LIFE OF THE CONGREGATION

REVISION OF THE RULE OF LIFE (Cst. - GD)

Chiarello Umberto, scj

Some Provincial Superiors have proposed that, among the themes to be dealt with at the next General Chapter, XXI, we consider a revision of the Rule of Life (Cst., GD). This is a proposal which deserves consideration, since it forces us to reflect upon the up-to-date value and significance, and assess the current suitability, of our Rule of Life (RV).

The Rule of Life, being made up of the Constitutions and the General Directory, expresses the spiritual content of the charism of Fr. Dehon (this is the inspirational part); it also outlines the organizational structure of the Congregation (this is the institutional part).

The inspirational part is the fruit of a reflection, already initiated in the Congregation at the XV General Chapter of 1966-67, which researched the biblical bases of Dehonian spirituality and attempted to express such content in more modern language.

In examining the Rule of Life the councilors of the SCRIS (Sacred Congregation of Religious and Secular Institutes) praised the inspirational part.

The text of the new Constitutions of the Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus is splendid when looked at as a spiritual and theological doctrine on the religious life. In fact the doctrine is sound and follows a sound theology. The style is elegant, lively and new. It is a pleasure to read.

The spirit of the Founder and the spirituality of the Institute are presented in the first part of the Constitutions in an extremely outstanding way. The intention of the Constitutions to update the worship of the Sacred Heart, today less in use, to current thinking is also done very well, as is also the manner in which the text emphasizes Divine Love: the center of the worship of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (Prot. S. 13 - 1/80, Rome, September 28, 1980).

In my opinion this inspirational part, which expresses the core of Fr. Dehon’s charism and the way in which it is interpreted today by the Dehonians, does not require any revision. It needs, rather, a translation for the various local cultures, under the banner of inculturation.

Fr. Dehon expressed his charism, and in particular his spirituality, with the terminology of the nineteenth century, linked to the devotional manner of St. Margaret Mary, in the socio-ecclesial context of his time and in the culture of the western world. The Rule of Life constituted an attempt, very successful, to set the content of the Dehonian charism and spirituality on a biblical bases, in order to re-express it in contemporary language. By liberating the charism of Fr. Dehon from the historical conditioning of St. Margaret Mary and from a nineteenth century devotional language, the text of the Rule of Life, faithfully interpreting Fr. Dehon’s charism, may be considered a paradigm for its translation in the language of differing cultures. Therefore, rather than a revision, except for a few editorial improvements,¹ what is needed today is a translation of Fr. Dehon’s charism and of Dehonian spirituality into the language of the various local cultures. Western culture itself has changed since the time the Rule of Life was compiled, therefore it could say little to the generations of today. Inculturation of the charism involves making evident its capacity to respond to the spiritual requirements of a specific people; it involves an evaluation of its dynamic force of contestation, purification, and promotion of the values of that particular culture, and it involves expressing it in a language comprehensible to the various peoples. Therefore, what is required is a translation of the Rule of Life in the secularized western culture for Europe and for North America, for the Asiatic and African cultures, and for that of Latin America. Now this, rather than being the task of the General Chapter, is the work of theologians, of those Dehonian formation directors and priests who belong to the various geo-cultural areas in which the Congregation is found.

The proposal to revise the Rule of Life should be considered with regard to the institutional part. In fact, the examining councilors of the SCRIS pronounced a negative judgement on the text which was presented to them.

Concrete and juridical discipline is almost totally missing from the present Constitutions, as one can see from the following particular observations. There is no concrete description coming from the text which shows how the religious, spiritual and material life is lived; or how the Congregation, the Province, the region and the communities are concretely governed. In this way the text of the Constitutions is wholly dependent on the general, provincial and regional administration.

The text of the Constitutions does not respond to the invitation of the Motu Proprio (M.P.) Ecclesiae Sanctae which demands equilibrium between spiritual and exhortative texts and regulatory and judaical texts. Even the essential norms, such as the composition of the General Chapter, the quality of the major and local Superiors, etc. is lacking in the text of the Constitutions and, consequently, they lack the approval of the Holy See (Prot. S. 13 - 1/80).

It is true that the writers then proceeded to integrate a minimum number of juridical norms in the text of the Constitutions and thus obtained SCRIS approval on March 14, 1982 (Cf. Prot. S. 13 - 1/80), referring many of the concrete regulations back to the GD and to the Recueil juridique (RJ). But, are the current Rule of Life (Cst. and GD) and the RJ sufficient to orient and guide the life and development of the Congregation today?

The reply to this question requires discernment, for a double series of observations.

