austraLasia #3398
Torrid Tuesday, and a Welcome Wednesday
ROME: 19 March 2014 -- Did you instinctively get the right answer as to who is who?
St Joseph has been a feature of the Roman Church's liturgical celebrations since the mid-15th century (before, really) - and that happens to be about the time another individual was born, in Tuscany: Michelangelo.
This year is the 450th anniversary of Michelangelo's death, so, after the celebration of the Solemnity of St Joseph with Mass at the Pisana, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone presiding (11.30 a.m.), and after a good lunch, some opportunity for a brief 'pisolino' (catnap) and any commission that wants to do some work (who would?), everyone heads for the Sistine chapel, M's great work of art, followed by a concerto by the Sistine Choir.
It is a much-needed break from a fairly torrid Tuesday, so this Wednesday break and celebration is very welcome ...
Tuesday was pretty torrid it would seem, but let's take a step back to Monday, when the RM, as is customary at the beginning of a Chapter week, makes a resumé of what has been, offers some pointers (in fact what he says is called 'facendo il punto', making the point) regarding what must be achieved. He saw this week as a crucial one for resolving some of the debate over structures of animation and government, getting to at least a first draft of the Chapter document, and not overlooking the real task: "Be more trenchant and courageous in the grand directions for the Congregation's future, especially in identifying the road we must take". So inevitably there is much to do this week!
Another 'background' detail that might help put this week into perspective too: at least 80 of the Chapter members are brand new, first-timers. Some of them don't take too easily or kindly (and you might argue, nor should they) to long-established ways of doing things, such as the docucentric, process-oriented dynamics of our General Chapters. Perhaps that was coming through in some written (5 min) and oral (3 min) interventions at times. That puts pressure on a commission like the juridical commission, who end up looking like the fly in the ointment, or thorn in the side or however you want to put it.
So the debate has gone on - especially on the composition of the General Council. One very clear intervention, though, put things into an interesting perspective. He reminded the assembly that while everyone seemed to be focusing on Missions, Social Communications (Salesian Family is already clearly out of the General Council and into a secretariat by every possible indication so far), what GC26 asked for was a good hard look at ALL the animation and government at Central level - so why was Formation and Youth Ministry escaping a certain degree of scrutiny? What about the Juridical office, also part of animation and government?
Others have been asking why this very important discussion is being handled largely within a certain commission and not by all commissions. Some wanted the YM Framework document discussed - but the Moderator reminded them that it is not something at the level of, say a Ratio, and it is not up to the Chapter to be dealing with this document.
IUXTA MODUM
Recall that term from yesterday? It had it's day on Tuesday! The juridical commission reworked its proposals on a range of issues and following the first round of straw votes (The RM had reminded everyone that if there are decisions that affect the C&R these have to come up for decision pretty soon, since they mean going to the Holy See for approval, and other things like elections could be affected, so - get a hurry on!)
So Tuesday was largely about getting a bit of a hurry on in that sense - moving to the next and 'iuxta modum' stage. It happens like this - the juridical commission puts forward its reworked proposal, that is voted on (straw vote still) and then there are opportunities to take some aspects of this proposal and 'modify' what needs to be modified, if people think it needs to be modified - then they vote (straw) on those. It begins to form up what any final and definitive vote will look like.
But to bring it all down to real life, this is what happened:
- Length of terms: this was never in much doubt even in the earlier discussions and straw voting, so it did not cause much difficulty at this either. Essentially, C. 128 and 142 are confirmed at this stage. No change. Similarly for the 'only a second consecutive term' clause.
- Composition of the General Council: the reworked proposal took into account the majority straw vote last time. Effectively C. 133 para. 1 looks like being confirmed, but since the Salesian Family looks like moving to a secretariat directly responsible to the RM, the second part of C. 133 (the newer version since GC26, in case you still have the old one!) will suppress the reference to the Vicar having responsibility for the SF (so there's one that has to get Holy See approval).
