Yesterday the Secretary General’s Synodi, in The Vatican released their document “Recollecting.” This details the process that will be followed to produce an evaluation of the Synod deliberations that have already taken place.
This is The Subject where Catholics should become involved, because it concerns the welfare of the Laity. The document is available online and I suggest that anyone who is interested in our Church should read it.
I have read the document and I am disappointed. My own Parish/Diocese has done very little regarding the synodal process - so we really do not have much to report - if anything. My disappointment is mainly because nothing in this process includes the subjects that our Pope discussed in his encyclical “Magnifica Humanitas.” Specifically Human Dignity, Subsidiarity and the Synod.
I have not read the document yet (if someone can post a link to it, I will print it off and read it later in the week).
My problem with the “synodal process” as it is being referred is that it make a democracy of the Church and only those who want to change the Church for the worse will be heard. We have seen how traditionalist voices have been ignored and even suppressed under Pope Francis and it seems Pope Leo (though I have more hope that Pope Leo will be fair).
The problem with politics is that the loudest get their way. The activists, tend to neglect their duties to their vocation and replace their reverence of God with a reverence to those in power who give them what they want and not necessarily what is right & just.
The Lutheran Church is very synodal and they have split into three synods in the United States.
And now we are seeing a split between the Vatican and the SSPX. Will there be an SSPX Synod and an Evangelical Catholic Church of America (ECCA) as a result of the synodal process like in the Lutheran Church?
I would not be surprised if this is what happens.
The way I look at it is, if you want to be Lutheran, go become Lutheran. If the Pope becomes Lutheran (as Pope Francis was pretty close to being, in how he believes the Church should be run), then what?
I just want to be a faithful Catholic Christian Husband, Father to my children, a good Son, and a Friend & Neighbor. I do not want to have to politic for how the Church should be going in matters of faith and morals. That is not my vocation. That is the authority and responsibility of the successors of the Apostles (the Bishops)! It is they who should be protecting the Apostolic Faith that they received, not perverting it!
There is a lack of trust among faithful Catholic Christians and it is growing. Because, Bishops (and Popes) are becoming unfaithful to what has been taught by the Apostolic Church through the ages.
I will read the document, but I do not have high expectations of what I will find in it.
Cade, I’m sure you’re probably the best Father ever. Your willingness to hear people out means that you are at least open to what others have to say. I’m sure your kids will be just fine Cade, and I mean that with nothing but respect.
Thank you for the kind words, but that wasn’t really my point. My point is that there are vocations within the body of Christ and it is not the duty of us to loosen and to bind, it is the role of the successors of the Apostles, who have been given the authority and responsibility to defend the Faith. My authority is over my Family and my responsibility is to follow this Faith, which I have received from Christ, passed on and protected by the Apostolic Fathers.
Our Faith should not be perverted by Politics. And sadly, that is what the Synodal Way leads to. The loudest engaged shapes the direction of our Country and that is never how God intended the Church to be.
Where Hans-Hermann Hoppe (a political philosopher) wrote a book titled, “Democracy: The god that Failed”, I propose that Making the Church democratic will fail God.
A synod is an official church assembly or meeting where religious leaders—usually bishops, clergy, and sometimes laity—gather to discuss and decide on matters of faith, church law, and governance.
The Catholic Church has traditionally held numerous councils and synods throughout her history, but not how it is being done under Pope Francis, Cardinal Fernández, and now Pope Leo. What they are referring to as the “Synodal Way” is more like how the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America understands synodality, though there are slight differences.
In the Lutheran Church they include lay delegates to vote on the direction of their Church (I once listened to an entire ELCA Synod and my co-worker’s daughter participated in an ELCA Synod as a lay person on more of a local level).
Modern Catholic synodality is more so Bishops taking up the desires of the lay people, rather than giving them direct voting power if that makes sense. Final teaching and authority remains anchored in the Magisterium and the Pope, who holds supreme jurisdiction (for now, but I would not put it past Cardinal Fernández and these modern Popes to change this, which would be a disaster).
