• AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    It calls for a “radical inclusion” of LGBTQ+ Catholics and others who have been marginalized by the church, and for new accountability measures to check how bishops exercise their authority to prevent abuses.

    The cardinals are among those who have issued such warnings, and their questions to Francis asked him to affirm Catholic doctrine lest the synod undue the church’s traditional teaching.

    In particular, they asked Francis to affirm that the church cannot bless same-sex couples, and that any sexual act outside marriage between man and woman is a grave sin.

    The signatories were some of Francis’ most vocal critics, all of them retired and of the more doctrinaire generation of cardinals appointed by St. John Paul II or Pope Benedict XVI.

    Brandmueller and Burke were among four signatories of a previous round of “dubia” to Francis in 2016 following his controversial opening to letting divorced and civilly remarried couples receive Communion.

    The cardinals didn’t publish his reply, but they apparently found it so unsatisfactory that they reformulated their five questions, submitted them to him again and asked him to simply respond with a yes or no.


    The original article contains 626 words, the summary contains 187 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a bad summary. It is the meeting agenda that is calling for the radical inclusion of LGBTQ+ members, and a group of five conservative cardinals who are fighting against this inclusion.

      You can just about extract this meaning from the text. Admittedly the grammar and structure of the article could use some work.

    • socialmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Isn’t the Pope’s word unchallengeable according to Catholic doctrine? I might be naive about this, but it seems like these cardinals could face ex-comunication for insubordination? If that doesn’t happen wouldn’t this public challenge weaken his power?

      I guess maybe that is the point for these cardinals, but maybe they’re cutting off their nose to spite their faces.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Pope is only infallible under certain conditions. That anything he declares is infallible is a misunderstanding. Not a surprising one since Catholicism is stupid and complicated and full of magical mumbo-jumbo bullshit.

      • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Catholic church exists to control, undermine, bully, abuse and extract money from their members.

        If the pope threatens those endeavors he is very likely to find himself no longer the pope. The rules will bend to the values because the values dictate the culture. The Jesus and love parts are just for decoration.

      • joel_feila@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        pope infallibility is like the supreme court. The is right until another pope is says otherwise. And yes the catholic church can excommunicate them, and they have for similar issues.