The Sat Report: Synodality, the Conversion of Processes, by trusting the Process
Analysis of Part III of the Final Document of the Synod on Synodality
This week brought Synodality back into the news for the first time in the month or so since the Synod ended, with the publication of a note by the Holy Father prefacing the Final Document of the Synod, and some interesting remarks that Pope Francis made to the plenary session of the Pontifical Theological Commission.
We will get to all that and my analysis of the third part of the Final document. I want first touch upon the latest working group that Pope Francis has set up, in this case to formally make ‘spiritual abuse’ a canonical crime. The communique signed by Cardinal Tucho Fernández, and approved by the Pope, on the topic of false mysticism, reads; “it is possible to classify a delict of “spiritual abuse,” avoiding the overly broad and ambiguous expression of “false mysticism.” It is proposed to entrust to the Dicastery for Legislative Texts and the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith the task of analyzing this possibility and presenting concrete proposals, forming a working group between them, chaired by the Prefect of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts.”
This a particular issue in Church law that has arisen a couple of times in the last few years when it comes prosecuting spiritually abusive priests, most notably in the case of Marko Rupnik. The difficulty, and I surmise the reason for the working group, is how to define spiritual abuse well enough so that it can be used for prosecutions, without unjustly prosecuting people as spiritually abusive. Don’t get me wrong, spiritual abuse is a real issue, I just struggle to see how it framed in legal terms in a way that said legal definition is not open to abuse. We should pray for the good work of both dicasteries involved.
The Final Document participates in the ordinary Magisterium of the Successor of Peter
This week also saw the publication by Pope Francis of a note accompanying the Final Document of the Synod of Bishops on Synodality, which has essentially become the preface to that text. In it the Holy Father formally makes the Final Document a magisterial document, calling for a creative implementation and a renewed commitment to Synodality. Below is my translation of the note. You can find the original Italian here.
Accompanying Note from the Holy Father Francis
At various moments in the journey of the Synod that I began in October 2021, we have listened to what the Holy Spirit is saying to the Churches in this time.
The Final Document of the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops gathers the fruits of a journey marked by listening to the People of God and the discernment of the Pastors. Allowing itself to be enlightened by the Holy Spirit, the whole Church was called to read its own experience and to identify the steps to take to live communion, achieve participation and promote the mission that Jesus Christ entrusted to it. The synodal journey, begun in the local Churches, then went through the national and continental phases, to arrive at the celebration of the Assembly of the Synod of Bishops in the two sessions of October 2023 and October 2024. Now the journey continues in the local Churches and in their groupings, treasuring the Final Document that was voted on and approved in all its parts by the Assembly on 26 October. I too have approved it and, by signing it, I have ordered its publication, joining the “we” of the Assembly which, through the Final Document, addresses the holy faithful People of God.
Recognizing the value of the synodal journey undertaken, I now deliver to the Church all the indications contained in the Final Document, as a restitution of what has matured over the course of these years, through listening and discernment, and as an authoritative orientation for its life and mission.
The Final Document participates in the ordinary Magisterium of the Successor of Peter (cf. EC 18 § 1; CCC 892) and as such I ask that it be accepted. It represents a form of exercise of the authentic teaching of the Bishop of Rome which has some novel features but which in effect corresponds to what I had the opportunity to clarify on 17 October 2015, when I affirmed that synodality is the adequate interpretative framework for understanding the hierarchical ministry.
Approving the Document, on October 26, I said that it «is not strictly normative» and that «its application will require various mediations». This does not mean that it does not commit the Churches from now on to make choices consistent with what is indicated in it. The local Churches and the groupings of Churches are now called to implement, in the different contexts, the authoritative indications contained in the Document, through the processes of discernment and decision-making provided for by law and by the Document itself. I also added that «time is needed to reach choices that involve the whole Church»: this applies in particular to the themes entrusted to the ten study groups, to which others may be added, in view of the necessary decisions. The conclusion of the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops does not put an end to the synodal process.
