Could âSynodalityâ Defeat âCo-Responsibilityâ? John C. Cavadini ALTHOUGH THE Preparatory Document for the sixteenth Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops,1 and, even more, the Working Document for the Continental Stage of the âsynodal journeyâ both feature the idea of âco-responsibilityâ in the Church, could it be the case that the notion of âsynodalityâ as âthe form, the style and the structure of the Churchâ (PD 2) tends in actuality to the erasure of âco-responsibilityâ as having any meaning independent of âsynodalityâ? And, since the possibilities of genuine lay leadership in the Church derive from the idea of âco-responsibility,â could it be that âsynodality,â though intending the contrary, actually tends towards the erasure of authentic lay leadership in the Church? That is the question that motivates this essay, which presents itself as an exercise in theology, that is, in âfaith seeking understanding,â where the mystery of faith of which we are seeking deeper understanding is the mystery of the Church. I. The history of Co-Responsibility The idea of âCoresponsibility in the Churchâ emerged on the postconciliar scene in 1968 with the publication of the monograph of the same name written by LĂ©on-Joseph Cardinal [End Page 289] Suenens.2 (We will return to a consideration of this book momentarily.) The term re-emerged in the twenty-first century with remarks of Pope Benedict XVI, which largely went unnoticed until they were brought back into prominence by a few scattered voices, perhaps most prominent among them the Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput as archbishop of Denver and, later, of Philadelphia.3 Benedictâs remarks are found, primarily, in two of his allocutions. The first and most substantial was his May 26, 2009 âAddress to the Pastoral Convention of the Diocese of Rome,â speaking as the local bishop in his cathedral, the Lateran Basilica of St. John, with the title âCo-responsible for the Churchâs Being and Action,â and the subtitle âChurch Membership and Pastoral Co-responsibility.â4 The context of the speech is the Diocese of Romeâs renewed commitment to the priority of pastoral work in the local parishes. The second, much briefer, allocution was the 2012 âMessage on the Occasion of the Sixth Ordinary Assembly of the International Forum of Catholic Action.â5 As I attempted to describe in an earlier essay,6 Benedictâs idea of co-responsibility flows from the mystery of the Church as expressed by the âtwin imagesâ featured as descriptions of the mystery of communion in the Church by Vatican II. This communion ultimately originates in the Trinity and is effected by the Eucharist: [End Page 290] The Church, which originates in the Trinitarian God, is a mystery of communion. . . . This communion is captured under the twin images of the âPeople of Godâ and the âBody of Christ,â where âPeople of Godâ expresses the continuity of the Churchâs history, [and] âBody of Christâ expresses the universality inaugurated in the Cross and in the Lordâs Resurrection. By the âcontinuity of the Churchâs history,â Benedict has in mind continuity with Israel, chosen with an orientation to a salvation with universal extension, an orientation to the Cross, for âin the Cross, St. Paul says, Christ broke down the wall of separation.â It is in Christ, as his body, that âwe really become the People of Godâ: In giving us his Body, he reunites us in this Body of his to make us one. In the communion of the âBody of Christâ we all become one people, the People of God, in which to cite St Paul again all are one and there are no longer distinctions or differences between Greek and Jew, the circumcised and the uncircumcised, the barbarian, the Scythian, the slave, the Jew, but Christ is all in all. He has broken down the wall of distinction. This is why it is âin Christâ that we really become the people of God: âFor us Christians, therefore, âBody of Christâ is not only an image, but a true concept, because Christ makes us the gift of his real Body, not only an image of it. Risen, Christ unites us all...
Read full abstract