There are a couple of articles concerning the Synod on the NCR site today. The first is this one, The conservative Catholic 'misinformation' campaign against the Synod of Bishops | National Catholic Reporter (ncronline.org) Not surprisingly, some people are losing their minds in a freakout over the Synod which has not even occurred yet:
"In October 2022, viewers of the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN) were told by German Cardinal Gerhard Müller, formerly one of the Vatican's highest-ranking officials, that Pope Francis' plans for the Synod of Bishops represented a "hostile takeover" of the Catholic Church."
"This July, EWTN viewers were told by Fr. Gerald Murray, a canon lawyer and popular commentator, the synod represented a "moment of crisis" for the global church. Those who also read Murray's popular blog at The Catholic Thing would see him describe the synodal process as a "disaster."
"Sharp warnings, of the kind that have become more and more frequent in certain Catholic media circles in the months leading up to the Oct. 4 opening of the synod assembly, which will bring hundreds of bishops, priests, religious and lay persons to Rome to discuss a range of topics facing the church."
"This kind of coverage and commentary shows a serious mistrust of the Holy Spirit," said Tony Spence, a longtime Catholic journalist who served as editor-in-chief of Catholic News Service from 2004-16. In interviews with NCR, Spence and other longtime Catholic media professionals, as well as theologians and history scholars, pushed back against a narrative in conservative and right-wing Catholic outlets that presents the synod on synodality as an ecclesial boondoggle at best, and a mortal threat to the Catholic Church at worst."
Contrast that view with that of Archbishop Paul Etienne of the Archdiocese of Seattle, WA: I am a US archbishop attending Pope Francis' synod. Here's how I am preparing. | National Catholic Reporter (ncronline.org). He had this to say:
"I'm too young to remember much about the Second Vatican Council, and I am too old not to be concerned about so much of its vision yet to be addressed by our church. One of its greatest insights was the need to gather to address the challenges of the times. The council fathers knew that the world and church were changing or in need of change. They also knew that there would be a need for a modality by which our church could continue to review and address the changes as they occurred. Their solution? Synods. "
"Pope Francis has chosen the topic of synodality for this synod. So, what does synodality mean? What does it mean to become a more synodal church? The word "synod" literally means to be together on a path. In March 2018, the International Theological Commission published the results of their study of the topic of synodality in the life and mission of the church. Here is a helpful sentence from their work:
"The normative sources for the synodal life of the Church in Scripture and Tradition show that at the heart of God's plan of salvation the whole human race's call to union with God and unity in Him is fulfilled in Jesus Christ and brought about through the ministry of the Church."
"I hear the words of the Risen Jesus as the synod draws ever closer: "Peace. Do not be afraid. Receive the Holy Spirit." Knowing that synodality is a community of faith seeking to know the Father's will by prayerfully reflecting on the Word of God, listening to the Holy Spirit, that we might more perfectly embody Christ as church, all guided by sacred Scripture and tradition, what is there to fear? This is the church at prayer! (Paragraph 11)."
"...There are two keys to this synod which I find helpful. First, the real protagonist of the synod is the Holy Spirit. We long to hear what the Holy Spirit is saying to the church today. Finally, the goal of the synod is not to produce a document, rather as the working document says: The goal "will be to continue to animate the synodal process in the ordinary life of the Church, identifying which pathways the Spirit invites us to walk along more decisively as one People of God" (Paragraph 3)."
"I consider it a privilege to have been invited to participate in this synod and look forward to daily gathering with members of the universal church to listen to God's word, to pray and reflect about the present realities of the church and the world to which we are sent to bear witness to the Risen Christ. I have spent the past several weeks renewing my prayer life, longing for greater receptivity to the voice of the Holy Spirit, to better discern in communion with the other synod delegates and our Holy Father, Francis, how best to carry out the mission of the church today. "
"I invite you to join all of us with your prayers.
"God the Father, your will make known,
Through your Holy Word, Jesus Christ your Son,
By the whispering, promptings, and power of your Holy Spirit,
Through the intercession of our Mother Mary, Amen."
My take is that those who think the synodal process is a "disaster" and a "hostile takeover" are coming at it from a position of fear. Especially since it hasn't even taken place yet.
The contrasting reaction of Archbishop Etienne reflects more of an openness and trust in the Holy Spirit to help the participants to prayerfully discern the will of the Father.
I think a lot of the right wing panic is driven by the German bishops' Synodal Path, which is perceived as a process to legislate a set of liberal policies which the Holy See is unlikely to decree unilaterally, and which are anathema to conservative Catholics.
