Tag: Synod15

Yesterday and today, the Synod Fathers heard from 15 of the “auditors” – mostly married couples, who are there at the Synod. The full texts of these have been published and the following is the passage that stood out for me, in what I have to say reads like a pretty mixed bag:

“We should not continually separate husband and wife for ministry in the parish, but rather let their sacrament shine by allowing them to work as a team. […] If a church is meant to be a family of families, then we should encourage our seminarians to be priests in love with their people, not merely priests in charge of a parish. Our faith is based on relationship with God, but it is learned and lived out in relationship with others. (Tony Witczak, USA)”

This morning also saw interventions (published in full) from the “fraternal delegates”, i.e., representatives of other Christian churches. Here the Syrian-Orthodox Archbishop of Zahle and Bekaa in Lebanon spoke particularly beautifully about the Eucharist:

“[The] Eastern Orthodox Church believes in the principle of economy which in Aramaic is mdabronutho. This principle finds the sacrament of the Eucharist to be a medicine for wounded souls, as well as an aid for people who want to recover their relationship with the Lord. Such a sacrament, that is effectively a salvific one, should not be part of the standards of punishment, except in some exceptional cases. The Eucharist is not a prize or a reward, but the means through which the Lord Jesus heals our weaknesses, and draws us to him. As Pope Francis said in his Corpus Christi homily last year: “The Eucharist is not a prize for the good, but the strength of sinners.””

Timothy Thornton, the Anglican bishop of Truro, emphasized the persistence of change in the life of a family and of the Church:

“A key part of families is that they change. Whenever you’re privileged to be a part of a family in its journey as a pastor you’re seeing a snapshot, a moment in time which has both a history and a future. We see a glimpse and don’t always fully understand, nor should we be given the privilege of being with the family throughout its journey.

All families change. When a couple announce their engagement they’re already looking to the future with hope, joy and some concern. When a couple marry they‘re full of plans about the future. When a baby is born the parents enjoy the moment but immediately they look to the future and wonder. We don’t want the baby to stay a baby that would be very odd. We hope and pray it will grow, develop and mature.

Change is a key part of the Christian faith. It’s at the heart of who we are and what we believe. Just look around this Hall and see all the change that’s taking place all the time. Every day we’re called to be converted to Christ, turn away from sin and turn to God. Every day we open ourselves to the possibility of transformation. That’s why all Christians are full of joy and hope every day. I was thrilled when I read Evangelii Gaudium, the joy of the gospel. That is what we all need to put before people. I’m sorry to say the biggest problem that faces my denomination is that we, as Christians, appear irrelevant to many people. We appear dull, boring and lacking in any sense of joy or hope.”

Dr. Tim MacQuiban, Director of the Methodist Ecumenical Office Rome, concluded his intervention with a call for being welcoming towards all:

“The family, however defined, is the place of mutual care and concern, compassion and helpfulness, giving and receiving, sharing and discipline, forgiving and being forgiven, whether in the traditional family or the family of faithful disciples who constitute local ecclesial communities. The Kingdom of God into which we are called is one of mercy and grace. God’s love is wide enough to encompass all. The Church which witnesses to God’s love revealed supremely in Jesus Christ should reflect this with appropriate teaching and pastoral support of those who embrace a single state or relationships without the blessing of the “gift” of children so that they may feel included and welcomed within the “household of faith”, the Church.”

Dr. A. Roy Medley, general secretary of American Baptist Churches USA, spoke with great conviction about the need to offer Jesus’ friendship and not our own judgment to those around us:

“Amidst such experiences [of dysfunction] people yearn for mercy. Hence, in Baptist hymnology, Jesus as friend, is an important theme. Hymns such as “What a Friend We Have in Jesus,” and “There is Not a Friend Like the Lowly Jesus,” express for us the presence of God in the midst of our imperfections and struggles. They remind us of the one who in his vocation of suffering servant enters our woundedness. This is the one who invites sinners to sit at his table; the one who is “gentle and humble in heart, in whom we find rest for our souls” (Matt 11:29); the one to whom we pray in all confidence, “Lord, have mercy.”

This is the presence of Christ and his church the world longs for but seldom expects. Instead they see us abandoning them in the midst of their greatest personal struggles. Two years ago, I was on a midnight flight and I was squeezed next to a young man 20 years old. During our 3 hour flight he kept waking me as he ordered one gin and tonic after another. By his fourth he was quite talkative and he began to pour out to me, a stranger, the heartbreak of his life. He was on his way home, having been arrested for possession of marijuana. He had a learning disorder and could not read – a fact that brought him much shame throughout his school years. His family life was a mess. And on it went for half an hour or more when he then asked me, “So, what do you do?” “I am a Baptist minister,” I replied. What he said next hurt me deeply: “So, I guess you have just been sitting there judging me.” “No, Son,” I said, “my heart has been breaking for you.”

