Pope Francis has articulated the four guiding concepts that direct his thinking and, I believe, guided the synodal project. These are: “Time is greater than space,” “Unity prevails over conflict,” “Realities are more important than ideas,” and “The whole is greater than the part”, which are presented in Lumen Fidei, Evangelii Gaudium, Laudato si’ and Amoris Laetitia. The fifth concept is the Ignatian process of discernment, where Francis accepts that the church, like the Society of Jesus, is always in tension.
The first concept, “Time is greater than space” (Lumen Fidei 57, Evangelii Gaudium 222-225, Laudato si’ 178, Amoris Laetitia 3 and 261) is best explained in Evangelii Gaudium:
“This principle enables us to work slowly but surely without being obsessed with immediate results. It helps us patiently to endure difficult and adverse situations, or inevitable changes in our plans. It invites us to accept the tension between fullness and limitation, and to give a priority to time’ which is preferable because ‘Giving priority to space means madly attempting to keep everything together in the present, trying to possess all the spaces of power and of self-assertion’. It is better to give ‘priority to time’, to ‘actions which generate new processes in society and engage other persons and groups who can develop them to the point where they bear fruit in significant historical events”. (223)
The second concept, “Unity prevails over conflict” (Laudato si’ 198, Evangelii Gaudium 226-230), is put in Lumen Fidei 55: “From a purely anthropological standpoint, unity is superior to conflict; rather than avoiding conflict, we need to confront it to resolve and move beyond it, to make it a link in a chain, as part of a progress towards unity.”
In Evangelii Gaudium (no.227), Francis describes three responses: to see and move as if it were not my problem; to see and become entrapped by the conflict; or, thirdly, to face the problem and resolve it by making it part of the change process. His third response reflects community, friendship, and communal life.
The third concept, “Realities are more important than ideas”, is presented first in Evangelii Gaudium (231-233) and then in Laudato si’ (201). The tension between ideas and realities prioritizes realities over ideas: “Realities simply are, whereas ideas are worked out” for which a “continuous dialogue between the two” is necessary so ideas do not “become detached from realities” (Evangelii Gaudium 231). Reality is to be seen for what it is and not masked with “angelic forms of purity, dictatorships of relativism, [or] empty rhetoric.” Francis links this idea to the Incarnation (Evangelii Gaudium 231) as a word put into use or given shape and form; that is a reality.
The fourth concept, “The whole is greater than the part” in Evangelii Gaudium (234-237) is summarized in Laudato si’ (141):
“The whole is greater than the part, but it is also greater than the sum of its parts. There is no need, then, to be overly obsessed with limited and particular questions. We constantly have to broaden our horizons and see the greater good, which will benefit us all.”
Here, Francis attempts to deal with the tension between the poles of globalization and localization (Evangelii Gaudium 234). While I think there is value in what he proposes, there are also problems. Staying with Evangelii Gaudium, I would note the following. If “time is greater than space”, does this mean time is more significant or proportionally larger? Does resolution through the application of time mean the same as “give it time and it will be ok” or “time heals all things”? Is it akin to the doctor’s diagnosis of time: “Come back in six weeks if the pain persists”? If it is, is this a relativization of time and concerns through a spiritualization of time? Does this approach to time avoid addressing the issue space as a process, or is it a way of taking the heat out of an issue by letting it take its “organic” course?
What, then, is “space”, and how does space work as a “place” where things, life, and situations are endured? Is space a locus theologicus when applied to the Christian tradition, or is time and is time chronos or kairos? Finally, is this an idealized view of history as becoming better through time, and what is the relationship between becoming and being (dasein and sein)?
The problem with “Unity prevails over conflict” is that it is not always true. Is this a Hegelian construct of Aufhebung (lifting up) to a higher level of consciousness—where resolution can be achieved because reality at the base level is understood dialectically but not at the higher level?
Given this question, what is the nature and form of the unity that prevails over conflict? Further, how does solidarity work to change history through a unity that resolves tensions and opposition? What, then, is the nature of solidarity? At what level does the resolution take place, and how does it deal with the messy details that inevitably exist in human affairs? How does the unity that prevails over conflict deal with sin?
“Realities are more important than ideas” appears to place ideas, which are linguistic and carriers of meaning, in opposition to realities, which seems to forget that realities and ideas can both be absurd or meaningful. Clearly, Francis is not presenting “idea” and “reality” as in classical epistemology. When he writes of “ineffective…idealisms and nominalisms,” his use of the plural indicates that he is not speaking of Idealism and Nominalism as they are understood historically and philosophically. So one is left asking, “What does he mean; what is he ‘getting at?’”
Pointing to an idea’s disconnect from the reality around it, he speaks of the reality that makes the idea reasonable, in a sense, the “idea’s reality.” Thus, if an idea loses touch with “its reality,” it becomes ineffectual idealism and eventually becomes ideology. Here, Francis preferences realities over ideas.
However, “a reality” devoid of an idea can also become devoid of objectivity, as an “event without a phenomenology”. Without a guiding idea, reality is a form of the absurd that creates a world of chaos (or chaos) that destroys social cohesion, as we see in North America’s United States.
