More PR speak. I don’t recall reading about Jesus meeting with his disciples to strategize branding strategies. In an era where 60+ percent of Catholics don’t believe in the real presence, it seems what we we need is folks to listen what the Lord’s Church has to say - not the other way around.
That response reads like it was written with a Synod on Synodality Media Relations Toolkit open on the desk.
I find myself reminded of Joan Didion's essay "Slouching Towards Bethlehem" in which she realizes that the hippie kids in 1960s Haight-Ashbury speak in a sort of ideological jargon NOT because they live according to some highly developed ideology, but rather because there has been a breakdown of social transmission and they're working with the only words they know...
"They feed back exactly what is given them. Because they do not believe in words — words are for 'typeheads,' Chester Anderson tells them, and a thought which needs words is just another ego trip — their only proficient vocabulary is in the society’s platitudes."
All this "maybe the real Synod will be the friends we make along the way" stuff is so weird. Maybe the Pillar can put together a post where it tries to identify the actual goals of this process in terms as specific as possible? Because it really seems like everyone, from the USCCB media shop to the apostolic see, is relying on this weird "this is how we become a listening Church that journeys together" language.
My only complaint about this communique from the USCCB is that they changed the font- the crayon-style font they normally use really conveys the intellectual and pastoral seriousness of the synod. The new Wes Anderson font they use here seems to indicate that the synod will have a strong twee emphasis which I fear will not be the case, nor will there be a montage to a Nick Drake deep cut. It's important not to confuse the laity and reassure them that felt banners are still very much in while not having unreasonable expectations that Bill Murray will deliver the opening convocation in a world-weary, sad-sack demeanor that really makes you want to root for the guy.
As if anyone needed more proof that this "Synod on Synodality" is a farce! The original tweet and this non-responsive "response" should be enough to convince even the most gullible that it is a trojan horse to smuggle heterodox ideas into the heart of the Church. It has hermeneutic of rupture written all--ALL--over it. Seriously. Look at the Germans.
The "listening church" seems to be all about giving the microphone only to the malcontents who want the Church to change her perennial and inspired teaching on human sexuality, divorce, remarriage, the priesthood, the episcopacy, the liturgy, etc. It is abundantly clear that the current hierarchy cares not a whit about the orthodox faithful or revelation or tradition. They are intent on reviving the corpse of the "spirit of Vatican II" and remaking the Church into their own image, one that is consonant with the zeitgeist of the 21st century: atheistic materialism and scientism with a veneer of "spirituality" by which any malign behavior can be justified.
All pursuing this ruinous path would do well to remember the warning of Bishop Fulton Sheen:
"Marry the spirit of the age and you become a widow in the next."
Someone needs to do an American Catholic version of Dilbert, set at a parish or chancery. It would be somewhere between a horror movie and comedic gold.
This language is disturbingly reminiscent of that employed at those "listening sessions" the Episcopal Church in the US had throughout the 1990's and early 2000's. And we know how that played out.
More PR speak. I don’t recall reading about Jesus meeting with his disciples to strategize branding strategies. In an era where 60+ percent of Catholics don’t believe in the real presence, it seems what we we need is folks to listen what the Lord’s Church has to say - not the other way around.
I found it ridiculous. The church seems to want to bring everyone in to dialogue but those who hold to the tenets of the faith.
"So, what did you learn from the public's response?"
USCCB response: More happy sounding platitudes and buzzwords.
There's a difference between listening and hearing. The response doesn't show that they heard.
'Ratioed'. I'm glad there's a word for it because it's very frustrating to watch it happen.
What aggravates me, in a figurative sense, is the 'tone' people like Richard Coll adopt, of benignant self-righteousness. SMH.
Um… 🤔
WSJ just dropped an article titled Why the Catholic Church is Losing Latin America. Ugh!
That response reads like it was written with a Synod on Synodality Media Relations Toolkit open on the desk.
I find myself reminded of Joan Didion's essay "Slouching Towards Bethlehem" in which she realizes that the hippie kids in 1960s Haight-Ashbury speak in a sort of ideological jargon NOT because they live according to some highly developed ideology, but rather because there has been a breakdown of social transmission and they're working with the only words they know...
"They feed back exactly what is given them. Because they do not believe in words — words are for 'typeheads,' Chester Anderson tells them, and a thought which needs words is just another ego trip — their only proficient vocabulary is in the society’s platitudes."
All this "maybe the real Synod will be the friends we make along the way" stuff is so weird. Maybe the Pillar can put together a post where it tries to identify the actual goals of this process in terms as specific as possible? Because it really seems like everyone, from the USCCB media shop to the apostolic see, is relying on this weird "this is how we become a listening Church that journeys together" language.
My only complaint about this communique from the USCCB is that they changed the font- the crayon-style font they normally use really conveys the intellectual and pastoral seriousness of the synod. The new Wes Anderson font they use here seems to indicate that the synod will have a strong twee emphasis which I fear will not be the case, nor will there be a montage to a Nick Drake deep cut. It's important not to confuse the laity and reassure them that felt banners are still very much in while not having unreasonable expectations that Bill Murray will deliver the opening convocation in a world-weary, sad-sack demeanor that really makes you want to root for the guy.
Mr. Coll's response included 137 words but not one single idea or thought of value.
As if anyone needed more proof that this "Synod on Synodality" is a farce! The original tweet and this non-responsive "response" should be enough to convince even the most gullible that it is a trojan horse to smuggle heterodox ideas into the heart of the Church. It has hermeneutic of rupture written all--ALL--over it. Seriously. Look at the Germans.
The "listening church" seems to be all about giving the microphone only to the malcontents who want the Church to change her perennial and inspired teaching on human sexuality, divorce, remarriage, the priesthood, the episcopacy, the liturgy, etc. It is abundantly clear that the current hierarchy cares not a whit about the orthodox faithful or revelation or tradition. They are intent on reviving the corpse of the "spirit of Vatican II" and remaking the Church into their own image, one that is consonant with the zeitgeist of the 21st century: atheistic materialism and scientism with a veneer of "spirituality" by which any malign behavior can be justified.
All pursuing this ruinous path would do well to remember the warning of Bishop Fulton Sheen:
"Marry the spirit of the age and you become a widow in the next."
Someone needs to do an American Catholic version of Dilbert, set at a parish or chancery. It would be somewhere between a horror movie and comedic gold.
The response, more PR and corporate speak, leaves me… speechless.
So much for a straight answer
This language is disturbingly reminiscent of that employed at those "listening sessions" the Episcopal Church in the US had throughout the 1990's and early 2000's. And we know how that played out.