 Welcome, welcome to the assembly here in the hall and welcome to the hordes of people online all across America. My name is Paul Lakeland, I direct the Center for Catholic Studies and I am so delighted, actually so grateful to Bishop John Stowe for graciously accepting our invitation to be here this evening. To offer the 29th Christopher F. Mooney SJ lecture in theology, religion and society. Father Mooney was academic vice president here at Fairfield in the 1980s a distinguished author of important works on education, human rights, race and science. He was one of the most avid movie fan that you could ever have known. He carried in his top pocket a little postcard with the eight movies he'd never seen, just in case they showed up. And one of my claims to fame is I took him to a movie that he actually walked out of. He was a great man and I know with all I knew about him, and he'd be delighted that we have Bishop Stowe here this evening. So Bishop Stowe is from the order of fries minor conventional a Franciscan, and he was ordained as the third Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Lexington in 2015. He's from Lorraine, Ohio, and he has a bachelor's degree in philosophy and history from St. Louis University in case you didn't know a Jesuit school and masters of divinity and licentured in sacred theology from the Jesuit school of theology at Berkeley now, After he was ordained in 1995 he served as a pastor in Texas, and eventually as chancellor of the diocese of El Paso, and 2010 he became the provincial of his province of the conventional Franciscans. Five years later, Pope Francis named him Bishop. Within the United States College of Catholic bishops the USCCB Bishop Stowe serves on the administrative committee, which sounds terribly boring but maybe it's not he's nodding his head it is. And on the Catholic campaign for human development subcommittee. Now he recently contributed a chapter entitled faithful pastors and fellow pilgrims to the recently published priestly ministry and people of God, hopes and horizons book published by Orbis Press in 2022 edited by Richard Gallaudy Thomas groom and Richard Lanan and published by Robert Elsberg the editor-in-chief of Orbus press service somewhere in this room. While Bishop Stowe is well known among the American hierarchy for his strong support for LGBTQ Catholics, for his concern for the environment, and for generally speaking his mind. He's best known to maybe to more informed Catholics for his staunch defense of the person and work of Pope Francis against American suspicions of the Pope among more conservative Catholics and even within the ranks of the bishops conference. As he pointed out in a Fordham University interview several years ago and I'm quoting the Bishop here. The first responsibility for Catholics, including the bishops is to read what the Holy Father actually says, rather than someone's characterization of it. Secondly, we should trust that the Pope is right intentioned and not involved in some sinister plot to undermine the church. This is mandate to preach the gospel in its fullness very seriously. Bishops should correct the distortions about people teaching and his pastoral priorities and try to explain how the universal perspective of the Pope will not always be in sync with the priorities of the United States. It's fortunate we are then to hear Bishop Stowe speak this evening on his chosen topic, a better kind of politics the vision of Fratelli Tutti. Before I ask you to join me in welcoming him with a round of applause. Let me just add to the to the people online watching online just to remind you to you that you can ask questions of the bishop and you can you can frame your question at any point during his presentation and type it into the Q&A button on your screen, and we will pick up those questions at the end of the session and mix them up with the questions from the crowd here. So, join me in welcoming Bishop Stowe. Thank you Dr. Lakeland that was very kind. It's really good to be at Fairfield University and I'm eager to learn even more about Father Christopher Mooney now that I've heard some of the stories about him. I'm titled in this a better kind of politics, the vision of Fratelli Tutti. The best way to dominate and gain control over people is to spread despair and discouragement, even under the guise of defending certain values. And verbally extremism and polarization have become political tools, employing a strategy of ridicule suspicion and relentless criticism. One denies the right of others to exist or to have an opinion. Their share of the truth and their values are rejected and a result, as a result, the life of society is impoverished and subjected to the hubris of the power. Political life no longer has to do with healthy debates about long term plans to improve people's lives and to advance the common good, but only with slick marketing techniques, primarily aimed at discrediting others. In this craven exchange of charges and counter charges, debate degenerates into a permanent state of disagreement and confrontation. When victory consists in eliminating one's opponents. How is it possible to raise our sights to recognize our neighbors, or to help those who have fallen along the way. A plan that would set great goals for the development of our entire human family. Nowadays, sounds like madness. So gathering tonight in the aftermath of the overhyped midterm elections, whose outcome was practically being declared on cable news before even the final tally of the 2020 presidential election was promoted. And this description of the distortion of politics that I just quoted sounds pretty accurate. I don't know about the Connecticut television market, but in states with races even more hotly contested than your governors, the barrage of negative advertising and scare tactics have only enhanced the distaste for politics in the United States, which has done nothing to entice 18 year olds and other other potential new voters to the polls. Reluctantly, we might have to concede that scare tactics work, whether about invoked access to abortion, what is more frequently referred to now as reproductive rights, or simply women's health care, or about a vague thread of impending disaster and collapse. Many voters of either political stripe did not so much vote vote for any candidate yesterday, but against them, the enemy, as they perceive them to be. The characterization of contemporary politics I cited comes from the opening chapter of Pope Francis and cyclical for telly Tutti, which he signed at the tomb of St. Francis of Assisi in Assisi on the vigil of his feast October 3 2020. This means that it was presented to the world during the final month of the ugliness of the last US presidential election, a context, certainly in the Pope's consciousness, but not the only example of poor politics he is describing. Many democratic nations have been witnessing a similar phenomenon in their elections in their electoral politics lately. Pope Francis laments the loss of any concern whatsoever for the common good. And throughout this encyclical will describe the diminished awareness of the dignity of the human person as a regressive reality, unexpected and unwelcome in the 21st century. It would be too well how employing these themes of the common good and inherent human dignity that are so central to Catholic social teaching would be dismissed as strategic disasters in campaigns designed to diminish the opponent, rather than have actual debates about issues and policy. The encyclical was released not in light of the US presidential elections, but in the midst of the global coronavirus pandemic. The mass celebrated at the tomb of St. Francis before the signing of the encyclical was extraordinarily simple by papal liturgical standards. It was very concelibrant, and the very limited assembly was carefully spaced according to social distancing and masked. The pandemic was, according to the Pope, an incredible opportunity for the world to come together and collaborate in response to a virus that had the power to bring global commerce and social interaction to a halt. But it wasn't an opportunity missed, despite initial signs that the common experience of vulnerability might move the world toward greater solidarity. He points to an alarming willingness to sacrifice the elderly. You might recall that a high level elected official in Texas suggested it was the duty of the elderly to die and get out of the way of the younger and more productive members of society. Our own governor in Kentucky in his daily press conferences repeatedly said, we will get through this, and we will get through this together. His steady optimism was helpful at a time of panic and fear, and he was genuinely genuinely sincere in what he said, and how he exercised his authority for the common good. But it quickly became clear that we were not all in it together in the same way. Some people have the option to work remotely in relative safety, while others disproportionately people of color in the poor were dubbed essential workers. And so had to put their own well being at risk for the good of others, even though there was no elevation of their employment status or their benefits corresponding to their essentialness. It is curious that workers so essential during the lockdown phases are suddenly not so essential when it comes to their immigration status or their access to health care. Pope Francis said that COVID-19 exposed false securities. Quote for all our hyper connectivity, we witnessed a fragmentation that made it more difficult to resolve problems that affect us all. No one who thinks that the only lesson to be learned was the need to improve what we're already doing, or to refine existing systems and regulations is denying reality. End of quote. Pope Francis noted that this fragmentation happened in a climate where in the previous projects toward greater unity like the European Union, we're coming apart. And what he terms and a historical deconstructionism was driving people, especially the young to limitless consumption and empty individualism, which opens the way for the emergence of unscrupulous and deceptive leaders. Again, a quote, if someone tells young people to ignore their history, to reject the experience of their elders, to look down on the past and to look forward to a future that he himself holds out. Doesn't it then become easy to draw them along so that they do only what he tells them. He needs the young to be shallow, uprooted and distrustful, so that they can trust only in his promises and act according to his plans. That's how various ideologies operate. They destroy or deconstruct all differences, so they can reign unopposed. They do so, however, they need young people who have no use for history, who spurn the spiritual and human riches inherited from past generations, and are ignorant of everything that came before them. What calls this a new form of cultural colonization, which empties words of their meaning, or manipulates them in order to weaken historical consciousness, critical thinking, the struggle for justice, and processes of integration, rendering words like democracy, freedom, justice and unity ambiguous and meaningless. Here he is leading to his own deconstruction of populism in favor of popular politics, fraternity and social friendship, central to the political vision of this encyclical. Pope Francis is both a dreamer and a realist. The first chapter of the encyclical is titled dark clouds over a closed world. And that title conjures up one of the many iconic images of this papacy, wherein he is standing alone with the blessed sacrament in an empty St. Peter's Square in a cold and dreary rain at nightfall. At that moment, captured globally on television and in the encyclical, the Pope makes no denial of the darkness, but neither does he submit to it or to its inevitability. As a Christian, the Pope is a person of hope. He's willing to dream of what could be and to just suggest paths towards that realization. But he's anything but naive. And he openly describes the obstacles and the opposition. He offers the well known Luke and parable of the good Samaritan as critical for the path forward, despite its apparent lack of political sophistication. In good Jesuit fashion, Francis describes the scene of the parable in a compelling and visual way. He points out that the Samaritan on the road to Jericho was an outsider, a foreigner with no rights. But when those whose religious status gave them rights and respectability did nothing to help the man beaten up on the side of the road, perhaps even for cultic reasons. It is the Samaritan who goes out of his way uses his own time and resources to care tenderly for the man in need, and even brings him to an end with a blank check for his future care. The Pope asks us to consider in our own context, who are the ones beaten up on the road today, and whether those who are expected to provide aid actually do so. He also notes the innkeeper's role as a part of the social structure that's needed. A good Samaritan cannot act entirely alone. The Pope reminds us that the parable was told by Jesus in response to two questions posed by a lawyer. One about how to inherit eternal life, which the lawyer correctly answered himself, referring to love of God and love of neighbor, the teachings of his tradition. And the second in an attempt to circumscribe the vagueness of the term neighbor. Ask Jesus, who is my neighbor. Jesus responds with a parable, which demonstrates neighborliness and finally instructs the lawyer as he would instruct us today to go and do likewise. The rest of the encyclical invites the whole world on a journey from being like a mob of strangers inhabiting the same planet to finding common ground. Moving from being associates who have found common interests to become neighbors concerned with each other's good. And then to actually becoming true brothers and sisters who share a common origin and a common home. Original. Not if one accepts the gospel. Unrealistic and naive. Only if one would label Christianity that way. Firing conversion. Certainly, chapter five is the part of the encyclical directly and explicitly devoted to politics, a new kind of politics. Reminiscent of Irenaeus refusal to let the falsely so called Gnostics as he referred to their second century doctrine to ruin the perfectly good word gnosis. Resents the abuse of the word and the concept of populism. Pope exposes the lack of concern for the vulnerable, both in economic liberalism and in so called populism. Each of which serves the interests of those already in power. A Christian worldview must be all inclusive. And include the most vulnerable. The Pope finds this vision to be common among the world's religions. So called populism has degenerated into another source of polarization. But this classification of populism has nothing to do with the people as its name would apply. For the Pope, the word people means that human beings are more than an aggregate of individuals. The notion of a government of the people has to take into account the social phenomena by which men and women create shared goals that transcend individual differences in favor of communitary and aspirations. Francis draws on the tradition of a theology of the people, a particularly Argentinian version of contextual theology, promoted by Lucy O'Kara, Juan Carlos can own and others. Maximo Borghese and his The Mind of Pope Francis illustrates this well. Francis calls the people, a mystical category, rather than a logical one. To be part of a people is to be part of a shared identity arising from social and cultural bonds. Popular leaders decline into populist leaders when people's culture is exploited ideologically for the benefit of the leader. Or when they seek popularity by appealing to the basest and most selfish inclinations of certain sectors of the population. Sound familiar? And worsened when it leads to the usurpation of institutions and laws. Sound familiar? Remember January 6. The further problem according to Francis is when politics is exclusively focused on short term advantages and does not see beyond the next election. Does that seem familiar? The Pope offers an alternative that is truly transformational and actually serves real people by promoting the common good over the long term. He has convened what he terms world meetings of popular movements, bringing together a broadly based group of people working for social change, often from the margins, and in that sense, truly popular. Some of these meetings, the Pope has personally led others he participates in remotely, as in the one that took place in Modesto California in 2017, where Catholics, other Christians, people of other religions and of no religion talked about and strategized for broader political and economic solutions to perennial problems. People working to solve homelessness, lack of health insurance, the plight of the undocumented immigrants and of refugees, those seeking to raise the minimum wage, promoters of drug rehabilitation and mental health services, advocates of Native American and women's rights, opponents of racism, and others came together despite their often quite different worldviews. And addressed the transcending needs that were recognized by all our most recently named Cardinal in the United States Robert McElroy address that gathering and received a sustained standing ovation. When he called for organized resistance to policies that diminish human dignity. In Fratelli Tutti the Pope places employment at the top of the list of priorities for popular politics, because work is essential to human realization for meeting basic human needs and to human dignity. In a genuinely developed society, he says, work it is is an essential dimension of social life, where it is not only a means of earning one's daily bread, but also a personal growth, the building of healthy relationships, self expression, and the exchange of gifts. And along with work, the world meeting of popular movements adds the priorities of housing and land. In Spanish, they are described together as the three T's to a bottle that show the Tierra work housing and land. Considering the common good without rooting the common good in one's own personal need or advantage requires the chief theological virtue of cherry. We rarely consider charity as a political solution. Rather, what government is not able or is unwilling to do for the disadvantage is often left to private or institutional charity. But Pope Francis invokes the classical meaning of disinterested love and suggests that charity unites the abstract and the institutional. It moves from the theoretical good to the desire to help which results from a personal encounter with the real person in need. But as even the case of the Good Samaritan reveals, there's always a need for structure or institution, likely in to provide the health that an individual is unable to offer. The Pope also reminds us of the ancient yet ever present reality of concupiscence, that is a proclivity to selfishness and narrow interests that always has to be confronted and overcome through fraternity. Any perfect world order in theory will need to recognize the reality of human weakness, what Christians call sin. Systems cannot just be put in place, nor can we think our way through every problem with a technological solution. The marketplace cannot resolve every problem. The pandemic should have made this very clear. Popular movements are truly human. They're not mechanistic or technological. It refers to the marginalized who become protagonists of their own integral human development as social poets who move beyond policies for the poor to those which are of from and with the poor. No coincidence that one of the dicasteries of the newly reformed Roman Korea is dedicated to integral human development. As it is no coincidence that refugees now live in the Vatican and a homeless shelter exists right next to St. Peter's Square and that the Pope celebrates his birthday with the homeless and meets with transgender victims of violence. Pope Francis lives what he proposes and offers an example of what fraternity can look like. In the United States such popular movements are found chiefly among those organizations supported by the campaign for human development, which requires that the organizations they fund include the very marginalized people being served in a decision making capacity. Many of the groups funded are involved with community organizing, helping the disenfranchised to find their own voice, articulate their own needs, understand the dynamics of power and government and be advocates for themselves. One such community organizing group from the Southwestern United States just had a 90 minute conversation with Pope Francis last month in his residence at Casa Santa Marta, and it was described as part by the participants as mutually enlightened. And as if this emphasis on popular movements and human fraternity was not challenging enough for an American church that has fully bought into market capitalism's values, as well as economic model. The Pope also uses his encyclical to address the decline of the usefulness of the nation state. The Encyclical quotes his 2015 address to the United Nations General Assembly, in which he called for a world authority regulated by law, because in a globalized economy, economic and financial concerns have come to prevail over the political. And they don't respect national boundaries. The Pope doesn't necessarily mean an individual with this authority, but there must be a transnational authority to protect the innocent, especially migrants who struggle to survive transcends national boundaries. He further calls for a reform of the United Nations, so that it can truly function as envision, as its founding document refers to it as a family of nations, rather than being dominated by a few overly powerful ones. He finds it unnecessary that the United Nations be legit delegitimized by these shortcomings, because it still plays an important role. Yet in too many cases, the law of force becomes more dominant than the force of law. The Pope endorses a multilateral endorses multilateral agreements, much more than bilateral ones, always with a concern for the protection of the weak and the greater common good. Global society, he says, is suffering from grave structural deficiencies that cannot be resolved by piecemeal solutions or quick fixes. Much needs to change through fundamental reform and major renewal. Only a healthy politics involving the most diverse sectors and skills is capable of overseeing this process. An economy that is an integral part of the political, social and cultural program directed to the common good could pave the way for different possibilities, which do not involve stifling human creativity and its ideals of progress, but rather directing that energy along new channels. Earlier in the encyclical following the reflective exegesis of the Good Samaritan parable, Pope Francis offered a reflection on a more open world in contrast to the closed world described in the first chapter. The more open world is based on human relationships, like in the story of the Good Samaritan, transcending national and ethnic boundaries. In these chapters he decries the result of the breakdown of such transcendent relationships. For example, racism, which he says never goes away, but periodically retreats and anti-immigrant sentiment, as well as the lack of attention to the hidden exiles in our midst, like the disabled or the abandoned elder. The common good requires a recognition of the great worth of each person. Solidarity, he teaches, is only born of conversion, and solidarity is more than sporadic generosity. The fourth chapter of the encyclical introduces the concept of gratuitousness, a concept that removes relationships and even politics from the realm of the utilitarian to one more responsive to the God who allows the sun to shine and the rain to fall on the good and the bad alive. Not everything has to be limited to political favors and even exchanges. In fact, the common good requires a certain gratuitousness, which is quite different from the play to pay system, which has evolved in our country. In the sixth chapter, the Pope moves us toward the implementation of the new politics described in chapter five through dialogue and friendship. Francis describes dialogue as quote approaching, speaking, looking at, listening, coming to know, understanding, and finding common ground. Dialogue is not the exchange of opinions, but a desire to come together. Selfish indifference or violent protest can undermine or end dialogue. Dialogue requires clear thinking, rational argument, a variety of perspectives, and the contribution of different fields of knowledge and different points of view. It doesn't result in relativism, but is rather a search for truth. We expect for the dignity of the other and the recognition that persons are more valuable than material things or ideas are necessary for a dialogue that contributes to the common good. Here again, the Pope leads by example. Not only has he brought Palestinian and Israeli leaders together in the Vatican, as well as warring factions from Sudan. But Pope Francis has initiated a dialogic process in the universal church with the goal of the restoration of synodality in the Western church and expanding synodality in the Eastern church. But what about in the Pope's own figurative backyard. Too much of what is seen in the governance of the universal church would not meet the Pope's own description of good politics. And the notion that the church is above the pettiness of politics is absurd. Politics, Francis insists, is not a dirty word. It's not a bad thing. It's not even a necessary evil. Politics is how pluralistic societies operate and make progress. Politics is noble when it involves relationships working toward the common good. The synodal process underway in the universal church is not explicitly described as a political process, but it too is built on encounters in relationship in order to walk together towards the future. Years before the election of Pope Francis, the ecumenical patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, addressed the Synod of Bishops in Rome. And he basically responded to a central question posed in St. John Paul II in cyclical Utlunim Sint. How could the Petrine ministry be exercised in a way that would promote Christian unity, especially of the Eastern and Western branches of the church. Bartholomew's unambiguous answer was to moderate the Petrine ministry by a rediscovery of synodality. That is, balance the monarchical papacy with a conciliar or a synodal structure. Bartholomew was thinking of the synod in the traditional way as a gathering of bishops. But Pope Francis is expanding the consultation phase of synods to reach well beyond the bishops. The social friendships and political charity needed for the promotion of the common good in society are needed in the church as well and should be modeled by the church. The church and society become more fraternal. They can make a more substantial witness to the cultivation of peace in the world. The processes that result in peace are not easy, the Pope reminds us, precisely because they require facing the stark truth. Truth is an inseparable companion of justice and mercy. Citing examples of the South African peace process and other such processes from recent history, the Pope insists that humanity must learn to quote, cultivate a penitential memory. One that can accept the past in order not to cloud the future with regrets, problems and pains. Germany's coming to terms with the legacy of Nazism and the Shoah is an example of a difficult process based in acknowledgement of the truth and a repentance that allows for the possibility of a reconciled future. We might ponder in the United States how different our present circumstances would be had we faced the horrors of chattel slavery soon after its elimination, instead of trying to smooth over the differences for the sake of a forged but not real unity. Or, had we acknowledged the violation of every treaty with Native Americans and the genocidal approach to acquiring their lands by our own government and tried to make amends, would we see something different than the devastation evident on so many Native reservations? Or, had the bishops openly faced the cruel reality of the abuse of minors by clergy and sought to bring about healing and reform before being forced to do so? The commandment to love the Pope reminds us is universal, but loving an oppressor doesn't mean allowing the oppressor to continue oppressing or be seen as acceptable when trampling the dignity of others. Reconciliation is not a flight from conflict, but the Pope says it is achieved in conflict, realized through dialogue and open, honest, patient negotiation. We can never move forward without remembering the past. We do not progress without an honest and unclouded memory, he says in paragraph 249. The eighth and final chapter of Fatelli Tutti contains the original theme of the encyclical in the mind of Pope Francis before he expanded its content in response to the pandemic. It considers the role of religions in the world, rooted in his own experience of issuing a joint appeal with the Grand Imam al-Tayyib for religions to never incite war and always promote human rights and their duty to the poor. Francis expanded the theme of the encyclical from the place of world religions in a more peaceful world to the need for universal fraternity. As in his previous encyclical Laudato Si, the Pope took the name and inspiration of this letter from his namesake, Francis of Assisi. He describes the relationship between the two encyclicals. Laudato Si was rooted in the famous poem that expressed Francis of Assisi's ability to view all of creation as brother and sister and as interrelated in its revelation of the creator. Francis gentleness promoted the simple use of rather than the exploitation and individual ownership of the gifts of creation and recognized humanity as the crown of creation. The title Fratelli Tutti comes from a letter of St. Francis to those who were interested in following his way of life. While Francis never intended to start a movement or an order, he lived his conversion freely and openly with such authenticity that people were drawn to the joy he radiated. Pope Francis had captured that joy born of an encounter with Christ in several of his apostolic exhortations which speak of joy, most notably his first, the joy of the gospel. Pope Francis was also moved by the example of St. Francis who was willing to create an encounter with the Sultan al-Malik in Egypt in the midst of the violent crusades. Francis went unarmed into the camp of the Muslims and greeted the Sultan as a brother. He was able to win the respect and appreciation of the Muslim leader by his own genuine regard for the Sultan as a fellow worshiper and son of God. It was an encounter without conversion of religion from either side and it was an encounter without martyrdom on either side. It was an encounter of mutual respect and of fraternity. Well, Francis believes that such encounters are not only possible but necessary for the future of humanity. He notes that Christians and Muslims together represent about two-thirds of the world's population. What a great gift it would be if these two large religions could each draw on their best traditions of peacemaking and live in mutual respect of the other. The lost opportunities of the global pandemic lamented at the outset of the encyclical give way to a fraternal vision of universal solidarity based on the simple example of a despised foreigner in a parable who acts neighborly and a hope for a different kind of politics promoting human dignity and the common good. The implied consequence of not realizing this dream or vision is that we will never be able to survive the global environmental catastrophe which draws ever closer unless we engage in this new relational and open way of living. As Francis titled his first book in English, Let Us Dream. Thank you. Thank you, Bishop Stowe, and we now have some time for some questions and comments. I'm going to start with the crowd here and I'm going to remind the people online that they can write in a question and we'll look at some of their questions soon. So, rather off. Thank you Bishop, I was just wondering if you could give us a sense of where you think in the church in the United States is succeeding in helping to create this different kind of politics and where it's falling short. Unfortunately, I'd have to say I don't think we have been a leader in promoting this kind of politics. We have allowed a single issue vision of politics to cloud our own political discourse and have kind of usurped the possibility of dialogue. At the same time, to point to an area of hope. I think the synodal process that has been underway, and the issues that have been generated from those discussions for both the internal life of the church, and how the church relates to the world does offer a lot of hope if we listen to what's being said, and if we can truly discern the movement of the Holy Spirit in the voice of the faithful. So, it's been a difficult sell, the synodal process in the United States. And part of it has to do with our attachment to a Western way of thinking and to a very pragmatic approach to planning, so that parishes and bishops said, I don't want to do this because I don't know where it's leading I don't know what it's supposed to happen I don't know what the result is going to be. Francis would say that's exactly the point. If we're open to the promptings of the Holy Spirit and listening to the spirit, as we go forward, then we don't know where it's going. And if we think we've got it all figured out or have to determine the end before we start, we're not leaving room for the spirit. That's how Francis approaches the concept of conflict as well. The concept of conflict he says is not something that we should be afraid of, not something that we should fear, but conflict points to when we reach the end of what we're capable of doing when we realize we've reached an impasse, when I can't budge on this and the other can't budge on that. Francis says that's when we have to be open to the Holy Spirit resolving something that we human beings cannot. And of course he goes back to chapter 15 of Acts about how the first apostles resolved the issue of welcoming the Gentiles into the fold. So that's a long answer to your question about today's politics but I don't think we can say we've given an example yet. Next week when the US Bishops Conference meets there's going to be a discussion about the quadrennial political forming political consciences or forming consciences document. Seems like the bishops will want to reintroduce the same document that's been in use since 2007. I think that would be a terrible mistake because we have so much has happened since that time. One of our democracy has been challenged since that time, and we have an encyclical about political thinking since that time so I think it's time for looking at that again. So I have a question from the online audience here from brother Dan a Jesuit brother from Canada would like. This is his question or comment and question. This presentation made some of Francis ideas even more concrete moving it away from the naive unrealistic label. Many have towards it. I still struggle with this notion of fraternity. Is it possible that even within the church we have different versions of what that could mean. The biggest challenge behind it that I see is how do we carry on fraternal concern for the other, when they may only have hate for us. That's a common question and of course, the Pope would again point to that example of how we when we can't humanly overcome our differences we have to leave room for the Holy Spirit. But I think it's fair to say that he presumes goodwill on both parts. And so it's very hard to forge these relationships without that goodwill. So Francis has been challenged on that point more than once and he says, if you look hard enough you can find some common point of interest you can find some point of conversions you can find something to work with. I'd be the first to admit it's a struggle for me in many occasions. But I also would be the first to admit that when you sit down and actually talk to a person, rather than categorize them according to their political beliefs or background or whatever, you do discover much more than that you had started with. So fraternity is a challenge and the Pope never says it's going to be easy. You know, we've had 2000 years of working at this Christian vision and haven't gotten it right so it's clearly going to be a challenge. But I do agree with the point that it is, it is concrete he's not just talking about abstract realities, because the concrete part of it is the face to face relationship, the dialogue, listening to one another. Your turn from the audience here. I'm interested with elections right now, but there is a very important one coming up next week you mentioned your meeting of the US Conference of Catholic bishops. And there is going to be an election of your new president and vice president. Normally the vice president becomes the president but in this year, the vice president is 75 years old so we cannot rise to be the president. There's going to be an election of a new group, you might say or a new slate. And American magazine did an article recently picturing the eight bishops who are considered most likely to be elected. And I was very happy to see our own Bishop Bishop Kajiano mungos. I think he has a unique ability to work with conservatives and progressives in our diocese but I'm wondering what your perception is or what your prediction might be as to what force in the church and there are other bishops and progressive bishops, the Bishop Archbishop of France, San Francisco was pictured there, and then you have someone like Bishop McElroy from San Diego, on the other end of the spectrum. Where do you think the bishops will come down in terms of electing a new president. Well, Archbishop quarterly only from San Francisco is certainly on the ballot Cardinal McElroy is not. There's no real progressive that's. Yeah, there's a ballot of 10 candidates and there's no real progressive on that so I think our best hope is for a centrist who really has credibility with those who would be more of a Benedict the 16th papacy and have not warmed to Francis. And there's, and those who are very much embracing the Francis agenda. Remember, as, as the quote that was given in the introduction, I think it's time for the US bishops to get on board with what Pope Francis has said. Now that he's been in office for nine years I don't think there's much excuse for not implementing his, his vision. So I would hope that we don't elect somebody who is clearly an opponent of the Pope. So not that he would be overtly so but that he doesn't teach things that undermine the magisterial teaching coming from Rome, and that he would have credibility with the broad center of the bishops conference. I don't think there's a pure center but there's, you know, like in any body there's a group that is more center than extreme. Right. And I think somebody that has credibility with all of those. I wouldn't venture as to a guest who might be on that list. I mean, who might win the election. So, another question from the online group. So this is from Marcelino San Miguel. How come the Pope has not come to comment on the reality of populist human government, nor that of Nicaragua, where there exists open disdain for human life, liberty and pursuit of brotherly respect. So, I read an interpretation of how I see our US politics reflected in what Pope Francis is saying but he doesn't criticize American politics. He doesn't go into specifics about any country, because the Vatican is one of the most respective force, one of the most respected forces for diplomacy in the world. And if you take a side to the point of explicitly condemning a regime or an action, he does talk about the issues that are brought up there. He does talk about the denial of human rights and the infringement upon basic human liberties, but it doesn't name the players. I think you can read between the lines and you can apply this to different political situations in the world, but he would sacrifice the ability to be a force for reconciliation if you were naming names. He's also been criticized for not being explicit enough about Russia and their role in Ukraine. And then when he gets more specific is criticized for being too specific about Russia and their role for the Ukraine. So he's walking a delicate tightrope in terms of being the universal leader open to promote dialogue. I think the great example is when he brought leaders from the sedan together and got down and kissed their feet and told them to talk to each other. I think that's the kind of diplomacy that that he works best with. Would you say the same is true for his relations with China. Yes, that's also a very contested thing, although I think the specific issue with relationship to China is looking at a much longer picture. And in that way might even understand the Chinese way of thinking better than many of the critics of that who are concerned about the immediate need. The Pope regularly denounces abuses of human rights, but to go out and call out single individuals or countries would be problematic for this global standing. Is there a question in the crowd here. Thanks Bishop for your talk. I wonder if you could speak a word to our young people who are here or online. They're not much different than the young people in your diocese now with the young people you meet on the road but those who have come of age in the pandemic those have come in age in a church that's divided. Come of age in a church you may not speak to them or their relatives if you're excluded. Who are really yearning for meaning and hope and connection. I think like hearing these, these ideals that Pope Francis articulates but don't necessarily see it. So maybe a word of encouragement. Yeah, I was thinking very much of this audience when thinking about what does this politics and this political climate do to young people and their ideals about what we've been taught democracy supposed to be what we've been taught a government by for and of the people is supposed to be, and very much. What is our understanding of the gospel and what Jesus is calling us to as a community. My words are of encouragement are, you guys are going to correct a lot of mistakes I hope of previous generations, like the Pope says we can't just ignore all of history that has come before us, but we don't have to repeat the mistakes either. And so, there are many ways that the generation of students today is much more inclusive in their way of thinking, much more inclusive in the circle of friends and relationships that they maintain people who are different than themselves. Much more advanced in terms of understanding the workings of the world, and probably my guess is much more jaded about the functionality or the ability to rescue so many of the systems that are in place today. I hope you're using your college years to really develop the best ideas and draw from the best that you have and to awaken your own creativity for how do we resolve the issues of the future. But I hope that Pope Francis does speak to you when he talks about the importance of relationship the importance of inclusivity. The importance of listening to others who are different than ourselves and not resulting to armed conflict or violent conflict but finding common ground and working towards a common good. I hope that at your age you do have some vision of hope for the future. You know, we're not wearing masks anymore and we're not exclusively limited to zoom anymore we have moved through some things but could we have done that better. Oh yes. And hopefully we're learning from those experiences so as not to repeat them again. I think your generation is giving hope to many of us who have expectations that you can figure out some of the things that we haven't. So we have a question from a distinguished American theologian Phyllis Agano who seems always to log on to our events. Thank you Phyllis. Phyllis would like to answer this. Can you comment on the fact that some US dioceses did not participate fully in the cynical process and that some US bishops, while they seem to have presented synod synthesis to the US CCB refused to publish this. Yeah, I don't know what happens in every diocese but I can. I can say that Dr Zagano is right in the point that she makes some took it much more seriously than others. There were some diocese that simply had a questionnaire online. That undermines the whole idea face to face encounters. Now, an online survey could be one way of including those that you wouldn't get in the door you wouldn't hear from otherwise, but it was not the ideal for how a synod should operate. Why somebody doesn't publish what was said is problematic but but I think it's not unreasonable to speculate they didn't like what was being said and what was being heard. I would transcend from that in some of our own diocese to look at what was contained in the national synthesis for the United States that mentioned several issues that are considered taboo ordination of women the role of women clerical ism, rebounding from the sexual abuse scandals, ordination of married persons, many of the things LGBT QIA relationships all of these things that have surfaced were included in the national synthesis, and we're included in the document that Rome set back for the continental phase. So I think, overall, the process is surfacing many things that need to be addressed. Is it true that not every place is on board with that and fully committing to the process, certainly it is. For those of you who don't know Dr Zagano she's done tremendous historical work on the role of women deacons in the early church and should always be commended for her work she was part of a group that Pope Francis commissioned in Rome to study that that issue. And she is a force to be reckoned with. So there are a couple more questions. One is going back to the council Vatican Council one of the great ideas that came forward brought forward by the bishops was the notion of the collegiality of bishops. And John Paul the second always like to talk about that having two kinds of this this was affective and effective collegiality. My impression at the moment so this is my question. My impression at the moment is that that's not very clear, either very clear among the American hierarchy, are you going to fix that I mean we're going to surely the hierarchy or to be modeling what it is that want the rest of us to do. I don't disagree with that. I can say that at the June meeting of the US ECB which is more of a retreat kind of meeting. In addition to our usual regional meetings. There were also random discussion groups where bishops were assigned to groups that they don't normally talk to. Almost everybody found those a lot more enlightening, because we're in the same region and always meeting with the same people it's very easy to think I know what he's going to say I know what he's going to say, and not really pay attention but when you're mixed in with other groups of people and getting to know them where they're coming from what the issues that they're dealing with and what their priorities are. So that is going to be incorporated into the November meeting as well that in addition to regional meetings there are where called fraternal dialogues. So, it's been kind of a spoon feeding the bishops to engage in a synodality process among themselves. I think for the same kind of purpose that you're describing affectivity. And if you think about the continental phase of the synod, the US and the Canadian Church have never done anything together in an official capacity so this is brand new territory for all of us. But the Pope really wants to use a decentralized model of the church, but it does require that the consensus of the local regional or national bodies of bishops has to be functional. And I don't think we're there yet. I can't resist telling you Phyllis is back on you to say thank you so much. I fear the synod no synod bishops presented danger of a further split within the US CCB you don't have to comment on that. I have one more question for you before we fall for the evening. Being a bishop right now. Is it the worst job in the world, or the best job in the world. It's somewhere in between but certainly closer to the best job. You know, essentially, I'm a pastor as a bishop just as I was as a priest so it's really my chosen vocation. Maybe a little more of the, the conflict to deal with and the bureaucracy to deal with an administration to deal with that nobody's specialty usually but. But in the long run I'm very enthused by our current Holy Father I think the model that he provides in the example that he gives is the direction forward. And, and I'm happy to do and I'm excited to be living through this in a little time when we can talk about the real issues that are on people's minds. You should still thank you so much for your generosity. Thank you all for being here this is the third and last of our major evening lectures for the semester. If you want to see what we're doing next semester. I think we have some leaflets for next semester's major events at the back door. We have one more event in our living theology series which happens at 5pm, and it's going to be led by by Kevin Maloy who is now going to tell you what it is. We have a conversation about current and growing policies in the US church on transgender people, and whether or not these policies invite the church that Pope Francis is striving for, and how better to invite, engage and transgender Catholics. That's on November 30th at 5pm. See you soon.