Understanding the Term ‘People of God’

This discussion about what model of the Church to use is reminiscent of the ecclesiological debates after the Council, where the People of God model was in danger of being interpreted in an overly democratic and political way. The 1985 Synod of Bishops cautioned against a purely sociological view of the Church: ‘We cannot replace a false unilateral vision of the Church as purely hierarchical with a new sociological conception which is also unilateral’.^{Footnote 10} Walter Kasper noted that we often wrongly use the term to refer to the laity alone as distinct from the hierarchy and this can lead to a politicization of the term.^{Footnote 11}

Joseph Ratzinger too, highlighted many times the Church's distinctiveness as the ‘People of God’; ecclesia To Theou.^{Footnote 12} In Democratie in der Kirche, like Kasper, he criticizes the view which identifies the People of God with the laity alone and in a way that appears to give justification for overcoming the laity's passivity or a right to criticize the ministry of the episcopate.^{Footnote 13} For Ratzinger, it is essential that the People of God is interpreted as referring to the whole Church, which precedes the separation into hierarchy and laity.^{Footnote 14} He goes on to say that what distinguishes the Church from a people understood in a sociological or political way (‘volk’) is that the Church is an assembly; the assembly of God. The very identity of this assembly is foreshadowed in the People of Israel and the covenant relationship which established them. The distinctiveness of the New Covenant gathering is the coming together of Christian members through the anamnesis of the death and Resurrection of the Lord.^{Footnote 15}

In The Ratzinger Report, he explained again that the Church is a gift of God and not one constructed by believers from the ground up. This view also includes noting the role of the hierarchy as gifted by God for the good of the Church, hence overcoming a Marxist hermeneutic of suspicion of all authority as working against ‘the people’. He goes on to say,

Ratzinger's rejection of the errors of democratization in the Church corresponds to his more general rejection of ‘making things’ from the bottom up as distinct from the possibility of receiving, which, as he emphasizes, is essential to the Christian understanding of faith, revelation, liturgy, and the Church itself.^{Footnote 17}

Accepting this principle of the Church and Revelation as a gift, is not to say on the other hand, that Ratzinger sees no place for the subjective aspects including receptivity to revelation and a role for the laity to exercise their charisms or participate in the life of the Church. As he says in Introduction to Christianity, emphasizing receptivity does not mean that ‘making is reduced in value or proclaimed to be superfluous. It is only because we have received that we can also make’.^{Footnote 18} Hence new and various expressions of Revelation related to different charisms nevertheless testify to a unity since Revelation is first received as a gift from God.^{Footnote 19} John Henry Newman in a similar way, explained how there can be a legitimate plurality in the expression of Revelation since the Church is as a personal subject with a ‘mind’. The mind of the Church contains the single idea of Christianity (Revelation) which takes possession of many minds of believers in the Church but in different ways.^{Footnote 20} As Johan Adam Mohler explains it, Church is the ongoing incarnation in history,^{Footnote 21} enfleshing Christ in various ways for new generations.

We can envisage possibilities for the development of the understanding of aspects of the deposit of faith through the synodal process, since each member of the Body of Christ receives the message of Revelation and in some sense interprets it. As Dei Verbum 8, explains, those who receive the word in the Church ponder it in their prayer, study and contemplation, and in this way, it bears fruit in new ways. Thus, all listening and discernment in the synodal process is to try to ascertain where the Holy Spirit, who keeps the Church in the freshness of youth (LG 4), is leading it to new life-giving paths for God's people.

