Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Francis makes an important move at the synod
JohnThavis.com ^ | October 10, 2014 | John Thavis

Posted on 10/11/2014 11:12:06 AM PDT by ebb tide

The Vatican just announced that Pope Francis has named six additional prelates to help write the revised relatio for the Synod of Bishops, to be released Monday. At the risk of oversimplifying, they all seem to be on the pope’s wavelength when it comes to promoting pastoral mercy.

They will assist Cardinal Peter Erdo, the primary drafter of the relatio, and two other synod officials, in the task of summing up the first week of spirited synod debate in a document that will form the basis for future discussion.

Sources in Rome view the revised relatio as the key document going forward, and there is particular interest in how it treats some of the more controversial issues at the synod, including proposals to admit divorced and remarried Catholics to the sacraments.

The papal appointees to the drafting group are:

Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, president of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Culture. Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl, archbishop of Washington, D.C. Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, rector of the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina and one of the pope’s top theological advisors. Archbishop Carlos Aguiar Retes of Mexico, president of CELAM, the Latin American bishops’ council. Archbishop Peter Kang U-Il of South Korea. Father Adolfo Nicolás Pachón of Spain, superior general of the Jesuit order.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: francis; jesuits; wuerl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last
To: Arthur McGowan

It appears to me that this has already happened in all but formally taking action, given the rampant dislike of Francis that we see here on the FR religion forum by Roman Catholics. Vatican II, too.


21 posted on 10/11/2014 1:26:21 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Please. Learn before you speak in the subject. Otherwise, your intent is to draw division, which is not what Christ would want. You know this.


22 posted on 10/11/2014 1:55:28 PM PDT by ImaGraftedBranch (...By reading this, you've collapsed my wave function. Thanks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; fwdude; RegulatorCountry; E. Pluribus Unum

Akin says --- that is wrong, for it can as well be interpreted that there are many more...

But as usual on these pages, it does appear that some wish to have most everything both ways, as in even ordinary magesterium is also considered infallible in it's teachings, but papal encyclicals (for instance) which teach on faith and morals can be downplayed(?) if any portion of the contents ever prove embarrassing.

Some split the baby even further and talk about alleged distinction between what is held [see The Meaning of Papal Infallibility, Thomas J. Shanahan, S.J.] and what must be believed.

How many preztels are in that box?

I do not agree the following is unadulterated, unvarnished truth itself (but the papacy sure as shooting does -- at least did on March 17, 1993), from;

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19930317en.html

The Successor of Peter Teaches Infallibly

... The magisterial function of bishops, then, is strictly tied to that of the Roman Pontiff. Therefore, the conciliar text goes on aptly to say:

"This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme Magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking" (LG 25).

This supreme authority of the papal Magisterium, to which the term apostolic has been traditionally reserved, even in its ordinary exercise derives from the institutional fact that the Roman Pontiff is the Successor of Peter in the mission of teaching, strengthening his brothers, and guaranteeing that the Church's preaching conforms to the "deposit of faith" of the apostles and of Christ's teaching. However, it also stems from the conviction, developed in Christian tradition, that the Bishop of Rome is also the heir to Peter in the charism of special assistance that Jesus promised him when he said: "I have prayed for you" (Lk 22:32). This signifies the Holy Spirit's continual help in the whole exercise of the teaching mission, meant to explain revealed truth and its consequences in human life.

For this reason the Second Vatican Council states that all the Pope's teaching should be listened to and accepted, even when it is not given ex cathedra but is proposed in the ordinary exercise of his Magisterium with the manifest intention of declaring, recalling and confirming the doctrine of faith. It is a consequence of the institutional fact and spiritual inheritance that completes the dimensions of the succession to Peter. ...

The example on this thread of how concept of infallibility is spoken of one way, when there are yet a few other ways to "hold to" or believe in the thing/condition which can be raised at any one time (according to whichever is most convenient it seems), is one of the reasons many outsiders cannot get past the fact that Rome and Romanists do seem to speak out of both sides of the face at once on this issue, and a few others...

As James White(?) put it, "what Rome giveth with one fork of it's tongue, it taketh away with the other"

23 posted on 10/11/2014 3:04:44 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
Whatever, dude.
24 posted on 10/11/2014 3:19:14 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

I’ve obviously missed an important piece of the Synod thread. Will someone be kind enough to advise me as to just what the “revised relate” is? It clearly is an important term in this Synod, but it’s not one I’ve heard before.


25 posted on 10/11/2014 3:38:14 PM PDT by tomsbartoo (St Pius X watch over us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

After this action I’m now beginning to question the pope’s competency. Any competent leader who sets up an obviously political committee to reach a clearly intended conclusion, would have the good sense to know who he should put on the committee and who he should leave off, long before he sets it up.

In this case it appears that the pope is now recognizing (a week into the deliberations) that he doesn’t have the votes. Astounding! It seems that he now sees no alternative but to stack the deck while everyone is watching. How embarrassing. I presume he’s simply saying that it really doesn’t make any difference as to what people think. He has his modernist bishops in his pocket and the secular press in his corner. What more does he need?

