The Roman Synod on the role of the bishop in the Church
gave clear witness to the world
that the Catholic Church truly is catholic.

Roman Synod 2001: Bishops as signs of hope

By Kenneth Baker, Editor

Most Catholics, and perhaps most priests, are not familiar with what takes place during a Roman Synod of Bishops. The purpose of this article is to inform the readers of HPR about what happened at the recent synod in Rome which took place from September 30 to October 27, 2001.

What is a synod? It is a four-week meeting of bishops from around the world which is held in Rome periodically, at a time and on a topic determined by the Holy Father.

Regular synods were a recommendation of Vatican II. Pope Paul VI established the rules and summoned the first synod in 1967. Including the first one, there have been twelve synods since 1967. They started off every two years; in 1971 the bishops complained that that was too often, so the Pope extended it to every three years from 1971 to 1990. But the 11th one was in 1994, and Pope John Paul II, because of the millennium celebration, delayed the last synod until 2001—a seven-year interval.

The synod is not a deliberative body. It is summoned to advise the Pope on some subject of his choosing. Thus, the synod in 1987 was on the laity, the one in 1990 on the priesthood, the one in 1994 on the religious or consecrated life.

The recent synod in 2001 was on the role of the bishop in the Church. The full title is: “The Bishop: Servant of the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the Hope of the World.” The participants are bishop representatives from each of the 112 Episcopal Conferences around the world. A conference can elect and send one delegate for each 25 bishops in the conference, with a maximum of four for those countries, like the USA and Italy, that have more than 100 bishops. The delegates from the USA were: Cardinals William Keeler of Baltimore and Francis George, O.M.I., of Chicago, and Bishops Joseph Fiorenza of Galveston/ Houston and Wilton Gregory of Belleville, Ill.

The Pope invited another 35 bishops as his guests and 37 attended ex officio (mostly from the Roman Curia). There were also ten heads of religious orders for a grand total of 247 fathers. In addition, there were 23 auditors—priests, nuns and laypersons who attend all the meetings and have some input. For example, Mr. Carl Anderson, the Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus, was an official auditor from the United States.

Here is the way a synod works. The Pope picks the topic to be covered and sets the date—it has until now always been in October which is a pleasant time to be in Rome. There is a permanent commission in the Roman Curia for synods. Their task is to draw up an outline of what should be discussed—in this case the bishop as the servant of the Gospel and a sign of hope. The outline, which is called in Latin Lineamenta, is sent to all the bishops’ conferences . They are asked to comment on it. When the replies come to Rome they are used to produce a second document call the Instrumentum Laboris (IL) or “working document.” This is then sent to all the bishops for their study and use.

The IL for the recent synod was made public in June 2001 and was the basis for all the work of the synod. The first two weeks of the synod, which meets in the morning and the afternoon Monday through Saturday noon, most of the time is dedicated to giving each of the 247 fathers 8 minutes to address the synod on the topic. At this synod 229 fathers addressed the group.

At the conclusion of this part, a summary of the main points is prepared and presented to all the delegates. Then they go into small group discussions according to language preference. There were 12 of them with about 20 to 25 members in each group. The working groups were the following: 3 English, 3 French, 3 Spanish, 2 Italian and 1 German. They spend about a week in these discussions. The purpose is to develop specific propositions that the members would like to present to the Pope.

The propositions go to an elected committee which sifts and unifies them into propositions that the whole assembly can vote on. When they vote they have three choices on each proposition: placet (yes); non placet (no); placet iuxta modum (yes, with reservations).

When the propositions have been voted on, they are sent to the Holy Father to do with them as he sees fit. Usually, he responds with an Apostolic Exhortation, for example, he published Christifideles Laici after the 1987 synod on the laity.

At the end of the synod the synod fathers publish a “Message” from the synod which has been prepared by a special committee appointed for that task. On the last day, there is a solemn concelebrated Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica with the Holy Father presiding. In his homily, he singles out some of the main themes of the synod and thanks all the participants. After that, the synod becomes part of the history of the Church.

