{"id":48942,"date":"2019-09-30T08:00:19","date_gmt":"2019-09-30T13:00:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/?p=48942"},"modified":"2019-09-30T08:12:21","modified_gmt":"2019-09-30T13:12:21","slug":"new-constructive-conversations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/","title":{"rendered":"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\u201cThose conflicts and disputes among you, where do they come from?\u201d, <\/em>St. James asks (4:1). \u201cDo they not come from your cravings that are at war within you?\u201d The introduction to this series is found at the end of this post. Below is #1, Christopher Altieri’s initial statement, and #2, Anthony Ruff’s response to that, and #3, Altieri’s response. The most recent post is given first. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

#3 Altieri (9-21)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Anthony \u2014 I\u2019m glad we agree on the point about the synod being fairly innocuous. All the same, I would not characterize all the concerns over doctrinal integrity or disciplinary revision as irrational, nor would I characterize the fears of a significant portion of the faithful as absurd. In many cases, those fears are misplaced. The are too often overblown. Nevertheless, I suspect they are very rarely irrational or absurd. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

You ask, \u201c[W]hy is there such irrationalism and absurdity at\nloose in the Catholic Church? And why is it being given positive coverage by\nsome influential right-leaning media?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fears certainly are being ginned up a good bit, but I\ncan\u2019t say exactly how, nor ought I speculate more than I already have on the\nmotor of either the fears themselves, or the efforts to excite them. There does\nseem to me to be no shortage of legitimate concern, reasonably expressed. For parcondicio<\/em>,\nI will say that the talk of dissent and schism coming from the other side of\nthe spectrum is also unhelpful, and in my view also misplaced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We already have broad agreement on mandatory celibacy for\nsecular priests, so I won\u2019t spend a good deal of time on the issue. I\u2019d only\nlike to say that you\u2019re quite right: the idea that relaxing the discipline in\nlimited local and exceptional cases for reasons of pastoral force majeure<\/em>\nis a pipe dream. Everybody knows it. So, why did Pope Francis float it as such?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On synodality, I think you\u2019ve mistaken my point. That will\nlikely be my fault. I wrote densely, almost telegraphically. The point warrants\nclarification. Let me unspool a bit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have the substance of an idea \u2014 synodality \u2014 to the\narticulation of which Pope Francis has devoted significant intellectual energy.\nHe has spoken eloquently of synodality, but mostly analogously: through images\nat once evocative and allusive, always thought-provoking and often charged with\ngreat emotion. I cannot think of any single place in which he has attacked the\nsubject prosaically, in concrete, practical, pedestrian terms. I think the\nplace in which he came closest to articulating such a vision was here:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA synodal\nChurch<\/a> is a Church which listens, which realizes that listening \u2018is\nmore than simply hearing\u2019. It is a mutual listening in which everyone has\nsomething to learn. The faithful people, the college of bishops, the Bishop of\nRome: all listening to each other, and all listening to the Holy Spirit, the\n\u2018Spirit of truth\u2019 (Jn<\/em> 14:17), in order to know what he \u2018says to the\nChurches\u2019 (Rev<\/em> 2:7).\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

He described the Extraordinary Assembly of the Synod of\nBishops as, \u201c[A] path of solidarity, a \u2018journey together\u2019,\u201d thus appropriating\na powerfully suggestive etymologie sauvage<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Synod of Bishops, however, is a creature of Pope St Paul\nVI, who created the body in response to the express desires of the Fathers of\nthe II Vatican Council. The Synod of Bishops \nonly very recently got a permanent juridical structure. No one had quite\nfigured out how to use the instrument \u2014 John Paul II employed it largely to\nkeep tabs on the worldwide episcopate, and Benedict mostly used it as a talking\nshop \u2014 until Francis, who has permanently erected the Synod of Bishops \u2014\nthrough its General Secretariat \u2014 outside the Roman Curia. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pope Francis has certainly taken steps<\/a>\ntoward altering the mechanics of ecclesial governance more generally, though those\nsteps have often been rather toward greater centralization. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The extent to which the law permanently establishing the Synod\nof Bishops gives any real power to the body as such, is an opinable question.