ARTICLES

Could Have Been Much Worse

Delegate Foresees Good Results from Sacramento Synod

BY WILLIAM ROSS

Whither the diocese of Sacramento?

That was the question before delegates of the first diocesan synod in 75 years, and the first one ever to feature lay participation.

From October 11-13, priests, religious, and laity from the diocese's 20 counties gathered at St. Isidore Church in Yuba City to deliberate on what direction the local Church should take over the next decade.

The synod effectively began with the Spring 2002 distribution of a survey of the laity, administered by the Center for Applied Research.

As the diocese compiled the results, parishes were asked to pick two delegates. When I saw the call for delegates, I jumped at the chance to take part in an event that could have a major impact on bringing needed change to the Church in America (or at least my small corner of it).

However, my prejudice was that because of how liberal I perceived the diocesan chancery to be, the outcome was somehow predetermined. And even if the outcome was orthodox, would the results be implemented?

While concerns over orthodoxy may have differed from parish to parish and even delegate to delegate, cynicism over the outcome was a factor amongst delegates across the board. At least one person quit in the months leading up to synod because she felt the fix was in, so to speak. Even during the synod, people expressed these concerns.

So it was with a wary eye but a hopeful heart that I attended this past April's orientation session.

At the orientation, we received several discussion topics. For instance, "how has the Church changed in the past 20 years?" One lady at my table must have been stuck in the '80s because she said, "well, two decades ago, women weren't allowed in the sanctuary."

One man at another table got up and related how his grandfather would never receive communion unless he had been to confession first. "Nowadays we don't care so much about the sacraments." He said this like it was a good thing. Toward the evening's end, the moderator, a sister I came to like, opined that people who like altar rails, incense, and Latin are reactionaries.

If such comments seemed to confirm my fears about the synod, what brought me some hope was that I recognized several well-formed, faithful Catholics in the audience that night.

As we left, we were told to go back to our parishes and, using the Center for Applied Research survey results, hold "Speak Out" sessions. The survey had identified several problems and challenges, and we were to discuss these at the sessions. We were then to compile our findings and forward them to the chancery for distribution at the synod.

Meanwhile, several of us wanted to prevent a heterodox outcome. The seminal account of the Second Vatican Council, The Rhine Flows Into the Tiber, details how the liberal northern European bishops got together beforehand and strategized how to make the proceedings go their way. In so doing, they thwarted the more orthodox curial officials, who saw the schema they had prepared beforehand ignored or otherwise discounted.

We asked, "why can't orthodox Catholics do the same?" We decided to meet each week to study the Vatican II documents as well as various papal encyclicals, such as Pius XII's Mediator Dei, Paul VI's Ecclesiam Suam, and several documents by John Paul II, including Dominicae Cenae, which says the key to Church renewal is the Eucharist. (To read them, go to www.papalencyclicals.net). We began developing proposals based on these readings, things we thought would strengthen the Church.

During the course of this work, we were also getting reports from the Speak Out sessions. We heard how people did not participate at Mass, about lack of community, and poor catechesis. At one suburban Sacramento parish, people asked, "how can we get more fellowship?" When someone suggested coffee and doughnuts after Mass, the priest and delegates nodded as if the suggestion was the most profound thing they had ever heard.

Things at my church, on the other hand, were pretty good, at least judging by the Speak Out session. More participation? We said it depends on how you define "participation." If you define it as simply exterior responses, but people have no interior participation of the soul, then all the exterior participation is ultimately of no avail.

Fellowship? At my parish, people enjoy spending time with one another after Mass. Also, attendance at extra-curricular parish events (special feast days, Sunday vespers, etc.) is respectable.

Knowledge of the faith? My fellow congregants aren't theologians, but whether young or old, we know our faith. Many of us make a point to constantly grow in knowledge of what the Church teaches. Furthermore, we have very good turnout for adult education and child catechism classes.

This is not to say that our Speak Out session trumped all others; I'm simply pointing out the disparity I noticed from what I was hearing from other parishes and my own community. We're not perfect. We have our own particular problems, and they're significant, but they're different problems.

It finally came time for the synod. My study group had decided to meet early on the first day for the rosary and the Divine Mercy chaplet before the Blessed Sacrament in St. Isidore. However, as we gathered, we might as well have been trying to pray in Grand Central Station. The liturgical dancers received instructions and practiced their moves, the cantors rehearsed, the piano pounded. It was a cacophony. Those who led each decade, instead of reverently praying in quiet tones, had to shout the "Hail Mary" just to be heard at all. Those who were praying along could just make out enough words to follow along.

This all led up to the opening Mass (or as several priests insisted on calling it, "Eucharist." Not "the opening Eucharist," just "opening Eucharist.") The dancers traipsed up the aisles, holding candles while a young Filipino man gesticulated gaily, directing the choir and dancers at the same time (It should be noted the Vatican has expressly forbidden liturgical dancing; see www.ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur52.htm).

That and the music were pretty bad. What was good was Bishop Weigand's homily. He called us to draw ourselves into the Eucharistic Year our Holy Father had just proclaimed. He proposed three ways of rekindling what John Paul has called the "eucharistic amazement": "study, prayer, and recalling the attraction, the amazement we have all experienced at high points in our encounter with our Eucharistic Lord." The bishop recounted how the Holy Spirit had led him to serve Mass daily at the age of 12, and this was how he had found his vocation.

