focus on how a bishops’ conference might serve the people in a way that preserves unity with the Church. This is done in dialogue with the Holy See and includes a request for an indult or special permission. Any approval by the Holy See for such an adaption would not involve a doctrinal question.
As the president of the USCCB, you witnessed the media’s coverage of the 2014 extraordinary synod. The coverage sparked excitement but also confusion about the likely outcome of this gathering. Now, the ordinary synod will take place in October, and there are signs of a replay of that dynamic. What have you learned about public messaging during this process?
I have a commitment to be available to the media and find ways to present a positive and accurate message about the synod.
Whenever I give talks on this subject, I begin by saying to people — even before I ask the audience to pray — “You have a responsibility to deepen your education about the synod.” If people limit themselves to headlines, here and there, they will always have a limited and inaccurate understanding of the synod. They need to find solid material.
View Comments
Comments
Join the Discussion
Bridget, your point is taken, but you must go deeper. All of us are unworthy to receive the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. We are all of us in the same boat. But the difference is that some are, because of being in the objective and subjective state of mortal sin, are unable to receive Our Lord for the good of our salvation. St. Paul makes this very clear (I Corinthians 11:27), as does the 2,000 years of practice based on Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium. No Pope can change that, even this one. It is only by leaving the impediment behind that we can travel the road to freedom in Christ. To ascent to another notion preserves us in slavery… an unhappy state indeed. It’s a hard dilemma, but in real life sometimes you can’t get around these things without climbing onto the Cross – and I know it isn’t easy and most often doesn’t seem fair. But it’s better than living on the ground in angst and self-deception.
Apologies for my untimely response. Actually the original author of the post is unknown to me…I simply considered it food for thought and neglected to note it as not my own. I admire the author.
I am not a liberal, conservative, or feminist. I am an elderly cradle Catholic. I have several family members among the Religious, and secular sisters and children who have served in the missions. Yes, I have read the CCC, plus several Papal Encyclicals and Exhortations, particularly PFrancis’s recent Exhortation on Mercy where he states:
“The Eucharist…is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak “
I have the advantage of hindsight. Mercy Mercy Mercy. “Love covers a multitude of sin”. I am a professional,working with individuals in Crisis. Generally those undereducated, underemployed, and poor. I am their advocate, and I see Christ’s broken body in each and every one. I have been married to one man for 39 years, no bitterness here…simply and only Mercy. It does not compromise my Catholicity. Or yours.
lisakaiser, be it known to you and all others:
I personally write only on this Catholic site for Catholics and those interested in becoming Catholic.
.
When I want to communicate with Jews, I will go to a Jewish web site.
When I want to communicate with those of other Faiths, I will go to their specific web sites.
When I want to communicate with society at large I will go to a secular site.
.
NEVER contradict a Catholic Bible or the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition” on a Catholic web site.
.
Good day, and good bye.
_____________________________________________________
ANNE,
LOL! This is an open comment forum. Anyone is free to comment here. No IDs are taken at the door! As for what is or is not my business: much of my family is RC, and I have RC friends, so what goes on in the RCC affects my family and me. And as I have BA in RC theology, I am interested in what the RCC does. And even if I had no RC family, and even if I had a BA in Islamic Studies I would still be free to comment here—as a human being.
ANNE - Thank you for posting this information of the Catechism in this Roman Catholic thread, it is always good to remember what the Catholic Faith teaches so we can get closer to Our Lord Jesus Christ!!! God Bless!!
lisakaiser, you have been told many times before that this is a Catholic web site. Most of us post for Catholics. I always post for Catholics only - keep this in mind.
.
Your opinions on the internal workings of the Catholic Church - the “Synod” - the topic of this article - have no bearing upon you either, and therefore are not your business.
_______________________________________
Kurtz is a babbler, loves all the buzz words like New Evangelization. He is so cold that butter would not melt in his mouth. The Church, in its lack of suppot for Catholic School education, lets the children be steeped in the hell of our secularized society while they newly evangelize queers and adulterers. This formula has already failed in other Churches so it seems logical that our Church would try it. A Jesuit pope is the floodgate. May God strike him like He did St. Paul.
