The next consistory (the official ceremony where the selection of new Cardinals is confirmed) will be a good test. The consistory will take place Feb. 22, while a meeting of the Council of Eight cardinals will be held on Feb. 17-18 and the Council of the Synod will meet on Feb. 24. Altogether, there will be about 15 days of consultations of cardinals, taking into account that a meeting of the council of cardinals for economic and managerial affairs of the Holy See (the so-called Council of Fifteen) will be held in February, the week before the meeting of the Council of Eight.

A Vatican official told Mondayvatican Oct. 30: «More than a consistory for the creation of new cardinals, I have the impression that this will be mostly a sort of synod of cardinals. It will represent a new way to offer advice, with cardinals from all over the world, giving everybody the opportunity to share their opinions. It will be something very similar to the CELAM assembly, which the cardinals in the group of eight have clearly said inspired their thinking about a reform of the synod of bishops.»

Cardinal Maradiaga is the coordinator of the group of eight cardinals, while Errazuiz Ossa is one of its most influential members. With more frequency in recent times, Maradiaga has expanded on his ideas about the Curia reform. He has also raised the reform of the IOR (the Institute for Religious Works, the so-called Vatican bank), although it is not part of the curia reform. He has shared with the media many details about what he thinks these reforms should entail.

That of the Congregation for the Laity is his most recent proposal, and some Canon law experts, as well as committed layman in the Catholic Church, have received the idea with skepticism.

In the Roman Curia, there are two different kinds of departments (a.k.a. dicasteries): the Congregations and the Pontifical Councils. While the Congregations have executive powers, the Pontifical Councils do not, and are more in the background. Broadly speaking, Congregations are part of the Church’s government, while the Pontifical Council are about the presence of the Church in the world.

A possible streamlining of the Curia has been widely discussed. It seems that Benedict XVI wanted to consolidate the responsibilities of different pontifical councils. This is the reason why one of his fist moves was to make the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue part of the Pontifical Council for Culture. At the same time, he left for some time the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and that for the Pontifical Council for Migrants under the same president.

Internal pressures and opposition, the need to find a balance between his men and the «system», and the Curia’s very strong old guard headed by the former Secretary of State Angelo Sodano (still very influential, also with the press) led Benedict XVI to renounce to redesigning the Curia.

Realizing that an overall reform would take too long, Benedict XVI opted for a different approach, one attracting less attention but even more challenging: to anchor everything strongly on Doctrine,  develop a solid juridical-legal framework, and to aim for a change in attitudes.

Benedict XVI implemented the reform of the criteria of admission to seminaries; the global reform of Vatican finances; the reform of the Penal Code, which has gone into effect under Pope Francis; the new constitution of Caritas Internationalis; the motu proprio about Catholic charities; and the reform of discipline in seminaries, which are now under the administration of the Congregation for the Clergy.

Pope Francis’ project seems to be of a different kind. More than consolidating pontifical councils and thus streamlining the «consultative» dicasteries, it seems that he aims at integrating the pontifical councils within the congregations, even by elevating some pontifical councils to the rank of congregation. It is rumored that the confirmation of the leadership of some Vatican dicasteries in their posts, until the expiration of their mandates, supports this hypothesis. This is the case, for example, with the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, which could become a Congregation encompassing the Pontifical Council for the Family, Migrants, and the Laity.

A Congregation for the Laity (which in Maradiaga’s vision would encompass the Pontifical Council for the Family, the Pontifical Academy for life, and the current Pontifical Council for the Laity) is a brand new proposal.

Commenting on it, an official of one of the dicasteries that would be interested in this possible reform told Mondyavatican that «this proposal would in fact ‘clericalize’ these dicasteries.»  A Congregation for the Laity, he adds, «would put issues relating to the family and the laity under one of the Roman Curia’s strongest type of structure. The members of congregations and pontifical councils are cardinals and bishops, rarely laymen. But giving the laity a congregation does not mean give laymen more importance within the ranks of the Church. More likely, it is about about putting the laity under one umbrella.»

The same official underscores that «lay people are very important within the ranks of dicasteries, where they oversee key portfolios and hold posts at the highest levels. Should there be a (political) will to expand the role of laymen, more of them should, above all, be made members of congregations and councils, and not just consultants in them.»

