Synod on Synodality World Tour: Africa, Part I
Themes from the Continental Document from Africa
This is the seventh in an occasional series exploring the contributions of different parts of the globe to the upcoming Synod on Synodality in October.
For this stop on my Synod on Synodality World Tour, I will be analyzing the African continental document adopted at the African Synodal Continental Assembly that met in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in March of this year. In earlier installments of this series, I reflected on the parallel documents from Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and Oceania, and most recently the Middle East.
The African continental document was drafted by a Continental Team consisting of the Secretaries General of Africa’s eight regional episcopal conferences, members of the African Synodal Initiative (the body organizing the synodal process throughout Africa), theologians, religious, and lay representatives. The team met twice, in Accra, Ghana in December 2022, and Nairobi, Kenya in January 2023, with 28 members attending the first session and 20 attending the second. A first draft of the document was written at the first session, and it was revised at the second.
The document was then presented at the African Continental Assembly in Addis Ababa. This assembly was attended by 209 cardinals, bishops, priests, religious, and lay people who prayerfully reflected on both the Working Document for the Continental Stage (DCS, a document produced by a Vatican team to serve as a starting point for the continental dialogue process) and the draft continental document. After making some revisions, both the entire body of the Continental Assembly, and a smaller group consisting in the cardinals and bishops, approved the continental document.
A note on geography: One of the eight regional episcopal conferences that make up the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) is the Assembly of the Catholic Hierarchy of Egypt (AHCE), which includes the eparchs of the Coptic Catholic Church as well as a handful of diaspora eparchies associated with other Eastern Catholic Churches and one Latin apostolic vicar (in Alexandria). The Egyptian Church, however, was represented at the Continental Assembly for the Middle East, and I included Patriarch Ibrahim Isaac Sidrak of Alexandria, the head of the Coptic Catholic Church, in my list of participants from the Middle East. I don’t know if the Egyptian church was also represented at the African Continental Assembly.
The African continental document is the shortest of the seven continental documents, coming in at only 14 pages. In addition, the first four pages are devoted to describing the synodal process in Africa, particularly the continental phase, which provides a rich portrait of how the process unfolded and how the continental document was drafted, but only leaves ten pages of reflection on synodality in Africa. Perhaps because of its brevity, the document addresses particular issues in somewhat general terms and sometimes lacks the detail and depth of other continental documents. That being said, the African document still has many rich insights into the life of the Church in Africa and provides a distinctive perspective on the issues that will be discussed at October’s Synod.
In my reflections on other continental documents, I have focused on the images for the Church used in each document. For example, the document from Latin America and the Caribbean drew on the image of the Church as the People of God, while the document from Asia spoke of the Church as a mother and a bridge-builder. The document from the Middle East expanded on the image proposed in the DCS, The Church as the biblical “tent of meeting,” suggesting that the Church is the dwelling place of Christ who “pitched His tent among us” (Jn. 1:14).
The African document, in contrast, appeals to the image of the Church as the “Family of God” (1). This image has been key to the African Church’s self-understanding long before the Continental Assembly. It was first proposed at the First Special Assembly for Africa of the Synod of Bishops in 1994 and referenced in Pope John Paul II’s post-synodal apostolic exhortation Ecclesia in Africa (1995). For example, John Paul wrote, “[T]his image emphasizes care for others, solidarity, warmth in human relationships, acceptance, dialogue and trust” (63).
The image of God’s Family remained central at the Second Special Assembly for Africa of the Synod of Bishops in 2009. In his 2011 post-synodal apostolic exhortation Africae Munus, Pope Benedict XVI emphasized the biblical resonances of the image, noting:
[T]o see the Church as a family and a fraternity is to recover one aspect of her heritage. In this community where Jesus Christ, “the first-born among many brethren” (Rom 8:29), reconciled all people with God the Father (cf. Eph 2:14-18) and bestowed the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 20:22), the Church for her part becomes the bearer of the Good News that every human person is a child of God. She is called to transmit this message to all humanity by proclaiming the salvation won for us by Christ, by celebrating our communion with God and by living in fraternal solidarity. (8)
Later, he links this image to the Eucharist, explaining that “The Eucharist is the force which brings together the scattered children of God and maintains them in communion, since in our veins there circulates the very Blood of Christ, who makes us children of God, members of God’s Family” (41).
For its part, the African continental document links the image of the Church as God’s Family to the theological concept of synodality. It explains that seeing the Church as God’s Family suggests a community “where everyone has his or her place and responsibilities according to ‘family values’” (2.1.2). This parallels other images associated with synodality, like that of the Body of Christ, that emphasize the distinctive roles and charisms within the Church while likewise insisting that these different roles work together as a unity.
Interestingly, the document also explains that the image of the Church as the “tent of meeting” proposed in the DCS was “heavily contested” among the African delegates. This was because many “associate the image [of a tent] with warfare, displacement and refugee situations” (2.1.2). As I noted in my earlier analysis, the continental document from Oceania shows that there was a similar reaction to the image among Eastern Catholics in that region, many of whom are refugees or migrants fleeing persecution or war.
