Today, the commissions began to report their findings to the General Assembly. Six commissions were formed at the beginning of Phase II of the Chapter, all based on the theme: Associated in the service of the poor through education as the lasallian response to the challenges of the 21st century. These commissions have met in formal sessions for 16 hours, but the members of the commissions have spent many more hours preparing for the formal sessions and working in sub-committees. Each commission had as a mandate the creation of a report that was to include three parts. The first part included observations that related to the theme of the commission; the data that should be taken into consideration by the commission. The second included the directions in which the commission should move as a result of these observations. The third section was a list of recommendations that the commission wanted the General Assembly to consider.

Each member of the Chapter had received the reports in advance so there was no need to read the report in General Assembly. When the General Assembly met to hear the reports, there was first a presentation by a member of the commission. Following this, there was time for questions of clarification about the 'observations' and 'directions' included in the report. With the observations and directions clarified, there was then a discussion about the observations and directions that preceded a vote by the Assembly on whether or not to 'accept the report'. Thus, the members of the Chapter voted on whether or not they favored the basic tenor or thrust of the report as a whole.

During this discussion and voting, all of the members of the Chapter (delegates, partners and consultants) had both voice and vote. If the report of the commission was accepted by the General Assembly, then the recommendations of the report were considered, one by one. As with the observations and directions of the report, there was first a time for questions of clarification that proceeded discussion of the recommendation, followed by a vote on the recommendation itself.

In the next phase of the Chapter, the commissions will take the recommendations of this second phase (and other considerations) and move toward the formulation of Chapter propositions that will be voted on by the delegates to the Chapter. If this is at all confusing, try working it out in three different languages with a multiplicity of cultures.

The diversity of languages and cultures at the Chapter is indeed a challenge, but is part and parcel of belonging to an organization that is truly multicultural. One of the most fascinating conversations that I had at table one evening was over the distinction between educator and teacher. I was quite surprised to find that in some countries, this is not just a question of nuance. In Austria, for example, teachers are those individuals who quite literally teach in the schools; just teach. Educators are those who perform those roles which might be considered extra-curricular or co-curricular. Campus ministers, coaches, prefects of students, anything that takes place in an educational institution that is not specifically teaching is done by educators. They have a different salary scale, different training and some would suggest a different status in the school environment. Brothers are either teachers or educators. They choose which ministry they wish to perform and train in university for that specialty.

This is just one example of the difficulty that confronts members of a Chapter such as ours. Sensitivity to language and culture issues are an integral part of working in this 'mosaic of cultures' and I hope it gives you a bit of an idea of the complexity of this experience we call a General Chapter.

The report from the Formation Commission.

One issue of the Formation commission concerned its scope. Was the commission to speak specifically about Brother formation, partner formation or some combination of the two? Because the current phase of the Chapter included our partner consultants, the commission decided that it would report on those aspects of formation that dealt with both Brother and partner formation. They believed that issues that dealt with the specific formation of Brothers could be taken up at a later time in the Chapter.

With this narrower scope in place, the commission then outlined its observations and orientations. They observed a great diversity of formation programs but still saw a great need for them so that Brothers and partners better understand each others roles, needs and expectations. While the Brothers have generally been responsible for the formation of partners, they saw partners taking a greater role in their own formation, depending on their level of formation as Lasallians. The commission also recognized that there is a lack resources (economic, informational, personnel) in some areas of the world. There is a need to promote the sharing of resources, formation experiences and information throughout the Institute.

With this background, the General Assembly accepted four recommendations from the commission. These dealt with (1) formation being a priority during the tenure of the next administration, with (2) the establishment of sessions for formators both at the international and local level, especially recognizing modular concepts that would facilitate the participation of partners, with (3) the financing of formation programs for partners and with (4) the inclusion of experiences of service of the poor in formation programs.

The report of the Commission on Evangelization.

A concern of the commission on Evangelization was that they not rewrite or restate the many publications that are already in place concerning the young and their evangelization. After citing several of these, they observed that young people around the world sometimes find it difficult to accept the Good News presented to them because it is so counter to the commercial culture in which they find themselves. In order to work with the young, we must know and understand their reality and use language and forms of expression that they understand. This is no small task recognizing that we currently minister in multi-cultural and multi religious communities all over the world.

Many experiences around the world suggested to them that good programs of faith development integrate religious education, service and community. The best way of sharing the Good News is through the good example of credible, authentic and coherent witnesses to the faith.

With this background, the General Assembly accepted two recommendations from the commission. One recommendation dealt with the establishment of commissions at various local levels in the Institute which would be responsible for the pastoral ministry of youth, the creation and animation of youth groups and the education and formation of those who work with youth groups. A second recommendation asked that FAITH, SERVICE and COMMUNITY be the guiding principals for Lasallian groups and programs.

The many Lasallian Youth Groups that already exist around the world will quickly recognize these guiding principals.