Archbishop Charles Scicluna shares his candid reflections on the recent Synod on Synodality in an interview with America Magazine, a leading Catholic publication, and Vatican correspondent Gerard O’Connell. The discussion touches on key topics, including the role and involvement of women in the Church.

Archbishop Scicluna is the adjunct secretary of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. He is well known for his work in combating the abuse of minors by clergy as the dicastery’s former chief prosecutor and for his special investigations into situations of abuse and cover-up worldwide.

What’s your first takeaway from this synod?

One of the best aspects of both this year’s and last year’s synod is that we were active protagonists rather than spectators. The fact we were divided into groups and sat around tables meant lively discussions could take place. Everybody had a name, everybody was interacting. The groups also changed so you had the opportunity to interact with different people. We also had moments of silence and prayer, and we had light moments and moments of tension. It was almost like being in a family. That really set the right tone as participants at past synods have tended to be mere passive spectators in a large hall—listening but having only limited opportunities to air their views.

The experience itself was also transformative and one that I think participants will carry with them in their hearts and minds. But, of course, it is a process. Processes need time and they need to be lived. Ultimately, what matters is not the documents but the experience. Cardinal Mario Grech told us that we proposed some 1,500 amendments to the draft of the final document. I had a few misgivings about Chapter Five [on forming missionary disciples], which I viewed as an anti-climactic end to a beautiful meditation on the church, but this can be developed. At the end of the day, it is through the formation of our people that these processes will come to be part of our lives.

I am also grateful for the pope’s wisdom. He said: “I’m approving this document, and there is not going to be a post-synodal exhortation. This is it.” That was not the case with the Synod on Youth because it was followed by “Christus Vivit,” which contained only a few cosmetic references to the document that we as a synod had approved together with the pope. So the work done by this latest synod is also the word and magisterium of the Holy Father. That is very positive. He was also very present. He was there when it was read and there when it was approved.

What really struck you about the final document?

I like the fact that the framework—thanks to Cardinal [Timothy] Radcliffe’s enlightened interventions—was very biblical. This made it easier to grasp and provided a solid grounding to relationships, processes and formation. Who are we? How are we going to relate together? What makes us walk together? These are the fundamental questions. I also liked the concept of checklists. For example, when we ask ourselves what discernment is, we can better define it by ticking the boxes that one believes apply to a process. It’s not always easy, but I think this method will also make life easier for the secretariat [of the synod] when it comes to auditing synodality.

“I was delighted at the conclusion of the synod to hear Pope Francis basically say: ‘O.K., that’s enough. Basta. We’ve talked enough. We’ve discussed enough. We’ve written enough. Now let’s go out there and do it.’”

You can set many ideals or guidelines, but these are somewhat pointless or useless if you don’t have a system that enables you to audit them. Evaluation is crucial, and it will help bishops coming to Rome for their ad limina [meetings] when they come to discuss synodality. It will probably also help the Dicastery of Bishops as they develop and renew the ad limina questionnaires in light of “Praedicate Evangelium,” the papal document that determines the competencies of the Roman Curia, as they can use checklists when it comes to evaluating the governance of bishops and their style of leadership.

One of the challenges, of course, will be the conversion of the Roman Curia to this style of leadership because we bishops also need to be able to engage with the Roman Curia—especially the dicasteries—in this spirit. We need to instill a culture of transparency and accountability across all levels. In some areas, this has improved, but there is still work to do. The Roman Curia can no longer say, “The law is set here, and it is to be obeyed out there.” Some interpret the posture of the hands of the statutes of St. Peter and St. Paul in front of the Vatican Basilica as saying just that. My hope is for a new more inclusive interpretation: “The law is set and obeyed here, and it also obeyed out there, having been set after hearing what the local churches out there have to say.” Publishing a document that has not been through a transparent process of consultation and accountability goes against the very ethos of synodality, and one hopes that will no longer happen.

The document also gives due importance to spiritual conversation. This is a good thing, but we have to admit that spiritual conversation is not a panacea. For example, when I’m dealing with financial experts on the audit for the Archdiocese of Malta, I don’t need to have a spiritual conversation with them. I need to know exactly where we stand. This also applies to safeguarding issues. Spiritual conversation is important when it comes to discerning policy, but it’s not the only way to engage in a synodal manner.

How do you view the way the situation of women is treated in the document?

I think we could do better. The document is important. But it is only a document. I would start with the experience of having women at our tables and engaging with us on an equal level. That is a very important transformative experience, and it is ultimately the lived experience that transforms people, not the theory. If you want to engage with women, don’t just talk or write about them. Engage with them! In Malta, we already have women on the archbishop’s council, in our media group, in the tribunal and so on. I believe this is the direction we need to go in.

You might say the document is a mirror for people to look at and say am I like that? Am I doing that?

Absolutely. It’s a checklist or a text for one’s examen at the end of the day as well as a guide not just for a bishop’s conscience but also for his consciousness. We need to be conscious of who or what the church really is and what its purpose truly is. For example, the document is open to the participation of women in all aspects of the church’s life. But at the end of the day, it’s what we make of it that will truly transform the church, not the document itself.

What surprised you?

One of my favorite lines in the document is that “Synodality is not an end in itself.” I was surprised to see that in the final text but also very glad. If I may quote from No. 32, it states: “Synodality is not an end in itself. Rather, it serves the mission that Christ entrusted to the Church, in the spirit. To evangelize is the essential mission of the Church. It is the grace and vocation proper to Church, her deepest identity.”

Somewhat interestingly, at this juncture, the document quotes “Evangelii Nuntiandi,” the apostolic exhortation [written] by Paul VI in 1975, which states that “the essential mission of the church is to evangelise.” Cardinal [Jean-Claude] Hollerich, the general relator of the synod, said this twice at the final press conference, and said loud and clear: “Synodality is for mission!”

Source: America Magazine