The role of the Church and of churchmen is to bring clarity, not ambiguity, calm not a “mess”, understanding not confusion. If what we are experiencing is, in the balance, ambiguity, a “mess” and confusion, then something has gone seriously wrong in the Church and with churchmen.
The auxiliary bishop of ‘s-Hertogenbosch in the Netherlands, Most Rev. Rob Mutsaerts, addressed an open letter to Leo XIV. He asks Leo to once again place Christ, conversion, the Eucharist, evangelization, and the salvation of souls clearly at the center of the Church’s life. He begins with a question that runs through the entire text: after years of meetings, consultations, and documents from the Synod on Synodality (aka “walking together about walkingtogetherity”), what have its real fruits been for the faith and mission of the Church?
Infovaticana – increasingly useful – has it.
I send you over to Infovaticana but with these excerpts to prime you.
Regarding interminable “walking together”:
Allow me to pose the uncomfortable question: What has all this really contributed?
Not: How many meetings were organized? Not: How many reports were drafted? Not: How many people participated?
But: Has faith been strengthened? Has Christ been proclaimed more clearly? Has Catholic identity been deepened? Have more people converted? Is Sunday Mass attendance higher? Are there more priestly vocations? Has catechesis become more effective? Has reverence toward the Eucharist increased? Has the moral teaching of the Church become clearer? Has missionary zeal increased?
When these questions are asked, it is impossible to consider the Synod a success.
[…]
Here lies the deepest weakness of the entire project. The Church does not exist primarily to confirm people in what they already are. It exists to lead them to Christ.
[…]
The Church of the martyrs did not transform the Roman world by organizing conversation groups about how Romans could perceive the Christian community as more inclusive. It proclaimed Christ.
Peter proclaimed Christ. Paul proclaimed Christ. Francis proclaimed Christ. Dominic proclaimed Christ. Francis Xavier proclaimed Christ. John Mary Vianney proclaimed Christ. Mother Teresa proclaimed Christ. John Paul II proclaimed Christ.
They certainly listened to people. But listening was never the final goal. The final goal was conversion to Christ.
[…]
Because when all the synods have ended, all the documents have been written, all the bodies have been dissolved, and our own names forgotten, only the question that truly matters will remain:
Have we brought Jesus Christ closer to the people entrusted to us?
[…]
“Have we brought Jesus Christ closer to the people entrusted to us?”
That really is the question isn’t?
Unfortunately, I think those busy with programs & projects will answer yes. Because apparently you’re doing evangelization if you’re busy with programs & projects.
I commend the good Bishop (is “good bishop” an oxymoron these days? I hope not) for his effort. Maybe I am too much of a pessimist, but I doubt anyone in Rome will pay attention. When Bishop Strickland was relieved of his position, a prominent Catholic priest and writer wrote an article essentially asking “Who is Bishop Strickland to make statements like he makes, he is only the Bishop of a small meaningless diocese. My guess is that Bishop Mutsaerts will get the same treatment, especially because in their hearts the other Bishops know he is right.
The Bishop of my diocese several years ago at a meeting of the Bishops of the USA supposedly made remarks, when he had a chance to speak, along these lines: “We have been here for nearly two hours and no one has mentioned Jesus Christ.” I am sure he said it more eloquently than that, but the story is that the other Bishops just looked at him.
I am not sure where he said it, but CS Lewis once stated that the question of capital punishment should be addressed by asking whether the guilty party is more likely to repent if he faces execution rather than a long and possibly permanent prison sentence. Taking that as inspiration, back in my Episcopalian days, I once recommended that a possible change in Church doctrine be addressed by asking whether it would increase the number of people who are saved. The so-called people of God in that parish did not seem to think that was an important question.
HOW LONG WILL THE SYNOD LAST???????
There was an effort, in the early stages of the Endless Synod, to solicit massive amounts of input from every Catholic in the world. An impressive number of people, but actually a tiny percentage of the total, filled out questionaires. No one could possibly read all of them.
That was a long time ago, and the questionnaires have not been seen again.
People were assigned to sift and summarize the questionaires, locally, nationally and internationally. Summaries of summaries.
Then people were assigned to go to big meetings and to talk to other assigned people. Who are these people? Whom do they represent? What are their qualifications? Who knows what they all talked about?
More summaries. And reports.
This process repeats itself, endlessly. A big bureaucratic machine, talking to itself. More and more remote from ordinary people. No end in sight.
A long synod with endless chatter.
By comparison, at the Council of Nicaea, 318 bishops, only bishops, met from May to July in 325. They produced 20 canons and the Nicaean Creed. And they condemned a heresy.
The the tune we all know:
And this Synod it never ends,
It just goes on and on my friends.
Pope Francis started all of this to make a big ole mess,
Pope Leo will continue it forever more I guess,
And this Synod it never ends . . . [repeat ad infinitum]
The floggings will continue until morale improves…
Or, the synod will continue until (delete where appropriate) 1. Women become bishops / 2. Gay “marriage” becomes accepted / 3. Anyone who opposes number 1 and 2 is crushed / 4. Anything else we want happens.
If the “final goal” of synodality is listening, then why do the synodalists never stop talking?
Excellent analysis of the on-going synodality charade, but it actually applies even more strongly to Vatican II, its “spirit”, and its questionable “fruits”. Just look around at our contemporary Church and please tell me what has improved with respect to bringing people closer to Christ.