Sermon Categories: Sermon

Philippe Grenalet est né à Batangafo (Préfecture de l’Ouham, République Centrafricaine). Il a été ordonné  le 22-07-2001 à Alindao par Mgr Juan Jose AGUIRRE, évêque du diocèse de Bangassou. Titulaire d’un Master en Théologie de la pastorale catéchétique à L’institut catholique de Paris. Entre autres ministères pastoral il était Coordonateur de la Commission de la Pastorale Biblique de l’ACERAC (Association des Conférences Episcopales de la Région de l’Afrique Centrale) de 2008-2014, et aussi il était membre du Conseil du Centre Biblique pour l’Afrique et Madagascar (CEBAM/BICAM) de 2007-2014.

 

Yago: Philippe, bienvenue sur ce blog “respirer le pardon” où l’on explore sous des angles différents comment le conflit peut être transformé. Vous êtes un prêtre diocésain en République centrafricaine. Vous avez rendu de nombreux services à différents niveaux tels que: catéchèse, pastorale biblique, prédicateur de retraite, formation des laïcs, enseignement, accompagnement spirituel, counselling, aumônerie du Renouveau Charismatique et de la Légion de Marie … Mais ce qui est pertinent pour notre entretien, c’est que vous avez servi dans un pays qui a traversé d’énormes défis liés à la violence, l’instabilité politique et la pauvreté précise.

Vous dites que l’attention et l’écoute est un souci pour vous. Pourquoi?

Philippe: Justement être attentif à l’autre c’est déjà pour moi une étape importante d’abord de valorisation de l’autre et ensuite l’écoute de l’autre c’est de lui permettre de prendre conscience que quelqu’un est là, un interlocuteur qui participe voire même complice de son histoire. L’écoute et l’attention font de l’écoutant le confident.

Yago: Tout d’abord, pourriez-vous nous dire ce qui vous pousse à écrire ce livret sur «l’apostolat de l’écoute»?

Philippe: La motivation est simple. J’avais écris ce livret d’abord dans le but de mettre à la protée de celles et ceux qui s’intéressent à ce ministère. Ensuite pour partager mes différentes expériences en ce domaine du counselling qui fait partie de ma formation. Enfin de mettre en évidence que dans notre ministère, l’apostolat de l’écoute reste et restera la trame d’une activité pastorale importante.

Yago: Comment avez-vous exercé “l’apostolat de l’écoute”?

Philippe: J’ai exercé cet apostolat dans plusieurs contextes: le sacrement de réconciliation, le sacrement des malades, l’accompagnement des couples et des personnes en difficultés, dans la catéchèse…Tout est pour moi une occasion d’écoute, c’est-à-dire savoir donner de son temps pour l’autre. L’écoute c’est l’accueil de l’autre. Pour moi c’est une valeur évangélique à désirer.

Yago: Quelle est la pertinence d’un apostolat d’écoute dans la situation actuelle de l’Eglise Centrafricaine?

Philippe: Je pense que cet apostolat vise d’abord une attention à la personne blessée. Ecouter et écouter. Mais faisons attention. Il faut écouter et reconnaitre son incapacité à donner des réponses…le silence joue parfois un rôle important.

Yago: Quel serait l’enjeu d’une bonne écoute dans l’apostolat?

Philippe: Il est la clef de voûte d’une bonne compréhension mutuelle. Ecouter sans juger est un exercice délicat qui convoque l’attention au contenu du dire de “l’autre”. Une écoute authentique est vraiment thérapeutique. Ecouter, c’est donner la possibilité à l’autre de se prendre en charge, de s’exprimer librement ; c’est coopérer à la résolution de son problème ; c’est l’aider à gérer son conflit intérieur (c’est à dire ce qui perturbe la personne intérieurement).

Yago: Quels seraient pour vous les principes de counselling: les outils pour un apostolat de l’écoute?

Philippe: Il faut décrire le counselling comme une relation d’aide basée sur un entretien entre deux personnes : le client, le conseiller. Une méthode de soutien psychosocial qui met l’accent sur l’importance de l’autodétermination du patient.

Yago: Selon vous, qui peut faire du counselling? Spécialement dans la situation actuelle dans la République Centrafricaine?

Philippe: Tout le monde peut faire le counselling, mais tous n’ont pas les aptitudes de le faire. Je m’explique, quand je parle des aptitudes cela veut dire que le conselling va au delà d’un simple conseil qu’on prodigue. C’est une science qui à ses règles et ses principes dont il faut l’acquérir, se former, se donner. Cela peut susciter ou réveiller certaines dispositions naturelles du conseiller. Pour ce faire il nous faut des centres spécialisés dans ce contexte : des centres d’écoute avec des personnes :

• qui s’intéressent et se soucient des autres
• qui ont une bonne connaissance des problèmes liés aux crises de la vie
• qui ont des aptitudes de base : savoir écouter, savoir utiliser le langage convenable, poser les questions et savoir répondre, savoir vérifier que le client a bien compris ce qui a été dit.

Il faut aussi inspirer confiance, avoir une attitude positive, être disponible et accessible, être discret et garder la « confidentialité », être logique et précis dans ses explications (pas de parole double)

Dans notre situation actuelle ce besoin est grandissant et a besoin d’un travail d’accompagnement afin d’aider les gens à se prendre en charge dans la gestion de leur crise.

Yago: Quelles sont les techniques de conseil les plus importantes selon vous?

Philippe: Je résume de cette manière : L’acceptation; La clarification; La reformulation; Le soutien; La technique du reflet; La réassurance; Le silence; La question; Le conseil.  Voilà en quoi consiste les techniques de conseil les plus importants.

Yago: Tu parles de la crise. Comment cela se passe-t-il? Quelles sont les étapes impliquées?

Philippe: La crise se manifeste à plusieurs niveaux et dépend du contexte. Elle est caractérisée par les étapes. Qu’est-ce qui provoque la crise ? C’est un événement, un fait de vie marqué par un choc ou une désorientation de l’ordre. La réception est douloureuse et va jusqu’à anéantir la victime du point vue psychologique et somatique. La crise va se développer, va être dramatisée et s’impose en impasse. Ce qui est visible c’est la réponse à laquelle la victime donne à l’événement douloureux. J’appelle cette réponse « une réponse de mort ». Pourquoi car l’idée de vengeance, de haine, de destruction, de violence de tout genre peut naître en la personne victime. D’une manière générale la victime se fait innocente mais elle peut être bourreau sans en avoir pris conscience. Quand la crise surgit les étapes sont :

• Le Choc : un problème, un fait, un événement provoque un choc de durée variable. Ce traumatisme résulte d’un face à face trop brutal avec la mort (maladie dangereuse, humiliation, diffamation, trahison,…) La personne est soudain totalement désorganisée et se réfugie dans un monde d’actions futiles. Elle se coupe totalement de tout le monde et ne veut rien savoir de qui que ce soit.
• Le déni : la personne traumatisée refuse l’information ou le diagnostic. (surtout pour le cas des maladies graves : HIV/Sida, cancer et autres).
• La colère : ce qui fait exploser la colère, c’est le mécanisme qui bloque le but à atteindre, spécialement quand il y a une persistance de frustration, avec une accumulation graduelle de tension. La révolte de la personne se manifeste très vivement ; elle est agressive vis-à-vis de l’autre, que ce soit un membre de sa famille ou une personne de son entourage. Elle pense et dit « pourquoi moi? »
• La dépression : elle peut être longue et sérieuse. Les problèmes causés par une nouvelle situation ou par une maladie, ou au sein de la famille, ou au niveau financier, aggravent la souffrance morale de la personne qui devient triste et sombre.
• Le marchandage : l’incroyable pression exercée sur le psychisme de la personne entraîne des comportements qui sont loin de ceux d’une personne «sereine».
• L’acceptation : à cette étape, la personne trouve une certaine paix. Cette étape est plus sereine que joyeuse. L’acceptation n’est pas une démission, c’est une progression. C’est le franchissement d’un seuil de perception nouveau et totalement inconnu.

Yago: Où vous placez l’acceptation?

Philippe: L’acceptation vient couronnée le processus de rétablissement de la crise. Elle est précédée par une longue négociation, difficile parfois, pour en arriver à une pacification intérieure de la victime. Elle est dans le temps et l’espace, et ne peut être mesurée. Seul le facteur temps est déterminant dans ce processus d’acceptation.

Yago: Quelles sont les réactions psychologiques dans une situation traumatisante?

Philippe: Toutes ces réactions psychologiques sont traumatisantes pour la personne a tel point qu’elle est paralysée dans ses forces vitales et petit à petit elle développe en elle un monstre. Ces réactions proviennent des informations stockées dans la mémoire de la personne telles que : la superstition, croyance etc.…là c’est le premier niveau. Le deuxième niveau se manifeste par la :- Peur et angoisse: la peur est une émotion qui cherche à «éviter» et implique la fuite devant la colère. Le fait que le monde est plein de danger, la peur est vécu comme une émotion. Selon certains psychologues, la peur est le noyau du comportement humain- angoisse de mort. Le point essentiel est le manque de courage ou de force pour faire face aux menaces ou dangers- Colère et frustration:   peuvent être engendrées par l’incertitude de la maladie, des problèmes- c’est-à-dire devant l’impossibilité de changer les circonstances. –Culpabilité: se condamner- de s’être mal conduit- être une victime passive. Conscience de «mal faire», la transgression de la loi qui est vécu comme une souffrance morale. Elle se réfère à un acte moralement mauvais fait par le concerné.- Remord : c’est un regret très profond et amer car l’acte posé sur le plan moral est mauvais. Par exemple, refuser d’assister un parent mourant.   –Désespoir et dépression : la perte de l’espérance, un pessimisme et un dégoût de la vie s’installent et entrainent parfois à un suicide de la part de la personne. –Choc

Yago: Comment se déroule la croissance post-traumatique?

Philippe: Quelles étapes sont nécessaires? (déconstruction du récit, réparer le monstre elle même a fait grossir on elle, reconstruction) (libération de la force vital) (préfiguration) (l’aspect de la mémoire) (récit de l’enfance, adolescence, famille)(le récit de la conviction, du rêve du futur) (récit des différents parcours de vie) (récit de haut et bas de la vie) (récit de relation avec la religion… différents mouvements) (affirmations identitaires) (configuration. comment tu t’écoute toi même) (passage) (intégration, paix intérieure, acceptance, regard positif sur ma situation) (découvrir que a redit de vie est dynamique)

La croissance post-traumatique se déroule sur la théorie de Paul Ricoeur le philosophe Français. Je me suis basé sur cette théorie pour élaborer le processus de croissance post-traumatique. C’est aussi le fruit de mes expériences de différents peuples (Africains, Européens, Asiatiques, Américains, Antillais) dont j’ai accompagné dans le cadre de cet apostolat de l’écoute. Une chose est certaine, se mettre devant le « sujet » on se rend compte que l’être humain reste le même partout dans le monde. Aucun sujet ne peut prétendre qu’il est mieux humanisé que l’autre. La violence, tout le monde en fait l’expérience ; la haine et le rejet sont vécus par tout le monde ; l’amour et la joie pareille. Ce schéma vient renforcé ma conviction que le sujet est tributaire des influences de toutes sortes. J’entends par « influence » tout ce qui bloque nos forces vitales de s’épanouir. En voici la démarche qui se vit sur le temps et l’espace et pourra être répétitif. L’homme est pluriel comme on le dit en philosophie.