I repeat here with conviction what I indicated at the end of the complex synodal journey that led to the promulgation of Amoris laetitia (19 March 2016): "not all doctrinal, moral or pastoral discussions need to be resolved with interventions of the magisterium. Naturally, a unity of doctrine and practice is necessary in the Church, but this does not prevent the existence of different ways of interpreting some aspects of the doctrine or some consequences that derive from it. This will happen until the Spirit leads us to the complete truth (cf. Jn 16:13), that is, when he introduces us perfectly into the mystery of Christ and we can see everything with his gaze. Furthermore, in each country or region more inculturated solutions can be sought, attentive to local traditions and challenges" (AL 3).
The Final Document contains indications that, in the light of its basic orientations, can already be received in the local Churches and in the groupings of Churches, taking into account the different contexts, what has already been done and what remains to be done to learn and develop ever better the style of the missionary synodal Church.
In many cases it is a question of giving effective implementation to what is already foreseen by the current law, Latin and Eastern. In other cases it will be possible to proceed, through a synodal discernment and within the framework of the possibilities indicated by the Final Document, to the creative activation of new forms of ministry and missionary action, experimenting and subjecting the experiences to verification. In the report foreseen for the ad limina visit each bishop will take care to report what choices have been made in the local Church entrusted to him in relation to what is indicated in the Final Document, what difficulties have been encountered, what have been the fruits.
The task of accompanying the “implementation phase” of the synodal journey, on the basis of the guidelines offered by the Final Document, is entrusted to the General Secretariat of the Synod together with the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia (see EC 19-21).
The synodal journey of the Catholic Church, also animated by the desire to continue the journey towards the full and visible unity of Christians, “needs that shared words be accompanied by deeds” (Final Greeting to the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, 26 October 2024). May the Holy Spirit, gift of the Risen One, sustain and guide the entire Church on this journey. May He, who is harmony, continue to rejuvenate the Church with the power of the Gospel, renew her and lead her to perfect union with her Spouse (see LG 4). Because the Spirit and the bride say to the Lord Jesus: “Come” (see Rev 22:17).
November 24, 2024
Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe
Francis
This note isn’t unexpected and what it does do is clearly show the immediate direction of travel, namely that although the text “is not strictly normative,” this doesn’t mean “that it does not commit the Churches from now on to make choices consistent with what is indicated in it.” The bureaucratic structures that are mandated by the Final document do seem compulsory. More on these later in the post.
The Holy Father then referencing the battles of the Synod of the Family, where after the first session where communion for the divorced and ‘remarried’ had been rejected, having not received sufficient votes, the Pope nevertheless decided to have the topic proceed to the subsequent session, where it passed by one vote after he stacked the deck. It was less a “complex synodal journey” as he puts it here, more of good old-fashioned ecclesial politicking. More interesting is that almost 9 years later, how small the numbers of divorced and ‘remarried’ Catholics have actually gone through the discernment process to see whether they can access the sacraments. I do wonder if the Vatican is at all interested to see and measure the fruits of Amoris laetitia. Critically appraising actions and correcting course is what the Church has done throughout the centuries. It hasn’t much done this recently. Changes are brought in, and nobody questions whether they were wise or achieved their intended purpose. So many examples, sanctuary remodeling, bishop emeriti, communion in the hand, reorientation of the liturgy, the Synod of Bishops, the abolition of the minor orders etc.
Invoking Amoris laetitia and the maxim "not all doctrinal, moral or pastoral discussions need to be resolved with interventions of the magisterium,” the Holy Father wants to remind us that he wants a less interventionalist Rome, except to when it comes to policing the contents of Parish bulletins. You wouldn’t want someone to stumble into a Traditional Latin Mass, accidentally on purpose.
“Naturally, a unity of doctrine and practice is necessary in the Church, but this does not prevent the existence of different ways of interpreting some aspects of the doctrine or some consequences that derive from it.” Remember in Germany homosexual couples can be blessed together as individuals, but in Africa this is completely unacceptable. The Holy Father says that “this will happen until the Spirit leads us to the complete truth, that is, when he introduces us perfectly into the mystery of Christ and we can see everything with his gaze.” I guess that is when the Germans will stop blessings individuals in homosexual unions together as a couple whilst not blessing the couple. This all sounds like a recipe for chaos, but God does work in mysterious ways.
