Synodality - Learning and practising together

By Sr. Dr. Katharina Kluitmann OSF

The little girl is maybe four. She speeds past me on a children's bicycle. In a curve, she wobbles and falls. Dumbfounded, she picks herself up again, gets on the bike and shouts, "Still have to practise a lot!"

That's how synodality works. Sometimes we speed towards the future. But then there is uncertainty. There is a crash. I would like to reflect on our big synodal crash in a moment. But this is only possible if we don't get stuck in "It's all their fault!" or "There's no point, we give up!" or even "Just don't think about it!". Yes, we have to think about it. The chance lies in continuing. We will only make it together. We still have a lot to practise and learn.

There was a clash when, in the 4th Synodal Assembly, after some texts had been already approved in the previous sessions, the first text to be voted upon was the foundational theological text of the Forum "Living in Successful Relationships". About 82% of the Synod, 90% of the non-bishops, and 61% of the bishops voted in favour of the text. Such a high approval rate, even more than half of the bishops. However, the statutes [of the Synodal Path] require, since important decisions in the Bishops' Conference must always be taken by a two-thirds majority, that two-thirds of the bishops also agree. And a few votes were missing. So the text was not approved. The statutes do not provide a second round. A paralysing atmosphere spread through the hall. The session was interrupted.

Young synod members, many of whom had made touching personal statements about their own queer identity or orientation, streamed from their seats into the centre scattered around the hall, embracing each other, some crying. But so many of them began to hug each other in a circle, always with arms around the shoulders of their fellow synod members. Countless older synod members, including many religious and clerics, showed solidarity and closeness. The circle grew larger and larger but could not become round because there was no space in the two intersecting aisles between four blocks of tables. The circle became a cross. An already elderly priest cried out, "Where are the shepherds?

This whole situation had arisen spontaneously. Some later interpreted it as an emotionalised protest. More about that later. In the debate that followed, I was first on the speaking list after more official statements were given. I stood up and said, ''Let's stand together!'' I hear this appeal everywhere. I say it myself. But it can't be that we, believers, have to stand with the bishops all the time, and they don't stand with us anymore." This statement received a lot of resonance and led, among other things, to me being with those who were also able to give feedback on the situation in the autumn meeting of the Bishops' Conference. So the bishops took a framework to reflect again and also invited a woman to join. That has to be acknowledged. It was necessary. Because among the bishops who voted "no" were some who had never taken part in discussions. This refusal to communicate, this exercise of their power without communication, has very much affected people far beyond the synodal assembly. The bishops need to reflect on their part. Everyone else needs to reflect on their part.

Let me tell you about myself, who is not a bishop but a religious woman. From the beginning of the debate on the text, which was formally rejected, I campaigned for its acceptance. I probably would not have done that a few years ago. There is a lot about this text that I would have always found good. Especially the "queer" topic of which I knew too little until the beginning of the synodal assembly. I have learnt. I have not read much on this, to be honest. The Synodal Path is an honorary office, besides my everyday life, which is not boring as it is. I simply talked to many young people. I asked when I didn't understand something. We spoke to each other. There was one session where we had fixed table seats at dinner because of Corona. I sat next to Janosch, who told me what it was like to be a young man with a past as a girl. You might call that "transman". For me, he has a name. Or Mara, who came out as non-binary right at the beginning of the Synodal Path. How much I learnt from her! There are so many more similar examples to tell.

All this has changed me. When a transman died in Münster, where I live, because he had stood up for queer people, I went to the memorial service - visibly as a religious woman. There, I again became aware of the suffering that queer people are often exposed to. I took this experience to the synodal assembly that took place shortly afterwards. I campaigned for the adoption of the text, which later led to the confrontation, also by telling people about the memorial service. Excluding people is one thing. But bringing people in by talking is also a possibility. I mentioned the name of that young man killed in the synod assembly. This way, Malte was present. The Synodal Path doesn't only happen in the assembly hall - it is streamed and can be watched on youtube afterwards. I received feedback on my statement not only from the queer community in Münster. Commenting was in full swing in the weeks before and after. You also have to learn to deal with that: ugly attacks sometimes deny me being Catholic; with praises; with thanks; with invitations to further events. Life is learning; the Synodal Way is learning, also on a personal level.

