Vatican II & All that Jazz (Pillar)

[zippy2006]

- The Pillar Podcast Ep. 51: Vatican II & all that jazz -

At 38:50 in the podcast we get a discussion on synods that goes on for about 15 minutes. At 40:30 Ed Condon says:

The spiritual sense of communion, a true ecclesiology of communion, which is an emotional as much as an intellectual state of being, atrophies if you [lean on] a legal centrality. You know, you lose the muscle memory of reflexive spiritual communion if you can rely on administrative communion for everything, and we have not built that muscle back up. And what I was going to say that I think might perhaps be unpopular is that, actually what you need if you want to really train those muscles of ecclesiological communion back up is what you need is, synods. You know, that's how you do it. (40:30-41:15)
​

Then a few minutes later JD Flynn says the following:

It seems to me, that to paraphrase Chesterton, you and I are sort of saying: "The synodal idea has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried." [...] Although I agree with you that that is a way of reestablishing certain balances which need to be established, and I think even helping bishops to better own their identity as successors of the Apostles and the meaning of that, which, you know, one place where we can really look to the meaning of that is the Council of Jerusalem which is an important template for certain aspects of episcopal communion. But, what we're sort of saying is, "Yeah, they're not getting it. They haven't gotten it, they haven't gotten it, they haven't gotten it." Is there any reason to think that they would, or that we would keep doing synods and they would get better? (46:15-47:09)
​

Condon responds:

I guess it's one of those things that you can't force the issue. I think it has to happen organically and we have to sort of grow towards... You know, it's relearning muscle memory, it's rebuilding a motor skill that the Church lost over a period of a century, give or take, through all of the sort of historical contexts that we were talking about. You know, the age of empire, that there was an age of great centrality and unified law. The Church, in a way, has always adapted her governing structures to reflect those of the period of history in which She is living. And the Church is now still reinventing and relearning how She wants to structure herself in a modern interconnected world. And I think that's fine. I don't know that you can force it. (49:20-50:17)​

This is interesting because you have conservative Catholic commentators admitting the need for synodality and yet critiquing the concrete steps that are being taken to achieve this end.

 

[Michie]

- The Pillar Podcast Ep. 51: Vatican II & all that jazz -

At 38:50 to in the podcast we get a discussion on synods that goes on for about 15 minutes. At 40:30 Condon says:

The spiritual sense of communion, a true ecclesiology of communion, which is an emotional as much as an intellectual state of being, atrophies if you [lean on] a legal centrality. You know, you lose the muscle memory of reflexive spiritual communion if you can rely on administrative communion for everything, and we have not built that muscle back up. And what I was going to say that I think might perhaps be unpopular is that, actually what you need if you want to really train those muscles of ecclesiological communion back up is what you need is, synods. You know, that's how you do it. (40:30-41:15)
​

Then a few minutes later JD Flynn says the following:

It seems to me, that to paraphrase Chesterton, you and I are sort of saying: "The synodal idea has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried." [...] Although I agree with you that that is a way of reestablishing certain balances which need to be established, and I think even helping bishops to better own their identity as successors of the Apostles and the meaning of that, which, you know, one place where we can really look to the meaning of that is the Council of Jerusalem which is an important template for certain aspects of episcopal communion. But, what we're sort of saying is, "Yeah, they're not getting it. They haven't gotten it, they haven't gotten it, they haven't gotten it." Is there any reason to think that they would, or that we would keep doing synods and they would get better? (46:15-47:09)
​

Condon responds:

I guess it's one of those things that you can't force the issue. I think it has to happen organically and we have to sort of grow towards... You know, it's relearning muscle memory, it's rebuilding a motor skill that the Church lost over a period of a century, give or take, through all of the sort of historical contexts that we were talking about. You know, the age of empire, that there was an age of great centrality and unified law. The Church, in a way, has always adapted her governing structures to reflect those of the period of history in which She is living. And the Church is now still reinventing and relearning how She wants to structure herself in a modern interconnected world. And I think that's fine. I don't know that you can force it. (49:20-50:17)​

This is interesting because you have conservative Catholic commentators admitting the need for synodality and yet critiquing the concrete steps that are being taken to achieve this end.

I think first both sides need to define what it is.

 

[zippy2006]

I think first both sides need to define what it is.

The question is really just, "Would it be good to have more synods in the Church?" Condon proposed synods as the solution to a fundamental problem we are experiencing.

 

[Michie]

Everyone has a different understanding of this and how it can be applied in the context of what the Church has always taught in each parish setting. It’s too ambiguous and generalized for any real conclusion of what it means and how it’s easily understood by laity and clergy alike. We can poll the laity till the cows come home but if they do not understand the do’s and don’ts of what their own Church teaches and keep getting mixed messages from clergy, I have hard time seeing this exercise as doing nothing but adding more confusion to an already convoluted situation.

 

[zippy2006]

Everyone has a different understanding of this...

I disagree. Pretty much everyone in the know understands what a synod is.

 

[Michie]

I disagree. Pretty much everyone in the know understands what a synod is.

Okay. A lot of people disagree what the purpose of this one is. That seems to be the problem.

Catholic Twitter Reacts Hotly as U.S. Bishops Set ‘Woke’ Tone for Synod in Viral Tweet

Are Catholics truly being represented in the process of synodality?

Pope chooses 'synodality' as theme for 2022 synod - Catholic Review

As pope opens synod, experts extol ‘synodality’ but struggle to define it

 

[Michie]

USCCB Speak: Full of Sound and Ennui Signifying Nothing

 

[Wolseley]

One of my major beefs with the modern Catholic Church is the "corporate workshop" environment when it comes to everything. They will come up with some stupid title like "Sowing Seeds 2022: Our Life As Church", and host a three-day event at a Hilton hotel someplace, which will feature speakers, flow charts, asset breakdowns, and illustrative participation exercises, along with catered meals and a $250 entrance charge per head, and at the end of which, not only will they not have accomplished anything, nobody will even remember what was said.

It's like Saul getting knocked off his horse on the road to Damascus, and the Lord's voice from the sky telling him, "Saul, I am disappointed that your quarterly reports have not been submitted within the time frame specified by the Commitee for Persecutions; this must be rectified by means of a written activity synopsis and given to all department heads within five (5) working days of receipt of this memo."