Synodality – and “controversial” issues – are here to stay: conclusions from the final document of the Synod

We have finished our work as synodal delegates and we have, with the approval of the Holy Father, we published our final document: “For a synodal Church: communion, participation and mission”. This is the fruit not only of our prayer, dialogue and discernment over the past two years in Rome, but more importantly, reflecting the broad consultation that began in 2021 with the People of God in every diocese in the world. What are the important points of this document? As I see it, they are as follows:

1. Synodality is a “constitutive dimension” of the church.

This is an important phrase and concept that appears at the beginning of the document (#28). It means that alongside, for example, the concept of magisterium or the tradition of social justice, it is an essential element of the church. The final document says that synodality – which is defined in a variety of ways in part 1 – is a way for the church to be more “participatory and missionary” and can no longer be considered a curiosity, a practice to be meddled with . or a passing fad. Rather, it is central to how the church understands itself.

Always mission-oriented – and therefore not an end in itself – synodality can be seen as “gathering at all levels of the Church for mutual listening, dialogue and communal discernment” (n. 28). This ancient way finds its roots in the Council of Jerusalem and the “constant ecclesial practice of meeting in synods,” a process that helps us together to “dialogue, discern and decide” (no. 28). For me, this is one of the most important messages of the synod: the fundamental place of synodality in the church.

The final document is firmly grounded in the person of Jesus Christ, something every delegate apparently wanted. The main theme of the document is the Resurrection — the retreat theme of Cardinal-elect Timothy Radcliffe for this final session of the synod and the visual backdrop to the Paul VI hall where we meet every day. The resurrection provides not only the literary structure of the document, but also its spiritual foundation. Everything we do, we do for, through and with the Risen One.

2. Decision-making must be participatory.

A theme repeated over and over in this document, regarding almost every aspect of church life, is broad participation in decision-making. “(It is essential to promote the widest possible participation in the process of discernment, involving especially those who are on the margins of the Christian community and society” (n. 82). It would be impossible to read this document and not understand that all people should have a voice in both decision-making and decision-making, while still acknowledging the role of hierarchy.

It is a recognition, once again, that the Holy Spirit is active and alive in all the People of God – not just in cardinals, archbishops, bishops and priests. The final document also helpfully outlines listening and discernment procedures. This extends to all levels of the church, including future synods, which are recommended, as this Synod did for the first time, to include not only bishops, but “other members of the People of God” (no. 136) Likewise , in terms of decision-making, the document also includes a strong call for the People of God to have “a greater voice in the election of bishops” (no. 70). Finally, to this is added the strong call for transparency, accountability and evaluation at all levels of the church, as a way of inviting the faithful to see, judge and understand how their pastors are functioning (no. 95).

3. Bishops and pastors are “duty to listen”.

The call for listening and participation is central to the document, as mentioned. And bishops and pastors are most strongly called, again and again, to listen to the voices of the faithful in their dioceses and parishes:

Those in authority are, in many cases, bound by existing law to consult before making a decision. Those with pastoral authority are obliged to listen to those who participate in the consultation and cannot pretend that the consultation did not take place. Therefore, those in authority will not depart from the fruits of consultation that produce agreement without a compelling reason that must be properly explained…” (No. 91).

It is also worth quoting at length no. 92, which speaks of the authority of the bishop, the episcopal conferences and the bishop of Rome, to take decisions, which are based on the magisterium. However:

Such an exercise of authority … is not without limits; it cannot ignore a direction that arises through proper discernment within a consultative process, especially if it is carried out by participatory bodies.

And at the parish level, the church is encouraged to listen to everyone – especially those who feel marginalized – the synod recommends that parishes consider establishing a “ministry of listening and accompaniment”. In my opinion, this proposal was truly a fruit of the Holy Spirit and seemed to flow naturally from our long conversations about the church we all love and serve. As the document notes, we have not decided whether this will be mandated, but we have recommended that local churches experiment with this new ministry (#78). But all localities need not move as quickly in this or other suggestions, as a synodal style recognizes: “Differences in rhythm can be appreciated as an expression of legitimate diversity…” (n. 124).

4. Pastoral councils, diocesan synods and other participatory gatherings should be mandatory.

During both sessions of the Synod, we delegates wrestled with the best way to ensure that the faithful can be heard and participate in the life of the church, which is centered, in most parts of the world, and for most people, in parish life. Thus, a variety of consultative bodies are noted in both the Latin and Eastern Catholic Churches, including, for the Latin Church: diocesan synods, presbyteral councils, diocesan pastoral councils, parish pastoral councils, and diocesan and pastoral councils for economic affairs (i.e., financial boards), are essential for participation, accountability and transparency. All of these are provided for in canon law, but often only exist “in name”. Therefore, we write: “We insist that they be mandatory, as requested at all stages of the synodal process, and that they be able to play their full role, and not just in a purely formal way…” (no. 104) .

5. Some “controversial” issues are not front and center, but included.

At the beginning of the synodal process in 2021, there were high hopes among many people that the synod would resolve, or even judge, some controversial issues, including the ordination of married men to the priesthood, the ordination of women to the priesthood. diaconate and LGBTQ issues. For the most part, these issues were turned over to the 10 “study groups” for further discernment. This made sense: the prospect of 350 delegates coming to a conclusion on some of these complicated subjects in a matter of weeks was unbearable. Study groups also allowed us to focus on the above topics. However, many of these topics were in the background of our discussions. It’s hard to talk about women’s roles in the church without bringing up the topic of deacon ordination. And the work of Study Group 5 (on the role of women) has been much in the news, with Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández initially not attending a meeting for synod delegates and then on Thursday speaking for 90 minutes on the topic before about 100 of minutes. delegates. For our part, we said, in a much larger section on women, “There is no reason or impediment to prevent women from fulfilling leadership roles in the Church: what comes from the Holy Spirit cannot be stopped. In addition, the question of women’s access to diaconal ministry remains open. This discernment must continue” (n. 60).

The place of women in general was a central theme of the document, as it has been an almost constant theme in our discussions over the past two years. (And it was not “controversial”.) Paragraph no. 60 begins with a clear statement (which many delegates from the developing world supported) regarding the “equal dignity” of women. We note their participation at all levels of the church, including “in positions of responsibility in Church institutions, in diocesan curias and in the Roman Curia” and demand “the full implementation of all opportunities already provided by Canon Law” for women, especially those roles that have been “underexplored”. There is also a call for “a significant presence of women” in the education and formation of priests and deacons (no. 148).

When it comes to LGBTQ issues, there has been a considerably greater openness to the topic this year and an ease in discussion in general, for a number of reasons. Mainly because the topic was assigned to a study group, there was less need for delegates to sort of debate the issues. But overall, I feel that attitudes have changed significantly among most delegates – and for the better. In the document, the term “LGBTQ” is not used – not surprisingly, as it is still anathema to some delegates – but we ask the church to listen to those who “experience the pain of feeling excluded or judged, because of their marital status . , identity or sexuality” (50). However, it is quite a feat that 350 delegates from around the world could agree to this kind of language. (The inclusion of the term “identity” was a pleasant surprise to me.) The final document is sure to delight some, disappoint others, and perhaps even anger some. But it is only the first step in a process for our church as we travel with the Risen Christ “together on the road” – which is, of course, the ancient meaning of the synod.

(The final document can be read in Italian here.)