The concept of synodality has become one of the most debated and controversial ideas in contemporary Catholic discourse.

Once a technical term rarely discussed outside theological circles, it has now moved to the center of Church life, provoking confusion, resistance, and intense criticism.

For many clergy, scholars, and lay faithful, the word itself has become emblematic of a deeper crisis involving authority, doctrine, and identity within the Catholic Church.

Among the most vocal critics of synodality is Dr.William Anthony Thomas, a theologian and Mariologist based in Rome, who has been closely involved with Vatican academic institutions for decades.

According to his analysis, synodality represents not a legitimate development of Catholic tradition, but a rupture rooted in philosophical and ecclesiological misunderstandings.

He argues that its adoption has contributed significantly to what he views as doctrinal ambiguity and institutional instability.

Dr.Thomas traces the modern use of synodality to influences outside Catholic theology, particularly to practices within the Church of England.

He identifies a key moment in its emergence as a meeting between Pope Francis and Justin Welby, the former Archbishop of Canterbury.

In the Anglican tradition, decision making relies heavily on collective deliberation among clergy and laity, a system that Dr.Thomas describes as fundamentally different from Catholic ecclesiology.

Following this influence, significant structural changes were introduced within the Vatican.

Sacred Congregations, long associated with doctrinal authority, were renamed Dicasteries.

The term dicastery, derived from a Greek word referring to decision making by citizens, symbolized a shift toward broader participation.

Critics argue that this change was not merely administrative but ideological, reflecting a move away from hierarchical clarity toward procedural consensus.

Dr.Thomas contends that the reinterpretation of the Second Vatican Council played a decisive role in this shift.

While Vatican II emphasized the dignity of the laity, he argues that it never proposed a model of governance based on numerical equality or emotional consensus.

In his view, the current emphasis on representation over competence undermines the Church’s apostolic foundation.

He maintains that authentic lay participation must be grounded in theological training, fidelity to doctrine, and service to truth, not in political categories such as parity or inclusivity.

He warns that under recent pontificates, individuals without sufficient theological formation or with agendas incompatible with Catholic teaching have been placed in influential roles.

The philosophical foundation of synodality, according to Dr.Thomas, can be traced to the ideas of Jean Jacques Rousseau.

Rousseau’s social contract theory, which prioritized collective sentiment over objective truth, played a key role in shaping modern secular democracy.

Dr.Thomas argues that importing such philosophy into the Church effectively replaces divine revelation with emotional consensus.

This shift, he claims, results in what he calls sentimentalism.

In this framework, moral judgments are avoided to prevent emotional discomfort.

Sin is no longer clearly named, and doctrinal teaching is softened to avoid offense.

He argues that this approach contradicts both Scripture and tradition, which emphasize conversion, repentance, and moral clarity.

Dr.Thomas insists that the Gospel itself is not a dialogue of mutual affirmation but a proclamation of victory over sin and death.

Christ’s mandate to the Church was to teach, baptize, and proclaim the truth, regardless of resistance.

He warns that when truth is subordinated to feelings, faith loses its transformative power.

The consequences of this shift, critics argue, are visible throughout Europe.

Vocations to the priesthood and religious life have declined sharply, while confusion regarding moral teaching has increased.

Dr.Thomas rejects the idea that vocations have disappeared.

He argues instead that candidates who demonstrate strong adherence to traditional Catholic beliefs are often discouraged or rejected by bishops who fear being labeled rigid.

He points to what he describes as an orchestrated erosion of discipline within seminaries and priestly formation.

According to his assessment, many bishops have been encouraged to avoid candidates considered too orthodox.

This, he claims, has created an artificial shortage of clergy that is then used to justify structural changes such as expanded lay leadership or proposals for married clergy.

Dr.Thomas also criticizes what he describes as authoritarian tendencies within recent Church governance.

He cites instances in which bishops were removed or marginalized for expressing positions that conflicted with prevailing policies, particularly during the global health crisis.

He argues that coercive measures regarding medical interventions violated principles of conscience and Church teaching on bodily integrity.

He further claims that the Vatican’s administrative transparency suffered under recent leadership.

Traditionally, papal audiences and decisions were carefully recorded and published.

However, deviations from this practice, including residence outside the Apostolic Palace, reduced accountability and increased secrecy.

Critics argue that this undermined trust among clergy and faithful alike.

The cultural implications of sentimental theology, Dr.Thomas argues, extend beyond Church governance into broader society.

He links the decline of moral clarity to what he describes as spiritual decay, manifesting in self destructive behaviors and loss of human dignity.

He maintains that the Church has failed to address these issues directly due to fear of appearing judgmental.

He contrasts this with periods in Church history when discipline and clarity fostered growth.

He argues that young people seeking meaning and structure are drawn to communities that offer firm teaching and spiritual discipline.

Where such clarity is absent, he believes, Christianity loses its appeal.

Dr.Thomas calls for a revival grounded in catechesis, sacramental life, Marian devotion, and clear proclamation of Christ as Redeemer.

He emphasizes that renewal cannot come from procedural reforms or sociological experiments, but from fidelity to apostolic teaching.

He rejects the claim that synodality has roots in Scripture or the early Church.

According to his analysis, there is no biblical mandate for a synodal structure as currently proposed.

He maintains that apostolic succession, not collective sentiment, defines Catholic authority.

In his view, synodality risks transforming the Church into a religious version of a parliamentary system, where doctrine becomes negotiable and truth is shaped by majority opinion.

He warns that such a model ultimately leads to fragmentation and loss of identity.

Dr.Thomas urges the faithful to exercise what Catholic theology calls the sensus fidei, the instinct of faith possessed by the baptized.

He encourages Catholics to express their concerns respectfully but clearly through direct communication with Church authorities.

He believes that sustained, widespread expression of concern can influence the direction of ecclesial policy.

He emphasizes that loyalty to the papacy does not require silence in the face of confusion.

True loyalty, he argues, is fidelity to Christ and the deposit of faith.

He insists that criticism rooted in love for the Church is not rebellion but responsibility.

As the Church moves forward under new leadership, the debate over synodality remains unresolved.

Supporters view it as a path toward inclusion and dialogue, while critics see it as a departure from divine constitution.

What is clear is that the conversation has exposed deep divisions and a widespread desire for clarity.

Whether synodality will reshape the Church or be reexamined remains to be seen.

What cannot be denied is that the issue has forced Catholics worldwide to confront fundamental questions about truth, authority, and the nature of the Church itself.