Interventions for justice and inclusivity

[Odell]

Taken from a source that supports more “inclusion” how would you answer each bullet point?

Seventy two Synod participants gave three-minute interventions today. Rosica summarized them and below are some of the most promising from his list.

*Exclusionary language is to be avoided. The Church should not pity gay persons, but recognize them for who they are: our sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, colleagues, friends, etc.

*The domination of men over women must be eliminated. For many women and children, home can be a dangerous place, but our Churches can also be dangerous places.

*We need to welcome the huge numbers of unbaptized and ask, “Are we the masters or the servants of the Eucharistic table?”

*We need a Eucharist that “is not a prize for the perfect, but nourishment for the weak.”

*The Instrumentum Laboris is too focused on the brokenness and not the joys of the family. We need a new anthropology where human nature is seen as good and beautiful and not fallen and broken.

*The family should teach the Church.

*On issues like divorce and remarriage, polygamy, and other cultural challenges, there is no universal solution. Instead there should be discussions and solutions at the regional and continental level.

*The Church should use form three of the general absolution as a clear signal for Catholics to “come home.”

myemail.constantcontact.com/Synod-Watch–The-Francis-strategy-for-change–a-synod-process-loosed–and-Durocher-s-stunning-proposal-for-women.html?soid=1101674625527&aid=hwMqquQdUh0

 

[NovusFidem]

It is a bit difficult to talk about this. If we try to defend the teachings we end up sounding too stiff, but if we say something to encourage those who feel excluded, we end up sounding too lax. If we try to be Christ-like, then we are interpreted depending on the media

*Exclusionary language is to be avoided. The Church should not pity gay persons, but recognize them for who they are: our sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, colleagues, friends, etc.

They are also sinners, and I don’t know WHY they find it an insult. We all are.

Also, when dealing with their sins, harsh language is unavoidable. No one would deal with murder and try to say “but we need another way to call it. Murder is too offensive!”. Our brothers and sisters are just that: our siblings. But what they do has to be called what it is.

*The domination of men over women must be eliminated. For many women and children, home can be a dangerous place, but our Churches can also be dangerous places.

Wholly agreed! With an observation: the “domination of men over women” comes from a misunderstanding of what our relationship (in marriage, with clergy, with community) is about. For instance, this very emphasized passage:

“Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.” (Ephesians 5:24)

…is often distorted by people, including Christians. Basically it says: “wives, live for your husbands”, which, by itself, sounds BAD. But, if you keep on reading:

“Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.” (Ephesians 5:25-27)

So, yeah. I have to cook, clean and be at hand, love him with all I can offer. He has to **die **for my sanctification. Not sure who got the short stick on this one.

Jokes aside, we have to love each other. If men are abusing this teaching in order to overpower women, saying they have to be subjected to their husbands and that’s it, we need to teach them better, and protect women.

The teaching being misused, however, doesn’t mean the teaching is wrong.

*We need to welcome the huge numbers of unbaptized and ask, “Are we the masters or the servants of the Eucharistic table?”

*We need a Eucharist that “is not a prize for the perfect, but nourishment for the weak.”

Let’s try this. Now, the Eucharist is water. Our souls are cups. Sin is a hammer. And we are thirsty.

We really need to drink from our cups, but we have sinned - we threw a hammer at our cup, and now it’s cracked. You can try to add water to it, but it all will leak before you get to drink for it, effectively leaving you still thirsty.

That’s it, basically. We need sanctifying Grace, but with sin we are spiritually dead, and Grace won’t be able to do anything for us. The Eucharist won’t clean the slate for us, won’t “fix the cup” - it is water, it is essential and filling, but we have no means to hold it with a broken cup.

What can fix the cup? The other Sacraments, like Baptism (only once in our lives) and Penance (for some, daily ). But to receive the** fixing powers of Penance**, you have to repent, which is something people who defend “Eucharist for all” have trouble understanding…

*The Instrumentum Laboris is too focused on the brokenness and not the joys of the family. We need a new anthropology where human nature is seen as good and beautiful and not fallen and broken.

Human nature is seen as good and beautiful, but it is also fallen and broken. Why not both? There’s beauty in it.

The family is broken as a secular institution. The Church still sees the beauty in it, but has problems communicating that beauty to a secular world. What we see as beautiful, society sees as limiting, restrictive.

