At their first meeting of the present six-year term in Rome in November, 1998, the provincial and regional superiors looked at the text: “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Government”, which were promulgated afterwards by the Superior General on January 01, 1999 (Prot. 2/99). But the evaluation of “Structures of Government” were remanded to this 2^nd meeting as was an examination of representation at the 21^st General Chapter.

In the recent meeting (Rome 5-16.11.2001), the Provincial Superiors further discussed the topic of the simplification of structures and new modalities on representation in the General Chapters.

The next general chapter will have to give definitive approval of the “Structures” and work out new norms for chapter representation.

At this time, these two topics demand that certain ambiguities that exist in our RofL be clarified:

• The nature of a “region”; if it is part of the Congregation or part of a province on which it is dependent;
• If a regional superior is a true major superior.

As all the Provinces/Regions and other components were already involved in 1998, before the elaboration of the new structures, we, again want to involve the whole Congregation to reflect on the “Simplification of the structures” (Text No.1) and on the “Representation to the General Chapters” (Text No.II).

The very Provincial/Regional and District Superiors will see to the establishment of study modalities: whether to hand it over to a Committee of experts, or to reflect together in their Council or treat this topic directly in the next Provincial Chapter or in the regional/district “Deliberative Assembly.”

Whatever the case may be, we expect your responses in Rome by the 10^th December 2002 and not later.

We would like to involve the whole Congregation as much as possible on the institutional topics of fundamental importance. I wish you all the best in your work for the good of the Institute, and I send you my fraternal greetings in Corde Jesu.

Superior General

and the General Council

Roma, 25.01.2002

1. The Regions

Problem: “Are SCJ regions part of the Congregation or of a Province?”

In Cst. 8a we read: “The Congregation of the Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus is a clerical apostolic religious Institute of pontifical right, made up of provinces and regions.”

The quick interpretation of the text is that Regions, as they are described in Cst. 126, are part of the Congregation even when a Region is directly dependent on a provincial superior. This interpretation is based on the drift of the text itself (Cst 8a) and on the right granted regional superiors to be de iure members of the General Chapter (Cst. 134c).

However, in practice regions are considered even today to be part of the province on which they depend. Thus the Elenchus 2000 listed regions together with their respective provinces (cf. ACR Region with the GE province; the MAR and RBM regions with the BM province; the FIN region with the PO province; the VEN region with the HI province); and for those regions with members from other provinces (ACR and FIN) the province to which the members belonged was indicated.

This position is explained by the fact that, according to our Rule of Life, a regional superior having only delegated authority (Cst. 127b) is not a major superior. In fact, “The regional superior has the powers that are delegated to him by a major Superior” (Cst. 127b). Now, major superiors should enjoy “ordinary powers” and not those simply delegated as CJC requires (Can. 131; 134 §1). Hence, it is reasoned that even respective regions cannot be considered as a [constituted] part of the Congregation.

This contradiction in our Constitutions was noted at the time by the consultors of S. Cong. Rel. & Sec. Inst. But nothing was done to annul it.

In the text “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Governance” a new structure was created called a “region nullius provinciae” (i.e., an independent or autonomous region) where, by acknowledging that the respective regional superior had authority ex iure, he was a major superior and for this kind of region (e.g., Madagascar), it was considered part of the Congregation insofar as it was a part equivalent to a province (cf. Can. 620).

2. Major Superiors

Using the phrase “Major Superior” for the cases in which the competence of the local superior is superseded (Cst. 45 c, 70b, 79 c, 111c, 114c, 127), our Rule of Life does not explicitly state who are the major superiors in the Congregation and does not even foresee their vicars. Keeping in mind the cases cited above, in our congregation the only major superiors other than the superior general are the provincial superiors while regional superiors named in Cst. 127 b are not major superiors. Based on Can 620, it is possible to introduce the figure of the vicar into our “Rule of Life” as other religious institutes have done.

According to Can. 620 “Major Superiors are those who govern a whole institute, a a province of an institute, some part equivalent to a province…as well as their vicars.”

The supreme moderator holds power over all provinces, house and members of the institute, which is to be exercised according to proper law; other superiors enjoy power within the limits of their office” (can 622).

Clarification of this lack in our Constitutions was requested in the past from the consultors of the S. Cong. Rel. & Sec. Inst. But up till now nothing has been done to revise the particular constitutions.

