PRINCIPAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MARIANIST ADMINISTRATION

PRINCIPALCHARACTERISTICSOFMARIANISTADMINISTRATION

SOCIETYOFMARY(MARIANISTS)

October 2, 2013

PRESENTATION

Throughout recent decades,we have been developingwithin the Society ofMary thetaskofreflectinguponthecharacteristicswhicharepropertothenatureoftheSMandthe “Marianist” way of conducting our apostolic mission. This endeavor has beenundertakenasaresponsetoaconcernabouthowtotransmitourcharismaticidentityintothefuture.Wecannotforgetthat,ifweshouldlosethisidentity,wewouldloseourraisond’êtreforbeingintheChurchandintheworld.Inthepast,thistransmissionhasbeenachievedalmostbyasortof“osmosis,”fromonereligioustoanother,andfromonegenerationofreligioustothenext. Inrecentyears,due, on the one hand, to the composition of the personnel of the Society and itsdistribution(diminishingnumberofreligiousintraditionalUnits,whilegrowinginnewculturesandcountries)and,ontheotherhand,thegrowingparticipationoflaywomenand laymen in ourmission, as they assume positions of responsibility, this “osmotictransmission” hasweakened considerably. We need, therefore, tomake use of otherresources:documents,meetings,formationseminars…In light of this, and for the same purpose, this present document, approved by theGeneral Council, presents the grounds upon which is based the proper way to"administrate"intheSocietyofMaryandthetraitsthatcharacterizeit.Itusestheterm"administration"initsbroadsense.Assuch,itisnotlimitedtotherealmofeconomicsandfinance,butgoesbeyondtoembracethesetofresources,bothhumanandmaterial,withwhichtheSocietylivesandcarriesoutitsmission.Itis,therefore,acomprehensivedocument–asisourintention–toassistintheformationofthosewhoexercisesomeresponsibilityinthisdomain,betheyreligiousorlaypersons.May St. Joseph, under whose patronage the Society of Mary, following the traditionstartedbyourFounder,hasalwaysentrusteditsadministration,accompanyusandhelpusremainfaithfultowhattheLordexpectsofus,forthegoodofGod’sKingdom.

ManuelJ.Cortés,SMSuperiorGeneral

God is perfectly able to enrich you with every grace, so that you always have enough for every conceivable need, and your resources overflow in all kinds of

good work. (2Cor 9:8)

Divine Providence has not abandoned us…we are living from day to day,

undoubtedly so that we might place all our trust in God.

(Chaminade, October 31, 1837)

Acknowledgements

As would be expected, the project to develop the Principal Characteristics, was acooperativeventure.WeareindebtedtoDr.SteveNiehielselfortheinitialinquiryandpublication,CharacteristicsofMarianistAdministration.Thankyou,Steve!

Wewish to thank all thosewho have interactedwith Dr. Neiheilsel’s work and thenprovideduswithvaluablefeedbackandsuggestions.

WeextendourappreciationtoDr.MaryLynneGasaway‐Hill,andBro.MichaelMcAward,SM for their help editing and formatting; and to our primary translators, Fr. BernardVial,SM(English‐French),Fr.PabloRambaud,SMandFr.LorenzoAmigo,SM(English‐Spanish).

EdwardAViolett,SMAssistantGeneralforTemporalities

IntroductionThe ideaof articulating theprincipal elements ofMarianistAdministrationgerminated in thedeliberationsofthe33rdGeneralChapterof2006oftheSocietyofMary(SM).Amongitsactions,the Chapter approved and published the “General Finance Directory on the Use andAdministration ofMaterialGoods in the Society ofMary” as well as called the Society to anincreasedknowledgeof,andalivingoutof,itscharism.In the last twenty‐five years or so, significantwork has been done to develop contemporaryresources that articulate the ideals of Marianist spirituality and the manner of Marianisteducation and pedagogy so as tomake themmore accessible. These resources have becomecritical indeepeningtheunderstandingof thecharismandputting it intopracticethroughouttheSociety.Yet,inthissametimeframe,withtheexceptionoftheGeneralFinanceDirectory,therehasbeenless development on the ideals of Marianist administration, particularly administrationassociatedwiththeThirdOffice—theOfficeofTemporalities.Toencouragethisdevelopment,aprocessof studyanddialoguewasundertaken to establisha setof characteristic elementsofMarianistadministration.Dr. Steven Neiheisel, a professor of Political Science with a specialty in administration andleadership, was invited to conduct the primary research. He initiated the inquiry into thecharacteristicelementsofMarianistadministrationinthefallof2007.Theresultofhisresearch,Characteristics of Marianist Administration1, was published in June 2009. This paper wasdistributed to the Unit administrations for discussion and feedback. Likewise, the paperwasdiscussedintheGeneralCouncilandintheTemporalitiesCommitteeoftheSociety.IthasalsobeenusedasaresourceinworkshopsgiventoschoolanduniversityadministratorsaswellastheleadershiptrainingprogramsforthebrothersoftheProvinceoftheUnitedStates.The PrincipalCharacteristicsofMarianistAdministration presented below is a redaction thatincorporatesDr.Neiheisel‘soriginalworkandthefeedbackreceivedintheensuingdiscussions.WhilethefocuswastodevelopcharacteristicsparticularlyassociatedwiththeThirdOffice,theMarianist system of administration is an integrated system that involves a diversity ofparticipants. Hence, the characteristics articulated in this synthesis are understandablyapplicablebeyondtheThirdOffice.The aim of this synthesis is fourfold: it is to be a basic articulation to help form and informadministratorsinMarianistCommunities,Unitadministrations,andMarianistorganizations;itisanaidinthemissionofdeepeningandsustainingMarianistorganizationalidentity;itistobea basic resource in crafting and evaluating organizational policies and actions; and it is toprovideabasisforfurtherstudyandamplification.WhilethePrincipalCharacteristicswouldnaturallyhaveresonanceintheotherbranchesoftheMarianistFamilybecauseofa sharedcharism, theyhavebeendevelopedoutof the tradition,experienceanddocumentsoftheSocietyofMary.TheirfocusthenisdirectedtotheSocietyandtheorganizationsassociatedwithit.ThePrincipalCharacteristicsofMarianistAdministrationwasratifiedbytheGeneralCouncilon22September2013.

