Featured on Where Peter Is on January 22, 2025

[This article is the last in a four-part series on mental health. The previous articles in the series have addressed the science of psychology, the ways that faith can help those suffering from mental illness, and the role of evil in our approach to mental health.]

In the Jewish communities where Christ dwelt, the traditional greeting was “Shalom aleichem.” The phrase has traditionally been translated as “peace be to you” which is a correct but incomplete translation of the word “shalom.” This is because our current understanding of the English term “peace” essentially amounts to freedom from conflict and disruption. In contrast, when Jesus and his companions used the term, it focused as much on the presence of fullness as it did on the absence of conflict. In fact, the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews explains the idea of shalom thus:

Shalom is rooted in the Hebrew word shalem, which means “whole” or “complete.” Beyond a lack of conflict, shalom is the presence of wholeness.

In other words, when Jesus and the people around Him greeted one another with “Shalom” or its extension “Shalom aleichem,” they were wishing one another wholeness, completion and flourishing, in addition to our own limited understanding of “peace.” The idea of shalom is similar to what many consider to be the ideal for mental health: a sense of contentment and well-being that flows from feelings of wholeness. In contrast, people who struggle with mental health issues often have difficulty finding a coherent narrative for their lives and struggle to integrate the various parts of themselves in a balanced way. It could be said, then, that the goal of psychological interventions is to promote shalom in the lives of help-seeking individuals.

At the risk of diving too deeply, this idea of shalom and human flourishing is not a new one. In fact, St. Augustine chronicles his own movement from disordered to properly ordered passions in his well-known book, Confessions. Similarly, many have recognized this same sort of thinking in St. Thomas Aquinas’s writings on human passions. Their philosophies both recognize the need for humans to be balanced and ordered wholes in order to truly flourish. This continuity of thought has resulted in the development of the sub-school of Thomistic psychology. Central to these ideas is the understanding that when something is unbalanced within a person, they cannot function to their fullest potential and they experience spiritual and emotional upheaval as a result. In contrast, when a person’s inner life is balanced into a cohesive whole, with each part fitting harmoniously and properly with every other part, people experience both spiritual and mental well-being.

Mental health as we understand it, is largely based in our physiology which means that to experience shalom, our physical bodies must also enter into this integrated balance. Luckily for us, the integration of body and soul is explained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, saving us from having to develop our own understanding of how the two relate to one another:

The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual…Man, though made of body and soul is a unity.

Because psychology and mental health exist both at the intersection of and through the realities of body and soul, an imbalance in either contributes to mental illness and psychological distress. This means that a comprehensive Catholic understanding of psychology will necessarily address both the physical and spiritual aspects of human life.

Of course, psychology was not developed by exclusively Christian thinkers and some of its most famous contributors were decidedly not Christian. This can make such a holistic understanding of human psychology particularly difficult. Yet, as was discussed in the first article of this series, many of the theories that psychologists have proposed can contribute to our Christian understanding of mental health and well-being even if they were not developed by people who understood the fullness of human nature. Their contributions still move us towards “shalom” as it relates to the body and the soul, even if they do so imperfectly.

Unfortunately, however, Catholic psychologists and therapists must face the reality that many of their clients do not share their Christian beliefs. This forces them to choose between two options:

1. They can use the fullest approach to mental health which inherently incorporates spiritual treatment into their practice but carries the cost of alienating a large number of their patients and, so, makes them impotent to help the greatest number of patients; or
2. They can focus only on the physical and mental components of their patients’ struggles, thereby helping the greatest number of patients possible, but sacrificing certain foundational aspects of Catholic psychology unless spiritual issues are brought into treatment by the patients themselves.

While there are some mental health practitioners who have chosen the first choice, many others, myself included, have opted for the latter. They opt to reach the greatest number of people in need and trust that the spiritual needs of their patients will either be raised by the patients themselves during treatment or addressed by others in their patients’ lives. In fact, it was the desire to help all grieving families that compelled me to make my book Raising Sunshine a secular guide in the hope that it would be beneficial to all who need it. Making this choice is not unlike the decision that physicians often make to treat their patients’ physical needs as death nears, while leaving their spiritual needs in the hands of others. It is also not unlike countless other choices we make every day in order to live within a secular world and to meet people where they are. It is an understandable decision and does much good, but it cannot be denied that it comes at a cost.

One way to minimize that cost is to allow patients to direct discussions of spiritual matters. Therapists who do this will find that when patients are open about their faith and willing to talk about spiritual issues, they can play a significant role in wrestling with them about the ways that mental health impacts their spiritual well-being and vice versa. Additionally, in the same way that they would with physical issues that are outside of their scope of practice, they can develop networks for appropriate referrals within their diocese so that they can assist their patients in finding appropriate spiritual guidance and resources.

When patients do not raise the topic of their faith in therapy, Catholic mental health practitioners can still play a key role in helping their patients to achieve as much healing and wholeness as possible with a purely secular approach. They can even do this while prompting their patients to dig deeper into their understanding of themselves and the world around them, which might eventually lead them to consider more spiritual questions. For the most part, however, therapy with these patients will largely follow a more traditional approach that respects the spiritual boundaries of individual patients and offers them the sort of care that they are open to receiving. In other words, while not offering them the best and fullest help possible, it still provides them with assistance and, in this case, something is much better than nothing.

Finally, if a Catholic mental health professional encounters a patient who believes that if they only had enough faith or prayed well enough, their mental health issues would disappear, these professionals can help to gently correct these erroneous beliefs, encourage patients to investigate and embrace scientifically backed interventions, and help them to recognize that scientific advances in the field may actually be the answers to their prayers for healing. St. Ignatius of Loyola once wrote, “Work like everything depends on you, pray like everything depends on God,” and St Benedict Regula said, “Pray and work.” Even St. Paul admonished us that faith that does not work itself out through action is dead. This is true in matters of mental health, as well. As physical beings, we cannot reduce everything to that which is spiritual in nature and demand that God heals us in a supernatural way. Instead, we must embrace the mundane physical gifts that God has given us and do the difficult work of healing while trusting that God, the ultimate healer, is working through our efforts.

By approaching therapy in these varied ways depending on specific patient needs, psychologists and therapists can help to move their patients towards a peace and wholeness that bolsters mental health and well-being. As much as a patient allows it, they can be good stewards of the knowledge and instruments that God has given us through the field of psychology, while not letting their usefulness be limited by more traditional mandates that mental healthcare remain separate from spiritual care. In short, therapy can be directed towards shalom – peace, wholeness, and completion – for all patients, even if the pathways to that shalom look quite different.

Featured on Where Peter Is on January 20, 2025

[This article is the third in a four-part series on mental health. The previous articles addressed the science of psychology and the unique role that the Church can play in the lives of those suffering from mental health issues. The final article will address the idea of shalom as the ideal for mental health and well-being.]

In all of the drama surrounding Mike Lewis’s recent coverage of Fr. Chad Ripperger, one issue stood out to me above the rest: Fr. Ripperger’s pronouncements that most people with bipolar disorder would no longer need treatment if they follow his instructions. My concern grew when I listened to one of his virtual talks and heard him declare that anti-depressants should rarely be used and, if they are, they should only be used for a few weeks while a patient is stabilized. This is patently false. In fact, most antidepressants do not even begin to have their desired effects for several weeks and it can take months more to carefully titrate to a properly therapeutic dose. To be frank, Fr. Ripperger’s statements are spine-chilling for three reasons:

1. It undermines years of working to combat stigma against mental illness by associating it with demonic possession.
2. It promotes a way of thinking that could keep people from seeking and continuing treatment they need.
3. It minimizes the real advances that psychology has made in past decades while publicizing an unproven, irresponsible idea.

In fact, it was Father Ripperger’s statements that prompted me to finally write this series that has long been sitting on the back burner of my mind, waiting to be written.