*The family should teach the Church.

The Holy Spirit should teach the Church, and the Church should teach society. The family should teach the Priests, sure: a healthy family will raise a man who will become a Priest who knows what family is about.

*On issues like divorce and remarriage, polygamy, and other cultural challenges, there is no universal solution. Instead there should be discussions and solutions at the regional and continental level.

True to a level, but too complex for me, can’t discuss without a lot of IMHO

*The Church should use form three of the general absolution as a clear signal for Catholics to “come home.”

Don’t see how that helps if the individual doesn’t regret their sins. It makes sense to use when a plane is crashing: EVERYONE is regretting every life choice ever made, including getting on that plane… but on the pews? For those who just sinned and would gladly do that again? I don’t think that’s going to produce anything of good…

 

[Corki]

Taken from a source that supports more “inclusion” how would you answer each bullet point?

Seventy two Synod participants gave three-minute interventions today. Rosica summarized them and below are some of the most promising from his list.

*Exclusionary language is to be avoided. The Church should not pity gay persons, but recognize them for who they are: our sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, colleagues, friends, etc.

I saw this in other media and wonder if it is a translation issue. I don’t know of any document, in English, that says we should “pity gay persons”. But there are many which call upon the Church to show compassion. Surely, the speaker does not want the Church to stop speaking about compassion for those who might be homosexual or to have any other burden.

*The domination of men over women must be eliminated. For many women and children, home can be a dangerous place, but our Churches can also be dangerous places.

This one is hard for us to understand in the US. In my parish, and in every parish I have lived as an adult, everything is run by the women other than the Mass itself. But in places around the world where this is a problem, I agree it should be addressed.

*We need to welcome the huge numbers of unbaptized and ask, “Are we the masters or the servants of the Eucharistic table?”

I don’t understand this. If this is a call for the Church to have open Communion, that’s just wrong and very off topic for this Synod. If its a call for more Evangelization, that’s a good thing (but still somewhat off topic).

*We need a Eucharist that “is not a prize for the perfect, but nourishment for the weak.”

Yes, many Popes and Bishops have said the same thing. It is part of the call for frequent reception of Communion and for frequent reception of the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

*The Instrumentum Laboris is too focused on the brokenness and not the joys of the family. We need a new anthropology where human nature is seen as good and beautiful and not fallen and broken.

Several of the Synod fathers have criticized the IL. However, the entire purpose for the Synod was to address challenges to families. Hard to do that without including those challenges in the preparatory documents.

*The family should teach the Church.

Yes.

*On issues like divorce and remarriage, polygamy, and other cultural challenges, there is no universal solution. Instead there should be discussions and solutions at the regional and continental level.

True. There is a universal goal but not a universal solution as to how to reach that goal.

*The Church should use form three of the general absolution as a clear signal for Catholics to “come home.”

I think we tried that little experiment in the US in the 80s and 90s. It did not have the desired effect. In fact, it was a dismal failure and encouraged people to use their faith as a Sunday check-off box.

 

[Odell]

Thank you both

Odell

 

[DavidFilmer]

*The Church should use form three of the general absolution as a clear signal for Catholics to “come home.”

Yup. General absolutions were badly abused.

Whoever came up with this idea is apparently unaware that it is a flagrant violation of Canon Law. General absolution is permissible only in emergencies (bombs are falling). By its very nature, it ought to be impossible to schedule a general absolution.

And the penitent is still required to attend regular confession at the soonest opportunity, assuming he survives the emergency. But the penitent is often not told about this (even though the priest is required to inform everyone, if possible). More abuse.

And there is no such thing as “form three of the general absolution.” Form 3 IS general absolution (the first form is ordinary confession; the second form is a “penance service”).

 

[MarcoPolo]

*The domination of men over women must be eliminated.

To this I would say, what are you talking about?

 

[Confiteor_Deo]

This priest has some ridiculous ideas. I think that the Church should certainly pity someone with such a heavy cross to bear and (for those who sin in homosexual attractions) are on the road to perdition. They need the so-called “exclusionary language” to learn what the Church teaches about what they are doing.

Holy Communion is not a trivial thing, it is the Most Blessed Sacrament of Our Lord’s Body & Blood and should be treated as such.