A surprisingly large number of priests are said to have lately been replying “no thanks” when invited to become bishops. If that’s so, it may help explain why Pope Francis, responding to discussions that took place last October at the Synod on Synodality, has commissioned a study that will include “criteria for selecting candidates to episcopacy.”
That is part of one of ten topics that surfaced at the synod without sufficient time to discuss them. The Pope last month said he was turning the ten over to “study groups” composed of staff from the Vatican’s synod secretariat, other sections of the Roman Curia, and unnamed “pastors and experts from all continents.“
The study groups will make an interim report to the Synod’s second (and presumably last) session next October and finish up by June 2025. To whom or what they will report and to what effect is not known.
There may, of course, be less to this than meets the eye. But even though most topics on the list are unremarkable, at least one—“Theological criteria and synodal methodologies for shared discernment of controversial doctrinal, pastoral, and ethical issues”—could refer either to something big or not much at all. I’ll get back to that.
If I am making too much of too little here, pardon the fault. After three years of synodal discussions and meetings, one is still hard put to find much substance in the output from the process.
In that judgment, I include the “synthesis report” prepared by the Vatican’s synod secretariat summing up deliberations at the first synod session. Unfortunately, this document exhibits rhetorical chutzpah in making the unverified and unverifiable claim that in the synod “the Holy Spirit has gifted us with an experience of the harmony that He alone can generate.”
Meanwhile—and unlike people close to Pope Francis, bishops whom Rome is asking to keep the synodal machinery churning locally, Church administrators who see themselves with a potential stake in all this, and the Catholic press—it is difficult to discern much interest yet in synods and synodality among the people in the pews.
In late February, Notre Dame University sponsored a session on the synod for bishops. While the tone of this well-attended but low-visibility gathering is said to have been hopeful, some warning signs appeared here and there.
Thus Notre Dame theologian John Cavadini, principal organizer of the meeting, found in the synod secretariat’s summary “at best a variety of Protestant ecclesiology” and at worst a version of synodality that gives scant recognition to “the Church as mystery.”
And in a paper on Church tradition as a key component in discerning the content of faith in a synodal context, theologian Christopher Ruddy of the Catholic University of America said tradition performs the important function of being a corrective to “the temptation of thinking that we know better today than our predecessors did.”
By way of example, Ruddy cited pressure for change in Church teaching on sexual morality and on ordaining women as priests. He asked, “Do we want to hold that two millennia of constant, unbroken teaching on human sexuality and ordained ministry are mistaken and need to be changed on the basis of purportedly greater insight?”
While pondering that, take another look at the mystery topic, quoted above, found among Pope Francis’s questions for consideration by ten study groups apart from the synod itself: “Theological criteria and synodal methodologies for shared discernment of controversial doctrinal, pastoral, and ethical issues.” I’m keeping my eye on that one.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Oh, I’m interested. The moment we get ordained women deacons and/or contraception, I’m done.
Those teachings are not just some nice “tradition” like which tree topper goes on the Christmas tree: the one that came down from great-grandpa, or the new one from Bronner’s in Frankenmuth. They are supposed to be the truth: women priests are impossible and contraception is immoral. For all time and for all people.
.
So if the Church decides, Oops, we were wrong, I’ll know that they have been pretty much wrong on everything else.
Bronner’s? Is that a Christmas tree ornament business?
If, Heaven forbid, something’s taught that goes against Christ’s teachings I’ll know that it’s coming from the wrong people. Not the wrong Church.
I actually filled out a Synod survey online and the questions themselves seemed to be set up to get predetermined results. The whole thing struck me as fishy.
Bronner’s in one of the largest Christmas ornament stores in the world, and they do ship world-wide. It is in Frankenmuth, Michigan.
Thank you so much Mrs. Hess for sharing that information. I’ll have to check it out.
🙂
Yes, my conclusion would also be that there’s a bunch of heretics in the Church who’ve managed to shout things louder than the faithful.
The Church cannot teach error. But that didn’t stop 1/2 to 2/3 of bishops from being Arian at one point. This life is a war, and having been confirmed some time ago, I am not at liberty to cut and run.
And how is one to know what the Church teaches if the leaders, theologians, and apologists tinker and toy with everything?
Stick with what you are taught and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Previous Popes have not toppled the teachings of the Church. Have faith in Jesus’ words that hell shall not prevail. Regular confession and receiving of the Holy Eucharist. Be faithful in your daily prayer life. Do these things and you will not be lead astray.
“The moment we get ordained women deacons and/or contraception, I’m done”. You should read the Pope’s confusing and rediculous reason for blocking ordaination of one half of the Catholic population. Please click on the following link. A synopsis follows…
The spousal nature of the Church, which he called the “Marian principle.”