The Pope does want each bishop worldwide to report on how they have implemented Synodality in their See, this being monitored in the ad limina visits, discussing the “difficulties [that] have been encountered, what have been the fruits.” The Holy Father ends the note by stating that Synodality being a key part of the ecumenical journey of full unity with Catholicism under the Bishop of Rome. I do think that the Holy Father is on to something here, and I pray that he is right.
Synodality centred on Christ
On Thursday, Pope Francis addressed the annual Plenary Session of the International Theological Commission (ITC), a body of the Roman Curia consisting of some 30 theologians, that offer advice to the Pope and the Vatican’s Doctrinal Office on matters of theology. In his address, Pope Francis praised the work of the Commission on a forthcoming document on the meaning of the Nicene Creed in the world today. The Holy Father used his address to emphasise the need to develop a theology of Synodality centred on Christ.
“We thus come to the second point, which is the need to develop a theology of synodality. The Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops devoted a paragraph of its Final Document to the task of theology, in the section on ‘Charisms, Vocations and Ministries for Mission;’ and offered these words of encouragement: “The Assembly invites theological institutions to continue research aimed at clarifying and deepening the meaning of synodality.” This was a vision of Saint Paul VI when, at the end of the Council, he created the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops. Almost sixty years later, this synodal theology has gradually developed and today we can say that it is mature. Today we cannot think of pastoral care without this dimension of synodality.”
I find it mildly amusing that even after 60 years, and the fact that Pope Francis says that is it “mature”, we still need “clarifying and deepening the meaning of synodality.” The logic would then seem that it is not mature enough yet. This I think is the biggest flaw with the Pope’s strategic push for Synodality, namely if you don’t get people to move along with you, specifically the laity, all these reforms will be for nothing. I’m yet to see anything other than apathy towards Synodality from rank-and-file Catholics, and what needs to be done first is to attempt to get them on board. At the moment it seems the Pope and the handful of yes-men that he has surrounded himself with have boarded the Synodality train and ploughing full steam ahead, with the laity still on the platform
The Holy Father continued, “along with the centrality of Christ, then, I would ask you to be mindful of the ecclesiological dimension of synodality, so as to accentuate its missionary purpose and the participation of the whole People of God in the variety of our cultures and traditions. I would say that the time has come to take a courageous step forward and to develop a theology of synodality, a theological reflection that can help, encourage and accompany the synodal process, for a new, more creative and daring missionary phase, inspired by the kerygma and involving every component of the Church’s life.”
All I would say is that Synodality will fail without the “participation of the people of God,” and the Vatican seems to have taken this participation as a given, when all the evidence thus far has shown the opposite.
Trust the Process
Continuing our series of analysing the sections of the Final Document of the Synod on Synodality, we now move on to the third part dealing with structural and procedural changes to make the Church more Synodal. An official working translation of the Final Document in English can be found here.
The section, as with all the sections, begins with a Cardinal-designate Radcliffe-esque meditation, in this case on the post-Resurrection account of the miraculous bountiful catch. The one recurring theme in this section is one of trust. “Decision-making processes need ecclesial discernment, which requires listening in a climate of trust that is supported by transparency and accountability.” The document continues; “Trust must be mutual: decision-makers need to be able to trust and listen to the People of God. The latter, in turn, needs to be able to trust those in authority.”
The various cover-ups, sexual and financial scandals that have plagued the Church over the last few decades have eroded trust in the institution founded by God Himself. Closer to home for this Pontificate, Traditionis custodes and Fiducia supplicans, have also had the same effect. In their own more devastating way, Rupnik, and the appearance of ignoring the women victims of clerical sexual abuse, has also done so. The appearance of nepotism with regards to case of Zanchetta, and the debacle of the laicisation, then annulment of the laicisation, then the confirmation of the laicisation of Príncipi too. For all the strides this Pontificate has made on the issue of addressing clerical sexual, the mishandling of high-profile cases has meant that on this distinct issue there has developed a lack of trust in Pope Francis to do the right thing. This is sad, but it is an unfortunate reality. This isn’t to say that the Holy Father cannot regain this trust. This will be done if the victims of Rupnik attain justice, if the Vatican finally publishes its report of how an Argentine bishop, who the Pope knew had homosexual pornography on this phone and was in involved in a financial scandal in his own diocese, was given a bespoke job at the Vatican Bank, and if the Vatican explains the Príncipi debacle.
