For a while, I have kept relatively quiet about the goings-on of the Catholic Church. When I have written about it, I have been subtle about which sector of the Catholic Church I am particularly criticising.

That time of quiet and subtlety is over.

In the most recent edition of the Catholic Outlook, the official publication of the Diocese of Parramatta, an article was published discussing Catholic considerations on the Voice to Parliament. This article encouraged Catholics to listen to Indigenous Australians and essentially vote in favour of the Voice to Parliament when it goes to a referendum.

Now, I’m well aware there have been many articles published about the Voice in recent weeks and months. So I’m not going to waste your time with the same opinions that you’ve heard before on this subject. The issues surrounding the Voice, particularly the Constitutional issues, have been covered in depth, and it is very clear that this is not something that should be supported.

What is also very clear is that the Diocese of Parramatta has the wrong priorities. Truly, what good is listening to the Indigenous people if you cannot listen to Catholics within your own Diocese?

Currently, the Bishop of Parramatta, Bishop Vincent Long van Nguyen, has been promoting the upcoming Diocesan Synod. For those unfamiliar with the term, ‘synodality’, at least in the context of the Catholic Church, consists of listening to the faithful to create a more inclusive and united church.

In recent years, it has been used in relation to the Synod on Synodality that the Catholic Church has been undertaking at the behest of Pope Francis. This more global Synod has seen local branches of the Catholic Church coming together on a national level to formulate resolutions that have been sent off to the Vatican for the final major stages of the Synod which will take place over 2023-24. But, as Cardinal George Pell wrote in his final article for The Spectator Australia before his passing, this Synod is toxic.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana in Kazakhstan, has also warned of how the concept of ‘synodality’ is causing significant issues within the Catholic Church. He notes how, after the Second Vatican Council, ‘People with the spirit of Modernism increasingly occupied the administrative structures of the Church. Modernism is a form of naturalism, which often carries with it the elimination of the supernatural.’ In other words, Modernism seeks to eliminate God from the equation.

Bishop Athanasius provides the example of continuous meetings as a problem arising from Modernism and its ugly child, ‘synodality’. He notes the following:

‘The continuous meetings and assemblies of bishops: they are spending so much money, it’s incredible. If we would reduce drastically the frequency of these meetings, we could give millions of dollars every year to the poor around the world. To me, this is a sin that churchmen are committing today. Even setting to the side for a moment the problems with these excessive meetings, which are ultimately a manifestation of Pelagianism and undermine the supernatural — to say nothing of the problem of the almost continuous stream of doctrinally ambiguous documents they produce — I believe it is sinful to spend so much money, which we could give to the poor in our world. We have to stop this. But it seems that the frequency of synods and meetings is only going to increase under the pretext of a so-called “synodality.”’

Bishop Athanasius continues by highlighting how ‘this phenomenon has invaded and infected the entire life of the Church. I compare it to the situation you have with a bicycle when the chain falls off and you just spin in place and don’t move from the starting line. Just spinning in place, an exterior activism with a spiritual lethargy and passivity.’

He’s spot on.

The core problem with Synods is that they are an opportunity for Modernists in the Catholic Church to shift the Church and reshape it with their own ideologies, which often do not align with the teachings of Christ nor the Church, at the centre. They are an opportunity for political activism, doctrinal ambiguity and, ultimately, heresy of all kinds.

Last year, I wrote a piece for The Spectator Australia in which I detailed the proceedings of the Plenary Council in Australia, whose resolutions would be submitted to the Vatican for the final stages of the Synod on Synodality. Within that piece, two key issues from the Plenary Council were discussed – the inclusion of Indigenous spirituality and Indigenous practices and symbols in the Catholic Church, including in the liturgy, and ‘gender equality’ in the Church, particularly within ordained Ministry, namely the Diaconate. Both of these resolutions would find themselves at odds with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Unfortunately, the Diocese of Parramatta did not particularly like that I had criticised their beloved Plenary Council, especially given the fact that I had honed in on the issues surrounding the inclusion of Indigenous practices in the Catholic Mass. Such criticism earned me the label ‘polarizing’ and squandered any chance I had of writing for the Diocesan publication, the Catholic Outlook.

I provide this information not because I seek to paint the Diocese in a bad light. I do this only to highlight the way in which this Diocese operates, and the obvious bias in their ideological leanings. This is important because it will inevitably direct the way in which the Diocesan Synod will be undertaken.

