The Bishops of the Patriarchal Curia: A Study and Reflection

Dr. Francis Eluvathingal

General Introduction

This Article has the scope and aim to understand in a better way and rediscover the bishops of the patriarchal curia, in the functioning of the patriarchal Church. The lack of a previous scientific study and sufficient sources limit this study a lot. There exist honorary patriarchates in the Western world and patriarchal Churches in the Orthodox non-Catholic Eastern tradition too. But the focus of our study is purely on the bishops of the Catholic Eastern Patriarchal and Major Archiepiscopal curias. There is no analogical canon seen in Codex Iuris Canonici (CIC) to make a comparative study and we would not attempt to look into the Eastern Orthodox non-Catholic tradition too.

1. Bishops of the Patriarchal Curia: In Canonical Traditions

After the permanent synod, the next in the list of the patriarchal curia are the bishops of the patriarchal curia. The bishops of the patriarchal curia were called in different Churches as vicars general or patriarchal vicars before CS and CCEO. Among the sources of the bishops of the patriarchal curia, one finds different references to the sources of this section. These sources help us to understand this office in the patriarchal curia.

1.1. Propaganda Fide Instruction

It is established that the number of the bishops are not to go above the number of the diocese and nobody should be ordained bishop, without his corresponding diocese.

1.2. Synodus Maronitarum in Monte Libano (1736)

The custom developed in the Antiochean patriarchate that some superiors of the monasteries or monks were elevated to episcopal order without a town or diocese but only for the sake of honour or to recompense to their special works done. However since after such bishops received episcopal ordination, they were not happy with their position hence they demanded dioceses to administer and if they were to be given, it was necessary to take away from some bishops or divide certain dioceses. Inconvenience is followed from both situations because it increases the number of bishops without necessity and also because certain portion is taken from one and given to the other might cause some quarrel; and also because the division makes the dioceses small; even the maintenance of priests would not be easy. Therefore we order by this synodal decree that it is sufficient to have the bishops who could be sustained decently; from now on, the part of the diocese may not be divided, no part should be given to the other but it may remain integral; and that those who are ordained as suffargan of the patriarch or for the cause of honour with a episcopal title of the monastery, they need to promise and give written assurance and they are to be kept in the archives of the patriarchate that they will not ask for any diocese by themselves or through other procurators, they would accept, unless the diocese is widowed by the death or by lack of pastor. If someone does on the contrary or induces the patriarch to violate the synodal decree in anyway he will be by the very fact suspended; neither he be absolved by anyone unless with the consent of the episcopal synod or unless the diocese is made free.

In order that the Most Reverend Lord patriarch may be able to exercise with due care and prudence the duty entrusted to him in those things that pertain to the patriarchal dignity, let him elect worthy ministers, with priestly or episcopal dignity; to them he shall entrust the temporal and spiritual matters of the patriarchal Church. And in accordance with the ancient customs of our Fathers, the Holy Synod, with the consent and approbation of the same Lord patriarch, determines and decides that at least one or two suffragan bishops, to whom no diocese is entrusted, shall abide constantly with the patriarch as his vicars general; to one of them shall be entrusted the care of the temporal matters, and to the other, of the spiritual things. Both can use the patriarchal seal; with diligence let them hear and study the things entrusted to them, refer them to the patriarch, and with him determine them. Let them keep the goods of the patriarchal see, and make the inventory to be signed by the patriarch; when the see is vacant let them give an account of everything to the college of the metropolitans and bishops; let them give the same inventory to the new patriarch so that he may confirm it with his hands. Let them not aspire after any diocese, unless after the death of its bishop, as we said earlier; and when thus promoted the office becomes vacant by that very fact and it has to be entrusted to another suffragan by the patriarch. For their decent sustenance, what is necessary will be provided from the income of the patriarchal Church and of the episcopal dioceses.

1.3. Synodus Bekorkien Maronitarum (1790)

And it was forbidden that if anyone would do any ordination for only honour of the family or for human respects without an assignment of a diocese or a monastery, except the two vicars of the patriarch that if he so wants them to be bishops, and that not more bishops beyond the eight sees or beyond the above said two vicars could be ordained, in other case, they are by the very fact suspended with the possibility of the absolution of the Apostolic See.

1.4. Synodus Sciarfensis Syrorum (1888)

The patriarch must either by himself or two bishops constituted for helping in the patriarchal matters, examine the candidates elected for episcopacy either by himself or through two bishops constituted for the general matters of the patriarchate, are to prove their fitness diligently. In order to examine those candidates the help of some are needed. In case of necessity, especially if the candidates are not able to go to the patriarchal palace, the patriarch is to send two bishops or a bishop with some outstanding priests with whose help he can examine the candidate; and then they should send an authentic result of the examination to the patriarchal curia.

1.5. Concilii Armenorum (1911)

It is the right of the patriarch to constitute one or two titular bishops for him that he may use their service for the administration of his diocese, for that he has to get them elected by the synod and get it confirmed by the Holy See. But in his suffragan diocese there must not be titular bishops unless after consulting the bishops and getting the consent of the Holy See. Such ordained bishops are to be provided with decent maintenance, so that they would not be bound to the bishops and his episcopal dignity will be honoured.

1.6. In Codificazione Canonica Orientale

In CCO, in different schemas, there are a few references to this heading: (1) vicars general and auxiliary bishops: both schemas give emphasis to the concept of the patriarchal vicars general and auxiliaries, (2) the patriarchal council: this is mentioned because the permanent synod was not considered in the beginning as the part of the patriarchal curia in a Church. But this patriarchal council was meant to be a council of episcopal members.

1.6.1. In Schema Prot. 106/31

In the schema prot. 106/31, c. 297 §1 says that the power of the patriarch is personal. His personal power cannot be fully vicariously given to a vicar general in the same way as to the diocese. But there can be a patriarchal vicar general or patriarchal vicar for his diocese according to the norms of c. 295 §2. A nomination of a patriarchal vicar for the whole patriarchal Church in sede plena, is reserved to the Holy See. And the same c. §3 said that the patriarchal vicar or apostolic administrator was transferred according to the particular or general law of the patriarchal power. And the patriarchal council, as per the norm, is to have as members the patriarchal vicar general, patriarchal vicars and auxiliary bishops.

Though a bit different from the above schema, the next schema said also almost the same. In c. 299 we read that the power of the patriarch was personal. Therefore nominating a vicar general for the whole patriarchate was impossible. We have seen more the mind of the consulters about the patriarchal vicars general in the canons of the de patriarchalis. These canons are given under the title, de curia patriarchalis.

1.6.2. In Schema Prot. 178/32

The patriarchal council, according to the norm of c. 276 §2, could consist of the patriarchal vicars and episcopal auxiliaries according to the particular law. And the patriarchal curia is to have patriarchal vicars, particularly those who reside in the curia and episcopal auxiliaries.

1.6.3. Schema Prot. 106/31 and Prot. 88/31

Canon 209 §1 says the power of the patriarch is personal and hence it is forbidden to nominate vicars general for the whole patriarchal Church. The patriarchal council would be composed of two bishops: one titular, the one who is the oldest among the titular bishops, who is resident in the patriarchal curia permanently. And the other who is also residential is nominated for 5 years by the patriarch, after hearing the bishops.

1.6.4. In CS (1957)

CS legislated in just one canon about the bishops of the patriarchal curia. CS c. 257 said that the patriarch could establish that a few titular bishops, but not more than three, be nominated by the election of synod, in accordance with c. 251, provided their livelihood was assured. The patriarch would assign to them an office with residence in the curia, and he would consecrate them after he has obtained their confirmation, from the Apostolic See, except in the case of one elected by c. 254 §2. Now according to this canon there are many things to be taken care of before the nomination of the titular bishops to the patriarchal curia.

1.6.4.1. Membership in the Patriarchal Curia.

CS c. 287 §2 said that the bishops who have an office in the curia with residence must also be considered as members of the curia. According to this canon an office and the residence in the patriarchal curia was the criterion for membership in the patriarchal curia, though c. 257, already spoke about the residence. However, this makes sure of the position of the titular bishops, considering them as members of the administrative organ of the patriarchal Church.

1.6.4.2. Responsibility of the Patriarch

CS c. 257 is specific about the duties of the patriarch with regard to these offices. He was to see to that: (1) if there is a need of titular bishops in the patriarchal curia or not; (2) but not more than three bishops; (3) the nomination to be according the directions of the canon taking into consideration cc. 251, 254 §2, (i.e. election of the synod); (4) to assure for their livelihood; (5) to assign to them an office; (6) to provide them with a residence in the curia; (7) consecrate them; (8) and make sure of adequate canonical permission from the Apostolic See if this was necessary.

1.6.4.3. Election of Titular Bishops

CS c. 251 says that the bishops are canonically elected to the synod according to the norms. But at the same time, the possibility of a secret election sending the letters to the bishops according to c. 255 was also possible. According to CS c. 255 §1; whenever a synod could not be called together according to c. 251, the patriarch, having obtained the permission of the Apostolic See, should ask by letter for the votes of the bishops. The patriarch must, for the validity of the procedure, make use of the aid of two bishops as tellers, who shall be appointed in accordance with particular law or if there is no such law, by the patriarch with the consent of the permanent synod. The tellers together with the patriarch shall take an oath according to c. 113 §1 faithfully to discharge their duty and to preserve secrecy and then open the letters of the bishops, count the votes, and together with the patriarch subscribe to a written report of the election. And §2 says that the votes cast by letter must be kept secret. CS c. 254 §2 states that if one is lawfully elected by the synod for a certain residential or titular eparchy among those enumerated in the list, it can go ahead further immediately after the elections, except if in the meantime the name of a candidate has been stricken from the list by the Apostolic See.

1.7. In Nuntia

In different numbers of Nuntia, one can find canons on the bishops of the patriarchal curia and the suggestions, discussions and decisions on the same. Coming to Nuntia 19 c. 55 (CS c. 257) is given without much change, almost within the same meaning and words of CS. In the same case, Nuntia 22 gives a short discussion on this canon. And Nuntia 24-25 gives this canon (c.86), almost as it is seen in CCEO. In Nuntia 27, there is correction of a few words. We will analyse the important proposals in detail, when we see each section particularly.

1.8. In CCEO

In order to nominate bishops for the patriarchal curia, the patriarch is to see that the basic requirements are fulfilled like the provision for support, the possibility of residing in the patriarchal curia and the possibility of having office. Those bishops are elected according to the norms of law and the patriarch can ordain them if all the requirements for the episcopal proclamation are fulfilled. The patriarch can appoint a maximum of three bishops to reside and work in the patriarchal curia, having the title of ‘bishops of the patriar­chal curia’ (c. 87). The patriarch must see that the means required for the fulfilment of this office are available and that the just remuneration of those who carry out the office is provided for (cf. c. 937 §1). In addition to those tasks entrusted to them by the patriarch, the bishops of the patriarchal curia have various functions assigned to them by law. The ordinary procedure for the election, approval and ordination of episcopal candidates (cf. cc. 181 §1 and 182‑187) is to be observed in the appointment of bishops of the patriarchal curia, who are per se different from auxiliary bishops (cc. 212-218).

