A theology of surprise needed
(Published in The Swag Autumn 2022)
Pope Francis famously announced that the current time as not
an era of change but a change of era. He is suggesting that a new way of
thinking and acting is necessary for responding adequately to the current
reality. Thus, whether talking with clergy, laity, women, refugees or LGBTI
people, he is constant in his call for dialogue, inclusion, compassionate
pastoral care, a halt to clericalism and a simpler humbler prayer and life
practice.
Some in the reform movements wonder why Francis is not quite
as consistent in a call for change in governance or doctrine. There must be
improvements in transparency, accountability, inclusion and integrity in
governance and further development of doctrine as theologians dialogue with
scientists, professionals, experts and anthropologists.
Francis, however, believes the key to church reform in this
change of era is returning to the basics of listening and acting in justice and
love to the cry of the poor, silenced, marginalised or erased. Francis seems to
be advocating for a more authentic pastoral practice and greater liturgical
relevance.
For Francis this seems to be the first step in restoring the
credibility of the church amongst its own and then in civil society. If we
return to the gospel and the Jesus method of evangelisation, we can then more
effectively engage with deeper governance and doctrinal change.
Both tasks are essential for the future of the church and
whether one must precede the other or they can both happen together is a matter
of opinion. The Pope has placed his hope in synodality.
Synodality seems to hinge on two things. It is a process and a
practice. Synodality, we are told, is a process of listening and dialogue.
However, it is also a practice of discernment, compassionate pastoral care and
good ritual. Listening and dialogue can be little more than a talk fest and, at
worst, becomes an unsafe space for the marginalised and minority groups. The
claim to listening that is not accompanied by a genuine search for a new way
ahead that creatively responds to the challenges of our time seems to be a
failure of synodality.
The synodal process must be more than recording of diverse
views especially if the process for decisions and proposals is in the hands of
those in power. This usually results in business as usual, not a new way ahead.
The discernment process must begin and stay with the
experience of the person in their life situations. The practices that accompany
the listening and dialogue process begin with discernment but it must be done
in a Jesus way.
The Cardijn method of see judge and act is essential to a deep
listening, a competent dialogue and a compassionate and just course of action.
This means all involved need to carefully listen to the experience of those
normally excluded or silenced, study the biblical, social and theological
perspectives and discern action in favour of the experience of the erased and
silenced. Just as the Syrophoenician woman became Jesus’ teacher, the outsider
and excluded stories inform the process of dialogue, reflection and action.
Synodality must relate to practice. Pope Francis speaks
powerfully that pastoral care begins with listening to the story of person
seeking love and justice. Reform of pastoral care is not a result of
synodality, it is a constitutive element of synodality. Without effective
listening and accompaniment of the poor and marginalised, there can be no
effective synodality. This requires another principle of Francis that asks for a
preference of patient listening and understanding over the teaching doctrine.
This approach could restore some confidence in the capacity to offer competent
pastoral care and create a safe space for deep dialogue.
The synodal process must include a practice that promotes
healing. Discussion and taking decisions on proposals will, if anything,
promote further hurt and division. An essential healing methodology in the
Christian tradition has been ritual. We believe that ritual and the liturgy are
the source and summit of christian life.
This will require a reform of the way we celebrate. It is not
the missal itself that leaves many Catholics uninspired at Mass, it is the way
it is used. Can we find ways in the official liturgy as well as other rituals
to nourish and inspire? Ritual can heal in ways discussion never will. We need
liturgies that respond to the change of era and involve all the baptised. While
this is a challenge, unless we find ways to respect the theology of baptism
where we believe all the baptised share equally in the gift of the Holy Spirit
and find ways to express this in the liturgy and ritual, we crush the chance
for synodality to take shape and become the method for moving forward and promoting
healing.
Synodality will depend on our ability to be flexible,
spontaneous, willing to try new things and open to surprise. A theological
challenge facing theologians of synodality might be to develop a theology of
surprise.