Here Is How the Morning of the First Day of the Pope’s Consistory with Cardinals Unfolded. Everything You Need to Know: Topics Discussed, Debates, Contributions, and Initial Proposals
Following Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica, the first session of the Extraordinary Consistory opened at 9:30 a.m. in Paul VI Hall. A total of 178 Cardinals attended, seated at tables according to their working groups. Pope Leo XIV addressed the assembly, outlining the four main topics of the consistory and stressing that Cardinals must not act as guardians of particular interests. He explained the criteria for discernment in the consistory, emphasizing the common good of the Church. The session covered a range of topics, debates, contributions, and initial proposals for the Church’s future direction.
3 months ago
The Extraordinary Consistory convened by Pope Leo XIV brought together 178 Cardinals to reflect on the world’s suffering, polarization and the Church’s mission to proclaim the Gospel, while exploring concrete proposals on social cohesion, the common good and the implementation of synodality. 1
After Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica, the Consistory opened at 9:30 a.m. in Paul VI Hall. Cardinal Luis José Rueda Aparicio introduced the theme “In what world are we called to proclaim the Gospel?” and handed the floor to Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re and Pope Leo XIV. 1
Discussions stressed the need for humane migration policies, ecological stewardship and the Church’s responsibility to act as a “Mother” that welcomes, acknowledges mistakes and transforms suffering into growth. 1
Cardinals affirmed that the Church, despite a credibility crisis in other institutions, can speak authoritatively for human dignity, peace and the common good, especially through synodality, charity and lay participation. 1
The third session began at 9:30 a.m. with Pope Leo XIV leading the Adsumus prayer. Cardinal Stephen Brislin presented the topic “Building for the Good: The Construction Works of Our Time.” 2
Groups examined deep societal rifts—between peoples, nations, families and generations—and linked them to a pervasive “exaggerated individualism” that fuels tribalism and alienation. 2
The challenge of AI was highlighted as an anthropological issue requiring a reaffirmation of human dignity, limits and the common good, opposing the reduction of persons to data. 2
Cardinals emphasized that the common good, rooted in faith, demands solidarity with the poor, a language of the heart, and the formation of future public servants grounded in Catholic Social Doctrine. 2
Synodality was presented as a path of listening that can counter division, with the Gospel positioned as the antidote to individualism and a catalyst for rebuilding a compassionate society. 2
The fourth session, held at 4:00 p.m. in the Synod Hall, was dedicated to deepening the understanding and practice of synodality. Cardinal Joseph Tobin opened the session and Cardinal Prosper Grech presented his report. 3
Discussions highlighted the complementary roles of the hierarchical Church and the People of God, as well as the contribution of Eastern‑Rite Catholic communities with their own synodal experience. 3
The session concluded with a shared commitment to make synodality a lived reality, fostering a beautiful, creative and evangelical priesthood while ensuring the entire Church discerns the Holy Spirit’s voice together. 3*
Investigate the Church’s evolving practice of synodality
Synodality has moved in the Catholic Church from being primarily a regular consultative practice of bishops toward becoming, in official Catholic theology and pastoral direction, a constitutive “modus vivendi et operandi”—the Church’s characteristic way of being and acting as the People of God walking together, in communion with and under the authority Christ gives to the bishops and the Bishop of Rome.
In Catholic usage, “synodality” does not start as an abstract slogan; it develops as a theological interpretation of ecclesial life and then becomes a pastoral program expressed through processes, assemblies, and discernment at multiple levels.
The International Theological Commission (ITC) describes this evolution by linking two realities:
A helpful way to think of the “evolution” is: the Council’s renewal created the ecclesiological space for synodality; later developments clarified that synodality expresses how communion is operationalized in the Church’s life (local, regional, universal).
One clear historical starting point mentioned in the scholarly account is Pope Paul VI’s decision (1965) to reintroduce regular meetings of bishops, which culminated in the institution of the Synod of Bishops as a vehicle for addressing issues for the universal Church.
In that earlier phase, “synod/synodality” tended to refer principally to episcopal collegiality—the bishops gathered in hierarchical communion with the Pope.
