Progressives have worked for decades to change the nature of the Church, now is their last chance

Contemporary witness on commonalities and differences of the process

Würzburg Synod and Synodal Path: "Less brotherly (and sisterly) love today"

At 87, Walter Bayerlein is one of the last living participants of the Würzburg Synod. He looks back on this reform process and compares the Synod with the Synodal Path - and warns of a mistake the latter should not make.

Power, clericalism, sexuality - many of the issues discussed at the Synodal Path were also on the table some 50 years earlier at the Würburg Synod (1971-1975). Some of the resolutions from that time still shape church life in Germany today, others were banned in the Vatican or never answered. This frustrates Walter Bayerlein. The now 87-year-old was a participant in the Würzburg Synod and has followed the Synodal Path. The former presiding judge at the Higher Regional Court in Munich belonged for decades to the board of the Diocesan Council of Catholics of the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising and was vice-president of the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK). In the katholisch.de interview, he draws a comparison between the Synodal Path and the Würzburg Synod and explains why the Church does not have much time left for correction.

Question: Mr Bayerlein, how often have you felt reminded of the Würzburg Synod while following the Synodal Path?

Bayerlein: Constantly, actually, because the aspirations and concerns are still the same ones to which I dedicated several years of my life as a member of the Würzburg Synod.

Question: What are those concerns?

Bayerlein: They are about power in the Church, about clericalism, about the meaningful humane organisation of marriage, family and sexuality and about the participation rights of non-ordained members of the Church, to name just a few examples.

Question: And where do you see the major differences between the Synodal Path and the Würzburg Synod?

Bayerlein: First of all, the starting point is different: at that time, bishops, clergy and laity were in a mood of departure after the end of the Second Vatican Council. The Synodal Path is busy somehow coming to grips with the catastrophe caused by the disclosure of the abuse cases. Tensions have already marked the Würzburg Synod, especially after the controversial encyclical "Humanae vitae". In the presence of the Blessed Sacrament in the Würzburg Cathedral we often had heated discussions, but most of the time very constructively. Over the years, mutual trust has grown steadily. The biggest fundamental difference, however, lies in the question of the statute.

"The behaviour of some hardliners and individual bishops, as far as I have learned from the media, I feel today to be much less collegial and "confraternal" than at the time of the Würzburg Synod," Walter Bayerlein criticises. He was a member of the Würzburg Synod and later, among other things, Vice-President of the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK).

Cathcon:  What does he expect, given the manifest failure of the post-Conciliar project

Question: In what way?

Bayerlein: The Würzburg Synod had a statute approved by Pope Paul VI, according to which everyone had equal voting rights - whether bishop, professor of theology or layman, woman or man. There were no blocking minorities and the bishops could only veto a decision if they could justify that something spoke against the doctrine of faith or morals, and - this is decisive - before the decision was taken, and this by the College of the Bishops' Conference. The adopted texts on which there was no such veto became ecclesiastical law when they were published in the diocesan official gazette. This meant that the debates were extremely serious, because every word mattered for the decision. With the Synodal Path, on the other hand, a few bishops were able to make use of their blocking minority and the bishops are not obliged by canon law to implement the decisions. They could thus lean back much more - sometimes ostentatiously. In Bishop Georg Bätzing, the Bishops' Conference has an energetic and level-headed chairman who has my greatest respect. The behaviour of some hardliners and individual bishops, as far as I have learned from the media, I feel today to be much less collegial and "confraternal" than at the time of the Würzburg Synod.

Question: In your view, are there also differences in the topics?

Bayerlein: The Würzburg Synod was underpinned by a large survey among the faithful. The topics thus came from the midst of the church community. The topics of the Synodal Path were determined by a different focus, namely the systemic causes of sexual abuse in the Church. That is why people in Rome think they can denigrate the Synodal Path as the result of an elitist, aloof academic class on the fringes of the church people who want to propagate a new Protestant church. I find such remarks - which unfortunately are sometimes also reported by Pope Francis himself - very irritating and hurtful for people who - like us at the time in the Würzburg Synod - have invested a lot of time and energy in this project out of love for the Church.

