SYNODALITY. The Diocesan Assembly took place on Wednesday 12 October and marked the “return” of the work done last year and indicated the way forward
It was a “restitution assembly”. After a year of synodal work in parishes and communities, the Diocese organized a meeting with them to “tell” what emerged and to indicate the future path. On this page we will summarize only the “restitution”, leaving the future perspectives of the synodal work to the next issues. About 170 people took part in the assembly on Wednesday 12 October, representing about 50 parishes, 11 lay groups, 3 religious institutes and 10 Pastoral Offices.
Practically the realities that were involved in the proposed work a year ago. In fact, the numbers of the report correspond in fact to the attendance at the assembly, not as numerous as might have been expected. Moreover, the same report by the synodal team mentions the fact that “on the part of various parish realities, there is an attitude more of an observer than an actor in this process, remaining ‘pockets’ of resistance, resignation and mistrust, especially where the priests harbored reservations and skepticism regarding this path“.
In the parishes involved the process involved to a large extent the organisms already present, such as pastoral councils, liturgical groups, family groups, listening centers, and others. But experiences are also to be recorded in which paths aimed at involving or at least giving a voice to people who are furthest away from pastoral and ecclesial life have been built.
In the non-parish context, the initiative of synodal groups with prison inmates should be noted (a testimony of which was proposed in a beautiful film by Icaro TV), with Caritas volunteers, with teachers / parents in some Catholic schools, and finally with believers / non-believers. At the end of this first year of development, despite the tight deadlines and almost peremptory deadlines, there has been a good return to the progress made: in fact, over 100 summaries have arrived, in which the most popular topics were “travel friends”, “ I listen” And “ be formed for synodality “.
The most beautiful fruit of this first phase of the Synod, is written in the synthesis of the synodal team, is the participation of the laity, “with a strong awareness of “wanting to be” a living part of the life of the Church, and the request to “be involved” in an active and not passive way in ecclesial life “.
The contents of the summaries
Communion, Listening / Dialogue, Language and Participation these are the four fundamental requests that emerged from the 100 reports presented. The proposed comparison has led to a new and deeper awareness of what the Church is, what generates it and what its mission is. “The discussion opened the hearts and minds of those who participated in the synodal meetings to listen to the most urgent indications of the Spirit regarding the conversion to be carried out as a Church, starting from the more personal dimension, to move on to the parish realities, also touching on the experience of associations and movements, to also reach the Church as an institution“.
From the confrontation they emerged five “conversion” modes.
The first concerns “a doing that arises from being Church“. Here the icon of Martha and Mary, the two sister friends of Jesus, was proposed, a figurative expression from “Doing” and “contemplating”. “ecclesial experiences that are increasingly open and connected to each other (diocesan bodies and associations, movements, consecrated life); making the parish a place of relationships, friendship, esteem and respect, a community that welcomes everyone; synodality as a style for the church“.
The second conversion concerns an attitude of mission, in listening and in dialogue.
Ecclesial communities should be increasingly oriented towards reaching people where they live, to welcome them, listen to them, know them as they are and in their reality of life. Then there is a style of “approaching one’s neighbor with humility, with a “child’s” heart, with a profound respect for the life, history, wounds and talents of those who meet. The Church institution must be concerned not so much with giving answers as with sharing questions ”. There is also the proposal to leave the walls of churches by celebrating liturgies in the area, favoring domestic celebrations, “so that Jesus the Eucharist may enter homes ”.
The third conversion is not simple, even if it is tremendously urgent and it is the one that concerns the ecclesial language which must become “understandable and that makes the beauty of the Gospel shine. Instead, the words of the Church are often felt as distant and incomprehensible, especially by young people ”. “ The language, the welcome, the testimony should change in the direction of greater credibility and a more joyful and less sad, formal, rigid spirituality ”. This also involves the liturgy, with “ celebrations often lived passively, without real involvement of all “ and that’s not a good thing to say, considering that the new Missal has just been published. But in this chapter there are many topics in focus, such as the “ involvement of women, ministerial celibacy, asset management, scandals ”.
Young people I’m the fourth conversion. First of all in the way of relating to them. It is necessary to pass from transmitting a doctrine to that of privileging an encounter.
From catechism to the new evangelization that you find truly effective channels and methods of contact, passing “from a scholastic approach to the proclamation of the gospel ”. In this the Church is struggling to keep up with the times. Young people, young couples and families who ask not to be considered only spectators, but to be more involved, both in the decision-making and responsibility phase, and in the operational one.
The fifth and final conversion concerns the poor. Don Oreste said the task of charity belongs to each one and to the whole community. And this is what emerged in the summary: “Charity must be a concrete and shared experience of the whole community and cannot be delegated to the operators of Caritas ”. Charity does not delegate and “ support for people in difficulty is an authentic work of mercy if it is not limited to the provision of aid but only if it is implemented in a context of welcoming, listening and sharing“.