by Silvester ASA, cicm 
General Councilor  

“Moral Imagination” has been employed in the worlds of peacebuilding and community organizing since 2005. John-Paul Lederach, a world-renowned authority on peacebuilding, defines moral imagination as the “capacity to imagine something rooted in the challenges of the real world yet capable of giving birth to that which does not yet exist.”¹ According to Lederach, an innate ability to weave a web of inclusive relationships is critical to realizing peace in a peaceful realm.²  He furthermore contends that moral imagination reveals itself in boldness and creative fidelity, which contribute significantly to the success of the peacebuilding and change processes.³  Moral imagination is also an artistry of networking and collaboration combined with optimism, patience, courage, creative fidelity, and risk-taking. Surprisingly, as an artistry, moral imagination permits serendipity to play a key part.⁴

Moral imagination is essential in establishing and maintaining peace. But, in our quest for more constructive community living, I believe we may benefit from Lederach’s marvelous work and appropriate moral imagination. One might reasonably wonder how this relates to CICM community life. To answer this topic, I propose that we look at the terms internationality and multiculturality, which have been commonly used in our everyday language for decades. The fact that we came from many nationalities and cultural groupings demonstrates that we are international and multicultural. This is stated explicitly in Article 1 of the CICM Constitutions, which states that “the Congregation is an international religious missionary Institute.” In 2010, the CICM General Government (GG) published a document titled “Guidelines for Multicultural Living in CICM,” which it hoped would become “a tool that will help all the confreres (to) live better this gift of multicultural character in our dear Congregation.”⁵  Furthermore, the 15th CICM General Chapter referred to “our universal and multicultural brotherhood” as an efficient way of vocation animation.⁶  In addition, while assigning formators to Initial Formation Communities, the current GG takes into account internationality and multiculturality. 

Internationality and multiculturality have undoubtedly become a part of our everyday life. However, the same may be true of every other place on earth. When you enter an airport like Chicago’s O’Hare, you are surrounded by international and multicultural people. Indeed, we cannot rule out the prospect of an intimate encounter taking place in such a public setting. However, without wishing to pass judgment on anyone, we might estimate that contact among people in such a space is likely to be superficial. For example, you can have a cup of cappuccino at a Starbucks at O’Hare International Airport without having to consider if the coffee beans are fair trade. The love symbol, on the other hand, is prominently visible on the surface of your cappuccino. You also do not have time to wonder if the person pouring you such a rich coffee is a Lakota or a Latin American, European, or Asian immigrant who happens to live on Chicago’s South Side, or “a skinny Black girl descended from slaves and raised by a single mother.”⁷

But, if you do ask yourself these questions about the social location of the individuals you meet and they lead you to a whole new way of understanding reality and inspire you to behave with empathy and compassion, you may have just crossed the threshold of interculturality owing to your moral imagination. One may be living in an international and multicultural environment where everyone is striving for peaceful coexistence and conflict avoidance at all costs. Internationality and multiculturality are, after all, realities that may be taken for granted. However, in an ideal-typical intercultural setting, everyone strives to “enter a mutually enriching and challenging relationship of understanding, acceptance, and care–to the point of sharing worlds of meaning in the deepest sense–with a person of a culture different from one’s own.”⁸  Therefore, we would leave our comfort zones in intercultural living to celebrate our diversity and uniqueness and be challenged and enriched by our encounters with holy different others.

“But, if you do ask yourself these questions
about the social location of the individuals you meet
and they lead you to a whole new way
of understanding reality and inspire you
to behave with empathy and compassion,
you may have just crossed the threshold
of interculturality owing to your moral imagination.”

The story of Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24,13-35 exemplifies moral imagination in its purest form. The two despondent disciples could have just ignored the apparently curious stranger and returned to their mundane lives. However, they opted to engage fully with the stranger and let moral imagination take its course. Because of their providential encounter with a stranger on the way, Cleopas and his companion finally understood everything correctly. Whatever the case may be, the truth is undeniably apparent. Our meeting with a stranger, as well as our readiness to use our moral imagination, can help us (re) discover our true calling and deepen our relationship with the risen Lord. The outcome of such an encounter is what is so unique about it. Cleopas and his companion were re-energized by their encounter with the Stranger, who turned out to be none other than the risen Lord, and they rushed back to Jerusalem exuberantly to tell others about it.

CIFA receives the visit of two General Councilors in November 2021 (Cameroon)

Like Cleopas and his companion before their encounter with the resurrected Lord, some of us may get tired of hearing about internationality and multiculturality. But I believe many more are like Cleopas and his companion after their encounter with the risen Lord. Many of us continue to be grateful for our Congregation’s international and multicultural nature despite our flaws. This is only the beginning of the intercultural journey. The open-ended invitation remains for us to let our moral imagination flow freely and let our encounters, with the holy different others, challenge and enrich us mutually. When this time comes, I hope you have just finished your coffee at O’Hare and left a hefty tip for the person who served you. For Christmas pasalubong to your community, don’t forget a pack of andouillette or a bottle of Johnny Walker of any label. Rejoice, for when you get home, your choice of mosselen-friet or Argentinian beef served with Moutarde de Dijon or couscous and okra, complete with bangus and piri-piri sambal, will be waiting for you. 