ANNE,
It is the RCC that teaches that RCs who who are divorced and civilly remarried when the valid (first) spouse is still alive, commit adultery if they are having a sexual relationship.
What the RCC teaches about divorce & remarriage is NOT applicable to anyone who is not RC.
Thanks Anne, my point exactly.
Mike Kurz, there can be no mistake about the teaching of Jesus regarding Adultery, Divorce and (civil) remarriage.
Jesus made if very clear, and more than once.
.
Teachings of JESUS about divorce and remarriage – Mk 10:6-12; Mt 5:32.
Teaching of JESUS about adultery, mercy, and required repentance – “Go and Sin NO more” Jn 8:11.
.
Jesus gave mercy / forgiveness but only when there was REPENTANCE.
There is no forgiveness of sin without repentance, and a resolution not to commit that sin again.
.
Doctrine of the Faith - CCC: ” 1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place.
Contrition is “sorrow of the soul
and detestation for the sin committed,
together with the resolution not to sin again.”
.
People who are divorced and civilly remarried when the valid (first) spouse is still alive, commit adultery if they are having a sexual relationship.
____________________________________________
“First of all, the dogma of indissolubility rests on a devious and poor interpretation of scripture”
WOW!!! where did you learned that! You might not be Roman Catholic!
The catholic couple to be married consent before GOD and His church. I think people forget that sometimes.
Bridget, You’re your assertions are simply wrong. The indissolveablity of Marriage after Christ’s commandment that “what God joins, let no man render” was backed up by Christ recounting that “because your hearts were stone, you were allowed to divorce”... BUT now I tell you, let no man render a Godly marriage.(sic)
What is the “devious and poor interpetation” of Christ direct commandment?? He acknowledges that the Jews were louts about marriage. and He simply cleaned that up. So where are you coming from? We do not suffer a lack of laxity in the world today. We suffer a lack of adherence to Christ’s commands and a lack of prelates who who are fearless enough to deliver those commands. These lazy prelates Like Kurtz, are not good news for the salvation of souls. As Christ said, “If you love me you WILL keep my commandments” Jn 14:15. The indissolution of Marriage was one of Christ’s commandments. And he clearly expained what a divorce and remarried person was, an audulterer! Its crystal clear by Gods words, not mine.
So Bridget, who’s the one making a ‘devious and poor interpretation of the scripture’?? Me thinks the lady protesteth too much.
Bridget, those who are divorced and civilly remarried are NOT Excommunicated.
In fact if they choose to remain in the Catholic Church they are to be treated with solicitude (attentive care and protectiveness) by the Priest and the Laity. (CCC 1650)
.
I am divorced and civilly remarried.
.
Divorced and civilly remarried Catholics have 3 choices.
1) If they believe that their first marriage was NOT valid, they can contact their Diocese Marriage Tribunal Office for annulment information and forms.
2) They can choose to live in complete continence, and receive the Sacraments.
3) They can choose to continue committing adultery with the valid spouse of another and not receive Holy Communion, raise their children Catholic, and go to Mass.
.
It would be good for you to read the ‘Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition” #1649-1651.
