Summer 2026 – halftime between the conclusion of the World Synod 2024 and the Ecclesial Assembly 2028. Where does the European process stand? Klara Antonia Csiszar reports and reflects on the current state of things[*].
During the years of the synod, a pastoral worker said something to me that has stayed with me. Pope Francis may change nothing about the great structures of the Church, and yet he changes everything, because he wants to change the way we are with one another. The sentence cuts deeper than it first sounds. It names a shift in the inner framework of the Church – one that lies not first at the level of ecclesiology as doctrine, but in its lived consequences: in the way we listen to one another, discern together, share responsibility, and shape the Church together. Synodality thus appears not as an add-on programme, but as the expression of a transformation of ecclesial culture.
a shift in the inner framework of the Church
Halftime is the moment when such sentences have to prove themselves. What, in Europe, has become of the synodal impulse that reached a provisional high point with the World Synod 2024? And what still lies ahead on the way to the continental Ecclesial Assembly 2028? At stake is nothing less than the question of whether synodality leads to a real transformation, or remains stuck in well-meant rhetoric of reform.
1. An anti-cyclical project in a divided age
Europe today is a space where interlocking crises converge. Totalitarian memories meet democratic exhaustion; advancing secularisation meets the nationalist charging of the religious. The ecological crisis is intertwined with a war that many long thought unthinkable, and that has shaken the self-evidence of peace on this continent. This war is not only a geopolitical caesura. It also strikes the ecclesial memory of Europe. When churches and monasteries are damaged, and when attitudes towards Russia and Ukraine open up rifts even among Christians, it becomes clear that synodality in Europe will also be a practice of bearing conflict.
perceiving one another, instead of thinking about one another in caricatures
Added to this is the deep loss of trust left behind by abuse and by the failure of institutional responsibility. In such a climate, the art of trust can only be relearned with great difficulty – learning to perceive one another, instead of only thinking about one another in caricatures. Abuse is not merely a background theme here. In some countries it ties up, over years, energies that are then missing elsewhere for processes of renewal. It is precisely here that it will become clear whether synodality holds even under conditions of reckoning, loss of trust, and structural overload. The same applies to the vocations crisis, overstretched pastoral spaces, burn-outs, and the erosion of the core communities that carry everything. The Conversation in the Spirit is not enough if it does not lead into processes that result in discernments and decisions.
a grammar of peace that cannot be decreed,
but only practised
It is exactly here that synodality gains its anti-cyclical profile. While social and also ecclesial discourses harden, and the conversation between the camps breaks off, the attempt is made to keep open spaces of listening, of spiritual discernment, and of common counsel. But this is no inner-ecclesial sideline. It could be the prophetic way of responding to the European situation as well – a grammar of peace that cannot be decreed, but only practised. Synodality is not an end in itself. It is oriented towards mission and means shaping together at all levels of the Church, mutual listening, and discerning in community. The question at halftime is therefore whether this synodal style actually leads into a transformation of our ecclesial habitus, or whether it remains mere invocation.
2. Europe’s places of learning – Prague, Linz, Varese
The actual synodal learning happens in the local churches, in parish halls, seminars, and small groups. And yet, at the continental level, three places have crystallised where something of a new European learning culture has become visible.
the grid of East versus West explains little
Prague 2023. For the first time, the People of God of Europe gathered as a continental Ecclesial Assembly. Delegates from thirty-nine bishops’ conferences, five working languages, spiritual conversation instead of the classic logic of debate. In the final document one finds the simple but theologically weighty sentence that we can confess that our Church is beautiful and the bearer of a vital diversity that is our richness. At the same time, the document does not shy away from clear priorities. It calls for exploring the synodal exercise of authority, for taking concrete and courageous decisions on the role of women, and for creating stable spaces for synodality at the continental level. In Prague it becomes visible that the familiar grid of East versus West explains little. Instead, finer constellations emerge: post-communist societies with their own history of freedom; strongly secularised contexts with small, creative communities; minority churches with ecumenical routine; and majority churches that must learn to deal with a new social marginality. Here synodality begins to perceive reality in a differentiated way, instead of pressing it into crude schemes.
confidence makes more openness possible,
even where differences become clear
Linz 2024. A few months before the second session of the World Synod, European synod delegates, bishops, theologians, religious, and those responsible in pastoral work came together in Linz. No one was obliged to come, and precisely this voluntariness is theologically not incidental. It shows that Europe is beginning to network synodally of its own accord. Compared with Prague, one can sense how much getting to know one another changes the atmosphere. Confidence makes more openness possible, even where differences become clear. In the small groups, experiences are shared that resemble one another right across the continent – a Church that is tired, in a Europe that is tired. At the same time, the conviction grows that this tiredness can be a kairos, if it leads into a deepened baptismal identity and into new forms of mission.
