Well? Would Pope Francis II be an improvement on Pope Francis I?
Well? Would Pope Francis II be an improvement on Pope Francis I?
Some time ago, I was contacted by an English reader who was concerned about a seminarian from an Archdiocese in England who, on social media outlets, has shown support for the “gay culture”. I received evidence of this “support” for the “so-called gay culture” and – given that the Vatican prohibition on the acceptance into seminary and ordination of homosexuals includes not only those who are homosexually active or with deep-seated homosexual tendencies but also those who “support the so-called gay culture” – the material did ring an alarm bell.
However, I didn’t act on the information immediately, but waited a bit before contacting the Rector at the Venerable English College in Rome to ask for an email address for the seminarian in question. I decided that the first, and fair, thing to do was to give the seminarian the opportunity to reflect on the Church’s prohibition on ordaining homosexuals, and to inform him of the fact that, despite his involvement in the “gay culture” having been scrubbed from his internet history, the evidence is still held on file by concerned Catholics.
Promptly, the Rector, Monsignor Whitmore, replied to provide an email address and I contacted the young man on 26 July 2018 explaining that “…a reader in England sent me some Facebook screen shots of you, ‘liking’ ‘gay’ clubs and stating that you were on ‘Pride’ committees – stuff like that -which led me to believe that you – at least at that time – didn’t fully and unequivocally accept Catholic teaching on homosexuality as laid out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You appeared also, on Twitter, to support a pro-gay ‘marriage’ article in the Telegraph… Since you are on your way to ordination to the priesthood, it would be reassuring to know that the above is all in the past and that you now, fully and unequivocally, accept Church teaching on homosexuality.”
[Name] replied promptly, to assure me that he did “now fully and unequivocally accept the Church’s teaching on this matter…” [emphasis added]. I decided that I was obliged to take him at his word, and reassured him on this point.
Then the veritable tsunami of homosexual scandals broke, with shocking insights into the normalising of homo-sexual life in Catholic seminaries, published across the internet. Bishops, not merely tolerating homosexual couplings (bad enough as that would be) but actually approving such activity within seminaries.
After further consultation with our source in England, I wrote again to the seminarian, my email dated 20 October, 2018, as follows, but this time, received no reply:
Further to our brief email exchange in July, when I was pleased to accept your assurance that you now accept the teaching of the Church on homosexuality, I hope you appreciate that, in the light of the tsunami of homosexual scandals involving priests and bishops which followed our correspondence, given the Church’s prohibition on the ordination of homosexual men or even those with “deep seated tendencies” or who “support the so-called gay culture”, I am unable to remain silent in the face of the evidence of your participation of the “gay” scene, and even support for same-sex marriage.
We are discussing, on our blog, the sacking of a sound priest from both Maynooth seminary in Ireland and St Mary’s Oscott in Birmingham, simply because he sought to apply the prohibition required by the Church. You can follow that conversation here
As you will see, if you read Father Marsden’s Open Letter to the UK Bishops, and contributions from our bloggers, on that thread, I must, on reflection, offer you another opportunity to re-consider your position.
My intention is not to upset you. I hope you understand that, and that I do, in conscience, believe that I was wrong to so readily dismiss the Church’s ruling on refusing homosexual candidates for seminary, in your case. That I was wrong to do so, has been driven home to me by the flood of revelations now in the public domain, and the shocking role of many bishops, themselves homosexually compromised, in the cover-up of homosexual abuse of vulnerable young people – including seminarians.
I look forward to your reply, in the hope that you have, in fact, realised yourself, in the light of the ongoing scandals, that the Church is wise to refuse ordination to those who are actively homosexual, have deep seated tendencies towards homosexuality and/or who support the so-called gay culture, and that you will, consequently, re-consider your own vocation. [Signed…] Ends.