1 StevenNeiheisel,PhD,(2009),CharacteristicsofMarianistAdministration,may be found in the

documents section of the Society of Mary on www.marianist.org.

[CHARACTERISTICS OF MARIANIST ADMINISTRATION] Page 1

OriginsandContexts

ThePrincipalCharacteristicsarticulatedhere,aswellasthosedevelopedinDr.Neiheisel’swork,areasynthesis.Thissynthesis isnotunderstood in thescientificsensewhereby twoormoreelements/componentsarebroughttogetherinaprocesstoformsomethingdifferentfromtheiroriginalstate.Instead,itisasynthesiswhichbringstogetherpartssothata“whole”canbeseenandgraspedwithafrugalclarityinsuchawaythatitalwayscommunicatesthereisstillmoretobe discovered in the “parts.” To grasp a full understanding of the PrincipalCharacteristicswithinsuchasynthesis,itisimportanttounderstandtheiroriginsandsomekeycontextsthatinfluenceandshapetheirapplication.Firstandforemost,thePrincipalCharacteristicsarerootedinadynamicCatholicandMarianistreligiousheritage,aheritagethat isdiscoverednotonly in thewrittenwordbutalso throughlivedexperience.AttheircoreareJesusandhisGospel.TheyarerootedinaCatholicChristiananthropology which seeks to understand the relationship between God and humanity, therelationshipsamongstthepeopleofGod,andtherelationshipbetweenpeopleandcreation.They aremost immediatelyderived from theMarianist charism, first given shapebyWilliamJosephChaminade2andhiscompanionsintheearlynineteenthcentury.TenetsofthecharismcanbefoundinwrittenforminthelettersandwritingsofFr.Chaminade,hisassociatesandhisfollowers.TheyarealsofoundintheConstitutionsanddocumentsoftheMarianistFamily—thelaycommunities/sodalitiesandthereligiouscongregations,theDaughtersofMaryImmaculate(FMI)andSocietyofMary(SM).Further,theycanbediscoveredinthelivedexperienceofthosewhoprofesstobeMarianists.Sometimesthisexperienceispresentinwrittenformandatothertimesitcomesthroughanoraltradition.Asisunderstoodfromexperienceandfromacademicresearch,cultureshapestheactuationofadministrativepractice3;sotooisitwiththePrincipalCharacteristics.Theyareactualizedinaparticular time and place, shaped by the norms of the culture inwhich they are active. OneexpectstofindvariationsofactuationsthroughouttheMarianistworldbutnotvariationsontheCharacteristics themselves.Forexample, inmanycultures, thenormativemannerofdecision‐making is largely reserved to theone in charge.TheMarianist administrator in this situationwouldunderstandthisnormbutalsoseizeonandoperateoutoftheprincipalcharacteristicofconsultationtoarriveatmajordecisions.Theoperationaldomainofmanagementandadministrationisalsoshapedbytheruleoflawineachcountry.Naturally,eachcountry’slegalrequirementswouldimpingeupontheactuationofthe Principal Characteristics to varying degrees. However, laws generally set minimumstandards, leavingmanagers and administrators free to augment practicewith higher ideals,thuscreatingspacefortheapplicationofthePrincipalCharacteristics.There are two other contexts worthy of attention as a frame of reference for the PrincipalCharacteristics:theprogressionofthescienceofmanagementandadministrationandCatholicSocial Teaching. Below are notes on these two contexts and the import they have on thePrincipalCharacteristics. 2 William Joseph Chaminade (1761‐1850), was priest of the diocese of Bordeaux, France. He founded

Marian sodalities (lay communities) and the Society of Mary. Along with Adèle de Batz de

Trenquelléon, he founded the Daughters of Mary Immaculate (FMI). Today, the Marianist Family

includes the Marianist Lay Communities, The Daughters of Mary Immaculate, The Society of Mary,

and the Alliance Mariale. Fr. Chaminade was beatified on September 3, 2000 by Pope John Paul II. 3 See Geert Hofstede (1980, 2001), Culture’s Consequences, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

Page 2 [CHARACTERISTICS OF MARIANIST ADMINISTRATION]

TheScienceofManagementandAdministration4SincetheonsetoftheIndustrialRevolutionmuchhasbeenstudiedandwrittenonthepersons,processes,andorganizationsthatmarshalhumanandmaterialresourcesforproduction.Overthe last centuryandhalf, four significantmovements canbedelineated in this inquiry.Thesemovements,whileportrayedhereassomewhatdiscrete,arelesssoinpractice.The first of these movements is ordinarily associated with the classicists of modernmanagement theory (e.g.Henri Fayol, Frederik Taylor).5They generally viewedorganizationsandthemeansofproductionmechanically.Theydrewsignificantlyfromengineering,strategicplanning and military practice. Administration from this perspective was characterized bycentralizedcommandandcontrolfunctionsthatworktofinetunethemechanicsofthesystemanditsprocesses.Organizationsareviewedasbureaucracieswithclearlydefinedhierarchicalstructures and regulations. Effective production in this perspective is largely attributed topersonalabilityandfunction.Takinginspirationfromanthropology,sociologyandpsychology,thesecondmovementfocusedonhuman relations andbehavioral perspectives. Itwas characterized by a “people‐centered”approach inwhichsocial relationships, socialneeds,andsocialattitudesareseen to criticallycondition productivity and organizational efficacy. From this perspective,managers focus onunderstandingtheworkerasaperson,comprehendingthesocialmilieuwithinandbeyondtheworkplace,enhancingworkersatisfaction,andattendingtoworkplaceenvironment.The third movement is rooted in the advent and aftermath of the Second World War, itscomplex logistical challenges and its corresponding massive efforts to rebuild nations andcontinentsintheensuingpeace.Commonlyreferredtoasthe“managementscienceapproach”,itwascharacterizedbytheunderstandingthatrationaldecision‐making is thekeyelement inbringing together an organization’s human and material resources in the most effective,productivemanner.Tothisend,themyriadofvariablesoftheorganization,itsmanagementandadministration,alongwiththeproductionprocessesarediscretelydelineatedandquantifiedsoas to incorporate them into rigorousquantitative formulas.The resultingmodelsprovide thebasisbywhichmanagementmakesitsdecisions.In the early 1970s, social scientists and some economists began to promote the notion thatmanyof theeconomicallywealthynations,particularly JapanandthoseofNorthAmericaandWestern Europe,weremoving or hadmoved into a post‐industrialage. They contended thatthese “new” age economies moved away from manufacturing and became increasinglydominatedbyservices,technology,information,knowledge,innovation,andfinance.Intandemwiththeseeconomicshiftswerealsochanges in lifestyles,socialrelationships,education,andworkstyles.Likewise,perspectivesonmanagementandadministrationhadchangedalongwiththesedevelopments.Approaches to management in the post‐industrialage (which still characterizes the time inwhichthisdocumentiswritten),arelargelybereftofmeta‐theories.Inthisage,anorganizationis understood as amultifaceted system6.As such, theydemandacute flexibilitywhere a “one

4 See and compare David Lewis (2001), The Management of Non‐Governmental Organizations, Routledge,

London. Daniel Wren (2004), The History of Management Thought, Wiley & Sons, Hoboken. 5BrotherGuiot’sManueldel’Économeandhissubsequentbook,Guidedel’ÉconomeusesFayol’sdefinitionofthefunctionsofanadministratortoframehiswork.6Chaminade’ssystemoftheThreeOffices,replicatedthroughouttheMarianistFamily,isa“systems”approachinorganizationalstructure.Herecognizedthatinorderforthemissiontobeaccomplished,the


sized”managementapproachwillnotfitallsystemsorallpartsofthesystemsatanygiventimeor in any given place. This situational or contingency approach to management andadministration can be characterized as eclectic — mixing and matching approaches as thecircumstances warrant. It has also been a confirming force toward the understanding thatmanagementandadministrationapproachesdifferamongstdifferenttypesoforganizations.For example, scholars have shown thatwhile parallelsmay exist, not‐for‐profit organizationswill require, because of their priorities and perspectives, a different set of managementapproaches than those employed in for profit organizations. Furthermore, within the sector,theremaybemoredifferentiationbasedon thesepriorities andperspectives, e.g. faithbasednot‐for‐profitsversussecularnot‐for‐profits.7Also during this period, there had been a rise to prominence of the development of theorganization’s mission, vision and values as an orientation for its management andadministrative practices. These “high level” principleswere seen to provide direction for theorganization in setting goals and in evaluatingperformance.Moreover, theywouldprovide adifferentiationbetweenorganizationsoperatinginthesamesectors.Asmuchasinventiondrovegrowthintheindustrialage,innovationwas(andremains)criticalto success in this age. Inherent in the process of innovation is transformation and change.Emergingfromthisdynamicprocessisanewdimensiontomanagementandadministration.Byand large, managers/administrators up to this point were primarily concerned with“transactional processes and relationships” that focused on the “allocation” of human andmaterialresourcesandtheirefficiency.8Intoday’senvironment,thetransformationandchangeprocesses demand thatmanagers develop strategic leadership skills to keep the organizationattuned to thechangingworldand itsemergingrequirements,whilepromoting innovation tomeettheserequirements.CatholicSocialTeaching9CatholicSocialTeaching(CST),alsoreferredtoasCatholicSocialDoctrine,isacollectivebodyofteaching that seeks to identify basic truths of the human person, to foreground moralcomponentsofsocialrelationshipsinsociety,andtoorientindividualandcommunalbehaviorinanethicalmanner.CST is commonly identified as emerging with the publication of Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical,RerumNovarum (OfNewThings) in1891. The“NewThings”thatconcernedthePopeandtheChurch at that timewere the vast social changeswrought by industrialization, new forms ofeconomics and political/governance systems. Subsequently and nearly paralleling thetimeframe of the developments in management science, other encyclicals and ChurchdocumentshavebeenpublishedthathavecometoformthecorpusofCST.

partsmustworktogetherinaunifiedstructureflexibleenoughtoaccommodatediversitythroughoutitspartsandmembers.7 See and compare Peter Drucker (1990), Managing the Non‐Profit Organization : Principles and Practices,

HarperCollins, New York. 8SeeStevenNeiheisel,PhD,(2009),CharacteristicsofMarianistAdministration.9 See and compare Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (2004), Compendium of the Social Doctrine of

the Church, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City; Peter J. Henriot, et. al. (1985), Catholic Social

Teaching: Our Best Kept Secret, Orbis Books, Maryknoll, New York; and Paul Devitt, “Themes of

Catholic Social Teaching”, Archdiocese of Canberra,

http://www.cg.catholic.org.au/services/default.cfm?loadref=129.


Whileeachofthedocumentsinthecorpusisprimarilywrittentoaddresstheexigenciesofthetimeinwhichitwaswritten,takentogether,commonthemescanberecognizedthroughoutthecorpus. The number and articulation of the themes vary depending on the author and theperspective emphasized. Delineated below are six of the most often repeated themes thatpertaintotheendeavorundertakeninthisdocument. HumanDignity,HumanRightsandResponsibilities

The cornerstone of CST is that of the human person as created by and in the image andlikenessofGod.Becauseofthis,afundamentaldignityinheresinallpersonsnotbecauseoftheirstate in life, theiraccomplishments, theirgender,ortheirethnicity,butbecausetheywerecreatedbyGod.Being created byGod, each person possesses universal, inviolable rights. These include aright to life and a worthy standard of living, to cultural and moral values, to worshipaccordingtoone’sconscience, tochooseone’sstate in life, tomeetingsandassociation, toemigrateandmigrate,and topoliticalandeconomic rights.Theserightsarecoupledwithduties, which include a reciprocity and respect of the rights of others, to mutuallycollaborate,toactforothersresponsibly,andtopreservelifeandliveitappropriately.