\nIt seems to me fairly clear that the new special legislation erecting the Synod\nof Bishops places the body squarely sub Petro<\/em>, making that position the\nguarantee of its work cum Petro<\/em>. (I discuss this at some length, here<\/a>\nand here<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I mention this only so we understand each other\u2019s points\nde depart<\/em> as fully as possible. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I will pause to press you a little on one specific point, regarding Pope Francis\u2019s politicking. You say: \u201cOne way to look at his political machinations is that he\u2019s propping up minority voices that have been suppressed and shut out for two papacies so that a real discussion with varying voices can happen.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m not entirely sure which \u201cminority\u201d voices are the ones\nyou have in mind, but I am certain John Paul II\u2019s approach to the worldwide\nepiscopate was essentially that of ecclesiastical d\u00e9tente achieved by a very\ncareful \u2014 and not perfectly successful \u2014 effort to create and maintain a\ndynamic equilibrium within the worldwide episcopate. When it comes to the idea\nthat voices favoring experimentation and innovation stemming from a commitment\nto what is essentially a hermeneutic of rupture \u2014 I speak descriptively and\ntechnically, not polemically \u2014 have been suppressed and shut out, I must confess\nI find the idea simply incredible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The example you adduce regarding the introduction of the\nvernacular illustrates the problems with the notion (the example does not\nvanquish the notion, but this is a Constructive Conversation). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whatever one\u2019s opinion of the Consilium\u2019s work, they far\nexceeded their mandate, and their descendants have enjoyed free rein since the\npromulgation of the new books. The old books (with due regard for convenient\nfictions) were suppressed. Priests and faithful devoted to their use became  suspect in the eyes of their brethren of the\ncloth (from whom many of the faithful learned suspicion). When those devoted to\nthe old books did not face exclusion from the Church\u2019s counsels, they were often\nthe object of derision among Catholics possessing the fashionable sort of\nerudition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps all that will prove to have been the hard and\nneedful thing, which, in another hundred years, will have shown itself to have\nbeen the thing that saved the Church. I have no crystal ball. History happened,\nthough. It always does.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These historical remarks shade perceptibly into the core of\nyour reply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First, let me register a perplexity: \u201c[T]he synod will not\nbe deliberative,\u201d you say. Quite right. Then, you offer, \u201c[I]t won\u2019t be redefining\nany doctrines such as the Trinity or the Real Presence or the sacramentality of\nHoly Orders[.]\u201d I do not think that any body, however vested, could redefine\nany one of the elements in that list. Those are settled matters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On one point \u2014 Holy Orders \u2014 there is room for change in taxis<\/em>,\nbut the II Vatican Council has definitively taught us which degrees of Holy\nOrders that participate in the Sacrament of Holy Orders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One thing we might see in the not too distant future, for example,\nis a restoration of the Order of Deaconesses, with recognition of the Order as\na Major Order on par with the old Subdiaconate, i.e. a Holy Order but not<\/strong>\npart of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Deaconesses were listed among the Kleros<\/em>\/Clerus<\/em>\nof the Churches that had the Order, so there is no question but that they would\nbe clergy. This \u201ccompromise\u201d \u2014 in scare quotes because it really represents the\nwhole of what is historically and theologically possible in these regards \u2014 is\nwarranted by what we already know and would not be impossible to introduce. It\ncould even lead to red hats for women.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(Pope Francis could have done it without a committee, and\nwould have done it if he had a mind to do it. So, I\u2019ll bet more than a nickel\nthis doesn\u2019t happen on his watch, if it happens at all.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Speaking strictly personally, I think such a solution would\ncause lots of trouble and solve very few problems. We\u2019ve barely begun to\nunderstand the spiritual place of \u201cpermanent\u201d Deacons in the life of the Latin\nChurch, let alone figure out how best to employ them in their mission of\nservice. Once we do, we\u2019ll need to figure out how to avoid situations like\nthose we had in the Middle Ages, when archdeacons controlled diocesan and\nmetropolitan purse-strings, and did not always manage affairs with perfect\npurity of heart.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c[The Synod Assembly] could make a real difference in ways\nthat will influence the church at large.