--------------------------------------

1 John Paul Lederach, The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace (Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 29.

2  I am appropriating Eric Law’s terminology, ‘Peaceful Realm.’ Eric H.F. Law, The Wolf Shall Dwell with the Lamb: A Spirituality for Leadership in a Multicultural Community (St. Louis: Missouri, Chalice Press, 1993), p.3.

3 Lederach, The Moral Imagination, p. 5.

4 Lederach, The Moral Imagination, p. 19.

5 CICM, Guidelines for Multicultural Living in CICM (Roma, 2010), p. 3.

6 CICM, Acts of the 15th General Chapter (Roma, 2017), p. 5.

7 Amanda Gorman, “The Hill We Climb,” Amanda Gorman’s inauguration poem, ’The Hill We Climb’ – Harvard Gazette

8  Stephen B. Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder, SVD., Prophetic Dialogue: Reflections on Christian Mission Today (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2011), p. 72.

by Jean-Gracia ETIENNE, cicm 
General Councilor  

The title chosen for our reflection is in line with the preparation of our 16th General Chapter, which will be held in Rome in June 2023. “Witnessing to the Gospel in a Changing World” is the chosen theme for this Chapter. “Spirituality and Mission” was chosen as one of three themes to inspire our reflections in the following months at the extended General Government (GG) meeting in July 2021. As religious missionaries of the CICM, let us meditate on this theme together.

Who are we? What is our Common Mission in Today’s World? What are the Demands that this Mission Places on Each of Us?

According to the confreres who wrote the Commentary on Chapter I of the CICM Constitutions, this chapter describes the Congregation’s essential characteristics. In this chapter, the elements that define the identity of CICM are described: missionary and religious vocation, tasks, and spirituality. The data that identify the Congregation and situate it in the Church and the significant difficulties that its members encounter and seek to answer as CICM religious missionaries are provided in Articles 1 and 2 of our Constitutions that introduce this chapter. Finally, Article 2 of our Constitutions provides the choices that define the CICM Congregation and the essential attitudes that each member should embody throughout their lives. Thus this article is regarded as the Congregation’s missionary manifesto.¹ Is this, however, clear to all members of the Institute? Do they all live it in the same way?

Historical Tension between the two Dimensions of our Vocation: Missionary and Religious

In the course of the Institute’s history, some members have perceived themselves to be more missionary than religious in carrying out their mission. Some have openly affirmed this. Others have demonstrated this through their daily lifestyle. General Chapters and Superiors General have made efforts to encourage all members of the Institute to obey the rules of our Constitutions. We can recall what the 13th General Chapter said regarding this topic recently. In fact, after observing some members of the Institute failure to practice their religious missionary life, the Chapter stated:

We define ourselves as religious missionaries. Yet, for many of us, the missionary aspect of our life seems to prevail over its religious dimension. At best, there is a tension. If worst comes to worst, we tend to choose one over the other. Should we choose between the two? The Chapter states that it is not a matter of choice at all. We are missionaries and religious. Religious life with its obligations is our concrete way as CICM to collaborate in the Church’s mission. Missionary commitment and religious consecration are meant to enrich each other and not to oppose each other. Both should be integrated harmoniously on the level of the individual and the community.²

Therefore, the Institute’s members were encouraged by the 13th General Chapter to improve their religious lives in order to deepen their missionary spirituality.

Observation of the Extended GG Meeting as a Preparation for the 16th General Chapter of 2023

The GG organized a meeting in Nemi, Italy, from July 19 to 24, 2021, as part of the preparations for the Institute’s 16th General Chapter. As consultants, four more confreres attended the meeting. Participants in small groups discussed the Institute’s recent past (15-20 years), current realities, and dreams for the next 15-20 years at the start of the meeting. In addition, participants considered Initial and Ongoing Formation, Leadership, and Finances in their reflections. The purpose of these exercises was to identify significant changes and transformations in the CICM mission and to discern the orientations to be given to the next General Chapter to respond more efficiently to the challenges of the present and the future.

The participants identified some beneficial outcomes that the Congregation has been able to achieve in the last 20 years to better participate in Missio Dei, thanks to the orientations of the General Chapters, the publication of important documents, the restructuring, and the commitment of the Institute members in various fields of the mission among other things. The members of the Congregation generally do their best to accomplish their mission, either Ad extra or Ad intra. As a result, in their mission fields, concerns about members’ lack of missionary zeal are uncommon.  However, we must continue to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ with renewed vigor. For, as St. John Paul II emphasized: “Proclamation is the permanent priority of mission. The Church cannot elude Christ’s explicit mandate, nor deprive men and women of the ‘Good News’ about their being loved and saved by God.”³

However, while reflecting on what needs to be changed and what has been lacking in the everyday lives of Institute members, it was noted that there was a lack of intense spiritual life, faithfulness to religious vows, and reconciliation among the members, among other things. Following this observation, the participants in the extended GG meeting felt compelled to return to the fundamentals of religious life: fidelity to vows, prayer, contemplation, reconciliation, and community life. This observation, among other challenges, inspired the theme for the next General Chapter:

Witnessing to the Gospel in a Changing World. In this context, witness entails proclamation, lifestyle, and presence because, in many cases, this

is the only way to be a missionary.4  It is also in this perspective that His Holiness Pope Paul VI declared: “It is therefore primarily by her conduct and by her life that the Church will evangelize the world, in other words, by her living witness of fidelity to the Lord Jesus – the witness of poverty and detachment, of freedom in the face of the powers of this world, in short, the witness of sanctity.”⁵

Since we have chosen to talk about spirituality, it seems necessary to us to define it.