PREFIGURATION

Cadre:

• Récit de l’enfance
• Récit familial
• Repères éducatifs (soit le père, soit la mère, soit les parents)
• Récit d’une conviction ou rêve d’un futur
• Récit de différents parcours de vie: (études, identification avec ses aspirations initiales, identification avec ses nouvelles aspirations)
• Récit des hauts et bas de sa vie: (ce qui fait la joie, et ce qui fait souffrir en lien avec son entourage « collaborateurs, parents, famille nucléaire et élargie)
• Récit de sa relation avec la religion: (1^er mouvement: « engouement, abandon et retour », 2^ème mouvement: « un cheminement normal de vie de foi, un cheminement qui s’éclaircit avec le temps).
• La présence des adjuvants dans le récit de vie: (celles et ceux qui ont été mis sur notre parcours et qui ont été des facteurs déterminants dans l’histoire de notre vie; celles et ceux qui ont permis un changement positif dans l’histoire de notre vie ; celles et ceux qui ont permis de devenir « ce que nous sommes aujourd’hui »
• La personnalisation du récit à travers les expressions : (« je tiens à ma liberté » ; « je suis resté marqué par… »; « je suis envoyé »; « j’ai de problème avec »; « je dois prendre un temps de recul »; « je suis… »; « j’ai compris qu’il faut dans la vie… ». « Le JE »  devient une affirmation identitaire.

CONFIGURATION

Cadre:

• Regard de foi,
• Repère et organisation de sa personnalité,
• Passage (de peur à l’affirmation identitaire ; de ses projets humains aux projets de Dieu),
• Récit de vie intégré,
• Capacité de déchiffrer le mouvement interne et externe du récit de vie avec un regard plus mature,
• Découvrir qu’un récit de vie n’est pas clos, n’est pas statique, mais plutôt ouvert sur l’avenir dont on ne maitrise pas en se confiant à Dieu maître de l’histoire.

Yago: Pourriez-vous nous donner quelques attitudes pour l’exercice de cet apostolat? (la compassion, l’empathie, être conscient du soi-même ….)

Philippe: L’apprentissage d’une bonne écoute est d’abord une qualité dans les relations humaines. Le véritable apostolat ou la véritable pastorale est celle de l’accompagnement, ce qui suppose une formation à l’écoute. Il nous faut des attitudes à l’exercice de cet apostolat :

• La compassion : La compassion est l’attitude de celui, qui, touché profondément par la souffrance, l’épreuve de l’autre, est interpellé au point de poser un acte d’amour.
• Empathie : Empathie veut dire “sentir du dedans”. C’est une attitude qui consiste à écouter l’autre en cherchant à comprendre comment il perçoit sa situation, son problème. On cherche à se mettre à la place de l’autre pour comprendre son problème tout en restant objectif.
• Etre conscient de soi-même :  Dans l’écoute, je me dois d’être conscient de mes idées, de mes émotions, d’être attentif aux mouvements physiques et émotionnels qui m’animent, et à l’écoute de la parole de l’autre.
• Accepter l’autre tel qu’il est : Accepter l’autre veut dire reconnaître, respecter ce qu’il est, être attentif à lui, quelle que soit sa vie. Là, on est en présence d’une “personne brisée – blessée” qui est en quête d’une libération.
• Humilité : Vivre l’écoute avec humilité, c’est reconnaître mes qualités mais aussi mes propres limites. Je dois veiller à ne pas posséder l’autre dans le processus d’écoute ; c’est-à-dire renoncer à tout pouvoir sur lui, à toute captation de sa liberté, ne pas chercher à le garder sous ma coupe, en dépendance.

Yago: Quelle est la dynamique de la rencontre-écoute?

Philippe: Dans la rencontre-écoute, c’est l’écoutant qui rentre dans le monde de l’autre à travers les faits expliqués. Il rentre dans le territoire de l’autre, il explore ensemble, il visite les recoins tout en ayant un regard de compassion. Cette dynamique se manifeste par la vulnérabilité de l’écouté qui fait tombé le masque de sa vie devant l’écoutant dans la confiance et le souci de la transparence.

Yago: Comment l’écoutant peux se libérer de ses tendances

Philippe: L’écoutant a intérêt à donner totalement son attention à la personne “brisée-blessée” qui est en face lui, c’est-à-dire l’écouté. Il y a besoin de faire un effort afin de se libérer des choses qui empêchent la bonne écoute.

Ces choses qui nous empêchent sont les distractions. Il y a trois sortes de distractions :

• distraction matérielle : son, bruit, cri, etc.
• distraction physique : malaise, démangeaison.
• distraction mentale : souvenir, préoccupation.

Yago: Que devons-nous faire?

Philippe: Notre attention doit d’abord porter sur ce que l’écouté dit :

• Est-ce qu’il parle du présent ou du passé ?
• A-t-il peur de son futur ?

Ensuite l’attention doit être portée sur l’intonation

Est-ce qu’il parle très vite ou doucement ?

• A-t-il la voix tremblante ?
• Parle-t-il avec peine ?

Enfin l’attention est portée sur le langage corporel

• Parle-t-il avec le front plié ?
• Les yeux fermés ?
• Les larmes aux yeux ?
• Avec un regard effrayant ?
• Avec les lèvres qui tremblent ?
• Les jambes qui bougent ? …

Le langage corporel est un message en soi. Qu’est-ce que l’autre exprime à travers sa face, ses mains, ses pieds, ses épaules, etc. …

Yago: Et le silence?

Philippe: Dans le silence, il y a trois attitudes :

• le consentement,
• le refus,
• l’indifférence.

Ces trois attitudes se manifestent du coté de l’écouté. Mais dans notre contexte, le silence a une autre connotation. Le silence nous parle de la peur, la honte de se révéler, ne pas être à l’aise avec l’écoutant …

Prêter attention à la personne qui parle, aux mots qu’il utilise, aux mouvements de son corps, à ses silences, nous aide à comprendre ses sentiments.

Yago: Est-ce que tu peux partager quelques attitudes pratiques?

Philippe: Trois facteurs importants comme attitudes pratiques :

1. Le contact des yeux

C’est une des possibilités pour assurer l’écouté qu’on est avec lui. Le regard posé sur l’autre est pour une manifestation de notre attention et de notre intérêt. Ce n’est pas pour fixer la personne comme pour découvrir quelque chose de caché. Non ! C’est une attitude de respect, de politesse et qui aide l’autre à se sentir à l’aise avec l’écoutant. C’est aussi pour dire ” je suis ici pour toi. Je m’intéresse à ce que tu dis… “

Regarder l’autre en suivant son mouvement, sa façon de s’asseoir, les mouvements des mains et des pieds. Quand l’autre se sent gêné, a honte ou a peur du regard, il faut momentanément déplacer son regard. Cela va l’aider à avoir confiance en elle-même.

1. Suivre l’écouté quand il parle

Suivre étape par étape l’écouté dans son récit. Ne rien ajouter ni retrancher de son récit. Accueillir ses dires sans porter de jugement.

La tentation serait de préparer une réponse préalable au problème. Or il s’agit juste d’accueillir la parole, et chercher la réponse ensemble avec l’écouté. Il faut faire très attention aux réalités culturelles de l’autre au risque de le scandaliser.

1. Respect et confiance

Dans l’écoute, on manifeste à l’autre qu’on lui fait confiance. Ainsi, en réfléchissant, il trouve une solution à son problème. On ne prend pas la décision à la place de l’autre, ce qui est dit et partagé avec l’autre ne doit pas être propagé : ça reste une confidence. A moins que pour des raisons particulières, l’autre demande de le faire.

Yago: Quels sont les risques d’un échec dans l’apostolat de l’écoute?

Philippe: Cet apostolat de l’écoute est difficile et suppose de se garder de toute naïveté. Certaines personnes abusent de notre disponibilité et veulent être le centre d’intérêt. Il convient de les aider, avec charité, à trouver un juste équilibre. Cela s’avère nécessaire, tant pour l’écoutant que pour l’écouté, sous peine d’échec de la rencontre-écoute.

Les raisons d’un échec de la part de l’écoutant sont multiples. On peut en particulier citer :

• Recherche de soi dans la rencontre-écoute.
• Excès de compassion pour la cause présentée.
• Manque de rigueur et de discipline dans le processus du dialogue.
• Manque de discernement afin de démanteler les pièges tendus.
• Volonté de partager son expérience personnelle à l’autre, ce qui fait que les rôles s’inversent : l’écoutant devient l’écouté.
• Manque de sérieux de la part de l’écoutant et négligence de détails dans le récit de l’écouté.
• Manque de contrôle de ses pulsions en face de l’autre.

Yago: Est-ce que vous pouvez donner une introduction à une approche biblique et chrétienne de l’apostolat de l’écoute?

Philippe: Cet apostolat ne peut se priver d’une base biblique. C’est le capital de notre approche qui est d’aider l’autre à se mettre debout. Personne n’est une île dit-on, car tout conflit est en relation avec l’autre, parce que chaque personne est en lien avec l’autre. J’ai abordé quelques points sur la relation interpersonnelle, le dialogue, la jalousie etc. L’approche biblique et chrétienne de l’apostolat de l’écoute nous aide à recentrer notre discours sur le « Sujet » en proie avec l’oppression de tout genre.

Yago: Merci de partager avec nous votre expérience sur cet apostolat. Je crois que c’est une grande contribution à la guérison de l’église centrafricaine.
Philippe: Merci à toi aussi de m’avoir donné l’espace pour partager à ce sujet.

Carl Stauffer was born and raised amidst the war in Vietnam. After completing his university education in 1985, Stauffer worked in the Criminal Justice and Substance Abuse fields. In 1988, he was ordained to the ministry and joined an urban, inter-racial church plant and community development project in the inner-city of Richmond, Virginia. In 1991, Stauffer became the first Executive Director of the Capital Area Victim-Offender Mediation Program in Richmond. In 1994, Stauffer and his family moved to South Africa under the auspices of the Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), a faith-based international relief and development agency. In South Africa, Stauffer worked with various transitional processes such as the Peace Accords, Community-Police Forums, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Local Community Development structures. From 2000 to 2009, Stauffer was appointed as the MCC Regional Peace Adviser for the Southern Africa region. His work has taken him to twenty African countries and ten other countries in the Caribbean, Middle East, Europe, and the Balkans. Stauffer’s academic interests focus on narratology, transitional justice, and post-war reconstruction and reconciliation. His research concentrates on the critique of transitional justice from a restorative frame, and the application of hybrid, parallel indigenous justice systems.

Yago: Thanks Carl for sharing your passion for the African people. Now, let us move to a very interesting reflection you wrote about the different roles that a peacebuilding practitioner must be equipped with. You remarkably used a whole imagery from the African traditions.  I would like to go through them so that we can share with the reader the richness and challenges that practitioners face on the field. But, first of all, what motivated you to process your experience in this way?

Carl: I would like to make a quick comment about the seven roles in general. They came, as you said, as part of my own journey. There are three major streams that led into it. The first one, there comes a time when the language and the discipline that you are studying becomes still, and the language of the books that I had been learning from became stale to me (no longer alive) – lifeless. I wanted to find a new language, and I wanted that language to be contextual to Africa, as well as contextual to my Christian faith, and many of the Christian leaders I was working with in Africa. So the language borrows from all of those different streams and my need for creativity. I wanted to make it as contextual as I could within what I was experiencing at a gut visceral level, on the ground, in practicing peacebuilding in Africa for 16 years.

