The Lord himself constituted the nucleus of the ecclesial community to which he gave his Spirit to continue his mission, bringing the Good News of the reconciliation of all things in him to every corner of human life.

The Church that is born to proclaim the Gospel is the community of followers of Jesus who discern in common the steps to be taken on the path that the Holy Spirit illuminates.

Synodality, as a constitutive dimension of ecclesial life, is only real if it is the Lord who traces the route and the Holy Spirit who points the way.

To walk together as the Church, the People of God, dreamed of by the Second Vatican Council.

The 36th General Congregation confirmed that discernment in common is inherent to the way of proceeding of the Society of Jesus. The image of the first companions in Venice (1537) highlights the capacity they acquired of deliberating in common, led by the light of the Holy Spirit, even though they were such a culturally diverse group.1 Nevertheless, they all had an active spiritual life, characterized by their having fallen in love with Christ in the Spiritual Exercises, by their service to the poor, and by their availability to be sent by the Church to any place where the need was greater.

The conviction that God is acting in history and is constantly communicating with human beings is the assumption on which our efforts to discern in common are based. For this reason, we should seek out those conditions which allow us to hear the Holy Spirit and be guided by Him in our life-mission. The personal and group disposition to receive and follow the Spirit who communicates with us prevents a false type of discernment in common, which only seeks to clothe in correct Ignatian language decisions that were already made on the basis of the criteria of one’s own group.

Not every decision requires discernment in common. The aim of discernment in common is seeking and finding the will of God in important matters, in which it is not completely clear what is to be done or how it is to be done, what is best or how to do it in the best way possible. It is therefore crucial that we know how to choose the matter or the matters that require an election through discernment in common. At the same time, full information, of good quality and accessible to all, about the matter to be treated is needed. Good discernment depends on having a precise knowledge about the matter to be decided and about the result that is to be expected from such a complex and demanding process. In this way we avoid banalizing “discernment,” using the word as a way to justify either major or minor decisions.

It is necessary to establish clearly which persons will participate in the process of discernment, why they participate, and under what conditions they do so. The matter about which the election is to be made will determine who is invited to participate in the process. This means that each participant should know precisely and should freely accept both the reasons for which he/she forms part of the group that is discerning and the conditions under which he/she does so. Depending on the group, the matter being discerned, and other conditions in which the process takes place, it may be convenient and prudent to invite other persons to accompany the process or to provide expertise in the matters being treated.

Or Ignatian indifference, is a condition without which it is not possible to make a good election. Those who take part in the discernment should cultivate interior freedom; that is, they should be detached from their own interests and be free to assume whatever is the greater good in the light of the Gospel. Indifference is the fruit of an authentic spiritual life in which life and mission are inseparable, as the 36th General Congregation has made clear. It is possible and necessary also for those who share in our mission but not in our Christian faith to acquire that interior freedom which enables them to divest themselves of self-love, self-will, and self-interests. This interior freedom is the human possibility to grow as persons in gratuitous relationship with others, seeking the greater good of all, even when such a pursuit involves as a consequence personal renunciation and sacrifice.

Discernment in common requires the existence of what Ignatius Loyola calls the union of hearts and minds in the group that is discerning, because the purpose of the process is to make an election freely according to the will of God. This union of hearts and minds is born of the shared sense of purpose possessed by all who form part of the group since what is at stake in the discernment directly affects all and each one. Thus, good mutual knowledge of each other is needed, a mutual knowledge that gives birth to trust in each other and motivates the active participation of each one.

In the Exercises Ignatius presents three different times for making good, sound decisions. In the first time,  there is no doubt about what the will of God is. In the second time, discernment in common may be done, by taking account of spiritual movements and their confirmation, or it may also be done by reasoning and deciding according to what is described in the third time.

For a group of persons who have experience in the discernment of spirits, discernment in common can take the form of a process in which they perceive and weigh the movements which the spirits provoke in the group that is seeking the will of God. The capacity of the group to discern the spirits in this way is thus a condition for its being able to make use of the second time of election. The discernment of spirits makes it possible for the group to become aware of the direction that its life would take if it were to follow one or another movement of spirit, in order to follow the movements of the good spirit. In Ignatian language, the movements that are most relevant for discernment are called consolation and desolation. “For just as in consolation it is more the good spirit who guides and counsels us, so in desolation it is the bad spirit, and by following his counsels we can never find the right way.”

The group that proposes to discern in common should find ways and spaces for personal and communal prayer, in accord with its particular characteristics. Personal prayer and communal prayer maintain a healthy tension between heaven and earth as we seek the magis that derives from our relationship with God and his Word. Such prayer helps us to keep in mind that as a body we are servants of the missio Dei. The Eucharist is the privileged mode of prayer in common. Thus it may have special significance and a central role in the processes of discernment in common. A community or a group that is able to celebrate the Eucharist as a source of life in the Spirit increases its ability to perceive the action of the Spirit in history and to experience how the Lord fulfills his promise to be with us all days until the end of history.