The determination of the administrator of the vacant patriarchal see (c. 127) is made according to the following factors. (1) The bishop designated by particular law; (2) or, if particular law makes no provi­sion, the bishop senior according to episcopal ordination among the bishops of the patriarchal curia; (3) or, if there are no bishops of the patriarchal curia, the bishop senior according to episcopal ordination of the permanent synod. The administrator of the Patriarchal Church is chosen from among the bishops of the patriarchal curia or the permanent synod because of their proximity to the patriarchal see and their presumed familiarity with the administration of the patriarchal office.

1.8.1. The Election

The patriarchal curial bishops are those who discharge functions and have office within the territorial boundaries of the Church (c. 181 §1). These bishops are to exercise the functions the patriarch entrusts to them. The procedure for the election of the patriarchal curial bishops is equal to that of the eparchial bishops inside the boundaries of the patriarchal Church. Only the members of the synod of bishops propose the candidates to the patriarch. The particular law can make norms on the way of investigating the suitability of the candidates. The Christian faithful would also include the consecrated people, both men and women who are good in prudence and Christian life (c. 182 §1). The findings are to be transmitted to the patriarch by the bishops and to the bishops by the patriarch, before the convocation of the synod.

The election of the bishop is to take place according to c. 181-183 and according the norms of cc. 947-956 on election. The bishops assembled in the synod give their votes to the presbyter whom they judge the most suitable Coram Domino (‘in the presence of the Lord’). After gath­ering sufficient information as for to ascertaining the suitability of the proposed candidates, the synod draws up a list of candidates, proceeding by secret vote. Unless there is some other determination of Law (ius), they vote on each name: those that obtain a majority vote, as per the norm of c. 107, are included in the list. It is possible that a norm of particular law, approved by the Roman Pontiff, determines the compilation of the list in another manner.

In the voting an absolute majority of votes of the electors present is required; but if this is not achieved in the first round of three balloting, on the fourth balloting only the two names that received the most votes in the third balloting have passive voice, and of these two, the one is elected who attains the majority of votes of the electors present, even if only this is rela­tive. The one elected may be informed and asked for his consent only if he has already obtained Pontifical assent; otherwise, the patriarch must first ask and obtain the assent of the Roman Pontiff (cc. 184 and 185).

Under particular circumstances, the patriarch, after consulting the Apos­tolic See, can call for a vote by correspondence. The candidate scoring an absolute majority is elected; otherwise the question will be deferred to the Apostolic See (c. 186). Canon 87 says that the patriarch ordains the patriarchal curial bishops and c. 188 fixes the term for ordination (three months) and for tak­ing possession (four months).

1.9. Other Aspects

Who decides the need for patriarchal curial bishops: the patriarch or the synod of bishops? Though the synod of bishops elects the bishops, it seems that it is not actually their competency to decide on the need of a curial bishop. In such case, if there is a vacancy for one of the curial bishops’ offices, is it possible for the patriarch to decide alone about the need of having a new bishop to this office? CCEO c. 87 says that the patriarch is to see whether there is a need for curial bishops in the patriarchal curia or not. Therefore it can be his personal decision.

Now c. 947 §1 says that the elec­tion is not to be deferred beyond three usable months to be reckoned from the receipt of the notice of vacancy of the office. In a patriarchal Church, if the office of the curial bishop is considered as a stable one, then the election is to be done according to this canon. The special norms for the election of bishops are to be followed as per the Code. However for the other procedures for the election, cc. 947- 957 are to be observed. One may note that if the candidate for the office, is already a bishop, then the procedure is rather easy as it is simply that of the transfer from one office to another. But if the candidate to be elected is a priest, then pontifical assent is a must before the proclamation and episcopal ordination.

1.10. During the Vacant Patriarchal See

We have seen above that the decision of having or not having of curial bishops is the personal decision of the patriarch. In the same way the canonical roles of the curial bishops are decided by the same patriarch too. If the patriarch would confer some of his executive powers to the bishops of the curia, he is free to do so, but the synod of bishops cannot make any particular law (leges) about it. If in a case the patriarch decides to make some norms about the functioning, giving some type of stability for the bishops of the curia in the office, that would be valid only till the same patriarch is in this office. When there is a vacancy for the patriarchal see at the death or resignation of the patriarch, then the senior bishop according to episcopal ordination among the bishops of the patriarchal curia becomes the administrator of the patriarchal Church unless particular law has determined otherwise (c. 126 §3). But there is no canon speaks about what happens to the other bishops when the see is vacant. If the analogy for this situation from Pastor Bonus is considered for such situation, according to its canonical legislation, the bishops of the curia are to cease from their function at the death of the patriarch and if the new patriarch wants so, they can be confirmed in the office though there is no obligation for a patriarch to do so.

1.11. The Canonical Roles as per CCEO

Canon 100 says that “the patriarch can reserve to himself matters which concern several eparchies and involve the civil authorities; he cannot, however, settle these matters without consulting the eparchial bishops concerned and without the consent of the permanent synod. If the matter is urgent and time is too short to convene the bishops who are members of the permanent synod, they may be substituted, for the case, by the bishops of the patriarchal curia.”

Concerning vacant eparchial sees within the territorial boundaries of a patriarchal Church, it is for the patriarch to appoint an administrator of the eparchy, after consulting the bishops of the patriarchal curia, if there are any (c. 220, 3°). In the same way, within the territorial boundaries of the pat­riarchal Church, if the right of the eparchial financial officer comes to an end in whatever manner, the election or appointment of a new financial officer pertains to the patriarch after having consulted the bishops of the patriarchal curia, if there are any (c. 232 §3).

There are other occasions when particular law can be made on the curial bishops so that they can be fully part of the administration of the patriarchal Church.

1.12. Other Possible Divisions

Though the above canons directly state that there are only a few things that the curial bishops of the patriarchal Church can canonically do, the code does not make explicitly a clear division of the power or offices for the curial bishops. A close observation on the canonical legislation suggests that the office of the patriarch is not a light one to be headed and carried out by one person alone. The same patriarch is also has look into the needs of his eparchial see as he is to an eparchial bishop. We have already seen in CCEO c. 78 §1, that the patriarch cannot constitute a vicar for the entire patriarchal Church nor can he delegate his power to someone for all cases. But this canon does not at all forbid the patriarch, from having different vicars for the administration of the patriarchal Church, sharing the powers partially, either vicariously or by way of delegation. Therefore this study would like to reflect and propose a division of the roles of the patriarch, which he can vicariously confer or by delegation to the curial bishops, or in a partial way entrust the responsibility of such sections or dicasteries. However, for the efficiency of the patriarchal administration, there should be some division of power, without which the patriarch would be overloaded in the field of patriarchal administration.

The patriarch is the father and head of the patriarchal Church and he remains always as the head of all the activities of the patriarchal Church. Therefore decisions of major importance are to be submitted to the approbation of the patriarch except for those which the patriarch has given official permission. As there can be only maximum of three bishops in the patriarchal curia in order to help the patriarch, there could be three sections or dicasteries functioning in the curia, with curial bishops as heads (we could call them presidents) of the sections. All these sections could have a secretary, preferably a priest and if needed other officers. Any acts that these sections undertake would be acts of the respective sections of which the patriarch has already transferred the power either vicariously or by delegation. But of course, the bishops in the patriarch do not have ordinary proper power, so they act in the name of the patriarch. However, these sections would have competence to deal only in those areas where the patriarch has vicariously or by delegation conferred the power or competence to the sections. Together with patriarch, the president of each section may sign the acts of his section in all important matters and the president may sign without the patriarch for other acts of his section if the patriarch has so decided. Dispatching the communications and other aspects are the responsibility of each section. The patriarch, together with the curial bishops, may decide if a matter is to be sent to the commission for further study before a decision is made. However, on the death of the patriarch, all these sections, presidents and secretaries, cease from their function, until the new patriarch confirms them in their office.

The first section could be more an administrative one. The president of the first section could also be nominated as the moderator of the curia with the responsibility for ensuring that the curia is well coordinated to function well and produce results according to the prescriptions of the law. This section may help the patriarch with regard to relations with: the Roman Pontiff, the Apostolic and Holy See of Rome, the patriarchal, major archiepiscopal and metropolitan churches and also the other sui iuris Churches, the synod of bishops, the eparchies, the exarchies, all the bishops and the exarchs of the same sui iuris Church and with the civil authorities. This section could also coordinate the activities of certain patriarchal commissions like the canon law commission, the pastoral care commission, the patriarchal assembly commission and the commission for the preparation of the synod. The president of this commission could be the chairman or an ex-officio member in these commissions, representing the patriarch on them. This section may help the patriarch to find personnel for the patriarchal curia.

The second section could be considered as a disciplinary section and could be entrusted with the responsibility for the general discipline of the patriarchal Church. This section might deal with the decrees, precepts, rescripts, canonical provisions, administrative acts, dignities, privileges, religious and societies of the patriarchal right, nominations of patriarchal authority and all the other official disciplinary acts. Hence it could be made responsible for the clerics and religious as far as disciplinary questions are concerned. It could also examine the statutes and typicon of religious institutes, associations and other movements before the patriarch approves them. It may see to the disciplinary questions of the laity too. It could also to be responsible as far as the discipline of the administration of the temporal goods of the patriarchal Church are concerned and could coordinate the activities of patriarchal commissions like the commission for priests and religious, the commission for education, the commission for seminary formation, and the commission for social communication, media and books. The president of this section would be the chairman or an ex-officio member in these commissions and he would represent the patriarch on them. This section would be responsible for official bulletins, press releases and the directories of the patriarchal Church.

The third section could be called a theologico-pastoral section and hence it would be as important as the other two sections as far as the patriarchal Church is concerned. It could be concerned with all the liturgical, theological, catechetical, pastoral, and ecumenical questions addressed to the patriarch, and coordinate the activities of some patriarchal commissions like the liturgical commission, the commission for catechism, that for ecumenism, as well as the commissions for evangelisation, and for censoring the books. The president of this section would be the chairman or an ex-officio member in these commissions and he would represent the patriarch on them. This section would also assist the patriarch in the preparation of pastoral and canonical visits of the patriarch and the preparation of the pastoral and encyclical letters, instructions, etc.