Throughout my career and studies, the relationship between evil and mental health has been problematic for me. This began to be the case when a Christian elementary school left a message saying that someone I love would not be allowed to attend their school. The details of the message are debated within my family, but my memory of the situation is that the school leadership believed that the loved one’s classic symptoms of Tourette Syndrome were actually the result of demonic activity. My family unanimously agrees that the school’s lack of knowledge about Tourette Syndrome resulted in judgements about this individual that were incorrect. Sadly, my loved one (a child at the time) was the person who received the message and it compounded the struggle with grief and stigma that they were already facing as they came to terms with their diagnosis and navigated brutal bullying and responses from the public school district; it doubtless also impacted their relationship with Christianity in complex and difficult ways. As a result, the unnecessary damage that this school’s assumption caused was significant at a time when the institution had the opportunity to be a bearer of Christ’s love and healing.

Since that time, the number of people I love who have Tourette Syndrome has grown – it is a heritable neurological condition – as has my frustration with people who, knowingly or not, allow the idea of demons to be weaponized against those with physical or mental illnesses.

As I progressed through my training, I encountered patients and even personal acquaintances who were reluctant to seek treatment or to continue with treatment that they were already receiving. This stemmed from a variety of issues, concerns about stigma and prejudice being prominent among them. In addition, therapy is time intensive and requires hard work and honesty about painful things that patients are often trying desperately to avoid. Similarly, psychiatric medications may cause unpleasant side-effects and a kind of psychological numbing that patients have difficulty tolerating. For psychotic patients, medication compliance can be particularly challenging due to paranoia related to their medications. Many of these patients believe that their treatment will poison or harm them in some way.

For some of the patients who were reluctant to accept treatment, their therapy and medication helped to make their lives more livable. For others, these interventions were literally keeping them alive by preventing suicide or dangerous hallucinations and delusions. For all of the patients, the factors that contribute to patients’ resistance towards treatment make them vulnerable.  Consequently, the idea that a prominent Catholic public figure like Fr. Ripperger would suggest an additional (and unfounded) reason for patients to inappropriately halt medication is unconscionable.

That being said, I do believe that there are cases of demonic possession and oppression as the Church teaches. Consequently, I acknowledge that there are times when exorcism is not only appropriate but merciful. In fact, the USCCB considers the sacramental of exorcism to be “just one more way the Church tends to the pastoral care of souls – even souls that are not her flock.” As a Catholic with a doctorate in psychology, I have been challenged at times to explore the intersection of mental illness and demonic activity more thoroughly. As I have delved into research on this topic, certain aspects of this relationship became clear to me.

First, and perhaps most important, the Church has a long history of requiring discernment in the assessment of demonic activity. For example, the USCCB states that all dioceses need to develop protocols to address possible cases of possession. These protocols should “include an assessment which involves medical, psychological, and psychiatric testing” that should be conducted prior to making any potential referrals to exorcists. These assessments should then be used to guide the Church in its determination, since only the Church can confirm possession. The USCCB is also clear that an exorcist’s determination requires “moral certitude” and a “balance within his own mind between not believing too easily that the devil is responsible for what is manifesting and attributing all possible manifestations solely to a natural, organic source.”

The USCCB is not alone in its prescription for caution in dealing with potential cases of demonic possession. In fact, earlier this month, the International Association of Exorcists (IAE), which includes over nine hundred exorcists and was approved by the Holy See as a private association of the faithful, put out a statement about the importance of responding to questions about exorcisms with great care. Specifically, they note the importance of ensuring that only qualified individuals participate in exorcisms and that exorcists can rely on medical and psychological professionals when making determinations. In fact, they state that to assume a supernatural origin for suffering that could be attributed to a natural cause is “not only wrong, but exposes people to unnecessary risks.” The association goes on to say that “The desire to identify at all costs an extraordinary demonic action as the cause of a situation of suffering, the origin of which is unknown, having omitted a previous serious discernment, besides being useless, can cause damage.”

From the viewpoint of the Church, prudential judgement in such matters is essential because the Church does not want to deny care to those in need, but it also resists the tendency to give undue credit to the devil or to foster an unhealthy focus on his works. According to the U.S. Bishops, prudential judgement in these cases is necessary to avoid the development of “sensationalist mentalities” or “sideshows” that detract from the Church’s true mission of serving Christ and sharing Him with the world.

This is all very reassuring from the viewpoint of psychology, because it promotes the idea that experts within different fields should participate in the evaluation of a potentially possessed person. This recognition of authority derived from education and experience helps to ensure that potential victims are treated appropriately by someone who specializes in the particular issues they are facing. In other words, I do not pretend to have any expertise in demonology and exorcism. I do, however, have knowledge of mental health conditions that was gained through years of work and study – twelve years to be precise. Specifically, I specialized in work with children with emotional and behavioral issues. Some of my pediatric patients have presented in ways that a non-psychologist might think of as a manifestation of possession. Out of respect for my patients, I will not elaborate on the particulars of their symptoms here. What is important is that, because I have developed a deep understanding of child development and how children react and respond to their worlds, I was able to recognize that these patients had problems with anxiety, confusion, anger, impulse control, etc. This meant that I could treat them appropriately which, thankfully, yielded good results. I do not say this out of arrogance, but simply as a recognition that there is too much knowledge for one person to be an expert in everything. It is, therefore, essential that people practice only within their field of expertise. Exorcism is not mine. Psychology is.

With that in mind, I believe it is essential that the teachings of the Church are followed and appropriate physical and mental health assessments are conducted prior to involving an exorcist. I also feel that it is important that the Church and its pastors are quick to refer parishioners to mental health professionals when they realize that they are being asked to offer care that goes beyond their area of expertise.

At the same time, Catholic mental health professionals should wrestle with the role that evil plays in their own lives and in the lives of their patients. This brings me to my second observation. We are all living in a fallen world. All of us are born with the stain of original sin and face endless temptations to err in our daily lives. At a minimum, this reality about our existence influences the ways we think and behave, hopefully making us more compassionate towards our fellow sinners.

Psychologists who truly accept this into their understanding will be cognizant of the ways that our fallen nature contributes to mental illness, as well as the ways that mental health can predispose us to certain types of sins. For example, a person who is experiencing depression is more likely to battle despair than someone who is generally happy and content with their life. On the other hand, participation in intrinsic evils like adultery can easily lead us to places of anxiety or depression. This delicate interplay between our mental and spiritual selves is one that psychologists should be willing to work with, acknowledging that both aspects are key to human flourishing.

My third conclusion is that there are times when both spiritual care, even possibly exorcism, and mental health treatments ought to be provided in tandem. Just as it is dangerous to say that psychological therapies are unnecessary if exorcisms are provided, it would be problematic for a believing mental health professional to deny the possibility of demonic activity impacting any of their patients. In most cases, there is likely no harm, in terms of the practice of psychology, in simultaneously pursuing both the spiritual aid of exorcism and the scientific help of psychology (I say in most cases and not all because in some patients there could be harm done by conducting an exorcism– I am thinking here principally of patients with psychosis, but also those with borderline and narcissistic personality disorders or scrupulosity).  In fact, a combined approach would likely be particularly helpful to patients who straddle the line between spiritual and mental torment or who present with signs of both. Nevertheless, it remains essential that both exorcists and mental health providers practice only within their fields of expertise and that neither discourages the interventions of the other. Additionally, when patient consent is obtained, collaboration between both experts would be beneficial and, according to psychiatrist Richard Gallagher, who regularly consults with exorcists, such collaboration is often the norm.

There remains the question of what to do with those patients who push the boundary of what might be considered “ordinary, run of the mill sins” and delve into the darkness of pure evil. I am thinking here about patients who are abusers, murderers, and other types of sadistic individuals. We are faced with the question of how to classify these patients. Are they mentally ill, or are they submitting to evil or possessed by it? This is a question that I cannot answer. It is well outside of my area of expertise, having never worked with or studied such individuals. Of course, I have my own ideas about what drives people to do clearly evil things, but at the end of the day, they are simply my own untested thoughts that I have developed to try to make sense of something that is otherwise nonsensical to me. What can be safely said about such cases is that they do not exist in a vacuum. We all commit evil against each other to varying degrees and the devil does “prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls.”  For most of us, who will never encounter such patients in our daily lives or lines of work, the most important thing is to fix our gaze not on what is evil but on what is good and to work to restore God’s kingdom within the small sphere of influence that we each have been given. God is a God of peace, justice and mercy who gives us rest and protection, and he can use both mental health treatment and exorcisms to bring healing into our lives. It is our job to use both prudentially.

