Influencers and mission: Vatican document on pastoral care in the networks
. Francisco Sosa The model proposed by the document aligns with the social magisterium of Pope Francis, especially in the selection of the parable of the “Good Samaritan” (Lk 10:30–36), as he used it in Fratelli Tutti to speak about peace and social friendship. From this, two questions arise that I propose for brief reflection: Can one be a neighbor to everyone on social media? And, consequently, can community be built beyond all differences? Who is one’s neighbor? To define the “other,” the “wounded neighbor” on social media, the document quotes Francis: “To decide who is my neighbor and who is not. It is up to me to be a neighbor or not—the decision is mine—it is up to me to be or not to be a neighbor to the person I encounter who is in need of help, even if they are a stranger or even hostile” (FT 55). It also cites examples of discord such as arguments that occur on social media, even among Catholics themselves. Moreover, a closer reading of the document reveals that the difference between “some” and “others” is not clearly defined—it doesn’t refer only to Catholics and non-Catholics, or even to believers and non-believers—but simply to those “some” and “others” who argue, fight, and insult each other without entering into dialogue, evangelization, or communion. This ambiguity for the lack of a precise definition does not express so much of a deficiency, but a richness: the call is to build community beyond differences (within the Church, “everyone, everyone, everyone” is welcome, as Francis often says). However, putting aside any naïveté, it also often seems difficult to achieve communion in the face of such radicalized or extreme positions. And here I am not thinking of non-believers or people of other faiths, but in particular among those who are Roman Catholic themselves. And while it is also true that tension and conflicts are healthy, and that it would be a mistake to demand uniformity in a Church that is “catholic,” it is also true that there are sectors (many of them active on social media) that polarize their opinions and become, in fact, promoters of exclusion and hatred. How can we be and build community in the face of those differences? Toward the end, the document proposes building communities on social media. In response to the issues mentioned above, I believe it is important to recall the principle from Pope Francis that “unity prevails over conflict” (Evangelii Gaudium, 226). The document reinforces the importance of encounter, of shared meals, of in-person gatherings, forming community, and finding unity with each other, especially in the Eucharist. However, like the wounded man by the side of the road in the parable of the Good Samaritan, we also encounter people on social media who are far removed not only from the practice of the faith, but also from the possibility of face-to-face encounters with others (whether due to geographical or existential distance). In this sense, in line with the pastoral magisterium of Francis, it is important to remember that we must prioritize the time and the processes (EG 222) more than merely the spaces that must be conquered. Evangelization based on doctrinal or disciplinary imposition, of throwing truths in people’s faces, no longer has a place—much less so in the digital space. Social media simply cannot continue to be the place of monologues passing one another, disguised as dialogue in posts and comments. Lastly, as the document reminds us, the Church is essentially a community; we do not evangelize alone. The logic of influencers who act in isolation and on their own should have no place in Christianity. There is an urgent need not only to create networks, but to build community and fraternity among digital evangelizers. It’s not just about coming together for the Eucharist or sharing spaces, but about thinking of ourselves as an ecclesial community that unites in difference and truly knows how to appreciate and celebrate its diversity: recognizing itself as a “synodal assembly” that announces–in a way that is both united and diverse–the Kingdom and the love of God. Below is the full document transcription: . DICASTERY FOR COMMUNICATION Towards Full Presence A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media 1) Great strides have been made in the digital age, but one of the pressing issues yet to be addressed is how we, as individuals and as an ecclesial community, are to live in the digital world as “loving neighbours” who are genuinely present and attentive to each other on our common journey along the “digital highways”. Advancements in technology have made new kinds of human interactions possible. In fact, the question is no longer whether to engage with the digital world, but how. Social media in particular is an environment where people interact, share experiences, and cultivate relationships unlike ever before. At the same time, however, as communication is increasingly influenced by artificial intelligence, there arises the need to rediscover the human encounter at its very core. Over the last two decades, our relationship with digital platforms has undergone an irreversible transformation. An awareness has emerged that these platforms can evolve to become co-created spaces, not just something that we passively use. Young people – as well as older generations – are asking to be met where they are, including on social media, because the digital world is “a significant part of young people’s identity and way of life.”[1] 2) Many Christians are asking for inspiration and guidance since social media, which is one expression of digital culture, has had a profound impact on both our faith communities and our individual spiritual journeys. Examples of faithful and creative engagement on social media abound around the world, from both local communities as well as individuals who give witness to their faith on these platforms, oftentimes more pervasively than the institutional Church. There are also numerous pastoral and educational initiatives developed by local Churches, movements, communities, congregations, universities, and individuals. 3) The universal Church has also