Cathcon: You would find them irritating because they are accurate.  Synodality was born in academe and there it will die.

Question: Democracy in the Church, celibacy, the diaconate of women - all this was already on the table 50 years ago. But nothing has really happened until today. Why is that?

Bayerlein: It all has to do with the question of the distribution of power and the way power is exercised in the Church. Even bishops are often treated by Rome like subordinate administrative officials while at the same time exalting the church office. In practice, Rome seems to think little of the original participation rights of the laity, who, as Vatican II says, are called "by the Lord himself" to the "service of salvation" in the world and in the Church (LG 33). In this respect, our Church does not have a theory deficit, but a practice deficit. At the Würzburg Synod, for example, we adopted a text on administrative jurisdiction at the second reading on the basis of a separation of powers with over 90 percent approval. However, this was then simply put on ice in Rome.

"As a believing Christian, however, I remain convinced that the Holy Spirit is always good for some kind of emergency landing in His Church. [...] Rome has not exclusively subscribed to the Holy Spirit."

- Quote: Dr. Walter Bayerlein

Question: The idea of an ecclesiastical administrative jurisdiction was also taken up at the Synodal Path ...

Bayerlein: Yes, but this overdue project is again under consideration in Rome. There, one stubbornly refuses to distinguish between a democracy as a form of state and proven democratic rules for living together, which largely correspond to human dignity. Apparently, an election as opposed to an appointment by a higher authority is a flaw from the church's point of view. Yet the Pope himself comes to his office by election. There is the old human rights principle: What concerns all, all should also participate in. It is said in the Benedictine rule that the abbot should do everything with advice. But the council is still something in the Church that can simply be ignored. It is annoying that we have to wait so long for the Church to change for the better. In my view, there is not much time left for correction. Otherwise more people in the church will resign and leave. The wholesome Christian message will thus be weakened, in the individual and in society.

Question: So you are not particularly optimistic that the proposals will be heard in Rome this time and implemented accordingly?

Bayerlein: No. If anything, the World Synod can bring something, although the omens are very different. On the one hand, there is now an "Instrumentum laboris" in which the current problems are openly listed. On the other hand, the non-appointment of the President of the Central Committee of German Catholics, Irme Stetter-Karp, is already a bitter blow. And the appointment of Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller is not a positive signal for me either.

Question: Nevertheless, some observers are currently noticing a changed mood and movement in the Church. To what extent can the mood be compared with that around the Second Vatican Council?

Bayerlein: The experience with the Council has shaped my life: In the time before the Second Vatican Council, I was a member of the BDKJ city tour in Munich, and a lot of things in the church seemed cemented to me. When it came to what came from above in Rome, we often raised our spikes, just like young people are. But then came reports about the Second Vatican Council and I became alert: At that time, I was surprised that the assembly had wiped the prefabricated texts from the Vatican off the table and had worked out the texts themselves. I was then impressed by the understanding of the Church as the "people of God on the way", the positively changed view of the role of the laity for the world and the Church, the fundamentally changed attitude to religious freedom and above all the revised teaching on Judaism. These were great signs of hope for me and important impulses for my Christianity. And at first this also had a noticeable effect in the Church. But then people in Rome tried to bring the windows, which had been opened wide by John XXIII, back to the tilt position. Often with success. As a believing Christian, however, I am still convinced that the Holy Spirit is always good for some kind of emergency landing in his Church. He blows where he wants, when he wants and how he wants. Rome does not have an exclusive subscription to the Holy Spirit. So perhaps this assembly can actually become the movement that gives the Pope a tailwind - but which I don't know whether he really wants and whether he can still cope with.

Question: About 50 years ago, the Würzburg Synod presented its results. What of it still has an impact today?

Bayerlein: Many of the results of the Würzburg Synod have been forgotten in retrospect, but they still play a role today. Texts from the resolution "Our Hope" still serve many parish councils today as an inspiring introduction to the agenda. Youth work still lives from the text that was adopted at that time. What was formulated by the Würzburg Synod on the meaning of marriage, family and human sexuality is, in my view, the best thing that had been published by Catholics up to that time. But of course Rome has also forbidden many things, such as preaching by lay people, which we decided on. This was banned again in 1983 by the new canon law - in my view completely without reason.

