It's taken four years, thousands of hours of meetings, and lots of money for the Church to create their own version of "I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony."
To me, it had the feel of the high school retreats we had in the 1980s. Lot's of sitting around in circles, giving everyone a chance to share their feelings, then a big group hug at the end where we promise that there would be no more clicques or people who thought they were better. Of course, by Monday everything was back to normal.
Wait, let me get this right in my head. I was under the understanding that a MAGESTERIAL document was NOT going to be produced by a parliamentary vote (consisting of a mixed group of lay, religious, clergy, and Bishops). I thought that this document would be used by Pope Francis to aid him in his drafting of his own apostolic exhortation.
Instead we are getting a magesterial document that has been produced by a group consisting of members, many of whom hold views contrary to established doctrine, that generated the document in discussions behind closed doors, sworn to secrecy, and shoved out with a popular vote and a papal rubber stamp. I feel so synodal now I don't know if I'll ever recover.
You cannot take a document drafted for one purpose and then declare that it is a different kind of document. The Synod participants were working under great time pressure to finish the final report and the doctrinal chaos within their ranks must have wiped out any chance of clear unambiguous statements. Any orthodox recommendation on anything would probably have upset some participants. Hence the gibberish in para 27 which probably no one understands. A magisterial document would in theory be carefully drafted and redrafted so that people might have a chance of understanding and learning from it.
I don't think it's a great idea, but I don't see any reason why the pope /can't/ do this. He can use ghost writers, he can get other people's input on whatever he writes, he hopefully has the whole draft and read through it - the part that makes it magisterial is the Pope putting it out as such in his name, not whether he wrote the words himself. (I'd feel weirder about the whole thing if he had announced in advance - without knowing the content or the vote - that the document would be part of his magisterial teaching regardless of what it ended up saying)
If this document is part of the ordinary Papal magisterium, what is it teaching us?
"The paragraph with the next highest number of “no” votes was the 27th, which focused on the liturgy, calling on Christian communities “to adopt celebratory styles that make visible the face of a synodal Church.”'
What does this mean?
".....the paragraph with the highest number of “no” votes was the 60th, which addressed women’s role in the Church, saying that “the question of women’s access to diaconal ministry remains open.”"
The 60th paragraph still had over a two thirds majority. If it means anything, it means that previous decisive Papal teaching on women's ordination is still up for grabs. And that any Papal teaching, including this document, isn't worth the paper it is written on. But I guess that we have to wait for that specialist group to report in 2025...
"Paragraph 78, addressing a proposal “to establish a ministry of listening and accompaniment,” attracted the third-highest number of “no” votes."
I thought that we have already have several such ministries. Such as priests, nuns, counsellors, doctors, nurses, psychiatrists, teachers....But perhaps we need people specially trained to advise people to ignore Church teaching.
"They added that it should be specified “that decisions made by an episcopal conference impose an ecclesial obligation on each bishop who participated in the decision in relation to his own diocese.”"
This is seriously scary. A Bishop has his own very extensive authority within his diocese. An Episcopal Conference is just an administrative convenience. He could ignore its decisions. Or at least he could until very recently.
This Synod represents the dying gasps of a generation of clerics whose mission was to sing a new church into being. It is a litany of vagaries that becomes an ode to the effete mission of men who were possessed by the spirit of Vatican II -- a spirit that we know has nothing to do with the actual documents of the illustrious Council. While I am grateful that there appear to be no outright heresies in the final document, the Pope's decision to simply adopt the synod document as part of his own papal magisterium is symbolic. Whether that symbol is good or bad, I am not yet sure. But matters of doctrinal authority, it seems to me, ought to be strictly centralized to the college of Bishops in union with Peter.
I don't even know how to quantify what this document is. It claims to be a product of the Sensus Fidelium, but I'm not aware of the Sensus Fidelium having been summoned and invoked in so rigid a process before. For all of its magniloquence, the Synod on Synod-ing has left me with no impression other than the hope that the passage of time will do more to renew the Church than these meetings and committees have.
“the spirit of Vatican II -- a spirit that we know has nothing to do with the actual documents of the illustrious Council. “
I first thought this but have now read Francis X. Murphy C.ss.R ./Xavier Rynne’s and John W. O’Malley’s coverage of the debates. I contend that the documents captured the debates pretty well. Much better than what I have read about the current synod.
