There is a generational gap between people born into the new digital culture (digital natives) and older generations (digital immigrants). An internal document of the Redemptorist Congregation states that their young candidates “have a different kind of experience, another way of conceiving the world, of reflecting, thinking, and working; they use new technologies and new languages. This tension, in many cases, creates two isolated groups”[1]. Digital natives have acquired a new way of expressing themselves and of perceiving reality. When they arrive at consecrated life, they are already accustomed to the use of new technologies and to the communicative dynamics that they generate. The religious community must make an effort to understand how these young people relate to others and face real life. At their side, digital immigrants are trying to learn the new language, but they will “always retain, to some degree, their ‘accent,’ that is, their foot in the past” since they did not learn it in childhood. “They speak an outdated language”[2]. In addition, they often have a dualistic view of the online/offline. For them, online communication is virtual, unreal, ephemeral, fallacious. Therefore, it should be avoided as much as possible, in order to facilitate authentic religious…

Darwin’s theory has had a decisive influence on Modernity and continues to be present in our imagination. It affirms that “there must in every case be a struggle for existence”[1]. It has thus spread a mentality that contradicts the Christian vision of the human being and of the world. The current ecological crisis is no stranger to it. Considering that the struggle is inevitable, “Human beings and material objects no longer extend a friendly hand to one another”[2].  A dialectic of permanent conflict Ignoring the natural ties that bind us to all creatures, modern culture has accentuated the separation and conflictive antagonism. Man has been defined as a wolf (homo homini lupus), a being internally divided (ontological dualism) and clearly detached from all other creatures (ontic dualism). The other is seen as a dangerous competitor, who must be defeated or outwitted (social Darwinism) because, as Hobbes said, “your death is my life.” Nature has been considered a battlefield (“eat or be eaten”), where only the strongest and most gifted survive. Therefore, a dialectic of perennial conflict has been justified at all levels, together with the despotic anthropocentrism, and the throwaway culture. For instance, it has been asserted that, in economics,…

Petrine primacy and synodality Pope Francis has affirmed that “it is precisely this path of synodality which God expects of the Church of the third millennium.” “Synodality is a constitutive dimension of the Church. We cannot be Church without recognizing a real practice of the sensus fidei of all the People of God” (S19df 88). The Synod of the Amazon invited us to “a pastoral conversion based on synodality”[1], thus recuperating the etymological meaning of the word “synod,” which means “walking together.” The Church must become more synodal, overcoming clericalism and erroneous conceptions of the principle of authority. This opens a reflection on the model of the Church and on the relationship between the Petrine primacy and synodality. John Chrysostom had already alluded to the collegial unity of the ecclesial community, expressing it with the phrase: “The Church has as its name synod.” The concept of synodality, in fact, “refers to the involvement and participation of the whole People of God in the life and mission of the Church.”[2] Welcoming this synodality, Saint Cyprian († 258), bishop of Carthage, said: “From the very beginning of my episcopacy I made it my rule never to do anything according to my own…

This post asserts that the main cause of the current socio-environmental crisis is the dualistic anthropological conception that has prevailed in Western philosophy[i]. Indeed, Western culture has accentuated the separation between man and other creatures (ontic dualism), and has also divided the human being internally, making a clear separation between soul and body (ontological dualism). In this sense, the encyclical Laudato si’ affirms that “there can be no ecology without an adequate anthropology” (LS 118), and that we need to overcome those unhealthy dualisms, that “left a mark on certain Christian thinkers in the course of history” (LS 98).  1. Ontological dualism Ontological dualism distinguishes clearly between the body and the spiritual/rational dimension of man. The latter would be the most authentically human and, therefore, the body should be subordinated to it. The human being is described using “multiple oppositional pairs: body/soul, rationality/affectivity, need/freedom, nature/culture, instinct/morality, etc.” In the seventeenth century, Descartes makes a net separation between the rational soul and the body. The first would be the essence of man, who is characterized by his ability to think (res cogitans), while his body would be only a material addition that does not differ substantially from those of animals. Both…

The encyclical Fratelli tutti devotes the fifth chapter to “a better kind of politics, one truly at the service of the common good”[1]. In line with Guardini’s polar opposition, Bergoglio had already stated, in 1989, that good politics “helps to recover the horizon of synthesis and unity of a community: horizon of a harmonization of interests.”[2] Politics must properly manage tensions between the particular and the common good, between personal and collective identity. It is based on social friendship, “combines love with hope and with confidence” (FT 196) and, therefore, seeks dialogue and consensus. On the contrary, populist politics is reduced to “slick marketing techniques” (FT 15), forgets the common good and uses confrontation to achieve its selfish goals. “Lack of concern for the vulnerable can hide behind a populism that exploits them demagogically for its own purposes, or a liberalism that serves the economic interests of the powerful. In both cases, it becomes difficult to envisage an open world that makes room for everyone” (FT 155). Aristotle had already indicated the need for social friendship to build the political community, if it is oriented towards the good of others and overcomes the emotional attachment that seeks only pleasure or…