This is the question the world asks the church, “Does God’s heart break for me? Does the church’s heart break for me?” Does this Jesus still invite sinners to his table? In the imperfection of our lives, can we discover through you, “What a friend we have in Jesus, all our sins and griefs to bear?””

An interesting observation made by a Synod Father, that reminded me of von Balthasar‘s way of speaking about the Trinity as the “transcendent origin” of human sexuality, was the intervention of Archbishop Mark Coleridge during one of the “free” discussion sessions, who said that:

“the Eucharist is in some sense sexual. At its epicentre are the words of Christ: “This is my body given for you”. This is what redeemed sexuality is – as distinct from unredeemed sexuality which says: “This is your body taken for me”. If the Eucharist is in some sense sexual, so too is married sexuality in some sense Eucharistic. We need to explore that connection more deeply, and in that task married couples have to lead the way.”

On a related topic, Fr. Manuel Dorantes – the Spanish speaking assistant to Fr. Federico Lombardi – reported the following intervention by a Synod Father during today’s press conference, saying:

“The topic of marriage preparation, especially sexual education, was discussed and there was a request for the Church to enter into this context in a clear way, given that current sexual education is very negative and disastrous. And often the parents in a family themselves don’t speak about the beauty of sexuality with their own children, leaving this task to public education. The Church herself needs to take on this role and present the Good News of human sexuality as a path of love and not as a path of sin.”

And finally, let’s again conclude with Pope Francis’ homily from this morning, where he attacked hypocrisy:

“Hypocrisy has no color, rather it plays with half-tones. It insinuates and seduces in a “chiaroscuro“, with the allure of the lie. In today’s reading, Jesus and the disciples are in the midst of a crowd that is so packed that people are trampling on each other’s feet, highlighting Christ’s frank warning to his disciples: “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees”. It is a very small thing, yeast, but Jesus talks about it as if to say “virus”. Like a doctor who says to his collaborators to pay attention to the risks of an epidemic.

Hypocrisy is that way of living, of act, of speaking that is not clear. Maybe it smiles, maybe it is serious … It isn’t light, it isn’t shade … It moves in a way that seems not to threaten anyone, like the serpent, but it has the charm of the chiaroscuro. It has the charm of things not being clear, of not saying things clearly; the charm of lies, of appearances … To the Pharisees, hypocrites, Jesus also said that they were full of themselves, of vanity, they liked to walk in the streets by showing that they were important, educated people …

Jesus, however, reassures the crowd. “Do not be afraid,” he says, because “there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, nor secret that will not be known.” As if to say that hiding does not help, even though the leaven of the Pharisees lead, and still leads, people to loving darkness more than light.

This yeast is a virus that will make you to get sick and die. Beware! This yeast brings darkness. Beware! But there is one who is greater than this: it is the Father who is in heaven. ‘Are not five sparrows sold for two small coins? Yet not one of them has escaped the notice of God. Even the hairs of your head have all been counted.’. And then, in the final exhortation: ‘Do not be afraid. You are worth more than many sparrows’. In front of all these fears that leave us this way and that way, and that give us the virus, the yeast of pharisaical hypocrisy, Jesus tells us: ‘There is a Father. There is a Father who loves you. There is a Father who cares for you’.”

Now that the third, and most controversial, part of the Instrumentum Laboris, dealing with how to approach challenging family situations, is being discussed, the intensity of messages heard from the Synod rises too.

For example, the Kazakhstani Archbishop Tomasz Peta didn’t mince his words, when he said, in his intervention during one of the General Congregations:

“Blessed Paul VI said in 1972: “From some crack the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”

I am convinced that these were prophetical words of the holy pope, the author of “Humanae vitae”. During the Synod last year, “the smoke of Satan” was trying to enter the aula of Paul VI.

Namely:
1) The proposal to admit to Holy Communion those who are divorced and living in new civil unions;
2) The affirmation that cohabitation is a union which may have in itself some values;
3) The pleading for homosexuality as something which is allegedly normal.

Some synod fathers have not understood correctly the appeal of Pope Francis for an open discussion and started to bring forward ideas which contradict the bi-millennial Tradition of the Church, rooted in the Eternal Word of God.

Unfortunately, one can still perceive the smell of this “infernal smoke” in some items of the “Instrumentum Laboris” and also in the interventions of some synod fathers this year.”

