Vatican City, Oct 3, 2018 / 02:59 pm (CNA).- At the end of a synod of bishops, the pope customarily issues a document- a post-synodal apostolic exhortation- that summarizes the gist of the meeting, and offers his reflections on whatever pastoral issue the synod took up for discussion.
Synods- at least modern synods- involve a great deal of time and expense, and often involve the best minds and hearts in the Church. But synodal documents- good or bad, well-constructed or hastily strung together- tend to have the same unhappy fate: they are consigned to library or chancery shelves, where they get dusty from disuse.
While there are some notable exceptions, post-synodal documents tend generally to have very few practical outcomes, and very little long-term impact on the life of the Church.
Apart from the substance of its controversy, Amoris laetitia, the exhortation that followed the 2015 Synod of Bishops on the family, is an unusual post-synodal document because it actually provoked a controversy of any kind- one still unresolved as the Church begins another synod, this one focusing on young adults, the faith, and vocation discernment.
During his Oct. 3 remarks opening the 2018 Synod of Bishops, Pope Francis mentioned the reputation of synodal exhortations for irrelevance, quipping that a synodal text is “generally only read by a few and criticized by many.”
Optimistically, Francis told the bishops gathered for the synod that he hopes the gathering will lead to “concrete pastoral proposals capable of fulfilling the Synod’s purpose.”
Earlier Wednesday, during the synod’s opening Mass celebrated in St. Peter’s Square, Pope Francis called for a meeting “anointed by hope.”
“Hope challenges us, moves us and shatters that conformism which says, ‘it’s always been done like this,’” the pope said.
He added that young people expect of the synod’s participants “a creative dedication, a dynamism which is intelligent, enthusiastic and full of hope.”
The pope’s call for creativity Wednesday encouraged bishops to update their prepared interventions- the short speeches each synod participant gives during the meeting’s initial sessions- suggesting that bishops “consider what you have prepared as a provisional draft open to any additions and changes that the Synod journey may suggest to each of you.”
Despite this call, there are synod observers who argue that the synod structure makes creativity and original thinking a difficult proposition. In the initial meetings of the synod, each synod participant will be given the opportunity to make a very short speech of approximately four minutes. While those speeches are added into the record, observers say they are not always reflected in the synod’s final report.
Of slightly more importance is the subsequent discussion on the resolutions that form synod’s final report, undertaken in groups divided by language. But even that discussion has only a limited capacity to shape the synod’s final text.
There are observers who ask whether the synodal structure allows for any genuine dialogue or debate, and whether the narrowly circumscribed window for intervention is a suitable environment for the prophetic ministry of bishops. Critics argue that the current structure gives most of the power to the Vatican staffers who organize the synods and do much of the report drafting, rather than to the bishop delegates.
At least one observer close to the synod has told CNA that bishops sometimes complain they are called only to rubber stamp texts mostly regarded as faits accomplis.
Francis last month issued a set of changes to the procedural rules for episcopal synods, that, according to some observers, further centralize real decision-making authority within the synod, placing considerable power over proceedings and final report in the hands of the general secretary. Those changes, critics say, mean that bishops will have even less influence over the final text than they did before. And, because of the new rules, the final text of the meeting can now be immediately approved by the pope, in place of an apostolic exhortation released months later.
Still, for the American bishops participating in the synod, Francis’ call for a new way of doing things is likely to resonate. Several members of the U.S. delegation are known as original thinkers and leaders, and some have already begun to signal that they’ll bring to the synod uniques ideas and approaches.
As the synod begins, it’s worth noting what some bishops from the U.S. delegation might bring to the table.
Bishop Robert Barron
Bishop Robert Barron, auxiliary of Los Angeles, is perhaps the U.S. bishop whose intervention in the synod is the most difficult to predict. Barron is a well-known public intellectual, a social media superstar, and the driving force behind the popular “Catholicism” series and Word on Fire catechetical apostolate.
