What is the purpose of listening to 'marginal' groups when we already know what they want, which is for the Church to accept their sins and call them virtues? Gee, what does the LGBT lobby want from the Church, anyways, they are so bashful.
Excellent and objective analysis of the Synodal process and pitfalls. I do wish Catholics on both sides of the political spectrum would dispense with the circular firing squad.
After 40 years of watching this kind of circus gradually reduce the Church to the level of a noisy fish market, I have every intention to avoid this latest chapter, the synodal chapter, in the descent into incoherence and irrelevance. The Bergoglian Church is a mess and this synodal nonsense only promises to make matters worse.
If the recent previous synods are anything to go by does not the final report already exist in draft? All it needs is for a few insults aimed at the so-called traditionalists to be added at the last moment.
The difference between Jesus associating with sinners and the modern-day Church reaching out to sinners is that Jesus did so to convert the sinners. Too many of our current Church leaders are doing so to bring the Church into compliance with today's culture. I also do not understand the talk about the "right" and the "left" in the Church. You either believe in the teachings of the Church or you don't. Instead of saying "right" and "left" we should all identify as "true" Catholics and if you do not accept fully all of the teachings of the Church then identify as Protestant. As far as listening to the heterodox, did Jesus go out and consult with sinners before he started his preaching. The Pope and Church leaders should listen to the Gospel and the Fathers of the Church who handed down the true Faith if they truly want to evangelize the true Faith.
will all others who may want to have a link be given a link...perhaps Courage would, the Latin disciples??...or the old/new Saint John Paul Life organization busted asunder by current personnel but reestablished??...certainly seems to be rightly described: sin-node/s...come Lord Jesus....
I was very disheartened by the New Ways debacle. Is it true that listening to everyone, including heretics and non-Catholics, could be good? I suppose it could be true. But it seems far more likely to me that it will end in a great number of expectations that cannot be fulfilled. From Pachamama to New Ways Ministries, it seems to me that the people in charge of things in Rome either have no idea what they're doing (and believe me, I'm not one to discount incompetence) or know quite well. When an archbishop commissions pornographic art for a cathedral and then is put in charge of the Pontifical Academy for Life and made Grand Chancellor of the John Paul II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences, this is either not a serious group of people, or is a deadly serious group of people. So which is it? The Church is indefectibly holy. The men in charge of it are not. But we all just sit and watch them destroy things.
Reading the comments, I recommend to all either letter 26 ("where there is no love, put love") or letter 27 ("May our Lord bring you to dwell in him so that the foolish things, which are ever arising, will make no impression on you"), collected works of St John of the Cross.
It's not possible to "listen" to everybody who wants to speak in a forum like a Synod. Even with the gargantuan effort to "listen" at every level of the Church, not everybody's voice will be heard at even the lowest levels in a formal way. This becomes even more true as you move up in the hierarchy to the Vatican. There is a practical requirement that only certain people will make it onto the Vatican's resource list for example. It sounds nice to say we listen to everybody, but that's just not true because it can't be true. There is a necessary filter that will be applied, as all of us do in our lives.
What's significant is that New Ways Ministry made it past that filter. Good news, bad news? It's an open question IMO. But you can't separate what's happening here to what's happening elsewhere in the Vatican. For example, in preparation for Traditionis Custodes the FSSP and other similar bodies, were NEVER part of the conversation. Nobody bothered to ask them what they thought or what they were seeing in their parishes. This is just one example of who makes it through the filter and who doesn't. Other examples abound.
My point is JD nor anybody else should be surprised that people get upset about things like this. Nor should it be brushed aside as a mere politicization (which is what we say about people we don't want to listen to). TC had a real negative impact on real people, and they were never consulted! It's a tough thing to ask those people to go on to take it seriously that this whole thing is about listening to everybody.
Taking prayer as granted, what could I do as an ordinary Catholic to positively impact the synod at my diocese? Do you think it’s worth my time to attend a session? I don’t have anything in particular I feel I need to say.
Pretend you're a future Church historian. How likely is it that this Synod will be viewed as a wise endeavor? Will it encourage religious wars or heal divisions? Will truths prevail or will errors flourish? Will a multiplicity of churches appear with quite different beliefs? Will the unity of the Catholic Church be sacrificed? Just asking these questions scares the hell out of me!
What is the purpose of listening to 'marginal' groups when we already know what they want, which is for the Church to accept their sins and call them virtues? Gee, what does the LGBT lobby want from the Church, anyways, they are so bashful.