1.13. Diplomatic Relation and the Bishops of the Patriarchal Curia

In the ecclesiastical life, diplomatic relations are very important. We know from the history, how the Roman Pontiff in his universal mission of the Petrine Ministry is successful with the diplomatic relationships. The bishops of the patriarchal curia, either one or all the three can be a diplomat or diplomats who work wherever there is a need. The areas of this work may be to keep relations with the civil authority, with other churches sui iuris, non-catholic churches.
1.14. Patriarchal Visitor

As we see in CCEO c. 148 §1, the patriarch has the right and the obligation to seek appropriate information concerning the Christian faithful who reside outside the territorial boundaries of the Church over which he presides. After getting consent of the Apostolic see he can send a visitor to collect information on this matter.

1.15. Titular Sees and the Titles

All three bishops would have titular sees and it would be better to have the title of archbishop or at least the senior most bishop of the patriarchal curia who could eventually be the administrator of the patriarchal Church, could have been conferred with a title of archbishop. This administrator during the period of vacancy of the patriarchal see would have the powers of the patriarch. The titles of those existed sees of the same Church may be also conferred to these titular bishops. The title of the archbishop can be very easily conferred to a titular bishop as all most all the secretaries of the dicasteries of the Roman curia are archbishops.

2. The Power Exercised by the Bishops in the Patriarchal Curia

At this juncture, it would be good to comment on the power that is exercised in the Patriarchal curia in general and the bishops of the patriarchal curia in a particular way. In order to understand this concept, let me first explain the analogical canons of the Roman curia. The Vatican II highlighted the vicarious character of the Roman curia, because, as we have already said, it does not operate by its own right or on its own initiative. It receives its power from the Roman Pontiff and exercises it within its own essential and innate dependence on the Pontiff. It is of the nature of this power that it always joins its own action to the will of the one from whom the power springs. It must display a faithful and harmonious interpretation of his will and manifest, as it were, an identity with that will, for the good of the Churches and service to the bishops. From this character the Roman curia draws its energy and strength, and in it too finds the boundaries of its duties and its code of behaviour.

The vicarious nature of the curia concerns not only in the head of each dicastery but regards the entire dicastery as an organ of the Holy See. Moreover, the prefects or presidents of the dicasteries can receive habitual faculties from the Pope ad personam (PB 18; Cf. CIC c. 132. CCEO c.), and in this way, they can realise acts of governance without having to submit them to the Roman Pontiff.

Even if the concept of “vicarious” technically pertains, above all, to the exercise of power, the expression also applies to all organs which carry out governing functions proper to the Petrine ministry in the area of promotion and development (such as the pontifical councils). Notwithstanding that these organs do not exercise power of governance or exercise it only in a delegated way, one must speak of a “vicarious” exercise of the functions of the primacy. Therefore the Roman Pontiff makes use of these dicasteries of Roman curia for the exercise of his ministry in the Universal Church in general and in the Latin Church in particular through different congregations, tribunals, councils, commissions, etc.

John Paul II, in the context of the reformation of the Roman curia said, “the curia appears as an instrument and a help to the Roman Pontiff. It has, therefore, an instrumental character that configures its notion and justifies its reason of being. It is relative to the Pope and from him it receives its power, and in the identity of the seeing with him, resides its force, its limits, and its code of conduct (…). Its power is vicarious…
2.1. Patriarchal Power and Authority in the Patriarchal Church

Unlike the Western Churches, a supra-episcopal power and authority, centred on the patriarch its head, and on the synod of bishops was re-introduced by Vatican II. Patriarchal authority had diverse functions and roles to exercise in the Church, as re-restored and affirmed by Vatican II. The origin of the authority of the patriarchs, which they enjoyed in ancient times, shows that all these rights were not handed down to them by the Church of Rome, but obtained through customs and sanctioned by the early ecumenical councils.

In the first millennium, the concentration of the authority, in the person of the patriarch and the synods of the patriarchal Church became a legitimate tradition, according to the regulation, determined by the early councils. The patriarchs truly enjoyed relative competence over all within the patriarchal territory. The reason for their authority was a simple and natural one. It was to the great sees, as we have seen, that the Gospel had first been brought and it was from these sees that the faith had spread throughout the world. The bishops of these sees sent missionaries to the neighbouring villages and they naturally ordained new bishops when the time came to set up other sees. The new bishops looked up to their consecrator with reverence. The patriarch with the synods exercised power and authority in the ecclesiastical life especially in the legislative, judicial and executive fields.

In modern times, the particular laws of the patriarchal Church cannot be contrary the general laws of the Church. Patriarchal authority could dispense someone from the law and dispensations could have been given in a serious case and with the consent of the permanent synod. In CS, the patriarch had the right to make the edicts, mandates and general orders for the whole patriarchal Church. He had the right to define the application of the laws and to provide for the execution of the same. In CCEO, the power of the patriarch is very clearly defined in different canons. Among them the most important one is c. 78 § 1.

The power which, according to the norm of the canons and legitimate customs, the patriarch has over bishops and other Christian faithful of the Church over which he presides is ordinary and proper, but personal.

But coming to power of governance, CCEO c. 985 says that it is distinguished as legislative, executive and judicial. This power of governance in the patriarchal Church are generally allocated as follows: the patriarch is endowed with executive authority; the synod of bishops is endowed with legislative authority. The same Synod constitutes the superior judicial instance of the patriarchal Church. In this manner, a balance of power is established between the individual authority of the patriarch and the collegial authority of the synod of bishops.
2.2. The Legislative Power in Patriarchal Church

The Holy Spirit through sacramental consecration gives the task of shepherding God’s people to the bishops. Hence the Church needs a creative legislative body that is permanent and in regular contact with the whole Christian community. The existence of such a legislative body is built up within the framework of the doctrine of episcopal collegiality as is stated in Vatican II. The Roman Pontiff and the ecumenical council remain the legislative body par excellence for the Universal Church. Unity of power is a necessary element of the hierarchical structure derived from Christ.

In the patriarchal Churches, the legislative power resides exclusively in the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church. The legislative power of the patriarch was exercised through the patriarchal synod and this intervention of the synod is the “conditio sine qua non” for the exercise of his legislative power. According to CCEO too, the patriarch cannot make laws for the whole patriarchal Church by his own authority. Outside his eparchy, the patriarch has legislative power only as a member of the synod of the patriarchal Church. The promulgation of laws and the publication of decisions of the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church come under the competence of the patriarch. Here, it is clear that the laws emanating from the synod of bishops do not get the form of law until they are promulgated by the patriarch (CCEO c. 112 § 1). There are also other conditions seen in CCEO with regard to legislative power. In CCEO c. 985 § 2, the legislative power of governance is to be exercised in the manner prescribed by law, and that legislative power in the Church possessed by a legislator below the highest Church authority cannot be validly delegated, unless otherwise explicitly provided for in the common law, a law which is contrary to a higher law cannot be validly enacted by a lower level legislator. PB says that different dicasteries cannot emanate laws or general decrees that have the force of law, and also not derogate the prescriptions in use by universal law, if not in a single case and with specific approval of the Supreme Pontiff. Applying these principles to the patriarchal curia, the concept is clear that the patriarchal curial organs do not or cannot have any legislative power.

The above common discipline does not exclude the possibility of having internal regulations for the sake of the better coordination of one of the organs of the curia. In general, the curial organs have only executive and judiciary power; except if the special permission is given by the synod of bishops for the particular legislation in certain minor things. CCEO c. 1285 § 3 speaks about the regulations of the tribunal. Like these, there can also be other internal regulations for other curial organs.
2.3. The Executive Power in Patriarchal Church

Executive power (office) is concerned with day-to-day administration. They have to be concerned with the application of the law. In the exercise of power, the Church provides for distinct functions, which is an aid to effective government. The executive function urges the application of the laws or enforces the execution of the sentences, disposing of things and removing all obstacles that impede the complete attainment of the social end, as it is given in OE. Regarding this executive power of the patriarchal authority, long discussions took place as is seen in Nuntia.

The fundamental principle regarding the administrative acts is established in CCEO c. 110 § 4. The synod of bishops is not competent for administrative acts, except for the exceptions indicated in the canons. For the application of the legislative norms, the patriarch has executive power. At the same time in c. 1063 § 2 speaks about the power of the synod of bishops for the administrative acts. This power of the patriarch can be considered under diverse aspects i.e. inside and outside of the patriarchal territory. Inside the territory, the patriarch exercises his major powers over the metropolitans, bishops, clergy and faithful. CCEO in many canons speaks about the exercise of the executive power of the patriarchal authority.
2.3.1. Exercise of Executive Power

According to CCEO, in order to carry out the executive power of the patriarchal authority, there is to be a curia in the patriarchal Church and it will find the means for the practical applications of the patriarchal executive authority. In this field, the permanent synod, the bishops of the curia, the commissions, and other officers of the curia function as a term, being the partakers of the executive power of the patriarchal authority.

Who all are the members of the curia and who all take part in the executive power of the patriarchal authority? Generally speaking, all those who are involved in the functioning of the curia could be listed as the members of the patriarchal curia. It is quite possible to have doubts about the grades of members. A close observation of the Annuario pontificio tells us that, all who are involved in the official works of the offices of the curia are listed as curial members. In the case of the patriarchal curia, as is obvious from the canons, the direct members of the curia are those listed as per cc. 114, 115, 123 §2. One can imply from the present praxis that those commission members would mean the ordinary members and the consultants of the commissions. All those persons who have an office or a role in the curia could be called as curial members. At the same time, all these curial members need not have executive power. It is to be limited to only to those whom the ordinary executive power is transferred either vicariously or by the way of delegation.

As a principle, the nominations and appointments are to be done as per the common laws and particular laws of the sui iuris Church. The synod of bishops of each Church is to make regulations, about nominations and appointments taking into consideration the common and particular laws. In CCEO c. 124, one sees that the persons of the commissions are appointed by the patriarch himself.

