Zb. Żak: The teaching of the Church is invariable. Thoughts 43/ 2023
date:28 October 2023 Editor: Anna
For I do not do the good which I will, but do the evil which I do not want. So I find in myself this law that erstwhile I want to do good, evil is imposed upon me. For the interior man [in me] has pleasance according to God’s Law. In my members, I see another law that fights the law of my head and enslaves me into the law of sin that dwells in my members (Rom. 7, 19-23).
The first session of the alleged Synod Assembly on Synodity ends; the second session will be held in October 2024. This is simply a origin for concern, for there will be a paper that may effort to change the teachings of the Church. Since the proceedings of this gathering are classified, it will not be possible to verify whether the paper corresponds to the course of discussion or not. It is besides crucial to know who advocates the change. It may be that the paper has been prepared earlier and possibly any insignificant modifications will be made to give the impression that the issues discussed during the meetings are included.
Why are you so anxious? Just examine what happened in connection with the 2015 household synod and the endorsement of ‘Amoris letitia’. The method of creating the paper is described by Fr. D. Kowalczyk SJ in the article “Methodology of the Synod, that is, we are not speaking directly?” (https://okoka.org.pl/library/P/PR/Kowalczyk/methodology-synodology-meaning-no-talk-right). Archbishop Bruno Forte, who was the peculiar secretary of this Synod, was to say that Pope Francis himself told him: “If we talk clearly about the communion of the divorced who live in fresh relationships, then those who live there, you have no thought what kind of rhetes they will do. So we are not speaking plainly. Make certain there are certain promises and then I will draw conclusions.” This archbishop, after this statement, seems to have disappeared, but found himself as a associate in the present gathering (for it cannot be called a synod unless it is done as Marxists do: the meaning of words changes). What happened to the introduction into the Church of Communion for people divorced in fresh relationships, as if it confirmed the “synodical methodology” outlined by Archbishop Forte. First, we have not rather clear statements on the Synod that the teaching of the inseparability of matrimony is invariable, but nevertheless, we request to consider the pastoral aspect and the requirements of mercy, and so we request to be open to various possibilities... Then the adhoration “Amoris Laetitia” appears, which reads, among others, "Divorced people surviving in a fresh relation can, for example, find themselves in very different situations that should not be catalogued or closed in besides harsh statements... And point 300 states that the Synod is not to be expected, nor is it expected, that the fresh general standards of the canonical kind should apply to all cases. And footnote 336: erstwhile it comes to sacramental discipline, due to the fact that after discernment it can be considered that there is no serious responsibility in the situation. At the time, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, G. Müller, and the Polish Episcopate, claimed that these passages, including footnote 336, must be interpreted in a spirit of continuity alternatively than breaking with the erstwhile doctrine and pastoral practice. However, bishops from Buenos Aires interpreted “Amoris laetitia” in a liberal spirit, breaking continuity with Tradition and teaching erstwhile popes. And Pope Francis replied that the explanation proposed by the bishops of Buenos Aires is the only possible explanation of “Amoris laetitia”. Thus communion for divorced people surviving in fresh relationships has been kind of ‘adopted’. And the current prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of Faith, V. Fernandez, answering the question of the cardinals. Dominic Duki, on the issue of Communion for divorced people surviving in fresh relationships, referred to a letter in which Francis accepted the opinions of Argentine bishops, and thus, according to the cardinal, these opinions became average papal teaching. Thus, 8 years after the Synod on the family, starting with 1 footnote in “Amoris laetitia”, was introduced, which they wanted to introduce. This is confirmed by Archbishop Bruno Forte: We are not speaking plainly, but slowly, we make facts that have been accomplished. Many fear that akin “methodology” will be utilized to introduce the blessing of LGBT couples into the Church.
Prof. M. Kornat in conversation on pch24.pl (https://pch24.pl/synod-czy-zbojeckie-collection-prof-mark-kornat-revolutionist-walks-o-rotation-total/) says explicitly that it is not a synod but a bandit assembly: “In the tradition of the Church, it is not possible to conven a convention in which people with no priestly ordination can vote on an equal basis with the hierarchy.” According to Prof. M. Kornat: “We gotta deal with the self-abuse of the word synod by the pope and his followers, as a congregation which the Church performs to explain the situation in her teaching—whether doctrinal or moral; or with any problems, specified as organizational nature. The synod of things is by nature a provincial, peculiar institution. However, the synod is being attempted to make the central institution of the Church, which will not formally pass fresh doctrinal orders, but authorises the pope to make revolutionary decisions. Francis and his people know that it is forbidden to uncover that there are disagreements during this bandit convention. They just want the faithful not to know, for example, that there are bishops who categorically argue this imagination of the Church, which the modernist group is trying to impose. If specified information were to come to light, then the conservative option could be strengthened. They cannot agree to this due to the fact that their aim is to bring the full Church into the revolution and apply Protestant solutions to it, so as not to say heretical."
Next: “The church is simply a monolith in doctrine, concerning religion and moral science. While fighting for dogmatic definitions at the time the Church was not uniform, various heresies were raging, but with the aid of the Holy Spirit the Church dealt with them and uniformity prevailed. All popes, since the Church had strengthened at the end of the first millennium to these days, were agreed that there could be no theological pluralism on fundamental issues, i.e. dogmas and moral norms."
It is crucial to see links with papers adopted at the Second Vatican Council: Dignitatis humanae acknowledges the multiplicity of religion, so it can be adored Pachamama, thanks to Nostra aetate you can sign a declaration from Abu Dhabi. We have a protestantized liturgy, thanks to post-collaborative reforms and many desecrations. The accepted collegiality of bishops (the function of episcopal conferences), makes bishops not liable for the faithful, and synodity is an updated version of collegiality.