The Church as Sacrament: Holiness and Mission

Avery Dulles argues that the People of God model, often understood as a more organizational aspect of Church cannot be pitted against the Body of Christ model, emphasizing more the interior communion. This is because, as he explains, both models capture a ‘communion ecclesiology’,^{Footnote 22} and hence represent the ‘union of members with one another and with God in Christ’.^{Footnote 23} Although he describes both models as ‘interpersonal’, he recognizes that both have weaknesses in that they tend to ‘divinize’ the Church in a way that idealizes it and both often fail to give Christians a clear missionary identity.^{Footnote 24} For Dulles, the Church as Sacrament offers a better way that unites both the hierarchical, social and graced dimensions into one integral understanding. It offers a reminder that we receive grace not just as a spiritual reality, but through its expression in the visible and social reality of the Church.^{Footnote 25} In The Splendor of the Church, Henri De Lubac reminds us, that although the social structure of the Christian community is seen to be inferior to the spiritual gifts which sustain it, that in its essentials, this visible structure is also of divine origin.^{Footnote 26}

What is common to all these models of communion ecclesiology is a reminder that human hands do not construct the Church, but that is based on the communion brought about by Christ's reconciliation of the world to himself on the cross at Calvary. This work of reconciliation is continued at every Eucharistic celebration and, hence, as De Lubac expressed it in reclaiming the first century Patristic understanding, ‘the Eucharist makes the Church’.^{Footnote 27} As Lumen Gentium also explains, it is through the Eucharist that the hierarchical dimensions are connected to the work of salvation, also overcoming any separation of ministerial authority with the elements of grace (LG 26).

As a premise to understanding synodality, and to avoid a politicized ecclesiology, it is also important to read the ‘Ecclesia tou Theou’ within the whole ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium. This acknowledges the Trinitarian dimensions of the Church as mystery (sacrament) as bringing about a union between God and humanity. Even the very first statement about the People of God in chapter two, grounds their identity in the call to holiness (LG, 9).^{Footnote 28} This is also a call to share in the priestly, prophetic, and kingly status of Jesus Christ through baptism and the other sacraments as outlined immediately afterwards in LG 10 –12. The gift of these three munera is not simply to fashion a mystical identity, they are given to be lived out by each member of the body in terms of their particular vocation in the Church and the world, bringing together both visible and invisible dimensions of the Church. Members of the Church become sacraments (signs and instruments) of that communion in the world through their own lives. Deepening this idea, chapter five goes on to elaborate what that union between God and man looks like: holiness not merely as an interior state, but ‘the perfection of charity’ (LG 39), and conformity to Christ and his Cross in the Holy Spirit (LG 40-41). In chapter eight, Mary's participation in the life of the Trinity, as daughter of the Father, Mother of the Son and temple of the Holy Spirit (LG 53) is an archetypal concretization of the identity of members being sacramental representations of ecclesial communion. She reveals concretely for the baptized, the possibilities of divinization through faith and grace and the call to share in the mystery of the Trinity as explained in chapter one. She is the ecclesial person par excellence.

A final dimension to the understanding of the Church as communion is related to mission. The Church as sacrament (LG1) is not only a sign, but also an instrument of salvation for all humanity. This is an invitation to be open not only to other Christians, but to all people of good will as expressed by Pope John XXIII's in Humani Salutis and Gaudet Mater Ecclesiae. Yet that openness to the world expressed also in Gaudium et Spes, was not just an indiscriminate embrace of the secular culture, but a proclamation of Christ as the answer to humanity's existential quest for the meaning of human nature (GS, 22).^{Footnote 29}

The Sensus Fidei and Faith as a Gift

Firstly, the sensus fidei, as LG 12 explains, is a special gift given to ‘the entire body of the faithful’, based on the anointing of all in baptism as prophets, called like Christ (Christos- the anointed one) to bring the good news (Lk 4: 18-19). It is this gift of the Holy Spirit that guarantees that all the faithful ‘cannot err in matters of belief’.

As Ormond Rush explains, it is important to establish, that theologically the sensus fidei is connected to the New Testament idea of the organ of faith’.^{Footnote 31} The 2014 document from the International Theological Commission on the sensus fidei echoes this view, and explains that faith as a theological virtue, enables the believer to ‘participate in the knowledge that God has of himself and of all things’ and through this participation in God, believer's knowledge becomes ‘connaturalized to God’.^{Footnote 32} Rush elaborates that the sensus fidei names the hermeneutical dimension at the heart of faith,^{Footnote 33} since it is both the capacity for interpretation based on the fides qua (the personal relationship with God), and the interpretation that results from it (fides quae).^{Footnote 34} Rush does not develop a theology of interpretation based on faith and discernment here,^{Footnote 35} but it is a salient reminder that the discernment at work in all stages of the Synodal process needs to be connected to the theological virtue of faith and thus requires a deep, spiritual form of listening to hear ‘what the Holy Spirit is saying to the churches’ (Rev 3:22).

