Fulda, Germany, Sep 24, 2019 / 12:10 pm (CNA).- The Church in Germany must revise its synodal plans in line with the pope’s leadership and the universal Church, Cardinal Rainer Woelki told the plenary session of the German Episcopal Conference Tuesday morning.
Speaking on the second day of the three-day meeting, Woelki, who is the Archbishop of Cologne, told the bishops that Pope Francis had offered them essential “fatherly advice” in his June letter to the Church in Germany.
“Let us take the pope very seriously!” Woelki told the bishops, as he called for key changes to be made to the synodal plans in order to bring them in line with Francis’ recommendations.
The bishops are meeting in Fulda from Sept. 23-25. Tomorrow they are expected to vote on the adoption of draft statutes for the “binding synodal process” announced by Cardinal Reinhard Marx earlier this year.
Woelki outlined several key themes in the pope’s letter which, he said, the bishops must honor, especially noting Pope Francis’ call for a focus on evangelization and communion with the wider Church.
The Church in Germany must begin by “re-evangelizing itself” is an “indispensable prerequisite” for its wider mission, Woelki said, noting that Francis’ letter made clear that this required the bishops to remain rooted in the essential unity of faith, in Christ, and with the whole Church.
“This is the indispensable sign for our Synodal Way, which has to run like a thread through it, so that the Synodal Way can bear true fruit. The Pope’s letter leaves no doubt about that.”
The pope’s letter has become a focal point for debate as the German bishops continue their deliberations on the creation of a Synodal Assembly in partnership with the Central Committee of German Catholics. Yesterday, the Apostolic Nuncio in Germany, Archbishop Nikola Eterovic, wrote to the German bishops, reminding them that the June letter was the first time a pope had written to all the German faithful since the rise of Nazism, and that it is essential that they listen to Francis.
Woekli said that the pope’s warning against a synod inspired by a “new Pelagianism,” focused on structural reform and bringing the Church into conformity with the zeitgeist, is an important exhortation.
“It is no coincidence that the Holy Father warns against a tendency that seems to me to be typical for Germany,” Woekli said, quoting the pope as he described “this old and ever new temptation of the promoters of Gnosticism […] who, in order to make their own name and reputation, to increase their doctrine and glory, have tried to say something always new and different from what the Word of God has given them.”
While it is important to enable the broad participation of believers in the life of the Church, Woelki said, this cannot be conflated or confused with the legitimate teaching and governing authority of the bishops, “the guarantor of apostolicity and catholicity.”
Referencing the recent Vatican assessment of the draft statutes for the Synodal Assembly, the cardinal reminded the bishops that there is a crucial difference between a parliamentary approach to Church governance and the proper role of discussion and consultation before the exercise of legitimate decision-making authority.
“The Synodal Way must not be walked without the universal Church. The [pope’s] letter urges this perspective when it says: ‘It is about living and feeling with the Church and in the Church[…] The universal church lives in and out of the particular churches, just as the particular churches live and flourish in and out of the universal church; if they were separated from the universal Church, they would weaken, corrupt and die.’”
The German synodal plans include the formation of working groups, called synodal fora, which are considering the themes of increasing women’s participation in Church ministries and offices, reforming Church teaching on sexual morality, and revising discipline in priestly life.
Several of these groups, formed in partnership with the Central Committee of German Catholics, have already begun work and are expected to advance proposals at odds with universal Church teaching, something Woelki said would go against the pope’s clear instructions.
“Pope Francis reminds us that the faith of the particular Churches is always located in the faith of the whole Church and must be found there,” he said. “In the long run, there cannot and should not be different ways of dealing with fundamental issues of faith and morality that would not only jeopardize, but possibly violate, the high good of unity that we profess in the Creed as an attribute of the Church.”
“The stipulations of the faith, which belong to the unchangeable existence of doctrine of the Church, cannot and therefore must not be put up for debate in the Synodal Way. The impression must not be conveyed that there would be a quasi-parliamentary vote on the faith,” Woelki insisted.
Vatican criticism of the German plans, put forward in a Sept. 4 letter to Cardinal Reinhard Marx from Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, raised a number of concerns. Foremost of these is the plan to invest the Synodal Assembly with “deliberative power” to pass resolutions on issues touching Church teaching and governance.
Woelki also said that listening to the pope’s instructions does not mean halting the synodal process.
“The Pope’s letter emphasizes that this does not mean ‘not going forward, not changing anything, and perhaps even not debating or arguing.’ But this must be done with the consciousness, as the pope says, ‘that we are essentially part of a larger body that claims us, that waits for us and needs us, and that we claim, expect and need.’”
He concluded by urging the other German bishops to make necessary changes to the synodal structures and topics for consideration, pointing to the alternative version he presented in August, which made explicit that the synodal body had a strictly consultative role and suggested alternative topics for consideration, centered on the evangelization.
“Together with the Holy Father, I again warn against taking a substantial and formal path that would take us out of the worldwide body of Christ. Our involvement in the faith of the universal Church, whose integrity we serve not least in the episcopal ministry, excludes any negotiation or a vote on matters of faith. This also applies to ecclesiastical discipline, insofar as it is embedded in the overall church context.”
