REFLECTIONS

Five Hundred Years of Christianity in the Philippines: Some Critical Issues and Challenges for Today’s Missionaries

: REFLECTIONS; 16 July 2021

Reflection 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.

Responsible Leadership

: REFLECTIONS; 11 May 2021

Reflection 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.

Plants and Farming: A lesson for a Missionary Discipleship

: REFLECTIONS; 04 March 2021

By Silvester Asa, cicm
General Councilor

I remember distinctly that moment when, on a visit to my mother’s hometown in Atapupu on the northern coast of Timor Island, some of my High School classmates, a group called “Smansa86”, [1] presented me with a Timorese sandalwood tree which was nicely wrapped in a plastic bag.

I was so delighted with this gift. For one thing, Timorese sandalwood was so precious that, in olden times, the Chinese merchants who traveled to Timor intermarried with daughters of native Timorese rulers and embraced the matriarchal system prevalent in Timor so that they could gain easy access to the sandalwood trade.[2] Subsequently, the Europeans, notably the Portuguese and the Dutch, also showed great interest in sandalwood trade that lured them to Timor, marking the beginning of decades of Western colonization of the Timorese people. Sadly, at present, due to overharvesting, one can hardly find a sandalwood tree in the land where it used to grow.[3]

As planned, I planted this sandalwood tree near the tombs of my maternal grandparents. I took some pictures of it and sent them to my High School classmates. Upon seeing the picture, a classmate who works at the Forestry Department asked me what had happened to the small plants that grew around the young sandalwood tree in the plastic bag they had given me. Because I thought they were wild plants that would hinder the growth of the sandalwood tree, so I decided to pluck them out. Little did I know that those plants were grown together with the sandalwood tree to support its growth.

I could not help but recall this particularly embarrassing experience when I read some articles of Robin Wall Kimmerer. I also wonder if my action was a little better than those of the settlers who arrived in North America for the first time. Ironically, even though they ate from the fruits of the garden produced by the Native Americans, the settlers belittled the Native American way of farming. Obviously, for those settlers, a garden was “straight rows of single species, not a three-dimensional sprawl of abundance”, [4] a form of agriculture the native people have practiced from the time immemorial.

Understandably, each culture has different views and practices in farming. What is quite disturbing is the settlers' attitude when facing a way of farming that differs from their own. While the native people “speak of this gardening style as the Three Sisters,”[5] where corn, beans and squash grow together, just like asters and goldenrod can grow together in perfect harmony and in turn evoke not only one’s sense of beauty but also nourishes human beings’ bodily needs, [6] the settlers looked at such farming condescendingly.

Roger Schroeder, SVD, described a missionary endeavor as “entering into someone else’s garden”.[7] Indeed, a missionary may be likened to someone entering into someone else’s garden. What is required of them is respect, prudence and humility. Lest they will be busy chasing their own “cultural shadows”.[8] Worse still, they will uproot some of those plants that have grown in the garden long before their arrival, thinking that they are weeds. As it has happened in the past, with all their noble intentions to spread the Gospel, some Christians considered the indigenous peoples inferior and advocated conquest rather than witnessing the Gospel values, which unfortunately resulted in the annihilation of not only a culture but also a people.[9]

Indeed, the experience I had in Timor and Kimmerer’s work serve as a stark reminder of the danger of acting recklessly in the field of the Lord. They can also serve as an invitation for us to “seek the thread that connects the world, to join instead of divide”. [10] As religious CICM missionaries, we are “sent to the nations to announce the Good News, wherever our missionary presence is most needed, especially where the Gospel is not known or lived”.[11] Our going forth, moving away from our own cultures to be religious missionaries in a culture different from our own does not detach us from our own cultures, for we will always carry with us our own cultural shadows wherever we go, as Peter Koh and Jan Swyngedouw have so poignantly noted.[12] Hopefully, the awareness of our own shadows enriches us in our encounter with the culture of the people to whom we are sent.

Indeed, for all my encounters with those who are “culturally holy other”, [13] I will always remain a Timorese, born in a land once famous for its sandalwood. But as a religious CICM missionary, I can dream of and work for a garden where the sandalwood tree grows amidst asters and goldenrod and provides support for the three sisters: corn, beans, and pumpkins. Such a garden would offer a beautiful sight of purple and yellow from the asters and goldenrod, bodily nourishment from the three sisters, healing and comfort to the broken soul from the therapeutically aromatic scent of the sandalwood. ■

[1] Smansa is an abbreviation of “SMA Satu.” SMA is Senior High School in Indonesia. “86” refers to the year we entered High School in 1986 (Batch 1986).

[2] Agni Malagina and Syefri Luwis. Koin Kuno Spanyol dan Kisah Rempah Wangi di Pulau Timor (Antique Spanish Coins and the Tale of Timorese Scented Spices) on National Geographic Indonesia, posted on February 8, 2019. Accessed on January 1, 2021. https://nationalgeographic.grid.id/read/131623619/koin-kuno-spanyol-dan-kisah-rempah-wangi-cendana-di-pulau-timor?page=2

[3] Sigiranus Marutho Bere. Pohon Cendana di Timor Nyaris Punah, (Timorese sandalwood, at the Brink of Extinction) posted on April 3, 2012, accessed on January 1, 2021. https://regional.kompas.com/read/2012/04/03/16514511/Pohon.Cendana.di.Timor.Nyaris.Punah

[4] Robin Wall Kimmerer. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants. The Three Sisters (Minneapolis: Milkweed Editions, 2013), 129.

[5] Kimmerer. Braiding, 131.

[6] Robin Wall Kimmerer. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants. Asters and Goldenrod (Minneapolis: Milkweed Editions, 2013), 46.

[7] Stephen B. Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder. Prophetic Dialogue: Reflections on Christian Mission Today (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2011), 33-4

[8] Peter Koh Joo-Kheng, CICM and Jan Swyngedouw, CICM, Our Cultural Shadows: Letters From and To A Young Missionary (Quezon City: Claretian Publications, 1998), xii.

[9] Stephen B. Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder. Constant in Context: A Theology of Mission for Today (New York: Orbis Books, 2004), 176.

[10] Kimmerer. Braiding Sweetgrass. 42.

[11] Congregation of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Constitutions and General Directory. Article 2. (Roma, 1988), 14.

[12] Koh, Our Cultural Shadows, xii.

[13] In his public lecture at Catholic Theological Union, CTU Chicago on “Interculturality and Leadership in Consecrated Life,” Antonio M. Pernia, SVD., spoke of “culturally other.” Thus, “Culturally Holy Other” is an addition from me based on Pernia’s lecture. Video Lecture at CTU, accessed on January 6, 2021. https://learn.ctu.edu/antonio-pernia-monday/

Dare to listen with more empathy in this time of crisis

: REFLECTIONS; 15 December 2020

By Jean-Gracia Étienne, cicm

General Councilor

Listening in interpersonal relationships

Listening is something fundamental in all interpersonal relationships and also in the human-divine relationship. Indeed, in the Bible, God speaks to His people and never ceases to ask them to listen. He reveals to them that through listening, they will know happiness (cf. Deut. 4:1). Thus, the first of the commandments is the Shema Israel that every Jewish parent teaches to his children from generation to generation (cf. Deut. 6:4). Therefore, we can say that listening is the key to good mutual understanding and that listening and entering into oneself brings life.[1] There are, however, many ways to listen to others. But it seems to us that listening with empathy is more appropriate in the context of the current crisis with its disastrous consequences on individuals’ lives.

Listening as a fraternal service

Listening is a precious gift that we can offer to others, especially in this time of crisis. We do not need much literature to show us that we live in incredibly difficult times with a future that has become more and more uncertain. The majority of the world’s population is finding it increasingly difficult to meet its basic needs. Even affluent people also face different types of difficulties, though they do not have to strive to obtain basic necessities. We are in direct or indirect contact with most of these categories of people who need to be listened to attentively; hence the urgency of making listening a fraternal service as well.

