"Fit for Mission? Youth" (?)

Yes, I'm reading Cooees again at the moment... You can tell, can't you?

And I am a little bit miffed by the fact that (working diligently as I have been today - actually, social club Christmas lunch at the Park Hyatt for all Archdiocesan employees...) I missed all the hoo-hah on this posting on Cooees concerning the new "youth ministry" blue print of the ACBC. Indeed, now that Hardman Window has closed the comments box on that posting, I feel rather left out, given that all other Catholic Bloggers - and indeed our own favourite "aCatholic" bloger, Mr Coyne, had a go.

Not that I have much to add to what Evelyn said:

"I do take issue with the idea that this is somehow worthy of an announcement. It might have sounded all wonderful in the lead up, but as a participant in the proceedings I don't have much excitement about the 'draft document.'...I read the document thoroughly. It made good points, I must say, like stating that the liturgy and the Eucharist is the source and summit of the christian life, and nothing 'iffy' was in there specifically.

"It was problematic because it never mentioned promotion of vocations to the priesthood, nor the role of the priesthood in youth ministry (something needed with this crowd). Nor did it mention the fact that parents are the primary formators of children and youth, something also sorely missing (it did pop up in one talk).

"The document was one of those typical Church documents built around consensus between the opposing parties on the ACBC Youth Council. It was written in such a way that it will probably never be read by anyone, let alone used, as it says nothing solid nor confronts anybody...

The document pretty much confirms the current work of every youth movement-not particularly a 'new way forward.' But an 'old way forward' with a new emphasis.

I take the point. Very strongly. Would it have been too much to expect something like a "Fit For Mission? Youth" document?