Solidarity,Participation,FamilyLifeandtheCommonGood

CreatedbyGod, thehumanperson isnaturally and fundamentally social.As socialbeingspeople are drawn into relationships with one another and engage a variety of humancommunitiesforsupport,protection,growthanddevelopment.Asthefoundationforbuildingcommunity,familylifehasauniqueroletoplayandneedstobesupported.Itisinthecontextofthefamilythatwefirstlearnaboutourselves,aboutourfaithandhowtofostersocialrelationships.SolidaritycallsustorecognizethatbybeingcreatedbyGodweformasinglehumanfamily.As such, we are tethered one to another in society. Not only arewe responsible for oneanother regardless of differences, but we also have a responsibility to fosterinterdependence, so that everyone achieves their potential in amanner that is respectfulandfree.As members of a human family, we have the responsibility and right to participate indecisions that affect our lives. We must participate in shaping our own destiny and thedestiniesofourcommunities.The common good is the collection of all the social conditions that make it possible forcommunities,groupsofcommunities,andindividualstoachievetheirfullhumanpotential.This principle of the common good also underlines our inter‐connectedness as a humanfamily.Inthiscontext,thepossessionoractionofanindividualrightand/orresponsibilityshouldnotadverselyaffectthecommongood.10

Subsidiarity

The principle of subsidiarity holds that decision‐making and responsibility should bedelegated, with decisions being made at the level of the individual person or personsaffected,orbythosewhohavetheresponsibilityforcarryingoutthesedecisions.

10 See Paul Devitt, “Themes of Catholic Social Teaching”, Archdiocese of Canberra,



TheDignityofWork

Atitscore,humanworkisanextensionofGod’screation.Thismeansitismuchmorethanaway to make a living. As such, work has an inherent dignity requiring decent and fairremuneration,theabilitytobesufficientlyproductive,andconditionsthatareconducivetothesafetyandhealthoftheworker.

Stewardship

“Allpropertyhasa ‘socialmortgage’.Peopleare torespectandsharetheresourcesof theearth,sinceweallareapartofthecommunityofcreation.”11

ThePreferentialOptionforthePoor

Themostvulnerablepersons—thosewhoarepoorandmarginalized—haveaspecialplacein society and require particular attention from the human family. For how the humancommunity takes care of its most vulnerable members is a measure of its overall moralaptitudeandthecollectivewell‐beingofthecommunity.

11 Paul Devitt, “Themes of Catholic Social Teaching”, Archdiocese of Canberra,



PrincipalCharacteristics

1. MarianistOrganizationalCultureOrganizationalcultureconsistsofthevaluesandnormsthatgivetheorganizationcharacterandpurpose. Organizational culture shapes the behavior ofmemberswithin the organization andprovidesvalue‐contentforgoalformationandmissiondesign.Marianistorganizationalcultureisthatwhichgivestheorganizationitsspecific,intentionalsetofvalues,givingshapetobothwhatgoesoninsidetheorganizationanditspublicface.12KeyConceptsinMarianistOrganizationalCulture1.1MissionFundamentaltoanyMarianistundertaking,indeedtowhatitmeanstobeMarianist,ismission.Simplyput,themissionisaneverdeepeningcommunionwithJesusChrist,livinghisGospelandinsodoing,drawingothersintotheprocessaswell.13Thecalltothismission isbothpersonalandcommunal.ForFatherChaminade,beinginmissionandbeingamissionaryareessentialtotheChristianlife.Itisapermanentprocessnotlimitedinscopeortocertaintypesofindividualsorgroups.Forhim,Mary,themotherofJesus,isthedefinitiveexampleofwhatitmeanstoembraceGod’scalltomission.SheisthefirsttowhollyacceptChristinherbeingandthefirsttobearhimtoothers;sheisthe firstmissionary.Withadeepsenseofhumilityanddedication,MarianistsandthoseassociatedwithMarianistorganizationsfollowherexampleofbringingChristtotheworld.MissionisthecauseandpurposeofallMarianistorganizations.1.2CommunityInFr.Chaminade’sunderstanding,missionwasnotasolitarytask.People,asareflectionoftheTrinitarian God, are relational beings. Drawing on one another for support, understanding,knowledge, love, and faith, interpersonal relationships are essential to human existence. Hebelieved themost efficaciousmanner ofmissionwas to gather people together in relationalgroups—incommunities.Using the first Christian communities of Jerusalem as inspiration, these groups, under theauspicesofMary,are tobea livingspectacleofapostolic renewalandregeneration.Theyaremarkedbyopenness,cooperation,mutuality,collegialityandasenseofservice.Moreover,theyhelptheirmemberstolearn,sustainanddeepentheirfaith,tocometogethertoactivelywitnesstothisfaith,andtoactinmission.

12StevenNeiheisel,PhD,2009:3.13compareManuelJ.Cortés,SM,2007,TheSpiritoftheSocietyistheSpiritofMary,CircularI:10‐11.