As I likewise noted, however, the biblical metaphor of the “tent of meeting” is meant to capture the experience of displacement and violence, as it appeals to the Israelites’ time wandering in the wilderness on their way to the Promised Land and being beset by enemies along the way. The Middle East document more enthusiastically embraced the image, noting that it suggests the Church is called “to walk under the guidance of the Word and in the strength of the Spirit, in the midst of challenges, changes and misfortunes,” with the hope of arriving in the Kingdom of God (4). It is fascinating that this image, chosen by the Vatican’s synodal team to be central to the synodal process, has ended up being so contested.
The African document does not shy away from the issues of war and displacement, however. It points out that the continent is plagued by conflict and war, and it suggests that a more synodal Church should be deeply engaged in peacemaking “in the manner of Christ, the Prince of Peace” (3.3). At the same time, it recognizes that in Africa, religion is often a source of conflict rather than of peace, and therefore a synodal Church should likewise engage in ecumenism and interreligious dialogue (3.3).
Given the emphasis placed on the image of God’s Family as the lens for understanding the Church, it is significant that the African document also devotes attention to the challenge of families in “irregular” situations and how to integrate them into the life of the Church. The Instrumentum Laboris, or working document in preparation for October’s Synod (which I analyzed here), also addresses this challenge. This theme links this year’s Synod with those in 2014 and 2015, and Pope Francis’s post-synodal apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, which likewise discussed the Church’s outreach to families in irregular situations.
According to the African continental document, families in irregular situations could include single parents and divorced and remarried couples, but also people in polygamous marriages, all of whom have been marginalized from the Church to one degree or another (2.1.12). Polygamous marriages are customary in some parts of Africa; in some places they are permitted by law, in others they are not legally recognized but still practiced. This tension between customary practice and the Church’s understanding of marriage creates spiritual and moral dilemmas for those in polygamous marriages (the Oceania document noted a similar problem in some parts of the Pacific islands).
People in all of these irregular situations likewise pose a dilemma for the Church. For example, spouses who are divorced and remarried, or who are part of a polygamous marriage, may not be able to “regularize” their situation. And they cannot simply be excluded from the Church. As the African document asks, “How does the openness of the family [of God] apply to such people in the spirit of Synodality that encourages the Church to walk together with all believers?” (2.1.12) It notes that some participants suggested that the Church must “revisit” certain positions that lead to the marginalization of families in these situations (2.1.12), but the document concludes that the Church must respond by developing “an evangelising family pastoral care and catechesis that will make it possible to help them to live their faith with confidence and joy” (3.7).
In my reflections on the Instrumentum Laboris, I noted how it groups LGBTQ persons together with people who are divorced and remarried and people in polygamous marriages, describing them as people “who feel excluded from the Church because of their status or sexuality,” a move I suggested could be controversial for lumping together groups in distinct situations, despite certain similarities. The African continental document, however, does not mention LGBTQ persons at all, even though the DCS had raised the issue of how to include LGBTQ persons in the Church as an important consideration (and in fact cites national synodal documents from the African continent addressing this very issue).
In February of this year, Pope Francis insisted that homosexuality should not be criminalized, expanding on comments he had made the previous month: “This is not right. Persons with homosexual tendencies are children of God. God loves them. God accompanies them . . . [C]ondemning a person like this is a sin. Criminalizing people with homosexual tendencies is an injustice.” Nevertheless, about 30 African countries criminalize homosexuality in some form. In March, Uganda passed a law penalizing homosexual acts with life in prison and criminalizes merely identifying as LGBTQ.
Catholic bishops in African nations have mostly supported such laws, in opposition to Francis’s position. In Gabon, the Catholic bishops’ conference protested a 2020 law decriminalizing homosexual acts. Similarly, the bishops in Ghana supported a bill outlawing homosexual acts in 2021. In Kenya, the bishops have criticized a Supreme Court ruling permitting the operation of LGBTQ nongovernmental organizations. It will be critical to see how this dynamic develops, in which some Synod participants support the exclusion, and even criminalization, of LGBTQ persons, while the majority of participants, led by Pope Francis, seek their greater inclusion in the Church.
Although silent on the theme of LGBTQ persons, the African document has quite a bit to say on inculturation, the adaption of the Church’s ministry and worship to local cultures. The document links inculturation to synodality by identifying the former as a kind of listening: “Listening is not only listening to people. It involves listening to the local culture with the dynamics of co-responsibility and with the consciousness that culture is dynamic and evolving” (2.1.3).
