Diocesan "Listening Sessions" for Synod?

[Geremia]

Is your diocese having a "listening session" with the bishop?

Mine has been. The bishop writes:

Last weekend I held a listening session...to gather suggestions and advice in response to our Holy Father's desire to listen to our people on issues related to marriage and family life in preparation for the Ordinary Synod in Rome during October, 2015.

Have you gone to a "listening session"? What did you tell your bishop?

It might be worthwhile to attend one of these if your diocese offers them, not so much as to participate in Francis's democratization of the Church as to bring the truth about marriage to those present.

I'd bring up:

• There is no such thing as divorce. All mention of divorce should be scrapped.
• In 1968 there were 338 annulments, in 2002 there were 50,000. The annulment process really is "divorce for Catholics."
• There needs to be mention of the virtue of chastity (cf. Pope Pius XI's encyclical Casti Connubii, "chaste marriages")!
• The Synod needs to explicitly condemn contraception, not just make a passing reference to Humanæ Vitæ
• There is nothing good about sodomite unions, as the Relatio currently says.

[Elliott]

It might be hard for us breeders to sit through. I doubt they would be interested in hearing about what the Church teaches.

[Geremia]

It might be hard for us breeders to sit through. I doubt they would be interested in hearing about what the Church teaches.

That's why I wrote: "It might be worthwhile to attend one...so...as to bring the truth about marriage to those present."

[Maximilian]

Is your diocese having a "listening session" with the bishop?

Mine has been. The bishop writes:

Last weekend I held a listening session...to gather suggestions and advice in response to our Holy Father's desire to listen to our people on issues related to marriage and family life in preparation for the Ordinary Synod in Rome during October, 2015.

Have you gone to a "listening session"? What did you tell your bishop?

It might be worthwhile to attend one of these if your diocese offers them, not so much as to participate in Francis's democratization of the Church as to bring the truth about marriage to those present.

I'd bring up:

• There is no such thing as divorce. All mention of divorce should be scrapped.
• In 1968 there were 338 annulments, in 2002 there were 50,000. The annulment process really is "divorce for Catholics."
• There needs to be mention of the virtue of chastity (cf. Pope Pius XI's encyclical Casti Connubii, "chaste marriages")!
• The Synod needs to explicitly condemn contraception, not just make a passing reference to Humanæ Vitæ
• There is nothing good about sodomite unions, as the Relatio currently says.

I'm sure it will feel like beating your head against the wall, but sometimes you might be able to get through to one or two people. If there is anyone there who has been seeking the truth but hasn't been able to find it anywhere, then when they finally have a chance to hear the truth, they might respond, even if everyone else at the meeting is unwilling to consider it.

[Geremia]

I'm sure it will feel like beating your head against the wall, but sometimes you might be able to get through to one or two people. If there is anyone there who has been seeking the truth but hasn't been able to find it anywhere, then when they finally have a chance to hear the truth, they might respond, even if everyone else at the meeting is unwilling to consider it.

I just came back from mine, held at a conservative parish in a liberal diocese, and I'd guess about 30% of the circa 90 people present were orthodox: openly anti-contraception, anti-"divorce for Catholics," etc.
Most of the older people there were pro-contraception, pro-"welcoming everyone," anti-"trying to convert people from homosexuality," etc.
This one young girl, who had an annulment, was talking about how easy hers was and how they should be even easier.
Let us weep and pray.

Here's what another diocese (Phoenix) is doing:
http://www.catholicsun.org/2015/02/02/phoenix-diocese-invites-catholics-to-participate-in-vatican-questionnaire-on-the-family/

[Geremia]

I spoke about how contraception is evil and how priests need to preach against it from the pulpit because most Catholics don't know it's evil.

Very little time was given to annulments, but those who did speak talked about how they should be easier, faster, etc. I wish I could've said they should be harder and NEVER EVER granted to people who have children.

[Maximilian]

I'm sure it will feel like beating your head against the wall, but sometimes you might be able to get through to one or two people. If there is anyone there who has been seeking the truth but hasn't been able to find it anywhere, then when they finally have a chance to hear the truth, they might respond, even if everyone else at the meeting is unwilling to consider it.

I just came back from mine, held at a conservative parish in a liberal diocese, and I'd guess about 30% of the circa 90 people present were orthodox: openly anti-contraception, anti-"divorce for Catholics," etc.
Most of the older people there were pro-contraception, pro-"welcoming everyone," anti-"trying to convert people from homosexuality," etc.
This one young girl, who had an annulment, was talking about how easy hers was and how they should be even easier.
Let us weep and pray.

Here's what another diocese (Phoenix) is doing:
http://www.catholicsun.org/2015/02/02/phoenix-diocese-invites-catholics-to-participate-in-vatican-questionnaire-on-the-family/

Even though it wasn't obvious, maybe you touched someone's heart.

Or someone might remember your words in the future even though they weren't ready to hear them today.

[Jacob]

The idea of a listening session is very very very bad.  They remind me of the group discussions that destroyed certain orders in the 60s and the indabas that have been used to destroy "orthodoxy" in certain mainline protestant groups.

[Archer]

It might be hard for us breeders to sit through. I doubt they would be interested in hearing about what the Church teaches.

That's why I wrote: "It might be worthwhile to attend one...so...as to bring the truth about marriage to those present."

If you've got the time and energy for a fight, maybe.  I personally would rather spend my limited time doing something worthwhile. 

[Geremia]

If you've got the time and energy for a fight, maybe.  I personally would rather spend my limited time doing something worthwhile.

It isn't worthwhile to have a chance to say contraception is evil in front of 90+ Novus Ordites?

[Elliott]

If they're going to have these meetings anyway, it's good there is someone with the patience to speak up for the truth. I wouldn't do it because I'd probably get mad and I don't speak well.

[aquinas138]

I spoke about how contraception is evil and how priests need to preach against it from the pulpit because most Catholics don't know it's evil.

Very little time was given to annulments, but those who did speak talked about how they should be easier, faster, etc. I wish I could've said they should be harder and NEVER EVER granted to people who have children.

I think we shouldn't overreact to the ease of procuring annulments by insisting they virtually never be granted; while I agree they seem to be too-freely given, it is also possible they were not given freely enough in the past. Social pressures were different; fewer people even sought to get an annulment, even those who probably would have been granted one. What we should want is for the tribunal to determine the truth of a situation; I have no doubt that there are invalid marriages out there that have produced children, and the fact that there are children does not make an invalid marriage valid. Given the culture's depraved ideas about sexuality and marriage being a pretty transitory and conditional arrangement, I'm not troubled by the fact annulment numbers are much higher than before the Council.

In any event, good for you for speaking up.

[Geremia]

I think we shouldn't overreact to the ease of procuring annulments by insisting they virtually never be granted; while I agree they seem to be too-freely given, it is also possible they were not given freely enough in the past. Social pressures were different; fewer people even sought to get an annulment, even those who probably would have been granted one. What we should want is for the tribunal to determine the truth of a situation; I have no doubt that there are invalid marriages out there that have produced children, and the fact that there are children does not make an invalid marriage valid. Given the culture's depraved ideas about sexuality and marriage being a pretty transitory and conditional arrangement, I'm not troubled by the fact annulment numbers are much higher than before the Council.

In some cases, it's good that couples try to go through the annulment process; many don't even care enough to go through the process. However, there are some who abuse it and use it as a form of "Catholic" divorce.