Time to move beyond “synoding”?

In the first volume of his trilogy, Jesus of Nazareth, Pope Benedict XVI saluted the important contributions that historical-critical analysis of the literary forms and editorial “layers” of ancient texts had made to understanding the Bible. The pope also suggested that the essential fruits of that method had been harvested and that the time had come for a less dissecting approach to biblical interpretation: one that “read individual [biblical] texts within the totality of the one Scripture, which then sheds light on the individual texts;” one that that took into account “the living tradition of the whole Church;” and one that read the Bible within the context of the Church’s faith and the interlocking truths within that faith.

Might something analogous be said about the Church’s recent explorations of “synodality” — that its essential fruits have been reaped and that it is time to bring those fruits to bear on the Church’s mission, which (as Pope Leo has reminded us since his election) is the proclamation of Jesus Christ as the light of the nations and the answer to the question that is every human life?

What are the fruits of the past several years of “synoding”?

First, the younger Churches of Africa and Asia, where many living parts of global Catholicism are found, have been heard. Their voices became stronger as the multiyear synodal process unfolded. And in the discussions among cardinals before the election of Pope Leo, it seemed that that’s what “synodality” meant to many cardinals from the so-called “peripheries:” we are being taken seriously. That is a very good thing.

Second, the universal missionary mandate that summons every baptized Catholic to be an evangelist has been underscored. So has the universal call to the holiness that makes living that missionary mandate possible. Those are also very good things.

Third, the obstacle that a clerical caste system poses to evangelization has been identified. The synodal process has shown that ordained leaders who listen to, take counsel from, and collaborate with those they are called to lead are the Church’s most effective pastors. Furthermore, we should now know that collaborative and consultative structures already exist throughout most of the world Church—and that being a Church permanently in mission has less to do with who flies what desk in the Roman Curia (or the diocesan chancery) than with those in Holy Orders empowering the laity for evangelization.

Fourth, the living parts of the world Church have made a powerful case that successful evangelization means offering and living Catholicism in full — not treading water in the Church of Maybe. To be sure, the life of faith is a continuous journey. The journey must have a destination, however, and clarity about doctrine and righteous living keeps us focused on that destination: the Kingdom of God manifest in the person of Jesus Christ. Bold witness to that truth has been another fruit of the Synod on Synodality.

Assuming that the synodal process is not an end in itself and recognizing that the synodal process of 2021-2024 has produced some good fruits, perhaps it may be suggested that it’s now time to move from synoding to applying the fruits of the past three years to mission and evangelization.

It is not self-evidently clear how that transition will be facilitated by the Synod general secretariat’s recent publication, Pathways for the Implementation Phase of the Synod 2025-2028. The document envisions a time-consuming (and very expensive) three-year process of national and continental meetings followed by a time-consuming (and even more expensive) global “Ecclesial Assembly” in Rome — the nature of which is undefined. Moreover, this new process, as described by Synod secretariat official Sister Nathalie Becquart, does not seek to resolve “tensions” between “sides” in an “impossible arrangement,” but to manage those tensions in a “dynamism” that will be lived differently in different sectors of the world Church.

On this 1,700^th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea, it is worth noting, with Father Gerald Murray, that if such an approach had been taken then, there would be no Creed universally confessed in the Church today. At Nicaea, the “tensions” in the Church were not resolved dynamically but definitively: the Arian denial of Christ’s divinity was authoritatively rejected and Christian orthodoxy was authoritatively affirmed.

It is no disparagement of the accomplishments of the 2021-2024 synodal process to suggest that its essential fruits have been harvested and it’s time to move on: not with more meetings, and not with circular debates over settled matters of Catholic faith and practice, but with the proclamation of Jesus Christ who, as Vatican II taught, reveals the truth about God and the truth about us.