Responsibility of lack of leadership

 Faced one hard truth today... 

In the last couple of years, I had come to moan the lack of truth worthy personnel who could  be entrusted responsibilities with a certain level of confidence, that they would take forward the legacy of our predecessors, of Don Bosco himself. That list of capable and clear-souled individuals who have matured over the years of formation, who could be relied upon. That diminishing list.  That rare species.  

Today, someone questioned me if that is not a systemic fault - of the present leadership? In a way no; but also yes, in a way! No, because those shoulders who are mature enough to take on responsibilities were trained in the previous generation, era, regime.  So, not really our fault. Not mine. But, then I asked myself, if the situation is bad now, have I made it better for the next generation to have sufficient and reliable personnel?  Or done nothing much, and eventually this trend is only going to get worse?  

Salesian feminism vis-a-vis brothers and clerics

 The idea proposed by most people so far was that the Salesian Brothers should have something more specific and special, suitable to their distinctive vocational choice. I too was thinking, what is it that we can offer, specifically to the brothers. 

 Today’s discussion in the Brothers group, there was a point made by Bosco (INS) which really struck a deep cord in me. He asked, “Why should the brothers be given something special? And if at all we give them something special, it should be given to ALL, clerics included! So those aspects and matters that Brothers would need additional should be offered to everyone, including the clerics.” 

 The analogy that came to my mind is that of instructions and guidelines offered to the girl child in the family. Most often the girls are taught how to sit, how to move, what not to do in public, and a million other things! Why teach only girls this? Because they have to be careful of the boys! So why not teach the same matters to the girls, but not alone; let these instructions and guidelines be offered to her brothers as well! So that tomorrow, he will be conscious of what the girls are going through! Now, that’s a more sensible and right approach to gender equality and response to male chauvinism. 

 So too with the Brothers. If they are to be ‘shielded’ from clericalism, teach them along with the clerics, so that EVERYONE learns what’s right, good and true.

Formation and apostolate

What is the major difference between formation houses and houses of active apostolate?  Or in other words, between formation and apostolate?  

I know I'm splitting hairs.  I am also very aware and conscious of the fact that the two are not different or segregated.  Nonetheless, there is a difference.  There should be a difference.  

During the discussions about getting familiarised with the GC29 documents it occurred to me that perhaps one thing that distinguishes formation from active apostolate is the degree of accompaniment.  While formation is all about accompaniment, during the initial years of formation, the young Salesian is offered a greater possibility of being accompanied.  During apostolate in full-fledged active communities, the level of accompaniment is significantly lower.  Of course, no accompaniment at this stage is bad; the fact is that the luxury formation settings provide for the type of accompaniment offered is not possible in communities with multiple sectors and works.  

Blessed are those who realise that formation is all about accompaniment; helping the young Salesian personalise the formation process so that no matter where he goes or does, he makes that an opportunity for learning and growing.  Just like Don Bosco who did not treat his seminary years as years of formation;  his whole life, every incident, every achievement and failure; every task and challenge, he turned it into a formation experience!  

Formation criteria

The Salesian formation guide, The Ratio, (at least in its earlier edition) states it clearly that formation guides while helping youngsters and young Salesians discern their vocation to Salesian religious life are to look for 'an abundance of good qualities'; and not just be satisfied by 'an absence of negative or bad qualities'.  

There is a world of difference between the two.  It is not enough to not do anything wrong or bad, or even do nothing at all.  One needs to be passionate and active in doing good and striving to be good.  Without that effort, one is already showing signs of being a parasite!  

Religious life and bitterness

I returned home yesterday from a visit to a few of our communities in the Vijayawada-Guntur region.  Add to that my daily quota of phone calls from confreres expressing their difficulties and issues.  All this makes me wonder, if only we are able to find and celebrate those reasons that bind and unite us than thrive in meticulously finding reasons to fight and differ from one another.  