What does Christian Spirituality Mean in the Catholic Context?

We choose to believe that the proper feature of spirituality is its historical incarnation, which leads us to call or define it as a tangible and visible form that every Christian offers to the action that God in Christ performs in him through the Holy Spirit. Spirituality is thus more practical; it is concerned with the experience that the Christian expresses and embodies in the unique religious sociocultural context that defines a person’s daily home. Thus, spirituality can be defined as a historical way of understanding and living the Gospel message, according to the faith and life of the Church, or as a style of living the Gospel in a given situation.⁶

More broadly, it might be regarded as a reformulation and rearrangement of key aspects of Christian life in light of “today,” concrete realities in which we must live, and concrete services we are called to provide.⁷  Furthermore, spirituality refers to the various ways of living specific to the stage of life or the religious family in which one is called to perform the Sequela Christi; it also asks us to speak of the spirituality of individual people, owing to the idea of uniqueness.⁸

Some Elements of CICM Spirituality

We limit ourselves to recalling the approach of the 14th General Chapter of the Institute on this question. In fact, in attempting to assess the quality of the personal and community religious life of the members of the Institute, the 14th General Chapter inquired: “Has our religious missionary life improved over the past few years?” The Chapter Capitulants contemplated the theme of CICM missionary spirituality in order to respond to this question. This spirituality was described as the “lifestyle of a person who is committed to live as authentically as possible all the consequences of discipleship of Jesus and membership in CICM every moment of his life and in all his relationships.”⁹

Second, the Chapter explains that the CICM missionary spirituality includes five pillars, which are based on articles 1 and 2 of our Constitutions, namely

1. dedicated to the Incarnate Word under the title and patronage of the Immaculate Heart of Mary…

 2. Sent to the nations to announce the Good News…

 3. Through the consecrated life…

 4. By being men of prayer and…

 5. In a Fraternal Communion.¹⁰

Furthermore, the Chapter acknowledges and appreciates the efforts of each confrere to sustain an ongoing personal relationship with the Lord in their daily life. It also stressed the members of the Institute’s perception of their identity as religious missionaries and encouraged them to keep their vows.¹¹ This is a whole life program that each of the Congregation’s members is called to integrate into their daily lives.

Some New Elements that Were Added to these Five Pillars of CICM Missionary Spirituality by the 15th General Chapter

The 15th General Chapter sought to examine, among other things, the charism of the Institute with a renewed vision while allowing itself to be inspired and strengthened by the missionary works of our Founder and his first companions. Thus, the Capitulants decided that “rootedness in the missionary tradition of the Church and in the original charism of our Founder, a renewed audacity and evangelical creativity, and a daring and optimistic vision of the future – will determine our missionary presence in the years to come.”¹²  However, this Chapter recognized that many obstacles hinder the process of the Institute’s members realizing their missionary goals. Furthermore, it acknowledged that one of these impediments is an exaggerated concern for the Institute’s members’ survival, work, and activities.¹³

For this reason, the Chapter expressed its desire to foster a positive attitude among Institute members in the coming years, encouraging them to see themselves favorably and be proud and grateful to God for becoming CICM missionaries.

Putting Christian, Religious, and Congregational Spirituality into Practice

We would like to emphasize the need to daily put Christian spirituality at the service of the charism of our Institute and our mission by quoting canon 673 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law: “The apostolate of all religious consists primarily in the witness of their consecrated life, which they are bound to foster through prayer and penance.” We take note of the Supreme Legislator’s link between our apostolic actions and living witness. As previously stated, we must continue to seek out and help our brothers and sisters. Meanwhile, we engage in the Church’s apostolates, focusing on the witness of our lives, which are nourished by prayer and penance. The image of a journey of building illustrates the dynamic of growth in each of our spiritual lives as we work toward full self-realization. Growth takes on the meaning of work, fatigue, and constant exercise as a journey and a building, accomplished by each in radical devotion to his being a new creation in Christ.¹⁴

For greater effectiveness and sustainability of this ongoing struggle, we must help each other in this process because canon 602 of the 1983 Code tells us that the fraternal life proper to each Institute unites all the members into, as it were, a special family in Christ. It is to be so defined that for all it proves of mutual assistance to fulfill their vocation. The fraternal union of the members, rooted and based in charity, is to be an example of universal reconciliation in Christ.

Therefore, each of the community’s members will challenge the model of a society that does not provide justice to all of its members and prevents openness to God in the name of his or her religious and community vision. In this context, our religious superiors have a vital role in their communities to foster a conducive environment for each member’s religious, human, and social development.

