Schism or Synod?

Last week I wrote about the Pope’s comments on the plane about schism. I imagine he’s wishing he hadn’t opened that can of worms – because everybody’s talking about it.

The latest to reach in is Villanova’s Massimo Faggioli, dealing with what a schism actually is and when they’ve actually happened. I had the feeling that he so truncated his explanations that it’s hard to understand and ultimately, inconclusive.

Rather, I prefer the clarity of John O’Loughlin Kennedy in the third of his excellent series on the Amazonian synod.

Its Instrumentum Laboris reopens questions that have either been overlooked or shelved in the past and some that were previously banned from discussion.
 
It draws attention to the exclusive pairing of ordination with celibacy, administration, seminary training, life commitment and sacramental ministry that has constrained missionary activity in a diverse world.
 
The lack of authority to ordain women is not mentioned directly, possibly because of its pseudo-infallible status, but only a specific ban can prevent it from arising in discussion of several directly related issues. Infallibility is not on the agenda but its extent and granularity will be the issue underlying all the issues in any free discussion.

“Pseudo-infallible status” is a term I will cherish!

Kennedy bases his argument on the Last Supper command of Jesus, “Do this in memory of me.” That command was given “to Christ’s disciples, both male and female, and not just to the apostles,” based on early Christian practice. It is only with the development of clerical roles that this universal command becomes limited to “professionals.” He goes on:

We believe that the Eucharist is the “source and summit” of spiritual life and the bond that links individual church communities into one universal church. Yet, Rome has regulated, and tolerated, the lack of the Eucharist in missionary dioceses for generations, if not centuries.

And continues to tolerate this as clergy numbers wither away in the developed world, as well.

This synod is not for us. It is for the peoples of the Amazon to bring their needs to Rome and to have the church respond. Yet their needs for Eucharist are the needs of the whole church.

Kennedy goes on to describe Augustinian priest Raymond Hickey’s 1980 proposal to ordain mission catechists, many of whom are leading prayer services in underserved areas. No response from the Curia. Yet it moved quickly to accept married priests from the Anglican traditions who do not accept women’s ordination. “If traditions and regulations, including Canon Law, can be adapted to further the mission of the Church to Anglicans, why not to indigenous Amazonians?” he asks.

One adaptation Kennedy suggests is a Community Mass, with scriptures and singing, where leadership could rotate and communion is shared. “Would such a Eucharist be valid? Of course, it would. It is closer to the two examples of Jesus than the modern Mass.” Remind you of the Eucharists some of us have already created?

This powerful article deserves to be read in its entirety. It is the third in a series of four on the Amazon synod. The first deals with the ecological and social justice issues raised in the working document and the implications for long-held clerical traditions. Part I of the series can be read here. The second is a detailed examination of the 1971 attempt to change canon laws about married priests and the resistance of the Vatican bureaucracy. Part II of the series can be read here. I really look forward to Part IV!