These communities are not homogeneous groupings. They include people from differentsegments of society and from a variety of professions and backgrounds. All are welcomedtogetherforthepurposeofthemission;andbecausethemissioniscommontoall,allhavethesame rights and responsibilities. Each member participates in the community offering theirtalentsandgifts.Directionoforaspecificroleinthecommunityemanatesnotfromstandingorstate,butfromaperson’sgiftsandtalentsaswellasthecallofthecommunity.Thediversityofmembership, coupled with its inherent range of gifts and talents, creates a dynamiccomplementarityinthecommunitywhichisauniqueresourceformission.FormedundertheauspicesofMaryandintheirdedicationtoher,Marianistcommunitiesseektoassumehercharacteristicsbothindividuallyandcorporately.Thesecharacteristicsinclude:aprofound trust in God; a deep sense of humility; recognition that one’s life is dedicated toservice;openness to theHolySpirit; agenuinesenseofwelcomeandhospitality; compassionandsolidarity;andarootednessintimeandplace.Incoming together for themission,Marianistcommunitiesstrive tobeof “oneheartandonesoul”;unitingtoforma“new”familybasedon“thebondsofmutualfriendship”andtheGospel.Thustheytakeonadistinctivefamilyspiritwhichpervadesallrelationshipsandactions.14ItisinandthroughcommunitythatMarianistorganizationsworktofulfillthemission.1.3EngagingtheWorld:beingcontemporary,beingfaithfulAttheheartofMarianistSpiritualityisJesus,hisincarnation,suffering,deathandresurrectionandthepursuitofaneverfaithfulunionwithhimandhisredeemingmissionintheworld:…themost faithful imitation of Jesus Christ, Son ofGod, become Son ofMary for the salvation of allhumankind.15For Fr. Chaminade, that Jesuswould choose to becomeman, by being born ofMary, so as toredeem the world, is a great “treasure.” In Jesus’ “holy humanity” he becomes accessible,presenting a tangible way of engaging the world.16 Marianists endeavor to emulate thisengagement.TheRuleofLifedescribesitinthisway:LiketheWordIncarnate,westrivetobeatonewiththepeopleofourtimeandtosharetheirjoyandhope,theirgriefandanguish.However,weremembertheLord'swarningtoremainvigilantsothatthenorms,customs,andhabitsoftheworldwillnottarnishorweakenthepowerofhisword.Thisconcerntobefaithfulwitnessesisparticularlyneedfulforacommunitywhichwishestobringto theworld the liberationof JesusChrist.Themoreattentiveourwatchfulness, thegreaterourapostolicboldness.17To be contemporary in engaging the world, Marianists and those associated with Marianistorganizations, need to be able to read the signs of the times and to respond to these withfaithfulnessandalacrity.Itnotonlyrequiresbeingimmersedinthepresentbutalsodemandscourage,akeenflexibilityandanabidingrecoursetoprovidence.In this endeavor to be contemporary, Marianists and those associated with MarianistorganizationsbecomealivinginstrumentinhelpingtomakeJesusandhisGospelembracedand

14RuleofLife,§§9,3515ConstitutionsoftheSocietyofMary1891:§6.16WilliamJosephChaminade,1842(?),Letters,no.1269,17RuleofLife2007:§11.


understoodinthecultureoftheday,andshowingthatJesusandhisGospelcanbeappliedandlivedintheworldtoday.18Marianistorganizationsalwaysendeavortobe incarnated intimeandplacesoastoensurethefecundityofJesusandhisGospel.

2. MarianistOrganizationalStructureOrganizationalstructureisthecommunicationalandgovernancearchitectureofanorganization.Howanorganization is structureddetermineshowmemberscommunicateand interfacewithinthe organization as well as how power is disbursed within the organization and how theorganizationisgoverned.19TheThreeOfficesThe foundation of the two congregations—the Daughters ofMary Immaculate (FMI) and theSociety of Mary (SM)—presented Fr. Chaminade and his collaborators with the challenge ofdevisingasystemtostructurethelivesandworkofthereligiousthatcommittedthemselvestotheendeavor.Criticaltotheefficacyofthesystemwastoensurethatalltheaspects(formation,commonlife,spiritual life, ministry, governance, etc.) of the individual congregations worked together toattaintheobjectivessetoutforeachofthem.Itwasasystemthatneededtoberesponsivetothe times, linked to thespiritualnatureof thecongregations in formand function,andamplystabletoallowthecongregationstodevelopandmature.CommonlyreferredtoovertheyearsastheThreeOffices,Fr.ChaminadebrieflydescribedthesysteminalettertoPopePiusVIIinthesewords,Themorecharacteristicspiritofthesegroups istoprovideaspecial leader forzeal,another forinstruction,and stillanother forwork,whileobliging theSuperiorof theSociety tohaveall themembersacttogetheralongthesethreelineswithoutinterruption.20Aswithmanycharismaticaspectsofthetworeligiouscongregations,theThreeOfficeshaditsexperiential antecedents in theSodalitiesandwas firmlybased inCristo‐centric spirituality21.FatherJosephStefanelli,SM,describesthesystemanditsspiritualbasisinthefollowingterms:Rooted inFr.Chaminade’sconvictionthatallChristiansaretobeChristattheirpropermomentandplaceintheworld,theOfficesenablethereligiousindividuallyandcorporatelytoparticipateinthethreefold functionsofChrist—toteach,togovern,andtosanctify—and inhisthreefoldroleofprophet,kingandpriest.22

18CompareJohnA.McGrath,SM,(2003),ReadingtheSignsoftheTimes,SpeakingtoaChangingWorld,AGSM,Roma:9. 19Neiheisel,2009:6.20Chaminade,1819,Letters,no.110;Thecontemporarytitlesoftheoffices,dependingonlanguage,arereligiouslife(zeal),education(instruction),andtemporalities(work)21 “…the three offices are explicitly identified as the three apostolic concerns of Christ in which every

Marianist must be led to participate”, Totten, John SM, 1968, The Three Categories and the

Aggiornamento, §5. 22InAmbrogioAlbano,SM(ed),1994,CommentaryontheRuleofLifeoftheSocietyofMary,NorthAmericanCenterforMarianistStudies,Dayton:1173.


