Declaration Concerning the Synod on the Family – Bishop Fellay

The Final Report of the second session of the Synod on the Family, published on October 24, 2015, far from showing a consensus of the Synod Fathers, is the expression of a compromise between profoundly divergent positions. Of course we can read in it some doctrinal reminders about marriage and the Catholic family, but we note also some regrettable ambiguities and omissions, and most importantly several breaches opened up in discipline in the name of a relativistic pastoral “mercy”.  The general impression that this document gives is of confusion, which will not fail to be exploited in a sense contrary to the constant teaching of the Church.

This is why it seems to us necessary to reaffirm the truth received from Christ (1) about the role of the pope and the bishops and (2) about marriage and the family. We are doing this in the same spirit that prompted us to send to Pope Francis a petition before the second session of this Synod.

1. The Role of the Pope and the Bishops[1]

As sons of the Catholic Church, we believe that the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of St. Peter, is the Vicar of Christ, and at the same time that he is the head of the whole Church. His power is a jurisdiction in the proper sense. With regard to this power, the pastors, as well as the faithful of the particular Churches, separately or all together, even in a Council, in a Synod, or in episcopal conferences, are obliged by a duty of hierarchical subordination and genuine obedience.

God has arranged things in such a way that, by maintaining unity of communion with the Bishop of Rome and by professing the same faith, the Church of Christ might be one flock under one Shepherd. God’s Holy Church is divinely constituted as a hierarchical society, in which the authority that governs the faithful comes from God, through the pope and the bishops who are subject to him.[2]

When the supreme papal Magisterium has issued the authentic expression of revealed truth, in dogmatic matters as well as in disciplinary matters, it is not within the province of ecclesiastical organs vested with a lesser degree of authority—such as bishops’ conferences—to introduce modifications to it.

The meaning of the sacred dogmas that must be preserved perpetually is the one that the Magisterium of the pope and the bishops has taught once and for all, and it is never lawful to deviate from it. Hence the Church’s pastoral ministry, when it practices mercy, must begin by remedying the poverty of ignorance, by giving souls the expression of the truth that will save them.

In the hierarchy thus instituted by God, in matters of faith and magisterial teaching, revealed truths were entrusted as a Sacred Deposit to the apostles and to their successors, the pope and the bishops, so that they might guard it faithfully and teach it authoritatively. The sources that contain this Deposit are the books of Sacred Scripture and the non-written traditions which, after being received by the apostles from Christ Himself or handed on by the apostles under the dictation of the Holy Ghost, have come down to us.

When the teaching Church declares the meaning of these truths contained in Scripture and Tradition, she imposes it with authority on the faithful, so that they might believe it as being revealed by God. It is false to say that the job of the pope and the bishops is to ratify what the sensus fidei or the common experience of the ‘People of God’ suggests to them.

As we already wrote in our Petition to the Holy Father: “Our uneasiness is caused by something that Saint Pius X condemned in his Encyclical Pascendi:  an alignment of dogma with supposed contemporary demands. Pius X and you, Holy Father, received the fullness of the authority to teach, sanctify and govern in obedience to Christ, who is the Head and the Shepherd of the flock in every age and in every place, whose faithful vicar the pope should be on this earth. The object of a dogmatic condemnation could not possibly become, with the passage of time, an authorized pastoral practice.”

This is what prompted Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to write in his Declaration dated November 21, 1974: “No authority, not even the highest in the hierarchy, can force us to abandon or diminish our Catholic Faith, so clearly expressed and professed by the Church’s Magisterium for nineteen centuries. ‘But though we,’ says St. Paul, ‘or an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.’”[3]

2. Marriage and the Catholic Family

As for marriage, God provided for the increase of the human race by instituting marriage, which is the stable and perpetual union of a man and a woman.[4] The marriage of baptized persons is a sacrament, since Christ elevated it to that dignity; marriage and the family are therefore institutions that are both divine and natural.

The primary end of marriage is the procreation and education of children, which no human intention should prevent by performing acts contrary to it. The secondary end of marriage is the mutual assistance that the spouses offer to each other as well as the remedy to concupiscence.

Christ established that the unity of marriage would be definitive, both for Christians and for all mankind. This unity possesses an indissoluble character, such that the conjugal bond can never be broken, neither by the will of the two parties nor by any human authority: “What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.”[5] In the case of the sacramental marriage of baptized persons, this unity and indissolubility are further explained by the fact that it is the sign of Christ’s union with His Bride.

Anything that human beings may decree or do against the unity or indissolubility of marriage is not in keeping with the requirements of nature or with the good of human society. Moreover, faithful Catholics have the serious duty not to join together solely by the bond of a civil marriage, without taking into account the religious marriage prescribed by the Church.