ReplyDeleteJack has written here a number of times that Francis comes from Latin America, which has a tradition of consultation and synodality. Francis and other Latin American prelate can be expected to feel confident about synodality. In addition, Francis is a Jesuit, a religious order with a culture of collective discernment.
ReplyDeleteNone of this is baked into American Catholicism. Most of us aren't predisposed to trust something new, especially when it is perceived to pose risks.
The best way for Francis to win over his skeptics is for them to try synodality and have a positive experience. Most of the feedback I have seen from American bishops after the local diocesan consultations was positive- and you'd better believe some of them were skeptical about that process, too!
Phyllis Zagano had this to say: "Some bishops are enthusiastically behind the synod, others are having nothing to do with it. They may misunderstand the synod's restrictions. Doctrine is not up for change. That means everything from teachings on the resurrection of Christ to restrictions against gay marriage are not under consideration. What it does mean is that discontinued practices, such as ordaining married men as priests and women as deacons, can be considered."
DeleteThe Synod is going to be considering married men as priests and women as deacons. If both happen, it will be a huge change. It will undo more than a thousand years of practice in the Western Church and make us more like the early Eastern Church which had many women deacons. However, we did undo more than a thousand years of Latin in the liturgy at Vatican II. Most people would agree that change was for the better although it has had its problems, especially when it comes to music and translations.
ReplyDeleteAs for the American bishops, they were not leaders at Vatican II. The Liturgical Movement in the USA was centered in Benedictine monasteries and developed outside the control of the American Bishops. They rather reluctantly imported the personnel of movement into the conference because they were generally clueless themselves.
If married priests and women deacons are approved by the Synod it will likely take the same form as approval of the vernacular at Vatican II. There will be a lot of praise for celibacy as an ideal just like there was a lot of praise for Latin and Gregorian Chant. Moreover, it will be
up to bishop conferences to decide how and when to implement married priests and women deacons. Dioceses in this country varied considerably in how quickly they adopted the permanent deaconate.
I expect the implementation of married priests and women deacons in the next ten years will be clumsy and awkward much like implementing the vernacular. There will be some married deacons and women pastoral leaders who will be obvious candidates. A longer pipe line of younger candidates will have to be developed; much will depend upon what that looks like. Will we get something different from the conservative young people who are attracted to the celibate priesthood? Some of this will await the slow by sure replacement of the American bishops much like Paul VI did after Vatican II. That is when American bishops became liberal and began to write Letters on the Economy and Nuclear Weapons until JP2 and Ratzinger put an end to that when the progressive bishops tried to write a Letter on Women. After elaborate listening (a foreshadow of synodality) the American bishops shelved the project because they realized that could not please American women and the Vatican on this issue.
I don't think that a majority of American bishops are in favor of married priests and women deacons. In that they are out of touch with the majority of Catholic laity. Their whole approach to the declining numbers of people in the pews is contained in the Eucharistic revival which assumes if that if Catholics just understood the Eucharist they would come back. Notions of attracting people back by having more attractive clergy, better homilies and liturgies are not part of their thinking.
ReplyDeleteFrancis is also promoting a more merciful, big tent Catholicism in which all are welcome including the divorced and LGTBQ+ That is probably more disturbing to conservative laity than married priests and women deacons. I suspect that conservative bishops are delighted when conservative media are focusing upon these issues to discredit the Synod. I think they are far more fearful of married priests and women deacons which would change their lives quite dramatically. Although laity and married deacons have come to play large roles and parishes and dioceses, the real decision making has been among bishops and priests behind closed doors. (The closed doors of the Synod will include significant numbers of non-bishops, probably enough to give substantial majorities for married priests and women deacons).
One has to ask why Francis is giving us two sessions of the World Synod a year apart (with the same membership in each). One answer is to see how various proposals play out at the local level across the world.
While consulting the laity in the coming year will be key to accepting married priests and women deacons worldwide, it is naive to think that Francis will be doing this simply for its own sake, i.e., that there will not be real substantial changes.
Jack, as you pointed out above, dioceses varied considerably in how quickly they implemented the permanent diaconate. Don't you suppose it would be the same with women deacons and married priests? I predict that it wouldn't affect the lives of many bishops now living all that much. I'm pretty sure the dioceses would have wide discretion about the timeline.
DeleteIt may be that married priests would be allowed at first on a "special needs" basis, in areas such as the Amazon where people are deprived of the sacraments for extended periods.
It's ironic that it is still controversial, because married priests were allowed in the Anglican Ordinariate, and are allowed in many of the (uniate) Eastern Rites.
