|
Post by iagosan on Dec 27, 2023 8:33:29 GMT
All this speculation is, of course, very interesting but it appears to me that it is really just the playing out of one of the Fatima visionaries predictions as the report linked below indicates:
"....This reported statement by Sister Lucia, expressed during the pontificate of Saint John Paul II, was revisited in 2016 by the Desde la Fe (From the Faith) weekly of the Archdiocese of Mexico, in the midst of the debate generated by President Enrique Pena Nieto, who announced his intention to promote same-sex marriage in this country.
The Mexican weekly recalled the statements that Cardinal Caffarra made to the Italian press in 2008, three years after the death of Sister Lucia.
On Feb. 16, 2008, the Italian cardinal had celebrated a Mass at the tomb of Padre Pio, after which he gave an interview with Tele Radio Padre Pio. He was asked about the prophecy of Sister Lucia dos Santos that speaks about “the final battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan.”
Cardinal Caffarra explained that Saint John Paul II had commissioned him to plan and establish the Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. At the beginning of this work, the cardinal wrote a letter to Sister Lucia of Fatima through her bishop, since he could not do it directly.“Inexplicably, since I did not expect a reply, seeing as I had only asked for her prayers, I received a long letter with her signature, which is now in the archives of the Institute,” the Italian cardinal said.
“In that letter we find written: ‘The final battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan will be about Marriage and the Family.’ Don’t be afraid, she added, because whoever works for the sanctity of Marriage and the Family will always be fought against and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue. Then she concluded: ‘nevertheless, Our Lady has already crushed his head’.”
Cardinal Caffarra added that “speaking again with John Paul II, you could feel that the family was the core, since it has to do with the supporting pillar of creation, the truth of the relationship between man and woman, between the generations. If the foundational pillar is damaged, the entire building collapses and we’re seeing this now, because we are right at this point and we know it......"
JPII already mentioned this situation way back in 2003.
You can read the whole "ECCLESIA IN EUROPA" document here:
or
i.e Pope John Paul II recognised this as this report mentiones
|
|
|
Post by iagosan on Dec 27, 2023 16:52:39 GMT
Hungarian Bishops Conference:
Priests should always avoid common blessings for couples who live together in a non-marital partnership or a marriage that is not valid in the Church, or who live in a same-sex partnership.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Dec 29, 2023 18:18:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Dec 29, 2023 21:00:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Dec 30, 2023 0:17:38 GMT
From the Crisis article: "If the DDF had stated that individuals involved in a same-sex union may receive a blessing—but not the couple per se—much controversy would have been avoided."
|
|
|
Post by farronwolf on Dec 30, 2023 4:01:20 GMT
Apparently the folks at Crisis magazine either don't read well or don't have good reading comprehension. I have posted this previously, but will do it again. Maybe someone can send it to them highlighted. But they will ignore the text and interpret the document as they see fit, instead of for what it actually says. 31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love.
|
|
|
Post by crusader on Dec 30, 2023 5:50:41 GMT
Apparently the folks at Crisis magazine either don't read well or don't have good reading comprehension. I have posted this previously, but will do it again. Maybe someone can send it to them highlighted. But they will ignore the text and interpret the document as they see fit, instead of for what it actually says. 31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love. The problem lies in the very section that you highlighted. If we're being honest, it's not that difficult or even reactionary, to see the potential for error that will come from this. In the section that you just highlighted, it says, very clearly, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit.
So lets be clear on the matter, this blessing is a blessing for the couple. But not to legitimize the status of their relationship, or so we are told, but for all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. Here is the problem with this type of blessing. They say it's not for the legitimization of the couple, but it goes on to say that it is for all that is true, good and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships. In other words, the tree is bad, but the fruit it produces is good...
They are trying to get around blessing the relationship by saying they are only blessing everything else that is true and good and valid that exists as a result from their relationship. It's not that difficult to see if you look at it for what it is. Now, before you say, "it's not a blessing for the couple, but for the individual in an irregular situation or same sex relationship" For starters, If that were true, this document wouldn't need to exist, because it's clearly not talking about an individual seeking a blessing. Secondly, the their in this section is plural, meaning it's referring to the couples' lives and the couples' relationships with others. How do we know this? Well the heading right before section 31, (which you left off) says very directly and plainly: III. Blessings of Couples in Irregular Situations and of Couples of the Same Sex
This document is not valid and it is not in keeping with the best teachings and doctrines of the Church.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Dec 30, 2023 7:00:40 GMT
It matters not what the media says. The fact remains that the bishops' conferences of many countries are not down with this document as written. There was no synodal process involved with the development of this document. While I personally don't see it as a doctrinal shift, the likes of Fr Martin and the Reporter keep insisting that it is, and certainly it raises a concern about the camel's nose being in the tent.
It's my further understanding that many priests were already quietly blessing gay couples as individuals when such people would request a blessing, or otherwise present themselves for individual blessings without announcing their status - for example, at the end of Mass, during papal or bishop visits, etc. So I have no idea why this document was even needed.
Bad strategic move, likely engineered by Fernandez because to be honest the Pope was breathing so badly during the Urbi et Orbi ceremony last weekend that it's amazing he's still upright, definitely he is not at his best.
I think a likely result of FS is that it will end up alarming so many bishops, including those who don't have a problem with the proposed type of blessing but are alarmed at how this was handled and the potential divisions between regions and between East and West that may result, that the next conclave will not wish to elect a "Pope Francis II". And it'll be a cold day you know where before we get another Jesuit Pope.
It's bizarre to me that the same Pope who frets so much over Church unity when someone wants to say TLM or even face ad orientem, blithely goes and releases a document like FS that is far more damaging to Church unity.
