Synodality, Agreement

 The Catholic Bishops’ Synod on Synodality 2021-2024 (also called the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops) was initiated by the late Pope Francis. Its Final Document for a Synodal Church, here called the Final Synod Document, has been written (link to PDF HERE). The next phase, Implementation, has recently begun. 

During the synodal process, Pope Francis invited all Catholics, including pastors and laity who are not experts, to meet in groups, freely (but respectfully) air their opinions, experiences, and feelings about the Church, along with fully listening to each other. He put a heavy emphasis on following the Holy Spirit, encouraging all to pray “each day for the presence of the Holy Spirit,” so that He, Who is of one essence with the Father and Son, would be the lead and guide of the Synod of Bishops (Justin McClellen from Catholic News Service, link HERE ).

Inevitably, tensions and difficulties are revealed in the discussions, a few focusing on the meaning of “synodality” itself. Some have said simpler terms are needed so people can understand it better. The Pope taught that synodality is not a one-time event but ongoing. The process continues in a cycle, with groups of people repeating prayer, contemplation, and discussion, trying to discern a way forward. Pope Leo XIV wants to continue the practice, reported on Vatican News as saying, “Synodality is the path God expects of the Church in the third millennium” (link HERE).

Along with the Synod Documents themselves, many experts have already written about synodality. Also, the Holy Father at the time of the 2021-2024 Synod appointed study groups for further development of thought. The Study Group 9 worked on some controversial subjects pertaining to the Church, issuing a Final Report this past May (link HERE for the full name and access to the report). They revealed that they had used the Biblical book of Acts, Chapters 10-15, as a basis for a “shift in paradigm” of methodology. Other theologians have related synodality to this particular moment in Church history (one example, by Andrew Likoudis on the Where Peter Is website, is HERE). 

I’d also like to focus on the events revealed in these passages of Acts, which I will get to shortly, though am not an expert as these writers are. Church leaders and influencers are often well-educated and even brilliant but sometimes intimidating. Intellectuals may think and speak in such lofty terms that they go over the heads of the less scholarly, who may have different opinions or perspectives but are afraid to express them. That may be one problem with the term “synodality” itself. But, Jesus called all of us to love each other, and everyone has that capability. For the Church to be inclusive, every member needs to be embraced, admittedly a challenge for any attempt of synodality. I got the feeling, though, that great efforts were made throughout the Synod to include people from many cultures and stations of life. 

In the Final Synod Document the word “discernment” is used frequently, pointing to one of the main elements of synodality. For some time I have thought that the closest thing in the Bible that synodality aligns with is “agreement.” Yet, the words “discern” and “agree” and their derivatives (words with the same base) are not fully interchangeable, The Final Synod Document uses “agreement” much less than “discernment.” On the other hand, “agreement” appears in the Bible in the events of Acts 10-15, and “synodality” and “discern” don’t (in the NABRE version which I will describe below). The word “discern” in a quick Google search means “to perceive, recognize or make out something that is not immediately obvious.” The meaning of “agree” is pretty straightforward, and either people agree or they don’t on a particular point. 

 

I’ve put links on my blog to the Synod on Synodality main website in the past (once again HERE), but in this post I’d like to elaborate on a few personal thoughts about it, using the Biblical source. When I mention a Bible book, chapter, and/ or verse, I’ll have a link to the chapter of the USCCB Bible where the verse is, within that text. Their version is the New American Bible, Revised Edition (NABRE).

The book of Acts in the Bible describes the beginning activities of Christian apostles. They were Jews by birth and were given the Jewish (Mosaic) Law by God through Moses. In Acts 15 of the Bible, a situation is described which became known as the Council of Jerusalem of 49 AD. There were various strands that led up to this meeting. 

A short time previously, Jesus Christ had lived a perfect life on Earth, died on the cross for our sins, and then rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven. Immediately before He disappeared into the sky, He told His disciples, “But you will receive power when the holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, throughout Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

At what is called Pentecost, the disciples of Christ, having remained in Jerusalem, experienced a noise like a great wind and “there appeared to them tongues as of fire, which parted and came to rest on each one of them. And they were all filled with the holy Spirit…” (Acts 2:1-4). Then one of the disciples, Peter, explained to his “fellow Israelites,” as he called those in the crowd, who Jesus Christ was and that He had been put to death but rose back to life. They were sorrowful about what had happened, but many repented and became Christians (cf. cf. Acts 2:22-41).

