Tuesday, October 18, 2005

From the Aula

As the Synod winds down, John Thavis of CNS reviews the propositions of the circuli minores, presented earlier today

-- Proposition 40 said Catholics who have divorced and civilly remarried without an annulment "cannot be admitted to holy Communion" because they are in clear contrast with church teaching on marriage. It encouraged other pastoral efforts toward such Catholics; it suggested that some margin of flexibility might be found in further study of church law on the conditions for annulments.

-- Proposition 46 said there is no "eucharistic coherence" when Catholic politicians promote laws that go against human good, justice and natural law. It indicated that in determining whether specific politicians should receive Communion bishops should "exercise the virtue of prudence."

-- Proposition 41 repeated church teaching that shared Communion with non-Catholic Christians "is generally not possible." An "ecumenical concelebration" of the Eucharist would be even more objectionable, it said. At the same time, it said exceptions that would allow for shared Communion when "precise conditions" are present should be respected.

-- Regarding Sunday Liturgies of the Word when no priest is present, Proposition 10 said it was up to bishops' conferences to set policies on distribution of Communion, but it asked the Vatican to consider preparing a new document spelling out universal rules on such liturgies.

The issue of ordaining married men of proven virtue, or "viri probati," was raised by several bishops in discussion of the shortage of priests that afflicts many parts of the world.

Proposition 11 said the lack of priests was a cause of "acute pain" and said the situation called for "effective pastoral initiatives."

But it added: "In this context, the synod fathers affirmed the importance of the inestimable gift of ecclesiastical celibacy in the practice of the Latin Church." Catholic faithful, it said, need to better know the reasons behind the relationship between celibacy and ordination.

"Some participants made reference to 'viri probati,' but in the end the small discussion groups evaluated this hypothesis as a road not to follow," it said.

And in other Synodal Buzz, one prelate, "conspicuous by his arrogance," in the words of one attendee, caused consternation by "writing his own modi [proposals] in the small groups without running them by the group."

The propositions were discussed in small groups this afternoon. They will be voted on later in the week.



Blogger Fr. John said...

So who was the arrogant bishop?

18/10/05 15:07  
Blogger Todd said...

Was he wearing that big red thing?

18/10/05 15:21  
Blogger John Hearn said...

You mean a devil suit? ;^)

18/10/05 15:48  
Blogger Jeff said...

Maybe they mean Ratzinger!

Anyway, tell us again why you have to run a proposal by "the group" before writing it down? I somehow missed that part...

18/10/05 17:13  
Blogger Jeff said...

Maybe this brilliant guy was the complainer:

"β€œI wonder why in the hell they brought us here and put us through all this,” he said Oct. 18, β€œto say absolutely nothing more than what has been painfully said for decades.”

This participant expressed hope that since Benedict XVI listened to most of the discussions, he might come up with more innovative responses to some of the pastoral problems identified in the synod."

Jeez, Loueez. You'd think a bishop would know better than that. That's what the Church DOES; it says the same things over and over in new ways to try to open deadened hearts.

18/10/05 17:28  
Blogger Fungulo said...

Doing the 'same thing over and over' landed plenty of priests in jail and Bernard Law in Rome ... just because something has been done 'over and over' doesn't mean it should ALWAYS be done!

19/10/05 03:36  
Blogger Fungulo said...

Jeff (answering your question above)

As I understand the way the Synod's currently functioning, the 'small groups' are supposed to collectively come up with 'modi' together.

So of course there is nothing wrong with the Synod Father writing anything, but I think the inference here is that he submitted it to the central group, as if it were a result of his small group's discussion.

Don't worry, we'll eventually hear all the details: none of this stuff is bound to any form of secrecy.

19/10/05 03:42  

Post a Comment

<< Home