Cardinal Joseph Zen preaches a sermon during a Mass at the Holy Cross Church on May 24, 2022, in Hong Kong, China. (Image: Anthony Kwan/Getty Images)
Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, the bishop emeritus of Hong Kong, has released another critique of the Synod on Synodality, arguing that the ongoing discussion and discernment process offers “two opposing visions” of the nature, organization, and role of the Church.
“On the one hand, the Church is presented as founded by Jesus on the apostles and their successors, with a hierarchy of ordained ministers who guide the faithful on the journey toward the heavenly Jerusalem,” the 92-year-old cardinal observes in a nearly 3,600-word commentary posted on Feb. 15 titled “How will the Synod continue and end?”
“On the other hand, there is talk of an undefined synodality, a ‘democracy of the baptized,’” he continues, interjecting “Which baptized people? Do they at least go to church regularly? Do they draw faith from the Bible and strength from the sacraments?”
“This other vision, if legitimized,” he warns, “can change everything, the doctrine of faith and the discipline of moral life.”
Going into a deeper examination of these visions of ecclesiology, the cardinal writes that “in order not to see a contradiction in it, we must understand this invitation to synodality not as having to do something completely new but as giving a new impulse to something that has always existed in the Church.”
Zen acknowledges that synods have been a “historic reality” of the Church. Yet while earlier synods took place within the framework of the apostolic tradition and were guided by the “hierarchy of ordained ministers who guide the faithful on the journey toward the heavenly Jerusalem,” the current synod is characterized by an “undefined synodality” and a “democracy of the baptized,” he argues.
“They tell us that synodality is a fundamental constitutive element of the life of the Church, but at the same time they emphasize that synodality is what the Lord expects of us today. Participation and communion are obviously permanent characteristics of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church. But doesn’t saying that synodality is ‘the thing that the Lord expects of us today’ mean that it is something new?” he writes.
“In order not to see a contradiction in it, we must understand this invitation to synodality not as having to do something completely new but as giving a new impulse to something that has always existed in the Church.”
One of the cardinal’s main concerns is how the Synod on Synodality is being conducted at the universal level, beginning with the initial assembly at the Vatican in October 2023 and culminating later this year with a final assembly in October.
Referring to the Synod on Synodality’s call to “walk together,” he asks: “What is the goal of this journey? Is there a guide that ensures the right direction?”
In his essay the cardinal also takes issue with the synod’s incorporation of the “conversation in the Spirit,” a dialogic process he says was initiated by the Jesuits in Canada. “Imposing this method on the synod proceedings is a manipulation aiming at avoiding discussions,” he argues. “It is all psychology and sociology, no faith and no theology.”
The cardinal has already expressed his concern over the trajectory of the Synod on Synodality in a letter addressed to bishops that was sent out just days before the start of the first session of the synod in October.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
The niece of Lucia Santos, Maria Dos Anjos Rua, praying the rosary at the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima in Fatima, Portugal on April 6, 2017. / Daniel Ibanez/CNA
Washington D.C., Oct 7, 2021 / 03:01 am (CNA).
October is designated by the Catholic… […]
Vatican City, Nov 4, 2017 / 05:38 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Echoing strains of the 1979 hit “Refugee” by Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, Pope Francis on Saturday told representatives from Catholic universities that just because people are often forced into becoming migrants are refugees, they don’t have to live like it – at least, not where education is concerned.
Among other things, he said the phenomenon of forced migrations is a “sign of the times,” and urged Catholic universities to find more opportunities for migrants and refugees to study, even if it means creating distance programs for people living in camps or welcome centers.
He also encouraged universities to conduct in-depth studies on both the causes of forced migration, as well as the “discriminatory” and “xenophobic” attitudes that traditionally Christian countries can at times have toward incoming migrants.
Catholic universities, he said Nov. 4, have the task of carrying out “a scientific, theological and pedagogical reflection” of the topic which is rooted in Catholic social teaching, and which looks to “overcome the prejudices and fears linked to a lack of knowledge about the migratory phenomenon.”
He spoke at the close of a conference organized by Catholic universities around the world, titled “Migrants and Refugees in a Globalized World: the Response of Universities.”
Happening in Rome Nov. 1-4, the conference was put on by the International Federation of Catholic Universities (IFCU) in partnership with the Being the Blessing Foundation, the Pontifical Gregorian University, and the Center for Interreligious Understanding.
