Instrumentum Laboris: the most shocking Vatican Document EVER?

“Will the bishops, successors of the Apostles be silent? Will the cardinals, the Pope’s advisors in the governing of the Church be silent, in the face of this political-religious manifesto which perverts the doctrine and praxis of the Mystical Body of Christ ?”

The first reactions in response to the Instrumentum Laboris for the Amazon Synod were focused on its opening to married priests and the insertion of women into the sacramental orders of the Church. But the Instrumentum Laboris is something more: it’s a manifesto for liberation eco-theology which proposes a pantheist, egalitarian “cosmo-vision” , unacceptable for a Catholic. The gates of the Magisterim, as José Antonio Ureta, rightly highlighted, are being thrown wide open “to Indian Theology and Ecotheology, two Latin American derivatives of Liberation Theology. After the collapse of the USSR and the failure of “real socialism”, the advocates of Liberation Theology (LT), on the Marxist style, attributed the historic role of revolutionary force to indigenous peoples and to nature”.*

In the document, published by the Holy See on June 17, the Amazon “bursts” into the life of the Church like a “new entity” (n.2). But what is the Amazon? It is not only a physical place and a “complex biosphere” (n.10) but also “a reality full of life and wisdom” (n.5), which ascends to a conceptual paradigm and calls us to a “pastoral, ecological and synodal” conversion (n.5). In order to carry out its prophetic role, the Church must heed “the Amazon peoples” (n.7). These people are able to live in “intercommunication” with the entire cosmos (n.12), but their rights are threatened by the economic interests of the multinationals, which, as the natives of Guaviare (Colombia) say “have slashed the veins of our Mother Earth” (n.17).    Click here to read more…

Comments invited…  

46 responses

  1. Will the Scottish bishops do anything? Yes, indeed! Joseph Toal will worry about whether the congregation are sitting, kneeling and standing at the same time and issue a document thereon; Leo Cushley will sack a few employees to promote some “yes-men” parish priest buddies; Hugh Gilbert will spend his time in hiding, wishing he were back in the cloister. The bearded one will be trimming his facial hair, as he doesn’t have enough priests to do any bishop-ping. Stephen Robson will be thinking up new jokes and tales for when he’s next asked to speak at Carfin. The other one … erm … ahhh … name escapes me … And Archbishop P. Tartaglia will be swithering between a doughnut or a second meringue. [Ed: well, he has my sympathy. I have the same struggle…]

    Whether they will do anything about the I.L. for the Amazon Adenoid? Not a snowball’s chance: they won’t even read it. Too busy “ordaining” new “deacons” and “communion ministers” to plug the gaps. [That’s enough gaps. Ed.]

  2. That document is full of new age language. It really is shocking.

    However, I’m not really sure if it’s a working document only or if it has some kind of authority.

    Does anyone know?

  3. Fidelis,

    “Instrumentum Laboris” just means it’s a “working document” for a synod of bishops, so it doesn’t have any authority but it shows what’s in the minds of the bishops/pope, and it is truly shocking, what I’ve read of it so far.

    • Laura,

      And don’t dismiss it as a “working document” as if it is of no significance. Remember Amoris Laetitia? In the end, a lot of the damage was found in footnotes, more or less, but that didn’t make it less damaging.

  4. Madame Editor

    (Whatever may happen in the short term), “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph.”

    As St. Padre Pio used to urge: “Pray, hope and don’t worry.”

  5. Wow! Six months ago, I couldn’t even spell “object of moderation “ and now I am one!

    • Leprechaun,

      That’s because you made a typo at login, when you omitted the “g” from your email address. Still, suggests you were in a rush to get here, so I’m not complaining 😀

  6. Here’s an excellent analysis of this deadly document: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/peruvian-expert-in-liberation-theology-reveals-scheme-behind-the-amazon-synod

    In short, it’s the “Catacombs Pact,” Liberation Theology, and the UN Agenda 2030 all wrapped into one package of abject surrender to Satanism, paganism, environmental quackery, and Marxism. A perfect example of evil calling itself good – but which no bishop or cardinal, with perhaps a couple of exceptions, will have the spine – or the faith – to call evil.

    If this document is approved by the Synod, I think we will be at the Crucifixion stage of the Passion of the Church.

    • RCA Victor,

      That’s a very interesting Lifesitenews article. I kept thinking, for something that’s been years in the making, how come we’re only hearing (or reading) about it now?

  7. Upon reading this Marxist manifesto, I wondered who the author might be?
    Convinced as I am of our Pontiffs theological limitations, and that all his global warming rants are composed by S(hell)enhuber of the Max Plank institute in Germany, but this diatribe has a different tone to his notorious Laudato Sei encyclical.
    Any guesses among our esteemed contributors as to who is the organ grinder?

  8. My money’s on Leonardo Boff, the Marxist cretin that Pope Francis has recently reinvigorated with his Papal embrace!

    • Athanasius,

      I’ve missed that news – I thought Leonardo Whatsisname was long gone. He was all the rage in my student days but haven’t heard of him for a very long time.