Furthermore, without wishing to enumerate and examine the various qualities required for the exercise of leadership in this specific context, we believe it is important to recall the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life’s luminous words in its Instruction on the service of authority and obedience:

Persons called to exercise authority must know that they will be able to do so only if they first undertake the pilgrimage that leads to seeking the will of God with intensity and righteousness [...] Persons in authority must act in such a way that the brothers or the sisters can perceive that when they give a command, they are doing so only to obey God.¹⁵

In the end, the only way to develop trustworthy relationships within our religious communities under the guidance of a Superior who sincerely aspires to serve humbly is to be open to God, others, and the future.

Finally, we must allow the Holy Spirit to guide us at all times so that we can boldly and bravely carry out our vocation and mission in the Church and in the world, which is full of challenges. In other words, regardless of our calling or mission, we can accomplish nothing without Christ. As with the vine and the branches, we must always remain connected to Him.

Let us put our complete trust in the Holy Trinity at all times and in all places. We should not be discouraged by the problems we shall face along the journey. Instead, we must renew our commitment to the Church of Christ’s spiritual and apostolic gifts. On the road to a more prosperous and brighter future!  

___________________

1 Cf. CICM Constitutions. Commentary, Chapter I: Our Institute, second edition, Rome, 2007, p. 5

2 Acts of the 13th CICM General Chapter, Rome 2005, p. 14.

3 Encyclical letter Redemptoris Missio, #44

4 Cf. Stephen B. Bevans & Roger P. Schroeder, Constants in context. A Theology of Mission for Today, p. 353. Orbis Books, Maryknoll, 2004.

5 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi, #41.

6 Cf. Carlo Laudazi, L’uomo chiamato all’unione con Dio in Cristo. Temi fondamentali di teologia spirituale, Teresianum OCD, Roma, 2013, p. 9.

7 Cf.C. Garcia, Corrientes actuales de espiritualidad, p. 7. Cité par Carlo Laudazi, L’uomo chiamato all’unione con Dio in Cristo. Temi fondamentali di teologia spirituale, p. 9.

8 Cf. Carlo Laudazi, Op. cit. p. 9.

9 William Wyndaele, quoted in the Acts of the 14th CICM General Chapter, Rome 2011, p. 8.

10 Acts of the 14th CICM General Chapter, p. 8.

11 Cf. Ibid., pp. 9–10.

12 CICM, Acts of the 15th General Chapter, Rome 2017, p. 13.

13 Ibid., pp. 11 and13.

14 Cf. Carlo Laudazi, Op. cit., p. 17.

15 Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, “The Service of Authority and Obedience. Faciem tuam, Domine, requiram. Instruction” in https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccscrlife/documents/rc_con_ccscrlife_doc_20080511_autorita-obbedienza_en.html, (october 4, 2021)

by Jozef MATTON, cicm 
General Councilor  

There have been consultations for either the appointment of Provincial Superiors or Provincial Councilors in all of the Provinces during the last few months. Some of the Provinces will still have consultations for the appointment of their Provincial Councilors at the end of the year.

We all know that these are not elections. In this regard, articles 91 to 93 of our Constitutions are clear. Consultations are a way to have all the confreres participate more actively in the life and governance of their Province.

Each confrere has the opportunity to explain to the General Government how he perceives his Province’s situation: who can lead the Province or collaborate in its governance as Provincial Superior or as a Councilor and why. Many of the confreres who participate in the consultations do so in this spirit.

Fallowing the appointments, a member of the General Government summarizes the contributions recorded on the consultation ballots of the confreres who took part in the consultations in that Province. He then submits it to the new Provincial Government as a working tool during their term of office.

Many confreres point out the location of the Province’s lights. They also indicate the shadows, the challenges, and the concerns. Finally, they note what the Provincial and his Council must address during their term in office!

Nevertheless, I am curious how many confreres consider what they can do to help solve or improve situations that they have identified. Sometimes, one gets the impression that the Province is only the business of the Superior Provincial and his Council.

Indeed, the Superior Provincial and his Council bear responsibility because the confreres have their trust in them by proposing them as possible leaders. However, the confrere’s responsibility should not be confined advising others!

Some Examples

• During consultations, several confreres express concern about

the temptation, if not the risk of depending on or favoring the confreres of certain nationalities. Is it only the responsibility of the Superior Provincial and his Councilors to make efforts to improve fraternity in an entity or a Province? Who is to blame for this predicament? The Superior Provincial? This scenario is promoted or even created by the confreres who are members of that District or Province. What criteria were used to recommend this or that confrere for Superior Provincial or Councilor? Is it because of his characteristics? Is it because he is a good friend of mine, or because we get along?

Articles 48 and following, under the common title “In Fraternal

Communion,” are clear! Art 50.1 explicitly states:

Each one helps to create a climate of mutual respect and trust in which we can share our experiences with one another. We will truly be brothers, particularly toward those experiencing difficulties.

