Describing Pope Francis’ synodality as “irreversible” and the decline in Church figures as “healing”, two prominent cardinals have weighed in on the future of the Church in Europe.
Synodality is impossible to forestall, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich attested this past week. Luxembourg’s Cardinal Hollerich served as the relator general of the multi-year Synod on Synodality and thus – alongside Cardinal Mario Grech – has become one of the most vocal champions of Pope Francis’ synod and synodal style.
Synodality, as begun by Pope Francis, is “irreversible” Hollerich claimed. Its goal is to change the Catholic Church which operates “from above” to become a more democratic Church. “We need a Church of the Christians, where I, as a bishop, am among the Christians,” he stated.
Hollerich described such a change as necessary, but noted that it must be supported across the Church, otherwise it would lead to “conflict and division”.
The cardinal made his comments on the sidelines of the “Shaping Synodality in Europe” conference, held near Puchberg in Austria. It was at that same conference that German bishops’ conference chairman Bishop Heiner Wilmer argued that the Church must be synodal in order for society to survive.
Although echoing the “necessity” theme expressed by many of the key advocates of the Synod on Synodality, Hollerich did not identity why Pope Francis’ synodality must be “irreversible”. Since it formally began in 2021, the Synod has been marked by controversy due to its style and composition, along with its discussions and action items.
A clear definition of synodality has been lacking, leading to very different interpretations from different continents. The view taken by the African delegates was that synodality simply meant how they lived their Catholic life already: the clergy in charge with a lively community life in which people of all ages were involved in activities. For the majority of those from the Anglosphere, synodality appeared to be a topic which was never fully understood, hence such delegates largely followed the dominant spirit. Another minority interpreted synodality as call to change their current practices and involve more collaboration between clergy and laity in appropriate areas, especially where the laity were more suited to take leading roles.
Against such differing views, it was thus the most vocal advocates who carried the greatest weight at the Synod on Synodality – figures such as those already entrenched in the Roman Curia, or the delegates from Germany and central Europe who had participated in Germany’s Synodal Way in previous years and laid down something for the Synod to imitate. Throughout the years, this small but dominant group formed synodality according to its own desires.
Continue reading at the Catholic Herald