When it became clear that the seminarian was going to sit it out, I felt I had no alternative but to contact the seminary Rector, Monsignor Philip Whitmore, Archdiocese of Westminster, copying into that email, the Vice Rector, Fr John Flynn, Diocese of Salford, Pastoral Director, Fr John Metcalfe, Diocese of Hallam, Academic Tutor, Fr James McAuley, Diocese of Portsmouth and Spiritual Director, Fr Anthony Doe, Archdiocese of Westminster. Thus, nobody at the seminary can claim ignorance of the fact that a seminarian with a public homosexual profile is to be ordained for an English archdiocese. My email – dated 24 October, 2018 – to the Rector, copies to the above-named senior staff, follows:
Dear Monsignor Whitmore,
Some months ago, I wrote to you to request an email address for [Name]. I repeat my gratitude for your speedy response to my request, and I apologise for the length of this email, which, I hope you will come to see, is lengthy only out of necessity. The following is the pertinent extract from my first email to [Name] which explains why I had decided to write to him:
“…a reader in England sent me some Facebook screen shots of you, ‘liking’ ‘gay’ clubs and stating that you were on ‘Pride’ committees – stuff like that -which led me to believe that you – at least at that time – didn’t fully and unequivocally accept Catholic teaching on homosexuality as laid out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You appeared also, on Twitter, to support a pro-gay ‘marriage’ article in the Telegraph… Since you are on your way to ordination to the priesthood, it would be reassuring to know that the above is all in the past and that you now, fully and unequivocally, accept Church teaching on homosexuality.”
[Name] replied promptly, to assure me that he did “now fully and unequivocally accept the Church’s teaching on this matter…”
Despite the Church’s prohibition on accepting homosexuals into seminary and ordaining homosexuals to the priesthood, I felt I could, in conscience, let the matter rest there.
However, in the light of the subsequent tsunami of scandals involving homosexual seminarians, priests and bishops, not least the persecution of priests such as Father David Marsden SCJ during his work as a seminary formator in not one, but two seminaries (Maynooth and Oscott), I now feel that I am conscience bound to inform you of my concerns about the prospect of [Name] going forward to ordination. Indeed, although I’m sure that you will be aware of the case of Father David Marsden SCJ, you can read about his situation and the attendant growing concern among the laity regarding the failure to apply the Church’s prohibition on accepting homosexuals into seminary, and, subsequently, ordaining them, on our blog here
My own conscience is now troubling me, not least because I am reminded of the detail of the Church’s concerns about homosexuality within the priesthood: “In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture”.” [emphasis added – Source]
Further, to bring the issue right up to date, I have, only this morning, received the following news from a friend in England:
“At today’s press briefing, Veteran Vaticanist Sandro Magister also asked a question on the Church’s acceptance of homosexuals. Magister asked Cardinal Tagle:
“You have said that the synod has been insistent on the welcome and accompaniment and integration of homosexual young people. So I ask you: In the seminaries throughout the world, we know that the welcome of homosexual young men as candidates to the priesthood is very strong and also very generous, with the effect that Pope Francis has spoken about it in alarming words.”
Last May, Pope Francis spoke behind closed doors to Italian bishops gathered for their plenary assembly, telling them: “The seminaries are welcoming too many homosexuals” and “we need to put the brakes on it.” Ends.
I wrote again to [Name] on Saturday, but, to date, I have not received any reply.
[Ed: at this point I reproduced here, my latest email to the seminarian, dated 20th October – see above].
If, Monsignor, you have any doubts about my concerns, I will readily email you the screen shots from [Name’s] Facebook which show that he – at the very least – “supports the so-called gay culture.”
Be assured, I take no pleasure in writing any of this but I feel duty bound to place the matter in your hands, leaving it with your conscience and the consciences of the staff copied into this email. [Signed, Editor, Catholic Truth] Ends.
Receiving no reply from the Rector, or any of the priests at the Venerable English College in Rome copied into my email, and since publicity is genuinely our last resort, I wrote one last time to the seminarian as follows:
When you failed to respond to my email dated 20 October, I decided that I ought to contact the Rector and other senior staff at your seminary. It occurs to me that I should have copied you into that email, so, with apologies for that oversight, better late than never, please find below, my email to them.
As a friend has just said, when even Pope Francis expresses the view that something has to be done about the rampant homosexuality in seminaries, it’s clear that there is a problem! Quite!
Thus, I repeat my exhortation to you to reconsider your position; perhaps you would reply to this email by Thursday, November 1, Feast of All Saints, latest, to let me know if you agree.
