The Catholic Church must free itself from this ‘toxic nightmare’

Shortly before he died recently, Cardinal George Pell wrote the following article under the above heading in which he denounced the Vatican’s plans for its forthcoming ‘Synod on Synodality’ as a ‘toxic nightmare’.

I am not a Catholic but I did think enough of Catholicism to send my son to a Catholic school. So I have considerable sympathy for what Pell wrote below. He is plainly an unapologetic advocate for traditional Catholic teaching

What he is up against is the South American "liberation theology" that Pope Francis brought with him to the Vatican. It is neo-Marxist claptrap that now seems to be spreading throughout the church. One can only hope that Francis soon fades from the scene one way or another. He is very infirm

The Catholic Synod of Bishops is now busy constructing what they think of as ‘God’s dream’ of synodality. Unfortunately this divine dream has developed into a toxic nightmare despite the bishops’ professed good intentions.

They have produced a 45-page booklet which presents its account of the discussions of the first stage of ‘listening and discernment’, held in many parts of the world, and it is one of the most incoherent documents ever sent out from Rome.

While we thank God that Catholic numbers around the globe, especially in Africa and Asia are increasing, the picture is radically different in Latin America with losses to the Protestants as well as the secularists.

With no sense of irony, the document is entitled ‘Enlarge the Space of Your Tent’, and the aim of doing so is to accommodate, not the newly baptised —those who have answered the call to repent and believe — but anyone who might be interested enough to listen. Participants are urged to be welcoming and radically inclusive: ‘No one is excluded’.

The document does not urge even the Catholic participants to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:16-20), much less to preach the Saviour in season and out of season (2 Timothy 4:2).

The first task for everyone and especially the teachers, is to listen in the Spirit. According to this recent update of the good news, ‘synodality’ as a way of being for the Church is not to be defined, but just to be lived. It revolves around five creative tensions, starting from radical inclusion and moving towards mission in a participatory style, practicing ‘co-responsibility with other believers and people of good will’. Difficulties are acknowledged, such as war, genocide and the gap between clergy and laity, but all can be sustained, say the Bishops, by a lively spirituality.

The image of the Church as an expanding tent with the Lord at its centre comes from Isaiah, and the point of it is to emphasise that this expanding tent is a place where people are heard and not judged, not excluded.

So we read that the people of God need new strategies; not quarrels and clashes but dialogue, where the distinction between believers and unbelievers is rejected. The people of God must actually listen, it insists, to the cry of the poor and of the earth.

Because of differences of opinion on abortion, contraception, the ordination of women to the priesthood and homosexual activity, some felt that no definitive positions on these issues can be established or proposed. This is also true of polygamy, and divorce and remarriage.

However the document is clear on the special problem of the inferior position of women and the dangers of clericalism, although the positive contribution of many priests is acknowledged.

What is one to make of this potpourri, this outpouring of New Age good will? It is not a summary of Catholic faith or New Testament teaching. It is incomplete, hostile in significant ways to the apostolic tradition and nowhere acknowledges the New Testament as the Word of God, normative for all teaching on faith and morals. The Old Testament is ignored, patriarchy rejected and the Mosaic Law, including the Ten Commandments, is not acknowledged.

Two points can be made initially. The two final synods in Rome in 2023 and ’24 will need to clarify their teaching on moral matters, as the Relator (chief writer and manager) Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich has publicly rejected the basic teachings of the Church on sexuality, on the grounds that they contradict modern science. In normal times this would have meant that his continuing as Relator was inappropriate, indeed impossible.

The synods have to choose whether they are servants and defenders of the apostolic tradition on faith and morals, or whether their discernment compels them to assert their sovereignty over Catholic teaching. They must decide whether basic teachings on things like priesthood and morality can be parked in a pluralist limbo where some choose to redefine sins downwards and most agree to differ respectfully.

Outside the synod, discipline is loosening – especially in Northern Europe, where a few bishops have not been rebuked, even after asserting a bishop’s right to dissent; a de facto pluralism already exists more widely in some parishes and religious orders on things like blessing homosexual activity.

Diocesan bishops are the successors of the apostles, the chief teacher in each diocese and the focus of local unity for their people and of universal unity around the Pope, the successor of Peter. Since the time of St Irenaeus of Lyon, the bishop is also the guarantor of continuing fidelity to Christ’s teaching, the apostolic tradition. They are governors and sometimes judges, as well as teachers and sacramental celebrants, and are not just wall flowers or rubber stamps.

