Concern about the Outcome of the Synod (1)

A Synod That Goes Around in Circles

The Catholic Thing published the opinion of canonist Fr. Gerald E. Murray on July 13: “in a document about the mission of the Church, the words sin, hell, redemption, and repentance do not appear. The IL [Instrumentum laboris, which served as the working basis for the synodal sessions] is all about transferring power from the hierarchy to the laity in the name of baptismal equality.

“This completely erroneous conception of the supposed role of the baptized in the governance of the Church renders the upcoming Synodal Assembly an exercise in pondering not how to promote the mission the Church to bring Christ to the world, but rather how to wrest sacred power from the shepherds of the Church.

“This is a revolution masquerading as an effort to arrive at a deeper fidelity to the Gospel. It is not.”

The same The Catholic Thing article published the judgment of academic Stephen P. White: “Even after three years, we still don’t have a straightforward answer to the question: What is synodality? And that, to say the least, is a big problem. We are told that synodality is a ‘constitutive dimension of the Church.’

“We are told that the meaning of synodality is discovered in practice: You have to practice synodality to know what it is. Part of the purpose of the synod on synodality is to discover better what synodality means. (Forgive the dated political allusion, but this reminds me of ‘We have to pass the bill to know what’s in it.’)

“If all this sounds circular and self-referential, the synod has a non-answer answer for that, too: the circularity is one of synodality’s advantages. ‘The circularity of the synodal process,’ the latest IL tells us, ‘recognises and enhances the Church’s rootedness in various contexts, serving the bonds that unite them.’ That’s not exactly reassuring. Or clear. [...]

“So here are a few such questions – questions to which I would love to know the answers:

• What does synodality change, modify, clarify, correct or add to the Nicene formulation that the Church is ‘one holy, catholic, and apostolic’?
• Are we to understand that synodality–this essential ‘style,’ which we’re told is an expression of the Church’s nature – has been hitherto absent from the Church? If so, how is it essential to the Church?
• If, rather, synodality has always been present in the Church – and if it pertains to the very nature of the Church, then it must be so – why then is there so much difficulty in defining or even describing it in consistent terms?
• And if synodality is present in the Church today, if it has always been present in the Church, if it is essential to the mission of the Church, then how is it that so few of the People of God have the slightest notion of what the word is supposed to mean?”

And Stephen P. White concludes that, in reality, “Synodality exists primarily in the realm of abstraction, and self-referential abstraction at that.”

The Goal of the Synod Is the Synod Itself

In an August 24 article in Catholic World Report, Russell Shaw, former Secretary for Public Affairs for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/United States Catholic Conference (now combined in the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops), makes a similar point: “Marshall McLuhan was a Canadian communication guru of the last century who was probably best known for saying, ‘The medium is the message.’

“As the second and last session of the Synod on Synodality draws near, it occurs to me that something along those lines is apparently what Pope Francis has in mind for the synod, but in a variant form: ‘The process is the product.’” He explains: “Although an ever-growing body of synodal reports, summaries, and syntheses already exists, the concluding session, October 2 to October 27, will add many more.

"A few months after that, the Pope will deliver his own summing up, telling us what he thinks the Synod on Synodality has accomplished. I expect it to be some version of the McLuhanesque insight just suggested: synodality itself is the synod’s result.”

Russell Shaw sees the conclusion of the Instrumentum laboris as an illustration of his point. He quotes nos. 109 and 110, two samples of synodal jargon: “Everything in this world is connected and is marked by a restless longing for the other. Everything is a call to a relationship…which will ultimately be fulfilled in the convivial sociality of differences, fully realized at the eschatological banquet prepared by God on his holy mountain….

“When the members of the Church allow themselves to be led by the Spirit of the Lord to horizons that they had not previously glimpsed, they experience immeasurable joy. In its beauty, humility, and simplicity, this is the ongoing conversion of the way of being the Church that the synodal process invites us to undertake.”

And he comments: “Good grief! Whoever wrote that is undoubtedly a good soul who wishes the Church well. But it leaves me with a McLuhanesque fear: What if the process that produced those sentences turns out to be the product?”