Since I have not had any reply from your Rector (not even the courtesy of an acknowledgement), then, absent the above requested assurance from you, I will be duty bound to place the information in my possession, into the public domain. That does not mean that I will name you – I won’t do that, but with the available data, it should not be too difficult for informed English Catholics to work out your identity. Obviously, that is not desirable, so I sincerely hope that you will reconsider your position, if not as a result of my email(s) then as a result of reminding yourself of the Church’s prohibition on the ordination of those with homosexual tendencies, or even who “support the so-called gay culture”…
[My above email to Mgr. Whitmore et al appended here, in original email – Ed.]
Kind regards – God bless you.
So, what do we learn from the above correspondence? Do we learn that Oscott is not the only English seminary with a serious homosexual problem? Is the English College in Rome also implicated? Well, we certainly learn this: that there is a seminarian in the English College in Rome who is going forward to ordination despite his documented support for the so-called “gay culture” – and we learn that each of his superiors, knowing this, apparently refuses to apply the Church’s prohibition on his ordination.
The Church has good reason for refusing ordination to homosexuals. It’s not about “bigotry” or “discrimination” in the pejorative sense. Below, the pertinent section from the Vatican document Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders…
“From the time of the Second Vatican Council until today, various Documents of the Magisterium, and especially the Catechism of the Catholic Church, have confirmed the teaching of the Church on homosexuality. The Catechism distinguishes between homosexual acts and homosexual tendencies.
Regarding acts, it teaches that Sacred Scripture presents them as grave sins. The Tradition has constantly considered them as intrinsically immoral and contrary to the natural law. Consequently, under no circumstance can they be approved.
Deep-seated homosexual tendencies, which are found in a number of men and women, are also objectively disordered and, for those same people, often constitute a trial. Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfil God’s will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter,
In the light of such teaching, this Dicastery, in accord with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or support the so-called “gay culture”
Such persons, in fact, find themselves in a situation that gravely hinders them from relating correctly to men and women. One must in no way overlook the negative consequences that can derive from the ordination of persons with deep-seated homosexual tendencies.
Different, however, would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only the expression of a transitory problem – for example, that of an adolescence not yet superseded. Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate. Source [Ed: emphases added].
Clearly, there is no excuse whatsoever for seminary Rectors to continue to accept and ordain young men with homosexual tendencies or who are supportive of the culture that nourishes this tendency – which is, in fact, a vice.
We have asked the seminarian in question to re-consider his position – that is, to withdraw from seminary and refuse ordination in an act of humble submission to the teaching and discipline of the Church. Failing this, his superiors should refuse him ordination.
Given the flood of recent scandals, and the ongoing scandals at the Irish and English seminaries, Maynooth and Oscott respectively, the senior seminary staff – together with their bishops/archbishops – bear a very heavy responsibility before God for their defiance in refusing to apply the crucial criteria for the discernment of priestly vocations. The crisis in the Church today is essentially a crisis in the priesthood and that crisis is hallmarked by the widespread infestation of homosexual activity and mentality, into the once glorious Catholic priesthood: “This Congregation reaffirms the need for Bishops, major superiors and all relevant authorities to carry out an attentive discernment concerning the suitability of candidates for holy orders, from the time of admission to the seminary until ordination. This discernment must be done in light of a conception of the ministerial priesthood that is in accordance with the teaching of the Church. Let Bishops, episcopal conferences and major superiors look to see that the constant norms of this Instruction be faithfully observed for the good of the candidates themselves, and to guarantee that the Church always has suitable priests who are true shepherds according to the Heart of Christ.”
The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, on 31 August 2005, approved this present Instruction and ordered its publication.
Rome, 4 November 2005, Memorial of St Charles Borromeo, Patron of Seminaries.
Presumably, our approaches to both the seminarian and senior seminary staff will continue to be ignored. Hopefully, bloggers and readers will feel rightly outraged at this blatant disregard for the Church’s prohibition on accepting into seminary and ordaining homosexuals, including men who – like the seminarian referred to above – support the “gay” culture. Given the flood of scandals which are continuing to shock the world, then, hopefully you, too, will contact the senior seminary staff at the Venerable English College in Rome – click here for email addresses. Let them know that you have read about this scandal on this blog and they’ll perhaps realise that rudely ignoring the genuine concerns of the Catholic people, isn’t going to work.