\u201d Indeed, and let me say: for good as\nwell as for ill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In your eloquent paragraph regarding liturgy, which I will\nnot reproduce here, I can see my own way to every word, except these four: \u201c[L]iturgy\nisn\u2019t just liturgy.\u201d The point is not that liturgy does the things you say\nliturgy does, in addition to being liturgy. The deep truth the Fathers of the\nII Vatican council recovered \u2014 with the help of the Liturgical Movement that\nwas a century old when the Council opened, and of the theologians of the Ressourcement<\/em>,\nwhich owes a debt to the Liturgical Movement that we are only now beginning to\nunderstand \u2014 is that liturgy is<\/em> all those things.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let us leave aside for the moment the historical objections\nand semantic quibbles I have with your saying that the Fathers voted down\nretaining Latin as the universal bond of unity in the solemn liturgy. It is a\nfair construction, and fairly captures the effect of the matter. I am\nconfident  you will agree when I consider\nyour affirmation, \u201cThere\u2019s no opposition between the horizontal and the\nvertical here, and no place for useless alleged polarizations between\nGod-centered and human-centered liturgy,\u201d and note that not every particular\nand concrete attempt to express the spirit of the liturgy will be (will have\nbeen) therefore equally successful. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Council Fathers registered what I would like to describe\nas a crescent opacity of order in the life of the Church, of which the loss of\nthe liturgy\u2019s cosmic significance was a major driver and at once a major\nsymptom. They desired a recovery of that significance, with a view \u2014 I hasten\nto add \u2014 to a recovery of the true basis of our koinonia<\/em>, the sense of\nwhich rather developed theologically, ritually, and devotionally in the Middle\nAges (which did not happen in a vacuum).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With Pope Francis\u2019s forceful championship of our duty to\ncare for creation, for example, I am surprised that more bishops have not\nreturned to the practice of Ember and Rogation Days, which are a public\nexpression of our participation in the rhythm of created order, and an official\nacknowledgment of the deep truth: All things are of [His] making, all times and\nseasons obey [His] laws. To be perfectly frank, I am disappointed I had to\nlearn of Ember and Rogation Days from devoted friends and obscure literature,\nrather than from my mother, who practiced them in the Catholic chapels and\nfields of Ohio in her childhood, and never mentioned them because she thought\nwe\u2019d simply done away with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the narrow question of \u201cliturgical uniformity\u201d: the\nuniversal use of Pius V\u2019s books in the Latin Church was arguably a gain for\nher, but the loss of local Rites in the wake of the Tridentine reform was undoubtedly\nan impoverishment. The Council Fathers recognized this. They knew that turning\nback the clock was impossible, that we cannot undo what is done, and that the\ngreat thing for the Church was to adapt to the world\u2019s changed \u2014 and rapidly\nchanging \u2014 circumstances, without conforming to the world. I will only say that\none may fairly construe the recovery of our common liturgical patrimony as part\nand parcel of that effort, and that in any case, to have devotion to the old\nbooks is not eo ipso<\/em> reactionary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What has all this to do with the Amazon Synod, though? In a\nword: nothing \u2014 but also everything. The irreducibly diverse cultural milieu of\nthe Amazon has a great deal to teach us, but the peoples of the Amazon have a\nright to the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is up to them to allow the\nGospel to challenge, transform, convict, and confirm their ways of life. It is\nnot ours to dictate that process, but it does belong to the whole Church to participate\nin its direction. Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Acknowledgment of that basic tension is rather conspicuously\nabsent from the Instrumentum laboris<\/em>, which seems to me rather to give a\nrather rose-colored gloss, at time approaching an ill-informed paean<\/em> to a\nsynthetic Amazonian cosmology and biology. In short: the romantic tone in which\nmuch of it is couched bothers me at least as much as the theological content of\nthe document. If you were to say, \u201cSo, what?\u201d I would have little in the way of\nrejoinder at this point. We need to let the thing play out.