COP15 – Puzzling Thoughts 3/4 – The Hadley Centre

Yesterday, Dec 11, I attended various side-events to COP15, and I am left with some puzzle pieces of thoughts.

 (3) The third side event in which I participated was the presentation of the prestigious Met Office Hadley Centre. The combination of presentations was brilliant, but we were given a very grim – nearly apocalyptic – image of the future, up to the point that one can wonder how these scientists “feel” about these issues, once they are facing their children and grandchildren and have to leave behind the cold rationality they rightly use in analyzing the facts … It is frightening and questions arise as to what kind of adaptation will be realistic and how hope can be generated in the face of such realities and out of such realities. Tackling global climate change, therefore, is not only a scientific, economic and political issue; a much broader and holistic strategy is necessary, in which the so-called human sciences and religions will play an important role. While wondering about strengthening people’s capacity to cope with these challenges, I was reminded of Aaron Antonovsky’s “sense of coherence” (SOC), but also of my own religion’s capacity to generate hope in desperate situations and to deal with situations of immense pain and suffering (e.g. the pest, or Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Nazi-Germany). There certainly is work to be done here, and urgently. Again, it is a pity that religions and their theologians, or that human sciences such as social psychology, are but tangentially present at COP15.

COP15 – Puzzling Thoughts 1/4 – Climate Debt

Yesterday, Dec 11, I attended various side-events to COP15, and I am left with some puzzle pieces of thoughts.

(1) Historical or Climate Debt: In a side-event organized by Christian-Aid on justice and the outcomes of Copenhagen, in which also Tom Athanasios from Eco-Equity spoke about greenhouse development rights, Satheesh on the Indian People’s Manifesto on Climate Change grown out of a participatory grass root movement, and Shirley Bolinos on her work with the coastal communities in the Philippines, Naomi Klein referred to the concepts of historical or climate debt and historical memory (http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/11/climate-rage). The developed countries have built up and continue to build up their wealth and industry at the cost of the (colonial and neo-colonial) developing countries, that today suffer most of the climate change impact, are least resilient to climate change, and have an impressive development arrear (at least as “development” is understood in the economic market logic sense. An historical, climate debt has accumulated that should incite and oblige the developed countries to commit to legally binding GHG emissions restrictions and to providing adaptation funds for developing countries.

This idea of a climate debt is contested by the US government: when in the process of industrialization, the now developed countries were not aware of the global climate change their development would bring about. Indeed, I can agree that the developed countries, when beginning their industrialization and changes of lifestyle, were not guilty of anthropogenic climate change. Of course, they are responsible, as it is their activities that have introduced current GHG levels in the atmosphere. However, today, the responsibility for GHG emissions implies guilt: we know what is happening and we should change our lifestyles, attitudes and behavior. Moreover, knowing about our responsibility in the so-called West and realizing how much western development has lead to global inequalities and injustices, it seems at least fair that the western world carry its load of the burden, and that load is bigger, much bigger than the load of the developing countries. There is a call, not only to protect the weak, but also to restore equity and justice on a global scale. Therefore, this is not only about repairing a historical fact from the past, it is also about deciding how to live equitably and justly today. The latter implies the former.  I think Naomi Klein is correct in her assessment of climate debt, I also think that this argument cannot be isolated from the larger reality of today’s global injustice.

COP15 – Dec 10, 2009 – The Strength of Youth

The number of people in Bella Center is increasing. My collection of documents has grown to the point that I will not be able to carry all of it to Belgium. It is easy to be overwhelmed by the complexity of issues and to drown in all that is on offer, without really touching the essentials. Veterans of the COP meetings advise to keep a focus and to stick to some reliable sources of information, such as CAN . Personally, of course, I am interested in the religious dimensions of this whole process … but here, I feel frustrated. Religion is only marginally present in the Bella Center. There is a group that refers to a Supreme Master; it is very vocal at the entrance of the Center, but is not precisely my cup of tea. Someone told me today that he thought religion should be more visible, particularly through statements of its leadership: “you do not really market your product, Father, and it is a good product that could be put to good use here.” There is a challenge … Of course, I know that religions are speaking and that at grassroot level many Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and others are passionately committed to environmental issues, to the point of giving their lives. But, are we really present amongst those who are governing our world and making the important decisions?