Adverse effects of non-listening

There is no doubt that there are people who have suffered painfully from non-listening in humanity's history. This situation is mentioned several times in the Bible. Take, for example, the character of Job, who in his torment cried out: “O that I had one to hear me”! (Jb. 31:35). Job also cried out: “Listen carefully to my speech and let this be your way of consolation. Bear with me that I may speak; then after I have spoken, you may mock me” (Jb. 21:2-3). Unfortunately, we can see that listening is becoming very superficial and rare amidst the current world’s turmoil. Several factors can explain this situation. First, our world is overwhelmed by the superfluity of speech on TV, radio, social networks, etc. Second, due to the virtual nature of communication with other people on the other side of the world, people devote less and less time to those close to them. Finally, people have become ever “dependent” on their electronic devices and are preoccupied with other concerns.

In light of this, it is more important than ever to train ourselves to listen so as to counteract the many causes of non-listening and make understanding more effective in relationships. There is much to be said about listening as a vital capacity in all human and human-divine relationships. Since, in this sharing, we want to focus on listening with empathy, we must seek to understand empathy better as an innate and natural capacity rooted in the depths of our human identity. [2]

What we mean by empathy

The concept of empathy has been defined in different ways. However, a consensus is emerging around certain fundamental elements related to this term, facilitating the emergence of specific definitions. We will limit ourselves here to two. The First of all, “empathy today refers to the ability to put oneself in the place of the other person in order to understand what he or she is experiencing”.[3] Moreover, according to the French dictionary Micro-Robert, empathy is “the ability to identify with others, to feel what they feel”. From these two brief related definitions, we can say that empathy implies an opening to the other while seeking to grasp what the others feel, see, or live in a given situation.

To better play this role, we need to forget about ourselves and care for each other in order to create constructive communication and meaningful relationships. Often our listening skills are relatively weak. We do not pay enough attention to the verbal and non-verbal messages that the other person conveys to us. Sometimes non-verbal messages, such as facial expressions, voice tones, body gestures, can be more expressive than words. [4]

Evolution in the understanding of empathy

The term empathy, as we understand it today, is not new. It is a philosophical concept that has been the subject of sustained reflection for more than a century. It has been the object of research and reflection by thinkers, from experts in psychology and neurology to sages, saints, and healers.[5] The concept “empathy” has become an inescapable concept today when we talk about interpersonal relationships. Indeed, it should be noted that “on the modern path of listening training, we encounter the rich and promising notion of empathy. Thanks to Carl ROGERS, listening has become central to human relationships. We can only listen to others by being able to focus on them”.[6] Nowadays, one of the approaches to helping people that emphasize active listening as the practical basis of a helping relationship is counseling, in its various forms and procedures. However, each individual is also called upon to practice listening daily.

Talk to me, I'm listening [7]

This cordial invitation is the title of a work in Italian. It could well express the availability of the person who is about to listen. At the same time, it is an invitation to the other to open up to dialogue. In a dialogue, it is essential to know how to distinguish between listening and hearing but also clarify the relationship between these two notions. Moreover, it is necessary to know the requirements that must be met to ensure good listening conditions. Therefore, it is essential not to confuse empathy with other human feelings, which are also very important in interpersonal relationships, such as sympathy, understanding, and the phenomenon of emotional contagion.

From this perspective, it is not possible to sympathize with someone you do not love, but it is possible to empathize with them. Thus, empathy is cultivated; it is, above all, a way of being. As religious missionaries, we must also develop a religious practice of empathy, called empathy in faith.

What is empathy in faith?

Empathy in faith is a believer’s way of practicing empathy. It is a way of living faith, hope, and love through concrete gestures, especially towards people who may need help to overcome difficulties in their lives. We must allow ourselves to be guided on this path by the Holy Spirit, who is the power and strength of God and who also reveals himself as an impetus for action.