3. Simplification of the Structures of the Congregation

The simultaneous presence of old and new structures whether at the juridical level of the Rule of Life as well as in concrete reality require that the next General Chapter see to their revision and abrogation following the criterion of simplification and making structures correspond to the concrete reality of the Congregation. In this passing phase, there are the following structures:

• Province
• Region nullius provinciae; regions dependent on the superior general or on a provincial;
• Autonomous district; a district dependent on the superior general or on a provincial;

3.1 Province: a whole made up of communities which has obtained a complete autonomy in persons and financial resources and whose religious are in a position to guarantee the carrying on of its apostolic works and the development of the Congregation.

Required for erecting new provinces, according to the document “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Governance”:

• A suitable number of religious with members qualified for the areas of direction and formation;
• Different communities with at least three local communities canonically erected;
• Novices and religious in formation; formational structures of which part are local and part in interprovincial; formation directors, of which some are natives; a Ratio Formationis;
• An “apostolic project” that is clearly laid out and in operation, with some specific proper works that identify the group as Dehonian;
• A process of communication and inculturation of the Dehonian charism in that country;
• The ability of sending religious in a “missio ad gentes” or beyond its frontiers;
• Provincial organisms (commissions, secretariats…) can be projected as interprovincial or by geographic zone;
• A common purse and sharing of goods; financial autonomy for ordinary and extraordinary management.

The provincial superior enjoys all the faculties assigned to him by universal and SCJ proper law (“ex iure”) as are listed in the Recueil Juridique (nn. 477-487).

3.2 Region: a whole made up of several communities that are striving toward self-sufficiency in persons and financial resources and whose religious are in a position to promote the development of their life and apostolic works.

Required for the erection of new regions according to the document “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Governance”:

• A sufficient number of religious in a position to promote a specific project of the Congregation, assuring its structures and services;
• At least three local communities canonically erected;
• Religious in formation; formational structures of which at least part are local and part interprovincial in the same geographic zone; a ratio formationis;
• An apostolic project, with at least on work which typifies the Dehonian charism, and vocational ministry;
• An agreement with the mother province, or with several guarantor provinces, for extraordinary expenses on the way to becoming a province;
• A common purse; a financial plan for arriving at a guarantee of autonomy for ordinary life; a plane for financial support, underwritten by the mother province or by guarantor provinces on the way to becoming a province.

The regional superior is nominated by the Superior general with the consent of his council or elected by the members of the region itself.

If it is independent, it is necessary that there be one or more guarantor provinces for the region to assist its financial and personnel-wise independence. An example? The IM and Lu provinces are the guarantors of Madagascar.

This type of region is considered a part of the Congregation, i.e., equivalent part to a province according to Can. 620; il respective regional superior is a major superior insofar as he has powers ex iure: all the faculties that a provincial superior has, excluding those reserved to the superior general and his council (e.g., starting new works, erection of houses and religious communities).

Abrogation of the structure of a “region directly dependent” on a superior general or a provincial superior (Cst. 126b), only the form of “independent region” remains which corresponds to the old “vice-province”.

Besides Madagascar, what other actual regions meet the requisites to be erected as autonomous regions, similar to an “equivalent part of a province”? Whenever, they do not have the required characteristics, these regions become like a district.

3.3 District: A unity of the communities of a determined territory with its Superior, for a development project of the Congregation; a unity that is not yet sufficiently autonomous in personnel and financial means to be a Region.

A structure which suits new situations in the Congregation as:

• Beginning of new foundations provincial or international in nature;
• Foundations already begun but which are not read to be made into autonomous regions;
• Structures into which present regions are going to be configure because they do not possess the requisites for an independent region.

• There should be a sufficient number of religious in a position to begin a project of founding and organizing communities, of which one should be canonically erected;
• It should correspond to a “project of the Congregation;”
• The inculturation of the Dehonian charism and vocational ministry should be under way;
• An agreement should exist with a mother province or with several guarantor provinces for sending personnel and for financial support;
• A common purse; a financial plan for arriving at local autonomy in loco at least for ordinary expenses.

A district can depend on only a single province or, if international in character, can depend directly on the General Administration and as a district it enjoys a certain autonomy.