In each community there are SO MANY factors and possibilities that can bring us together.  Yet time and again, we choose to see the few frailties and shortcomings of one another and harp on them to such an extent that neither do I do anything worthwhile nor do I let others do any good.  Together we spend our time, energy and passion in tearing down one another!  

I know there is no magical formula to better the situation.  But I truly wonder, if after years of formation and training, this is what we end up as, then there is something wrong in our priorities or methodology.  

This image truly expresses my present feeling and experience! 

God-experience over prayer

I do not have the answer to the question that I am asking myself but certainly I feel that there is something missing in our prioritisation and process of stressing on prayer and a meaningful prayer life. 

The insistence on prayer (especially community prayer) is a very common reminder that I have heard of since my initial years of formation and training.  Nonetheless, I fear that we have consistently misplaced our importance.  That we have put the cart before the horse. That we have missed stressing the core and have focused on the accidentals or sure by products.  

For me, the insistence and effort should be at offering our young people, our formees and certainly ourselves, a profound personal God-experience.  A sincere thirst, a passion for God.  Now how exactly do we do that, I have no magic formulas.  But if I truly taste God and have an experience of him, no matter how fleeting or far-in-between my many days on earth, I will find may own ways of staying in touch with him, relishing him.  Prayer, attendance at the Eucharist, partaking in the sacraments, will all happen by default thereafter.  

Aim big, achieve big. Dream small, achieve small!  Certainly God-experience is no small aim. 

Identifying the Lord

 Most people who enter an active field of work, after a prolonged period of theoretical study and even stimulated practice will vouch for the fact that the actual task itself is nothing compared to what they've been preparing themselves for all along.  No soldier would say that actual war and killing is the same as all the drill and practice they've had before hand.  No matter how many years a medical student practices his or her medicine, the first surgery is always different.  One may participate in a holy Mass all ones life, yet celebrating the first Mass as a priest is a totally different experience altogether. Nothing ever prepares one for reality.  Meeting reality in its crude and actual form is much more than all that one undergoes in order to prepare one when one encounters it.  

John the Baptist was born in order to prepare for the Lord.  He himself knew this all too well and did a great job.  Yet when the Lord himself appeared on the scene, John was not sure if He was the Messiah.  So he sends out his disciples to ask Jesus directly if he is the messiah.  After all those years of being and doing what he was doing, even John the Baptist was not 100% sure when he met Jesus.  The same as any army personnel or a surgeon or a newly ordained priest.  There is something more than the sum of all preparation that eludes one when one encounters the actual reality.  That first or actual encounter is lesson in its own right.  

So I ask myself, if John the Baptist whose mission was to prepare the way, did not instantly recognise the messiah, what chance do I have of recognising or identifying - leave alone worshipping - Him?  One way it is to be always ready, and treat everyone as the messiah.  A perpetual advent!  Another way would be to ask the Lord himself!!  

Formation blues

 There is a lovely scene in the movie 'Hidden figures' when the chief of the space project tells his main supervisor who constantly brushes aside the only black female 'super computer' who calculates the mathematical side of the space project to the moon, that his main job is to look for talent and nurture it, not curb it. 

Having spent more than a decade in formation settings, as a formator, I ask myself, how much of a talent have I recognised in those I've lived with, especially the students - leave alone encouraged and nurtured it?  

Perhaps most of us formators are looking for ways and means of 'moulding' the students into a particular cast.  So we'd be more keen about trimming their eccentricities and creativities, rather than see how those can further the Salesian mission. The former method is easier to carry out and well formulated in our guidebooks, in comparison to the latter! The latter requires an interpretation of the guidelines... multiply the interpretations with the number of students we engage with!!  But that's formation.  That's the task of a formator.  The regularity and constancy to this process is brought in by his/her person, not the bending of everyone else to one's monolithic interpretation. 

Philomena

I watched the movie Philomena, with Fr Peter this evening.  I had seen it earlier and found it very insightful and deep.  Knew Fr Peter would love it - I was right.  

