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.
Just remember: Our Lord told His apostles, "Go out to all the world, and establish committees to strategize your branding and actualize your open-minded innovative outlook."
But the laity are the Lord's Church as well and one goal of Vatican II was to include their special gifts again. In 1992 Pope StJPII gave a general audience where he says this...
""1. "It is not only through the sacraments and the ministries of the Church that the Holy Spirit sanctifies and leads the people of God and enriches it with virtues, but, 'allotting his gifts to everyone according as he wills' (1 Cor 12:11), he distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank. By these gifts he makes them fit and ready to undertake the various tasks and offices which contribute toward the renewal and building up of the Church" (LG 12). This is the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. Therefore, the People of God's sharing in the messianic mission is not obtained only through the Church's ministerial structure and sacramental life. It also occurs in another way, that of the spiritual gifts or charisms. This doctrine, recalled by the Council, is based on the New Testament and helps to show that the development of the ecclesial community does not depend only on the institution of ministries and sacraments, but is also furthered by the free and unforeseeable gifts of the Spirit, who works outside established channels, too. Because of this bestowal of special graces it is apparent that the universal priesthood of the ecclesial community is led by the Spirit with a sovereign freedom that is often amazing--"as he wishes," St. Paul says (1 Cor 12:11).
2. St. Paul describes the variety and diversity of the charisms, which must be attributed to the work of the one Spirit (cf. 1 Cor 12:4). Each of us receives from God many gifts which are appropriate for us personally and for our mission. Because of this diversity, no individual way of holiness or mission is ever identical to the others. The Holy Spirit shows respect for each person and wants to foster in each one an original development of the spiritual life and the giving of witness."
This is what synodality is all about and we have to recognise it as a work of the Holy Spirit in my opinion.
It does not follow, from John Paul's allocution, that the present 'synodal process' is necessarily a useful or et cetera way of utilising the laity's gifts, 'a work of the Holy Ghost'. It may be, and it may not be; it may be in parts, and not in others. Spes contra spem.
You are so right, a self effacing superiority, like he and the rest of the Synodal crew can hardly contain their distain for people who actually believe our Lord is present, body, soul and divinity in the Holy Eucharist.
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.
I like your take on this a lot, but actually the messaging has been very clear from the beginning. The process is the point. We need to "be church" in a way that is "listening" to those "marginalized". You are not supposed to ask, "Yes, but what happens after all that" because that is not being open to the Spirit. Who knows where the Spirit will lead? Well ok, it's going to be lady deacons and intercommunion with the Lutherans, but you don't know that right now because you are fostering inclusivity and accompaniment at this stage.
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.
Just remember: Our Lord told His apostles, "Go out to all the world, and establish committees to strategize your branding and actualize your open-minded innovative outlook."
What? You mean He didn't actually say that?
But the laity are the Lord's Church as well and one goal of Vatican II was to include their special gifts again. In 1992 Pope StJPII gave a general audience where he says this...
""1. "It is not only through the sacraments and the ministries of the Church that the Holy Spirit sanctifies and leads the people of God and enriches it with virtues, but, 'allotting his gifts to everyone according as he wills' (1 Cor 12:11), he distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank. By these gifts he makes them fit and ready to undertake the various tasks and offices which contribute toward the renewal and building up of the Church" (LG 12). This is the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. Therefore, the People of God's sharing in the messianic mission is not obtained only through the Church's ministerial structure and sacramental life. It also occurs in another way, that of the spiritual gifts or charisms. This doctrine, recalled by the Council, is based on the New Testament and helps to show that the development of the ecclesial community does not depend only on the institution of ministries and sacraments, but is also furthered by the free and unforeseeable gifts of the Spirit, who works outside established channels, too. Because of this bestowal of special graces it is apparent that the universal priesthood of the ecclesial community is led by the Spirit with a sovereign freedom that is often amazing--"as he wishes," St. Paul says (1 Cor 12:11).
2. St. Paul describes the variety and diversity of the charisms, which must be attributed to the work of the one Spirit (cf. 1 Cor 12:4). Each of us receives from God many gifts which are appropriate for us personally and for our mission. Because of this diversity, no individual way of holiness or mission is ever identical to the others. The Holy Spirit shows respect for each person and wants to foster in each one an original development of the spiritual life and the giving of witness."
This is what synodality is all about and we have to recognise it as a work of the Holy Spirit in my opinion.
http://www.totus2us.co.uk/teaching/jpii-catechesis-on-the-church/the-role-of-charisms-in-the-churchs-life/
It does not follow, from John Paul's allocution, that the present 'synodal process' is necessarily a useful or et cetera way of utilising the laity's gifts, 'a work of the Holy Ghost'. It may be, and it may not be; it may be in parts, and not in others. Spes contra spem.
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.
You are so right, a self effacing superiority, like he and the rest of the Synodal crew can hardly contain their distain for people who actually believe our Lord is present, body, soul and divinity in the Holy Eucharist.
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.
I like your take on this a lot, but actually the messaging has been very clear from the beginning. The process is the point. We need to "be church" in a way that is "listening" to those "marginalized". You are not supposed to ask, "Yes, but what happens after all that" because that is not being open to the Spirit. Who knows where the Spirit will lead? Well ok, it's going to be lady deacons and intercommunion with the Lutherans, but you don't know that right now because you are fostering inclusivity and accompaniment at this stage.
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.
Wes Anderson films and Nick Drake songs? Martin, you have good taste.
Mr. Coll's response included 137 words but not one single idea or thought of value.
A so-called “Microsoft tech response” as we used to say: technically correct and of absolutely no 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."
Well done and absolutely correct.
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.