CNA Newsroom, Apr 26, 2024 / 13:57 pm (CNA).
Four German bishops on Wednesday distanced themselves from the controversial Synodal Way’s plans for a permanent body to oversee the Church in Germany, instead appealing for unity with the universal Church.
The four bishops are the same who have previously blocked funding for this body: Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki of Cologne and three prelates from Bavaria: Gregor Maria Hanke, OSB, of Eichstätt; Stefan Oster, SDB, of Passau; and Rudolf Voderholzer of Regensburg.
In a joint statement, the prelates confirmed on April 24 that they would not be parties to a committee charged with setting up a German “Synodal Council, as this would conflict with the sacramental constitution of the Church.”
The four bishops also rejected the view that the German Bishops’ Conference could legally establish a “synodal committee” if four of its members did not support the committee.
Given the Vatican’s repeated interventions against the German process, the bishops said on Wednesday they would instead look to the Synod of Bishops in Rome to point the way for “a more synodal Church [in Germany] in unity with the universal Church.
Warning of a threat of a new schism from Germany, the Vatican intervened as early as July 2022 against plans for a German synodal council.
In January 2023, Rome asserted “that neither the Synodal Way, nor any body established by it, nor any bishops’ conference has the competence to establish the ‘synodal council’ at the national, diocesan, or parish level.” German Bishops’ Conference president Bishop Georg Bätzing immediately dismissed the warning.
In the meantime, Synodal Way organizers have continued with plans to establish a synodal committee: On Monday, April 22, German diocesan bishops approved the statutes for a synodal committee.
The move is a significant development: The German prelates were initially expected to vote on the statutes for a preparatory committee during their February plenary assembly.
However, that vote was suspended following another Vatican intervention.
Following a March meeting where “differences and points of agreement were identified,” the Vatican and Synodal Way supporters announced they would work together to resolve the issues.
Given that the bishops have now adopted the statutes for a synodal committee and the lay organization ZdK already approved these on Nov. 25, 2023 — despite earlier warnings from Rome of the risk of a new German schism — it is unclear how, or if, the Vatican will respond.
According to an earlier report on the official portal of the Church in Germany, katholisch.de, the synodal committee will still meet again in June to discuss plans.
The Synodal Way — “Synodaler Weg,” sometimes translated as Synodal Path — is not a synod but a highly controversial event designed to create “pressure” on the Church, as one founder has admitted.
The German process, which cost several million dollars, not only aims to establish a permanent synodal council: Delegates also passed several resolutions to change Church practices based on transgender ideology and have called for the priestly ordination of women, same-sex blessings, as well as changes to Church teaching on sexual acts.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
As a matter of simple inquiry, from the back bleachers, five questions:
1. If not a permanent German “synodal assembly,” what more “universal” hybrid cut from the same cloth might we possibly see from synodal Rome?
2. In opposition to abstract “transgender ideology” (Dignitas Infinita!), at the separable (?) and concrete level why do we still have the half-blessing of irregular couples–as “couples” (Fiducia Supplicans)?
3. If not the “priestly ordination of women,” might we see halfway-house approval of non-ordained deaconesses–replacing Lay Ecclesial Ministers (?)–and perhaps no more fixed in place than were “civil unions” as a secularist step toward gay “marriages”? “Time is greater than space” (Evangelii Gaudium, 2013).
4. About “same-sex blessings,” already we have Fiducia Supplicans, although ‘splained by Cardinal Fernandez as a sorta restraint on the German proposal…
5. About “sexual acts,” generally, the overall pattern of ambiguous fluidity on so much (subjectivism, situationism), including silent dismissal of the Catechism and Veritatis Splendor on concrete moral absolutes (among the underground ever since publication in the early 1990s), adding up to a flanking reversal of Humanae Vitae without ever having to risk saying so in writing?
Beyond the “non-synod” Der Synodal Weg, what is the meaning of apparent synodal unity in Rome if our universal grounding in both natural law and the whole magisterium is obscured and even eclipsed? Procedurally, of course!…
…Experts, amnesiac study groups, mutually-isolated roundtables, 3-minute speaker limits, etc.
Just askin’…
‘Synodaler Weg’?
Hah!
That’s German for “Yodeling Heresy.”
At least there’s the nucleus for a 2nd German counter reformation.
The first, “Two Roman Catholic armies, the emperor’s and the League’s, converged on the kingdom [the Palatinate], routing Frederick V [a Calvinist] at the White Mountain in November 1620 and replacing the regime of the estates in Bohemia with a system of ‘confessional absolutism’ based on rigid Catholic conformity and political authoritarianism. At the same time, the Palatinate was conquered by Spanish and Bavarian troops, and the electoral title was transferred to Maximilian of Bavaria in 1623. In the Palatinate, too, the Counter-Reformation sought to bring Protestantism to an end. As the war spread into Hesse and Westphalia and as Spain resumed its attack on the Netherlands, Catholic forces seemed near triumph” (Britannica).
Cardinal Woelki bishops Hanke, Oster, Voderholzer [Gerhard Muller]can raise an army of faithful Catholics to inspire a revival using the weapons of truth, faith, prayer, professing Christ via media and all available means. Would our present Roman emperor support them? If not, with a flair of hope [verging on zealous fantasy], support from foreign interventionists Cardinals Willem Eijk, Ambongo, Sarah Africa, Burke the US et Al and a regiment of bishops [At least this dream betters the current nightmare].