Here are a few observations on the mechanics of the synod. The official language is Latin, but the bishops can speak in their own language. So there is a simultaneous translation in five languages—English, French, German, Italian and Spanish. Members of the press are not admitted to the meetings, but receive a press briefing in the same five languages after each session. Rapidly the Vatican Press Office prints summaries of each talk in the five languages. So everything is available in English shortly after each session. In addition, there are four press conferences with bishop-members so the journalists can ask them questions about the synod. These are conducted in five languages with simultaneous translation a là the United Nations.

As mentioned above, the IL or “Working Document” is the basis of the comments given by the bishops in their 8-minute talks. That document has five parts: 1) The Bishop as a Minister of Hope; 2) The Spirituality of the Bishop; 3) The Bishop in Relation to the Universal Church; 4) The Bishop and his Diocese; 5) The Bishop in Relation to the World. Most of the bishops in their talks spoke on one or more paragraphs of that document.

It is not possible to summarize all that was said in 229 talks, but I will try to give the reader an outline of the main points made by the bishops.

The key idea that dominated the whole synod is that of “communion” (in Latin, communio). The extraordinary synod in 1985 singled out this concept as the main uniting theme of the Second Vatican Council. The way it is used here, communion means union with God through the grace and love of Jesus Christ. This leads to union with the Pope, other bishops, priests and all the faithful. It is another way of saying that one is a member of the Mystical Body of Christ. By the will of God the bishop has a special place in the Body of Christ because he is endowed by God, by reason of his ordination, with spiritual authority over the people of God in his diocese. But since he is a member of the church, he must be in communion with the Pope, who is the head of the college of bishops, and all the other bishops in the world. Everything else that was said about the bishop in the Church derives from and is related to the principle of communion.

This insight of the 1985 synod has not been well understood by most Catholics, including priests, but it is now being repeated by the 2001 synod on the role of the bishop in the Church. It was repeated often in the synod that the bishop should live and encourage others to live a “spirituality of communion.” This has to do with promoting union among Catholics on all levels of the Church.

The theme of the synod is that the bishop is the “servant or minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the hope of the world.” So in the thinking of the synod there is an intimate relationship between the bishop and hope. What is the connection?

The connection is that the bishop’s primary task is to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ —the Good News that Christ, the Word of God, died for our sins, rose from the dead and ascended into heaven where he now gloriously reigns. He therefore promises resurrection and eternal life to all who believe in him and follow his commandments. So those who believe in Christ have hope. Thus Christ is the hope of the world—and the bishop is the one on the local level who is responsible for preaching faith in Jesus Christ.

In their talks many bishops stressed the point that the first responsibility of a bishop is to be an evangelizer. He does that through his own teaching and example—and through the priests, religious and lay people who work with him in this.

In order to be a credible and effective evangelizer, the bishop must develop a deep interior life of prayer to put him in communion with the Lord. It was said that he must be a man of prayer, a man of the Holy Spirit; that he is called to be a saint and that he should be a model of Christian virtue for others.

Several bishops mentioned the need for an ongoing or permanent formation of bishops. But what this might be in detail was not fleshed out. One bishop suggested that they keep abreast of developments in dogma and morals, and that they continue their study of the Bible.

The three tasks of the bishop are to teach, to sanctify and to rule. The role of sanctifying has been treated above. The teaching function of the bishops is crucial, since he is sent out by Christ to teach the whole truth about God, man and the world. Cardinal William Baum, formerly of Washington, D.C., said that teaching is of the essence of the office of bishop, that he must teach the truth and correct errors. The strongest talk on this point was given by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He said the bishop must judge and decide with authority—not on debated theological points, but on the baptismal faith of the Church. At the end of his talk he received a prolonged applause of approval from the assembled bishops. Archbishop George Pell of Sydney, Australia, said, “One duty of the bishop is to encourage the development of genuine Christian hope.” The bishop does that by not being silent about the Last Things—death, judgment, heaven and hell.