In his speech to participants, the Pope said the work of Catholic universities is to “harmonize” scientific research with theology, and to promote true “dialogue” between faith and reason.
And this happens primarily through three fundamental aspects, which according to Francis are research, teaching and social promotion.
He encouraged the academics to launch deeper studies on the “remote causes” of forced migration with the aim of finding practical solutions, even if those solutions are long-term, so that from the start people are ensured of the basic right “of not being forced to migrate.”
“It’s also important to reflect on the negative, and at times discriminatory and xenophobic reactions, that the welcome of migrants is having in countries of ancient Christian tradition,” so that a real and true formation in conscience can be achieved.
To this end, the Pope said the contribution migrants offer their host countries is “worthy of greater appreciation.”
Francis also urged them to delve into a solid theological reflection “on migrations as a sign of the times,” saying the stories that migrants and refugees bring with them “is a challenge to the faith and love of believers,” who themselves are called on “to heal the evils that derive from migrations” and to discover how God works within them, “even if it was caused by obvious injustices.”
When it comes to teaching opportunities for migrants, Francis said Catholic universities ought to provide those living in refugee camps or migrant welcome centers the opportunity to pursue higher education, whether that is through the development of courses and distance-learning programs, or scholarships that allow for relocation.
The “dense international academic network” must also be taken advantage of, he said, allowing for the recognition of the professional qualifications that migrants and refugees already have both for their own benefit, and that of the societies who welcome them.
Students must also be educated in “a careful reading of the migratory phenomenon, in a perspective of justice, global co-responsibility and of communion in cultural diversity,” Pope Francis said, noting that many of them will go on to become political leaders, entrepreneurs and “artisans of culture.”
In terms of acting in society, he said the university is often viewed as an entity that “takes charge of the society in which it operates, exercising, first and foremost, a role of critical consciousness in respect to the different forms of political, economic and cultural power.”
He then pointed to 20 “action points” proposed by the Migrants and Refugees section of the Vatican dicastery for Integral Human Development regarding the U.N. Global Compacts of migrants and refugees for 2018, saying these can help Catholic universities become “privileged actors” in society.
Part of this social action, he said, might include something like creating incentives for student volunteering programs that assist refugees, those who have requested asylum and migrants that have freshly arrived in their new country.
Francis closed his speech by telling the academics that their work is linked to the “four cornerstones” of the Church’s attitude toward reality of contemporary migrations, which are “to welcome, protect, promote and integrate.”
Pointing to the day’s feast of St. Charles Borromeo, the Pope said the saint was “an enlightened and passionate pastor, who made humility his motto,” and prayed that his “exemplary life” would inspire their “intellectual and social activity, and also the experience of brotherhood” in the IFCU.
This photo of Father Allan Travers was featured in the local newspaper after his pitching “performance” for the Detroit Tigers against the Philadelphia A’s on May 18, 1912. The photo featured the caption “strikebreaker,” which worried Travers’ mother, since there was a street trolley strike in Philadelphia earlier in the month, and she didn’t want her son caught in the confusion. / Photo credit: Public domain
Detroit, Mich., Jul 23, 2023 / 08:00 am (CNA).
The worst pitcher ever to take the mound for the Detroit Tigers became a Catholic priest.
Granted, Allan Travers was already on the path to the priesthood before suiting up for Detroit on May 18, 1912. But his story — and place in baseball history — is the prime example of being in the right place at the right time (or the wrong place at the wrong time).
Travers played in only one game, but one was enough to show that God had plans for him that didn’t involve the big leagues.
The story begins, as most stories of Tigers lore do, with Ty Cobb.
The Tigers were in New York on May 15 to play the Highlanders (the precursor to the Yankees). Cobb was playing in the outfield when he was verbally abused by a New York fan who was using profanity and racial slurs to describe Cobb’s play.
Cobb — never known for keeping his cool — stormed into the stands and unleashed a volley of punches on the fan. Tigers players rushed to the scene of the chaos, yelling at Cobb to lay off the man, who was missing one hand and three fingers on his other hand after suffering an industrial accident.
Cobb didn’t care and continued the barrage.
Ban Johnson, president of the American League, happened to be at the game, checking on the family-friendly excitement of what was turning into America’s pastime.
