Stones.

Missionary pastors are setting to work on a series of planning forms and worksheets with over 46 assessment / action points pertaining to the implementation of UIH.

A recent communique to clergy from the diocese’s Office of Evangelization contained the following remarks & suggestions:

I recognize some of the baggage associated with UiH among the pastorates. With that I mind I would like to suggest that when you have moment, perhaps you might reflect on 1 Samuel 17 using guided lectio divina. For the sake of this exercise, I would suggest you begin as the protagonist, David. From that perspective ask God to give you an understanding of the passage with these three questions regarding the diocesan offices:

1)      Do you see the diocese in the person of Goliath? Why do you see it that way? Is that accurate in the eyes of God?

2)      Do you see the diocesan offices in the person of King Saul who loads down David with all this unnecessary and cumbersome armor? Why do you see it that way? Is that understanding correct in the eyes of God?

3)      Do you see the diocesan offices, particularly the 5 roadshows, as five smooth stones from which you can draw the right one for a particular Goliath which taunts your pastorate?

I trust God will give us all the right perspective and get us all focused on the right enemy. In case you hadn’t noticed, he’s kicking our Ars Celebrandi. In the meantime, my staff will make sure we are smoothing the rough edges off the stones and casting off any unnecessary armor so that by faith, each of you can bring the fight to Goliath and the “Philistines” that threaten your pastorate.

We’ll limit our remarks to two points.

1. The above would suggest that some number of our clergy are struggling with these changes of assignment, parish life, and the duties attached to UiH. The assumption in the above remarks seems once again to be that this plan of the diocese is uniquely connected to the mind of God and that the concerns and struggles of others are de facto wrong.

The promptings of “Is that correct in the eyes of God?” would seem to admit of only one answer, and to suggest that the askers already know it. The suggested prayer then becomes a tool to make one see how wrong he is to have had any doubts.

However well-intentioned the author(s), this reads as dismissive of others and in this instance, also of the intellect, charisms and pastoral experience of the clergy, many of whom have been in the trenches for some considerable time at this point, and whose difficulties therefore might be more than “baggage”. One would think that if our priests did in fact view their lives as a David/Goliath struggle with their superiors, that said superiors might also wish to consider the reasons for that, and moreover be concerned with how the problem might be repaired.

2. The above should also illustrate to each of us why our clergy–priests and bishop–need our daily prayers. Please consider increasing yours if you can in some form. We’re aware that we keep pressing for this, perhaps to a point of monotony, but as a reader recently reminded us: “We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. “