How liberals are handling their defeat at the Synod

Fr. Z's Blog ^ | 10/27/2015 | Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

[LovedSinner]

Ross Douthat of the NYT really got under the skin of a whole raft of libs who, in typical lib fashion, reacted badly and are now trying silence him. Douthat wrote about how the libs lost at the Synod, how they did not get their Church and doctrine changing agenda through. HERE – go read it now. That made liberal heads explode. They signed on to a group letter whining to the Editor of Hell’s Bible that that sort of thing shouldn’t be permitted. After all, they sneered, Douthat doesn’t have a theology degree.

So the libs wrote a letter. Here it is with the list of signatories I have at this time.

To the editor of the New York Times

On Sunday, October 18, the Times published Ross Douthat’s piece “The Plot to Change Catholicism.” Aside from the fact that Mr. Douthat has no professional qualifications for writing on the subject, the problem with his article and other recent statements is his view of Catholicism as unapologetically subject to a politically partisan narrative that has very little to do with what Catholicism really is. Moreover, accusing other members of the Catholic church of heresy, sometimes subtly, sometimes openly, is serious business that can have serious consequences for those so accused. This is not what we expect of the New York Times.

[LovedSinner]

I posted an earlier thread about Douthat's piece here.

Here is a list of the signers:

John O’Malley, SJ (Georgetown University) Massimo Faggioli (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota) Nicholas P. Cafardi (Duquesne University) Gerard Mannion (Georgetown University) Stephen Schloesser, SJ (Loyola University Chicago) Katarina Schuth OSF (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota) Leslie Tentler (Catholic University of America, emerita)

John Slattery (University of Notre Dame) Megan McCabe (Boston College) Thomas M. Bolin (St. Norbert College) Kevin Brown (Boston College) Alan C. Mitchell (Georgetown University) Elizabeth Antus (John Carroll University) Kathleen Grimes (Villanova University) Fran Rossi Szpylczyn Christopher Bellitto (Kean University) Katharine Mahon (University of Notre Dame) Corey Harris (Alvernia University) Kevin Ahern (Manhattan College) John DeCostanza (Dominican University) Daniel Cosacchi (Loyola University Chicago) Amy Levad (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota) Christine McCarthy (Fordham University) Sonja Anderson (Yale University) Fr. Robert A. Busch (Diocese of Amarillo) Brandon Peterson (University of Utah) Heather Miller Rubens (Institute for Christian and Jewish Studies) Daniel Dion (Rivier University) Mark Miller (University of San Francisco) William T. Ditewig (Santa Clara University) Stuart Squires (Brescia University) Gerald O’Collins, SJ (Gregorian University, emeritus) Anthony J. Godzieba (Villanova University) Terrence W. Tilley (Fordham University) Michael J. Hollerich (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota) Gerald Schlabach (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota) Luca Badini Confalonieri (Wijngaards Institute for Catholic Research) Francis Schussler Fiorenza (Harvard Divinity School) Rebecca A. Chabot (Iliff School of Theology) Mark Massa, SJ (Boston College School of Theology and Ministry) James T. Bretzke, SJ (Boston College School of Theology and Ministry) Anne Clifford (Iowa State University) Jack Downey (La Salle University) Sherry Jordon (University of St. Thomas, Minnesota) Julia Lamm (Georgetown University)

Bill Donohue of the Catholic League and Rod Dreher also wrote about this whiny letter, and Fr. Z linked to them.

Fr. Z says the libs are in panic mode.

[LovedSinner]

Oops, I linked to the wrong Douthat article, and so did Fr. Z. Here is the right article.

[Yardstick]

What a bunch of haughty, small souled dweebs. Douthat must be doing good work if he’s got them in a tizzy.

[LovedSinner]

Hypocrisy.

[sitetest]

Apparently, despite the machinations of Simplicio Bergoglio, the Catholics mostly won.

[LovedSinner]

The liberals are so classless. The worst part is they are trying to accuse Douthat of McCarthyism, while being guilty of exactly the same themselves.

[LovedSinner]

We can thank the Holy Spirit for the victory, not the Holy Father.

Though I do wish all Catholics could treat him with respect.

[sitetest]

Yes. I agree, we should thank the Holy Spirit.

The pope, on the other hand... what is there to respect? I’m not altogether sure that he’s really a pope.

[LovedSinner]

Respect him for his office, if nothing else. If he had preached heresy, then he would not be a pope.

[sitetest]

He may not be pope anyway. I think there are legitimate questions about Benedict’s abdication. And Bergoglio’s encyclical on the environment was not Catholic.

[LovedSinner]

Hmmm...well I am not a huge fan of the encyclical either, but I believe he is the valid Pope.

Previous Popes have written horrible encyclicals too, including some supporting slavery. But none have required Catholics to believe in slavery, and likewise Francis cannot bind Catholics on matters of economics or science anyway, so I do not see how this means he is not Pope.

[sitetest]

The encyclical is awful. It is trash. It may be heresy. It certainly enshrined certain gnostic concepts. But going back to the start. I have questions about Benedict’s abdication. If his abdication is not on the up and up, then Bergoglio is an anti-pope.

As it is, based on the encyclical one, I have questions.

[Falconspeed]

Thanks for the link to Fr. Z. Over at the American Conservative web site, linked by Fr. Z, Rob Dreher points out how conservative theologians do not write scolding letters with many signatures to the NY Times about liberal opinions. Good point.

The list of theologians complaining about an opinion in the NYT are showing their true colors: weak, bossy, inferiority complexes, and comfortable in their plush university offices.