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Allow me to delay you a little while longer, for a word\nabout rupture and progressivism. Leave aside the narrow question of the II\nVatican Council Fathers\u2019 understanding of their work\u2019s relationship to the\nhistory of the Church, and focus with me on a broader, prior issue: theological\nanthropology. Specifically, focus with me for a moment on the perduring effects\nof Original Sin on human nature, hence the effect our wound has on human\naffairs generally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The persistence of Original Sin means that our brokenness\nwill be with us until we are ready to enter celestial Jerusalem. Looked at from\nthe other side, this anthropological truth is also the true ground of any sane\nprogressivism, for it means that man is infinitely perfectible. However much\nbetter we become, there will always be something left undone. Socially, this\nmeans at once that we cannot eradicate evil: there will always be suffering,\nviolence, waste, poverty and all manner of injustice. It means as well that\nnone of the foregoing is an acceptable excuse for not making a go at getting\nbetter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whatever opinion one has of Pope Francis\u2019s governance, his constant exhortations to the practice of the corporal as well as the spiritual works of mercy \u2014 in essence calls to live as though Our Lord said what He is recorded as having said in Mt. 25:31-46 and meant it, are trenchant. Indeed, they are urgently necessary. We ignore them at our souls\u2019 peril.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It also means that, whatever we do in our efforts to order\nour lives together, we will make things worse for some people, often in ways we\ncannot possibly envision, but sometimes in ways we can. We cannot help this. It\nis inevitable. This is, in its turn, reason for great care in our counsels and\ncaution in our proceedings. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fearless and indefatigable willingness to face our\nbrokenness utterly and unflinchingly, coupled with perfect and tireless caution\nin vigilance before and behind our every step: this is the twofold attitude\nthat will keep us to the way. His scriptis<\/em>, all the theology in the\nworld will not avail men destitute of common sense, precious little of which is\non display in the Instrumentum laboris<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then, to the extent there is anything discernibly\ntheological in a meaningfully Christian sense to be found in the Instrumentum\nlaboris<\/em>, it is there as a sort of drape or dressing thrown over the\nskeleton of a practical address, which does not bear the marks of the needful\ndisposition and wears the wrap very poorly. That could be merely a stylistic\ninfelicity, but I did not want to leave it unremarked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You asked me to identify some of my specific concerns with\nthe document, but at this stage, having taxed you surely beyond my rights, I\u2019ll\npunt: what are yours?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

#2 Ruff<\/strong> (9-18)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Christopher, let me begin by thanking you warmly for such a constructive, irenic, and thoughtful piece. You come at this with a perspective and expertise other than my own, and I appreciate that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CALMING THE WATERS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christopher, you\u2019re ratcheting down the irrational fears and absurd accusations of heresy flying around this synod \u2013 good for you. I agree. This synod doesn\u2019t pose the threat to the church that some think it does.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But why is there such irrationalism and absurdity at loose in the Catholic Church? And why is it being given positive coverage by some influential right-leaning media? That might be something worth talking about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

MANDATORY CELIBACY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m not sure the synod doesn\u2019t pose a threat to the church because it\u2019s not a deliberative body and can\u2019t do much, though. There are indications that Pope Francis is encouraging the Synod to do some pretty big things that could change the church significantly. I\u2019ll say more about liturgy below, but start with your point on clerical celibacy. Allowing some<\/em> older married men to be ordained in some<\/em> exceptional circumstances \u2013 if Rome agrees to this, will it be like the vernacular after Vatican II, which immediately spread everywhere?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I share both your ringing affirmation of the value of celibacy and your openness to married priests. If celibacy is made optional for secular (diocesan) priests, though, I\u2019m not very hopeful that the Catholic Church, at least in the West, has the inner strength to maintain celibacy among diocesan priests in meaningful numbers for very long. And then recruitment for religious orders when the dominant norm is married clergy? Maybe\u2026 probably\u2026 I\u2019m not sure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If we\u2019re moving toward optional celibacy, it seems to me we should be honest and admit that married priests will probably become the practical norm within a generation or three. We might as well accept that there will be huge changes to our ecclesial identity and huge spiritual losses in this change. And then, I suppose, think about the huge gains that will also come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SOCIAL JUSTICE<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

You affirm the rightness of the Church standing up for victims of horrible injustice in the Amazon. I agree.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