Another Synod Father who is certainly not using a new language is the Guinean Cardinal Robert Sarah who characterizes the present situation saying that “we find ourselves between gender ideology and ISIS” and elaborates it thus:

“Several clues enable us to intuit the same demonic origin of these two movements. Unlike the Spirit of Truth that promotes communion in the distinction (perichoresis), these encourage confusion (homo-gamy) or subordination (poly-gamy). Furthermore, they demand a universal and totalitarian rule, are violently intolerant, destroyers of families, society and the Church, and are openly Christianophobic.

“We are not contending against creatures of flesh and blood ….” We need to be inclusive and welcoming to all that is human; but what comes from the Enemy cannot and must not be assimilated. You can not join Christ and Belial! What Nazi-Fascism and Communism were in the 20th century, Western homosexual and abortion Ideologies and Islamic Fanaticism are today.”

There are very different takes on what is happening at the Synod too. For example, the papally-appointed Synod special secretary, Archbishop Bruno Forte described the working of the Synod as follows:

“Pope Francis has asked us to speak with complete freedom about everything. He pointed out at the beginning of the Extraordinary Synod: “There is nothing that we cannot speak about.” And this is taking place and I think it’s very constructive, because it shows a living Church, co-responsible and involved. To translate this participation and involvement into a spirit of conspiracy or divisions is, I think, a stretch, coming from those who see things only from the outside, without experiencing them from within. Do not forget that we are all men of faith, who feel responsibility towards God and towards our brothers. And that brings us together much more strongly than any possible and hypothetical partisan conflicts that could apply.”

Speaking about challenges, the Colombian Cardinal Rubén Salazar Gómez said:

“In Colombia, for example, only one in three couples is married, while the others live in free or temporary unions, and this creates a fairly big problem in the social life of the nation. Then, it is necessary that the Church, especially the Church in Colombia, is able to proclaim with courage, but also with clarity and with force, the Gospel of the family. This means that one rediscovers the value and the beauty of family life, the beauty of marriage, the beauty of conjugal love, the beauty of the relationship between parents and children, the beauty of the relationships within the family. We must rediscover all this, because the fundamental meaning of these values got a bit lost. And for us, in society, I think this announcement will be welcomed with true joy, because one feels the need to rediscover all that is essential for the life of the family and if it is fundamental to family life it is so also to the life of society.”

Finally, let’s again conclude with Pope Francis’ homily from this morning’s mass, where he started by speaking about the gratuitousness of salvation:

“One of the hardest things to understand, for all Christians, is the gratuitousness of salvation in Jesus Christ. We are used to hearing that Jesus is the Son of God, who came to love, to save us and who died for us. But we have heard it so many times that we have become used to it. When we enter into the mystery of God, into this love without limits, we become astonished and perhaps prefer not to understand it.

Jesus also seems a bit hard on these lawyers because he says strong things to them. Says strong and very hard things. ‘You have taken away the key of knowledge. You yourselves did not enter and you stopped those trying to enter, because you have taken away the key’, that is the key to the gratuity of salvation, the key to that knowledge. And these doctors of the law thought that one could be saved by only respecting all the commandments, and who did not do it was condemned. So they shortened the horizons of God and they made the love of God small, small, to the measurement of each of us. This the battle that both Jesus and Paul fought to defend the doctrine. […]

Jesus says: ‘The greatest love is this: to love God with all your life, with all your heart, with all your strength, and your neighbor as yourself’. Because it is the only commandment that is the height of the gratuity of God’s salvation. And then Jesus adds: ‘In this commandment are all others, because it calls – and makes all good – all the others’. But the source is love; the horizon is love. If you have closed the door, and you have taken away the key of love, you will not be up to the height of the gratuity of salvation you received. This struggle for control of salvation – that only these will be saved, those who do these things – hasn’t finished with Jesus and Paul. […]

This fight does not end, and it is also struggle that we carry inside. And it will do us well to ask today: Do I believe that the Lord saved me gratuitously? Do I believe that I do not deserve salvation? And if I merit something it is through Jesus Christ and what He has done for me? Let us ask ourselves these questions today, only like that will we be faithful to this love that is so merciful: the love of a father and of a mother, because God says He is like a mother to us; love, great horizons, no limits, no restrictions. And let us not be fooled by the doctors who limit this love.”