      • Editor

        I was also surprised when I heard that old Commie was still on the go, I thought he’d popped his clogs decades ago until I read that Francis had invited him to the Vatican after years of exile. I have no doubt he’s behing this work.

    • Athanasius,

      Gosh! I had to Google Boff, and he was pushing for women priests and then eventually resigned from the priesthood – and Pope Francis embraced him? You’d bet he authored that awful working document? Things are really getting worse. It’s terrible.

  9. The author of this document is supposedly a Brazilian bishop with an Austrian name – I saw it yesterday but now I can’t find it. Started with a “K,” I think. Whatever his name is, he is on record as supporting female ordination.

    • WOW, talk about perfect timing, RCA Victor. I’m just finalising my little newsletter (July edition) piece on the Amazon Synod of Bishops, so a whopping big “thank you” for that! I’ll squeeze in a mention of that little bombshell.

  10. The contents of this document do not surprise me, after all, it was during Francis’ pontificate that the writings of Teilhard de Chardin were rehabilitated, having previously been on the index. When Francis was at seminary Teilhard was very popular among modernist Catholic intellectuals. The document is thoroughly Teilhardian in spirit. Teilhard was a Jesuit and modernist theologian and Hegelian philosopher whose ideas were based on Darwin’s and are essentially pantheistic, i.e. God and the universe are one, and are evolving to an ‘omega point’, the cosmic Christ.

  11. Miles, thank you for that insight. I haven’t seen you here for a while, or perhaps I just haven’t been on the blog enough, but nice to hear from you.

  12. Notice

    I have just discovered that today’s Feast (Sts. Peter & Paul) is NOT a holy day of obligation, as mistakenly announced by the SSPX priest last Sunday. The Feast is transferred to Sunday when it falls on Saturday or Monday. Still, it’s a great Feast and Mass in St. Andrew’s chapel is at 11am for those who wish to go. Mass is also at 11am in Edinburgh.

    • Editor

      I have raised the matter several times with our prior over many months because it is not the policy of the SSPX to disobey the bishops in matters that do not threaten faith. He has not responded directly to any of my emails, the last one being sent just before Corpus Christi, which feast he also wrongly announced as a day of obligation. I am told he did speak on the subject last Sunday during his homily in Edinburgh, indicating, sadly, that he is fully aware of the transferrence of holy days by the bishops but will not be complying. That’s extremely worrying. I have emailed him again in the matter and copied the email to the District Superior.

      • Athanasius,

        I got curious about Holy Days to see about the authority and you are right, it’s the bishops who can make the changes with the approval of the Holy See:

        “The Code of Canon Law for the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church lists (in Canon 1246) the 10 universal Holy Days of Obligation, though it notes that each country’s bishops’ conference can, with the permission of the Vatican, modify that list:

        Sunday is the day on which the paschal mystery is celebrated in light of the apostolic tradition and is to be observed as the foremost holy day of obligation in the universal Church….

        However, the conference of bishops can abolish certain holy days of obligation or transfer them to a Sunday with prior approval of the Apostolic See.
        https://www.learnreligions.com/holy-days-of-obligation-541520

        If the SSPX wishes to restore all the holy days, they would need to contact the Vatican and seek approval, IMHO.

        • Margaret Mary

          It has always been the position of the SSPX to declare that a particular transferred feast is “Traditonally” a holy day of obligation, encouraging the faithful for that reason to try to get to Mass if they can. Sadly, the odd priest in the SSPX in the UK doesn’t advise the faithful in this way, declaring instead that transferred feasts are still formal holy days of obligation. It’s reckless at best, which is why I have now written to the Superior General to have it stopped.

        • Margaret Mary,

          [Your comment] recalls Editor’s reminder of Abp. Lefebvre’s warning – that if the canonical irregularity continues too long, a schismatic mentality would result.

          I must say, though, that there was never any such confusion in my former SSPX chapel about Holy Days, and I don’t see how any SSPX clergy could foul up something so basic.

          • RCA Victor

            You’re right on all counts, the Archbishop was always wary of a schismatic mindset creeping in the longer the canonical irregularity continues, that’s exactly what we saw with Bishop Williamson and the so-called “Resistance” a few years back. Fortunately, the SSPX got shot of them pretty quickly but there’s still the odd one with odd views, it’s not a widespread issue.

          • Editor,

            I see your simple theory and raise (or lower) you one even simpler: this issue of Holy Days aside, I think what the SSPX has been doing can be characterized as “preaching to the choir.”

            All well and good, to sanctify the choir, but as you say, where are the conversion efforts?

            I should add, though, in their favor, that the Society does have another mechanism for conversion: its schools. In my experience, those schools do attract some new (i.e. non-SSPX) Catholic families who want a traditional Catholic education for their children, even families who aren’t quite sure about the canonical status of the SSPX.

            (For that matter, who is sure about the canonical status of the SSPX??)

