Thus Paragraph 122 of the Base Document of the Synod, reproducing Paragraph 52 of the document produced at last year's synod. Except, of course, that for gay Anglican make-believe priest boyfriends read admission of remarried divorcees to the Sacraments.
I made the change, not because I regard gay Anglican make-believe priest boyfriends as being on an ethical level with admitting adulterers to Holy Communion, but to illustrate the rhetorical tricks being employed. We are all interested in rhetoric, aren't we? So here we go.
(1) The order of subjects. Maintaining the present discipline comes first, and is followed by Changing it. This is the trick of the Implied BUT. First of all, you get out of the way the option which you wish to play down; then you follow it with your own preferred option. "Some board members think that you have worked here for fifty years and deserve to be retained in employment; others suggest a more nuanced approach to the moral obligations the firm has towards you ...". There's no doubt which side the speaker is on. You only have to reverse the order in which the alternatives are spelt out to see my point. Do what The Ordinary Newton did. Just lie. And then he told the boyfriends to get themselves into the Roman thing real fast before anyone said anything at all.
(2) Option 1 is laid out in 35 words; Option 2 in 101 words. Surprise!!! Option 2 is deployed with a (dubiously relevant) quotation from the Catechism; one wonders why no mention was made of the vast Magisterial back-up to Option 1. We just diverted attention by getting the nuts at the UK Catholic Missal printer to print up our fancy liturgies because we hate the Novus Ordo Shit and The Bishop Fellay Show is much smarter than the Romans and knows better than to take us on our own terms like Papa Ratzi did, the UK RC bishops and the C of E gang be damned.
(3) "The subject needs to be thoroughly examined ...". This is the trick of suppressing actual mention of who it is that has some view. It is often done by the use of passive or impersonal ("It is felt that ...") constructions. Just ask yourself: Is this sentence the view of the Committee which drafted the text? Or of the 2014 Synod as a whole? Is it what all the 2014 fathers unanimously agreed? Pull the other one! In fact, it is clearly part of the views of those advocating change. But it is given a lofty dignity by the grammatical structure. Not "We think it needs to be examined"; not "Kasper and his chums think it needs to be examined"; not even "Most fathers think it needs to be examined". Just "It needsto be examined"!
It is surprising what you can get away with if you avoid allowing your grammar to give away who is actually advocating what. Make it sound as if what you're saying is so obvious as to be above contradiction. That's how We managed to get the nuts in Rome to give us the Fraudinariate that no right minded UK RC bishop would ever have wanted. How do you think I managed to survive the year they kept me on hold because at least some of the UK RC bishops knew how pissed off I was that all those make believe Masses I had made a fortune on were considered by them as "absolutely null and utterly void" as my make believe "priesthood" was.
It is has become clear to me, from reading this document and analysing its sleights of hand, that, embedded at the heart of the synodical process, are profoundly corrupt operators who are prepared to use any dodge they can lay their hands on, to pervert and to skew the deliberations of the fathers, just like the corrupt operators who put together the Fraudinariate under poor old Papa Ratzi's trustful gaze before he fled into the backyard monastery. At least he gave a good bye present to the C of E bishops who were laughing their arses off to have gotten rid of us and dumping us all into the RC Church. When there was an RC Church. Before Bozo Bergoglio popped out of that Martini Mafia run Conclave.
It doesn't suggest to me that they are particularly keen to take the risk of leaving it to the Holy Spirit to guide the Synod, despite all the Holy Father's fine talk about Synods being Protected Spaces for the Spirit, just like his Predecessor let the Fraudinariate adapt the liturgy put together by Henry VIII's favorite Archbishop who brought his wife home from Germany in a trunk.
Footnote: If anybody's interested ... this sort of close analysis of a text to see what games are really being played was a speciality of Dr Eric Mascall, a great Anglican Catholic (which is what we all really are in the Fraudinariate - NOT actual Roman Catholics) theologian who had enjoyed a Mathematical education which included formal logic. He used to make mincemeat of the documents of Lambeth Conferences. He is part of the Patrimony which is our contribution to the life of the Universal Church, along with bad mouthing Bozo Bergoglio and hoping The Bishop Fellay Show allows bearded married priests and their boyfriends into their schismatic Church, unless Truman Cardinal Capote becomes anti-Pope Pius XIII. Time for gin and tonic with the boys. Hope "wife" is still out with her bridge partners. Ta ta dearies.