Vatican learns about online-poll questions

Digital Catholics have strong opinions about that Synod on Synodality thing

This is going to be a short post. I hope.

But if people start responding to the issue in the “case study” described in this post — in terms of a specific issue in online Roman Catholic digital warfare — the comments pages for this thing could get totally out of hand.

So, what is this post not about?

Well, it’s not about the hurricane of arguments surrounding the Vatican’s whole Synod on Synodality process. I mean, I have written about that topic in my On Religion columns (for example, “Drawing hope from synodality era, German bishops bolt ahead on same-sex blessings”) and I poured out oceans of ink (explore this Google search) at GetReligion.org discussing the press coverage of this ecclesiastical roller-coaster.

All of that is interesting reading, I guess, for Catholics who follow Rational Sheep. But what about everyone else? What does that topic have to do with “faith, family and digital culture”?

Thus, my goal here is to talk about how we get caught up with the whole process of online life that is defined by terms such as “like,” “forward,” “comment,” “restack,” etc. You can add “viral,” “FTW” (For The Win), “own” (as in, “He really OWNED the libs on that on”) and other common terms in social-media warfare.

The journalist in me, the teacher, the reader, the parent and the churchman in me, also wants to wants to know how we can find information online that actually helps us learn about what is happening in the world around us, including in our faith traditions.

At some point, you have to look at the bytes of information that you see online and ask, “What is this?” or “What does this mean?”, which may require asking, “What does this not mean?”

That leads me to one of those quick, audience-participation polls that appeared on X the other day. It looked like this:

I cannot link to the actual X post, because that is problematic here at Substack (the embed codes just don’t work, yet). Thus, that’s a screenshot of the Vatican_va tweet.

Also, I cannot link to that X tweet because this happened, as described in a Catholic News Agency headline: “Vatican office deletes online poll showing negative response to Synod on Synodality.” Here is the overture:

The Vatican was criticized by online commentators over the weekend for swiftly deleting an online poll that reflected poorly on the Synod on Synodality.

Originally posted … to the social media account of the office facilitating the synod, the poll asked: “Do you believe that synodality as a path of conversion and reform can enhance the mission and participation of all the baptized?”

Respondents could only answer “yes” or “no,” and 88% responded in the negative.

The low levels of support for synodality, a novel theological concept that means journeying together, come as a multiyear, global consultative process focusing on the topic draws to a close, with a final gathering set for the Vatican City this October.

The poll garnered approximately 136,000 views on the official X account of the Secretariat of the Synod. Approximately 7,000 people submitted their vote within the 24 hours the poll was live on that channel. An additional 780 people cast their vote on Facebook before polling was closed.

On Saturday both X and Facebook posts that displayed the final results — as well as accompanying comments of social media users — were deleted from the official accounts of the synod office.

This leads to my question: What does this mean?

As you would expect, the CNA story went straight to social media to harvest some acidic bytes of commentary. A sample?

“The Synod_va Church wants to hear from you. Until and unless you tell them something they don’t want to hear. #synodality,” Amanda (@TheMrsFarnum) wrote on X.

Another X user, Matthew Hazell (@MPHazell), an English Catholic working on projects that compare tradition and reformed Roman rite liturgies, criticized the removal of the posts, writing: “Oh dear, the @Synod_va poll on #synodality was deleted! Doesn’t seem very #synodal…” and, in another separate post: “Perhaps the experts and the October 2024 #Synod participants will be forwarded the results.”

However, Jonathan Lewis, who works for a Catholic technology company, offered a different take on the online poll, arguing that the results said more about respondents than synodality.

“Based on the top comments and poll results, this post reiterates the reality of North American resistance to synodality compared with the global Church,” Lewis said on X.

In other words, some people online are saying (this is my take on some common points of view) that this poll shows that:

* Synodality is a flop.

* The kinds of Catholics who congregate online in certain forms of social-media think that synodality is a flop and that really matters.

* The kinds of Catholics who congregate online in certain forms of social-media think that synodality is a flop and that doesn’t matter at all since we know that only crazy traditional Catholics care about social media.

* The kinds of Catholics who congregate online in certain forms of social-media think that synodality is a flop and that doesn’t matter since we know that only crazy traditional Catholics care about social media — as opposed to the enlightened and reform-minded Catholics who have abandoned X and now gather in other digital locations for the purpose of doing positive work that helps the Church evolve.

* That this was simply one piece of online debate and that it’s almost impossible to know what it means, without serious follow-up by the hierarchy, either here in America or at the global level.

But how would serious Catholics do that? Professional polling by Catholics? Professional polling by outsiders from “neutral” think tanks? More social-media polls? Bishops meeting with the people that they trust to discuss this matter while avoiding the people that they don’t trust?

I found this X response by Brother Juan Gabriel, a Dominican friar to be helpful. Hang on, because there is some “inside baseball” church lingo ahead:

@Synod_va asked a question, and the people answered in a way that they didn't seem to expect, so they deleted the poll. This is about the worst way they could have handled this; it doesn't quite foster trust in the synodal process.

It leaves the impression that there are, as some suspect, pre-planned questions and answers, and only the people who give the desired answers will actually be listened to. That's quite unfortunate. Thankfully, though, this isn't the entire picture.

I think that what the entire synodal process claims to be has been overshadowed by the lack of subsidiarity. True synodality should be bottom up. In other words, the desired goals of the process may not be seen at the worldwide level, but I do see them at more local levels.

Wait, isn’t the whole Synod on Synodality process supposed to be about a “bottom up” process to listen to Catholics at the local, diocesan, national and global levels? Is that what is happening? Or are church leaders turning to the “usual suspects” in their Inner Rings, thus putting their thumbs on the scales that are measuring the results?

This question is sincere: Does anyone have any idea (a) how religious leaders could attempt to get valid feedback today without using the omnipresent tools of social media and (b) how religious leaders could attempt to get valid feedback today WHILE USING the omnipresent tools of social media?

Thus, I will dare to ask: What did this Vatican_va X poll (and what happened to the poll) actually mean? What did it NOT mean?

Lord have mercy.

FIRST IMAGE: Screen shot from Vatican.va