Strong support from the church for the consensus promoted by the government

The archbishop of Rosario, Eduardo Martin, said he was part of the group of prelates who visited the pope this week; "It's the maturity we claim as citizens of the political leadership," he said.

ROME.-
The ad limina visit of a first group of Argentine bishops was recently completed, during which they met the

Pope

and with the different "ministries" of the

Vatican

, Archbishop of Rosario, Eduardo Martin, gave an update on the meetings and left a definition of a strong political impact: the support of the Church
the government's proposal to grant 10 points with the opposition.

"It is the maturity that we claim as citizens, as Christians, of the political leadership, especially since the problems are solved neither with a sign government, nor with a government d & rsquo; Another sign, "said Martín, who is also president of the Episcopal Commission for Catholic Education.

In an interview with
THE NATION, stressed the great difference of climate and attitude during the last visit
ad limina from 2009, in which he participated and spoke about the Pope's postponed trip, which should take place next year or next year.

-You were also at the last visit
ad limina of 2009, ten years ago, when Benedict XVI was Pope and you, Bishop of Rio Cuarto. What changes did you notice?

Obviously, we are in another era of the Church, where the attitude is much more attentive and which we found in Rome, in the dicasteries, where they told us themselves that "before the bishops do not come with fear We now want to listen, know what are the concerns and learn because you are in the trench. "So, all the meetings in general were very good, there was a very open dialogue, also with the Holy Father, who did not deliver a speech but who wished us to speak very freely. he had a family dialogue for two hours.

-What is your balance?

-Very positive. I leave with various teachings of the Holy Father on the life of the Church, seminaries, priests, religious orders and, above all, on the spirit of all the congregations on the basis of the great pastoral document of the Pope. ,
Evangelii Gaudium, from the launch of the Church to the mission. Today's paradigm is mission. This is how all institutions are called and we too must become pastorally missionary.

– From the meeting with the Pope, who touched him the most?

-Personally, firstly, he devoted all his time to the world to speak, he was at peace, he is seen by a man in peace, lucid and able to think for two extraordinary hours, and who encouraged us to show courage the missionary audacity.

– According to what they said, at the meeting, the pope said that he was hurt by the polarization that reigns in the country and that he wanted to go to Argentina . Does this polarization delay your trip?

From this he says absolutely nothing. He said that at some point the trip was planned, it was on the agenda when he was supposed to go to Chile, but as there were elections in November, they had to have place in January and it was not possible in Argentina. But then he does not say anything.

– Do you expect a visit next year?

-I do not know, it's one of my interpretations, but you can wait. If the pope said that it was on the agenda, I understand that the pope intends to go to Argentina. Now, when? I do not know. I can not dare to generate expectations: it may be next year or the next year, I do not know. We aspire to that and the Pope knows it.

-According to what they said, during the meeting with him, there was no question of politics, Macri or Cristina, or anything. But in the episcopate in general, how do you perceive what is happening and how does this government act?

– Obviously, with concern about the uncertainty generated about an economic process that seemed to want to be overcome and that was disarmed and this lack of understanding, although it now seems that things are changing …

-I was another question: how do you evaluate Macri's proposal for a stability agreement with the opposition?

– This dialogue that the government initiates me personally brings me tranquility, that the leaders begin to dialogue. Because it's like a father and a mother in a family: if parents argue, poor children are left in anguish, anguish; if they understand each other, the boys make sure. Suppose it's a big family, the rulers act as a father, because they must understand each other to ensure the safety of the people, the certainty of a way, that there are no sacrifices, no suffering, but the certainty of a path. And it is the maturity that we claim as citizens, as Christians, of the political leadership, especially since the problems are solved neither with a sign government, nor with a government. Another sign. I think it's smart and humble to say, "Well, let's put ourselves on a table and seek agreement, consensus, as wide as possible."

-A big challenge …

– The big challenge in Argentina is that we have to live together: the other is not someone that I have to eliminate, the other is the other. The great challenge is to dialogue and live together for the building of the common good and not for food.

-So when you read this news of these 10 points, it seemed good …

-Always the Church has opted for dialogue. The gospel is a dialogue, the pope evokes the culture of the encounter, it is about people who ripen the fact of the dialogue. What happens is that they start to generate not dialogues, but confrontations and epithets that give themselves to each other and that really generate more distances …

-The famous crack …

-Of course, because the other is not someone that I can push back, the other may have a different thought and behavior, well, but the other l & # 39; is. There is a phrase of Alberdi who, I think, says: "We must also put the bad ones because they belong to the family", conceiving that we are a family. Now, if we are not from a family, it is there that "these are, they are not", "they are the good ones, these bad guys", and this has always been the case since the original sin … That's why clever and humble effort to say that we have not solved the problems; Twenty or thirty years ago, structural poverty in Argentina existed and we did not solve it. So, why do not we sit down at a table and not look for a few minimum points to be able to say that we are making a common path, with some differences. It's the maturity we need. Therefore, when there are attempts to dialogue, knowing that it is a sincere and genuine attempt, and not a thing to save time or other goals, c & d; Is positive.