“The journey undertaken in recent years has helped us rediscover a more humble and selfless ecclesial style, in keeping with the Beatitudes.” Archbishop Erio Castellucci, Archbishop of Modena-Nonantola, Bishop of Carpi, and President of the National Committee of the Synodal Pathway, speaks about the value of synodality starting from the speech delivered by Pope Leo XIV to the Italian Bishops’ Conference on 17 June. In this interview, he discusses listening, the synodal method, resistances, and the ecclesial fruits of the ongoing journey.
(Foto Siciliani-Gennari/SIR)
“Synodality must become a mindset, in the heart, in decision-making processes, and in ways of acting.” What does it mean for you today to translate this exhortation of the Pontiff into the concrete life of local Churches?
It means treasuring the journey that we as Churches in Italy have undertaken over these four years: a journey of listening, dialogue, discernment, and experiences open even beyond the boundaries of our communities. The Pope, with great precision, indicates three levels of synodality: the heart, that is, passion, without which it would be mere bureaucratic exercise; decision-making processes, meaning ecclesial structures and their functioning in the perspective of communion and mission; and ways of acting, namely the styles that should characterise communion within Christian communities for evangelising action in society.
The Pope asked not to “defend ourselves from the provocations of the Spirit”. In your opinion, what are the most urgent provocations to embrace in this time?
These have emerged in recent years around three challenges.
The first provocation concerns the need to rethink mission in terms of proximity; not consolidation, much less conquest.
Until a few decades ago, we were used to considering ourselves a majority and counting memberships; now, with the advance of secularism, we are rediscovering some evangelical styles more in keeping with the Beatitudes, more humble, selfless, as Pope Francis told us in Florence ten years ago.
Archbishop of Modena-Nonantola and Bishop of Carpi, Archbishop Erio Castellucci is Vice-President of the Italian Bishops’ Conference and President of the National Committee for the Synodal Pathway. A theologian and lecturer in ecclesiology, he has led the Italian Church’s synodal process from the outset, coordinating listening, discernment, and drafting of texts. He is regarded as one of the main references for synodal thought and practice in the Church in Italy.
What does this change imply for concrete ecclesial life?
Within this fundamental provocation, the other two emerge: rethinking the formation of the baptised at all levels, giving primacy to the Word of God and listening to experiences with an evangelical flavour; and shaping co-responsibility in the pastoral life of communities, including the management of structures.
The Augustinian reference to the body in which every member is necessary evokes a Church that is not hierarchical but organic. How is this vision being translated in the Italian Synodal Pathway?
It is being translated above all in the method of listening. When Pope Francis launched the work of the last Universal Synod on the Synodal Church (of which our Italian Pathway is part), he used one of his effective images: overturning the pyramid.
The twenty million people who were able to take part in some synodal moment – half a million in our country – experienced the Church as the Body of Christ, and not as a verticalised Church.
For many it was a new experience that opened up unprecedented paths, awakened expectations and availability, and built bridges with the social realities of the territory. The dense network of group facilitators and diocesan delegates, involving tens of thousands of collaborators, needs to be consolidated and represents an enormous potential for our Churches.
What does it mean in practice that synodality is not only a method but a spiritual and cultural form? What are the strongest resistances to this passage?
There are quite a few resistances. A minority of Catholics attacked the Synodal Pathway from its first steps, considering it a misleading path for the Church, exposing it to a democratic drift. In any case, it was a position aimed more at attacking Pope Francis than the Synod. Another line, diametrically opposed, considers the Synodal Pathway insufficient, believing that a kind of revolution rather than a reform is needed. This second line also ends up resisting synodal renewal, as it risks disregarding it.
Is there a middle way that holds together fidelity and innovation?
Between these two extremes, there is the vast majority of those who took part in the experience, who know that
It is important to set goals in line with Vatican II and patiently pace the steps.
This is also the way to bring out the spiritual and cultural form of the Synod: adopting, in the footsteps of the Council, the “reading of the signs of the times” requested by John XXIII.
In his speech to the Italian Bishops’ Conference on 17 June 2025, Pope Leo XIV asked that synodality “become a mindset, in the heart, in decision-making processes, and in ways of acting”. He invited the Italian bishops not to “defend themselves from the provocations of the Spirit”, but to cultivate a style of concrete communion, participation, and discernment. Synodality, he said, is “a profound reform of ecclesial life”, not only a method but a spiritual and pastoral form.
After the postponement of the bishops’ assembly, you spoke of a text “not yet mature” and of the need to “listen to creativity” going beyond schemes. How can this dynamism become a permanent resource for the synodal process?
The debate that took place at the Second Synodal Assembly of the Churches in Italy in Rome (30 March – 3 April 2025) was lively and constructive, though not without some polemical undertones. At the end, the delegates, together with the bishops and the Synodal Pathway Committee, voted almost unanimously to convene a third Assembly on 25 October, before delivering a text to the Italian Bishops’ Conference to which the bishops themselves can give definitive form.
What were the limitations of the document discussed in April?
The document presented to that second Assembly was deemed too concise to capture the richness of the journey undertaken. They were “propositions”, by their nature synthetic, presupposing all the previous documents; but
The many amendments drawn up in the working groups during those days required a global rethinking.
How is the drafting of the final text proceeding?
Thus, in recent weeks, work has resumed to produce a more mature and flowing text. For me, as I believe for all those who experienced it, it was a rich and constructive Church experience: we truly experienced the synodal style, which also involves discussions and disagreements, but in the end seeks to listen to the Spirit, in the harmony of different voices.