That Primacy of the Pope Which Divides the Churches. But on Which Francis Blocks Reform

2025 will not only be the year of jubi­lee for the Church of Rome. It will also be the 1700th anni­ver­sa­ry of the fir­st ecu­me­ni­cal coun­cil in histo­ry, held in 325 in the city of Nicaea, modern-day Iznik, in Anatolia, not far from the Bosphorus.

For the occa­sion Pope Francis plans to meet in Iznik with Constantinople patriarch Bartholomew and other heads of the Eastern Churches, with the aim of agreeing once and for all on a com­mon date for the cele­bra­tion of Easter, which by a for­tu­na­te coin­ci­den­ce of the dif­fe­rent calen­dars will indeed be so next year, April 20.

But abo­ve all, the anni­ver­sa­ry of Nicaea will be a chan­ce to fur­ther ecu­me­ni­cal dia­lo­gue on the pri­ma­cy of the pope, on how to rethink it and put it into prac­ti­ce with the con­sen­sus of all the Churches divi­ded from Rome, of the East as of the West. An effort as toil­so­me as ever, but one that has taken a few steps for­ward in the last few deca­des, as docu­men­ted in a text publi­shed this year by the Vatican dica­ste­ry for Christian uni­ty, hea­ded by Swiss car­di­nal Kurt Koch.

The text, which bears the title “The Bishop of Rome” and is pre­sen­ted as “a stu­dy docu­ment,” fol­lo­ws in the foo­tsteps of the con­ci­liar decree “Unitatis redin­te­gra­tio” and the con­cur­rent lif­ting, on December 7, 1965, of the mutual excom­mu­ni­ca­tions bet­ween the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, dating back to the great schi­sm of 1054.

The ecu­me­ni­cal dia­lo­gue encou­ra­ged by Vatican Council II has had one of its most deba­ted que­stions in papal pri­ma­cy. Paul VI sin­gled it out right away as “the grea­te­st obsta­cle on the path of ecu­me­ni­sm.” And John Paul II, in the 1995 ency­cli­cal “Ut unum sint,” expres­sed the hope that this obsta­cle could be over­co­me by fin­ding “a way of exer­ci­sing the pri­ma­cy which, whi­le in no way renoun­cing what is essen­tial to its mis­sion, is none­the­less open to a new situa­tion.”

This appeal was fol­lo­wed by dozens of respon­ses from various Churches and ecu­me­ni­cal move­men­ts and around fif­ty docu­men­ts with the resul­ts of the dia­lo­gues stit­ched toge­ther with the Catholic Church. The text of the dica­ste­ry for Christian uni­ty pre­sen­ts a gene­ral index and a tho­rou­gh sum­ma­ry of all this.

As regards, for exam­ple, the Eastern Churches, the mixed com­mis­sion of Catholic and Orthodox theo­lo­gians that mee­ts perio­di­cal­ly pro­du­ced a docu­ment in 2016, in Chieti, pre­ci­se­ly on “syno­da­li­ty and pri­ma­cy in the fir­st mil­len­nium,” in line with that famous dic­tum of the young Joseph Ratzinger accor­ding to which, on the pri­ma­cy of the pope, “Rome must not requi­re more of the East than was for­mu­la­ted and lived during the fir­st mil­len­nium.”

But without going so far as to adopt the two dif­fe­rent under­stan­dings of the pri­ma­cy of the bishop of Rome from back in tho­se fir­st thou­sand years in the West and in the East, accor­ding to what is writ­ten in the docu­ment.

And the two posi­tions appea­red even more distant in the sub­se­quent docu­ment of 2023, pro­du­ced in Alexandria, Egypt and dedi­ca­ted to the second mil­len­nium, that of the bol­ste­ring of the pope’s pri­ma­cy and infal­li­bi­li­ty, cul­mi­na­ting in Vatican Council I. In addi­tion, mis­sing from the mee­ting was the patriar­cha­te of Moscow, alrea­dy at odds with the patriar­cha­te of Constantinople pre­ci­se­ly on the que­stion of the pri­ma­cy of the lat­ter in the camp of Orthodoxy.

