How is it that my answer came into being?
It was not my intention to explain anything in the document, but respond to your remarks.
So what initially triggered me were your remarks, where you say that "If you really want to know the sensus fidei, generate a sample of nations, dioceses, and parishes; then field a brief, well-translated universal survey, add a few demographic markers, and include a few open questions." So that is not sensus fidei. As a reference for understanding I included the link to what you should read to understand it. In short: Sensus Fidei is more like if the Vatican limits the adoration of a saint, and then after 200 years, if the fidei are still revering that saint and reverence only grows, then the sensus (the institutional instrument of the church) is God speaking through the church. And the church is not a compilation of individual opinions of the members, but an emergence of an attitude of the fidei as a body. So When I wrote that down, I started to look at the vatican document and was indignated by possible changes in that document that I had noticed, and for this reason I wrote the rest of my answer just thinking out loud. However my point is: PLease start to understand Sensus Fidei, and indeed as the article mentions: a synod has the wrong dynamics. I would say that a synod dynamics, including the opinion of every member of the church is like trying to press wine from grape seeds.

Sensus Fidei is not a democratic process where all the people who pay money to the church have a vote.
It is all explained here in this link below, and it is very clearly authorized by ehm... Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller when he was still Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, before he was silenced and kicked out by his one and only "superior".
Sensus fidei in the life of the Church (2014)
This doc is from 2014, just after B16 abdicated, what could fnarcis have said at that point that was worth mentioning in a doc that was in the making from 2006 or so?
Believe me that when I first read this, there was no reference to pope Francis and there were logically many references to pope B16. Today there is not any reference left in this doc to B16. I am not going to read it myself again, however a quick search shows that all the B16 references were removed and replaced by references to pope Francis. This is more serious than you might think and is evidence that the base of the church is treated as a game of Jenga and will drop anytime soon, that fnarcis is indeed resentful and narcissistic.

charismatic
/ˌkarɪzˈmatɪk/

adjective

1.

exercising a compelling charm which inspires devotion in others.
"he was a charismatic figure with great appeal to the public"

I got a riddle for you.
Suppose the pope obeys the rule, and there are seventy cardinals. Seven recently died, and seven new were just elected. Leading to the number of seventy cardinals. Now what to do if the seven that recently died were resurrected from the dead? This would lead to a situation with seventy seven cardinals. The real question is: Would the Holy Spirit prevent the seven from being resurrected, because now there are already seventy?

Reason is the European nitrogen concentration problem NOx. The Netherlands is overcrowded, so the industry, the cars, the house builders, the road builders and the farmers together produce too much noxious NOx per square meter. This forces the Netherlands to stop producing cows, cheese, steel, asphalt, concrete and more even to stop simply building new homes. For this reason homes become truly out of reach for middle income and lower. It is hard for starters on the home market and soon I believe it will become impossible to buy homes for starting families. House market is already like the drug market or the Mafia or the Mob.
Now they will force people with houses below 355.000 euros to sell their house not to the highest bidder.

I foresee that if you have a house of say 300.000 Euros and are not member of the 'poor' target group, you will never be able to buy a house back in the same price category.

Problem is that people with bad sexual intentions are looking for places where prey is readily available for them. For this reason many of those bad apples find in the church a place to get what they want. This way bad people with sexual aberrations agglomerate in seminaries. And then finally they get "power" and will even find themselves approved by the heads of some seminaries. This because some of them found that becoming the head of the seminary is like becoming the wolf taking care of the herd of sheep, taking a sheep or two from time to time. Then between them they will start approving assignations to position with much prey. Mechanisms like that skew the numbers. The Catholic Church is a magnet for abusers, so the church is full of them not because abusive is a characteristic of catholics.
The problem is that the good shepherds never listened to Jesus when He said:
Matthew 10:16 Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
And this way the church became corrupted. The good shepherds only wanted to be as innocent as doves, not as shrewd as snakes. And now the bad apples are shrewd as snakes and innocent as doves. Unfortunately that is also the tactics of the devil. A dove is the perfect disguise. Or a wolf in sheep's cloth. Or a sexual abuser in a cassock.

@Kenjiro M. Yoshimori The USA Bishops make no chance to impose their will on what others are doing. Even stronger, you should not impose your will on what others are doing. Rev.22:11-12 But you can withdraw imprimatur, because you don't want to be associated with certain practises. Maybe that can change their minds, because now they must change all their administration, letter heads on correspondence, signs at the doors etc.