ABERRO AGENDA, aberro-sex agenda, Big Gender, Cardinal Burke, Catholic Church, Eponymous Flower blog, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, Fr. Z, Francis Effect, Genderism, Giuseppe Nardi, Great Cardinal, Harvesting the Fruits blog, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, John Paul II, Joseph Ratzinger, latae sententiae, Louie Verrecchio, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, neo-modernism, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Polls, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, risk event, Roman Curia, s Benedict XVI, s Bergoglio, Soap Bubble Papacy™, spirit of Vatican II, SSPX, State of Necessity, supplied jurisdiction, sustainability, Synod 2014, Team Bergoglio, Thomism, Tradition, TransRational, Truth, Vatican, Vatican II
Today I draw your attention to the recent book written by Edward Pentin that provides detailed background as to what transpired at the Secret Synod of Bishop’s of 2014. This book has been released by Ignatius Press. (see here)
The below video is the book promotion interview that Edward Pentin gave to Raymond Arroyo of ETWN.
The reason that I am posting the video, along with partial transcripts and a passage and link from a Fr. Z post below, is that they provides more confirmation as to the TRUE AGENDA of the Synod of Bishops of both 2014 and 2015, the TRUE AGENDA as we have laid it out over a series of posts, starting on the 18th of December 2014 titled The Synod of the Three Paragraphs (see here), with the most recent on the Sunday 6th of September 2015 titled A “Small” Embedded Risk Event. (see here)
I am reproducing the below for your information and FOR THE RECORD:
Here is a fragment of the transcripts from the above interview
Arroyo: You suggest in the book (Ed note: The Rigging of a Vatican Synod?) that this is all a Trojan horse.
Pentin: Yes, this is one view that…that… the divorce and remarriage issue was being used by certain people in the Synod to push through another agenda.
Arroyo: And what was that other agenda?
Pentin: That other agenda basically centered on validating same-sex unions within the Church, changing the Church’s views on human sexuality, the Church’s doctrine in a sense, so the Church’s pastoral practice, which in turn… they argue affects doctrine. So in loosening of the teaching on cohabitation for example, and so forth…
Arroyo: It was that interim report, the report that sort of coalesced and gathered all the interventions and the conversations throughout the first half of this process, they issue this interim report, that is what caused so many fireworks…
Arroyo: because it was released to the public, to the press before the cardinals even got a glimpse of it. Tell me how that came to be and many cardinals said this bears no relations to the conversation we’ve been having. In fact, nobody even talked about homosexuality or communion for divorced/remarried people. We barely had a conversation about that.
Pentin: Yes This is what really alerted people to that fact that they thought there was some… some sort of rigging going on, because they…they said we didn’t hear about these things discussed during the first week and suddenly they were front and center and they were put out to the press before they were even heard… and before they had even seen the report themselves. So they argue that there was… that that was being pushed through…
Please view the rest of the video.
On an aside, there is a post at Fr. Z’s blog about this book and resulting vapors that some of the less masculine members of the “c”atholic press are experiencing due to its publication. I am posting the link for your viewing pleasure here.
If one goes to the Fr. Z link, one will read a passage that he reproduces, a passage of text from the heretic Michael Sean Winters of the “Fishwrap”. In the Fishwrap piece, we find the following passage with Fr. Z usual commentary in : (emphasis added)
I thought the language on homosexuality in the Interim Report was unimpeachable: It basically said everyone should be welcomed in the Church. Full stop. [Not quite full stop, no. First, they were vague. What does “welcome” mean? In the civilized world is there a Catholic parish that turns homosexuals away? Not a one. It isn’t a sin to be a homosexual. Does it mean give them Holy Communion without emendation of life if they are openly sexually active? What does “welcome” mean? Should we have them stand up during Mass so we can all say “Bravo!”? Also, are we to welcome homosexuals because they are homosexuals or because they are people? There was clearly an agenda hidden inside the vague language.] It happily, and hopefully, avoided the language of “intrinsic disorder” which, whatever its theological precision, which is questionable, its pastoral significance is obvious and malign.
PS h/t to Richard Malcolm for drawing my attention to this video.