Intellectually, Barron is difficult to pigeonhole. A polyglot with a doctorate from the theology faculty at the Institut Catholique du Paris, Barron’s intellectual interests and influences are broad-ranging. He’s managed to bring those interests to film and television reviews, to YouTube videos immensely popular with young people, and to seminars on preaching and pastoral work that have built a following among millennial priests.
The breadth and depth of Barron’s intellect make him hard to place consistently as a member of any of the ideological camps in which U.S. bishops are typically classified.
So what will he offer the synod?
In a Oct. 2 interview with L.A’s Angelus News, Barron said that he would prioritize ministry to young people in the context of their own culture. “We have to get them, we have to invade their space,” Barron told Angelus.
Barron told Angelus that he feels it important to address what he calls “the culture of self-invention.”
That culture, he said, “celebrated almost constantly: that I decide what my life is about, I decide what I’m going to believe, how I’m going to act, and no one tells me what to do.”
While calling for a methodology intended to speak in the language of a fluid culture, Barron told Angelus that calls for doctrinal and fluidity would be a mistake.
Saying the doctrine is “not ours to play with,” Barron added that “dumbed-down Catholicism has been a disaster.”
Archbishop Jose Gomez
Barron is not the only U.S. delegate from Los Angeles. His boss- L.A.’s Archbishop Jose Gomez, was also elected to the synod. Gomez, who is vice-president of the U.S. bishops’ conference, can be counted on for a perspective that differs significantly from that of his brother American bishops.
Gomez seems to very capably straddle notably different worlds. He is Mexican-born, and also the bishop of the largest diocese in U.S. He is a member of an ecclesial movement, and has also spent decades in diocesan ministry. He is regarded as a doctrinal conservative, and has also become the most outspoken American bishop on immigration reform.
From that unique position in the Church, Gomez has appeal and credibility across a remarkably broad swath in the Church. His intervention will carry a great deal of weight among a number of bishops.
The archbishop is likely to discuss themes that reflect his Opus Dei formation- most especially, the universal call to holiness, and the importance of intentional sacramental and devotional formation for young people. Gomez’ intervention will likely be Christocentric, and call for distinctive place for lay Catholics in the life of the Church.
To Angelus, Gomez said this week that “we need to change gears and say that the lay faithful are also called to holiness and to be leaders in the Church.”
“We need to understand that we all are called to holiness; that sometimes we are still in the process of understanding that the Church not only belongs to the pope and the bishops and the priests, but to everyone — the lay faithful,” he added. His intervention is likely to follow along similar lines.
Gomez is also likely to emphasize works of mercy, especially service to the poor.
“The young people of today, it seems to me, are trying to do something, to take action. It is difficult for them to stop and learn the teachings of the Church. The first encounter with Christ in serving other people is what I think is most important for us,” he said in an Oct. 2 interview.
Cardinal Blase Cupich
Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago was appointed to participate in the synod, along with Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, who withdrew in response to fallout from the sexual abuse crisis in his diocese.
Cupich is reported to be a close collaborator of Pope Francis. He was appointed personally by Francis to this synod, rather than being elected by the U.S. bishops, and was similarly appointed by the pope to attend the 2015 synod.
After the synod, he became a vocal supporter of Pope Francis’ Amoris laetitia, hosting closed-door conferences on the document for bishops and theologians, and saying this February that the document “represents an enormous change of approach, a paradigm shift holistically rooted in Scripture, tradition and human experience.”
Cupich has been expected by observers to play a significant role in the 2018 synod. The cardinal, however, has had a difficult summer.
He become a central figure in the sexual crisis dubbed the “summer of hell,” especially because of an Aug. 27 interview in which he argued, or appeared to argue, that Pope Francis would focus on environmentalism and migration rather than going down the “rabbit hole” of an investigation into allegations of widespread corruption and misconduct leveled Aug. 25 by former Vatican diplomat Archbishop Carlo Vigano.
