Although it was again a very full day, I would also say that it was more subdued. The title of the day was "Discovery - Leadership" and it began with a presentation by Sr. Rekha Chennatu, RA (Assumption Sisters) with the title A Synodal Leadership Paradigm: Insights from John’s Gospel. She was a sister from Kerala India who had been Superior General of her order for 14 years and was also a Vatican-ratified Scripture scholar whose specialty was the gospel of John. Her style and approach were radically opposite to that of Fr. Massingale. Her delivery was calm, scholarly, and mentally rapid - meaning that the thoughts and ideas came pouring forth like people exiting the Metro. It was hard to keep up because some ideas would have benefited from the occasional pause. But her notes were straightforward. I was reminded of my time in college, not negatively, just requiring a different kind of attention.
She spoke of John's radical ecclesiology of covenant friendship in leadership. Servant leadership is fine as far as it goes. But John's spirituality goes deeper and wider. "We are called to life another way. We need to create communities of friends, covenant partners. That would bring about radical changes in our communities." This was illustrated by an exegesis of the Good Shepherd discourse, the foot washing by Jesus (which was John's symbolic representation of Jesus on the cross; i.e., the most powerful representation of God's love), and the commisioning of Peter (Do you love me more than others; more than these material things; more than you love your ministries or functions?) Therefore, "One can reasonably conclude that Jesus inaugurated a new community of participative leadership." Her general insight? The Johannine model invites people to contribute all their talents - leads to collaboration and reciprocity in leadership roles. This is the synodal way - each member has a different role and functions in the building of the community - not related to superiority and inferiority.
While not the most dramatic of presentations, the content was solid, which the questions confirmed. One example: Who has the decisive vote in the community of equals? (Answer: I encourage everyone to speak their mind. Every member has the freedom to express her / his views clearly, with conviction, and with reasons, and why they say what they are saying. Once that is done, we must be detached from our opinions and ideas and listen to those of others from THEIR perspectives. And if, after that, there is no consensus, then we need more time and space until we come to a consensus.) So you get the idea. Her knowledge of John came out during a question about women leadership in John. Immediately, she highlighted the women in John's gospel and how they were leaders in their communities: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of Jesus, Martha and Mary, ending with Mary Magdalene again who didn't give up but remained at the tomb looking for Jesus, while the disciples left the scene.
One thing that stood out to me was her response to a question about the likely resistance to the leadership model in John's spirituality. She said, "The Johannine model is the friendship or synodal model of leadership, invited us to deal with one another as friends. It makes a radical difference to relate to one another as friends. Resistance, being comfortable with the way that we used to do things, shouldn't be in our vocabulary. We need to break that chain. When we keep saying that, we are really killing the charism. We are not allowing the charism to come alive in new ways. And it can no longer be leaven. We need to leave our comfort zones and embrace this vulnerability of resistance, recognize it, and slowly we will be able to respond creatively through our openness. It may not be possible by ourselves, but when we do this together and with God, it can become a graceful experience for all of us. Leadership is all about the power of love, all about friendship, all about sacrifice, all about assuming responsibility today, and moving forward in accomplishing God’s mission." That's a long quotation. But it's a perfect illustration of the fact that while her delivery was nothing to write home about, the substance of what she said had real value.
Before we stopped at about 12:30, Br. Jorge made some announcements, among which was a recognition from the central commission that they had not followed the proper procedures in the consideration and voting on the acceptance of the AIMEL proposals yesterday, having failed to include a time for discussion - a decision that the moderator for the session had made because of time constraints, although there was nothing in the manual of procedures for that option, and also for not recognizing the attempt of a member of the Chapter to make a point of order to that effect at the time. You can guess who that member might have been. As with any legislative process, the kinks gradually straighten out, and the proposal would have passed nevertheless. But it was appropriate to recognize that a public discussion of this rather significant proposal had been left out, and in my opinion, based on how I read the assembly, it is still needed. It will almost certainly emerge through other means in the process ahead.
In the afternoon there was a report from the Econome General. The details were for the Chapter alone and confidential to that group. Therefore, all I will say is that it provided the broad outlines of the current fiscal situation of the Institute and the Casa Generalizia, and that there was a long question period that followed, all of it well handled by the Econome General. The Moderator extended the question period into that of the next activity, but the schedule was accommodated to allow for that.
Now there were two more Marketplace sessions. My language group was ENG2 and we went to the presentation on the Secretariat for Formation, followed by another presentation in a different location that covered CIAMEL and the Secretariat for Association. Both were well planned and very informative. The formation one had Br. Rey, Br. Luis, and Br. Sylvain make separate presentations in English, Spanish, and French, which effectively illustrated the breadth of the Institute's formation audience. Those who did not know all the languages could follow along in the brochure that was handed out. As always, the question period was the most engaging part.
The CIAMEL and Association presentation was equally rich. One of the comments that stood out for me was that the publications that have been provided are good and helpful, but it would also be great to have specific formation programs in Rome for school leaders. Another person suggested some kind of pedagogical handbook - similar in intent as the Conduct of Schools - that would help teachers become better teachers. All in all, it was a very helpful and positive session. In the group reflection session that followed, I appreciated the comment that our conversation around "Association" and how to best handle that among our Partners, perhaps coming up with a new word or process or sets of characteristics, was one that has so far been pretty much done from the perspective of the Brothers. With the best of intentions, the Brothers have worked at developing this understanding. Wouldn't it be more appropriate if the Partners themselves were the ones to develop their understanding of that reality through their own experiences, language, conversations, and discernment? (I'm not saying this as well as the person who brought this forward, but the point is clear.)
Earlier in the day, I had agreed to go out to dinner with Br. Chris Patino and Br. Guillaume Yame from Togo, working in Benin. He is one of the secretaries for the Chapter. We left at 7:00 pm and emerged from the Metro at Ottaviano station in a torrential rain. Luckily, the restaurant was not far away, and we proceeded to have a very nice dinner and doing what Brothers usually do on such occasions; i.e., solve the problems of the Institute. Since Guillaume had never been to Rome before, we walked to the semi-empty Vatican afterwards, which of course was very impressive to Guillaume (and to us also; it never fails to impress). After some photos, we made our way back to the Metro and thus back to the Casa Generalizia. Another full day, but nicely ended.