In this viewing, as in the previous viewing, I again found myself on the side of the journalist - raging, unforgiving and deeply upset.  To really fathom the 'forgiveness' of Philomena and her attitude to what she underwent in the prime of her life, is something very very difficult.  To reach that state of equanimity where you see the past as something you wish didn't happen, but not exactly for the same reasons which you were then told.  

However, this time I understood to some extent the logic of the stubbornness of the former superior of the convent who hid the fact from both, Philomena and her son as well.  Her strong conviction that what she did and the way she did it was the right and the best thing to have done, and that God certainly would approve of it stems perhaps from a deep fear of having to face a past.  If she were to change her opinion and see that what she then did was not something good, would be to negate a whole lifetime - that too while having done and lived it with great fervour and dedication.  That fear of rendering one's whole life's effort - genuine and dedicated - as totally absurd and disgraceful would be too horrible a thing to do to oneself.  Especially at that age and stage of life where one could do nothing more!  When all you have is memories.  But Philomena actually shows that even at that advanced age and time, when unable to do anything more, she could still forgive!  The Sister, on the other hand, couldn't forgive herself!  

Choosing ministers

In the first reading of the day, we hear the apostles asking the community to find replacement for them to carry on, responsibly and with diligence, the work they were doing - doing charity.  It is interesting to note that the apostles did not merely appoint people of their own accord.  They asked the community to choose. They merely approved and blessed them. 

One might argue that they themselves were picked up by the Lord - not proposed and chosen by the people.  And they considered prayer and preaching their main task.  But for doing charity, they request the community to elect persons. However, in an age when there is not much of a difference in prayer and charity, when one is called to do both, without being biased towards one or the other, do we also not ought to take into consideration the means of choosing/appointing disciples?  Should formation of priests and religious, and most importantly, promotion of them over the years, be the sole privilege of the priests and religious?  Should not the lay people whom priests and religious work for and with, not have a say in their formation? 

The most formidable reason I fully endorse the need for the approval of the people (formators and lay staff) in permitting priests and religious to the orders or vows is the criteria listed in the Acts: respectable people filled with the Spirit and with wisdom.  This will also go on to confirm the fact that every one is capable of discerning the Spirit and recognizing wisdom - not just the religious, or the educated! While it is God who offers us our vocation, it is our individual responsibility to make that vocation useful to others.  So why not ask the community - the whole community, and not just the religious or priests alone - to help in the discerning the worthiness of individuals for pastoral ministry?

The young leading the way

When Don Bosco was writing the regulations for the oratory of St Francis de Sales and the rules for the fledgling Salesian congregation, he adopted varied tactics.  When it came to the oratory itself, he was no stickler for rules.  But he did write down 'guidelines' more as a reflection and help to others working with him, rather than as a formal code book.  That he had to greatly alter this style, he learnt it the hard way, while writing and submitting his Rules for the congregation to the Vatican. 

Another aspect that comes out more strikingly in his guidelines for the oratory (more than the boarding schools, which came under the jurisdiction of the State and needed formal approval) is the direct engagement of the young people themselves in the everyday running of the house.  While it is true that there were priests and teachers and Don Bosco himself, but it was the boys themselves who were actively involved in the running of the place.

Young people need to be trusted and given responsibilities, rather than shielded from them.  One of my own greatest learnings and joys at Navajeevan, Ramanthapur was this pedagogy of letting boys take charge of things. These boys (just like most of those with Don Bosco then) were already living their life out on the street - all on their own.  They certainly knew what decision-making means, especially the consequences of them.  Adding my trust to their abilities and giving them that freedom made a huge difference to the way things were carried out in the house. 

Grandiosity

Aiming for the sky is always considered a challenging and motivating factor.  However, practically speaking, that long distance goal is only good in theory.  In real practical life, it is one step-at-a-time. 

