Vatican City, Oct 20, 2023 / 07:31 am (CNA).
This past week the Synod on Synodality assembly delved into two crucial themes: the accompaniment of LGBT individuals and the topic of a female diaconate. Additionally, the assembly discussed the structure of the Church, all with the aim of shaping a more synodal future for the Church.
The process has been driven by what the Synod calls “active listening and speaking from the heart,” which, some participants have reportedly said, tends to be driven by emotions. It also raises a fundamental question: Will something truly defined ever emerge from the process?
Several notable events also took place: Pope Francis met with members of New Ways Ministry, a U.S.-based LGBT ministry group which was previously denounced by both the U.S. bishops’ conference and the Vatican’s doctrinal office, three theologians held a conference designed to show support for the synodal journey, and a special prayer service for migrants presided over by Pope Francis was held at St. Peter’s Square.
LGBT issues
The issue of the debate on LGBT inclusion was downplayed by Vatican spokesperson Paolo Ruffini, who stated that “the blessing of homosexual couples is not the theme of the Synod.”
However, on Oct. 17, Sister Jeannine Gramick, co-founder of New Ways Ministry, an LGBT+ organization which was previously denounced by both the U.S. bishops’ conference and the Vatican’s doctrinal office for causing confusion on sexual morality among the Catholic faithful, met with Pope Francis, along with three other New Ways staff members.
The meeting was publicized by Vatican Media, and perceived as an endorsement of New Ways Ministry’s approach by Pope Francis. It occurred despite a controversy surrounding the Synod’s website, which was forced to remove a New Ways Ministry video that invited LGBT people to participate in the assembly.
Women’s ordination and other key topics
Apart from LGBTQ+ issues, the Synod also engaged in discussions related to the female diaconate and even contemplated the possibility of women delivering homilies, which already happens in situations such as in German-speaking Switzerland, where the priest is treated almost like a mere consecration official. The topic of “female priesthood” was even broached, raising fundamental questions about the role of women in the Church despite assurances from Synod organizers that changes to doctrine were not on the agenda. One intervention during a morning session was reportedly significant in this discussion. Responding to calls for women’s ordination not only to the diaconate, but in some cases also to the priesthood, a laywoman participant argued that the focus on women’s ordination is a distraction from what women in the Church need and is an attempt to clericalize the laity. The intervention received loud applause.
The week also saw deliberations on the role of parishes, priests, and bishops. Ruffini emphasized that the Synod is not just a “roundtable or a talk show,” but a “conversation of the Spirit.” However, it remains to be seen what the fruit of these conversations of the Spirit will be, the methodology of which is explained in great detail in the synodal process, but the practical results of which have yet to be understood.
Theological debates
There is a lot of talk about avoiding the media’s agenda for the Synod, and it is a legitimate concern. But is there a theological agenda on the Synod? The topic is hotly debated, since the interventions are so proscribed as to prevent true theological debate and discussion.
Outside the Synod, on Oct. 14, three theologians convened a conference entitled: “Church and Synod are synonymous: styles and forms of a synodal Church.” Among the speakers of the meeting was Archbishop Roberto Repole, an innovator who recently entrusted the management of parishes to lay people in his home diocese of Turin.
Archbishop Repole argued that the Second Vatican Council didn’t fully embrace the realities of local churches. He advocated for synodality to infuse the Gospel into the culture in which local churches operate, emphasizing the democratic culture of the local churches..
For Monsignor Giacomo Canobbio, professor emeritus of the Southern Theological Faculty and fellow presenter, the Synod is “an implementation of an idea of the Church that comes from afar” and “a response to the signs of the times.” Still, it is, above all, he said, an antidote to clericalism, a theme that Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, the Synod’s relator general, during the module B3 discussion, also highlighted.
Finally, Simona Segoloni Ruta, a professor at the Pontifical Theological Institute John Paul II, opined that “talking about bishops without talking about the people of God is impossible.” Therefore, she argued, the Synod is necessary because “it would not be possible to gather only the bishops if the Church wants to feel together.”
At the Synod itself, work began on Wednesday on module B3 of the Instrumentum Laboris, the Synod’s working document, with a focus on “the question of authority, its meaning, and the style of its exercise within a synodal Church.” In an address to the synodal assembly in the General Congregation, Italian theologian Father Dario Vitali focused on authority and concrete changes to the institutional Church. The theologian proposed the need “to reimagine the Church in a synodal key, so that the entire Church and everything in the Church — life, processes, institutions — is reinterpreted in terms of synodality.”