____________________________________
First of all, the dogma of indissolubility rests on a devious and poor interpretation of scripture. The custom of marriage at Jesus’ time was contractual, often accompanied by a bride price in a pre-arranged agreement by each family. It involved issues of property, of loyalty to each other, and of a social unit of family that most often fell under the bridegroom’s relatives and forever separated the bride from her own family. Jesus came to help celebrate the marriage at Cana, not to officiate over a new sacrament. For centuries after Christ, marriage was not even celebrated by the church but was instead a mostly civil matter, continuing Jewish and Roman traditions, mostly of “ownership” of the bride and then mother of the groom’s offspring. Even Joseph had contemplated divorcing Mary until commanded by an angel to proceed in marrying her. St. Paul found reason to allow a new marriage and nullity for an old marriage when there was conflict over the Christian faith. His advice is for the Christian to “leave” the marriage in order to be free in their belief and worship. Finally, the long-standing tradition in the Orthodox faith is to allow people to move forward into a new marriage since it is needed for their salvation as in ‘it is not good for a person to live alone.’ Finally, someone must challenge the false assumption that divorce involves sin or a “mistake” by one or both parties, hence the need for forgiveness for not sticking it out. Most of the divorces I have witnessed have been for gross and malicious behavior on the part of one of the parties, to the extent that the so-called love contract cannot continue. Most often it is the innocent party that must suffer the privations of living unmarried even though dependent for support (often not forthcoming and causing a condition of impoverishment) and for human intimacy and the redemption of love. The excommunication of divorced and remarried amounts simply to “cruel and unusual punishment” by ecclesiastical bodies who have no pastoral inclinations whatsoever and cling to a dogmatic understanding that even Christ himself would abhor. Jesus did not excommunicate the woman at the well but gave her his promise of eternal new life! And that after 6 previous marriages!
Anthropologists, scripture scholars and theologians constantly advance and develop our understanding of Jesus, his Word, and the Traditions of our faith. Let us allow God to continue to enlighten us, as He has always done, and continues to do.
Let us remember that some Cardinals/Bishops at the Synod are proposing SACRILEGE against the Body and Blood of our Lord. -
Holy Communion for those who choose to continue living in Mortal Sin.
.
1 Cor 11:27-30 = Condemnation for receiving unworthily;
Mt 7:6 = JESUS on Profaning the Holy;
CCC #2120 = on Sacrilege against the Eucharist being grave;
Jn 8:11 = JESUS on “Go and Sin No More”.
.
It is disconcerting that the word “SACRILEGE” was not used in the 2014 Synod Document.
- - - - - - - - -
.
To Receive Holy Communion worthily, DOCTRINE of the FAITH Requires that: 1) ALL be sorry for their mortal sins INCLUDING the resolution NOT to sin again.
CCC: 1451;
&
2) Anyone receiving Holy Communion must already be in the state of Grace. And if sinned mortally must not receive Communion without absolution in the Sacrament of Penance CCC: #1415;
&
CCC: 1355 “.... Because this bread and wine have been made Eucharist .... no one may take part in it unless he:
believes that what we teach is true,
has received baptism for the forgiveness of sins and new birth,
and lives in keeping with what Christ taught.”
.
It is NOT PASTORAL, CHARITABLE, or MERCIFUL to
remotely participate in the mortal sins of others by condoning or affirming them in their mortal sins (CCC 1868);
or to
facilitate them in committing Sacrilege against the Body and Blood of our Lord.
__________________________________________
The best thing that could come out of the Synod is to REQUIRED that the two most important books in the Catholic Faith are read by all the literate.
1) Sacred Scripture which contains the speech of God in entirety (CCC 81);
2) The “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition”.
- - - - - -
AS:
a) Required texts in: Grades 11 & 12 in all Catholic High Schools, all Catholic Colleges and Universities, ALL Seminaries, all Convents.
b) All current Priests, all Nuns, all Catechists, required to read or re-read them (and teach according to them).
c) All literate Laity urged to read them at home via all Diocese web sites and Diocese publications, all Parish web sites and from the pulpit.
.
The lack of catechesis/education is what has caused most of the problems identified at the 2014 Synod. The answers are contained in the Bible and CCC.
Hosea 4:6.
.
People can not accurately teach their children - what they do not know.
People can not accurately evangelize others - what they do not know.
.
The lack of complete and accurate education of most of the Laity is a grave scandal which has taken place over the last 45 years.
_____________________________________________
The only thing I can think of is praying for the Pope!
