Cardinal Joseph Zen: Did the Synod on “Synodality” End Smoothly?

Dancing in the Streets, Dr. Janet E. Smith
November 11, 2024
HAPPENING WEDNESDAY: Join Bishop Joseph Strickland in Praying the Rosary Outside of the USCCB
November 11, 2024

Cardonal Zen. Blog. Nov. 9, 2024

By Cardinal Joseph Zen, Nov. 9, 2024

On October 27, the XVI Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops announced its closing. The Pope immediately approved of the document adopted by the Synod and said he would not write a Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation. All parties found this to be a completely “innovative” approach, but it seems that few have pointed out that this approach was rather problematic. I felt that way, but didn’t dare to raise it publicly. I feared that my pessimistic mindset may have led me to wrong judgments. But, then, after reading three articles, I now boldly express here my worries for the future of our Church.

The first article, “The Church of Permanent Revolution” was written by Jules Gomes on November 1. The second is “Tutto, tranne che sinodale. La strana Chiesa voluta da papa rancesco” written by Sandro Magister on November 4. The third article is Bishop Robert Barron’s “Some Thoughts Upon Returning from the Second Session of the Synod” on November 5.

I write down the following remarks for your reference:

First, to call this Synod on Synodality a Synod of Bishops is a misnomer.

The “XVI Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops,” which opened solemnly in 2021, is the sixteenth periodical meeting of the “Synod of Bishops” founded by Pope Paul VI with the motu proprio “Apostolic Sollicitudo.” The purpose of Paul VI’s creation of the “Synod of Bishops” is apparent: to provide an opportunity, periodically, for the Pope to obtain the opinions of his “brother bishops” on specific issues so it is an instrument for the bishops, the successors of the Apostles, to collegially exercise their role in leading the Church.

Five years after Pope Francis took office, he made changes to Pope Paul VI’s original plan with the release of the apostolic constitution “Episcopalis communio.” However, for this latest meeting, he did not even abide by the rules he set himself. Suddenly, with his personal authority, he invited 96 lay men and women to participate in the Synod as voting members.

The Pope obviously has the power to convene any form of consultative meetings, but this time he could not say that he improved Paul VI’s original plan. He used the name “synod” to replace the “Synod of Bishops” with a hybrid kind of meeting.

Second, what should the purpose of holding a Synod be?

From the “Synods” held under Pope Francis, we can see that he wants to change the Church’s doctrines or disciplines each time rather than discuss how to safeguard these doctrines and disciplines.

He used the Synod on the Family (2004-2005) to try to let the divorced and remarried Catholics receive Holy Communion. He wanted to use the Synod of Amazon to introduce “the ordination of highly respected married laymen (viri probati) as priests. And for the Synod this time, from the two leading figures he appointed and the documents issued by the secretariat, we can see that he has some broader goals: to change the hierarchical system of the Church (replace with a democratic group of baptized people); to establish female deacons (opening way for female priests); to abolish priestly celibacy; and to change the traditional doctrine on “sexual” ethics (beginning with the blessings the homosexual couples).

To achieve these ends, the Synod meetings were held with the procedure in which sharing was emphasized while discussion was limited. Bishops, along with the non-bishops surrounding a table, were led by the nose by the so-called “facilitators.” Everything in the assembly was kept strictly confidential, that we, the People of God, had no way to learn about the progress of the assembly, though the “leaders” said they gave much importance to sharing and participating.

Third, their agenda failed.

Although there were few formal discussions in the assembly, the “leaders” encountered strong opposition when they proposed their agenda. Even the Pope affirmed, outside the synod, that there would be no female deacons. The assembly seems did not discuss the “abolition of priestly celibacy,” an issue that had already been discussed many times in previous synods.

The 2023 Synod of Bishops took no resolutions; only a Summary of the discussed topics was given to the members and to the public. Everyone assumed everything would be discussed and voted on in the 2024 Synod assembly.

The acronym LGBTQ once appeared solemnly in the synod documents, did not appear in the Summary.

Surprise! Surprise! The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, between the Synods in 2023 and 2024, issued a strong declaration “Fiducia Supplicans,” insisting that clergy can bless “homosexual couples” in certain circumstances. This declaration caused unprecedented division in the Church, with the African bishops in the forefront of protest, and great confusion among the faithful. The declaration, finally, was put on hold.

But then, there was other surprise. Between the 2023 and 2024 Synods, the Pope announced that he had entrusted several study groups to study all those controversial issues, and they would submit their responses in 2025. This approach, on the one hand, disappointed the radicals; on the other hand, it left the traditionalists still worried about how those problems would be solved at the end.