Note

Though this article is not meant to be a commentary on the works of Fr. Ripperger, I do want to acknowledge that some have defended his expertise in psychology by referencing his 800-page tome, Introduction to the Science of Mental Health. Having heard him speak on issues of mental health, I have decided that it is not worth the time and expense it would require to read the teachings of someone whose statements have repeatedly flown in the face of the field of mental health.

This work likely contains some accurate teachings about psychology, and his ideas on emotions and the connection between Thomistic thought and psychology are often compelling. However, we must remember that it is possible for anyone to write a book about any subject they choose, regardless of expertise. His biography indicates that his education and professional background do not indicate that he has the qualifications to write or speak authoritatively on mental health, which likely explains why his statements often contradict accepted psychological theories and research.

Fr Ripperger’s statements suggesting that recognized psychological disorders are the result of demonic activity or those that serve to undermine standard and appropriate treatments and theories within the field of psychology have the potential to cause great harm. Fr Ripperger’s education and expertise lie in the areas of philosophy and theology. His comments about psychology should not be considered equivalent to the teachings of experts in the field.

Featured on Where Peter Is on January 15, 2025

(This article is the second in a four-part series on faith and mental health. The first installment addressed the scientific underpinnings of psychology as well as some of the challenges that have historically plagued the field. The next article will address the complex relationship that exists between evil and illness.)

Most of us have had some experience with psychiatric illness, whether through a relationship with someone who is suffering from one of these disorders or our own personal mental health journeys. While our faith should not be touted as a cure for these challenges, in many ways, the Church offers a powerful source of strength for individuals who suffer and struggle with their mental health.

Of course, the psalms reflect the full range of human emotion and are often brimming with anger, sorrow, or anxiety. Jesus, Himself, drew strength from the psalms as He wrestled with the overwhelming anguish of his crucifixion, crying out,

My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

in reference to Psalm 22. This particular psalm then continues on to ask God why He does not answer or help in a time of intense physical distress. In fact, the following verses speak of one whose life is “poured out like water,” their bones out of joint, and their heart melted like wax. By the end of the psalm, however, the psalmist adheres himself to his faith, recognizing that from God alone comes help and strength. Like Jesus, when we suffer emotional distress, we find in the psalms our own hearts’ cries for help and healing as well as the hope that God can and will answer us, even if His reply does not follow our preferred timelines.

The psalms are not the only source of strength that the Church offers to those who struggle with mental health. Throughout the Bible we are given glimpses of people who have experienced the real suffering that our life on this earth can bring. We read of Rahab whose fear of the Israelite army caused her to turn to God and take her place in his salvific plan. We meet David whose sometimes impulsive behavior wins him victories and costs him great loss. We hear about Elijah who was so afraid of one of history’s most infamous evil queens that he became suicidal. Then we see God’s gentle care and tenderness towards him as he is healed and prepared to continue the work he has been given to do. We find Job whose entire life was destroyed and finds himself in the very deepest depths of despair, yet God meets him exactly where he is.

The traditions of the Church also offer healing grace to those who suffer. For example, our liturgical seasons call us to wrestle with joy, sorrow, repentance, life, and death, but they also remind us that our present struggles are just fleeting and temporary challenges in our imperfect world. The structured prayers of the Church give us words when we have none of our own and the prayers of others lift us up when we are too weak to carry on. Even the very Mass itself allows us to unite our own suffering with Christ’s and to commune with Him and all the Saints in a powerful, intimate way while gaining strength from the grace that Christ bestows upon us and works within us.

We see these treasures of our faith and rightly recognize them as a balm for broken souls. Yet, we lie to ourselves if we believe that they are the solution to all our mental and emotional struggles. Even prayer, as faith-filled and honest as it may be, rarely brings about rapid and complete healing in broken hearts. It can do so, of course, since God has the power to heal however He chooses, but most often He opts not to work in this way. Instead, our reality, as creatures born into a world that falls short of paradise, is that our very bodies sometimes betray us leaving us prey to easily observable illnesses like chickenpox, but also to less visible ones like depression or psychosis that result from glitches in our brains.

Like any other part of our being, when our thoughts and feelings are working correctly, they are true assets. However, when something goes awry – and scientific research has shown us that this often corresponds with physiological changes in our brains – we experience illness. In the same way that we do not treat bacterial illnesses solely with admonitions to increase our faith and pray more fervently, we should not respond to mental illness in this way either. Instead, while prayer and deriving strength from our faith are important aspects of healing, prudential action involves seeking help – specifically help that has scientific backing. Often, such help includes therapy and/or medications, administered and taken in accordance with research findings.

Far from being a sign of a weak faith, seeking out these interventions shows an acceptance of God’s healing gifts which He has given us through the minds and work of scientists. Thus, when the Bible tells us, “Do not be anxious about anything,” one of the ways that we can live out this teaching is by seeking psychological help to manage uncontrollable and disruptive anxiety. In short, while our faith can certainly aid us in overcoming psychological struggles, it does not take the place of appropriate and effective treatment.

It remains to be said that mental health disorders can predispose us to certain types of sins (despair leading to a lack of faith in God and OCD resulting in scrupulosity, for example). While psychiatric disorders are certainly mitigating factors that impact our culpability, it is good for us to recognize our own propensity to sin in particular ways and to wrestle with these sins through prayer and the study of God’s word. At the same time, we should not neglect treatment of the underlying issues that contribute to these predispositions. For whatever reason, God has allowed our unique struggles with sin to be part of our lives’ stories and He is glorified through them when we allow Him to direct those stories.

To conclude, I offer you this story about a woman who once experienced something remarkably close to depression. In her own words, she described her suffering thus:

There is so much contradiction in my soul. Such deep longing for God – so deep that it is painful – a suffering continual – and yet not wanted by God – repulsed – empty – no faith – no love – no zeal. Souls hold no attraction – Heaven means nothing – to me it looks like an empty place – the thought of it means nothing to me and yet this torturing longing for God. Pray for me please that I keep smiling at Him in spite of everything. For I am only His – so He has every right over me. I am perfectly happy to be nobody even to God.

For most of her adult life, this struggle was her emotional and spiritual experience. Yet, she kept doing the work she had been called to do, kept praying, kept seeking God. In fact, as one person wrote, it was this suffering that made her life of faith so remarkable: “For me, this darkness is the single most heroic aspect of her life.” In 2016, this woman who had been dead for almost a decade, was canonized as St. Teresa of Calcutta, though the world still knows her as Mother Teresa. Her story reminds us that it is our journey towards God and not our feelings that define our lives and shape our purposes. When we struggle with disorders that disrupt our emotions, we can be assured that God can still work with, through, and for us.

Featured on Where Peter Is on January 13, 2025

(This article is the first in a four-part series on Mental Health written by Ariane Sroubek, PsyD. Ariane holds a doctorate in School and Child Clinical Psychology as well as a bachelor’s degree in biblical and theological studies. Her undergraduate work in psychology took place at a Christian college where the integration of faith and learning was prioritized.)

Throughout history, deep thinkers have wrestled with the integration of faith and science. Within the Church, this struggle has at times resulted in epic mistakes, such as rejecting the idea that the earth revolves around the sun. At other times, the Church has embraced science in surprising ways. Pope Pius XII’s eagerness to accept the Big Bang theory is a good example of this.

The desire to integrate science with our understanding of creation as it relates to Scripture and Church teaching has been addressed by Where Peter Is contributors before. Rather than reinvent the wheel, I refer you to these past articles for a better understanding of the intersection of faith and science in general (see Fr. Alex Roche’s 2022 article, Pete Vere’s 2018 article, Pedro Gabriel’s 2023 article). The importance of developing a solid comprehension of the Catholic approach to science cannot be overstated, particularly as it relates to specific fields of science like psychology; I encourage you to build your own understanding of how faith and science intersect. This is especially important in an age when the acceptance of reality is often questioned and even ideas that are supported with irrefutable evidence are revised to suit political agendas.

