Change is on everybody’s lips. Everybody wants to prepare for it and make it happen, everybody is promising it. Occasionally it is presented as a dismal affair which needs to be resisted. However more likely than not, it is projected as something necessary and desirable. Only, to get it implemented, one needs to change how things are done, following which the quality of life would improve for all.

Change is not the monopoly of government or opposition, even if both talk a lot about it with commitment as if it belonged to them alone. Actually, a whole range of organizations in civil society as well as in the religious, economic and other sectors keep delivering and emphasizing similar change messages. Perhaps the call for change is the one that has the widest resonance in the country.

Yet then, when one comes to its implementation and how this is being done, messages become rather tepid, not to say laconic. For as long as the “successes” can be announced with the greatest effect, perhaps yes, we still get to hear about it. On the other hand, frequently change does not occur with speed or painlessly – indeed at times much pain is involved.  On this point ... many – not to say everybody... but perhaps after all, yes: better say everybody! ... we all keep our mouth shut.

***

EUROPE’S PLUSES

I was told: You’re always criticising what’s going on in the EU and never mention any of its good points. Is it possible that everything’s so bad?

True, I’m frequently critical, for this is necessary since one should not allow oneself to be carried along the tide of those who just see Europe as the acme of what’s good and beautiful. Anyway, there are more than enough people who only know how, or only want, to praise “Europe” to the skies.

Still, to cross the t’s and dot the i’s: Europe, or better the EU, has many positive achievements which it would be obtuse to deny.

For instance: the establishment of an increasingly compact continental market in goods and to a lesser extent in services; the creation of a continental space where the citizens of members states can move, live and work freely; the establishment of a security structure covering social welfare, liberty of speech and the rule of law.

***

RESILIENCE

The debates that arise within the Catholic Church about matters that concern its management or the beliefs it stands for are most interesting. Despite the authoritarian structures that define how it is run and the rigidity with which it defends its beliefs, the Church has demonstrated an exceptional resilience over the centuries. Meanwhile other structures including democratic ones, were repeatedly blown out of the water.

Perhaps one could learn how all this has been and still is made possible by following contemporary controversies and internal debates. The methods by which they are conducted, buried or highlighted are not invented overnight as soon as disputes emerge. They have been honed over centuries as they showed themselves to be effective or otherwise.

So the questions that arise include: How are these methods shaping up today? Have they been updated? – have they become more or less effective?