1. New Foundations

a) Mongolia
“In the first three years the General Government … should study the possibility of a new foundation in Asia to take place in the second three years” (XCG 50). In conjunction with the Consolata Sisters we were able to carry out this chapter injunction to the letter. This is what happened:
- In spring 2000 a joint study committee launched a series of projects to become better acquainted with the needier areas of Asia that would fit our criteria. To help us in this endeavor we consulted the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.
- In February 2001 the two General Councils decided to concentrate on two countries: Cambodia and Mongolia. They visited these countries in July of that year.
- In September 2001 following their visits to those countries and on the basis of data they collected the Councils decided on making a foundation in Mongolia in 2003 after personnel had been prepared for this task.
- On May 19, 2002, at the Sanctuary of the Consolata in Turin and in the midst of celebrations marking the 100th anniversary of our first missionaries’ departure for Kenya, Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe gave missionary crosses to our brothers and sisters who would go to Mongolia.
- In May 2003 there was an intense preparatory course for missionaries at Nepi. It concluded on May 31 with the missionary mandate. One of our missionaries fell sick and was replaced with someone else.
- On July 20, 2003 the missionaries left Rome. They passed through South Korea, were given visas and arrived in Mongolia at the end of the month.
We will not go into detail on the criteria and reasons for choosing Mongolia – these have been amply explained in various bulletins and in the joint letter (November 16, 2001) addressed to both Congregations.
At present our missionaries are still studying the language. Their first missionary work should begin sometime during 2005 in a city outside the capital. Our missionaries and the local church are fully engaged in discernment concerning this new foundation.

b) Djibouti
“In Africa: explore the possibility of establishing a community devoted to dialogue with Muslims in one of our Regions” (XCG 81).
The African Regional Superiors approached this Chapter recommendation decisively in the first continental meeting (December 2000) after the Chapter. A variety of venues (Zanzibar, Mozambique, Ivory Coast) were discussed on that occasion. The Bishop of Djibouti Msgr. Georges Perron’s suggestion aroused interest and general agreement. We launched a study of that little country in the Horn of Africa and at the same time the Consolata Sisters expressed their willingness to join us in this effort – but they needed a little time. On the basis of criteria suggested by the Continent Superiors the two Councils agreed that the foundation would be made in 2004.
Meanwhile in mid-2001 a new bishop, Msgr. Giorgio Bertin, OFM, was appointed in Djibouti. Our discussions and relations with the new Bishop continued. There were visits from both the General Government and the Region of Ethiopia. The missionaries chosen for this work were given a whole year to study Islam. They attended courses at the PISAI in Rome. Finally in mid-September 2004 they arrived in Djibouti where they began work in the diocesan Caritas and a local high school; they continued their Islamic studies.
From the very beginning the Ethiopia Region has extended a warm welcome to this community and its activity. It respected and encouraged the community’s specific task – as the XCG had requested and as the Continent Superiors had requested. Our confrères must discern and pursue any possibility for dialogue with Muslims. Initially this will be done primarily by giving witness (example) with their work in schools, health care and Caritas. Through these venues our missionaries can establish close contact with people and engage them in dialogue on vital matters. Through its intimate contact with and experience of Islam, the Djibouti community can be of service to all our other missionaries in Africa who live in continual contact with Muslims.

2. Re-Structuring

As the XCG (cf. p. 55) urged the General Government has not failed to encourage and exhort Regions to recognize the need for re-structuring. We set out more specific recommendations in our six-year plan: we asked four Regions (Kenya, Tanzania, Brazil and Colombia) to engage in more definitive re-structuring. We brought to the attention of these Regions (and the others as well) the criteria established in the Chapter:
- seriously review their commitments;
- decide immediately which communities and works should be given up and set up a precise time-table to accomplish this;
- new foundations should be launched only after clear contracts with Ordinaries have been agreed upon; these contracts should reflect the parameters established by the Chapter.
Some Regions have been very slow in their efforts at re-structuring. They say this is necessary because they need a sufficient number of communities to house older personnel. These same Regions are asking for younger personnel to handle their projects and revitalize their communities.
At the end of our mandate we were surprised to discover that the number of communities in the Congregation has increased (we opened 29 new communities and closed 26 old communities). In spite of this, experience obliges us to reaffirm the need to continue and accelerate our re-structuring. There are various reasons for this:
- Congregation personnel is not increasing and our current members are aging;
- the need to revitalize some projects and launch others that conform to the Chapter’s criteria; the need to establish new foundations;
- unless we re-structure we are undermining mission/vocation promotion because we lack sufficient, well-trained personnel;
- unless we reduce the number of our commitments we cannot carry out the recommendation of the XCG that there be at least three missionaries in every community.