“Let’s take the pope really seriously,” Woelki concluded. “We do not need agitated activism, but the serenity of all who are fully committed to Christ.”
“It is crucial that the Church in Germany shows with words and deeds how beautiful it is to live in the presence of the Lord, to know that He accompanies and surrounds us: For the joy of the Lord is our strength.”
[…]
The Vatican’s Response: “A day late and a dollar short.”
My advice to the Vatican: Don’t bother; the People of God are already on it.
The dollar short being: this was primarily an offence aimed against God; it was a Luciferian anti-liturgy.
In 2024 and of Paris we read: “…there should not be allusions ridiculing the religious convictions of many people.”
In 1938 and in Munich Chamberlain said it was ‘Peace for our time’ and Hitler said he had ‘No more territorial demands to make in Europe.”
At all levels civilization is up for grabs, and we delineate the limits to “freedom of expression.”
Yes, and “many” people is actually several billion people, which is not a small thing.
Kudos to Bishop Barron for getting on this without waiting for everybody else to go first.
True that!
I’m not sure how this letter can be characterized as coming “from the Vatican” — i.e., from the pope’s administration.
The story says that the signatories were “led by Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke,” who was expelled from his Vatican apartment and denied his Vatican paycheck by Bergoglio just this past November.
If the letter originated from the Vatican hierarchy, I hardly think that Cardinal Burke, who is viewed with such contempt by Bergoglio, would be among the signers.
brineyman, please take note that this piece emanated from CNA. For me, that explains all. If you peruse so many of the “news stories” of CNA, they pretty much all make reference in one fashion or another to “the Vatican” – as if the Catholic Church was synonymous with the Vatican.
Not the same letter, but TWO totally different letters (the first was an “open letter” on July 30, and the more recent was an email(!) from “the Holy See” as the home base of the Church but also a sovereign state like the nation-states participating in the Olympics.
About the possibility of the second communication from, say, the pope, yours truly made this earlier comment:
“Or, maybe NOT a direct response from Pope Francis or from any pope? Would such an action be twisted to confer a kind of equivalence and legitimacy to a tribe of lunatics floating through Paris or wherever?
“Another proposition is that the Holy Spirit already works in subtle but concrete ways…
“The demand for an apology [the first letter] comes from bishops from around the world (just as the Olympic Games include nations from around the world). And the demand was possibly fostered by Cardinal Burke who, by incoherent circumstance, no longer lives in the Vatican. And, therefore, now is more free to say what must be said without engaging in an historic pissing contest between the perennial Catholic Church and moral mutants feeding on what’s left of the West.
“The brief letter also evangelizes clearly and concisely, in only a few sentences, rather than in thousands of unread words on Vatican letterhead. The only fly in the ointment (fly, so to speak), is the earlier Vatican blessing of irregular “couples” under Fiducia Supplicans… butt surely pairs of drag queens are not to be excluded.
“Better that oblique harmonizers of “polarities” stay out of this.”
Paolo below references a release from the Vatican Press Office. NO ONE apparently signed the release. No office of the Vatican is identified. Not only that. It does not mention Francis. NO names are mentioned. In its entirety (Italian followed by English translation)
olympiques de Paris 2024
Created: 03 August 2024
Hits: 19
Holy See Press Office Bulletin
Le Saint-Siège a été attristé par certaines scènes de la cérémonie d’ouverture des Jeux Olympiques de Paris et ne peut que se joindre aux voix qui se sont élevées ces derniers jours pour déplorer l’offense faite à de nombreux chrétiens et croyants d’autres religions.
Dans un événement prestigieux où le monde entier se réunit autour de valeurs communes ne devraient pas se trouver des allusions ridiculisant les convictions religieuses de nombreuses personnes.
La liberté d’expression, qui, évidemment, n’est pas remise en cause, trouve sa limite dans le respect des autres.
© http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino.html – August 3, 2024
The Holy See was saddened by some scenes of the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Paris and can only join the voices that have been raised in recent days to deplore the offense caused to many Christians and believers of other religions.
At a prestigious event where the whole world unites around common values, there should be no allusions that ridicule the religious beliefs of many people.
Freedom of expression, which is obviously not in question, finds its limit in respect for others.
This CNA piece is confounding as it appears to be reporting on more the press release. This CNA news piece appears to conflate the earlier open letter with Burke, Barron, etc.
I would like to see the whole document. If anyone has a link to it share it please.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/Gioacchino-Genovese.pdf
I apologize, the provided web address is not relevant. Here is the correct one I could access:(https://www.ilcattolico.it/catechesi/documenti-catechesi/communique-du-saint-siege-pour-les-jeux-olympiques-de-paris-2024.html)
Thank you!
A perfectly secular statement which could be done by any bureaucrat. (The objective reality i.e. blasphemy is swapped with “hurt feelings” which “nice people” should not cause.)
