Bureaucratic synodality vs. a style and an attitude

By Dr. Jeff Mirus ( bio - articles - email ) | Jul 01, 2025

In a brief meeting with the Ordinary Council of the General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops on June 27th, Pope Leo said he wanted to share “an idea that I consider central”. It turns out this idea was a very simple one: “Synodality is a style, an attitude that helps us to be Church, promoting authentic experiences of participation and communion.” I agree wholeheartedly with this insight. It is just this “style and attitude” which propels us into a common “synodality” or “way together”—that is, into many particular missions within the overall mission of collaborating with Jesus Christ within the Church He founded to extend His presence throughout the world.

Three days later, however, the secretary general of the General Secretariat of the Synod, Cardinal Mario Grech, proceeded to belabor the concept of synodality with immense angst:

We know well, however, that difficulties and resistance remain in recognizing the proposal of synodality as a fruitful path for the renewal of ecclesial life. Some, unfortunately, express these reservations in a marked manner, exercising a certain influence on others.

Indeed, Cardinal Grech called for a “permanent forum” to deepen the theological, canonical, pastoral, spiritual and communicative aspects of the synodality of the Church”, and he rhapsodized: “Wouldn’t it be possible to imagine a network of conferences on various continents with the patronage of the General Secretariat of the Synod? What riches could we promote in this way, strengthening a synodal mentality?”

That’s a lot of firepower to explore and belabor what Pope Leo regards as a style and an attitude. One wonders almost inescapably: Is synodality becoming the Church’s version of bureaucracy? Are we headed toward a system which requires everything under the sun to be synodally discussed and vetted?

Leadership does not come from “meetings”

Now I admit that on rare occasions, meetings and reviews of various kinds can be used to foster a fresh spirit and a fresh enthusiasm. But that only happens when the meetings and reviews are led by someone who can impart that spirit and enthusiasm to the group. It is not—I repeat, very definitely not—a normal outcome of meetings and reviews, which very rapidly become hoops that must be jumped through, a series of requirements which more often hamper rather than foster effective action.

I am pretty sure most people would agree that either a new sense of mission is communicated by a good leader, or it doesn’t get communicated at all. Indeed, I would suggest that, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, meetings and reviews do not energize; they enervate. Meetings to create or receive “marching orders”, of course, can be very effective. But endless meetings for sharing and group-think are invariably annoying time sinks, except for those participants who are seeking to use them to wrest control away from effective executives (in the Church, we call these executives “bishops”).

Hopefully this goes a long way toward explaining why Pope Leo refers to synodality as a style or an attitude. Presumably this pope has far too much missionary experience to resort to badly-orchestrated group-think to get things done. As the Pope recently reminded us by parsing the word “synod” into its Greek roots, “synodality” means that we Catholics are on “a way together” which benefits from the active participation of all—not so much in discussions or planning sessions but in the “way together” itself, that is, in ongoing apostolic work, ongoing witness to Christ.

I would further note that the Church was not energized by such a style and attitude under Pope St. Paul VI, whom Pope Francis frequently cited in favor of synodality. Paul VI found it very difficult to motivate Catholics at all; he had to ignore the “majority report” from the meetings dealing with the issue of contraception; and he was forced to suffer his way to holiness as a result. In contrast, the most recent example of that style and that attitude, and the energy generated from them, was provided by Pope St. John Paul II. Under JPII, anyone who truly and deeply accepted the wholeness of the Catholic Faith knew what it meant to be energized into adopting a style and an attitude that fueled evangelization and all kinds of Catholic apostolic action through an immense variety of personal and group initiatives.

The early efforts to combat the implosion of Catholicism during the 1960s and 1970s exploded in priestly vocations, religious renewal, and the lay apostolate under the leadership of Pope St. John Paul II. Although JPII worked hard to reclaim a proper understanding of the Second Vatican Council at the Synod of Bishops in 1985, as a general rule he did not lead through endless meetings or any other endless process of vetting widespread human input.

A better model

Many of the organizations which took up the slack in those days, along with those older religious orders and dioceses which clawed their way through an arduous process of renewal, are still leading the way today. I strongly suspect that what these centers of effective apostolic action would tolerate least is a process of wasting inordinate amounts of time, energy and money attending huge group sessions to harvest the fruits of a synodality understood primarily in terms of what we might call “bureaucratic insight and control.”

They, and many others influenced by their example, have long since put their shoulders to the synodal plow, planting and harvesting for Jesus Christ under the aegis of the Catholic Church. They are not interested in group-think sessions which provide every possible interest group with an opportunity to present its own point of view, nor do they need flabby texts on synodality which sap their apostolic fervor and encourage them (at least as has been the case so far) to continue to sap their energies by engaging in never-ending discussions.

A better model for fruitful Catholic action is the classic agricultural model proposed by Jesus Christ when he said “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest” (Mt 9:37-8, Lk 10:2). Or as Our Lord said, apparently to those who are constantly talking about the future harvest:

Do you not say, “There are yet four months, then comes the harvest”? I tell you, lift up your eyes, and see how the fields are already white for harvest. He who reaps receives wages, and gathers fruit for eternal life, so that sower and reaper may rejoice together. [Jn 4:35-36]

At some point, we all need to stop chattering and take Our Lord’s injunction seriously: “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God” (Lk 9:62). Talk, we must understand, is not only very often self-interested but very often exceedingly cheap. Worst of all, it often creates an illusion of progress when no real work is actually being done.

This is what we refer to as empty talk, and real farmers have little use for it. But they excel at working hard together. With considerable urgency, they dig in and get their hands dirty—so that existing crops are harvested, and new crops begin to grow.