We took an Oath of Fidelity at the opening Mass. Basically it was the Nicene Creed, but with the additional sentiment, "I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate when they exercise the authentic Magisterium even if they proclaim those teachings in an act that is not definitive." One delegate I knew complained to a sister and a priest that a woman at his table had said she did not take the Oath of Fidelity. Another priest at the table, who works for the chancery, said he didn't agree with it either and he hadn't taken it, though he had recited the Nicene Creed. The sister and the first priest said they agreed with the woman and the chancery priest.

Then it was time for the festivities to begin. As we mingled beforehand with friends, I would be introduced to people. Judging by the way they were dressed, I thought they were husbands and fathers like me. Well, they were fathers, but spiritual fathers, priests. It was sad to see the number of priests in civies.

The synod started with us looking over the Speak Out session proposals, which were divided into four categories: community, the liturgy, evangelization, and catechesis. We were first to look at the proposals for community and liturgy, and come up with three upon which everyone at our table agreed. We did the same with the other categories, as well.

Along the way, several key movements emerged. First, people wanted more instruction in the liturgy. Most of us are going to Mass, evidently, not knowing why we do what we do or why we are even there. Another fervent cry was for more teaching on Christ's Real Presence in the Eucharist. Yet another was for better homilies.

Also key was a desire for more community. Parishioners desperately want to relate to one another, to build a community, to grow in the Faith with one another as brothers and sisters.

Finally, people want to know their faith. They not only want their children to know it -- and admit that their children don't know it -- but they want to know it.

By the end, we had dozens of recommendations from the four combined categories, and of these we had to choose seven. This was done by a vote.

When the vote was tallied, the following recommendations had risen to the top: 1) Develop programs to help parents with catechesis for themselves and their children to promote the Catholic family, introduce religious symbols, and enrich the Domestic Church (i.e., the home) by providing nurturing, educational opportunities. 2) Have the diocese provide more educational opportunities and encourage people to avail themselves of these. 3) Increase efforts to recruit more priestly and religious vocations through a program of prayer, education, and invitation. 4) Develop a plan to promote understanding of all aspects of the liturgy and sacraments as the foundation of our faith for children and adults. 5) Identify and promote welcoming activities for new parishioners, inactive Catholics, and faithful parishioners. 6) Make a preferential option for the development, support, and funding for youth and young adult ministries. 7) Capitalize on the fact that the Liturgy is the most common and central activity of Catholic life in the parish. Make every effort to teach the Faith, especially in relation to the Liturgy. Train ministers and catechize the faithful. Have priests set aside the time and effort necessary to make the celebration truly reflect the spiritual reality that occurs during each Mass.

All things considered, this was a good outcome. It was surely better than many had thought it would be. Certainly, my own fears were not realized.

There were other encouraging and bright spots. The priests willing to throw themselves into the confessional box until the last person received reconciliation. The old couple in the corner continuously praying the rosary for a holy outcome. The group of people who daily gathered at 7 a.m. to pray the rosary and Divine Mercy chaplet. The many faithful people who may not know their faith well but who want to, and who want to be authentically Catholic.

That said, it could have been better (of course it could have). I wish there had been more emphasis on abjuring sin and becoming holy and what that would take. I wish so many had not been so unapologetic about their dissent. For instance, there was a supplemental session where the topic of priestesses was discussed. (Synods by canon law may not discuss anything outside of their competency, i.e., anything touching on doctrine; so synod organizers allowed people discuss the topic of women priests -- forbidden by the Holy See -- after the closing of the first day's official business.) Given the comments that were made there, dissent may not have been widespread, but it was there.

I also wish the liturgies hadn't been so bad. The first night's Vespers was the exception. It was a nice combination of traditional chant and modern songs done in a timeless style (and much of it in Latin). As one friend of mine put it, "It was like I was transported in time to the ancient Church. It was very moving." There was also the lovely benediction each evening.

But the rest of the liturgies had the bad music, with the lyrics all focused on "we" or "I." There was no silence. There was nothing outwardly mysterious, reverent, or transcendent.

The second Mass' homily discussed how the bad pre-Vatican II days were replete with pharisaical, man-made accretions, and how the post-Vatican II era has produced nothing but good. Then there was the adulatory quoting of heretic priest Father Hans Küng. I kept waiting to hear "The Twilight Zone" theme. And the closing gospel music Mass -- with electric bass and drums -- was too much. I left and caught an evening Mass elsewhere.

All of this can't detract, however, from the sense that our prayers had been answered, that the outcome was a holy one. From the beginning, synod director Sister Eileen Enright encouraged us to ask the Holy Spirit for His guidance and protection. I think our prayers were answered in that the outcome of the Synod was so efficacious and positive, especially given some of the heterodox agendas at play.

Canon law says Bishop Weigand can accept or reject any of the Synod's recommendations, but I think His Excellency was impressed by the course of our deliberations. In his closing remarks, he observed it was noteworthy that in the Year of the Eucharist, in the diocese of Sacramento, where our cathedral is called that of the Blessed Sacrament (which will reopen during next year's Synod on the Eucharist in Rome), that so much of our discussions revolved around the Real Presence.

The Synod's recommendations will not of themselves get us to the filial faithfulness and holiness this diocese and our Church so desperately needs -- that all of us need, each and every one of us -- if we're to see true renewal. But it has all the appearances of being a good start.

TOP