In addition to being a teacher and sanctifier, the bishop is also one with authority—a ruler, judge and leader of his flock. Cardinal Joachim Meisner of Cologne, Germany, stressed the authority or jurisdiction of the bishop. His ministry, he said, “implies a clear and unequivocal right to govern, including also an element of jurisdiction.” He went on to say, “Bishops are not only called to bear witness , feed and care for the faith, but also to judge it, to discipline it and to impose it accordingly.” At the conclusion of his talk, Cardinal Meisner received the first applause of the synod.

The theological notion of communion is closely related to other aspects of the Church, such as the papal primacy, collegiality, synods and episcopal conferences. Many of the bishops made this connection in their talks. “Effective” collegiality has to do with the common actions of the bishops along with the Pope, such as happens in an ecumenical council. “Affective” collegiality concerns the sense of communion among the bishops of a country and all the bishops in the world. For, there is no collegiality in the strict sense unless the bishops act in concert with the Pope.

With regard to synods, a few bishops suggested that the rules governing synods be studied and changed. Some would like to see it run in a more democratic way to decide questions by vote. The problem with this is that it naturally develops parties and divisions—and the Holy See wants to avoid that as much as possible. One bishop suggested that the Pope should meet on a regular basis with the presidents of the 112 episcopal conferences. These are not very subtle hints that there should be more democracy in the Church.

At least fourteen bishops spoke about episcopal conferences; not one of them said anything critical about them. The thrust was to give them more power in the Church. One bishop, though, Oswald Gomis from Sri Lanka, asked for some guidelines on how a diocese should relate to the episcopal conference. Some want to see more study on the theology of episcopal conferences, even though the Vatican published a whole document on this in 1998 called Apostolos Suos.

Three bishops raised the question whether or not the principle of “subsidiarity” might apply to episcopal conferences. Archbishop Joseph Fiorenza of Galveston/Houston said there should be more subsidiarity in the Church. But it was pointed out later in the synod (in the Relatio Post Disceptationem) that subsidiarity does not apply to the Church in the same way it applies to civil society. The reason is that the Pope has ordinary, direct and immediate authority over all the faithful, and the diocesan bishop has the same authority over the faithful in his diocese. So there cannot be any groups in the Church that operate independently of the Holy Father.

Another point that comes up regularly was that of ecumenism and interreligious dialogue. Several bishops spoke rather strongly about the obligation of the bishop to promote good relations with other Christians and, when possible, to engage in dialogue with members of other religions, especially with Moslems. This was a touchy point at the time since the war in Afghanistan started after the first week of the synod on October 7.

With regard to the life of the bishop, many suggestions were made—some by only one bishop, others by two or three. Here are a some that I wrote down. A few bishops spoke of the age of retirement. One wanted it raised from 75 to 78; a few others wanted it reduced to 70. One bishop said that bishops should be appointed for ten or fifteen years, with the possibility of a second term.

Several said that the bishop in his personal life should be a model Christian and so a sign of hope to others. One said that more should be done to take care of retired bishops. At least two speakers mentioned that the bishop should use the media to promote the Gospel of hope.

Finally, there was the question about the relations of the Latin Church of the West to the Oriental Churches. Some of the bishops said that more attention should be paid to the ancient rights of the oriental patriarchates and that more should be done to care for the immigrants who belong to the Oriental Churches.

At this point I would like to make a few editorial comments about the synod of 2001. In general, the talks tended to be rather abstract and theoretical, with few concrete suggestions. This synod was very low-key in comparison with past synods. The news media were not much interested in it, so the number of journalists present was significantly fewer than in the past. There was very little coverage of the synod in the international press. Perhaps one reason for this was the tension after the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center and then concern about the American bombing of Afghanistan.

Catholic liberals like to portray the curial Cardinals as the “bad guys” in the Church, but at this synod they got most of the applause from the other bishops. Those most concerned about the authority and role of bishops’ conferences are the presidents of them. Serious present problems of the Church in America and Europe were rarely or not at all mentioned, such as: 1) how to deal with dissenters from the Magisterium; 2) the relation of the bishop to a Catholic University in his diocese (no one mentioned Ex Corde Ecclessiae!); 3) the miserable state of catechetics; 4) gross violations of the rubrics of the Mass; 5) the Latin liturgy and the use of Latin in the Church and in seminaries; 6) false teaching in seminaries; 7) priest pedophiles and the huge sums of money paid out to settle court cases; 8) loss of faith among Catholics, especially in the Real Presence; 9) massive decline in attendance at Mass in Europe and America; 10) the aging of the clergy in the West and the lack of sufficient vocations.

