La fe y el arte de nuestro tiempo

The Pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela, Spain

In the context of Christian education, education has a central role in shaping Christian character and encouraging students to implement the Great Commission in their actions and behavior. The Christian education approach covers various aspects, including the formation of Christian character, understanding values such as love and caring, spreading God's Word, motivation for service and giving, and pastoral spiritual aspects of students. Christian education also motivates students to carry out service and giving as an expression of Christ's love for fellow human beings. Thus, students learn to reflect on values such as forgiveness, honesty, and compassion in the context of service. The importance of spreading God's Word in Christian education includes a deep understanding of the message of God's Word and how it is relevant in everyday life. Students are taught to understand the teachings of Christianity in a spiritual context and apply them in their lives, including in their decisions and actions. It includes the development of a personal relationship with God, an understanding of spiritual vocations, and character development that reflects the values of Christianity. Spiritual guidance and deepening understanding of Christian teachings are integral in shepherding the spiritual aspects of students. Thus, Christian education has a great responsibility in shaping Christian character, understanding the values of Christianity, and shepherding the spiritual aspects of students. Through this holistic approach, Christian education helps students carry out the Great Commission in their actions and behaviors, making them beneficial citizens of society as well as staunch followers of Christian religious values.

The confessor saints and spiritual fathers from the communist period are, for us today, spiritual, cultural, and moral models. They overcame the social injustices of that time, which was dominated by ideologies that restricted faith, freedom of expression, freedom of movement, and denied the dignity of the human person.Thus, God ordained that the confessor saints be, for us today, a support and strength in the face of all the injustices that have come and continue to come upon us.The struggle they carried out each day is invaluable – a struggle to become more prayerful and better toward their fellow human beings, whether friend or foe. Forgiveness and Christian love for others were constants in their lives. They followed what each prayer teaches us: kindness, forgiveness, Christian love, and humility. By following all these, we may lose many social opportunities, but we gain salvation.Today, more than ever, we need these holy and salvific models, because the danger of losing our human dignity is everywhere, regardless of the society in which we live. Even though we no longer live in a communist society, the danger of our dehumanization is ever‑present. That is why we need the confessor saints, who teach us how to be truly good‑hearted, forgiving, and patient people

The attempt to explore human beings transdisciplinarily as beings of love can contribute to a more realistic anthropology, with an increased practical relevance for science and research. On the other hand, with its holistic orientation towards the whole person, it leads to an improper standardization of scientific research results. In order to avoid the problems associated with the holistic study of man asHomo amans, this article therefore reverses the perspective. Fundamentally, the nature of love is not discussed anthropologically on the basis of an examination of human nature and its altruism or egoism, but on the basis of the phenomenon of love in its ambivalence. Following Kierkegaard’s phenomenology of love, the article shows that love cannot be clearly distinguished from selfish acts without the reference of interpersonal relationships with a “third party.” In the Christian perspective, God is such a “third party,” who makes our fellow human beings recognizable to us as neighbors of God and enables us to behave in the spirit of love. Christian love of neighbor is therefore an example of the revolutionary, socially transformative dynamics of love.

Ongoing discussions on creation care and agapeic ethic have paid less attention to the interplay between love, creation, waste management challenges, and mission. This paper, therefore, discusses a missional perspective of agapeic ethic as a ground norm for eco-theology and motivation for eco-care (especially proper waste management). An attempt is made to discuss the concept and dimensions of love and the nexus between love, creation, and missional purpose. This paper adopts a non-participant observation of refuse collection as carried out by refuse collectors, the waste disposal practices of people, and the waste handling and disposal practices of selected churches. This research was conducted across Port Harcourt City, Obio Akpor, Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni, Oyibo, and Eleme municipal areas of Rivers State, Nigeria. The churches observed include Protestant Churches (Seventh-Day Adventist Church, Church of Nigeria that is Anglican Communion, and Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints); the Roman Catholic Church; Pentecostal Churches (such as Salvation Ministries Worldwide, Redeemed Christian Church of God, and Deeper Life Bible Church); and African Indigenous Churches (namely, the Christ Apostolic Church, Cherubim and Seraphim, and Celestial Church of Christ). The information gathered was critically analysed and used in measuring stakeholders’ disposition to and understanding of the research focus. Ecological liberation hermeneutics was adopted as an interpretative framework, while the eco-justice principles of interconnectedness and purpose were engaged to foreground the underlying issues in this study. This paper argued that Christians’ involvement in proper waste management, keeping both private and public spaces clean, is a morally and divinely imposed duty and a practical testimonial of their love for God, their fellow human beings, and non-human others. This is a fulfilment of the mission where Christian love (agape) serves as an ethical principle of inflicting ‘no harm’ to humans or non-human others.

