Is this Amazonian Synod as bad as people are saying?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prodigal1984
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Beats me. In real life to censure an individual in a group discussion they’d have to become almost violent. This seems like a fairly reasonable post.

I’m often scared to comment on anything here.
 
Yes, as all people should be…
It is the same missionary Spirit that guides them , I think…
There are about 300 languages in Amazonia coming from about 20 different linguistic families and there are independent ones unrelated.
That alone is a whole of a challenge.
It is very diverse and rich culturally.
Archaeologically we are speaking of cultures dating 12000 years…
And we are talking about Brazil, Peru, Bolivia,Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana , French Guyana and Surinam, and about 7 million km2.( REPAM pan Amazonian network. Red PanAmazonica)
Huge…and it’s biodiversity is amazing.
It is late for me now. There so much to share …
Good night and God bless you
 
Last edited:
God bless you too. I just imagined the faces of the Bishops with letters showering before the Synod. I wasn t being that serious…
 
Some of the language was a bit insensitive towards the native peoples of the Amazon. Other than that, I’m in total agreement. I believe Cdl Sarah said something along the lines of the Church baptizing the native culture, not assimilating the culture into the Church; not his exact words, just paraphrasing here.
 
Last edited:
Yes it is . Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider have circulated a document detailing all the errors in the Instrumentum Laboris of the Synod, and called for the faithful to do prayer and fasting (which I fully intend to do)

www.ncregister.com

Cardinal Burke, Bishop Schneider Announce Crusade of Prayer and Fasting

Citing “serious theological errors and heresies” in the Amazon Synod’s working document, they call on the faithful to pray and fast over a 40 day period to prevent such errors being approved.
www.ncregister.com www.ncregister.com
 
Fauken said:
Incorporate their culture and spirituality into Catholicism as much as possible
Click to expand...
And this to me is the particularly bonkers bit. Since when did Holy Mother Church do that? Are we not a missionary church? The church teaches. That’s the job.
 
graciew said:
It is the same Cardinals who wrote the Dubia and I find news here, nowhere else at least in Spanish . Like all quiet to say it somehow.
You have asked I answer.
As I was reading C. Brandenuller’s, part of it because I honestly didn t even finish reading it, his words account for nothing about not like Medellin, Aparecida…it s as if he didn t belong ( well he doesn t …to CELAM), even his language is different.There are words as inculturation that he gives a weird twist which made me at least wonder if he has had any exposition to Amazonia or a part of it.
Through his words ( if they accurately express what he is thinking which I am not judging) he sounds very distant, and cut from any pastoral concept so it makes it difficult to see what his reservations are even before it has started.
As if we weren’t understood , as if it were a different language he is using.
I won’t dispute a Cardinal of course, but there are serious bishops involved in the Synod who do understand these pastoral issues.So I sincerely do not see the point of having to be pointing anything out when there are bother bishops involved in the Synod,and who know the situation.Why doubt that they will do their job well?
From the bottom of my heart, I don t understand them , nor this attitude,nor this need .
But they are our Church so, so be it.
Click to expand...
graciew, from memory I think you are South American am I right? I just want to relay a wonderful experience. My son had a strong desire to go to World Youth Day this year in Panama. I was a bit worried because you do hear some negative stories about cartels and murders. He and his friends decided to spend the first week in Mexico City and visit Guadalupe and the city surrounds. Then they went down to Panama City for the WYD week. The day before the Popes general Mass, hoards of youth all walked the 14 miles to the Mass site and then slept on the ground under the stars. My son said it was the best sleep he had ever had. He’s come home from that ‘pilgrimage’ with a pilgrims appreciation of the earth God put under our feet to walk ‘the way’ and the grace of simplicity and enthusiasm for the wonderful sacrifice of Christ. I don’t think it is a coincidence that the Holy Spirit has honed in on South America, with a Pope, a WYD and an important Synod, to guide the future of the Church.
 
It’s alwaaaays wrong to assimilate secondary elements when evangelizing pagans…

Oh, except when it’s Rome. Then it’s totally ok to assimilate latin, roman titles, roman law, roman architecture, and greek philosophy.
 
AlbMagno said:
Oh, except when it’s Rome. Then it’s totally ok to assimilate latin, roman titles, roman law, roman architecture, and greek philosophy.
Click to expand...
Are Latin, titles, law, architecture, and Greek philosophy inseparable from Roman/Greek paganism?
 
Last edited:
Fauken said:
Are Latin, titles, law, architecture, and Greek philosophy inseparable from Roman/Greek paganism?
Click to expand...
With respect to Greek and Roman philosophy: they can be separated, but it’s not been an uncontroversial process. Eastern Orthodox continue to criticise Catholics for using Aristotelian philosophy (especially by Aquinas), while Protestants criticise both Orthodox and Catholics for using Hellenistic philosophy in general.

Part of what @AlbMagno is commenting on is that the identity of the Church (specifically the Western Church) was born - partially - out of a particular socio-historical context, and so embodies particular ways of doing and thinking that are peculiar to this context. These are to be distinguished from the dogmas of the faith that are sourced from God that are applicable all times and places.

