Status report

Wednesday, June 1, 2022 (04:17)

As the responsible leader of the sinoditiim I start to realize that we probably won’t manage to do our job.

Today and tomorrow I will travel by car with my family and two friends from Beglium to Italy. On Friday or Saturday we plan to visit Assisi. I will return to Estonia only on June 24th.

We now managed to write a 10 pages report (“Sinodi kohtumised Eesti Apostellikus Administratuuris”) that seems to reflect quite well what many Catholics in Estonia would say at the Synod. It is a synthesis of the 17 reports that had been submitted during the consultation phase. Thanks to the editor for her work.

The next step would be to show this document to the authors of the 17 reports, asking them to confirm whether this document reflects what they have to say. I can say already now that at least one of them (me) would not confirm.

As the Synodal Contact Person I insist that our synthesis should be published and preserved. Everybody, even those whose interest will wake up only later, can read the result of our work. I failed to convince the other members of the sinoditiim that this is important. But for me it is a required condition.

At the moment there is only one document that is public and has more than three “signers”: the report I submitted on 2022-03-21. This report is visibly being opposed by a majority of the sinoditiim and therefore cannot be used as our input to the Synod.

I concretely suggest the following steps:

  • The sinoditiim finalizes their current draft and then publishes it.

  • Collect “signatures” of people who confirm that this is what they would say at the Synod. Signatures don’t need to be public, it is enough if the sinoditiim knows their name.

If we manage to do this, then we would have a description of the two opposing “camps” on this Synod:

  • those who prefer the report produced by the majority sinoditiim

  • those who prefer the report I submitted 2022-03-21.

No, we probably won’t manage to do our job. We won’t reach a consensus about what to say at the Synod. But our work is not useless, and maybe even the opposite: the fact of having two instead of one synthesis might become our most valuable input to the Synod.