“The way is not only [ordained] ministry. The Church is woman. The Church is a spouse. We have not developed a theology of women that reflects this,” Pope Francis said. The Marian principle, which is the principle of femininity (femineidad) in the Church, of the woman in the Church, where the Church sees a mirror of herself because she is a woman and a spouse.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/252928/pope-francis-explains-to-america-magazine-why-women-cannot-be-ordained-priests
Combining women priests with contraception seem odd.
Don’t leave.
Thank you.
MorganD: Perhaps you can read Hans Urs von Balthasar’s The Office of Peter And the Structure of the Church, which is what Francis appears to be drawing upon, and then tell us how “confusing and ridiculous” it is. I read it when I was a 26-year-old Evangelical Protestant, and recognized how brilliant it was. You might also want to examine some of the pertinent magisterial documents addressing ordination. Then get back to us. Thanks.
Francis often does demonstrate some familiarity with the deep theology within our faith. But he’ll find a way to present it as essentially unsettled. He recognizes this spousal understanding in the same commentary where he implies “we haven’t developed” what he then draws upon to form his explanation, thereby allowing for future reinterpretations to carry it further than the understanding he might claim to defend as settled at any given moment to appease his critics. Early in his pontificate he did talk about creating a committee of theologians to “restudy” Humanae Vitae to see if perhaps the straightforward encyclical really meant something completely different than what everyone who studied, talked, argued, debated, and agonized about for decades, over its unambiguous teaching, might have gotten wrong, that it really meant to endorse contraception.
About the initially proposed “committee of theologians to “restudy” Humanae Vitae,” perhaps the followup strategy is less direct, consisting more obliquely of broader and populist synodality/study groups–designed to create a foggy atmosphere within which Humanae Vitae and much of natural law is obscured rather than openly attacked and contradicted.
Moral absolutes, what’s that?
Fiducia Supplicans blesses “irregular couples,” most notably homosexual “couples” but also bundled into the package deal are cohabiting couples–who, most likely, are childless and not devout readers of Humanae Vitae or of the elaborating Theology of the Body.
Synodism: a flanking movement, so to speak?
Carl. I am no expert on “settled Canon law” given the plethora of documents surrounding the ‘ISSUE”. That being said, I want to see our church exploit any reasonable avenue to overcome, what I believe is, the serious decline caused mainly by the sexual abuse by male only priesthood.
Christopher Ruddy cited “pressure for change in Church teaching on sexual morality and on ordaining women as priests”.
Notice the inclusive “sexual morality” with “woman priests”. Another confusion.
Ignatius Press: Hans Urs von Balthasar examines what he calls the anti-Roman attitude-a “WIDESPREAD” hostility toward the Papacy. True, Pope Francis has taken a beating, on this website and other Catholic sites, on doctrine interpretation. Nothing specific here on women.
Catholic Answers: Most Christian denominations have long since admitted women to their ministries on an equal basis with men. Not to do so is almost universally seen today as a form of discrimination—this at a time when almost any form of discrimination is seen as the gravest of wrongs.
Finally, I have examined several church documents, but I cannot find a crisp clear answer to satisfy me and perhaps the uniformed Catholic. What I have concluded is the texts use mythology, “the church is a woman”.
Thanks for the opportunity to express my thoughts.
As a catholic of 77 years, I prefer to concentrate on trying to love God above all things and loving my neighbor for His sake. I’ll let the deep-thinking theologians worry about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I don’t care whether the church is right or wrong on tangential doctrinal and political issues that don’t affect my salvation. God can judge the correctness of the changing teachings of each pope and bishop, and take action He deems appropriate.
Thank you, esteemed Mr. Shaw and CWR, for keeping your eyes on this untrustworthy Bergoglian papacy and its Synodolatry project.
By calling out the evil and corruption — even at times before it is manifested — you help protect the flock from the predators within.
Kudos, too, on exposing the artless “art” used to merchandise the Synod. It alone is a tipoff that the Holy Spirit is nowhere to be found here.
Duh.
You need to ask?
The synod is a San Gallan Mafia agenda, the same “group” Francis recently revealed tried to thwart the election of Ratzinger in 2005. Now they got their pope.
Unfortunately, we all got their pope.
I have felt all along that this synod has been an excuse to try to legitimize women deacons and priests by claiming there is a demand for it among the faithful. ( There is not.) . As a woman myself I am opposed to that. I serve in a church ministry which is open to women but will consider dropping out of that if it means working with women “priests”. A hard NO on that. Can’t see any point to the rest of this. Why would I care what ultra-liberal church members feel free to demand and foist on the rest of us?? It pretty much looks like the church took that same bait after Vatican two, and we know the exodus that happened and how our beautiful churches were stripped and protestantized. Anyone who can THINK is leery of this hair-brained synod.