Cupich apologized for his remarks in a Chicago Tribune op-ed issued nearly a month after the interview.
“It was a mistake for me to even mention that the Church has a bigger agenda than responding to the charges in the letter by former Papal Nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano,” he wrote.
“What I should have said, because it has been my conviction throughout my ministry, is that nothing is more important for the Church than protecting young people. I apologize for the offense caused by my comments. It pains me deeply to think that my poor choice of words may have added to the suffering of victim-survivors.”
Those difficulties do not seem to have prevented Cupich from getting an early start to active participation in the synod. After Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia published Sept. 21 an anonymous theologian’s criticism of the synod’s working document in the journal First Things, Cupich sent the magazine a letter, saying that the “use of anonymous criticism in American society does not necessarily contribute to healthy public discourse, but in fact can erode it.”
Cupich wrote that the commentary published by Chaput “raises essential questions about the nature of theological dialogue in our Church,” before criticizing the text for “selectivity, condescension, and the deployment of partial truths” which served to “obfuscate the fullness of truth.”
“What is needed is the spirit of synodality that Pope Francis has made the very heart of the Church’s upcoming moment of dialogue and teaching in search of ways to bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the next generations,” Cupich added.
Cupich, it seems, is likely to offer an intervention, and points for discussion, in support of the synod’s working document, or instrumentum laboris. In recent months, he has discussed publicly the importance of listening to young adults, the gifts young people offer to the Church, and the importance of dialoguing with young people about sexuality and gender- topics which all receive considerable treatment in the instrumentum laboris.
“Young people today are living in a whole different world than when I grew up. So they find their classmates, maybe even themselves, in situations where their family is broken and they’re in blended families,” Cupich said in August interview with Rome Reports.
“The same thing too is with young people who have friends who have same-sex attraction, who are gay and lesbian. They treasure those friendships. So how can we speak to them in a way that challenges them – no matter what their attraction is – to live a life that’s in-tune with the Gospel?”
Archbishop Charles Chaput
Archbishop Charles Chaput has not been hesitant to express his views on the synod’s instrumentum laboris. In addition to the theological commentary he published last month, the archbishop has published or cited comments from young Catholics critical of the synod’s preparatory documents on several occasions.
On Sept. 29, the archbishop published an op-ed in the prominent Italian newspaper Il Foglio, saying that “the synod’s instrumentum laboris or ‘working document,’ needs to be reviewed and revised. As it stands, the text is strong in the social sciences, but much less so in its call to belief, conversion, and mission.”
Citing the Sept. 21 theological reflection, Chaput lamented within the document “‘serious theological concerns…including: a false understanding of the conscience and its role in the moral life;’ a ‘false dichotomy proposed between truth and freedom,’ a ‘pervasive focus on socio-cultural elements, to the exclusion of deeper religious and moral issues,’ an ‘absence of the hope of the Gospel,’ and an ‘insufficient treatment of the abuse scandal.’”
“The synod’s success depends on a profound confidence in the Word of God and the mission of the Church, despite the sins of her leaders,” his commentary added.
Chaput’s commentary proved criticism from Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the synod’s secretary general. Baldisseri told journalists Oct. 1 that because Chaput, whom he alluded to but did not name, is a member of the synod’s planning council, he could have raised objections to the instrumentum laboris early in the planning process.
In fact, sources tell CNA, the instrumentum laboris was given to members of the planning commission only days before they were asked to approve it, as is typical for the synod council. Sources also say it was likely available only in Italian. If those things are true, it seems improbable that Chaput, or any bishop, would have been able to adequately study the document and give meaningful feedback before it was released.
Nevertheless, it seems unlikely that Chaput will focus on the instrumentum laboris during his intervention.
Instead, Chaput, as a frequent observer of culture, is likely to comment on the way that family, public, and ecclesial culture impact the development of young people- and he will probably raise the sexual abuse crisis, since most of his recent public remarks have addressed the imprudence of holding a synod on young adults without recognizing that sexual abuse and misconduct will be rather significant elephants in the room.