i recognize and acknowledge all my ancestors as I open the circle to deliver the Presidential Address at the 2021 American Folklore Society (AFS) annual meeting with an open heart and a deep connection to those who came before me and to those who will follow. I dedicate this talk to the many mentors and role models, folklorists whose life paths intersected with mine either at AFS or on my way to AFS, and to those who have passed on, especially Bess Lomax Hawes, Judith McCulloch, and most recently, Frank de Caro, Leonard Primiano, Enedina Vásquez, and Pang Xiong Sirirathasuk Sikoun. I also dedicate it to the younger folklorists out there who are embarking on a career or on an education path toward a career in folklore: you are our future.I trust you've had as good an annual meeting as I have. Since the virtual welcome session on Monday and the many virtual gatherings—actually from pre-conference section meetings and convenings and right up until now, I have sensed a strong affirmation, secure in the future of AFS and of our field. We have survived. We will survive. I am reminded of Sarita Liendo, an elder tradition bearer who for her entire life worked with the folk Catholic tradition of matachines–in her community, it was Los Matachines de la Santa Cruz. Doña Sarita and her community honored the Holy Cross, the object of devotion for the folk Catholic dance tradition in a poor working-class barrio on the banks of the Rio Grande River in Laredo, Texas. “Con o sin dinero, los matachines bailan,” she told me once. For 2 years now, the matachines have clandestinely danced on May 3, albeit without the usual 3-day fiesta, without the large, shared community meal, and without the procession to the church or the mass of thanksgiving. But they have danced. And so, as the matachines must dance with or without money, with or without a city permit, with or without the usual elements, so, too, must we carry on with or without the usual accoutrements of our annual gathering—and this year particularly, we gather both virtually and in person in a format we have never before tried. We go forward con o sin. . . . The lesson is clear, with or without . . . we must persist.My deepest gratitude to the membership of AFS for allowing me to serve as your president. As anyone who has had the privilege of serving will tell you, the time goes by in the proverbial blink of an eye, and “with COVID time,” well, it's been even more challenging. I am still having trouble figuring out the day of the week, and when I say last year, I usually mean 2 years ago. When I began my presidency on January 1, 2020, the world was a different place. Time is only one thing that seems to have shifted. As I mentioned in my welcome remarks on Monday, we can never go back to the status quo that existed before the pandemic, before COVID-19 wreaked havoc within our lives. We cannot return to the “normal” that is rooted in the conditions that led us to the problems in the first place. The world is different. The Black Lives Matter movement, the #MeToo movement, the January 6 insurrection, the end of our military intervention in Afghanistan, the images of thousands of Haitians in Del Rio, Texas—these and the thousands of small daily events in our own lives, professional and personal, add up to major shifts, systemic changes, and paradigmatic changes.When I joined AFS almost 40 years ago, AFS was a different organization. I distinctly remember telling Pat Jasper, who was encouraging me to join, that if I did, I would be an active member, and it would not be to just add one more organization to my CV. I joined and then faced my Chicane Studies colleagues who were questioning my choice to join what they perceived to be a racist and outdated organization; some even accused me of going to the dark side, for, indeed, working on folklore was deemed a betrayal. In my view, and in defending my choice, I knew and still know that the field of folkloristics may have pretty negative baggage. However, unless we get into the exclusionary spaces, we are in a way complicit in the continued marginalizing: we allow others to tell our story, to study our culture, and to, in effect, teach us who we are. Perhaps my goal was to be a working member of the society precisely to change the negative view others have of our field. When I first served on the Executive Board, or as co-chair of the Cultural Diversity Committee (CDC), or as convener for a section, or in so many other roles within AFS, I kept that goal front and center—to create the society that I felt responded to the higher charge that I could defend to those who would call it the enemy. Facing our history is a step toward building a society that allows us to be the best that we can be. Despite the fact that I was teaching and “doing folklore” in my scholarly work at the time, I didn't necessarily call myself a folklorist. Once I became a member of AFS, I felt that I could claim to be a folklorist. After all, I was working at the National Endowment for the Arts Folk and Traditional Arts program, had been integrating folkloristics into my English classes for a number of years, and had written a dissertation on a folk play. But the label “folklorist” didn't seem to fit, even then. I suppose some kind of impostor syndrome nestled in my heart—after all, I had never taken a class specifically called “Folklore.” By the way, if you are interested in how I came to call myself a folklorist, I refer you to my AFS origin story online in our AFS website under the Resources section as a Case Study—Thanks, Tom Mould, for the invitation to contribute to that lively space.2 And by the way, if you have not yet visited the new website, please do so—browse the various tabs, and let us know if you find any problems or if you have ideas for us to make it even better.3In my address, this afternoon, I do refer to our history, but I will also talk about the present, signaling and highlighting the extraordinary times we are living in and the challenges such a reality poses for our work, for AFS, and for society in general. Finally, I wish to focus on the path ahead for AFS, with some imaginings and dreams of what awaits and where we can go in the future. Grounding my remarks on my own path and with references to various folk traditions, I challenge AFS to go forth and “do work that matters”4 in the world.I anchor my talk on the Gloria E. Anzaldúan concept of nepantla, the idea that we are always in flux and going from one space or time to the next, and that it is in that in-betweenness that change happens. Nepantla rooted in Nahuatl thought is a useful term to describe what happens in the interstices. The story goes that when a friar questioned an Indian man who had converted to Catholicism about his devotion to both the Christian God and his old Gods, he answered “I am in nepantla.” In other words, he was being smart and covering all bases. Being in that liminal state, that in-betweenness, that nepantla that Chicana philosopher Gloria E. Anzaldúa spoke about, allows our field to move forward, confronting the past. Anzaldúa teaches us that “transformations occur in this in-between space, an unstable, unpredictable, precarious, always-in-transition space lacking clear boundaries. Nepantla es tierra desconocida [is terra incognita], and living in this liminal zone means being in a constant state of displacement–an uncomfortable, even alarming feeling” (Anzaldúa 2002b:1). We either survive as a field, or we don't. I am an optimist and believe we will, but it will not be easy. It will be messy, and it will be difficult. It has been so in the past. But we have survived for almost 200 years, and we must change now to be able to exist in the future. How can we as folklorists go forward with our work in the face of so many issues that appear to be more immediate, more relevant? That is one of the arguments my Chicane colleagues used when dissuading my interest in cultural studies. At this meeting, the open table sessions “Why the F— Am I Here?” arise from a need to think deeply about why I am here and not out there feeding the migrants in Del Rio or Laredo, or even just working for social justice in some direct and grassroots ways. Why am I not writing a manifesto? Why am I not out in the streets protesting? Well, perhaps I am in my own way creating revolution and paradigm shifts.My aim this afternoon is to explore these questions. First, I want to reflect on our path—where we've been, where we are, and where we shall go collectively as an organization and as individual folklorists honoring those in our past and those in our future. Secondly, I want to share my angst of being in a pandemic that seems to never end and share my views of how I see our field as key to moving forward to a new normal. What an opportunity to find a new way of relating with one another, a new way of being folklorists in the world! In a way, it is my manifesto—a call for a move away from the settler colonial mentality, a declaration of where we are and where we need to be.I am not the first AFS president to structure a talk along the chronology that looks at the past, the present, and the future. In preparation for today, I read several addresses by past presidents. Diane Goldstein and John Roberts noted in their presidential addresses that others had also structured their remarks similarly—past, present, future (Roberts 1999:166; Goldstein 2016:125). The “path” of my title is not accidental nor a mere cliché. I use it fully conscious of the lessons I learned in my experience walking a real path, the pilgrimage Camino de Santiago de Compostela in northern Spain over the last 10 years.I see clear connections to our path as the AFS—more on this later. I will not necessarily use a linear narrative for my remarks. For although I believe in the power of chronological narratives, I also believe we can use a recursive approach that may appear to be ambling and digressive, but in fact, it is the way most stories go. Or at least in my narrative discourse strategies, that's how they go.I feel the responsibility of following on the path forged by my immediate predecessors, those who have steered the AFS ship well and with vision. I must tell you how in awe I am when I think back to my earliest AFS meetings about 30 years ago–how far we've come! And how far we have to go!On the Camino, I would often hear “ultreya!” and wonder what it meant. I asked and received variant explanations. Basically, it's a fitting saying in Latin—although some mistakenly told me it was Basque—meaning “go forth,” “go beyond”—ultreya—and the complete saying, according to written sources that date to the twelfth century, is: “E ultreia, e suseia, Deus adiuva nos!”5 As we proceed on our AFS path, I, too, say: “Ultreya! E suseya!”As I explore our past, I go back to my colleagues who warned against joining AFS. They saw folklore as a field steeped in settler colonialism. Hence, they argued, as they tried to steer me away from the errors of my decision, that I did not belong. Unfortunately, the founders of our field and the early scholars reinforced the colonial structures and perpetuated the cultural genocide and repression of non-Eurocentric cultures even while attempting to “save” them. I offer one example: Captain John Gregory Bourke, who served as president of our society and who died while in office in 1896. Bourke's fascinating life is fraught with issues, because he was a military man and yet did ethnographic research in the southwest for a number of years, insinuating himself into sacred rituals. His copious notes are a treasure trove of cultural information, true. But his practice of offering gifts so as to get the information, and the dubious ethical manner in which he collected the material, show that he was fully aware of what he was doing. Nevertheless, his diaries contain valuable information as well as secret material that he spirited away. We have his own words to indict him as he writes about how some of the groups were upset because he had been taking notes and going into ceremonies. I am conflicted. I am grateful to have his notes, for instance, on South Texas Mexican communities, but also indignant because of how he portrays my ancestors.Speaking of contradictions, we have women folklorists of Mexican origin in the first half of the twentieth century deeply engaged in collecting folklore and using it in their fiction. Novels like Elena Zamora O'Shea's El Mesquite and Jovita González and Margaret Elmer's (Eve Raleigh's pseudonym) Caballero come to mind. Another early author whose work draws on the folklore of the region is playwright Josefina Niggli. These authors clearly write for a white audience, and it appears they chose to be interlocutors so as to educate their non-Spanish-speaking readers. Perhaps unconsciously countering the master narratives that Bourke and Aurelio Espinoza had left behind, or perhaps to usher in a new way of doing folklore, these women also wrote fiction. While it is laudable that these early folklorists were writing at all, we have to admit that they were writing for a white gaze of many who remained impervious, and who at best were curious and at worst looked askance—sometimes in disgust—at the women's findings. Grounded in the white supremacist origins of the nineteenth century, some scholars Othered their object of study and excluded any but the white and Eurocentric views that indubitably positioned the object of study as “peasant” Other—no wonder the term “folklore” is still pejorative in the Global South. I was not surprised by the contemporary white supremacist movement, the monster that reared its head as it became emboldened by the political climate under the Donald Trump administration that came into power in 2016. We can read similar rhetoric in the descriptions of Indigenous, Mexican, and African American communities by folklorists in the nineteenth century.If, as some have claimed, the past is a foreign country, then AFS's past is a well-charted territory with terrain that we can visit and explore with our twenty-first century lens; we can perhaps then discern the nature of the enterprise more fully. In joining AFS, I suppose I was looking to do what Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak observes of actions that challenge “from within but against the grain” and, therefore I claim, constitute real change. But do we effect the kind of change that is permanent and that is in the of the That to be I am us a into our history as I but we must also of where we are and our let us at the We need to where we are at and what it is we are doing to effect the change to not in the past and in the old and I know that the change will but only if we work toward it I am reminded of idea that are that the of which they let us the state of with that in mind. We can find in the fact that we acknowledge our past with all its for that is the first I am we can all a time when we were with a and us to just do what we just it a day at a has been especially the pandemic times in which we are but even It was a I even when I was writing my at a time, a These are but it may just work that by taking one step at a time, we will get one of these is an the society is taking in an to the of folklorists of from our The by and was first at the AFS in as an it now as a virtual with images and information on the AFS The first in the of are but the of the that to those who have been or who may not be for their work on of the first to be Jovita was a and, at a time when received a she a at the of and worked Frank served as president of the Texas Folklore Society and several and also at in she received her a that is rooted in the folklore of South Texas. I am also to see also as in the to be to the of American Indian in and yet she At last I believe the and have has to They have various scholars to the of Perhaps some of you are of this of That is a to do the is of and the session to How do we move with and de on the on where we are now and how do we move focus is on the we the words we use to talk about the work we do and how it can who do not share the or experience that many of us have. We are in the questioning and the past years have us it is that words have But then I always knew the at key in and like words . . . just field can the of and of change. thing that came up in that is how words like and carry the of words that are good and It allows for us to from the of white and For using like of the more a that may not be the one that that the have to be while the term the where it on the that have to We must remember that and words carry the a call for the old of doing work in communities For to community we may want to approach our work from a different banks are where could community and by and for I want to a for, in my view, such are in how we can move forward being folklorists doing that The at the session of a in that could be to the and various that the community could In this the all and a for a these as to or that a for what you that have connection to and can not to that it may not like the offer for like to in that and community while meeting the goal of and the us by and while also and is the I am the use of a allows for for our work and the best of all I will this concept a more later. I will from a of my views on that we can effect our words and with our issues, and acknowledge the that we are and how we will go I became AFS president ago, we have and from the of we have been by political and The on the political that in the of January and the continued that is our have taken a on our way of I the with the we face the of a world that at times seems We see our without the means of to the that are on that or the many of from Monday who in or out without a way of with May her be of my a in Laredo, has shared with me the that are have as has my in and in Texas. We have with the of the reality along with the of to As I told you on Monday, I am I am many of you are not just the online teaching and the virtual meetings but the that when we are engaged with social with doing that As we the state of we cannot our own as an have also an and a future. we must of society will in fact it I that this is not the AFS I I am others have the I that change is what we need to if we we will not survive. is also our way of the past and creating the future. The of on the that looking history in the also a moving The idea allows for a of the past and a into the future that both with the we that have and we face a But we have to change in to move It is to see so many doing just by our field with ideas for a practice rooted in our history but also to move AFS The American Folklore Society as an must as it to be in the twenty-first century with the twenty-first as we change con with of our role and our in the of as we the new as we create to the future. At the of the I see other of this I have the Cultural Diversity Committee from a to a fully and that within AFS and with the charge of the Executive to create for I am a to do more of the but in a more systemic and the organization. We will a I the and work at a different within the organization to us the will return to the a but for now, I will to a on the Camino de years ago, I over on the Camino de Santiago in northern Spain from de in to Santiago de Compostela in In along this path following the to the end of the was before the Christian began to visit the of the that are in the How did end up Well, the story goes that when the far and their was by the to and a But he was called back to where he was his was then and on a on the of or to is the in who appears in the story in the the that early on the The the story of how the of are taken by his to for a to the and a to not their but to going and the in They go to what is now But too, they are and in fact, the their they and return to time, she to a for the in a sacred But she has and when they get to the sacred they are by a we a in this they have the of and with the Christian of the on their side, they the they have to with that have been the last is the one most For a time, they a to the time, their extraordinary having the they and she allows to the story on a The for about It is not until the century that a a in the and and there is the the with the of the knew that was in the but one had his perhaps one had as they were for years with the many and of daily story me of that his field while from the in the with the of to the When the goes to the the him and the of his the the in that it is the whose have been As the of the and the the of the claim, began to By the twelfth century, the pilgrimage had taken and it appears in narratives, in of in forward to when I am on a in the origins of a folk from the of and Laredo, which is to the object of my The to the Camino de Santiago to of But I am a poor and on a to get the research and myself away from the section of the the fact that I had learned about the Camino from may he in who began taking on the pilgrimage that time, I was not able to make the for 30 By the way, passed away in of which is one I am to write my on the Camino, to his I would to say he was a and his a on Santiago that of and all manner of of the along the also a of But I . . . When I in I was a that I had been for a in my would teach when I was for to I believe it was only I was to the experience with a that I the Camino experience is an even one for a because of the folklore along the the the the and the material with the Camino, not to the folk and