Giventhisprofoundspiritualfoundation,theOfficesystemgoesbeyondamereadministrativeandgovernancestructure.Thesystemismeanttoconveya“wholeness”aboutinteractionandrelationships,ThethreeofficesofReligiousLife,Education,andTemporalitiesrepresentthreeareasofconcernthat embrace the totality of the Society and each of itsmembers, both in internal life and inapostolic mission. Each office is concerned with the formation, motivation, and direction ofMarianistsandthoseinfluencedbythem.23Ateachlevelofadministration(General,Unit,andCommunity)oftheSM,aleadershipcouncil(“team”)isformed.Itincludesthereligioussuperiorandusually24atleastthreeassistantswhohead theOffices.Although leadership/governance is shared, theassistantsare subordinate tothesuperior.Theyareaccountabletohim(aswellasoneanother).Yet,bydefinition,theyhavedelegatedresponsibilitiesintheareasthatfalltotheirrespectiveofficesandhavetheabilitytoactintheirleadershiproleinconcertwiththesuperiorandthecouncil.Withasteadyfocusonthe mission, process and interaction in the council is marked by collegiality, consultation,consensusandsubsidiarity.While theOffice system inherently allows for complementarity and specialization, theOfficesarenotdiscretecompartments.Astheyattendtotheirparticularfocus,theymustdosowiththeobjectives of the other two offices in mind. For example, if the Office of Temporalities isunderstood to attend to the relationshipswith thematerial and practicalworld, this focus iscoloredthroughandthroughbytheconcernsoftheotheroffices.Bydefinition,thecompositionofthecouncilismixed.Undernormalcircumstancesmembershipisbalancedbetweenbrothersandpriests.25TheOfficesystemwasalsoemployedintheapostolicworksoftheSM.Forthefirst150yearsorsooftheSociety,thecommunitycouncilwascommonlythecouncil fortheapostolate,addingrepresentatives from the work when required.26Practically speaking, this was a naturaldevelopment in thatmostof the staff of the apostolatewere religious.Philosophically, itwasalsoefficaciousinthatthecommunitywasthekeyagentintheapostolate.Inrecenttimes,withmorelaycollaboratorsandgreaterspecializationatexecutiveleadershiplevels, thishas changed.Asa result, theovertorganizationaluseof theThreeOffices isquitediverse in the apostolic works. That said, many features of the Offices, and the sharedleadershipsystemitprovides,continuetobefoundintheseapostolicworks.ForMarianistorganizations,thesystemoftheThreeOfficesnotonlyhelpsestablishaMarianistidentityfortheorganizationsbutmoreimportantly,itisapowerfulmeansfortheorganizationstopursuethemission.

23RuleofLife,§7.16. 24 While the responsibility for the Three Offices has formally been attended to on the Councils and has

been utilized as structure, throughout the history of the Society there has not always been a one to

one correlation with regards to the assistants and the three offices (for more detail see Fr. Stefanelli’s

article on the Three Offices referenced above p. 1181ff.). 25Ifthecouncilcompositionisnotanevennumber,theimbalanceontheCouncilbetweenbrothersandpriestscanonlybebyoneRL7.96).26 A practice followed even in the time of Fr. Chaminade. Chaminade, 1835, Letters, no. 781.


3. MarianistOrganizationalProcessesOrganizational processes include communications and how organizationsmake decisions. ForMarianistorganizations,communicationanddecision‐makingprocessesgobeyondmereefficiencyandmustsupport,promoteandreflectMarianistvalues.273.1Person‐CenteredAlthoughcommunicationswithintheorganizationmustpromotemissioneffectiveness,thehumandimension,the factthatmembersoftheorganizationhavepersonalneedsandaspirations,mustneverbelostorrelegatedtounimportance.CommunicationswithinMarianistorganizationsmusthave a high regard for the person, valued through an emphasis on person‐to‐personcommunication.28People, and their ever‐deepening union with Jesus Christ, are central to the mission of theSocietyofMary.Themostefficaciousmannerforthemissionisrecognizingthisandactingfromit. All other means—structures, institutions, apostolates, rules, etc.—while necessary andappropriate,aremereinstrumentsforthemission.Personsarethepriority.HumanrelationshipsinMarianistorganizationsarecriticalforperson‐centeredorganizationalprocesses.Tobemissionoriented,theserelationshipsmustbeboundbymutualunderstandingforged inpersonal accompaniment.Theyare framedwithanappreciation thatpersonsgrow,developandchange.Theyaremarkedbymutualrespect,patience,openness,trust,cooperation,attentiveness,courtesy,amiability,andcollegiality.3.2Decision‐MakingMarianistdecision‐makingisconsultative.29Indeed, in the practice of a system of shared governance that the Three Offices engenderscoupled with the Marianist priority of creating and sustaining community, consultation anddialogue are fundamental in ensuring the effectiveness and integrity of the system. It is apractice that beganwith Fr. Chaminade, himself. It is a practice thatwasnot easy to form insomeofhisfollowersbutnonethelesslamentedwhennotpracticed:“…because Ihave thehabitof consultingbefore commandingandof consultingespecially thosewhoaretocarryoutthecommand.YouweresurelypermittedtobelievethatitwouldbethuswithFatherCaillet,whoforthetimebeingisrepresentingmeinSaintRemy.”30Participationiselementalinthefunctioningofcommunity.Consequently,“activecollaboration”ofthemembers,“dialogue,”and“communaldiscernment”“inplanning,making,executing,andevaluating decisions” all have essential functions in this participation.31Consensus andsubsidiarityarekeyfeaturesintheconsultationanddecision‐makingprocesses.

27Neiheisel2009:7.28Neiheisel2009:7.29Neiheisel2009:7.30Chaminade1824,Letters,no.300.Seealsono.301inwhichFr.ChaminadeoffersP.CailletsomeinstructionsintheMarianistmannerofauthority. 31 Rule of Life, 7.4; Neiheisel 2009: 7.


While there aredifferent typesof decisions32andwhile consultation is theprimarymeans inMarianistorganizationstoprocessdecisions,therearethosedecisionsthatcannotorshouldnotbeprocessedinawideconsultativemannerduetothenatureofthedecisions.Thosedecisionsthat require limitedornoconsultation shouldbe clearlydefinedanddecidedwitha senseofaccountability,faithfulnesstothemission,respectforthoseinvolved,andaspiritoftrust.3.3FlexibilityMarianist organizational processes must be flexible as Marianist organizations are called torespondtothesignsofthetimes.33ForMarianiststherearetwocrucialconstancies:themissionandtheuniversalityofthemission(applicable in all times and in all places). As times change, to be able to pursue themissioneffectively in an incarnatedway, the processes andmethodsmayneed to be updated andorreformed.Adaptationandchangeisnecessaryinthemannerofmission,butnotinthemissionitself,whichisconstantanduniversal.TheConstitutionsof1839,inaddressingeducation,providesanaptdescriptionofthisflexibility,widelyapplicabletoMarianistorganizationalprocesses:“The principles of education, well grasped, do not vary; but the procedures whereby theseprinciplesareappliedandthemethodsofteachingmustnecessarilyfollowtheprogressofhumansocietyandbeadaptedtoitsneedsandtoitswishes.Toadmitinvariabilityintheformandmatterof instruction,would limittoaveryshorttimetheserviceandeventheexistenceofan Institutedevotedtoeducation.”34Although the Constitutions set out the need for flexibility in response to changing times andhumanprogress,italsocautionsthatcaremustbetakeninembracingnewways:“However, changes and innovation are made with prudent reserve. These are only deemedadmissible in the caseswhen themethods in actual use have become inadequate, orwhen theadvantagesofthenewprocedureshavebeenuniversallyrecognized.”353.4CommunityCommunityasaprocessmustservethemission.36Marianistorganizationsseektodevelopandsustainthemselvesas“authenticcommunities.”Allwhoareassociatedwiththeorganizationjointogethertosupportoneanotherinthemissionofanever‐deepeningunionwithChristbylivinghisgospelpersonallyandcommunally.37Yet,aspowerfulandefficaciouscommunitybuildingisinaMarianistorganization,itisnotanendinandofitself.Communitymustalsobeoutwardlyfocused—attentivetoandengagingthemission: The community itself isaprimary instrument to fulfillourmission.Weknow that the