‘Enlarge the Tent’ is alive to the failings of bishops, who sometimes do not listen, have autocratic tendencies and can be clericalist and individualist. There are signs of hope, of effective leadership and cooperation, but the document opines that pyramid models of authority should be destroyed and the only genuine authority comes from love and service. Baptismal dignity is to be emphasised, not ministerial ordination and governance styles should be less hierarchical and more circular and participative.

The main actors in all Catholic synods (and councils) and in all Orthodox synods have been the bishops. In a gentle, cooperative way this should be asserted and put into practice at the continental synods so that pastoral initiatives remain within the limits of sound doctrine. Bishops are not there simply to validate due process and offer a ‘nihil obstat’ to what they have observed.

None of the synod’s participants, lay, religious, priest or bishop are well served by the synod ruling that voting is not allowed and propositions cannot be proposed. To pass on only the organising committee’s views to the Holy Father for him to do as he decides is an abuse of synodality, a sidelining of the bishops, which is unjustified by scripture or tradition. It is not due process and is liable to manipulation.

By an enormous margin, regularly worshipping Catholics everywhere do not endorse the present synod findings. Neither is there much enthusiasm at senior Church levels. Continued meetings of this sort deepen divisions and a knowing few can exploit the muddle and good will. The ex-Anglicans among us are right to identify the deepening confusion, the attack on traditional morals and the insertion into the dialogue of neo-Marxist jargon about exclusion, alienation, identity, marginalisation, the voiceless, LGBTQ as well as the displacement of Christian notions of forgiveness, sin, sacrifice, healing, redemption. Why the silence on the afterlife of reward or punishment, on the four last things; death and judgement, heaven and hell?

So far the synodal way has neglected, indeed downgraded the Transcendent, covered up the centrality of Christ with appeals to the Holy Spirit and encouraged resentment, especially among participants.

Working documents are not part of the magisterium. They are one basis for discussion; to be judged by the whole people of God and especially by the bishops with and under the Pope. This working document needs radical changes. The bishops must realise that there is work to be done, in God’s name, sooner rather than later.

https://spectator.com.au/2023/01/the-catholic-church-must-free-itself-from-this-toxic-nightmare

***************************************************

London Neuters a Scottish Gender Swap Law

Lest anyone think America has a lock on the culture wars, a decision by the British government to block Scotland from passing a law pertaining to subjective gender identification will prove otherwise.

The Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has said that the issue “will inevitably end up in court” given that “the Scottish government will vigorously defend this legislation.”

The Gender Recognition Reform Bill would have allowed people aged 16 or older in Scotland to change the gender designation on their identity documents by self-declaration, removing the need for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The age at which one is currently permitted to effect such a sweeping personal change is 18.

The bill, viewed in some quarters as radical, would have gone even further by slashing the amount of time transgender people are required to live in a different expressed gender before the change could be legally recognized, to three months for adults or six months for people ages 16 and 17. The requirement is now two full years. In the rest of the United Kingdom, individuals seeking an alternative gender identification must obtain the relevant medical diagnosis before they can make that transition legally.

Amid the choppy cultural currents in Britain, there were also fractious politics at play. That is because while Scotland’s government is devolved and semi-autonomous, on Monday — for the first time — the British government invoked Section 35 of the Scotland Act to veto the bill. The reasoning was that it could undermine U.K.-wide equality legislation that guarantees women and girls access to single-sex spaces. This is also an emerging and highly contentious issue in America, where one’s choice of restroom is now fraught with political overtones.

Opponents of the bill have argued that gender self-recognition could allow predatory men to gain access to spaces that are intended for women. Advocates of the law say that fear is overblown. Yet as the Spectator noted, “in truth the Scottish National Party (SNP) wants to institutionalize in law a borderline religious idea that many people simply do not accept — namely, that we all have something called a ‘gender identity’” and that “erasing the idea of ‘woman’ erases a woman’s liberties, specifically her liberty to associate with her own sex and her own sex only.”

The British secretary for Scotland, Alister Jack, said of the bill that it “also risks creating significant complications from having two different gender recognition regimes in the U.K. and allowing more fraudulent or bad faith applications.”

It is a heated issue, indeed: A ruckus erupted on Tuesday in the House of Commons, when Conservative and SNP lawmakers sparred and an opposition Labor legislator, Rosie Duffield, was heckled by members of her own party after she commended the Tory intervention.

Ms. Sturgeon, for her part, sees this as part of a two-sided battle. “A U.K. government wanting to undermine the Scottish parliament and choosing an issue where they think they can stoke some kind of culture war, and that’s what it is about,” she said. “And in doing that, they’re undermining devolution … but they’re also weaponizing a stigmatized, vulnerable, often marginalized group in our society.”

