Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
For example, unlike what had been done in the previous synods, at the session last October the remarks of the fathers in the assembly were not made public. Every day the Vatican press office provided only a list of the speakers and a summary of the themes addressed, but without ever saying who had said what.
Many synod fathers protested against what they saw as an act of censorship. But to no effect. Pope Francis himself had made the decision.
And he has also held this decision firm for the next and concluding session of the synod, explaining the reasons in an interview last March 13 with the vaticanista Valentina Alazraki, for the Mexican network Televisa:
“A synod without freedom is not a synod. It is a conference. The synod, instead, is a protected space in which the Holy Spirit can work. And for this reason the persons must be free. This is why I will not allow the things that each one says to be published with name and surname. No, it should not be known who has said it. I have no problem with revealing what has been said, but not who has said it, in such a way that one may feel free to say what one wishes."
This does not change the fact that the apparatus of the synod is not untouchable, and that from now until October it can be changed. Francis himself has said that he would like it to work better, in the light of the principle of episcopal collegiality “cum Petro e sub Petro.”
And this is what Australian theologian Paul A. McGavin, from a trip to Papua New Guinea, suggests in the open letter to the pope published below.
Synod. A Letter Almost from the Ends of the Earth
While I understand the desire to be able to speak freely, I do think that there are repercussions from not knowing what was said or whom it was said by.
Many synod fathers protested against what they saw as an act of censorship. But to no effect. Pope Francis himself had made the decision.
And he has also held this decision firm for the next and concluding session of the synod, explaining the reasons in an interview last March 13 with the vaticanista Valentina Alazraki, for the Mexican network Televisa:
“A synod without freedom is not a synod. It is a conference. The synod, instead, is a protected space in which the Holy Spirit can work. And for this reason the persons must be free. This is why I will not allow the things that each one says to be published with name and surname. No, it should not be known who has said it. I have no problem with revealing what has been said, but not who has said it, in such a way that one may feel free to say what one wishes."
This does not change the fact that the apparatus of the synod is not untouchable, and that from now until October it can be changed. Francis himself has said that he would like it to work better, in the light of the principle of episcopal collegiality “cum Petro e sub Petro.”
And this is what Australian theologian Paul A. McGavin, from a trip to Papua New Guinea, suggests in the open letter to the pope published below.
Synod. A Letter Almost from the Ends of the Earth
While I understand the desire to be able to speak freely, I do think that there are repercussions from not knowing what was said or whom it was said by.