Today, I decided to join the side events concerning youth and young people. The climate change crisis is of particular importance to them. On their orange T-shirts (paid for by the Dutch government), one can read: what will be your age in 2050? In the meetings I attended, young people were well aware of their creativity and energy, and they asked to be taken seriously. Politicians and negotiators, amongst whom Yvo De Boer of UNFCCC, challenge them to exercise even more pressure than they do now and to engage in politics. These young people know that they will have to change their lifestyles, that the world in which they live today will have changed profoundly by 2050. They also have a much more global sense than people of my generation: the earth is their home, they have friends all over the globe, and they are using all the means available to communicate globally – some of them continue to talk and listen to their computers (they use SKYPE) while they are walking in the corridors. This is refreshing in a context where nationalities and country boundaries dominate the discussions.

There was an interesting contribution by Tracy Bach, a Vermont professor of law, on intergenerational equity and justice. She referred to Edith Brown Weiss’ 1989 book “In Fairness to Future Generations” to point out three criteria to be included in lawmaking: keep open the options for future generations, preserve the quality of the world to be passed on to next generations, and secure equal access to public resources. However, in my eyes, the most interesting contribution came from Aman Jain, the president of an international student association, AIESEC. He was dynamic, enthusiastic, challenging and clear in his presentation and he stressed the importance of leadership, political action and commitment in an intergenerational perspective.

These young people and their commitment represent a great contribution and asset to COP15. As the indigenous people, to whose voices I paid attention yesterday, the young people know their future is at stake, they are willing to commit to change matters for the best, and they offer new perspectives and approaches. Both these groups give me hope and strength. I want to work with them. Karl Rahner spoke in a Christmas homily about “die ewige Jugend Gottes” (the neverending, eternal youth of God); I felt something of that today.

COP15: More Is Needed than Financial and Economic Wizardry

A session organized by the delegation of the Netherlands on Mitigation Efforts of Developed Countries – Will It Be Enough?, submerged me in the kind of financial and economic details most probably determine the negotiations at COP15. The various presentations attempted to map and model various strategies for keeping global warming under 2°C, taking into account pledges made by developed countries and the so-called REDD factor, concerned with reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. More financial and economic wizardry appears, when speakers address the so-called “hot air” generated by the economic decline of Russia and the Ukraine or when they point out that the 17% GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions’ reduction pledged by the USA refers to the baseline 2005 and means a reduction of a mere 3% when the “usual” baseline of 1990 is taken. The overall perspective of the Dutch seemed to me rather pessimistic: many more pledges are necessary if the goal is to keep the 2°C limit …

For a theologian with some background in mathematics, all of this is not easy to grasp, and it is clear that it would be worthwhile to have some specialists in economics and financing amongst us in Copenhagen. My personal frustration is that I have the impression that COP15 is being reduced to finding economic and financial solutions to a crisis, the seriousness of which has been laid out before us by the scientists of the IPCC, who have been asked explicitly to avoid any political interpretation of their measurements and models – the use of the word “urgency” in the IPCC presentation was already too much for some of the journalists present … The crisis is reduced to a technical problem, for which we can design a series of possible solutions among which to choose. Politics seem reduced to applied economics and financing. Ethical questions do not seem to be addressed; religious perspectives have nearly completely disappeared out of the Bella Center. Moreover, I am somewhat surprised not to see military people here – they may be present, but I have not seen uniforms – and there is a growing suspicion in me that at some moment of time the issue of global warming and security needs to be addressed. I hope that there are psychologists and sociologists amongst the negotiators, and not only amongst the representatives of IGOs or NGOs. In short, I miss the interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary environment that seems to be necessary for addressing the worldwide crisis. The narratives of suffering people, such as the indigenous people, remind us of this; the cold calculations of the economists and financial experts – however important and crucial they may be – seem to hide the fact that we are facing questions about just and equitable life styles and about sustainable life together on the planet earth and in close and even intimate connection with it. A complex, interwoven and holistic perspective is required – at least, I think so – that even our best available science cannot yet offer, and that is certainly truncated if only its economic and financial aspects are taken under consideration. I think it is a gift from indigenous traditions but also from religions to intuit and suggest such holistic perspectives and worldviews.

Institutionalized religions, churches and organizations offer opportunities for inspiring spiritual depth as well as the means of spaces in which experiences of concrete people, political reflection and advocacy, broad and interdisciplinary scientific reflection, and mobilization of public opinion. As a Jesuit, I feel that there is a task here for the Society of Jesus and for the Ignatian Family. As a Roman Catholic, I feel that a clear voice from those who have the most universal and broad perspective, is urgently needed to complement and strengthen the many initiatives that are already functioning at local levels. There are already some cautious declarations. More is needed. This would undoubtedly enrich the Bella Center and the participants at COP15.

COP15 – Dec 8, 2009 – IPCC Session

Today, the IPCC organized a side event on “IPCC Findings and Activities and their Relevance for the UNFCCC Process,” summarizing its AR4 findings (AR = Assessment Report) and offering a forward look on AR5.

In his introduction, the IPCC Chair R.K. Pachauri offered an overview of the IPCC process to reach at that what I would call our “best available science” (BAS) today. To build up AR4, 450 scientists participated as lead authors, working in teams, the work of which has been subject to peer (more than 2.500 scientists collaborated) and governmental expert reviews. The IPCC uses reliable data sets gathered from many sources that corroborate one another. Its procedures are very reliable, robust and transparent. Recently, the reliability of the IPCC has been questioned because of the publication of private e-mail correspondence obtained by malicious hacking into the servers of the East Anglia Climate Research Unit. Climate skeptics and even countries such as Saudi Arabia have made use of the exasperation of scientists with those who contest anthropogenic global warming to spread doubt about the seriousness of IPCC reports. I felt somewhat of that anger, when it became clear that all the questions addressed to R.K. Pachauri – mostly by anglo-saxon journalists – concerned these e-mails. But, of course, if I say that these journalists should know better and focus on the real issues at stake, that in press conferences their questions should be ignored when they have been asked over and over again, then I run the risk of being considered intolerant and in danger of obscuring issues. I admire the patience with which R.K. Pachauri answered these questions and observations – that in itself is worth a Nobel Prize.

Thanks to God, the rest of the side event was devoted to the real issues at stake. Scientists presented the issues at stake in the three Work Groups (WG) of AR4, and their outlook on AR5.

Thomas Stocker, co-chair of WG1 (the physical science basis of climate change), emphasized and illustrated three important results of AR4 WG1: (a) warming in the climate system is unequivocal; (b) most of the observed increase in temperature is very likely due to an increase in GHG (greenhouse gas) concentrations in the atmosphere; (c) continued GHG emissions will lead to changes that would very likely be larger than those observed today. For AR5, Stocker points to three observations and three projections: (O1) CO2 presence in the atmosphere reaches higher levels and its increase is more rapid than ever over the past 1000 years; (O2) the extensive thinning of ice surface on the margins of Greenland and Antarctica; (03) the persistent sea-level rise consistent with earlier estimates; (P1) the rapid loss of arctic sea ice (depending on the models used, the arctic sea will be ice free sometime between 2030 and 2060); (P2) the long-term commitment and irreversibility of the CO2 perturbation (it will take hundreds of years before CO2 levels in the atmosphere will diminish); (P3) geo-engineering could cause abrupt climate changes, but there is a “termination problem” inherent to all geo-engineering (if we stop the geo-engineering process, global climate quickly returns to an equilibrium near to what would have been the case without the geo-engineering). Stocker concludes that there is good reason to stand behind the scientific results presented in AR4, that we experience unprecedented changes in the climate system, that there is widespread melting of the ice margins, that CO2 remains in the atmosphere for very long periods and leads to changes in climate and in ocean chemistry, and that geo-engineering is inherently problematic. These issues will be addressed in AR5 WG1.