But with regard to the appointments of the secretariat employers, and other employers, there is no canon law binding in anyway to any person. This can be done by the patriarch himself or he can decide whether it is to be done either by the moderator of the curia or if the statutes approved by the synod of bishops so decides by the chairman of each curial organ. Even though the Code does not specify about the ad-hoc committees and other councils, the patriarch with the advice of the synod of bishops, specifying their role, can constitute them even as the part of the curia. For the appointments of the other employers like office assistants, drivers, receptionist, etc. of the patriarchal curia, the finance officer himself or the moderator himself can see to it. As far as their rights and duties are concerned, the civil law is to be followed.
2.4. The Judiciary Power in Patriarchal Church

In the ancient times, the patriarch in his patriarchate had enjoyed wide judiciary power, for judging either in the internal forum or in the external forum, personally or through his tribunals, the spiritual as well as those of the temporal affairs of the Church. The council of Constantinople IV (869-870), c. 19 says that the patriarch in his own territory is the supreme ecclesiastical judge that enforces punishment on those who had violated or neglected the laws. The canonical legislation has stabilised an organisation of tribunals of patriarchs, defining their competency. In the council Lateran IV (1215), c. 5, we see that this rule does not exclude the appeal to the Roman Pontiff. The council of Chalcedon (451), in the cc. 8, 9 stabilises the orders for the judicial instance of the clergy that is the priests to the bishop, the bishop to the metropolitan, the metropolitan to the patriarch. The council of Constantinople IV (869-870) in the c. 10 stabilises the rule that each judiciary instance has to be presided over by the “careful enquiry and judgement in synod.” Canon 26 prescribes that clergy deposed and unjustly judged have the right of appeal to the ecclesiastical superior tribunal. In the Church judicial power exists which is possessed by judges or judicial colleges. Judicial power reflects the mentality of the community in a special way.

The synod of bishops of the patriarchal Churches is the superior tribunal according to CCEO c.1062 with a bishop elected as the general moderator for the administration of justice, endowed with the right of vigilance in all the tribunals situated within the territorial limits of the patriarchal Churches. In the same way there is also the ordinary tribunal of the patriarchal Church which is part of the patriarchal curia as per c. 1063. This tribunal is erected by the patriarch himself. The patriarch is to appoint the important personnel to the tribunal with the consent of the permanent synod. This canon seems to suggest a kind of judicial power to the patriarch. But it is to be noted that the patriarch is not vicariously transferring his judicial power to the ordinary tribunal as it is the case of the eparchial tribunal or of the roman rota or apostolic signatory. In CCEO c. 985 § 3 says that the judicial power of governance, which is possessed by judges or judicial colleges, is to be exercised in the manner prescribed by law and cannot be delegated, except to carry out acts, which are preparatory to a decree or a sentence.
2.5. Conferring of Power in the Patriarchal Curia

In a patriarchal curia, the exercise of the executive power of the patriarch and the conferring of this power to the three bishops of the curia need further study and clarification. In this context, this study is to address the technical choices that the legislator has made to regulate the conferring and the exercise of the power of governance in the Church. Both the codes (CCEO c. 981; CIC c. 131) make a classification of ecclesiastical power based on the techniques relating to the conferring of power. According to this criterion the power of governance is divided into different categories: ordinary power and delegated power and further the ordinary power into proper and vicarious power.
2.5.1. Ordinary Power

Ordinary power is exercised by all the hierarchs who have ordinary power. CCEO c. 984 § 1 determines who all are hierarchs. It says that the ordinary power of governance is that which is joined to a certain office by the law itself. The notion of ‘hierarch’ is applied to the holders of ecclesiastical office in which executive jurisdictional functions are exercised over their subjects. There are two fundamental elements in this: the exercise of “general executive power” and a “hierarchical bond” of subjection that exists in the hierarchical structures with regard to legitimate pastors. The concept of hierarch applies only to executive power, which therefore excludes the legislative and judiciary power. And the notion of hierarch does not apply to all of the offices, which are competent to exercise ‘ordinary executive power’.

Thus the ordinary power of governance is a juridical power annexed to an ecclesiastical office, with regard to the juridical competencies that stably shaped this office in the governmental structure of the Church. It is received ipso iure by the conferral and the taking the possession of a specific office, in order that the responsibilities assigned by law to this office might be fulfilled (CIC 145 §2 and CCEO 936 §2). The ordinary power is obtained with the office and lost with the forfeiture of the office, with the exception of the suspension of power.

The ordinary power is distinguished into two categories as per CCEO c. 981 § 2: proper and vicarious, according to the autonomy with which the power is possessed and exercised.
2.5.1.1. Proper Ordinary Power

Proper ordinary power is generally associated with episcopal offices, also referred to as capital offices or offices of presidency which direct the eparchies or any other hierarchical structure. This is the case regardless of who holds the office whether it be a bishop or a priest. Therefore it is a juridical power exercised by the titular of the capital office “in his own name” for the pastoral care of the subjects for whom he is responsible. This power pertains to the principal office of each jurisdictional structure. The conceptual basis of this power is the sacramental ontological element, which the holder of the principal office acquires by receiving the potestas sacra. Depending on the case in question, the proper ordinary power entails either immediate participation in the power of Christ (cf. CIC cc. 331 and 381 § 1) or mediated participation, a iure, in the power of the successor of Peter.

As far as the patriarchal curia is concerned, proper ordinary power can be exercised only by the patriarch himself. Of course the power of the bishops of the curia is not a proper ordinary power, even though they receive the power of order with episcopal consecration. In the same way no other episcopal or priestly member enjoys proper ordinary power in the patriarchal curia.
2.5.1.2. Vicarious Ordinary Power

Vicarious ordinary power is exercised by the offices, which depend on the capital office from which they have received the competency to act. This power is exercised in the name of the titulary of the capital office or in the name of the one with proper power – technically, however, one who exercises vicarious power is acting with full organic responsibility. This power is based on a juridical transfer of competencies from the capital office to the vicarious office. Such a transfer is called vicarious decentralisation or this power arises from the juridical transference of competence or the decentralisation of part of the functions of the office with proper power.

Vicarious ordinary power is subdivided into general or special as per CIC 134 §1. But this division is not clear in CCEO c. 984 §1, as it is in CIC. According to CIC, general vicarious ordinary power pertains to all those offices that perform functions of authority and have the same competence as the offices with proper power. On the other hand, in the other offices, special vicarious power is exercised for the strict fulfilment of the functions assigned to the office. But CCEO hints at to the general vicarious ordinary power, which corresponds to those ecclesiastical offices endowed with the same rights and duties as the capital offices, for example the eparchial protosyncellus and the syncellus. CCEO c. 248 § 1 says that they exercise the same executive powers of governance as the eparchial bishop, excepting for those things which the eparchial bishop has reserved to himself or to others or which by law require his own special mandate, by which the act is null if the required mandate is not obtained. On the other hand, the special vicarious ordinary power corresponds to the endowment of a special juridical power.

Coming to the power of the patriarch, the Code specifies that the patriarch cannot constitute a vicar for the entire patriarchal Church nor can he delegate his power to someone for all the cases (CCEO c. 78 § 1). The power of the patriarch is personal and it cannot be transferred wholly to a vicar for the whole patriarchal Church. Coming to the structure of the Roman curia too, it is to be noted that the Supreme Pontiff does not have a vicar for the whole universal Church. But the Pontiff has transferred his ordinary power to different dicasteries. The dicasteries of the Roman curia have a vicarious character. In other words, the dicasteries do not exercise ordinary power but rather vicarious power received from the Roman Pontiff.

In this sense, c. 78 § 1 does not exclude to having different bishops with vicarious power for the patriarchal Church. The bishops of the patriarchal curia can be entrusted with such powers of the patriarch for different purposes. Even though the bishops of the curia do not have proper ordinary power, they can have vicarious ordinary power. For the bishops of the patriarchal curia to have the vicarious ordinary power, it has to be lawfully constituted and transferred.

In praxis, it seems that in different patriarchal Churches, there are bishops in the patriarchal curia. They are not ‘protosyncellus’ for the whole patriarchal Church in the strict sense, having vicarious power as in the case of an eparchial protosyncellus. But they could be sharers of the vicarious power of the patriarch, if it is lawfully conferred and constituted.
2.5.1.3. Vicarious Procedure

Vicarious power and vicarious procedure are different. Both of them may be operative in practice. Vicarious power is a type of power of governance enjoyed by the vicarious offices, whereas vicarious procedure is an administrative technique of decentralisation or transfer of functions among offices belonging to the same ecclesiastical body. Vicarious procedure can be present even when the transferred functions do not carry with them the exercise of the power of governance. Therefore vicarious office is not only the office in which vicarious power is exercised- for example the office of the prefect of a dicastery of Roman curia or the protosyncellus of the eparchial curia- but all those offices in which the tasks are determined by recourse to the administrative technique of vicarious procedure.
2.5.2. Delegated Power

Delegated power is juridical power conferred on a person but not by means of an office (CCEO c. 981 §1). Delegated power is a non-organic way of exercising power because it is not linked to the conferral of a specific office, but is conferred to a person. It is exercised through another and is restricted to the area specified in the mandate of delegation. It may be a iure, if the delegation is included in the law, or ab homine, if it proceeds from a singular administrative act. It may be universal, for matters of a similar character, or singular, for a specific case. In other words, this power is exercised in the name of the person who delegated this power and according to the mandate of delegation. Juridical power is bound to a certain person on the basis of his particular personal characteristics. In other words, it is a juridical power not bound to an ecclesiastical office.

CCEO c. 989 says about delegated power. And it can be defined as the subjective juridical situation of power of one who enjoys the capacity to perform acts of governance assigned to him personally by the office holder having ordinary executive authority. The activity of the delegate is circumscribed by the conditions of the delegation and the norms of the Code concerning the exercise and interpretation of this type of power: “a person who has received delegated power is understood to have also been conferred whatever is necessary to exercise that power” (CCEO c. 989). Coming to the question of our topic, i.e. about the bishops of the patriarchal curia, the patriarch can delegate this power to the bishops of the curia basing on these canons. Once it is delegated, it is to be understood that the bishops of the curia are conferred with everything necessary to exercise what is delegated. But in a case where the patriarch delegates a bishop of the patriarchal curia for something either in universal or singular, the delegated person has only competence to do the delegated function or after the delegated function, there is no possibility of continuation.

The delegation of power is particularly suited to the personal character of power in the Church and its spiritual content. As the responsibility of pastoral government falls on the holders of the episcopal or capital offices, these incumbents have the discretion to opt for a fiduciary transfer of their own power in the interests of good government. The disadvantage is that delegation of power may at times lead to instability or competence conflicts. Consequently, to maintain good order and government, the governing subject must utilise this type of power with prudence. Delegated power is cancelled for any one of the reasons listed in CCEO c. 992.

Again, with regard to the delegation of the power of the patriarch, the Code is clear in its legislation. Canon 78 § 1 says that the patriarch cannot delegate his power to someone for all cases. So, from the context it is clear that the patriarch can delegate someone for particular cases (cf. CCEO c. 83 § 2). If there is a presumed absence of the patriarch for a long time, his major powers (not all) can be delegated to someone. It is therefore extremely important that in the constitution of an office or in the confirmation of a duty to an ecclesiastical office, that it comes clearly underlined if, other competences are established by the Code itself and the eventual power annexed to such office from the universal law, the patriarch intends to confer ulterior faculty or delegation.

