Last Updated:Friday - 09/24/2010

Pastoral problem on horizon

It was anticipated to be a quiet, unnewsworthy synod, this Synod of Bishops focused on the topic of the role of the bishop. It would complete the cycle of synods about various types of vocation within the Church - lay, clerical, consecrated and, now, episcopal. The bishops would get together for a month and talk about their responsibility to teach, pray, administer and lead worship.

But things have been brewing among the bishops, brewing for a long time. Those who wanted to keep this a relatively bland synod have been unable to keep the lid on the pot.

We have had a striking scenario. The bishops first raised concerns in individual speeches for 10 days about the importance of shared responsibility among bishops in the Church and the need to give more importance to the synod itself. Then, when the bishops broke into small groups to try to formulate some overall consensus on the general theme, the cardinal overseeing this part of the synod told them essentially not to talk about this type of reform. The bishops simply ignored his advice and came back with calls to give the synod more authority within the Church, with some even calling the Roman Curia a barrier to the bishops' exercise of shared responsibility.

Winnipeg Archbishop James Weisgerber pointed out in an interview (Page 5) that one of the bishops' concerns is that they feel they are not listened to when they visit Rome. But Weisgerber and others have been clear that there is more involved here than a human relations problem. There is also a structural problem within the Church, particularly within the relationship between the Curia and diocesan bishops.

The issue of shared responsibility also was a major concern at the 1998 synod on the Church in Asia. Bishop after bishop at that synod spoke of the need for the central authority in the Church to respect the local bishops' responsibility and ability to make the Catholic faith speak to the culture of his people.

The ordinary faithful Catholic needs to know that change is coming in the relationship between the local bishops and Rome. Such change may come under the current pope or a future one. Tensions in the Church exist that will not be wished away simply by reasserting the doctrine of the pope's universal primacy. One can accept that doctrine while still saying that there is a need for a change in the way primacy is exercised.

Pope John Paul said as much in his 1995 encyclical That All May Be One. In this encyclical on the topic of ecumenism, the pope call for a re-evaluation of the manner in which papal primacy might be exercised in a reunited Christian Church. This was a particularly bold call that to date has not received much serious comment from competent analysts.

This issue of how responsibility might be shared among the bishops, including the pope, has now been broached. And broached again. And again. It will not go away until it is dealt with through structural reform.

Yet, a pastoral problem arises with it - if there are major reforms to the synod of bishops and to the Roman Curia, how will ordinary Catholics be helped to see that this does not involve and will not lead to a "watering down" of the faith? The suggestion that decentralization of authority would lead to a faith that is less one, holy, catholic and apostolic implies a lack of trust in the charism of the local bishop.

To some extent the centralized model of authority has nurtured that lack of trust, in particular, by the way the bishops say the Roman Curia has helped the pope exercise his authority. But as the Church reforms its structures, there will have to be a serious effort to teach the fact that the local bishop is not a potential heretic. He is a true heir to and competent teacher of the faith of the Apostles.

Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 -- Western Catholic Reporter