Perhaps one day he just might find out.


26 posted on 10/11/2014 3:52:24 PM PDT by tomsbartoo (St Pius X watch over us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

One thing: You can’t accuse these Catholic FReepers of “papalotry.”


27 posted on 10/11/2014 4:02:33 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Not "whatever" in this instance...for I just proved how wrong your own comment in #18 was --- why it was, showing how it was [wrong], providing links in support of what I said, even with myself not needing to necessarily agree with all of the info found at those links to do it!

Yeah, you lose this round.

If you find that uncomfortable, then [cough, cough] don't be tearing into individual freepers here, getting crude with them, and I'll leave things alone myself...

28 posted on 10/11/2014 4:18:17 PM PDT by BlueDragon (i shot the sheriff...but i did not shoot no deputy, no, no....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

I turned you off with:

“Akin says-—”


29 posted on 10/11/2014 4:48:38 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
We're not allowed to say anything to the Catholic-bashers on the religion threads, so all I can say is "Whatever, dude."
30 posted on 10/11/2014 5:28:10 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

No, that is not correct either.

Your comment #18 still stands -- stands defeated, anyway, and stands as proof one can get away with rude comments the likes of which I once had deleted, simply for having used the same phrase -- but without the added "you are so good at it" additional layer of intended insult.

So round two goes to me also, and I didn't have to lift a finger.

Meanwhile, the "the moderator is unfair meme" is more of a forum disruption game than anything.

Sore losers blame the refs...

31 posted on 10/11/2014 6:20:37 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide

Your own loss, for there was much more than link to Akin. But then you may have already known about all the layers of various claims to "infallibility" beyond that being applied simply to the words of a pope?

Then again, in that one link from the Vatican, as to the words of a pope needing to be believed...there wasn't much of any talk of

Chair-y

32 posted on 10/11/2014 6:28:42 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

That's actually pretty funny.


33 posted on 10/11/2014 6:34:07 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

I didn’t say, or at least I didn’t mean to say, that the Popes have taught infallibly only three times. The Pope, the bishops, all priests, and all Catholics, in fact, teach and believe infallibly when they teach and believe what the Church has always taught and always believed.

I’m not talking about niggling controversies or messy situations (such as when the state has interfered with the Church’s freedom to govern or teach), but the main outline—the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Councils, etc.


34 posted on 10/11/2014 7:06:42 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

Whatever, dude. Rock on.


35 posted on 10/11/2014 7:16:34 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

I think it should be spelled “papalatry.”


36 posted on 10/11/2014 7:22:40 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon

No worries. I know all about papal infallibility and there are no “layers”.


37 posted on 10/11/2014 7:38:16 PM PDT by ebb tide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
If I may add to this it looks to me that you are conflating authority and infallibility. Popes must be obeyed regardless of whether they are speaking with the latter, and so they always have the former. Your quote is speaking to the overall teaching authority of the Petrine ministry, and is not directly addressing only infallibility itself, the heading notwithstanding. Infallibility is only guaranteed when the pope speaks ex cathedra, as clearly defined in Vatican I and quoted in the audience you have referenced: "When the Roman Pontiff speaks ex cathedra ... he enjoys that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished to endow his Church in defining a doctrine on faith and morals."

As for how many infallible statements popes have uttered, well that is impossible to say looking back. How many times have the popes quoted scripture? How many times have they quoted the canons of general councils? How many times have they merely applied the foundational principles of the Catholic faith without any change or alteration? These would all be infallible. If I say, right now, Christ is Lord, then I do so without any possibility of error, and so have said something infallible. However, none of what I say is guaranteed to be so, and therefore I do not personally enjoy the charism of infallibility. I can, with hindsight, be found to be absolutely unerring in something I say, but that means nothing about me or my place on earth. The Church, and by extension the Holy Father, has the promise of infallibility, but only under very specific situations, and that allows us to be certain of what the Church teaches. So, yes, popes can be said to have spoken infallibly many times, but only rarely can we say we know without any doubt that they are infallible merely because they said it. There are ex cathedra pronouncements (including the canonisation of saints), and also when they, like any bishop, can be said to be "authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, ... are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held." These latter, however, are not what most people are speaking about when discussing infallible pronouncements because they are not peculiar to the papacy and so not specifically "papal infallibility."

38 posted on 10/11/2014 7:52:24 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ebb tide; cothrige

et; (may we call you ET?)

No layers?

Too funny.

Just look at all the shadings in the links I provided, paying attention to the over-wrapping "layer" in the Vatican link, then consider the little mini lecture I received in the comment immediately below you own...which begins with the view that I am conflating authority and infallibility-- as if there is no overlap to those?

Who's to say where 'conflating' begins...when the descriptions can often be rather fluid.

39 posted on 10/11/2014 9:20:07 PM PDT by BlueDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson