– Marco Carvalho
Pope Francis has recently announced a radical reform of the formation program for all priests preparing for the Holy See’s diplomatic service. The decision, Reverend Stephen Morgan claims, can only enrich the experience a priest brings to a diplomatic role.
Pope Francis has recently asked all future Vatican diplomats to spend a year of formation on mission. How revolutionary is this new rule?
Revolutionary is a word that has rather negative connotations, I think – at least in the context of the Church. I think it would be more accurate to describe it as a significant alteration in the entry requirements for many entering the Papal Diplomatic Service. For many, the entry route leads straight from Seminary – often entered immediately after High School of an Undergraduate Degree – through the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academia, the college that trains papal diplomats. This can mean that by the time of the first diplomatic posting, a man may have been ten or even twelve years in formation and had limited experience outside the rather rarefied environment of Church institutions.
Adding a formal requirement for work as a local missionary can only mean that they will be better prepared for the demanding roles they will take up. It is also fair to say that it is a typically Jesuit move. Before Jesuits are ordained they typically have to undertake what is called a “regency,” doing some apostolic work for two to three years and before they are permitted to take their final vows they do a “Tertianship,” where again they will be assigned to a period of apostolic work, usually in a place very different from where they are usually based. In some way, this move by Pope Francis reflects his own Jesuit experience and mirrors what he has done in altering the structure and length formation for contemplative nuns.
How will it influence the way the Papal Diplomatic Service works?
I don’t really know how to answer this question. It seems to me that the Diplomatic Service of the Holy See works extraordinarily well already, at least in how it represents the interests of the Holy See to Governments around the world and how it keeps the Pope and the Roman Curia abreast of developments in the 183 countries and territories around the world where it is present.
It also has a role in representing the communion between the Pope and local Bishops across the world, a kind of daily, local manifestation of that communion. Here in Macau we are very familiar with the sight of those members of the service who work at the Study Mission in Hong Kong. In my short time in Macau, we have been blessed to have two extraordinarily able Delegates of that office, Monsignor Ante Josic and now Monsignor Javier Herrera Corona, to whom congratulations are due, on his being confirmed in that post.
Vatican diplomats have a long ‘on-the-job’ apprenticeship too, with a very wide range of experiences. Monsignor Javier is from Mexico and has served in a number of vastly different places: he was in Kenya at a time of great strife in the north of the country and during the war in neighbouring South Sudan and then served as number two in the nunciature to Great Britain before coming to this part of the world. His experience of the Church is both broad and deep. It is a typical path for priests engaged in this important, demanding and often unrecognised work.
We have recently celebrated the 100th anniversary of Maximum Illud and this decision follows similar lines. Could it help the Vatican to be more aware of the needs and challenges that the local churches face?
I think the Vatican is already pretty well aware of the challenges local churches around the world face. Sometimes tensions emerge because the Holy See wants to move in a direction local Bishops are uncomfortable with: this is inevitable since different priorities can mean different perspectives.
The connection to the centenary of Maximum Illud is interesting and one that is worth exploring further. I think it is worth reflecting upon what is and what isn’t mission territory today. Traditionally we have thought of mission in terms of working in under-developed countries where Christianity is relatively new or weak. But, as all three Popes of my adult lifetime – St John Paul II, Benedict XVI and now Francis – have constantly pointed out, wherever the Church is, she is missionary. Given the precipitous collapse not only of practice but also of belief in the formerly largely-Christian countries of Europe, I would suggest that serving for a year in the centre of my hometown, Cardiff, in a rural parish in my own diocese of Portsmouth or in a deprived “bairro” in Lisbon or Porto is as much a missionary experience as those that more normally spring to mind when we think of the missions.
Macau Diocese is, despite being nearly 450 years old, still very much a missionary diocese. I know that the Bishop would be delighted if any future Papal diplomat chose to spend his missionary year working in this corner of the Lord’s vineyard.
Diplomats, in a general way, are often seen as somehow removed from the world. How can this decision, taken by Pope Francis, help the Church to reinforce its proximity with the flock it serves?
Any pastoral experience, whether missionary or otherwise, can only enrich the experiences a priest brings to an administrative or diplomatic role. During the pontificate of Pope St John Paul II, the Roman Curia itself became rather more international than it had been: he was, after all, the first non-Italian Pope for 455 years. This already meant that there were a higher proportion of people who had experience of life in ordinary parishes and missions serving in administrative posts.
Three of the great curial Cardinals of the last fifty years – Gantin, Arinze and Sarah – have come from being Bishops in missionary West Africa. I think we should also remember that the immediate job of the Papal Diplomatic Service is to serve the Holy Father and his collaborators in the various offices of the Holy See, rather than serve local bishops, their churches or faithful. There need not be an opposition between those things and it is certainly true that those Papal Diplomats who serve the Pope best are those whose training, character and experience make them able to listen to, observe and represent the concerns of the local church accurately to him.
In the end, this is a prudential judgement of Pope Francis, influenced by his own experience as a Jesuit and a Bishop – we should remember that he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires for over fifteen years before he became Pope. I have no doubt that it is that time and the exposure to the concerns of bishops from around the world who have come to make their five-yearly visit to Rome that has led to this change.
Follow
