Seems generally solid. I don't think it would be prudent if the document were to be too specific, as, if the document is to have a shelf-life, it can't be too narrowly tailored. At the same time, it can be too broad and following the Aparecida explicitly would seem prudent.
Curious whether there have been any studies to see what effect, if any, the Aparecida document has had in helping rebuild a culture of life in South America. Have there been any conversions noted among pro-choice legislators? Any notable dissenters? Any practical effect that can be measured? More broadly, In a world that seems so relentlessly bent toward secularism, what is the best way to move hearts and change minds?
Words without meaning as the enemy of Christ and his Church — and that includes Biden, Pelosi and the alleged “Catholic” left whose hands are stained with the blood of 60 million lives — openly mock and taunt those who have fought to end this monumental evil. You have deserted those who fight for the faith and have sided with “cultural catholics” who only wave their rosaries to gain votes. Sadly, so many of our bishops would have fit very well in Henry VIII’s England. Their capitulation then spoke, and now speaks, ruin for Holy Mother the Church in public live. What will constrain these anti-life, anti-marriage, gender confusion policies from growing faster and more furiously? Dear Bishops, If you think your parishes are empty now, just wait and see what the whirlwind brings… and forget about us paying to keep you in your palaces, as Henry did; the dollars stop here and now. My family’s monies will go to save the unborn and protect other families threatened by the Secular State. And Jesus wept.
This document is full of wisdom, and not a little hope. Reading it gives so much more benefit than did the time I spent viewing the 5 minute statements comprising the Bishops' Zoom meeting this past June. It really does deserve a good reading, even in a draft state. Section 22 is simply sublime text - I expect many who read it will be moved deeply, as I was. In contrast, section 33, which seems central to the abortion-supporting-politician controversy, whizzes by almost before its significance is realized. Elucidation is needed here: entire books have been written just on this idea. (Perhaps though it will be a point of particular contention.)
More generally, I liked the emphasis on the "community" in Communion: the teaching that we receive grace not only individually, but also *as a body of participants* in the liturgy via Communion is powerful, especially given current political circumstances (not to mention the West's atomized ethos). Catholics still care about this, I think. I wonder if any Bishops have suggested additional verbiage about our duty *to each other* to ensure our worthiness when we present ourselves for Communion. The avoidance of "scandal" is mentioned a couple of times, but I worry that that is a poor word choice today, when scandals are simply commonplace tabloid fodder, and forgotten when the next one gets publicized. Something suggesting an obligation to those in the pews around you might carry more weight. And: it seems to me to be worthwhile to call out the multitudes of "cafeteria Catholics", whose numbers apparently include one President now, for some additional instruction as to the tenets of our faith. (That is: we are neither Protestants nor evangelicals; our faith may be demanding, but it is also a product of divine revelation and prudentially reasoned consideration, and it should be cherished as such in its entirety.)
Finally, on the central real presence topic, a suggestion: there would be value I think in producing a second, shorter document (possibly web-based), geared toward the TLDR crowd, in a more contemporary format, as an experimental outreach effort. This draft document was very rewarding for me to read, but I am willing to concede that I am fully in the “senior” age demographic, and we are used to plowing through pages of challenging texts. The target (ie. younger) audience for this document is less likely to seek it out unbidden. So how about producing a complementary document, along the lines of the online “explainers” one finds on the web about complex topics - like the real presence? An explainer which challenges readers who have had materialistic scientism hammered into them throughout their schooling might serve as an intriguing entrance to this document (consider providing hyperlinks between the two documents to make cross navigation easy).
PS: “We miss you and we love you.” - I know in my bones that these words alone (from section 51!) will touch the hearts of thousands of young readers, who are currently searching for a home for their hearts and minds. (Consult the JPII-era World Youth Day YouTube videos if you doubt this fact.) They may be currently engaged in social-justice oriented protests, but there is a God-sized hole in their hearts which the currently in-favor ideologies *cannot possibly* fill. We do not do Mother Church any favors by burying these words at the end of a lengthy (albeit worthily so) read.
Why does it take nearly a year for the USCCB to draft a generic document ultimately no more novel or insightful than the related catechism passages? Does it really help anything? Considering recent history, the secular news will spin whatever is actually said to their own ends, so it seems rather useless to say anything unless it is simple, blunt, and specific enough not to be abused. To me, this appears to be an example of church officials spending huge amounts of time, thought, and effort playing by worldly, bureaucratic rules to little or no benefit.
Am I wrong? (This is an honest question). I really do appreciate the Pillar's timely and accurate reporting on this issue for clarity's sake, I'm not finding fault with that. But, I cannot see how this document ultimately matters. Is there any significant benefit from the USCCB's general processes and products that I'm too cynical to see?
I am interested to see how secular media spins this. Reads well to me. God willing, secular media will accidentally find a way to not ruin how useful this message could be from their platforms. Especially since it’s nowhere near as divisive as they had expected.
