Some people are worried that the broader participation of the faithful in decision-making, as proposed in the Final Report of the Synod on Synodality, might endanger the hierarchical structure of the church. Is this concern warranted?
A careful reading of the report shows that the concern is not warranted. The report deals with this question in Part III in a section titled “The Structure of the Decision-making Process.”
It begins by stressing the participation of the whole church in decision-making, at least as regards seeking their advice; “In the synodal church ‘the whole community, in the free and rich diversity of its members, is called together to pray, listen, analyse, dialogue, discern and offer advice on taking pastoral decisions’ for mission. The way to promote a synodal church is to foster as great a participation of all the People of God as possible in decision-making processes” (Final Report, n. 87).
By way of stressing the participation of all the faithful, while respecting the hierarchical nature of the church, the document quotes the Church Fathers; “The Fathers of the church reflect on the communal nature of the mission of the People of God with a triple ‘nothing without’: ‘nothing without the bishop’ (St Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Trallians 2, 2) ‘nothing without the council of presbyters, nothing without the consent of the people’ (St Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 14, 4). When this logic of ‘nothing without’ is disregarded, the identity of the Church is obscured, and its mission is hindered” (n. 88).
Naturally, the expression “nothing without the consent of the people” does not mean that the faithful must be able to give their consent to every decision taken by the hierarchy. In fact, it applies to very few decisions. Listening to the views and advice of as many people as possible before making decisions is an important principle in a synodal church, but needing their consent is another matter.
As regards when the faithful are to be consulted, the Final Report says: “Those in authority are, in several instances, obligated by current law to conduct a consultation before taking a decision. Those with pastoral authority are obliged to listen to those who participate in the consultation and may not act as if the consultation had not taken place. Therefore, those in authority will not depart from the fruits of consultation that produce an agreement without a compelling reason (cf. CIC, can. 127, § 2, 2°; CCEO can. 934, § 2, 3°), which must be appropriately explained” (n. 91).
As this paragraph says, consultation of the faithful before making a decision is required only “in several instances.” An example of this is in a parish pastoral council, as I explained in my last column (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 537). Another example is in the administration of diocesan goods, where, in matters “of major importance, the diocesan Bishop must consult the finance committee and the college of consultors” (Can. 1277). In these cases, if the parish priest or diocesan bishop decides not to follow the advice he has received, he should therefore explain why he is not doing so. This would be dictated, in any case, by courtesy and common sense.
One of the few instances in which the bishop must not only consult others but actually obtain their consent before he acts is in the extraordinary administration of church goods: “For acts of extraordinary administration, he needs the consent of the committee and of the college of consultors” (Can. 1277). The question of what constitutes extraordinary administration is determined by the Bishops’ Conference.
By way of making clear that the hierarchical structure of the church is not endangered in a synodal church, the Final Report states; “In a synodal church, the authority of the Bishop, of the Episcopal College and of the Bishop of Rome in regard to decision-taking is inviolable as it is grounded in the hierarchical structure of the church established by Christ; it serves both unity and legitimate diversity (n. 92, cf. LG 13).”
As in any community that lives according to justice, the exercise of authority in the church does not consist in an arbitrary imposition of will. Rather, authority should always be exercised in service of communion and the reception of Christ, who is the truth towards whom the Holy Spirit guides us in different moments and contexts (n. 91; cf. Jn 14:16).”