3. Re-structuring Regions

a) Congo
On June 16, 1999, only a few days after the conclusion of the XCG, the General Government decreed that the Congo Region should be divided in two: the Region of the Congo with the communities in the north and the Delegation of Kinshasa with two seminaries and two parishes. This decision was taken in conjunction with the confrères involved because the country was de facto divided in two and it was impossible to travel from one part to the other. The missionaries hope and the General Government was determined that this division would only be temporary. When the social and political situation improved there would be a return to a single Region. Re-unification finally took place on October 1, 2004. The two Regions became a single Region under the governance of a transitional Regional Government. This situation will be normalized immediately after the General Chapter when confrères involved will elect a new Regional Government in the way they choose.
During the five years that the two Regions went their separate way it was impossible to share personnel or mission/formation projects between north and south. It is worth noting, however, that this separation did not undermine the missionary efforts of the two groups. On the contrary, now after five years, the Congo Region boasts more communities, projects and works.

b) Totteridge Seminary – London
General Chapters in the past have frequently discussed the Totteridge Theological Seminary because of its isolation and the fact that we had so few confrères in England. The last Chapter reviewed this problem in the context of re-structuring the General House Group. The chapter reached no clear conclusions and delegated the resolution of this problem to the General Government.
On April 17, 2000, the General Council established a study commission coordinated by the Vice-Superior General with the task of studying the pros and cons of maintaining our community in London and taking part in the Missionary Institute. The commission worked diligently in various stages and meetings from mid-2000 until summer 2001. On October 24, 2001 the commission met and formulated conclusions to its study: it outlines the advantages and disadvantages of maintaining the Totteridge Seminary and suggested that it be closed (cf. Dossier Ad Hoc).
On March 8, 2002 the General Council studied the commissions work and proposals closely and decided that the Totteridge Theological Community should wind down and close in June 2003. The seminary building was sold in January 2004.
Currently the seven founding congregations are no longer sending their students to the Missionary Institute. The Institute is closing down its seminary courses and launching an experiment of missionary formation for lay people and religious in the London area. If the number of students dips below 100 the Missionary Institute will close its doors and sell its building. Our Congregation is one of the seven Religious Congregations who own the plant.
We continue to work in London at our hospitality community in Finchley. This house offers hospitality to confrères in transit and others who are in England to study the language.

c) Ivory Coast
The first three Consolata Missionaries arrived in Ivory Coast in early 1995. They moved into a neighborhood on the outskirts of San Pedro and began working in the newly established cathedral parish of the Diocese of San Pedro. In 1997 they opened a mission in Sago. In 2000 the Congregation accepted responsibility for the parish in Grand-Béréby for six years. The following year the Nuncio and the Bishop of Odienné asked them to open a mission in Dianra. In 2002 a second mission, Marandala, was established in the same diocese.
Our missionaries held their first Conference in February 2001 and on the 6th of February of that year the Ivory Coast Delegation was established. It was placed under the protection of Blessed Allamano; Father Zachariah King’aru was named Delegation Superior.
At present the Delegation includes 14 missionaries (13 priests and 1 brother). Because the political situation is unstable, our men are concentrating on current commitments and are postponing any work in the capital which could serve as a base for procurement and vocation work.

d) Re-structuring the General House Group
The General House group includes 30 missionaries. Compared to six years ago there has been an enormous reduction in personnel. At the suggestion of the General Chapter, the General Government moved in three directions to reduce personnel while continuing to host the missionaries involved in the new foundation in Mongolia: it established Ivory Coast as a delegation and initiated the closing of the Totteridge Seminary; it transferred the Rome-Bravetta Seminary to the Region of Italy.
Discussion with the Italian Region on the transfer of this seminary were protracted. The Italian Region expressed a negative response to this transfer during its Regional Conference. Later it expressed some interest in the proposal. We believe that this transfer (September 1, 2004) will be to the benefit of the Italian Region and will rectify an anomalous situation. Young people were admitted to this seminary by the General Government. The intervening level of jurisdiction recommended by Canon Law was missing.

4. New house for aged and infirm missionaries in Alpignano

We would like to offer an explanation and some considerations on the role played by the General Government in this Italian Region project. In November 2000, the Notiziario della Direzione Generale [General Government Newsletter] reported: “ At the request of the Italian Regional Government the General Council authorized a study of the proposal made by the Commune of Alpignano to acquire the building currently used as a Home for Aged Missionaries and the Castle where relatives and benefactors are offered hospitality. If this were done it would preclude the need to undertake major (not to be postponed) repairs. We could build a new, more functional building that met standards. This could be done on the land we own and are using for farming purposes.” The IMC immediately formed a committee to study the possibility of building a new house and establish contact with the Commune of Alpignano. After various interactions an understanding was reached between the Congregation and the Commune. For a while there was no follow-up – there was a crisis in the Commune Council. The new administration elected in spring, 2004, was not interested in this project. Both the study committee and the General Government are of the opinion that plans for the new building should go forward even if the Commune is not interesting in buying the old buildings.
In brief, why are we doing this? Above all because the structure of the Castle (where we currently host guests) cannot be brought up to standards because of restrictions imposed by the Sovrintendenza alle Belle Arti (Government landmark commission). Since it cannot meet standard requirements it cannot be used for hospitality. The other building would also require extensive work and in the meantime the Commune could expropriate our farm land.
We believe that this project will make it possible for the Congregation to offer better assistance to our aged and infirm confrères and offer hospitality to our benefactors. In the event that the number of aged and infirm declines the new building would be a good investment that would help support our missions.