In a stunning move, a priest from the Denver Archdiocese has critiqued the atrocious questionnaire being distributed worldwide by the Vatican in advance of the next Synod on the Family. This tool was supposedly circulated to gather some family-related data from what may remain of the Catholic Church, but it has all the characteristics of a frivolous pretense.
Rorate Caeli has published the points in Fr. James Jackson’s review. Some examples:
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.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.
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.
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.Beginning with #33, a list of solutions is proposed.“Proclamation…in espousing values,” “…a more positive approach to the richness of various religious experiences,” and denunciations of poverty stemming from “market logic.”I have no idea what these mean.
Reading the Bible, increased catechesis, older couples lending a hand in formation are mentioned, and while these make sense, it seems to me that this has already been going on for some time. “Meaningful liturgies” are mentioned, but this is vague and sentimental.
The “trauma of family break-up” is mentioned, closely followed by a proposal to streamline the annulment process.How such streamlining can possibly address the trauma is not discussed. We can streamline the process of annulment all we want, and the trauma to the children of divorce will remain.
Father’s summation can be extended to much of what we hear coming from the new FrancisChurch every day.
In short, I found the document vague, secular, naive and sentimental. It was discouraging to read.
I would add insidious.