The Sensus Fidei and the Voice of the Infallible Church: a Demonstration of Universal Agreement

Secondly, the understanding of the sensus fidei in LG 12, testifies to the infallible faith of the Church which is discerned by listening for a manifestation of unity and agreement, when, ‘the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith ‘from the Bishops’ down to the last of the lay faithful’ they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals’.^{Footnote 36} Such universal agreement is a very obvious fruit and sign of the Holy Spirit, but again has to be carefully discerned, within a communion ecclesiology. In the synodal process, listening out for this voice of the Spirit is not about finding a majority voice or opinion, but by a unity between or among specific parts of the body who testify to the infallible Church.

Newman's article, On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine, is often quoted as a justification for listening to the laity alone as testifying to the sensus fidei. Yet Newman listened to the laity, not to hear their voices ‘per se’, but for the purpose of understanding Revelation correctly (or the apostolic deposit of faith) and noted that this should be an ongoing principle in the Church.^{Footnote 37} He drew this idea from his previous work, The Arians of the Fourth Century, elaborating that during the Arian crisis, the Bishops failed to live up to their particular way of teaching, consistent with their vocation - their commission to preach the Gospel, whereas the laity lived up to their particular way of teaching through their baptismal witness and thus preserved the faith.^{Footnote 38} He writes,

Newman gives the example of how listening to the laity contributed to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary in 1854, thus manifesting apostolic tradition in a way that benefitted doctrinal development. He writes that the Holy See in this process treated the laity with ‘attention and consideration’, since ‘the body of the faithful is one of the witnesses to the fact of the tradition of revealed doctrine, and because their consensus through Christendom is the voice of the infallible Church’.^{Footnote 40} Their unified voice testified to the gift of infallibility, the ‘infallibility in believing’ of the whole Church together which cannot err.^{Footnote 41}

While Newman's ideas on consulting the laity have been quoted often in relation to synodal listening, they arose in their historical context out of a legitimate reaction to a pyramidical church, where, as Dulles describes it, the clerics taught and the laity passively received.^{Footnote 42} Today we have to also avoid ‘reversing the pyramid’ so that the clergy and Bishops somehow see themselves as subordinate to the laity as though the laity's voice is always equated with the sensus fidelium and the infallible church. As Newman explained, this is not always the case since the voice of the infallible Church, can be manifested in various parts of the Church: in the laity, in the clergy or the bishops alone at different points in history. As he explains,

Consulting the Faithful in the Context of the Conspiratio Pastorum et Fidelium

Developing this consideration of what we are listening for in the synodal process by drawing on Newman, the hierarchy are to consult the laity, not so much by listening to their voice, but by listening for where there is a ‘conspiratio’ between pastors and the faithful in their expressions of faith. Newman explains, that since the Church is one body, thus there is a mutual inspiration by the Holy Spirit of the teachers (ecclesia docens) and learners (ecclesia docta) in the Church, the conspiratio pastorum et fidelium. testifying to the deposit of apostolic tradition.

This conspiratio acknowledges the distinct roles of each in the Church and listens in appropriate ways. Newman explains that a Bishop is to consult the laity like a doctor consults his patients. The patient is not supposed to diagnose him/herself, but rather explain the problem to the medic so that the medic can treat the patient appropriately.^{Footnote 44} Hence applying the analogy to the theological consultation of the laity, they are to be consulted since they embody, witness or testify to the gift of Revelation given to the Church. As Newman puts it, ‘their belief, is sought for, as a testimony to that apostolical tradition, on which alone any doctrine whatsoever can be defined’.^{Footnote 45}