REAL OR FAKE SYNODALITY?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Christopher, you say that under Francis synods are managed affairs, as they\u2019ve been under every pope since Vatican II (which they certainly have been). You go so far as to say that Pope Francis is using synods as an \u201cinstitutional counterweight\u201d to synodality!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But I see differences between Francis and his predecessors in this. John Paul II in particular strong-armed synods to repeat what he had already decided. (There\u2019s the joke about John Paul sitting in the front row reading during the interminable speeches no one listened to \u2013 was he reading his office book\u2026 or the final synod report?) John Paul\u2019s handling of synods was a part of his larger campaign to roll back the collegiality and synodality affirmed at Vatican II \u2013 think Apostolos suos<\/a>.<\/em> Or his issuing (with Ratzinger\u2019s support) Liturgiam authenticam<\/a><\/em> on liturgical translation, which violated the letter and the spirit of <\/a>Sacrosanctum Concilium<\/a><\/em>, until Francis set things right with Magnum principium<\/a>,<\/em> which follows faithfully what the Council said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Francis brings his strong convictions to both the family synod and the Amazon synod, and I grant that he does a bit of stacking the deck to advance his convictions. But he gets the bishops talking and allows them to have real input into the final document. This is new. One way to look at his political machinations is that he\u2019s propping up minority voices that have been suppressed and shut out for two papacies so that a real discussion with varying voices can happen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

LITURGICAL INCULTURATION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I want to turn to a focal point of this Constructive Conversation: liturgical inculturation.<\/em> This is another issue where the synod will not be deliberative \u2013 it won\u2019t be redefining any doctrines such as the Trinity or the Real Presence or the sacramentality of Holy Orders \u2013 but it could make a real difference in ways that will influence the church at large.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here\u2019s the point: liturgy isn\u2019t just liturgy. This is a central point of the liturgy constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium <\/em>which hasn\u2019t yet taken root. Liturgy expresses the nature of the church (SC 2). It isn\u2019t just a delivery system for the commodity of grace to be delivered to individuals, as it had become at least since the high Middle Ages and was before Vatican II. Liturgy does its (Christ\u2019s) work of saving and reconciling and empowering precisely in the way that the community, by its active participation, is drawn into Christ\u2019s work and necessarily drawn closer to each other. There\u2019s no opposition between the horizontal and the vertical here, and no place for useless alleged polarizations between God-centered and human-centered liturgy. A dynamic variety in how the Catholic liturgy is inculturated in various locales is a feature, not a bug. It expresses the nature of the church, of Christian and human community, of transformative grace, of the Spirit\u2019s creativity, of the Kingdom to come.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This Vatican II notion of liturgy is a development which was large enough to represent a sort of rupture \u2013 a term which I know some have difficulties with, but I don\u2019t think it can be avoided to do justice to the matter. The fathers of Vatican II voted down<\/em> retaining Latin as the universal bond of unity in the solemn (sung) liturgy, and thereby bade farewell to liturgical uniformity as a mark of the Catholic Church. When SC 23 counsels avoidance of \u201cnotable differences between the rites used in adjacent regions,\u201d this can only mean that there will<\/em> be regional differences. And I hope everyone reads, ponders, and prays over SC 37-40 on liturgical adaptation to culture between now and the Amazon synod, which crescendos in each successive article until it arrives at \u201can even more radical adaptation of the liturgy\u201d by article 40.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I repeat: all this isn\u2019t merely about superficial, ceremonial ornaments. It\u2019s about the nature of the Church and of salvation in Christ. This is why Liturgiam authenticam<\/em> and Summorum Pontificum<\/em> are so problematic \u2013 a step backward \u2013 from the standpoint of the breakthroughs of Vatican II.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is also why one can say that Vatican II both changed nothing and changed everything. No central doctrines about the Trinity or Christology or soteriology or the like are redefined in SC. But the very nature of the church and the human-divine relationship is reconceptualized. This is why it is misleading to call Vatican II \u201cmerely\u201d a pastoral council because it didn\u2019t change doctrine. Its vision leaves virtually no doctrine unaffected, near as I can tell. This is how I understand Vatican II to be pastoral in a way which is substantive, binding, and irrevocable<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Amazon synod, even if not deliberative and not redefining doctrine, offers the real possibility that increased liturgical inculturation involving \u201cradical adaptation\u201d will happen in local churches. That could enrich the entire Catholic Church\u2019s understanding not just of liturgy, but of the church itself. It\u2019s not for me to say how this could or should be done in the Amazon. As a white guy in central Minnesota, my only role is to affirm on Vatican II grounds the goodness of this happening in the Amazon \u2013 and elsewhere.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