On the topic of ecclesial discernment, the document outlines that “the more everyone is heard, the greater the discernment.” Possibly the biggest flaw of this entire process. “Therefore, it is essential that we promote the broadest participation possible in the discernment process, particularly involving those who are at the margins of the Christian community and society.” The million-dollar question is how to get people to engage in the process, perhaps the first step is in rebuilding trust.
On what ecclesial discernment requires the document is nicely outlines what is required “It calls for interior freedom, humility, prayer, mutual trust, an openness to the new and a surrender to the will of God.” It then lists the elements that should be included in the process:
a) clearly setting out the object of discernment and disseminating information and the means for adequately understanding it;
b) giving sufficient time for prayerful preparation, for listening to the Word of God and for reflection on the question;
c) an inner disposition of freedom regarding one's own interests, both personal and as a group, and a commitment to the pursuit of the common good;
d) allowing time to listen attentively and respectfully to each person’s voice;
e) searching for the widest possible consensus which will emerge when “our hearts burn within us” (cf. Lk 24.32), without hiding conflicts or searching for the lowest common denominator;
f) the facilitators of the process formulating the consensus in such a way that allows the participants to say whether they recognise themselves in it or not.
The text then moves on to the structure of the decision making process, quoting one of the motifs that arose from the Synod floor and was repeated a couple of times during the Press briefings; “The Fathers of the Church reflect on the communal nature of the mission of the People of God with a triple “nothing without”: “nothing without the bishop” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Trallians 2,2) “nothing without the council of presbyters, nothing without the consent of the people” (St. Cyprian of Carthage, Letters 14,4).” The theme of trust then reappears, “it is necessary to encourage procedures that make reciprocity between the assembly and the person presiding effective in an atmosphere of openness to the Spirit and mutual trust in search of a consensus that could, possibly, be unanimous.”
The first major proposal of the document follows, “a revision in the Code of Canon Law from a synodal perspective,” more specifically “the recurring formula in the Code of Canon Law, “merely consultative vote” (tantum consultivum) should be reviewed to eliminate the possibility of ambiguity.” In the same paragraph the nature of authority in the Church is addressed, “in a synodal Church, the authority of the Bishop, of the Episcopal College and of the Bishop of Rome in regard to decision-taking is inviolable as it is grounded in the hierarchical structure of the Church established by Christ”, before adding “however, is not without limits: it may not ignore a direction which emerges through proper discernment within a consultative process, especially if this is done by participatory bodies.” This of course has major implications for how the Church is governed. The irony being that unlike the Pontificates of Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, this has been the most centralising Pontificate of the Conciliar era, with the Pope having surrounded himself with advisors and curial heads that completely agree with his program. This is not meant as a criticism of Pope Francis, I believe that Catholicism functions better with the Pope as an absolute monarch, purely from a functional point of view. I do believe, however, that a diversity of perspectives, especially from those that aren’t afraid to question decisions, helps foster good governance. The Holy Father lacks consistency here, very much do as I say, not as I do. Perhaps this is what Synodality will bring to the Petrine ministry, aiding Peter better see the will of God.
Speaking of consistency and transparency, the final document uses the following words to describe the latter, “truth, loyalty, clarity, honesty, integrity, consistency; rejection of obscurity, hypocrisy and ambiguity; and absence of ulterior motives.” Later the links being transparency and trust are underscored; “the attitude to transparency we have just outlined safeguards the trust and credibility needed by a synodal Church that is attentive to relationships. When this trust is violated, the weakest and the most vulnerable suffer the most. Wherever the Church enjoys trust, the practice of transparency, accountability and evaluation helps to strengthen its credibility. These practices are even more critical where the Church’s credibility needs rebuilding. They are particularly important in regard to the safeguarding of minors and vulnerable adults.”