Newman's understanding of the ‘conspiratio’ is a way of developing a listening church in the context of a communio ecclesiology. It neither rejects the legitimate consultation of the laity nor subordinates the Church to their voice since the Church is to exercise a discerning listening to where their testimony points to revelation and tradition. The conspiratio model therefore also avoids any anti-clericalism or a rejection of the legitimate teaching role for the hierarchy. Andrew Meszaros, in his book, The Prophetic Church, elaborates how Newman's understanding of consultation of the laity, differed from the method of the modernist George Tyrrell who was fighting for ‘a quasi-‘gallican’ ecclesiology, where the normativity of magisterial pronouncements (i.e., of the ecclesia docens) was based on their reduction to the beliefs of the faithful, (i.e., of the ecclesia discerns)’.^{Footnote 46} For Newman, while all in the Church including the laity have the task of witnessing to the faith, the task of preserving it to hand it on by teaching is the role of theologians. The task of judging the contents of Tradition and giving it some binding value has been the task of the hierarchy.^{Footnote 47}

The Distinctive Role of the Hierarchy in a Communion Ecclesiology and in the Synodal Process

Consistent with the understanding of ‘listening’ as discernment of the deposit of faith among all the faithful, and not just one part of the body, in the Vademecum, Pope Francis has also clarified that the consultation of the faithful cannot be done apart from the hierarchy, since the Church is a communion on mission discerning together. He explains that synodality is an ‘ecclesial process’ which ‘can only take place at the heart of a hierarchically structured community’.^{Footnote 48} However, what is needed in the synodal process as it evolves in the Church today is more theological and practical clarity around how ecclesial discernment is to take place. How can it acknowledge how different members with distinctive vocations exercise discernment or teaching in the synodal process? In a culture with a sociological (and often theological and pastoral) bias against formal authority, theological clarification is needed to uphold the distinctive and the formal magisterial teaching authority of the Church to guard and interpret the deposit of apostolic faith.

While all the time recognizing the unity of vocations within a communion ecclesiology, this distinction in roles actually serves the purpose of maintaining union in the Church through the Spirit. Yves Congar in his book, Lay People in the Church, makes a particularly useful contribution on this point. Quoting Matthias Scheeben, he writes, that ‘the whole Church transmits the tradition…widely and deeply… through their lives rather than through statements’.^{Footnote 49} Yet he makes the distinction: the hierarchy are to declare the authentic apostolic faith, expound it and maintain it and they alone teach with authority. The laity are teachers in a different way - called to live by it (the apostolic teaching), safeguard it, develop and defend it. The laity witness to it not only through their words but through their ‘silent witness’, which Congar describes as ‘a wordless call to repentance – that is, to a change of life - to conversion, to faith’.^{Footnote 50} The laity however, also defend it but in a different way, by calling for the attention of the hierarchy to issues where they are to make decisions and exercise authority for the good of the Church.^{Footnote 51}

LG 12 also highlights the specific role for the Magisterium and official teachers of the Church as guardians of the deposit of faith. It highlights that the sensus fidei or supernatural sense of the faith, while given to all the People of God, ‘is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority, in faithful and respectful obedience’ to them. In a way consistent with the central understanding of Scripture for understanding Revelation in Dei Verbum 10, it goes on to explain that this is because through the Magisterium: ‘the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God’. In this way, the people of God can adhere to the apostolic faith, ‘the faith given once and for all to the saints’. The bishops’ role is to interpret Revelation so all the faithful can ‘penetrate it more deeply with right thinking’, and ‘apply it more fully in its life’. As Rush explains, it is the task of the Magisterium and the theologians to ‘attend to the lived faith of the whole church’ and to bring the one apostolic faith in these different expressions to a synthesis.^{Footnote 52} Hence while the Spirit is given to everyone in the Church, appointed leaders are given the gift or ‘special competence’ to judge the charisms (LG 12). This is one of the hierarchical charisms mentioned in general in LG 4. LG 12, recognises that the hierarchy is not opposed to the prophetic charisms. Their role is not about ‘extinguish(ing) the Spirit’, but they are ‘to test all things and hold fast to that which is good (1 Thess 5:19)’.