Is there anything else, then, that we can do, beyond the above calling to account of those with responsibility to deal with this situation, and the obvious prayer and penance? Let’s hear it! But first, an important note…
Please do not speculate, in the comments, as to the identity of the seminarian reported in this article. or name any seminarians at the English College in Rome. If you have information pertinent to this situation, please contact the Rector directly, and if you think Catholic Truth can help in any way, email firstname.lastname@example.org Indeed, it would be useful for us to be able to include in any future reports the fact that the identity of this seminarian has been reported to the Rector by others, independently of our approaches. However, here, on the blog, no names, no pack drill… Anyone flouting this instruction will be blocked from participating in the discussion.
CDF does its job and says Medjugorje is false, and according to this report Pope Francis over-ruled that and ‘saved’ Medjugorje. Sadly, it has a ring of truth about it.
Ed: if you agree that the following report “has a ring of truth about it” tell us!
From Gloria TV
Chiara Amirante, founder of the Roman aid organization Nuovi Orizzonti, told a crowd on November 1 during a visit in Medjugorie that she recently talked one hour with Pope Francis about the alleged Bosnian place of apparitions, and that she had “the blessing of the Pope” to speak about what was said. According to Amirante Francis told her:
“Chiara, look, it’s I who saved Medjugorje because the Commission of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, had already said, based on many news also false ones that Medjugorje is all false. So it’s I who then saved Medjugorje, it’s I who sent [Archbishop] Hoser because I believe – what I also said in the press conference [on the flight from Fatima to Rome in May 2017] – that the fruits are many and unequivocal.
You can say that I have Medjugorje at heart, and that I did not realise that that statement [about Our Lady who speak too much in Medjugorie] which I said as a personal opinion but which also was based in a wrong information, did have such an strong impact.
So you can say that I have Medjugorje at heart, very at heart and that I am moving ahead with my delegate Hoser, precisely to preserve everything that is beautiful in Medjugorje.” Source
The Bishops of Honduras are concerned about the serious migration crisis of thousands of Hondurans who are leaving the country. The caravan now has arrived in Mexico, and the US government has announced retaliation and forbidden their entry.
In a statement also sent to Fides News Agency, the Episcopal Conference of Honduras defines the mobilization of so many people a “human tragedy” and expresses pain and concern for the delicate situation created.
“It is a shocking reality, caused by the current situation in our country, which forces a multitude to leave what little it has, venturing without any certainty for the migration route to the United States, with the desire to reach the promised land, the ‘American dream’, which allows them to solve their economic problems and improve their living conditions, for them and their families and, in many cases, to ensure the long-awaited physical security”, reads the document.
The Bishops, therefore, ask the Honduran government to intervene as soon as possible and stop the country’s crisis, a crisis never seen in the history of the Central American nation. “It is the duty of the Honduran State to provide its citizens with the means to satisfy their basic needs, such as decent, stable and well-paid work, health, education and housing, and when these conditions do not exist, people are forced to live in tragedy and many of them hope to undertake a path that leads to development and improvement, finding themselves in the shameful and painful need to leave their families, their friends, their community, their culture, their environment, and their land”, emphasizes the declaration.
“We were deaf to the cries of their rights and blind to see that reality. The news of this caravan is the massive form of thousands of people, mostly young people, who go with the hope of obtaining sufficient resources to transform Honduras”, the text continues.
In conclusion, the Bishops thank the neighboring countries for the reception and the aid provided towards Hondurans, reminding everyone of the Pope’s request: “welcome, protect, promote and integrate migrants”.
In the last hours, according to local information, the group of the caravan increases, now there are more than 7 thousand, but also the tension on the border with the United States increases, after the insistent warnings of the American President himself. The caravan of the migrants has also created some social tension in Mexico: a group of Mexicans, in fact, welcomed them by providing them with help, while other Mexicans do not agree with the so-called “arrogance” with which they want to enter the United States. Source – Zenit…
Are the bishops correct in placing the responsibility for the material well-being of its citizens on the Honduran State? And what next, now that these economic migrants are heading for the American border in their thousands: should they be welcomed with open arms (and all those who are likely to follow) – is that Christian charity? Or is the American President right to warn against illegal entry into the U.S.A? Is it uncharitable to enforce immigration laws against poor people seeking a better deal in this world? How do we, as Catholics, know what is right in this situation?
