Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,608
- 910
These are some excerpts from an interview with Archbishop Chaput:
I served a term on the Permanent Council of the Synod of Bishops starting in 2015. And I remember some brief discussions about the difficulty of holding another ecumenical council because of the large number of bishops today. But I’d be very wary of the idea that synodality can somehow take the place of an ecumenical council in the life of the Church. There’s no tradition of bishops delegating their personal responsibility for the universal Church to a smaller number of bishops, so any such development would need to be very carefully examined and discussed before any attempt at implementation. That’s not the current spirit or reality of what’s happening.
www.pillarcatholic.com
I am a bit surprised about Chaput's views on synodality as a permanent feature but not necessarily his views on the Pope.
Archbishop, interpreting and understanding Vatican II seems to be at the heart of much current disagreement in the Church. Sixty years after the council concluded, why is an authoritative reading of Vatican II still in question?
Was Vatican II an organic development and reform of Church life, or a break with the past and a new beginning? That’s the central question, and the answers to it lead down very different paths. Breaking with the past seems to disregard any notion of a genuine development of doctrine. Both Ratzinger and Pell saw the council as an experience of continuity and reform. They were right. But division and conflict have been common in the aftermath of many councils. They just have to be endured and worked through.Archbishop, the notion of synodality seems to be a major theme of the Holy Father’s pontificate. What will be the outcome of the three-year ‘synod on synodality’ effort?
About the outcome, I have no idea. About the process, I think it’s imprudent and prone to manipulation, and manipulation always involves dishonesty. The claim that Vatican II somehow implied the need for synodality as a permanent feature of Church life is simply false. The council never came close to suggesting that. Moreover, I was a delegate to the 2018 synod, and the way “synodality” was smuggled onto the agenda was manipulative and offensive. It had nothing at all to do with the synod’s theme of young people and the faith. Synodality risks becoming a kind of Vatican III Lite; a rolling council on a much more controllable, malleable scale. That wouldn’t serve the needs of the Church or her people.I served a term on the Permanent Council of the Synod of Bishops starting in 2015. And I remember some brief discussions about the difficulty of holding another ecumenical council because of the large number of bishops today. But I’d be very wary of the idea that synodality can somehow take the place of an ecumenical council in the life of the Church. There’s no tradition of bishops delegating their personal responsibility for the universal Church to a smaller number of bishops, so any such development would need to be very carefully examined and discussed before any attempt at implementation. That’s not the current spirit or reality of what’s happening.
Chaput: 'Speaking the truth is polarizing'
Archbishop Charles Chaput has a view on some central issues in the life of the Church.
www.pillarcatholic.com
I am a bit surprised about Chaput's views on synodality as a permanent feature but not necessarily his views on the Pope.
