VaticanNews portal reports on the fourth session of the Consistory (27.06.2026), where “Cardinal” Mario Grech, Secretary General of the Synod, delivered an introductory address on the “implementation phase” of the Synod on Synodality. The article presents this phase not as a return to doctrine, but as a process of “integrating insights into the life of communities,” widening dialogue with “Churches throughout the world,” and using four verbs: “to remember,” “to interpret,” “to orient,” and “to celebrate.” Grech emphasizes “conversation in the Spirit,” the “shared presence of the Holy Spirit,” and the “collegial communion” between the Consistory and synodal assemblies, all under the banner of “gentle listening” in contrast to a world accustomed to war and coercion. The whole text is a classic specimen of post-conciliar newspeak, in which the Mystical Body of Christ is replaced by a humanitarian NGO, and the Kingship of Christ the Lord is buried under the rubble of “synodal” dialogue.
A Synod Without Dogma: The Implementation of Apostasy
The cited article relates Cardinal Grech’s teaching on the “implementation phase” of the Synod: “…not simply aimed at applying decisions, but at allowing the insights gained along the journey to mature in the life of communities.” This sentence alone reveals the modernist creed: the “life of communities” becomes the supreme criterion of truth, not the immutable deposit of Faith. The Church has always taught that doctrine does not “mature” in the subjective consciousness of communities, but is received objectively from the Magisterium, which is only the authentic interpreter of the deposit of Revelation (Vatican Council I, *Dei Filius*, cap. 2). Pius XI in the encyclical *Quas Primas* explicitly teaches that Christ reigns over minds by the submission of the intellect to revealed Truth, and that peace is only possible in the Kingdom of Christ, not in the “kingdom” of dialogue. The Synod, by contrast, makes “communities” the judge of doctrine, thereby applying the condemned modernist principle of the evolution of dogmas. The “implementation phase” is nothing other than the bureaucratic enforcement of the “new orientation” already outlined by the conciliar sect: relativization of dogma, democratization of the Church, and the transformation of the priest into a social animator.
Linguistic Decomposition: “Gentle Listening” Instead of Preaching Repentance
The linguistic level of the article is a textbook example of naturalistic humanism. The “greatness of listening” is opposed to “geopolitics accustomed, almost resigned, to war and economic coercion.” The Church, however, was instituted by Christ not to “listen” to the world, but to preach repentance and conversion (Mark 1:15). The article’s vocabulary—“humility of dialogue,” “widening dialogue,” “exchanging gifts and experiences”—is borrowed directly from the lexicon of international humanitarian organizations, not from the prophetic language of the Gospel. The complete absence of the terms “state of grace,” “sin,” “heresy,” “dogma,” “sacrament,” and “salvation of souls” exposes the profound spiritual poverty of the conciliar message. The “implementation phase” is described as a process of “integrating insights,” but one looks in vain for any “insight” concerning the necessity of the true Mass, the social reign of Christ the King, or the obligation to convert non-Catholics to the one true Church. The article speaks of “cultures” that “receive and interpret the insights that have emerged according to their own times and ways,” which is nothing other than the condemned heresy of religious relativism (Syllabus of Errors, prop. 15–17; *Lamentabili sane exitu*, prop. 15–18). “In cultures, institutions, pastoral practices, and ecclesial relationships”—this is the language of sociology, not of theology.
Theological Bankruptcy: The “Holy Spirit” of the Synod Versus the Holy Spirit of the Church
Cardinal Grech, quoted in the article, asserts that the synodal experience was supported by the “method of conversation in the Spirit,” and that there is a “substantial difference between thematic spiritual conversation and a conversation in the Spirit—that is, within the mutual speaking and giving of the Risen Lord among us as a work of the Spirit.” This pseudo-mystical jargon is a direct blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, who is the Soul of the Church and acts exclusively through the sacraments, the Magisterium, and the objective truths of Faith. The article further claims that the Consistory and synodal assemblies reveal “two operative dimensions of the same communion,” and that the Consistory is a “living memory of the collegial communion that the Master gave to his first disciples as a relational style of governance.” The Church has always taught that collegiality is subordinate to the Primacy of Peter, and that the Holy Spirit guarantees the Church only in the sphere of infallible Magisterium, not in the “synodal” chatter of “participatory bodies.” The Council of Trent and Vatican I have already condemned the idea that the Holy Spirit operates apart from the hierarchy instituted by Christ. The Synod, however, makes the “Spirit” a guarantor of its own “listening,” thereby opening the door to every subjective illusion and heresy. The “Risen Lord” is invoked, but His command to “teach all nations” (Matt. 28:19) is replaced by the command to “dialogue.”
Symptomatic Apostasy: The Four Verbs as a Program of Dechristianization
The four verbs—“to remember,” “to interpret,” “to orient,” “to celebrate”—are presented as the stages of the implementation process. But what is there to “remember”? The conciliar sect has systematically destroyed the memory of Tradition. What is there to “interpret”? The “insights” of the Synod are already a clear program of naturalistic ecumenism and the abolition of the Kingship of Christ. “To orient” means to open the Church to “new perspectives,” which are nothing other than the errors condemned by the pre-conciliar Magisterium. And “to celebrate” is the final stage of apostasy: the idolatrous “celebration” of man and his “gifts,” in which the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is replaced by the assembly’s “celebration” of its own communal experience. The article’s complete silence about the true Mass, the propitiatory sacrifice, and the Real Presence exposes the synodal “celebration” as a Protestant memorial and a satanic parody of the Eucharist. The “implementation phase” is thus the final stage of the “new advent” of the Church in the desert of modernism.
The Consistory as a “Relational Style of Governance”: The End of the Papacy
Grech, as quoted in the article, claims that the Consistory is a “living memory of the collegial communion that the Master gave to his first disciples as a relational style of governance.” This is a direct denial of the dogma of the Papacy as defined by Vatican I: the Roman Pontiff has full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church (*Pastor Aeternus*, cap. 3). The Synod, by contrast, reduces Peter’s successor to a moderator of a “collegial” assembly, in which “synodal teams, participatory bodies, ordained ministers, consecrated men and women, associations, movements, educational institutions, families, young people, and local communities” all participate on an equal footing. This is the democratization of the Church, condemned by every Pope from St. Pius X to Pius XII, and the practical implementation of the heretical “People of God” ecclesiology of the conciliar sect. The “implementation phase” is therefore not a return to Tradition, but the final liquidation of the Papacy as instituted by Christ.
The “Missionary Resource” of Synodality: Dialogue with the World as Apostasy
The article concludes with a statement that synodality is a “missionary resource” capable of helping the ecclesial community “listen to humanity’s questions and discern together the steps to be taken.” This is the final apostasy: the Church no longer teaches, but “listens” to the world; it no longer converts, but “discerns” with the world. The pre-conciliar Magisterium has always taught that the Church’s mission is to preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments for the salvation of souls, not to “dialogue” with the spirit of the age. Pius XI in *Quas Primas* explicitly warns that the rejection of Christ the Kingship leads to the destruction of society, and Pius IX in the *Syllabus of Errors* condemns the idea that the Pope can “reconcile himself with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (prop. 80). The Synod, by contrast, makes “dialogue” and “listening” the supreme pastoral category, thereby fulfilling the prophecy of St. Paul about the “man of sin” who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God (2 Thess. 2:4). The “implementation phase” is thus the practical implementation of the religion of Antichrist, in which man replaces God, and the assembly replaces the altar.
Source:
Cardinal Grech: Synod is a sign of gentle listening (vaticannews.va)
Date: 27.06.2026