The second phase of the synod is to break up into small discussion groups called in Latin Circuli Minores. At this synod there were 12 of them, as I mentioned above. For the first time in my memory of past synods there was no Latin discussion group. This is yet another indication that Latin, even though it is still the official language of the Church, is de facto disappearing.

Each group had about 20 to 25 members, including the auditors. This phase of the synod lasts about one week. At the conclusion of the two weeks of giving and hearing talks on the topic, the General Secretary presents a summary (relatio in Latin) of the main points made in the 229 talks the bishops heard. The report was prepared by Cardinals Egan and Bergoglio with the help of the assigned periti or theological advisors to the synod.

The report, which in Latin is called Relatio Post Disceptationem, was actually given by Cardinal Bergoglio on October 12 because Egan had flown to New York to preside over a prayer service at St. Patrick’s Cathedral for the victims of the September 11 terrorist attack. That report is the basis of the discussions of the 12 discussion groups.

The report has four sections and closely follows the material given in the IL or working document. The first section is called “The Bishop in Communion with the Lord” (1-12). This deals with the nature of a bishop and especially with his spiritual life. The second section is entitled “The Bishop at the Service of Communion in the Universal Church” (13-18). The concern here is with the bishop’s responsibility for the whole Church, his missionary obligations, collegiality, subsidiarity and the structure of synods. There is not much said about episcopal conferences, even though many bishops touched on that point in their talks to the general assembly.

The third section is “The Bishop at the Service of the Communion of the Particular Church” (19-33). Here the report treats of the pastoral duty of a bishop in the context of his threefold role of teacher, sanctifier and ruler. It stresses that the bishop should be a father and friend to his priests and all members of the diocese; he should take special care of the parishes, develop a diocesan plan, watch over his diocesan curia, and in general be an evangelizer of the Gospel of Jesus for the hope of the world. The fourth section carries the title, “The Bishop at the Service of Communion in the World” (34-39). The emphasis here is on the prophetic role of the bishop. He is not only to proclaim the Gospel, but also to unmask contemporary errors and moral evils; he should proclaim the social doctrine of the Church and engage in ecumenical and interreligious dialogue, especially with Islam.

The conclusion (38-39) considers the bishop as a preacher of hope which derives from the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Finally, the bishops are told to ask themselves whether or not they give sufficient attention to the Last Things and the eternal life promised by Jesus. Then they ask for guidance from the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of Hope.

The reader should note the presence of the word “communion” in the title of each of the four sections of the report. This bears out my statement above that the idea of “communion” was the key concept used at the synod to describe the role of the bishop in the Church as a minister of hope for the world.

At the end of the Report the General Secretary appended ten sets of questions to guide the discussion groups. The questions reflect the main areas of concern expressed by the bishops in their talks to the assembly. The ten sets of questions cover the following areas: 1) the Bishop as teacher of the faith; 2) the spiritual life of the Bishop; 3) the relationship of the Bishop with his priests; 4) promoting vocations and the formation of seminarians; 5) how to encourage affective collegiality; 6) meetings of Bishops of the same ecclesiastical province; 7) the Bishop and the parishes of the diocese; 8) the Diocesan Curia; 9) the Bishop as a witness of authentic poverty; 10) the Bishop and inculturation in the Third Millennium.

The reader should recall that the bishops broke up into 12 small discussion groups of about 25 persons and reflected on these questions. They did that for about four days. At the conclusion of this phase of the synod, the secretary of each group (called a Relator in Latin) gave a 20-minute report on the results of the conversations. A summary of those reports was made available to the press, but not the whole text.

