Well the Synod on the family has come and gone and the MSM message can be explained by two memes:
Meme #1 those nasty conservatives have won:
The final synod document restated Church teachings that gays should not suffer discrimination in society, but also repeated the stand that there was “no foundation whatsoever” for same-sex marriage, which “could not even remotely” be compared to heterosexual unions.
And the Pope is really mad about it:
Pope Francis, ending a contentious bishops’ meeting on family issues, on Saturday excoriated immovable Church leaders who “bury their heads in the sand” and hide behind rigid doctrine while families suffer.
The pope spoke at the end of a three-week gathering, known as a synod, where the bishops agreed to a qualified opening toward divorcees who have remarried outside the Church but rejected calls for more welcoming language toward homosexuals.
It was the latest in a series of admonitions to bishops by the pontiff, who has stressed since his election in 2013 that the 1.2 billion-member Church should be open to change, side with the poor and rid itself of the pomp and stuffiness that has alienated so many Catholics.
Breitbart notes that this has made people like Fr. Thomas Reese a tad upset:
As other Christian communions have little by little caved under the pressures of modern society–abandoning age-old Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality and adapting their standards to a secular morality–the Catholic Church alone has stood firm, they asserted.
But Father Reese and other liberal reformers do not like the Church the way it is. They want to remake it to be like the Anglican Church, a body that modifies its teaching every few years to keep up with the times and mirror the secular world around it. Yet none of these reformers takes the logical step of actually becoming Anglicans, because then they would cease to be relevant.
The liberal desire to make marriage perishable is accompanied by their wish to see homosexuality celebrated as part of God’s plan for humanity.
In fact after last year’s attempt to fix the game the disappointment must have been even greater than the media realizes:
The clearest evidence of a more open and honest synod process in 2015 was that the fruit of last year’s synod — the instrumentum laboris, or working document for this year’s synod — was regularly lambasted by nearly all the language-group reports. It must have been painful for the synod secretariat, which composed the document after last year’s synod, to publish the near-universal disdain for their work, but it is to their credit that they did so. After the second-round of such reports were published, with their withering evaluation of the poor document they had been given, the dynamic for a much different conclusion was set in motion. After the reports were published, simply ramming the instrumentum laboris through was no longer an option.
That the final report was so radically different from the original instrumentum laboris was described by more than one synod father as a “miracle”. But it wasn’t a miracle. It was the difference between a document designed to reflect the priorities and vision of the synod secretariat, which from the beginning favored Cardinal Kasper’s proposal, and a document drafted to reflect the considered judgments of the synod fathers from throughout the Church.
Was the synod rigged? It was once, but not this year. And the reaction to the rigging last year made for a different Synod 2015.
However liberals like Reese have a solution to not getting what they want, do it anyways:
The more likely result will be that certain parishes and dioceses will become known as places where divorced and remarried Catholics are unofficially welcomed at Communion — don’t ask, don’t tell. Pastoral practice will change, and theology and the bishops will catch up eventually.
because he sees no way to be welcoming to those in sin without communion
Whether this pastoral outreach without Communion will sell back home remains to be seen. I doubt it.
I would suggest the good father read Simcha Fisher’s excellent piece at Pathos
I wondered why. I mean, why would someone want to be in the Church if they can’t receive the Eucharist? There are many wonderful things about the Church, but without the Eucharist . . . what’s the point? Who wants to hang around a restaurant if you never get to sit and eat?
And then I realized. The children. People will bring their children to be fed. If they feel welcome, and if they feel like they’re not utterly rejected, even though they can’t receive Communion, they will bring their children to Mass, and will bring their children to catechism class, and will bring their children to the sacraments. They will make sure their children stay involved in the life of the Church. Or at least they might! And there is hope for the next generation . . . and also for the cousins, who always keep up on the family news, and for the friends of the family, and for the lady in the grocery line who stop and chat about marriage and want to know all about your personal life . . .
They can tell that lady, “Well, it’s complicated, but I’m still a Catholic.There is still a place for me. It’s not what I’d wish, but it’s better than nothing. They still want me, and I still need Him.”
Fisher has figured out what Reese has not, this synod wasn’t about ideology it was really about family after all:
That’s what I mean when I say I figured out the Synod. It really wasn’t hidden! It’s all about the family. It’s always been about the family — and the family is about more than the one marriage and the one couple in question. That’s why they didn’t call it “The Synod About Gay People and Divorce” or “The Synod About Just How Popey the Pope Plans to Be, Anyway” or “The I-Don’t-Recall-Jesus-Talking-Much-About-Marriage,-Do-Youuu? Synod” Nope. Every single human being is, for better or worse, part of a family, and because of this, what we do affects lots of other people — and how we’re treated affects lots of other people, too.
It’s about future generations, and also it’s about how the faith of children can affect parents.
I think Fisher’s piece should be distributed to every priest and bishop in the US.
Let me close with a personal story.
Before I switched to St. Bernards I would attend daily mass on Saturday there because they had one and my parish didn’t (I’d also go if I woke up late since they have both a 7 & an 8 AM weekday mass) On Saturdays I noticed a man, maybe 10 years older than me who regularly went up for communion with his hands crosses not accepting the host.
Now he could have stayed in his pew as I do if I’m not confessed, or he could have skipped mass but he did not he went up every time and made it a point to get a blessing.
The more I saw it the more it hit me just how amazing a statement this was. There are three other parishes in the city plus others in adjoining towns. He could easily go to a mass where he is not known and receive to his heart’s content, yet that was not for him instead he would go up, happy to approach christ in the Eucharist but respecting him so much that he would not receive in an unworthy state and by doing so in public he declared to the any person willing to see just what the Eucharist and loving Christ is.
How can you not admire a person like that?
I think he could teach Fr. Reese a thing or two about the Eucharist he certainly taught me and I let him know that he did.
I didn’t ask why he doesn’t receive, I’ll likely never know but I’ll tell you this, when the time comes for me to be I judged I hope that St. Peter can say that I respected the Eucharist as this man does.