Yago: First you see the practitioner as the “seer”. You say that often in complex conflict situation “things are not always what they seem”. Yes, more than not “there is a story behind a story.” How do you see the practitioner as a “seer”?

Carl: “Seer” is a word used in the Old Testament, for the prophet and for the “Men of Issachar” (a small band of people in ancient Israel who were geographically located) who saw the sign of the times and knew what to do for the nation. They were not only able to analyze, interpret, but they were also able to strategize – a very important role. Yes, we can use the technical word, conflict analysis, but the “seer” is more than that to me. It was trying to capture the strategic notion of our work, the technical analysis, but more importantly the spiritual ability to see in other realms and that is very much part of what the Holy Spirit has promised us, but also it refers to the elders, the wise people, the one’s who can “see” into multiple dimensions of reality at one time. 

Alice in Wonderland talks about, things are not what they seem, and I think the best peacebuilders realize that much of their work is intuitive, that ultimately they can be very strategic, but the turning points, the shifts, in the conflict often happen in unexplainable ways, or in surprising ways, in a release of energy over activity that is in another realm, or in another facet not of our reality of what we can see, right here.  

And as Paul said “we live by what is unseen, not what is seen; what is eternal and not what is temporal.” It doesn’t mean that we are not connected with the temporal but we also understand that the temporal is not the only thing that is real. Material is not the only thing that is real. And therefore when I go into a conflict resolution process I am asking a different set of questions. I ask/pray “where is the Spirit already at work, and how can I align myself to that energy?”

Yago: The second role is  “the bridge builder.” We have to become expert in relationships. In fact, in the end all is about relationships. The practitioner is challenged to relate to him/herself and also to know how to relate with the other without taking stands. To be able to bring real reconciliation through his/her own reconciled self. Could you expand on this?

Carl: I don’t actually know how to build a material bridge. But I have talked to others and asked “how do you build a bridge?”. And some experts say that the bridge must be built from one side to the other, and others say, no we must start in the middle and build from each side out until you meet in the center. I like the latter analogy if that is true. The bridge is best built from both sides, meaning both sides of the conflict, or the different views, the polarization, and then you build together and the bridge builder spans the columns that are the scaffolding for the bridge and are in the middle of the rushing river or gorge, and they are able to hold up, many different truths, many different ideas, many different people that make up the conflict, and hold it in a way that remains balanced. 

The other thing about the bridge is this: the bridge is for walking, for driving, for carrying weight from one place to the other. And this becomes symbolic of the conflict, and those in the conflict who are trying to reconcile, they have to use us and the intermediary process, this becomes the scaffolding, the matrix of strength that holds up that conversation, relationships, emotions – sometimes it is a painful job, a heavy job, a thankless job – a servant’s job

Yago: The third role is the “conduit”. It is about the practitioner capacity of active listening and deep communication. You say that in the journey of conflict transformation, we are often required to be like a “human sponge”. What do you mean by that? How do you envision the practitioner as a conduit?

Carl: The conduit is something that other substances pass through. It is a form that allows another energy to pass through it. I like the sponge analogy because a sponge is porous which makes it highly absorbent. Likewise, we have to be porous. If we are hard and protect ourselves as a shell we will not be able to function in healthy reciprocity with others. Some practitioners would say, no, we should be able to deflect the anger, emotions, or aggression. When we are dealing with an angry person and they are pouring their rage out, if we deflect that rage or respond in like anger, this is what they are used to, that is what continues the cycle of violence. It keeps the same instinctual reaction and counter-reaction feedback loop in the brain going, and once again this reinforces negative perceptions or prejudices of the “Other”. When we literally or figuratively open our porous self, our inner spirit to absorb another person’s pain, we become a co-healer with that person.

At the same time, we must remain keenly aware that we have the resources that can bring light to bear on the darkness that we have taken from within. When our sponge is very heavy, when it is full, we must know how to squeeze it out so that we are able to absorb again. That’s where the caregiver’s resiliency regimen (taking care of self) becomes vitally important – we can’t do without it. I cannot imagine still being in the peacebuilding field if I didn’t have my grounding faith, my spiritual and physical disciplines, and my family, church and community support networks to keep me balanced; without those pieces the work would not be possible for a long period of time. I have seen many people abandon the cause. I talk about casualties. Not literal, though we have many of those people who die for the cause, but we have just as many casualties of people who emotionally, psychologically or spiritually breakdown and leave the race. I’m talking about brilliant peacebuilders who didn’t have their own internal or external resources to squeeze the sponge out and so, left the field all together, did something totally different, because it was impossible for them to imagine engaging at that depth again without burning out. For me, my self-care has its origins in a spiritual source – a resource beyond myself. My strength does not only come through the support of other people to counsel, coach or debrief with me, it also comes in rituals of prayer, of silence, of exercise, of mindfulness, of meditation, of play, of humor, of worship, of song and study of sacred scriptures, riding motorcycle and many other ways in which we empty ourselves so the Divine (God) can fill us.

Yago: Now you describe the peacebuilder as the “activist.” You say that the activist plays a crucial role in precipitating change and re-ordering social configuration. You use the analogy of the African drum. Could you share with us why?

Carl: Yes, I chose the African drum metaphor carefully just because the African tree and drum are overused analogies. I think about the function of the drum beyond the fact that it makes rhythm when we sing or celebrate, that is the one function that we know the best. However, in ancient times the drum was a communication tool. It helped to communicate to other tribes. It called the people in dispersed villages together for a meeting, for a celebration or for a feast. It also sounded the call to war, in that way it was an instrument for mobilizing people to fight. It was used as a warning signal in the event of ensuing danger. So, when I was looking at advocacy, I liked the idea that the drum represents both a celebration, that can be a form for unity and it can also be a form for war  – of resistence. This kind of tension brings together the ‘yin and yang’ of advocacy. Holding this tension in balance is critical because in our peacebuilding field there are some people who say that advocacy and non-violent strategic action are located in other disciplines, not peacebuilding. 

In my mind, activism is a precursor to social change, a forerunner to durable peacebuilding. We must ignite our ‘moral imagination’ in order to find the energy to work for a future vision of peace. This may involve advocacy to change institutions and structures in a way that feels threatening and disconcerting for some people; it upsets the social structures of the status quo. If we are turning everything upside down, it is upsetting – advocacy is risky business. We will be called troublemakers and ‘rabble-rousers’, and so was Jesus! But I believe that a mature advocate has the horizon of peace in mind, and therefore will not hesitate to stir things up in order to reach that goal. Not because we want trouble, or we want to cause chaos, or we want to destroy for the sake of destruction, but because ultimately we want to build up. Like God commissioned the prophet Jeremiah of the Old Testament, “to uproot, and tear down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant” (Jeremiah 1:10, NIV).

Yago: Another role is “the translator-guide.” You say that facilitation is both an art and a science. You use the analogy of the “bushman tracker.” Could you elaborate on this description?

Carl: The “translator-guide” was an accommodation of words, I couldn’t choose one or the other so, I put them together. The concept of translation became quite real to me personally because I had to use translation in a much of my travel internationally. I was accompanied by translators in many parts of Africa and I realized how extremely important this service was for my work. Not only are your ideas and your words in the hands and minds of someone else, but also your life, and your spirit, the way you want to send the message in all its entirety is in the hands of this translator so, some are good, some are not, some are very well trained. One translator, just on the side, as a joke, said to me, “if I don’t agree with what you are saying then I won’t translate it.” I said, “then, we are going to have a problem!” But the best translators are with you in mind, body and spirit. I can remember, one of the best translators I worked with was from South Africa. He was very bright, and he had a beautiful vocabulary. He could also sense the person he was translating for, so he learnt to mirror me in my tone of voice, in my facial expressions, even in my body action, and he moved with me in such a way that he was almost seamless, before I finished my sentence, he started translating the sentence so there was never a gap, there was this dance between he and I as facilitator and translator.

The other analogy is the tracker, which I think is really interesting because this goes back to the indigenous people of Southern Africa, the Koi San (desert dwellers). They evolved over thousands of years this elaborate process for hunting and to survive, so the men from one generation will pass this oral tradition on. But it was more than an oral tradition, it was the whole body experience – every sensory capacity was being used so that they learned how to walk in such a way that they couldn’t be heard, they learned the way of the seasons, the winds, the clouds, the storms. They could tell the difference between each animal print, even the animal sounds, not only of the different species of course, but from within the same species. For instance, they knew when the baboons were fighting, mating, hungry or sending a message of alarm. Apparently, the baboons make a distinct call when they have come across a lion kill. So, when a good tracker hears this sound he can lead the sightseers close to the lions. They could interpret so much about nature, and the world, and water, and sand and soil, and the sea. Today they have become very popular game reserve ‘tour-guides’ or ‘trackers’ for those who want a truly remarkable wilderness experience. Word has it that these trackers can sneak up, and come very close to large, dangerous predators like lions without being noticed. This was a necessary skill in ancient times in order to get close enough to use the hunting bow or poison dart successfully. 

A good facilitator is like a tracker – they must use all their senses and every intuitive capacity. It is not just a matter of what you see, and what you know, and what comes out of your mouth, it is not just the obvious – it is beyond that. The attentive facilitator can feel the pulse of the group. They are mindful of the temperature of the group, if the participants are tired, confused, angry, frustrated, or bored. A mature facilitator has to understand this. And in many ways, just like the indigenous traditions of the Koi San trackers is being lost, so too, the art of wise facilitation was almost lost when it was reduced to technical, calculated skill-sets and lecture formats that give pre-immanence to the intellectual mind but remain devoid of spirit and soul. There are many other ways in which we know, in which we pass on information, in which we communicate and experience shared community and meaningful collective spaces.

Yago: Another role is the “carrier-catalyst.” Here you bring a beautiful analogy of the African woman carrying her baby on her back.

Carl: And this was a tough one, because I know this was against the literature of the West, which says we are not to “carry” the conflict, we are to be objective, the mediator must put an objective distance between him/herself and give the problem to the actors involved in the conflict. The idea of carrier sounds threatening to them – the mediator is accused of patronizing the parties by “carrying” the conflict for them. The mediator could be accused of allowing the disputing parties to become dependent on him/her by “carrying” the conflict for them.

I don’t mean that the “carrier” role is disempowering. I agree we must empower the parties and the actors in the conflict. But what I am getting at here is that just by the role we have been given and I saw this in Africa, the mediating role was not given to a stranger who was objective, or a paid professional. It was given to someone who carried a lot of social network, a lot of social capital in a village or in a town. They usually had a lot of responsibility. They were leaders and elders in many different sectors of society, and therefore the conflict was one more thing to carry and it was a burden; it was a major responsibility. The mediators are not necessarily carrying the solution to the problem; they are carrying the process. So, that is what I mean by this word “carrier”.

And the analogy of the African women who carries the baby at her back or in front, and carrying the baby wherever, to the market, to work in the farm, to go to work in town, to church, or wherever. The bonding between the mother and the child in that way is amazing. There you are as a mediator carrying the relationship and the task. Likewise, the mother has a lot of things to accomplish when she carries the baby with her. Sometimes the baby is sleeping and sometimes the baby is very active. Sometimes the baby is very unhappy and as the mediator you still have to be the mother so to speak – the midwife in this process.

The catalyst is a scientific term, and this also speaks to our role as mediators. The science world tells us that a catalytic entity is a substance that when combined with another substance can change the form of that other substance without its own form being changed. Now, you don’t want to carry that analogy too far because we also want to be open to be changed in the process of transforming conflict, but not in a negative way. We don’t want to lose our identity, because we become so distracted, distorted, or disturbed by our own trauma, or our own story and we lose track of our role as guide. We are to walk alongside others, accompany others in the conflict, without becoming biased, or falling into the same anger, or the same violence, or the same attitude of hatred – what we call vicarious or secondary trauma.

Yago: In the analogy of the woman and the baby, who is who in the context of conflict?

Carl: Yes, when I say the carrier, I was thinking of the mother carrying the baby as the mediator, and the baby being, if you will, the conflict.

I am doing a mediation right now with some medical professionals at the hospital, until that contract is finished I am carrying it, we have the task and responsibility to take this process with us, until it is finished or resolved or we can lay it down and it can walk in its own.

Yago: And the last role, summarizing all the rest is the peacebuilder as the “healer”. The practitioner is called to be a caregiver, confident and counselor. As you said earlier in the interview peacebuilding requires the coordinated overlap of many disciplines, trauma healing and conflict transformation are intimately linked.

Carl: Our tools of conflict resolution if you will, our skills, our instruments, our techniques are lifeless and useless if they aren’t motivated and energized by a spiritual dynamic and understanding. I must know that what I am doing, the particular skill that I am using is also packaged with healing. It is embedded with the potential to heal, not just to resolve or to manage a conflict or an injustice. In the past century 70% of all casualties of war were women, children, and non-uniformed civilians. Simply put, the way we do war now involves many more civilian casualties than it does military casualties, and therefore we are all working with this thing called trauma all the time in this field and yet we are in denial. Political scientists are in denial if they assume that they can do high-level negotiations between conflicting parties and form a new civilian government without having to deal with psychosocial trauma. I think our negotiations break down over and over again, because of our failure to recognize the trauma, identity and dignity wounds that have occurred in the process of war and violence. Positive peace demands that we take our work beyond just power politics and resource interests and economics. And not only that, many of our tools and techniques require a kind of logic that is not possible unless some of the trauma work is being done first.

In summary, the logics of negotiations or mediation are useless with a highly traumatized population that is suffering from complex post-traumatic-stress symptoms. These processes are best served if they come after or along with meeting the people’s trauma and resiliency needs. And then, taking care of ourselves, as we have already talked about, becomes absolutely essential. Thus, at all levels to deny the trauma flow, and to deny the healing role is to deny at least half of our work. This trauma element is being ignored by much of our political science and international relations studies and practice, and yet we wonder why we don’t see the results we would like to.

The other part of this healing role comes back again to the spiritual and the intuitive. Healing is not a matter of applying one technique everywhere we go. Instead, it is a process of trying to understand the context spiritually – to see the unseen and to understand the ‘story behind the story’ in order to apply the right healing mechanisms. Healing takes different forms depending on the context and the way the healing will be experienced and understood. Once again from my own tradition, if you look at Jesus, he didn’t have one formula for everyone, he had a different formula because He first listened and heard from each individual person as to what they wanted. He looked into their heart, he looked and saw and then he responded to that. 

For instance, the woman caught in adultery, he didn’t cast a demon of adultery out of her, as far as we can tell in the Gospel writings Jesus said to her: “Go and sin no more”. Jesus was in essence saying to her, “you have trapped yourself in a social network of sin, of destructive patterns of behavior and you can make a decision to walk out of that, and I am challenging you, walk out of that”. Jesus was giving her a choice to walk out of brokenness and into healing. I am sure there were other structural matters to be addressed, but for whatever reasons, Jesus knew that she had certain choices that she could make to walk out of this oppression. With others Jesus encountered, they were oppressed by spiritual darkness, and Jesus tapped into the spiritual realm through prayer to change configurations so that these persons were free. Yet others that came to Jesus for healing seemed to suffer from a physical illness alone (like blindness) and there was not a spiritual dynamic to it. This was a natural phenomenon and Jesus would touch the eyes and they were physically healed. Still others were given a spiritual diagnosis. Nicodemus came to Jesus at midnight, and Jesus said to him, “you must be born again”. Jesus was giving a spiritual recipe for healing. He didn’t pray for him to be exorcised from a demon of doubt – you know what I mean?  So we have a tendency to hold to one way of healing and then, we try to apply it everywhere, assuming that there is only one way in which the Spirit works. And I think we need to become attune to the specific context, to the specific need and act intuitively at that point, which means we have to be refilling ourselves with Spirit all the time.

Yago: Thanks for sharing with us the different roles of the peacebuilding practitioner as an intervener. It openly shows the richness and the demands on the field. Certainly, we have got a good guideline for the ongoing reflective discernment we are called to exercise as practitioners.

REDEFINING TRAUMA AND IDENTITY
Insights from an African Context

Ray Motsi, Ph.D. was born in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. He left Zimbabwe at the age of 19 and attended college in England. After he graduated, he learned that there had been a massacre in Zimbabwe. This massacre was part of Robert Mugabe’s Gukurahundi Conflict. He knew it was time to take a stand and make a change. He has dedicated his life to combatting the conflict in Zimbabwe through peace-building and non-violence. President of the Theological College of Zimbabwe (TCZ) since January 1991. Dr. Motsi previously has served as a Baptist pastor in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe for more than 20 years and, in 2002, he founded Grace to Heal, a faith-based organization focusing on community peacemaking and conflict transformation. He graduated from TCZ with a B.A. in Practical Theology in 1990 and then later from the University of Pretoria in South Africa where he earned his M.A. in Old Testament and Hebrew in 2001, and his Ph.D. in Peacebuidling, Conflict Resolution, and Trauma Healing in 2009. 

Yago: Ray, you are welcome to this blog called “Breathing Forgiveness.” In this blog we are aiming at deconstructing the energies of enslavement that keep perpetuating tremendous suffering in today’s world. In this interview we want to be enlightened by your insights and reflections as a peacebuilder practitioner and as a Pastor in the demanding context of Zimbabwe. You have been for decades at the forefront against the Mugabe regime. In the first half of the interview we want to reflect in your understanding of trauma in the African context and also its challenges for pastoral care. In the second half we shall focus in your experience as a church leader and a peacebuilder in the Zimbabwean context.

You are very much concerned about the “post-traumatic stress disorder” (PTSD) approach in the African context. For you is clear that PTSD is not the only measurement for trauma assessment. You say that trauma should not be left to medical psychiatry terms or be limited to PTSD alone. Could you tell us what does it mean PTSD and why is so predominant in the scientific western understanding of right intervention?

Ray: Trauma in African context is not just a psychological problem it is far more than that. It must be realised that trauma must not be removed from its context and it must take into consideration the world view within which it happens. Africans are social-centric by nature and not individualistic as the Westerners. My social and spiritual being is intertwined by the extended family and community. This is our first line of defense. Evidently, trauma in Africa is by and large a social and political ill rather than just a medical pathological problem.

Yago: In the context of your reflection on trauma in cultural context you ask yourself if the Western worldview is better than the African one. How would you answer this question? How would you describe the main characteristics and differences between a Western and African worldview?

Ray: The main difference between the Western world view and the African world view is the cultural emphasis. African culture is based on Ubuntu (I am because we are) We are a community of people not just an individual. I believe that this is also very biblical in its practice.

Yago: The psychological and psychiatry approach of the Western worldview perceive a person as ego-centric self. How does the ego-centric self understands the individual being and its relationship to trauma?

Ray: I am not an expert in Western culture or world view. I am an African, hence I notice and see the differences in the emphasis in terms of practice and approach to life existential crises. When an African is in a crisis he/she looks for family/relative to talk to. After that we will then go to a medical doctor or where ever to seek for help. When one gets sick the whole family is affected. It is not so with the Western people, they look for a doctor to fix it. 

Yago: You say that from an African point of view the dualism which is foundational in psychology and psychiatry will lead to mistreatment of survivors as they become alienated from the community. The western view disregards the social origins and path of mental illness. You point out that most of the world’s population holds on to a more socio-centric conception of the self, where individuals exist within networks of social relationships. How does this conception of the self shapes the understanding  of trauma?

Ray: The conception of the self is the basis of how to understand the whole picture. If therefore the self stands alone and has no relationship with the rest in a meaningful way there is no way anybody who seeks to help that individual should bother about others who may be involved or connected to that person. Trauma is perceived the same way. Psychology and Psychiatry avoid and ignore the social and political milieu within which trauma is caused. Hence, there are no efforts to find ways and means of how to avoid, address the causes of it and stop it from happening again. All PTSD practitioners do is to deal with the individual mental health.

Yago: Mike Wessells, in his article “Trauma, Peacebuilding and Development: An African Region Perspective,” says that the trauma approach has also suffered from ethnocentrism and culture bias. The term ‘trauma’ has in many contexts been a neo-colonial imposition that tends to silence or marginalize local understandings and practices related to mental health and psychosocial well-being. It also reduces local peoples’ sense of dignity, empowerment and positive cultural identity. Are we marginalizing local knowledge coming from the African context?

Ray: The African Culture is marginalised as pagan/traditional. What even educated people forget is that there is no culture that is better than the other. All have strengths and weaknesses and positives and negatives. We would be taking great strides if we could consider positives from other cultures as we deal with trauma. The understanding of the person is based on the cultural value system that the person has been brought up in and what has been acquired educationally or through exposure.

Trauma in Africa is caused by politically motivated  violence and not necessarily war or combat. This violence is community based and it affects the fabric of society and disables the cohesiveness of the society. In order to cover the full gamut of trauma we need to learn from others who have a different context. Trauma has does not have one face it is multifaced and layered.

Yago: You talk about the risk of using pre-packed universal interpretations, definitions, and approaches to psychological suffering and trauma. Can the victim be re-traumatized? Why are we so dependant in the science and in the power of the international scientific community? 

Ray: It is easier to take a western approach in Europe, America and probably Australia. But it is impossible in Africa. Take for an example Rwanda. A million people were killed and as a result over three million people where affected. It takes a psychologist or psychiatrist to certify one person twelve to twenty weeks in order to certify a person as one who suffers from PTSD. How many years would it take us to go through three million people?   Hence in my research I suggested a psychosocial approach as a comprehensive way of handling victims.

Yago: In the African worldview individualism is intertwined with the whole tribe and community and cannot be understood in isolation. So, could we say that a collective identity makes a person be traumatized because of the group being affected? And also that whatever happens to the individual happens to the whole group?

Ray: That is precisely the case for us here in Africa. That is the rational for Ubuntu.

Yago: Wessells says that the dominant focus of the trauma idiom, which in many African countries is PTSD, fails to take into account the on-going, cumulative nature of the distress. The protracted armed conflicts, the tendency of conflicts to spread across national boundaries, the intermingling of conflict and natural disasters such as the current drought, and the prevalence of ongoing sources of distress make it legitimate to ask “where’s the ‘post’ in ‘post-traumatic stress disorder.” What is your view on this regard?

Ray: According to Basoglu M. 1989, this is because of secondary, associated and recurrent trauma.

Yago: Wessells also says that war-affected Africans often report that their greatest sources of distress are not the emotional residues of past violence as suggested by the trauma approach but the large array of interacting stresses of daily living and the destruction of their systems of social support. Would you agree with him?

Ray: The destruction of property/homes, granaries and watching as your neighbours are being killed or beaten up is part of this problem. Sometimes one is forced to rape or kill his or her relative or neighbour in front of the whole community.

Yago: Culture provides the community with a system of values, lifestyles, and knowledge, the disruption of it will have deleterious effect on its members. How would you evaluate the legacy and aftermath of colonization, slavery and the current imposition of neo-liberal economies in the African continent? Can we say that we are in a traumatized continent?

Ray: To say that we were traumatized is overstating the case but we were taken a couple of decades back in more ways than one due to disenfranchisement. The results of colonialism have more disadvantages than advantages. Africa cannot speak with a clear voice due to the divide and rule plan of the West. The attitude of many Africans towards white people emanates from colonial legacy, vestiges and hangovers. Neo-liberalism maintains the western shackles not only on our ankles but in our brains; hence, slavery has taken a different form but it is slavery nevertheless. This slavery is now based on the supply matrix. As long as they can control the supply of money and  other resources then Africa is a playing field for the big teams.

Yago: You also say that the symptoms are not the only way to ascertain trauma. Why?

Ray: Symptoms are signs / indicators that there might be something there and not the final results. The symptoms for trauma are not only unique to traumatised people. This is true because we now know that there are other methods of how to ascertain trauma not necessarily based on symptoms but on hard evidence. People do not respond to the same incident equally because their reaction and response depend on their disposition.

Yago: Let us move to the issue of torture as a traumatic event. Wessells says that “although torture survivors may experience PTSD and other maladies and may benefit from counselling, no amount of counselling will correct the structural violence, human rights violations, and systems of state oppression that produce many forms of trauma.” Do you agree with him?

Ray: Victim of Torture (VOT) is what I am more familiar with because it was the context of my PhD research. Yes I agree with Wessells. If one loses a hand and/ or an eye there is no amount of counseling that can replace that ha limb. The trauma may not be as painful as it was before but it remains traumatic experience. Volf Miroslav confirms that in his Book  “The End of Memory.” 

Yago: You say that by definition torture is a complex phenomenon with interacting social, culture, political, medical, psychological and biological dimension. It can not be adequately be dealt with by a single method. How would you approach people being traumatized by torture?

Ray: A psychosocial approach is what I suggest as a comprehensive way of handling the community and not just individuals. Mobilisation of different groups of expertise and organisations to try and restore and improve the community will hasten the healing.

Yago: Wessels proposes that in place of ‘trauma’, a better term is ‘psychosocial well-being’. He says that this phrase reaches across different levels more easily than does ‘trauma’ yet avoids imparting clinical meanings to distress that have political, economic and historic origins. Would you agree with Mike’s term and approach?

Ray: That was precisely my conclusion in my PhD dissertation. No two people have the same disposition hence there is need for a  psychosocial approach.

Yago: Let us move now to issues of identity. How does our sense of identity affect our resiliency and capacity to navigate in violent and stressful contexts?

Ray: Our sense of identity is based on our world view and who we are. In an African context we have our motivation from a sense of belonging, our history, people and give me the identity that spurs me to live up to the name and family identity. This position is not always true in the western culture.     

Yago: You say that the individuals understanding and the perception of the event will determine how a person is affected and how he/she responds; culture plays a key role in how individuals cope with potential traumatizing experiences. Could you elaborate more in depth these important insights?

Ray: In our case the way in which traumatising events take place is often mixed with tribal, political and religious undertones. These are aspects that connect us to others. The attack is not always aimed at an individual but to the group. These events are sudden, unexpected and beyond one’s control. As a result we look to others to explain or make sense of what happened. If those others are victims  like you then there is a crisis which leads to trauma.

Yago: Shame is the response to helplessness, the violation of bodily, family and tribal integrity. How much shame distorts our real human identity?

Ray: It depends on what you call real. The fact that my wife/mother is raped in my presence takes away my identity as an African man who should protect his family from intruders and harm. My real identity is with my people and not as an individual. Tribal integrity is passed on and demonstrated by men within the clan. If therefore men become helplessness it means that tribe be ashamed amongst others and becomes a laughing object. The tribe is vulnerable, voiceless and weak. 

Yago: You say that the more control people can exercise on a situation, the less they suffer from diverging symptoms and cope better in general. Could you expand on this?

Ray: Control over one‘s life gives a sense of responsibility and assurance that I am myself. But if I cannot have responsibility of myself and my circumstances then it is easier to be attacked from outside. Being able to cope with personal problems is a sign of personal inner resolve and  functionality.

Yago: In developing effective psychosocial programs, it is vital to start from an analysis of how the affected people understand their situation and regard as their greatest problems. You say that it is about the importance of working with a critical eye. This is a quite challenging approach inviting the practitioner to develop active listening and profound respect for the experience of the other. Isn’t it?

Ray: It is not the practitioner who  has a problem and therefore we must start with those that are not well by asking them to explain their pain/trauma or problem. There is a methodology called Empathy and Distanciation. Social scientist have now realised that there is no way one can engage a traumatised person and remain totally objective. Using empathy and distanciation will enable the practitioner to be empathetic but to also distance one’s self from the victim. To do this, one needs certain skills  and  experiences without a doubt. This is called “narrative social reconstruction” by Pollard.

Yago: You say that “quiet often trauma has to involve a betrayal of trust.” The shattering of one’s sense of connectedness between individual and community creates a crisis of faith. Could you explain how influential this is in the African sense of self?

Ray: First and foremost the betrayal is a personal one where one thinks he/she lost control of one’s self. Secondly, it is on the part of the family or community that did not protect me during my ordeal. Trauma’s major effect is inward even though the causes are by and large outward. Because of the shattering of the sense of self one cannot be able to build meaningful relationships. Hence, lack of connectedness.  

Yago: You define trauma from a psychosocial perspective. Could we say that the image/concept of a broken social fabric is fundamental in the understanding of trauma in the African context?

Ray: Absolutely, the social fabric plays the role of the second line of defense. When one fails to protect oneself then the community jumps in and where there is no community/family particularly extended the crisis is worse.

Yago: You are asking for an integrated and inter-disciplinary approach. In which way psychosocial programmes are likely to increase the survivors’ own coping resources?

Ray: The possibility of individuals coping with multiple approaches is far better than a single phased approach. People do not respond the same to an incident.

Yago: Finally, you say that the ongoing discussion about how useful or limited this diagnosis of PTSD and how widely it should be used, especially in large-scale ongoing traumatic events in both western and non western societies should not distract us from the task ahead. Which is the task ahead of us?

Ray: The task ahead is to care for the survivors of torture, victims of injustices, survivors of and prisoners of war and abused people. We can not wait until we have come up with a methodology that is acceptable to all.

Rodrigo Mejía Saldarriaga, born in Medellín (Colombia) in 1938. Entered the Society of Jesus  (The Jesuits) in 1956.  After obtaining his Master in Philosophy and Classical Letters he was sent as a missionary to the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1964 for three years after which he resumed his studies of Master in Theology at the  Xaveriana Pontifical University in Bogotá (Colombia) and his Doctorate in Theology at the Pontifical  Gregorian University in Rome. Back in Congo, he was Rector of the St. Peter Canisius Jesuit  Institute of Philosophy in Kinshasa until 1984 when he was sent to Nairobi in order to be one of the co-founder members of the staff of the newly started Hekima College as well as the newly born Catholic University of East Africa (CUEA) where he taught Pastoral Theology. At the same time he also co-founded the Parish of St. Joseph The Worker in the slum area of Kangemi in Nairobi in 1985, where he used to reside. In  1995 he was appointed Provincial Superior of the Jesuits in Eastern Africa.  In 1998 he was assigned to Ethiopia where he was General Secretary of the Archdiocese of Addis Ababa.  In 2007 he was consecrated Bishop of the Apostolic Vicariate of Soddo-Hosanna. In 2013, reached the limit of canonical age, he became Bishop Emeritus of Soddo and returned to Nairobi. He currently lives in the Jesuit Spirituality Centre of Mwangaza, in Karen (Nairobi) and gives spiritual retreats.

Yago: Bishop Rodrigo Mejía, in this interview we would like to study how Pope Francis envisions Joy as a essential transformative attitude to deal with injustices in today’s world. 

You say that “The Joy of the Gospel” is Pope Francis’ program. What do you mean by that?

Bishop Rodrigo Mejía: He himself, in the text of the Apostolic Exhortation itself, said that this is not just a document as usual. He says, “I want to emphasize that what I am trying to express here has a programmatic significance and important consequences” (No. 25). Programmatic significance means this is his program. If a Catholic asks, “Where is Pope Francis willing to orient the Church in the years to come?” The response is in the line of the Joy of the Gospel. Besides, in the same Exhortation he says “I was happy to take up the request of the Fathers of the Synod to write this exhortation” (No. 16).

Q: Why precisely “The Joy of the Gospel”? How relevant is this term?

Bishop Rodrigo: I think that he realizes that living in a time of crisis for the Church, as is our situation today, evangelizers can grow weary, perhaps because they are older or because there are less vocations, or because of the accusations against priests. On the other hand, evangelizers face great challenges, widespread violence, terrorism, human trafficking, etc. Evangelizers can become discouraged, thinking, “the challenges are too many and too great.” So, the Pope says that we cannot allow pessimism to overwhelm us; he says that we have to keep the joy of evangelizing and the joy of being evangelized. And he says that if we allow this to be our missionary impulse, this is what would make possible a new period for the Church, a renewal of the Church. It is joy that will renew the Church. In the first chapter he explains very well what kind of joy he is talking about. It is not a superficial enthusiasm but is a kind of renewal of the motivation that, with the help of the Spirit, who is there always, we can renew the Church and we can renew evangelization. I think this joy is a fact that he has communicated not only to the Church, in his own personal messages and actions, but even to those outside the Church. We can say that, by at large, people are happy with the Pope. This happiness is the joy of seeing that a renewal is possible, a new evangelization is possible.

Q: You say that “The Joy of the Gospel” coexists with suffering, even is produced by suffering. What do you mean by this?

Bishop Rodrigo: It is not the joy of victory. It is not the joy of complacency about what we have achieved. It is the joy of knowing for Whom and for what we are struggling. And that is a joy similar to the joy of an athlete who is training for a long distance race. The training of such an athlete demands sacrifice, self-discipline, self-denial, many hours on the track and in the gym, abstention from alcohol, fidelity to proper diet, etc. Such sacrifices are undertaken willingly and in joy because of the goal. With all the more reason the evangelizer should be one who is willing to undergo struggle and hardship because he can be sure of attaining the goal for which he sacrifices and strives, because he can be sure that the Lord will be faithful to his promise. “I will be with you until the end of time.” So, in moments of trials and difficulties and indeed through the evangelizer truly arrives at his goal. No joy is stable, durable, and solid, without a cost. Our sufferings, hardships and challenges are but the human collaboration we have to offer for that; but once we are convinced of the joy, we are ready to pay the price.

Q: Does desolation takes away “The Joy of the Gospel”?

Bishop Rodrigo: Desolation may come. In addition, inclinations to pessimism and discouragement may come, but Pope Francis reminds us that we have a responsibility to allow such movements to shape our lives or to oppose them. Such should be our response when we recognize such movements, to use the vocabulary of Saint Ignatius of Loyola, as not coming from the “good spirit”, precisely because they work to divide or separate us from the joy of the Kingdom. In moments of desolation we have to assess their meaning, whether they have a meaning, may be a test, or an instance of the dark night of the soul, as John of the Cross observes. It is not uncommon in the lives of the saints to have moments of darkness or cloudiness. Even Moses had to enter into the cloud to meet Yahweh. It is normal, it is human, but we should not allow ourselves to be shaped and overcome by such moments. We have to continue faithfully our pilgrimage, the journey of evangelization, even in the face of such struggles.

Q: The Beatitudes are the charter and the wisdom of the Kingdom. You invite us to take the Beatitudes as the final reference for our examination of conscience and also for the preparation of the sacrament of reconciliation. Could you expand on this?

Bishop Rodrigo: Many translations in English use the word blessed when translating each of the Beatitudes. It is a very liturgical word because a blessing is a liturgical ceremony. And we also say in our prayers “blessed be you Lord God of all creation.” God blesses us but we also bless Him, and we glorify Him, we proclaim Him happy. This is to worship God. In the Beatitudes the better English translation would be happy. It is more faithful to the original Greek “makarios”. It means a real happiness, a durable joy that is not limited to this life, but that will be fulfilled in the joy of eternal life. Now, this is the joy of the Beatitudes which is not the joy centred in myself but it is the joy of serving, the joy of doing the will of God. When I am convinced, through faith, that I am doing what God wants, even if I suffer, I am happy because I am sure I am serving the Lord. It is like the soldier who fights willingly and with devotion when he knows that there is purpose and meaning to his cause. There is a reason for joy. The Beatitudes are the charter of the Kingdom of God. They are the portrait of Jesus himself at the same time. That’s why we could use them more as a mirror, as an aide to our examination of conscience, and not just for daily life but also in preparation for our confession. We usually do not kill, steal, or commit adultery, but it is more common that we lose enthusiasm, react with anger, lose patience, lack meekness, fear being persecuted for justice, remain silent when we should speak, etc. The Beatitudes could help us to make a fuller examination of our motivations and attitudes, and especially as evangelizers in the light of the joy and happiness called forth in us by the Beatitudes.

Q: Pope Francis in n. 33 is inviting us to be bold and creative in the task of rethinking the goals, structures, style, and methods of evangelization. We have to avoid the mere pastoral of maintenance. What are the consequences of this statement? Why is Pope Francis so blunt in this intention?

Bishop Rodrigo: I think that he realizes that we are still keeping structures that were useful and good for the Church in the past but that are not responding to the present needs, the present mentality, the new generations, the new social situations. We may think that these structures are untouchable. We may declare them part of the tradition of the Church and this is not always the case. These structures are not to be identified with dogmas. They can change and they should be updated or replaced. We have to find a way of proceeding that is more meaningful to contemporary people. That is in general. In particular, the Pope is working with a group of nine cardinals to bring some important innovations. This includes a revision of the constitution of the Roman Curia, a work that has already been underway for more than two years and which would see a revision of the structures and organization of the hierarchy. This may include new ways of relating between Rome and the Bishops’ Conferences (not only the bishops at national level, but also the regional Bishop’s conferences, like AMECEA, SECAM, etc.) and greater collegiality in decision making, more autonomy in certain domains, etc. We do not know because this has not been published, but we expect a simplification of the processes of the administration in the Vatican. The Pope has already started this process, but he is also inviting, even at the level of parishes, a participation in the revision of our structures of catechesis, our structures of lay involvement, and our structures of pastoral work at all levels combined with an assessment of their relevance and meaningfulness in today’s world.

Q: We are talking about the risk of clericalism.

Bishop Rodrigo: In the old versions of Canon Law there were some structures that were presented as originated explicitly by divine will, and therefore, incapable of being changed precisely because they were supposed to be ordained by the will of God, that is, instituted, directly or indirectly by Christ. However, this does not apply to all the ecclesial structures, and it is these latter structures which the Church may and in appropriate circumstances should revise.

Q: You say that the problem is: doing things in the same way while expecting different results.

Bishop Rodrigo: Exactly, that is what the Pope means. We cannot continue doing things in the same way we have been doing for 2000 years and expect new results, because if the method is the same, the results will be the same. So, if we want to expect better results, we have to alter our way of proceeding.

Q: You also mention that joy is related to creativity. You talk about the creative joy. How are joy and creativity connected?

Bishop Rodrigo: Creativity in human terms engenders joy. An artist can spend hours painting, without a concern for time, and he is happy while he is working and not only when the work is finished. In a sense he is happy not because he has finished the work but he is happy with the process. If the process is just repetitive, is monotonous, is routine, it is very difficult that it begets joy. You need a lot of faith to do the same thing every day and express joy. Creativity can bring the joy of newness.

Q: Pope Francis is inviting us to revise our motivation for evangelization. What are the risks and challenges we are facing as pastoral agents?

Bishop Rodrigo: The Pope identifies motivations as presenting both challenges and temptations. The reason is that we may be evangelizers having good intentions of course. Nobody evangelizes with bad intention. However, there are also intentions and motivations that coming not from the Holy Spirit but from the world, like ecclesiastical ambitions for power, promotion, honour, advancement, prestige, etc. That’s why he told the new cardinals not to allow people to call them “princes of the Church”. The quest for honour, prestige, power, comfort, and so on, should not be the guiding motivation of evangelists. That’s why he is puts us on the alert to purify our motivations. We evangelize because we have received this mission from the Holy Spirit.

Q: Can we discover perfect joy in darkness?

Bishop Rodrigo: Darkness is an ambiguous term. Darkness is a state of spirit more than an outside situation. We may discover joy in suffering and in being tested. Darkness means more an absence of joy, a feeling of desolation. And darkness in the gospel of John is also equivalent to sin. The power of darkness is the power of sin. I would not say darkness, but we certainly can have joy in the middle of suffering or being tested. As Martin Luther King expresses very well: “I have never been so free as when I am now, here in prison.” To have been in prison for such a noble cause was for him something that gave him pride and joy, a sense of satisfaction in his suffering. That is what Peter and John express after they were flogged for the first time by the Sanhedrin. They came back joyful at having been found worthy of suffering for the sake of the Name. If they suffer for the sake of the Name, that means they have been graced by God to undergo this trial.

Q: You and Pope Francis differentiate between obligation and impulse. What do you mean when relating it to Joy?

Bishop Rodrigo: Obligation may have a negative connotation. “I do that by obligation” I do not like it, I do not feel committed to that, I do not feel any joy in doing that, but I do because I am obliged to do. This is to do things out of duty, as a burden, as something coming from outside, imposed. This is not the attitude in the mission because this attitude does not reflect joy. But, you should do the things out of missionary impulse, this impulse is motivation coming from grace, from the Holy Spirit, it is giving you the joy of doing that. Externally someone may judge that what you are doing is difficult and that’s why sometimes people would ask if we do not find it difficult to go to mass every day, to pray, to obey, to have vows, etc. But it is also possible to under these routines freely. And such routines freely undertaken can give rise to an altogether different experience, an experience of liberation, happiness and joy. Vocation implies a free choice not an obligation.

Q: The risk of individualism in the Church and its relation to mission as a personal calling.

Bishop Rodrigo: Christ gives the mission in the Gospels to concrete persons. In the Gospels, the Apostles receive a mandate to go on mission as a group. The Great Commission of Matthew’s Gospel instructs the Apostles to “go and preach the Gospel” to all nations. But the Apostles have been chosen personally. Hence, there are the two elements here; the personal calling and the communal or ecclesial dimension in the mission. The mission is personal because the response to the call has to be personal, as it is very clearly in the passage of Luke in relation to the annunciation to Mary, “let it be done to me according to your will.” In this sense, we should avoid comparing missions because each one has his or her own mission, as in the body there are different missions, i.e. the personal aspect is to give an account of my mission. However, by individualism we understand here an action planned and done in isolation, without any reference to the mission of the community: I do not mind what the mission of the Holy Spirit is and I do not know what the mission of the group is. I have my own calling and “charism”, and I go ahead alone. That is precisely what Pope Francis intends to reject and to condemn, especially at the beginning of his Apostolic Exhortation. We have to avoid a kind of competitive, protagonist and individualistic approach in which I become the centre of the mission and I tend to feel look at myself as indispensable to the mission and to make every success of the mission depending on my own. Sometimes pastoral agents feel so indispensable that they cannot be moved from “their mission”. They are not available for other missions. We have to avoid that in the new evangelization. In the past, because of the lack of personnel, the missionaries were working alone very often, without a team. That situation enhanced this individualism, if the missionary was changed, he or she moved with his or her benefactor because they were friends helping him or her more than they were friends helping him or her more than helping the mission. This is what we have to avoid in the new evangelization. We have, more and more, to work as a team; for practical reasons, because if at any time we lack help, the mission does not depend on one individual. I recall here the traditional Zulu Proverb: “If you want to go fast, walk alone; but if you want to go far, walk with others”.

Q: How do you understand the Kingdom of God?

Bishop Rodrigo: The kingdom of God is a plan or a program. The kingdom of God and the plan of salvation for me are interchangeable. It is where God may be the point of reference for everything. The king is the head, the king is the point of reference for all people, the king unites the people, and the king rules over them and so a perfect kingdom is a kingdom of peace and justice. It is described very well in the preface of the feast of Christ the King; a kingdom of justice. It is not a territory. The evangelist Matthew never speaks of Kingdom of God, he speaks about the Kingdom of heaven; the reason is that for his Jewish sensitivity, it is better to avoid the name of God. He is a Jew writing to the Jewish community, but the kingdom of God and the Kingdom of heaven have the same meaning in the Gospels. Today the tendency among some exegetes is to translate kingdom as “kingship” underlining, not a territory, but the sovereignty of God over creation and over all humankind, to unify, to make all things one. Such is the idea in Saint Paul: to make heaven and earth only one unit. Now, this involves fundamentally a communion with God. There was an interpretation at the beginning of the past century that the kingdom of God was completely interior, completely personal, and spiritual and therefore invisible. The kingdom of God is fulfilled when I, as an individual and as a person, receive and accept the faith in my heart. So the kingdom of God is within me. It is true in a sense that if we accept in faith and we receive the message of the gospel and we live it in ourselves, we are in the Kingdom of God. However, we cannot reduce the kingdom of God to a purely individual and private reality. Those who have received the gospel create interrelations that are visible and show the kingdom of God as a new people, a new Israel, a new creation even. Others, especially in the past, identify the Kingdom of God and the Church. The Church would be identical with the Kingdom of God on earth. Today this is not accepted in Ecclesiology. There is a distinction between Kingdom and the Church. The Church is a sacrament, an instrument, a symbol, and a herald of the Kingdom and tries to live the spirit of Kingdom in itself; but the real consolation and fulfilment of the Kingdom is eschatological. As long as we are still pilgrims on earth, we are on the way of the kingdom. It is true that those who are on the way, in a sense they are already in the Kingdom because Jesus said, “I am the way”. That is why we pray in “Our Father”: “your kingdom come” every day.

Q: You say that tradition is not a simple repetition. You also say that we live in a living tradition. What do you mean by that? How do the present and the future relate with tradition?

Bishop Rodrigo: If we take an example from nature, it may help us to understand. We see here in Africa weaverbirds; they make their nest very nicely, but they never change the model. They cannot innovate or improve even their model. They are working by instinct and by repetition. The repetition may give you skills, but the repetition alone does not give you the capacity to question whether what you are doing is the best way or not, or whether the result can be improved or not. So, the element of improvement, progress, and creativity is not present in the simple fact of repetition, and that’s why what we have to examine tradition, we have to examine how relevant this tradition is today. Is what we are repeating from the past understood and relevant for today? Do people appreciate it today? Is it a symbol that continues to appeal? What tradition meant to maintain is the value conveyed through these repetitions. Can we convey these same values today in another way? Once people, jokingly, said to a bishop “you have to love tradition” and the bishop replied, “yes, I love tradition very much, and that’s is way I want to start new ones”… Someone wrote: “We have to be faithful to the fire of our ancestors, not to its ashes”.

Q: Good intention is not enough for evangelization. Could you expand on this?

Bishop Rodrigo: Good intention means good will. The person says. “I do not have bad intentions; I want to do good to people”. However, good intention needs to be submitted to the test of discernment, because with good intentions alone you can still make mistakes. If the good intention is an act of the will only, it may be an act of emotions or feelings, and with good intentions you can make a mistake; even a person treating a sick person with good intention but not having the least notion of medicine can do the contrary thing. For example, if a person, victim of a car accident is laying down motionless, the first thing is to say “don’t move until the paramedics come” because the person may have a fracture. In fact, by moving the wounded in an abrupt way the fracture may get worse, even if done with good intention. The same happens in our mission: if we do not submit it to the discernment and consult with the community, we can make serious pastoral mistakes with “good intention”.

Q: You say that we have to change the poles. God does not need our love. Could you explain more on this?

Bishop Rodrigo: We cannot say that God created the world and humankind because he was missing something. God was not missing anything; he created freely and out of love because love tends to communicate. Now, He loves us and He is fulfilled in his love. He is not deficient. If I don’t love him, anthropologically we say we offend him, we sadden God, God is not happy etc. This is our way of expressing that our relations are broken and in the parable of the prodigal son, Jesus himself compares God with the father of the prodigal son. It is clear that the father is missing his son humanly speaking. However, he is missing his son out of love, of course. Now, we have to avoid two extremes, that God is really missing something because we are making him incomplete, or we are disturbing his infinite joy, in other words, we cannot disturb his infinite joy; but the other extreme is to think that God is indifferent, for God is the same whether we love him or not. This is not true because the response, the positive response of love, is dialogue with the beloved. That is why that appears in the prayer for unity; keep them in the unity in the chapter 17 of John. “As the father loves, I love you”. If God remains indifferent how could He be compassionate? The main point is that the love, with which we love Him, comes also from Him, not from us. John is very clear in his first letter: “It is not we who have first loved Him but He who loved us first. God is the source of any genuine love.

Q: Could we say that outside love there is no salvation?

Bishop Rodrigo: Yes, I prefer this statement; “outside Love that there is no salvation”, instead of the traditional, “outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation”. Why? Because the love of God is not confined to the Church and this is developed in the First Letter of John. “God is love and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him” (1 John 4: 16). Therefore, love for one another can happen inside the Church or outside the Church. And in the final analysis is love that will save the people. Matthew 25:31-46, in the parable of last judgment, wrote, “I was hungry…” many people will say, “When did you see you? We did not know the gospel, we did not recognise you, and we were not in the Church. Yes, but whoever visited me, made an act of love, come to my kingdom. That is why love provides a better image, a better description of the salvific action of God beyond the visible belonging to the Church.

Q: Marianne Williamson says that our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. Do we fear resurrection? Do we know how to preach resurrection?

Bishop Rodrigo: Well, we, people, in general, are afraid of death but it is, for a good part, because we do not have the conviction of resurrection. Many, even Christians, may hold resurrection as a theoretical truth, and we cannot even imagine what resurrection is. Usually resurrection, in popular religiosity, is comparable to re-animation or resuscitation; it is to resume the same body that we have, and to continue, to re-start a living like Lazarus. We call it the resurrection of Lazarus, in fact Lazarus was not resurrected theologically, he was resuscitated, he was re-animated (and I don’t know whether he was very happy by the way, to start again dealing with his life…). Resurrection means a new life, and of course, of this new life, we do not have experience, it is a matter of faith. We cannot imagine it because nobody has come to describe to us what the situation in the afterlife is. We know by the data of the Gospel that our bodies will be transformed and in that Paul insists that our identity will be maintained. We will be identified as Jesus was identified after his resurrection, but his body was a glorious body not the same identical earthly body. This is the only information we have about the resurrection of Jesus, as a model, but Paul has a larger idea of resurrection. This is the resurrection after death, but there is also a spiritual resurrection from sin, from the death of sin, and in that resurrection, we are already risen with Christ. We are already participating in the life that we are going to have later on. How? By Grace and in the Spirit. This is why Paul teaches “we are new creatures” (Letter to the Galatians), we are renewed in Baptism. That is the ritual of baptism in Easter, when the paschal candle is put into the water, Christ is symbolized descending to the realm of the dead to bring them resurrect to new life as the candle is brought from the water, this is the symbol of our spiritual resurrection. And if we are resurrected with Christ, wrote Paul to the Colossians, let us look for the things that are above where Christ is in glory. I mean we have to change our life. However, we have to have this joy of the gospel permanently because we are already risen with Christ. This is not so well understood and this is why we, priests, do not preach enough about this kind of resurrection.

Q: Could you go deeper on your statement “we are resurrected already”?

Bishop Rodrigo: Yes! We are resurrected from the power of sin, we are resurrected from the darkness of ignorance, we are resurrected from slavery to passions, and from the slavery of the power of darkness, the power of sin, and in that sense we are free, we can call God “Abba” Father. These all are signs of resurrection.

Q: Pope Francis was also inviting Consecrated Men and Women to keep watch. It is an invitation to prophecy but also to mindfulness. What can you say on this?

Bishop Rodrigo: What Pope Francis wants is what Vatican II already suggested in the decree of the Renewal of Religious Life. The danger is that religious life may become a ghetto, a kind of community in which everyone feels secure, is talking the truth, praying, living in community but not having any concern or any impact in the civil society around them; and that means we do not know what is happening and the prophetic aspect of Religious Life is lost. Many Christians consider the monks, the monasteries, and the religious life, as if they do not belong to this society, as though they do not belong to this world. By being religious, we should become not angelic but more human, more interested in what is happening around us and more ready to see it with the eyes of faith. When we discern that something is positive, we encourage people, but when we see signs that are not in the line of the kingdom of God, we denounce the evils of society. However, if we are not aware of what is happening, how can we have an impact in society? Our religious communities should be aware of what is happening in society, and discern what is happening in order to tell the people “keep watch.”

Q: Pope Francis is inviting us to a critical contemplation of our world. Are we equipped to do that? Do we have the skills to look at the root causes?

Bishop Rodrigo: Yes, certainly, because our pastoral theology as a theological discipline has developed very much in the last years. Pastoral theology is a real critical reflection on the action of the Church in the world, questioning and seeking meaningful answers to such questions as what we are doing? the demands of the gospel? the mandate of Christ? the meaning of that mandate? the receptivity of that mandate? the action of the Church-ad-intra? and so on. Our pastoral theology provides us with important indicators, parameters, dimensions,  but of course we must employ them. When I am invited in a school, for example, how are these dimensions present in that school? We may think that the diakonia is very well because we are giving the service of education, but that school may lack koinonia, that is, communion with the parents, with families. Indeed we have aids to assessing our actions. But very often we don’t use them and this is the problem. The invitation of Pope Francis is to be more attentive and not to be afraid of being critical of our own actions with a view to being of greater service, not with a view of seeing only shortcomings and being discouraged, not with a view to being prophets of doom, as he says, but with a view of encouraging and doing better.

Q: Pope Francis is inviting us to evangelize, not only persons but also structures and politics. How can we do this?

Bishop Rodrigo: We can do it at two levels, if we take into consideration that structures come from people. People produce social structures and we have to be aware of their interaction. On the other hand, structures also shape the mentality/minds of people. So there has to be a strategy that would deal with both dimensions. A critical analysis of the structure itself (objective), be it the structure of education, health, culture, religion, etc., in the society. Here I analyse concrete structures objectively: are they helpful for our society today yes or not? Are they against the values of the Kingdom of God? This, irrespectively of who created that structure or where it comes from. On the other hand, we have to make people aware that some structures may be harmful for the society, that they are not as effective and fair as they were in the past. It is our duty, as a new generation, to revisit our own structures and not to be afraid of recognizing structures of the past that are no longer appropriate, even if they have a long tradition. Humankind by itself spontaneously makes such adjustments. We come from a system of government that consisted only in absolute monarchies, only kings, everywhere. Now from kings they came into republic and then republic, and then democracy and participation and from republic, federal republic, parliamentary republic, and so on. Society itself is reflective. We have to contribute to that common reflection proposing the changes of structures that we think, from the ethical point of view, that are better for society. In the Catholic Social Teaching of the Church, we have a fantastic guide and instrument for this structural discernment.

Q: How can we evangelize the current economic structures ruling the world?

Bishop Rodrigo: The first step is to see the situation and describe properly what is happening. A past idea was to produce more richness, more money, and more technology in order to be able to be able to redistribute it. Unfortunately, the result was more accumulation of riches in the hands of a few people, resulting in a bigger gap between the rich and the poor. This is a fact. It is up to us to analyse that and to make it known that the people are suffering in following this model. It is not because of the collapse of Communism that the Capitalistic approach of globalisation is good. It is not good, there is a structural sin there. There is ambition, lack of control, subjection to a dictatorship of the free Market. This is idolatry of economy. We need to change that structure. That is the first step. The second step is to examine what we can propose. What kind of alternative models of economy are better? That is more difficult because it requires skills, professional reflection, and in that the Church has a rich resource in properly motivated professional lay people. This is a real “lay ministry” and we can co-opt people who know deeply and are familiar with international market, international monetary funds, etc., qualified people who can propose new ways. They are the Church also!

Q: What about evangelizing the structures within the Catholic Church?

Bishop Rodrigo: The Pope is very much aware that there is a need to revise these structures. He affirms that from the very beginning of the Exhortation (No. 32). One structure is centralism. We were taking centralism in the past as a symbol of unity, and it is true, it was. However, the Pope says that too much centralism does not help the Church today, that there has to be more collegiality. Collegiality is another structure. It was accepted at Vatican II but the pope notes in the instruction that we have not advanced very far in implementing collegiality. Collegiality is having the capacity of decision-making in common even at a local level, of more autonomy, more responsibility to the particular Churches. So far, collegiality is officially recognized only in the ecumenical councils where the Bishops decide even dogmatic things, by majority voting, always in union with the Pope.  Collegiality is not a matter of putting the Pope aside. However, the structure of the Synod of Bishops has to be revised, and it is being revised, and in fact the pope has already introduced some important changes. In the last meeting of the previous year, the pope changed the structures telling the bishops to “speak boldly, honestly and frankly and to listen with humility”. Nor were their remarks to be limited to 3 or 4 minutes and the bishops were allowed even to contradict one another. These were important examples of collegiality and the recognition that at the universal level it is impossible, more and more impossible, to give uniform rules appropriate to every local Church. Such might have been possible and necessary in the past. Why? Because we were living in the Christendom mentality, but now the Christendom is finished, and you can see that, even in Europe, we cannot talk about Christian countries, even catholic countries. So, each episcopal conference, each local Church has to take its responsibility. Such is an example of evangelising structures.