Fr. Arturo Sosa Abascal, superior general of the Jesuits, said in an interview Monday that Pope Francis consciously calls himself the Bishop of Rome, instead of using grander titles.
“Very frequently we forget that the pope is not the chief of the Church, he’s the Bishop of Rome,” Fr. Sosa told EWTN in an interview Oct. 15.
“As the bishop of Rome, he has another service to do to the Church, that is, to try to [bring about] the communion of the whole Church.”
By convoking the youth synod, taking place in Rome Oct. 3-28, Francis is exercising his role as pope by bringing together a group “of his own peers” to make a “contribution to the communion of the whole Church,” Sosa said.
“Fr. Sosa is certainly correct to say that the pope is the Bishop of Rome, but it would be a mistake to infer from that title that the Holy Father is merely ‘first among equals,’” Chad Pecknold, Associate Professor of Theology at the Catholic University of America, told CNA.
Pecknold told CNA that popes often and correctly speak of their “brother bishops,” but that the Petrine office is unique.
The pope “holds an office of supreme authority over every bishop in communion with him, and of course over the faithful too. It isn’t a charism of dominance but of paternal care – the popes traditionally use the title ‘servant of the servants of God.’”
Sosa said that because Pope Francis feels each bishop is responsible for his local church, this synod, in which Church leaders come together to discuss and decide church affairs, is an expression of dialogue and communion between all of the bishops.
Pecknold agreed that the world’s bishops are each truly invested with the authority to govern, teach, and minister to their own dioceses. But a bishop’s ministry must always be done in union with the pope, who, he said, “is the visible center of communion for the universal Church.”
“The worldwide college of bishops exists in what the Church calls ‘hierarchical communion’ with each other and with the head, the pope. When the we talk about authority of the college of bishops to teach or lead, the Church is always careful to emphasize that this is only possible in union with the pope, who is the head of the college,” Pecknold explained.
In his interview, Sosa also explained that the collaborative work of the synod is a work of discernment, something he said was very important to Pope Francis. The Jesuit superior said that although the concept of discernment is a key feature of Jesuit spirituality, the act of listening to the Spirit has been a part of the Church’s for a long time.
“Discernment is the way that this communion [of the universal Church] can be made and how the Church will find the structure to reflect a Church that is open to that synodality,” Sosa continued.
“Because the Church is supposed to be governed not by men but by the Spirit. So [the Synod of Bishops] is not a kind of parliament, where you have to have a majority or minority, but we all together try to listen to the Spirit. And that’s what discernment teaches us to do.”
In comments to journalists Oct. 16, Cardinal Louis Sako I, Chaldean Catholic Patriarch of Babylon, echoed this point: “The synod is not a political parliament, is a synod of fathers, teachers,” he said. “What can we give, what can we offer the young, the faithful?”
The Synod of Bishops, which was established by Pope St. Paul VI following Vatican Council II, was created to continue the collaborative effects of the council fathers.
The Code of Canon Law defines it as a work of “collaborative assistance” to the pope’s ministry, and stresses that it exists to “foster unity” among the bishops, including with the pope. It also states that the synod is itself a creation of papal authority, deriving its legitimacy not from the bishops attending but from the pope who called them to the session. Whether a synod session’s conclusions are deliberative or consultative is explicitly up to the pope, who decides how much of his own authority to delegate to it.
In this sense, Pecknold told CNA, it functions nothing like a parliament.
“Parliaments are political, legislative bodies,” he said.
“The Synod of Bishops exists to foster unity and to give the pope the benefit of their counsel. In that sense, their job isn’t to pass this resolution or block that one – it is to work together to advise the pope as best they can, and that is a work of communion and service, not confrontation.” Source
Pope Francis DID emphasise, right from the beginning, from his words on election delivered from the Vatican balcony, that he was Bishop of Rome… He has, it seems, sought to play down his papal role. So, the question has to be… does it matter? Shouldn’t we applaud his humility in shying away from all things Petrine?
Pope Francis has canonized Pope Paul VI, Archbishop Oscar Romero and five other saints.
This morning in St. Peter’s Square, before a crowd of about 70,000 people, Pope Francis presided over Holy Mass for the canonization of the saints while the Synod of Bishops on young people, the faith and vocational discernment is underway in the Vatican, Oct. 3-28, 2018.