Seems generally solid. I don't think it would be prudent if the document were to be too specific, as, if the document is to have a shelf-life, it can't be too narrowly tailored. At the same time, it can be too broad and following the Aparecida explicitly would seem prudent.
Curious whether there have been any studies to see what effect, if any, the Aparecida document has had in helping rebuild a culture of life in South America. Have there been any conversions noted among pro-choice legislators? Any notable dissenters? Any practical effect that can be measured? More broadly, In a world that seems so relentlessly bent toward secularism, what is the best way to move hearts and change minds?
Thankyou for the update. It all sounds positive so far.
So, basically this document is pretty toothless when it comes to the grave evil of politicians embracing abortion.
Words without meaning as the enemy of Christ and his Church — and that includes Biden, Pelosi and the alleged “Catholic” left whose hands are stained with the blood of 60 million lives — openly mock and taunt those who have fought to end this monumental evil. You have deserted those who fight for the faith and have sided with “cultural catholics” who only wave their rosaries to gain votes. Sadly, so many of our bishops would have fit very well in Henry VIII’s England. Their capitulation then spoke, and now speaks, ruin for Holy Mother the Church in public live. What will constrain these anti-life, anti-marriage, gender confusion policies from growing faster and more furiously? Dear Bishops, If you think your parishes are empty now, just wait and see what the whirlwind brings… and forget about us paying to keep you in your palaces, as Henry did; the dollars stop here and now. My family’s monies will go to save the unborn and protect other families threatened by the Secular State. And Jesus wept.
This document is full of wisdom, and not a little hope. Reading it gives so much more benefit than did the time I spent viewing the 5 minute statements comprising the Bishops' Zoom meeting this past June. It really does deserve a good reading, even in a draft state. Section 22 is simply sublime text - I expect many who read it will be moved deeply, as I was. In contrast, section 33, which seems central to the abortion-supporting-politician controversy, whizzes by almost before its significance is realized. Elucidation is needed here: entire books have been written just on this idea. (Perhaps though it will be a point of particular contention.)
More generally, I liked the emphasis on the "community" in Communion: the teaching that we receive grace not only individually, but also *as a body of participants* in the liturgy via Communion is powerful, especially given current political circumstances (not to mention the West's atomized ethos). Catholics still care about this, I think. I wonder if any Bishops have suggested additional verbiage about our duty *to each other* to ensure our worthiness when we present ourselves for Communion. The avoidance of "scandal" is mentioned a couple of times, but I worry that that is a poor word choice today, when scandals are simply commonplace tabloid fodder, and forgotten when the next one gets publicized. Something suggesting an obligation to those in the pews around you might carry more weight. And: it seems to me to be worthwhile to call out the multitudes of "cafeteria Catholics", whose numbers apparently include one President now, for some additional instruction as to the tenets of our faith. (That is: we are neither Protestants nor evangelicals; our faith may be demanding, but it is also a product of divine revelation and prudentially reasoned consideration, and it should be cherished as such in its entirety.)
Finally, on the central real presence topic, a suggestion: there would be value I think in producing a second, shorter document (possibly web-based), geared toward the TLDR crowd, in a more contemporary format, as an experimental outreach effort. This draft document was very rewarding for me to read, but I am willing to concede that I am fully in the “senior” age demographic, and we are used to plowing through pages of challenging texts. The target (ie. younger) audience for this document is less likely to seek it out unbidden. So how about producing a complementary document, along the lines of the online “explainers” one finds on the web about complex topics - like the real presence? An explainer which challenges readers who have had materialistic scientism hammered into them throughout their schooling might serve as an intriguing entrance to this document (consider providing hyperlinks between the two documents to make cross navigation easy).
PS: “We miss you and we love you.” - I know in my bones that these words alone (from section 51!) will touch the hearts of thousands of young readers, who are currently searching for a home for their hearts and minds. (Consult the JPII-era World Youth Day YouTube videos if you doubt this fact.) They may be currently engaged in social-justice oriented protests, but there is a God-sized hole in their hearts which the currently in-favor ideologies *cannot possibly* fill. We do not do Mother Church any favors by burying these words at the end of a lengthy (albeit worthily so) read.
So... nothing. Just restating what has been said before, but more vaguely. Why bother?
Why does it take nearly a year for the USCCB to draft a generic document ultimately no more novel or insightful than the related catechism passages? Does it really help anything? Considering recent history, the secular news will spin whatever is actually said to their own ends, so it seems rather useless to say anything unless it is simple, blunt, and specific enough not to be abused. To me, this appears to be an example of church officials spending huge amounts of time, thought, and effort playing by worldly, bureaucratic rules to little or no benefit.
Am I wrong? (This is an honest question). I really do appreciate the Pillar's timely and accurate reporting on this issue for clarity's sake, I'm not finding fault with that. But, I cannot see how this document ultimately matters. Is there any significant benefit from the USCCB's general processes and products that I'm too cynical to see?
I am interested to see how secular media spins this. Reads well to me. God willing, secular media will accidentally find a way to not ruin how useful this message could be from their platforms. Especially since it’s nowhere near as divisive as they had expected.