It'll be a great irony if radical synodality happens simply because the Roman Curia goes broke. Nothing in the Divine Law or solid ecclesiology requires that it exist (though the lack would make some things quite messy, as least for a while). Bishops could be elected by cathedral canons. Metropolitans could erect courts of final appeal, …
It'll be a great irony if radical synodality happens simply because the Roman Curia goes broke. Nothing in the Divine Law or solid ecclesiology requires that it exist (though the lack would make some things quite messy, as least for a while). Bishops could be elected by cathedral canons. Metropolitans could erect courts of final appeal, with the Pope only accepting appeals in the case of disagreements between two bishops. The Pope could rely on local prelates to function as his "eyes and ears" on the ground throughout the world and not maintain a network of nunciatures. Church law and liturgical regulation could be governed by local synods. The Pope's role would inevitably become far more limited, but it would also require his interventions to be fewer, more succinct, and only when strictly necessary, all of which would be improvements. The Petrine charism does not require the Bishop of Rome to function as the global chairman of Catholic, Inc., anymore than it required him to be the sovereign prince of the Papal States. After 1870, the popes transformed their role from temporal ruler to that of the modern "global pastor". It may be that over the course of the next century, that role too will wither away and be replaced by a new paradigm.
The loss of the Papal States was probably looked at as a tragedy by Catholics at the time, but in retrospect may have been part of God's providence to get the Popes to stop being worldly leaders and focus more on being a spiritual leader. Similarly a bankrupt Roman Curia would likely be painful but could again be part of God's plan to take the Church in a better direction, whatever direction that may eventually be.
In other words, go back to how the Church was run in the late Middle Ages. Although there ended up being a fair amount of bribery involved in selecting bishops at the time.
Less interference from temporal rulers, but otherwise yes. Though as The Pillar has been commendably dogged in reporting, the Church in the modern day is far from immune to bribery, embezzlement, and financial corruption.
It'll be a great irony if radical synodality happens simply because the Roman Curia goes broke. Nothing in the Divine Law or solid ecclesiology requires that it exist (though the lack would make some things quite messy, as least for a while). Bishops could be elected by cathedral canons. Metropolitans could erect courts of final appeal, with the Pope only accepting appeals in the case of disagreements between two bishops. The Pope could rely on local prelates to function as his "eyes and ears" on the ground throughout the world and not maintain a network of nunciatures. Church law and liturgical regulation could be governed by local synods. The Pope's role would inevitably become far more limited, but it would also require his interventions to be fewer, more succinct, and only when strictly necessary, all of which would be improvements. The Petrine charism does not require the Bishop of Rome to function as the global chairman of Catholic, Inc., anymore than it required him to be the sovereign prince of the Papal States. After 1870, the popes transformed their role from temporal ruler to that of the modern "global pastor". It may be that over the course of the next century, that role too will wither away and be replaced by a new paradigm.
The loss of the Papal States was probably looked at as a tragedy by Catholics at the time, but in retrospect may have been part of God's providence to get the Popes to stop being worldly leaders and focus more on being a spiritual leader. Similarly a bankrupt Roman Curia would likely be painful but could again be part of God's plan to take the Church in a better direction, whatever direction that may eventually be.
It would also stop the cash-gobbling nunciatures from usurping all authority out of the local/national bishops’ conferences.
In other words, go back to how the Church was run in the late Middle Ages. Although there ended up being a fair amount of bribery involved in selecting bishops at the time.
Less interference from temporal rulers, but otherwise yes. Though as The Pillar has been commendably dogged in reporting, the Church in the modern day is far from immune to bribery, embezzlement, and financial corruption.