Here are some of the main points made. To #1: Great stress was laid on the duty of the bishop to be a teacher of the faith for the hope of the world. It was also said that he has authority and is a ruler of his diocese, but this was not given much importance. To #2: The spirituality of the bishop was one of the main topics of this synod. He is to be a model of holiness and a teacher of holiness for the whole diocese. Cardinal Carlo Martini of Milan said that the two main topics of the synod were the spirituality of the bishop and ecclesiology. To #3: The bishop is urged to be close to the family of priests in his diocese. To them he is to be father, brother and friend. He is to show special concern for their spiritual, medical and financial wellbeing. To #4: The bishop is to promote vocations to the priesthood and religious life. He should give special attention to his seminary and to the formation of future priests. To #5: The most debated point was that of episcopal collegiality and communion. Here questions were raised about the relations between the episcopal conferences and the Holy See, especially the Roman Curia. Some bishops want to see more power given to the episcopal conferences; one group said that the Roman Curia should be decentralized (English Group C); others would like to see the structure of the Roman Synod itself studied and changed. Here they also talked about the problem of subsidiarity and whether or not it applies to the structure of the Church. To #6: The sixth question has to do with “ecclesiastical provinces,” that is, an archdiocese and the nearby dioceses dependent on it. The bishops did not have a problem with this; under this heading again they spoke about episcopal conferences, their relations to each other and to the Holy See in Rome. To #7: The importance of the parish was mentioned by many bishops. The bishop is in touch with the people of his diocese primarily through the local parishes. The bishop is urged to visit them on a regular basis so he can know what is happening of the local level. To #8: Discussion on the Diocesan Curia focused on the competence of the people working there; it was said that it should operate in a charitable way and not be reduced to a mere bureaucracy. To #9: The ninth area concerned poverty. No one disagreed with this. The bishop should be a witness to evangelical poverty in his personal lifestyle; he should also manifest a spirit of detachment from earthly, material things and he should give preferential attention to the needs of the poor in his diocese. To #10: This was a wide area to cover— globalization, inculturation and how the Church should function in a huge city or “Megalopolis” like Mexico City which has more than 22 million inhabitants. Here an effort should be made to bridge the gap between faith and culture.

The above observations should give you some sense of the thinking of the bishops on ten areas of concern. In the third phase of the synod the fathers draw up a series of concrete proposals in the form of propositions based on the ten sets of questions, or anything else pertaining to the topic that they think is important enough to bring to the attention of the Holy Father. The propositions are written in Latin; each one is to contain one idea only. They go to a committee that sifts through them, puts them in order and eliminates reduplications. The propositions are secret and are for the eyes of the Pope only. In past synods, however, many or most of them have been leaked to the Italian press and were printed for all to see the day after they are passed by the assembly.

In past synods the propositions have followed the ten areas of discussion. It is clear from what some bishops said that the propositions from the 2001 synod will do the same.

During the fourth and last week, while the synod fathers were debating the propositions, a special committee, appointed by the General Secretary, composed a “Message to the People of God.” This is a brief statement, five pages in length, addressed to Catholics, in which the bishops say what they have been discussing and what they hope to do in the future.
There are two main sections in the Message. The first one is entitled, “Jesus Christ Our Hope.” Here the bishops recount many of the problems in the world, including a condemnation of terrorism, and assert that Christ is the answer to all man’s problems—he is our Savior and the Hope of the world.

The second main part is called, “The Bishop, Servant of the Gospel of Hope.” That is the theme of the whole synod. The main points are that the bishop is called to be a model of holiness; he should practice the spirituality of communion; collegiality is a consequence of communion and “is at the service of communion” (#16). The Message stresses the fact that the bishop must proclaim God’s plan of salvation in Jesus Christ to all. There is heavy emphasis on the duty of the bishop to promote ecumenical dialogue.

The bishops thank priests, deacons, religious, lay people and all who help in the task of evangelizing the world. They make an appeal to theologians, politicians and economic leaders to help in promoting a civilization of love. You will find the document in Origins, Vol. 31, No. 22, November 8, 2001, pp.365-370.