The district superior is a delegate superior of the respective major superior by whom he is named and is dependent upon and enjoys only those faculties that are delegated.

If the district is made up of more than 9 religious, the superior is assisted by 2 councilors, otherwise all the religious make up the council; he is also assisted by a treasurer.

Only a “district directly dependent on the superior general” not being a “part equivalent to a province” can be considered, in a wide sense, a part of the Congregation; the religious are juridically members of such a district (India, Philippines, and shortly Uruguay).

A district dependent on a province is considered “part of a province.” Such a structure is applicable to new provincial foundations, in which the religious continue to be members of the province of origin.

4. Provinces Growing Smaller and/or Aging - A new Reality

In the document “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Governance” (Prot. N. 2/99 of 01/01/99) the situation of such provinces were treated by giving some possibilities for fusion or confederation among them, or their reconfiguration as regions or autonomous districts.

It is a fact that two provinces, GA and LW have already proceeded to fusion into the EF province and that the FL province is considering how it will be structured in the near future. An example is the path taken by the CG province which has become the CGA region. At present, both the CA province and the CGA region have expressed a desire to become an “independent region”.

The new structures of “a district directly dependent on the Superior General” and “a district dependent on a province” can adequately incorporate and help the new realities arising from province initiatives or those international in makeup because they slowly are in correspondence with the requisites. This applies to Albania, Bielorussia, Moldavia, Slovakia, and Ukraine.

Questionnaire:

1. How do you value the “new” structures of the Congregation (Regione Nullius Procince, District, directly subjected to the Superior General and a District dependent on the Provincial Superior) and their simplification (repeal the Region dependant on the Superior General or on the Provincial Superior)?
2. Is it necessary to propose specific criteria and seek particular requisites for provinces actually decreasing and/or aging?

1.1 Our Rule of Life (1986) prescribes the following about representation at the General Chapter: “The members of the general chapter are: the superior general and his council, the general treasurer and the other general co- workers (cf. No. 131: the general secretary, the general procurator at the Holy See), the provincial and regional superiors, and those delegates elected by provincial chapters according to the criteria indicated in the General Directory” (Cst. 134c).

“In convoking the general chapter, the superior general with the deliberative vote of his council and after consultation with the provincial councils, is to indicate the number of delegates for each province, in proportion to the number of religious in each province (GD 134.1).

Current norms give full chapter representation only to provinces: to their elected delegates and to the respective provincial superiors; the representation of regions is limited exclusively to the regional superiors and excludes representation by elected delegates. The norms do not provide for participation by the new international realities (districts) and leaves numerical proportions undefined and imprecise…

The result of all these limitations and exclusions came to the attention of the 20^th General Chapter where the representation of component parts of the Congregation revealed the lack of equality and the discrimination.

Provinces with few members (CGA with 8 religious, CA with 15 religious, CH with 28 religious) had at least two representatives (the superior and an elected delegate), as did other more numerous provinces. For the new international realities (MAD with 43 religious and PHI with 16) a single religious from each had been invited as auditors and these were later admitted by the General Chapter itself as members. India had no representative (IND with 10 religious).

1.2 Representation at the General Chapter is an open question and a problem that needs resolution. What are being sought are “new criteria” that guarantee the participation from all the parts of the Congregation as the new Code of Canon Law requires: “The general chapter, which holds supreme authority in the institute according to the norm of the constitutions, is to be so formed that, representing the entire institute, it should be a true sign of its unity in love…(can 631, §1).

The general chapter should be representative of the entire institute and all its component parts (can. 620); of its sectors of life and activity according to the which the institute is organized: “Major superiors are those who govern a whole institute, a province of an institute, some part equivalent to a province…(can 620).

The “whole institute” apart from the general government is made up of “provinces” and “of parts equivalent to the province” (can 620) for which representation by elected delegates are certainly to be attributed to regions “nullius provinciae.”

As for participation from the districts, the 20^th General Chapter decided that “the Superior General with the consultative vote of his council can invite other religious from territorial communities or activity sectors as observers not representatives at a chapter and other members according to the norms of the Rules of the Chapter (GD 134.6). In the document which followed, “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Governance” certain international “territorial communities” which are treated in GD 134,6 were qualified and named “Districts”.

