When synodality confronts hierarchy 

I admire your strength of purpose and your tenacity John. However, I have to say that in my experience people who have power, and a lot of it, tend to want to hold on to it, irrespective of their religious persuasions. And Catholic clergy do not have the benefit of being married with a family of their own with wife and children, who can ground them in the reality of most people's lives. So I think it's a kind of 'Father knows best' mentality that pervades the clergy at all levels of the hierarchy, and no doubt this attitude is underpinned by Church teaching. I am not however, suggesting that marriage is an all purpose fixit for this situation.
The laity are battling with the clergy's entrenched beliefs in their own status, power and the age-old deference afforded to them in generations past. Remember the times when a Catholic family was expected to have at least one son a priest and one daughter a nun? I think those days have long passed.

Unfortunately, power sharing between laity and clergy, whilst a good idea, seems to me wishful thinking. I am nearly eighty and I doubt It will happen in my lifetime, short of a sort of coup d'etat by the laity.

So good luck and best wishes for your venture, John. You are to be commended for taking the stance you have.

“The ‘traditional hierarchical view challenges the exercise of authority in a synodal way……
To Peter “feed my flock” we will always need central direction (Leadership) a leadership that reflects the humility/Honesty of St Peter, sodality (Brotherhood) comes with Truth, and those who will serve It in humility. Presently the Church is rudderless as spiritual corruption has produced dead/dormant consciences throughout the whole church which has ultimately manifested itself in the elite holding God's Word (Will) in contempt ( Via The Divine Mercy Image) and in doing so collude with the ongoing breaking of the Second Commandment.
“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”
See my post on this site under the Article Broken: A profound study of Christianity and the priesthood (eurekastreet.com.au)
So, the present situation can only be confronted by a vigorous serving of the Truth in all situations, for this to happen, we will have to have a renewed spiritual awakening, emanating from humility. Anything else is just moving the deck chairs, as the underlying present situation, will remain.

It is said “the fish rots from the head down” to counter this we need to see true humble leadership, as
Hope’s springs eternal or so the saying goes’
Does the church present a weed?
When she should present a rose,
A light set upon a hill,
All mankind shall see and know God’s, Holy Will.
No word need be spoken, as all mankind shall see,
God’s lovers as they bend their knee.
Justice and Love reflected from above.
The missionary shall call, we would have this for one and all
A crystal (Rome) sat on a hill, manifesting our Fathers
Holy Will.
To create this ‘Hope’ should be our priority, as where can mankind look to see the Truth within the Gospels, actually working. We will always need central direction (Leadership). If it cannot be seen in Rome/Peter (Pope Francis and his Cardinals), where? If the leaders of our Church cannot do this what HOPE is there for mankind?
It is said you cannot be what you do not see/envisage, so we need to see our Shepherds holding the bright lamp of Truth high above their own vulnerabilities, teachings us by example, in humility, how we are also to be made ‘Holy’ (Sanctified) as in
“Sanctify them in the Truth; thy Word is Truth as thou didst send me into the World so I have sent them into the World and for their sake, I consecrate myself that they also may be consecrated in truth”
So, in our present shameful situation, is God preparing the birth (Building up) of a Church that will be truthful with herself. A Church that proceeds and leads in humility, ‘openly’ acknowledging her failings before God and all of her children.
As a humble heart (Church) will never cover its tracks or hide its shortcomings, and in doing so confers authenticity, as it walks in its own vulnerability /weakness/brokenness in trust/faith before God and mankind. It is a heart (Church) to be trusted, as it ‘dispels’ darkness within its own ego/self, in serving God (Truth) first, before any other.
“God will not despise a broken spirit and contrite heart” and neither will the faithful. The leadership has nothing to fear, no matter how compromised, as the cleansing grace of humility (Full ‘open’ acknowledgment of past failings/sins) in Sodality which is the communal bond of love that holds His flock together.
We need to see true discipleship, and working disciples, as demonstrated, in my post, via the link
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/06/14/whats-going-to-bring-the-nones-back-to-the-church/#comment-139855
kevin your brother
In Christ

Traditional authority guards magisterial orthodoxy. Magisterial orthodoxy tells the laity whether the infusion they are inhaling is the incense of Satan. Not all smoke smells like smoke.

