“Who are we to judge and say that there are no elements of truth and sanctification in [those relationships]?” he asked in 2014.

Ever since July 2013, you can be sure that when a churchman says "who are we to judge?", you are in the presence of a toadying company man, like the guy at work who makes sure to insert the boss's favorite buzzwords into any meeting or conversation when he's present.

It seems strange now that Cardinal Schönborn was once considered a very orthodox prelate — even a good candidate for the papacy — particularly due to his work overseeing the production of the new Catechism.

And while we're on the topic of company men, there's another tell. How many prelates were faithful "reform of the reform" Ratzingerians under Benedict, then became fervent who-am-I-to-judgers under Francis? Dolan and Tagle were in this group along with Sconborn, but I know there are many others.

The bandwagon does fill up quickly, doesn't it?

Yup - spineless bastards, the lot of them.

With no real convictions of their own, might I add. These are 'yes' men that have lost the entire purpose of their priesthood, if they ever had a purpose to begin with.

I think we should respect the Holy Father and his supporters - they appear to have found a sure fire way to bring the Church into sync with European secularism. The Church, if you recall, should be viewed as a "Field Hospital." (Benedict said something quite similar but the meaning was very different.) In the near future the Francis' Euro minions are going to approach one and all and say "You are not hurt. The mercy of the Lord will be given unconditionally at your leisure will provide you spiritual health. No hospital needed." In addition everyone will be assured that they will not be judged - what a powerful call to join the faith.
Help me on this. How did the Church chose as vicar of Christ a man who admires the bishops that have almost destroyed Catholicism in Northern Europe. Is he mad or are we being punished?

a wise Catholic man told me once "when God is mad at the sheep he sends bad shepherds"...so I guess he meant we are being punished

...we are definitely being punished, according to that scenario.

Yes, indeed the Church is a field hospital. But if the treatment is left to these doctors, you will never get well.

According to Pope Francis not the sinful behaviour wounded the sinner but the Church and Christ commandments. Sinner is not only the harmless victim of sin but the causer of sin and the wounds.

Church militant ignores the controversial things the pope said
Like... irregular relationships are not living in mortal sin and... "No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! The Pope worshipping is taken to another level by Church militant. They don't care about the truth, about Christ and the Catholic teaching and mislead people for not criticizing the pope. Church militant claims to expose falshood and to server the truth yet they cover and hide the destructive anti-catholic statements and actions of Pope Francis.

The Church is Field Hospital after a Battle?

“I see clearly,” the pope continues, “that the thing the church needs most today is the ability to heal wounds and to warm the hearts of the faithful; it needs nearness, proximity. I see the church as a field hospital after battle. It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars! You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything else. Heal the wounds, heal the wounds.... And you have to start from the ground up. - Pope Francis, The Church as Field Hospital | Interview with Pope Francis by Fr. Antonio Spadaro, 2013

1) Has the Church throughout her history and Holy Tradition ever described herself as a "Field Hospital"?
No, she hasn't.
In The parable of the Good Samaritan, the man [us] waylaid by the robbers [the devil, the world, the flesh, our sins] and left for the dead, has compassion shown to him by the Good Samaritan [Jesus, the Son of God himself]. The inn is the Church, and the pope, the bishops and priests ought to act like the innkeeper, who has been entrusted with everything [and then some] required to make the man well, what the priest and the levite [the old dispensation] were unable to do.

2) Then whence comes such an alien expression as the church [is] a field hospital after battle?
From the interview, the pope himself says this is how he sees the Church, but that is not how the Church sees herself [see 1) above]. I understand this is an expression from the book The Shoes of the Fisherman a novel by an Australian writer Morris West first published in 1963 [to be verified]. It is entirely a Pope Francis' expression.

By now it ought not be surprising how secular and unspiritual the pope is.

3) What does it even mean?
As we are now familiar with Pope Francis' juxtaposition of statements and expressions, words and phrases are jumbled together and a closer inspection reveal strange and new teaching that often, as in this case here, contain contradictions e.g. if the Church is a field hospital after a battle, it can only patch up the wounded but not heal the wounds and warm the hearts of the faithful. Church teaching is [and has always been] very clear on what the wounded and the dead [in mortal sin] ought to do to be cured or be raised from the dead.

Yes. Or a hospital which only administers pain-relieving drugs, leaving the underlying diseases untreated and festering away.

It seems strange now that Cardinal Schönborn was once considered a very orthodox prelate — even a good candidate for the papacy — particularly due to his work overseeing the production of the new Catechism.

Let's be honest about the "more inclusive" language for gays idea. The Church is presently so nuanced and so careful about this right now, that being any more "inclusive" will simply mean condoning the sin of homosexuality. That is simply the next logical step.