Charles Field presented the activities of WG2 (impacts, adaptation and vulnerability), stressing that AR4 presented a vast range of observed changes and impacts as well as of projected future impacts (the magnitude of which depends on the models used; extreme events are possible as well). He observed that many stressors are important as far as impacts are concerned. Mitigation can help to delay, avoid or reduce impacts, while adaptation can address vulnerabilities. AR5 will concentrate on common frameworks for mitigation, adaptation and impacts; it will broaden the range of impacts and study the connections between climate change and development, as well as between climate science and climate impacts; it will take into account a new generation of models and pay due attention to regional aspects and to ocean impacts. Climate change is occurring: what information is needed for good policy decisions?

Vicente Barros, also speaking in the area of AR5 WG2, introduced a special report on managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation, a report that will be published in 2011 and that will focus on the intersection of three concerns: (a) vulnerabilities; (b) the frequency, intensity and duration of extreme events; (c) the tools available for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptability.

As to WG3 (climate change mitigation), Youba Sokona pointed out that global anthropogenic GHG emissions, especially CO2 emissions, are still growing. Contributing factors to this continuing increase are population growth, income increase per capita, carbon intensity and energy intensity. The stabilization of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere is, from a scientific point of view, urgent, and technological advances and transfers will be important to attain this. All sectors and regions will have to contribute.

The question session afterwards highlighted the need to take into account ocean factors, e.g. acidification, as well as time and regional scales, whereby a distinction will be made between near-time predictability and long-term climate change.

It is clear that the work for AR5 is well under way and that it will produce a wider array of models and frameworks to unfold a reality that comes forward in ever increasing complexity. The methods will also allow for improved regional focus, which will allow improved adaptation planning. Although a lot of mist was created by continuing questions on the hacking of personal e-mails, it is clear that the IPCC aims at maintaining its focus on essential matters and with increasing scientific sharpness. One can only applaud that. I feel the deep commitment of these scientists to provide reliable and clear material for good and crucial policy decision making. This was a very refreshing session.

The IPCC provides our best available science today (BAS). Let us keep these scientists in high esteem!

Registering for COP15 in Copenhagen

José Ignacio Garcia, a fellow Jesuit at OCIPE in Brussels, and myself registered this afternoon at COP15 as part of Franciscans International, an NGO that attempts to embody the global commitment of the Franciscan family and that was willing to accept us as part of their delegation. It was a remarkable experience: many, many, many people queing up to be registered, some confusions, but also, amidst what could become an aggressive chaos, a lot of efficiency, patience, common sense and humor. The organizers have done a very good job. There is a great capacity here to deal with stress. What struck me most, while waiting for registration and photo, is the enormous diversity of the participants – people from all over the globe and of all ages and generations are present. I felt very much encouraged by the presence of young people, from international organisations and from NGOs and IGOs: that is impressive. One really feels that there future is at stake here in Stockholm and that they want to be present at these discussions.

Once registered, one gains access to the main conference space. Organisations were constructing their exhibits and the rooms for the side events were being arranged. I visited several of these organisations: the IPCC, UNEP, WWF, GTF (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit) and the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie. I will see more tomorrow, but I was already expressed to see the concrete faces of organisations I know about through the internet.

Because I had long times to travel and to wait today, I had the opportunity to read in Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Le milieu divin. It strikes me how TdC attempts to explain how the Christian faith does not turn one away from the world and from the earth, but effects rather the opposite: it commits one to the world discovering the deep creative energies of love that inhabit it and ourselves. I hope that we will be able to touch these energies in the coming days, so that we do not face the challenges in despair, but rather with proactive hope. At least, COP15 touches the constructive energies of many people. And that remains true, even if one may wonder whether the main discussion here – touching on economic approaches to the crisis, particularly with regard to CO2 measures – touches the deep core of the challenges.

A Few References on the Occasion of COP15 in Copenhagen

I encountered two interesting references on the occasion of COP15 in Copenhagen.

Riccardo Petrella comments in the Dec 2009 issue of Le Monde Diplomatique on two obstacles on the road to Copenhagen. The fact that the planet and its natural resources have been increasingly perceived from a consumption mentality, invites us to address the climate and environmental crisis from a mere economical viewpoint and in terms of the logic of the markets. If people expect an agreement in Copenhagen, it seems to be on these terms. Is that enough and does that really provide a solution? Petrella’s second obstacle concerns the attitude of the United States of America, which will be crucial to move other countries into action – there is a historical responsibility there for the US and its president Obama. Will they meet the challenge? Le Monde Diplomatique has prepared some extensive webpages on climate change and the Copenhagen challenges.