Sad reportage regarding the Archbishop of New York today, Timothy Cardinal Dolan, and his handler’s treatment of Michael Voris. From an American point of view, it is rather Clintonesque. Or is it Obamaesque? From and Argentine perspective one might find it rather Peronian, or would it be Bergoglian. They want everything to change, except their hold and power, which is directly related to their lack of accountability. Archbishops behaving badly. Not a good portent for October.
“I can’t say that I am hearing a great deal of anxiety…” really tugged my string very hard. My jaw dropped. I guess that’s why I ended up submitting my first comment twice, when there was a delay in getting the comments published. Besides the utter absurdity of it, it indicates either one of two things. 1] The archbishop is, to be polite, disingenuous. While that is certainly possible, I choose not to believe it, and even if it is true, it distracts from a deeper problem. 2] I was once told by a priest/psychologist that priests are more often than not, type A personalities. I think when this kind of individual is surrounded by others with similar personality structure, education, etc., they forget that there is a whole other way of viewing things that is quite different from their view. They can also tend to view themselves as being in a superior position. The clerical state is not so highly regarded, maybe for longer than we realize, and many assume a more academic posture in relation to these issues. Academics can be well, good, and necessary, but the primary lens these pastors have to employ is what it always has been: Scripture, Apostolic Tradition, and the Magisterium. When that multilayered lens is brought to bear upon these issues, all becomes quite clear. Then the episcopate will understand that their base is indeed VERY ANXIOUS. We need these priests to men of prayer. We need priests with the courage. We don’t need pandering, paternalistic coochy-coo nonsense. A classic example is the latest from Domus Sanctae Marthae, “God dreams of us…” These confections and geriatric musing have to stop—from ALL of them. Shepherd your flock! We’re thirsty, and all you can provide is polluted water from the bottom of the empty sewer of academia. We want the Living Water… and it comes at a cost, and we know that. We don’t want to feel good, we want to BE good, and we want you to BE good too. Make it happen in October. See where the anxiety is stemming from, Archbishop?
It is scary when anyone, let alone a bishop, mis-labels sinful situations that can cause eternal damnation as simply “irregular.” Also, can someone get these Prelates’ definition of “accompany”? I mean, who is preventing them from going for a walk with people in sinful situations? A synod is not needed to go for long walks on the beach, especially when the topic is, something like a biblical interpretation of the phrase, “Go and sin no more.” Or is “accompany” being mis-used too?
Bob, this is the first thing that hit me as well when I read this statement: ‘I can’t say that I am hearing a great deal of anxiety’.....
Excuse me Archbishop Kurtz? Are we living in different worlds here?? That was as far off base as anything I have read so far. Yes, we should be eager to serve those in need, but haven’t we always been for 2,000 years now? That was kind of an incomprehensible statement. That said, he talks the talk, but will he really ‘walk the walk’? And more importantly, how many Bishops that will be participating in the Synod are prepared to ‘talk the talk’ AND ‘walk the walk’? That is the ever so scary 64 million dollar question? I’m praying the deck isn’t staked against us.
St. Michael the Archangel defend us in battle.
Bishop Kurtz speaks from both sides of his mouth. He is a deceiver, not a believer, as most progressive Bishops are. “Pastoral Care” is the code word for “Church Destruction” and loss of souls. These Prelates need God’s mercy, but only after they have received God’s Justice! Thank God Chirst promised that would never happen, but He also said there will only be a remnant left.
By the way, what ever happened to that 300 page report on the Homosexual Lobby in the Heirarchy of the Church that Pope Benedict gave to Pope Francis 2 years ago?? Crickets ever since. Is this the attack of the Homosexual Lobby on the Church?
I hope the unity being sought between Catholic beliefs and pastoral practice means bishops and priests will now conform their pastoral practice to actual Catholic teaching instead of the other way around. If the Church would actually teach and preach its awesome truth, there would be no crisis of family and marriage.
Our call to Holiness, is a call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds.