The circuli minores have now published their reports on Part 2 of the Instrumentum Laboris, entitled “The Discernment of the Family Vocation.“ What I would like to do again is to pull together the contents of the English, Italian, Spanish and German reports, grouping it by topic and using acronyms of the source group names from their official list (i.e., AA will refer to Circulus Anglicus “A”):

1. Need for closer links to Scripture.
   AA: “Seen through the lens of the Holy Family of Nazareth, the text would benefit from a more abundant use of Sacred Scripture, notably Luke Chapters 1 and 2, as well as examples from the Old Testament.”
   AD: “In the material on family and God’s salvific plan, the text lacks grounding in the Book of Tobit and the Song of Songs, which is vital to the Scriptural presentation of marriage.”
   IA: “There is a need for enriching the text with a greater biblical and patristic inspiration.”
   IB: “As in Part I, here too there is a need to report the shortage of references to God’s Word and the almost total lack of reference to the Tradition of the Church.”
   HB: “More explicit reference to both the Old and New Testaments (the spousal love of God towards his people) and the rich post-conciliar magisterium on the family are proposed.”
   G: “Any impression should be avoided that Holy Scripture be used only as a source of quotes for dogmatic, legal or ethical beliefs. The Law of the New Covenant is the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of believers (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church no. 1965 to 1966). The written word must be integrated into the living Word that dwells in the hearts of people in the Holy Spirit. This gives the Scriptures far-reaching spiritual power.”
2. Use a positive, new language.
   AB: “We propose alongside the term “indissolubility” to use a language which is less legal, and which shows better the mystery of God’s love speaking of marriage as a grace, a blessing, and a lifelong covenant of love.”
   AC: “The need to present the indissolubility of marriage as a gift from God rather than a burden and to find a more positive way of speaking about it, so that people can fully appreciate the gift. This relates to the larger question of language, as the Synod looks to shape a language which, in the words of the Instrumentum Laboris, is “symbolic”, “experiential”, “meaningful”, “clear”, “inviting”, “open”, “joyful”, “optimistic” and “hopeful”.”
   AD: “Some said the text needs to frame the notion of “indissolubility” more positively, rather than treating it as a burden.”
   IA: “[There is a] desire to use a language capable of moving men and women of our times to easily understand that the Gospel of the family is the Good News of salvation, addressed to them.”
   IB: “It becomes necessary and urgent to be careful about the language used and to judge the actual comprehensibility of what is expressed. The Christian truth is the Person of Christ who chose to be born, grow, live in a family and, to this day does no stop communicating his message, but he could not settle for it just being well formulated: it must be able to truly “water the earth” (Isaiah 55:10).”
3. Provide “best practices.”
   AA: “The final document would benefit from a consideration of “best practices,” which would show families how to more fully and faithfully live out their vocation. At the heart of such “best practices” is the receiving of the Word of God in the family. [… “B]est practices” should also address proper catechesis and prayer and worship, including prayer within each family.”
   AC: “The need to develop resources in the vital area of family prayer, understood in both formal and less formal ways, both liturgically and devotionally. These resources would again have to be culturally sensitive. […]
   One thing which the Synod might consider producing is a list of practical initiatives or strategies to support families and to help those that are in trouble. This would be something concrete and would be in keeping with the essentially practical character of this second Synod on marriage and the family.”
   AD: “Some in our group spoke about the need for the text to list devotions that both enhance and express family life and spirituality. The rosary was central to the discussion; so was the importance of parents reading Scripture to children, and siblings reading Scripture together. Bishops stressed the value of families attending Sunday Eucharist and other liturgical celebrations together, and were surprised the text didn’t focus on this in greater detail. Some suggested that various practices of popular piety be listed as concrete expressions of family devotions.”
4. Present marriage in the context of the history of salvation.
   AB: “The reflection should illustrate how the Divine Pedagogy for marriage and the family has accompanied the entire history of salvation and continues right until our day. [… The Genesis] account of the creation of marriage presents […] the three basic characteristics of marriage, as it was in the beginning – monogamy, permanence, and equality of the sexes. […]
   But the Divine pedagogy of salvation history concerning marriage and the family reached its climax with the Son of God’s entry in human history, as Jesus Christ was born into a human family. It was considered inappropriate for a Rabbi to speak with a woman yet Jesus dared to speak to a woman, who was a Samaritan – an “excommunicated” and a renowned sinner – something even more scandalous. To a woman who was brought before him prior to her being stoned for the fact that she had committed adultery, he said: “I do not condemn you. Go and sin no more.” He dirtied his hands through work, but not with stones to throw at others.”