Having one of the league’s star players beat up a disabled spectator didn’t jibe well with Johnson’s vision for baseball, so Cobb was suspended indefinitely.
The Tigers felt Cobb’s punishment was unfair, so the players voted to strike until Cobb was reinstated for the club’s next game in three days against the two-time defending World Series champion Philadelphia Athletics.
Detroit Tigers legend Ty Cobb is pictured in 1911. Not one to keep his cool, Cobb launched himself into the stands to attack a fan who insulted him in 1912, resulting in a league suspension and sparking his teammates to strike in protest. Credit: Public domain
Johnson called the Tigers’ bluff, informing then Tigers owner Frank Navin the team would face a $5,000 fine for every game Detroit forfeited.
Navin needed to field a team, and quick, so he and Tigers manager Hughie Jennings collaborated with Athletics owner/manager Connie Mack to field a team of players to take the field.
This was well before the age of expansive minor league rosters — or commercial airlines, for that matter — so it wasn’t as though the Tigers could call up the farm team in Toledo and get them to Philadelphia in time to play the A’s. Instead, scouting was done the old-fashioned way, spreading word throughout town, asking who wanted to play baseball.
And this is where Aloysius Joseph “Allan” Travers, the student manager on the St. Joseph’s College baseball team, comes into the story.
Jennings worked with a friend of his, Joe Nolan, a sportswriter for The Philadelphia Bulletin,to field a team. Nolan knew Travers, a junior at St. Joseph’s who lived in Philadelphia, from the time the A’s fielded a second-stringer team to play St. Joseph’s College.
Nolan asked Travers to find 10-12 amateur players in the area who could suit up for the Tigers in case the Tiger players followed through on their strike threats. The idea was that the amateurs would never actually take the field; rather, it was just a tactic to get Jennings’ “real” players on the field.
Father Allan Travers, SJ, was a priest who taught at St. Joseph’s College (now St. Joseph’s University) in Philadelphia. But in 1913, while a student at St. Joseph, he was the improbable pitcher for the Detroit Tigers, where he secured a bizarre spot in baseball history. Credit: Public domain
Travers rounded up eight players who were free that day and enticed by the $25 Navin offered to each player.
Jennings had his team of strike-breakers, as requested by Navin.
When the umpire called “play ball,” the Tiger regulars took the field, but when the umpire spotted Cobb and told him to take a seat, the rest of the team walked out and took off their uniforms.
The strike-breakers would have to play after all. They were ushered into the locker room and donned the Tigers’ gray uniforms (this was in the days before names were on the back of uniforms). Two bench coaches joined the group to offer the squad some big league experience.
The question was, who would pitch?
There were no takers at first, so Navin offered an extra $25. Travers volunteered; $50 was good money for a college kid in 1912. There was one small problem — Travers had never played organized ball.
He was the assistant manager on the college baseball team, tasked with keeping stats and writing game summaries.
But there he was, the college student with plans to join the seminary after graduation, pitching before 20,000 fans at Shibe Park against the two-time defending World Series champions. A modern David versus Goliath, a plucky underdog story.
This time Goliath won.
Travers did as well as one would expect the assistant manager of a college baseball team to do against professionals. He pitched a complete game, surrendering 24 runs on 26 hits (both American League records), walking seven and striking out one. He got an MLB strikeout — they can’t take that away from him.
But the 15.75 ERA leaves a mark. He also batted 0-for-3 at the plate.
Travers’ time in the major leagues was abrupt. After the 24-2 shellacking the A’s put on the strikebreaking Tigers, Cobb persuaded his teammates to end the strike before the team’s upcoming series against the Washington Senators.
Travers’ calling was the priesthood, not pitching.
After graduating from St. Joseph’s College in 1913, he joined the Society of Jesus, studying at St. Andrew on the Hudson in New York and Woodstock College in Maryland. He was ordained a priest in 1926, making him the only priest ever to play in a Major League game.
His ministry took him to teaching positions at St. Francis Xavier High School in Manhattan and St. Joseph’s Prep and St. Joseph’s College in Philadelphia.
Father Travers didn’t speak about his baseball exploits, but he did give an interview about his bizarre start for the Tigers.
“About noon when Nolan told me about the strike of Detroit, he told me the club would be fined and might lose its franchise if 12 players didn’t show up,” Travers told sportswriter Red Smith. “He told me to round up as many fellows as I could. We never thought we’d play a game.”