Nonetheless, the field of psychology poses several unique issues for the Church which makes the integration of psychology and faith particularly challenging. It is to these issues that I now turn.

“Soft” v “real” science

Even within the secular world, psychology is often pejoratively considered to be a “soft science.” In some ways this is a fair analysis. Most – though not all – psychologists spend their lives engaged in research that takes place far from a lab bench or imaging machine that could provide the kind of hard data that we have come to associate with “real science.”

In reality, however, the same is true for all applied sciences. For example, consider the field of medicine, which is rarely – if ever – derided as a “soft science.” Yet most practicing physicians who engage in research do so clinically, using largely the same methods and approaches that psychologists use to test treatments in real time: hypothesis testing, data collection, statistical analysis, and peer review of findings. While medical science as a whole is backed by armies of lab researchers, clinical research in medicine is based on the same scientific principles that govern psychological research.

The scientific method that directs both medical and psychological research ensures that, while some theories can be challenging to accept, they are continuously tested and revised in precise ways. This means that erroneous assumptions are challenged and knowledge builds on and modifies itself over time. This means that our understanding of the truth – as much as we can comprehend it at any particular point in time – is ultimately the goal of psychological research.

Me-search

There is a temptation for armchair psychologists to engage in what my professors once called “me-search.” That is, to say that while most of us will rarely, if ever, handle raw elements like mercury or viral assays outside of our high school science labs, we are all intimately familiar with human emotions and behaviors. This personal knowledge makes it tempting to consider ourselves “experts” on the human condition and to generalize our individual experiences to the world around us. Because psychology is the science of human emotions and behaviors, we are often driven to weigh-in on questions that are raised within the field but, due to our limited subject pool, our lack of experimental controls, and our tendency to conflate correlation and causation, our “me-search” frequently misrepresents those around us and leads us to erroneous and highly biased conclusions – the very things that good research is designed to avoid.

In contrast, a well-designed psychological study attempts to control selection bias within the subject pool, eliminate confounding factors that might influence results, and ensure that the number of subjects is appropriate to draw the conclusions that are being evaluated. Once such a conclusion is reached, the findings are checked by other researchers at conferences and through publications. Unlike the article that you are presently reading, which will be edited only for spelling and grammatical errors, psychological research papers are checked by experts in the field before they reach publication and are then continuously reevaluated based on knowledge gained in future studies.

While these precautions are not failproof and mistakes do happen, they give scientific (and psychological) research a level of authority which, when placed within the larger body of research, draws us closer and closer to an accurate approximation of how things really work in our world. The same is not true of “me-search.” For this reason, we should be skeptical of anyone who makes pronouncements about psychology but lacks training in the field and in the conducting and interpretation of psychological research.

Regardless of any religious knowledge, charisma or fan base they may have, a person who does not have professional training is unqualified to teach anything about the field of psychology that strays from official and current understandings within the field. They are similarly unqualified to weigh in on areas of dispute within the field in any sort of authoritative manner unless of course they qualify their opinions and identify their true area of expertise as well as the limits of their knowledge. Sadly, people with influence frequently fail to recognize their limitations in this area.

A checkered history

Another issue that often plagues the Church’s relationship with psychology lies in the history of the field. While it is in some ways a comparatively new scientific field, psychologists have had ample opportunities to suggest outrageous theories and to violate ethical principles with their research. Most undergraduates are familiar with the nightmare of the Stanford Prison Experiment and the horrors of the Milgram authority experiment that tried to make sense of the atrocities of the Holocaust. My own undergraduate research addressed some of the ethical issues raised by Asch’s conformity studies.

These and other similarly notorious experiments have tarnished the name of psychology. However, they have also led to drastic changes in oversight which make it very difficult for ethically questionable studies to occur today. In fact, many proposed studies never see the light of day due to onerous requirements for documentation and approval by ethical review boards and other such committees. This kind of scrutiny is particularly intense for any research involving children or animals, given the limits of consent that such research studies face and their vulnerable participant populations.

Atheistic theories

In addition to these broader ethical issues, many Christians are rightfully skeptical about theories of humanity that have been developed by atheists and  centered their understanding of humanity on issues like sexuality which, while important, play only a secondary role in Christian understanding of human motivation and behavior. Nonetheless, skepticism need not mean rejection and Christians can question and criticize aspects of psychological theory and even practice while valuing the contributions that the field has made.

There is no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Indeed, the contributions of psychology are numerous, ranging from drastic improvements in the care of the mentally ill to a better understanding of emotions and development that facilitates healing and human thriving.

Conflicting priorities

Lastly, because of the intersection and interaction between our physical, mental and spiritual health, it is all too easy for one area to be prioritized above the others. This will be discussed in greater depth in future articles but consider, for instance, the slogan “Faith Over Fear” that gained such popularity during the pandemic. At times, this phrase was weaponized and used to suggest that other believers could not have sufficient faith if they were fearful of the real physical threat that was circulating among us. This likely led to one of two disordered responses to a virus that has killed over seven million people at the time of this writing: either reckless abandon in the face of an actual threat, or shame for a natural response of apprehension and alertness that God built into our psyche for our own protection.

On the other hand, anxiety that persisted once prudent measures to avoid the spread of the virus had been taken could be indicative of a need to trust more fully in the goodness and sovereignty of God. Those of us who found ourselves lying awake at night worrying about the virus likely wrestled with the spiritual implications of our fear, and we were right to do so. For some of us, renewing our faith in God’s goodness was enough. For others, particularly those of us who struggled with anxiety disorders before the pandemic, interventions were probably necessary to help us get to a place where we could truly lean into our faith. In short, during the pandemic, a delicate balance of faith and fear was appropriate and necessary given the situation – the one tempering, motivating, and shaping the other. This recent, extreme example serves to highlight the intersection of all three aspects of ourselves: our minds, our spirit and our body. However, for those of us whose faith is central to our lives, we experience this intersection daily in countless, less dramatic situations.

Conclusion

As we embark on a new year which promises to cause emotional upheaval for many of us, I hope you will join me on my exploration of specific aspects of mental health and their relationships to our faith. The mental health crisis does not spare those within the church, and too often false teachers have taken advantage of the crisis to exploit the vulnerable in service to their own personal goals. This reality makes this exploration not only prudent but necessary for anyone who recognizes both the realities of our lives and the centrality of our faith.

Featured on Where Peter Is on December 18, 2024

Last week, the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) released Translate Hate: The Catholic Edition, a document that seeks to promote awareness of antisemitism and to equip Catholics to address it effectively within their communities. The sixty-three-page edition contains explanations of antisemitic caricatures, symbols, ideas, and language. In addition, it offers relevant commentary by the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. This commentary identifies the ways in which the Church contributed to antisemitism historically and highlights how, despite these past contributions, this particular form of prejudice is in direct conflict with established Church teaching and with the very roots of our Christian faith.

In his opening letter, Bishop Joseph C. Bambera of Scranton writes:

The committee encourages all Catholics – especially those who preach or instruct others – to take the message of the Second Vatican Council’s document, Nostra Aetate, to heart: the Jewish people remain beloved of God and share with us a common spiritual heritage.

Throughout the letter, Bishop Bambera emphasizes this heritage and highlights multiple papal admonitions against antisemitism, particularly those that followed Vatican II. To highlight the importance of the issue, he quotes Pope Francis’s 2013 Address to Members of the International Jewish Committee on Interreligious Consultations:

A true Christian cannot be antisemitic.

The release of the document is timely, given the increase of antisemitism within the United States. According to the Catholic News Agency’s reporting on the document’s release, the increase in hostility towards our Jewish brothers and sisters has “skyrocketed” since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. While much of this increase has occurred during the Israel-Hamas war, the document makes a clear distinction between antisemitism and appropriate criticism of specific government actions, particularly given the Church’s stance that the development of two independent states – Israel and Palestine – is the best solution to the conflict.