He also proclaimed canonized saints Francesco Spinelli, Vincenzo Romano, Maria Caterina Kasper, Nazaria Ignazia of Saint Teresa of Jesus, and Nunzio Sulprizio. To read entire report click here
Then click here to read a thoroughly documented commentary on “The Canonization Crisis” published on The Remnant website.
I’d forgotten all about these canonisations until a fellow parishioner reminded me this morning after Mass. We were talking about the widespread scandals of recent weeks and months, and she added that it was going to be all downhill from today. I asked her “why today?” She then reminded me that Pope Paul VI (pictured below with the six Protestant ministers whom he invited to help him create a new Mass, one that would be acceptable to our – increasingly – separated Protestant brothers and sisters), is now being rewarded for this scandal by “canonisation”. Along with Archbishop Romero, advocate for the poor. I’m no expert on the life and times of Archbishop Oscar Romero, so this article is interesting – especially in its conclusion.
From left: A. Raymond George (Methodist), Ronald Jaspar (Anglican),
Massey Shepherd (Episcopalian),
Friedrich Künneth (Lutheran),
Eugene Brand (Lutheran),
Max Thurian (Ecumenical community of Taize).
I NEVER refer to “Saint” John Paul II or “Saint” John XXIII. Nor will I acknowledge “Saint Paul VI”. Will you?
Vatican City, Oct 3, 2018 / 04:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Francis began the Synod on young people Oct. 3 with a homily calling for the Holy Spirit to renew hope and dynamism in the Church.
Hope can “broaden our horizons, expand our hearts and transform those frames of mind that today paralyze, separate and alienate us from young people,” said Pope Francis.
The Synod of Bishops commenced its fifteenth ordinary general session with Pope Francis asking to begin the assembly “anointed by hope.”
“Hope challenges us, moves us and shatters that conformism which says, ‘it’s always been done like this,’” he continued.
In a historic first, two bishops from mainland China are participating in the Synod of Bishops due to the Holy See’s provisional agreement with China on the appointment of bishops in September.
One of the bishops at the synod, Bishop Giuseppe Guo Jincai of Chengde, was among the seven bishops recognized by the Vatican on Sept. 22.
“The communion of the entire Episcopate with the Successor of Peter is yet more visible thanks to their presence,” the pope said as he welcomed the delegates from China.
The Synod of Bishops is taking place over three weeks from October 3-28 and will focus on the themes of young people, the faith, and vocational discernment.
“Hope asks us to get up and look directly into the eyes of young people and see their situations,” said Pope Francis, “This same hope asks us to make efforts to reverse situations of uncertainty, exclusion and violence, to which our young people are exposed.”
More than 300 participants are gathered in Rome, including clerics and religious, as well as 49 auditors, among them 36 young people from five continents.\
“May the Spirit give us the grace to be a memory that is diligent, living and effective, that does not allow itself from one generation to the next to be extinguished or crushed by the prophets of doom and misfortune, by our own shortcomings, mistakes and sins,” Pope Francis prayed.
“Rather may it be a memory capable of enkindling our hearts and of discerning the ways of the Spirit,” he continued. “With this attitude of docile listening to the voice of the Spirit, we have gathered from all parts of the world.”
“The Holy Spirit will be the first to preserve, to keep alive and relevant, the memory of the Lord in the heart of his disciples. It is the Spirit who ensures that the richness and beauty of the Gospel will be a source of constant joy and freshness,” he said. Source – Catholic News Agency
“Hope challenges us, moves us and shatters that conformism which says, ‘it’s always been done like this,’” [said Pope Francis]
What’s that, if not trashing Tradition? Look at what happens when we STOP doing what has always been done… confusion, chaos and scandal by the bucketful.
I get the feeling that young people are going to be short-changed by this Synod, to put it mildly. What do you think? Will they come away from it, excited that they face the challenge of changing themselves, the challenge of holiness… or will they leave in a rebellious spirit, determined to change Christ’s Church, to fashion it in a way that allows them to live in conformity to the spirit of the world – totally opposed to the Holy Spirit, which Pope Francis invokes so freely to justify his calls to challenge Tradition, to, effectively, challenge Christ, Himself?