Linz condenses several insights. The awareness grows that Europe needs a synodal culture that cannot be decreed, but must be practised through listening, sharing, spiritual conversation, and accountability. Formation moves to the centre – human and spiritual formation that makes one capable of really discerning, instead of merely moderating. And it becomes clear that synodality in Europe also means thinking in European terms. Linz is a laboratory for the idea that Europe does not only meet in Rome, but creates its own spaces, in which bishops and delegates work together and take on responsibility. One could say: Linz is the moment when the continent grasps that an event must become a practice, if synodality is to have a truly transforming effect.
synodality changes the power relations in theological formation
Varese. At the Villa Cagnola near Milan, those responsible for formation in a synodal Church meet. Three insights stand out. Synodality changes the power relations in theological formation, because teaching itself becomes an act of listening. Inter-ministerial formats, in which clergy, laity, and religious learn together, are not an addition, but a precondition for a Church that understands itself as the People of God on the way. And Europe needs networks that connect universities, seminaries, and new places of learning, in order to develop creative formats of formation. Formation proves to be, here, not a technical theme, but a spiritual key for a transformation of ecclesial culture.
3. Many realities – one continent
Whoever accompanies synodal processes in Europe comes to know a continent that consists of tensions. Europe comprises thirty-nine bishops’ conferences; at least half of them live in a minority situation – numerically, structurally, financially, or in their social standing. This difference is not marginal, but constitutive for the question of what synodality can achieve and how it concretely takes shape.
a parish council of four people
There is the small village in central Romania. A parish with seven subsidiary churches, scattered across a hilly landscape. Two hundred faithful, many of them abroad. A parish council of four people, when all of them come. A priest who is on the road for hours on Sundays to celebrate the Eucharist in all the communities. If you tell him about synodality, he listens attentively, lets the ideas be explained to him, and then says soberly: with us this sounds good. But who is actually supposed to do it? What does synodality mean for us?
a provincial council on the pastoral care of catechumens
And there is Paris. An ecclesiastical province that opens a provincial council on the pastoral care of catechumens and on the integration of the newly baptised. Theological institutions found Écoles de synodalité and develop differentiated programmes of formation. Here the question is not whether synodality is possible, but what shape it should take and how it can structurally change ecclesial practice.
Both realities are legitimate. Both belong inalienably to Europe. But they cannot be accompanied with the same formats. What in Paris is a well-thought-out programme can, in central Romania, become an overload or lead to frustration. And what at the village on the periphery gives hope as a next step – a shared prayer, an honest conversation between the priest and the elders – barely appears as an item on continental agendas.
staying curious about the realities of others
Synodality in Europe therefore means, first of all, to speak less about one another and more with one another, to stay curious about the realities of others. The diversity of the continent is not a problem that has to be managed, but its real resource – though only if one truly listens to one another, precisely there where no cameras are standing. Transformation begins with the willingness not only to know the perspective of others, but to allow it as a corrective to one’s own view.
5. What we see – an honest stocktaking
Since 2025, the European synodal Task Force at the CCEE has been accompanying the implementation process on the continent. From visits, feedback, and reports, no uniform picture emerges, but a few lines are clear.
the real problem of halftime is
the gap between decision and habitus
Synodality finds itself in a liminal phase. There is broad agreement at the programmatic level; synodality stands in mission statements and pastoral plans. Yet in many places the inculturation into a lived practice is missing. The gap between decision and habitus is the real problem of halftime. Diaspora churches have a particularly hard time, lacking the personnel and financial resources to carry processes over the long term. Added to this is a widespread misunderstanding: 2028 is not seldom understood, or hoped, to be the end point of the synodal path. In fact, the planned Ecclesial Assembly 2028 is conceived as a further step on a lasting path of learning, not as its conclusion. Transformation in the proper sense begins only there, where one no longer measures the synodal style by events, but by everyday life.
much depends on the bishop
A second insight is sobering and theologically significant: much depends on the bishop. Where he understands synodality as spiritual renewal, motivates, and is himself ready to learn, spaces of real participation arise. People take on responsibility and have experiences that change their understanding of Church. Where a bishop remains reserved or actively counteracts, the process stalls or advances only slowly – sometimes carried by committed lay people who look for ways and means to make something possible nonetheless.
joint spiritual formation of the bishops
not optional, but a structural necessity
From this follows a clear consequence: a joint spiritual formation of the bishops at the European level would not be optional, but a structural necessity. What is meant are formats of spiritual discernment, in which bishops experience what synodality means and what it does not mean, bring their own fears and reservations into words, and can inform themselves about theological developments. The transformation of leadership begins with leadership personnel themselves entering a path of learning. An imbalance and much frustration arise where those who do the forming do not have the last word, and the decision-makers find no time for their own further formation.
listening to the Spirit on the scale of a whole continent
Into this picture fits the group of National Delegates, named for each bishops’ conference and working closely with Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich as Relator of the World Synod. It is more than a technical network. Here local learning processes are gathered, interwoven with the continental horizon, and mirrored back into the overall synodal movement. Where this group is used seriously, a place arises in which bishops, delegates, and synodal teams practise together what it means to listen to the Spirit on the scale of a whole continent – beyond the logic of mere reporting. This too belongs to the transformation of synodal processes: they are not only reported upwards, but answered for together.
a synodality that listens in only one direction is none
An honest assessment includes further observations. Structures alone are not enough. Where pastoral councils formally exist but work without real participation, synodality remains an empty shell. Processes of formation and development are more decisive than the mere creation of bodies. The peripheries are the test: many creative impulses come not from the centres, but from diaspora contexts, border regions, and small communities.
where synodality becomes a lever for particular
church-political goals, mistrust grows
And finally, synodality proves itself in how it deals with scepticism. A synodality that listens in only one direction is none. The worry that synodality could import a Western liberalism into the Church is widespread and deserves a theologically serious answer. Synodality is not an ideological option, but a re-tethering to early Christian practice and to the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, which holds equally for East and West. Where synodality becomes a lever for particular church-political goals, mistrust grows – and rightly so. Transformation here demands the willingness to reflect self-critically on the synodal method and to protect it from instrumentalisation.