So when Christ first left the disciples, they received the Holy Spirit to teach them how to proceed, but it wasn’t as though they knew everything immediately.  In Acts 10, a situation arises that shows Peter still apparently thought he should follow the Jewish Law. Though he eventually changed his mind, notice what he says immediately after his vision.

Jews at that time did not enter homes of non-Jews, called Gentiles, and were used to keeping separate from them. Some apparently did not expect to welcome people without Jewish heritage into the group of Christian believers. But one day a Gentile centurion (soldier) named Cornelius, who found the favor of God, was told by an angel to seek out the disciple Peter. Cornelius sent out some trusted servants to get Peter, who was staying in another city. In the meantime, Peter had a vision concerning food. He was hungry and went into a trance.

“He saw the heaven opened and something resembling a large sheet coming down, lowered to the ground by its four corners. In it were all the earth’s four-legged animals and reptiles and the birds of the sky. A voice said to him, ‘Get up, Peter. Slaughter and eat.’ But Peter said, ‘Certainly not, sir. For never have I eaten anything profane and unclean.’ The voice spoke to him again, a second time, ‘What God has made clean, you are not to call profane.’ This happened three times, and then the object was taken up into the sky” (Acts 10:11-16).

The servants of Cornelius found Peter and eventually Peter traveled there with some “circumcised believers” (those who had been Jewish and had followed the Law). Peter and his companions made their way into the soldier's house. Cornelius had invited friends and family for the occasion. Peter said, “In truth, I see that God shows no partially” (Acts 10:34). He proceeded to tell them in detail about Jesus Christ. 

Then, even as Peter spoke, “the holy Spirit fell upon all who were listening to the word. The circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the holy Spirit should have been poured out on the Gentiles also” (Acts 10:44-45). Peter responded, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have? He ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 10:47-48).

Another thread toward the Council of Jerusalem came from the apostle Paul, who became a convert from Judaism after a direct encounter with the Lord (Acts 9). He had traveled to many cities to evangelize about Jesus Christ being God, and returned to a previous one, Antioch. There, others had come from Judea (now part of Israel) and were instructing their brothers that they had to follow the ancient Jewish Law in order to become Christian. Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem where they met with the apostles and presbyters (other leaders) and described this matter. “But some from the party of the Pharisees who had become believers stood up and said, ‘It is necessary to circumcise them and direct them to observe the Mosaic Law’” (Acts 15:5).

So now we have several questions. The fact some of the believers were astounded that the Holy Spirit was poured out on the Gentiles certainly points to at least some of them expecting the religion to remain within the Jewish heritage. And, if Gentiles could become Christians, must they follow Jewish Laws? Circumcision, the removal of the foreskin of the penis, was part of the Jewish Law at the time. This added to a different question of whether Christians of Jewish heritage could now accept certain changes in their own practices of the Mosaic Law, since Christ had died for their sins. And so a Council was called, presided by James in Jerusalem in AD. 49. Again from the Bible:

The apostles and the presbyters met together to see about this matter. After much debate had taken place, Peter got up and said to them, ‘My brothers, you are well aware that from early days God made his choice among you that through my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by granting them the holy Spirit just as he did us. He made no distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts. Why, then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on the shoulders of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they.’ The whole assembly fell silent, and they listened while Paul and Barnabas described the signs and wonders God had worked among the Gentiles through them (Acts 15:6-12). 

The group once again fell silent, and then one of them, James, spoke. He quoted a prophet of the Scriptures from their past that predicted the Gentiles would be included in God's people (in the Bible, this particular prediction is in Amos 9:11-12). He said, “‘It is my judgment, therefore, that we ought to stop troubling the Gentiles who turn to God, but tell them by letter to avoid pollution from idols, unlawful marriage, the meat of strangled animals, and blood'” (Acts 15:19-20). The chapter continues:

Then the apostles and presbyters, in agreement with the whole church, decided to choose representatives and to send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. The ones chosen were Judas, who was called Barsabbas, and Silas, leaders among the brothers. This is the letter delivered by them: "The apostles and the presbyters, your brothers, to the brothers of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia of Gentile origin: greetings. Since we have heard that some of our number [who went out] without any mandate from us have upset you with their teachings and disturbed your peace of mind, we have with one accord decided to choose representatives and to send them to you along with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, who have dedicated their lives to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. So we are sending Judas and Silas who will also convey this same message by word of mouth. 'It is the decision of the holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond the necessities, namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from meats of strangled animals, and from unlawful marriage. If you keep free of these, you will be doing what is right. Farewell.'" And so they were sent on their journey. Upon their arrival in Antioch they called the assembly together and delivered the letter. The people of Antioch were delighted with the exhortation (Acts 15:22-31).

At the Council of Jerusalem, all persons ended in agreement, even those who disagreed at first. There were former Pharisees, who had been tightly tied to the Jewish law.  Though inevitably transformed by turning to Jesus Christ, they were used to being the big-wigs of the Jewish religion and hung on to some previous ways. In fact, they were the ones who caused the Council to take place since they taught differently than Paul. 

A vote could have been called at the start of the meeting, and whichever side had the most people obviously would have won. In our day, Pope Francis warned the Church against this type of democracy. Even after discussion, one group can have more ecclesiastical power than another and get their way, leaving the other side disgruntled.

Though not all the Pharisees were the worst of villains at the time of Jesus, they sure didn’t look good as a group. But during the Council, they listened to the testimony of Peter and Paul, who had experiences of seeing how the Gentiles were believing in Jesus. If these Pharisees had not been moved to think differently about following the Jewish Law, James could not have written “in agreement with the whole church,” or “with one accord,” or ”It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us” in his letter.

Looking at the various aspects, we see that the converted Pharisees were considered a part of the assembly, able to voice their opinions. Peter, who was considered a leader among disciples, was given a vision by God. But Peter was “secular” as far as religious background, having been a fisherman, and had also not done himself proud when he denied knowing Christ before He was crucified. Paul had persecuted Christians before he had a conversion experience directly with Jesus, so had not been perfect either. But here they were all trying to follow the Holy Spirit to find the right answer: what God wanted.

When it was acknowledged that the “whole church agreed,” Peter and Paul at the time of the Council already had pretty good ideas about the questions that had been presented. So it must have been the Pharisees who were willing to listen and change their minds because of the meeting. We assume they were moved by the Holy Spirit, so that the Truth was revealed for all of them in their unity. In the end, the whole group seemed confident that the Holy Spirit was with them in their decision. The agreement in itself during the First Church Council showed the way toward God’s will.

It was God who gave Peter the vision; it was God who brought signs and wonders to the Gentiles through the apostles. Those were experiences for the Jews to see and hear as well as the Gentiles. And it was very probably God the Holy Spirit who moved the Pharisees and other Jewish converts to look at things differently when they were willing to listen, so that a letter could be sent to Antioch “in agreement with the whole church,” a letter which included the phrase, “It is the decision of the holy Spirit and of us.” 

Though I definitely believe the Council of 49 AD came up with the right answer, it was the Truth itself, by God’s help, that all the members recognized as important. If we only care about who is in charge, or who gets to write the letter, we are just back where the Church had drifted, into hierarchical clericalism as Pope Francis called it, before he promoted synodality. And whoever the Catholic Church designated as "all members" back then (probably meaning male Magisterium), Pope Francis stressed "all" (meaning ALL) members now, impractical as that may sound. Yet, in the case of enthusiastic laity, their focus on the "sense of the faithful" must not overlook clerical leadership, and also be honest with themselves and others about real differences between believers. Though I’m all for women, the poor, and the marginalized having much more of a voice in the Church, I would not want to see balances go from one extreme to another.

With God, all things are possible. But I believe that for the accomplishment of synodality (dare I call it agreement?) we need very wise leadership. They must assess what needs to be considered separately under time limitations and what can wait for further discussion, listening, and prayer. In important matters, they must not rush those who do not at first agree. This process could take much time, but be very fruitful, just as we desire.