We have a first series of facts. In the revision in the Rule of Life (Cst., GD), there is no account taken of all the critical observations made by the examiners and councilors of the SCRIS, in order not to make the text of the Constitutions heavy and not to augment the GD with too many juridical norms. Thus, for example, the figure of the Regional Superior was not defined and, as a consequence, the nature of the Region as part of the Congregation: the rules in the Rule of Life concerning the administration of goods and also those concerning the relationship between Superiors and the respective treasurers remained imprecise (Cf. Richieste della SCRIS - Requests of the SCRIS).²

In addition, in 1983, the new Codex Juris Canonici (CJC) was promulgated with several important additions concerning the institutional aspect of the religious institutes and, so far, no account has been taken of these additions. For example, Can.620 anticipates, in addition, the being made equivalent to a Province; Can. 631 §1 provides new criteria concerning representation at the General Chapter.

There is a second series of facts which reflect the way in which the Congregation has recently been developing, and which finds no mention in the current Rule of Life.

In the Rule of Life the foundations dealt with by a single Province have their constitutional guarantee with the local area Community (Cst. 73, GD 73) and with the region which “can be directly under the Superior General or the Provincial Superior” (Cst. 126).

The foundations of international character with the coordination of the General Government, such as those of the Philippines and India, and that of Madagascar, which is handled by two Provinces, do not find sufficient configuration in the current Rule of Life. Hence the need to have a new structure of the Congregation and forms of government such as the District, with its varied typology, and the autonomous Region, considered equivalent to a Province.

On the basis of this series of facts, the XIX General Chapter had already initiated an analysis of the Rule of Life concerning the institutional aspects of the Congregation, suggesting modifications which were approved later by the XX General Chapter. A provisional addition of Our Rule of Life (2001), shortly to be published, will speak of this.

The XX General Chapter, with two motions, authorized the process of the revision of the existing structures (Motion 7) and the creation of new structures (Motion 6); and, with a recommendation, urged also the revision of the GD and of the NAB, giving the mandate to the Superior General and his Council.

The XX General Chapter mandated the general administration to study the structures of the government of the Congregation on a general and provincial level, and that of geographical area, as part of the World Wide Strategy. It will be able to have the aid of committees of experts who will be in dialogue with the parties concerned. At the next meeting of the provincial/regional Superiors with the general administration they will be asked for their opinion on possible solutions envisaged (Motion 7, Structures of Government).

The XX General Chapter recognized that the motion by the Delegate of Madagascar requires an urgent operational response. It gave the Superior General and his Council the mandate to study an intermediary judiciary figure between territorial and provincial Communities, one which may be adequate to the specific situation of Madagascar and also applicable to the new foundations of international character. This new governmental structure will be made operative ad experimentum until the next General Chapter (Motion 6, New Judiciary Figure For New Realities).

The XX General Chapter entrusted the general administration with the task of studying other possible amendments to be conveyed to the general administration for possible application to the Rules of the Congregation concerning the administration of goods, in dialogue with the Holy See, and of taking advantage of the counsel of an ad hoc committee of experts, promulgating these amendments ad experimentum until the next General Chapter”. (Recommendation n. 12).

This is why it would be opportune for the XXI General Chapter to complete the revision of the part of the Rule of Life (Cst. and GD) which concerns the institutional arrangement of the Congregation.

As things are we have a series of questions which so far have been left in abeyance; these include the new structures of the Congregation which will be inserted into the Rule of Life.

What follows here is a list of open questions and interrogations which demand further reflection and which wait for a definitive answer:

1. Who are the Major Superiors according to the S.C.J. Constitution? If one wishes to use the words Major Superior there is no explicit and direct indication of the term in the Rule of Life. One has to refer to universal law to consider the Supreme Moderator and the Provincial Superiors as Major Superiors.

But is the Regional Superior a true Major Superior or a Superior delegate? Or is he only a delegate of the Provincial Superior? As it stands in Cst. 127b, which states that: The Regional Superior has the powers that are delegated to him by a Major Superior, he is not a Major Superior but a (superior) delegate of the Major Superior.

2. Are the S.C.J. Regions part of the Congregation or of the Province? How should we interpret the affirmation that 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 (Cst. 8a)?

Which type of S.C.J. Region can be made equivalent to a Province? This question was answered with the Regione nullius provinciae, created in the document entitled “Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Government”.

The Rule of Life must therefore be made to conform with the new CJC, which says: The Major Superiors are those who govern the entire Institute, or a Province of it, or a part of the Institute made equivalent to it, or a house sui juris, and likewise their respective vicars (Can. 620).

To properly frame the new foundations of international character, the new figure of District was created with its varied typology: a District is dependent on a Province or on the General Government, and “Distretto nullius provinciae”.

Now the simultaneous presence of old and new structures, both on the level of concrete reality and on the institutional level, requires that one proceeds to their simplification. In addition, it would be opportune to give definite criteria and that the necessary requisites be indicated for the different structures; covering them when they undertake the task to be erected, modified or suppressed, while avoiding that such subjects depend on personal discernment or be left to the discretion of the General Government.

