HUA HIN: 8th March 2005 -- Acronyms, abbreviations and initialisms (all three are different) are something of a fact of life today, religious and Salesian life being no exception:  PPL, CPL, OPP, EPP... but the core element in those three initialisms is planning.  The EAOTV (drat it, there we go again) spent Day Two on what lies behind - or what does not lie behind - a planning mentality at every level.

    In the English-speaking world there has been quite some hesitation about the way to represent what in Italian is called POI (Progetto Organico Ispettoriale).  Apart from the fact that many people think a POI is what Australians eat with tomato sauce, and preferably a meat poi at that, the linguistic difficulty is not with pronunciation but the use of the word 'organic'.  In English, at least, 'organic' is decidedly chemical, possibly even scatological, therefore not for human consumption!  It is, frankly, not a word easily associated with planning other than at an agricultural level, so while we may see OPP as a possible English gloss for POI, in fact what we are talking about is planning at the level of the province - a PP?  A provincial plan, or better, a province plan?

    Anyway - this is not an excursus on the part of the writer, but something which represented an element of confusion, including that between between OPP - a so-called organic provincial plan - and an EPP, or educative and pastoral plan (decidedly different but connected) that needed to be sorted out at a Team Visit being held with English as the language medium.

    Japan, in a way, led the way.  Since a PP was asked of all provinces by GC25, the fact remains that Japan is the one province which has carried this one through to some degree of completion, and it is there to see in writing, though in Italian where, incidentally, there is nothing at all wrong with POI.  a Progetto Organico Ispettoriale is what it is in that language!  If you wish to see the Japanese model, you will find it at www.bosconet.aust.com in the usual place.

    Offering his own reflections on this and the deeper issues at stake, the Rector Major at the end of the day summed it up thus: there were two fundamental questions - WHY do this planning, and HOW do we do it?  He identified three levels of challenge in today's religious life.  One is cultural (global culture) where individualism attacks everything we profoundly believe as Christians about God, Trinity, human life as communion and community.  When 'I want to be No. 1' the end result is sectorialism, fragmentation and division.  Don Bosco was singular in respect of his single motivation, single aim, undivided heart.  As Don Rua put it, our Founder ventured nothing if it wasn't aimed at the salvation of the young.

    Then there is a challenge at personal level today - people are activists, and this results in physical tiredness, psychological stress and spiritual emptiness.  They no longer find, at community level 'their deepest needs' being answered. 

    Finally there is the institutional level, and if we are really honest, looking at the reality of young people today and the way that challenges us, we have to ask - are we really meeting their needs?

    All of the above forces us to admit that we must move from the question of how we do things to the deeper question of how we should plan things.  Here the RM mentioned a best-selling book on organisational change by Spencer Johnson MD, Who moved my Cheese?  Let's face it, the world has changed.  But have we?  It's all about our planning (and here the Italian is possibly stronger and better - project) mentality.