The Catholic Standard quoted Rabbi Noam Marans, who collaborated with Bishop Bambera on the release of the document. He addressed the present need for the document, saying:

We’re dealing with a three-headed monster with antisemitism…the skyrocketing toxicity of hate in the U.S. and in the world…distance from the reality and the lessons of the Shoah…and social media.

Translate Hate: The Catholic Edition concludes with a call for the faithful to assist in identifying and reporting antisemitism, defending those being targeted, and educating others on the dangers that such hatred poses. To this end, it provides a list of resources, including documents that address Jewish-Catholic relations, relevant Catholic social teaching, an in-depth definition of antisemitism, and contact information of agencies that will take reports of antisemitism.

Featured on Where Peter Is on November 21, 2024

Yesterday, Pope Francis announced that dates have been set for the canonizations of Blessed Carlo Acutis and Blessed Pier Giorgio Frassati. Soon to become the first millennial saint, the canonization of Carlo Acutis will take place on April 27^th and will coincide with the Jubilee for Adolescents in Rome (April 25-27^th). Pier Giorgio Frassati is expected to be canonized during the Jubilee for Young People (July 28^th – August 3^rd). Pope Francis made the announcement during an audience on the International Day for the Rights of Children and Adolescents. He also announced a summit on the rights of children which will take place on February 3^rd of 2025. The summit will focus on children facing abuse, exploitation, and war.

News of the saints’ canonization is likely to generate excitement among the youth of the Church who see these saints as people they can relate to. Carlo Acutis is perhaps the best known of the two new saints. In 2021, he was patron of the first year of Eucharistic Revival approved by the USCCB. The role was appropriate for the young saint who dedicated much of his short life to spreading love and devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. One of the ways he did this was via a website focused on Eucharistic Miracles. The website he created to share these miracles is still accessible, providing a tangible link to the t-shirt wearing, Pokémon playing saint who died from leukemia in 2006 at the age of fifteen. At his death, he completed his goal:

To always be united with Christ: This is my life’s program.

Pier Giorgio Frassati, who Saint John-Paul II called, the “Man of the Beatitudes” was an avid sportsman. A photograph of the saint shows him standing on top of a mountain peak carrying an ice axe and displaying the confidence of a man who frequently enjoyed mountaineering. As a young man, Frassati participated in multiple Catholic organizations and spent much of his time and resources caring for the poor. In particular, he joined the St. Vincent de Paul Society after becoming motivated to care for soldiers returning from WWI. He loved athletics, art, music and leading his friends toward Christ. Frassati was openly and actively anti-Fascist and anti-Communist, seeing his political activism as a means of living out his faith and heeding the cry of the poor. Like Acutis, Frassati died young when, at the age of twenty-four, he died of polio which he likely contracted while caring for the poor in his hometown of Turin, Italy.

Featured on Where Peter Is on October 24, 2024

This morning, the Vatican released Pope Francis’s fourth encyclical, Dilexit nos (He Loved Us). The document was presented at the Vatican Press Office by Monsignor Bruno Forte, Archbishop of Chieti-Vasto and Sister Antonella Fraccaro, General Superior of the Disciples of the Gospel. The release date for the document was previously announced earlier this week.

The document comes four years after Pope Francis released Fratelli tutti and focuses on the Sacred Heart of Jesus and its transformative power in our lives.

Because of Jesus, “we have come to know and believe in the love that God has for us” (1 Jn 4:16).

As an encyclical, Dilexit nos is a pastoral letter from Pope Francis that is meant to guide and direct the Church. It contains authoritative teachings and it is hoped that all Catholics will welcome it with reverence and an openness to applying its teachings to their own lives and circumstances. In addition, it is a way for Pope Francis to offer his own judgment on concrete issues based upon the teachings of the Church. As Catholics, we are called to respect those judgements and to wrestle with them as part of our own individual formation of conscience, recognizing that they were given to us by the successor of St. Peter. At a time when our world is full of turmoil and often seems to roil with hatred, this document is certainly much needed and greatly anticipated by many within the Church.

In the deepest fibre of our being, we were made to love and to be loved.

You can access the official English translation of Dilexit nos here.

Featured on Where Peter Is on October 22, 2024

The Vatican announced on Monday that Pope Francis will release his fourth encyclical, Dilexit nos, on Thursday, October 24th. The document’s title is translated as “He loved us” and reflects its focus on the Sacred Heart of Jesus, a devotion which Pope Francis holds particularly dear due to its emphasis on mercy. The new encyclical will be presented at the Vatican Press Offices by Monsignor Bruno Forte and Sr. Antonella Fraccaro. Its release coincides with the 350th anniversary of the apparitions that led to devotions and reparations to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Pope Francis previously announced that he would be releasing an encyclical on the Sacred Heart of Jesus in June of this past year, the month that is traditionally associated with the Sacred Heart. At that time, the Holy Father expressed his hope that his writing would help a world that has “lost its heart” to be moved and guided by his reflections on Christ’s love. Pope Francis also spoke about the importance of reparations to the Sacred Heart of Jesus during a conference in May of this year, when he said,

Reparation is fully manifested in the sacrifice of the cross. The novelty here is that it reveals the Lord’s mercy toward the sinner.

During that talk, he addressed the role that reparations to the Sacred Heart of Jesus have in healing wounds from abuse within the Church. Many of the points made during the Pope’s talk, paralleled those made by Sr. Theresa Marie Nguyen, O.P., who wrote a reflection on the ways in which the Sacred Heart of Jesus can help us to love one another more fully. For example, during the conference, Pope Francis stated,

Reparation therefore contributes to people’s reconciliation between themselves, but also to reconciliation with God, because the wrong done to our neighbors is also an offense to God.

The Church has recognized devotions to the Sacred Heart of Jesus for centuries, dating back to apparitions that appeared to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque in 1673. During these apparitions, Jesus revealed His heart, which was crowned with thorns and surrounded by flames. He charged the young Saint to share His love, especially the love He bears for sinners. Pope Pius XII, wrote his own encyclical on the devotion, Haurietis aquas, stating that it was a “banner of salvation,” that heralds Christ’s saving grace in today’s world. Pope Benedict XVI also wrote about the devotion, issuing a letter in 2006.

Featured on Where Peter Is throughout October 2024

The second and final session of the Assembly for the Synod on Synodality began meeting last Wednesday, October 2 in the Paul VI Hall at the Vatican. The current 3-year process has been described by CNN’s Vatican correspondent Christopher Lamb as the “largest listening and consulting effort ever to be undertaken in history.” This year’s session will differ from the previous meeting because many of the more specific and highly charged issues discussed in last year’s assembly (such as polygamous families and women in the diaconate) were handed over to study groups to address. That means the focus of the current session will be synodality in the Church.

While the formal title of the initiative, For a Synodal Church: Communion, Participation, and Mission, is a bit intimidating, the actual purpose of the synod is not. According to Kim Daniels, a member of the Vatican Dicastery for Communication, the Synod on Synodality (and synodality more broadly) is “a gathering of the faithful with their pastors in order to listen to what the Holy Spirit is saying to our Church.” A Church that practices synodality, then, is one that prayerfully listens to its members and to the Holy Spirit as it seeks discernment for future action. Participants in the Second Session this month will focus on how to move forward as a Church that listens to all its members and is oriented toward effective evangelization in today’s world rather than the self-preservation of Church structures.

As reported in the Catholic News Service’s overview of this month’s assembly, the participants will be working from the Instrumentum Laboris (working document) with the ultimate goal of enhancing “the unique contribution of each baptized person and of each church in the one mission of proclaiming the Risen Lord and his Gospel in the world today.” To do this, they will work to develop recommendations on how to:

1. Help members of the Church to listen to one another and the Holy Spirit
2. Encourage the baptized to work towards fulfilling the mission of the Church
3. Reach out to those who remain outside of or alienated by the Church
4. Increase accountability for Church leadership
5. Ensure that local church councils are representative of their parishioners and that their recommendations are heard
6. Allow women to participate more fully in the mission of the Church

While the scope of this global undertaking is vast and messy, its purpose is to ensure that the Church, while remaining rooted in Tradition, is responsive to the current situations and needs of the world we live in.

