The threat of a runaway Synod

By Phil Lawler ( bio - articles - email ) | Sep 13, 2024

Writing in the notorious National Catholic Reporter, the equally notorious Father Thomas Reese, SJ, laments that as things stand, the Synod on Synodality will not produce the radical doctrine changes that he wants. But he sees a way to change that outcome. And I suspect he’s not the only one who sees it.

The problem, as Father Reese sees it, is that the Synod on Synodality might confine itself to a discussion of synodality. “Talking only about synodality can lead to a level of theological abstraction that goes nowhere,” he remarks. On that point of course he’s right. Since nobody really knows what “synodality” means, the October session could easily degenerate into a discussion about how to have a discussion, a process of defining the process.

Actually some of us would be satisfied with that result. If the Synod meeting in October does nothing worse than waste the time of the participants, and produce another prolix discourse on “how to be Church”—in short if there are no more assaults on the perennial teachings of the Church—we will let loose a long sigh of relief. For three years we have worried about the likelihood of a more damaging result.

We have worried, in fact, about the sort of result that Father Reese wanted. His hopes had been raised by the seemingly endless discussions leading up to this year’s session, including last year’s meeting of the Synod of Bishops. He recalls:

Some of the topics discussed were controversial: women deacons, the church’s ministry to LGBTQ+ Catholics, priestly formation, the selection of bishops and the role of the laity in the church. Since the synod could not reach consensus on these topics, its synthesis report called for further study.

Unfortunately (from the Reese perspective), Pope Francis has taken some of those hot-button issues off the agenda for the October session, assigning them instead to special study groups. So the opportunity for radical changes has been lost.

Or has it? Father Reese sees a way to revive the hopes of the Natonal Catholic Reporter readers. When they gather in Rome, the bishops (along the non-bishops and even non-Catholics who have been paradoxically invited to participate in the Synod of Bishops) should ignore the Pope’s directions. Father Reese opines that the Synod “needs to set its own agenda, even if that means rejecting the Pope’s agenda.”

There is precedent for that approach, Father Reese reminds us. “The fathers of the Second Vatican Council threw out the documents drawn up by the Vatican Curia and set their own agenda. Could history repeat itself?”

Yes, it could happen. How would Pope Francis react if, during the first week of the October meeting, the Synod fathers announced that they would discuss women deacons and homosexual marriage—and perhaps a host of other doctrinally sensitive topics—regardless of the Pope’s directives. Having spent the last three years insisting that the Church must be practice “synodal” government, would the Pontiff now countermand a decision by the Synod?

Rest assured that Father Reese is not the only “progressive” Catholic dreaming about a Synod that tosses aside restraints and sets its own radical agenda. The German bishops’ conference has continued down its own “Synodal Path,” undeterred by the occasional mild expressions of dismay from Rome. The German delegation will arrive at the Synod ready for battle; to date the Pope has been markedly reluctant to oppose them.

For that matter, would Pope Francis even want to bring a runaway Synod back under control? Throughout his pontificate he has delighted in raising questions, testing boundaries, encouraging restive Catholics to “make a mess.” As I explained several years ago, in the teaching of Pope Francis, the persistent confusion isn’t a bug; it’s a feature. Maybe the Pontiff would be happy to let the Synod rush in, to discuss issues on which he himself has chosen not to speak plainly. Maybe that’s been his plan all along.