There are many types and degrees of disordered inclinations, including disorder sexual inclinations, some more difficult to overcome than others. Why then, the desire to classify a group of persons according to a particular type of sexual inclination/orientation, which is a sin against chastity, and a violation of God’s Commandment in regards to the sin of adultery?
To list “sexual inclination/orientation” as a protected class, is to demean the inherent Dignity of the human person, who is not, in essence, an object of sexual desire/orientation.
i hear my Catholic communities’ members voice their diverse opinions on child bearing, contraception, ministering to the gay communities, and i hear a range of beliefs and convictions. i urge defense of all of them, as we, the Roman Catholic Church have been strongest when we championed diversity and weakest when we tried to enforce uniformity. the beauty of our church is that we believe in us and the rest of us, both and, not us and them, either or. enforcement of uniformity of belief closes the doors to the movement of the Holy Spirit, who enlightens each of us on what we uniquely are called to do. God our creator created us each in his image, but he is infinitely vast and each of us cannot contain but a scintilla of that likeness, but as a whole, we come much closer to the view he was able to give us through His Son, who reached out beyond the constraints of his Jewish faith to the pharisee, the tax collector, the samaritan, the leper, with mercy and acceptance. we have learned so much more about what constitutes human kind, perhaps we have even reached the age of reason if not adolescence and no longer need to be spoken to as to children, but can discern more clearly what the Spirit asks us to do, without judging others as we are asked not to do, for His ways are not our ways, and His time is not our time.
After reading this interview, I do not feel hopeful that the sanctity of Christ’s teaching will be very strongly defended by this Archbishop.
One issue that the starting point on divorce and “streamlining” the nullity process bothers me. This could be meant to accept a new quick and easy decision process making it easy to get an annulment. Declaring a real marriage null when it is a valid marriage to give people an opportunity to receive the Eucharist violates the Gospel which contains a direct and clear statement that divorced people who remarry commit adultery. The issue could be solved by getting the new husband and wife to forgo sexual relations in their new life. However, I don’t think it is good for anyone to try to find a way around God’s law.
Despite the façade of thoughtful charity, Archbishop Kurtz’s interview is an insufficient response to the concerns of Roman Catholic adults who are deeply concerned about the disingenuous shenanigans of the many Synod participants. Surely he cannot believe that men and women professionally involved in the secular world will fall for the façade of genuine theological reflection, when it is perfectly apparent that there is a radically non-Christian agenda at work. The development of doctrine cannot contradict traditional understanding. It pertains to the deepening and amplification of the truth contained in the doctrine. A maple tree does not spring from the seed of a palm tree. Anyone who lived through the horror of the aftermath of Vatican II questions the key players in the current debacle unfolding before our eyes. Are they underhanded left-wing subversives who thrive in the dark? It is mind numbing to witness members of the American hierarchy who were ever so devoted to Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict in a lip-lock with heterodoxy. What does this say about these individuals? How did they attain the offices they now hold except by deception? Does this lead anyone to surmise that maybe the 2013 conclave wasn’t so squeaky clean in its deliberations? There is something radically wrong here. The Pope and his team whine about clericalism, but are so immersed in this club they can’t really see the corruption they are engaged in and are promoting, to the detriment of the laity. They have projected over and over a vindictive, retaliatory response to any perspective that opposes them. Look at this cast of characters and the incredible statements and activities they have engaged in from the first day of this pontificate. Heartbreaking, mortifying and discouraging. This is not the way of our Lord and Master, the merciful and Good Shepherd. This is a counterfeit. Will I live to see L’Obsservatore Romano become the Sunday insert over at the National Catholic Reporter? Is it hyperbole to say we are well on our way? The Kasper Katholic Kirche is no substitute for the Truth.
I submit for consideration once again the following, lifted from Fr. Hunwicke’s blog:
“The Holy Spirit was not promised to Peter’s successors so that they should, by His revelation, disclose new teaching, but so that, with His assistance, they should devoutly guard and faithfully set forth the revelation handed down through the apostles, the Deposit of Faith.” – from Vatican Council I
“After the Second Vatican Council, the impression arose that the pope really could do anything ... especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council ... In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope’s authority is bound to the Tradition of faith ... The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition.” – From Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
One wishes that before Archbishop Kurtz faults the laity for being mis-educated, attention be turned to the Synod Fathers who engineered mixed messages and suppressed faithful lay input at the 2014 Synod and threaten to do likewise in 2015.