Question: What do you think will be the legacy of the Synodal Path?

Bayerlein: If you draw a line now and look at what the Synodal Path has achieved, some people say that it has achieved nothing. I disagree: it has shown that in a Church like in Germany it is possible to name problems openly and straightforwardly and thus to enter into an open exchange in which even bishops who are willing to reform openly commit themselves to change. The Vatican dicasteries would be well advised to take this really seriously. Whether they agree to each of these solutions, which indeed sometimes still look a little strange from a world-church perspective, is another question. That the Synodal Path has achieved nothing cannot therefore be said. It can be said that it has achieved far too little. But that is already rooted in the statute. Another fruit is the network that has been created.

Question: What do you mean by that?

Bayerlein: Nebulously, one often speaks of the spirit of an assembly without knowing exactly how to grasp it. Through the consultations and cooperation at the Würzburg Synod, we had a network across all dioceses and church offices. But afterwards we simply dumbed down this chapter. The Synodal Path should not make this mistake again.

Source

Walter Bayerlein celebrated his 80th birthday in 2015

Decisive shaper of the lay apostolate / Cardinal Marx: "Critical and motivating companion along the path".

Munich, 14 December 2015. Walter Bayerlein, one of the decisive shapers of the democratically legitimised lay apostolate in Germany, completed his 80th year on Friday, 11 December. In a letter of congratulations, Cardinal Reinhard Marx paid tribute to Bayerlein's "multifaceted work" and "immense commitment". Bayerlein had always been a "critical and motivating companion", said the Archbishop of Munich and Freising and President of the German Bishops' Conference: "Your advice was sought, your impulses were taken up, because you always represented a deeply Christian view in our society." Bayerlein's commitment during the Würzburg Synod in particular "was of great significance for the lay apostolate and continues to reverberate to this day."

Hans Tremmel, Chairman of the Diocesan Council of Catholics of the Archdiocese, described Bayerlein as an "extraordinarily important initiator of the German lay apostolate". Bayerlein exemplifies the "serious dialogue between bishops, priests and laity, pushing for co-decision", says Tremmel: "I am glad to still be able to profit from his memories and experiences. One can learn from him to present one's position pointedly and yet factually, to express one's opinion clearly and yet not create irreconcilable fronts." But one can also learn from Bayerlein that socio-political commitment is part of the core mission of councils and associations. His activities in family law policy and the protection of the unborn deserve special attention, the chair emphasised. Through his commitment to the Donum Vitae association, Bayerlein had "contributed significantly to the fact that counselling of pregnant women in conflict situations, based on Christian values, could be continued even after the Church left the state counselling system".

Bayerlein played a decisive role in the reorganisation of the lay apostolate in Germany from the 1960s onwards. He was decisively influenced by the newly formulated position of the laity in church and society in the Second Vatican Council. In his memoirs, he emphasises how important it was to finally give the "faith and life experience of non-ordained women and men in the teaching of the Church the weight that corresponds to their dignity as mature Christians". As a member of the Würzburg Synod, which discussed the implementation of the Second Vatican Council in Germany between 1971 and 1975, he made a decisive contribution to the development of the present form of parish and Catholic councils.

Bayerlein was a member of the board of the Diocesan Council of Catholics of the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising from 1968 to 2002. From 1972 to 2005 he worked on the Central Committee of German Catholics and was its Vice-President for many years. Bayerlein was a founding member at the federal level as well as a founding initiator of Donum Vitae in Bavaria and continues to support the association today with a high level of personal commitment. In 2008, he was awarded the Federal Cross of Merit.

See The Scandal of Donum Vitae enabling abortions

The former Presiding Judge at the Higher Regional Court in Munich is still active for the Diocesan Council of Catholics and a member of the expert committee on the Second Vatican Council and the Würzburg Synod. Thus, in recent years, five decades after the Council and four decades after the Synod, he has been committed to taking up the impulses of the Council and the Synod anew and has participated in many events in parishes and educational institutions. 

Source