Many beautiful texts and recommendations for fraternal life in our Provinces and Congregation can be found in the Guidelines for Multicultural Life in CICM. It is beneficial to read them and, more importantly, to put them into practice in our everyday lives. And this is not only the responsibility of the Superiors and their Councils.

Tsimba Ngoma Edouard, the former Superior General, in the introduction to the Guidelines for Multicultural Life in CICM that were published in 2010, wrote:

Many of our General Chapters have discussed the topic of internationality. The 13th General Chapter of 2005 affirmed that “our multicultural character has become an integral element in the identity of CICM. Confreres should receive this gift, value it, and make every effort to integrate themselves into this reality of the Congregation”. The present document will be, I hope, a tool that will help all the confreres to live better this gift of multicultural character in our dear Congregation.

• A few Provinces are experiencing financial difficulties. And many times, we have read in the comments on consultation bulletins that the Superior Provincial and his Council must handle this problem and do everything possible to improve management. They must even take strict measures against confreres in the event of fraud or other forms of cheating.

Has the confrere who wrote this thought about how he manages money and how is his lifestyle? Has he considered whether he is overly demanding? What has he done to counsel a confrere when he notices that he is not living up to the requirements of religious life?

Perhaps, our formation in religious life does not prepare us enough to manage the assets of a community, a Province, or an Institute responsibly. A Treasurer is assigned to each level of an Institute, and his primary function is to manage material goods. However, this does not imply that he is solely accountable for the financial well-being of a given entity.

The General Guidelines for Financial Administration contain an entire chapter entitled Co-responsibility in the Administration of Goods and in Our Financial Policy.

In No. 15, we read the following about co-responsibility in financial matters:

Co-responsibility in the administration of goods and in financial policy goes hand in hand with subsidiarity. We must realize that we are all co-responsible for the financial support of the Institute and its works, so that each of us can feel upheld by his confreres. This presupposes a responsible attitude of each one with regard to the task entrusted to him personally, to his community, his Province or Autonomous District, and to the Institute as a whole. It also presupposes that all be concerned about carrying out our common options in an ever-better way.

I could give other examples since life, and indeed religious life, has many sides.

Being a religious missionary in the Congregation of the Immaculate Heart of Mary is not a solitary game for one’s interest or profit. It is instead a collective commitment to announce the Good News of the Kingdom of God. Therefore, let us not put the burdens on the shoulders of others and take the benefits as our own.

All Together Responsible

When we profess our religious vows, we are saying, in one way or another, that we commit ourselves to live a life shaped by the requirements of religious life in the Congregation. Religious life is therefore lived not as a solitary life but at the service of the common mission entrusted to the Institute in view of the realization of the Kingdom of God. And by accepting the vows, the Institute commits itself to work together with this confrere so that he can live in fidelity to his missionary-religious commitment. Thus, we are responsible for one another in view of a common mission.

I have written this before in another article: We are here for the mission, not the mission for us. (Cf. Chronica, No.5, September 2019, p. 201.)

On the occasion of the first profession or the renewal of vows, we can read beautiful texts expressing the will to live the requirements of religious life and the mission. However, unfortunately, the reality shows things to be quite different.

We have beautiful texts. Many of our Documents are truly unique and serve as references and models for many other Institutes.

If we were willing to live in depth our common commitment as missionaries and religious as our Documents speak of, we would avoid many of our problems and difficulties in our communities, our Provinces, and our Congregation. Cor Unum Et Anima Una. 

“The choice of our leaders follows a discernment process that can be improved and become more participative. The provisions of the Constitutions (Art. 91) and the General Directory (Art. 91.1) remain the basis of our discernment. It should never be equated with a democratic election where membership of a group of interests would take precedence over the human and spiritual qualities of the confreres we propose for leadership.”

Acts of the 15th General Chapter, p. 18

by Adorable Castillo, cicm 
Vicar General  

In a very informative article published in SEDOS Bulletin¹, James H. Kroeger states that the Philippines is the “world’s third-largest local church” (after Brazil and Mexico) with 82.9% of its total population of over 100 mil- lion are Roman Catholics. Sixty percent (60%) of Asia’s 120 million Catholics are Filipinos. Catholicism was introduced to the natives of the more than 7000 islands by Spanish missionaries who joined the Ferdinand Magellan’s expedition in 1521. The first Mass was celebrated in the Philippines on the small island of Limawasa. It was a milestone in the development of the local Church in the Philippines. In 1565, Miguel Lopez de Legazpi and his colonial fleet landed on the island of Cebu and established a permanent Spanish settlement there. Some years later, in 1571, he transferred his colonial headquarters to Manila. The archipelago was claimed by the Spanish Crown under King Philip II and maintained as an important colony until 1898.

Evangelization of the Philippines was purposely undertaken by several groups of dedicated missionaries: the Augustinians (1565), the Franciscans (1578), the Jesuits (1581), the Dominicans (1587), and the Augustinian Recollects (1606). Manila became a bishopric in 1579 with Fray Domingo de Salazar, OP, as the first bishop. Salazar was an exceptional breed. He was a zealous “disciple” of Bartolome de las Casas (later bishop of Chiapas in Mexico). In the very first Synod of Manila held in 1582, he denounced the abuses of colonial officials and held them accountable before God and people, and even refused “absolution” and “holy communion” to those offending Spaniards.

After the Philippine revolution in 1898 and the subsequent American imperial occupation beginning in 1899, several male missionary groups (non-Spanish) were summoned to continue the works of the Spanish missionaries. To name a few: Irish Redemptorists (1905), Mill Hill Missionaries (1906), CICM Missionaries (1907), Missionaries of the Sacred Heart (1908), Divine Word Missionaries (1908), De la Salle Brothers (1911), Oblates of Saint Joseph (1915), Maryknoll Missionaries (1926), Columban Missionaries (1929), Society of Saint Paul (1937), PME-Quebec (1937), Oblates of Mary Immaculate (1939), and others. Thousands of dedicated female religious also came to engage in the many caritative, educational and social works of the Church.

One peculiar question is being asked whether the Philippines is indeed “Christianized” after 500 years of the presence of Christianity. According to the statistics, almost 94% of Filipinos are Christians that comprise 82.9% Roman Catholics, 5.2% Protestants (of diverse denominations present since 1901), 2.6% Aglipayans (an independent Church founded by Isabelo de los Reyes and Gregorio Aglipay in 1902), and 2.3% Iglesia ni Cristo (founded by Felix Manalo in 1914). If more than 94% of the Filipinos are “baptized,” are they “evangelized”? The Gospel was supposedly proclaimed by the missionaries when Magellan landed in the archipelago in 1521 and, surely, it has been known since then. Is the Gospel being “radically” lived out as a way of life for most Filipinos? It is interesting to note that Filipinos, by and large, have been “sacramentalized,” but inadequately “evangelized.” And therefore, there is the urgent need for “new evangelization” that has been undertaken since the papacy of John Paul II who visited the Philippines twice in 1981 and 1995, respectively. Are contemporary missionaries and pastoral agents involved in this initiative of “new evangelization” or just a routine continuation of the “sacramentalization” of the “baptized”? For in- stance, how do we ensure a holistic formation for newly ordained deacons? Vested with a deacon’s stole and a majestic dalmatic, are they also being trained to “serve” the poorest of the poor akin to the function reserved to the first seven deacons in Acts of the Apostles 6, 1–6? Or are they just simply being prepared to become alert and adept “altar servers”? While bishops, priests and deacons “render service at the altar,” the ordained ministry is best and perhaps, authentically exercised “beyond the altar,” in the peripheries, in the fringe of mainstream society where we find the “last, the least and the lost.”

Magellan got the commission to embark on a voyage around the world to search for gold and spices and to establish Spanish dominion in those “newly discovered lands.” In other words, Magellan and his sailors were “mercenaries,” commissioned and paid by the Spanish Crown to promote Spain’s imperialistic ambition and commercial interests. But when the fam- ished and travel-weary Magellan and his crew encountered the natives of Homonhon and Limasawa in the provinces of Samar and Leyte, respectively, they were “disarmed,” if not “charmed,” by their hospitality and generosity. In other words, Magellan and his “mercenaries” unwittingly became “mission- aries” in their own right, as appropriately expressed by Bishop Pablo David of Kalookan:

They were mostly mercenaries who quickly shifted to acting like missionaries when they encountered people of good will among the natives of Samar, Leyte and Cebu. They were strangers in need of shelter and provisions and who were treated as welcome guests by our ancestors... These European foreigners, who thought they were bringing God to godless people, were probably surprised     to find God in the simple and generous hearts of the natives who gave them food, drink and shelter, and who helped them bury their dead and worship their God.²

The unexpected but providential “missionary” transformation of Magellan and his crew of “mercenaries” is an opportune challenge for today’s “missionaries” in the Philippines to carry out boldly and sincerely their missionary mandate and be consciously wary of any unfortunate “re- versal of roles.”

Catholic educational institutions founded by the missionaries have been flourishing in the Philippines. Thousands of parochial schools have educated millions of young Filipinos. A considerable number of our leaders in government, business sector, and civil society have been formed in these schools. A nagging question remains: Why is it that the Philippines scored low in the 2020 corruption perception index totaled as 34 out of 100? Five years ago, a populist leader got elected and his policies resulted in the killing of thousands of small-time drug runners, militant activists and innocent civilians. Apparently, our educational institution has educated “an elite but not a people.” While we value academic excellence as one of the primary goals of Catholic education, measured by the sheer number of professionals and experts graduating from Catholic schools, do we promote the formation of an informed social conscience and a profound sense of social responsibility?

