My reflections on the Synodal Event in Kilkenny.
I have followed the Synodal process since the beginning, being very grateful to Francis for this initiative, and as a member of the ACP I did whatever I could to promote it. I know it has given hope to many of us who have longed and worked for reform in the Church.
II attended the Synodal meeting in Athlone three years ago, and I came away feeling excited and energised by what I heard there. It seemed that the process of change had really taken hold in the Church here, and that the bishops were fully behind it.
And then I went to the recently held Synodal event in Kilkenny, where over two hundred people gathered, and where we hoped that the movement for change would continue. I came away disappointed, and dispirited. It was dramatically different to the Athlone event, and, rather than moving forward, it seemed to me to be going in the opposite direction.
I have great time for Julieanne Moran, and her committee, who are trying to steer this movement, and I wouldn’t want anything I say here to be a criticism of them. Also, what I am presenting my personal opinion, and I don’t present it as any more than that.
The movement up to now, both in Ireland and internationally, has highlighted specific issues in the Church that needed to be addressed, issues around women, priesthood, sexual teaching maybe especially to do with LGBT people, certain other doctrines, and many more. These were noticeably absent in Kilkenny. Rather than being specific, we spent the day largely dealing with generalities, and that, in my experience, has always been a way of avoiding having to make decisions.
We were grouped in tables of seven or eight, and in the course of the day we had a number of table conversations, using the ‘conversation in the Spirit’ method, as defined by the Synodal process. I did not think it was helpful; the structure dictated that it was more personal, with little possibility of interaction between the members. As a consequence, a proper examination of a topic leading to a decision was practically impossible, and by the end of the morning our summary of the discussion amounted to a few generalised words (‘mission’, ‘kerygma’, ‘inspiring’) and others that carried no real movement towards action. Reading after lunch what other groups had put up on the display, I could see they were largely similar.
The absence of most of the areas in Church life needing attention that featured in reports from around the world, and in Ireland, during the past few years, was noticeable.
What had happened to change the process? I don’t know, but there were a couple of things that I was aware of.
The attendance in Kilkenny was very different to Athlone. I had a sense that at least some of the bishops were exercising more influence, leading to a much more traditional conversation. There seemed to be a much higher proportion of people from Northern Ireland, and a stronger ‘evangelical style’ content.
I believe that the Church in Ireland is in serious decline, and I have had great hope in the Synodal process. But over the five or so years, I do detect, among both laity and priests, a gradual waning of interest. The reason I came away disturbed from Kilkenny was that I believe that if this process does not bring about some real and noticeable change the decline will accelerate, so that when the generation around my age dies there will be only a small minority left, probably of a very traditional bent.
I know that I will be dead and gone, and in that sense it shouldn’t matter very much to me. But I can truly say that I have given a great deal of my life to the Church, and despite all my travails with the institution, I still love and value it deeply.
I pray that the initial momentum can be restored, and that change will happen.
Tony Flannery