The replacement Detroit Tigers are pictured in the dugout against the Philadelphia A’s on May 18, 1912. Photo credit: Public domain
The priest said Jennings told him to avoid throwing fastballs to “avoid getting killed out there,” but the A’s didn’t hold back, even resorting to bunting when they found out the third baseman had never played baseball before.
“I fed ‘em nothing but slow stuff after Frank Baker almost hit one out of the park on me, which fortunately went foul,” Travers said. “I was doing fine until they started bunting. The guy playing third base had never played baseball before. I just didn’t get any support. I threw a beautiful slow ball and the A’s were just hitting easy flies. Trouble was, no one could catch them.”
Curious enough, the only “fame” Travers got from his start was his picture in the newspaper with the word “Strikebreaker” printed above. There was a trolley strike in Philadelphia that month, and Travers’ mother was worried for her son’s safety because people might suspect he was a scab.
Travers didn’t like talking about his baseball “career” with his students, and his story is not well known, save for a few baseball history blogs.
He did sign a ball from that fateful day that wound up in the collection of Ada, Michigan, resident Steve Nagengast, who claims to have the largest collection of Tigers autographs. Nagengast was featured in the Detroit News, and the anecdote about Travers piqued Detroit Catholic’s interest.
Travers didn’t have the greatest impact on Tigers history. But the $5,000-per-game fine the Tigers faced for each game the club forfeited would have been devastating, especially in an era when professional teams folded and changed towns all the time.
So who knows.
Father Travers’ one-game career might have just saved the Tigers.
So we have two visions: “On the one hand, the Church is presented as founded by Jesus on the apostles and their successors, with a hierarchy of ordained ministers who guide the faithful on the journey toward the heavenly Jerusalem”, which is a very top down approach, and then we have: “an undefined synodality, a ‘democracy of the baptized”, a bottom up approach.
But could there be a third option? How about a hierarchical Church that is at the same time a listening Church?
When the Pope issues a document like Fiducia, conservatives complain that it was “top down”, that there was no consultation. When the Synod was on, conservatives complain that that consultation is unnecessary.
I’m reminded of a philosophy professor who was a good critic of postmodernism. Mocking its many ironies, he said: “I’m opposed to censorship, unless it is the censorship of something I’m opposed to”.
Your third option has been going on since Vatican II. The Church has listened to and responded to everything from women priests to opposition to Humane Vitae to married priests to abortion to liturgical practices to the role of women to liberation theology to……..If one does like the answers, one’s conclusion would be that the Church is not listening.
Excellent points. Especially re one’s complaint and conclusion about NOT BEING HEARD. This is a ubiquitous phenomenon in virtually all relationships of all kinds —– spouses, parents & children –– everywhere. The problem often arises from a perceived lack of respect & acknowledgement, not just the difference of opinions or decisions.
The simplistic bifurcation of leadership styles between top–down & bottom–up seems unhelpful when trying to bridge the two for a better, commonly acceptable outcome. One size/solution does not fit all and the leadership approach must be tailored to the context. In the Church, with God’s Will as the primary guide, there is no “bottom–up” way. As we are taught in James, chapter one, verses 5–6, the bottom members are still children of God needing Heavenly guidance. The mortal “top members” must listen and help all to see the Lord’s way, the one way He knows will be of greatest benefit to His Children.
Mankind’s social organizations & clubs can make up their own rules & notions. Those who agree can join & work toward change & improvement. In the Church, we follow & obey God’s teachings. It’s not up for debate. The Lord decides & specifies, not by committee or majority vote. We repent, exercise faith and obey.
Not even the pope or bishops possess the truth. All human thoughts and formulae always fall short of God’s fullness. The truth is entrusted to the whole Church and the sum total of the Church’s teaching will never exhaust the mystery that is God. God is the only source of authority and thus, all reflection on faith is a ministry, a service of the Word. A council is the Church in action at a given time and a given place in history. A dogma is not an endpoint as much as a new beginning and must be reinterpreted in dialogue with the sensus fidei.
The belief that the early church was democratic is a Protestant invention to discredit the priesthood and papacy. For the current church hierarchy to push the Protestant lie in the synod speaks volumes about the real crisis in the church.