We must not limit ourselves to illuminating the mind with our wisdom and exciting others' hearts with feelings of love, hope, and joy. The Spirit also moves us to transform enlightenment and love into action and effective work.[8] Empathy in faith can also be seen as an effective way to help us overcome the limitations and pitfalls of empathy, such as simulation, projection, assimilation, etc., by setting love its driving force.

Let’s cultivate more empathy

We hope that these few lines will be an encouragement for us to seek a better understanding of empathy as an innate attitude that allows us to understand better and feel, even if only partially, the emotions and suffering of others. Moreover, we hope that these lines can help us practice empathy more consciously in our daily interpersonal relationships, in our pastoral approaches, and in the many different forms of the accompaniment wherein, people must always be at the center of any helping relationship. A good practice is learned and cultivated through training while keeping a certain balance.

It should also be remembered that in the practice of listening with empathy, “the golden mean is to resonate with the other, not to merge, which leads to confusion”.[9] Also, we must not forget this principle known and accepted by all: “Man is a mystery, an authentic mystery”. This means that a person is more than the body he possesses, his occupations, the social position he occupies, what he owns, etc. All these qualities are only some of the aspects through which he expresses himself.

To complete these few elements, we can also say that, in a Christian context, the person is a body, mind, spirit, image, and child of God. Thus, the person is revealed as a unique being, conscious, responsible, free, and capable of loving. We must also keep in mind that each person has his or her history and particularity. By taking these aspects into account, we can better relate and walk with a person under the Spirit's guidance. The prudence of the Spirit will allow us to respond to the concerns of our fellows. This capability for empathy can lead us to genuine encounters. Guided by the Holy Spirit, let us dare to take one more step each day towards this culture of encounter.

Living our differences: Challenges and Opportunities

: REFLECTIONS; 18 November 2020

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.

During these last weeks and even last months, we have all been witnesses to a resurgence of racism and its concomitant violence. And this phenomenon does not concern only the United States. Apparently, for some people, to accept differences is not possible. However, something is obvious: we are all different and sometimes very different in a wide variety of areas. Twins can be less different from the physical point of view. And yet, each one will follow his or her own path and will build his or her life in his or her own way, possibly with a partner chosen by him or her and not with her twin brother or his twin sister.

It's no different in CICM: we're all different from each other. It is said that in Scheut, one can find a specimen of each species. It is with all these differences, that we must live together or, in order to better express it and in a more positive way, that we can live together.

Our differences: a challenge

We often find in our environment, both far and near, that differences can lead to disputes. We don’t have to go far away to witness it. Households sometimes suffer from it. Business relations are sometimes put under pressure because of differences among people. Religious communities are not spared from this predicament. We know all very well that living with others, and therefore with people different from us, is not always obvious, whether in religious communities or in families. And yet we easily say, "It wouldn't be a good thing if we were all alike: life would be too monotonous." Is a bouquet of flowers of the same variety and color the most beautiful or the contrary? Even on this point, opinions are different.

Variety, which involves differences, is therefore not always a source of harmony. To achieve this, we need some practice and exert some effort. Just as each member of an orchestra must train very hard in order to ensure that all instruments merge into one unit while preserving his or her own timbre and his or her specific place in the whole ensemble. Sometimes, one has to disappear. Who was not witness of this reality and who did not experience it in his own life?

Our differences: an opportunity

Living and, above all, living together means living with differences. This should not always lead to disputes, because these conflicts often involve only what is superficial. For one, it’s the skin while for another, it’s the shell. It is rare for the core to be the source of the dispute. It is precisely this core that can help us to transcend differences and to recognize variety as an enriching experience.

What about the core? In my own opinion, for all of us CICM, the core consists in our faith in Jesus Christ and in our free commitment to follow him together in his redeeming mission. We are neither committed for our own business nor for our own profit.