Traditionalists see these “listening sessions”, as some Bishops are referring to them, as a waste of time, because the only ones being listened to are LGBTQ.A.i+ activists, feminists, and sometimes even non-Catholics, while the voice of faithful Catholic Christians are being silenced or discarded.
So, the argument sometimes goes like this. Political Catholics will say, “If you don’t show up to these “listening sessions” then you are not contributing to the synodal way.” While those who are apposed to this new form of synodality are like, “Why would we participate in a process that we find problematic?”
Bishops should not be trying to understand how the lay people and political activists feel about a particular Church teaching. The Apostles never sat down with believers and said, we’re here to consider your personal feelings about these teaching that have been given to us by Christ and that we have been given the authority to keep and share. No, they would say, this is the Faith. If you disagree with this Faith, then you are not in communion with the Apostolic Church.
So what are the options?
Faithful Catholic Christians can play the synodal game and continue to not be listened to, while political Catholics (and non-Catholic activists) do get listened to. We watch as our Church falls the way of many Protestant Churches (i.e. schisms and the Church falls to the ways of the world).
Or we can do what the Church has always done for 2,000+ years and those who don’t like it can break themselves off (like the so-called reformers did) and start their own Churches or (Synods not in communion with the Apostolic Church).
The funny thing is that I am not even a traditionalist Catholic. I understand their concerns thought and even agree with some of their concerns. Perhaps I am listening more than some Bishops are. However, there are things that I think were good about Vatican II and other things that have resulted in not so good things.
The more the Church goes the way of the world and of the political activists, the more traditional I appear to be and maybe even the more traditional I become.
The third option is to remain in communion with the Apostolic Church and have faith that God will correct the direction of the Church. I choose to continue to be faithful to the good, the true; and the beautiful; and be obedient, but not unto sin. And Pray for our Bishops and for the Pope and for future Bishops.
Jesus made a promise, “on this rock (referring to St. Peter) I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18).
Trouble, yes, but anything worse than the Church has experienced through her history? Na. There have been darker times and yet, some of the greatest Saints have come out of those dark times.
Many thanks for your response. For the document go online to Synod 20221 2024 and school down to “Recollecting.”
Unfortunately the media never understood what “Synod” meant - it is a conversation of equals - not a democracy and it works best with the principle of Subsidiarity in the clear understanding that Christ is at the table - thus Discernment. Unfortunately Francis was too generous in allowing the Hot Button activists to be members of the process and fortunately their interests were deferred. Imagine the process at your own parish and you convening in maybe one of the Parish Synod forums - This would be more like a Faith group that would be able to delve into every question regarding faith and the application of it in your own parish. The system we have now was OK when most church members were illiterate. This is no longer the case and it is time we also introduced the main Christian principle of Human Dignity, which seems to confuse much of society today.
I have to be honest. Every time I see the logo for the Synod on Synodality, I am repulsed by it.
For those who love democracy, their brains probably lit up with glee every time they see it. Like an idol or a brand name for something that they consume.
“…Christ is at the table” is very fluffy. What does that mean? I’m still reading Trent Horn’s book, “Counterfeit Christs” and he is going through the many different views of who Jesus was and is. If you are talking about the true Christs, then I have no problem with this, but if you are talking about “Jesus is my homeboy” Jesus (of the 90’s, then I am not on board, nor do I want to sit at this table.
I am not imagining a good time. I am imagining more fluff, cotton candy, and rainbows (and not God’s rainbow).
I think the problem is that some use dignity and affirmation synonymously—that to show dignity means to affirm. So, we are not starting from a mutual understanding of dignity.
I view dignity as who we are in the eyes of God, not how we are perceived by others nor how I perceive myself.
If I have to play the pronoun game, pretend that two men or two women playing house is a “marriage”, or that a boy can be a girl and a girl can be a boy in order for them to feel like they have dignity, then I am not about that Synodality. I believe this is the opposite of treating someone with human dignity.