When I read the words of leaders like Cardinal Zen, I am inspired and uplifted. However, there are others that leave me confused and conflicted. Hearing and listening to the servants of God that truly shepherd the flock, rather than leave them wandering, is what is needed. God bless him to be able to continue to call out to the Church and lead all to Christ.
Cardinal Zen appears among us as a type of Elijah. Our wilderness is not the Advent supernatural to nature reference distinct from the City of Man. Rather ours is the dark wilderness of deceit and deception. Zen’s remarkable eyesight pierces the machinations, shattering them with plain scriptural based theologic. An odyssey of which he asks, “What is the goal of this journey?
Our Elijah references, parody like, Jezebel’s prophets hopping and shouting to awaken Baal. Whilst Ahab, monarch of God’s Israel, he doth sitteth in quiet approval.
So we have two visions: “On the one hand, the Church is presented as founded by Jesus on the apostles and their successors, with a hierarchy of ordained ministers who guide the faithful on the journey toward the heavenly Jerusalem”, which is a very top down approach, and then we have: “an undefined synodality, a ‘democracy of the baptized”, a bottom up approach.
But could there be a third option? How about a hierarchical Church that is at the same time a listening Church?
When the Pope issues a document like Fiducia, conservatives complain that it was “top down”, that there was no consultation. When the Synod was on, conservatives complain that that consultation is unnecessary.
I’m reminded of a philosophy professor who was a good critic of postmodernism. Mocking its many ironies, he said: “I’m opposed to censorship, unless it is the censorship of something I’m opposed to”.
Your third option has been going on since Vatican II. The Church has listened to and responded to everything from women priests to opposition to Humane Vitae to married priests to abortion to liturgical practices to the role of women to liberation theology to……..If one does like the answers, one’s conclusion would be that the Church is not listening.
Correction last sentence: “…does *not* like….”
Excellent points. Especially re one’s complaint and conclusion about NOT BEING HEARD. This is a ubiquitous phenomenon in virtually all relationships of all kinds —– spouses, parents & children –– everywhere. The problem often arises from a perceived lack of respect & acknowledgement, not just the difference of opinions or decisions.
The simplistic bifurcation of leadership styles between top–down & bottom–up seems unhelpful when trying to bridge the two for a better, commonly acceptable outcome. One size/solution does not fit all and the leadership approach must be tailored to the context. In the Church, with God’s Will as the primary guide, there is no “bottom–up” way. As we are taught in James, chapter one, verses 5–6, the bottom members are still children of God needing Heavenly guidance. The mortal “top members” must listen and help all to see the Lord’s way, the one way He knows will be of greatest benefit to His Children.
Mankind’s social organizations & clubs can make up their own rules & notions. Those who agree can join & work toward change & improvement. In the Church, we follow & obey God’s teachings. It’s not up for debate. The Lord decides & specifies, not by committee or majority vote. We repent, exercise faith and obey.
Not even the pope or bishops possess the truth. All human thoughts and formulae always fall short of God’s fullness. The truth is entrusted to the whole Church and the sum total of the Church’s teaching will never exhaust the mystery that is God. God is the only source of authority and thus, all reflection on faith is a ministry, a service of the Word. A council is the Church in action at a given time and a given place in history. A dogma is not an endpoint as much as a new beginning and must be reinterpreted in dialogue with the sensus fidei.
Father Pieter Fransen, S.J.
The belief that the early church was democratic is a Protestant invention to discredit the priesthood and papacy. For the current church hierarchy to push the Protestant lie in the synod speaks volumes about the real crisis in the church.
When I read the words of leaders like Cardinal Zen, I am inspired and uplifted. However, there are others that leave me confused and conflicted. Hearing and listening to the servants of God that truly shepherd the flock, rather than leave them wandering, is what is needed. God bless him to be able to continue to call out to the Church and lead all to Christ.
Cardinal Zen appears among us as a type of Elijah. Our wilderness is not the Advent supernatural to nature reference distinct from the City of Man. Rather ours is the dark wilderness of deceit and deception. Zen’s remarkable eyesight pierces the machinations, shattering them with plain scriptural based theologic. An odyssey of which he asks, “What is the goal of this journey?
Our Elijah references, parody like, Jezebel’s prophets hopping and shouting to awaken Baal. Whilst Ahab, monarch of God’s Israel, he doth sitteth in quiet approval.