FEATURES / Synod on Synodality
As the second and final assembly of the Synod on Synodality begins, one of the advisers helping to facilitate discussions summarises it as a stage in the dramatic transformation of Christianity into a Church that will grow through encounter and witness, just as in its first centuries / By AUSTEN IVEREIGH
The shape of the Church to come
THERE IS A TEMPLATE for the statement of a bishop newly appointed to a diocese in England and Wales that has been in use for as long as I can remember. First: express surprise, shock and above all humility at the appointment. Then say something nice about the diocese (“beautiful part of the country”) and how you are looking forward to getting to know it. Then say you’ ll miss your existing diocese and the wonderful people in it, even as you are honoured by the Pope’s trust in you for this new mission. Finally, thank the retiring bishop or interim stand-in for their support, and ask for prayers. Follow with a potted summary of your blameless ascent up the ecclesiastical ladder.
So accustomed are Catholics to this vacuity – indistinguishable from the communiqués of remote corporations (“Mr Brown will be taking over from Mr Smith as head of accounts. Mr Brown says how delighted he is …”) – that most of us struggle to imagine how it could be different. A new bishop has been appointed; we know little of him, nor he of us. But the news is all about him.
The Instrumentum Laboris (IL), or working document, for the second and final assembly of the Synod on Synodality that begins this week in Rome allows us to envision another way, in a Church that is “closer to the lives of her people, less bureaucratic and more relational” (5). It is a Church that takes seriously the “we” of the People of God: not simply the sum of the baptised, but “the communitarian and historical subject of synodality and mission” (3), through which the Spirit is acting. It is a Church in which the normal way of operating is interdependence and reciprocity and mutual listening; where ministries and charisms in all the baptised are valued and encouraged; where there is participatory decision-making, formation in listening and discernment. It is a Church in which the bishop is not a remote monarch, ruling in isolation from the Church he serves, but who listens and accompanies synodal decisionmaking processes at every level in the diocese, fostering accountability and transparency.
Put like this – and let’s face it: the Synod on Synodality has often struggled with finding language that captures this shift – it might seem abstract. But the IL begins and ends with the image of God’s promised banquet in Isaiah, in which social ladders and political pyramids are upturned, and the Spirit is heard in the young and the poor and the spurned; and in which, amazingly, even ordinary people are agents of God’s purpose, by virtue of their baptism. Synodal conversion is a journey of rediscovering that joyful amazement in the daily life and culture of a Church whose heart is open to the Kingdom.
THE IL DOES NOT deal specifically with how bishops are appointed, for, like many topics that have arisen in the course of these three years – including women deacons, LGBT issues and the mission to the digital world – it has been entrusted to one of the 10 study groups adjacent to the assembly poring over the canonical and theological questions relating to these topics. This is not to “exclude” them from the Synod, but to ensure they are dealt with, while allowing the assembly to focus on its main task. The groups will present brief “work-in-progress” reports to the assembly, and their conclusions to the Pope next year. But look at IL 91, which calls for creating and strengthening “different types of councils – parish, deanery, diocesan, or eparchial – as essential instruments for the planning, organisation, execution and evaluation of pastoral activities”. Now imagine a future bishop being named to a diocese that has a vigorous pastoral council, one which has for years been organising listening and discernment processes in parishes and deaneries, and collating their fruits. It would be a diocese in which problems and challenges – pastoral, social, institutional – would constantly have been surfaced and prayed over by large numbers of people, who draw up proposals that have buy-in from the ordinary faithful across the diocese, because they were involved in the listening processes from the get-go. Now further imagine that the bishop has been appointed, perhaps, because he can identify with the priorities it has discerned. Would his statement be all about him, or at least as much about the diocese, and how he proposes to lead it in its
ILLUSTRATION: ALAMY/SANDEMA
mission and priorities? The People of God of that particular Church would not be passive and invisible, as now, but a subject.
The clericalist mindset is so embedded that people object: surely this emasculates the bishop’s authority? They know little of the Church’s deepest traditions. “The aim of synodal ecclesial discernment,” says the IL, “is not to make the bishops obey the voice of the people, subordinating the former to the latter, nor to offer the bishops an expedient to make decisions that have already been taken seem more acceptable, but rather to lead to a shared decision in obedience to the Holy Spirit.” It is the same ancient notion of authority and decision-making that runs from chapter 15 of the Acts of the Apostles through the Early Church synods and coun-
cils, chapter 3 of St Benedict’s
Rule, and so on, well into the Middle Ages, where it was assumed that delib-
eration “takes place with the help of all, never without the pastoral authority that takes decisions by virtue of its office”, as IL 70 puts it. Earlier, the IL quotes Pope Francis’ October 2015 speech that synodality offers “the most appropriate interpretative framework for understand-
ing the hierarchical ministry itself ” (8).
Accountability, trans-
parency, discernment – all these belong “to the oldest of the Church’s traditions”, and “found in the very nature of the Church as a mystery of communion” (73-74). The bishop’s authority to take decisions is not reduced by this, but enhanced, legitimised and copperbottomed. He is free, indeed obliged, to make the final discernment, and is not bound by any general agreement that has emerged from church listening processes. But he needs a convincing reason to do so, as canon law even now says, lest he injure the bond between himself and the people. For in the Church the exercise of authority constitutes a “moderating force in the common search for what the Spirit requires, as a ministry at the service of the unity of the People of God” (69).
THE CONCLUDING gathering in Rome, for- mally known as the “second session” of the XVI General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, will bring to a close a remarkable three-year ecclesial event aimed at bringing the yeast of
4 | THE TABLET | 5 OCTOBER 2024
For more features, news, analysis and comment, visit www.thetablet.co.uk