John Warhurst constructs here "the language of synodality" and "the language of hierarchy" as opposites; the former as enlivening, the latter as "deadening." Such a dichotomized modelling does not reflect the ecclesiology of Vatican II: the Council, while distinguishing roles of the hierarchy and the laity in the Church, recognizes the complementarity of both in the structure and unity of the Church, the People of God and the Mystical Body of Christ. Nor is there an intrinsic opposition between "synodality", a process revived by Pope Paul VI, and "hierarchy" as Church reform groups often assume.

'A patchwork church": how apt!

"How are teamwork and co-responsibility put into practice?" A most important question and one for which there already exist models which may provide part, if not all, of the answer. My experience as a university surgeon and teacher has perhaps coloured my perspectives. However, the practice of such an occupation mirrors the Catholic Church in so many ways and in recent times we have seen the damage that "synodality" of a sort has wreaked on the lives of those for whom we, the doctors and nurses, (health heirarchy) are ultimately responsible. Despite the most extraordinary advances in treatment of all manner of human affliction over the last 50 years our news bulletins are no strangers to reports of the loss of otherwise salvageable human lives in our hospitals, from the most highly equipped and specially staffed to the humble country hospital. Up until the mid 1970s, all hospitals employed an administrative structure that embraced an elite hierarchy (like the Catholic Church). Hospitals were administered by highly qualified Medical Superintendents, responsible for overall medical care and Matrons, responsible for overall nursing care (the scriptures, tradition and the Magisterium). A similar hierarchy existed at the point of care in every ward and department of the hospital (the dioceses) with overall responsibility borne by the senior medical specialist who accepted such responsibility on behalf of all those doctors below him. He made sure that mistakes were not made and, if they were, steps were taken to ensure it didn't happen again (unhappily some bishops abandoned that responsibility in the Church). Similarly ward sisters exercised the same authority over their nurses. Disasters and unnecessary deaths were rare. THEN CAME THE GREAT ENLIGHTENMENT. Governments, driven by economics rather than care of the sick got rid of Medical Superintendents and Matrons and replaced them with medically ignorant administrators (the laity) whose task was to provide budget demands, accounting and business management as having primacy of place over patient care for which they bore no responsibility. At the work face all authority for management was removed from the hierarchy of doctors and nurses other, of course, than civil legal responsibility for anything that went wrong. The "team", a group responsible for patient care and made up of all manner of diverse health care workers, was born. No one individual was responsible. Individual responsibility was lost to the communal all in together "team". The team involved itself in frequent meetings remote from the patients in a room where it might not be alerted by urgent alarms at the bedside (Plenary perhaps). Nurses became clerks with a vast part of their time spent entering data into computers which was designed to serve good management not sick patients. The hierarchy (doctors and nurses) was emasculated and unacceptable numbers of people die. No one is responsible - the 'team" (the diverse laity with multiple agendas) makes no mistakes. The Catholic Church might do well not to abolish an educated hierarchy and replaee it with a management team serving its own interests.

The Australian Catholic hierarchy are notorious for their authoritanianism throughout the Catholic World. Intelligent clergy in Ireland used to make jokes about them. A former Papal Nuncio tried to get some more normal bishops nominated but he was checkmated by the Old Guard. John RD's take is pretty right. It is interesting that the Pope - the Head of the Church - is the one driving the push for synodality and it is the local hierarchs trying to subvert it. Whither obedience to the Vicar of Christ? 'When I want to' is unacceptable on every level. If the hierarchy are disobedient to the Pope they are getting close to both heresy and schism, in which case they should not be followed.

John the plenary response to the abuse crisis is paternalistic and inadequate in that:
It refers to the scourge of paedophilia as past tense;
It offers a flimsy apology on behalf of their brethren who committed these crimes (Heaven's above! a not us, but them) as they distance themselves from responsibility and claim the moral high ground;
They do not address the recommendations of the Royal Commission: Theme 4: Criminal justice and the protection of children;
Theme 4 covers actions taken by the Australian Government to address recommendations made by the Royal Commission to better protect children from child sexual abuse by reforming criminal justice systems in Australia. This includes recommendations made to strengthen mandatory reporting and reportable conduct laws, and strengthen protections under state and territory Working with Children Checks. These recommendations can be found in the Royal Commission’s Working with Children Checks Report (released in August 2015), and the Criminal Justice Report (released in August 2017), and Volume 7 of the Final Report.