5. Wels 2026 – Practising transformation
From 14 to 17 September 2026, the educational centre Schloss Puchberg near Wels will become, for a few days, a European laboratory of synodal transformation. Under the title “Shaping Synodality in Europe – From Vision to Roadmap”, under the patronage of the CCEE and organised by the European synodal Task Force and the Research Group Synodality at the KU Linz, delegates of the bishops’ conferences, members of diocesan and national synod teams, theologians, religious, and those responsible in pastoral work will gather. The conference understands itself expressly as a milestone on the way to the European Ecclesial Assembly in spring 2028 and to the worldwide Ecclesial Assembly in the autumn of the same year.
listening to the life stories, wounds, and hopes of the continent
The concept of Wels is deliberately laid out as a path of transformation. The three thematic axes “Liturgy – Embracing the World”, “Transforming Europe – Listening to the Life of Our Continent” and “Transforming the Church – Giving Shape to Mission” mark a movement from celebrating God, through listening to the world, to the concrete shaping of ecclesial mission. On the first day, the liturgy stands at the centre as the place where the Church learns to embrace the world. The second day listens to Europe itself, to the life stories, wounds, and hopes of the continent, and asks what a synodal Church must learn from these voices, if it does not want to exhaust itself in internal communication. The third day, finally, takes the ecclesial shape into view and wrestles with how mission, leadership, and participation can look in a Church that is on a synodal path – not only in language, but in structures and pathways of decision.
if it succeeds
Wels is thus more than a conference that talks about synodality. The claim of transformation is inscribed into its form. If it succeeds that in Wels not only expectations of Rome are formulated, but common European steps are agreed, then this conference could indeed become what its subtitle announces: a transition from vision to roadmap, from description to transformation. A continuation of the tradition of the European Symposia is planned for autumn 2027 in Belgium.
6. What is still outstanding
Before 2028, Europe needs its own, multi-stage path of preparation – not as a compulsory exercise, but as a real process of learning. The Prague document describes the churches of Europe as pieces of a puzzle of a whole that is greater than any single piece. Europe will have to strengthen its middle level.
the bishops’ conferences too must become bearers of synodal development
Not only individual bishops, but the bishops’ conferences themselves must become bearers of synodal development. Otherwise the CCEE, too, remains structurally weak. Synodality will only take lasting shape in Europe if the final document of the Synod is translated, at the continental level as well, into more reliable forms of participation, decision, transparency, accountability, and evaluation.
halftime is the moment to ask honestly
Europe would also be well advised if – similarly to Africa – it prepares early for further steps: for instance, a joint preparation of the delegates who will represent the regions of Europe in the Ecclesial Assembly, as well as a follow-up meeting at the continental level, at which it is considered what the first Ecclesial Assembly means for Europe and how its content can be worked on further at the continental level. SECAM already has all these meetings and steps in view for 2026.
Equally, the question arises whether the CCEE – similarly to SECAM, which is already holding such an assembly for the twentieth time – could in future envisage and organise regular plenary assemblies at the continental level.
Halftime is the moment to ask honestly whether and how this puzzle of Europe grows together, or whether the pieces merely lie side by side without touching. For the European voice in the world Church, it will also be important whether it succeeds in constructively interweaving experiences and resources – of larger but also of smaller local churches – with the worldwide synodal process, without losing sight of the more modest realities of other churches.
I believe it is growing together. Slowly.
Often painfully. But it is growing.
The village in central Romania and the ecclesiastical province of Paris do not have to do the same thing. But they should stop talking about one another and begin to talk with one another. That would be synodality. I believe it is growing together. Slowly. Often painfully. But it is growing. A Church that walks synodal paths in Europe can become a roadmap for a good way of being together – not because it has all the answers, but because it dares to stay together in the tensions, instead of being split by them. Perhaps this is exactly the transformation to which the Spirit invites us at this halftime.
—
Klara-Antonia Csiszar is a professor of pastoral theology at the Catholic Private University (KU) of Linz and was one of the 28 expert advisers to the Roman Synod.
[*]Part 4 of the series «From the Synod 2024 to the Ecclesial Assembly 2028 – Interim assessments from around the world», with contributions from Africa (20 July), Latin America (22 July), North America (24 July), Europe (27 July), the Middle East (28 July), and Asia (29 July).
This contribution is also published in German (original version). The English translation was produced with the help of AI.
Header image: Created with AI.