The stu­dy docu­ment “The Bishop of Rome” does not limit itself to focu­sing on the resul­ts achie­ved in the past deca­des. It goes fur­ther. In its last twen­ty or so pages it pre­sen­ts a series of “pro­po­sals” for “an exer­ci­se of pri­ma­cy in the 21st cen­tu­ry,” that is, “for a renewed exer­ci­se of the mini­stry of

uni­ty of the Bishop of Rome that can be ‘reco­gni­sed by all con­cer­ned.’”

And here are the pro­po­sals in their essen­tial pas­sa­ges, in the order in which the docu­ment pre­sen­ts them.

RE-READ VATICAN I

“Among the pro­po­sals expres­sed by the dia­lo­gues, the call for a Catholic ‘re-reception’ or offi­cial com­men­ta­ry of Vatican I seems par­ti­cu­lar­ly impor­tant. […] It is essen­tial to re-read Vatican I in light of the who­le Tradition, ‘accor­ding to the ancient and con­stant belief of the uni­ver­sal Church,’ and again­st the hori­zon of a gro­wing ecu­me­ni­cal con­ver­gen­ce on the bibli­cal foun­da­tion, histo­ri­cal deve­lo­p­men­ts, and theo­lo­gi­cal signi­fi­can­ce of pri­ma­cy and syno­da­li­ty.”

PATRIARCH OF THE WEST, BUT POPE OF ALL

“Another impor­tant pro­po­sal is that a clea­rer distinc­tion be made bet­ween the dif­fe­rent respon­si­bi­li­ties of the Pope, espe­cial­ly bet­ween his mini­stry as head of the Catholic Church and his mini­stry of uni­ty among all Christians, or more spe­ci­fi­cal­ly bet­ween his patriar­chal mini­stry in the Latin Church and his pri­ma­tial mini­stry in the com­mu­nion of Churches. The remo­val of the title ‘Patriarch of the West’ from the ‘Annuario Pontificio’ in 2006 rai­sed some con­cerns in ecu­me­ni­cal cir­cles and gave an oppor­tu­ni­ty to begin a reflec­tion on the distinc­tion bet­ween the­se dif­fe­rent respon­si­bi­li­ties, which needs to be con­ti­nued.”

BISHOP OF ROME WITH HIS CATHEDRAL

“Since the dif­fe­rent respon­si­bi­li­ties of the Pope are groun­ded in his mini­stry as Bishop of Rome, the Church pre­si­ding in cha­ri­ty over all the Churches, it is also essen­tial to highlight his epi­sco­pal mini­stry at the local level, as a bishop among bishops. […] the listing of his other pon­ti­fi­cal titles as ‘histo­ri­cal’ (see ‘Annuario Pontificio’ 2020), may con­tri­bu­te to a new ima­ge of the papa­cy. Similarly, the cathe­dral of the dio­ce­se of Rome has been given a grea­ter pro­mi­nen­ce sin­ce recent papal docu­men­ts and cor­re­spon­den­ce have been signed from Saint John Lateran, a church which could play a more signi­fi­cant role also at the inau­gu­ra­tion of a new pon­ti­fi­ca­te. Nevertheless, the ter­mi­no­lo­gy used in offi­cial Catholic docu­men­ts and sta­te­men­ts con­cer­ning the mini­stry of the Pope often fails to reflect the­se deve­lo­p­men­ts and lacks ecu­me­ni­cal sen­si­ti­vi­ty.”