32 See Rule of Life, Chapter 7. 33Neiheisel2009:7.34Constitutions1839:§267.35Constitutions1839:§268.36Neiheisel2009:7. 37 See Rule of Life: §§5.5,5.11.


qualityofour lifehasgreater impact thanourwords.Therefore, togetherweseekways tobearlivingwitnesstooursharedfaith.383.5TheServiceofAuthorityThe Cristo‐centric focus of Marianist life and mission extends to the exercise of authority.SeekingtoemulateJesus,thosewhoexerciseauthorityinMarianistorganizationsstrivetobeofservice in their leadershiproles.Theyseek tohelp thoseaccountable to them in theirhumanand spiritual development and to accomplish the mission.39 Their leadership is primarily aleadership of animation by offering encouragement, stimulation, and direction throughwordanddeed40This serviceof authority ismarkedby a commitment todelegation and is characterizedby asenseofmutualresponsibility,participation,subsidiarityandaccountability.41Fr.ChaminadegivesthefollowingcounseltoFatherCailletontheexerciseofauthority:“Itmight,ingeneral,besaidthatthebestsuperioristheonewhomakeshissuperiorshiptheleastfelt. Is it very easy to recognize the keystone? Let a superior support all the parts of anestablishment,sothatnotasingleoneofthembeshaky,butdoubtlessbyan influencethat issomellowandatthesametimesoactivethathewillseemtobegoingbeyondthemerefulfillmentofduty.”42

4. MarianistOrganizationalAssetsHowanorganizationemploysandallocatesresources isareflectionof itsvaluesandculture. Inhealthyorganizations,thereiscongruencebetweenvaluesandresourceallocation.Inotherwords,resourceuseandallocationisdrivenbystatedvaluesandaremeanstoachievingthevalue‐basedgoalsoftheorganization.4.1ManagingPeople43In managing people, the Marianist administrator works from the heart, understanding thestrengthsandweaknessesofeachpersonunderhis/hercare,and taking responsibility for theirformation.InMarianistorganizations,highlevelsofperformanceareexpectedandaccountabilityisclear;yet,withasenseofjustice,peoplearemanagedwithanunderstandingofthecompletehumanperson:everyone is a fragile human person – everyone is broken and sinful. Marianist administrationallowsforleadershipfromtheheart.Marianistsviewalllifeasavocationandeachperson’slifeasavocation.Thissensibilitycallsonadministratorstolooktoeachoftheiremployeesaspeopleservingthemission,notsimplypeople

38 Rule of Life: §67 39 RuleofLife:§45 40 Albano 1994: 46. 41 RuleofLife:§7.1.Also,see Chaminade 1816, Letters, no. 76 42Chaminade1824,Letters,no.301.43 Neiheisel 2009: 9‐10.


performingtasks.Itistheresponsibilityoftheadministratortohelpeachgroupmemberdiscerntheirgiftswhichpointtowardorganizationalcontribution.For the Marianist administrator, the management of people is much about the formation ofpersons. Employees should not be seen as merely instrumental to the task. Marianistadministratorshavealargerresponsibilitytothewholeperson,fortheirspiritualaswellastheirprofessionaldevelopment.Administratorsdiscerngifts,developgifts,anddeploygifts.TheMarianistadministratorrespectsopenness,encouragingdialoguewithintheorganization inorder to strengthen it. He or she is not afraid of conflict, but is committed to working inpartnershipwithallmembersoftheorganizationinthefamilyspirit.4.2ManagingFinancialandMaterialResourcesThematerialandfinancialresourcesofMarianistOrganizationsareassetsoftheSocietyofMaryandtheChurchinserviceofthemission.Marianistadministratorsaretoconsiderthemselvesstewardsoffinancialandmaterialassets,notowners.Theyarethereforecalledtousetheseresourcesprudentlyandjustlytoservethemission.44Practicallyspeaking,thismeansMarianistadministratorsmustvaluesimplicityandausterityintheuseofresourcesaswellastotalandopenaccountability.45Inordertobuildandmaintaintrustthroughouttheorganization,itisparticularlyimportanttoinsure transparency in the management of material assets. Accountability is the highestresponsibilityofanadministratorinMarianistorganizations.464.3NetworkingConstitutively,Marianistorganizationsdonotstandalone.47Althoughdiverse,intheirpursuitofthesameMarianistmission,theynaturallyformacomplementarynetwork.Thus,theyseektostandtogether,supportoneanotherandbeinanever‐developingwebofsolidaritythroughouttheworld.That which distinguishes our schools is the complementary institutions, which we stronglyendeavortoestablisheverywhere…484.4OptionforPersonswhoarePoor“TheReignofGodandtheexperienceofpovertycannotbeseparated.It isthroughandwiththepoorthatGodwillestablishtheReign.”49

44 Neiheisel 2009: 10. Also, see and compare Rule of Life: 28. 45 General Finance Directory: 10. 46 General Finance Directory: 12. 47 Compare Chaminade1833,Letters,no.694. 48 Spirit of our Foundation III, p. 106 §91asquotedinFerree1966:133. 49 Cano‐Manuel in Albano (ed) 1994: 930.


