A Synodal church? Perhaps, but the Primacy of Peter Remains Untouchable

It was the year 1995, and the pope at the time, John Paul II, wrote the encyclical Ut unum sint saying that he was willing to seek and find "a form of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing the essentials of its mission, is open to a new situation" (No. 95). Earlier in the encyclical he had stated that God constituted the successor of the apostle Peter as the "perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity" (no. 88). For the pope, Christian unity will be realized "when all share in the fullness of the means of salvation which Christ has entrusted to his Church" (86), where church is to be understood as the Catholic Church claiming the "fullness of the means of salvation." In light of the re-proposition of the traditional version of the Catholic conception of the papacy, it was difficult for a non-Catholic to understand what it meant to seek new "forms" for the exercise of primacy when the substance of it could not be altered at all.

It was the year 2013 and Pope Francis wrote the apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium. In it he wrote that "even the papacy and the central structures of the universal Church need to heed the call to a pastoral conversion" (No. 32). In those words there was even an expectation of "conversion," which, in the biblical meaning, means radical change and reversal of course. Some observers from outside the Catholic world might have expected some structural changes in the papacy.

It has been almost 30 years since John Paul II's words and 10 years since Francis'. In recent times, Pope Francis introduced the magic word "synodal" into the internal debate of the Catholic Church. Since then, a discussion has opened up about what a "synodal" church means. The first phase of the synod concluded and, to be honest, not much was clarified. Does synodal mean some cosmetic changes to the decision-making processes that previously had been vertical, but perhaps now is a bit more horizontal? Does Synodal mean some sprinkling in of lay participation without changing the hierarchical structure of the church? Does Synodal mean using the language of renewal without intervening in the dogmatic knots of the church of Rome?

While waiting for clarification on what "synodal church" means, here is a clue on possible synodal changes in the papacy. With the Synod in progress, a conference of Catholic theologians was held in Rome with the programmatic title: "Without prejudice to the primacy of the chair of Peter: the exercise of the Petrine ministry in a synodal church." It is a very effective title: "without prejudice to the primacy of the Chair of Peter." Regardless of what "synodal" means, everything can move except the primacy of Peter, which must stand "still." It seems that everything can enter the synodal dynamic (women's diaconate, acceptance of the LGBTQ2+ community, idea of the church as an open tent where all are "brothers," etc.), except for the papacy, which must remain untouched.

One can’t help but wonder: So what? After countless books, speeches, conferences, synods, etc., and after all the fuss raised by "synodality" that was supposed to change the face of the church of Rome and turn it inside out, the reality is that the church of Rome does not change in its supporting structures. Even in Synodal church, the papacy remains stationary in its fundamental architecture: the chair of Peter with its addendums concerning primacy, infallibility, verticality, and the vicariate of Christ.

Rome is Catholic but it is also Roman. As it opens itself to (Catholic) synodality it strengthens the (Roman) papacy. Those who think that synodality is synonymous with evangelicalism are therefore deluding themselves. It appears to be a mode of catholicity that, while it elasticizes some aspects, it does not touch the decisive ones.