The Catholic Church’s Synod on Synodality opens tomorrow, the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi. It’s purpose is to bring about a church that is more “synodal.” What does that mean?

The prophets Zechariah, Nehemiah and Baruch, our readings this week, may help understand its meaning. They wrote during the Restoration Period, when some Jews returned to Jerusalem from exile about 540 BC hoping to restore the Temple. Some Jews who remained in the city did not think it was time to rebuild at all. Others wanted it rebuilt as a temple for Jews alone. 

Zechariah, like other prophets then, saw a temple that was home for all nations. “In those days ten men of every nationality, speaking different tongues, shall take hold, yes, take hold of every Jew by the edge of his garment and say, ‘Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.’ (Zech 8:23)

I believe this synod has been called by Pope Francis to make the Catholic Church a home for all nations. For that reason, those gathered for the synod are bishops, as well as men and women, from all nations.

Some are worried the synod is going to change basic church beliefs and practices. Five cardinals recently expressed doubts, which Pope Francis answered publicly yesterday on the Vatican website. (https://www.vaticannews.va/en.html) Their doubts were about changing church doctrines, marriage, women’s ordination, church structure and forgiveness. 

The media seems mainly interested in the issues of same sex marriage and the ordination of women. Here’s Pope Francis’ answer to their question about marriage. The cardinal’s wanted a “yes or no” answer, but the pope presented a more nuanced response. 

I ended my homily today at the 11 AM Mass with a question. “What kind of church will your kids like to belong to?” I think Pope Francis is pointing it out.

The Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called “marriage.” Other forms of union realize it only in “a partial and analogous way” (Amoris Laetitia 292), so they cannot be strictly called “marriage.”

b) It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere “ideal.”

c) For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.

d) However, in our relationships with people, we must not lose the pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defence of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.

e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.

f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as “sinners” other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).

g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops’ Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that “is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule” as this “would lead to an intolerable casuistry” (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.