These discussions introduce a spectrum of perspectives, but not all participants share these views. Rumors of planned absences to avoid contentious debates or to express opposition to certain positions have circulated, challenging the vision of the Synod as a harmonious gathering.
The new calendar
The Synod organizers introduced a brand-new timetable for the proceedings. Most notably, the draft of the summary report, described by Ruffini, as “short and transitory,” will now be presented to the delegates as a unified document, rather than in two parts. This adjustment is intended to allow for more substantial consideration of the “road map” for the next phase of the synodal process leading to the concluding session to be held in October of 2024.
Furthermore, a Letter to the People of God will be published at the conclusion of this Synod session, marking a change from the previous practice of releasing it only at the end of the entire Synod process.
As a result, the Synod will pause its activities on the afternoon of Oct. 23 and throughout Oct. 24 for deliberations on the Letter of the Assembly to the People of God, discussed first in smaller circles and then among the wider general congregation.
Questions about the methodology of the Synod arise
This new calendar demonstrates the adaptability and responsiveness of the Synod fathers and that synodality as a method also involves constant listening. But it also raises concerns about whether the synodal assembly might turn into an ongoing debate where nothing can be considered definitive in practice, and everything remains under discussion.
Many participants have expressed doubts about the method, albeit anonymously, owing to fears about breaking the request for confidentiality.
These doubts revolve around the practice of assigning new tables and subtopics to participants at the start of each new module, as well as the fact that in this novel approach everyone discusses particular themes at their tables, but few would be expected to have a global vision of the Synod.
Add to it that the short duration of each interaction — limited to four minutes — makes it challenging to articulate complex thoughts and so favors emotional appeals. At least one intervention in the general congregation reportedly raised eyebrows, and there is a concern among participants that facts are being manipulated for emotional effect.
Some Synod fathers also complained that the approach appears too “Western-centric,” at least on issues-related to sexuality and gender. However, it remains to be seen whether the summary text will truly encompass all perspectives since the final text is voted on, potentially leaving out important nuances and divergent views.
With this comes an inevitable democratization of the process. And along with democratization comes subjectification, a byproduct of the listening process that prioritizes emotion over reason. Every theme must make it into the final text, meaning there will be no formal conclusions, no viewpoints more true than others.
The method, until now, seems to be keeping Synod participants in relative harmony. Cardinal Cristobal Lopez Romero, archbishop of Rabat, underlined that in the discussions, there are “divergences, but never clashes.” However, Archbishop Zbigņev Stankevičs of Riga, Latvia, was one of the few to publicly make waves. At the daily press briefing he defended the Church’s pastoral care of homosexuals, but drew a clear line in the sand by saying homosexual unions could not be blessed because they are sinful.
Finally, Archbishop Gintaras Grušas of Vilnius, president of the European bishops, used a homily during one of the Masses for participants to caution against synodality becoming an end in itself and emphasizing the role of synodality in serving the Church’s mission of evangelization.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
We read: “The process has been driven by what the Synod calls ‘active listening and speaking from the heart’.”
“From the heart”?
What we are now witnessing is the backsliding of Faith & Reason into pagan times of Homer and the pre-Christian Classics, when POETRY and PHILOSOPHY/THEOLOGY were undifferentiated and felt to be the same thing. Consider the lucidity of the following (yes, too long, but only ONE-PERCENT as long as the 27,000 murky words of the Instrumentum Laboris):
“The inspiration of philosophy was identical with that of poetry. By the discovery of a principle of understanding, which should embody the true LOGOS of explanation of action and reaction, of doing and suffering in the world, it aimed at once to satisfy the spirit of classical curiosity and, at the same time, to possess itself of an instrument by which to control the environment. In its quest for such a principle, however, philosophy had claim to a certain autonomy. The basis of this claim was twofold; it rested upon (a) a fresh and original attitude towards the data, and (b) a new sense of propriety regarding the interpretation which might justly be put upon them.
“Thus, with respect to the data, it denied itself the indulgence which poetry had shown itself so ready to exploit, i.e., that of CONSTRUCTION of the COSMOS [!] freely without let or hindrance. On the contrary, it professed the utmost regard for phenomena, the ‘observed facts’: and from this standpoint its chief concern was to ‘save appearances’ even if this was to magnify out of all proportion the difficulties of the task.