Conclusion

From CCO one can understand that the curial bishops had a very significant role to play in the patriarchal curias of almost all the Churches. They existed with the title of the patriarchal vicars. Almost all the patriarchs appointed a vicar general to the whole patriarchate, as an eparchial bishop appointing a protosyncellus to his eparchy. But the concept of having a patriarchal vicar general for the whole patriarchate was changed during CCO. CS legislated that the power of the patriarch is personal and he cannot have a vicar general for the whole patriarchate. At present, there exist bishops with the title of the ‘bishops of the patriarchal curia’ in most of the Churches, though there cannot be more than three bishops in a curia as long as provision is made for their support (c. 87).

CCEO, even though with maximum scrupulosity tried to figure out all the roles of the other curial organs, failed to specify the canonical roles of the patriarchal curial bishops except a few of them. Neither CS did that. A possible reason might be to give maximum freedom to the patriarchs to specify their roles. The patriarch is free to confer his ordinary executive power vicariously to the curial bishops or he can delegate the curial bishops his executive powers partially.

This study proposes a division of the offices of the bishops of the patriarchal curia, taking conclusions also from the interviews with the patriarchs and considering the spirit of the code. This division is under the presumption that there are three bishops in the curias and there would be three dicasteries under their leadership, such as: the administrative dicastery, disciplinary dicastery and theologico-pastoral dicastery. This study proposes also their possible functioning, specific roles, etc.

It is clear from CCEO that the offices of the bishops of the patriarchal curia are not similar to the office of the protosyncellus and syncelli of an eparchy, including the eparchy of the patriarch. In the case of eparchial protosyncellus, there is an obligation from the part of the eparchial bishops to have them (“constituendus est” cf. c. 245). But in the case of curial bishops, there is no obligation for the patriarch to have them (“potest curare” cf. c. 87). But it seems that the eparchial protosyncellus and syncelli have no stability at all in office (cf. cc. 247 §1, 87). But in the case of the bishops of the patriarchal curia, strictly speaking they have no stability in the office. But one should be very careful as they are already bishops. They have the right for an office if they are made bishops and provision is to be made for their support. If a patriarch does not want a particular bishop in the curia, as he is a bishop, the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church should get involved for transferring him. If it is the case of stably constituting a bishop with vicarious power, there is to be special regulations in relation to this: such as, how many years one can be head of a dicastery, can the person be re-appointed, how many times one can be re-appointed, when one has to retire, etc.

It may be possible to have the same dicasteries and functions in a patriarchal curia with non-episcopal members. In that case, the non-episcopal members will become the heads of the dicasteries. Naturally there will be lots of disadvantages for such system. The concept of transferring the vicarious power and power of delegation need not be as effective as it is in the case of the episcopal heads of the dicasteries.

There is to be a clear distinction between the office and the roles of the bishops of the patriarchal curia (titular). Both the election and transfer of the curial bishops are connected very much to the synod of bishops, thus the patriarch cannot transfer them, as he wants without the consent of the synod of bishops. On the other hand, for the curial bishops in order to exercise the vicarious or delegated ordinary executive power, they must receive it from the patriarch himself as only he has generally the executive power. But there cannot be any presumption that the new patriarch would confer the same executive power to the bishops of the curia. It seems that there is a lacuna legis about the “stability” of this office on conferring of power and about the recourse against administrative acts of the curial bishops.

In order to constitute this office in a stable manner, it is important that there is a regulation in the Church promulgated by the competent authority of the patriarchal church. As the patriarch has no legislative power, the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church has to do that. In such situation, if the synod of bishop makes a regulation which is made the part of the particular law of the Church, then the patriarch will not be able to freely transfer the power.

But we are discussing on transferring the executive power of the patriarch either vicariously or by delegation. Even if a lawful regulation is made about the functioning of the transfer of his executive power, it need not be considered as something done with the legislative authority in the patriarchal Church. Hence the patriarch can make a regulation which is part of the exercise of his executive power without entering into the legislative power of the patriarchal Church.

Curial Bishops of the Catholic Oriental Churches
Dr. Francis Eluvathingal
Who is a Curial Bishop? How is he elected? What are his duties and responsibilities?
Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Churches have declared to have curial Bishops in their respective Major Archiepiscopal curia. By the Episcopal Consecration and taking charge as curial bishops, all the Catholic Oriental 6 Patriarchal and 4 Major Archiepiscopal Churches will have bishops in their curia in order to help their Father and Head in the administration of their Churches.
In the Particular Laws of the Maronite church (1736) for the first time, we find legislation on having such office. Later this concept is developed in the laws of the Syrian (1888) and Armenian (1911) churches. These bishops were called as vicars general or patriarchal vicars in the beginning. Only by Cleri Sanctitati (CS, 1957) this figure was called Bishops of the curia which as repeated by CCEO.
Election of Curial Bishops
The Major Archbishop is to see whether there is a need for curial bishops in the Major Archiepiscopal curia or not (c. 87). Therefore it can be his personal decision. As per the law, any bishop can be transferred from his office as curial bishop and a curial bishop can be transferred to any other episcopal office. The Major Archbishop and the members of the synod of bishops can propose the names of the candidates. After gath¬ering sufficient information as for to ascertaining the suitability of the proposed candidates, the synod draws up a list of candidates, proceeding by secret vote. If the candidate to be elected is a priest, then pontifical assent is a must before the proclamation and episcopal ordination. For the election of a curial bishop, the other procedures are as same as of an eparchial bishop.
Administrative Role of the Curial Bishops as per CCEO
To carry out the administration of the sui iuris church, two organs get involved: the synod of bishops and the curia. After the permanent synod come the bishops of the curia in the next. The curial bishops can discharge functions only within the territorial boundaries of the Church (c. 181 §1). These bishops are to exercise the functions the Major Archbishop entrusts to them. In order to nominate bishops to the curia, the Major Archbishop is to see that the basic requirements are fulfilled like the provision for support, the possibility of residing and having an office in the curia. The Major Archbishop can appoint a maximum of three bishops in the curia, having the title of ‘bishops of the curia’ (c. 87). These bishops have various functions assigned to them by law.
The bishop senior according to episcopal ordination among the bishops of the curia will be the administrator of the vacant Major Archiepiscopal see (c. 127). The Major Archbishop can reserve to himself matters which concern several eparchies and involve the civil authorities, and if an urgent decision is to be taken, the Major Archbishop has to get the consent of the bishops of the curia (c. 100). There are other such situation also where the Major Archbishop has to discuss the matter with the bishops of the Curia (see c. 220, 3° and c. 232 §3).
The other Division of the Roles of the Curial Bishops
Though a few roles of these bishops are specified by CCEO, it does not make a clear division of the powers or offices for the curial bishops. We have seen in CCEO c. 78 §1, that the Major Archbishop cannot constitute a vicar for the entire church nor can he delegate his power to someone for all cases. But this canon does not at all forbid the Major Archbishop, from having different vicars for the administration of the Major Archiepiscopal Church, sharing the powers partially, either vicariously or by way of delegation. All three bishops would have titular sees and it would be better to have the title of archbishop at least to the senior most bishop of the curia who could eventually be the administrator of the Church. This administrator during the period of vacancy of the see would have the powers of the Major Archbishop. The titles of those existed sees of the same Church may be also conferred to these titular bishops.
As there can be only maximum of three bishops in the curia in order to help the Major Archbishop, there could be three sections functioning in the curia, with curial bishops as heads. All these sections could have a secretary, preferably a priest and if needed other officers. However, on the death of the Major Archbishop, all the heads of these sections, presidents and secretaries, cease from their function, until the new Major Archbishop confirms them in their office. The following is a division done in the light of the canon law and other situations.
Section for General Administration (SGA)
This is the first section. The president of it could also be nominated as the moderator of the curia with the responsibility of ensuring the skilful coordination of the curia. This section may help the Major Archbishop to effectively relate with the Roman Pontiff, the Apostolic and Holy See, the patriarchal, major archiepiscopal and metropolitan and other sui iuris Churches, the synod of bishops, the eparchies, the exarchies, all the bishops and the exarchs of the same sui iuris Church and with the civil authorities. This section might deal with the preparation of the decrees, instructions, precepts, rescripts, canonical provisions, administrative acts, dignities, privileges, elections and nominations of Major Archiepiscopal authority and all the other official acts. This section may help the Major Archbishop to find personnel, after having done the required enquiry, for the Major Archiepiscopal curia and other offices where the Major Archiepiscopal authority has to appoint persons. This section could also coordinate the activities of certain Major Archiepiscopal commissions like the commission for the Major Archiepiscopal assembly and for the preparation of the synod. The president of this section could be the chairman or an ex-officio member in these commissions in order to co-ordinate the activities of these commissions, representing the Major Archbishop in the commission meetings. This section could be made responsible for official bulletins, press releases and the directories of the Church. The responsibility of the Public Relation Office also could be entrusted to this section. This section would also assist the Major Archbishop in the preparation of pastoral and canonical visits of the Major Archbishop; be responsible for the vigilance of the administration of the temporal goods of the Church. The general vigilance on the tribunals of the Church could be also the responsibility of this section.
Section for Faith Related Subjects (SFRS)
The second section could be entrusted with the chief responsibility of protecting the faith of the Church. Hence it could be made responsible for the liturgy, theology, spirituality, discipline, doctrine, particular laws, customs, sacraments, sacramental, history, culture, art, literature, catechesis, liturgical music, structure of the Church, eco-theology, etc. The cults to the founder and the saints of the church, the prayers and relics of the saints, etc are to be under the vigilance of it. In the same way, it can see that those oriental fathers of the Church and those who have toiled hard for the well being the Church are respected with various programmes. It could also examine the theological books, statutes and typicon of religious institutes, by-law of the associations and other movements before the approval is given to them. This section can make scientific studies on the faith related subjects which will enable the synod of bishops to make more effective decisions. This section can help the Major Archbishop in the preparation of the pastoral and encyclical letters and it may see to the disciplinary questions of the laity, the religious and the priests as far as disciplinary questions are concerned in relation to the faith and morals. It could coordinate the activities of commissions like the commission for liturgy, for the particular law, for the catechism, for doctrine and theology, for censoring the books and for ecumenism. The president of this section would be the chairman or an ex-officio member in these commissions in order to co-ordinate the activities of these commissions and he would represent the Major Archbishop in the commission meetings.
Section for the Human Resources (SHR)
The most important resource of the Church is the human resource. This section has to deal with the various issues of the christian faithful, related to their spiritual and material well being. It will have to give utmost care for the needs of the secular priests, the men and women religious and those leading consecrated life, the seminarians, etc. The needs of the laity in general and in particular of the aged, family members, women, youth, children, daliths, widows, the sick, handicapped, mentally retarded, etc. are be cared for by this section. The needs of the associations, migrants, pilgrims, the non-catholics, the non-christians, etc. are to be cared by this section. The co-ordination among the activities of the farmers, business men, politicians, doctors, engineers, nurses, etc and all those who are working for the development of the nation contributing in one way or other is very much necessary. It can take initiatives for activities to foster relations with the hierarchy, clergy, religious and the laity. It has to take special interest for encouraging the needs of the missionaries and those who are involved in the evangelization works and those who work in the fields of education and health care. The media can be made use by this section to propagate the Christian values and principles to the vast public. The lay persons, the religious and clergy involved in various heroic gospel works, are to be given due recognition and they are to be respected with honours and titles in a systematic way by this section. It is to coordinate the activities of some Major Archiepiscopal commissions like the commission for pastoral care and evangelization, for clergy, religious and consecrated life, for education, for seminary formation, for Laity, for social communication, for the family, etc. The president of this section would be the chairman or an ex-officio member in these commissions in order to co-ordinate the activities of these commissions and he would represent the Major Archbishop in the commission meetings.

കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ ദൗത്യങ്ങള്‍
Sunday Shalom and Sathyadeepam, February 2010 റവ.ഡോ. ഫ്രാന്‍സിസ്‌ എലുവത്തിങ്കല്‍

സീറോ മലബാര്‍ - സീറോ മലങ്കര സഭകളില്‍ നിയമിതരായിരിക്കുന്ന കൂരിയാ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ അഭിഷിക്തരാകുന്നതോടെ പൗരസ്‌ത്യ കത്തോലിക്കാ സഭകളില്‍ നിലവിലുള്ള ആറു പാത്രിയാര്‍ക്കാ സഭകളിലും മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ക്കി എപ്പിസ്‌കോപ്പല്‍ സഭകളിലും സഭാ ഭരണത്തില്‍ സഭാ തലവന്മാരെ സഹായിക്കാനായി കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ ഉണ്ടാവുകയാണ്‌. പൗരസ്‌ത്യ സഭകളുടെ പൊതു നിയമസംഹിത (സി.സി.ഇ.ഒ) നിലവില്‍ വന്നിട്ട്‌ 20 വര്‍ഷമാകുന്ന ഈ വേളയില്‍ മലബാര്‍ - മലങ്കര സഭകളിലെ ഈ നിയമനങ്ങള്‍ ദൈവപരിപാലനയായേ കാണാനാകൂ. മാര്‍പാപ്പയെ സഹായിക്കാനായി വത്തിക്കാന്‍ കൂരിയായില്‍ വിവിധ ഓഫീസുകളിലായി അമ്പതോളം മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ സേവനം ചെയ്യുന്നുണ്ട്‌. ഇതിന്റെ വെളിച്ചത്തില്‍ വേണം പൗരസ്‌ത്യ സഭകളില്‍ പാത്രിയാര്‍ക്കീസുമാര്‍ക്കും മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പുമാര്‍ക്കും സഭാ ഭരണത്തില്‍ സഹായിക്കാന്‍ മെത്രാന്മാരെ നിയമിക്കാനായി സഭാ നിയമം അനുവദിക്കുന്നതിനെ മനസിലാക്കാന്‍. വിവിധ പൗരസ്‌ത്യ സഭകളുടെ നിയമത്തിലൂടെ കടന്നുപോകുമ്പോള്‍ എ.ഡി 1736-ലെ മാരോനൈറ്റ്‌ സഭാ നിയമത്തിലാണ്‌ ആദ്യമായി ഇത്തരം മെത്രാന്മാരെപ്പറ്റി പറയുന്നതെങ്കിലും അന്ന്‌ കൂരിയാ മെത്രാന്‍ എന്ന വാക്ക്‌ ഉപയോഗിച്ചിട്ടില്ല.

പിന്നീട്‌ സിറിയന്‍ സഭയുടെ നിയമത്തിലും (1888), അര്‍മ്മേനിയന്‍ സഭയുടെ നിയമത്തിലും (1911) ഇത്തരം മെത്രാന്മാരെക്കുറിച്ച്‌ പ്രതിപാദിക്കുന്നു. 1957-ല്‍ പന്ത്രണ്ടാം പീയൂസ്‌ മാര്‍പാപ്പ പുറത്തിറക്കിയ cler i santitah എന്ന -Motu proprio ല്‍ ആണ്‌ ആദ്യമായി പൗരസ്‌ത്യ സഭകളിലെ കൂരിയാ മെത്രാന്മാരെക്കുറിച്ച്‌ പൊതു നിയമം ഉണ്ടാക്കിയത്‌. 1990-ലെ സി.സി.ഇ.ഒ.യിലും ഇക്കാര്യം വലിയ വ്യത്യാസം കൂടാതെ ആവര്‍ത്തിക്കുന്നു.
കൂരിയാ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ സഭാ നിയമത്തില്‍

മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ക്കി എപ്പിസ്‌കോപ്പല്‍ സഭയുടെ ഭരണക്രമം മുന്നോട്ടു കൊണ്ടുപോകുന്നത്‌ രണ്ട്‌ സംവിധാനങ്ങളിലൂടെയാണ്‌. മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ സിനഡും, മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ക്കി എപ്പിസ്‌കോപ്പല്‍ കൂരിയായും. കൂരിയ സംവിധാനത്തില്‍ സ്ഥിരം സിനഡ്‌ കഴിഞ്ഞാല്‍ ഏറ്റവും പ്രാധാന്യമുള്ള സംവിധാനം കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടേതാണ്‌. സഭയുടെ പൊതു ഭരണത്തില്‍ സിനഡിനെയും, മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിനെയും സഹായിക്കാനുള്ളവരാണ്‌ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍. സി.സി.ഇ.ഒ പ്രകാരം ഒരു സഭയില്‍ ഉണ്ടാകാവുന്ന കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ ഏറ്റവും ഉയര്‍ന്ന സംഖ്യ മൂന്നായി പരിമിതപ്പെടുത്തിയിരിക്കുന്നു. (സി. 87).

സഭാ ഭരണത്തില്‍ മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്റെ എല്ലാ അധികാരങ്ങളുമുള്ള ഒരു പ്രോട്ടോ സിഞ്ചെല്ലൂസ്‌ അഥവാ വികാരി ജനറാള്‍ ഉണ്ടാകുവാനോ, മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്റെ എല്ലാ അധികാരങ്ങളും ഒരു മെത്രാന്‌ മാത്രമായി ഏല്‍പിക്കുവാനോ സഭാനിയമം അനുവദിക്കുന്നില്ല. എന്നാല്‍ മൂന്ന്‌ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്കുമായി കുറെ ഉത്തരവാദിത്വങ്ങള്‍ ഏല്‍പിക്കുവാന്‍ നിയമതടസമൊന്നുമില്ല. സ്വ ന്തം അധികാരം ഉപയോഗിച്ച്‌ ശുശ്രൂഷ ചെയ്യുവാന്‍ കൂരിയാ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ സാധിക്കില്ല എന്നത്‌ രൂപതാ മെത്രാന്മാരില്‍ നിന്നും കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരെ വ്യത്യസ്‌തരാക്കുന്നു. ഒരു മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പി ന്‌ തന്റെ അധികാരങ്ങളില്‍ ഏതെല്ലാം കൂരി യ മെത്രാന്മാ രെ ഏല്‌പിക്കാം എന്ന്‌ തീരുമാനിക്കാനുള്ള അവകാശമുണ്ട്‌. അതിന്‌ മെത്രാന്‍ സിനഡിന്റെ അനുവാദം ആവശ്യമില്ലെങ്കിലും സിനഡുമായി ധാരണയുണ്ടായാല്‍ വള രെ നല്ലതു തന്നെ. നിയമസംഹിത അനുസരിച്ച്‌ സഭാഭര ണ സംബന്ധമായ തീരുമാനങ്ങള്‍ മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബി ഷപ്‌ കൈകൊള്ളുന്നതിന്‌ മുമ്പ്‌ അദ്ദേഹം കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ ഉപദേശം തേടണമെന്ന്‌ അനുശാസിക്കുന്നുണ്ട്‌. ഉദാഹരണത്തിന്‌ സിവില്‍ ഭരണാധികാരികളുമായി ബ ന്ധപ്പെട്ടതോ, രൂപതകളുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെട്ടതോ ആയ കാ ര്യങ്ങളില്‍ അത്യാവശ്യ തീരുമാനങ്ങള്‍ കൈക്കൊള്ളേ ണ്ടി വരുമ്പോള്‍ സ്ഥിരം സിനഡ്‌ വിളിച്ചുകൂട്ടി തീരുമാനം എടുക്കാന്‍ മാത്രം സാവകാശമില്ലാത്ത സാഹചര്യത്തില്‍ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരോട്‌ ഉപദേശം തേടിവേണം മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്‌ തീരുമാനം എടുക്കാന്‍. (സി 100) ഇതുപോലെ ഉപദേശം ആരായേണ്ട മറ്റു സാഹചര്യങ്ങളെ പറ്റി നിയമസംഹിത വ്യക്തമാക്കുന്നുണ്ട്‌. (സി.സി 220,3,232 83)

മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്‌ രാജി വയ്‌ക്കുകയോ മരണപ്പെടുകയോ ചെയ്യുന്നത്‌ വഴി സഭാ തലവന്റെ സ്ഥാനം ഒഴിവായാല്‍ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരില്‍ മെത്രാന്‍പട്ടത്തില്‍ ഏറ്റവും സീനിയര്‍ ആയ മെത്രാനാകും സഭയുടെ താല്‌ക്കാലിക ഭരണാധികാരി. (സി. 127). പുതിയ മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപിനെ തിരഞ്ഞെടുക്കുന്ന സിനഡു വരെ അദ്ദേഹം തല്‍സ്ഥാനത്ത്‌ തുടര്‍ന്ന്‌ നിയമം അനുശാസിക്കുന്ന കാര്യങ്ങള്‍ ചെയ്യണം ( സി.128). ഈ താല്‌ക്കാലിക ഭരണാധികാരിയാണ്‌ സഭയുടെ തലവന്റെ സ്ഥാനം ഒഴിവായതിനെക്കുറിച്ച്‌ മാര്‍പാപ്പയെയും മറ്റ്‌ മെത്രാന്‍മാരെയും അറിയിക്കേണ്ടത്‌. മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ക്കി എപ്പിസ്‌കോപ്പല്‍ സഭയുടെ ആസ്ഥാനത്ത്‌ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ ഓഫീസും താമസസ്ഥലവും ഉണ്ടെന്ന്‌ ഉറപ്പു വരുത്താനും, അവരുടെ ജീവസന്ധാരണത്തിന്‌ ആവശ്യമായ എല്ലാ കാര്യങ്ങളും ചെയ്‌തു കൊടുക്കുവാനുമുള്ള ഉത്തരവാദിത്വം മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിനാണ്‌. മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പ്‌ തന്നെയാണ്‌ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ മെത്രാന്‍ പട്ടം കൊടുക്കുന്നത്‌. (സി. 87). കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്‍ ഏതെങ്കിലും സ്ഥാനിക രൂപതുടെ സ്ഥാനിക (titular) മെത്രാനായിട്ടാണ്‌ അവരോധിതനാകുക (സി. 179).

കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ തിരഞ്ഞെടുപ്പ്‌
രൂപത മെത്രാന്മാരെപ്പോലെതന്നെ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരെയും തിരഞ്ഞെടുക്കുന്നത്‌ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ സിനഡാണ്‌. (സി. 110 3). മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിനോടൊത്ത്‌ പ്രവര്‍ത്തിക്കാന്‍ ഉള്ളവര്‍ എന്ന നിലയില്‍ മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്റെ മനസിനിണങ്ങിയ വ്യക്തികള്‍ ആകണം എന്നതില്‍ ഒരു പക്ഷം ഇല്ല. എന്നാല്‍ ഈ സ്ഥാനത്തേക്ക്‌ തിരഞ്ഞെടുക്കപ്പെടുവാനുള്ളവരുടെ പേര്‌ നിര്‍ദ്ദേശിക്കാന്‍ സഭയിലെ എല്ലാ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്കും അവകാശമുണ്ട്‌. പേരുകള്‍ അടങ്ങുന്ന പട്ടികയില്‍ നിന്ന്‌ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരെ തിരഞ്ഞെടുക്കണം എന്ന്‌ നിയമം അനുശാസിക്കുന്നു. കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരെ മറ്റ്‌ രൂപതകളിലേക്കും രൂപതാ മെത്രാന്മാരെ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരായും മാറ്റം കൊടുക്കുവാനായി സഭാ നിയമം അനുവദിക്കുന്നുണ്ട്‌ (സി. 85). മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ സിനഡില്‍ സംബന്ധിക്കുവാനും മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ക്കി എപ്പിസ്‌കോപ്പല്‍ അസംബ്ലിയില്‍ സംബന്ധിക്കുവാനും കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ നിയമത്താല്‍ തന്നെ സാധിക്കും. മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്റെ സ്ഥാനം ഒഴിവായാല്‍ സഭയുടെ താല്‌ക്കാലിക ഭരണാധികാരി ആയി എല്ലാ കാര്യങ്ങളും ചെയ്യണം എന്നതുകൊണ്ട്‌ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരില്‍ പ്രായത്തില്‍ സീനിയര്‍ എങ്കിലും സ്ഥാനിക ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പായിരിക്കുന്നതും നല്ലതാണ്‌.

കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ ശുശ്രൂഷാ സാധ്യതകള്‍
സഭയുടെ തലവന്‍ എന്ന രീതിയില്‍ മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്‌ ഭാരിച്ച ഉത്തരിവാദിത്വങ്ങള്‍ ലോകത്തിന്റെ പല ഭാഗങ്ങളില്‍ താമസിക്കുന്ന സഭാ തനയരോട്‌ ഉണ്ടെന്നിരിക്കെ സഭാ ഭരണത്തില്‍ വ്യത്യസ്‌തങ്ങളായ ശുശ്രൂഷകള്‍ ചെയ്യുവാന്‍ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ ഉണ്ടാകുന്നത്‌ അഭിലഷണീയം തന്നെ. വ്യക്തമായ കാഴ്‌ചപ്പാടുകളും ഉത്തമബോധ്യങ്ങളുമുള്ള കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാരുടെ സഹായത്തോടെ സഭയ്‌ക്ക്‌ അതിവേഗത്തില്‍ ബഹുദൂരം സഞ്ചരിക്കാനാകും. വത്തിക്കാന്‍ കൂരിയയുടെ മാതൃകയില്‍ മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ക്കി എപ്പിസ്‌കോപ്പല്‍ സഭയുടെ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ വിവിധ ദൗത്യങ്ങള്‍ ഏല്‍പ്പിക്കുന്നത്‌ സഭയുടെ പൊതു വളര്‍ച്ചയ്‌ക്ക്‌ മുതല്‍ക്കൂട്ടാകും. മൂന്ന്‌ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ കൂരിയായില്‍ പ്രവര്‍ത്തിക്കുന്നു എന്ന വിധത്തില്‍, (1) ഭരണനിര്‍വ്വഹണ വിഭാഗം (2) വിശ്വാസ സംബന്ധമായ വിഷയങ്ങള്‍ക്കുള്ള വിഭാഗം, (3) മാനവശേഷിക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള വിഭാഗം എന്നിങ്ങനെ മൂന്നായി തിരിക്കാം. ഓരോ വിഭാഗത്തിനും ശുശ്രൂഷ ചെയ്യാവുന്ന മേഖലകള്‍ വിഭാഗത്തില്‍ സേവനം ചെയ്യുന്ന വ്യക്തികള്‍ വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ പ്രസിഡന്റ്‌ ആയ മെത്രാന്റെ ഉത്തരവാദിത്വങ്ങള്‍ എന്നിവ വ്യക്തമായി തന്നെ തരംതിരിക്കുന്നത്‌ സഭയുടെ നന്മയ്‌ക്ക്‌ ഉപകരിക്കും. ഒരു മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്‌ തന്റെ തന്നെ അധികാരത്താല്‍ തന്റെ സഭയ്‌ക്ക്‌ വേണ്ടി പ്രത്യേക നിയമം ഉണ്ടാക്കുവാന്‍ കഴിയില്ലെങ്കിലും തന്റെ ചില ദൗത്യങ്ങള്‍ കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ ഏല്‍പിക്കാനായി ചില ധാരണകള്‍ ഉണ്ടാക്കാവുന്നതാണ്‌. ഈ ധാരണകള്‍ക്ക്‌ മെത്രാന്‍ സിനഡിന്റെ കൂടി അംഗീകാരം ഉണ്ടെങ്കില്‍ ഏറ്റവും നല്ലത്‌. മൂന്ന്‌ വിഭാഗങ്ങളുടെ ദൗത്യങ്ങളെ ഇപ്രകാരം വേര്‍തിരിക്കാം.

(1) ഭരണ നിര്‍വ്വഹണ വിഭാഗം: കൂരിയായുടെ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനം ഏകോപിപ്പിക്കുന്ന ദൗത്യം ഈ വിഭാഗത്തെ ഏല്‍പിക്കാം. അതുകൊണ്ട്‌ തന്നെ ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ തലവനായ മെത്രാനെ കൂരിയായുടെ പൊതു മോഡറേറ്റര്‍ ആയി നിയമിക്കാം. മാര്‍പാപ്പ, പൗരസ്‌ത്യ തിരുസംഘം, പരിശുദ്ധ സിംഹാസനത്തിലെ മറ്റ്‌ ഓഫീസുകള്‍, മറ്റ്‌ പൗരസ്‌ത്യ സഭകള്‍, സ്വന്തം സഭയിലെ രൂപതകള്‍, എക്‌സാര്‍ക്കേറ്റുകള്‍, മെത്രാന്മാര്‍, മറ്റ്‌ സഭാധികാരികള്‍, സിവില്‍ ഭരണാധികാരികള്‍, സാമൂഹ്യ പ്രവര്‍ത്തകര്‍, എന്നിവരുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെടുന്ന എല്ലാ കാര്യങ്ങളും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തെ ഏല്‍പിക്കാം. മെത്രാന്‍ സിനഡും, സ്ഥിരസിനഡും കൈക്കൊള്ളുന്ന തീരുമാനങ്ങള്‍ പ്രവൃത്തിപഥത്തില്‍ കൊണ്ടുവരിക, ഓരോ കാലഘട്ടത്തില്‍ വ്യത്യസ്‌തങ്ങളായ ഓഫീസുകളില്‍ നിയമിതരാകേണ്ട വ്യക്തികളെക്കുറിച്ച്‌ വേണ്ടത്ര അന്വേഷണങ്ങള്‍ നടത്തി നല്ല തീരുമാനങ്ങളില്‍ എത്താന്‍ സഹായിക്കുക തുടങ്ങി ദൗത്യങ്ങളും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ ചുമതലയാകാം. ഭരണനിര്‍വ്വഹണവുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെട്ട്‌ സിനഡിന്റെയും അസംബ്ലിയുടെയും ഒരുക്കത്തിനായുള്ള കമ്മീഷന്റെ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളെ ഏകോപിപ്പിക്കുവാന്‍ ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ സാധിക്കും. ഭരണനിര്‍വ്വഹണത്തിന്‌ ആവശ്യമായ എഴുത്തുകള്‍, ഡിക്രികള്‍ എന്നിവ തയ്യാറാക്കി അയ്‌ക്കുന്നതും സഭാ കോടതികളുടെ കാര്യങ്ങളില്‍ ശ്രദ്ധിക്കുന്നതും സഭയുടെ ഔദ്യോഗിക ജിഹ്വയായ ബുള്ളറ്റിന്‍, പത്രമാധ്യമങ്ങള്‍ക്ക്‌ വേണ്ടിയുള്ള അറിയിപ്പുകള്‍, പബ്ലിക്‌ റിലേഷന്‍ ഓഫീസ്‌ എന്നിവയും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ ഉത്തരവാദിത്വമാകാം.


(2) വിശ്വാസ സംബന്ധമായ വിഷയങ്ങള്‍ക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള വിഭാഗം: വിശ്വാസ സംരക്ഷണം എന്നത്‌ ഒരു സഭാ വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ പരമോന്നതമായ ദൗത്യമാണ്‌. ഓരോ സഭയ്‌ക്കും സ്വന്തമായുള്ള ആരാധനാക്രമം, ദൈവശാസ്‌ത്രം, ആധ്യാത്മികത, പ്രത്യേക നിയമങ്ങള്‍, കൂദാശാനുഷ്‌ഠാനങ്ങള്‍, കൂദാശാനുകരണങ്ങള്‍, ചരിത്രം, സംസ്‌കാരം, കല, സാഹിത്യം, മതബോധനം, അജപാലനം, മതസിദ്ധാന്തം, ദൈവാലയ സംവിധാനം, പ്രകൃതിപാലനം തുടങ്ങി അനേക കാര്യങ്ങള്‍ അതിന്റെ തനിമയില്‍ സംരക്ഷിക്കുവാനായി നിരന്തരമായ പരിശ്രമവും സംഘാത പ്രവര്‍ത്തനവും ആവശ്യമാണ്‌.

