Dear Friends
CRA President, Br Peter Carroll FMS.
Since the closure of the Plenary Council there have been a variety of summaries and assessments, comments and critiques about the process and event. Some of these have been positive, some anything but positive. This was inevitable. For progressives in the Church, any outcomes were likely to be too little; for the traditionalists, any actions were destined to be viewed as excessive. Since most of the Faithful hold the middle ground, I suspect they will be satisfied.
One thing is clear, none of the Motions, approved or not, were radical. There was no talk of married clergy, ordaining women, changes to Church teaching or anything that truly “progressive” Catholics would support. There was great respect for the magisterium, the office of Bishop and the traditions of the Church.
The failed deliberative vote on women in the Church was a pivotal point in proceedings. It had to be. If the failure of the Bishops to support the Motions had not been addressed, it would have left the Council without any statement on one of the major issues that had been discerned over the preceding 4 years. This would have been untenable. Undoubtedly it would have led to a collapse of the Plenary Council – if not in reality, then at least in its authority. To be honest, I suspect some might have been pleased with this; particularly the opponents of Pope Francis’s agenda, mostly his pursuit of a synodal Church. The astute response of the Steering Committee averted a disaster. Unfortunately, while the topic was revisited and motions finally passed successfully, the episode will leave lingering hurt and suspicion that many Bishops ‘don’t get’ the issue.
The real significance of the Assembly was the event itself. Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, Religious, lay women and men, young people, academics, Diocesan and Parish officials, Parishioners sitting at round tables praying, sharing, discerning together. That, in itself, was an incredible experience. From what I heard and observed, some people’s positions did change through this process. This is testimony to their capacity to set aside their personal opinions and listen attentively to others. Sadly, others seemed less able to reconsider their positions.
The Plenary Council was a first step towards the Synodal Church that Pope Francis is promoting. And the positive is that a start has been made – not a perfect start, but a genuine one. Hopefully in the years to come the Church will develop and refine its Synodal processes so that they are more inclusive and less legalistic.
Religious Institutes are familiar with regular Synodal processes such as Chapters, where significant issues are identified, and goals established. In fact, we take them for granted. Not so in the Church more generally. What we can say is that as a result of the Plenary process, the Australian Church now has a set of 8 national priorities.
1. Travelling with and supporting our First Nations peoples
2. Protecting young people, and healing hurt and harm
3. Strengthening Missionary outreach and discipleship
4. Enhancing the role of women in the Church
5. Deepening the Church’s sacramental life
6. Improving and widening the availability of Formation for leadership
7. Developing more contemporary approaches to Church governance
8. Hearing the cry of the poor and the earth, and promoting Integral Ecology
It seems that the plenary process, over the last four years, has enabled the Church to discern contemporary needs and significant issues. The suggestions to promote them may be limited, but the process has commenced.
From our experience we know that Religious Institutes can set priorities and develop strategies, but they always need to be implemented at the local level. This will be a major challenge in the years ahead. All the Dioceses are now committed to having their own Synods within five years; how these are approached will be a telling sign of the commitment to this process by individual Bishops and Diocesan leadership.
One of the things I learned from the first Assembly is the chasm that exists between the major metropolitan Archdioceses and the other Dioceses, particularly the isolated and remote ones. These latter ones have few resources, human and financial, and some struggle to survive. This issue, while mentioned at the Assembly was effectively neglected. One imagines that ongoing discussions will take place at the Bishops Conference. Past Plenary Councils have erected Dioceses. Maybe a future one will examine the need to merge, consolidate, strengthen or redistribute resources.
Despite its limitations and failings, Australia’s Plenary Council has responded clearly and positively to the challenge offered by Pope Francis last year: “If we want to speak of a synodal Church, we cannot remain satisfied with appearances alone; we need content, means and structures that can facilitate dialogue and interaction within the People of God, especially between priests and laity”. The Council certainly did that. A synodal Church is developing in Australia. Let’s be hopeful for the future.
Br Peter Carroll FMS,
President, Catholic Religious Australia.