A “synodality” that fails to convince: the best-articulated doubts of bishops and cardinals who are speaking out and appealing to Pope Leo XIV
Bishops and cardinals express doubts that synodality may replace the Church’s own mission. The critique comes from clergy who support consultation, dialogue and shared discernment. Auxiliary Bishop Rob Mutsaerts of ’s‑Hertogenbosch wrote an open letter to Pope Leo XIV asking whether the synodal process brings souls closer to Christ. The concerns surface as the Synod on Synodality moves from formal meetings into a longer implementation phase.
about 1 month ago
The article examines growing criticism of the Catholic Church’s synodal process from within its hierarchy, highlighting concerns that the method of consultation may be eclipsing the Church’s core mission of evangelization and communion. 1
The synodality initiative, launched in 2021, involved extensive dialogue among bishops, clergy, religious, and laity across the world. Its formal phase ran through 2024, with implementation continuing through 2028. 1
In an open letter to Pope Leo XIV dated August 13, Mutsaerts asked whether the synodal process is truly bringing souls closer to Christ, urging measurement of outcomes such as faith growth, Mass attendance, vocations, and Eucharistic devotion rather than merely counting meetings. 1
Woelki warned that the German “Synodal Path” overemphasized participation and shared governance while neglecting the Church’s sacramental and hierarchical nature. He emphasized that the Church belongs to Christ, not to its members as shareholders, and cautioned against structures gaining a life of their own. 1
Scola accepted synodality as a valuable method but stressed that its source is communion, not procedural abundance. He argued that more meetings or consultations do not automatically produce greater unity or missionary effectiveness, and warned against treating the method as the organizing principle of Catholic life. 1
The proposed German Synodal Conference, intended to give permanent continuity to the process, awaits Vatican approval and may see its planned November launch delayed. Woelki, who declined participation in drafting its statutes, is awaiting Rome’s corrective feedback. 1
Critics fear that prolonged discussion of settled doctrines—such as priestly ordination, the female diaconate, sexual morality, and authority—creates expectations of a “vote” on core teachings, potentially leading to frustration rather than renewal. Mutsaerts likens the Church’s current state to a house on fire, suggesting that governance reforms should not distract from urgent spiritual crises like empty churches, aging religious, and declining vocations. 1
The Pope faces the challenge of integrating listening and participation with the Church’s evangelizing mission. Success, according to the article, will be judged by tangible signs of faith—stronger belief, deeper sacramental life, increased vocations, and effective proclamation of Christ—rather than by the number of synodal meetings. 1
The piece concludes that synodality should remain a means to foster communion and mission, not an end in itself. The central question for the Church moving forward is whether the process ultimately leads to a clearer proclamation of Christ, enabling the faithful to “walk the journey” rather than endlessly debating how to organize that walk. 1*
Synodality threatens Church mission, bishops argue
The claim that “synodality threatens the Church’s mission” identifies a real concern, but it is too broad as a Catholic judgment. The Church’s official teaching presents authentic synodality not as a substitute for evangelization or hierarchical authority, but as a way of strengthening communion and mission. The danger lies not in synodality itself, but in misunderstanding or instrumentalizing it.
Synodality means that the whole People of God participates—according to the vocation and responsibility proper to each member—in the life and mission of the Church. It is not simply a democratic procedure, nor does it mean that every opinion has equal theological authority. The International Theological Commission distinguishes synodality, which involves the participation of the whole Church, from collegiality, which refers specifically to the communion and shared exercise of ministry among bishops in union with the Pope.
The theological basis is the Church’s nature as a communion. Pope Francis described synodality as “an essential dimension of the Church,” and stated that it is the path God expects the Church to follow in the third millennium.
This does not mean that the Church is governed by public opinion. Bishops retain their proper teaching and governing authority. Synodal listening helps pastors discern faithfully, but it does not abolish the distinction between the ministerial priesthood and the common vocation of all the baptized. As the theological analysis of Pope Francis’s vision explains, synodality does not “level down” the teaching authority of bishops, who remain interpreters and witnesses of the faith of the whole Church.
The term has sometimes been criticized as excessively flexible or “protean”—capable of being interpreted in radically different ways. One concern is that groups may use the synodal process to introduce changes modeled more on contemporary democratic culture than on the Church’s sacramental, apostolic, and Trinitarian identity.
