Word, Sacrament, Charism
Cardinal Marc Ouellet - A Presentation of Cardinal Marc Ouellet's Book Edizioni Cantagalli (2024) - Aula Magna of the Lercaro Foundation, Bologna, June 24, 2024
Moderator: This evening, we are presenting Cardinal Marc Ouellet's book, Word, Sacrament, Charism: For a Synodal Church Between Risks and Opportunities, published in 2024 by Cantagalli. For those who do not know him, I will briefly introduce Cardinal Marc Ouellet: he is Prefect Emeritus of the Dicastery for Bishops, President Emeritus of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, and Archbishop Emeritus of Quebec, Canada. In short, he has had a long and rich career—or perhaps it would be better to say, mission—in the Church, which led him to be a close collaborator of three popes: John Paul II, who created him a cardinal in 2003; Benedict XVI; and Pope Francis, who confirmed him in his positions.
Last but not least, the current pontiff, Pope Leo XIV, was the prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops before his election as Pope. So, with a play on words, we could say that he was Marc Ouellet's successor at the Dicastery. Cardinal Ouellet has also written numerous philosophical and theological essays. In addition to the one we are presenting this evening, I would like to mention the very recent Per un'antropologia delle vocazioni: Uomo e donna, immagine di Cristo (For an Anthropology of Vocations: Man and Woman, Image of Christ), enriched by a homily from Leo XIV written when he was still a cardinal, which was published in 2025 by Cantagalli. I would also like to mention another very interesting book that I had the opportunity to read: Amici dello sposo: Per una visione rinnovata del celibato sacerdotale (Friends of the Bridegroom: For a Renewed Vision of Priestly Celibacy), also published by Cantagalli in 2019.
Before we get to the heart of the meeting, I must offer two important acknowledgments. First, the idea for this event was born in October 2024 when, in a conversation with a dear friend, I mentioned that I had just finished reading this very book, Parola, sacramento, carisma. I told him it was, in my opinion, a fundamental text for orienting oneself in the historical moment that the Catholic Church, and especially the charismatic movements, are experiencing. This friend accepted my invitation to read it and suggested that I should be bold and try to invite Cardinal Ouellet, whom he had met shortly before here in Bologna. About a week after this exchange, there was a meeting at Feltrinelli, and my friend called me, asking to discuss the book calmly because he had started it and was struggling a bit with the first few pages; he wanted to exchange thoughts on the content. The day after this call, my friend, while walking towards San Luca, had a serious accident. He fell into a coma and, after months of fighting at the Maggiore hospital in Bologna, emerged from it. He has begun a long and complicated rehabilitation process and is now at the Bellaria hospital.
So, it is to this friend, Stefano Locatelli—known to many of us here as “Stefano”—that we owe this meeting, because he was the one who urged me to invite Cardinal Ouellet. On behalf of the Newman Association, which is small but determined, I would never have thought of inviting the Cardinal. Therefore, Stefano is one of the organizers and promoters of this meeting, even though he is not here tonight. Our first thanks go to him.
Our second thanks go to Cardinal Matteo Maria Zuppi, our “Don Matteo.” From the very first time that Michele Pecorella, also from Newman, and I met with him—it must have been around January or February—he encouraged, supported, and urged us to organize this event. He initially wanted to be here as a speaker but then realized he would not be able to make it. He then hoped to at least say a few words of greeting, but he was unable to do even that. However, on Saturday, he sent us a video message, which we will now watch together.
