The Final Report of the Synod is now available in Italian only:
[Our translation of paragraphs 84-86 of the "Relazione Finale" and our commentary on these, and on the Pope's speech, are located in a separate post: The Triumph of Ambiguity - The Synod's Final Relatio, numbers 84-86)]
[Original posting time: 10/24/15 3:30 PM]
The final document of the Synod is expected to be published this evening, Rome time. No word yet on whether it will be only in Italian, or if translations are to be made available at the same time. Once the document is out we will try to post relevant passages as soon as possible.
***
[Original posting time: 10/24/15 3:30 PM]
The final document of the Synod is expected to be published this evening, Rome time. No word yet on whether it will be only in Italian, or if translations are to be made available at the same time. Once the document is out we will try to post relevant passages as soon as possible.
However we already have an idea about its contents from the official Vatican press briefing today, where Cardinals Schönborn and Damasceno Assis spoke.
It might be protested that these two Cardinals are more or less on the "progressive" side, and therefore have an interest in twisting or distorting the presentation of the final document. Our response is that if the document can be interpreted in a heterodox-friendly manner, then that is a major issue even if a first reading of it is friendly to orthodoxy. We already saw this happen with the Synod Instrumentum Laboris (henceforth referred to as IL), which at its release was largely hailed as a "conservative" document, only for its progressivist time-bombs to become more evident upon a closer reading of the text.
But first we begin with Edward Pentin's report for today (Will the Synod Final Report Twist 'Familiaris Consortio'?):
As the synod fathers vote on each paragraph of the final report this afternoon, there are concerns that a proposal to admit civilly remarried divorcees to holy Communion will be subtly voted through, based on what many believe is a false interpretation of Pope St. John Paul II’s apostolic exhortation Familiaris consortio.
The paragraph of the final report in question allegedly doesn’t explicitly mention the Eucharist, but sources inside the synod say there are concerns that if passed, the word “discernment” will be interpreted differently according to where one stands on the issue.
“If I had to guess, my sense is that it will go through and be passed,” a synod source said, “though one wonders what the fallout will be if it does, given that it leaves room for many interpretations.”
The part of Familiaris consortio article no. 84 referring to discernment states:
"Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children's upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid."
At a press conference today, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, moderator of the German language group at the synod, said that “discernment” is the “key word”, adding that situations with regards divorced and civilly remarried persons are “different”, not always “black and white” and so require this discernment. Citing the “practices of St. Ignatius,” he even suggested such an approach would be Jesuitical.
Critics say such an interpretation would still retain the “internal forum” idea that has apparently been dropped in the report, and amount to a “twisting” of Familiaris consortio as a means to further the possibility of admitting remarried divorcees to holy Communion.
Francis X. Rocca's tweets indicate that Cardinal Schonborn affirmed that the final document refers to the communion for "remarried" divorcees in an "oblique" way:
