Synodality and Investment

By Jonathan Capelo Gavela, CFA

All investors—or anyone responsible for preserving and managing wealth—need a set of rules, principles, and ultimately a decision-making framework if they want to succeed over the long term. Professionalization and proper governance have become cross-cutting requirements for any assets that aim to endure, whether those of an individual investor, a large family fortune, a foundation, or a religious congregation.

A client’s investment policy may take a purely financial approach, maximizing returns according to a given risk profile. At other times, the approach is broader, incorporating a mission and values into return objectives, guiding decision-making according to different priorities and time horizons. In the case of religious congregations, we rely on the Social Doctrine of the Church as an ethical and social framework, and on Mensuram Bonam as a practical guide for responsible investment. While these texts help determine what to invest in, the final document of the Synod suggests how decisions should be made within the Church. This often goes unnoticed, or there is little reflection on how to apply synodality to an institution’s assets.

The literal meaning of synodality is “walking together.” It is a way of living and governing an institution that involves listening, dialogue, participation, and shared decision-making. This is precisely one of the key elements of the final document of the 2024 Synod, which reflects the conclusions of the synodal process carried out since 2021, involving not only bishops but also priests, religious members, and laypeople. The presence of laypeople is not new, but this is the first time they have had voting rights and real decision-making power. Beyond its religious dimension, the final document proposes a more participatory, transparent, and co-responsible form of governance, in which authority does not disappear but is exercised in a more relational way and open to listening. In this framework, the contribution of laypeople and the exchange of views gain real value, as unilateral decisions are no longer sufficient.

Synodality does not explicitly address investment, but it does speak to how decisions regarding the management of assets are made: who participates, how decisions are structured, and what controls are in place. Specifically, it emphasizes ecclesial discernment, decision-making processes, and a culture of transparency, accountability, and evaluation. In other words, good intentions are not enough: procedures, decision-making bodies, methodologies, and an institutional culture capable of justifying decisions and reviewing outcomes are required. In this framework, management should not rest solely with the bursar but should also be supported by qualified teams of laypeople and religious members, as well as external experts when necessary.

For a long time, the financial management of many religious congregations rested in a few hands, carried out with great generosity but sometimes with limited expertise in asset management or with poorly formalized procedures. Today, reality is different. The complexity of markets, regulatory changes, the need to preserve assets in a more persistently inflationary environment, and the demand for consistency with mission all make it advisable to bring in experts and move forward methodically. This is not about bureaucratizing decision-making or allowing external parties to decide in place of the bursar, but about professionalizing and improving processes.

In short, investing is not just about buying or selling funds or delegating management to a bank; it is an institutional act that reflects values, processes, and responsibilities. It begins long before allocating resources and does not end with the execution of an investment. Investing means choosing professionals who are aligned with the client’s interests, and then evaluating and supervising their work with sound judgment. And in certain contexts, it can also be a way of carrying out a mission.