Recently, Pope Francis addressed the delegation who presented him with the 2023 “È Giornalismo” Prize – Francis had declined similar awards in the past, because, as he said, he is not interested in awards. Nevertheless, he accepted this particular award, recognizing the vital role played by social media and social communications in promoting rational discourse and fostering a culture of dialogue, as opposed to confrontation. The Pope openly sought the assistance of journalists “to narrate this process for what it really is, leaving behind the logic of slogans and pre-packaged stories.”
Francis is asking for help to explain to people the upcoming October Synod on Synodality which might be exotic or unfamiliar to Catholics who might find the Synod on Synodality “abstruse, self-referential, excessively technical, of little interest to the general public.”
This assertion resonates with my own experience; many of my students, some of whom are cradle Catholics, remain unacquainted with synodality; this is probably the case with a considerable portion of the Catholic faithful. A Synod on Synodality, therefore, may be difficult to grasp.
As an Eastern Catholic, I find Pope Francis’s call to “Turn East” for synodality models particularly noteworthy. He alludes to Pope Paul VI’s pivotal role in establishing the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops or as he put it:
because he [Paul VI] had realized that in the Western Church synodality had disappeared, whereas in the Eastern Church they have this dimension.
The theme of “Turning East” is not novel; Pope Francis has recurrently invited Westerners to explore synodality models rooted in Eastern Christian traditions. Francis can probably be credited as the pontiff who reintroduced the term “synodality” into contemporary discourse. Pope Francis appears convinced that synodality is the path desired by God for the Church in the third millennium. Pope Francis, since early in his pontificate, has extended an invitation to the Western Church to engage with the concept of synodality. In his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium he underlines the potential of learning:
…in the dialogue with our Orthodox brothers and sisters, we Catholics have the opportunity to learn more about the meaning of episcopal collegiality and their experience of synodality. Through an exchange of gifts, the Spirit can lead us ever more fully into truth and goodness.
In in Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis views the development of synodality in the Western Church through ecumenical lenses. He posits that this development could contribute to reconciling differences between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The idea is that by adopting synodality, the Western Church might enable the Orthodox Churches to comprehend and recognize the primacy of the Roman Pontiff within a synodal framework, drawing parallels with the position of the Protos (first) in the Orthodox Church and the Roman Pontiff’s role within a synodal ecclesiology.
The Roman Church has much to glean from the Eastern Churches, particularly regarding the importance of the local Church perspectives. However, it must exercise caution to avoid the potential pitfalls associated with political synodality in Orthodoxy, including problems surrounding autocephaly and Orthodox national churches, which have historically engendered divisions within and among Orthodox churches, jeopardizing the Church’s unity and universality.
The historical context underscores the presence of synodality in the early and united Church, both in the Eastern and Western traditions. Several historical examples further illuminate this point.
Probably the earliest source of the synodal model in the early Church is described in the Council of Jerusalem when an issue was raised in Antioch concerning circumcision of the non-Jews. In this historical context, we discern the pivotal role played by the local Christian community. They engaged in a process of consultation with the Apostles and Elders of Jerusalem to address this pressing issue.
Additionally, the community sent Paul, Barnabas and Titus, as well as a delegation, which accompanied them to Jerusalem. This is how the Acts of the Apostles (15:6-28) describes the assembly, the apostles, and the presbyters getting together to discuss the matter. The Apostolic Canons (par 34), emphasizes the importance of reciprocal consent within the ecclesiastical hierarchy and between the bishops and the people. While it acknowledges the bishop as the Protos (the foremost authority) and the head of the community, it underscores that the bishop should not act unilaterally without obtaining consent from other bishops and the community:
The bishops of every nation must acknowledge him who is first among them and account him as their head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent; but each may do those things only which concern his own parish, and the country places which belong to it. But neither let him (who is the first) do anything without the consent of all; for so there will be unanimity, and God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit.
The Council of Nicaea (325), in Canon 5, mandated the convening of local synods in each province on a semi-annual basis twice a year, specifically before the Lenten season and in autumn. These synods served as forums where both laymen and clergy who had been excommunicated by their local bishops could have an opportunity to appeal their cases. Functioning as ecclesiastical courts, these local synods played a vital role in addressing disputes and grievances within the Church.