Following the trajectory of his recent remarks, Chaput will likely call for a pastoral focus on forming young people from a genuinely Christian anthropology, and toward a Christocentric self-identity.
__
Whether the interventions of any American bishop will make a major difference in the synod’s final text remains to be seen. Indeed, whether the final text will have an impact on the Church, or merely gather dust on chancery shelves, also remains to be seen. But the interventions and actions of the U.S. delegation can teach a lot about what kind of men lead the Church in the U.S., and what kind of future that Church might have.
[…]
Another whack job with a token catholic look but underneath the sulphuric emissions are all too real! Lord, come back soon!
This woman is a troublemaker, as is Francis. Whenever people use the word “extreme” to describe ideas other than their own, I conclude that they’re into demonizing those with whom they disagree. I pray for the Pope’s successor that he will be a faithful Catholic.
The Pontiff Francis believes that “his-reform,” (which is “the-evil-spirit-of-vadigun-too”) is halfway to its goal, which is, as the woman “Ms-Caram-of-Argentina” represents, the “new-pagan-church-of-sacramental-sodomy.”
These above understand their duty to protect and defend the serial-sex-abusers of their cult, like “Rev.” Rupnik. He must remain free, to send a message to the “rigid, childish, backwardist” pewsitters, who the ruler of their cult is, and that The Beast who rules the world, is likewise their Occult Lord and Mistress.
calling myself an evangelical catholic I have to concur with many of your views. In Ireland which has lost most of its catholic ethos some of us who are sinners still recognise our sins but we certainly do not condone sin. And that is what homosexaulity is. A disbelief in Hell is another popular perception at present. It is a dangerous one and of course is aimed at the young who remain so vulnerable because of the society they have been brought into.
Utterly unsurprising. The Pope has surrounded himself with shallow revolutionaries and heretics for many decades. He is comfortable among them because he is one of them. We become like the people we choose as friends. Pray for all of them, and those who parrot their lies.
Amen!
Poor judgment by Pope Francis in his guest selections, at the very least! He’s not protecting Catholic teaching.
Yes, yes, yes.
Has he ever? He is as bad as the rest of them and probably way worse
Arguing for gay marriage, denying the existence of hell, defending abortion, vilifying the moral code laid down in the Bible — and Bergoglio meets with her? Encourages her?
Never mind hell. Will the Catholic Church exist once Bergoglio’s diabolical papacy is finished?
Our Lord said the Gates of Hell will not prevail for a reason, and He did not say how close they might come. Pope Paul saw the smoke. We are seeing the flames.
And he enables Rupnik while booting Strickland and Burke.
Appalling.
Here’s a story idea for CWR:
Bergoglio is the worst pope in how many hundreds of years?
Was there ever a Borgia as bad as this?
How about Stephen VI? John XII? Boniface VIII?
I would love to see how our own Bergoglio stacks up with some of the worst billing in Church history.
Worst popes. Not worst “billing.”
(Sigh.)
. the listing of the name of a performer, act, or the like, on a marquee, poster, handbill, etc., esp. in regard to prominence: got top billing.
(I think he meant the prominence relationship/top tier as far as billing, perhaps)
It appears the cult of faux katholics is not to be undone…
When Pope Francis welcomes and talks to clergy who has opposing Catholic views than the Church, shows us that he is tolerant, it doesn’t mean that he agrees with their views and/or life styles. Wouldn’t Jesus do the same? However, Jesus would probably correct them gently and would tell them to sin no more.
I also wonder what Pope Francis reaction would be with very Orthodox and/or traditional Catholics. I assume that he would be kind too. Isn’t this what Jesus would want from the Pope, and/or one of us?