Judith N. Shklar on disobedience and obligation in a “society of strangers”

The process of globalization is inevitable because it is part of human nature. Man by nature is a social being with an irresistible urge to associate with his fellow human beings. Man cannot survive without associating with his fellow human beings. Globalization is a manifestation of this natural urge in man to associate with his fellow human beings and it is irresistible. I understand globalization to mean the process by which mankind gets closer together. This process has in recent times been facilitated by modern means of communication and transportation. Tremendous progress was made in this direction in the 20th century by the unprecedented advancement in the means of transportation and communication, e.g. Satellite and E-mail. This has turned the world to “global village”. You could have your dinner in Lagos and your breakfast the following morning in London. Through CNN, you could see and know what is happening in other part of the world. And through improved telecommunication, you could talk with anybody in other parts of the world. Through all these advancements in transportation and telecommunication, mankind is fast coming together, getting to know more about one another, becoming more and more interested and involved in what goes on in other parts of the world. Despite its numerous advantages, globalization has serious effects on African culture. It affects almost if not all aspects of African culture. One of such is the loss of one’s cultural identity and even national identity. The paper discusses meaning and definitions of culture, characteristics of culture, Categories and types of culture, meaning and definition of globalization, features of globalization, advantages of globalization and the impacts of globalization on African culture. The paper therefore concludes that globalization is good, but we must embrace it with caution and guard against the dangers inherent in it so that our cultural heritage is not eroded and sacrificed on the altar of globalization.

During the 12th century the three most important sites in the Holy Land were in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth. While these sites were controlled by the Crusaders (c. 1099– 1187), the numbers of pilgrims from the West increased, and the churches at each of the sites were gradually renovated and decorated. While they were cathedral churches for their respective Latin bishop, archbishop, or patriarch, nonetheless their greatest function was as centres of Christian pilgrimage. The artistic patronage of these pilgrims to the Holy Land in the 12th century provides ample evidence for the diversity of European visitors to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. In this regard, I propose that it was the church at Bethlehem that included the largest programme of pilgrim-sponsored art from the 12th century. Pilgrims to Bethlehem engaged local painters to provide icons that would commemorate their patron saints, linking the holy place of the birth of Christ with their European homeland. These large icons, which decorate columns of the nave and aisles of the Church of the Nativity, include a surprisingly diverse array of saintly figures that include cult images of the Virgin and Child, along with the images of apostles, bishops, deacons, ascetics, soldier-saints, holy kings and important female saints. On rare occasions the images of the pilgrims who may have commissioned the column paintings were also represented. Furthermore, in one independent instance there is a small devotional icon which links patron saints associated with the three great Christian pilgrimage sites at the time — Jerusalem, Rome and Santiago de Compostela — ordered by an anonymous pilgrim who appears to have visited all three sites.

This article develops in three levels: a) the problems of the documentation to study the rural and urban houses in the 18th century; b) the size and the characteristics of the rural houses of the western Galicia; c) the houses of the cities -Santiago de Compostela and Coruna-. A comparison is done between the housings of both areas; those of the nobility and the peasants; and those of the rich merchants who turned into an influential sector during the second half of the century. In addition, the routes by means of which goods were accumulated in the houses.

For the ecumenical movement, the Second Vatican Council was a turning point that fundamentally changed the conditions for relationships between the churches. Since the council, the Roman Catholic Church has become an active partner in the ecumenical movement, while until the middle of the 20th century it had deliberately rejected any recognition of the ecumenical movement as a new reality in the life of the churches. The change has particularly affected the World Council of Churches (WCC), and the jubilee of the Second Vatican Council (2nd VC) is an appropriate moment to assess the developments in ecumenical relations during these fifty years. Of course, the significance of the 2nd VC goes far beyond its impact for ecumenical relations. Mention could and should be made of its new understanding of the place of the church in the modern world, of its affirmations of human rights and religious liberty, as well as of its initiatives preparing the way for inter-religious encounter and dialogue. The following reflections, however, will be limited to the development of ecumenical relations in the fifty years since the council. The generation of those in the leadership of the WCC who witnessed the 2nd VC and who participated in its successive sessions as observers on behalf of the WCC and of some of its member churches has passed away. This is true in particular for the first general secretary of the WCC, Dr W.A. Visser't Hooft; for the principal observer on behalf of the WCC, Dr Lukas Vischer; and for the two Orthodox observers, Dr Nikos Nissiotis and Fr Vitalij Borovoij. Their accounts still provide a vivid testimony for the groundbreaking significance of the council. The present attempt to assess the development in ecumenical relations between the Roman Catholic Church and the WCC is written from the perspective of someone who since 1971 has been involved in shaping these relationships, who was co-secretary of the Joint Working Group between the Vatican and the WCC, and general secretary of the WCC from 1993-2003. The foundation for the new phase in ecumenical relationships was laid decisively by the Decree on Ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio, which was approved by the council in November 1994. With its affirmation that those “who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are brought into certain, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church” (N. 3), the decree formulated the ecumenical consequences of the new articulation of the ecclesiological self-understanding of the Roman Catholic Church in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium). Thus, the relationships between the Roman Catholic Church and the other Christian churches were placed on a new basis. Soon after the council, this became evident in the development of an impressive network of bilateral dialogues between the major church families, which have led to important results. An assessment of these dialogues, which have been documented in several volumes under the title “Growth in Agreement,” is beyond the scope of these reflections. In the immediate period following the announcement of the forthcoming Vatican Council, the WCC became the privileged ecumenical partner for the Roman Catholic Church. Even before the official establishment of the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, a first secret encounter took place at Milano in 1960 between Cardinal Bea, the future president of the secretariat, and Dr Visser't Hooft, the general secretary of the WCC. Subsequently, the WCC served as a facilitator for the invitations of ecumenical observers at the council and was itself represented by two observers. The position papers and commentaries of the ecumenical observers were taken seriously at the council. For example, the preface to the Decree on Ecumenism, which refers positively to the ecumenical movement, has been influenced by a memorandum from the WCC. A second encounter between Cardinal Bea und Dr Visser't Hooft took place in April of 1964, even before the promulgation of the Decree on Ecumenism. It prepared the way for the establishment of a Joint Working Group (JWG) between the Roman Catholic Church and the WCC with the initial mandate to clarify the basis for future relationships. During its first mandate period between 1965 and 1967, the JWG developed a very productive activity. With the publication of a basic working document on the understanding and the methodologies of “ecumenical dialogue” it had fulfilled its initial task. As a consequence, a number of common initiatives were launched for direct collaboration between the Vatican and the WCC. Mention should be made in particular of the joint Committee on Society, Development and Peace (SODEPAX), which began its work with a joint secretariat in 1968. High hopes were placed in this endeavour and SODEPAX quickly became a symbol for the new quality of relationships. However, the increasingly independent dynamics of its activities led the two parent bodies to reduce and refocus the mandate, and eventually this form of structured cooperation was concluded in 1980. The Joint Advisory Group on Social Thought and Action that was created in its place proved to be ineffective and was terminated after a few years. The same fate caught up with two other early initiatives, that is, the Women's Ecumenical Liaison Group and a structure for cooperation in the field of the laity, both of which ceased operation after only a few years. What remained from this initial hopeful period were official cooperative relationships in the fields of theological study, especially in the framework of the Commission on Faith and Order; of mission and evangelism, facilitated especially by Catholic missionary orders; of ecumenical diakonia; and of inter-religious dialogue. The most long-lasting cooperative endeavour has been the joint preparation of the Week of Prayer for Christian unity. At the 4th Assembly of the WCC in Uppsala (1968), Fr Roberto Tucci SJ in a public address mentioned the possibility that the Roman Catholic Church might join the WCC as a full member. At the same time, the Vatican approved the inclusion of Roman Catholic theologians as official members of the WCC Commission on Faith and Order. Since then all decisive theological study processes in the WCC have benefited from full Roman Catholic participation. One year later, in June 1969, Pope Paul VI visited the WCC secretariat in Geneva. This was a gesture of high symbolic significance, even though the Pope left no doubt about the difficulties that still needed to be resolved on the ecumenical way. In the same year, the JWG formed a small working group to study the conditions and implications of a possible Roman Catholic membership of the WCC. The report under the title “Pattern of Relationships between the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches” (1972) came to the conclusion that there were no fundamental obstacles preventing possible membership. However, serious consultations on the highest levels in the Roman Curia led to the conclusion that the Roman Catholic Church would not further pursue this option in the near future. These conditions have not changed in the forty years since then, even though the Roman Catholic Church has joined national ecumenical structures in more than fifty countries as a full member. The focus of ecumenical activities on the part of the Vatican shifted more and more towards bilateral dialogues with the major Christian church families and structured cooperation with the WCC was reduced. despite all divisions which have occurred in the course of the centuries there is a real though imperfect communion which continues to exist between those who believe in Christ and are baptized in his name . . . Through the development of the ecumenical movement that communion has been experienced anew. This is not to claim that it has been created anew. Since it is beyond human power and initiative, it precedes all ecumenical efforts for the restoration of the unity of all Christians.1 The report also referred to the failure of the efforts to give visible and structured expression to the relationships between the Roman Catholic Church and the WCC. While there was no doubt that the Roman Catholic Church could accept the basis of the WCC, the report indicates that the Roman Catholic Church understood its constitution “as a universal fellowship with a universal mission and structure as an essential element of its identity.” It sees further difficulties in “the way in which authority is considered in the Roman Catholic Church and the processes through which it is exercised.”2 In this way the report for the first time points to the fundamental differences in the understanding of ecclesial fellowship, and thus it concludes this assessment with the question: “How can the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches, without forming one structured fellowship, intensify their joint activities and thereby strengthen the unity, the common witness and the renewal of the churches?”3 In any case, the question how “the real, though imperfect communion” can gain visible shape has remained open since then and it has become clear that the Decree on Ecumenism of the 2nd VC did not offer a conclusive answer. In the following years, until the 5th Assembly of the WCC at Vancouver (1983), cooperation with the Roman Catholic Church concentrated more and more on the work of the Commission on Faith and Order. During this period the commission concluded its work on the convergence documents on “Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry” (BEM), which were approved at the meeting of the commission in Lima (1982). In appropriating the results of bilateral dialogues and with full participation of the Roman Catholic members of the commission these convergence texts manifested a large measure of agreement on central issues of doctrine and church order. No other result of ecumenical theological work has been discussed on a similarly broad level in the churches. In 1987 an official response from the Roman Catholic Church to the convergence texts stated that “BEM is perhaps the most significant result of the [Faith and Order] movement.” The response underlines that baptism is the decisive basis for the communion which “already exists between divided Christians.” It is somewhat more reserved regarding the text on the eucharist, but it considers that a reception by all churches of the theological understanding and description of the celebration of the eucharist as expressed in the Lima document would be an important development in the direction of affirming a “common faith.” Critical questions were addressed in particular to the document on the ministry. But even here the response comes to the conclusion that the acceptance of the proposals of the Lima document on the ministry would represent a “major step towards Christian unity.”4 In order to avoid misunderstandings the response however underlines once again the self-understanding of the Roman Catholic Church and its unity by quoting explicitly the affirmation in the Decree on Ecumenism (No. 4) that the “unity of the one and only Church which Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning . . . subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.”5 It links this with the expectation “that the study of ecclesiology must come more and more into the centre of the ecumenical dialogue.”6 When in 1984 Pope John Paul II visited the ecumenical centre in Geneva he emphasized his office as Bishop of Rome, which had served as the visible point of reference and as the guarantee of unity in faithfulness to the apostolic tradition. Ten years later, after the Commission on Faith and Order at its 5th World Conference in Santiago de Compostela also recommended a common study of the question of a universal office of unity, the Pope came back to this question in his encyclical Ut Unum Sint “on commitment to ecumenism” (1995) and invited church leaders and theologians “to engage in a patient and fraternal dialogue on this subject” in order “to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation” (No. 95f). This dialogue has begun, but so far no solution has been found. The WCC assembly at Vancouver (1983) gave the impulse for a “conciliar process for justice, peace and the integrity of creation,” which became a crystallization point for ecumenical cooperation in the period until 1990. The Roman Catholic Church was invited to co-sponsor this process. While it accepted this invitation on national and regional levels, its participation on the global level remained restricted, especially because of questions regarding the ecclesiological foundations of the conciliar process. This fact served to underline the need to give more focused attention to the issues of ecclesiology, as had been urged already in the Roman Catholic response to the BEM document. On the basis of a proposal by the Faith and Order Commission, the 6th Assembly of the WCC at Canberra (1991) in its declaration on “The Unity of the Church as Koinonia: Gift and Calling” re-affirmed the importance of the concept of koinonia in searching for a common ecumenical understanding on ecclesiology. Since its 5th World Conference at Santiago de Compostela (1993) the Commission on Faith and Order had concentrated its attention on working out a convergence statement on the church. Several preliminary statements were published and circulated among the churches for reaction. After successive revisions, a final text has been accepted by the Commission in 2012 under the title, The Church: Towards a Common Vision. In November 2013 it was received by the 10th Assembly of the WCC at Busan and it is now before the churches for serious study and appropriate reception. It will now have to be seen whether and how the Roman Catholic Church will respond to this concerted ecumenical effort to address the core issues of ecclesiology that have been at the centre of ecumenical dialogues during these past decades. This question is of particular interest since, with the document “Dominus Jesus” (2000) and the subsequent Decree with “Responses to some questions regarding certain aspects of the Doctrine On the Church” (2007), the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith strongly affirmed the uniqueness and exclusivity of the Roman Catholic Church and defended a rather restrictive interpretation of the teachings of Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of the 2nd VC. This is a matter of concern particularly for the churches of the Reformation. The council had referred to them as “ecclesial communities,” but this has now been sharpened in the sense that they cannot “according to Catholic doctrine be called Churches in the proper sense,” since, due to “the absence of the sacramental priesthood they have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the eucharistic mystery.”7 These statements were issued by the Vatican under the responsibility of Cardinal Ratzinger before he became Pope Benedict XVI. Whether new ecumenical signals will come from Pope Francis still has to be seen. At this stage it appears that there are still profound differences in the understanding of the church and of ecclesial communion. On the one hand we discern a universal ecclesiology oriented towards communion with the Bishop of Rome and the recognition of his primacy which stands over against an ecclesiology that recognizes the plurality of local churches and is oriented toward a communion in which “all churches are able to recognize in one another the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church in its fullness.”8 This brief retrospective of developments during these fifty years leaves a mixed impression. The 2nd VC and particularly the Decree on Ecumenism have irrevocably brought the Roman Catholic Church into the ecumenical movement and its ecumenical commitment has been re-affirmed in very solemn terms by successive popes. In many ways the Roman Catholic Church has even begun to claim leadership responsibility regarding the development of ecumenical relationships that would have been unthinkable in the period before the 2nd VC. The numerous bilateral doctrinal dialogues have reached important clarifications regarding basic issues of faith and order and have concluded many of the doctrinal controversies between the churches. One of the most significant results is the “Common Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” between the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran churches that was solemnly signed in 1999. Ecumenical collaboration between the Roman Catholic Church and the WCC has so far been based on the conviction that there is only “one ecumenical movement” that embraces all Christian churches and traditions. This is reflected also in the Decree on Ecumenism, which in the headline of its first chapter speaks of “Catholic Principles of Ecumenism,” instead of “Principles of Catholic Ecumenism” as was initially proposed. However, after fifty years there are increasing doubts whether we are still dealing with one and the same ecumenical movement, or whether competitive understandings of ecumenism and its ultimate goal have emerged in the meantime. The ecclesiological self-understanding of the Roman Catholic Church as articulated in the official interpretation of the teachings of the 2nd VC places the Roman Catholic Church with its universal structure and its hierarchical understanding of authority and its exercise into the centre of the search for Christian unity. This cannot easily be reconciled with the understanding of ecclesial unity in conciliar fellowship that has developed in the course of serious dialogue within the fellowship of churches in the WCC. The fact that it has not been possible so far to give visible and structured expression to the “real though imperfect” communion based on the common baptism indicates that there are still differences of rather basic character. The recent Vatican statements referred to above strengthen this impression, precisely where they interpret the teachings of the council. It is evident that the declarations of the 2nd VC, including the Decree on Ecumenism, were the result of controversial discussions among the council fathers trying to hold together widely divergent positions and convictions. Thus, they allow for different interpretations and show signs of internal tension or even contradictions. It should therefore not come as a surprise that the process of renewal that was initiated by the council has not yet reached its full clarity. However, that raises the question whether the changes in ecumenical relationships that were initiated by the council, and particularly by the Decree on Ecumenism, can be regarded as an open process in the sense that the ecumenical reception and discussion of the teachings of the council can make a contribution to clarifying the remaining questions and tensions, or whether the Decree on Ecumenism has to be regarded as the final word of the Roman Catholic Church concerning the challenges of the ecumenical movement. While the papal encyclical Ut Unum Sint has in many respects been received as a source of encouragement, there was disappointment among many ecumenical partners that Pope John Paul II did not go beyond repeating and re-affirming the teachings of the Decree on Ecumenism and did not appear to adequately recognize and honour the insights and clarifications that have been reached in the course of fifty years of intensive ecumenical dialogue, not least in the context of bilateral conversations. The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are ‘numerous elements of sanctification and of truth’ which are found outside her structure, but which “as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity”.9 In a lecture 2004, on the occasion of the fortieth anniversary of the Decree on Ecumenism, Cardinal Kasper as President of the Pontifical Council on Promoting Christian Unity already dealt extensively with this same issue and stated that the formulation “subsists in” “contains in nuce the whole ecumenical problem.”10 The Cardinal felt that thanks to this formulation, which replaced the simple “is,” the council was able to take a decisive step forward. “It wished to do justice to the fact that there are found outside of the Catholic Church not only individual Christians but also ‘elements of the church’, indeed churches and ecclesial communities which, although not in full communion, rightly belong to the one church and possess salvatory significance for their members.” The concept “subsistit in”, according to the intention of the Theological Commission of the Council, means: the church of Christ Jesus has its concrete location in the Catholic Church… It is not a purely Platonic entity or a prospective future reality, it exists in a concrete historical form, it is located in the Catholic Church. Understood in this sense “subsistit in” encompasses the essential thrust of the “est.” But it no longer formulates the self-concept [self-image] of the Catholic Church in “splendid isolation”, but also takes account of churches and ecclesial communities in which the one church of Jesus Christ is effectively present, but which are not in full communion with it. In formulating its own identity, the Catholic Church at the same time establishes a relationship of dialogue with these churches and ecclesial communities. Accordingly it is a misunderstanding of “subsistit in” to make it the basis of an ecclesiological pluralism or relativism which implies that the one church of Christ Jesus subsists in many and thus the Catholic Church is one among many other churches . . . The Catholic Church continues to as it to be the true church of Christ in which the of the of are present, but it now sees itself in a context of dialogue with the other churches and ecclesial communities. It does not any new doctrine but establishes a new and formulates its self-concept in a concrete one could even The Council is that the church is on a through towards a concrete historical of what its most profound This interpretation is but it is not clear how this position can as a basis of further ecumenical dialogues on ecclesiology. the theological dialogue will But the reception of their results difficulties in all because the new and common that has been developed through these dialogues cannot easily be reconciled with the doctrinal of the churches. a towards the affirmation of a communion” will not be possible without a of the ecclesiological by the teachings of the council. The papal encyclical Ut Unum Sint also has not been able to open a way forward. An of a new ecumenical might be in the response from the Vatican to the of the WCC document Towards a Common and a Common of the WCC This response the “common or basis of ecumenism” by repeating the conviction that is a true and real, even imperfect, koinonia between the Catholic Church and other Churches and But it then “It is a real sacramental koinonia the churches a true baptism by which one is into the of explicitly the of the which already exists between the churches by of their common this statement recognizes the ecclesiological quality of these ecumenical relationships. It once again that this “real but imperfect communion” is to any to form of it even is to that understanding the WCC has ecclesiological believe that a further development of the of a as in these statements could the ecumenical dialogue about the understanding of the church and its unity from the present, and open future It is that the Joint Working Group between the Roman Catholic Church and the WCC has a study on the and Ecumenical of a Common was the general secretary of the World Council of Churches, from through

