Archbishop Chaput shares theological critique of youth synod prep document

  • Thread starter Thread starter commenter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The complaints outlined in the article seem rather weak, especially for a working document. I don’t doubt that some bishops may arrive with their own agenda, but this is just a prep document. Expecting it to be all inclusive of everything every bishop wants is unrealistic. Argument from absence is only valid when absence is not to be expected. In this case, it should be expected that all of Catholic theology, and all of society today, would not be included in a 66-page document.

http://www.synod2018.va/content/dam...boris in pdf/Instrumentum laboris_ENGLISH.pdf
Lord Jesus,
in journeying towards the Synod,
your Church turns her attention to all the young people in the world.
We pray that they might boldly
take charge of their lives,
aim for the most beautiful and profound things of life
and always keep their hearts unencumbered
Click to expand...
Accompanied by wise and generous guides,
help them respond to the call
you make to each of them,
to realize a proper plan of life
and achieve happiness.
Keep their hearts open to dreaming great dreams
and make them concerned for the good of others.
Click to expand...
Like the Beloved Disciple,
may they stand at the foot of the Cross,
to receive your Mother as a gift from You.
May they be witnesses to your Resurrection
and be aware that you are at their side
as they joyously proclaim you as Lord.
Amen.
(POPE FRANCIS)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Interesting that he takes issue with the anonymity of the theologian. I completely understand the theologian’s aversion to identifying himself; if he was some priest in the Chicago Archdiocese, for example, he probably would have been carted off to a mental institution for writing such a critique.
 
Cardinal Cupich’s response to this anonymous (and frankly slanted) critique was very well done.
 
It seems that the theologian critic asked for anonymity but was known to Archbishop Chaput.

Speaking of the critique, the Archbishop says:
“In fact the critique I selected is among the most charitable I’ve received from scholars; others have been longer, more thorough, and less gentle in assessing the 33,000-word text.”

Archbishop Chaput ends by saying " I certainly agree with the cardinal that unnamed sources can be regrettable. So is the toxic environment in many of our academic communities that makes them necessary."
 
if only he complained about Titans’ OT win over the Eagles 😉
 
JimG said:
Archbishop Chaput ends by saying " I certainly agree with the cardinal that unnamed sources can be regrettable. So is the toxic environment in many of our academic communities that makes them necessary."
Click to expand...
I would rather say that resorting to anonymity is the biggest contributor to the toxic environment in academic communities.
 
pnewton said:
40.png
JimG:
Archbishop Chaput ends by saying " I certainly agree with the cardinal that unnamed sources can be regrettable. So is the toxic environment in many of our academic communities that makes them necessary."
Click to expand...
I would rather say that resorting to anonymity is the biggest contributor to the toxic environment in academic communities.
Click to expand...
There is enormous amount of nonsense coming from academia, with a name attached. There also is a tendency to attack the source, if their ideas challenge the prevailing political correctness. Resorting to anonymity is a minor issue, considering the extreme herd mentality in most of academia now.

Anonymous theological arguments can still be refuted on their merits. If you can.
 
Last edited:
Cardinal Baldiserri, Secretary General of the upcoming Synod, was dismissive in a press conference of Archbishop Chaput’s call to cancel the synod. See story here.

Meanwhile, Archbishop Chaput was the recipient of an open letter critical of the Synod. See story here.
 
commenter said:
Anonymous theological arguments can still be refuted on their merits. If you can.
Click to expand...
Yes, they can. I was referring to short-comings of anonymity though.

But yes, the critique can itself be critiqued. I would say the critique misses that this is a youth synod, more pastoral than theological. Of course dialogue will work better than dissertation, for example. I get the impression that whoever wrote this critique does not know any actual young people.
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
Cardinal Baldiserri, Secretary General of the upcoming Synod, was dismissive in a press conference of Archbishop Chaput’s call to cancel the synod. See story here.

Meanwhile, Archbishop Chaput was the recipient of an open letter critical of the Synod. See story here.
Click to expand...
According to ++Vigano, the Pope referred to ++Chaput as the Right winger. The Vatican has been asked to respond to Vigano’s statements. Thus far, they haven’t confirmed or denied this.

Academia is not the only toxic environment now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top