English group D, moderated by Cardinal Thomas Collins of Toronto and related by Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia, expressed gratitude for the “hard work” that had gone into the Intrumentum laboris, but were scathing about its content.
They found it to be “flawed, or inadequate, especially in its theology, clarity, trust in the power of grace, its use of Scripture and its tendency to see the world through overwhelmingly Western eyes.” Some in the group said the first section of the text “creates a sense of pastoral despair,” another said it was “condescending” to poor countries, while one member called it “too careful and political correct”.
“If marriage is a vocation”, they added, “we can’t promote vocations by talking first about its problems.” The said the Church deserves a “better text” and lacks “beauty, clarity and force.”
Christian families, it said in closing, offer an important “counter-witness” to the world and they need to be “recognized, honored and encouraged by the document.”
English group C, moderated by Archbishop Eamon Martin of Armagh, Ireland, and related by Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, Australia, expressed uncertainty about how to work through the Intrumentum laboris, and said the new methodology for completing that task was “unclear.” They said the document has “more than its fair share” of “Church-speak” and they wanted a synod that was like Vatican II, a “language event, which is more than cosmetic.” They said the synod journey began not just in 2013 when it was announced by Pope Francis, but “from the Second Vatican Council and all that led to it.”
English group B, moderated by Cardinal Vincent Nichols of Westminster, England, and related by Archbishop Diarmuid Martin of Dublin, Ireland, stressed the difficulties and challenges many families face today, and said that the humanization of society depends on how the Church realises “God’s dream for his beloved creation.” The group said “generosity” is at the “root of a culture of life,” and that a debt of gratitude is owed to families who support and challenge the ministry of priests in “immense ways.”
Other language groups echoed the criticism of the Eurocentric perspective of the Intrumentum laboris, and called on states to pay greater attention to the needs of families and above all to their weakest members. Some expressed concern about gender theory, which when it becomes absolute, leads to the “imposition of a point of view that denies the relationship between sexual identity and the sexual beings we are in our bodies.”
Meanwhile, the subject of greater flexability in the role of the Bishops Conferences has been discussed. It seems to refer to what some observers believe could be a possible result of the synod: that certain pastoral practices, particularly with regard to civilly remarried divorcees, could be left to individual bishops conferences to decide.
Speaking to reporters today in reference to this theme, Cardinal Antonio Tagle of Manila, Philippines, said “what space could be given to bishops’ conferences” needs to be further examined but added such a solution has “not been worked out yet.” Critics strongly oppose such a move, saying matters touching so clearly on doctrine cannot be left to local bishops to decide.
Going down this road is going to result in different practices and approaches in different parts of the globe. It is a threat to the very universality of the Church and for me the thought of it is akin to sucking on a lemon!