The reception of the Eucharist (or sacramental Communion) requires the state of sanctifying grace and union with Christ through charity; it increases this charity and at the same time signifies Christ’s love for the Church, which is united with Him as His only Spouse. Consequently, those who deliberately cohabit or even live together in an adulterous union, contrary to the laws God and of the Church, cannot be admitted to Eucharistic Communion because they are giving the bad example of a serious lack of justice and charity, and they are considered public sinners: “He that shall marry her that is put away committeth adultery.”[6]

In order to receive absolution for one’s sins within the framework of the Sacrament of Penance, it is necessary to have the firm resolution to sin no more, and consequently those who refuse to put an end to their irregular situation cannot receive valid absolution.[7]

In keeping with the natural law, man has a right to exercise his sexuality only within lawful marriage, while respecting the limits set by morality. This is why homosexuality contradicts natural and divine law. Unions entered into apart from marriage (cohabitation, adulterous, or even homosexual unions) are a disorder contrary to the requirements of the natural divine law and are therefore a sin; it is impossible to acknowledge therein any moral good whatsoever, even diminished.

Given current errors and civil legislation against the sanctity of marriage and the purity of morals, the natural law allows no exceptions, because God in His infinite wisdom, when He gave His law, foresaw all cases and all circumstances, unlike human legislators. Therefore so-called situation ethics, whereby some propose to adapt the rules of conduct dictated by the natural law to the variable circumstances of different cultures, is inadmissible. The solution to problems of a moral order must not be decided solely by the consciences of the spouses of or their pastors, and the natural law is imposed on conscience as a rule of action.

The Good Samaritan’s care for the sinner is manifested by a kind of mercy that does not compromise with his sin, just as the physician who wants to help a sick person recover his health effectively does not compromise with his sickness but helps him to get rid of it. One cannot emancipate oneself from Gospel teaching in the name of a subjectivist pastoral approach which, while recalling it in general, would abolish in on a case-by-case basis. One cannot grant to the bishops the faculty of suspending the law of the indissolubility of marriage ad casum, without running the risk of weakening the teaching of the Gospel and of fragmenting the authority of the Church. For, in this erroneous view, what is affirmed doctrinally could be denied pastorally, and what is forbidden de jure could be authorized de facto.

In this utter confusion it is now up to the pope—in keeping with his responsibility, and within the limits set on him by Christ—to restate clearly and firmly the Catholic truth quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus,[8] and to keep this universal truth from being contradicted in practice locally.

Following Christ’s counsel: vigilate et orate, we pray for the pope: oremus pro pontifice nostro Francisco, and we remain vigilant: non tradat eum in manus inimicorum ejus, so that God may not deliver him over to the power of his enemies. We implore Mary, Mother of the Church, to obtain for him the graces that will enable him to be the faithful steward of the treasures of her Divine Son.

Menzingen, October 27, 2015
+ Bernard FELLAY
Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X

Found Online Here

Our Lady Of Akita

I was reading a blog from Fr. Blake on the “Synod Of Madness” and one of the comments reminded me of Our Lady Of Akita.

Can we say that time is up?


 

October 13, 1973

“My dear daughter, listen well to what I have to say to you. You will inform your superior.”

After a short silence:

“As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.”

“The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confrères…churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.

“The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them”

“With courage, speak to your superior. He will know how to encourage each one of you to pray and to accomplish works of reparation.”

“It is Bishop Ito, who directs your community.”

And She smiled and then said:

“You have still something to ask? Today is the last time that I will speak to you in living voice. From now on you will obey the one sent to you and your superior.”

“Pray very much the prayers of the Rosary. I alone am able still to save you from the calamities which approach. Those who place their confidence in me will be saved.”

On A Band-Aid Being Heritical

As the Synod continues to go on in Rome and as I read the response to it by the bloggers, one thing of the main things that people are trying to do is trying to put a big bandage on the giant boo-boo.  This boo-boo (or as I like to call it: HERESY) isn’t some scrape that happened on the way to full “enlightenment,” it is a cancer that is eating out the very heart and soul of our faith.

You see, God doesn’t like cancerous limbs.  In John 15, Jesus’ says those that don’t produce fruit will be cut off.  The cutting off, isn’t some monstrous evil thing, it is to protect the body from the cancerous cell that is trying to poison the root. If this cancer is allowed to continue, it will corrupt the root. The time is long since passed to beat around the bush concerning what we need to do.  The Catholic Church is in a state of Crisis not seen since the great Arian Crisis and our actions have to rise to the occasion.

I contend, this crisis isn’t new and the church has been in this crisis for nearly 50 years now, but it seems, that by God’s divine mercy, people are slowly starting to see it for what it is.  This crisis isn’t just about having a Mass said in Latin, it is about the entire mindset of the church.  This crisis is bringing to a head the traditional understanding of the Faith delivered and the modernistic, humanistic, heretical doctrines of man being the center of all that has been espoused in since the Second Vatican Council.