PRIMACY AND SYNODALITY TOGETHER

“The syno­dal sha­ping of the Catholic Church is cru­cial for her ecu­me­ni­cal com­mit­ment. […] Many syno­dal insti­tu­tions and prac­ti­ces of the Eastern Catholic Churches could inspi­re the Latin Church. […] It is also impor­tant to rea­li­ze the call of the Second Vatican Council con­cer­ning epi­sco­pal con­fe­ren­ces. […] In par­ti­cu­lar, it might be obser­ved that the paral­lel bet­ween the epi­sco­pal con­fe­ren­ces and the ancient patriar­cha­tes dra­wn by ‘Lumen gen­tium’ 23 has not been deve­lo­ped, either theo­lo­gi­cal­ly or cano­ni­cal­ly. […] The 2021–2024 syno­dal pro­cess for the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops enti­tled ‘For a Synodal Church: com­mu­nion, par­ti­ci­pa­tion and mis­sion,’ based on a broad con­sul­ta­tion of the who­le People of God at the local, regio­nal, natio­nal, con­ti­nen­tal and uni­ver­sal levels, is a favou­ra­ble occa­sion to dee­pen the reflec­tion on the syno­dal dyna­mic arti­cu­la­ting the per­so­nal, col­le­gial and com­mu­nal dimen­sions of the Church.”

A PERMANENT SYNODAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE WHOLE CHURCH

“Pope Francis esta­bli­shed a fur­ther expres­sion of epi­sco­pal com­mu­nion and assi­stan­ce to the ‘munus petri­num’ which the Episcopate across the world is able to offer, when, in the fir­st year of his pon­ti­fi­ca­te, he crea­ted a Council of Cardinals.14 Though not part of the Roman Curia, this Council, along­si­de the ordi­na­ry and extraor­di­na­ry Consistories), could be the fir­st step towards a per­ma­nent syno­dal gover­ning struc­tu­re at the level of the enti­re Church, invol­ving acti­ve par­ti­ci­pa­tion of local bishops. This was alrea­dy sug­ge­sted during Vatican II by the Melkite Patriarch Maximus IV.”

NEXT APPOINTMENT IN NICAEA

“A syno­da­li­ty ‘ad extra,’ pro­mo­ting regu­lar mee­tings among Church repre­sen­ta­ti­ves at the world­wi­de level, some­ti­mes cal­led ‘con­ci­liar fel­lo­w­ship’, is indi­ca­ted as a pro­mi­sing way to make visi­ble and dee­pen the com­mu­nion alrea­dy shared. […] The invi­ta­tion to other Christian com­mu­nions to par­ti­ci­pa­te in Catholic syno­dal pro­ces­ses at all levels is par­ti­cu­lar­ly impor­tant, and could be exten­ded to the ‘ad limi­na’ visi­ts, as sug­ge­sted by dif­fe­rent dia­lo­gues. At ano­ther level, the 2018 mee­ting in Bari of Church lea­ders gathe­red at the invi­ta­tion of Pope Francis, to pray, reflect and exchan­ge infor­mal­ly on the situa­tion of Christians in the Middle East, indi­ca­tes a new way of exer­ci­sing syno­da­li­ty and pri­ma­cy. A joint pre­pa­ra­tion and com­me­mo­ra­tion of the 1700th anni­ver­sa­ry of the First Ecumenical Council (Nicaea, 325) could pro­vi­de the occa­sion to prac­ti­se this syno­da­li­ty among Christians of all tra­di­tions.”

FIRST STEPS IN COMMON WITH THE CHURCHES OF THE EAST…

“Avoiding a super­fi­cial and unrea­li­stic oppo­si­tion bet­ween law and com­mu­nion, a pro­po­sal of com­mu­nion based on ‘a ser­vi­ce of love reco­gni­sed by all con­cer­ned’ (‘Ut unum sint’ 95) should not be expres­sed in juri­di­cal terms alo­ne, but on the basis of a ‘koi­no­nia’ eccle­sio­lo­gy roo­ted in the sacra­men­tal under­stan­ding of the Church favou­red by the Second Vatican Council. […] With regard to the Orthodox Churches, with which the Catholic Church reco­gni­zes a com­mon eccle­sial order based on the apo­sto­lic tra­di­tion and the sacra­men­ts, this model might ali­gn clo­se­ly with the often quo­ted prin­ci­ple that ‘Rome must not requi­re more of the East than was for­mu­la­ted and lived during the fir­st mil­len­nium.’ […] This model could inclu­de two respon­si­bi­li­ties iden­ti­fied by the dia­lo­gues rela­ted to the mini­stry of uni­ty of the Bishop of Rome: a spe­ci­fic role in Ecumenical coun­cils such as con­ve­ning and pre­si­ding, and a role of media­tion in case of con­flic­ts of a disci­pli­na­ry or doc­tri­nal natu­re, throu­gh the syno­dal exer­ci­se of the pro­ce­du­re of appeal (as descri­bed for exam­ple by the Council of Sardica, 343).”