Why am I focusing on this, when you tell me that the Synod on Synodality is not about this. Because, if you look at the current push in our culture, it evolves around this.
The Synod on Synodality reminds me of the anti-bullying campaign in government schools a few years back. It claimed to be about ending bullying, but what it was really about was accepting and affirming what was being pushed at that moment in our culture. And I keep saying “our” culture, when I should be saying “their” culture.
@RanagC Don’t take anything I have said here as an attack on you. My frustration is with the perversion that is happening under the Synod on Synodality. It is the push that I have a problem with. I never had a problem with an anti-bullying message. I did have a problem with what their intentions were behind the campaign. And I get the same feeling with this Synod on Synodality. That what it claims it is supposed to be is not what it really is about.
The slogan “Love is Love” was super effective, because who can be against love? Anti-bullying? Who is not against bullying? Subsidiarity? Who is against subsidiarity? The problem is that that is not what these campaigns are about. It is wizardry and manipulation. A spell (not literally) is being put on you and anyone who entertains or engages in the cultural push.
There is another push too and that is the Church’s teaching against artificial means of birth control. I imagine in these sit-downs that some will say, “Well, an estimated 98% of sexually active ‘Catholic’ women of reproductive age in the U.S. have used artificial birth control at some point in their lives, with roughly 68% to 70% actively using a modern contraceptive method at any given time.” What is democracy? If a majority want something, then they should get what they want. But, you have told me that Synodality is not a democracy. It is simply a listening session. So, then this is an argument in favor of changing the Church’s teaching, simply because a majority is doing a certain behavior. And a bad argument at that.
The majority of women and men who support abortion do not believe that the unborn child is a human being, let alone has equal human dignity. So the Church should change her teaching on abortion?
I’m sorry for going on about this, but it matters. And I don’t think those who support the Synod on Synodality understand why some do not want to sit down at the table. It is because we see what this is really about and we do not want anything to do with it.
I hope you don;t mind if I call you a sceptic. I did not realise just how deep the mistrust has reached. I am glad that you have pointed this out to me, which makes the true Synod process even more necessary. To answer your remarks ….
The Synod is not democracy - we do not need another 1% rule. It works through consensus, that is we talk and discern with the Holy Spirit in order to reach consensus - that is what it is supposed to be.
Christ - His Holy Spirit is seated at the table and that is not fluffy at all. The Gospel today explained Jesus very well in his own words - You are either with Him or not.
There are huge issues to attend to and we have a lot of very capable people who would like to participate.
There is only one kind of Human Dignity - God created humanity and he wants to know each one of us so that we can become his children. We, as individuals, need to respond to the call. That is who we are in the eyes of God.
God made us all different, which includes genuine diversity, but does not include something we pretend to be.
If you want to be cynical - it is reasonable that with a well operating Synodal church, progress may be faster than the Clergy would like, even though the Traditional Catholic culture would remain.
I also would not like the process to be hijacked by a few Hot Button agitators, but that would be up to the Laity to prevent it.
I appreciate all your thoughts - God Bless - Randal
I do not believe the “spirit of Synodality”, as it is referred to, is the same as The Holy Spirit. The spirit of this or the spirit of that describes something. In the spirit of Christmas, I donated to the Salvation Army.
The Holy Spirit would not affirm sin.
Maybe a hypothetical will help me better understand you.
Let’s say a group of individuals sit down at a table. Each claims that they are following the Holy Spirit (only all of them agree that anyone who identify as a cat should be able to be ordained a Priest. The Holy Spirit?
Now let’s say a group of individuals sit down at a table. One claims the Holy Spirit is telling her that anyone who identifies as a cat should be able to be ordained a Priest.
Another says that the Holy Spirit is telling him that no one would be able to understand the Holily, because not everyone speaks Meowanese. Plus, let’s say that Fr. Feline says the words of the Consecration like, “Meow, Meow, Meow. Meow. Meow, Meow, Meow…”
A Third person at the table chimes in and says that cats deserve equal human dignity just as much as anyone else! And “the Spirit told me this!”