The document offers a sophisticated account of how the process of inculturating the Gospel is tied to colonialism and decolonization:
The Church in Africa is a fruit of the endeavours of Western missionaries. The Church came with a culture into another culture. Synodality should help to listen to the cultural practices that have been either ignored, condemned or suppressed by the Western culture through which the Gospel was preached to Africans. These cultural practices, some deeply influenced and changed by Western and Christian cultural influences, continue to affect the way Christians live out the Gospel. (2.1.3)
Inculturation does not mean simply rejecting Western cultural influences and uncritically adopting African cultural norms and practices. As the document notes, African cultural practices “should . . . be listened to in view of either integrating, purifying or collectively rejecting them based on a clear understanding of the exigencies of the Gospel” (2.1.3). This passage echoes the more developed treatment of the relationship between the Gospel and culture in the Second Vatican Council’s Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes:
The Gospel of Christ constantly renews the life and culture of fallen man, it combats and removes the errors and evils resulting from the permanent allurement of sin. It never ceases to purify and elevate the morality of peoples. By riches coming from above, it makes fruitful, as it were from within, the spiritual qualities and traditions of every people of every age. It strengthens, perfects and restores them in Christ. (58)
The African document proposes the liturgy as one area where there should be greater inculturation: “Listening invites us to another way of celebrating our liturgy in a culturally authentic manner” (2.1.3), and likewise, “Inculturation helps the faith to be rooted in the life and practice of the people. Worship in Africa is an integral experience involving the whole person: mind, spirit and body. The current ways of celebrating the liturgy sometimes leave many Africans unfulfilled” (3.4).
Like other continental documents, the African document addresses the challenge of co-responsibility—the involvement of both clergy and laity in the life and mission of the Church—and the problem of clericalism. In my commentary on the Instrumentum Laboris, I noted that the Church’s growing understanding of synodality suggests that “[W]e are each different parts of the body, but there needs to be a nervous system through which each part can coordinate with the others and let the body know when there is a problem.”
The African document echoes this, stating: “The recognition of the value of everyone in a Christian community imposes the necessity of taking their opinions into consideration for proper discernment and decision-making” (2.1.6). This principle was reflected in the Continental Assembly procedures in which the final document was approved by an assembly including bishops, priests, religious, and laity, but also by the bishops acting separately, a process reflecting the ancient Eastern practice of synodality (as I noted in my analysis of the Middle East document).
As the document likewise notes, however, “Many expressed the view that decisions in the Church are sometimes taken without sufficient dialogue” (2.1.6). Regarding the problem of clericalism, the document notes that “Pastors who lead the people of God should be the first to imbibe the Synodal mentality and apply it in their life and ministry” (2.1.9). It goes on to say that this new style of leadership will require updating the formation provided in seminaries, but it also suggests that lay people also need to be formed in a synodal style of leadership (2.1.9).
Lay people can contribute to clericalism just as much as the clergy. As other continental documents have also noted, lay people contribute to clericalism through their passivity and excessive deference:
Inasmuch as some priests could be accused of being closed and authoritative, the internalised clericalism of laity is also seen as promoting such a culture by not playing its proper role in the Church and by deferring to priests to carry all the burden of leading, teaching and making all the decisions. This deference is seen as another form of clericalism. (2.1.13)
Importantly, it insists that the antidote for this “internalized clericalism” is for lay people to share in the responsibility for the Church’s mission.
The document also points out that women and young people in particular have been excluded from full participation in the leadership and ministry of the Church. Although noting that, in most countries, women make up the majority of active participants in the Church and “make enormous contribution to the Church in Africa,” nevertheless “there are not enough structures to encourage and enhance their participation, especially in the decision-making processes and platforms of the Church” (3.6).
Similarly, young people make up the majority of the population throughout Africa but “do not find enough space to exercise their initiatives in the Church” and often face difficult challenges from the surrounding culture while finding little support in the Church (3.6). The document also notes that, in response to this challenge, “There is a call to adapt the activities and celebrations of the Church to styles that will attract and maintain the youth in the Church” (2.1.4).
More than other continental documents, the African document expresses a certain tension between the synodal process and the Church’s responsibility for holding to the Truth. While recognizing that synodality requires a listening Church and a certain openness to the world, the document notes, “[S]ome feel that the Church must not be too open to every new idea since some ideas are perceived as not for the betterment of the world. In such cases, the Church should even have courage to go against certain currents of thought” (2.1.10). It goes on to say that new ideas that seem to challenge the Church’s teachings should be evaluated with discernment.
Similarly, the document states that “inclusivity should be harmonised with conversion” (2.1.8). What this means is that, although the Church’s mission includes “walking together in communion,” nevertheless “The mission of the Church to spread the Gospel of Christ to the ends of the earth should be based on the need to help people abandon their old ways that are not in conformity with the Word of God and embrace the truth of the Gospel” (2.1.8).
This tension expressed in the African document is not inconsistent with the broader synodal process, however. The DCS in fact identifies the same tension, stating that the synodal process envisions a Church “boldly proclaiming its authentic teaching while at the same time offering a witness of radical inclusion and acceptance through its pastoral and discerning accompaniment,” what it calls the “tension of truth and mercy” (30, citing the document from the episcopal conference of England and Wales). Perhaps, however, it would be better to say that mercy, because it is ultimately divine, is itself an expression of truth.
As I already mentioned, the African continental document is noteworthy for what it doesn’t talk about—the place of LGBTQ persons in the Church. This is certainly going to be a point of tension, if not conflict, as the Synod unfolds. There is greater unity around the issues of co-responsibility, the problem of clericalism, and the need for new forms of formation for both clerical and lay leaders. The African document’s image of the Church as the Family of God provides a fruitful metaphor for thinking about how the members of the Church, although playing different roles, work together as participants in the mission of the Church.