An issue then is the historical pattern where sometimes one is confused for the other: where local ways of doing and thinking about particular things are assumed as universally applicable and can therefore replace other local ways. Often this has accompanied the inference that other local ways are irredeemably non-Christian.

This has been a longstanding point of contention in the theology of the Church’s mission and evangelisation: we’ve not only sought to make new people Catholics, but also (subconsciously) make them Romans. This doesn’t just apply to people in the New World, but also Eastern Catholics in the Old World whose own local ways were replaced by Roman ways (which were then re-replaced through De-Latinisation).

This isn’t exclusive to the Catholic Church, mind you. It’s an also been an issue in Protestantism and (to a lesser extent) in Eastern Orthodoxy, as well as other religions. It’s part of the uncomfortable historical reality of religions frequently piggy-backing on mass colonisation of newly discovered lands.

In any case, I’ve read the document issued by Burke and Schneider, and whilst I do have tentative agreement with them on some points, I feel that much of their interpretation of the working document is very pessimistic and hypercritical. Their reading of integral ecology (section 5) is (in my opinion) missing the point completely.
 
Fauken said:
You’re giving reasons why all these things are important but not why bishops should be gathering together to deal with the environment as their top concern, instead of using a solution headed by lay people. Does the Church not have lay ecologists or doctors?
Click to expand...
A Synod for the Amazon suggests ecology will be a major focus. It could be a Synod for South America, or for Portugese speakers, or any number of other divisions. But the title of the Synod refers to an ecological reality, the Amazon River, which has a profound impact on all aspects of culture.

Native cultures are assuming a greater importance in the Church. Mistakes of “cultural imperialism” are recognized by most people, in and out of the Church. The Amazon is a major area where the gospel should be spread, but it should not come as an imposition. It has to come by a transformation of the people. So bishops have to understand in order to guide the Church and not make the same kind of mistakes over and over.

This is not so much bishops doing what lay ecologists might do as it is bishops affirming what they hear from the people of the Amazon. They cannot come in with ideas of industrial development, Spanish nobility, or other structures and impose them. That has created many problems in the past.

And they cannot simply take the native culture and say everything in it is great. They have to discern what will help the gospel to grow. That discernment is done with help from ecologists, but it is the sort of thing bishops have to do. That is why there are bishops.
 
Shouldn’t they have discussed this stuff, I don’t know… 500 years ago?
 
Yes, I am South American.
That was very sweet of you and I am so glad your son had such an experience of God and growth. So good he went!
It is that culture of encounter Pope Francis speaks about also…
Thanks so much for sharing your son’s experience, Emeraldlady .
 
Last edited:
Prodigal1984 said:
Shouldn’t they have discussed this stuff, I don’t know… 500 years ago?
Click to expand...
Funny you ahould mention it.

In 1493, 526 years ago, Alexander VI issued Inter caetera which divided the world between the Spanish and the Portugese. The line went through the eastern part of Brazil, giving them “sovereignty” over Brazil. It was the first decision on the Amazon, though done with essentially no knowledge of it; it probably was an accident that part of the Americas went to the Portugese.

More intelligent decisions can be made today to refine those past positions and respect the great gift God has given us all in the Amazon.
 
Fauken said:
Roughly:
  • Listen to the native peoples more
  • Incorporate their culture and spirituality into Catholicism as much as possible
Click to expand...
These are the points that concern me most. The Church’s mission is to spread its teachings, not change them based on interactions with other cultures. We’re talking here about pantheism. That stands in direct contradiction to the Catholic faith.
 
gracepoole said:
These are the points that concern me most. The Church’s mission is to spread its teachings, not change them based on interactions with other cultures. We’re talking here about pantheism. That stands in direct contradiction to the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
I agree. Living the Gospel profoundly changes the lives of those who follow it: why should be surprising or bad that their culture would then change with it? I’m half afraid this kind of “dialogue” will result in a Santeria-like religion.
 
Last edited:
gracepoole said:
40.png
Fauken:
Roughly:
  • Listen to the native peoples more
  • Incorporate their culture and spirituality into Catholicism as much as possible
Click to expand...
These are the points that concern me most. The Church’s mission is to spread its teachings, not change them based on interactions with other cultures. We’re talking here about pantheism. That stands in direct contradiction to the Catholic faith.
Click to expand...
The Church teaches in order to convert people, not to replace them. The impetus for missionary activity is love, which enables converts to share whatever good they know with the Church. It is not an imposition on them, but a nurturing, which accepts them and all that is good in them.
the Church, being the salt of the earth and the light of the world (cf. Matt. 5:13-14), is more urgently called upon to save and renew every creature, that all things may be restored in Christ and all men may constitute one family in Him and one people of God…
whatever good is found to be sown in the hearts and minds of men, or in the rites and cultures peculiar to various peoples, not only is not lost, but is healed, uplifted, and perfected for the glory of God, the shame of the demon, and the bliss of men.
Ad Gentes 1,9
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top