Theme 4 - Criminal justice and the protection of children [PDF]

Theme 4 - Criminal justice and the protection of children [DOCX]
They say they will make it an excommunicable offence by church legislation in the future; Yet how will they identify the offenders??
They refer to indigenous Australians in a paternalistic fashion like dingoes around a campfire;
They assume prayer will solve the problem when it should be dealt with internally by the church in the nature of an inquisition;
They do not address the 12 recommendations made by the RC that were scotched by the Vatican;
Forgiveness for these crimes is not in the realm of the hierarchy to forgive nor in the realm of the Vatican to bury in the catacombs and forget.
They do not address the issue of equal rights for women in terms of article 2 of the UDHR.

With the exception of Edward Fido's insights, I'd imagine that those who operate ES might be disheartened by the absolutist Nietzschean 'No' that their champions like John Warhurst regularly encounter. Unless the rank and file of Catholics, not present overhere and, registering a minimalist attendance at Mass, re-enter the consultative process, one has to assume, on the basis of minimalist lay response, that nothing will change and that the Synod, designed by the hierarchy, will have achieved exactly what they intended, which is more of the same. In my view, that would mean that it was hardly worth running with at all. What an opportunity wasted! Take heart, John Warhurst. There is more to the Body of Christ than meets the resolutely blind but crushing eye! My guess is that the silent but more progressive bishops are counting on people such as you and me staying on in the face of their silence. They should remember in that case that their model, of a 'hierarchical' Church, isn't the only one around and, when push comes to shove, the 'Attendant-Laity', such as it is and already approaching old age, will be the last to leave before they switch the lights off. Sic Transit Gloria Mundi!

The problem with the rapidly sinking ship SS Catholicism Inc Oz, John F, is that she is not and was not well administered like the great Australian hospitals of yore. We tend to follow the dreadful Mannix-Mulkearns model, when either a fading geriatric or a total twit (Mulkearns) almost runs the ship into the reef. Oops! I think we might have struck it. With Cornish cousins, I know what that means. I do not think the Catholic hierarchy are of the capability of the likes of John W or yourself. Much the same was said about the former Anglican Archbishop of Brisbane, Peter Hollingsworth, who well and truly screwed up his archdiocese's response to its paedophilia problem. He was forced to resign as Governor-General because of public outrage. We need better leaders! OK, Bishop Nguyen of Parramatta and Archbishop Foley in Cairns and a few others might get a guernsey. Where are the current likes of Archbishop Polding or the late, saintly Joseph Grech? There are and were many excellent nuns who could have filled the role of matrons to Catholics, but it was and still is mainly an exclusive, geriatric club of misogynists. God save us from this twittery!

John leads with a heading awaiting a conclusion. No doubt reluctantly, but with a sense of the ineluctable, he provides the most likely ending in his final paragraph. This result will be a bitter pill for reform minded Catholics. But, it won't be the end of the synodality path if protagonists, like John, lick their wounds, take a leaf from Fagin, and 'review the situation.'

If advocates of synodality are to become agents of change there are three areas of inquiry which have been overlooked. One – what is inherent in the clerical control model that is so endearing to clerics and a good many practising Catholics? Two – what are the particular circumstances, that in a happenstance manner, are bolstering the continuance of the clerical control model, today? Three - having tried the name and shame approach are there overlooked avenues of intervention that lie latent in Church history that could energise and refocus renewal efforts. Look closely at the tactics employed by Francis. From the day of his election, He has continually pointed to a modus operandi that is helping to turn the barque of Peter without capsizing or running aground. A well informed, scaled to local church needs, set of tactics remain waiting to be identified and actualised.