Cardinal Zuppi (via video): Good evening. I am sorry I cannot be with you. Unfortunately, I am in Chioggia and then traveling to Rome, because tomorrow morning we will have the first audience of the Italian Episcopal Conference with its primate, the bishop of Rome, Leo XIV. I greet Cardinal Ouellet with great friendship and gratitude because he will help us reflect on synodality and charisms—the risks and opportunities. I know how much this is part of his reflection, and I would say his passion: bringing together the institution and charisms. Therefore, synodality and charisms, and what these can bring—I would even say must bring—to the journey of the Church. This includes the difficulties, which I am sure the Cardinal will mention, but above all the responsibility we have, because charisms are a gift. As such, they must not be buried, rejected, or wasted, but rightly valued and protected. It is precisely in the vision of the Church's mission that charisms find their important meaning. So, thank you for your reflection, thank you to the Cardinal, and thank you also to the Newman Association for organizing this meeting, which will certainly help everyone. Thank you.
Moderator: Good. Now, getting to the heart of the presentation. For this meeting, we have decided, in agreement with the Cardinal, to take what we call a “pedagogical” approach, in the etymological sense of the term. The idea is to ask him to help us—to guide us—through some of the key concepts in his book. We will do this through a series of questions. So, I will start with the first one.
We all still have in our minds and hearts the speech that Pope Leo XIV gave during the Pentecost vigil last week in St. Peter's Square, addressing all lay movements and associations. He said, and I quote:
"On the evening of my election, looking with emotion at the people of God gathered here, I recalled the word ‘synodality,’ which happily expresses the way in which the Spirit shapes the Church. In this word, the syn, the ‘with,’ resounds, which constitutes the secret of God's life. God is not solitude; God is ‘with’ in himself and is God ‘with’ us. At the same time, synodality reminds us of the way, odos, because where there is the Spirit there is movement, there is a journey. We are a people on a journey. This awareness does not distance us but immerses us in humanity, like yeast in dough that makes it all rise. Dear friends, God created the world so that we might be together. Synodality is the ecclesial name for this awareness. It is the path that asks each of us to recognize our debt and our treasure, feeling part of a whole outside of which everything withers, even the most original of charisms."
In the Church today, the word “synodality” has been used a lot. Just a few weeks ago, the second Synodal Assembly of the Italian Church concluded, and the synodal journey of the universal Church will continue in the coming years toward the great final assembly in 2028. But, as happens with words that are very much in vogue, this one can be used with very different meanings, shaped to suit one's liking, used as a slogan but not taken into account in practice, or, ultimately, completely opposed. So, the first question is this: what, then, is synodality according to the Church, as described in this book?
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: Good evening, everyone. Good evening to each and every one of you. Thank you for the invitation. I am delighted to be here with you to share, first and foremost, our faith, but also something of the theology that must nourish our faith and help it grow.
I would like to respond to a beautiful question that had a great answer within the Pope's text. This text is beautiful. But before commenting on it, I would like to explain how this book came about to give you some insight into its genesis, which is somewhat my experience of the Synods. I am already quite advanced in years; since 2005, I have attended all the synods in Rome: from the Synod on the Eucharist, then the 2008 Synod on the Word of God, where I had to serve as the relator general. You will find, among other things, in the first part of the book, the introductory conference of this Synod on the Word of God in the life and mission of the Church. In 2012, I remember, there was the Synod on the New Evangelization, and I was a little dissatisfied with the attention given to ecclesial movements at that time because it seemed to me that charisms had contributed a great deal to the new evangelization. Then, I will skip the two Synods on the family, which were an enormous commitment for me as Prefect for the Dicastery for Bishops, and also marked the beginning of the pontificate: learning with the Pope not only to teach doctrine well but also to accompany the faithful, especially married couples—to resume a dialogue with them in their current situations and to walk with them. This was a difficult but very important school.
The Synod on the Amazon in 2019 was more challenging for me because there was strong pressure to impose viri probati on the assembly without a thorough discussion of the value of priestly celibacy and vocational promotion. It was from there, from the beginning of the synodal research, that the awareness arose that synodality could move forward with a deeper vocational awareness, with vocational promotion, beginning with the baptismal vocation. This concept was born and developed, and for this reason, I founded the Center for Research and Anthropology of Vocations, which has organized two symposia. The first, in 2022, was on the baptismal and ministerial priesthood and the relationship between the two; the books from that have been published. The second, which was mentioned here, was in '24: For an anthropology of vocations: Man, woman, image of God. Today, we have to deal with the whole anthropological crisis, gender theory, and everything that revolves around it. We have written a book on this that allows us to situate ourselves as Christians, with a beautiful anthropology that is somewhat challenged in today's culture.