Most often we Salesians fail, and miserably at that, because we think too big.  Well, dreaming of huge grand plans is nothing harmful.  The danger is embarking on it purely on the dream alone.  Not really testing it out in bits and learning from it, before going for the big kill.  We often are in a hurry to make it big!  We forget that it takes years of hard work and effort, including a humility to constantly evaluate ones own work and learn from it.  Humility also to accept the fact that we do not know-it-all.  Therefore the need to involve and learn from others who are experts in that field.  Once we have worked on a small task, involving people, gaining experience and wisdom, and have significantly proved it to be successful, then present it as a working model.  Then take up something bigger and gain from that experience... learn, evaluate, experiment, involve, reflect, plan.  By this time you have a network in place (of people, places, contacts, experiences, information).  Bigger tasks will naturally come your way or be entrusted to you. 

Mere grandiosity, solely on the basis of 'reaching out' is something we religious should be cautious about.  Don Bosco did not straight away build large houses and churches!  He first started meeting boys in the streets, in the prisons, in their work places.  He then gathered them on Sundays.  Again, not in a grand place of his own.  His initial boarders were living with him in his house, not a large well-furnished boarding house!  He built up his work bit by bit.  As the felt need presented itself, he undertook bigger houses and places.  He did not build (buildings) and then start working!!  

Formation and knowledge

Reading this particular article on Aeon about walking and applying the philosophy of Gilbert Ryle to it, I was wondering if this can be applied to the whole process of formation and that particular phase of intellectual formation too.

Just a handful of us formators back in the province believe that a student discerning his vocation to priestly or religious life ought to have a rather meaningful and sensible intellectual capacity.  Lacking in which he or she will make things and life miserable for others and themselves - the exact opposite of what ministry seeks to do in service of the people! Most formators feel that intellectual capacity should not be a major factor to be considered when deciding whether a person continues being a religious or priest or not. 

Ryle seems to suggest that if self-teaching is activated, that would suffice for improving a skill. 

We can think about Ryle’s view as a middle way between the just-do-it view and intellectualism. Intellectualism claims that skilled action requires thought, and gives a picture of thought as deliberate, conscious internal activity. The just-do-it view observes that it is not plausible that skill requires this kind of conscious thinking, and concludes that thought is the enemy of skill. Ryle agrees with the just-do-it view that conscious thought is not a requirement of skill, but offers an alternative view of thinking as engaged problem solving, claiming that this kind of thought is a requirement of skilled action.

If I'm reading it right, Ryle would say that just because is a person is kind and considerate, does exempt him or her from engaging in a very intellectual exercise of thinking. Nonetheless, to actually continue being kind and considerate and develop it as a skill rather than blindly repeat certain kind actions and utterances, a particular kind of thought is essential. 

One need not be an expert in oceanography to be a priest or religious but if one is not competent to reflect on ones own ministry and willing to make sufficient effort to learn from it, even if already 'good' at it, then one certainly is not worthy of becoming a priest or religious. Openness and humility to learn, require a certain kind of thinking to actualize and bear fruit.  

Why philosophy?

By way of specialisation, every course designed at the higher education level is meant for a particular profession.  So if one is studying computer science, one intends to become a computer specialist.  One studying physics, a sort of scientist.  One studying history, goes into library sciences, archiving, writing, perhaps even into teaching.  It is more evident in arts: a music student gets into the music industry; one studying media, gets into that particular stream of work.  Generally!  Though no rule that one should choose a career only based on what one has studied!  

However, I think philosophy is the only subject or course, that is undertaken by students for no particular single profession.  Of those who opt for philosophy, just a handful of them enter into academia.  The rest, what do they do?  Or why do people study philosophy?  No one undertakes a philosophy course to become a philosopher - certainly not most!  