Therefore, let’s stop speculating what the Pope’s intentions are when he welcomes clergy who disagree with Catholic doctrine. However, that’s not easy to do, and I think the Vatican should explain what the objective of these meeting between the Pope and controversial Catholic clergy.
The Vatican needs to be more transparent in this area and many others!
That’s exactly the problem – Francis has marginalized orthodox and traditional Catholics, used all sorts of pejorative names to describe them, dismissed them from their positions and refuses to meet with them. That’s how fair and open minded this pope is and why some of us have chosen to ignore every utterance of his.
When has he had anything but praise for the actual heterodoxy of the heretics and insults for loyal Catholics?
Dominican Sister Lucía Caram espouses heresy through her Spanish media outlet and Pope Francis encourages her to continue. Not the garden variety topics like Fiducia Suplicans. Rather the high toxic variety like freedom to commit abortion [a freedom she says God cannot object to because of the very gift of freedom], Catholic Church homosexual marriage, non existence of hell.
When the Holy Father visited Athens a Greek Orthodox priest famously shouted, Papa! Eísai Hairetikós. Pope! You are a heretic. We know that canonically he’s not, because the formal canonical conviction requires adamancy and consistency. Francis knows that and avoids it. However, what Gk Orthodox Fr Ionis shouted is what much of the world believes. If not the heretical condemnation, at least the predilection of beliefs. The planet has become largely heterodox insofar as Christ’s revelation and Catholic moral doctrine.
Diabolic in its etymological Gk form means to disrupt, to break apart. If there is a clear, unambiguous policy identified in this pontificate it’s to dismember, to break apart the unity that existed and that distinguished Catholic Christianity through the centuries.
“We know that canonically he’s not, because the formal canonical conviction requires adamancy and consistency. Francis knows that and avoids it.”
In the sport of wrestling, the action is considered in bounds so long as any part of either wrestler’s body remains with the circle that defines the boundary. Many wrestlers have scored points by having only the tops of their shoes inside that area. Francis is constantly drifting out to the perimeter, ever so careful to leave one toe in, as he continually shoots ankle picks on matters than he wishes to pin.
Perhaps it’s better to remain completely in bounds when the referee is the Almighty and might recognize a transparent attempt to stall or flee the mat.
A really good, humorous analogy. Wonder that he knows he can fool a lot of us but not God, then what is his game? The presumptive answer isn’t pleasant. A reason why I offer my prayer with deep intent at the, Recordare, Domine, Ecclesiae tuae toto orbe diffusae, ut eam in caritate perficias, una com Papa nostro Francis.
That’s una ‘cum’ Papa nostro Francis. Cum, meaning with, referring to unity, which is where the disruption is. The literal dismembering of the Body of Christ.
Those who criticize the Pope and sister need to get their Bibles out and read between the lines. Jesus came for all of us not just for those christians who are perfect.
“Those who criticize the Pope and sister need to get their Bibles out and read between the lines.”
Deep. But what about those who criticize those who criticize the Pope and sister?
You too may choose to read. Rev. 21:1-8. Then ask the Holy Spirit’s help to figure out where you may be found in the book.
So it’s a mere “imperfection” for a nun or an American President to promote abortion and for a Pope to praise them for such devotion to such a world view? And there it is an objective evil to criticize cold-blooded moral indifference to this greatest crime in human history?
He did not come for the righteous is how I understand it.
Obviously you’re the one who did not get your Bible out. And if you did you probably did not read it.
Go on. Start reading.
Just when you might think that anything could not get worse with this papacy—another new mess.
Sister Caram has the right to preach a gospel. It’s just not, undeniably, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a gospel with no hell, ergo no real need for repentance and conversion. I’m OK, you’re OK.
She has a right to advocate for her version of a church. It is just not, undeniably, the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is rather a church that surrenders to the secular culture on abortion, pornography and just about everything else. A church destined for irrelevance because if a church does identify with the secular culture, who then needs it?
