Charism succession in Communion and Liberation:1992; 2005

I was de-cluttering and swept up a stack of Traces magazines when I saw “A New Beginning” from April 2005, when Julián Carrón took over leadership of Communion and Liberation. “A New Beginning” is notes from Carrón’s address to the National Council of CL from March 2005. The pages are divided, and along the top, there’s “The Greatest Sacrifice is to Give Your Life for an Other’s Work” written by Giussani. Carrón’s article is accompanied by an account of the unanimous vote for Carrón and one blank ballot by members of the Central Diakonia and a photo of Carrón and Giussani side by side.

“A New Beginning” has some interesting details. In 1997, for example, Giussani said “Lord, let me tell everyone that if Carrón were to take over all the functions I have, I would be very glad.” Unsurprisingly, it also cites Giussani’s phrase about “the uninterrupted following… of the people indicated as the point of reference, as the true interpretation of what happened in me…” (Traces 2005:4, 9. Emphasis mine). There are other passages in that section, which also emphasize Carrón as the legitimate successor, etc., but that does not interest me as much as the passage from Giussani, which is published above this talk.

The Giussani passage is a 4-point discussion of charism, which seems to be the original text which was expanded in Generating Traces in the History of the World to 6 1/2 pages. As in Generating Traces, the passage in question comes at the culmination of a discussion of charism.

“In order to limit this temptation that we are all inclined to, we must make a normal practice of comparison with the charism, as correction and as an ideal to be continually re-awakened. We have to make of this comparison a habit, habitus, and a virtue. This is our virtue: comparison with the charism in its originality.

4. At this point, we are back again at the ephemeral, because God makes use of the ephemeral. Here again is the importance of the ephemeral: for the moment, the final comparison is with the person with whom it all started.

I may dissolve, but the texts I leave behind, and the uninterrupted following— God willing— of the people indicated as the point of reference, as the true interpretation of what happened in me, become the instrument for correction and re-awakening; they become the tool of morality. The line of references indicated is what is most alive in the present, because a text can be interpreted, too; it is difficult to interpret it wrongly, but it is possible.

To give your life for an Other’s work always implies a link between the word ‘Other’ and something historical, something concrete that can be touched, felt, described, photographed, and has a name and surname. Without this, our pride imposes itself–this is ephemeral, yes; ephemeral in the worst sense of the word.

To speak of charism without a historical reference is not to speak of a Catholic charism.” (Traces 2005:4, 10-11).

In contrast with the later text, the translation here uses the term “following” instead of the more loaded term “succession,” but like it says that the “true interpretation” of the charism is the “line of references.” I checked the Italian original for both and in both cases the phrase is “il sequito ininterrotto,“ so the phrase is identical in both places. In Traces 2005:4, the citation is from Giussani, L’avvenimento cristiano, 65-70. Looking at the Scritti website, I see the full editorial history for the article. It’s from notes revised by the author relating to the National Council of Managers of CL, in Milan, February 15, 1992. This places it well before the December 1992 meeting in Madrid and the subsequent collaboration with Prades and Alberto, which resulted in Generating Traces in the History of the World (documented previously in The mistake of charism succession in Communion and Liberation). That blog post also contains details about Kevin Farrell’s letter to Davide Prosperi, which states that “the doctrine of ‘charism succession’ … is seriously contrary to the teachings of the Church.”

[Update 7/31/2022]

I expanded the quote to include the context before the paragraph beginning “I may dissolve,” in order to show the direct connection between uninterrupted succession and true interpretation with charism. I also cleaned up a couple of typos.

[Update 8/29/2022]

I expanded the quote again to include two more paragraphs, including the last sentence “To speak of charism without a historical reference is not to speak of a Catholic charism.”

I would add that the event of this February 1992 speech of Giussani is covered in The Life of Luigi Giussani, 826-830.

I also include here the remarks of Filippo Santoro, Archbishop and special delegate to Memores Domini, a CL group.

“Can the charism be transmitted through an election?
This path responds to the request of the Dicastery, since it highlights the personal responsibility of each member of the association, through a moment of participation. The charism is not the property of a person but is manifested in the action of the Holy Spirit in the life of the founder, and is then given to the whole community that follows him and that can also revive it through the elective process.” (via english.Clonline.org, but content tends to get removed over time)
Santoro: "The Church and the charism of CL? A path of full harmony" (clonline.org). Original: L'arcivescovo Santoro: «Chiesa e carisma Cl? Un percorso di piena sintonia» (avvenire.it)

[Update 9/28/2022]

Prosperi has released “The Point from which We Start Again”, notes from his Introduction to the International Assembly of Leaders of Communion and Liberation, La Thuile, August 26, 2022. This is the PDF.

This text grapples with the text listed above and deftly makes the distinction between authority (institution) and authoritativeness (charism) in the life of the movement. “Authoritativeness is holiness; authority is a task” (qtd from Giussani on p11 of The Point From which We Start Again). Bringing this passage of Giussani alongside the passage from Generating Traces, corrects it in line with the correction of Farrell.

Reading this passage again, I am struck by the term comparison, which is a weighty word in CL: “comparison with the charism in its originality” [either the founder, or his current successor]. Because of the existential weight of the word comparison, this passage remains problematic for me personally.