   AC: “The need to see more clearly how the Church through the ages has come to a deeper understanding and surer presentation of the teaching on marriage and the family which has its roots in Christ himself. The teaching has been constant, but the articulation of it and the practice based upon that articulation have not been.”
   IC: “The fact of the Incarnation of the Word in a human family, in fact in the family of Nazareth, is the stone that stirs the history of the world with its novelty. We must immerse ourselves in the mystery of Jesus’ birth, of Mary’s yes to the angel’s annunciation made that Word germinate in her womb, of the assent of Joseph who does his part by naming Jesus and taking Mary with him, of the recognition by the Magi and the plotting of Herod, of the participation of Jesus in the story of his exiled, persecuted and fugitive people, of his anticipation by Zechariah and the joy of John the Baptist, of the transmission of blessing from generation to generation, of the welcoming of Israel through its shepherds, through Simeon and Anna, of the presentation of Jesus in the Temple that fulfills the promise, of the losing and finding of Jesus who wants “be in his Father’s house” (Lk 2:49). And, then, we must be there during the endless thirty years where Jesus has digested the prayer and religious tradition of his people to learn the faith of the fathers and to let that faith rise to a telling of the mystery of the Kingdom. […] This, more than the “sacred” family, is the family made “holy and sanctified” by the incarnation of him who is the Son of the Father, the son of Mary and Joseph.”
5. Speak also about need for sacrifice and conversion.
   AC: “In speaking of the joy of marriage and family life, there is a need to speak also of the life of sacrifice and even the suffering which this involves and so to set joy within its proper context of the Paschal Mystery.”
   IA: “Make the primacy of grace, the recognition of sin and the need to encourage ways of conversion more explicit, recalling that the Gospel truth about the family is incarnate in the life of a couple through the working of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of divine love that elevates the human love of a couple to the reality of the Sacrament.”
   IC: “The path of the cross is therefore also at the heart of the Word of Jesus on marriage and the family, in the sense that these goods, while great and sacred, are to be configured in the mystery of the New Covenant, which brings the ancient one to completion, of which marital love is the privileged image.”
6. Marriage and family life as a vocation.
   AA: “In Jesus, the fulfillment of God’s revelation, the family uncovers its calling within the universal call to holiness. For the disciple of Jesus, every vocation calls the person and the community in two distinct and complementary dimensions. We are called to communion and we are called for mission. We see this in the call of the 12 Apostles. They are called to be friends of Jesus and sent out to preach. The same is true of those disciples who are called to family life.”
   IB: “A renewed alliance is to be recommended between the different forms of vocation to love: marriage, the priesthood, consecrated life. A fruitful exchange of gifts is accomplished in the communion of vocations, that enlivens and enriches the ecclesial community. We live in a time that calls for the ability to “stay close,” to accompany, to accept, to forgive. Family and consecrated life can learn to accompany and support each other, helping each other in their respective difficulties, also experiencing new forms of communion and sharing.”
7. Use clear language.
   AA: “Though every effort should be made to provide for streamlined, attractive language, a primary concern was the clarity of well-grounded explanations of Church teaching on marriage and the family.”
   IB: “The words “nature” and “natural”, of great importance in Christian philosophical and theological tradition, conceived from a perspective of creation, appear repeatedly in the text. Here it is suggested that it ought not be overlooked that such terminology, in cultural circles with which we dialogue, is not unambiguous and is difficult to understand for normal people; their use is therefore not easy at the pastoral level.”
8. Emphasize the Word of God in the life of the family.
   AB: “[F]ocus on the centrality of the Word of God in the theology of marriage, in the pastoral care of the family, and in family piety. The Christian community welcomes the Word of God especially when proclaimed at the Sunday Liturgy. Thus a goal for every couple and family would be to worship together faithfully at Mass every Sunday. Married couples and families also encounter the Word of God in the array of devotions and celebrations that are part of our Catholic heritage. Such piety includes approaching together the sacrament of reconciliation, common prayer and reading of the Scriptures, and other encounters with God’s word in catechesis and prayer.”
   AC: “There is a need to draw more deeply and richly from the Scripture, not just in citing biblical texts but in presenting the Bible as a matrix for Christian married and family life. As at Vatican II, the Bible would be a prime resource for the shaping of a new language to speak of marriage and the family; and the Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini could serve as a resource for practical suggestions.”
