March 01, 2011

Mon Dieu

I've started reading the Marguerite Vacher book on the early CSJ foundations in Le Puy and environs, up to the French Revolution (in French - bien sûr). It is really interesting and gives great context. One of the elements that has caught my attention is her discussion of the loose network of houses that characterized the initial foundation. Once the group sent a group off to a new diocese or area, that group then because quite autonomous, eventually forming the various congregations of France, which have subsequently federated, and in some cases merged.
I like the idea of a loose federation, with the authority remaining close to the community and to the mission. There are things that are centralized, for the good of all, but there is also an agility and a mutual responsibility in community if the buck stops right here, in each local community or cluster. It is related to the Vatican II notion of subsidiarity, however with a significant difference. In subsidiarity, the power is presumed to 'belong' at the central level, and is only delegated to the local level for practical reasons. In federation instead, the power is presumed to reside locally, and is only given to the central authority if it is best exercised there. Basically you come to the same result, but the federation is more flexible and more adaptable.
I was talking with a Vietnamese sister about her congregation which was founded in the 17th century, like the CSJs. She said that her community also split into separate congregations so that they would be smaller and more able to adapt to local needs and conditions. They have resisted merging, because they see the benefits of the current arrangement.
This has been an interesting discovery as we begin to discuss emerging CSSJ futures.
--Amy

4 comments:

  1. We are undergoing similar explorations. Mary MacKillop sent here sisters out in small groups. In the 1990s the congregation decided that in order to be more inclusive and to share leadership there would be no named leaders of communities. As a result the provincial (local major superior) became the default dealing with minor local issues. Now that we realise this resulted in people slipping through the gaps so to speak sisters are back in small communities or living alone so we have to explore new ways of local leadership. At the moment we have formed clusters of sisters into local communities. Mine is the whole of the South Island and lower North. The Cook Strait separates us. No named leader as yet but it is I believe having a positive effect. Deliberatly reaching out and connecting has given a strong sense of belonging so that our last provincial meeting was very good. We could even disagree with each other. Sian RSJ NZ

    ReplyDelete
  2. I find both of these exciting. I like the small groups. Much more ownership of relationships and the need to work with each other, and to have the hard conversations. Also, practically who knows what is needed locally better than the local people. sandy

    ReplyDelete
  3. Interesting - a balance then. I think we've 'institutionalized' so long that it will take some imagining to get where we need to be. It's so great to have imagining partners.
    --Amy

    ReplyDelete
  4. I just came across your blog. I love the fact that you are embracing technology to reach out. Very inspiring. Keep it up.

    Missouri Johnson

    http://missouri-oneofusislying.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete

Comments