A Priest Responds to the 2015 "Family Synod" Preparatory Document: - "Vague, secular, naive, sentimental, discouraging."

A response to the [Lineamenta, the preparatory] document on the Synod of the Family, submitted to the Very Rev. Michael Pavlakovich, V.F. at the request of the Archbishop of Denver.

1. In the Preface the desire is expressed to "find concrete solutions to so many difficulties and innumerable challenges that families must confront." I suggest concentrating on one or two difficulties, and trying to solve those.

For example, if the Universal Church tried to stop cohabitation of couples, and was at all successful, then many other problems would improve. This would mean a united effort, with at least the Pope and the bishops working together. But trying to address all the numerous problems outlined in the Relatio at the same, time is not realistic.

2. The language of sin and redemption was missing from the documents.

Instead, we were treated to sentences like "The challenge for the Church is to assist couples in their emotive maturation and affective development." This is an example of substituting sociology and psychology for the Word of God and the teaching of the Church, examples of which may be found throughout the document.

3. Many of the statements were too vague to understand.

For example, "...a reflection capable of reframing the great questions about the meaning of human existence, can be responsive to humanity's most profound expectations." I do not know what this means. And there seems to be little in the document about our obligation to be responsive to the expectations of the Lord.

4. Throughout the document there is a sentimental notion of mercy which can be quite misleading.

For example, "Jesus looked upon the women and men he met with love and tenderness...in proclaiming the demands of the Kingdom of God." Except when He didn't. The words He used to condemn the Pharisees were not words of tenderness.

5. It seems that the writers of these documents went to great lengths to avoid talking about sin.

For example, "...the Church turns with love to those who participate in her life in an incomplete manner..." If there is no sin, then there is no need of salvation. Which is why I suppose, that the sentence continues with "...recognizing that the grace of God works also in their lives by giving them the courage to do good, to care for one another and to be of service to the community in which they live and work." There is no salvation in the "courage to do good etc.," as the pagans do as much.

6. I could find no distinction between short term and long term goals, or even a mention of the desirability of setting these.

7. In #32, there was a call for missionary conversion by everyone in the Church.

But for this to take place there must be doctrinal unity – a unity of faith – at least amongst the pope and the bishops. In the document there is no mention of this.

Read more.

LikeShare

aderito

Mar 12, 2015

The deciever comes with soft words ,and soft actions ,Jesus warned us of it ,.Catholic brothers ,keep your eyes open ,let us not be decieved ,Amen

Leonard Wessell

Mar 11, 2015

Finally we are getting somewere. In the posting immediately below it was noted (and I picked it up in my short comment) without the sacrum there is not Catholic Mass. There is also no sin. I implore the readers to consult Rudolf Otto's The Holy. Otto, a Luther pastor, did not write a theological tract, rather a phemenological description of the Holy/sacrum. Only in terms of the sacrum does sin become more than an imperfection needing therapeutic treatment (which is what the good Father is complaining about). Consider (and the following is but an abbreviation:

The Holy is experienced as a myterium tremendum et fascinans, that is, it is literally beyond the finite into and up to the infinite (of which we have an inkling, but no clear theoretical knowledge), i.e., it is TREMENDOUS in is mysterious attraction! In other words, it fascinates us as nothing (no thing) else. Even the atheist Nietzsche said: "All desire seeks deep, profound eternity [the Holy or sacrum]". The Holy inspires awe. What inspires awe is awesome, yet falsely confronted it is awe-ful, this last feature being entailed within the notion of SIN. A person, who insults deeply the president of a country, is one thing. To insult God as the mysterium tremendum et infinitum is another thing, is awe-ful. Being awe-ful before God's consciousness is being in a state of sin. (Sin entails more, as I am only speaking phemenonologically).

The thematic plans for the Synod, well revealed by the Father, lack the sacrum/the Holy. The problems mentioned are not false problems, but ones that pertain essentially to life IN this world within the needs of this world. And the nees in and for this world are one that take place with or without a God, as they are human life difficulties. Ah, difficulties or inperfections or disadvantages or any of a endless life-problems. The problem area is limited to the family and, hey, a nagging wife is a problem that perhaps a pyschologist could therapeutically ameliorate.

The complaint of the author of the posting is basically that the coming Synod both in language use and thematic choice relfect difficulties that in this world and are to be improved by this worldly means aka therapy. In my judgment, this is the logical consequence of Vat II's and the current Pope's affirmation of the world, adapting to current needs of the world today (God know what it will be tomorrow). Alas, I am slowly coming to the conclusion that Pope Francis & Co art "fundamentally transforming" (to borrow a term from Obama) the Church from an institution mediating between the profane and the Holy into a churchy institution seeking to help matters in this world in its terms (i.e., without reference to "deep, profound eternity". I would venture to say that Nietzsche would see the "death of God" in such a fundamental transformation.