… AND WITH THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES OF THE WEST

“Some Western Christian com­mu­nions also reco­gni­ze the fir­st mil­len­nium as a point of refe­ren­ce. Even if some fun­da­men­tal eccle­sio­lo­gi­cal issues remain to be resol­ved, such as apo­sto­li­ci­ty and ordai­ned mini­stry, and the sacra­men­tal natu­re and orde­ring of the Church, many dia­lo­gues reco­gni­ze the need for a pri­ma­cy for the who­le Church to pro­mo­te Christian uni­ty and mis­sion. At the same time, they highlight the pri­ma­cy of the Gospel and the neces­si­ty of a com­mu­nal and col­le­gial exer­ci­se of pri­ma­cy. […] These dia­lo­gues offer impor­tant insights and per­spec­ti­ves towards an accep­ta­ble exer­ci­se of a mini­stry of uni­ty by the Bishop of Rome, a pri­ma­cy of pro­cla­ma­tion and wit­ness (kerigma-martyria), which could be recei­ved by other Western Christians even befo­re the resto­ra­tion of full com­mu­nion.”

*

These are the pro­po­sals of the stu­dy docu­ment “The Bishop of Rome.” But they are lar­ge­ly con­tra­dic­ted by the actual moda­li­ty of govern­ment imple­men­ted by Pope Francis.

A bit of sub­dued cri­ti­ci­sm emer­ges in the docu­ment itself. For exam­ple, whe­re it reco­gni­zes a “lack of ecu­me­ni­cal sen­si­ti­vi­ty” in the ways in which Francis acts as bishop of Rome.

But the most gla­ring con­tra­dic­tion is the one con­cer­ning syno­da­li­ty. The docu­ment banks on the 2021–2024 synod dedi­ca­ted pre­ci­se­ly to refor­ming the Church in a syno­dal sen­se, but is silent on the actual anni­hi­la­tion of this pur­po­se by such a pope as Francis, who has humi­lia­ted the synods, both the late­st one and tho­se befo­re, by in fact exer­ci­sing over them a soli­ta­ry and abso­lu­te domi­nion, as brought to light by the pre­vious post of Settimo Cielo.

Not to men­tion his unheard-of claim of deri­ving even the tem­po­ral powers of the pope from his role as pri­ma­te of the Church. A claim codi­fied in the pre­am­ble of the new fun­da­men­tal law of Vatican City State publi­shed on May 13, 2023, cloa­king in divi­ne right not only the supre­me spi­ri­tual govern­ment of the Church, but also the tem­po­ral govern­ment, still on the part of the pope, of Vatican City State.

In two mil­len­nia of histo­ry, never has a pope dared so much. And it is obvious that this inor­di­na­te­ly enlar­ges the obsta­cle that papal pri­ma­cy poses to a recon­ci­lia­tion bet­ween the Churches.

And again. How can one not regi­ster the syste­ma­tic vio­la­tion of the fun­da­men­tal pre­cep­ts of a rule of law in the trial brought at the Vatican again­st Cardinal Angelo Becciu and other defen­dan­ts, with Pope Francis cal­ling the sho­ts as he plea­ses?

In short, when put to the test, the stu­dy docu­ment “The Bishop of Rome,” with its pro­po­sals of ecu­me­ni­cal good will, is nul­li­fied by the actual con­duct of the rei­gning pope.

(Translated by Matthew Sherry: traduttore@hotmail.com)

————

Sandro Magister is past “vati­ca­ni­sta” of the Italian wee­kly L’Espresso.
The late­st arti­cles in English of his blog Settimo Cielo are on this page.
But the full archi­ve of Settimo Cielo in English, from 2017 to today, is acces­si­ble.
As is the com­ple­te index of the blog www.chiesa, which pre­ce­ded it.