Yet as the Spectator also observed, “the bigotry belongs to those who wish to force women to accept men in their spaces and who damn as a ‘TERF’ (ie, a witch) any woman who dares object.” The acronym TERF stands for “trans exclusionary radical feminist.”

Another remarkable aspect of the controversy is how most of the press appeared to line up in favor of the Scottish “reform.” Consider a headline from Bloomberg: “Scotland’s Gender Bill Blocked by Rishi Sunak, Stoking Nationalist Ire.” Such verbiage telegraphs that what Westminster did was wrong.

It is not only pro-Tory publications like the Spectator that disagree. While a spate of countries like Argentina and Canada have legalized gender self-recognition, not everyone is on board with what is perceived in many places as ideologically driven social engineering. In Hungary, the Hungarian Children Protection Act that was passed in 2021 was branded a “shame” by the EU chief, Ursula von der Leyen, and as anti-gay by many others. However, Budapest’s law neither prohibited homosexuality nor impeded the right of transgender people to transition as adults. It outlawed gender reassignment for minors under the age of 18.

Writing in the Hungarian Conservative, Kai Jäger stated that “critics who point out that the transgender orthodoxy violates women’s rights or rests on questionable arguments and evidence are regularly ostracized or face substantial social costs,” adding that the Hungarian Children Protection Act is “a reasonable response to protect minors from the excesses of transgenderism that we now witness on a regular basis in many Western countries.”

https://www.nysun.com/article/london-neuters-a-scottish-gender-swap-law-warns-on-cake

*********************************************************

Woman Who Was Offered Abortion Says Choosing Life for Her Daughter Was the ‘Best Decision’ She Ever Made

A real woman

A career-driven 25-year-old living in New York City was initially terrified and scared to discover that she was pregnant. However, she was more shocked when her doctor defaulted to offering an abortion. Seeing her fully formed baby at 12 weeks, the woman was sure she wanted her baby and believes it to be her best decision so far.

Hannah Finn, now 28, is a senior recruiter in the healthcare IT industry. She lives in Orlando, Florida, where she was born and raised, with her 3-year-old daughter, Tara Mary, husband, Matt, and a dog named Nash.

However, when Hannah found out she was pregnant on Feb. 21, 2019, life was different.

The Lord’s Armor

“I was really focused on advancing my career, but also on my social life. I lived in a beautiful apartment, had some great friends, and selfishly, was pretty focused on myself,” Hannah told The Epoch Times.

Hannah was “terrified, shaking, and scared” upon reading the result of her pregnancy test. “But this inkling of joy that came over me was much more powerful,” she said. “I looked out at the twinkling New York City lights and could feel my life and body changing … I felt as though the Lord was putting armor on me, preparing me for the journey I was about to embark on.”

That evening, Hannah broke the news to Tara’s biological father.

Four days later, Hannah and her baby’s biological father attended their first OB appointment. As soon as Hannah explained their situation to the doctor, her demeanor changed and she began to suggest options.

“I was shocked and confused when she started talking about the ‘ladies uptown’ who could perform an abortion for me, and how nice they were, and how I could go today,” Hannah said.

Upon hearing that Hannah thought she was eight weeks pregnant, the doctor had yet another suggestion: the abortion pill.

“She said, ‘You will take the first one there and then the other at home, where, you know, you’ll just have like a heavy period after. Easy,'” Hannah said, adding, “Staring at her in horror, I asked if we could just move along with this appointment first. I had yet to see my baby … I never asked about abortion, or showed any signs of curiosity on the subject.”

‘The Most Beautiful Sight’

Hannah’s ultrasound revealed that she was already 12 weeks pregnant. She recalled her doctor’s hesitation to show her the screen, but eventually, she spun it around.

“I saw the most beautiful sight I had ever seen,” Hannah said. “My baby was a fully-formed, heart beating, fingerprinted, legged, and armed human being. At the end of the appointment, [the doctor] noticed the tears in my eyes and saw my dedication to the baby, so she started pointing out the little wave Tara gave us, prescribed me prenatal vitamins, and finally said, ‘Congratulations.'”

The suggestion to abort her baby had been hard for Hannah to hear; she grew up pro-life in a Catholic family and always believed that life begins at conception.

She said: “I was looking at the screen and there was a perfect, waving, living baby moving around … I loved her so much, I couldn’t fathom just ripping her life away, a life with potential and beauty. God created her and sent her to me, entrusting me to take care of her and hand-selecting me as her mother.”

Although she knew she had disappointed her parents, she asked herself how she could possibly be ashamed of the perfect child she had conceived. Despite the odds stacked against her as a single mother at that time, she knew things would fall into place.