Quest to seek and find God in all things
Francis’ language suggests that we have to look at reality or realities “as they are”, which leaves one to ask: “Does reality—as it is perceived or experienced in an individual circumstance—have an absolute value? What challenges “realities” and defines “one” as good and the “other” as evil in an absolute sense? This question is essential, not only because it frames Francis’s understanding of time, space, unity, conflict, reality and ideas but also of doctrine, the development of dogma, the liturgical tradition, and certitude.
In an interview with Jesuit Father Antonio Spadaro of La Civiltà Cattolica in the section titled “Certitude and Mistakes”, when asked: “So if the encounter with God is not an ‘empirical eureka,’ and if it is a journey that sees with the eyes of history, then we can also make mistakes?” Francis replied:
“Yes, in this quest to seek and find God in all things there is still an area of uncertainty. There must be. If a person says that he met God with total certainty and is not touched by a margin of uncertainty, then this is not good.”
Francis described this as an “important key.” He went on to say:
“If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing. Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security,’ those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists—they have a static and inward-directed view of things. In this way, faith becomes an ideology among other ideologies.”
Here, time and space, realities and ideas collide, and one is left with an ideology that comes into being when (or because) one holds onto an idea and refuses to see its own reality, for example, in matters of sexual ethics, gender debates, immigration, and traditional liturgical Catholicism.
The fourth concept, “The whole is greater than the part”, does not express a balance but a tension, prioritizing the whole over the parts. From a hermeneutical point of view, the relationship of the whole to the parts is described as a “hermeneutical circle”: the whole must be interpreted in the light of the parts, the parts in the light of the whole. This is not always helpful where the polarities cannot be denied; therefore, how we approach tensions is essential.
The implication is that the whole and the parts need to be brought into dialogue while positing that one pole (time, unity, realities, whole) is superior to the other (space, conflict, ideas, parts). But if the poles contain both good and evil, hope and hopelessness, faith and faithlessness, how will they be addressed or understood, and what happens to the “catholic” “and, and”?
While it is true that Catholic and Christian “restorationists” run the risk of becoming ideological, what is the role of inspiration in Scripture and the role of divine revelation in doctrine?
In his interview with Father Spadaro in La Civiltà Cattolica, Francis offers an answer:
“God manifests himself in historical revelation, in time. Time initiates processes, and space crystallizes them. God is in time, in the processes. We must not focus on occupying the spaces where power is exercised, but rather on starting long-run historical processes. We must initiate processes rather than occupy spaces. God manifests himself in time and is present in the processes of history. This gives priority to actions that give birth to new historical dynamics. And it requires patience, waiting.”
Discernment
Francis then addresses the fifth concept, discernment, as the process through which one discerns the encounter. When asked by Father Spadaro:
“How do you understand the role of service to the universal church that you have been called to play in the light of Ignatian spirituality? What does it mean for a Jesuit to be elected pope? What element of Ignatian spirituality helps you live your ministry?”
The pope replied:
Discernment is one of the things that worked inside St. Ignatius. For him it is an instrument of struggle in order to know the Lord and follow him more closely. I was always struck by a saying that describes the vision of Ignatius: non coerceri a maximo, sed contineri a minimo divinum est (“not to be limited by the greatest and yet to be contained in the tiniest—this is the divine”). I thought a lot about this phrase in connection with the issue of different roles in the government of the church, about becoming the superior of somebody else: it is important not to be restricted by a larger space, and it is important to be able to stay in restricted spaces. This virtue of the large and small is magnanimity. Thanks to magnanimity, we can always look at the horizon from the position where we are. That means being able to do the little things of every day with a big heart open to God and to others. That means being able to appreciate the small things inside large horizons, those of the kingdom of God.
According to Francis, following St. Ignatius, “great principles must be embodied in the circumstances of place, time and people,” which begins to ground his concepts, not a principle of a systematic theology but of a pastoral spirituality.
In this context of pastoral spirituality, “discernment takes time,” and changes and reforms do not take place in a short time. Francis has been putting the church through an Ignatian spiritual exercise and laying ‘the foundations for real, effective change’ through a ‘time of discernment.’ Discernment expresses Francis’ identity. In this context, he stated: “The Society of Jesus is an institution in tension,” … “always fundamentally in tension.” A tension that takes the Society of Jesus out of itself to the world when it is focused on Christ and the Church.
I would offer two questions to historians. First, is the fundamental problem with Francis’ set of ideas—his principles—that they were not brought into tension with actual realities and, therefore, instead of bringing about change, became a handbrake to delay action and stop change? Second, when looked at with magnanimity, has the process of discernment brought value to the universal church—which is made up of many different sectors—in moving the thinking of the church forward in fundamental ways of seeing, judging and acting?
J. P. Grayland is currently assistant lecturer in the Department of Liturgy, University of Würzburg (Germany). A priest of the Catholic Diocese of Palmerston North (New Zealand), his latest book is titled: Catholics. Prayer, Belief and Diversity in a Secular Context (Te Hepara Pai, 2020).
Reproduced with permission by La Croix International.