In fact, Pastor Bonus states that «the dicasteries are composed of the cardinal prefect or the presiding archbishop, a body of cardinals and of some bishops, assisted by a secretary, consultors, senior administrators, and a suitable number of officials»  (art. 3).  It also foresees that, «according to the specific nature of certain dicasteries, clerics and other faithful can be added to the body of cardinals and bishops.»

Pastor Bonus can obviously be changed. But there would also be a need to change Canon Law, which establishes that some posts are reserved for clergy only.

A brand new Pastoral Constitution to replace Pastor Bonus is in fact what the group of eight cardinals is thinking about. At the same time, Archbishop José Carballo, Secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, has spoken about the possibility of reforming Canon Law. Taking the floor Oct. 29 at a conference about vocational perseverance, and speaking about religious brothers and sisters abandoning consecrated life, Carballo asserted that «there seems to be a need for a specific path for each novice,»  and also «a novitiate longer than what is contemplated in Canon Law,» to allow for better discernment.

According to canon 648 of the Code of Canon Law, the novitiate must last from a minimum of 12 months to a maximum of 2 years.

A reform of the Code could be an option, because Canon Law «is not the Gospel, it is written by men,»  Carballo said. At that point, Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, Prefect of the Congregation, commented: «That is what Pope Francis told us.» In a conversation after his remarks, Carballo told the author of this blog that «a reform of Canon Law should not only be about the novitiate, it could also be more comprehensive.»

In fact, no reform of the Code of Canon Law is expected at this time. Perhaps in the more distance future. The new code of Canon Law was issued in 1981 after decades of work. It took 16 years to draft «Pastor Bonus»  – which was mostly a realigning of the Curia more than a revolution. The reform of the Synod of Bishops will also take some time, which is the reason why the minor adjustments of every synod are portrayed as exceptions – not changes – to the norm.

The general impression is that we are at the stage of general consultations, more or less open. The group of eight cardinals will meet Dec. 3-5, and it is possible that in February there will be a broader consultation of cardinals, maybe extending it to the members of the General Secretariat of the synod. Paul VI even thought about having the members of the General Secretary of the Synod participate in conclaves. He was dissuaded from doing so, Benny Lai reported, by Cardinal Giuseppe Siri, who thought that the members of the General Secretary of the Synod could be influenced by others. 

That of February may be a sort of mini informal council, partly corresponding to the notion of the permanent assembly that Pope Francis wishes for the Church. This sort of a reform of synodality, a concept close to the Pope’s heart.

This is a rather sterile discussion, because it only looks at the practical aspects of the issues.  Actually, the Church is in fact out of date, but not because of those frequently mentioned considerations.  The Church is 200 years behind where it needs to be in order to build, in advance, structures and shape the intelligentsia allowing her to face future problems.

This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Second Vatican Council. We look back at a Church that understood, before the 1968 revolution came about, the need to step up to the challenges of the times.  The Church of the Council created brand new vocabularies and found a way to harmonize tradition (ultimately Faith, which tenets remain immutable) with the new times.  It is a revolution. But it is a gentle revolution – simply a change of perspective.  The decision to turn the altar and let the priest face the congregation while celebrating the Holy Mass is also a symbolic act: the priest faces the people because faith itself is directed towards the people.  A prophecy, more than a Council.

But the discourse that followed the Second Vatican Council was full of conflicting ideas.  The Church was so focused on itself that it was hardly aware of the new signs of the times.  This was a Church that seemed to lack in prophecy.

Recently, the Nobel Prize for medicine was awarded to the Japanese scientist Yamamaka.  He is working on the so-called «ethical stem cells», i.e. adult stem cells that he programs to «go back in time», enabling them to become a given organ, from a vast range of human body parts.  That news spread fast at the beginning, but then there was silence.  This denotes a Catholic world unable to advance its positions in the public arena.  Yamanaka’s research interests had been well known for a long time.  The Pontifical Academy for Life promoted discussions about this research.  But this «Catholic endorsement» took place within Catholic circles, often non-scientific circles.  This presented an image of Catholics favoring ideology over science.  Once that a Nobel prize had shown that there is no need to destroy embryos for research, the Catholic Church could have weight in to promote this finding, through her diplomatic and cultural means.  It does not.  Aside from some semi-official declaration, nothing is done at a diplomatic level, or even – more simply – at a communications level.  No one in the Holy See or Catholic newspapers use the occasion to, at the very least, make reference to prior Holy See international interventions to defend human life.

