Here at codebreaker central, Pope Francis’s statements on the Synod on the Family have already brought out some his most beloved non sequiturs. They deserve some thorough undoing, because if we don’t undo them, His Holiness will have you caught up in knots.

I do hope you do not think I am distorting His Holiness’s words, it is just that they are ambiguous enough to demand being examined. Under the spotlight, even simple statements that seem innocuous do not appear to be so with a little scrutiny.

So here they are, in all their glory…

Please be specific: what kind of family?

_“Every single family, despite its weaknesses, is always a light, amid the darkness of the world.”_

This sounds lovely, but unfortunately the initial premise is false. Every single family is not always a light amid the darkness of the world. Some families are broken in two by divorce. Divorce, we assume, would be included in that area of ‘weakness’, in spite of which “all” families are a “light to the world”.

A family that prays together, that stays together, that resolves its difficulties and, in a truly Catholic sense, lives and passes on the Faith – that family is a light amid the darkness of the world. A family that is ridden with adultery, infidelity, or a family formed out of the tragedy of human selfishness and sin following divorce is not a light to the world.

A “family” (in modern parlance) composed of a same-sex partnering who adopt or obtain a child through surrogacy is not a light amid the darkness of the world. Some families are deeply involved in the mafia, gun crime, human trafficking and the drug trade. Are they lights amid the darkness of the world? No.

Of course, if the Pope declares all – every single one – families to be “lights” amid the darkness of the world, then we can immediately say that there is no darkness in the world, because all families are composed of “light”. Is the darkness of the world, then, just those who have not yet formed families? Yet still everyone comes from one.

The simple answer is that while in essence THE FAMILY is essentially good, it is simply untrue to declare that all families are light amid the darkness of the world, for if that were really true, there wouldn’t be much darkness, would there?

~

Please define your terms

“May the Synod recognize, value and highlight all the good, beauty and Holy aspects of the family. May it embrace all vulnerable situations that test the family.”

So, although we see that some aspects of the family are good, beautiful and holy, we might well ask what a “vulnerable situation” is and whether, if it is not good, beautiful or holy, it should be embraced by the Synod, especially if it “tests” the solidity and unity of the family. Put simply, we cannot embrace both truth, beauty and goodness and evils of the age at the same time – and still call ourselves Christians.

~

Pot, meet kettle.

“A Church that keeps its doors closed, betrays itself and its mission, instead of being a bridge it turns into a barrier.”

This is surely His Holiness’s favourite non sequitur, for there is no evidence, none whatsoever, the Church’s doors are closed in the first place. This hyperbolic language serves no purpose but to create the illusion that priests and bishops are slamming ‘doors’ in the faces of innocent people when, in fact, anyone is welcome to attend Mass and seek the graces which may be obtained by doing so.

While the Pope tells his Bishops and Cardinals not to “politicize” the Synod – whatever that means – the Pope is not afraid to use political slogans concerning “door-slamming” that portray those who recognise that some people do not live, that is, make no attempt to live, in communion with Jesus Christ and therefore cannot receive Holy Communion. This is in conformity with his own “ideology” – and we know that the Pope has also advised Synod Fathers not to bring into the Synod Hall their own “ideologies”.

His statement on “doors” can very easily be construed as an attempt to suggest that “a Church” (in fact there is only One True Church) that “keeps its doors closed” (notice that he is saying the doors are shut, presumably, by all his less humble predecessors and the less humble and merciful Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ) betrays its mission.

Pope Francis presumably says this in the full knowledge that the mission of the Church is the salvation of souls but, presumably, caring very little for the success of that mission because souls are not saved by admitting unrepentant mortal sinners to Holy Communion.

In fact, according to St Paul, they are damned in doing so. If the Salvation of Souls is not the Church’s mission – and that mission is not betrayed by ensuring that great care is taken about reception of the Holy Eucharist – then of what “mission” could His Holiness be thinking?

The Pope can, on a whim, decide to change the entire mission of the Church if he wants to, away from the salvation of souls to being inclusive of everyone (even those who have no desire to be in Communion with Christ and His Church) but if it is anything but the Salvation of souls then everyone should be given a heads up that Christ’s mission is not being continued by His Vicar on Earth.

In terms of “barriers,” the only barriers that exist in the Church are the prison bars that keep people enslaved to sin, lacking what is necessary to change, thinking not to ask God for grace, thinking not to seek to reject vice and evil, seeking not virtue, calling out not to Christ or His Blessed Mother or the plethora of Saints available for heavenly aid. Instead, it is suggested that it is the new “hope” that the Church established by Jesus Christ for the Salvation of Souls will drop its mission and open the door to sacrilege and eternal damnation for all who refuse to repent and do penance.

Read what His Holiness says and dissect it. It is not pleasant, but for the good of the Church and the Salvation of Souls, it simply must be done. If the original premise of what His Holiness says on these important matters is false, then his conclusions, also, are false and he is leading his flock away from Jesus Christ.

This, readers, is precisely the threat posed by this Synod and its conclusions. Here at this website, we are not alone in recognising the shifting sands from which much of His Holiness’s deployment of language grenades are launched.

Cardinal Robert Sarah has noticed as well:

Cardinal Sarah refutes treacherous expressions

~