Q: You also talk about ecological structures. What are they?

Bishop Rodrigo: The ecological structures are the policies, international or national, that the different governments have, because they are responsible for the common good, for the protection of the atmosphere and the environment. Now if we pollute and poison the environment, we are damaging the common good. Therefore, there is an ethics in the dealing with creation. The book of Genesis is very clear: “master creation”, not “destroy creation”. Therefore, it is not that we cannot use creation, that we cannot cut a tree, and utilize nature. It is not that. We can utilize nature but we have to be mindful of generations that are to come. In addition, we should utilize creation in such a way that the side effects of our usage is not more detrimental that the progress we are pursuing. Such consideration are part of the ethics of the common good. Therefore, evangelising these structures means examining them first, critically, and also saying how we can minimise the damage, how can we avoid pollution, etc. Here, again, in the Catholic Social Doctrine, we have solid principles about environment and integrity of creation and that is part of evangelisation.

Q: Pope Francis talks about a “globalization of indifference” happening in today’s world. What does he mean by that?

Bishop Rodrigo: Well, he uses globalisation in the sense of generalisation. In fact, in the face of such big problems that emerge at the international level and that are decided at high levels – the United Nations, the Security Council, and so on – we can ask, “What can I, as an individual, do?” As an individual, I can do nothing or very little; therefore, for me all remains the same. I hear the news, I watch the TV, I learn of victims of terrorism, of migrants drowning, etc. Since I can do nothing, I become insensitive; nothing tortures me because every day the news is the same, the same disasters. Therefore, at that moment, if they ask my opinion, or they ask my collaboration, I would say: “I can do nothing”, I enter into a situation of indifference, for me this is normal that people die from Ebola or AIDS; it’s normal; especially if I am not living in that situation. This indifference affects much more the people who live in affluent societies, with comfort, and a quality of life that is very far geographically and humanly from these problems. When we live in isolation, as in an ivory tower, we feel protected. We tend even to justify these evils, “this is life, life is like that, you see, the big fish eats the small fish”, or “it has always been like that”. Others can go even further and think: “this is the plan of God; this is the will of God, the survival of the fittest”.

Q: Is it the Church integrating the Social Doctrine of the Church into her proclamation? Is the Social Doctrine of the Church well understood by pastoral agents?

Bishop Rodrigo: I would say that at the Social Doctrine of the Church is certainly influencing the ordinary magisterium of the Pope’s teachings and the documents of the different Roman Congregations. I see more and more that this is the case. If you read attentively, the Joy of the Gospel you will see that it refers several times to the Catholic Social Teaching of the Church. However, at the popular level, this continues to be our “best kept secret”. Because people do not know much about Catholic Social Teaching and can think that we don’t have qualified people to teach it to the people. We think that we need to be great experts in sociology, anthropology, economy, and all kinds of disciplines. It helps, but if you read the Compendium of Catholic Social Doctrine and the Encyclical letters, you will see that they were addressed to common people and the Compendium has a common language, although the Compendium – the great initiative of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace – is still quite large. It is a reference book, it is not a book to put in the hands of a common Catholic or a common Christian. What we need in order to make it known is a vulgarize version of the Social Teaching of the Church. Short manuals, perhaps by topics or problems (ecology, races, slavery, economy… whatever) might be more effective. Such, unfortunately, does not exist in Africa. Another thing that I see is that there is a very good will in starting Justice and Peace Commissions at different levels. One of the main tasks of JPC is precisely to make known the social teachings of the Church at the popular level. Something is being done, for example, here in Kenya, through the Lenten campaigns. It is a good idea during the Lenten Season to take a topic and make it known at the parish level and to Small Christian Communities. The JPC publishes such booklets in English and Swahili for the use of communities. Something is done, for sure, but the problem is that still we are not working in much collaboration. We are rather dividing our energies a lot. There is a JPC for women Religious, there is JPC for men Religious, there is a JPC for the Bishop’s Conference, there is JPC for the Universities, etc. I have contacted members of all of them, practically, and they do not know each other, nor do they know what the others are doing. This is what, jokingly, I tell them, “you are very evangelical because the right hand does not know what the left is doing”.

Q: You talk about balancing proclamation and denunciation. Could you expand on this?

Bishop Rodrigo: It is easy to denounce, to protest is easy. When we see a problem to cry and to criticise is comparatively easy. It may be done with the best of intentions, but it is not always done in an enlightened fashion. The great challenge is to take action that would also strive to bring about improvement. What do we do to avoid or improve shortcomings? Do we expect everything to come from above? After the proclamation, comes the question. Such was the situation of John the Baptist and the question to Peter from the first converted: brethren, what must we do? And that is why I stress that even in proclamation we can produce good documents, telling what to do. But the next step is implementation of the proclamation.

Q: Religion is undergoing the risk of becoming privatized. How?

Bishop Rodrigo: A major reason for this is the misunderstanding of religion. This is not new, it has always been, even in the times of Jesus, and in the Old Testament: religion is frequently regarded as one’s private relations with God. My spiritual life (prayer) with God; confession is asking forgiveness from God, the sacraments are asking the grace of God, everything I relate to God, vertically to heaven. Therefore, it is my own responsibility. And when I die, I will be judged personally, and I have to give account of my life to God, not to anybody else. On the other hand, many have a kind of scepticism towards those who represent religion socially: the priests, and the pastors. Jesus Christ, the Gospel, that is very nice, but not the Church, the Church has many defects: priests do not preach well, they do not prepare their homilies or they have limitations and failings, and so on. And Therefore, there may be mistrust of the Church. And when I do not accept the aspect of communion with the others, I am happy with communion with God alone. That is precisely what the First Letter of Johnstresses. If one is not in communion with his brothers, how can he claim to be in communion with God? These are often false pretexts to justify a “comfortable” and private religion. However, we do must realise that religion is “re-ligare” (to bind together): in religion we are bound together with God and with the others.

Q: You say that we have to evangelize cultures in order to enculturate the Gospel. Why?

Bishop Rodrigo: Because enculturation is a bi-lateral process; it is not a unilateral process. If I pretend to take the Gospel and apply it to a culture in such a way as to make the Gospel fit to the culture or a local Church, what I am doing is changing the Gospel and not the culture. This is not enculturation.  In the proper process of enculturation both change, the way of understanding the Gospel and the way of understanding the culture. The interaction of both produces a renewed culture. The Pope says that we have to revise whether every single element of culture is in line with the Gospel. We can talk about a culture of corruption, in which corruption is culturally normal, but that is against the Gospel; or a culture of slavery which was accepted for centuries, for example. Slavery existed in Europe, in society, for centuries and the majority of people did not see it as contrary to the Gospel. At that moment, thanks to prophets like Bartolomeo de las Casas, or Peter Claver, and others, voices emerged which made us aware that slavery is not in harmony with the Gospel. Paul, for example, did not speak against slavery, but he did try to humanize it, demanding that one treat slaves well, consider them like brother and sisters. But Paul never told Philemon that slavery was bad. When Paul lived he had not reached that level of enculturation. Today we go beyond that, and today we also have a heightened awareness of other injustices in various cultures, especially concerning the role of women in society and in the Church. We recognize that such structures have to be revised to that they are more in accordance with human dignity and revelation, as we have come to understand this in our present age. In this way there is an interaction between culture and the Gospel.

Q: What is the stand of the Pope about women in the Church, especially as regards decision-making and power?

Bishop Rodrigo: He recognizes that the rights and dignity of women, as we have come to understand these today, requires that women be given greater roles in the Church. That is the principle. Participation in the Church means participation in deliberation, decision-making, consultation, etc. We have bodies for that, bodies in which women can be integrated. We have from the bottom, parish pastoral councils, diocesan pastoral councils, we have Roman congregations in which women are most welcome, and they could give their own opinions and take part in decision making. The mistake is to believe this is possible only if they are permitted to celebrate the Eucharist. The Pope says that this is a mistake because the sacraments do not give any power. Sacraments are not sources of power. The power of the parish priest comes from his leadership and the consultation with the parish council. So, it’s another source of power but not the sacraments. So let us not think of the enhancing the role of women in the Church only in the confection of the sacraments, that is, the essence of the ordained priesthood. The Pope himself has taken the initiative to increase the role of women in the Vatican Curia and the congregations.

Q: Can we say that there exists a culture of corruption within the Church?

Bishop Rodrigo: Even in the Church there is corruption, because the culture of corruption can exist everywhere even if not in the same way. In the Church, the corruption may not be necessarily financial, although it could be financial as well, but it is not necessarily financial. What may happen in the Church is a confluence of influences, whereby I want to have a promotion. So I cultivate friendships that can work to bring about my name to be chosen for this or for that. That may happen in the Church and is part of what the Pope describes “spiritual worldliness” (Nos. 93-97). That is indeed spiritual worldliness. In addition, there may be people who take advantage of the structure of the Church, lay people, Christian or not, under the appearance of helping the Church financially. They may give funds in the name of a member of the Church which is then received, but received in a naïve or a-critical manner which does not ask about the source of such funds, which may be dirty money, monies being laundered, whether coming from drugs, or the mafia, or from some other illegal source. Such monies might be deposited in the account of a Cardinal or a Bishop and allegedly destined for charity. Thanks to God, such abuses are being recognized and eliminated. That is the aspect of financial corruption. Another way of corruption is this misadministration. It happens in the Church that a prelate, a Bishop or a priest, may receive an amount of money for a project, but instead of it being directed to that project, it is directed elsewhere, even if to some good. But such procedures are clearly not properly accountable nor transparent. Transparency and accountability are understandably important dimensions of modern evangelisation.

Q: You talk about the main causes of all temptations are pleasure, power and prestige.

Bishop Rodrigo: The Pope mentions these causes in the instruction because, I think, the analysis of the temptations of Christ reveal that they are the root of all temptations. Power because it is human. Power gives you at the same prestige and prestige gives you pleasure. But there is also ambition, the quest for honour, fame, glory and so on. Pleasure may be of different kinds. It may be physical, psychological, moral, success, accomplishment, and so on. In themselves, these are human tendencies that can be used for good or for bad. In the sense that even self-satisfaction, you have to have a minimum of self-esteem and a minimum of taking care of your own health but not for your own pleasure but for service. Power is necessary in authority; not as oppressing power but as a service to the common good. We can say the same is of prestige, it is good that the people see that we live the Gospel not for us to be praised but, the Gospel says it very clearly, so that people see your good works and they may give glory to the Father who is in heaven. So people may be encouraged by our good example. However, you can also give good example in a pharisaic way just to get praise, just for honour, for prestige, to be recognized. The tendencies that in themselves are human may be “disordered”, as St. Ignatius would say, because they miss the right purpose for which they exist.

Yago: Bishop Rodrigo, thanks a lot for your wonderful contribution to this blog. We have gained greatly through your witness.

Bishop Rodrigo: Thanks to you Yago!