    • MM,

      I’m not sure what to make of that report. This stood out:

      Brandmüller wrote, “that the Instrumentum laboris contradicts the binding teaching of the Church in decisive points and thus has to be qualified as heretical.” Then again, these things usually are pretty awful. Brandmüller could well be overstating his case — even the most egregious statements in the document may be susceptible of an orthodox construction — but this one really is special, nonetheless.”

      I couldn’t find (on an admittedly quick skim) any examples offered ot the Cardinal “overstating his case” and given what we DO know of the document’s contents, I suspect that it would be extremely difficult to “overstate” the case for heresy!

  13. Editor,

    Out of curiosity I consulted my 1962 Missal (Angelus Press) on “Holy Days of Obligation for England, Wales and Scotland”:

    All Sundays – The Octave Day of the Nativity, Jan. 1 – The Epiphany, Jan. 6 – Ascension Day – Corpus Christi – SS. Peter & Paul, June 29 – The Assumption, Aug. 15 – All Saints, Nov. 1 – Christmas Day, Dec. 25.

    In Scotland, besides the above for England: St. Joseph, Mar. 19 – The Immaculate Conception, Dec. 8.

    • RCA Victor

      The bishops have since transferred Sts. Peter & Paul if the Feast falls on Saturday or Monday.

  14. Elizabeth,

    I am sorry for attempting to correct you and then disobeying the boss myself! 😄

  15. Below, an extract from the June Bulletin of the SSPX in Scotland, Vox Clamantis, written by the Prior on the subject of Holy Days of Obligation. Father read the following to the congregation this morning in Glasgow, having read the comments on this blog last night, and I have to admit that had I been more careful and read the June bulletin when it was first available, both at the church and online, I wouldn’t have wasted so much time on the topic here. Below, the very clear – and ANYTHING but “schismatic” – position of the SSPX on the matter of Holy Days of Obligation,

    Father Sebastian Wall, Prior, writes:

    Dear Faithful,

    June presents us most years with a real flowering of the Church’s liturgical year. This year we celebrate Whitsun, Corpus Christi and the Sacred Heart during June as well as the feasts which always fall in that month, viz St John the Baptist and Sts Peter and Paul.

    In common with much of the developed world, Scotland had a predominantly agricultural economy until relatively recently and it may seem odd that these holy days – Whit week and the various isolated days of sanctification and, therefore, abstinence from work, – occur during such a busy time on the land.

    Nowadays, of course, considerations of weather in the country and commerce in the towns are the principal concerns of modern man. Whit Monday was still a bank holiday in England when I was a boy though that has long since fallen to “Spring Bank Holiday” and the secularisation of modern society continues apace.

    That is probably why the bishops, whose decision it is whether a holyday of obligation remains so within their jurisdiction, are probably motivated by the thought that it is better for there to be no obligation to hear Mass on certain days, if the people are not going to go, either because they cannot, due to work, or will not. This makes it quite tricky for us in Tradition, who cannot oblige our faithful under pain of sin, but would like to keep the traditional days holy (particularly Corpus Christi which always, and Sts Peter and Paul which often falls on a day other than Sunday.)

    But we must be careful not to let lack of obligation lead to indifference. That is why your priests make considerable efforts to provide you with the possibility of hearing Mass on these days since a) they have been kept so for centuries, through the industrial revolution and well beyond, b) they are still holidays in the universal Church to which we belong and c) they offer worship to God and sanctification to His people. We would like to encourage our faithful too, if it is at all possible (inconvenience notwithstanding) to make similar efforts. The retired and self-employed will obviously find it easier to get to Mass on these days but I urge everyone to make a special effort, making the act virtuous rather than merely required. God will not let Himself be outdone in generosity.

    (Rev Sebastian Wall (Prior), Vox Clamantis, Bulletin of the Society of Saint Pius X in Scotland, June, 2019). Ends.

    I’ve now got “check the monthly SSPX bulletin” in my diary – quite aside from the above extracts, there is a wealth of reading in the current, July, issue into which I’ve just dipped, and I’m sure that will be true of Vox Clamantis generally speaking.

    Finally, I’ve now deleted most of the comments on the topic of the holy days; apart from being off topic, they were based on a flawed understanding of the SSPX position on holy days, corrected by the above extract from Fr Wall’s statement in the June edition of his newsletter. The buck stops with me, so I shoulder the blame for not having checked the facts before allowing the discussion to continue.

    With apologies, therefore, to all who have devoted time and energy to this subject 😀 and with thanks to all who contributed to the topic, I will now close this thread.

  16. Elizabeth,

    To reasonable souls like your good self, arranging a chat over coffee or tea is the self-evident thing to do when it is clear there is some kind of deep misunderstanding or personality clash. But it’s not self-evident to an awful lot of people. I’ve tried twice recently to do just that to “sort it out” but was effectively told to sling my hook in one case, and totally blanked out/ignored in the other. And so the same unChristian atmosphere prevails whenever I encounter those who don’t trust me to make a cup of tea 😀

    What’s that Yorkshire saying…. “there’s nowt so queer as folk”!

%d bloggers like this: