P. Rafael Pacaníns

I understand that one of the topics under consideration at the Consistory of Cardinals is synodality. I’m speaking as a bishop who was an elected delegate to both rounds of the Synod and Synodality in Rome and who has just presided over a local synod in my own diocese. Synods are good and useful tools for the determination of practical pastoral strategies, but they oughtn’t to be forums for debate regarding doctrine. When settled teaching becomes a subject for synodal determination, the Church devolves into relativism and self-doubt—as is clearly evident in the misconceived “Synodal Way” in Germany. I’m sympathetic with the founders of the journal “Communio”—Joseph Ratzinger, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and Henri de Lubac—who broke with the journal Concilium the stated purpose of which was the perpetuation of the “spirit of Vatican II.” The great Communio theologians said that councils are indeed sometimes necessary in the life of the Church but that one sighs with relief at the end of a council, for the Church can then return to its essential work. As long as it sits in council, the Church is in suspense, unsure of itself, wringing its hands. It was precisely the perpetuation of the spirit of Vatican II that led to so much vacillation and drift in the years when I was coming of age. So, if we must continue with synodality, let it be dedicated to the consideration of practical means by which the Church can more effectively do its work of worshipping God, evangelizing, and serving the poor. And let it not be a defining and permanent feature of the Church’s life, lest we lose our verve and focus.