Excellent and objective analysis of the Synodal process and pitfalls. I do wish Catholics on both sides of the political spectrum would dispense with the circular firing squad.
Why has the pope allowed the camel to get its nose under the tent?
After 40 years of watching this kind of circus gradually reduce the Church to the level of a noisy fish market, I have every intention to avoid this latest chapter, the synodal chapter, in the descent into incoherence and irrelevance. The Bergoglian Church is a mess and this synodal nonsense only promises to make matters worse.
The crayon aesthetic surrounding this synod is frankly the quintessence of the felt banner generation that cannot go away soon enough.
If the recent previous synods are anything to go by does not the final report already exist in draft? All it needs is for a few insults aimed at the so-called traditionalists to be added at the last moment.
The difference between Jesus associating with sinners and the modern-day Church reaching out to sinners is that Jesus did so to convert the sinners. Too many of our current Church leaders are doing so to bring the Church into compliance with today's culture. I also do not understand the talk about the "right" and the "left" in the Church. You either believe in the teachings of the Church or you don't. Instead of saying "right" and "left" we should all identify as "true" Catholics and if you do not accept fully all of the teachings of the Church then identify as Protestant. As far as listening to the heterodox, did Jesus go out and consult with sinners before he started his preaching. The Pope and Church leaders should listen to the Gospel and the Fathers of the Church who handed down the true Faith if they truly want to evangelize the true Faith.
will all others who may want to have a link be given a link...perhaps Courage would, the Latin disciples??...or the old/new Saint John Paul Life organization busted asunder by current personnel but reestablished??...certainly seems to be rightly described: sin-node/s...come Lord Jesus....
I was very disheartened by the New Ways debacle. Is it true that listening to everyone, including heretics and non-Catholics, could be good? I suppose it could be true. But it seems far more likely to me that it will end in a great number of expectations that cannot be fulfilled. From Pachamama to New Ways Ministries, it seems to me that the people in charge of things in Rome either have no idea what they're doing (and believe me, I'm not one to discount incompetence) or know quite well. When an archbishop commissions pornographic art for a cathedral and then is put in charge of the Pontifical Academy for Life and made Grand Chancellor of the John Paul II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences, this is either not a serious group of people, or is a deadly serious group of people. So which is it? The Church is indefectibly holy. The men in charge of it are not. But we all just sit and watch them destroy things.
I'm totally plagiarizing bits of this post for my upcoming parish coordinator meeting on the SOS.
Reading the comments, I recommend to all either letter 26 ("where there is no love, put love") or letter 27 ("May our Lord bring you to dwell in him so that the foolish things, which are ever arising, will make no impression on you"), collected works of St John of the Cross.
It's not possible to "listen" to everybody who wants to speak in a forum like a Synod. Even with the gargantuan effort to "listen" at every level of the Church, not everybody's voice will be heard at even the lowest levels in a formal way. This becomes even more true as you move up in the hierarchy to the Vatican. There is a practical requirement that only certain people will make it onto the Vatican's resource list for example. It sounds nice to say we listen to everybody, but that's just not true because it can't be true. There is a necessary filter that will be applied, as all of us do in our lives.
What's significant is that New Ways Ministry made it past that filter. Good news, bad news? It's an open question IMO. But you can't separate what's happening here to what's happening elsewhere in the Vatican. For example, in preparation for Traditionis Custodes the FSSP and other similar bodies, were NEVER part of the conversation. Nobody bothered to ask them what they thought or what they were seeing in their parishes. This is just one example of who makes it through the filter and who doesn't. Other examples abound.
My point is JD nor anybody else should be surprised that people get upset about things like this. Nor should it be brushed aside as a mere politicization (which is what we say about people we don't want to listen to). TC had a real negative impact on real people, and they were never consulted! It's a tough thing to ask those people to go on to take it seriously that this whole thing is about listening to everybody.
Taking prayer as granted, what could I do as an ordinary Catholic to positively impact the synod at my diocese? Do you think it’s worth my time to attend a session? I don’t have anything in particular I feel I need to say.
Pretend you're a future Church historian. How likely is it that this Synod will be viewed as a wise endeavor? Will it encourage religious wars or heal divisions? Will truths prevail or will errors flourish? Will a multiplicity of churches appear with quite different beliefs? Will the unity of the Catholic Church be sacrificed? Just asking these questions scares the hell out of me!