The following links offer information about the daily happenings of the Second Session:

General Links:

• The Synod’s official website in English.
• Link to Second Session page.
• Link to the latest updates posted on the Vatican website.
• Vatican News coverage (in English) of the Second Session.

Vatican News Transcripts of Father (and soon-to-be-Cardinal) Timothy Radcliffe’s retreat meditations:

• Meditation 1: ‘Resurrection: Searching in the Dark’ – Text / Video
• Meditation 2: ‘The Locked Room’ – Text / Video
• Meditation 3: ‘Resurrection Fishing’ – Text / Video
• Meditation 4: ‘Resurrection & Breakfast Conversation’ – Text / Video

Link to coverage of the Opening Mass on October 1^.

Links to the full text of the Opening Addresses on October 1:

•                Cardinal Grech
•                Cardinal Hollerich
•                Cardinal Aguiar Retes

Link to Pope Francis’ Angelus and Rosary for peace at St. Mary Major on Sunday, October 6th.

Links to the daily press briefings on the synodal proceedings:

October 3^rd (Day Two) – Emphasis was on the importance of forgiveness and mercy, “spirituality and prayer,” “paths to peace,” and the idea that the Session’s study groups are “laboratories of Synodal life” and collaborative spaces to “foster harmony without creating uniformity.”  The issue of accepting women into the diaconate was raised and it was determined that more exploration was needed (see Pedro Gabriel’s article from October 5^th).

October 4^th (Day Three) – Participants addressed the need to listen to the excluded and to be a “family of those who have no family,” as well as the idea that all the baptized share equal “dignity and co-responsibility” for the mission of the Church. They also focused on the interaction between local cultures and the Church, the rejection of the corporate model within the structure of the Church, and digital evangelization. Additionally, problems with the way that Fiducia supplicans was developed and released were discussed.

October 5^th (Day Four) – The General Assembly issued a call for all people to work as agents of peace and condemned the arms trade. They addressed specific needs throughout the world including oppression and violence in the Middle East, desperation in Haiti, migration challenges in the Philippines, the shifting away from a Western Church to one that is more heavily influenced by the Global South, the needs of the global poor, the marginalization of women and LGBTQ+ people within the Church, and the importance of combatting clericalism.

October 7^th (Day Five) – The fifth day of the session began today with prayer for those suffering in the Middle East and with a reminder that Pope Francis declared the day to be one of prayer and fasting for peace. In keeping with this focus, a fundraiser to support the only Catholic Church in Gaza was announced. Archbishop Gintaras Grušas tied the day of prayer to the larger theme of synodality by recognizing it as an opportunity to participate in solidarity with those who are suffering. During the daily press briefing, plans for the assembly this week were discussed. Additionally, presenters emphasized the importance of collaboration and dialogue with other Churches and faiths, how to build Christ’s Kingdom while valuing differences, the necessity of truly listening to one another, and the ways in which the Church can move forward as a synodal body, particularly in vulnerable areas of the globe (specifically Syria, Lebanon, Russia, Ukraine, Myanmar, Vietnam and Indonesia).

October 8th (Day 6) – When speaking of the work the assembly has done so far, the Archbishop of Abidjan said, “…we are not materially changing the Church, but we are in a process that will lead to modifying the way of living the Church in the near future.” During the daily press release, it was announced that the assembly raised 62,000 Euros which were given to the Catholic parish of the Holy Family in Gaza to support victims of the war. Additionally, three of the 21 new Cardinals announced by Pope Francis over the weekend were present at this briefing. These newly elected Cardinals – from the Ivory Coast, Japan and Brazil – each responded to questions.  According to the briefing, the assembly addressed the importance of Christian Initiation in a secular world, the necessity of healing wounds caused by scandals within the Church, the need for trust in order for any synodal process to be effective, the importance of the Church nurturing charity and mission , ongoing concerns about the role of women in the Church, the recognition of forgiveness as an aspect of Christ’s love, the role of community in the Church, the importance of baptism, and the need for the Church to accompany the newly baptized. Additionally, some members called for the Synod’s working document to be more comprehensive and to be written in language that is easy to understand.

October 9th (Day 7):  In the synod session today, the following issues were addressed: the need for better Christian Initiation for young people, greater cooperation between the laity and their priests and bishops, the participation of women as both listeners within the church and ambassador for peace in global conflicts, empowering young people to direct youth and digital ministries, accompaniment of victims of abuse, allowing the poor to become leaders of ministry rather than merely the recipients of it, alleviating the burdens of loneliness and heavy workloads for priests, and the importance of producing a Final Document that inspires action. Additionally, participants in the daily press conference described the role of deacons as bridges who bring the Church to families and the marginalized and then create pathways for them to return to the Church. They also acknowledged deacons’ roles in assisting parish priests with overwhelming administrative work. Participants emphasized the importance of synodal discernment for anyone who has responsibility within the Church, including the laity, and petitioned for assistance for the Church in Mozambique which continues to struggle in the aftermath of war.

October 10th (Day 8) – On the eight day of the synod, the focus was on Christian unity. The participants spent the morning working within their smaller groups and planned to use the afternoon to focus on Part II of Instrumentum Laboris, Pathways. During the daily briefing, participants discussed: the ties between ecumenism and synodality, the “exchange of gifts” between Churches, the experiences of non-Catholic, ecumenical participants in the synod (specifically representatives of the Orthodox, Anglican and Mennonite Churches), the challenges and promises of the ecumenical process, and the journey of seeking commonality in the hope of greater unity in the future.

October 11th (Day 9) – Today was the 62nd anniversary of the Second Vatican Council which has been credited with the birth of a “new ecumenical era” in the Church. In light of this, an ecumenical vigil was held in the evening. Earlier in the day, synod participants focused on the theme of caring for relationships within the Church and the world in general. They addressed the need for trust, transparency and accountability within the Church. Participants also highlighted the importance of listening carefully to suffering and seeking complex solutions for complex problems, rather than finding simplistic answers. Other topics of discussion included the importance of prayer in listening, openness to differences, ensuring that all are represented and that specialists are able to share their wisdom in the discernment process,  the importance of the methods and culture being developed through the synod, and the challenges facing participants as they continue to learn how to take what they hear as they listen and integrate it into their decision making. Finally, plans were made for the next several days of the synod.

October 14th (Day 10) – Over the weekend, the synod participants continued to focus on the second module of Instrumentum laboris. Particular attention was paid to decision making within the Church, Catholic schools and their roles in faith formation, accountability and abuse within the Church, resisting clericalism, the role of women and the laity in the mission of the Church, and how to learn from Churches that are already using a synodal approach. On Monday morning, participants discussed the need for transparency in the Church, methods of synodality, and the type of culture that should exist in a synodal Church. During the afternoon, working groups spent time drafting their reports. At the daily press conference, Sr. Gloria Liliana Franco Echeverri, ODN spoke on the importance of undertaking synodality and discernment with “the style of Jesus.” Bishop Edouard Sinayobye of Cyangugu, Rwanda, discussed the importance of the Holy Spirit in the synodal process and how this process is an opportunity to build unity within the Church. Then Archbishop Zbigneus Stankevics of Riga, Latvia, shared his desire for the synodal process to “involve every baptized person in the Church” as they work to “expand the Kingsom of God throughout the world.” He said that a goal of the synod was “freeing the charisms of every baptized person” in part by decentralizing and sharing responsibility within the Church. He cautioned that this should not be done in a democratic or secular way, but instead through spiritual communion. This, he said, would lead to the realization of the “final goal of the synod” which he declared to be mission and a missionary church. He encouraged participants to learn from the good fruits of the Church’s work throughout the world. On Tuesday, participants will transition to focusing on the third module of Instrumentum laboris, which is “Places.”