[piusv]

Anyone who thinks that this was a “win” for the “conservatives” is living in a dream world. Their heads are still firmly planted in the sand.

The only reason why the “liberals” are unhappy is because it wasn’t a blatant denial of Church teaching. However, they did get the opening of the door to abuse Church teaching.

[piusv]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3353118/posts

[Repent and Believe]

"The encyclical is awful. It is trash. It may be heresy...." The Synod was not without heresy. In the following passages there is no mention of serious sin or fornication or repentance or rejection of immoral situations, no, there is explaining it away as a difficult situation. Does that mean if I murder my mother in law, God forbid, that the next synod may explain how tense she makes me feel without mentioning the sin of murder?: Then they again leave out any condemnation this time in para 72, of mixed marriages, and so are muting true Catholic teaching there also. In para 84, a discussion about divorced "remarried" fornicators the living-in-sin aspect is never mentioned but far to the contrary they are encouraged to be integrated into the life of the cChurch. They'll likely based on this document then be selected as Godparents for innocent children getting baptized! And so they will confess in the ceremony that "I reject Satan and all his pomps" and go back to their house and continue to fornicate. They thus pander throughout the document to the weak and unstable people who often need words of firm urging to repentance and full conversion! Where are any such words which frequented the tongues of many great saints throughout the ages? Besides, THAT IS SERIOUS HERESY. THAT IS ONE OF NUMEROUS REASONS WHY "Francis" IS NOT A POPE. The following is GOOGLE computerized translation of final synod document, written in a somewhat effeminate softy fashion and revealing what many "conservative Catholics" are missing in their sighs of relief (as pointed out above): 70. The pastoral propose clearly the Gospel message and captures the positive elements present in those situations that do not yet or no longer correspond to it. In many countries, a growing number of couples live together without marriage or canonical or civil. In some countries there is a traditional wedding, concerted between families and often celebrated in different stages. In other countries instead it is increasing the number of those who, after living together for a long time, ask for the celebration of marriage in church. Simple cohabitation is often chosen because of the general mentality contrary to the institutions and firm commitments, but also the expectation of existential security (job and fixed salary). In other countries, finally, de facto unions are becoming more numerous, not only for the rejection of the values ​​of family and marriage, but also to the fact that marriage is perceived as a luxury, and social conditions, so that the misery material pushes to live facto unions. All these situations must be addressed in a constructive manner, trying to turn them into opportunities journey of conversion towards the fullness of marriage and the family in the light of the Gospel. 71. The choice of civil marriage or, in several cases, the simple living together, often not motivated by prejudice or resistance against the sacramental union, but from situations or cultural contingents. In many circumstances, the decision to live together is a sign of a relationship that actually want to navigate to a stability perspective. This will, which translates into a lasting bond, reliable and open to life can be considered a commitment on which to base a way to the sacrament of marriage, found out how God's plan for their lives. The path of growth, which can lead to sacramental marriage, will be encouraged by the recognition of the distinguishing characteristics of the generous and lasting: the desire to seek the good of others before their own; the experience of forgiveness requested and donated; the aspiration to found a family is not closed on itself and open to the good of the ecclesial community and the entire society. Along this route could be given those signs of love that properly correspond to the reflection of God in an authentic conjugal project. 72. The issues related to mixed marriages require specific attention. Marriages between Catholics and other baptized "have, despite their particular physiognomy, many elements that it is good use of and develop both for their intrinsic value and for the contribution they can make to the ecumenical movement." For this purpose "is to be found [...] cordial cooperation between the Catholic and non-Catholic minister, from the time of preparation for marriage and wedding" (FC, 78). About eucharistic sharing remembers that "the decision to allow or not the non-Catholic marriage to Eucharistic communion must be taken in accordance with the rules existing in this area, both for Eastern Christians and for other Christians, and considering this special situation, that is, receive the sacrament of Christian marriage two Christians baptized. Although the spouses of a mixed marriage have in common the sacraments of baptism and marriage, Eucharistic sharing can only be exceptional and, in any case, consideration to the provisions set out in [...] "(Pontifical Council for Promoting 'Christian Unity, Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism, March 25, 1993, 159-160). (snip) 84. The baptized who are divorced and civilly remarried need to be more integrated in the Christian communities in different ways as possible, avoiding any chance of scandal. The logic of integration is the key to their pastoral care, because they only know that they belong to the Body of Christ which is the Church, but it can have a joyful and fruitful experience. Are baptized, are brothers and sisters, the Holy Spirit pours into their gifts and talents for the good of all. Their participation can be expressed in different ecclesial services: it is therefore necessary to discern which of the various forms of exclusion currently practiced in the liturgy, pastoral, educational and institutional framework can be overcome.

[sitetest]

We expected far worse. I don’t really think of it as a “win” so much as “not the loss that we feared.” I am battered by a world that imposes loss on me at every front. I have very little left. If I am expecting a great loss, and in its place, I see only a bit of erosion, then you will need to forgive me my brief moment of joy. I dont get many these days.

[LovedSinner]

You have not read the first Douthat article that I posted. Douthat thinks that harm was done during the synod, but it was minimized. We knew months ago that the synod would be harmful and confuse people, but in most scenarios things would have been far worse.

We actually agree far more than disagree. Please do not say that I am living in a dream world or similar in the future since we actually agree on the main points.

[LovedSinner]

Does anyone else want to interrupt this post and give their pet theory of why Pope Francis is not the Pope, the Catholic Church is in heresy, and how good news in this article is actually bad, bad, bad news!

[LovedSinner]

Good explanation. Remember Francis is almost 80. He doesn’t have much times left. We need to run out the clock.