In this paper the conception of Christian love to neighboursand fellow human beings is analyzed within the sermons of the Danishtheologian N.F.S. Grundtvig (1783-1872). In his sermons Grundtvigpersistently expresses the importance of the value of fatherliness. TheChristian person should thus act in a strongly fatherly way towards hisneighbour. Grundtvig criticizes popular ideas of his own time of the natureand essence of Christian neighbour love, and he distinguishessharply between a true and a false sort of Christian love. According tothe sermons of Grundtvig, only a responsible and fatherly, or even patriarchal,way of loving can be a true form of Christian love. These findingsbreak with quite a few common assumptions in the research literature.

Within the walls of convents in New Spain, women wrote manuscripts. This type of writing is considered a continuation of a late medieval European cultural practice, adapted and promoted as a means of spreading Christian precepts in America. In the specific context of Counter-Reformation ideology, writing about the dialogue between God and the nun served a didactic, theological, and devotional purpose, especially during the 17th and 18th centuries. Approaches to the historical study of manuscripts authored by women in convents have broadened greatly in the last two decades of the 20th century and the early 21st century, coming to include the process by which they were incorporated into the Christian theological framework and its underpinnings in New Spain and considering the various types of writing developed in communities of female thinkers as part of New Spain’s intellectual modernity. These writings were shaped by various levels of social interactions and narratives, the first being between the religious woman and her confessor, as well as sometimes a scribe. At other levels, the convent and episcopal authorities also played a role. Finally, chaplains, chroniclers, and religious people with ties to the monastic communities wrote, transcribed, and disseminated these materials. The cataloging of these handwritten and printed texts authored by religious women from New Spain was itself shaped by a historical process in which common elements were adapted to develop texts in different literary canons. One must bear in mind that the different conditions under which women’s convent writings were produced were determined by their purpose, the intellectual capacity of their male and female creators, and the context in which they were written. Some texts were intended to show the world God’s presence manifested through holiness in the Americas, others recounted the convent’s piety fueled by religious vocations and love of Christ, and others sought to highlight the importance of the religious order’s establishment and the feminine purity protected within its walls.