9. The relationship between mercy and justice.
   AB: “The group felt a strong need for a deeper reflection on the relationship between mercy and justice, particularly as it is presented in Misericordiae Vultus. […] God never gives up on his mercy. It is mercy which reveals God’s true face. God’s mercy reaches out to all of us, especially to those who suffer, those who are weak, and those who fail. “How can I give you up, O Ephraim! How can I hand you over, O Israel… My heart recoils within me, my compassion grows warm and tender.” (Hs 11:8-9) As Pope Francis stresses in Misericordiae Vultus, God’s anger lasts for a moment, but his mercy lasts forever.”
   G: “We have extensively discussed the terms that are often presented as opposed: mercy and truth, grace and justice and their theological relationships among each other. In God they are not opposed: Because God is love, in God justice and mercy coincide. The mercy of God is the fundamental truth of revelation, which does not stand in opposition to other revealed truths. Rather, it opens to us the deepest reason, since it tells us why God has emptied himself in his Son and why Jesus Christ is persistently present for our salvation in his Church through his Word and Sacraments. The mercy of God reveals to us the reason and the purpose of the entire work of salvation. The righteousness of God is his mercy with which he makes us righteous. […]
   As meant by Thomas Aquinas and the Council of Trent, the application of the basic principles of prudence and wisdom is due to every particular, often complex, situation. It is not about exceptions, where God’s Word is not to be valid, but it is a question of the fair and equitable application of the Word of Jesus – for example, the Word about the indissolubility of marriage – in intelligence and wisdom. Thomas Aquinas has made the necessity of a concretizing application clear when he says: “Intelligence is not only about the considerations of reason, but also its application to action, which is the purpose of practical reason (STh II-II-47,3: “ad prudentiam pertinet non solum consideratio rationis, sed etiam applicatio ad opus, quae est finis practicae rationis”).”
10. Natural marriage.
    AD: “Some bishops felt that we need to better understand the relationship between the newness of the Christian sacrament of matrimony and the natural structure of marriage built into God’s plan from the start.”
    G: “Finally, we have struggled with the concept of natural marriage. In the history of mankind, natural marriage is always also culturally marked. The term natural marriage could imply that there is a natural way of life of people without cultural conditioning. We therefore propose the formulation: “Creation-based marriage”.”
11. Need for nuanced analysis of obstacles to marriage among young people.
    AC: “The need for a more nuanced understanding of why young people these days decide not to marry or to delay marriage, often for a long time. The Instrumentum Laboris presents fear as the dominant motive. But it is also true that young people at times do not see the point of marriage or regard it as a purely personal or private matter which makes a public ceremony irrelevant to them. They are also affected in many ways by a culture of options which baulks at closing doors, and they prefer to test a relationship before making any final commitment. Powerful economic factors can also have their effect. We need to beware of a too simplistic reading of a complex phenomenon.”
    HA: “When speaking about youth and marriage, it is done from the perspective of fear, which is not enough, it is an anthropological question: they live day by day, “forever” does not fit their way of thinking, they do not ask themselves that, it is another way of looking at life. Perhaps we could speak of informality: a piece of paper does not make marriage and perhaps we have surrounded it with so many formalities that it does not fit the minds of young people, who often identify formality with hypocrisy.”
12. Definition of marriage.
    AD: “The Instrumentum Laboris nowhere defines marriage. This is a serious defect. It causes ambiguity throughout the text. Most bishops agreed that the document should add the definition of marriage from Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes 48.”
    HA: “There is a need for a definition of the family, either from Gaudium et Spes #52 or other documents such as Familiaris Consortio.”
13. Emphasis on graduality.
    HA: “We must emphasize graduality and processuality to welcome the process through which God communicates the grace of the Alliance, which educates in a way where every person is taken into account, progressively, in community, that corrects, accompanies and forgives. Being the pedagogy of God, processuality is also contained in Tradition (St. Agustine’s De cathequizandis rudibus) and it is also indicated by Aparecida (280, 281). […] Following the thesis of the “semina Verbi,” it can not be ignored that there are many positive values in other types of families.”
    G: “Another aspect of our discussion was the […] gradual introduction of people to the sacrament of marriage, ranging from non-binding relations, via unmarried couples living together and those who are only civilly married up to ecclesially-valid, sacramental marriage. To accompany these people pastorally at the various stages, is a great pastoral task, but also a great joy. […]