How would you handle this? How would you “discern” this? In light of Sacred Tradition, as I would? In light of the “spirit of Synodality”? Or some other way? Forgive my absurd hypothetical, but it will help me better understand what you mean.
Can you give me some examples and how you think we should attend to them?
I’m with you in the first two sentences. Your last sentence has reminded me of a billboard that the Divided Methodist Church (which only has about 40 members) put up that promoted this idea, “Being Gay is a Gift from God.” Do you agree with this statement? Is that something the Holy Spirit has revealed to them?
The word progress is a loaded word. Progressives are the ones who are embracing this synodal way to push their own agendas. I do not believe these individuals are discerning with the Holy Spirit. They bring to the table a political agenda.
How so? Through violence? Because, what tends to happen in political discourse these days is violence. I believe in the non-aggression principle. Shouting down to one another? That doesn’t do anyone any good either.
All of this reminds me of having family meetings as a kid. It never ended well. Which is why I never continued the practice now that I have a family of my own.
Personally, I think the Parents should parent and the children should listen. I know it is now trendy for Parents to listen to their children and let the world Parent your children.
Mother-Church is acting more like a modern Parent than being a responsible Parent.
I genuinely appreciate all your thoughts as well. I have seen what happens when you let your children make the rules. I have a Brother (who’s daughters both have preferred pronouns and one identifies as a boy). My Brother and his Wife are the “listening Parents”. Their children got to choose when they wanted to go to bed. If they wanted to brush their teeth or not. They got to choose what they ate. If they wanted a personal pan pizza from Pizza Hut with no sauce and no cheese three times a week, that is what they want.
The Synod… It works through consensus, that is we talk and discern with the Holy Spirit in order to reach consensus - that is what it is supposed to be.
The Holy Spirit cannot be anything mother than virtuous.
I do not believe the “spirit of Synodality”, as it is referred to, is the same as The Holy Spirit. The spirit of this or the spirit of that describes something. In the spirit of Christmas, I donated to the Salvation Army.
The Holy Spirit would not affirm sin. This is correct
Christ - His Holy Spirit is seated at the table and that is not fluffy at all. The Gospel today explained Jesus very well in his own words - You are either with Him or not.
Maybe a hypothetical will help me better understand you.
Let’s say a group of individuals sit down at a table. Each claims that they are following the Holy Spirit (only all of them agree that anyone who identify as a cat should be able to be ordained a Priest. The Holy Spirit?
Now let’s say a group of individuals sit down at a table. One claims the Holy Spirit is telling her that anyone who identifies as a cat should be able to be ordained a Priest.
Another says that the Holy Spirit is telling him that no one would be able to understand the Holily, because not everyone speaks Meowanese. Plus, let’s say that Fr. Feline says the words of the Consecration like, “Meow, Meow, Meow. Meow. Meow, Meow, Meow…”
A Third person at the table chimes in and says that cats deserve equal human dignity just as much as anyone else! And “the Spirit told me this!”
How would you handle this? How would you “discern” this? In light of Sacred Tradition, as I would? In light of the “spirit of Synodality”? Or some other way? Forgive my absurd hypothetical, but it will help me better understand what you mean.
Anything is possible when people are not sincere or misguided.
There are huge issues to attend to and we have a lot of very capable people who would like to participate.
Can you give me some examples and how you think we should attend to them?
The majority of the Faithful do not realise what Christianity actually entails. The most problematic problem in the Catholic Church is how invested we are in the secular world. Jesus said that there are two main commandments - Love God and Love neighbour. The basis of loving you neighbour is community. How do we build a community if we do not know the person sitting next to us at Mass?
There is only one kind of Human Dignity - God created humanity and he wants to know each one of us so that we can become his children. We, as individuals, need to respond to the call. That is who we are in the eyes of God.
God made us all different, which includes genuine diversity, but does not include something we pretend to be.
I’m with you in the first two sentences. Your last sentence has reminded me of a billboard that the Divided Methodist Church (which only has about 40 members) put up that promoted this idea, “Being Gay is a Gift from God.” Do you agree with this statement? Is that something the Holy Spirit has revealed to them?