They produce hundreds of thousands of words that future bureaucrats can refer to in order to support anything required. Every verbal pudding becomes a precedent that can be invoked to support creating more precedents. I blather, therefore I am.
Was this Francis saying "yes, this is exactly what I wanted!" or was this Francis saying "I'm done with this, I don't want to spend any more time on this." ??
I pity whoever had to read all that bureaucratic blather in order to write this piece. But thanks for writing it. The institutional face of the Church grows colder and colder, harder and harder, drier and drier.
If the Pope hasn't read the 28,000 word document himself and released a document specifically saying it is his teaching, then I'm skeptical this will hold up in the decades to come that this is part of his magisterium.
"But he noted that the statement concerning women deacons was now the pope’s ruling and reflected the pope’s repeated calls for the matter to be studied further."
How many times does the question of women deaconesses have to be studied and the answer be "No" before the answer will finally be accepted? I'm utterly baffled by this pontificate, under which multiple commissions studied this question, if I remember correctly.
I'll be interested to see how the bishops of the world "receive" this document.
I vaguely remember that before or early in his pontificate, Pope Francis said something to the effect that if you don’t want something done, appoint a commission. Could this be his strategy re women deacons?
Did you guys stop making these articles into TL;DR audio podcasts or is my feed not working? I also have not received a bonus episode with the normal podcast for the past two episodes (but I am still getting the TL;DR pillar post articles).
It's taken four years, thousands of hours of meetings, and lots of money for the Church to create their own version of "I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony."
"... I'd like to buy JD a Coke, and keep Ed. company."
Brought to you by An Anonymous Group of Pillar Listeners! Visit pillarcatholic.com/anonymous-group-of-listeners to learn how you can get involved.
It reminds me how this SoS is a throwback to the 1970s...
To me, it had the feel of the high school retreats we had in the 1980s. Lot's of sitting around in circles, giving everyone a chance to share their feelings, then a big group hug at the end where we promise that there would be no more clicques or people who thought they were better. Of course, by Monday everything was back to normal.
I think I’ll keep my copy of the report on the nightstand.
or use it prop up the short leg on the nightstand?
Brilliant! Why didn’t I think of that?
😉
This is the way the world ends / Not with a bang but a whimper
T.S. Eliot, “The Hollow Men”
So, the issue of female deacons will be back for the umpteenth sequel.
As "John Adams" sang about Congress in "1776", "Piddle, twiddle, and resolve, nothing's ever solved."
Yet, in fact, it has been resolved definitively.
Wait, let me get this right in my head. I was under the understanding that a MAGESTERIAL document was NOT going to be produced by a parliamentary vote (consisting of a mixed group of lay, religious, clergy, and Bishops). I thought that this document would be used by Pope Francis to aid him in his drafting of his own apostolic exhortation.
Instead we are getting a magesterial document that has been produced by a group consisting of members, many of whom hold views contrary to established doctrine, that generated the document in discussions behind closed doors, sworn to secrecy, and shoved out with a popular vote and a papal rubber stamp. I feel so synodal now I don't know if I'll ever recover.
You cannot take a document drafted for one purpose and then declare that it is a different kind of document. The Synod participants were working under great time pressure to finish the final report and the doctrinal chaos within their ranks must have wiped out any chance of clear unambiguous statements. Any orthodox recommendation on anything would probably have upset some participants. Hence the gibberish in para 27 which probably no one understands. A magisterial document would in theory be carefully drafted and redrafted so that people might have a chance of understanding and learning from it.
I don't think it's a great idea, but I don't see any reason why the pope /can't/ do this. He can use ghost writers, he can get other people's input on whatever he writes, he hopefully has the whole draft and read through it - the part that makes it magisterial is the Pope putting it out as such in his name, not whether he wrote the words himself. (I'd feel weirder about the whole thing if he had announced in advance - without knowing the content or the vote - that the document would be part of his magisterial teaching regardless of what it ended up saying)
> Pope Francis ‘adopts’
It followed me home, mama! Can I keep it?
(sorry, I'll read more than "3 words of the headline" later.)
🤣
It has such a lovable whine.
Breh
If this document is part of the ordinary Papal magisterium, what is it teaching us?