The call for Marianists and for all those associated with Marianist Organizations to live theGospelofJesusisacalltohelpestablishtheReignofGodinthistimeandplace.Theirabilitytodo so is directly related to their ability to embrace persons who are poor and to direct thematerialandpersonnelresourcesavailablefortheirwell‐being:Seeking tobe sensitive to the sufferingsandmiseryofothers,wecultivatea special love for thepoor,shareourresourceswiththem,andofferourpersonaltalentstoworktogetherwiththem.Thus,wecommitourselvestohelpbuildasocietythatisjustandfraternal.50

5. SpiritualAssets

5.1TheSystemofVirtues51For Fr. Chaminade the union/conformity with Christ was not to be an intangible goal.Transformation into the likeness of Jesus was tangible, reachable. As an aid to thistransformation, as well as a companion process to the organizational system of the ThreeOffices,52Fr. Chaminade promoted a set of progressive spiritual “exercises” to practice andassumethevirtuesofJesus.TheSystemofVirtuesisdevelopmentalandincludes:thevirtuesofpreparationwhichassistinself‐knowledgeandself‐discipline;thevirtuesofpurificationwhichassistinunderstandingandovercomingweaknesses and faults; and the virtues of consummationwhich promote a deepsenseofinnerfreedomallowingforgreaterdedicationandserviceinmission.The virtues are interior principles, which not only guide our relationshipwith God, but alsoshape how we relate with our neighbors and with the created universe.53As such, they areimportant and fitting developmental and spiritual assets forMarianists and those associatedwithMarianistorganizations.5.2St.Josephaspatron54St. Joseph holds a place of privilege for Marianists. As the husband of Mary, he closelyparticipateswithher inGod’splanof salvation inbringing Jesus to theworld. Fr.ChaminademaintainsthatSt.Joseph,intheintimatealliancehesharedwithMary,dynamicallyentersintoalltheexperienceandfecundityofMary’srelationshipwiththetriuneGod.Assuch,Marianistdevotion to him naturally leads to a deeper commitment to Mary and to her son, Jesus. Fr.ChaminaderegardedSt.JosephasthesecondpatronoftheSociety.Fr.ChaminadespokeoftenofSt.Josephtohisfollowersinhisconferencesandhomilies.ForFr.Chaminade, he is a rare example of humility, prudence, right action, patience, fidelity, and

50 Rule of Life: 27. 51 For further reference see Quentin Hakenewerth, SM (1986), Growing in the Virtues of Jesus: The

Marianist Method of Virtues for Use in Groups and Quentin Hakenewerth, SM (1997), The Grain of Wheat:

Dynamics of Spiritual Growth. 52 See Stefanelli in Albano (ed) 1994: 1197 53 See Hospital in Albano (ed) 1994: 1150. 54 For further reference see Piero Ferrero, SM (2000), San Giuseppe nella Tradizione Marianista, Roma.

and Javier Anso, SM (2006), Go to St. Joseph, SM Three Offices No. 115, Roma.


obedience to the will of God.55He exhorted his followers to emulate these attributes of St.Josephpersonallyandincommunity.But itwasSt. Joseph’spaternalcareof theHolyFamilythat inspiredFr.Chaminade’songoingdevotiontoSt.Joseph,eventothepointoftakinghisnameandmakingithisown.Subsequently,eachoftheSuperiorGeneralswhohavefollowedhim,aswasmandatedintheConstitutions,56adds thename Joseph tohisowngivennames. Insodoing,heechoesSt. Joseph’s careof theHolyFamily,asheassumestheofficeofSuperiorGeneralandtheministerialcareoftheSocietyofMary.ThroughhisattributesandhiscarethroughouthislifeforMaryandJesus,St.Josephshowsbyexamplethewaytoattendtoandsustainthemission.Assuch,St.JosephisamodelforpersonalandcorporateactionforallMarianistsandthoseassociatedwithMarianistorganizations.

55 Cf. Notes d’Instruction IV, p. 115. 56 Constitutions 1839: §406.


ReferencesandforFurtherReading WrittenandspokenwordofFr.WilliamJosephChaminade:EcritsetParoles(1994),EdizionePiemme,Vercelli,Italia.ChaminadeLegacy(2006),NorthAmericanCenterforMarianistStudies,Dayton.DocumentsoftheSocietyofMary:RuleofLifeoftheSocietyofMary(1981,2007)[http://www.marianist.org/PDFs/Rule%20of%20Life/SinossiTutti.pdf]Albano,A.(ed)(1988)DictionnairedelaRègledeViemarianiste,CEMAR,Roma.Albano,A.(ed)(1990)DiccionariodelaRegladeVidamarianista,ImprentaSM,Madrid.Albano,A.(ed)(1994)CommentaryontheRuleofLifeoftheSocietyofMary,NorthAmericanCenterforMarianistStudies,DaytonCharacteristicsofMarianistEducation(1996)[http://www.marianist.org/site.php?use=EdChar2]CharacteristicsofMarianistUniversities(1999)[http://marianistuniversities.org/wp‐content/uploads/2013/02/Characteristics‐of‐Marianist‐Universities.pdf]ConstitutionsoftheSocietyofMary(1839)Ferree,W.(1963),SeminaronAdministrationintheSocietyofMary,MarianistPublications,Dayton.Landolfi,P.(ed)(1964),TextsofCapitalImportanceinaSynthesisofFatherChaminade’sThought,MarianistPublications,Dayton.Ferree,W.(1966),TextsofCapitalImportanceinaSynthesisofFatherChaminade’sThought:PartII,MarianistPublications,Dayton.Hoffer,P.(1959),GuideforReligiousAdministrators,BrucePublishingCompany,Milwaukee.Guiot,J.(1948),‘Manueldel’ÉconomedelaSociétédeMarie’,AG,Nivelles.Guiot,J.(1956),Guidedel’Économeetdel’AdministrateurdeCollectivité,CentredeDocumentationScolaire,Paris.

Date post:	13-Feb-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times