Newman also explained in a similar way the distinctive role of the hierarchy and of the Ecclesia docens, as discerning and using reason to draw boundaries and defend doctrinal principles. In Consulting the Faithful, after outlining that the whole Church can manifest the apostolic tradition, Newman holds that we are to grant ‘at the same time fully, that the gift of discerning, discriminating, defining, promulgating, and enforcing any portion of that tradition resides solely in the Ecclesia docens’.^{Footnote 53} Elsewhere, Newman also describes this discerning role of the hierarchy in a Marian way. The bishops have to,

The importance of listening to the sense of the faith in all the baptised and their legitimate role as teachers by witnessing, raises the question of their formation. Christifideles Laici, the 1988, synodal exhortation on the vocation and mission of the laity, spoke of the need to form them in an integral way: spiritually, doctrinally and humanly.^{Footnote 55} Yet, as the results of the National synthesis of the diocesan reports from the 2021-2022 synodal process of the Church of England and Wales, and those of the Continental phase have shown, this call for adequate formation at all levels persists today. The issue of formation of the laity also asks us to examine how bishops and priests understand their roles as teachers. Evangelli Gaudium 102, explains that clericalism can be an obstacle to formation of the laity and prevent them from taking their place in a co-responsible Church. While expecting the priest to be entirely responsible for this task of formation of the laity is to undermine the laity's responsibility, nevertheless, as Presbyterorum Ordinis and Pastores Dabo Vobis, highlight, one of the key aspects of the vocation of ministerial priests is to serve the common priesthood of the laity. Formation of the laity is part of their call to be shepherd leaders in the manner of Christ the servant.^{Footnote 56} For a renewal of the Church as communion, and for a true exercise of synodal listening which seeks to listen to where the apostolic faith is alive today, it is important that formation of all in the faith is a priority.

Listening to Tradition

As Newman also came to appreciate that, being true to Tradition is not to be understood in a historicist way (as Tractarians did),^{Footnote 59} but in a way that allows for the work of the Holy Spirit in the whole Church and development of that Tradition through time. This principle led to his acceptance of the development of doctrine and his conversion to the Catholic faith. Pope Benedict explained that being open to the possibility of interpreting the faith in new ways involves a faithfulness to Tradition since the Church is not only a synchronic communion in the present but a diachronic communion through time in connection with the living past.^{Footnote 60}

As we have explained, Newman was clear that we consult the laity as witnesses to apostolic tradition. Thus, those who held the sensus fidei were instructed in the faith, practiced it and were in a communion of grace.^{Footnote 61} This corresponds to the understanding of the Sensus Fidelium as defined by the International Theological Commission in its 2014 document.^{Footnote 62} Yet, in the Vademecum for the Synodal Process, Pope Francis called the Church to reach out and listen to those who are outside the visible bonds of the Catholic Church and to those ‘on the margins’. Is this possible and do all those on the margins testify to the sensus fidei, and if not can we listen to them and what are we listening for?

Listening to the Lapsed

Ormond Rush argues that while a primary source of the sensus fidelium is those Catholics who practice and avail themselves regularly of the sacraments, that in countries such as the US, this accounts for only around 24 percent of Catholics.^{Footnote 63} Rush advocates that we also listen to nominal Catholics as a secondary source of testimony to the sensus fidei (about 76 percent of US Catholics). Despite their varying degrees of commitment to the Church, he explains that their fides qua may not have been severed and that the Holy Spirit may also speak through them.^{Footnote 64} They still belong to the Church through baptism even if the link is very weak. Sometimes it can be the case that in listening to those who have lapsed we can learn how our faith can be purified as we attempt to bear witness to Tradition. However, since many have lapsed due to disagreeing with fundamental Church principles on faith and morals, the criteria for listening to this possibility of ‘secondary testimony’ must be carefully discerned. Theologians need to articulate carefully, for the good of Church unity, what exactly we are listening for and how to discern what the Spirit is saying through the lapsed for the good of the Church. Where are they still living according to the apostolic tradition and why do they have certain difficulties with Church teaching on faith and morals? Pope Francis's style of reaching out is not simply to proclaim Church teaching but to accompany.