From there, we had the experience of synodality from 2021 to 2024. As you have lived this same experience in your parishes, dioceses, or at the national level, you have experienced something of this consultation, this listening, and this fraternal experience. I would say that the synodal events as such—that is, the Assembly in October '23 and October '24—were truly an experience of sharing through "conversation in the Holy Spirit," as we called it. It was a moment for everyone because we were sitting around tables of ten to twelve people. The methodology required us to state what we had prepared, then to listen to everyone else, and finally, to say what had struck us in the contributions of others. This was a methodology that forced us to welcome the thoughts of others. It was a moment of conversion, to a certain extent, because everyone arrives with their own ideas and, in a way, wants to propose them with a certain insistence, if not impose them.
In this sense, the concrete synodal experience we had was described by the Pope as “walking together,” but walking together in the presence of God—that is, in the communion that God shares with us, which is his very being, his Spirit, who dwells in our hearts and impels us to communion with one another. It is a communion that is not only human fraternity but is, in a certain way, human-divine, because God is personally involved in the gift, in the listening, in the effort of communion among us, and in the openness of the Assembly to the Church's mission to proclaim the Gospel to all nations.
That said, I would say that the concrete experience was perhaps more the sociology of synodality than the theology of synodality. What I have just described—the sense of the mystery of the Church, of God's presence in the Church—was, of course, stated in the principles. But then we dealt with sociology: how consultations should be carried out, reporting, all those who have responsibilities. It felt that the passion was more focused on sociology, which left me a little frustrated because I am more interested in the mysterious dimension of the Church. Otherwise, the Church risks becoming just another charitable NGO if it loses the sense of mystery that is the foundation and soul of its existence.
The book was born out of this dissatisfaction and, at the same time, out of a broader experience of Church governance. The book, as you can see, is titled Word, Sacrament, Charism. We are very aware that the Church is founded on the Word of God—that is, Christ—and on the sacraments. The Council told us that the Church is like a sacrament. But the charisms are there; they are present but modest, scattered, and they do not have the ecclesiological status that I believe they should. And that is the thesis of the book.
Moderator:
Thank you very much. I will now move on to the second question. This book provides a prolegomenon to the concepts in the title—that is, a sort of introduction for constructing an ecclesiology. One of these prolegomena, addressed in parallel with synodality, is the concept of pneumatology. What exactly does this concept mean? What is the link between synodality and pneumatology? And above all, how does this concept involve all Christians and not just the experts or those involved in synodal assemblies?
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: We must think about the theology of the pneuma, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit—that is, pneumatology—in a more concrete way, by trying to understand the passage from Trinitarian communion to ecclesial communion. Why does the Holy Spirit manifest himself in ecclesial communion? Because He is in himself, as a person, a person-communion. Pope John Paul II called him that. The Holy Spirit is person-communion.
Why is this so? It is the paradox of God. The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as their mutual love, their “we.” But this subjective “we,” so to speak, of the Father and the Son, is also a third, another, an objective third person, whom Balthasar calls “the witness.” He is the subjective witness of the mutual love of the Father and the Son, and He is the objective witness because He is a third. This is the paradox of God. God is one, but the Spirit is from the Father and the Son and constitutes the unity of God. By being third, God is one. In God, love has this configuration. In other words, love in itself is fruitful, generative. This is why the Son proceeds from the Father in what we call in theology the “generation” of the Son. It is a generation of love. The Son, who is of the same substance as the Father, responds to the Father with the same love, but in the opposite sense—that is, as love received, Eucharistic love, love of gratitude towards the Father.