The ITC’s historical-theological account also underlines that synodality, even if the term is modern, has deep roots in the Church’s way of discerning and deciding together—especially signaled by the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) as a normative model of communitarian and apostolic discernment.
A key point here is that the Church did not “invent” synodality; it reconfigured it: modern synodal structures grow from older patterns of assembly, communion, and discernment, and they were explicitly tied to collegiality in the episcopal sense.
A major shift described by contemporary theological analysis is that, over time—especially in the pontificate of Pope Francis—synodality increasingly is treated not merely as a procedure but as an essential dimension or even a constitutive element of the Church.
The ITC frames this in strongly ecclesiological terms:
Synodality is the Church’s “specific modus vivendi et operandi”, the People of God, revealing the Church as communion when members “journey together, gather in assembly and take an active part in her evangelising mission.”
So “evolution” here means a change in emphasis:
A common confusion is to treat synodality and collegiality (or primacy) as if they were rival principles. Catholic theology resists that simplification.
The ITC explicitly explains a “reciprocal relationship”:
Crucially, “synodality implies collegiality and vice versa,” because they “support and authenticate each other.”
That is why Catholic teaching can insist on synodality while also affirming the sacramental nature of ecclesial authority and the apostolic role of bishops.
The ITC presents synodality as not simply an idea, but as a program: it requires “processes, structures, and events” to make a “synodal Church” real.
The practical architecture is described as layered:
This multi-level view matches the ITC’s claim that synodality is the Church’s characteristic way of walking together as a pilgrim People of God and as the assembly convoked by the risen Lord.
A decisive feature of Catholic development is the attempt to interpret Petrine primacy and synodal communion together.
Catholic ecumenical theology (via the Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity) states that primacy and synodality are not opposing principles but “mutually constitutive and sustaining realities” for communion.
In that same line, the Dicastery quotes the idea that:
“primacy presupposes the exercise of synodality, so synodality entails the exercise of primacy.”
The Dicastery also articulates synodal communion through the triad “all–some–one”:
This helps clarify the “evolution” in practice: synodality is meant to be a dynamic that includes communal, collegial, and personal dimensions rather than flattening authority into a mere consensus mechanism.
Recent papal teaching consistently links synodality to listening—both to the People of God and to the Spirit.
For example, in an Extraordinary Consistory, Pope Leo XIV emphasizes:
“I am here to listen… the synodal dynamic implies a listening… a listening par excellance.”
And in a message about convening ecclesial leaders for synodal discernment, Pope Leo XIV describes a journey “in mutual listening” aimed at pastoral steps grounded in current local Church practice.
This illustrates a practical evolution: synodal life becomes not only about assemblies, but about conversion of attitudes—a disciplined spiritual habit of receiving, discerning, and speaking truthfully in charity.
Catholic discussions of synodality also include pointed critiques about how far synodality may be interpreted as changing governance.
One major theme in the reviewed scholarly debate is that synodality must not be reduced to ideology or social logic. Michael Hanby warns that the elevation of synodality to a “constitutive” element can be misunderstood when treated ideologically—e.g., reading it as a politics-driven “implementation” of Vatican II rather than as an ecclesiological deepening.
Nicholas Healy’s analysis presses a different but related concern: synodality’s programmatic aims (processes enabling mutual listening and participation) must be understood in light of the sacramental nature of ecclesial authority and the vocation proper to laity and bishops.
Together, these critiques highlight what the Church tries to safeguard theologically:
Across these sources, the Church’s evolving synodal practice can be summarized as a shift in emphasis with real continuity:
The Church’s evolving practice of synodality, as developed in contemporary Catholic theology and articulated in magisterial and academic reflection, is best understood as a deepening rather than a simple replacement: synodality grows from older patterns of ecclesial discernment and the modern institution of the Synod of Bishops, then expands toward a synodal ecclesiology where communion is lived through listening together at every level—without denying the divinely given roles of bishops and the Bishop of Rome, since primacy and synodality are described as mutually constitutive realities in the service of ecclesial communion.