Listening to Other Christians

In the Synodal Process, building on the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, other Christians through their baptism and faith practice are also considered as a witness to Tradition and holders of the sensus fidei. John Burkhard, writes that ‘when formulating the teaching on the sensus fidei totius populi in LG 12, the Bishops had all baptized Christians in mind.^{Footnote 65} However Ormond Rush says we need to clarify this in relation to LG 8 and LG 15, which makes it clear that those outside the bonds of the Catholic Church are related to her, but not in full communion with her.^{Footnote 66} The foundational theological idea here is that the Church of Christ subsists in the Roman Catholic Church (LG 8) and tangible elements of truth and grace are found outside of her in other Christians through a common baptism, the Scriptures and a triune faith (LG 15).

Since the sensus fidei is related to living a life of grace and of faith, elements of this are surely found among our Christian brothers and sisters, albeit that formal elements of communion are also missing. As national and international bi-lateral and muti-lateral ecumenical dialogues show, listening to other Christians with respect and receptivity highlights that the elements of grace found outside her can sometimes be lived more vibrantly in other denominations. This can be very edifying for Catholic members of these dialogues, aiding a deepened understanding of certain aspects of Revelation for Catholic theologians as well as moving towards greater Christian unity. Those who engage in ecumenical dialogues are familiar with the concept of receptive ecumenism as expressed by Paul Murray. The principle is that dialogue is undertaken with other Christians, asking, ‘not what I can teach the other’, but ‘what I can learn from the other’, at the same time presuming that my dialogue partners will have the same goodwill and openness to learn from the Catholic tradition.^{Footnote 67} Ecumenical dialogue from within a Catholic hermeneutical lens, holds fast to the principle that Tradition and Magisterium are not above Scripture and yet all are so linked that ‘one cannot stand without the others’ (Dei Verbum 10). Rush explains that it is the work of theologians engaged in ecumenism to discern how exactly and to what extent, other Christians participate in the infallibility in believing which is affirmed of the whole People of God in LG 12.^{Footnote 68}

Pope Francis is open to how new interpretations of revelation can arise in ecumenical discussions, which accords with his understanding of the ‘overflow’ and the work of the spirit in reconciling apparently opposite theological views in a synodal process. In writing to a Catholic-Orthodox working group about the importance of finding a new interpretation to bring opposites together (Gegensätze), he writes, ‘It is good to cultivate a unity enriched by differences that will not yield to the temptation of a bland uniformity, which is never good. In this spirit, your discussions centre on appreciating how differing aspects present in our traditions, rather than giving rise to disagreements, can become legitimate opportunities for expressing the shared apostolic faith’.^{Footnote 69}

Ecumenical dialogues have also shaped some key developments in Catholic theology and thus contributed to new emphases and theological and ecclesial renewal.^{Footnote 70} We see for example how much Pope John Paul's ecclesiology in Ecclesia De Eucharistia was influenced by the themes of the Catholic-Orthodox dialogues on the Church, the Trinity and the Eucharist and impacted a whole generation of communion ecclesiologists. We also see how dialogues on Mariology with Anglicans and Lutherans have helped further the appreciation of Mary as a model of faith and grace as first set forth in Lumen Gentium chapter eight. Dialogue with Anglicans or Methodists on Authority have fed into imagining new possibilities of more decentralized decision making in the Catholic Church based on a recognition of common baptism and a greater appreciation of collegiality and synodality.^{Footnote 71} Even recognizing the differences between the current synodal process and how it differs from that of Anglican synodality or Methodist conferring, points to what is distinctive for a Catholic ecclesiological understanding of synodality. Thus, listening to other Christians can help in the renewal of the Church and the synodal process, once members of these dialogues are clear how to discern where the living Tradition and the sensus fidei exists in the dialogue.