This perfect equality of love, or consubstantiality—forgive the big word—this equality of love between the Father and the Son is once again fruitful. The mutuality of love is fruitful. You have an example of this in the family: in the loving relationship between a man and a woman and the fruitfulness of this love in the child. This is the closest image to the Holy Trinity, which is why man is created in the image and likeness of God. To think about God, we use the anthropological categories we have.
I say this to help us understand that the Holy Trinity, which is communion, wanted to create a world within this communion and give itself in participation. The mission of the Word is precisely to bring this revelation of God-as-love to humanity through the Son. And the Son, who manifested the love of the Father and his love for all sinful humanity by taking upon himself the sin of the world and bringing about reconciliation, gave us as his ultimate gift the communion between the Father and the Son: the gift of the Holy Spirit. This is the ultimate gift we receive from God through the mission of Jesus Christ. The Spirit continues the Son's mission of communion. The Son showed us the face of God in his way of loving us to the extreme, and the Spirit continues what I call “the incarnation of love.” God wanted to incarnate his love in his Son, Jesus Christ. But then one asks, “He has returned to Heaven. What happens now with the Incarnation?” The Incarnation is now us. We are the ones who are baptized and made one body with Christ. We are the Body of Christ, the continuation of the Incarnation, but through the gift of the Holy Spirit—a divine gift that is communion and can make two into one, and can make many into one.
This is the mystery of the Church. The Spirit in the Church, from a multitude, makes one reality, one unity. The unity of the Church is a reality that makes us one with the Virgin Mary, with all the saints in heaven, and among ourselves, because we are baptized and participate in the body of Christ in the Spirit. Synodal ecclesiology seeks to live this communion, this sense of belonging to one another. We are one in the Spirit of Christ, who makes us one body with Him. This means that we walk together, all of us, and each one has his place, his gift, his charism. And we must all share these gifts so that the Church may be that luminous sign of love in the world that helps the world perceive the presence of God.
Moderator: That makes me think, and I'd like to follow up before we move on. If being one is a gift that the Holy Spirit gives to the Church, what role do individual Christians have? Does this happen automatically, or is there a task for the individual Christian? I ask because, sometimes, looking with cynicism—but I would also add, realism—at many realities of the Church, one is tempted to say, “This gift isn't so effective after all.”
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: A provocative question, of course. Well, the condition is faith, because the Father sent his Son as a witness of his love and asks us to believe in him. To have the Father, we must recognize the Son. He who does not have the Son does not have the Father, does not know the Father, because the Father has placed all his treasure in this Son. So the Son calls us to believe, but we believe precisely because of the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is He who makes us believe. “No one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except in the Holy Spirit.”
Of course, the quality or degree of faith can vary among people. But when we are baptized in the faith of the Church, we may be very mediocre, but there is still a foundation of gift that keeps us in the ecclesial body, in the hope that we will be a holy element—that is, dynamic, bringing light not only to the rest of the flock but also to those who are outside. So faith is the very first gift. We do not value the gift of faith enough, and we do not cultivate this gift enough. It is the most basic, because all other gifts are a fruit of this fundamental gift, which makes us one. The sign and “mark” of baptism on the baptized person as a member of the body of Christ is something that cannot be taken away. It is an irreversible gift. One can even renounce one's faith, but the gift that God has given, uniting us to the body of Christ, is irreversible.
Moderator: I'd like to make another provocative statement on this because it particularly touches me. If faith, as you say, is the first gift, and all the other gifts of the Spirit are consequential, does that mean that if the gift of unity is missing, faith is also missing?
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: Of course. When unity is lacking, humility is lacking, prayer is lacking, and turning to God to understand one another when we have drifted apart is lacking. So there are conditions. Faith needs an ethos, fertile ground, to grow and bear more fruit. This is why a Christian who does not pray does not know who Jesus is, because Jesus is prayer incarnate—that is, a relationship with the Father. In baptism, we are introduced into his relationship with the Father, so He leads us. Our prayer is always “second”; it is always preceded by his. This is why the “Our Father” is such a fundamental prayer, because we pray it in Jesus, in his prayer that includes ours. If we knew more that prayer is life—the Trinitarian life in us—then following Jesus in his prayer, in his adoration of the Father, in his acceptance of the Father's will, changes the atmosphere of our hearts and the quality of our relationships. A little daily adoration changes the tone of our personal and community life.
Moderator: The next question concerns the third part of this book, which is dedicated to charism. In it, you observe a certain lack of reflection on pneumatology in the Church. And this lack, as you were saying, is reflected in the way the institution often approaches movements and charisms. The question is this: how does the phenomenon of charismatic movements fit into your discussion of pneumatology and synodality?
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: Well, again, allow me to recall my experience. At 80 years of age, one looks back a little. I am very grateful to have lived during these years, partly because during my studies in Rome, I got to know the development of ecclesial movements, in Italy in particular, and also the charismatic movement, which came from the United States. But also the Focolare Movement, which I have followed since the 1970s; Communion and Liberation since the late 1970s. I frequented the Community of Sant'Egidio, the Renewal in the Holy Spirit, and others. In this sense, I also saw how the popes—Paul VI, John Paul II—welcomed these movements positively. I remember the famous conference Benedict XVI gave in 1998 on movements, which I revisited in 2006 at a meeting on the theology of movements. At that time, I saw there a great richness, in full development and with great enthusiasm.
But as human realities grow, some defects can also develop, and Pope Francis has offered some corrections. I am a witness that Pope Francis had great esteem for movements, but he is someone who, as they say, “reforms by reforming”: when he saw flaws, he made corrections. For example, I remember him saying, “Your movements are beautiful, but make connections with the local communities, in the dioceses.” He gave this direction to open up the Church and revitalize it more broadly.
From my experience in the Synod of '21-'24, my impression is that movements and charisms, in general, have been underestimated and not listened to enough. I felt this, perhaps because I am more sensitive to this than others. For this reason, in June 2022, I made an important speech at a meeting of charisms, calling for an ecclesial government more open to the Holy Spirit. This is one of the chapters of the book, at the end—perhaps a little strong. I came to the following conclusion: there is an ecclesiological problem. It is not just because these movements have not found a place in canon law; it is because the reform of the law in 1983 was... well, this development was still too recent to be integrated. To the point that in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, the word “charism” does not appear. Imagine, it's not there. For me, that is a huge gap. They used different words, but that's the most obvious point: ecclesiologically, we are not where we should be. And now, in 2025, with a season of movements and charisms that have matured, we must address the issues of formation and ecclesiological conception. What status do charisms have in the Church?
As you know, there are Protestant Churches that have lost the ordained ministry but have developed charisms. The Orthodox Churches also consider that we Catholics do not give much importance to charisms. In a way, we have an ecumenical tide: we need to meet more and seek a new balance. We need this broader dialogue to arrive, on our Catholic side, at a valuing and integration of charisms into fundamental theology. This is what I have observed and why the book is a call for ecclesiological reform.
I said this to the Pope. The Pope was elected on May 8. On May 10, he summoned us cardinals. We were there for ten or eleven days talking to the “abstract future pope” who was, however, among us. Then he invited us, and there he was, right in front of us. So I, among others, took the floor and said that Christian initiation is not at the right point, at any level of catechesis and preparation. And I said, “In movements, in charismatic experiences, there are formulas of Christian formation and accompaniment that produce Christians who persevere, who endure, who have awareness, enthusiasm, and a sense of belonging.” These are things that we cannot always easily find at the parish level. So, for this reason, I said, “The Church needs to listen more to charisms.” The Pope listened to me very attentively, so much so that when I was among the very few cardinals present at that Pentecost celebration of the movements, and I went to greet him, he said to me, “If you have come for the charisms, I know.” All right. So the message got through, and we will resume the dialogue.
Moderator: There is another question on this topic, which goes into more detail. What relationship exists between hierarchical gifts and charismatic gifts? The Pope also spoke about this. That is, between the institution and the movements. How can they harmonize without, on the one hand, hindering the action of the Holy Spirit or, on the other, allowing movements to become autonomous without ecclesial awareness?
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: Well, I recommend, as spiritual reading, that you return to the text of the Council, Lumen Gentium, number 4. It is only one paragraph, but it is extraordinarily dense and rich. There, it speaks of the mission of the person of the Holy Spirit.
What can I say about this? Charismatic gifts and institutional or hierarchical gifts. The Church is built on baptism—the foundation—and on the ordained ministry, that is, the hierarchy. When I try to understand the Church in a Trinitarian way, I understand that the fundamental gift is divine filiation, participation in the Son, and the hierarchical ministry is participation in divine paternity. The Trinitarian father-son relationship is translated into the life of the Church in the relationship between pastors and the faithful. Then someone asks me, “But where is the Holy Spirit?” Well, He is in everything, but I like to see Him in a particular way in the charismatic dimension of the Church. By this, I mean first and foremost everything that is consecrated life. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit, given to people who give their lives in following Christ, in a surge of holiness that is also lived communally.
I see that the Trinitarian logic is that, just as the Father and the Son “breathe” or “conspire” the Holy Spirit as the fruitfulness of their love, we must also think about things in reverse. That is, the Holy Spirit brings something to the Father and the Son that “requalifies” their relationship. Here, I will tell you something that is a little bit mine: this requalification by the Holy Spirit makes the father-son relationship something more than a simple father-son relationship. In this sense, I dare say that in God, the Holy Spirit is nuptial. It is the nuptial dimension—that is, a “more” of love.
Moderator: That's beautiful. By the way, if I'm not mistaken, this concept of requalification is not in the book, or I missed it.
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: No, it's not exactly the same in the book, but it's not far off. Anyway, I haven't finished. Sorry.
So, obviously, between the hierarchical and charismatic gifts, the role of the hierarchy is to discern charisms, recognize them, accompany them, and make corrections when necessary. That's right. And on the part of the charisms, there must be a welcoming of God's gifts, an imploring, an openness, and an obedience. Obedience to the gift, not just obedience to the hierarchy, but obedience to the gift—and a defense of the gift. When the hierarchy does not understand, we must not immediately abandon the battle. We must defend our charism. This takes parrhesia, courage, and also the ability to endure some tension. It's part of the life of the Church. We were talking at dinner about Peter and Paul, who had some considerable tensions.
The development of this paragraph, perhaps the most important one, can be found in the document from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith called Iuvenescit Ecclesia, that is, “the Spirit permanently rejuvenates the Church.” It is at the end of the book. And the text, after John Paul II, speaks of the co-essentiality of hierarchical and charismatic gifts. In other words, the Church cannot do without the hierarchy—bishops, priests, deacons—but the Church cannot do without charisms either. They are co-essential.
The forms of consecrated life throughout history have undergone enormous changes, but consecrated life has always existed. From monasticism to new communities, the essence of this charism in the Church is fundamental. And I ask you a question that I have asked myself: who evangelized the world? Africa, Asia, even America? When you stop to think about it, it was the Franciscans, the Benedictines, the Jesuits, the Dominicans, the Augustinians; it was all the women's communities. Even if, from contemplation, they did not always have the opportunity to act outside the walls of the monastery, they developed from the Renaissance onwards. Evangelization was done by charisms. Even today, evangelization is done by charisms. That is why bishops are there: to administer and, in a sense, to bring the Gospel in person, but also to keep the Church together, to discern charisms, to encourage, and to support. They have a more administrative role, so to speak, but also one of proclamation and witness. But those who are at the forefront of evangelization, on the ground, are the charisms. This, in my opinion, must be taken more into account in fundamental ecclesiology.
Moderator: I will continue. Another question is related to charisms, as this is a fundamental theme of your book. In recent years, especially after the death of the founders of the 20th-century charisms, there has been a great push from the Church to, in quotation marks, “institutionalize” lay movements and associations. What is your opinion on this? And, as you seem to suggest in your book, could this be an opportunity for growth for the movements and the Church, to develop a theology and pastoral ministry based on a pneumatological reflection?
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: Well, it must be said at the outset that every founding charism tends to institutionalize itself. The charisms I mentioned developed from a founder or foundress, but they were translated into constitutions, into a rule of life. So charism needs to be translated into certain rules and habits; otherwise, it remains a bit vague. Like St. Francis, who wanted the Gospel raw, without gloss—but there is a Franciscan rule that was established later.
In any case, there is a normal and positive dimension of institutionalization for charisms, even the smallest ones that exist in communities. The purpose of institutions is to serve the community because gifts are meant to serve the community. Therefore, institutionalization must be vigilant so that institutions serve the community and not the other way around.
That said, in the last ten to fifteen years, there has been an evolution that has not been entirely positive, due to various factors. On the one hand, there has been a certain rigidity in the discernment process, partly because of the inadequate law I mentioned earlier. Also, the formation of jurists and canonists depends on the tools they have. If their tools are not flexible, their governance can be negative. They can be inflexible in applying the law, and if the law is inadequate and they are inflexible in applying it, this causes disasters. I have seen disasters caused by poor discernment. I feel I must say this, without going into details.
But I must also add another factor: the issue of abuse. The abuse scandal over the last fifteen to twenty years has forced the Church to adjust its legislation and regulations to eradicate these crimes. This was necessary, and we must not regret the work that has been done. But I would say that, at times, the focus has been so concentrated on finding what could have gone wrong that we have lost sight of the good that was being done. I believe that we are not yet at the right point of balance in how to apply the new legislation to eradicate all abuse. We are still in a phase of hesitation and perhaps rigidity, and I believe that many charisms have suffered greatly from being subjected to endless examinations and constant cases, where the only thought is solving this or that problem.
I say this, therefore, to acknowledge that it is a complex situation. We must take things with caution and measure. It seems to me that, to conclude on this point, we need to improve the discernment of charisms in the Church in general, and we also need to improve the accompaniment of charisms. I believe that we have gone too far in wanting to control everything and that we must leave freedom to charisms, so as not to obscure the dynamism proper to the Holy Spirit who moves people to give witness, to live in communion, and to push the mission of the Church beyond its borders. So, in a way, my conclusion is that we need to work towards a more systematic promotion of charisms in fundamental ecclesiology—not just rejoicing that charisms exist, but also accompanying them. Sometimes we do not have sufficient formation to enable them to bear fruit as the Holy Spirit would like.
Moderator: Thank you very much, truly, both for your willingness to address some difficult questions and for the content of the book which lent itself to them. If I may be frank, the tone with which you explained these concepts—the relationship between these different gifts and the role that charismatic movements have in their relationship with the institution—personally fills me with enthusiasm to contribute to greater mutual understanding. As the Pope said at last Saturday's meeting before the vigil, I was very struck by his position. He said, “I don't know you; I want to get to know you because I need to learn who you are,” speaking to the presidents of lay associations and movements. Indeed, your presentation and the content of this book, personally, make me very enthusiastic about contributing to this mutual knowledge. I invite everyone to read the book, which, if I may say so, is truly refreshing, especially the first part. Before getting into the topic of synodality and charisms, there is a sort of catechism, almost, in which he explains what God is, giving definitions of God and how He is present in history and in the personal life of each of us. The first part is truly refreshing. Have a good evening.
Cardinal Marc Ouellet: Thank you very much. A beautiful, beautiful dialogue. Thank you very much.
The text of the dialogue has not been reviewed by the speakers.