“Saddened”? Why not outraged? Among the episcopal signatories, I trust that the name Jorge Mario Bergoglio stood out as prominently as John Hancock’s on the Declaration of Independence. Then again . . .
Yes. If Francis put his John Hancock there, it’s in invisible ink. Perhaps the magician will come out from under the white cloak and call the ‘nothingness’ into objectively sensible, visible being. We dream.
It took 10 days, this statement is really nothing, and we still have yet to hear from the Pope himself.
…who is he to judge?
Curious….first al Azhar university in Cairo condemns then President Erdoğan of Turkey and finally The Holy See….curiouser and curiouser Your Holiness.
Or maybe not in the Vatican Wonderland.
The plot thickens…
About Al-Azhar, it was the grand imam Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb of Al-Azhar who co-signed with Pope Francis the Abu Dhabi Declaration (2019), which affirmed: “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings.”
Two points:
FIRST, the Sheikh was reported in 2019 as having a following of 150 million Muslims, but not the full 1.5 billion members of sectarian Islam as reported or implied now (but only ten percent).
SECOND, while the Declaration has been questioned on its ambiguity about a “pluralism” of (equivalent?) religions as “willed” rather than only permitted by God, it could also be questioned what, exactly, is meant by a pluralism of sexes? Only a ghostwriter editing oversight, or more like a “wardrobe malfunction” at an infamous Superbowl halftime?
About this fluidly inclusive term (plurality of sexes, as in gender theory?), was it this insane sin seen sailing the Seine scene?
Glad the Vatican was so prompt in responding to the Parisian disgrace. Guess they had to fit in the “Querido Jimmy” letter from “Francesco” first.
I don’t know and have no time to investigate. It seems, in this article, CNA confuses two different things. Imagine a cross of MSNBC with Fox, reporting truth.
CNA website seems to suggest that EWTN sponsors, operates or supports CNA in some manner. Can we trust CNA as a reliable news source? I wonder. Do they receive any funds from the Vatican? What editorial process is used to verify stories which writers at CNA put forth? Anyone?
Meiron, I do not understand the assumptions behind the questions. Catholic News Agency is owned by EWTN; the home page identifies them as a “service of EWTN News.” So that relationship has always been clear to me but maybe not to others? As far as I know, EWTN does not get funding from the Vatican, although they do seem to have a broadcasting agreement regarding Vatican events.
I have not seen a serious reason to doubt the basic integrity of CNA’s reporting. Some stories are better than others, and they may occasionally get something wrong but not at an especially high rate. Have you seen something suggesting that EWTN or CNA has an agends in the way they are reporting Vatican-related news? It is possible that I am misunderstanding your post so I wanted to ask.
Having read this 3x, I conclude:
The beginning of the article says “the Vatican… issued a statement.” The second paragraph states the statement was “e-mailed. Many folks may reasonably consider a statement transmitted by e-mail to equivocally refer to an “e-mail letter,’ an “e-mail,” or a “letter”. In fact, the Vatican Press Office released its statement and classified it as a Press Office Release.
The final three paragraphs refer to the distinct letter signed by Burke and other bishops. The ‘signatories’ to that letter are not signatories to the Press Release. NO signatories whatsoever occur on the Press Release.
The name of Francis? Notable by absence…like Biden at the debate….
I would boycott this olympics. But if you need an olympics “fix” watch the movie “The Boys in the Boat”. Based on a true story about a US Olympic Crew team from the 1930’s. Excellent and worth the time.
“Vatican deplores Olympic offense”. Could that mean the costuming and choreography weren’t done well?
Perhaps it’s time for Rome to reaffirm the complementary roles of apologetics and dialogue in spreading the Gospel.
Meiron above – That’s French, not Italian.
Just sayin’.
Thanks, Cleo. Next time, can you help spot my error before I make it? Très reconnaissant!
As a side note, I went looking for the entire text of the press release Sunday morning after catching up with the news because the reports seemed too fragmentary to understand. “Surely there must be more to it, at least more context,” I thought. (I was wrong.). Reuters reported that a statement in French (which is an unusual choice) had been emailed on Saturday night. That made me chuckle because it reminded me of the infamous Friday afternoon information dump practiced by many presidential administrations when they had to deliver bad news and wanted to attract as little attention as possible.
The statement was hard to find, perhaps because it was only in French at that point and I wasn’t looking on French-language sites. A quich search of the Vatican site came up empty. I finally found it later that day on the Italian site Messainlatino. Any confusion caused by this Vatican statement seems (to me) to come from the Vatican itself, not the news agencies reporting on it. There just isn’t much substance there.
John Allen credits the President of Turkey for the Vatican statement, as their prez announced ahead of time, publically to his cabinet, that he was calling Francis, and then did a release confirming the call and its contents, leaving the Vatican on hook to not leave the prez in the public breeze as a possible liar if him ignored, and the Vatican wanting good diplomatic relations with real a real power in the Muslim world…so, we get a note from the diplomats, Francis saying,”handleithandleithandleit.” And a note bemoaning only our poor precious widdle hurt feelings.