This concern is legitimate when “listening” is treated as though it automatically validates every proposal. The Church does not determine truth by counting votes, measuring social approval, or identifying the loudest participants. Christian discernment must remain subject to Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the Magisterium, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
A second danger is that synodality may become focused primarily on institutional reform, representation, procedures, or disputes about Church governance. Such a process could turn the Church inward and consume energy that should be directed toward proclaiming Christ, sanctifying the faithful, serving the poor, and calling the world to conversion.
The 2023 theological analysis of Pope Francis’s theology makes the essential relationship clear: mission is not for the sake of synodality; synodality is for the sake of mission. The Church must therefore ask of every synodal initiative: Does it help people encounter Jesus Christ? Does it strengthen the celebration of the sacraments? Does it make Christian witness more credible? Does it bring the Gospel to those who are distant from the Church?
The German “Synodal Way” has intensified these anxieties. Pope Leo XIV acknowledged that local Churches may live synodality differently because of legitimate cultural differences, but he also stressed the need to ensure that the German process does not separate itself from the path of the universal Church. He called for continued dialogue and listening so that no group—whether powerful or marginalized—is excluded.
This expresses an important Catholic principle: inculturation is not ecclesial independence. Local Churches may address pastoral circumstances in different ways, but they cannot redefine the faith or establish practices contrary to the universal communion of the Church.
The 2024 Final Document of the Synod of Bishops is unequivocal:
“Synodality is not an end in itself. Rather, it serves the mission that Christ entrusted to the Church in the Spirit.”
Evangelization is described as “the essential mission of the Church,” her “deepest identity.” The Church fulfills this mission through preaching and teaching, baptism, the Eucharist, reconciliation, closeness to all people, and the use of the diverse charisms and ministries given by the Spirit.
The document therefore presents synodality and mission as mutually reinforcing:
“Mission illuminates synodality and synodality spurs to mission.”
This means that listening to the faithful is not merely an administrative exercise. The lived experience of families, young people, migrants, the poor, converts, catechists, religious, and those who feel excluded can help the Church recognize where pastoral care is needed and how the Gospel can be communicated more effectively. But such listening must lead to a deeper encounter with Christ, not merely to institutional self-expression.
The traditional model is the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. Faced with a serious controversy concerning Gentile converts, the Church gathered, listened to testimony, engaged in discussion, considered the Scriptures, heard Peter’s authoritative witness, and received James’s formulation of the decision. The community then accepted the decision with joy.
This account shows several features of Catholic synodality:
The Council of Jerusalem was therefore neither authoritarian unilateralism nor parliamentary democracy. It was a process of ecclesial discernment ordered toward fidelity to Christ and the universal mission of the Church.
A serious objection would arise if synodality were used to weaken the office of bishops or to make episcopal decisions subject to permanent popular approval. Catholic teaching does not support this interpretation.
The 2024 Final Document states that pastoral authority is a particular gift of the Spirit, linked to the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Bishops and other pastors receive this gift to safeguard the apostolic proclamation and promote ecclesial communion.
At the same time, authority must be exercised as a service. Synodality provides the context in which hierarchical ministry is properly understood and calls the entire Church—including those who exercise authority—to conversion and reform.
Thus, synodality requires both:
Removing either element distorts the Church. Participation without apostolic authority risks fragmentation; authority without genuine listening can become detached from the concrete life of the faithful.
The 2023 response of Pope Francis to the dubia of two cardinals provides a particularly useful clarification. It affirms that the Church is a “mystery of missionary communion” and that communion necessarily includes real participation, allowing the People of God to make their voices heard in appropriate ways. In this sense, synodality is an essential dimension of the Church’s life.
But the same response warns against making one particular synodal methodology absolute:
“To sacralize or impose a determined synodal methodology” would freeze the synodal path and disregard the diverse characteristics of particular Churches and the richness of the universal Church.
This distinction resolves much of the controversy. The Church can affirm synodality as an ecclesial reality while remaining cautious about particular programs, structures, consultation formats, or theological agendas presented as though they were universally binding.
The headline is accurate only if it refers to a distorted form of synodality—one that:
But authentic synodality, as described by the Church’s theological and synodal documents, does not threaten mission. It is ordered toward mission, nourishes communion, recognizes the gifts of the baptized, encourages pastoral conversion, and helps the Church proclaim Christ more effectively. The decisive question is not whether the Church should be synodal, but whether her synodality remains apostolic, sacramental, Christ-centered, faithful to the Magisterium, and directed toward the salvation of the world.
In Catholic terms, synodality is not an alternative to mission or episcopal authority. Properly understood, it is a manner of walking together under the guidance of the Holy Spirit so that the Church may fulfill her mission more faithfully.