- Regional Councillors: C. 140 gets pretty strong support to remain unchanged.
Then the juridical commission put forward a raft of 'new' proposals, most of them along 'status quo' lines, such as:
- R. 104 and the extraordinary visitation. Keep as is.
- Team visit (NOT a C&R term or issue, but it is part of animation and government praxis): confirmed as a valid and flexible tool
- elections: no change for RM, Vicar, procedures and Regionals - as described in the relevant C&R articles. BUT - and keep an eye on this one: Sector Councillor election procedures slated for change: suggested that assembly break into region groups and regions (voting secretly) study challenges and profile for a candidate, then put up one name internal to the Region and one name from outside the Region.
This latter group of proposals will be up for further discussion and straw voting.
In the meantime it is not beyond possibility that there could be other proposals now, relating to how the General Council functions internally - since this has been very much an issue in all the discussion.
THEME
Also in the meantime, the Drafting Group has arrived at the 'Way forward' (or ahead, as it was put in the pre-Chapter document), and the first of these (core topic one, Mystics) is due to go to the assembly - it is only a page.
Perhaps just one comment on this from an 'English' language point of view. The Italian language is a marvellous language for what they call 'sintesi' (synthesis, summary). It can make grammatical and lexical choices that don't work quite so well in English, so for example, it can make use of nominalisations and non-finite grammatical forms (like infinitives and gerunds) and abstract nouns which help 'sum up' a multitude of thoughts! All of that can result in a lot of meaning being implicit - and that doesn't make for good concrete ways forward at times. Of course it works both ways. Imagine if the Chapter was being held all in English! Then languages like Italian would be feeling the opposite problem!
Another good reason for continuing to pray to the Holy Spirit - and also St Joseph, Patron of the Salesian Society (C. 9), who probably knew a lot about 'hitting the nail on the head'.
And 'hitting the nail on the head' is a way of making the point - it lacks a subject if used as a title. You only understand it when it is in a clear context.
Torrid Tuesday, and a Welcome Wednesday
ROME: 19 March 2014 -- Did you instinctively get the right answer as to who is who?
St Joseph has been a feature of the Roman Church's liturgical celebrations since the mid-15th century (before, really) - and that happens to be about the time another individual was born, in Tuscany: Michelangelo.
This year is the 450th anniversary of Michelangelo's death, so, after the celebration of the Solemnity of St Joseph with Mass at the Pisana, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone presiding (11.30 a.m.), and after a good lunch, some opportunity for a brief 'pisolino' (catnap) and any commission that wants to do some work (who would?), everyone heads for the Sistine chapel, M's great work of art, followed by a concerto by the Sistine Choir.
It is a much-needed break from a fairly torrid Tuesday, so this Wednesday break and celebration is very welcome ...
Tuesday was pretty torrid it would seem, but let's take a step back to Monday, when the RM, as is customary at the beginning of a Chapter week, makes a resumé of what has been, offers some pointers (in fact what he says is called 'facendo il punto', making the point) regarding what must be achieved. He saw this week as a crucial one for resolving some of the debate over structures of animation and government, getting to at least a first draft of the Chapter document, and not overlooking the real task: "Be more trenchant and courageous in the grand directions for the Congregation's future, especially in identifying the road we must take". So inevitably there is much to do this week!
Another 'background' detail that might help put this week into perspective too: at least 80 of the Chapter members are brand new, first-timers. Some of them don't take too easily or kindly (and you might argue, nor should they) to long-established ways of doing things, such as the docucentric, process-oriented dynamics of our General Chapters. Perhaps that was coming through in some written (5 min) and oral (3 min) interventions at times. That puts pressure on a commission like the juridical commission, who end up looking like the fly in the ointment, or thorn in the side or however you want to put it.
