(ANALYSIS) The Religion Guy’s answer: Before the final session of a Synod of Bishops that concludes at the Vatican October 27, much printer’s ink was spilled because Pope Francis removed the issue of allowing women deacons from the agenda.

Jesuit Father Thomas Reese, the Catholic columnist for Religion News Service, reminds us that the pope took other delicate matters off the table, and among these delegates have privately discussed reforming the church’s system of appointing bishops.

To Reese, this is a key to the collaboration in “synodality: and the “transparency, listening and accountability” that are Francis’s stated hopes for his church.

READ: A New Look At The Status Of Women Across Global Christianity

Bishop-picking is not a matter of dogma and thus subject to revision. For instance, Canon lawyer John Finnegan wrote that through history “about 10” different methods of choosing bishops occurred just in the United States.

The most remarkable American example was the very first choice, which occurred two months after March 9, 1789, that signal date in the history of global democracy when the U.S. Constitution went into effect. Echoing the revolutionary spirit, the priests of the new nation acquired the pope’s permission to gather and elect John Carroll the first bishop, after which the pontiff endorsed their choice. At that same meeting, the U.S. priests petitioned for permission to also elect their future bishops, but the Vatican said no.

Highly secretive process

In modern times, most Catholic bishops have been chosen through a highly secretive process controlled by the  male hierarchy, often with little or no formal advice from priests, much less laymen or laywomen. This totally contrasts with elections in Protestant denominations that have bishops. There’s more consultation in Eastern Rite jurisdictions subject to the papacy, in missionary lands, and by tradition in certain European dioceses. In all cases, the reigning pope exercises the totally centralized power to appoint each of the world’s bishops, now numbering 5,353.

In past times, barring of lay members’ influence was intended to prevent corrupt political and economic influences. But is this the best way to choose modern leaders for 1.4 billion Catholics living in vastly varied nations? Could more collaboration and “synodality” enter the process?

Years of diplomatic agony after which the Vatican reluctantly recognized bishops hand-picked by China’s atheistic rulers provide another example of the variations in appointments. And a 1971 study of these questions by the Canon Law Society of America showed there were notably participatory practices in Christianity’s founding centuries.

For instance, Pope Leo the Great (in office 440–461) was a proponent of papal supremacy in many ways, yet he specified that to be legitimate a bishop needs to be elected by the clergy of a diocese, accepted by the people, and receive final approval from the bishops of his region. Typically, the lay parishioners’ role was to gather in public, learn who won the election, and either cheer or jeer.  Election of the pope echoes aspects of this tradition, since he is the bishop of Rome elected by cardinals who have nominal clergy asssignments in the Roman diocese.

Continually updated lists

The current ultra-confidential process for appointments in the U.S., in line with the Code of Canon Law (revised 1983), is typical for nations in the West. The church maintains continually updated, running lists of possible candidates for each diocese, as follows. There are certain alterations when choosing archbishops, assistant (“auxiliary”) bishops, and coadjutor bishops who are designated to succeed the incumbent.

The national church is divided into regional provinces, 33 in the case of the U.S. Each bishop has the right to suggest priests as candidates for future bishop to the archbishop who leads the province. The province’s bishops meet, usually each year, to vote on these names, which are forwarded to the nuncio, the Vatican ambassador to the U.S., currently French Cardinal Christophe Pierre, a veteran papal diplomat.

Investigation of these candidates is a major responsibility of the nuncio. A nuncio is encouraged to conduct broad consultations on needs of a diocese, which must include its bishops and may involve priests and prominent lay members though this is not mandated. The nuncio also requests questionnaires from persons who’d know each candidate.

The nuncio sends a terna (list of three names) with his own preference to the Vatican’s Discastery for Bishops, whose duties include assessment of bishop candidates worldwide. Its “prefect,” or leader, as of last year is a Chicago native, a former leader of the Augustinian order and missionary bishop in Peru, Cardinal Robert Prevost.

The pope’s power

The full discastery is an international panel of bishops, among them U.S. Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Joseph Tobin of Newark. Francis innovated by also appointing two nuns and a laywoman to this body in 2022. In case of a bishop opening, this group may approve the nuncio’s favorite, or one of his other two names, or request a different terna from him. Finally, the prefect meets the pope, who has full power to approve the proposed candidate, or not.

In the heady years following the Second Vatican Council, members of the Canon Law Society approved a 1971 “Provisional Plan for Choosing Bishops for the United States.” These specialists asserted that “there are no theological, canonical, or historical obstacles to a broad participation of clergy, religious, and laity in the selection of bishops. On the contrary, there are many indications that such participation is desirable.”

Under the canonists’ proposal, each diocese would appoint a Committee for Nominating Bishops, with one member named by the bishop and the diocesan Pastoral Council choosing two each of diocesan priests, religious order priests, religious order sisters, laymen, and laywomen. The committee, employing “the broadest participation of” local Catholic institutions, would propose potential bishop candidates from inside or outside the diocese to a Priests’ Senate, which then sets a list of potential nominees for the annual meeting of bishops from the regional province. Then the system depicted above would proceed.

More radically, Leonard Swidler, professor of Catholic thought at Temple University, proposed a 1996 “constitution” for the church. Bishops would be directly elected by a Diocesan Council, “the main decision-making body of the diocese,” co-chaired by the bishop and an elected lay parishioner, and consisting of an equal number of clergy and laity. Likewise, a group of one- third each of bishops, clergy and laity delegated by nation-level councils would have power to elect the pope to a 10-year term.

No more College of Cardinals? No conclave? No white smoke? Guess again.

This piece was first published at Patheos.

Richard N. Ostling was a longtime religion writer with The Associated Press and with Time magazine, where he produced 23 cover stories, as well as a Time senior correspondent providing field reportage for dozens of major articles. He has interviewed such personalities as Billy Graham, the Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI); ranking rabbis and Muslim leaders; and authorities on other faiths; as well as numerous ordinary believers. He writes a bi-weekly column for Religion Unplugged.