It is rather a common commitment. The very first article of our constitutions already says it: “The Congregation is an international religious missionary Institute. It was founded by Theophile Verbist and is dedicated to the Incarnate Word, under the name and patronage of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. (Const. Art.1)” By our commitment to the Institute, each of us becomes aware of this international character: it is the cornerstone of our CICM identity.

At the moment, we are around 800 confreres in our Congregation. It means 800 different people, each with his specific character and qualities. It is not possible to provide a list of the elements that make us different within our Congregation, within our Province and within our small or large communities. Generally, we did not create these differences ourselves. We have inherited many differences from our history. My experiences are never someone else's. My way of dealing with pleasant and unpleasant experiences is original and it is never the same as the way it is dealt with by somebody else. It makes me unique compared with another. It should be a reassuring experience. I don't have to be like the other. I can and I have the right to be myself. Conversely, the other should not be my double. There is no uniform model of being a CICM missionary.

Our Differences: a wealth

The reality of the rich history of our Congregation shows that the skins or shells are all very different. We have a wide variety, a mosaic of presences among people of very different cultures. Thanks to this diversity, the Congregation grew up and our deepest aspiration is that it can continue to grow in the future. We must not only accept these differences, diversity and variety, and to learn how to live with them. We must exert more effort to build and live a committed and fruitful missionary life with other confreres, even if a good number of us are perhaps more advanced in age. This major challenge for each of us will remain fundamental within our small or large community, within our Province and certainly within our Congregation. This is perhaps the greatest challenge for the future of our Congregation.

A temptation may arise: to use the fact that we are all unique to carry out our own project or to justify our mistakes and possible shortcomings. Unfortunately, this also happens. By doing so, we hide, we avoid questioning ourselves. We make little effort to recognize this problem, to accept its consequences, to work to solve it and thus to live in a new and more coherent way.

Some of us may say, "You have to understand, he’s like that." Perhaps it helps others to accept us as we are and to make it possible to "live together" with us; but let us not allow this to be an excuse that justifies everything. When I focus on my being different from the others, turning it into an ideology and using it as an argument to make excuses, I bring little added value to the community, whether big or small, far　from it. You could only say that it is human. It becomes very difficult when I want to be the determining standard for judging or evaluating others. The other should not be the clone of myself, and my personality should not be a normative part of my view of others.

To interact with people, with confreres from different backgrounds and cultures allows us to learn how to discover the world, and how to live in it. It is always interesting to see that the world is neither limited to the recreation hall nor to our house, nor to our convent for example.

We can also develop useful qualities such as the tolerance, the respect for others, the recognition of the dignity of others and the openness of mind. The difference is an incredible wealth. It is enough to accept others, and to show them that I too deserve to be accepted because my culture is as interesting as others’.

As a conclusion

I would like to repeat a small part of the homily I delivered at the end of my canonical visit to AIFC in the Philippines in 2018.

"Of course, a great challenge for each of us is the multicultural life, not only in the formation houses, but also in the mission. We are experiencing it in our daily lives also here at the AIFC. Each of us has his own culture, even if we come from the same country! I was born into a farming family. I had a very clear experience from the beginning that confreres living in town had a culture, a way of acting and thinking that were different from mine.

My humble experience has taught me that:

• first of all, we must tolerate that other people's cultures are or may be different!

• But this is not enough. We must accept that the other peoples’ cultures are or may be different.

• But more than accepting, we must appreciate the cultures of others. Life and collaboration in a multicultural spirit are not possible if we cannot appreciate the culture of those with whom we are sharing our life and work.

• But appreciating the culture of others is not enough; we also need to learn from other peoples' culture! We can all learn from each other! The culture of others can teach us something, but for that we must be open to this possibility, because we are certainly not better than others. Some of you have clearly said to me that other people's culture has helped them to learn many things, even about themselves!”

We have a common commitment: to live together with our diversity. The rest is just the skin. Even if the skin is different, the nutritious part is there. It’s under the skin!

Dear confreres, in all our houses and communities, and even on our liturgical garments we find our motto: "Cor unum et anima una." Let us pray and strive above all so that this motto does not become just empty words!