John,
As usual, your reflections encourage me to remain with the Church, although so many I know, particularly my own children, have totally given up on the Faith of our Fathers.
I have to share an interesting example where our Archbishop seems disconnected with the reality of Parish life .
Previously, we had a situation where lay participation in Ministry through Commission by the Archbishop of
Lectors and Acolytes was encouraged. We even had a number of married Deacons ordained to assist in our Parishes . That was over thirty years ago, when I myself was commissioned as an Acolyte by Archbishop Francis Carrol . How things have changed since then. About four years ago I recommended to our Parish Priest that a Minister of the Eucharist, a convert, who assisted me on the Altar ? be made an Acolyte. However I was informed that the Archbishop was not allowing any more Acolytes or Lectors in the Archdioceses ! Recently a request from our Parish Priest for this gentleman was turned down. Pope Francis has stressed time and time again his desire for lay ministry to play a much larger role in the Church.
I have a strong feeling that there is a feeling within the more conservative clergy that lay ministry or even married Deacons are a threat to their power and status . Henri, your comment about deference rings a strong note for me. Unfortunately the Clergy and the Hierarchy have lost that respect, perhaps for ever, by their secrecy and coverups as exposed by the Royal Commission .

With Christmas around the corner and the Paraclete hovering above there may be scope, John W., for the kind of compromise you seek. After all, we can only be sure that we mingle, however disconsolately, among ourselves and work with those who turn up. While we're all male there's sufficient variety among us to see if we can model the compromise that we seek with the bishops. Their resolution indicates scope for working with JohnRD, who maddeningly but gratifyingly never shuts his door, and John Frawley, whose wisdom about systems administration is hard to fault. Equally, with some experience myself of universities, you will doubtless agree that 'silos' exist there too! The Jesuits would also recognise also from their close association with universities. Many moons ago Bill Uren sat in on a postgraduate research seminar of mine at which a colleague of your's at ANU didn't so much as insert a spoke in my wheel as hijack the entire vehicle! Mrs W, a great executive administrator in Church education contexts, will share her own wisdom of working with bishops. Finally, I think that 'Communion, Participation & Mission' offer promising tripartite theological scope for proceeding towards the next stage of Synodality.

There is no doubt, Edward F, that the hospital hierarchy of yesteryear made mistakes - they were, however, accountable. The dilution of personal responsibility in the team approach hides, protects and promotes incompetence. Management is the new goal which has pushed care of the sick, once the only goal of health/hospital care, into the background.

You should've seen management in the CES before it was scuppered, John F. We were supposed to be there to help people. There were some wonderful CES Managers, including a 6'4" Latvian who looked like a Viking chieftain, who kept telling the Zone Manager what a complete moron the latter was and where to go. We got involved in numerous wage subsidy schemes of questionable efficacy and funding some strange training courses. Like the Catholic Church, we should have stuck to our last. The Church's primary role is to celebrate God in the Eucharist and bring his Joy into the world. Cardinal Raymond Burke is a real-life 'Spitting Image' puppet-type parody of a Church leader. Only a Roy Chen Yee could love him. I fear it is only with the demise of the current generation of our woeful leaders that we will move ahead. If it were not for the Society of Jesus, ES and the feisty men and women who write for and to it, we would be in a deep bog.

Roy Chen Yee. No doubt Jesus truly loves Cardinal Burke but I reckon he must also sometimes cradle his forehead in frustration and disbelief with the cardinal's rantings on ocacsions.

I am extremely glad people of the intelligence and perspicacity of Michael F; Joan Seymour; Jo Dallimore; John F and Bill B and so many more are staying in the Church and holding the bastards accountable. What the hierarchy want are knee jerk reactionaries such as Roy Chen Yee. That is the Church of the Inquisition. God save us from that! It would be a dead, 'museum' Church. Reform is much needed and it is coming from the Pope himself. I don't believe the local hierarchy have either Francis' spiritual depth or vision and they don't seem to share his reform agenda. But they will be replaced in time. We must pray earnestly for better men. I myself am thinking of transferring to the Eastern Rite, which has many of the things I want: married clergy; the chrismation of infants at Baptism and thus full entry into the Church and beautiful Liturgy. Christianity is beautiful. Father O'Boggart and his mental bludgeon are a joke. We need to consign him and his like to the dustbin of History.