On accountability, “clericalism is based on the implicit assumption that those who have authority in the Church are not to be held to account for their actions and decisions as if they were isolated from or above the rest of the People of God.” The words Zanchetta, Príncipi, and Rupnik, come to mind. Will anyone be held to account for these, probably not, but I still hold on to hope. I am encouraged when the Synod document says, “However, those in positions of authority have greater responsibility in this regard and are called to account for it to God and to His People. While accountability to one’s superiors has been practised over the centuries, the dimension of authority’s being accountable to the community is in need of restoration.”
What follows is a list of bureaucratic structures that the Synod says are necessary to be established everywhere, which at the same time telling all of us, especially me, “we need to realise that this is not a bureaucratic task for its own sake”:
a) effective functioning of finance councils;
b) effective involvement of the People of God, in particular of the more competent members, in pastoral and financial planning;
c) preparation and publication (appropriate to the local context and in an accessible form) of an annual financial report, insofar as possible externally audited, demonstrating the transparency of how the temporal goods and financial resources of the Church and its institutions are being managed;
d) the preparation and publication of an annual report on the carrying out of the local Church’s mission, including also safeguarding initiatives (the protection of minors and vulnerable adults), and progress made in promoting the laity’s access to positions of authority and to decision-making processes, specifying the proportion of men and women;
e) periodic evaluations of all the ministries and roles within the Church.
The text then goes onto describe the many ways in which the laity already participate in decision making, accountability and evaluation in the Latin Church; Diocesan Synod, Presbyteral Council, Diocesan Pastoral Council, Parish pastoral council, Diocesan and Parish Council for Economic Affairs. It also lists the structures already in place in the Eastern Churches; Eparchial Assembly, Eparchial Assembly for Economic Affairs, Presbyteral Council, Eparchial Pastoral Council, and Parish Councils. The document tells us that “a synodal Church is based upon the existence, efficiency and effective vitality of these participatory bodies, not on the merely nominal existence of them.”
The document is explicit when it says that it wants these bureaucratic instruments to be a permanent fixture of the Church of the Third Millennium, “we insist that they be made mandatory, as was requested at all stages of the synodal process, and that they can fully play their role, and not just in a purely formal way, in ways appropriate to their diverse local contexts.”
The text then mandates an adoption of the “conversation in the Spirit,” that characterised the way the Synod assemblies worked in Rome. The question of how this will translate is yet to be seen. More importantly is how the various members of these bodies are selected. If it is the same five women who run the parish, you are never going to get out of the groupthink mentality that has dominates the Church at the local level, with every dwindling congregation sizes, that results in everyone being shocked when said Parish is no longer viable and is shut down. The text outlines the need for “women, young people, and those living in poverty or on the margins,” wanting “the baptised who are committed to living their faith in the ordinary realities of life, … not only those engaged with organising ecclesial life and services internally.” No mention specifically of men, who currently are almost completely absence from parish life, with the one exception of the priest. If the Church doesn’t start to seriously address this, it will continue its decline in the West. It is disappointing that this wasn’t addressed here. If the Holy Father is wise, the topic of the next Synod will be on men.
On consultation with those outside the Church, the text says that “it may be appropriate to provide for the participation of delegates from other Churches and Christian Communions, as happened during this synodal assembly, or representatives of the religions present in a territory”, as well as saying that “without limiting consultation to members of the Catholic Church, these gatherings should be open to listening to the contributions from other Churches and Christian Communions. Attention should also be paid to the religions in the territory.” My only question is to what end, building the Kingdom of Christ in this world, or a path to religious indifferentism? God has commissioned us to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to observe all that He commanded.
That concludes this section of the final document of the Synod on Synodality. This was a longer post than usual, but I wanted to include some of this week’s news. The next section of the final document is on bonds between the Bishop of Rome and the College of Bishops, and between the episcopate and the people of God.
From our end, next the Sat Report will preview next weekend’s consistory, where the Holy Father will create 21 new Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, with 20, an average age of 62.5, of these being eligible to vote in a future conclave. After that we will continue our analysis on the Final Document. Until then. God bless.