Reflections and thoughts
on the topics of the PCO 2001

Br. Hermann Schalück, ofm

Dear Brother Giacomo
Dear Members of the PCO

Given that it is impossible for me to go to the PCO, which I deeply regret, I will write down some thoughts, as you requested. Although they are, undoubtedly, fragmented and incomplete, I hope that they can be useful in the work of the PCO.

1. I am impressed by the quality of the preparatory work (Instrumentum Laboris and the Explanatory Guide&...that accompanies it). Some important topics of the last 20 years, as well as of the General Chapter 1997, appear once again in them. Matters that are very complex and which would require more time to answer are dealt with bravely and competently.

2. I would like and propose that the "context" of the eventual changes to the structures be analysed with greater clarity. If this were not done during the PCO, it would be convenient to do it in conjunction with the next General Chapter. The Explanatory Guide&... has some starting points that are very good in this regard. Effectively, the changes in structures should not be a superficial adaptation but rather positive responses to the new challenges, radical in part, to the Order, the Church and society. For this, perhaps, it would be convenient to work out in the near future a new version of the document The Vocation of the Order Today (Madrid 1973). The new situation of the world presents us with new challenges. Topics such as population growth, structural injustice, violence and non-violence, the infringement of human rights, ecology, the need for inter-religious dialogue, among others, should be understood as challenges to our charism. Besides, in my opinion, ecumenism, the situation of women in the Church, the participation of the laity in our charism and the "complementary nature" of the inter-Franciscan family should also be taken up. There is a great difference between trying to analyse and resolve the topics of the structures within an "exclusive" horizon, almost "pro domo", and doing so in an "inclusive" understanding and, therefore, participative horizon.

3. I, personally, am of the opinion that our Order has not been up to the challenges of our "global mission" during the past twenty years. Said in other words: The "Fraternity" continues to be defined and lived at times in a way that is too intimate, too local or even too national (in some cases, unfortunately, even in a "nationalist" way). We are tied to local and "provincial" structures that, together, are not adequate to express our mission in a global context. The planning and setting in motion of the "Africa Project" and, perhaps, other later initiatives (for example, the new beginning in Albania) were an important step forward towards a different mentality. But for these and similar initiatives that could rejuvenate and "renew the face of our Order", there is, in the long term, a lack of tools and efficacious strategies. This is because the "Fraternitas" is not sufficiently filled with the fire of "mission". Certain structures that have no future from a human point of view (Houses, Provinces, "own" Missions, "own" SFO) are viewed, in a sense of "auto-appropriation", as property that must be defended and not as elements that, in the sense and frame-work of a "global mission", must, perhaps, be radically changed and placed in a new context. This is something that is psychologically understandable, but it brings about a lot of sadness. To change it is not only a matter of new structures. It is also a matter of a renewed missionary spirituality, incarnated in the world of today. It is a matter of "creative fidelity", of which the exhortation Vita Consecrata speaks.

4. In the documents received up to now I do not find any elements that would permit, in the medium and long term, certain changes of mentality and the subsequent changes of structures. In the Ratio Formationis of the whole Order and in that of the Entities of the Order there should not be non-obligatory recommendations on inter-cultural exchanges, on "exchanges of programmes" and on study of other languages only. These elements, in my opinion, will have to be constitutive of our initial and ongoing formation very soon. It seems to me that this is a consequence of our vocation to be brothers and brothers to our world of today.

5. Our Order has been in a process of re-structuring the Provinces for some time now. Unfortunately, this process is being carried out in a reactionary manner, that is, as a response to "situations of emergency" rather than for reasons of the positive assumption that the Church, especially the Church, but also that the changing cultural and social structures and rapid development of our world invite us to a new way of thinking that could offer a new future to the Order. I am party to the fact that this should not be entrusted to the separate Provinces alone whether these reflect or do not reflect on their function, on their mission, on their future — autonomously or in a new way — or on ways of working in common. There should be in all Provinces at the same time a process of reflection on its role and on how to put its future in motion. The PCO or, at the latest, the next General Chapter must set this process, which is necessary, in motion and lay down for it a time scale and content. In any case, in my opinion, the number, magnitude and geographic distribution of our present Provinces do not correspond to the mission that is convenient for our Fraternity to have, or even should have, in the third millennium of the "one world" in which we live in order to remain faithful to its vocation as a "missionary Fraternity". In both the North-South and East-West perspectives, our Order, just like the present world order, presents the image of an unjust divide in material resources and personnel. If we wish to be a "prophetic" Fraternity, we have to introduce other tendencies soon.

6. I agree a lot with all the proposals that give to the Conferences, with greater force than hitherto — perhaps with a fundamental shading that has to be determined in the Statutes -, the function of a participative and more co-responsible organ for the future of both the Entities and of the Order as a whole. In the context of self-assessment to which I alluded in the previous number 5, the Conferences should receive from the government of the Order the mandate to reflect on the future of the Entities that make it up and to present proposals for its future. I would also like to present the idea that the Conferences could eventually have their own deliberative Chapters. In this same context, it is important that the Conferences should have Secretariats (especially for Formation/Studies and for Mission/ Evangelisation) that would be stronger structurally than those that now exist and, thus, capable of functioning and co-operating in a greater interaction between the Entities, between some Conferences and others and between the Conferences and the central Government of the Order.

7. For good joint work on "structures", reference is made, correctly, to the importance of good "leadership", that is, to a leadership that responds qualitatively to the new circumstances, to the new reality. I expressly support all the reflections proposed in this regard, especially to those relative to the pre-election and election of the General Definitors. The right to proposal based on criteria of nationality and of purely numerical strength of a Conference should be suppressed. There should be, like that for the election of the Minister General, lists based on criteria of distinct aptitude that respond to international and inter-culture characteristics. In my opinion, the number of Definitors should not be increased.

These are my reflections. I salute all the Members of the PCO from the heart and I hope the Assembly receives the Spirit of God, the creator of new life.

Pax et Bonum!
To you and yours.

22nd October 2001
Aachen