Discernment in common should include periods of time dedicated to sharing the fruit of prayer or personal reflection. The sharing is an opportunity to present to others with simplicity and without making speeches, what one has perceived as movements of the Spirit or as the fruit of one’s personal reflection on the point in question. On the other hand, our disposition to “listen to the other person” respectfully, without contradicting the spiritual movements that the other person has felt interiorly, can produce a spiritual echo or new spiritual movements in the person listening, giving rise to a fresh way of perceiving things. The custom of spiritual conversation, the habit of listening attentively to others and knowing how to communicate one’s own experience and ideas simply and clearly contribute to good discernment in common when the matter under consideration requires it.

The examen helps us to perceive the true nature of spiritual movements and to confirm that we are on the right path. The personal examen of each participant needs to be combined with the examen of what is happening in the group as a whole. Learning to examine the movements of the group allows us to take the pulse of the process or to confirm it, so that we can know whether we should continue onward, and how, guided by the Spirit. The constant monitoring of the movements of the group reflected in the examen is an instrument which helps us maintain a memory of the process. Just as we learn to perceive our interior movements, discernment in common requires that we develop the ability to perceive and interpret spiritual movements of the group which is listening to the Spirit in order to find the will of God.

Those who take part in the discernment should know and accept from the start the manner by which a final decision is to be made. For example, we understand clearly that a General Congregation of the Society of Jesus makes its decisions by a majority of votes, except when the Formula prescribes otherwise. Similarly, it is known that, in the discernment of a religious community of Jesuits, the final decision rests with the Local Superior, and the decisions of a Province or a Region are the responsibility of the Major Superior. The apostolic works and institutions are governed by their own statutes and norms, which determine how decisions that affect the whole are made and who makes them.

Good communal discernment is both art and discipline. While groups can discern on their own, a skilled facilitator can make a significant difference by holding the process, creating space for the Spirit to move, and attending to movements that emerge.

Consider a facilitator when:

• The matter is complex, contentious, or high-stakes
• The group is new to discernment or experiencing conflict
• The decision-maker wants to participate fully without managing the process

An Ignatian facilitator is someone deeply formed in Ignatian spirituality who can recognize consolation and desolation, distinguish spiritual conversation from discussion, and hold space for the group’s encounter with God. They need not be a Jesuit, but must be steeped in the Exercises and Ignatian way of proceeding.
Essential qualities:

• Deeply familiar with the Ignatian tradition and its tools—especially the Rules for Discernment, the examen, and the practice of spiritual conversation
• Listens deeply—to words and what’s beneath them
• Humble enough to serve without controlling
• Can design appropriate processes and ask open questions
• Distinguishes authentic discernment from “false discernment” that merely clothes pre-made decisions in spiritual language

One of the most common ways discernment falters is when participants don’t understand what they’re doing or why. If people aren’t clear about the matter being discerned, their role in the process, or how the final decision will be made, confusion and frustration follow. Some may think they’re voting, others that they’re merely consultants, still others that they’re engaged in spiritual conversation. This ambiguity breeds mistrust and can lead to a sense that the process is being manipulated. From the very beginning, everyone needs to know: What are we discerning? Who decides? How will we proceed? What’s expected of me?

Without prayer, what looks like discernment becomes mere planning or problem-solving dressed in spiritual language. Prayer—both personal and communal—is what opens us to hear the Spirit rather than just our own preferences and anxieties. When groups rush into discussion without creating space for silence, for listening to Scripture, for bringing the matter before God, they lose access to the deeper wisdom that discernment seeks. The examen, too, often gets skipped when time is short, yet it’s precisely this practice that helps us notice the movements of consolation and desolation that guide authentic discernment. Without prayer, we’re just having a meeting.

Spiritual conversation is not the same as debate, discussion, or even dialogue in the usual sense. It’s a distinctive practice of sharing what we’ve noticed in prayer and listening receptively to what others have experienced, without immediately arguing or problem-solving. The pitfall comes when groups think they’re having spiritual conversation but are actually engaging in persuasive speech, defending positions, or forming alliances. True spiritual conversation requires vulnerability—naming our movements honestly—and humility—receiving others’ experience without contradiction. When this gets confused with advocacy or negotiation, the group loses its contemplative center and the Spirit’s movements get drowned out by louder voices.

Discernment happens in a group of real people with different communication styles, cultural backgrounds, and levels of comfort speaking up. When facilitators or leaders fail to create conditions where everyone can participate—when dominant voices aren’t gently managed, when quieter members aren’t specifically invited to share, when jargon or insider language excludes some participants—the discernment becomes partial at best. Poor communication also means failing to explain what’s happening at each stage, not naming the movements being observed, or leaving people unclear about what was decided and why. Good discernment requires intentional, inclusive, transparent communication at every step.

This is just a placeholder

This is just a placeholder

This is just a placeholder

This is just a placeholder

This is just a placeholder