Synod on Synodality World Tour: The Middle East, Part I
Themes from the Continental Document from the Middle East
This is the fifth in an occasional series exploring the contributions of different parts of the globe to the upcoming Synod on Synodality in October.
The next step in our world tour in preparation for the Synod on Synodality in October takes us to the Middle East. In February of this year, delegates from Egypt, the Holy Land, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and the Persian Gulf states met for their Continental Assembly in Harissa, Lebanon, the home of the Shrine of Our Lady of Lebanon, a pilgrimage site of the Maronite Church that is frequented by both Christians and Muslims. The participants represented several Eastern Catholic Churches—the Coptic, Maronite, Melkite Greek, Syriac, Chaldean, and Armenian Churches—as well as the Latin Church in the Middle East. In earlier posts, I analyzed key themes in the documents from Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia and Oceania, and in today’s post I will analyze the document composed at the meeting in Harissa. The 125 delegates at the meeting, including 80 lay people, produced a continental document outlining the challenges and opportunities faced by the Churches in the Middle East in more fully living out synodality.
One of the most notable characteristics of the Middle East document is its rich discussion of the concept of synodality, drawing on Eastern theological and ecclesial traditions. Out of all the continental groupings represented in the synodal process, the Middle East is the only one amongst which Eastern Catholic Churches predominate, and the document appeals to Pope John Paul II’s statement in his 1995 encyclical Ut Unum Sint that “The Church must breathe with her two lungs,” referring to the East and West (16).
The document insists, “The theology of our Eastern Catholic Churches has always emphasized the meaning of synodality” (12). This is an important reminder for skeptics in the West who have criticized Pope Francis’s call for synodality, and the synodal process itself, as a novelty. In an interview with the Spanish periodical Vida Nueva published yesterday, Pope Francis noted:
The Synod was the dream of Paul VI. When the Second Vatican Council ended, he realized that the Church in the West had lost the synodal dimension. For this reason, he created the Secretariat for the Synod of Bishops, to begin work on that. After fifty years, a document signed by me, that a group of theologians and I developed, came out, in which the doctrine of synodality was clarified and anchored [in Scripture and Tradition].
I recently called a convent to speak to a nun. Everything was going fine until she asked me: “This Synod, won’t it change doctrine on us?” And I answered: “Tell me, dear, who put that in your head?” It is about moving forward to recover the synodal dimension that the Eastern Church has and that we [in the West] have lost. (My own translation, emphasis added)
The pope’s claim that the Western Church has lost the sense of synodality is remarkable, not least because of the fact that, in an address commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Synod of Bishops (which I have cited more than once in this newsletter), Francis insisted that synodality is “a constitutive element of the Church.” Along the same lines, the Middle East document states: “Synodality is not a casual thing in the life of the Church. It is a sign inherent in her nature. True synodality is, for us, members of the mystical body of Christ, identification with Christ and imitation of His way of life” (8). More strongly than the other documents I have studied so far, this document seemingly equates synodality with the following of Christ.
Perhaps the document’s most enlightening theological insight into synodality is the claim that synodality is the characteristic that provides the Church its spiritual or mystical quality: “The Church is synodal through her very nature, for it is not only an institutional and juridical body, but first and foremost the mystery of Christ who works among and in those who believe in Him” (9). Synodality is a way of expressing the fact that the Church is a living body. The document goes on to say that it is the Holy Spirit that gives the Body of Christ life and that works within the Christian faithful (9, 10), linking synodality and the Spirit in a way that has been characteristic of the recent synodal process.
The Middle East document deftly weaves together the images of the Church as the Body of Christ and the People of God, the two main images presented in Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium. The Body of Christ vivified by the Holy Spirit is made up of distinct parts with different missions; likewise, “In His plan, God sees His People as partners; a people made up of men, women and children, of strangers, responding to God’s call and flocking from all sides to worship Him, to listen to His Word, to discern His will and to act according to His precepts” (12). The People of God have embarked together on a “common journey” (10). Here the document echoes themes that are universally present in the worldwide synodal documents, the participation and co-responsibility of all the faithful in living out the mission of the Church.
The document goes on to say that, historically, the most important manifestation of synodality in the Eastern Churches has been the synodal structure of the Eastern Patriarchates. It notes that, according to historical practice, representatives of the entire body of the faithful, including lay people and religious, would approve and accept the decisions of the bishops, signifying the unity and shared faith of the Church (13-15). This corresponds with the participation of all the faithful, of all states of life, in the Eucharist; indeed, “No synod can be held if it is not inaugurated and closed by the celebration of the Eucharist—a sign of communion and unity . . .” (13).