The synod? How so LJ? Mythology is the source. “the church is a woman and a priest must be male”. PLease don’t use this to bolt fom your church ministry.
As I said before, our church is serious trouble and losing the faithful mainly by the criminal sexual abuse by our MEN priests and our complicit Bishops. The vetting of holy women might not be needed and might even save us money.
God bless.
People who leave the church because of the sex abuse cases are just looking for an excuse to go. I can’t respect that. The church does NOT have a monopoly on sex abuse by a longshot. The newspapers are full of stories about abusers who are teachers ( I recall one especially notorious case where a female teacher had sex with a 13 year old student. She went to jail but eventually became pregnant and then married the boy. Thats a template for disgusting.), dentists, doctors, coaches, and odd “uncles” and MORE, have all been in the papers for this crime. Not to mention the violent criminal types who abuse their victims and then kill them. The media simply finds reporting on the sexual wrongs of men sworn to celibacy to be especially titillating. Most priests would NEVER commit such a sin, despite media attempts to make it seem like every single one of them are guilty. What makes the church cases especially upsetting is that we expect so much more from our priests in terms of their standards of behavior. Years ago it was legitimately thought that counseling and change of venue would “cure” a priest of this malady.Study of this deviancy was in it’s infancy. It took decades for science to learn otherwise. The church also was concerned that the scandal would do immense harm to the church, which is why they didnt want this in the newspapers. I do not justify their actions, which were less then honest, but given the reaction of the public in many leaving the church they were unfortunately correct.
I do not think the reason for no women priests is because the “church is a woman and a priest must be male”. Its because our priests are to model being “another Christ”. Jesus defied many conventions of his day. If he had wanted women Apostles there was nothing stopping him from selecting them. HE did not chose them for that role.
I am concerned about the synod which has women priest/deacons as a topic and seems stacked with secular laypeople.Emphasis on secular.I am not interested at all in what some militant feminist ( even if in the guise of a nun) has to say. The current pontiff has also tried to legitimize a number of things which do not reflect traditional catholic teaching and has suppressed things ( and staff) who DO reflect it.The whole thing feels like a red herring to me and I will not be able in good conscience to cooperate with ever more untraditional and radical changes.
Ordinary and extra ordinary Catholics are co-pilgrims on a common journey. Both carry enormous responsibilities in the task of evangelizing and converting one another as they joyfully march to their eternal glory.
Of the ten study groups and their assignments, Shaw writes that “most topics on the list are unremarkable,” but also notes “a version of synodality that gives scant recognition to ‘the Church as mystery’.” Two comments:
FIRST, about “mystery,” from the real [!] Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in 1985, this:
“The task of this Extraordinary Synod has been that of meditating, deepening and fostering the application of the teaching of Vatican II twenty years after its conclusion” (Closing Remarks by St. Pope John Paul II). And, in the Final Report, such as this: “We cannot replace a false unilateral vision of the Church as purely hierarchical [“clericalism”!] with a new sociological conception which is also unilateral.” And, this: “When pluriformity is true richness and carries with it fullness, this is true catholicity. The pluralism of fundamentally opposed positions [e.g., the “harmonization of polarities,” as in Fiducia Supplicans—and its aftermath] instead leads to dissolution, destruction and the loss of identify.”
SECOND, about “dissolution” (as foreseen in 1985) and whether the ten study-group questions are “unremarkable” (Shaw), yours truly humbly refers to my ten back-bleacher and yet self-evident remarks (!) previously posted: https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/03/29/cardinal-grechs-controversial-comments-add-to-list-of-concerns-on-postsynodal-study-groups/
Nothing but widespread disinterest at best, confusion and heterodoxy at worst comes across in Russell Shaw’s article, consistent with other like studies on synod’s. It seems Cardinal Mario Martini’s dream of radical change in the Church has evaporated. However, appearances may be deceptive.
Pope Francis, Martini’s Synodality protege is persistent in keeping the locomotive on track stocking the firebox with controversial fuel. To where is a mystery if we insist on naivete, since the earmarks of radical change are evident everywhere in appointments, changes in the structure and focus of dicasteries, in the undying agenda of addressing the more radical issues, normalization of adult homosexual relationships, female ordination. After 11 years of pontificate, Catholics are less Catholic more Protestant less concerned about Church affairs and practice.
Loss of interest in Synodality is not a problem for advancing the heterodox agenda. Indeed it’s a favorable sign for the engineers. Except for the troublesome traditionalists, war weary, ragged, impugned by their own as too extreme, intellectually unsophisticated, the rednecks of the Church, now a bishop or two joining ranks making noise on the internet, voicing disapproval here, there and everywhere. Causing insufferable consternation for high echelon, their resort to insult and ungainly expletive. As for the redneck orthodox God is mysterious in his choice for companionship.