Perhaps the answer to this lies in the fact that philosophy is a discipline rather than a content-based course.  It actually enables one to evaluate, explore and enact what is most relevant, not just about concepts and texts but in life as well.  As such, philosophy assists any and every field of work or profession.  That can actually be the greatest strength - and also the worst quality - one can acquire studying philosophy.  

Priests and religious who have this 'compulsory' study of philosophy, indeed are greatly privileged.  But unfortunately are the worst prepared or ready for it, by way of willingness. And thereby the ones who make the least use of it. 

Teasing the mind

Assisting in teaching philosophy of religion at the University has indeed been a very special experience, so far.  I've taught the same course, albeit with a different content, but more or less the same themes, earlier as well.  That's in a seminary. But this experience here at the University has been very enriching. 

Comparatively I can say that back in the seminary we teach a group of students who are all believers.  So there is not a huge deal to convey proofs or arguments in favour of God or religion.  Convincing them of arguments for theism is pretty much a cake's walk. Unfortunately even the arguments against God and religion that are used and cited are mostly like paper tigers - appearing strong but somehow easily thrashed.  We do not really offer hardcore anti-theistic rational arguments for a robust philosophical study.  We merely tease or tickle the mind rather than crank it up to its maximum capacity. 

Perhaps we're afraid that the rational arguments may really challenge their faith.  Perhaps we, the educators ourselves, have not really been challenged.  Whatever it be the case, this opportunity to teach philosophy of religion has indeed been a great challenge for me.  Look forward to it, from further perspectives, in the next term as well.  

Bishops and authenticity

In the first reading of the day Paul admonishes the Corinthians to be squabbling with one another and then approaching an 'outsider' to arbitrate justice, forgetting that within the believing community there are individuals who are capable of amicably resolving the issue with greater depth and insight.  But this lack of trust of the one (or some) within is also an indicator that either there isn't one at all or that people have divided up life into faith-related and other-related so neatly that one does not have a bearing on the other.

The first imagery that came to my mind as I read this passage was the scandal of sexual abuse and the Church, all over the world, especially involving Bishops who either were involved directly in the abuse or covered up cases for the sake of 'preserving' the image of the Church.  From that perspective, I found myself reading Paul admonishing the Bishops rather than the people.  I should say, my experience of the Bishops in my lifetime has not been a very happy one.  Only on rare occasions have I met or interacted with Bishops whom I've come across as genuinely human.  Most don't even deserve to be called Christians, leave alone be ordained!

However, Pope Francis' homily this morning about the same reading, sheds a slightly different light which perhaps I've not looked into.  Speaking almost on behalf of and to the Bishops he

invited them to remember three things in these troubled times: their strength lies in being men of prayer; they should have the humility to remember they were chosen by God; and they need to remain close to the people. 

The Bishops Pope Francis has in mind and is speaking about are those who truly feel the burden of being human, not the ones who've decided and live as though they are above everything. (More quotes from the sermon). 

Witness

The ongoing meeting of the formators (postnovitiate stage) of East and South Asia in Thailand, seems an interesting one.  Am reminded of the formation meetings I attended years ago.  Some of them were very challenging.  Not just the content but it was more about looking into ourselves.  The shift from focusing on what we should be telling and doing with our students to who we ourselves should be, made a big impact on me.

For quite sometime it was all about information: what we should do, how we should form the students, rules, policies, documents... and all that.  But at some point it struck me that if I am not that ideal person or atleast not making the effort to become the ideal one I'm trying to form, then how can I expect my student to be so?  Then on the meetings were more of forming myself rather than 'becoming a formator'.   Be and thereby form.  Or better, 'witnessing as formation'.  Was reminded of the same this morning when I read a statement made on behalf of a formee, from the ongoing meeting in Thailand.

Today we will say, what you are telling us. But tomorrow we will do, what you are doing now!

Joseph called Barsabbas

In the selection process for the replacement of Judas, Joseph and Matthias are the finalists.  Unable to decide upon which one, the apostles pray and cast lots (initially reminded me of the soldiers at the foot of the cross casting lots for the robe of Jesus).  The lot falls for Matthias and he is announced as one of the apostles. 