Here we see a subtle distinction in how synodality is understood. On the one hand, there is the traditional sense outlined here that refers to the sharing of all the faithful in the governing and teaching roles of the bishops. On the other, synodality refers to the significantly broader participation of all the faithful in the evangelizing mission of the Church in diverse ways consistent with their vocation. My own sense is that these two senses become somewhat elided in the Middle East document. Let me explain.
The document explains that in recent centuries, the ancient practice of synodality was lost and participation in the synods of the Eastern Churches was limited to bishops (13). Much of the document’s discussion of the greater participation of all the faithful in the life of the Church, then, is conceived as the recovery of the more ancient practice, although incorporating more modern elements of ecclesial administration.
Part of this recovery involves the rejection of clericalism. Like other synodal documents, the Middle East document decries clericalism as an obstacle to synodality and a source of alienation among the faithful:
Where power is not exercised in a spirit of service, trust between the faithful and clerics is eroded, and so the clerical spirit will prevail to the extent that bishops, priests and consecrated persons begin to abuse their power. Assembly participants expressed dissatisfaction with ecclesiastical authorities who monopolize power and make decisions without consulting the faithful, and complained about the lack of coordination between ordained ministers and their lay partners. (23)
In response, the document calls for fostering the expectation that “each baptized person live and recognize themselves as a member of the People of God, through word, committed action, example of life and witness,” and greater recognition of “the complementarity between the common priesthood and the ministerial priesthood” (48).
These proposals, however, are expressed mainly in terms of reforming the governance structures of the Church. For example, in a key passage it states:
It has become clear to the Assembly that the Eastern Churches are synodal in structure. For these different structures to be put at the service of communion, partnership and mission, they must be constantly renewed, especially by activating them at different levels: the Pastoral and Diocesan Councils, the National Assemblies of Patriarchs and Bishops, and the Council of Catholic Patriarchs of the East. This way, these structures can become more contributive, professional and transparent, and will not hinder the transmission of the message of the Church to all. (36)
Of course, re-imagining the structures of governance is one of the key themes of the Synod, but my sense is that the Middle East document focuses on these institutional structures at the expense of exploring how synodality ought to be lived out in the life of the local parish and in the Church’s evangelizing mission to the world. There is very little discussion of parish life in the document, in contrast to the other continental documents. This may just be a reflection of the pastoral realities of the Eastern Churches in the Middle East. But even though the document has a very rich theological account of synodality, its portrayal of what that ought to look like in everyday life is relatively limited compared to what the other regions have to say.
In my analysis of the documents from Asia and Oceania, I focused on the images of the Church used in those documents—in Asia, mother and bridge-builder, in Oceania, the tent of meeting. The Middle East document likewise appeals to the image of the tent, which is drawn in turn from the Working Document for the Continental Stage, a synthesis document produced by the Vatican to serve as a starting point for the continental discussions. The latter had proposed “enlarge the space of your tent” (drawn from Is. 54:2) as a theme for the synodal process.
Here again the Middle East document presents a phenomenal theological reflection on this theme (the entire section, Section I, is worth reading). The reflection begins with the Gospel of John’s claim that God “pitched His tent among us” (1:14) as the Incarnate Word. It states: “The Word precedes the Church, and traces for her the path according to which, thanks to the inspirations of the Spirit who leads her, [she] apprehends the needs of her People and of the world” (5). In a moving passage, it explains:
[T]he People of God living in the Middle East are constantly being called to walk under the guidance of the Word and in the strength of the Spirit, in the midst of challenges, changes and misfortunes, animated by the hope of seeing this world transfigured into the Kingdom of God, a kingdom of peace, justice and joy, where God’s love is bestowed, without distinction, on all human beings. (4)
God’s dwelling place in the world “has become concrete in His mystical Body and in the union of its members” (5). The Church is the dwelling in which the Incarnate Word becomes sacramentally present to the world. The members of the Church are a pilgrim people, and in continuity with God’s journey with His people in the Old Testament, “The Church also pitches her tent, in response to God’s presence and action in her, and moves on until she reaches her dwelling place, which is, as we learn in the Book of Revelation 12:12, the heavenly house” (6).
Although the Church and its members have no earthly home, by pitching its tent in the world, the Church becomes incarnate in the world. The document explains: “The synodal Church is the Church of unity, catholicity, holiness and apostolicity. These four signs constitute the Church of God in a place, in a ‘humus’ [i.e., soil], i.e., in a history, geography, culture, language, challenges, traditions, poetry, stories, etc.” (10). Here we see the traditional Eastern emphasis on the local Church, but also a more contemporary focus on inculturation.
The Churches of the Middle East have been “open to the civilizations of the peoples who have taken up residence there, to their languages and traditions,” but also have “lived their unity in diversity, placing themselves at the service of the proclamation of the Gospel and the witness of the faith” (19). Interestingly, the document links this unity in diversity in the cultural realm with the unity of the faithful that is nevertheless expressed through a variety of charisms and vocations (19-20).