3. Representation at the General Chapter. The current normative is a well of incongruences. The CG Province with 8 members, the CA Province with 15 members, were represented at the preceding XX General Chapter by 2 religious each. For Madagascar with 43 religious, for the Philippines with 16 religious and India with 10 religious, there were only the respective Superiors, present as simple attendees.

What new criteria must be invented to conform the Rule of Life to Can. 631 §1? In fact, this says: The General Chapter, which holds supreme authority in the Institute according to the norms of the Constitutions, is to be composed in such a way that, representing the entire Institute, it may truly be the sign of its unity in charity... (Can. 631 § 1).

4. The Regions and the Districts must be given suitable instruments for their internal government, providing them with a constitutional guarantee.

The Congregation and the Provinces have the Chapters, General (Cst. 133) and Provincial (Cst. 124); the Regions and the Districts, like some small Provinces, have, in fact, the Assembly (annual/biannual) of all the members, which has a consulting character. A constitutional guarantee must be given to this kind of Assembly, making mention of it in the Rule of Life.

The decision making Capitular Assembly of the religious who have taken perpetual vows should be extended also to the Region and to the “autonomous District”: in preparation for the General Chapter, for the election of delegates, and for the approval and modifications of their particular administration.

In addition to the General Directory of the Congregation there is a Particular Directory, denominated Province Directory (for the Province), Regional Directory (for the Region) and Particular Directory (for the autonomous District); all the Directories, Provincial/Regional/Particular to be confirmed by the General Government (cf. Cst. 113; GD 124).

Some Provinces review and reconfirm their Provincial Directory at each celebration of the Provincial Chapter, convinced that this expires and requires new confirmation. Instead, analogous to the General Directory, the Provincial Directory is part of the individual right of a Province and is a fixed entity.

5. Administration of Goods. Numbers 137-143 of the Rule of Life have an inspirational character with a few general indications. The evaluation made by SCRIS is that they consist of too generalized norms which must be made specific, at least there should be an indication that there exist norms concerning alienation, for incurring debts and obligations, etc. ... . In addition, Cst. 138b should emphasize the vigilance of the Superior General and the dependence of the General Council concerning the General Treasurer.

Personally, I do not believe that in order to respond to these requests concerning the administration of goods, one has to touch the numbers of the Rule of Life: these are fine as they are. Thus, rather than adding norms to the General Directory, it would be sufficient to intervene in the NAB (Norms for the Administration of Goods), which have already been waiting to be reviewed since the XIX General Chapter. Their revision was urged by the Provincial Treasurers at their meeting in January 1997, and requested by the XX General Chapter.

I have presented a list, not exhaustive, of open questions concerning the Rule of Life. The document on the new Structures of the Congregation and Forms of Government (Prot. N. 2/99 of January 1, 1999) has already provided some answers to them. They are answers which will be verified at the next meeting of the Major Superiors in November 2001, in Rome; at the XXI General Chapter it is to be hoped that they will be finalized. The objective is that our Rule of Life , brought up to date in its institutional part, may respond to and accompany the life and the current development of the Congregation.

¹ Chiarello, Umberto, La Nostra Regola di Vita (Our Rule of Life), Studia Dehoniana 43, Rome 2000, PP. 62-63, editorial modification.

² Some requests of the SCRIS (Prot. S. 13 - 1/80), which received no response:

Cst. 55b. Respect and loyalty toward our Superiors is not enough, “submission” to them is also necessary .

GD 63. Some clarification regarding hospitality would be useful.

GD 63ff. Principles are too general; they should be specified in some cases (hospitality).

Cst. 73a. The Superior General should at least be informed before a decision is made by the Provincial Superior (to constitute certain territorial communities).

Cst. 113-114. Rules are too general... How is decentralization achieved in practice? This is what one needs to know from the Constitutions. This applies also to subsidiary considerations. It is the Constitutions which much fix standards and limits, to avoid contrasts among Superiors.

Cst. 115. Even if the new Law anticipates the possibility of the construction of a religious house made by the competent authorities according to the Constitutions, it seems strange that there is no need for confirmation from the Superior General, or at least a nulla osta from him beforehand.

Cst. 127. Is the Superior of the Region a Major Superior, or is he only a delegate?

Cst. 132. For the nomination of the other general collaborators, specify that this is a matter which must have the consent of the General Council.

Cst. 137-143 (Administration of Goods). The Rules are too general, they must be made more specific - at least indicate that rules exist for alienation, for incurring debts and obligations, etc.

Cst. 138b. Indicate the vigilance of the Superior General and the dependence on the General Council concerning the General Treasurer.