The Message is a product of a committee so it has the limitations of such a document. It was voted on and approved by a great majority of the bishops. In the hierarchy of Church documents, the Message is not an important statement. This one, like similar Messages in the past, is bland and general in tone. It lacks specificity; in short, it has no teeth. The important document from the synod is the Apostolic Exhortation which the Pope will produce during the next year or so.

On Friday, October 26, the bishops voted on the final propositions. There are 67 of them. What is in them? As of this writing I do not know because they are secret. But based on past experience and on what some bishops said in press briefings, the propositions follow the ten areas of discussion in the Discussion Groups. One should not expect any surprises.

That means that the propositions will cover the following areas: 1) the bishop as a teacher and guardian of the faith; 2) the spiritual life of the bishop; 3) the bishop’s relationship to the priests in his diocese; 4) promotion of vocations to the priesthood and care for the seminary; 5) the spirituality of communion and fostering affective collegiality; 6) the importance of parish visitations; 7) the relationship of episcopal conferences to the Pope and the relationship of individual dioceses to the episcopal conference; 8) bishops as models of Gospel poverty; 9) inculturation or the relationship between faith and culture.

Undoubtedly there will be propositions on a few other matters, but most of them will refer to one of the topics given above. The propositions are important because they make specific, concrete suggestions to the Pope on what should be done. They are as it were “guideposts” for him when he writes his Apostolic Exhortation. That letter will be the most important result of the synod.

Between synods there is a committee called “Post-Synodal Council” that meets twice a year to plan the next synod. The council has 15 members—12 elected by the synod and 3 appointed by the Pope. On the last day of the synod the fathers elected the 12 members of the Post-Synod Council—three from each of four geographical areas—Africa, America, Asia/Oceania, and Europe. Cardinal Francis George, O.M.I., was one of those elected from America. Archbishop George Pell of Sydney, Australia, was elected for Asia/ Oceania. The Pope, when he was the Archbishop of Krakow, was elected to the Council twice—in 1974 and again in 1977.

The synod concluded on October 27 with a beautiful Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica. Those who concelebrated with the Pope were 5 cardinals, 7 patriarchs, 70 archbishops, 105 bishops and 10 priests. Most Catholics have never seen so many cardinals and bishops in one place, along with the Pope. It is an impressive, dignified and moving sight.

In his homily during the Mass the Pope said that Christ is the hope of the world and that the task given to bishops, as successors of the apostles, is to spread his Gospel to the ends of the world. He pointed out that Christ is the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep. The bishop must try to imitate Christ in that by teaching the faith, correcting errors, and caring for the souls of the faithful.

The Pope stressed the importance of the ecclesiology of communion and mission, that is, the bishops, with the grace of God, united among themselves and with the Pope for the hope of salvation of the world. In conclusion, he asked the bishops to bring his greetings to the faithful and especially to the priests. He also asked them to greet the Emeritus Bishops and urged the bishops to include the Emeriti in the work of the local Episcopal Conference.

In the last paragraph he mentioned by name the fifteen bishops canonized during the 20th century, including Saints Robert Bellarmine, John Fisher, Oliver Plunkett, and John Neumann (see Origins Vol. 31, No. 22, November 8, 2001, pp.370-372).

To sum up, the main results of the 2001 Synod on bishops are the following. These are points that the vast majority of the fathers agreed on: 1) the bishop must strive to be a holy person by imitating Christ and he must be an example of holiness to the faithful; 2) the bishop is a witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the hope of the world; 3) the bishop must be in a state of permanent formation, especially in the areas of dogmatic, pastoral and moral theology (regarding the latter, he should be up to date on bioethics); 4) all bishops should strive to promote and increase the spirituality of communion and collegiality.

Unlike some previous synods, this one was described by several Cardinals and Bishops as a synod of great unity, peace and serenity. The bishops came from all part of the world—different cultures, countries and languages—but they were enthusiastically untied with one another and with Pope John Paul II, the Successor of St. Peter. The synod gave witness to all that the Catholic Church truly is catholic.

Reverend Kenneth Baker, S.J., has been editor of HPR since 1971. This is the tenth synod that he has covered during that time. There has been an extensive article in these pages summarizing each synod.