The US and European churches want women deacons (well some of them do), but the areas where they might be most needed could be for ministry to other women in places in the emerging world which are still patriarchal. It would be an easy step to ordain women religious who are already serving in those places.
I think you are right about the two sessions being a year apart to see how things are playing out.
Jack and all - FWIW, here are my expectations for the possible changes that have been broached in this discussion:
ReplyDelete* Married priests: I think this could be the one that is most readily accepted by a consensus of Catholics. It's well understood that married priests were common in the West for hundreds of years; and it is widespread today in Eastern Christianity. And of course, there are thousands of married deacons today in Roman Catholicism. The details that matter would include: marriage is not possible after entering holy orders; and celibacy would continue to be promoted/held up as a common and readily-attainable alternative way of priestly life (perhaps in religious orders?), as happens today in Orthodoxy.
* Women deacons - in terms of acceptance, I think most American Catholics would accept them; but a vocal minority, almost certainly supported and amplified by conservative Catholic media and social media, wouldn't accept them. Bishops will need to decide how much appetite they have for controversy and conflict.
* Welcoming back the divorced (but not annulled): I think most American Catholics would be okay with this. But if it isn't preceded by the hard work of aligning theology and tradition with pastoral practice, it won't be fully "received" (accepted).
* Welcoming LGBTQ+ folks: of course, they should be welcomed now. This is an "umbrella" term that touches on a number of flashpoints: gay and lesbian Catholics in same sex marriages; and trans persons who wish to identify as a gender other than the sex of their birth (as well as the subset who have undergone sex-change procedures). My guess is: the American bishops aren't ready to go to those places yet; and probably, quite a few American Catholics aren't, either. Regardless of what the synod says, I wouldn't look for widespread changes in the American church, at least in the short term. Just my guess.
Although there were married bishops (and Popes) in the early Church, the monastic movement led to celibate bishops first in the Eastern Churches then in the West.
DeleteOrthodox Bishops generally come from the monastic clergy, although some widowed priests have become bishops in the West because of the lack of monasteries here.
The Orthodox do have a tradition of idiosyncratic monks, i.e., monks who observe chastity and pray the Office but do not have vows of poverty or obedience, literally they live along-side regular monks but in their own manner, i.e., they have their own room, eat and sleep when they want, etc.
The Western Church does have a tradition of canons regular, i.e., clergy who observed chastity and lived a life in common celebrating the liturgy but did not necessarily take vows of poverty and obedience.
So, it is very likely that various lifestyles might evolve in the Roman Rite that would support celibate diocesan priests without making them become full time religious with vows of poverty and obedience. The religious vow of obedience to a superior is much more than the promises that deacons and priests make to a bishop to exercise their ministry in collaboration with the bishop.
Reunion with the Orthodox is such as strong motivation that Rome is unlikely to consider either married bishops or women priests.
Jim, about the necessity for "...aligning theology and tradition with pastoral practice" in admitting the divorced and remarried, but not annulled, to Communion, how do the Orthodox do it? I don't think they do annulments. The part of annulments in our church which has never made sense to me is that they basically say that the first marriage didn't exist, at least in a sacramental sense. I wonder if we could get to the place where you could have a valid, but not sacramental, marriage. Which would mean you weren't living in sin.
DeleteHi Katherine - I tried to respond to your question here (how do the Orthodox do it?), but my response was too long for the comment field :-). So I just posted it as a separate post. I think it's an interesting topic in general; and Orthodoxy's views surely would be considered by the Synod.
DeleteUpdate on Televising the Ecumenical Prayer Vigil:
ReplyDelete"To enable as many people as possible to take part in the ecumenical prayer vigil on 30 September, the teams of “Vatican Media” will be broadcasting live between 4.30pm and 6pm the programme leading up to the vigil, and then from 6pm to 7pm the prayer presided over by Pope Francis in the presence of Patriarch Bartholomew, Archbishop Justin Welby, the General Secretary of the Lutheran World Federation, Rev. Anne Burghardt, and many church leaders from different denominations.
On the Vatican Media YouTube channel it will be possible to follow the entire programme in eight languages: Italian, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Polish and Arabic.
A number of television and radio channels will also be broadcasting the prayer vigil live but still no EWTN. However they will be broadcasting the opening Mass next Wednesday.
Thanks for the information, Jack.
DeleteCardinal Cupich wrote this article for the Chicago Catholic: https://www.chicagocatholic.com/cardinal-blase-j.-cupich/-/article/2023/08/30/-synodality-a-new-word-for-an-ancient-reality
ReplyDelete