We dismissed the social reign of Christ, which Pope Pius XI (the Quas primas encyclical), pointed out as an antidote to laicization and moved the celebration of Christ the King at the end of time (from last Sunday October to the end of the liturgical year), as the king of the Universe, let us not be amazed that in this planet there are enemies of the Church
Let us pray that the papers of the alleged synod do not change the teaching of the Church and the regulation of Jesus Christ over all creation.
Zb.
Photo by PCH24.pl
Why are you so anxious? Just examine what happened in connection with the 2015 household synod and the endorsement of ‘Amoris letitia’. The method of creating the paper is described by Fr. D. Kowalczyk SJ in the article “Methodology of the Synod, that is, we are not speaking directly?” (https://okoka.org.pl/library/P/PR/Kowalczyk/methodology-synodology-meaning-no-talk-right). Archbishop Bruno Forte, who was the peculiar secretary of this Synod, was to say that Pope Francis himself told him: “If we talk clearly about the communion of the divorced who live in fresh relationships, then those who live there, you have no thought what kind of rhetes they will do. So we are not speaking plainly. Make certain there are certain promises and then I will draw conclusions.” This archbishop, after this statement, seems to have disappeared, but found himself as a associate in the present gathering (for it cannot be called a synod unless it is done as Marxists do: the meaning of words changes). What happened to the introduction into the Church of Communion for people divorced in fresh relationships, as if it confirmed the “synodical methodology” outlined by Archbishop Forte. First, we have not rather clear statements on the Synod that the teaching of the inseparability of matrimony is invariable, but nevertheless, we request to consider the pastoral aspect and the requirements of mercy, and so we request to be open to various possibilities... Then the adhoration “Amoris Laetitia” appears, which reads, among others, "Divorced people surviving in a fresh relation can, for example, find themselves in very different situations that should not be catalogued or closed in besides harsh statements... And point 300 states that the Synod is not to be expected, nor is it expected, that the fresh general standards of the canonical kind should apply to all cases. And footnote 336: erstwhile it comes to sacramental discipline, due to the fact that after discernment it can be considered that there is no serious responsibility in the situation. At the time, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, G. Müller, and the Polish Episcopate, claimed that these passages, including footnote 336, must be interpreted in a spirit of continuity alternatively than breaking with the erstwhile doctrine and pastoral practice. However, bishops from Buenos Aires interpreted “Amoris laetitia” in a liberal spirit, breaking continuity with Tradition and teaching erstwhile popes. And Pope Francis replied that the explanation proposed by the bishops of Buenos Aires is the only possible explanation of “Amoris laetitia”. Thus communion for divorced people surviving in fresh relationships has been kind of ‘adopted’. And the current prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of Faith, V. Fernandez, answering the question of the cardinals. Dominic Duki, on the issue of Communion for divorced people surviving in fresh relationships, referred to a letter in which Francis accepted the opinions of Argentine bishops, and thus, according to the cardinal, these opinions became average papal teaching. Thus, 8 years after the Synod on the family, starting with 1 footnote in “Amoris laetitia”, was introduced, which they wanted to introduce. This is confirmed by Archbishop Bruno Forte: We are not speaking plainly, but slowly, we make facts that have been accomplished. Many fear that akin “methodology” will be utilized to introduce the blessing of LGBT couples into the Church.
Prof. M. Kornat in conversation on pch24.pl (https://pch24.pl/synod-czy-zbojeckie-collection-prof-mark-kornat-revolutionist-walks-o-rotation-total/) says explicitly that it is not a synod but a bandit assembly: “In the tradition of the Church, it is not possible to conven a convention in which people with no priestly ordination can vote on an equal basis with the hierarchy.” According to Prof. M. Kornat: “We gotta deal with the self-abuse of the word synod by the pope and his followers, as a congregation which the Church performs to explain the situation in her teaching—whether doctrinal or moral; or with any problems, specified as organizational nature. The synod of things is by nature a provincial, peculiar institution. However, the synod is being attempted to make the central institution of the Church, which will not formally pass fresh doctrinal orders, but authorises the pope to make revolutionary decisions. Francis and his people know that it is forbidden to uncover that there are disagreements during this bandit convention. They just want the faithful not to know, for example, that there are bishops who categorically argue this imagination of the Church, which the modernist group is trying to impose. If specified information were to come to light, then the conservative option could be strengthened. They cannot agree to this due to the fact that their aim is to bring the full Church into the revolution and apply Protestant solutions to it, so as not to say heretical."
Next: “The church is simply a monolith in doctrine, concerning religion and moral science. While fighting for dogmatic definitions at the time the Church was not uniform, various heresies were raging, but with the aid of the Holy Spirit the Church dealt with them and uniformity prevailed. All popes, since the Church had strengthened at the end of the first millennium to these days, were agreed that there could be no theological pluralism on fundamental issues, i.e. dogmas and moral norms."
It is crucial to see links with papers adopted at the Second Vatican Council: Dignitatis humanae acknowledges the multiplicity of religion, so it can be adored Pachamama, thanks to Nostra aetate you can sign a declaration from Abu Dhabi. We have a protestantized liturgy, thanks to post-collaborative reforms and many desecrations. The accepted collegiality of bishops (the function of episcopal conferences), makes bishops not liable for the faithful, and synodity is an updated version of collegiality.
We dismissed the social reign of Christ, which Pope Pius XI (the Quas primas encyclical), pointed out as an antidote to laicization and moved the celebration of Christ the King at the end of time (from last Sunday October to the end of the liturgical year), as the king of the Universe, let us not be amazed that in this planet there are enemies of the Church
Let us pray that the papers of the alleged synod do not change the teaching of the Church and the regulation of Jesus Christ over all creation.
Zb.
Photo by PCH24.pl