The mindset of tradition and modernism are diametrically opposed and there can be no synthesis of the two.  We can’t blend them.  The last 50 years of the church prove this out.  Currently, the prelates in Rome are discussing how to “pastorally” allow something God forbids.  HOW DARE THEY!  The wolves are circling the sheep fold “Seeking Whom They Can Devour.”

How can we stop this?  Praying and fasting are some of the ways along with recognizing where we have allowed modernism to creep into our own lives.  We must, completely, totally, and without reserve accept the Faith that was delivered and believed by all everywhere at whatever personal cost this might cause us and then let the chips fall where they will.   As long as we accept any heresy, the seed of that heresy will remain and will sprout forth its ugly fruit sometime in the future.  The time for band-aids has past.  The church militant needs to say, “NOT ON MY WATCH.”

 

-Jonathan Byrd

Parallel Synod – Something Is Amiss

Rorate has posted an article that, if true, is very serious.  It appears the “conclusion” of the synod has already been written.


BOMBSHELL – SECRET PARALLEL SYNOD: Papal Post-Synod Document ALREADY being drafted by Jesuit group to allow communion for divorced and other aberrations

Summary: Italian journalist Marco Tosatti reveals that A SECRET PARALLEL SYNOD has been established in Rome, a cabal composed almost exclusively by Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian presence (easy to guess who), to draft the necessary post-synodal documents to implement whatever the Pope wants to implement. And they will implement it, no matter what, as the secret committee to draft the Annulment reforms has shown; what everyone supposed was true in fact is true: the Synodal process is a sham.
***
The always admirably well informed Marco Tosatti, who has refused to become a stealth spokesman for the pontificate and has kept his journalistic integrity — and, for this reason, has become, along with Sandro Magister, the best Italian religious correspondent in the current pontificate — reports today on the most recent machinations for 2015 “Synod on the Family”, which opens in a few days.

Because since, as Edward Pentin revealed in detail, the 2014 Synod was rigged, the 2015 will be rigged beyond all measure, as Pentin himself reported on September 29 at the National Catholic Register, on procedural changes to be announced tomorrow (Friday) that will make any control over the outcome impossible by Synod Fathers who realize they are being cheated (as happened last year – the manipulators learned their lesson):
At last year’s meeting, the interim document, properly called a relatio post-disceptationem, caused controversy after it was sent out to the media before the synod fathers had read it. Critics said the document lacked references to Scripture and tradition, and most controversially, appeared to imply the Church was considering giving tacit acceptance of same-sex relationships — an issue that was hardly discussed during the meeting’s first week.
The probable decision not to have an interim report may be an effort to avoid last year’s controversy from recurring. But some fear it will lead to less transparency, and worry the timing could be intentional in order to facilitate the advancement of controversial proposals as time runs out for discussion.
Another rumored change is that the rule on propositions having to pass by a two-thirds majority might be eliminated and a simple majority take its place.
This would favor a controversial proposal, such as Cardinal Kasper’s, because his thesis only received a simple majority at the last synod. (It should have therefore been rejected under the rules in place, but the Holy Father insisted that it, and the paragraph on a new approach to same-sex relationships that also failed to achieve a two-thirds majority, remain in the lineamenta (guidelines), for this October’s synod).
And in fact the first part of Marco Tosatti’s article today translates what Pentin reveals in his own piece in the Register. Then, Tosatti adds his own exclusive information, which is quite explosive, considering that the last time a secret papal commission met, what we got was the most authoritarian canon law reforms in the history of the Church, in violation of all understanding of the proper boundaries of papal power and establishing de facto Catholic divorce under the guise of easy acccess to “annulments”:
In this context [that is, of the procedural changes mentioned by Edward Pentin], news has arrived to us for about twelve days that around thirty people, almost all of them Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian, are working on the themes on the Synod, in a very reserved way, under the coordinatin of Father Antonio Spadaro, the director of Civiltà Cattolica [the official journal of the Holy See], who spends a long time in Santa Marta, in consultation with the Pope.
The discretion in the works extends also to the Jesuits of the same House, the villa of Civiltà Cattolica, Villa Malta, on the Pincio [Hill], where part of the work is done. One possibility is that the “task force” works to provide the Pope the instruments for an eventual post-synodal document on the theme of the Eucharist to the remarried divorced, on cohabiting [couples], and same-sex couples.
Update: A final observation is in order. As Pentin and other observers have noted, it has been said that the Pope may wish to avoid a typical post-synodal EXHORTATION, which has been the typical papal document following the creation of the post-conciliar format of the Synod of Bishops. These exhortations have typically been papal lists of the majority decisions of the synods, as guided by the popes, and interpreted by them, and have guided future decisions. This is obviously not what we mention above. Considering the character of Francis, it is not surprising that he now wants to avoid a wordy exhortation that leads nowhere. No, the post-synodal documents being prepared secretly should obviously have an executive or legislative nature and would be promulgated with a different shape and weight than that of a mere exhortation. It would obviously make no sense for the Pope and his allies to go through this immense process and get absolutely no palpable result (text) from it, right?…