The Synod organizers posted an online survey on “X” and “Facebook”; one question asked: “Do you believe that synodality as a path of conversion and reform can enhance the participation in the mission of all the baptized?” Someone saw the survey and took photos to testify. The answer for “yes” remained at a dozen percent, while “no” was well over 80%. This survey, which was supposed to be completed in 24 hours, was taken down before the set time. Faced with such a failure, will they accept their fate?

Fourth, the final attempt—final danger.

Individual topics were no longer to be discussed, and there will be no conclusion either. So, what remained to be discussed in the October 2024 assembly? Synodality! A Synodal Church! A Church in which “the baptized,” a democratic group, “talk together and walk together”!

But a document issued by the Holy See in 2018, with the approval of the Pope, stated clearly that Synodality is the principle by which the hierarchy leads the Church body through synods (ecumenical councils and statutory synods at all levels) according to the law.

These are two entirely different ecclesiologies. One is the teaching of the Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution of the Church (Lumen Gentium). The other is the way taken by the Dutch Church immediately after the Vatican II (they even published a new catechism; and today the Church in the Netherlands is moribund). It is the “Synodal Path” taken by the German Church, which started before the Synod on Synodality was convened in Rome (it has not been stopped so far, and the German Church has lost half a million members in 2022). The Anglican Church in England has female bishops and approved same-sex marriages, now 80% of the global Anglican community, the Global Anglican Future Conference, has announced that they will recognize no more the Archbishop of Canterbury as their Primate.

The Instrumentum Laboris of the 2024 Synod recommends, the bishops’ conference in each country should enjoy “autonomy in determining ‘Doctrine’.”

Doesn’t that mean the Catholic Church becomes the same as the Anglican Church? We will no longer be the one, catholic, apostolic Church? Nor the holy Church, because there are no longer reliable ethical teachings to lead the faithful to distinguish good from evil.

Facing such terrible danger, some bishops and cardinals called on the faithful to pray. The Holy Spirit has blessed us, the assembly did not approve that terrible proposal. However, the Synod’s conclusion “left a tail behind.” The long section on Part IV of the final document, where it speaks of the links for unity: episcopal conferences and ecclesial assemblies (paragraphs 124-129) makes some good clarifications, but leaves many points to be clarified for future “synodal” reflections. The future remains very fluid.

Fifth, has the Synod on Synodality really been concluded?

Strange new things keep happening.

As I said at the beginning of this article, on the closing day of the Synod, the Pope said that he agreed with the document the Synod adopted and that he would not write a “Post-Synodal Exhortation” according to tradition.

I’m sure some people greatly appreciate the Pope’s humility and confidence in the Synod participants. But I have some reservation:

If the Pope really accepted the decision of the Synod, I think he is unwise:

This assembly is not a formal Synod of Bishops; this is a more reason why its conclusion should be said to have “only” advisory value. The Pope’s approval of it is equivalent to giving it an authoritative teaching value.

In the long history of the Synod of Bishops, there were only a dozen concise deliberations, not to be made public, as conclusive advises to be offered to the Pope from his brother bishops. The Pope has absolute freedom to decide whether to accept them. That practice fully respects the papal authority, and the Pope is responsible for writing a post-synod exhortation. He needs to spend sufficient time writing this exhortation. Now that Pope Francis immediately endorsed such a lengthy document, how can he take the responsibility for its every word?

The faithful may readily accept the authority of the Pope, but several questions are in order: What is the value of this synod conclusion? Who wrote the draft of this document? Is it a group elected by the Synod plenary assembly that can really represent them? Will the members of the plenary assembly have sufficient time to study this document? Who handles the “amendments” proposed by plenary assembly members? Has each amendment been discussed and voted on by all members? The study of the document and the discussion of the “amendments” are complicated operations. Such a long document can’t be seriously made in a hurry. I ask again: How can the Pope be fully responsible for such final document?

Unless we assume that it was the Pope who directed and led the writing of this document.

Isn’t this assumption a conspiracy theory? No. Everyone knows the Pope believes in “process” (time is greater than space). What could not be achieved in this assembly, can be achieved in the process that begins now. The Synod has ended, but the Synodal Church begins now! We have to live in it!

We can only entrust ourselves to the Holy Spirit.

Our Lady, Help of the Christians, Mother of the Church, pray for us!

Dedication of Lateran Basilica

SOURCE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>