Like in Latin America and elsewhere, popular religiosity in the Philippines is a social phenomenon to reckon with. Millions of devotees flock to the Quiapo Church for the annual feast of the Black Nazarene. Millions also participate in the festive celebration of the Santo Niño and actively take part in numerous devotions to the Blessed Virgin and other saints in various parts of the country. What is the role of popular religiosity in today’s effort of evangelization? Pope Francis puts great emphasis on the inherent power of popular religiosity to deepen the faith of the faithful and to harness their capacity for social transformation. In Argentina, he was known as the “bishop of the slums” for his pastoral program in the “villas miserias” of Buenos Aires. He recognizes the evangelizing power of popular expressions of faith in both the “never-ending process of inculturation” (Evangelii Gaudium # 126) and liberating pastoral activity for the poor to promote social change. In a book entitled Pasyon and Revolution, Filipino historian Rafael

C. Ileto argues that the popular reading of the passion of Christ became a powerful ideological vehicle for local resistance and uprisings against colonial rule in 19th century Philippines.³ The EDSA people power revolution of 1986 was one of the exemplary manifestations of the symbolic as well as the transformative role of popular religiosity in a historic political upheaval in the Philippines.

In the article mentioned above, J. H. Kroeger states that in the Philippines “Priest-Catholic ratio is one of the lowest in the world” and “there is also the glaring inequitable distribution of apostolic personnel within the country.”⁴ Priests and religious are mostly found in urban areas where the demand for sacraments is high and where the amenities of modern life are readily available. We can arguably say that the idea of “peripheries” is not just geographical but also more existential. However, should we turn a blind eye to the neglect of “geographical peripheries” and the abandon of the rural areas, we run the risk of committing a missionary “sin of omission.”

Another issue that should interest today’s missionaries in the Philippines is the presence of Islam in the country and the call for interreligious dialogue. Muslims represent just 4.6% of the population, predominantly present in Mindanao, in the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi. Islam was introduced in the archipelago way back in the 14th century by Muslim merchants and Sufi missionaries. Due to prolonged social unrest and violent political upheaval, a good number of Muslims have already migrated to most big cities in Luzon and the Visayas. The most recent devastating event was the Marawi City siege that started on May 23, 2017 and lasted for five months. Hundreds of thousands of people, both Christians and Muslims, were displaced and economic hardship in large proportion ensued. The causes of social unrest, rebellion, and violence in these areas are myriads. Perhaps the only solution possible is “peace and dialogue” among peoples of different faiths. Pope Francis has already initiated a lot of endeavors to promote dialogue between Muslims and Christians. In 2019, he met the Grand Imam Ahmad al-Tayyeb in Abu Dhabi, and in 2020, he went to Iraq and visited the Shia leader Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. In his latest encyclical Fratelli Tutti, he highlights the role of religious leaders as mediators of peace and dialogue in these words:

As religious leaders, we are called to be true “people of dialogue,” to cooperate in building peace not as intermediaries but as authentic mediators. Intermediaries seek to give everyone a discount, ultimately in order to gain something for themselves. The mediator, on the other hand, is one who retains nothing for himself, but rather spends himself generously until he is consumed, knowing that the only gain is peace. Each one of us is called to be an artisan of peace, by uniting and not dividing, by extinguishing hatred and not holding on to it, by opening paths of dialogue and not by constructing new walls. (#284)

There are still many challenges that lie ahead for us missionaries who wish to learn from the past 500 years of Christianity in the Philippines. The past has only a future if we are attentive to the promptings of the Spirit in our present time, and if we fully appreciate the gift of faith that we have received. As the main theme of the celebration evokes: we are “gifted to give” and the gift remains a gift if it is shared with the rest of the world.

¹  See James H. Kroeger, “A Beautiful Journey of Faith: Five Centuries of Philippine Catholicism” in SEDOS Bulletin, vol. 53, no. 1/2 (January-February, 2021), pp. 2-16.

²  “Church Situation in the Philippines: Church-State Relation, Perspectives for the Future,” unpublished article of Pablo David, Bishop of Kalookan, 2021.

³  See Rafael C. Ileto, Pasion and Revolution: Popular Movements in the Philippines, 1840- 1910 (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1997).

⁴  Kroeger, p. 11.

by Charles Phukuta, cicm
Superior General 

The triennial process of consultations for the appointment of new Provincial Governments is underway in all our entities.  In its delibera­tions, the 15^th General Chapter addressed the issue of leadership as an essential part of our mission and our fraternal communion, declaring that “the CICM leadership will have to become a service of authority. It is a leadership of proximity, which, through good communication, interpersonal relationships and regular accompaniment, will lead the confreres to give the best of themselves and resolutely participate in decision-making processes.”^[1]

In this context, the leader is called to guide, showing the way, inspiring courage, or giving hope to the ones he serves. When leaders fail to play this role, eventually, the organization suffers. Thus, the importance of a good selection of a leader who, at a particular moment in history, can foster an acute awareness of the mission to be achieved and stimulate a sense of belonging among the members of the entity they serve.

Although our Constitutions talk a lot about the Government of the Institute, there is but one article about who the congregational leaders are or ought to be. Article 101 stipulates: “The Superior general will be a man of God. He must love the institute, be imbued with its spirit and convinced of its mission. He shows wisdom and discernment. He is truly a brother to all the members of the institute, guiding them with courage and steadfastness”. This article provides us with a description of the Superior General’s identity and spirituality and all the leaders of the Institute. The illustration of article 101 could practically apply to all responsible parish priests or administrators of works.