The Synod of Laodicea, also in the fourth century (363-64), established a compulsory obligation for bishops to attend these synods. Failure to do so resulted in being held in contempt, with the sole exception being illness, as stipulated in Canon 40. Notably, St. John Chrysostom’s assertion that “Church and Synod are synonymous” underscores the inseparable relationship between the Church and synodical processes, reinforcing the importance of collective decision-making within the ecclesiastical structure.
These early Church examples of synodality are still present in the Eastern Catholic Churches, or Greek Catholic Churches, which are an integral part of the Catholic Church.
Thus, prior to exploring Eastern Orthodox models of synodality, it would be beneficial for the Western Church to examine the existing synodical structures within the Eastern Catholic Churches that are an integral part of the Catholic communion. In these Eastern Catholic communities, synodality has occupied a prominent position, and a robust framework for synodal practices and provisions exists. A wealth of examples illustrating this embedded Eastern Catholic synodality can be found within the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. Here are several illustrative examples.
In the context of electing patriarchs and bishops, the patriarchal or archiepiscopal Churches adhere to a synodal process that differs from the practices used in the Latin Church. Canon 63, for instance, prescribes that:
A patriarch is canonically elected in the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church.
Canon 65/2 specifies the timing for the convening of the synod of bishops:
The synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church must be convened within one month of the vacancy of the see with due regard for establishing a longer term in particular law, but not, however, beyond two months.
Canon 66 delineates the criteria for active voting rights in the election of a patriarch, limiting the electoral process to ordained bishops (sola membra) exclusively. If a non-member votes, then the election is invalid:
It is forbidden for anyone other than the members of the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church to be present in the hall at the election of the patriarch …
No one is allowed either before or during the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church to interfere in any manner with the election of the patriarch (Canon 66/2). And Canon 68 stipulates that bishops are obligated to be summoned to the electoral synod, with provisions for those unable to attend, who may submit written justifications for their absence:
All bishops legitimately convoked are bound by the grave obligation to be present at the election.
If a certain bishop considers himself to be detained by a just impediment, he is to submit his reasons in writing to the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church. The legitimacy of the impediment is to be decided upon by the bishops who are present in the designated place at the first session of the synod.
It is noteworthy that Canon 72/2 specifies that if the election of the patriarch does not yield a successful outcome within fifteen days from the opening of the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church, only then is the matter delegated to the Roman Pontiff. Upon accepting of the newly appointed position as patriarch, the newly elected assumes the office immediately, without the requiring confirmation from the Roman Pontiff. Instead, the synod of the patriarchal church proceeds with the enthronement ceremony, adhering to the liturgical prescriptions outlined in the liturgical books. Following the election, the synod of bishops notifies the Roman Pontiff via a synodal letter, and the newly elected patriarch expeditiously requests ecclesiastical communion from the Roman Pontiff (Canon 76/2). This request is conveyed through a handwritten letter. Subsequent to receiving ecclesiastical communion from the Roman Pontiff, the newly elected patriarch gains the authority to convene a synod of bishops or ordain new bishops.
The patriarchal assembly must be convoked at least once every five years or more frequently, if the synod of bishops deems it necessary. The composition of the patriarchal assembly within the patriarchal Church is interesting. In addition to rectors from Catholic universities and deans of faculties of theology and canon law, who are academic theologians and canon lawyers, two lay individuals are extended invitations to join the patriarchal assembly (Canon 143/6). However, it is left to the discretion of the eparchial bishop to determine the specific criteria governing the selection of these two lay representatives for participation in the patriarchal assembly.
These examples serve to exemplify the inherent synodality found within the Eastern Catholic Churches in communion with Rome.
In conclusion, while the Latin Church can certainly look to Eastern Orthodoxy for models of synodality, it must not overlook the rich tradition of lived synodality within the Eastern Catholic Churches, which are in union with Rome. The lesson here, contra Ovid, is that the most fertile ground may often be found in one’s own backyard, and a neighbor’s herd might not always have richer milk.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.