‘Faith Was Everything’

The then-expectant mother found pregnancy physically challenging. She was diagnosed with hyperemesis gravidarum, an intense morning sickness lasting all day. This meant that she could barely eat.

Throughout her pregnancy, Hannah enjoyed the support of her loving friends, attended confession, and spoke with priests. Then, at her younger sister’s suggestion, she made contact with a group of women that provided the ultimate sanctuary.

“She told me to contact the Sisters of Life, the community of Roman Catholic women who take a fourth vow to protect and enhance the sacredness of human life, aside from the typical three vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience,” Hannah said.

Although they were in New York City, Hannah was hesitant to contact them at first. She thought to herself that she didn’t need anything from them since she had a job, family, and friends.

“It wasn’t until I realized that my heart was in need, and that’s what mattered,” Hannah said. “I remember when I visited their website, in the upper left-hand corner there was a tab that read, ‘Pregnant? Need help?’ and I clicked on it.”

Hannah then met up with two Sisters and, over tea, poured out her heart and soul. She felt seen and heard like never before.

“They immediately loved me and told me that I was worthy … they told me none of this was accidental and they were proud of me,” Hannah said. “As the next couple weeks went by and I met with some of the other Sisters at the convent, where a few single moms and their babies lived, I realized this was the perfect step for me to take for my motherhood.”

The convent had one room available. Hannah moved in there for a transformative experience and took the time to become friendly with the Sisters and help them with other moms, who already had babies, at the house. She also accompanied them on other activities and attended mass with them.

Hannah strongly believes that “faith was everything” during her pregnancy journey.

“I had always been a faithful person, but now I really understood it,” Hannah said. “I was literally experiencing a miracle within my own body.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/woman-who-was-offered-abortion-says-choosing-life-for-her-daughter-was-the-best-decision-she-ever-made_4904193.html

*****************************************************

‘Tradwife’ trend says women must serve husbands, ditch careers: ‘The way it should be’

Regressed gender roles are being ushered in by way of the “tradwife” trend – “traditional wives” who are more apt to be homemakers and reject modern feminism.

The TikTok hashtag #TradWife has garnered 110.6 million views, as younger women post in support or in jest at the seemingly antiquated, fringe lifestyle.

“I’ve never believed that women should work full-time if a woman is married or has children,” 25-year-old Estee Williams, who has more than 35,000 followers on TikTok, told The Post. “We as women have realized we CAN compete with men. Yes, but at what cost?”

“I see women moving away from their roots to compete with men,” the Virginia-based tradwife added. “That’s not the way it should be. We are women and we need to embrace that.”

The concept of “tradwifery” was also linked to the values held in the traditionalist Catholic church, according to an article by the Political Research Associates, a social justice research group.

“In some circles, being a tradwife — short for ‘traditional wife’ — also means being a fundamentalist Christian, and accepting that women shouldn’t work, shouldn’t have the right to vote, and should fully submit to their husbands and their faith to live a happy life of homemaking,” the organization wrote.

For Williams, that especially rings true in her household.

“The Bible speaks of wives submitting and serving their husbands and being their husband’s helping mate,” said Williams, who touts the nuclear family as a guiding model. “The Bible talks specifically about gender roles, and I completely support traditional gender roles.”

A “misconception” about the tradwife movement is that the women who model the lifestyle are not choosing to be homemakers and are also attempting to impose it on others, TikToker Williams said in a video with over 660,000 views.

“Nobody’s pushing it; people are typically just living it,” she said in the video.

“Tradwives also believe that they should submit to their husbands and serve their husbands and family, and that triggers people because the words ‘submit’ and ‘serve’ – it makes women think that we’re saying we’re less than a man,” she continued in the clip. “That’s not what we’re saying.”

Instead, she insisted tradwives are just willing homemakers who hold “traditional values.” While she told The Post that both the traditional and “modern” woman – the latter of whom she describes as “career-oriented” and a “boss babe” – can coexist, maintaining a career and being a homemaker is just too difficult in her eyes.

“Being a traditional wife means disregarding society standards of women being career oriented and choosing to focus completely on your own family and their needs,” said Williams, who supports “traditional gender roles.”

Self-proclaimed tradwife Alexia Delarosa, 29, told the Daily Mail that her husband “doesn’t have any duties assigned to him,” and instead she completes the household chores alone. She said she was particularly drawn to the “’50s style family life” and wanted to model her own home similarly.

“Matthew loves to be at work, and I love to be at home taking care of things,” the San Diego mama said of her husband. “We both thrive in our roles and this arrangement works perfectly for us.”

https://nypost.com/2023/01/18/tradwife-trend-says-women-must-serve-husbands-ditch-careers-the-way-it-should-be/

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*****************************************