October 15th (Day 11) – Today’s session began with a remembrance of Jose Carlos de Sousa, a homeless Brazilian poet who resided under the colonnade in St. Peter’s Square. His funeral was held later in the day within the Vatican. Participants in the Synod shifted their attention today to the role of “places” in the Church. The morning’s prayer and meditation were led by Sr. Maria Ignazia Angelini and Cardinal Hollerich. They spoke about the ways in which human interactions allow the Gospel to be incarnate in our world. Additionally, they spoke of the dynamic and responsive nature of mission, the role that place and culture have played in the history of the Church, and the ways in which different places and cultures interact. During the daily press conference, Sr. Nirmala Alex Maria Nazareth, Superior General of the Sisters of the Apostolic Carmel shared her hope for the future that has been kindled by the synod. Cardinal Steiner, Archbishop of Manaus, Brazil, discussed the practical nature of synodality, the vital role that women have played in remote areas where they have had to carry out the roles that deacons ordinarily play, the issue of celibacy in the priesthood, and the climate crisis that is currently facing Brazil as it suffers from profound drought. Finally, Cardinal-elect Roberto Repole, Archbishop of Turin, spoke of the ways in which the Synod is a reflection of our universal Church and the discussions that have been taking place about the role of people with disabilities within the Church. The day ended with a showing of the film lo Capitano. The showing was arranged by the Dicastery for Culture and Education.

October 16th (Day 12) – Continuing with the theme of “places,” Paul VI Hall said today that the Church needs to be in “the digital world,” noting that “there is a need to be creative and to imagine, to expand the places of our Church into other realms.” Participants discussed how part of this imaginative vision involves discerning how to structure a united Church in the face of “contemporary challenges” like rapid change, migration, and technology. Decentralization of Church responsibility is one aspect of this vision. Additionally, Fr. Rush emphasized the critical role of theologians in helping “the Church to continue its living traditions. Fr. Prisco spoke about the importance of theologians and cannon lawyers working together to develop new responses to the new situations that confront the Church today. He also shared the importance of consensus in discernment, stating that if there is no consensus on an issue, then more discussion is needed. As a result, he cautioned that some issues, such as women’s ministry, will remain unresolved at the end of the synod as discussions on these topics continue. In the evening, a theological-pastoral forum was held to address the role of local churches within the universal Church.

October 17th (Day 13) – During the morning session of the Synod, participants discussed the Church’s relationship with migrants, renewing parish life, incorporating people with disabilities and creating a council for them, and structuring the connections between Rome and local churches. To this end, they suggested consulting local churches during the creation of Vatican documents and increasing the frequency of visits made by Vatican Dicastries. During the daily briefing, Sr. Samuela Maria Rigon, Superior General of the Sisters of the Sorrowful Mother shared that roughly one quarter of synod participants are laity, young people and members of religious orders. Cardinal Charles Bo, Archbishop of Yangon, Myanmar, and President of the Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences (FABC) discussed the synods process in Asia and shared that the FABC is pleased with the progress in “the Church’s commitment to listening to everyone.” Then Cardinal Gerald Cyprien Lacroix of Quebec, Canada, cautioned that the church needs to listen and adjust practices in mission, media and spiritual growth. Finally, Prefect Ruffini said that the Church has been discussing allocating greater authority to local churches for a some time. However, this discussion has accelerated since Vatican II.

October 18th (Day 14) – Today the primary focus of the assembly was on the decentralization of Church power and responsibility. This conversation involved the value of diverse churches, the idea that people who follow different rites live within the same geographic areas and territories, and the need to develop criteria to decentralize in a “healthy” way. This will involve “fidelity to the magisterium, ecclesial communion with the successor of Peter, respect for local Churches, subsidiarity and synodality.” Other issues discussed included the overwhelming administrative tasks facing parishes which “stifle missionary enthusiasm,” ways in which Church leaders can walk with the laity and the suffering, the importance of the incarnation of the Gospel throughout the world, specific strengths and needs of the Church in various geographic areas (the Mediterranean, Latin America, and South Sudan), and the danger of polarization. Bishop Luis Marin de San Martin reflected on the many challenges the world faces, saying that the Synod creates hope that the Church is “capable of addressing today’s issues.” To do so, the Church must be Christ-centered, inclusive, responsive, and embrace the brotherhood of humanity.

In the evening, a Q&A session between students and the leaders of the Synod was held. In their responses to the students, the leaders highlighted the importance of listening to others, resisting polarization, finding commonalities, and recognizing religion as a path to brotherhood as different faiths work together to solve global problems. In addition, the participants reassured students that synodality is not a threat to tradition and truth. Bishop Flores said, “The Church has been messy for 200 years, but the Spirit keeps it together…I do not worry that the faith of the Church will be compromised if we listen to each other.” The Synod leaders expressed their hope that the students would bring the synodality home with them and asked them to rembember that, “The beauty is we are not by ourselves. Pope Francis does not want to do his mission by himself; he called the whole Church to do it with him.”

On Sunday night, October 20th, the digital synod initiative concluded with an online prayer vigil for digital missionaries.

Monday morning, October 21st, Fr. Timothy Radcliffe, O.P. offered a meditation in preparation for this week’s work of drafting the Synod’s Final Document. Father Radcliffe reminded participants of the freedom which undergirds their work: the freedom to share their beliefs openly and the freedom that comes from knowing that God is not threatened by any mistakes that they might make, but will “work all for the good of those who love God.” He reassured listeners, “we need not be afraid of disagreement, for the Holy Spirit is at work in it…and even if you are disappointed by the results of the Synod, God’s providence is at work in this assembly, bringing us to the Kingdom in ways that God alone knows. His will for our good cannot be frustrated.”

October 21st (Day 15): The fifteenth day of the Synod session began with a Mass that was celebrated in St. Peter’s Basilica. The homily was given by Cardinal Grech. Participants were later given copies of the draft of the Final Document which was presented by Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich. He emphasized that the text of the document is provisional and that it is currently confidential. This confidentiality is necessary so that discussions can continue freely as the assembly works on the document. The document is understood to be based on both discussions from the current session of the Synod and those that occurred during previous sessions in the past years. The morning session ended with prayer for Fr. Marcelo Perez, who was murdered on Sunday in Chiapas, Mexico. In the afternoon, participants met in their small groups to discuss their initial responses to the document. During the daily briefing, Cardinal Zuppi stated that dialogue is “foundational to the Church itself” and Bishop Manuel Nin Guell, Apostolic Exarch for Byzantine Rite Catholics in Greece, explained that the Synod has raised awareness of Eastern Catholic Churches within the Assembly.

October 22nd (Day 16): Today, the assembly focused on discerning changes to the final document which, while written in Italian, has been unofficially translated into multiple languages. Participants and groups made proposals for modifications that were then voted on. Those proposals that received an absolute majority of votes were accepted. So far, the topics addressed have included youth, women, the laity, those in consecrated life, Bishops’ conferences, priests, and a rejection of war. Poor Francis attended the meeting of the General Congregation. Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo Beskngu offered the reminder that the Synod was not focused on addressing a particular problem, but rather on “imagining a new way of being Church” which can then be applied to the specific challenges we face. During the daily briefing, Archbishop Andrew Nkea Fuanya of Cameroon spoke about the contributions that African Catholics have made to the Synod. He noted that the current focus in Africa is on keeping Churches full. Franz-Josef Overbeck, Bishop of Essen in Germany then spoke about the challenges he sees in a country that is largely not religious. He expressed the need for a “new evangelization” within post-secular nations. Finally, Fr. Clarence Sandanaraj Davedassan from Malaysia shared that the minority status of Catholics in Asia makes dialogue “a matter of survival…within a pluralist culture.” He noted that a particular challenge is learning how to evangelize in places where speaking publicly about faith is illegal.