The Dec 14, 2009 editorial of America also emphasizes the important role that can be played by the USA and stresses the important connection between climate change challenges and global justice and poverty issues.

David Attenborough’s “The Truth about Climate Change”

Yesterday I ran into David Attenborough’s DVD The Truth about Climate Change as produced by the BBC and the Open University. It contains two parts: Are We Changing Planet Earth? and Can We Save Planet Earth? This is an excellent introduction to the challenge of global climate change, pointing out the seriousness of the challenge, the urgency to act responsbly, and providing, mainly in the second part, a set of very concrete steps individuals and societies can take. The despair viewers may feel when confronted with climate change is, therefore, always turned into positive energy. I recommend this as a top introduction and will invite my students and as many as possible of my fellow Jesuits to watch it. One cannot remain unmoved when encountering the passion of David Attenborough!

Victor Codina SJ on Ignatius Loyola’s Two Standards

I finished reading a short and inspiring reflection on Ignatius Loyola’s meditation on the two standards (Spiritual Exercises 136-148) by the Bolivian Jesuit Victor Codina (*). He shows how this ignatian meditation intends deeper ways of spiritual discernment and how it addresses two different logics and approaches to our commitments in the world. The kenotic way of Jesus is unveiled in Luke’s narrative about Jesus’ temptations in the desert, after his baptism by John the Baptist and the revelation of the Trinity. Following Jesus in his kenotic life style and approach, in his friendship with the poor, is listening and following the Holy Spirit’s guidance in our lives. Codina’s hermeneutics and analyses are thought provoking. E.g., he emphasizes Jesus as the Galilean (“Galilea, región despreciada”): “La Bandera de Jesús es el estilo particular de Jesús de Nazaret, un estílo galileo, nazareno”, a theme that is also addressed by Virgilio Elizondo in his emphasis on the Galilean Jesus, as well as by Elías López in his work on forgiveness and reconciliation. These theologians are not mentioned by V. Codina, who refers chiefly to Aloysius Pieris, Ignacio Ellacuría, and Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI). For those interested in the reflection on ignatian spirituality, V. Codina offers interesting material for reflection on the importance of the Trinity and especially of the Spirit (not very often mentioned explicitly in the Spiritual Exercises), as well as the connection of the work of the Spirit with the ignatian “magis” in its dynamism towards  the “minus” that is also visible in the gospel beatitudes. For those who know Spanish, I recommend V. Codina’s reflection on the two standards. 

* Victor Codina’s full text “Dos banderas” como lugar teológico has been published by Cristianisme e Justicia (Barcelona) in its Eides series (July 2009) and will, I suppose, be very soon available on the Eides webpage.

Porto Velho – XII Interecclesial CEB Meeting

In his second letter, Afonso Murad, emphasizes how the hard realities of the Amazon Region, the exploitation of the natural resources, the oppression of indigenous people, the agro-industries and the neccessity for water resources, the innercity violence and drug abuse, do not lead to despair, but unveil the hopes and the desire to commit of the participants in Porto Velho. This finds its expression in the liturgies, in the atmosphere of solidarity, and in the sharing of experiences and contexts. This already the articulation of the dream for a just, inclusive and sustainable society.

I received some further web references concerning the meeting in Porto Velho:

Adveniat in Germany hosts a blog on the event: http://adveniat.de/blog/.

The official site of the Brazilian Bishops Conference offers further materials and photographs: http://www.cnbb.org.br/ns/

Porto Velho – CEB Meeting

I promised to keep track of the XIIth Interecclesial Meeting of the Ecclesial Base Communities. I received a letter from one of the participants, Afonso Murad, a theologian from Brasil.

In his address to the meeting, the Archbishop of Porto Velho, Mgr. Moacir Grechi, quoted an African thought : “Little people who do small things in unimportant places, reach extraordinary results”. It illustrates well the awareness of people who are locally committed in very concrete situations, but who are also aware of the fact that their struggles have a universal, planetary importance. The first celebration of the meeting illustrated symbolically the complexities of the Amazon region: the river and the forest, the inhabitants, the biodiversity and cultural diversities in the region, the destruction of nature by agricultural industry, the hope and the resistance of its people. The perspective of the meeting is “socio-environmental” and originates with the situation of the poor.

The way of proceeding of the meeting is also highly symbollical: the central meeting point is called the “haven”, to which the 12 miniplenaries or “rivers” report. The 144 smaller discussion groups, in which participants can exchange their personal experiences, approaches and convictions, are called “canoes”. Today’s theme concentrated on the effort to “SEE” and to hear the prophetic cry of the earth and of the peoples of the Amazon region as a gift to the whole of humanity and the whole planet. The hopes and struggles that are articulated in this meeting, although they may be small and insignificant, and although they concern truly local issues in unimportant places, are nevertheless crucial for a planetary hope and struggle.

For maps of the Amazone region, see: http://www.raisg.socioambiental.org/.

12th Interecclesial Meeting of Brazilian Ecclesial Basic Communities

From July 21st to July 25th Brazil’s Ecclesial Basic Communities meet in Porto Velho around the theme of Ecology and Mission: “From the belly of the earth, the cry that comes from Amazonia”. This is a very important and well attended meeting in which the socio-environmental concerns of the Amazonia region as well as the indigenous viewpoints, theologies and cosmologies will receive full attention. The meeting is important not only because of the Amazone region itself, which is threatened by deforestation and inconsiderate use of its water resources, but also because of the threats to what its indigenous may contribute to the reflection on worldwide sustainable lifestyles in a period of growing global environmental concerns (as illustrated in an IRIN notification that the IPCC plans to prepare, by 2011, a special report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation). I will provide some more news on the meeting in Porto Velho over the coming days, as I also hope that participants will be aware of the contribution they can offer towards the preparation of the coming United Nations’ Climate Change Conference (COP15: COP stands for “Conference of the Parties”) in Copenhagen from December 7th to 18th, 2009.

Two Thoughts About a Faculty of Theology

Today’s proclamation of the exam results at our Faculty of Theology, K.U.Leuven, provided a welcome oportunity for the inauguration of the newly renovated collegium veteranorum, a building which will host the dean and the key administration offices of the Faculty from August 15th, 2009 on. Two thoughts struck me in the various speeches that were on offer. They concern the role and the place of a faculty of theology in today’s world.

Prof. Mathijs Lamberigts, a former dean of the faculty, told us how he had moved forward the project of the renovation of the collegium veteranorum. One of his arguments with the university authorities claimed that a faculty of theology needs a front door that opens it up to the street and through which the street can enter. It’s a powerful metaphor to state that the world and the concrete realities of that world should never be very far from the heart of our concerns and thoughts. Theologians cannot isolate themselves from the concrete real lives of people, a fact which our current dean, Prof. Lieven Boeve, put forward by saying to those students graduating today that their input, arising out of their pastoral and educational commitments, will be crucial to our faculty and our ways of thinking in Leuven. We need that input to feed our thought.

One of the university’s top managers, Prof. Koenraad Debackere, praised the Leuven theologians for their entrepreneurial spirit – they know how to acquire funding, they know how to manage the greatest theology library in the world, etc. – and referred to the importance of values in setting up economic systems so as to point to the role theologians can and have to play in a world that is suffering one of the worst economic crises in its history: the renovated building can be an embodiment in the midst of the university precisely to highlight and emphasize the role of theologians.

I liked both remarks, because I am convinced that we live in a rapidly changing world – the environmental crisis being a key player in these dramatic changes – and as a theologian I feel the urgency to build up a theological reflection that addresses these challenges. How can we, in a faculty of theology, empower (in Flemish, I would say: “toerusten”, to equip, to provide with the necessary tools and skills) our young students so that they become more capable to address a world, the shape and contours of which we can hardly imagine today. And, inevitably, as professors we will increasingly have to learn to listen to the intuitions of our young students – not only when they describe the crisis and its dangers, but also and foremost when they express their hopes and their ideas about what will be important to address the challenges. To try to find out the ways in which theology can become a source of creativity and of hope in a rapidly changing world is, I think, the main challenge of a faculty of theology. May the new offices of the dean remind us constantly of this!

 

Brian Lennon’s “So You Can’t Forgive …?”

Brian Lennon is an Irish Jesuit, committed to the Northern Ireland peace process and involved in many grassroots processes. He has recently published a very interesting little book that I had the occasion to read today: So You Can’t Forgive …? Moving Towards Freedom (Dublin: The Columba Press, 2009, 84 pp.). He concentrates on and analyses the processes of forgiving in a wronged person, stresses the importance of separating from the wrongdoer before, in a Christian movement as illustrated by many biblical references, moving beyond the separation. Brian synthetically summarizes the process of forgiving (he doesn’t want to use the word “forgiviness” or “reconciliation” as he concentrates on the processes in the wronged person alone) in four steps, the latter two reflecting the move into a Christian attitude and its call to forgiving:

1. Recognizing my anger and accepting it as legitimate.
2. Letting go of the desire for revenge by separating myself from the wrongdoer.
3. Developing a degree of empathy with the wrongdoer by distinguishing between the bad act and the person who did it.
4. Wishing the perpetrator well.

The use of the “I” person involves the reader as if it were in the process of a challenging workshop and, indeed, the book offers insights which are grasped with more depth when readers become involved with their own histories of being called to forgiving, when the book begins to tickle one’s own life.

I am really impressed by this book as it unknots what I could call the “compulsive Christian” in me, who feels guilty while having to fathom patiently all the diverse aspects of a process of forgiving, thereby unlocking many possible pitfalls that I would have liked to avoid, but that I am called to address if I desire to heal in freedom. I allow myself to quote a passage from the book, on p. 27, that is profoundly compassionate, full of humor and encouragement:

COMPARING OURSELVES TO OUR LORD
Another trap, for Christians, is to compare ourselves to Our Lord: he did it, so why can’t we? One answer is because we are not Our Lord!
Yes, we are called to follow Our Lord. Yes, he did say ‘Be perfect as my heavenly Father is perfect.’ But nowhere in the gospels does it say that we have to achieve this overnight.
We have to be patient with ourselves. One old, old trap is to set ourselves a goal, e.g. giving up drink, then beat ourselves up for not achieving it, and then because we are fed up on account of this we go back on the drink!
It can be the same with forgiving: we can set ourselves impossible goals, and then when we fail we give up the whole idea.

Brian invites us to engage into forgiving as a life process of growing in freedom and of following God, unfolding patiently the rich complexity of a love that heals us by allowing us to explore our depths.

Rodrigo Plá’s “La Zona”

This evening I saw Rodrigo Plá’s impressive movie “La Zona”, about human reactions when in a rich area of a Mexican city, separated as an enclave from the rest of the poor city by walls and private security people, robbers kill one of the inhabitants, who take revenge in their own hands while protecting their secure life. It is a very hard movie, not only because of its plot itself, but also because some very profound logics of human behaviour are unwrapped: violence and greed are all at once not strange to us, to the viewers of the movie. Do we not live in protected zones of many kinds, keeping our privileges by keeping others out and policing our neighbours dictatorially when these privileges become threatened? To me, the movie is also a metaphor for the contrast between rich and poor in our world and it explains how people become trapped in violent logics so as to maintain the advantages of power, status and wealth.

This is not the most beautiful side of our human nature and behaviour and I came out of the movie with pain in my heart. The young Alejandro, who befriends Daniel, one of the persecuted robbers in the zone, gives hope: in him profound and compassionate humanity works its way to the surface of existence. The mystic Jan Ruusbroec wrote that compassion is the deepest of human characteristics, and the theologian Jon Sobrino insists that compassion is the starting point of every serious theology into which we sometimes have to be shocked. These ideas are also present in the movie and they stimulate me to change myself, the people around me, and the world.

Added later: While talking to a friend, it struck me how this movie also invites me to think about the Church as a holistic, inclusive and universal endeavour. The Church is about bridging in a life giving way murderous differences and separations … it’s about constructing frontierspaces of encounter on borderlines of separation.