OVER TO YOU<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019ve said a lot, Christopher, probably too much for you to respond to. Take up what you will, ignore the rest. Oh, you mention \u201ctheologically problematic elements\u201d in the Instrumentum Laboris<\/em>. What is theologically problematic, and why? I\u2019m not trying to stir the pot. Oh, actually, I am.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

awr<\/p>\n\n\n\n

*                    *                    *                    *                    *<\/p>\n\n\n\n

#1 ALTIERI<\/strong> (9-18)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
Christopher Altieri<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The\napproach I will take to the business is that of a political philosopher (and an\nAugustinian at that, though an atypical one, who reads Eric Voegelin through\nthe lens of St. Augustine of Hippo, and also happens to read Machiavelli in the\nFlorentine original \u2014 something I intend both literally and figuratively \u2014 so I\ntend to view ecclesiastical politics with a degree of circumspection).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\ndo not write here as a journalist, but only as a concerned citizen of the\nChurch. Readers familiar with my journalistic work, however, will perhaps\nrecall the pieces I wrote for The\nCatholic Herald<\/em> and the Catholic World Report<\/em>, in both of which I recognized\nthat the Instrumentum laboris<\/em> contains some theologically problematic\nelements, and also attempted to articulate the sense I have, of those elements\nnot really being cause for concern \u2014 at least, not of the sort that has given\nrise to fears of institutionalized ambiguity, doctrinal creep, or even official\ndefection from divinely revealed and definitively formulated dogma.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nreasons for which I think those concerns misplaced, are complex.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They\nboil down to these: the Synod of Bishops is not a deliberative body and the\nSpecial Assembly has no brief for the exercise of deliberative function; the Instrumentum<\/em>\nis meant to be a \u201ckitchen sink\u201d, a catch-all document allowing the organizers\nand managers of the Assembly to say they heard everyone invited to contribute;\ntheir agenda is primarily disciplinary, and regards a matter not essential to\nthe faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nleaders of the Church in the Amazon region are trying to hear and make heard\nthe people who live there, who have been victims of greedy and unscrupulous\nforeign interlopers and local potentates for five centuries. Robbed of their\nlabor, their wealth, their very children, the peoples of the Amazon are\nimpatient. The Church has not only the right, but the duty to speak in their\nbehalf and to stand with them in solidarity. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately,\nit appears the Assembly\u2019s organizers and managers are interested in using the\ngathering to further an experiment in ecclesiastical sociology: obtaining\npermission for a controverted proposal \u2014 the local relaxation of discipline\nwith regard to secular clerical celibacy \u2014 thus removing obstacles for other\nOrdinaries in other places, who would plead similar pastoral emergency and ask\nthe same relaxation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\nis not to say they are not genuinely concerned with the challenges and hopes of\nthe Amazon region and its people. Quite the contrary, even the request for a\nchange in discipline arises from the Amazon bishops themselves \u2014 some of them,\nat least \u2014 and is motivated by a real pastoral concern. The organizers and\nmanagers of the Synod Assembly are merely trying to make hay while the sun\nshines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\nthe post-Conciliar era, Synod Assemblies have always been managed affairs. To\nhis credit, Pope Francis has largely abandoned the pretense of their being\nanything else, and has gone so far as to make new law for their preparation,\nconduct, and issue. The result, however, is that Synod Assemblies are now an\ninstitutional counterweight to the \u201csynodality\u201d Pope Francis has championed in\nmany of his speeches and some of his governance, rather than the embodiment of\nit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When\nit comes to the broad question of secular celibacy, I do not have any\nparticular insight to offer, but only what might be a helpful frame for\ndiscussion of the issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When\nit comes to Latin discipline, the real question is not whether celibacy is good\nfor the Church or for priests \u2014 it is \u2014 but whether it should be a requirement\nfor secular priests. There are powerful arguments in favor of changing the\ndiscipline. Take one: Admitting married men to the higher ranks of Holy Orders \u2014\nviri probati<\/em> \u2014 will break the strangle-hold bishops have over their\nclergy. A man who is established in life, familiar with the ways of the world,\nand independent of means, is harder to co-opt, corrupt, cow, or otherwise\ncontrol. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We\u2019re\ntold celibacy frees men to give all in the service of the Gospel. The fact is,\nwe have secular men in Holy Orders with very little real-world experience, no\nmeans of support, and no marketable skills, who are utterly dependent for their\nnext meal on the good grace of the bishop. It was not ever thus. This reduction\nof the lower ranks of the secular clergy to near-total dependency is at most\n150 years old. That\u2019s only a little more than a blink of an eye in\necclesiastical terms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sed\ncontra<\/em>,\none will urge that such a development will lead to a caste system in the\nsecular clergy, with bishops being chosen from the lot most ambitious and least\nlikely to be interested in marrying in any case (whether secular or religious).\nThat is remedied by opening the episcopate to married men, though such a\nsolution creates some \u201cnew\u201d problems and exacerbates existing ones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One\nmight further note that the Latin Church instituted the current and\nlong-standing discipline for known reasons. That point could be taken either\nway: On one hand, the old way has been tried and found wanting; on the other,\nthe social conditions that made the change worthwhile a thousand years ago \u2014\nfeudalism, class distinctions, property and inheritance law (not to mention\necclesiastical organization and governance) \u2014 have all changed radically, so\nthose old reasons may no longer apply, or may really apply in a qualified sense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More narrowly, with regard to the proposal soon to be under consideration at the Synod Assembly, I would observe that the specific use to which any change in discipline would be put in the Amazon itself \u2014 i.e. putting \u201celders\u201d in Holy Orders roughly as simplex priests, without training, faculties, or even most of the rights proper to the clerical state \u2014 is not without its own difficulties, lacunae, and serious counterindications, even among those of us generally sympathetic to the case for a relaxation in discipline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

*               *               *               *               *<\/p>\n\n\n\n

INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES <\/em>(September 16) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For this new series, we at Pray Tell <\/em>took our cue from St. James. We thought about what Pray Tell<\/em> could do to be helpful at a time when church and society are being torn apart by conflicts and disputes. \u201cConstructive Conversations\u201d is our response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each entry in this series will offer a running\ndialogue between two figures modelling honest and respectful exchange. The\nseries will advance conversation on the topic itself, but even more so, we hope\nit will advance positive models of how<\/em> to have a constructive\nconversation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our first topic is liturgical inculturation and the Amazon synod.<\/em> (Any controversy there, do you think?!) Pray Tell<\/em> moderator Fr. Anthony Ruff OSB will go up against<\/s> engage Christopher Altieri, a journalist, writer, and editor based in Rome who has worked at Vatican Radio and holds a PhD from the Pontifical Gregorian University. He writes for Catholic World Report<\/a> <\/em>and is a contributing editor to the Catholic Herald<\/em><\/a> out of London.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this series we wish to avoid both\ndisrespectful flaming and false irenicism that papers over real differences.\nThe goal is not to come to consensus, but to clarify what the differences are\nand what the legitimate concerns are of those with whom we differ. If the dialogue\npartners come to modify their position, or to restate their concerns after\nhaving learned from another viewpoint, that could be a good thing \u2013 but each\nperson retains the freedom to hold and state their our own positions.