#543
THE STRUCTURES COMMISSION AGAIN!
It should
be no surprise that this commission is taking the limelight (in 'austraLasia' reports but probably back in
OK - so the commission in question will run some 'straw' votes past the general assembly to check which way the wind is blowing:
(1) RM, Vicar (with Salesian Family portfolio), Economer, then four councillors - Formation, Youth pastoral, Social Communications, MIssions [note from editor: we were debating this model in GC23 I recall!]
(2) RM, Vicar (with Salesian Family), Economer, two councillors: Salesian Mission (minister for almost everything), Formation. They then work with secretariates (e.g. to manage 'mission' including youth pastoral, soc com., mission 'ad gentes').
(3) RM, Vicar, Economer, 3 councillors: Formation, Salesian Family, Salesian Mission+
(4) RM, Vicar, Economer + 4 councillors without portfolio. The RM would then apportion tasks as needed.
All models above would have Regional Councillors as part of the Council
How best to elect the Vicar? The commission will propose election by the general assembly
And the Economer? Two models proposed - one that the assembly elects him, the other that the RM proposes three names and the assembly selects (votes) one
Regions? Australia-Asia may become two if the commission proposal is accepted - that means an additional councillor.
Term limits? 12 years for general councillors, 6 years once renewable for RM. [editor's note again: this has been battled over for three GCs now. It will be a major decision, this 'limiting' the term of the RM]
We wait with bated breath! At the heart of all this lies a 'sleeper'; it is the question of process - not the litle matter of straw votes, commissions and so on but the larger issue of the way the whole Chapter experience works, from the initial process of receiving comments from around the world to the present ones listed above. There is much in all that which cansift out experiences which come into conflict with a dominant culture.