INTRODUCTIONIt is a widely held consensus among leaders in higher education institutions and policy decision makers that global education is a necessity for college students today (Hovland & Schneider, 2011; Haring-Smith, 2011; Reimer, 2009). With advancement of communication technology, expanding global trade, and intensified global conflicts and social change, it is imperative to prepare college students to become globally competent in an ever-complex global environment. According to Reimer (2009), global competency refers to the knowledge and skills that help people understand flat world in which they live, skills to integrate across disciplinary domains to comprehend global affairs and events, and intellect to create possibilities to address them...[it] also includes fostering an attitude that makes it possible to interact peacefully, respectfully, and productively with fellow human beings from diverse geographies (25). Skills and knowledge such as foreign languages and ability to understand and critically reflect on global issues are of essence in today's global education. This study reflects on question of whether or not college students today are effectively prepared to become globally competent citizens.This study assesses students' level of global competency in setting of a publicly funded, regional university. The three elements of global competency under discussion are (1) Global awareness: knowledge of global affairs and ability to discuss and reflect on issues in today's global context. (2) Global citizenship: understanding of responsible citizenship and action one takes to meet challenges in global community and (3) Global competitiveness and cooperation: professional knowledge and training to compete and work with other nationalities in global work force. The researchers invited college professors to assess and discuss level of global awareness and knowledge among college students, based on their experiences of teaching various disciplinary and general educations courses. Although a significant amount of literature on global education based their analysis on student body, mainly through use of surveys, we believe that college professors are in a unique position to evaluate level of global cultural awareness and knowledge among college students. Because of their regular classroom involvement and contact, faculty members have firsthand knowledge about their students. Additionally, faculty members possess broad perspectives on global issues and current affairs and have expertise in discipline specific knowledge. Therefore, they will be able to discuss expectations of global knowledge for undergraduate students in general and academic disciplines specifically. Faculty members can also identify and critically reflect on issues in academic curriculum and university resources; they can also provide directions and suggestions to enhance global cultural literacy education.We asked college professors, based on their years of experiences working with undergraduate students, to evaluate whether or not college graduates possess sufficient understanding and awareness of global issues to enable them to think critically of world they live in and to empower them to become active citizens in global society. Are college graduates equipped with sufficient knowledge and skills to compete and work with other internationals? If not, what factors contribute to lack of global awareness and knowledge among college students? The current paper will specifically explore cultural barriers that hinder global cultural acquisition. We focus on three aspects of barriers: cultural capital, media influence, and institutional culture.Cultural and Institutional Underpinnings of Global EducationThe acquisition of global awareness and knowledge is greatly affected by culture of higher education practices. American society's economic transformation during post WWI and WWII required professional training and expertise for trained employees and technicians, and institution of education needed to make adjustments and innovations to fulfill these needs (Frank and Meyer, 2007. …

El objetivo del presente trabajo consiste en dar a conocer las últimas voluntades del regidor y notario compostelano Lope Gómez de Marzoa. Además de analizar sus disposiciones testamentarias, se estudiarán brevemente algunos de los aspectos menos conocidos de su biografía, tratando de clarificar especialmente sus orígenes familiares y su papel como hombre de negocios y miembro de las élites urbanas en la Galicia del siglo XV. Asimismo, se hará referencia a algunos de los pleitos en los que se vieron inmersos tanto él como, sobre todo, sus herederos. Finalmente, se publican los nuevos documentos que permiten reconstruir los últimos momentos y voluntades de Lope Gómez de Marzoa. [gl] O obxectivo do presente traballo consiste en dar a coñecer as últimas vontades do rexedor e notario compostelán Lope Gómez de Marzoa. Ademais de analizar as súas disposicións testamentarias, estudaranse brevemente algún dos aspectos menos coñecidos da súa biografía, tratando de clarificar especialmente as súas orixes familiares e o seu papel como home de negocios e membro das elites urbanas na Galicia do século XV. Así mesmo, faráse referencia a algúns dos preitos nos que se viron inmersos tanto el como, sobre todo, os seus herdeiros. Finalmente, publícanse os novos documentos que permiten reconstruír os últimos momentos e vontades de Lope Gómez de Marzoa.