Pope Francis, the legacy of the Synod

If we look at it in its entirety, the working document of the upcoming Synod on synodality – though the organizers would prefer “Synod on the life of the Church” – wanted by Pope Francis is balanced. It is a document that responds to two souls, two different approaches: that of listening to the people of God, always and in every circumstance, and that of recalling that the Church is one and so is the doctrine, that the Pope is the guarantor of unity and that therefore the instrumentum laboris is neither a magisterial document nor a document that establishes precisely what will be discussed at the next Synod of the bishops.

Inserted in these two souls, the Instrumentum Laboris becomes a text that can be seen from all perspectives without contradictions. The text indeed addresses all of the most controversial issues debated in recent years – married priests; the female diaconate; the role of women; communion for the divorced and remarried. However, it contains these themes in the form of a question in the part where the solicitations are collected and not in the section of the text, which, more than any other, is intended to provide the background to the debate.

At the same time, possible thrusts for the democratization of the Church through the Synod are rejected, sometimes with verbal balancing acts. It emphasizes that the local Churches are the most important but that they cannot ignore the relationship with Rome, and it maintains that there is already an established magisterium on the divorced and remarried, and therefore this would not be under discussion, but since it is being discussed, the topic cannot be set aside. At least, we must ask ourselves what has not been understood.

In the end, the problem with the Synod is not the Synod itself but the way it is used. Above all, the issue of the Synod concerns not so much the discussion but how much of the debate will be embraced by the Pope in his final words.

At the moment, what we have is the idea of a very broad and, at the same time, inconclusive debate. There is also talk of evangelization, and of prayer’s central role in discernment, but the document seems also to be influenced precisely by local discussions, which are often of a sociological nature. They lose sight of the main objective of the Church, which is the Eucharist. The temptation of over-leaning towards society and reality is the greatest temptation of the synodal journey.

Of course, this temptation is experienced in many ways at the local level. The Synod of the Church of Germany began in 2019 and works on a pragmatic-sociological basis. Indeed, saying that the lack of trust in the Church, emanating from the abuse crisis, must be addressed by restructuring power and doctrine, means that this social dimension becomes preponderant. It is no coincidence that the fora of the German Synod never had the Eucharist at the center.

It is not the only example, although it is the most striking. Even the final documents of the continental synodal stages have shown that often the debate is centered on sociological themes. It is said that new synodal structures must be created in the Church, and in doing so, the aim is for a substantial paradigm shift, which, however, would change the very nature of the Church.

These are the debates, and they were like this at the time of the Second Vatican Council. Benedict XVI told the Swiss bishops in 2006 that when he returned home from the Council, he was always asked the same questions and that in essence the questions under discussion at the Council were not addressed. Before renouncing the pontificate, Benedict XVI gave a spectacular speech on the Council of the Media and the real Council, which says a lot about the situation of the Church today.

Will we be able to overcome this impasse? Paradoxically, such an open text contains all the antibodies to define a more Christ-centric model of the Church, going beyond questions of power and contingent questions. The text includes an appeal to ongoing formation, which is also very present in other synodal texts (such as in the Lineamenta of the 2014 synod, to tell the truth somewhat neglected), and which opens up a new (in fact, always the same) model of the Church, based on catechesis and the truth of the faith. In speaking of the new vocabularies, the text does not deny that these can be traditional, leaving an open space for the great traditionalist movement, which significantly attracts young people, as concretely seen in the last pilgrimage to Chartres.

However, to overcome this impasse, there is also a need for a deliberate intent from the Holy Father. The Pope will be called upon to give direction, and he will be called upon to do so clearly and precisely unless the goal is actually to fuel confusion in the Church.

Since the beginning of his pontificate, Pope Francis has wanted the Church to be in a “permanent state of synod,” so the discussions have remained open and never defined. Amoris Laetitia, which many see as being at the heart of doctrinal drifts, is an open document that brings no conclusions and leaves everything to the personal initiative of the faithful, priests, and bishops. The Querida Amazonia did not open the door to the viri probati, or men of proven faith, perhaps married, who could celebrate where priests did not reach. It just said that more reflection is needed.

It is striking that the Pope does not want to take a position on these issues, yet he has taken clear-cut government decisions, such as those concerning further restrictions on the celebration of Mass with the ancient rite or those that have, in practice, imposed on bishops the duty to be judges of first instance in matrimonial nullity proceedings.

In discussions, however, Pope Francis seems to want to leave the impression that there is active listening taking place and that final decisions are not made. This, however, risks fueling confusion or favoring the personal initiatives of those who are more courageous, more astute, or just ill-intent. Initiatives leading to a new thrust of doctrinal change are difficult to reject. In the long run, the risk is creating one or more schisms by dint of having many discussions.

And yet one must be practical because this synodal process will end in October 2024, and an exhortation from the Pope cannot come before the beginning of 2025 unless the Pope decides not to wait for the full final document of the assembly. A long process, with an already elderly and ill Pope, means that it will be the Pope’s successor who will have to manage what will happen after the Synod. Yet, the Synod risks being the great legacy of Pope Francis—an open heritage, which we will have to find a way to define. At least to guarantee a serene future for the Church, avoiding the polarizations that cannot fail to take place today.