Electric-box Niveau 41

A community wrote to his bishop

Eminence,
we are a group of community Christian XYZ in XXYY, in various capacities in the parish, each according to their sensitivity, ability and charisma. You can read our names in the document attached to this letter.

are writing about the sudden decision to move our parish priest, Fr XY, to another community. Sudden at least for our people that within a few weeks you will see deprived of their spiritual leader, at a time over everything already quite critical, as he sees the emergence of new community ministry.

A dispatch on July 3, 2010 signed by Msgr. YZ, with tones from the press release, offers knowledge the decisions taken on the pastoral community and, beyond some paternalistic way, in no way seems to want to really take care of the deep feeling of the people who will be affected also by the effects of those provisions.

The thought of the faithful and perhaps even that of the priests involved and their possible indications, concerns or doubts about it, according to an established practice of the Church but not laudable, even this time were the least considered. Everything is presented as already agreed and the laity in particular, must not help but take note, more or less willingly, in a too obvious party game that always sees them relegated, in the things that set affecting the life of the Church, the subordinate role of eternal infants, without any possibility of intervening in what should be a genuine and sincere communication between adult Christians.

And everything just in time when, in reference to build communities pastoral, a call that there has been more frequently targeted by the ecclesiastical authorities is the "shared responsibility". We ask ourselves what meaning to give this request a community of believers where you realize you do not actually have any say on a matter as fundamental as that of the removal of the priest who presides over the twelve years in the Eucharistic celebration.

is indeed the same kind of doubts regarding the manner by which the draft of the new pastoral community has taken shape. Even there, no precautionary demand for interventions aimed at people or at least in pastoral councils. Everything is simply notified when the fundamentals have already been broadly defined. Nobody, for example, has seen fit to ask the four parishes selected what they thought of the fact of being called to walk together, even though some, at least from the geographical point of view and perhaps even historic, turn out to be rather distant from each other. The

So the problem is mainly of method: why would you want to decide everything at the table, asking nothing from Christians in the territories concerned actually live and work? It may be objected that the priests were involved in the project since inception, and then transfer one of them because just as we begin the journey? What a curious way of proceeding! Would not it be better to let the Community ministry was driven at least until weaning by the priests with whom he was conceived?

And also the exchange of cross between the pastor and ZZYY YYZZ it was so essential? What are the mysterious "pastoral reasons" and demanded that the course in which press release of July 3 there is no mention? For our part we are not so convinced that the relational aspect, the simple everyday horizon of faces and stories in which people are immersed, may be too happily cleared the much-celebrated "availability of the Gospel." In the name of which still too often in the Church gives the impression of favor what separates this gathering, which degrades to that which gladdens.

The question at the bottom, Eminence, is one. At this point it becomes a wish: that the act of design can involve, from the ground up, the same people for whom the project is conceived. In our case, both for the birth of the pastoral community, both as regards the transfer of Don Romeo, it would only try to listen to the people of God, before which called for unconditional compliance. Otherwise the impression of bitterness that one gets is that the word "responsibility" is an empty shell. And that's insistent calls to it are mostly due to the pastoral emergency resulting from chronic shortage of priests (and some whispers that even if there were enough priests, shared responsibility we would have certainly heard of). Mature lay people and share responsibility certainly can not return to play as mere executors directives and harmless users of religious services.

If it is legitimate in decisions concerning the life of the Diocese the final say is up to you, dear Eminence, if obedience to the priest that is just as valid and valuable in the context of charity, for a while ' time to repeat this part we feel that there is a third element at play that can not be ignored: it is called community responsible. That's always community relations and faces. That is, or tries to be, a communion of minds and hearts. Give substance to your body and, therefore, request the co-responsibility!

Under it, we dare to hope a Church which, even at home, really try to walk the streets of genuine friendliness in the way to take and implement decisions. No form of being ecclesia, that is old or new, will also rely on a true sisterly and brotherly communion, which essentially consists in listening to reason and sincere feelings.

addition to the aforementioned "availability of the Gospel", this - we think - it would be "the strong example of faith (and love), for which we should all" I am truly grateful. "

parresia With filial and affectionate.
***