Representation at a general chapter of religious belonging to a district should be mindful of the various kinds of district types. Only in a ‘district” that is international in character (India, Philippines) are religious juridically members of that district for the sake of autochthonous or native born religious. Now, rather than awaiting an invitation from the superior general, it is possible to acknowledge that such a district has the possibility to send one “delegate” elected by the religious who are its members. Religious who are members of a “district dependent upon a provincial superior” continue to be members of their province and they have representation at a general chapter through the province of origin.

As a result of direct representation at a general chapter to members of “independent regions” and “autonomous districts,” such religious should not be computed in the totals of their provinces of origin nor are they to be elected by the provincial chapters of their provinces of origin.

In determining the numerical proportions for provinces and regions, one needs to recall that “the total number of delegates to the general chapter from the provinces is always to exceed, by at least one, the number of “de jure” members (GD 1342; cf Cst. 124).

This is an absolute principle to respect to so as to avoid turning the general chapter into a meeting of major superiors and to guarantee its character of being an assembly of the base.

All the components constituting the whole Congregation, erected by the Supreme Moderator, have the right of representation to the General Chapter, either directly or through the respective Province. The chapter, in fact, is the expression of the unity of the Congregation in the diversity of its component parts (can.631,§1).

1.3 There are three possible general modes of representation at a general chapter: the first is in accordance with the current legislation of the constitutions; the third by revamping the legislation.

1.3.1 First Mode. Keeping in mind cans. 620 andd 631, §1, and observing the current norm of Cst. 134c, representation at the general chapter would end up like this:

- De iure members of the general chapter are: the superior general and his council, the general treasurer, the secretary general and the procurator at the Holy See, the provincial and regional superiors.

- The elected delegates from provincial chapters and the assembly chapters of “independent regions” insofar as they are “parts equivalent to a province” in proportion to the number of religious they have.

- A delegate elected from every “autonomous district” i.e., those directly dependent on the superior general; their superior can be elected.

1.3.2. Second mode. Keeping in mind cans. 620 and 631, §1, and making a modification of Cst. 134c (Establishing a minimum quorum for the participation of the Superiors), representation at the general chapter would end up like this:

- De iure members: the superior general and his council, the general treasurer, the secretary general and the procurator at the Holy See (cf. Cst. 131), the provincial and regional superiors with at least 40 (or 30 or 25) members in their province/region (this is the part to be modified).

- Delegates elected by provincial chapters and by assembly chapters of “independent regions” in proportion to the number of their religious up to a maximum of 3 delegates for each province and region (a constraint to be applied to GD 134.1)

- A delegate elected from every “autonomous district;” the superior can be elected.

In both modes, it becomes possible formulate various hypotheses for participation at the general chapter.

1.3.3. Third modality. Keeping in mind canons 620 and 631, §1, and making some modification to Cst.134c (establishing a minimum quorum for the participation of the Superiors) the representation to the General Chapter is attributed as follows:

• The “de iure” members the Superior General and his Council, the general Bursar, the General Secretariat and the Procurator to the Holy See (cf. Cst. 131); the Provincial and Regional Superiors in their capacity as Major Superiors.
• The delegates elected by Provincial Chapters and the Chapter Assembly of an “Independent Region” who have not less than 15 religious (modified part).
• An elected delegate for every “Autonomous District”, the superior himself can be elected.

2. Provincial Chapter or Assembly Chapter in Two Sessions

In preparation for general chapters, several provinces hold their provincial chapter in two sessions: the first one to elect delegates to the general chapter and to examine the topics called for by the general chapter; the second one devoted to the internal affairs of the province.

After the general chapter, several provinces take up consideration of the decisions of the general chapter to make applications to the life of the province, either by holding another session of the provincial chapter or in the annual assembly.

It is important to the congregation and its component parts (provinces/regions/ districts) to receive the stimuli and absorb the orientations and directives that the general chapter provides for the entire congregation . The general chapter cannot remain some episodic and isolated fact but ought to be able to unfold its dynamic force so as to promote congregational unity with a common response.

Questionnaire:

1. Which of the three modalities favours better participation of the entire Institute and its base to the General Chapter? Any other modality to suggest?
2. Do we have to establish a ceiling of 3 elected delegates for each Province and Region? (clarification of GD 134,1).
3. What initiative do you propose so that the decisions and motions of any general chapter just concluded be taken up in every province/region/district and rendered operative?