October 23rd (Day 17): As of today, more than 1,000 modifications to the Final Document have been proposed. Nine hundred of these changes were recommended by small working groups and roughly one hundred by individuals participating in the Synod. The assembly will vote on the Final Document at the end of the session on Saturday of this week. During the day, members voted for new members of the Ordinary Council. The new council members will begin their work after the conclusion of the current session and will help to implement the synodal process going forward and prepare for the next Synod. During the daily briefing, speakers discussed the bishops’ role as pastors and the need to serve local parishes, the importance of bishops welcoming the marginalized to participate in the Church, relationships and building bridges, accountability and transparency within the Church, and hope for an end to the war in the Holy Land. Additionally, the role of Bishops’ Conferences was clarified as one in which Bishops concretely apply the teachings of the Church to the specific needs and circumstances of a particular group of people, not to make or propose new dogmas.

October 25th – There was no news briefing today, however, the Vatican released the audio of a meeting regarding women in ministry that occurred yesterday afternoon. The contents of the audio suggests that the goal of the Church is to enrich the role of women in ministry and to explore options for expanding the role of women within the Church. To do this, the Church must consider various cultures and opinions. Additionally, it must examine women who are already engaged in ministry and leadership roles, particularly in places like the Amazon, Africa and Asia. Moving forward, one avenue that the Church is considering involves allocating more powerful roles to women without clericalizing these roles. Additionally, the possibility of woman deacons will continue to be explored. In the meantime, the Church can begin to move forward by taking concrete steps to empower women within the Church.

October 26^th and 27^th (Final Days of the Synodal Assembly): On Saturday, October 26^th, the Assembly adopted the Final Document. It is composed of five parts:

1. 1. An exploration and explanation of the synodal process as well as its necessity
   2. The importance of relationships at all levels of Church and the need to renew them and subject them to the teachings of the Gospel
   3. The importance of trust and discernment in the decision making processes that exist within the Church – this involves accountability
   4. The shared journey of the diverse and changing people of the Church who are bonded together through relationship and communion
   5. The importance of spiritual formation within the Church, specifically the shared responsibility for this formation among all Church members, making the Church a safe place for all people, and sharing Church social doctrine more widely

The document concludes with a prayer entrusting its implementation to the Virgin Mary. In its article describing the document, the Vatican described it as a step towards the implementation of the Second Vatican Council. It shared the Assembly’s vision of the Church having the sole purpose of making an encounter with Jesus possible. Everything else (Church structures, bureaucracies, world standing, etc.) are valuable only for the ways that they advance this purpose. The Vatican also made it clear that the document embraces a Church community in which all are welcome and there is space for everyone within “a community of forgiven sinners who experience God’s love and want to communicate it to everyone.”

In his final address to the Assembly, Pope Francis described the document as a gift to the Church that has a “threefold” nature: guidance, a symbol of unity, and a shared mission. He emphasized the need to listen to one another and the role of the Church as a people who open doors, rather than erecting walls. He called the church to be a witness to peace through listening and reconciliation and noted that the Holy Spirit is the force that drives unity within the Church.

At the Vatican Press Conference that followed the release of the document, Synod leaders said that the document requires of a shift in our understanding of the Universal Church from a “multinational corporation” to a “communion of Churches.” They acknowledged that the document calls for greater roles for women and the laity but cautioned that the idea of a female diaconate remains under consideration. The leaders clarified that the document is part of the magisterium and, therefore, serves as guidelines for the Church moving forward. They also explained that, while the Synod’s ten study groups are expected to finish their work by June of next year, there will be an additional time of discernment following the conclusion of their work.

The Synodal Assembly was finally concluded on Sunday, October 27^th with a Mass officiated by Pope Francis. Now that this aspect of the synodal process has concluded, the synod moves onto the implementation phase. At the present time, the Final Document is only available in Italian.

Featured on Where Peter Is on September 27, 2024

A Reflection on Today’s Readings

Recently, I was playing a form of Bible roulette. If you have not heard the term before, it is a reference to when someone points to a random verse in the Bible and tries to apply it to their life. Usually, the verse is applied literally since there is no other context to guide interpretation. I know that this approach is based on terrible theology at best and magical thinking at worst. I am also fully aware of the risks of taking Bible passages out of context. As a result, I am generally not one to engage in this sort of activity, but I was feeling anxious about an upcoming surgery and anxiety sometimes pushes us to do things we know we ought not to do.

In that anxious moment, I thought me in the lectionary verses that are assigned to the day of my procedure. So, anticipating the reassurance of a passage along the lines of Isaiah 41:10 (“Fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand”) I eagerly flipped through the missal to September 27, 2024. Rather than promises of protection, I looked down upon the words of Ecclesiastes 3:1-2:

There is an appointed time for everything,
and a time for every thing under the heavens.
A time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to uproot the plant.

“Okay,” I thought, “let’s try the next reading instead.” Turning to Psalm 144:3-4, I read:

LORD, what is man, that you notice him;
the son of man, that you take thought of him?
Man is like a breath;
his days, like a passing shadow.

I could not help but chuckle to myself at this clear example of why Bible roulette does not work. If we read a verse with the intention of applying it to our lives without viewing it in the larger context of the Word and teachings of the Church, then we run the risk of getting ourselves into serious trouble.

In my case, if I honestly thought that this verse had direct implications for my surgery, I would have a difficult time going through with it even though I know that it is a routine and relatively low-risk procedure. After all, who would willingly lie down on an operating table if, when they asked the doctor how the procedure was expected to go, they got the reply, “There is an appointed time for everything… A time to scatter stones, and a time to gather them; a time to embrace, and a time to be far from embraces,” or, perhaps worse, “Human life, a mere puff of wind, days as fleeting as a shadow.” Certainly not me.

Yet, on the day this article is being published, I am in fact going into surgery and I do it with the comfort of the entire Gospel teaching, not just a verse that was cherry-picked from here or there.

That same comfort is woven through each of the passages that we read today, though we may have to strain a bit to see it. In the first reading (Eccl 3:1-11), we are reminded of the many seasons that compose our lives and of the fact that we are powerless to hold onto or extend any one of them. As challenging and even painful as this reality may be, at the end of the reading we are told that, while we do not always know what God is doing as our lives change, we do know that He is at work in that change.

We are also told in verses like Romans 8:28 (“And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to his purpose”) that whatever work God is doing in our lives will be good. I take great comfort in this knowledge — particularly today since, because of my operation, my life will change. While I look forward to getting it over with and being able to heal, part of me grieves for the changes that will come. Still, God is working.

The Psalm for the day (Ps 144:1-2, 3-4) begins with imagery of war before progressing to reflect on the transience of human life. Our life on earth is a “mere puff of wind” and then we are gone. I love that visual of something that suddenly is, then is no more, leaving no trace of having been here except perhaps a few changes it made to the world while it existed. Yet, in the middle of the reading, we are asked to ponder how amazing it is that God – the eternal Creator of all – would care about us.

This is an outrageous belief, really, but it is also precisely the message that God gives us throughout His word. In fact, even at the beginning of this reading, we find that, during the chaos and tumult of war, God is a fortress, shelter, and shield amid the rapidly passing lives of His people. We see it in its fullest sense through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and in our participation in this sacrifice at the Eucharist: God not only cares about us, He also gives Himself for and to us.

In the Gospel reading for today (Lk 9:18-22), we see St. Peter recognize Jesus as the Savior who God sent to deliver and protect His people. In this passage, St. Peter calls Jesus “the Christ” which means the anointed, holy one of God, the one whom God has chosen as the appointed ruler of all. Jesus must have been pleased with this answer since His disciples get His questions wrong on so many other occasions. But rather than praise St. Peter’s insight, Jesus throws him a curve ball.

He tells His followers that He, the Christ, will have to suffer and die. Surely, the disciples were perplexed by this. Why would the Chosen One have to go through such agony? Just as we cannot always see the way that God is working through the seasons of our own lives, the disciples must have struggled to understand what God was doing with the life of His Son. Yet, as a resurrection people who have the benefit of living on the other side of Christ’s three days in the grave, we know that He was indeed doing something powerful, something amazing, and something worth all the pain required to accomplish it.

So, taken in context, the readings today teach us that life is fleeting and changes are inevitable. Yet, throughout change, God’s goodness and His work in our lives remain constant. What great comfort that is on this and every day!