Friday, October 17, 2014

Gallicus B- More concern over cetain international organizations

Common to Gallicus A and B is a concern over imposing liberalized views on poor countries, by "certain international organizations" I present Gallicus B below. As with Gallicus A, please send any corrections, etc to the comment box and feel free to share, but give attribution (a link to this site).

Moderator: His Eminence Christopher Cardinal Schönborn, O.P
Relator: His Excellency Archbishop André Léonard

Our work was conducted in a beautiful climate of frankness and mutual listening. All appreciated the universal “debate” in which the voices of Europe, Aisa and the Middle East, Africa and North America have resounded in tones very diverse, but generally in a symphonic manner. The observations and issues have been clarified thanks to the diverse experiences within the same linguistic group.

We welcome with gratitude the presence of laity, men and women – especially of couples – who touched and edified us through their lived “witness,” which at times out performed our theological “rantings” and were yet indispensable.

Within our first exchanges, in reaction to the innumerable interventions of the Synod Fathers, our attention is focused on two principal issues:

1. How to unite doctrine and discipline, the dogmatic and localized pastoral approach? How to join the love of truth and pastoral charity in a manner which shocks neither the younger nor the elder son of the celebrated parable reported by Luke?

2. How to take into account the great variety of pastoral situations from around the world and eventually refer the treatment to the national, regional or continental conferences of bishops, in virtue of the principle of subsidiarity, while respecting the Catholicity and hence the universality of the Church, all the more so because many of the essential problems are linked, at the same time, with fundamental traits of human nature?

While overall regretting a dense, stringy and excessively verbose style, and hence, generally, boring – a style further aggravated by translation into another language – we have mostly responded by producing substantial modifications on these essential points that follow:

1. Lacking an absolute majority (9 for, 5 against, 4 abstentions), recourse to the concept of “gradualism”, in analogy to the ecumenical development of Lumen gentium (§ 8 “subsistit in”) and the patristic expression “seeds of the Word”, was rejected every time these expressions were likely to be mistaken as legitimizing, a priori, situations of irregular lives, indeed sinful, although we recognize that, a posteriori, many of these situations may be a path or step toward a better situation.

2. With respect to the possibility of ascending to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist, certain Fathers argued, within a perspective both doctrinal and pastoral, in favor of the present discipline in virtue of its doctrinal foundation, constantly confirmed by the magisterium of the Church. Other Fathers, inspired by the same doctrinal and pastoral solicitude propose that the magisterium of the Church adopt another discipline, but under very precise conditions (cf. n. 47 of the Relatio Post Desceptationem).

3. We have requested that the practice of “spiritual communion,” traditionally recommended to those who, for difference reasons, cannot communicate “sacramentally”, be studied and evaluated in its theological foundations and, if it is approved by this examination, be promoted and better diffused among the faithful.

4. We strongly emphasize that although she cannot legitimize all situations of life, the joint, not contrary, mercy of our Lord and His Church should guide all of us on a path of truth, conversion and peace within his own situation of life.

5. We render our respect and our welcome to homosexual persons and denounce unjust, and often violent, discrimination which they have been subjected to and often are still subjected to, even within the Church, alas! But this must not mean that the Church should legitimize homosexual practices and much less recognize, as certain States do, a so-called homosexual “marriage.” On the contrary, we denounce all the proceedings of certain international organizations seeking to impose, in exchange for financial blackmail, on poor countries that they legislate so-called homosexual “marriage.”

6. Finally, we wish to present in a manner, positive and updated for today, the prophetic inspiration which animated the blessed Paul VI when, in his encyclical Humanae vitae, he celebrated the books of the profound bond that unites, within the conjugal life, both the spiritual and bodily life of spouses and openness to the gift of life.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.