The Eastern Churches of the Middle East, of course, reflect the diversity of cultures and traditions in the region, particularly in their different liturgical rites. The document celebrates this, but also notes that there are calls within the Churches for a reform of the Eastern liturgies:
Some participants recommended abandoning liturgical puritanism, being open to the process of evolution of liturgical prayers and their adaptation to the aspirations of the faithful, especially the young, thus emphasizing the need for a liturgical reform capable, on the one hand, of taking into consideration the safeguarding of tradition and, on the other hand, of opening up to modernity. Hence the urgency of allowing the Liturgy to adapt to the emerging realities and their context, in order to be able to regenerate it in conformity with the requests involved in the process of returning to the roots. (25)
In other words, although the Eastern liturgies reflect a kind of inculturation of Christian worship, some suggest that they need to be adapted to the contemporary context, or otherwise there is a risk that the liturgy will become alien to contemporary cultural life. Although it is doubtful that the reform of the liturgies of the Eastern Churches will be taken up at the Synod, it is still significant that this topic was broached.
Of course, a key element of the cultural context for Christians in the Middle East is that they are a minority throughout the region. Given this context, the document teaches that an important aspect of the mission of the Church in the Middle East is to “promote coexistence and dialogue with other religions, in order to manifest the true and unique face of God” (31). Along these lines, it praises the Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together published jointly by Pope Francis and Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of the al-Azhar Mosque at a 2019 meeting in Abu Dhabi.
Along the same lines, the document points out that synodality is reflected not just in the structures of the Eastern Churches and their relationships with each other, but also in their ecumenical relations with the Orthodox Churches and other Christian churches in the region, institutionalized in the Midde East Council of Churches (MECC) (15). It goes on to say that synodality is likewise expressed in “common dialogue with Muslims, Jews and other parts of Middle Eastern society” (15). I was surprised to learn that the Continental Assembly for the Middle East “was also attended by friends from the Orthodox and Protestant Churches and the Middle East Council of Churches (MECC), as well as agnostic men and women. Some representatives of Muslim denominations also took part in the opening session” (1). This is a remarkable ecumenical and interfaith gesture.
Unfortunately, the realities of being a religious minority in the Middle East—and in some cases, Christians are ethnic minorities, as well—are more characterized by conflict than by peaceable journeying together. For example, the document notes the “risk of dissolution into the predominant Muslim culture” (29) as a result of the difficulty of preserving Christian religious and cultural traditions in the midst of a much larger majority culture. Similarly, it laments the emigration of Christians from the region, particularly young people, both to escape religious persecution and to search for economic opportunities. This emigration “leads to the emptying of the Churches of their capacities and resources, and to the dispersal of families,” and serves as an “existential threat” to the Middle Eastern Churches (33).
The document also notes that “fundamentalist movements” and “religious extremism” (29) pose a threat to Christians in the region, and that “armed conflicts, violence, hatred and war” (11) are challenges to living out the Church’s mission. In response, this mission must include a commitment “to heal the wounds, to console the sorrows, to be in solidarity in the trials, to purify the memory, and to collectively elaborate decisions and put them into practice” (11). This mission, however, involves risk. As the document puts it, in stark terms: the Church in the Middle East is “[a] Church announcing the mystery of Christ, and a faithful witness of the Good News, even to the point of martyrdom” (10).
A key point raised in the document is that, “due to multiple hardships suffered through persecution, immigration and other difficult situations,” the Churches in the Middle East are at risk of what it calls “minority complexes,” a kind of immobilization resulting from fear and despair (48). To overcome these complexes, Christians must rely on the theological virtues of Faith and Hope. The Churches must be willing to “revive the prophetic spirit that listens to the Will of God and works for its accomplishment, for God is the true Master of History” (48).
I think the Middle East document presents a penetrating analysis of the social and cultural situation of the Churches in the region and how they can better live out synodality in that context. As I already noted, the document is theologically rich, more so than the other documents I have so far analyzed. I think one important contribution the document makes to the global synodal process is its recovery of the Eastern tradition of synodality, which, as Pope Francis noted, has been neglected in the West. On the other hand, its discussion of synodality in the Church is primarily focused on governance structures and mostly overlooks parish life, which in most parts of the world is where one can often find the greatest dynamism in the Church.
Next week I hope to take a look at the Synod on Synodality participants from the Middle East, just as I have previously done for Latin America and the Caribbean, and Asia and Oceania. In the meantime, I plan to publish my interview with Dr. Hosffman Ospino on Latino/a youth and Hispanic ministry in the United States, hopefully on Tuesday of next week.