It is a missed opportunity. Just like with trans-humanism.  Trans-humanism touches on different areas of human life, including the military.  There are already projects to install electronic chips in soldiers, to enhance their human capacities through technology.  This is an issue of concern to the Holy See, which has discussed it in international congresses organized by Vatican dicasteries.  But the discussion has not reached a larger public.  There is a sort of gap between the top and the grassroots of the Church, a separation between academy and people.  This is the crisis of the Church.  This is what makes the Church 200 years out of date.

Almost unable to gain attention in the public square, unable to communicate because nobody thought about renovating the communication process, the Church’s image is that of an institution detached from reality.  In the past, parishes built communities.  Now they often don’t.  There has been a scarcity of priests able to «fill» vacancies in the parishes.  There are always fewer culturally learned priests.  All too often, the view is that a simple priest is all that is needed to head a parish.  But the role of a parish priest is one of the most delicate: he must transmit and have help faith and theology come alive in the community, while understanding and living within the community.

It is a problem that is evident at the highest echelons of the Catholic hierarchy.  As in the board of the Authority for Financial Information, tasked with monitoring Vatican finances.  The board is comprised by people coming from the Bank of Italy.   The former president of the IOR’s (the Vatican trust fund) Council of Superintendents, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, came himself from «outside the Vatican».  Even the «anti money-laundering expert» hired by the Holy See, René Bruehlart, did not have prior Vatican experience or expertise.  Can «outsiders» – with more of a technical than a humanistic formation – who are not fully aware of the Vatican’s universe serve the biggest institution in the world? Will they be able to understand how important she is? Will they be able to contribute deep and far reaching insights?

Another example: when the problem of religious sects erupted in the world in the 70s,  Massimo Introvigne – a lawyer – decided to study the phenomenon.  He had the funds to do it, so he began collecting data and studying new religions and forms of worship.  He became one of the most prominent experts on the issue. Why did not anybody within the Catholic hierarchy thought about studying new religions, before Introvigne did?

There is another, clear problem: regularization.  Initiatives in the Catholic world, but outside any «official control» or endorsement, are regularized.  Just like it happened to Aid to the Church in Need (ACN).  Last year, ACN became a Pontifical Foundation.  It is a big honor, in recognition of the work done.  But it is also a boomerang, with ACN obliged to be politically correct in its the Report on Religious Freedom in the World.

In the end, there is one problem that can comprise all the others. The need to divulgate Catholic thought both internally and externally has been so undervalued that the rights to the Pope’s third book about Jesus of Nazareth have been given to Rizzoli, a non-Catholic publishing house, thus leaving out the whole Catholic publishing world.  The rationale for this choice is that Rizzoli would guarantee a better distribution.  But this seems like the Church surrendering to a sign of the times: the preeminence of the market over ideals.  Few understand Christian utopia.  A concession that confirms it will take the Church many years to re-organize sharing her message in publications and the media, since at the moment Catholic medias have scant impact on the public opinion. On one hand, there is this lack of impact on the public opinion. On the end, there is the lack on vision to make Catholic medias (not institutional Catholic ones) compete with “lay” medias.

The Church is 200 years out of date, not because it is not able to adjust its moral position, but because there are no successors to her brilliant minds of the past.  In part because the Church did not invest in forming a new generation.

This would be an interesting topic to discuss in the synod of bishops for the new evangelization.  A United  Nations document from the mid eighties mentions integral human development, a Christian/Catholic notion.  It was a time when international negotiations could be positively influenced by Catholicism.  Today, who will negotiate treaties? How will Catholic thought be represented?

Pope Paul VI was prophetic.  After the Second Vatican Council, he understood that a new profession of the Creed was needed. This same Pope wrote in the encyclical Populorum Progressio that the world suffers from a lack of thinking and reflection. Nowadays, even the Church suffers from her lack of thought.