Admittedly, the Constitutions do not speak of a confrere endowed with extraordinary qualities. A responsible leader does not have to have exceptional gifts but being a man of God is central. While the depth of our relationship with God varies, we all are men of God. We love the Congregation and have a good knowledge of its spirit and mission. We have all received the gifts of wisdom and discernment to some extent.

Nonetheless, the last element of article 101 is the most difficult to put into practice: to be a true brother to each confrere, as the leader keeps on being courageous and firm. Experience shows that it is not easy to be a brother to all. As a matter of fact, some confreres consider the Superior as a brother insofar as he is neither courageous nor firm, especially about issues that have to do with them. There is no compatibility about being a true brother and giving in continually out of complacency.

Accordingly, a congregational leader is, at the most basic level, a good confrere, aware of his gifts and responsive to his needs for growth. He demonstrates appropriate conduct through normative and personal actions and interpersonal relationships. He promotes such conduct among members through interpersonal communication, empowerment, and decision-making. No wonder the leader is called to be a positive, honest, and trustworthy role model who uses Gospel values and the principles of religious missionary vocation as a compass for his leadership and decision-making.

A responsible leader is a mature person with a spirituality firmly rooted in Christ. He is easy to get in touch with and has a great capacity to accommodate. Confreres feel at home with him, which strengthens their motivation. He knows where he is going, and he is not afraid to take responsibility. Finally, and above all, he is inspired by the team spirit.

The Constitutions do not ask for exceptional qualities, but where do we find a leader who has all the necessary attributes? I do not know. However, I am sure a team is more likely to meet the challenge. Remarkably, Canon Law talks about a collegium empowered to effectively take decisions as the supreme authority of religious institutes. Canon 631 is about general chapters. It is a pretty clear statement of team leadership, but it is not a practical instrument of ordinary government.

For this reason, with the consent of his Council, the Superior General appoints the other Major Superiors and their Councils after consultation with the members of the entities concerned. Paraphrasing Perfectæ Caritatis, Canon Law (618-619) describes their leadership as docile to the will of God and in a spirit of service. They regard the members of the Institute as children of God and respect them as such. They listen to them attentively, even the most difficult ones, and promote cooperation, thus building caring communities where one seeks and loves God and one another.

Based on articles 83-85 of our Constitutions, what is described above refers to things that each confrere should expect from any other con­frere. It is about our identity. Leaders and all those in authority must personally ensure that none of those aspects is disregarded. This does not mean that leaders are required to fulfill every obligation to each member individually. They can call on other confreres to give a hand, especially members of the Council who must personally account for it.

It is not uncommon that the personal exercise of authority, even by well-motivated leaders, can easily descend into arbitrariness or outright peremptory disregard of differing opinions. When it comes to concrete decisions that directly affect members, Canon Law considers the superior’s role and position as legally distinct from those of the council members. The two perform different functions of government. Superiors are not allowed to function without a council. Teamwork is a necessity, and Canon Law (cc. 127 and 627) insists on the need to seek and value the assistance of councils; it also establishes several guidelines that guarantee individual freedom and responsibility.

Thus, the Councilor’s principal role consists of helping the Superior, offering him informed and honest counsel. To counsel well, the Counci­lor needs to be attentive to the reality of the Province. If necessary, he reminds the Superior to consult the members about matters that will affect them. The Councilor should be free to say what he thinks considerately and discreet enough not to take what is spoken about in the Government outside.

Our Constitutions and Common Directory stipulate decisions that require the advice or consent of the Council for their validity. The action of a Superior is legally invalid if he does not seek advice or obtain the consent of the Council on the matter in question. When an action requires consent, the Superior cannot legitimately act if he has not obtained it.

Even at the parish or another congregational work level, responsible Superiors share their authority instead of just applying it. As good listeners, they find ways to engage and involve everyone in the Administration and Governance processes. They highlight their members’ capacities as well as lead them to take responsibility for their actions. They encourage freedom of expression to broaden their minds. They favor collaboration rather than competition. Working side by side, not against each other, facilitates the ministry of Administration and Governance. They value and promote teamwork, interactions, and cooperation between confreres and between Provinces. In turn, they become more present with each other, more human, good-humored, curious, and compassionate. The reality is that today’s leaders must be supple in a fast-changing world, ready to fall a thousand times and rise. By tapping into their humanity, responsible leaders can see and understand others better, appreciate individuality and difference, and create a thriving culture of solidarity and universal brotherhood.

Today, our society demands greater accountability, even from the Church. Many confreres would agree that leadership is one of our crucial challenges. They share their concerns. They are not asking for theoretical answers such as new statements or new structures. Of course, these can also be helpful, but they need a lot more, namely, spirituality, community, proper accompaniment, compassion, reconciliation, and passion for the mission. It is from each confrere that they expect a response. The honest answer to their questions will be in relationships - with God and with one another. We hope that this reflection will invite further contem­plative reflection, especially by the new Provincial Governments. In our desire for responsible leadership, following the example of Christ at the Last Supper, let us reach for the pitcher and pour water into a basin. The feet of the confreres are waiting.

^[1] Acts of the 15^th General Chapter, p. 5.

By Jozef Matton, cicm
General Councilor

We don’t have to exert much effort in order to see that we are all quite different from each other.