"The paragraph with the next highest number of “no” votes was the 27th, which focused on the liturgy, calling on Christian communities “to adopt celebratory styles that make visible the face of a synodal Church.”'
What does this mean?
".....the paragraph with the highest number of “no” votes was the 60th, which addressed women’s role in the Church, saying that “the question of women’s access to diaconal ministry remains open.”"
The 60th paragraph still had over a two thirds majority. If it means anything, it means that previous decisive Papal teaching on women's ordination is still up for grabs. And that any Papal teaching, including this document, isn't worth the paper it is written on. But I guess that we have to wait for that specialist group to report in 2025...
"Paragraph 78, addressing a proposal “to establish a ministry of listening and accompaniment,” attracted the third-highest number of “no” votes."
I thought that we have already have several such ministries. Such as priests, nuns, counsellors, doctors, nurses, psychiatrists, teachers....But perhaps we need people specially trained to advise people to ignore Church teaching.
"They added that it should be specified “that decisions made by an episcopal conference impose an ecclesial obligation on each bishop who participated in the decision in relation to his own diocese.”"
This is seriously scary. A Bishop has his own very extensive authority within his diocese. An Episcopal Conference is just an administrative convenience. He could ignore its decisions. Or at least he could until very recently.
Why does this whole exercise feel like the church has no idea how broken it really is…..and not broken in a humble way……”and Jesus wept”.
Is there a translation of this document into English? I'm assuming that if I wait long enough, there will be a translation on the main page?
This Synod represents the dying gasps of a generation of clerics whose mission was to sing a new church into being. It is a litany of vagaries that becomes an ode to the effete mission of men who were possessed by the spirit of Vatican II -- a spirit that we know has nothing to do with the actual documents of the illustrious Council. While I am grateful that there appear to be no outright heresies in the final document, the Pope's decision to simply adopt the synod document as part of his own papal magisterium is symbolic. Whether that symbol is good or bad, I am not yet sure. But matters of doctrinal authority, it seems to me, ought to be strictly centralized to the college of Bishops in union with Peter.
I don't even know how to quantify what this document is. It claims to be a product of the Sensus Fidelium, but I'm not aware of the Sensus Fidelium having been summoned and invoked in so rigid a process before. For all of its magniloquence, the Synod on Synod-ing has left me with no impression other than the hope that the passage of time will do more to renew the Church than these meetings and committees have.
“the spirit of Vatican II -- a spirit that we know has nothing to do with the actual documents of the illustrious Council. “
I first thought this but have now read Francis X. Murphy C.ss.R ./Xavier Rynne’s and John W. O’Malley’s coverage of the debates. I contend that the documents captured the debates pretty well. Much better than what I have read about the current synod.
The synod is dead. And just like all of the synods that came before, it will have almost no impact on anything whatsoever.
"it will have almost no impact on anything whatsoever."
-Your lips to God's ears.
They produce hundreds of thousands of words that future bureaucrats can refer to in order to support anything required. Every verbal pudding becomes a precedent that can be invoked to support creating more precedents. I blather, therefore I am.
Was this Francis saying "yes, this is exactly what I wanted!" or was this Francis saying "I'm done with this, I don't want to spend any more time on this." ??
I'm not sure but it's effect will likely be the later - both for Francis and the Church. Praise God.
I pity whoever had to read all that bureaucratic blather in order to write this piece. But thanks for writing it. The institutional face of the Church grows colder and colder, harder and harder, drier and drier.
If the Pope hasn't read the 28,000 word document himself and released a document specifically saying it is his teaching, then I'm skeptical this will hold up in the decades to come that this is part of his magisterium.
"But he noted that the statement concerning women deacons was now the pope’s ruling and reflected the pope’s repeated calls for the matter to be studied further."
How many times does the question of women deaconesses have to be studied and the answer be "No" before the answer will finally be accepted? I'm utterly baffled by this pontificate, under which multiple commissions studied this question, if I remember correctly.
I'll be interested to see how the bishops of the world "receive" this document.
I vaguely remember that before or early in his pontificate, Pope Francis said something to the effect that if you don’t want something done, appoint a commission. Could this be his strategy re women deacons?
Did you guys stop making these articles into TL;DR audio podcasts or is my feed not working? I also have not received a bonus episode with the normal podcast for the past two episodes (but I am still getting the TL;DR pillar post articles).