“Then, with respect to the LOGOS or explanation [!], it boldly transferred the court of final appeal from the heart to the head [!]; thereby committing itself to the pursuit of intelligible connections rather than of aesthetic satisfaction [!]. These self-imposed decencies constituted the DIFFERENTIA of philosophy. By accepting them she was to attain significance in her own right as the supreme effort of Classicism to interpret the riddle of the Sphinx” (Charles Norris Cochrane, “Christianity and Classical Culture,” 1940/1970).
SAID DIFFERENTLY, it was providential that St. Paul crossed to Macedonia to engage the Greeks, and THUS to enable a coherent synthesis of Faith and Reason. The Catholic faith was not and is not just another of the syncretic mystery religions that accompanied (accompaniment!) to twilight of the Roman Empire.
And, there’s even a reason biologically why, in permanently important ways, the head is above the heart. And, we now might add, also above those other parts of the anatomy which are now of such preoccupying fascination to the curiously coupled Synod(s) on Synodality. The “riddle of the sphincters!”
Andrea Gagliarducci recognizes an essential change within the Church that precedes the Synod reaching back to the secular runaway aftermath of VatII, and in isolated instances, that Council. That’s the functionary role relegated to priesthood, as Andrea notes in Switzerland where the priest is perceived as a consecration official.
Concomitant with the process of dilution of faith and practice is the diminution of priesthood. Scripture subject to form geschichte, historical, cultural dynamics that affect meaning [targeted by Benedict XVI in Jesus of Nazareth], Christ, eventually the breezy eyed nice guy who wouldn’t harm an ant never mind crush someone’s feelings. Priests [many not all] became smiling flight attendants positive about everything reflecting the ‘development’ of theology, the now remote possibility of mortal sin and hell [His Holiness not immune had said about hell, God is not a torturer].
Lost is the priest as Alter Christus, and with the Apostle, crucified. All the fire, fierce austerity, love until death commitment has been smothered with theological rationalizations by effeminates and intellectual dilettantes. All come to fore in the German Synod and now infecting the entire Church. Standouts who resist with sound theology in defense of Christ’s revelation are pilloried. They are evidence the Living Flame of Love, the Holy Spirit is alive and well.
It’s official. The Church is downstream from the culture. Sadly, this culture is radically broken. This is the worse time for the Church to be downstream from the culture. Yet, here we are. Pile on the prayers, reparation, fasting, penance . . . the world, the Church needs it.
The sin/odd on sinodality
I have observed this push to ordain women, and as a woman myself, fail to understand it. Many professions have had to compromise needed standards in order to accommodate women entering. In this category are police, firemen and elements of the military. Now they are pressing their case for the priesthood. I recall reading some time ago that seminaries had to be wary of candidates presenting themselves for entry who were in reality NOT men, but “Trans” people. It sounded from the article as though such attempts had already been made and discovered. That any woman would consider beginning a career as a Priest with such a profound LIE is evidence of some significant emotional disconnect , if not mental illness. My observation is that women who insist on pressing themselves into traditional areas where they are not needed,nor can meet the qualifications, are usually the smallest number but shrillest voices in the room. Approval of these roles for women in the church will end in the further emptying of the pews. Its hard to see how that is the working of the Holy Spirit. The Pope should never have called this unneeded synod.
LJ. “any woman would consider beginning a career as a Priest with such a profound LIE is evidence of some significant emotional disconnect , if not mental illness.”
WOW! Could today’s pedophile male priesthood have mental illess as well?
Keep them barefoot and pregnant and in the kitchen.
Wow, LJ! What an amazing, intellectually honest comment! I couldn’t agree more with everything you said! You made your point exceedingly well!
The faithful can only hope and pray for this:
“…the synodal assembly might turn into an ongoing debate where nothing can be considered definitive in practice, and everything remains under discussion.”
Like the sequels of Hollywood, fans lose interest as the shows devolve into hints and allusions of former fervor of reform and change. Yawn. Even our popcorn becomes stale.
Meanwhile, the perpetual battle between good and evil continues in the hearts of the faithful, the children of the inheritance. Let the synodal-mover-shakers at themselves forever.
Aha! There it is!
The hot-button issues have been produced right on time, as predicted.
Proof that the spirit behind this Synod on Synodolatry is not the Holy One. For the Holy Spirit is spontaneous, unpredictable, surprising.
Whereas the unholy one very predictably subverts truth via agendas, narratives and ideologies executed by its unimaginative, ideological, slogan-spewing minions.
You can’t produce an insult better than an unoriginal unfounded cliché? Are you so devoid of a respect for women and a public courage to demonstrate it that you are unwilling to conceive that God knows better how both men and women should serve Him and each other than the shallow expectations of pop culture would presume?