God have mercy on us. I had a very strange feeling when I read earlier today that these 2 Cardinals would be part of the presentation, but after reading this, especially Schonborn's words I feel sick. Just who are our shepherds?

reaching out to the suffering on a face to face basis does demand that the pain of the suffering person be taken in to account and that we act to address that pain. also, there is a difference between the corporal and spiritual works of mercy and those differences cause us to apply the christian approach to them differently in real life.

for example, we find a person who is starving or homeless, it is unchristian to say to them that before i address you physical needs you must listen to my preaching and accept it.

on the other hand, we find a person who knows the teachings of the Church but is deliberately and publicly defying the Church's constant teachings, it is unchristian to say to them, oh never mind, you can still pretend to be in communion with the Church. that is not addressing the person's needs.

publishing an Apostolic Exhortation or expounding the moral teachings of the Church is something far different.

it is not right to confuse the two different scenarios, i.e. the application of the corporal as opposed to the spiritual works of mercy.

if the bishops can not judge what is behavior in keeping with the Gospel, who can?

if no one can judge, how can we know what is the Gospel?

if no one can know what is the Gospel, how can it be proclaimed?

does current pastoral practice require judging the state of the soul of the spouse who abandoned their first spouse? i have never heard of that being the current practice.

surely, the bishops can tell the faithful what christian life is and is not.

Jesus was very clear that anyone who abandons their spouse for another is committing adultery.

forcing one's valid spouse to live a life without a conjugal relationship is an ongoing sin. marriage gives both spouses the right to a conjugal relationship. abandoning one's spouse results in one person being denied their God-given vocation in this world. that is the conundrum the divorced and re-married catholic presents to his pastor. i am very curious how the Exhortation will address it.

as for unmarried people who are sexually tempted by each other deliberately placing themselves in an occasion of sin by sleeping and living in the same home, how is this not a sin?

two men or two women who are not sexually attracted to each other do not have this problem. a man and a woman with natural sexual urges who co-habitate are also deliberately placing themselves in a near occasion of sin. it is similar to a person who knows they are an alcoholic deliberately keeping an open bottle of whiskey in each room of their home.

Both members of Team Bergoglio...is anyone surprised...?

Gossip and speculation until we have it in our hands

You're right. We should just shut our brains off like docile little sheep.

'outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church.'
Lionel:
No one knows of any one saved outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church. This is an objective mistake made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
Physically no one in 1949 could have seen a case of someone saved outside the visible boundaries of the Church, i.e without faith and baptism

He drew an analogy with Lumen Gentium, a document of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), which taught that there are “elements of sanctification and of truth” outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church.
In the same way, he suggested, there may be virtues and truth in relationships that fall short of the Church’s full vision of marriage as a permanent, lifelong union between a man and a woman open to new life.

Lionel: He is referring to Lumen Gentium 8 which says there are 'elements of sanctification and truth' in other religions. Cardinal Schonborn like Cardinl Ratzinger infers that LG 8 refers not to invisible for us cases, but personally known people ,saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So LG 8 for them contradicts and rejects the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. From here we get Pope Benedict's 'development of doctrine' on EENS.
Cardinal Schonborn is implying that if the Church's teaching on extra ecclesiam nulla salus can be changed with LG 8 then why not change other teachings of the Church.
Their entire new theology is based on mixing up what is invisible as being visible and they get away with it.
It is important for us to affirm LG 8, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc as being invisible cases. They are hypothetical cases. So they cannot be an exception in 2016 to the 16th century missionaries interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.We cannot know of any hypothetical case which is objectively visible.
We must affirm that there is nothing in Vatican Council II ( including hypothetical LG 14) which contradicts extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
_________________________

FIY: Extremely powerful and dead-on open letter to Francis. This man deserves a medal. I hope many men join him.

http://www.christthemorning...

I'm emailing this to my priest.

I spent so much mental real estate worrying about the two synods and this exhortation, and now I do not even care anymore. Not a bit. How many people read any papal documents at all? Virtually none. How many will read our present Pontiff blathering on for yet another 200+ pages? I am starting think that this all horrible for sure, but relatively inconsequential. None of this is really worse than the bomb that hit the Church at VII -- this is just fallout.

How many will read it? Very few. Which is why there will certainly be key passages either leaked to the media, or handed to them on a silver platter.

The document will have at least enough of the trappings of orthodoxy that the Jimmy Akins of the world can defend it with a zillion things to know and share.

But the media will report on the salacious bits -- the little bombs interspersed throughout -- and the public will lap it up, and more Catholics will follow non-magisterial authority in the direction of perdition.

This is what is maddening about the whole damn thing.

“In sum, the October 2015 assembly was nothing but a theatrical play destined to prepare the final act which is already written: the post-Synodal Exhortation of mercy and forgiveness for all.”

This is the problem with a synodal system. Taken honestly, it is simply suppose to provide a basis in which senior prelates can advise the Holy Father. Taken dishonestly, it is a method in which the pope packs it with like minded bishops who regurgitate his own opinion in a dishonest attempt to disguise a predetermined outcome. Its an abuse of trust, a lie if you will. We are on to this pope, we know full well what is coming with this character.

I'd go with the second option: taken dishonestly.

Schönborn is a coward and is a liar. I can't get me head around the argument he uses to justify and sanctioning civil or otherwise of perverse sexual relationships. It like say that Dr Goebbels such a nice man, he and his wife so lovely and all those gorgeous children... There has to be some social acceptance of Nazism without adding he helped kill millions and he suicided with his wife and children. Rightly excommunicated. I can't understand the confusion... the fuehrer so kind to animals! It is totally besides the fact sex is meant for coitus... within loving life long committed relationships open to children. You can't build any relationship on sodomy full stop and the Church and State must never sanction this. A law that is against morality is no law and must be disobeyed.