German Synodality is an example of Absolute Duplicity: Bergoglio and C6 Marx created this German situation to justify the establishing of a Synodal Superlodge on the ruins of Post-Conciliarism.
Bergoglioism alone is deliberately responsible for this soul-destroying Synodal Mess, and the clean up is going to take decades.
I just used the term
“Bergoglioism.”
My preferred definition would be
“the dressing of Freemasonic Praxis against Catholic Truth.”
Perhaps there are more complete definitions out there?!
I think you chose the right handle!!! 🤩
How about: Bergoglioism: Where an old man acting much like a frustrated petulant child conducts assemblies of endless séances, called synods, to conjure up “the spirit” of some preordained prophecies he plans to impose on God to redefine the Catholic religion.
That pretty-much deserves to be the full OED entry for Bergoglioism 😉
Yes, and about the “regiment of bishops” and others (?), perhaps one galvanizing factor is stirring in the Eucharistic Revival, and what the Mass actually means and does not mean?
In his posthumous book, “What is Christianity” (Ignatius 2023), Benedict XVI presents compact and lucid chapters on “Theology of the Liturgy” (pp. 57-61),” “The Catholic Priesthood” (pp. 122-155), and “The Meaning of Communion” (pp. 155-177). Included is the irreducible difference between the Eucharistic Catholic Mass and the assembled Protestant liturgies. In place of transubstantiation, Luther’s commingling with the unchanged elements, and the more reductionist and mere symbolism of Calvin.
At issue is Christ’s divine self-sacrifice to the Father in expiation [!] for our creaturely and abysmal offenses against both the Creator and our very selves (the image and likeness of God!). At issue is transitory celebrations of the Last Supper, stripped of the permanent renewal and extension of Calvary opening into the Resurrection.
Benedict writes:
“It is quite clear, therefore, that ‘Last Supper’ and ‘Mass’ are two completely different forms of worship, which by their nature exclude each other. Anyone who preaches intercommunion today ought to remember this [….] A Catholic […] perceives the Holy Mass, not as an illegitimate relapse into the sacrificial worship of the Old Covenant, but rather as our inclusion in the Body of Christ and therefore in his self-gift to the Father, an act that makes us all become one with him. The conciliar decree on the priesthood, as well as the Vatican II constitution on the liturgy, are supported by this calm certainty, even though, in the concrete implementation of the liturgical reform, Luther’s thesis silently played a certain role, so that in some circles it could be maintained that the Council of Trent’s Decree on the Sacrifice of the Mass had been abrogated” (p. 124).
QUESTION: About the Eucharistic Revival at least in the United States, how much of the alternative 16th-century mindset of “some circles”—German and others—is working its way into our synodal “roundtables” in Rome?
And of course, several Special Operations battalions of Laymen armed with tried faith and superb knowledge. I can hear the clarion call.
Amen, Fr. Morello, PhD! Thanks be to God for you SO soldiers of Christ/theologians! We Catholics appreciate your service!
This synod was a bad idea, period. Inclusion of uneducated, albeit well intended, lay people was a bad idea, period. The unnecessary pushing of women into the steps to priesthood is a bad idea, period.( And many women like myself neither want it nor feel oppressed by our current status.) This is again an exercise in “aren’t we clever”, not unlike V2, which came close to destroying the church in terms of the numbers of priests, religious and faithful lay people who walked away and never returned. Those who loved the Latin Mass are still being suppressed, like that is an intelligent idea. As far as the danger of schism, it is alive and well. If the Vatican saw this looming (and hard to imagine they would be so dim as to NOT see it) they should have done something clearer and more substantial years ago. Like remove some Bishops from office. One can only conclude that this uproar is exactly what they want in Rome. Or, this Pope wants it. However if they expect the remaining faithful to foot the bill for another crazed round of V2, I think they will be very much mistaken. And that is a lesson they will not learn until it is too late.
Let them go, we don’t need them! If they don’t go excommunicate them. Support the faithful ones and build a new loyal Church in Germany. If they return, repentant, kill the fatted calf for them and celebrate. But we are called to love them through it all.
Time heals. We must allow time to pass and eventually the bad of this Pontificate will be sifted and winnowed out and the Church will continue on as it has for over two millennia. In the future we will have a new set of problems , and those of the present may seem quite tame. 🤪
These German bishops started to vote on doing this a few weeks ago but Pope Francis quickly ordered it stopped threatening “serious consequences” if it continued. Despite the usual insinuations, Pope Francis is against the idea. This latest approach is a floater to reintroduce the idea of these bishops becoming self governing as a group. Germany’s problem is far worse than a group of clerical rouges. About a year ago I read an article pointing out that Germany is easily the most immoral country in all of Europe. If so what kind of shepherds would you expect them to have? Just the other day I caught a news item that the German parliament passed a law imposing a fine of 10,000 euros on anyone who mentions a person’s actual gender at birth without (his/her/or it’s) personal permission. It also said that parents could assign any gender they wished to a child at birth since they could choose later presumably. The German bishops don’t seem to have said anything about it.
Francis fiddles while Rome burns