But what is this learning about? Learning happens; the experience I just shared proves it; learning happens in a relationship. We know from neuroscience that learning goes better when we have positive feelings. Every student knows that they learn more from a teacher they like than the one they don't. Relationships trigger feelings, positive or negative. Without falling into clichés, there is evidence that, on average, women have a different approach to relationships and feelings than men. What roles do emotions play? Are they allowed to play a role in a synod? In fact, I experience all-male groups differently from all-female groups, be it in religious orders, in a group of bishops, or women's associations. And do you know what I like best? Mixed groups! The Church needs an extra dose of women, at least when we think of the bishops' assemblies because clergy have always been men. A very homogeneous group, topped by bishops who are all men and academics and all in a specific age segment. Mixing facilitates learning because more perspectives come together. We still have a lot to learn.

I would like to distinguish two levels of learning here: learning on the content level and learning on the meta level. Both have already been mentioned. Yes, we can learn about many topics on the content level, as I have just described my learning on queer people. The same applies sociologically to questions of power, socio-psychologically to questions of women, and not least to questions of the priesthood in the Catholic Church. There too, there are more than just theological dimensions. We can and must still learn a lot on the content level - and that never stops.

But there is also the meta-level. It involves questions of communication culture, the role of emotionality, and the structuring of meetings. In our German process, for example, we see that we have taken on too much. We will not manage all written texts with effort. We will look for ways, and they are partly already found, how to honour these texts and bring them further into the discourse. A continuation of the Synodal Path in the form of a Synodal Council has already been decided. That is why it is important to reflect on the experiences we have had. We are learning. And there is much to reflect on, especially as the cultures in parishes, bishops' conferences, and associations are very different. Almost everyone had to adjust. We, religious, too. We are used to chapters, come together in manageable groups, and get to know each other better. I very much wish - and we, religious, have published this in a book on the Synodal Path[1] - that the universal Church also learns from us, religious orders.

In addition to these structural issues, there is also the issue of emotions. Bishop Bätzing, the President of the Bishops' Conference, said to the press at the end of the Bishops' Conference: "How do you deal with emotionality? How is a process nevertheless driven forward factually and intellectually?" I think this is a central question. Because I also hear that emotions must be kept out of the process. But that is not possible. Emotions are there. As it was said at one point, "emotions are fact"; emotions are facts. Psychologically, it is quite clear that emotions are always there and disturb the process all the less and even advance it if they are perceived and named. Only what is on the table can be dealt with. It can be handled. You can decide whether to follow it or to put it aside, perhaps for a while. You will stumble upon what you sweep under the carpet sooner or later. The idea that one can be without emotion in something that touches the heart as much as one's faith and one's church commitment is naïve and dangerous. St Ignatius of Loyola's teaching on the discernment of spirits works above all with movements and emotions, and synodality is supposed to be such a discernment process! So also theologically and spiritually, there is no doubt about the relevance of consciously including feelings in the process. It is easier in a two-person setting. But what about in a large gathering? There is a good example: At first, the applause at the synodal meetings showed how the assembly felt about the speeches. Then young synod members circulated red and green cards. This had some very practical advantages. One could raise the card and thereby express one's agreement or disagreement without losing time through applause (or even booing). However, there were situations in which these cards led to displeasure, which was expressed. The cards disappeared immediately. A small side note: If critics of the Synodal Path still refer to these cards, I consider it inappropriate. Even these people must realise that synodality is a learning process and that we have learnt from this.

Only then, when we have learnt and understood from these and countless other points, will we have to practise, rehearse. And it will continue to be the case that we sometimes fall on our faces. Then, like the little girl on her bicycle, we should stand up and say, "Still have to practise a lot!"

[1] Marcus Leitschuh, Katharina Kluitmann (Hgg.), Wir können auch anders. Der Beitrag der Orden zum Synodalen Weg und für die Zukunft der Kirche.