News

Bishop Nin: The Synod on Synodality has nothing to do with Traditional Concepts of Synodality

10 Comments

Editor’s Note: I totally agree, because a Synod in traditional understanding, is one convened by a validly elected canonical superior, and this Synod was convoked by Bergoglio while he was antipope.

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

10 thoughts on “Bishop Nin: The Synod on Synodality has nothing to do with Traditional Concepts of Synodality”

    1. If they are still alive after Jan 30, their appointments are validated. But if they died before, they were anti-bishops.

      Appointments of living men are validated, because the only thing lacking was the consent of one holding the munus. But canonical acts cannot be validated because they are not living things, but past acts, which have no being unless they are re-promulgated by one with the munus.

      Also, grant hypothetically that a pope wants to make the Church democratic. Well Bishops were elected by the faithful of each Diocese from the beginning, so that he could reinstitute. But that any body be given authority to change the Faith, no pope has that authority, since he must serve the Deposit of the Faith, he does not reign over it as his own possession or creation.

      This is why, God permitted so few to attend the assembly which elected Bergoglio, for otherwise, he would realize he would have to repromulgate all his acts to validate them.

      And if I am correct in this interpretation of the Divine Will — the interpretation of which is always a very uncertain thing, since God is omnipotent and thus omnipotently creative — then the next pope will recognize the validity of that election, so that the Bergoglian papacy can be hop-skipped over, and relegated to the dustbin of history.

  3. In that case, why wouldn’t a synod be valid now that Bergoglio is a valid pope?

    Moreover, there is much to be said about the tradition of diocesan or regional synods in the West vs. in the East, attended not only by bishops:

    Marc Aoun et Jeanne-Marie Tuffery-Andrieu (dir.), Conciles provinciaux et synodes diocésains du concile de Trente à la Révolution française. Défis ecclésiaux et enjeux politiques?, Strasbourg, Presses universitaires de Strasbourg, 2010 .

    [https://books.openedition.org/pus/9069]

    Francis Rapp, “Les synodes diocésains en France au Moyen Âge”, p. 19-30: “Devaient y prendre part en principe tous les prêtres ayant charge d’âmes, mais étaient aussi priés de venir les chanoines de la cathédrale, les membres de la hiérarchie diocésaine, les abbés et les prieurs des couvents bénédictins”.

    https://books.openedition.org/pus/9096?lang=fr

    Synodal statutes of the diocese of Sens (and Auxerre).
    In September 1658 Henri de Gondrin called for a synod and published the statutes. Of 950 pastors, priors and abbots are called to attend; 800 were present.

    https://books.openedition.org/pus/9147?lang=fr

    Ahead of the October General Assembly of the Synod on Synodality, the Vatican unveils the list of participants which – for the first time – contains non-bishops.

    https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2023-07/vatican-october-assembly-synod-on-synodality-list-participants.html

    1. Because a synod in the canonical sense is convoked by a canonical act, and if the one with the power does not have it when convoked, it becomes merely a get together. We can see this when a Pope convenes an Ecumenical Council, but dies before or during it. The new pope must reconvene it.

      But there can be synods in the sense of a business meeting, and someone who is not an ecclesiastical superior could convoke them, such as King during war time to discuss the support of the war by the Ecclesiastical Barons.

      When the new Code of Canon Law in 1917 was promulgated all previous customs and laws regarding Synods were abolished. In the New Code, Synods are very specific, and none of the kinds listed have to do with anything which has canonical authority over the whole Church. Thus this synod in november must depend on a papal act to have any existence in ecclesiastical right. And it does not. Ergo .. QED.

      This is why laymen and laywomen are being invited. Because it is, canonically, not a Synod. It’s just a get together.

      After it concludes, its decisions bind no one, even if Pope Francis wants them to. Without a papal act establishing its decisions in law as law, it remains an agit-prop event only.

      1. Cependant:
        L’élargissement de la composition ne change pas la dénomination du Synode

        Le cardinal Grech a dissipé tout malentendu à ce sujet: «Le Synode des évêques le restera dans la formulation. Les évêques ont un ministère fondateur, ils sont les responsables du peuple de Dieu qui leur est confié». Il a précisé que les rencontres continentales étaient aussi des assemblées ecclésiales où pouvaient s’exprimer les différentes instances du peuple de Dieu. «Le caractère épiscopal du Synode doit être sauvegardé, il ne peut être transformé en quelque chose de différent», a-t-il affirmé.

        https://www.vaticannews.va/fr/vatican/news/2023-07/vatican-liste-participants-synode-synodalite-2023.html

  4. Is this synod by invitation only, and if it is, does that mean it has no power to bind? I seem to recall you saying that a while ago. If my memory fails me I apologize for any confusion. Thanks.

    1. A Council can bind, but a Synod cannot bind in the new Code. On top of that a Council must allow those who have the right to attend to attend. It cannot be a selective, invitation only event.

Comments are closed.