Everyone is a gift from God. A Gay person is just as capable of being a good Christian as anyone else. If a gay person chooses to be immoral that is no different than a straight person being immoral. A Christian is not supposed to behave immorally, which is sinful. A problem that many of us have is to be judgemental, which is also wrong.
If you want to be cynical - it is reasonable that with a well operating Synodal church, progress may be faster than the Clergy would like, even though the Traditional Catholic culture would remain.
The word progress is a loaded word. Progressives are the ones who are embracing this synodal way to push their own agendas. I do not believe these individuals are discerning with the Holy Spirit. They bring to the table a political agenda.
Many words have been misused purposely to suit Secularism, which does not believe in God, which has no moral basis, but enables Secularists to be relative in their thought and behaviour. Av Woman may choose to have an unmarried sexual relationship, but she is unable to choose to end an ensuing pregnancy, because in the eyes of God - that is murder and the father is an accomplice if he promotes such an action.
I also would not like the process to be hijacked by a few Hot Button agitators, but that would be up to the Laity to prevent it.
There is always supervision of a Synod both externally and internally. While one is free to voice an opinion, it will be ignored if it is outside of the purview of the synod. Each Synod is meant to be a virtuous exercise, with absolutely no room for violence.
The sign did not say “Individuals who identify as their disordered attraction is a gift from God.” The sign specifically said, “BEING Gay is a Gift from God.” There is a difference. One is theologically true, while the other is theologically untrue.
We do not celebrate the disordered attractions of “straight persons” (to use your thermology).
Judgmental of what? Judging behavior is not un-Biblical. Scripture warns against judging the behavior of others, while not taking account of our own sins. The Bible does not say not to judge. It says not to be a hypocrite, rather than prohibiting all forms of discernment.
Who? Fr, James Martin? Cardinal Fernández (who wrote a book titled, “Heal Me with Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing”)? These guys are not giving me much reassurance that good will come from this.
It won’t be though. Those who virtue signal will be affirmed and those who believe in truth will be silenced or shouted down. It is best to just not participate and bite the tongue, while watching the Church go the way of the Protestant Churches over the same issues that caused their recent schisms. If I had trust in many of our leaders, I would not have a problem with this Synod, but I do not trust some of their intentions.
I hope they prove me wrong and that there won’t be further Schisms as a result of this campaign. And if you don’t like that I keep calling it a campaign, the word campaign means “a planned series of actions or events that work together to reach a specific goal.”
What is that goal? That is what I want to know.
If the goal is to just sit around and sing kumbaya that is fluffff-yyyyyy.
And if the goal is to let the children make the rules, that is the Bishops neglecting their responsibility to their children. And do you know what happens when Parents neglect their responsibility? Their children grow to resent them.
And that is what has happened to me. The Holy Spirit led me back home from a fluffy non-Denominational Church, which prided itself on not having rules and being no different from the world. They did not judge. And now I come home and see my Mother engaging in similar behavior. How do you think this makes me feel?
The prodigal son in Jesus’ parable returned home after experiencing all the false promises of the world, not because he wanted his Dad to affirm him in his behavior and fallen worldview, but to repent, and rejoin the loving and stable home that he had left. Not one that told him what he wanted to hear, but what he needed to hear.
Before the boy left, he did not respect his father, but he returned, because he came to respect his father. Had he returned to a home where the father was snorting cocaine off of his neighbor’s Wife’s tramp-stamp, I’m pretty sure the young man would have resented his father.
Prior to falling away, I would have identified more with the other brother in that parable, but after leaving and returning home, I saw myself more at the son who left.
And I had many of the same questions that the young man must have asked himself before returning. Would I be welcomed back? The answer was yes! More than I ever could have imagined! Has the Church changed much since I’ve been gone? The answer is no! Thanks be to God. Now had I been old enough to have fallen away under Vatican I and returned later under Vatican II, I might have other feelings.
| 
RanagC: