It has, by all accounts, been a bumpy ride.

 During the three weeks of the Synod, we have heard, in a drip feed manner, reports of discussions, disagreements and even of a letter supposedly signed by “the thirteen”, followed by retractions and side-stepping. All a bit messy. But wasn’t that the wish of Francis, that we accept a messy church on our journey? There is a phrase in England that “you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs”.

 I am writing this on Friday, before the end of the Synod. What statement will be released and when it will happen is a matter of conjecture. That the Synod, as a continuation of the Council, took place at all is important.

 Whatever the formulation of words that we are finally given, one question that will remain is that of governance, of who contributes a view and experience. A constant thread that has been evident in commentaries on the Synod has been the total dominance of the male voice on an issue where the partnership of man and woman has equality.

 One of two English representatives, +Peter Doyle of Northampton (the other of course being the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster , Vincent Nicholls) was quoted on NCR.

“ (Doyle) ….expressed concern that the church leaders are discussing issues of family life but may be limited in their understanding of those issues because of their celibate lifestyles.

Bishop Peter Doyle, who heads the Northampton diocese some 70 miles north of London, said in an interview Saturday he thinks "there is a bit of an issue."

"I thought I understood marriage and family life because I come from a family, because I've ministered for 37 years in a parish," said Doyle. "When I got involved in marriage and family life, I suddenly realized that there was a whole world there that I didn't know."

"I am a little concerned that there is a big area that we don't actually understand," said the bishop.

"Of course, we're bringing the views of everyone," he continued. "But I think it's quite difficult to kind of see things from a family point of view. I think there is a difficulty. I don't think there's any need to avoid that."

 That is a crucial statement. Belonging to a family as a child is very different from living out day by day the commitment of a shared Sacrament. I would hope that the sentiments expressed by +Peter are recognised and that a realistic response is forthcoming.

 We share this particular slot in time. Through our family life we look in two directions. Where we have come from, fragmentary evidence from our often failing memories and where, through our continuing line of children and grandchildren we might be headed.

I wrote this a couple of days ago.

 Marrow in the bones,

reflective history of continuation,

the stuff of scaffolding

round which the supple clay

of complex flesh is formed.

It tells where we came from,

a recurring pulse of people,

individuals we did not know,

whose love or lust moved

through nights and days

of a distant, vacant time

that we cannot imagine.

Their words and language

spoke of a now-forgotten story.

Yet here in the marrow of my bones

rests their lives

and their gift of life to me.

The urge to change,

to surge beyond the immediate time

to walk a journey in a different way

to that which others began,

to offer signposts to those who follow,

silently determined by a lost

and wordless song.

To those countless people whose hope in the outcomes of the Synod directly affects their Christian experience of faith in Jesus of Galilee, we pray that doors will not be closed and discussion ended. The holding of hands is one of the most expressive acts of love and concern that we can share with each other. It is a sign of our generosity to each other and the generosity of the Lord to each one of us.

 END

-----