    The Church’s teaching on marriage has historically developed and deepened. Initially it was the humanization of marriage that has been condensed in the conviction of monogamy. In the light of the Christian faith, the personal dignity of the spouses has been recognized and the deeper divine likeness of man perceived in the relationship of husband and wife. In a further step, the ecclesial nature of marriage has been deepened and it became understood as a domestic church. Finally, the church became explicitly aware of the sacramentality of marriage. This historical path of deepening can today be seen also in the lives of many people. They are initially affected by the human dimension of marriage, they let themselves be convinced by the Christian view of marriage in the environment of the Church and therefore find a way to celebrate sacramental marriage. Just like the historical development of the Church’s teaching has taken time, so too must ecclesial ministry give the people of today time for maturing on their way towards sacramental marriage and not act according to the principle of “all or nothing”. Here we need to unfold the idea of ​​a “step by step process” (FC 9) in the present, for which John Paul II has already laid a foundation in Familiaris Consortio […] (FC 65). The Church stands inevitably in tension between the necessary clarity of the doctrine of marriage and the family on the one hand and the concrete pastoral task on the other hand, also to support and convince those people who only partially coincide in their life with the principles of the Church. With them it is important to take steps on the way to a fullness of life in marriage and family, as the Gospel of the family proclaims.”
14. The danger of idealizing marriage.
    AD: “Others saw a danger in referring to Catholic teaching as simply an “ideal” to be pursued and honored but not practical for the living of daily life. They described this as an approach that implies that only the “pure” can live the Gospel, but not ordinary people.”
    IA: “Among these risks is worth mentioning the confusion of the Christian proposal with an abstract ideal.”
15. Reinforce close, dynamic relationship among family, Church and God.
    AB: “God recognizes the image of Himself in the faithfulness of his spouses and confirms with his blessing this fruit of his grace. The deepest meaning of the indissolubility of marriage, is then, the affirmation and protection of these beautiful and positive qualities that sustain marriage and family life, most especially in times of turbulence and conflict. The Church, therefore, looks to married couples as the heart of the entire family, which, in turn, looks to Jesus especially to his faithful love in the darkness of the cross.”
16. The need for mercy.
    AB: “All of us need God’s mercy. In many societies today there is a sense of self-sufficiency, whereby people feel that they have no need of mercy and no awareness of their own sinfulness. At times this is due to an inadequate catechesis on sin, not recognizing sin as a wounding of our relationship with God and with each other, a wound which can be healed only through the saving power of God’s mercy. On the other hand there can be a tendency for us to put human limits on God’s mercy.”
17. Find balance between local and universal.
    AC: “A great richness and challenge of our discussions continues to be the different modulations of marriage and the family in the various cultures represented in the group. There are certainly points of convergence, arising from our shared sense of God’s plan which is inscribed in creation and which comes to its fullness in Christ crucified and risen, as proclaimed by the Church. But the different ways in which that mystery takes flesh in different parts of the world make it challenging to balance the local and the universal. That remains an overarching task of this Synod.”
18. Opposition to seeing traces of good in irregular relationships.
    AD: “The text tends to treat irregular relationships as somehow also containing “seeds of the Word.” Some bishops felt this was inappropriate and misleading.”
19. Realism about valid conditions for separation.
    AD: “Bishops said the text should present the canonical reasons for separation of spouses and reasons for seeking an annulment. We need to be realistic about marital problems rather than simply encouraging people to stay together. Again, violence against women was a key part of the discussion.”
20. Marriage and family spirituality.
    HA: “Married spirituality is born of the presence of God in the midst of spouses.”
21. [Differences of opinion reported.]
    AC: “One thing which the Synod might consider producing is a list of practical initiatives or strategies to support families and to help those that are in trouble. This would be something concrete and would be in keeping with the essentially practical character of this second Synod on marriage and the family. On many of these points there was consensus, on others there was wide if not universal agreement, and on a few there was significant disagreement.”
    AD: “One person felt the text’s grasp of Scripture could be improved by embracing newer scholarship. The person worried that many of us were reading Scripture in too fundamentalist a manner, and other ways of interpreting Scripture might be more fruitful. Others disagreed and thought that the understanding of Scripture in the text was adequate.”

