I must confess that when I learned about the bishops’ note, I was very happy from its first reading. But after reading what was published in Vida Nueva in issue 3.450 and hearing other voices, I reread the note, and this reflection came to me:
It is more than evident that, although not explicitly quoting, the note speaks of Emmaus, Effetá, Bartimaeus, Hakuna, and all those new encounters or led by “newcomers” groups working evangelization which we call First Announcement.
I walked in 2018 and participated in the launch of Emmaus in my diocese, and I remain linked to the Emmaus Retreats.
Without denying that emotivity is used in these retreats and various emotional impacts are provoked in the walkers, I still think they are a good tool to provoke an encounter with God. Even if dynamics are conceived for this purpose to cause an impact.
Precisely one of the comments I have heard is that, generally, the walker already comes “impacted” from home due to various life circumstances and that the retreat seeks to provoke a reset of the operating system, which is sometimes good.
All this does not preclude the temptation of proselytism and spiritual manipulation, and cases are occurring. Especially in those people who have experienced a “conversion,” a “fall from the horse” or “from the fifth floor.” Some need to be told: “now relax and wait for the soufflé to deflate.”
Going from a dissolute life to spending more hours of adoration before the Tabernacle than in the sanctuary lamp also does not seem like a healthy change to me. Cases occur where dependence on spiritual experiences is generated as if it were a drug and the daily, weekly, fortnightly, or monthly shot was needed. And as a plastic image, it can look very nice to say that prayer is my dose, my daily shot, but only if it is just an image and not a real “drug addiction.” One thing is integrating prayer into our life, which is good and healthy, and another is very different: conditioning our life on prayer. If you want prayer to mark your life, perhaps you are receiving an invitation to monastic life; but in lay life, the advice of Saint Josemaría Escrivá is more appropriate, which proposed making life a prayer. But taking into account the obligations each one has towards their work, their family, their friends, …
The bishops propose supervision of all these initiatives, and that is where the alarm bells went off for me. If this supervision is for spiritual accompaniment, I see it not only as correct but necessary; however, if it is for a spiritual direction then I have my reservations. Why? Because many of these initiatives have arisen in a framework of freedom that I believe is important not to lose. Freedom must be guaranteed, not only for the group but for all individuals who participate. But a freedom that implies that the retreats, the encounters will not be subject to the ideological bias marked by the priest, or the bishop who accompanies and hosts them, nor by any group of brothers affiliated with a movement, collective, or ecclesial tradition.
The argument would be that in this, as in other things in life, when something is normalized or boxed in, it loses its essence and even discourages the staff from continuing the activity.
In this line of avoiding biases, the alternation every two retreats where some groups designate “leaders” for the retreats—who are, after all, the servants who serve the most—is very good. This alternation helps minimize the risks of adopting a “line.” However, even the script of the retreats does not leave much room, although the selection of testimonies or the treatment given to the sacraments that are offered, proposed, or “imposed,” can have their ideological biases.
Therefore, a review of these processes, yes; spiritual accompaniment, yes; but perhaps not only for these but for all, those who are centenarians and those newcomers, as well as the “lifelong” ones, who may also need an inspection (ITV) and to adapt to a 21st-century Church. Reading the signs of the times affects us all equally.
With Pope Francis we were able to see the richness of a Church in its diversity where we all have room, everyone, everyone. With certain common criteria that safeguard above all the freedom of the individual, which is what can be at risk in these new formats of first announcement evangelization. But beyond that, I believe the intervention of Holy Mother should be that of a mother with a child who is growing and taking steps in life, maintaining a prudent distance but walking at their own pace.
We can say that the only one who can and must set the pace in the Catholic Church is the Pope, and even in his case, better the synodal option, not anymore the collegial one, but the synodal one. I take this opportunity to celebrate the paths proposed by Group 7 of the Synod on the way toward the election of bishops in the future, responding to a demand born from the people that would recover, to some extent, what the Church already did in its beginnings.
The image of the Good Shepherd is beautiful, but the flock… it doesn’t quite fit with the model of Church that many believe must walk in this Third Millennium. In any case, I find it valid to concretize it in a single Good Shepherd, while the rest are a flock in a line of discipleship among equals.
So: Welcome the bishops’ note “Cor ad Cor loquitur,” but let it not be used to “manipulate” these initiatives in any other way while they are doing good for many.
The note includes some considerations that can help guarantee that the experience has follow-up, continuity, and a path process within and with the Church. Let us keep present and enhance those proposals of spiritual accompaniment; I insist that not spiritual direction.
Perhaps there are church experiences that do not have to end up formally registered or governed by statutes approved with a nihil obstat; perhaps they only need to be accompanied, period. And let Ruah go its own way. I&strong>refer to a Church where one can sing “there is freedom in the house of God.” Because “the wind blows wherever it wants and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes: So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit” (Jn. 3, 8-15)
Non solum sed etiam
I commented earlier that not only new evangelizing and pious proposals could be subject to a review. Also those ancestral pious devotions perhaps should undergo an ad intra review and an external audit. Analyzing, for example, behaviors such as the exclusion of women from certain spheres when we preach a discipleship of Equals as a reality more aligned with the Gospel.
And those pious traditions that our ancestors lived with fervor and which are maintained today because generation after generation have demonstrated their healing strength and their contribution to faith.
The other day I attended my youngest daughter’s “Consecration to the Heart of Mary.” I accompanied her because it was an important day for her. My daughter and I have already talked about that I have never felt that inclination, need, or contractualized devotion.
I must admit that I saw her happy, and that makes me glad. I also consider her a girl with her own judgment during her youth. Which does not mean that she might allow herself to be carried away by emotion at some point.
Those who led this act are members of a faithful association formed by consecrated priests who call themselves brothers and consecrated laywomen who call themselves sisters, as if it were an order regular, although Rome has not yet spoken on that demand. In the ceremony, the new consecrates were also surrounded by people who had taken the step of consecration before them.
I admit that I do not fully recognize myself in the model of Church they represent; I am also very cautious and observant, but I must also acknowledge that they have a grip on a sector of the parish, including the young parish. I recognize that they are making an effort to adapt, not diocesan integration, on the ground, I will not say they have been welcomed (although there is a part that has), because it would not fit the truth, but rather the land to which they have brought them or to which they have managed to arrive after adjusting the terms of “a contract” that benefits both contracting parties.
The youth of a large part of them is the great attraction. Nevertheless, the appearance of reports of spiritual abuse, power abuse, and conscience abuse keeps me alert.
But my daughter is happy, and that matters to me, and beyond the fact that I do not identify with that church that is bringing her closer to God, I respect absolutely her journey of faith. But also my most absolute sincerity in coherence with my conscience and my Christian militancy.
And if one day she encounters some disappointment with the Church, I will try to accompany her and tell her that her father knew how to see in those frustrating experiences an opportunity to strengthen her faith in God, and to see the Church in its true measure, as a work of men whose meaning and end are in this life. It has many good things and some very bad things corresponding to its human nature.
I will closely follow both my daughter and those who accompany her on the path of faith, because they too are the Church, but formed by sinful men and women who sometimes make mistakes. And with both them and others, my willingness to accompany them and, yes also, why not to be accompanied one day. I do not rule out that my little daughter will end up accompanying me on the path of faith at the end of my days. If that is to be, blessed be God!
But, closing the circle of this post, as long as we are talking about accompaniment and not spiritual direction.
Txenti García Corres
Digital Religion
Reflection regarding the note: “Cor ad Cor loquitur” and something more