Listening to Those of Other Religions and Atheists

In the Synodal process, Pope Francis also calls the Church to listen to those of other religions. This again is consistent with a communion ecclesiology when we understand that the Church is called to be a sacrament of salvation to all humanity (LG 1). Nostra Aetate reminds us that what unites us in this dialogue with those of other religions is a common humanity where we journey to seek answers to the meaning of life, death, suffering and love.^{Footnote 72}

Lumen Gentium 16, explains that those of other religions are ‘related in various ways’ to the People of God, and the logos can be manifested and discerned in their faith and practice in a way that can purify an understanding of Catholic belief. Witnessing for example to the priority of God in the Jewish and Muslim religion highlights what is most central to religion and in this way is related to the deposit of faith. Listening to the differences between us, also highlights the Christian-specificity of the relationship between God and human beings as expressed in Christian faith.

Dialogue with unbelievers can also be a means of deepening and purifying an understanding of the deposit of faith in a way that highlights the how it is connected to the existential search of men. Both those who believe in God and those who don't, have this search for meaning in common. As Ratzinger explains in his Introduction to Christianity ‘those who have faith are always tempted to doubt and those who don't have faith are always tempted to believe’.^{Footnote 73} As Pope Benedict, he put this premise into practice through his Court of the Gentiles initiative where he invited atheist scholars to dialogue with Christian ones on the deepest questions which pertained to humanity and society, thus building mutual respect but also linking Christian beliefs to what is most essential in the human search for truth.^{Footnote 74} This began at the Sorbonne but continues today at international and national levels. It is a fruitful manifestation of communion ecclesiology in practice and can also be a very useful template for listening to those of other religions and none in the synodal process, since it is grounded in the Catholic synthesis between faith and reason and knows how to listen and interpret philosophical theories and ideas in a way that enriches the faith.

Reasoning and Penetrating the Tradition

As LG 12, explains, the sensus fidei is a way of ‘deeply penetrating’ the Tradition. Thus, the reception of the apostolic tradition involves dialogue and the exercise of reason in a way that avoids falling into the extremes of either rationalism or fideism. In the last of his University Sermons, No. 15, Newman puts forward Mary as a model and archetype of receiving Revelation, in a way that includes the use of reason and discussion and as such moves beyond a traditional understanding which might interpret Mary's receptivity in a purely passive sense. He writes,

A theology of listening in a synodal church can benefit from such a model of receptivity and reasoning to the apostolic faith. Yet theological clarification is also needed in acknowledging the different level of theological enquiry operating in the Church.

Judgment and Decision Making in the Discernment Process

Another later stage in the operation of the sensus fidei (as described in LG 12), at work in the Synodal process, is the level of application to life. This is based on firstly making judgements, which then in turn allow for possibilities of development which as Newman explains is part of how the Church operates as a communion of believers receptive to revelation. For Newman, the ‘process of development, like faith itself, is shared by a communion of minds, each of them ever engaged in passing judgment on the things which come before it’.^{Footnote 76} For the synodal process, too, listening may open up to possible developments in doctrinal understanding.

Pope Francis has previously explained that judgment takes place at different levels in a synodal Church of communion, ‘the primatial aspect, communitarian aspect of the whole People of God and collegial dimension all work together’. ^{Footnote 77} These are captured in the three words, ‘all, some, and one’. In an address to a Catholic-Orthodox working group in October 2021, he quotes document on Synodality from the International Theological Commission (2018), ‘synodality involves the exercise of the sensus fidei of the universitas fidelium (all), the ministry of leadership of the college of Bishops, each one with his presbyterium (some), and the ministry of unity of the Bishop of Rome (one)’ (Synodality in the Life and Mission of the Church, 2018, No. 64)’. Each has their own ministries, but all operate together for the good of the synodal Church.

The Synod of Bishops, which shall be held in October 2023, is one of two fora for final decision making in the Synodal process. While acknowledging the common baptism and operation of the Spirit in all the baptized, traditionally since the establishment of the Synod in 1965, this forum has always been for the Bishops’ alone, based on the distinction of teaching roles between those with office and those without. In the current Synodal process, like no other Synod before, we can presume that bishops have already listened to all the baptized at the diocesan and continental phases. It is now for the bishops to be the chief discerners within a hierarchical communion which is to serve the communion in faith and grace of all the Church. Nevertheless, apart from Bishops, Pope Francis has invited others to be involved in this process of decision making at this level including some women for the first time.