In his speeches on the Synod and the importance of synodality over the last few weeks, Bishop Vincent has often pointed to how the Church needs to look at the ‘signs of the times’ and change itself accordingly.

With the greatest respect to the Bishop, this is dangerously wrong.

The ‘signs of the times’ were exactly what we saw occur with the Plenary Council last year. People who think they are modern day prophets who have all the answers to save the Church and ensure its progression in the world meet and discuss the need for more Indigenous spirituality, inclusive language, and gender equality to combat secularism, the breakdown of the family unit, and a falling out with religion.

The Church does not need to align itself with the dysfunctional and disordered views and values of the world. It must provide a home for moral objectivity, not moral relativism. The Church must be of God, not of the world.

The Diocese of Parramatta may claim it will listen to the people, that it will listen to the everyday parishioners, but it seems as if the Modernists in the upper ranks of the Diocese, of which there are many, have already set the agenda for the Synod and the outcome they desire. In a synthesis paper that will inevitably guide the Synod, the Diocese has highlighted that, from submissions received from individuals and groups throughout the Diocese, there is a need for inclusion of Indigenous spirituality in the Catholic Church, which, at the very least, would consist of ‘incorporation of appropriate Acknowledgement of Country rituals into regular liturgies, signage on church properties and Indigenous sacred art’. The only traditional owner of the land that I’ll be acknowledging is God.

There were also suggestions made in the synthesis that more inclusive, positive language be used in prayers, throughout liturgies, and in Catholic texts. On this same subject, suggestions were acknowledged including ridding ourselves of ‘the misogynistic rules which allow sexual discrimination even in these times’ and that ‘without women visible as church leaders, there will be no church worthy of leading’. There were also calls to be inclusive of LGBTQ+ individuals.

All of these suggestions that have been acknowledged in the writing of this synthesis document are, of course, part of this ‘signs of the times’ ideology that the Bishop and the Diocese have taken a fancy to. It speaks volumes that the document even notes on the first page that, from submissions, the Diocese ‘heard voices that spoke of disappointment in a Church that is moving too slowly towards greater synodality, or failing to read and respond to the signs of the times’.

I think, however, that it speaks even greater volumes of just how this Diocese is thinking that the following was noted on the second page of the Synthesis:

‘We are surprised by the strength of feeling expressed by those responding with concern about the current direction of the church towards synodality and seeking to return to a more certain way of “tradition”. We heard in their voices a real lamentation.’

That the Diocese of Parramatta is surprised by the fact that everyday Catholics, 40 per cent of whom made submissions were under the age of 18, want to return to tradition demonstrates just how out of touch with the people God has entrusted to it to shepherd it has become. That the Synthesis puts the word ‘tradition’ in quotation marks demonstrates how much contempt it has for tradition. Tradition is the lifeblood of the Catholic Church.

The problem is chiefly that the people running the show, the same people who are running this Synod, are Modernists using it as a means of political opportunism to further warped ideological agendas which are completely out of line with the Catholic faith. These people are a minority, however they comprise the majority of the upper levels of the Diocese (ie. the Chancery). The whole concept of synodality is a ploy to imbue Modernism in the Catholic Church.

The Diocese’s idea of listening does not seem to be to listen to all Catholics of the Diocese; it is to only listen to those who tell them what they want to hear. Those who are more Conservative and Traditional are ignored and not included in the main meetings to discuss actions that need to be undertaken by the Church in response to what has been ‘heard’.

If the Diocese truly intends to ‘listen’, then it must actually listen, not only to the voices of those who agree with the direction it wants to take, but to those who are more Conservative and want to return to tradition.

But something should be made clear – the Church is not a democracy. And while it may choose to listen, it should not do so in such a way that the inherent values and teachings of the Catholic Church are compromised.

Bishop Athanasius said in an interview with Raymond Arroyo late last year, ‘The first mission of the Church is to teach, not to listen to opinions.’

Jesus did not tell his Apostles to listen to the opinions of others. He told them to teach.

Cardinal George Pell was right. As is Bishop Athanasius Schneider. As is Cardinal Gerhard Muller. Synodality is toxic. It only serves to bring about heresies and create division within the Church. The Church must turn away from this path and return to its roots, to tradition, to its primary role of teaching the Word of God.

Joel Agius is an independent writer. If you would like to read more of his work, you can do so at JJ’s Outlook or keep up to date with his musings on Twitter.