
Is Pope Leo facing a synodal way litmus test?
One Bavarian diocese could show where the pope's mind is on the Church in Germany.
As the former prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Bishops, Pope Leo XIV will be used to looking at intimidatingly long lists of episcopal vacancies.
Among the many dioceses on the current list is Eichstätt. The diocese in Bavaria, southern Germany, fell vacant June 8 when Bishop Gregor Maria Hanke resigned at the age of 70, citing “inner fatigue” and misgivings about the country’s “synodal way.”
The synodal way brought together Germany’s bishops and select lay people between 2019 and 2023 to discuss far-reaching changes to Catholic teaching and practice. When it ended, with a hefty 150 pages of resolutions, Germany’s 27 diocesan bishops were asked to join a temporary “synodal committee,” whose main task is to establish a permanent body of bishops and lay people with extensive powers over the Church in Germany.
Hanke was one of four diocesan bishops who refused to take part in either the synodal committee or the national synodal body, potentially undermining the synodal way project.
The appointment of Hanke’s successor is eagerly anticipated in Germany because of what it might say about the new pope’s stance on the synodal way.
But the Eichstätt diocese is one of the country’s smallest in terms of Catholic population. So why is it being seen as a litmus test for Pope Leo? And what are the pope’s options?
Does Leo like the synodal way?
Shortly after Pope Leo XIV walked onto the balcony overlooking St. Peter’s Square in May, a debate began in Germany. Was the first U.S.-born pope a supporter of the synodal way or a critic?
The evidence was scant and contradictory, but opinions were plentiful.
The facts can be quickly summarized. When Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, the future pope, was prefect of the bishops’ dicastery, he was one of the signatories of a February 2024 Vatican letter asking the German bishops to delay a vote on the statutes of the synodal committee ahead of talks in Rome.
He took part in the talks with German bishops in March and June 2024, which resulted in an agreement that the bishops would not take any further steps toward establishing a permanent national synodal body without the Vatican’s approval.
His predecessor at the Dicastery for Bishops, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, had called unsuccessfully for a moratorium on the synodal way. But Prevost’s position seemed more ambiguous. Did he help to rein in the synodal way project or did he ensure its survival?
Ludwig Ring-Eifel, the chief reporter of German Catholic news agency KNA, suggested in May that Munich’s Cardinal Reinhard Marx had backed Leo’s election ahead of the conclave.
“Marx gave Prevost credit for having saved the German synodal way from canonical extinction with a compromise formula, whereas Prevost’s predecessor Marc Ouellet had gone on a hard confrontation course with the German Catholics’ reform project,” Ring-Eifel wrote.
After Leo XIV’s election, the two leading synodal way figures — lay leader Irme Stetter-Karp and bishops’ conference chairman Bishop Georg Bätzing — highlighted Leo’s commitment to a “synodal Church,” expressed in his first public address. They argued that his election gave a new momentum to efforts to establish a national synodal body in Germany.
Others weren’t so sure. Essen’s Bishop Franz-Josef Overbeck described Leo XIV as “reserved” concerning the issues discussed in Germany.
“We are really in a different world to the one he experienced in Peru,” Overbeck said, referring to the pope’s years as an Augustinian missionary priest and later bishop in the Latin American country.
The German-born Bishop Norbert Strotmann, who served as general secretary of Peru’s bishops’ conference from 2017 to 2023, said he did not expect Pope Leo “to respond to regional reform requests.”
“He has experienced — for example, with regard to the bishops’ conference in his home country of the USA — how difficult it is to bring conservative and progressive currents together,” he commented. “I can’t imagine him taking steps that would cost him the support of a quarter or a third of the faithful.”
The interpretations, then, have been inconsistent — and they will be until Pope Leo either voices an opinion publicly or takes actions that clearly express his views.
Why is Eichstätt seen as a litmus test?
In a June 24 video, German Catholic journalist Benjamin Leven commented on the back-and-forth debate over Pope Leo’s position on the synodal way.
While the synodal way’s critics pointed to the pope’s signature on the Vatican letter, supporters highlighted his recent appointment of Bishop Shane Mackinlay as the next Archbishop of Brisbane. Mackinlay was an observer at the synodal way’s final plenary assembly and described the German Church’s contribution to the global synodal process launched by Pope Francis as “a great enrichment for all of us.”
“So will Pope Leo appoint a critic of the synodal way as Bishop of Eichstätt so as not to further weaken the phalanx of critics?” asked Leven. “Or will he appoint a supporter? Both would be perceived as a statement of Church policy.”
“Irrespective of this, the decision also has significance beyond Eichstätt. Whoever is appointed to the post in Eichstätt will in any case be regarded as the first German ‘Leo bishop.’”
Leven argued this would still be the case even if Pope Leo filled another vacant German see, Münster, before Eichstätt.
“Although a bishop’s see is also vacant in Münster, the cathedral chapter there elects the new head shepherd. In Bavaria, on the other hand, the appointment is in the hands of the pope alone,” Leven said, referring to regional differences in bishops’ appointments in Germany.
The Eichstätt diocese invited lay people this week to draw up the ideal profile of their next bishop. But ultimately, the pope is free to choose who he likes. So when the name of the next Bishop of Eichstätt appears on the Vatican’s daily bulletin, there will be little doubt it is Leo XIV’s considered choice.
What are the pope’s options?
Perhaps the most obvious thing for Pope Leo to do would be to make a like-for-like appointment.
If Bishop Hanke rejected the post-synodal way developments, the thinking might go, then so should his successor. That way, Leo would preserve the present 4 to 23 split among German diocesan bishops over the synodal way.
Many observers would see this as a signal of continuity. But synodal way supporters could interpret it as an early sign of disfavor from Leo.
Another option would be for the pope to appoint a synodal way enthusiast to Eichstätt. Such a candidate would probably be easier to find and likely earn Leo some goodwill from Germany’s ecclesiastical elite.
It wouldn’t greatly alter the balance in the German Church as there would still be three bishops serving as a counterweight to the majority pushing for a new national synodal body. Such a body arguably requires the unanimous support of the country’s bishops to function with full legitimacy.
But Pope Leo isn’t restricted to two options — for or against the synodal way. He could opt for a candidate who takes a mixed approach. The new bishop might, for instance, agree to join the synodal committee and future national synodal body, but use their position to advocate for spiritual renewal to be taken as seriously as structural change within the synodal way project.
Bishops with mixed profiles do exist in the German Church. Bamberg’s Archbishop Herwig Gössl, for example, was one of 21 bishops who voted “no” to a synodal way document calling for a change in the Church’s approach to sexual ethics. The text was spiked after it failed to gain the required two-thirds majority among the bishops, prompting protests in the assembly hall. Yet Gössl endorsed another resolution calling for “a re-evaluation of homosexuality in the Magisterium” and is a member of the synodal committee.
If Pope Leo decides to go for a more nuanced option, he might avoid the litmus test seemingly presented by the Eichstätt vacancy, maintaining what could be a deliberate strategic ambiguity around his views.
German bishops who’ve met him describe Leo XIV as a good listener who makes an effort to understand unfamiliar perspectives. Given his initial stress on the theme of unity, his instinct might be to take more time, hold more talks, and make further efforts to identify common ground between Rome and the German Church.
Delaying decisions would likely frustrate both critics and supporters of the synodal way. Nevertheless, Pope Leo might believe that the goal of promoting unity is better served by avoiding divisive decisions early in his reign.
But given how little we know about a pope who became a bishop little more than 10 years ago and was a cardinal for less than two years, we need more evidence before we can make confident predictions about his relations with the German Church.
Saint John Henry Newman once said that remedies spring up in the Church naturally if we but wait for them. Could this principle apply to the situation facing the Church in Germany? I recall a previous Pillar article noting that younger German priests tend to be much more theologically conservative and skeptical of the Synodal Way currently taking place in Germany. If this observation is accurate, how might it influence future episcopal appointments, even in dioceses where the Pope doesn’t have a completely free rein in selecting bishops? Given that His Holiness Leo XIV will likely reign for another 10 to 15 years, could he simply work to delay or redirect the Synodal Way until the clerical situation becomes more favorable to orthodoxy?
St Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, pray for us.