Truth will judge the synod

We are just a month away from the infamous Synod on Synodality in Rome and Catholic social media is awash with speculation, gossip, politicking and posturing. If the intention of this Synod was to reconcile and unite we must declare it a failure thus far because battle lines have been drawn from the get go and the entire process seems to have deepened existing partisan conflicts.

It sadly feels like groundhog day to this ex-Anglican who hoped that by becoming Catholic he had escaped the horrors unleashed when you politicise church process via abuse of synodal process. Politicisation in the Church always leads to division and decline which, from where I am standing, is the danger of the forthcoming Synod in Rome. At present there seems to be far too much politicking going on and not enough reasoned theology.

That the church is damaged by politics should not surprise authentic Christians; when we lose sight of the supernatural we lose grace and are estranged from God. Then the united body is fractured meaning people retreat back to the political camps of this fallen world; each selfishly seeking a utopia born of man’s dreams not God’s will. The left tend towards watering everything down to appease the secular world- all rainbow flags and environmental causes- the right retreats into nostalgic ghettos fantasising about a romanticised church in a fondly imagined past. Neither is helpful to the actual work of evangelism where the pressing need today is for the Church to unite, reclaim her supernatural faith with confidence, step navel gazing and convert afresh this fallen world.

Beware the dangers of politicising church process, of becoming worldly where we ought to be spiritual. That is my voice crying from the wilderness of Kent as this synod approaches.

A warning easy to deliver but hard for Church heirarchs to heed at present given that the main criticism of this entire papacy centres on the fact it has always seemed more embroiled with settling political scores from the 1970’s than deepening authentic faith in believers. Where Pope Saint John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI promoted even handedly both liberal and traditionalist from across the Church spectrum, Pope Francis stands accused by his critics of having rigidly ‘stacked the deck’ in the college of Cardinals with those of a modernist bent. Furthermore they claim he has refused to even dialogue with critics, ignoring the infamous ‘Dubia cardinals’ and adopting a policy of ‘nothing wrong to the left of me and all wrong to the right of me’. As evidence they point to fact he has defended clerics mired in controversy if they are modernist, such as Cardinal Maradiaga, but put out to pasture more traditionalist prelates who seemingly did little to merit it, such as Cardinal Ganswein.

If the charge is true and the Pope HAS decided to align himself heavily with one side in the church wars this spells disaster. For whilst it will undoubetdly delight those who hunger for modernist change, who demand women priests, gay blessings and the like, it will scandalise the main body of the faithful. Partisan leadership – left or right- harms Church unity and credibility. Indeed left and right have no rightful place in Church teaching at all. All that matters is what is truth and what is error, nothing else. The faithful must never be put in the impossible situation, which would occur if partisan leadership was enacted, of having to choose between fidelity to the papal office or the utterances of its present incumbent. The faithful deserve and require only that which is revealed by God himself.

That the present papacy is even seen by some to be partisan is already creating tension. When traditionalists are routinely caricatured and attacked in papal pronouncements- as being ‘backward’ and ‘rigid’- it hardly helps them feel loved and supported. It pushes many people away rather than gathering them in. People then obviously retreat to the margins and bear grudges which fosters a spirit of disunity – then division deepens. This isn’t sensible. Far wiser is a leadership model that enables the whole church to flourish that genuine friendship might blossom between people of different opinions. That is the always the better way because the fruit of such unity is trust and benefit of the doubt over defensiveness and suspicion.

The second issue caused by polarising leadership is damaged credibility. This is a serious problem that the Francis pontificate has yet to overcome. Put bluntly you can’t keep calling people names then expect them to trust you and embrace your teaching. You might have divine power to impose it but few will open their hearts to it. For on a simple human level you can’t use politics to divide then claim with legitimacy to speak for the whole. You will not carry the people with you and future failure and breakdown is all but guaranteed. For this reason I believe the Vatican would be wise to pause the entire process and first reconcile and make peace with all factions in the church. Only when everyone feels listened to will the process gain legitimacy in the eyes of all.

At this point moderates will say “but that is the very point of the synod it’s a listening process!” Maybe. But who is being listened to? And who is actually being heard? Critics of the Synod claim the process is only one sided, much like they claim of the pontificate itself. They say all may speak but only pre-selected voices, the ones that chime with modernist intentions, are listened to. The critics claim the collators in the synodal process (it doesn’t help that they all seem to be modernists, like Austen Ivereigh) filter out legitimate concerns of the traditionally minded but promote heavy handedly calls for radical change.

We begin to see that there is a huge divide between listening and hearing. At present a large cohort in the church do not feel heard by this pontificate. They feel marginalised and misrepresented. This group claim they are fobbed off and demonised repeatedly by those in charge. They may be wrong. They may be right. But whatever you personally think of them, until they feel heard, there will be no overall trust in the process. Future generations will simply not accept that the Holy Spirit has spoken if one political camp was seen to overcome another with little evidence of genuine love, mercy or balance in the process. Such politicking would reflect the government processes of this fallen world not the workings of the Apostolic faith founded by Christ. The same, yesterday, today and forever.

All of this, as I stated, I already witnessed in Anglican days. In that body, when the ordination of women was being discussed, those who held legitimate concerns were obviously sidelined, then demonised and marginalised. The liberal victors smashed through change, and repeatedly voted until it went their way (never taking no as the Holy Spirit’s answer note!) but they never really healed the broken relationships or answered the questions of those who were unconvinced. It did not lead to growth, unity or anything virtuous only an ever widening divide, damage and decline. I learnt then how easily synods are manipulated and corrupted and steered towards pre-selected answers. Politics not discernment wins the day but what of the claims of authentic grace and the will of God when your opponents lie crushed at your feet? Have you not, at this point, won the world but lost your very soul?

This then is the backdrop to the synod. You can see why our prayers are needed. On one side of the divide we find a depressed despondent traditionalist camp who believe the process is flawed and fear the worst. They think this synod will unleash a plethora of heretical innovations to destroy the authentic faith. They think we now enter the prophesied age of apostasy. For the record I don’t think those fears will be realised…yet. Modernists boil frogs slowly and I suspect -at this stage- they won’t go too far. What they want is to usher in the ‘era of synodality’ only to set the stage for future innovation. Anglicanism proved synodal governance leads only in one direction. If this October they simply change the process by which change is made the victory is secured for the future. The Catholic church will have turned liberal protestant. It will have been aligned to run on the flawed Anglican model. The model that politicises church process and inevitably delivers up the will of the zeitgeist.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the divide are the defenders of team Francis who, like apparatchiks in the Soviet era, shut down debate and demonise any who dare question the narrative. Hardly a good optic in a Synod that claims to be listening but the intention here is to scare; when reputations and preferment rest on blind obedience timid clergy fall into line. But the manipulators of change should be warned- bullying never works in the long run because history is not judged by those in the present. What will future generations make of changes today if the proper channels of debate and church practice are bypassed? Ultimately truth always prevails in a Church where God pulls the strings in centuries not decades. Those who live by the sword die by the sword. Is the same true for those who put lines through history at whim?

The appeal to truth and authenticity as final arbiter of church change is the central thesis of an excellent article published in First Things website by Michael Hanby. It is entitled Synodality and the Spirit of Truth. Do read it by clicking on the words ‘first things website’ above. It is long but it is worth your time. It makes clear that authentic change in the church requires the backing of objective truth. Nothing else will suffice. Roads can be bumpy in the present day but the voice of the church changes slowly and God always wins in the end…despite all of our attempts to frustrate him. Hold the line and be faithful we have some interesting weeks ahead.