The Pope’s arbitrary actions belie his call for ‘synodal’ governance
By removing a Puerto Rican bishop from office, without citing any cause or ordering any investigation, Pope Francis has moved into uncharted waters.
The Roman Pontiff appoints bishops, and the Roman Pontiff can remove them; that much is not in dispute. But ordinarily no cleric is stripped of office without some canonical process. Bishop Daniel Fernandez Torres was not even accused of any legal or canonical crime, much less given “due process.”
Once again the Pope, who is the supreme legislator of the Church, can make his own rules. But today’s announcement is unprecedented and unsettling. By dismissing a bishop the way the chief executive of a multinational corporation might dismiss a branch manager, Pope Francis has made nonsense of his own frequent calls for “collegial” and “synodal” government.
There have been a handful of cases in recent years in which the Vatican has asked a diocesan bishop to resign, after an investigation in which the prelate has been found guilty of some serious misconduct. (Most such cases have involved sexual abuse—either by the prelate himself or by clerics under his supervision.) A decade ago, Pope Benedict XVI forced Bishop William Morris of Toowoomba, Australia, to resign early, after a two-year investigation triggered by the Australian bishop’s advocacy for the ordination of women.
Bishop Fernandez, however, refused to resign, explaining that he did not want to become a party to what he sees as an injustice. So in effect he was fired.
What was his offense? The Vatican, as usual, offered no explanation. The dismissed bishop reports that he was charged on two counts: a lack of “communion” with his brother bishops in Puerto Rico; and disobedience to the Pope, because he did not travel to Rome to explain himself.
Bishop Fernandez replies that he could not travel to Rome last year, because of Covid-era restrictions. If he did not have a vaccine passport—which seems likely, since he defended Catholics who resisted vaccination—then that explanation rings true, and the charge of “disobedience” is unsustainable.
As for the alleged lack of “communion,” it is true that Bishop Fernandez had disagreements on policy with his brother bishops. He refused to sign a statement describing Covid vaccination as a duty; he resisted sending his seminarians to an interdiocesan institution; he strongly objected to legislation banning “conversion therapy” for homosexuals. But none of these disagreements involved breaking communion with other bishops. In no case did he even suggest a break from the universal Church; in no case did he teach something contrary to Catholic doctrine.
Quite the contrary, in fact. In his vigorous defense of the family, Bishop Fernandez seemed much more anxious to defend traditional Catholic teaching than his brother bishops in Puerto Rico. If that is the reason for his removal, then the Pope’s expressed desire to “hagan lio [make a mess]” has entered a frightening new phase.
In Germany, Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg, the president of the episcopal conference, is urging Pope Francis to act quickly on the resignation of Cardinal Rainier Woelki of Cologne. Although Bishop Bätzing does not say what action he wants the Pontiff to take, he seems clearly to be hinting at a quick acceptance of the resignation of Cardinal Woelki—who just happens to be one of the minority of German prelates objecting to the “Synodal Path” and its call for radical changes in Church doctrine and discipline. Meanwhile in Munich, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, who has also offered to resign, remains in office at the Pope’s behest, with the full support of the episcopal conference he once led.
Run down the list of bishops who have been accused of misconduct and forced to resign, and you may notice that a disproportionate number could be classified as “conservative” or traditionalist in their sympathies. Or take the opposite perspective, and look at the list of prelates who have been retained in office or even promoted during the current pontificate, despite evidence of misconduct, and notice the preponderance of progressives. The Pope’s campaign for reform in the Church is strongly conditioned by his desire for his type of reform.
One more thought: Catholics do not deny the universal authority of the Pope (assuming that he was the Pope). But Orthodox Christians question the extent of that authority, and fear the arbitrary use of papal power. While Pope Francis speaks often of synodal government, the Orthodox churches have lived synodal government for generations, and firmly believe in the proper authority of all bishops as successors to the apostles. The Pope’s handling of Bishop Fernandez bespeaks a very different approach, and could be a significant setback to the ecumenical cause.