I wasn’t going to mention it, but what started out as potentially just noise is gaining in scale as time passes. Yesterday morning, there was a report about an alleged letter having been written by 13 cardinals and hand-delivered to Pope Francis, raising concerns about the procedures of the synod and it initial working document, the Instrumentum Laboris. I won’t say any more about the letter’s supposed content or signatories, since both have since been repeatedly disputed, although some of the cardinals who supposedly signed this letter did admit to having written a similar one to Pope Francis. My main reason for mentioning this disputed letter is to provide context for the reactions from various Synod Fathers that do shed light on their thinking.

First, a statement by the spokesperson of Cardinal George Pell, who was alleged to have hand-delivered the letter to Pope Francis, says – in addition to denouncing the publication of private letters and expressing a concern about the membership of the drafting committee of the Synod’s final report:

“[M]inority elements want to change the Church’s teachings on the proper dispositions necessary for the reception of Communion. Obviously there is no possibility of change on this doctrine.”

A rather interesting move, ahead of Pope Francis deciding what to do after the Synod …

While several cardinals who are alleged to have signed it have denied any involvement, Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier confirmed that he did sign a similar letter – as did Cardinal Pell, while Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who is on the 10-member drafting committee for the final report, argued that the suspicions of irregularity were already brought to the Synod as prejudices:

“If you’re convinced this is all rigged, then you’re going to see that everywhere. I think that was the single most powerful negative element as this synod opened, that there was an aura around fostered by a number saying this isn’t going to be a fair synod. So no matter what you do, that’s the starting point. Everything looks yellow to the jaundiced eye.”

Cardinal Gerhard Müller, on the other hand, refused to either confirm or deny whether his being on the list of alleged signatories is correct. Instead he delivered a scathing attack on those who published the letter:

“The scandal is that a private letter of the Pope is made public. This is a new Vatileaks: the Pope’s private documents are the private property of the Pope and no one else. No one can publish it, I do not know how that could have happened. Whoever did it needs to justify themselves. The intention of those who wanted it published is to sow strife, create tensions. That seems clear to me.”

Cardinal Müller then launched into a categorical denial of any questions about his loyalty to the pope:

“I think [Pope Francis] spoke about those who say that in the Roman Curia there is opposition against the pope [when he warned against a “hermeneutic of conspiracy”]. Those who say and write that there are wolves, that Francis is surrounded by wolves. It is an offensive and criminal expression. I’m not a wolf against the Pope. I know who the Pope is and what primacy means, a thousand times more than those who say these things. As prefect of the Congregation, I am the first collaborator of the Holy Father, not just me but all those who are part of it. And I won’t allow my obedience and my service to the Pope and the Church to be put in doubt.”

To conclude the matter, Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office, stated:

“[I]n terms of content, the difficulties included in the letter were mentioned on Monday evening in the Synod Hall, as I have previously said, although not covered extensively or in detail.

As we know, the General Secretary and the Pope responded clearly the following morning. Therefore, to provide this text and this list of signatories some days later constitutes a disruption that was not intended by the signatories (at least by the most authoritative). Therefore it would be inappropriate to allow it to have any influence.

That observations can be made regarding the methodology of the Synod is neither new nor surprising. However, once agreed upon, a commitment is made to put it into practice in the best way possible.”

Turning back to the interviews and interventions with Synod Fathers, a particularly encouraging one is Vatican Radio speaking with don Roberto Rosa, an Italian parish priest whom Pope Francis has personally nominated as Synod Father. Don Rosa explains:

“It was something unexpected, which began with a letter that I sent to the Pope at the beginning of August about some pastoral issues. I wrote without even thinking that would read it. A few days later I received a phone call directly from Pope Francis, who had my letter in his hand and together we talked about several pastoral problems of the family. Then we said goodbye. A few days later, I received the appointment, unexpected, to participate as a Synod Father in this Synod on the family.”

Don Rosa then spoke at length about various challenges related to work – both its lack in some cases and its absolutization in others, where it is at the expense of family life. Asked what he would hope to see the Synod do about these challenges, he replied:

“[T]he Church, above all, should propose to those entrepreneurs who are Catholics, engaged in trade, in supermarkets for example, to make a bold choice: to live Sundays and also bring them into life for their employees. This would lead to a rediscovery of the value of work, which clearly is a tool for bringing ahead one’s own family – “ora et labora”, we have been created by God also for work – however, the ultimate purpose of our lives is not the job, it is celebration. I would say that God created us for Sunday. That’s where the sense is of all the work. […] The Gospel always goes against the current, it is always a great innovation that makes life more beautiful for men and women, in the world, in the Church. So, let’s rediscover the Gospel of life, of a full life!”

On the subject of a new language and respect for homosexuals, Cardinal John Dew said the following:

“[Homosexuality is] an issue that people have to to talk about and its an issue that families struggle with, really struggle with. Such people need to be respected you know not not condemned but be respected. If this is their sexual orientation that we have to respect them and try somehow, and no one’s too sure how, but to to include them in the life of the Church. When we have documents which talk about intrinsically disordered or being evil, that’s not going to help people. You know we’ve got to find a way to express what the teaching actually says but not putting things in ways that people feel that they are being branded and they’re being told that the are bad or evil. Scripture was written for a particular time, Paul was writing about particular issues and so for people just to pick out something and even for Church authorities to quote something without putting it in context is not helpful for people. I just hope that something will come out in the final document that helps people to see, I’m sure that’s what Pope Francis is trying to do, this trying to help people to see that the Church is here to to support and assist them. And especially when there’s some area, whether it’s an area of sexual morality or some other difficulty in their families that they’re struggling with.”