Dear Father Peter. I am from the south. I am not sure why you would use the branding of “RED NECKS”?
Webster: often disparaging of a person whose behavior and opinions are similar to those attributed to rednecks.
I am disappointed that as a priest, your use of vitroil being a way to communicate a position is a mystery.
God bless.
It’s pretty obvious that there truly is a large grouping of active homosexual prelates in the Vatican who work night and day to push their agenda. Francis seems very sympathetic to them. I totally distrust this “synod” stuff as simply a cover for the homosexual to get average people in the pews to support their grave sin.
Agree, Bill, with the unfortunate truth of your comment.
This past week the Diocese of Sacramento filed for Chapter 11 due to abuse claims and the Archdiocese of Baltimore announced it was suing its insurers for their unwillingness to pay for its abuse claims. We have become desensitized to these events and the horrible moral and financial scandal that spawned them, namely, the admission to seminaries and later ordination to the priesthood of men leading active gay lifestyles. In the meantime the Lavender Mafia in the Vatican seeks to normalize and even promote that lifestyle in the Church.
St Peter Damian pray for us.
No.
“Do we want to hold that two millennia of constant, unbroken teaching on human sexuality and ordained ministry are mistaken and need to be changed on the basis of purportedly greater insight?”
It’s been years, but I knew Chis Ruddy way back and was always amused with his direct and self-evident questions that not many bothered to ask. I’ll echo his spirit with my own favoite, do we view God as such an idiot that He would have deprived His peoples of the past with sufficient innate, natural, and universal moral insight in how they ought to order their lives together independent of precepts enshrined by local culture?
If you read the “Presentation” opening statement in Dignitas Infinita, it relates how it was already 5 years in the making when it came to be published. In other words, its result was contemplated ahead of the conclusion of the “synod” and aside from it.
Further it describes its purpose to cover “dignity” in various “realms” as would be drawn form “Christian anthropology” -: ” … illustrating the significance and beneficial implications of the concept in the social, political and economic … “. If you read DI thoughtfully you may find it puts categories into a tumble in order to achieve its purpose with familiar words that invite agreement. A sort of distortion of metaphysics, reason, theology and faith. Philosophy on a roam.
It then tries to stress the precedence of the “ontological” dignity so as to harmonize its theme-ing. The idea would seem to be “keep the doors to repenting open”. Even for such a motive, DI does not prove it has gone about it the right way or that dignity is such a lynchpin.
Here’s one upset. Abortion is an evil act of taking the life of an innocent. The arguments presently going have to do with tolerating it via admissible procedure. “Dignity” can’t address that.
Another good way to review the “synod” is by going over past commentary made in the run-up to the meetings. Here is Cardinal Burke at October 5 2023; FS came December 2023. This video is not long with many points discussed for good discerning.
The World Over October 5, 2023 | NEW FORMAL QUESTIONS: Cardinal Raymond Burke with Raymond Arroyo – EWTN – Oct 5, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTM-sMF3kvg
‘ Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea also repeated his criticism of Fiducia Supplicans, the recent Vatican document authorizing blessings of couples involved in same-sex unions, insisting that it’s not just traditional African culture but Catholic teaching itself which makes the document unacceptable. ‘
https://cruxnow.com/church-in-africa/2024/04/african-cardinal-papal-critic-says-western-prelates-have-lost-their-nerve
‘ This in mind, he called on the African bishops to remember the universal nature of the faith in the Synod’s October 2024 session:
“Dear brother bishops, this is a point that demands to be guarded with great vigilance in view of the upcoming session of the Synod. We know that some, although they say otherwise, are preparing to advocate a program of reforms in it. Among these is the destructive idea that the truth of the faith should be received differentially according to places, cultures and peoples.”
Referring to this idea as a “misrepresentation of the dictatorship of relativism,” Sarah warned that it “aims to allow violations of doctrine and morality in certain places under the pretext of cultural adaptation.”
The former prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship listed a number of the more controversial issues being pushed by differing activists within the Church, outlining them as part of the “dictatorship of relativism.”
“It would like to allow female diaconate in Germany, married priests in Belgium, confusion between ordained priesthood and baptismal priesthood in the Amazon.”
He also made another veiled attack on some papal appointees to the Synod, who are in favor of female deacons: “Some recently appointed theological experts do not hide their plans. And they will tell you with false kindness, <>
But quoting from the Cameroonian bishops’ December 21 text, Sarah urged them to resist such language since “we, successors of the apostles, were ordained not to promote and defend our cultures, but the universal unity of the faith.” ‘
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-sarah-african-bishops-have-spoken-for-the-whole-church-by-rejecting-homosexual-blessings/
Edit: insert at 5th paragraph after false kindness: ‘Rest assured, in Africa, we will not impose this kind of innovation on you. You are not culturally ready.’”