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On the \u201cconflicts among us\u201d (James 4:1)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":48996,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_wpas_customize_per_network":false},"categories":[3119],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48942","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-plaza-new-ws"],"yoast_head":"\nConstructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri - Home<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri - Home\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"On the \u201cconflicts among us\u201d (James 4:1)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Home\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-09-30T13:00:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-09-30T13:12:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"524\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"424\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"27 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7fbf63ff85d447cf06b0588add3e41d2\"},\"headline\":\"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-30T13:00:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-30T13:12:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":5332,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/Split-Church.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"4_THE PLAZA\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/\",\"name\":\"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri - Home\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/Split-Church.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-30T13:00:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-30T13:12:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/Split-Church.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/Split-Church.jpg\",\"width\":524,\"height\":424},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/2019\\\/09\\\/30\\\/new-constructive-conversations\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Home\",\"description\":\"Worship, Wit & Wisdom\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Home\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/09\\\/cropped-BlogHeaderFinal2.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/09\\\/cropped-BlogHeaderFinal2.jpg\",\"width\":1340,\"height\":209,\"caption\":\"Home\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/7fbf63ff85d447cf06b0588add3e41d2\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"description\":\"Katharine E. Harmon, Ph.D., edits the blog, Pray Tell: Worship, Wit & Wisdom.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/praytellblog.com\\\/index.php\\\/author\\\/editor\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri - Home","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri - Home","og_description":"On the \u201cconflicts among us\u201d (James 4:1)","og_url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/","og_site_name":"Home","article_published_time":"2019-09-30T13:00:19+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-09-30T13:12:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":524,"height":424,"url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"27 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7fbf63ff85d447cf06b0588add3e41d2"},"headline":"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri","datePublished":"2019-09-30T13:00:19+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-30T13:12:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/"},"wordCount":5332,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg","articleSection":["4_THE PLAZA"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/","url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/","name":"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri - Home","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg","datePublished":"2019-09-30T13:00:19+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-30T13:12:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg","width":524,"height":424},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2019\/09\/30\/new-constructive-conversations\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Constructive Conversations: #1 Altieri, #2 Ruff, #3 Altieri"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/","name":"Home","description":"Worship, Wit & Wisdom","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#organization","name":"Home","url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/cropped-BlogHeaderFinal2.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/cropped-BlogHeaderFinal2.jpg","width":1340,"height":209,"caption":"Home"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/#\/schema\/person\/7fbf63ff85d447cf06b0588add3e41d2","name":"Editor","description":"Katharine E. Harmon, Ph.D., edits the blog, Pray Tell: Worship, Wit & Wisdom.","url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/author\/editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/Split-Church.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48942","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/29"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48942"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48942\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":49207,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48942\/revisions\/49207"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/48996"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48942"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48942"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48942"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}