Ministers, writers, philosophers, scientists and religious... The second edition of the Church and Democratic Society Congress, sponsored by the Paul VI Foundation, brought together in Madrid on March 9 and 10, 2022, people from very different professional and cultural backgrounds. A representation as broad as the theme that was discussed during the two days: the future of our society.
The world to comeThe congress marked a key point in the new stage of this foundation, heir to the Leo XIII Social Institute founded by Cardinal Angel Herrera Oria, which four years ago began a new cycle in its history with a profound renewal of its training programs through the promotion of a new training program for its members. think tank and the organization of congresses, forums and seminars in areas such as: bioethics, science and health; technology, ecology, development and human promotion; cultural, social and political dialogue; humanist leadership and social and digital economy.
From this transformation were born the Observatory of Bioethics and Science, the Forums of Interdisciplinary Meetings and the Paul VI Thought Center, to reflect on and recover the legacy of Pope Montini and, a year later, the School of Economy and Society.
On this occasion, he gave an interview to Omnes in which he reminds that "being at the forefront of dialogue with society is inscribed deep in the nature of the Church.".
The Second Congress of the Church and Democratic Society was attended by people of diverse political, cultural and social sensibilities. Is it a sign of the open dialogue objective pursued by this foundation?
-We cannot forget that the Paul VI Foundation was born in 1968 when Cardinal Angel Herrera Oria took over the reins of the Leo XIII Social School and launched this project for the dissemination of the Social Doctrine of the Church; and dialogue is the basis of the Social Doctrine of the Church and, even more so, in the mind of Pope Paul VI, under whose auspices this initiative was founded.
Dialogue is a gift. Paul VI himself says that dialogue is part of God's revelation. Revelation is a dialogue: God who speaks and man who responds.
Therefore, dialogue is inscribed in the deepest part of the nature of the Church. We have to be present, and being in the front line is a risk because the claim is to dialogue with everyone, to make the message of salvation present in the midst of the world.
On behalf of the Church, the Paul VI Foundation wants to be on the frontier of this dialogue. We are aware that those who are on the front line also take many risks, everything comes at you "head on.
That is why the dialogue with everyone has been so important in this congress. The congress was born in 2018 and it was born with a vocation of permanence. The first congress was that year, it would have been held in 2020 but it could not be held due to the pandemic. This year's call was therefore the second one, but our intention is to organize a congress like this one again in two years.
During these days we have wanted to look to the future: to the world to come. There is constant talk that we are in a change of era, and it is true. We have seen it, for example, very clearly manifested at the table Young people and the future: three views of a postmodern society. We are in a real moment of change and we need to know how we look to the future.
Many times I remember one of the most painful experiences I have had in my ministry: when a girl asked me what to expect, if it was possible to expect something today. I was saddened. When a young person looks to the future with fear and not with hope, something is happening.
Therefore, we have to help to look at the world with hope. Our obligation, also from the Church, is to see how the world is coming.
One of the dangers we continue to face is that of creating closed groups or environments in which dialogue is considered a danger to the firmness of principles....
-I think that dialogue is not a danger, it is a possibility. Dialogue does not take us away from our identity.
Entering into dialogue entails the certainty that the other person, the deferential position, can enrich me, but does not have to convince me.
I believe that a well-planned dialogue enriches and even strengthens the principles we want to defend because we can meet someone who thinks completely different, even contrary, and that this very difference helps to reinforce my position.
At the closing of the Congress, he referred to the mistaken idea that everything in the past was better. Now there are those who say that "everything is against Catholics. Have we polarized positions in the Church "either with me or against me"?
-We can fall into a polarization if we do not assume that the Church, throughout history, has sailed against the current. Christ's message is a proposal that is always original, always young and in contrast with the world.
Man is the image of God and has the dignity of the children of God but, at the same time, he is wounded by sin. To all this is added freedom.
Therefore, throughout history, society and culture have not been in favor of the Gospel. Sometimes very explicitly, as in the present moment or at the end of the 18th century; at other times, as St. Ignatius would say, "dressed as an angel of light".
There have been periods in which society has supported the Church, but many times in order to use it. Nor in those periods has it been so easy for the Church.
We have to assume that our vision and our mission in the world is paradoxical, because the Gospel is paradoxical. We must expect that we will experience rejection, misunderstanding, even persecution, but this should not slow us down or frighten us; on the contrary.
If this reality leads us to a reaction of extremes, of denial, contrary... it means that we have not understood Christian revelation.
One might object that it is not difficult for you to say this, because "it's your paycheck". But what about when the Christian position leads to problems in society or at work?
-This is indeed a reality. Quite a few people come to us with this type of situation. Maybe not so much that they could lose their jobs, but many of them consider in conscience that they cannot do such and such a thing. Whenever they have talked to me about these problems, I always advise them to stay, to stay there, to be there, to be present. Sometimes we can do everything, sometimes we can do a little, sometimes nothing, just be there.
Here we also enter into a very important topic: conscientious objection. Conscientious objection involves personal conscience, formed by an objective reality in the case of believers by revelation, by the faith of the Church and the gift of freedom that God respects me. And the State, the established powers must also respect this conscience. We have to announce -and denounce if necessary- this right to object in conscience to realities or situations that we may be living.
To bring this theme of presence to a theological level, we can ask ourselves what the Virgin Mary could do at the foot of the cross. Faced with the impotence of not being able to do anything, she was, she simply was, as the Gospel of St. John tells us.
In this sense, have we Catholics been or do we really live the consequences of a lack of presence in the public sphere?
-I believe that, if we look at the broad horizon of what we consider the public sphere, we are present. Sometimes there are those who miss a word from the Church, from the pastors, at certain moments. And it is not easy because sometimes we have to speak but at other times we have to be prudent.
In this sense, one of the raisons d'être of the Paul VI Foundation is to promote the presence of the laity in public life: in politics, the economy, trade unions and the media.
The Catholic presence is not reduced to the word of pastors to illuminate a concrete reality but, especially, it is manifested in the presence of the laity informing society with the principles of the Gospel.
During the congress, the reality of "yearning" young people became evident. Educated perhaps outside the faith but who yearn or wish to hope and even believe in something more.
-In some areas of social reality, such as politics, there is a lot of tension and this does not contribute to dialogue. However, I believe that in contact with the simple people there are many possibilities for this encounter.
There are many people in need, hungry for transcendence, many people who are back and need to hear a different word, a word of faith. We are in a good moment for proclamation and dialogue.
From this last congress that we have celebrated, I will keep a call to hope, which I have seen in many moments. And hope resides in the young people, in spite of those who have no confidence in them. I was delighted with the round table of young people, where so many concerns were expressed, or to see a young nun in Africa who makes Christ present in the most remote territories and who affirms that the Eucharist is the root of life. These are signs of hope.
Speaking of dialogue and hope, we are in a synodal process in which the encounter with the other is key, but is it permeating the Church?
-I believe that the synod has touched the people of God and is taking root, not without difficulty, in the Church. Synodality cannot be renounced, because synodality is not an invention of Pope Francis but is part of the essence of the Church. The challenge of this moment is to move from the synod as "something that I have to do" to the synod as "something that I have to live".".
The purpose of this synodal process is to make us aware that, in the Church, we are a synod and we have to live as a synod. If this remains in the Church, we will have truly achieved what this process seeks.