We read, for example: “In 2014, she told La Opinión de Málaga online news that ‘those who freely make the decision [to abort] have to be the people [involved]. The Church cannot meddle in there. Not even God, who made us free for a reason’.”
Consider the abruptness, totality and irreversibly of being (ex)terminated even before we see the light of day. Sometimes with a scissors through the skull in a late-term abortion. Small wonder that Pope St. John Paul II identified abortion as an “unspeakable crime.”
But, hey, in bizarro-world Sister What’sername ingests face time with the papacy she despises.
We notice that in another posting today, one of the issues for the next Synod and for the earlier working groups is “the mission in the digital age.” https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/03/14/pope-francis-study-groups-to-examine-10-synod-on-synodality-themes-through-june-2025/
Fraud-alert! These two have chosen nomenclature to connote a St. Pope Francis and a St. Sr. Lucia! Instead of fraudsters, let us think on our dear Lord Jesus and his good true saints who also suffered fraudsters. These two shall pass as shall we. Some will die twice but others only once. Good Christian soldiers, stand guard and stay strong through the blood of Christ.
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”
And the who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.” And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment. The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.
Rev. 21:1-8.
You folks would probably consider me on the lunatic fringe of Catholicism, but even I think Religion Digital is over the line. As a Franciscan we try to live – Gospel to Life, Life to Gospel. Not easy for some Catholics to accept.
Peace my friends
Next time, just tell us you think whatever you embrace makes you better than the rest of us.
Have you ever found yourself thanking the Almighty that you aren’t like the rest of the rabble?
“You folks would probably consider me on the lunatic fringe of Catholicism…”. Cease wondering. Yes, I do. Not even on the fringe. More, I have metaphysical certitude that the OSF has little to do any more with St. Francis of Assisi.
“If any are found who…are not Catholics, let all the brothers, wherever they may have found such a one, be bound through obedience to bring him before the custodian of that place nearest to where they found him. And the custodian is strictly bound by obedience to keep him securely day and night as a prisoner, so that he cannot be taken from his hands until he can personally deliver him into the hands of his minister. And the minister is bound by obedience to send him with such brothers who shall guard him as a prisoner until they deliver him to the Lord of Ostia, who is the Master, the Protector and the Corrector of this fraternity.”
The Testament of St. Francis
Ah, how Catholic media so quickly adopted woke-speak as put forth in the woke bible “style book”….this sister and her pals are only “controversial”, not heretical.
Anything inside the Church today which flaunts ancient teaching and scripture is only “controversial” and not heretical.
And then folk wonder why Catholic media seems to be so ineffective in helping staunch the tidal wave of the “controversial” swamping the Church, and same with pronouncements by hierarchy.
It really is time for the villagers to gather and remove the threat of the Jesuit vampires.
“Continue fighting for this living Church…”🤣 Brilliant! Reads like St. Basil the Great! More like drivel from the formation manual of the Berkeley Jesuits. 🤦🏼♂️
Not that it’s wrong in itself for the Pope to meet with simpatico atheists…(Does this pontificate believe that anything is objectively wrong?)
Yes, plastic straws and backwardist rigidity (i.e., virtually anything that smacks of orthodox Catholicism).
After promising long ago never to go there again, I made myself google “Berkeley Jesuits.” The front page of the Jesuit School of Theology is actually worse than the rubbage of this pontificate. I had to put a mask on to read it! 😷
Living Theology. [I’m alive!]
Transforming Our World. [I’m a transformer!]
The most dynamic and rigorous learning occurs at the intersection of scholarship and culture. [I’m intersecting!]
Health Advisory Alert: Find Covid-19 announcements and resources from JST here. [I’m distancing!]
Find Your Purpose [I’m on purpose!]
Dear Fool!
You’ve had this disordered order and its pathetic prelate pegged from the beginning.
Now you reveal that there is actually a googlable page for ‘Berkeley Jesuits.’
I would never have believed it. I mean, talk about redundancy!