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Dec 30, 2023 12:31:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Dec 30, 2023 12:47:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Dec 30, 2023 16:39:48 GMT
Apparently the folks at Crisis magazine either don't read well or don't have good reading comprehension. I have posted this previously, but will do it again. Maybe someone can send it to them highlighted. But they will ignore the text and interpret the document as they see fit, instead of for what it actually says. 31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love. Then somebody needs to get cracking, and direct all those African bishops, as well as those bishops in ossified European redoubts such as Poland and Hungary, to read the document, and get with the program. Yes, the document makes razor-sharp distinctions with Jesuit precision, but somehow that's getting lost on people of more traditional sensibilities. Wonder why?
|
|
|
Post by farronwolf on Dec 31, 2023 1:41:42 GMT
Apparently the folks at Crisis magazine either don't read well or don't have good reading comprehension. I have posted this previously, but will do it again. Maybe someone can send it to them highlighted. But they will ignore the text and interpret the document as they see fit, instead of for what it actually says. 31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love. Then somebody needs to get cracking, and direct all those African bishops, as well as those bishops in ossified European redoubts such as Poland and Hungary, to read the document, and get with the program. Yes, the document makes razor-sharp distinctions with Jesuit precision, but somehow that's getting lost on people of more traditional sensibilities. Wonder why? Because people tend to make things into what they want them to be instead of what they are. Typical human nature I guess. Why is the fuss about same sex couple, and not about irregular marriages? Same thing.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Dec 31, 2023 2:29:28 GMT
Then somebody needs to get cracking, and direct all those African bishops, as well as those bishops in ossified European redoubts such as Poland and Hungary, to read the document, and get with the program. Yes, the document makes razor-sharp distinctions with Jesuit precision, but somehow that's getting lost on people of more traditional sensibilities. Wonder why? Because people tend to make things into what they want them to be instead of what they are. Typical human nature I guess. Why is the fuss about same sex couple, and not about irregular marriages? Same thing. Because there are still countries and cultures in the world, such as in Africa and in parts of Asia and the Middle East, where same-sex relationships are not accepted by the general culture, and in some cases may even be against the civil law. It's like if the Pope told the US bishops to bless poly individuals in poly relationships, so you had a guy showing up to some parish priest's office in New York with his two "wives", requesting a triad's blessing. Technically the priest could bless each of them as individuals, but it's highly likely the priest would have some strong words to the effect that the Church does not permit a person to have poly relationships. Because the Secular US culture would call that "bigamy" and it's against the secular law as well as the church law. On the other hand, parts of Africa have poly relationships, as in one man with a couple of wives, as a regular practice, so the priests there would likely be much calmer about blessing in that circumstance.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Dec 31, 2023 4:28:17 GMT
Because people tend to make things into what they want them to be instead of what they are. Typical human nature I guess. Why is the fuss about same sex couple, and not about irregular marriages? Same thing. Because there are still countries and cultures in the world, such as in Africa and in parts of Asia and the Middle East, where same-sex relationships are not accepted by the general culture, and in some cases may even be against the civil law. It's like if the Pope told the US bishops to bless poly individuals in poly relationships, so you had a guy showing up to some parish priest's office in New York with his two "wives", requesting a triad's blessing. Technically the priest could bless each of them as individuals, but it's highly likely the priest would have some strong words to the effect that the Church does not permit a person to have poly relationships. Because the Secular US culture would call that "bigamy" and it's against the secular law as well as the church law. On the other hand, parts of Africa have poly relationships, as in one man with a couple of wives, as a regular practice, so the priests there would likely be much calmer about blessing in that circumstance. As long as the Church is on a roll, wonder if they've ever considered blessing polygamous relationships? In Africa where it's part of the culture? In the West where the thing now is to put together "throuples"? Put it under the rubric of blessing the individuals and helping them to become holier?
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Dec 31, 2023 11:18:40 GMT
Because there are still countries and cultures in the world, such as in Africa and in parts of Asia and the Middle East, where same-sex relationships are not accepted by the general culture, and in some cases may even be against the civil law. It's like if the Pope told the US bishops to bless poly individuals in poly relationships, so you had a guy showing up to some parish priest's office in New York with his two "wives", requesting a triad's blessing. Technically the priest could bless each of them as individuals, but it's highly likely the priest would have some strong words to the effect that the Church does not permit a person to have poly relationships. Because the Secular US culture would call that "bigamy" and it's against the secular law as well as the church law. On the other hand, parts of Africa have poly relationships, as in one man with a couple of wives, as a regular practice, so the priests there would likely be much calmer about blessing in that circumstance. As long as the Church is on a roll, wonder if they've ever considered blessing polygamous relationships? In Africa where it's part of the culture? In the West where the thing now is to put together "throuples"? Put it under the rubric of blessing the individuals and helping them to become holier? I thought the question of poly relationships had been raised by Pope Francis or one of his minions before. I remember a discussion on it and my mind went immediately to polyamorous people in USA because I used to encounter quite a few of those, and I just couldn't see the Church ever accepting that. Then somebody pointed out that in parts of Africa, polygamy was actually an accepted social practice and the Church therefore had to figure out how to respond to it. However, if I remember right, the whole background of FS is that the German bishops, and other bishops in Europe as well as some bishops and Fr Martin/ New Ways Ministry in US, wanted to bless and in some cases were already blessing same-sex relationships. Like the group blessings in the public square that happened in Germany. And the Pope recently, like a few months ago, reiterated that gay unions cannot be blessed, but the Vatican would consider what other blessings might be possible. I thought that meant they'd probably take up this issue again the next phase of the Synod, have these discussions with the African, Asian, Hungarian, Polish bishops there. Instead, the DDF whips up FS without any kind of synodal process, and drops it on the Catholic world right before Christmas...smh
|
|