What became of Joseph called Barsabbas?  Simple: He carried on his life and ministry!  That's how I would like to remember him.  If among all the people they had to choose from, the apostles zeroed in on these two men, they surely must have been men of faith, men dedicated to the ministry and truly in love with Jesus.  So I don't think being granted the title of an 'apostle' would have made any big difference to their personal character.  All that happened was that one got an additional role and responsibilities, the other didn't get that role... but the ministry and life of faith continued.

How often in life, have we seen people give up everything for a particular goal or post?  And once they do get the post, life is totally different.   It happens all the time in politics and with politicians.  It happens also with priests, religious and bishops..., especially those whose aim is the post (religious politicians?).  I wish Luke the author of the Acts had enumerated the qualities of Joseph and Matthias and a bit more of the selection criteria.  But honestly speaking all that was needed is clearly mentioned:

...it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection.

...been with Jesus and his people and a genuine witness of all that Jesus stood for... we get the role for being this, with the confidence that we would do better.  If those basic qualities for which we were granted the role and related responsibilities are compromised with, then one has no right to continue in that role or claim anything related to it.  That would be the story of Judas, not Joseph Barsabbas!

Selection, deselection and God's plan

Some Catholic dioceses in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana have stopped taking any young men as candidates for priesthood.  To that effect, they have closed down their seminaries and formation houses.  Perhaps one or two are sent for formation to other diocesan formation centres - that too if the candidate is a 'highly recommended' one.  The simple reason for this closure?  Too many vocations! So say the Bishops.  They don't know what to do with those already priests, so why have more!  I've always found that logic strange and the whole process very confusing.  However, reading the conversion narrative of Saul (to Paul), planted a wild thought in my mind.

God chose Saul as his messenger at a very crucial mode.  Christianity was being suppressed.  The Apostles and the few fervent disciples were doing their best.  But perhaps God felt that a bit of extra boost at this time would do a great deal of good in the long run and hence, without discounting the great work already being done, he choose a man who would actually shift the gear of the whole work of evangelisation, not just in deed but in vision and text too.  Would Christianity have had the same rigour and accelerated growth without Paul?  Perhaps not!

So perhaps even this 'break' in accepting candidates for priesthood, could also be phase in evangelisation.  Just like Saul was chosen for that extra zeal he brought to the evangelisation process in the early days of Christianity, so too a lull could do some good for the very same evangelisation process today!  

Vocations to priestly and religious life

Vocations to priestly and religious life in the West are on the decline for decades.  Most congregations are either winding up or on the verge of closing down.  The same is the case for many Parishes.  Either merged or closed down altogether.  Here in this diocese of Arundel and Brighton, recently three parishes were merged or rather were being catered to by two priests.  And this is not a solitary case.

The Salesian province of Great Britain too has shrunk very much in numbers.  Naturally many would like to see more join the Salesians and continue the good work carried out by so many in former years.  However, the scenario at large has changed much.  So has the Church and the congregation too.  The recurrent questions one has to come face to face in the present times is: What next? How can we get vocations?  Very many ask and seek to find an answer to the question, 'Why are people not joining us anymore?'  However, I think prior to that question we Salesians need to ask ourselves, "Why is it that we want people to join us to become Salesians?"

If we have nothing distinctive or special or challenging to offer, why would any youngster want to join us?  If all that we presently do can be done without professing the vows or getting ordained, why then opt for priestly or religious life?  Where and how does God feature in our life, in our invitation to young people to join us?  If we have a relevant answer to that question then perhaps we can move to the next question of 'What more can we do to have young people join us?'

A proper understanding of 'consecration' will certainly do us a lot of good.  But am not sure if consecrated life is to be understood or interpreted as a counter-witness to the 'social' life.