His Excellency and his colleagues have a responsibility to communicate truth clearly, consistently, and openly—not to engage in a blame game!
I would pray (and perhaps dream) that when the synod reopens, those spiritual leaders that voted against the two offending issues (adultery and Gay issues)refuse to participate, in any manner, until the travesty of the re-insertion of that which they voted out, gets resolved by immediate and permanent removal.
If this forces the crisis that is but one hidden apple-skin away, so be it, and let God handle the outcome.
The deception that free thought is the order of the day reeks of the diabolical in lieu of the blatant manipulation from above.
I believe that the Archbishop is putting a positive spin on the Synod. He states that he perceives no anxiety, yet in my circles there is great anxiety. There have been Bishops already on record that they fully intend to push the envelope on ‘pastoral care’ and that indeed there will be a wide gap between church teaching and practice.
Despite the façade of thoughtful charity, Archbishop Kurtz’s interview is an insufficient response to the concerns of Roman Catholic adults who are deeply concerned about the disingenuous shenanigans of the many Synod participants. Surely he cannot believe that men and women professionally involved in the secular world will fall for the façade of genuine theological reflection, when it is perfectly apparent that there is a radically non-Christian agenda at work. The development of doctrine cannot contradict traditional understanding. It pertains to the deepening and amplification of the truth contained in the doctrine. A maple tree does not spring from the seed of a palm tree. Anyone who lived through the horror of the aftermath of Vatican II questions the key players in the current debacle unfolding before our eyes. Are they underhanded left-wing subversives who thrive in the dark? It is mind numbing to witness members of the American hierarchy who were ever so devoted to Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict in a lip-lock with heterodoxy. What does this say about these individuals? How did they attain the offices they now hold except by deception? Does this lead anyone to surmise that maybe the 2013 conclave wasn’t so squeaky clean in its deliberations? There is something radically wrong here. The Pope and his team whine about clericalism, but are so immersed in this club they can’t really see the corruption they are engaged in and are promoting, to the detriment of the laity. They have projected over and over a vindictive, retaliatory response to any perspective that opposes them. Look at this cast of characters and the incredible statements and activities they have engaged in from the first day of this pontificate. Heartbreaking, mortifying and discouraging. This is not the way of our Lord and Master, the merciful and Good Shepherd. This is a counterfeit. Will I live to see L’Observatore Romano become the Sunday insert over at the National Catholic Reporter? Is it hyperbole to say we are well on our way? The Kasper Katholic Kirch is no substitute for the Truth.
I submit for consideration once again the following, lifted from Fr. Hunwicke’s blog:
“The Holy Spirit was not promised to Peter’s successors so that they should, by His revelation, disclose new teaching, but so that, with His assistance, they should devoutly guard and faithfully set forth the revelation handed down through the apostles, the Deposit of Faith.” – from Vatican Council I
“Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrote: “After the Second Vatican Council, the impression arose that the pope really could do anything ... especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council ... In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope’s authority is bound to the Tradition of faith ... The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition.” – From Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.
“I can’t say that I am hearing a great deal of anxiety. I sense that, in general, people are eager to reach out to those in need.” Really, where has the archbishop been for the past few months? Perhaps the “eagerness” he speaks of is that of watching the Church fold into the political correctness of modernity so prevalent in today’s laity and clergy.
As for “adaptations,” just look at how the Mass has turned into a circus in many places, how much the clergy doesn’t know about being Catholic and how the bishops let their dioceses and schools run amok. Adaptions should have to mean Protestantism.
Join the Discussion
We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words. By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines. Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words. Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.
Comments are no longer being accepted on this article.