Fatima Perspectives #1248
The bishops and cardinals who attended the fake Synod on Youth and Blah, Blah, Blah may have thought they were at a gathering focused on the supposed concerns and needs of “young people,” but in fact they were merely providing elaborate window-dressing for what Francis and the synod controllers had planned from the beginning, which is the only reason these sham spectacles are staged as anyone but the terminally naïve can see.
Accordingly, the synod’s final document was written by Francis’ handpicked committee of drafters, sprung on the Synod Fathers on the last day of the event, and then only in Italian, and read aloud at breakneck speed for an immediate up-or-down vote on each paragraph — hurry up now! — after which we were told “the Spirit” had spoken.
Thus, it should hardly be surprising that the Final Document is riddled with material the Synod Fathers never discussed or debated, but which “the Spirit” — meaning Francis — had dictated outside the proceedings. We have already seen how the “LGBT” concept was smuggled into the document by way of a sly incorporation of the Instrumentum Laboris, which in turn smuggled in that infamous “LGBT” reference which appeared nowhere in the final preparatory document following the meeting with “young people” in Rome — from which Cardinal Baldisseri falsely claimed the reference had been taken.
Now even the ultra-progressive Crux online magazine observes that the many references to “synodality” and “discernment” in the Final Document came out of nowhere, there having been no real discussion of these vague notions by the Synod Fathers themselves. As Crux reports, they were inserted into the Final Document just before it was submitted for the pro forma rapid-fire voting: “A member of the drafting committee for the final document of the 2018 Synod of Bishops says that language on ‘synodality’ and ‘discernment’ in a draft distributed to bishops earlier this week came from neither synod discussions nor the committee, guessing it was inserted by officials appointed by Pope Francis to run the event.”
Got that? Not even the drafting committee handpicked by Francis had inserted these notions, meaning they had to have been inserted by the direct order of Francis and/or members of his innermost circle.
Crux quotes Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, India, a member of both the drafting committee and Francis’ “council of cardinals,” who admitted that synodality in particular “wasn’t very prominent in the minds of the synod fathers, but it’s come out very strongly” in the Final Document. As he further advised Crux: “There was some resistance when it was publicized because this document has so much on synodality when we really haven’t discussed it, which is true.”
Furthermore, Crux notes that language concerning “sexual orientation” is present in the Final Document even though it “doesn’t result from input from participants in the synod hall.” When Crux asked Gracias “who was responsible for inserting such language, Gracias speculated it was the officials charged by Francis with overseeing synod operations, beginning with Italian Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri. ‘Maybe [it was] Baldisseri himself. Maybe the two special secretaries, who are the Jesuit and the Salesian. So, they put it in.’” Gracias further admitted that “he presumes that Baldisseri and his aides were trying to capture the mind of the pope, even if it wasn’t a major theme of the summit itself.”
The mind of the Pope! Not the mind of the Synod Fathers or “the Spirit” that is trotted out to provide a warrant for whatever Francis wishes a synod to say.
As Crux rather amusingly concludes: “The insertion of those concepts into a draft of the final document may feed perceptions among conservative critics of the pope that the process is ‘rigged.’”
In other words, the rigging of the synod might lead one to think the synod was rigged.
But Francis now has what he wanted from the beginning: “synodality,” “discernment” and “sexual orientation” — none of which were actually synodal subjects — are now placed in the tool box of verbal tools by which the “fluid” pseudo-Magisterium Francis is attempting to impose upon the Church will continue its astounding attack on Church teaching regarding the Sixth Commandment, the Fifth Commandment (respecting the moral licitness of capital punishment) and any other Church teaching he would like to liquify by affirming it in principle while dissolving it in practice.
It now seems undeniable that a future Pope will have to undo all of what Francis has done. One can only view with apprehension the state of affairs in the Church and the world that will accompany the arrival of that heroic Pope.
Want to read more?
Latest Fatima Perspectives
Fatima Perspectives Archive