So the debate has gone on - especially on the composition of the General Council. One very clear intervention, though, put things into an interesting perspective. He reminded the assembly that while everyone seemed to be focusing on Missions, Social Communications (Salesian Family is already clearly out of the General Council and into a secretariat by every possible indication so far), what GC26 asked for was a good hard look at ALL the animation and government at Central level - so why was Formation and Youth Ministry escaping a certain degree of scrutiny? What about the Juridical office, also part of animation and government?
Others have been asking why this very important discussion is being handled largely within a certain commission and not by all commissions. Some wanted the YM Framework document discussed - but the Moderator reminded them that it is not something at the level of, say a Ratio, and it is not up to the Chapter to be dealing with this document.
IUXTA MODUM
Recall that term from yesterday? It had it's day on Tuesday! The juridical commission reworked its proposals on a range of issues and following the first round of straw votes (The RM had reminded everyone that if there are decisions that affect the C&R these have to come up for decision pretty soon, since they mean going to the Holy See for approval, and other things like elections could be affected, so - get a hurry on!)
So Tuesday was largely about getting a bit of a hurry on in that sense - moving to the next and 'iuxta modum' stage. It happens like this - the juridical commission puts forward its reworked proposal, that is voted on (straw vote still) and then there are opportunities to take some aspects of this proposal and 'modify' what needs to be modified, if people think it needs to be modified - then they vote (straw) on those. It begins to form up what any final and definitive vote will look like.
But to bring it all down to real life, this is what happened:
- Length of terms: this was never in much doubt even in the earlier discussions and straw voting, so it did not cause much difficulty at this either. Essentially, C. 128 and 142 are confirmed at this stage. No change. Similarly for the 'only a second consecutive term' clause.
- Composition of the General Council: the reworked proposal took into account the majority straw vote last time. Effectively C. 133 para. 1 looks like being confirmed, but since the Salesian Family looks like moving to a secretariat directly responsible to the RM, the second part of C. 133 (the newer version since GC26, in case you still have the old one!) will suppress the reference to the Vicar having responsibility for the SF (so there's one that has to get Holy See approval).
- Regional Councillors: C. 140 gets pretty strong support to remain unchanged.
Then the juridical commission put forward a raft of 'new' proposals, most of them along 'status quo' lines, such as:
- R. 104 and the extraordinary visitation. Keep as is.
- Team visit (NOT a C&R term or issue, but it is part of animation and government praxis): confirmed as a valid and flexible tool
- elections: no change for RM, Vicar, procedures and Regionals - as described in the relevant C&R articles. BUT - and keep an eye on this one: Sector Councillor election procedures slated for change: suggested that assembly break into region groups and regions (voting secretly) study challenges and profile for a candidate, then put up one name internal to the Region and one name from outside the Region.
This latter group of proposals will be up for further discussion and straw voting.
In the meantime it is not beyond possibility that there could be other proposals now, relating to how the General Council functions internally - since this has been very much an issue in all the discussion.
THEME
Also in the meantime, the Drafting Group has arrived at the 'Way forward' (or ahead, as it was put in the pre-Chapter document), and the first of these (core topic one, Mystics) is due to go to the assembly - it is only a page.
Perhaps just one comment on this from an 'English' language point of view. The Italian language is a marvellous language for what they call 'sintesi' (synthesis, summary). It can make grammatical and lexical choices that don't work quite so well in English, so for example, it can make use of nominalisations and non-finite grammatical forms (like infinitives and gerunds) and abstract nouns which help 'sum up' a multitude of thoughts! All of that can result in a lot of meaning being implicit - and that doesn't make for good concrete ways forward at times. Of course it works both ways. Imagine if the Chapter was being held all in English! Then languages like Italian would be feeling the opposite problem!
Another good reason for continuing to pray to the Holy Spirit - and also St Joseph, Patron of the Salesian Society (C. 9), who probably knew a lot about 'hitting the nail on the head'.
And 'hitting the nail on the head' is a way of making the point - it lacks a subject if used as a title. You only understand it when it is in a clear context.
