Synod on Synodality: Revolution or much ado about nothing?

Perhaps it is in the very nature of the Synod of Synodality to take steps back after having taken several steps forward. But the tone of the first days of the last general assembly of the Synod makes it evident that, for the moment, there is no talk of revolution within the Church.

That tone was set days before the meeting began this week at the Vatican, when in his speech in Belgium on Sept. 27, Pope Francis said the Synod was not intended to promote what he called “fashionable” reforms.

It now seems clear that, while delegates can discuss many things over the next three weeks, nothing will be decided. There will be no doctrinal changes. There is no diminution of the role of the bishop. There is no rush to resolve the issue of opening the diaconate to women.

Instead, the real challenge this month may well be how to manage the expectations of those who hope and push for radical changes. Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, the Synod’s general rapporteur, alluded to that danger at the end of last year’s assembly when he noted that many would be disappointed if women were not given a greater role in the Church.

But is an important change in the government of the Church on the horizon? That seems unlikely. Pope Francis himself, in his opening address to this year’s assembly on October 1, emphasized that “the presence in the Assembly of the Synod of Bishops of members who are not bishops does not diminish the ‘episcopal’ dimension of the Assembly”, in reference to the dozens of lay people and religious who participate as delegates with the right to vote.

addedwith evident annoyance, that suggestions to the contrary were due to “some storm of rumors going from one place to another.” In fact, there is not even “any limit” nor is “the proper authority of each bishop and the Episcopal College” repealed, he said.

Rather, the Pope tried to clarify, the assembly “points out the way in which he is called to assume the exercise of episcopal authority in a Church conscious of being constitutively relational and therefore synodal.” In short, it is a “way of governing”, a way of governing. However, it is still a government rather than an open forum.

There have been many other signs that no revolution is imminent.

For example, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, said in his report on the new ministries that Pope Francis does not consider the issue of the female diaconate to be “ripe.” In other words, the reflection continues. The Church will strive to give more space to women in decision-making positions, but more discussion is needed about any type of ordained ministry, something the Pope had already indicated in his in-flight press conference on September 29. upon his return from Belgium.

Furthermore, in their interim reports to the Synod, the study groups commissioned by the Pope to examine the issues of the female diaconate and other controversial issues showed some caution on the part of the bishops in addressing doctrinal issues. Bishops may agree to give laypeople a greater say in decision-making, perhaps, but not when it comes to doctrinal matters.

The study group charged with examining the role of the “bishop-judge” is a clear example. Pope Francis has placed bishops at the center of the marriage annulment process, asking—in fact almost imposing—that they be the final judges. But the bishops called to speak on the issue have reaffirmed that the bishop, in some cases, should have the option of delegating that responsibility to regional and national courts that “could guarantee great impartiality in decisions.” Is this a step back from what Pope Francis has already asked for?

And when it comes to making the bishop selection process more transparent, much depends on how the apostolic nuncio in each country exercises the selection process. “More attention to the local Church” and “more participation of the local Church” are called for, but this is a question of focus, not of revolutionary change.

Likewise, while the news is that the Dicastery for Bishops has launched an investigation to evaluate the practice of ad limina visits, we already know that Pope Francis has long included interdepartmental meetings in his ad limina visits when the local situation requires it.

The study groups have also emphasized that there is no need to change the Fundamental Reasonthe Vatican document, already revised by Pope Francis in 2016, which serves as the basis for the training of priests and deacons. At most, says the study group text, one could write “a preamble that, on the one hand, clearly describes the relational identity of ordained ministers in a synodal and missionary Church and indicates, on the other hand, the principles and criteria for the implementation of the Fundamental Reason and the National Account in harmony with this ecclesiological and missiological framework.”

Perhaps the most interesting part refers to the question of the relationship between the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Latin Church because, according to the text of the study group, it is intended to have a “document of the Holy See, edited by the Dicastery for the Churches Orientales, addressed by the Holy Father to the Latin bishops and containing some guidance on these aspects.”

The Synod’s canonical commission focuses on making diocesan/eparchial and parish pastoral councils mandatory. But this issue is already highlighted in the document of the International Theological Commission on synodality, published in 2018.

Up to this point, in short, a lot has been said about nothing. Perhaps there is more emphasis on the “cry of the poor” and the need not to focus on doctrinal issues. And yet, when it comes to making a concrete proposal, the bishops seem content with their ordinary discipline.

Translated and adapted by the ACI Prensa team. Originally published in CNA.