സഭയുടെ സ്ഥാപകന്‍, സഭയിലെ വിശുദ്ധര്‍, അവരുടെ തിരുശേഷിപ്പുകള്‍, നൊവേനകള്‍, പ്രാര്‍ത്ഥനകള്‍, സഭയ്‌ക്കുവേണ്ടി പ്രവര്‍ത്തിച്ച്‌ സ്വര്‍ഗം പൂകിയവരെ വേണ്ട രീതിയില്‍ ആദരിക്കുന്നതിനുള്ള പരിപാടികള്‍ തുടങ്ങിയവ ഈ വിഭാഗത്തെ ഏല്‍പ്പിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്‌. സഭയുടെ പേരില്‍ ഇറങ്ങുന്ന പ്രാര്‍ത്ഥനകള്‍, ദൈവശാസ്‌ത്രഗ്രന്ഥങ്ങള്‍, വിവിധ സന്യാസസഭകളുടെയും, സംഘടനകളുടെയും നിയമസംഹിതകള്‍ എന്നിവ പഠിച്ച്‌ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരണത്തിനാവശ്യമായ അനുവാദം കൊടുക്കുന്നതും, സഭയിലെ വിശ്വാസപരവും ആരാധനാക്രമപരവുമായ അച്ചടക്കം പാലിക്കുന്ന കാര്യങ്ങളില്‍ ശ്രദ്ധിക്കുന്നതും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ ഉത്തരവാദിത്വമാകാം. സഭാനിയമകമ്മീഷന്‍, ആരാധനാക്രമകമ്മീഷന്‍, മതബോധന കമ്മീഷന്‍, സഭാഐക്യത്തിനായുള്ള കമ്മീഷന്‍, ദൈവശാസ്‌ത്ര കമ്മീഷന്‍ എന്നിവയുടെ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളെ ഏകോപിപ്പിക്കാനും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ കഴിയും.

(3) മാനവശേഷിക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ള വിഭാഗം: വ്യത്യസ്‌തങ്ങളായ ജീവിതരീതികള്‍ തിരഞ്ഞെടുത്ത്‌ ജീവിക്കുന്ന ക്രൈസ്‌തവ വിശ്വാസ സമൂഹത്തിന്റെ ആത്മീയ ഭൗതിക ആവശ്യങ്ങളെപ്പറ്റി കേള്‍ക്കാനും, അവര്‍ക്ക്‌ ആവശ്യമായതൊക്കെ ചെയ്യാനുള്ള വിഭാഗമാണ്‌ മാനവശേഷിക്കുവേണ്ടിയുള്ളത്‌. വൈദികര്‍ സന്യാസിനി - സന്യാസികള്‍, മറ്റ്‌ സഭാ സമൂഹങ്ങള്‍, സെമിനാരിക്കാര്‍ എന്നിവരുടെ കാര്യങ്ങളില്‍ പ്രത്യേക ശ്രദ്ധ ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ എടുക്കാം. വൃദ്ധര്‍, കുടുംബസ്ഥര്‍, സ്‌ത്രീകള്‍, യുവജനങ്ങള്‍, കുട്ടികള്‍, വിധവകള്‍, വികലാംഗര്‍, ബുദ്ധിമാന്ദ്യം ഉള്ളവര്‍, ദളിതര്‍ തുടങ്ങി വിവിധ വിഭാഗങ്ങളുടെ ആധ്യാത്മികവും ഭൗതികവും മാനസീകവുമായ വളര്‍ച്ചയും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ ലക്ഷ്യം വയ്‌ക്കാം.

വിവിധ സംഘടനകള്‍, കുടിയേറ്റക്കാര്‍, തീര്‍ത്ഥാടകര്‍, അന്യമതസ്ഥര്‍ എന്നിവരുടെ പ്രശ്‌നങ്ങളോടൊപ്പം കൃഷിക്കാര്‍, വ്യവസായികള്‍, രാഷ്‌ട്രീയ സംഘടനകളില്‍ പ്രവര്‍ത്തിക്കുന്നവര്‍, വൈദ്യരംഗത്തും ആതുര ശുശ്രൂഷയിലും ശ്രദ്ധിക്കുന്നവര്‍ തുടങ്ങി സമൂഹനിര്‍മ്മിതിക്കായി പ്രവര്‍ത്തിക്കുന്ന വ്യത്യസ്‌തങ്ങളായ വിഭാഗങ്ങളെ കോര്‍ത്തിണക്കാന്‍ ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ സാധിക്കുന്നു. ജനസമ്പര്‍ക്കപരിപാടികളും മാധ്യമങ്ങളിലൂടെയുള്ള പ്രവര്‍ത്തനവും ഊര്‍ജ്ജിതപെടുത്തുവാനും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ ശ്രദ്ധിക്കാം.

മിഷന്‍ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളിലും സുവിശേഷ പ്രഘോഷണത്തിലും ഏര്‍പ്പെടുന്ന വ്യക്തികളെ വേണ്ട രീതിയില്‍ പ്രോത്സാഹിപ്പിക്കാനും സഭാ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളില്‍ മികവ്‌ തെളിയിക്കുന്ന വ്യക്തികളെ കണ്ടുപിടിച്ച്‌ ആദരിക്കാനും ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ സാധിക്കും. വൈദികര്‍ക്ക്‌ വേണ്ടിയുള്ള കമ്മീഷന്‍, സന്യാസിനി സന്യാസികളുടെ കമ്മീഷന്‍, യുവജന കമ്മീഷന്‍, കുടുംബത്തിന്‌ വേണ്ടിയുള്ള കമ്മീഷന്‍, സെമിനാരി കമ്മീഷന്‍, സാമൂഹ്യ സമ്പര്‍ക്കകമ്മീഷന്‍, പ്രവാസികളുടെ അജപാലനം, സുവിശേഷവല്‍ക്കരണ കമ്മീഷന്‍ എന്നിവയുടെ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളെ ഏകോപിപ്പിക്കാന്‍ ഈ വിഭാഗത്തിന്‌ സാധിക്കും. മേജര്‍ ആര്‍ച്ച്‌ ബിഷപ്പിന്‌ സഭയുടെ വിശ്വാസം സംരക്ഷിക്കുന്ന കരുത്തുറ്റ തൂണുകളും കൂട്ടായ്‌മയില്‍ വളരുന്ന സ്‌നേഹ സമൂഹമായി സഭയെ മാറ്റാന്‍ ഒരൊറ്റ ആത്മാവോടും മനസോടും കൂടി പ്രവര്‍ത്തിക്കാന്‍ പ്രോത്സാഹിപ്പിക്കുന്ന ചാലകശക്തിയാകാനും കൂരിയ മെത്രാന്മാര്‍ക്ക്‌ കഴിഞ്ഞാല്‍ സഭാ നിയമത്തിന്റെ ഈ സാധ്യതകള്‍ സാഫല്യമടയും.

പ്രവാസികളുടെ കുട്ടികള്‍ വളരുകയാണ്?
ഗള്‍ഫ് കുടുംബങ്ങളിലെ ആകുലതകള്‍, പ്രയാസങ്ങള്‍ നമ്മള്‍ ഒരുപാട് ചര്‍ച്ച ചെയ്തു. അതൊക്കെ മുതിര്‍ന്നവരുടെ പ്രശ്്‌നങ്ങളും പരിഭവങ്ങളും ഗൃഹാതുരത്വ നൊമ്പരങ്ങളുമാണ്. എന്നാല്‍ ഇതില്‍ നിന്നൊക്കെ വ്യത്യസ്തമായി നാം നമ്മുടെ കുട്ടികളെക്കുറിച്ച് ചിന്തിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ടോ. ഈ പ്രവാസ ഭൂമിയില്‍ നമ്മോടൊത്തു അവരും വളരുകയാണ്. നാം ചേര്‍ക്കുന്ന സ്‌കൂളുകളില്‍... നാം ഇഷ്ടപ്പെടുന്ന സിലബസില്‍.. നാം നിര്‍ദേശിക്കുന്ന സമയത്ത്... അവര്‍ പഠിക്കുകയാണ്. ഇടുങ്ങിയ താമസ സൗകര്യത്തില്‍ ഒരു പഠനമുറി (അല്ല പഠനസ്ഥലം) അവര്‍ക്ക് അനുവദിക്കുകയാണ്. ആവശ്യപ്പെട്ട കമ്പ്യൂട്ടറും ഒരു കൊച്ചുകട്ടിലും... അനുബന്ധ സാധനങ്ങളുമായി നാം നമ്മുടെ കുട്ടികളെ മൂലയിലിരുത്തി. പഠനവും ട്യൂഷനും... വീഡിയോ ഗെയിമും... മാത്രമാണോ നമ്മുടെ കുട്ടികള്‍ക്കാവശ്യം.

അല്ല, എന്ന് എല്ലാ മാതാപിതാക്കള്‍ക്കും അറിയാം. പക്ഷേ എന്ത് ചെയ്യാം. വായു കടക്കാത്ത മുറിയില്‍ നിന്ന് എ.സി.യുടെ ശീതികരിച്ച സ്‌കൂള്‍ ബസ്സിലേക്ക് അവിടുന്ന് ഈര്‍പ്പമുള്ള ക്ലാസ് മുറിയിലേക്ക്... പ്ലേ ഗ്രൗണ്ടില്‍ കളിക്കാനനുവദിക്കാത്ത സ്‌കൂളുകളുണ്ട്. മിക്ക സ്വകാര്യ സ്്കൂളുകളിലും പ്ലേഗ്രൗണ്ടില്ല. പിന്നീട് ഉള്ളത് ഇന്‍ഡോര്‍ ഗെയിമാണ്. വായു കടക്കാത്ത കൊച്ചു മുറിയിലുള്ള ഗെയിമില്‍ കുട്ടികളുടെ വളര്‍ച്ചായ്ക്കാവശ്യമായതെന്താണ് കിട്ടുന്നത്. പ്രഭാതഭക്ഷണവും... ഉച്ചഭക്ഷണവും ടിന്‍ഫുഡ് കൊണ്ട് തയ്യാറാക്കി ടിന്‍ പാത്രത്തിലടച്ച് നാം നമ്മുടെ കുട്ടികളെ സ്‌കൂളിലയക്കുന്നു.പ്രതികരിക്കാനോ പ്രതിഷേധിക്കാനോ കഴിയാതെ ഒരു തലമുറ 'സുഖ'മായി ഇവിടെ ജീവിക്കുന്നു.

നൂറ് കുട്ടികള്‍ കൂടി നില്‍ക്കുന്നതില്‍നിന്ന് ഗള്‍ഫില്‍ ജീവിക്കുന്ന കുട്ടികളെ വളരെ പെട്ടെന്ന് തിരിച്ചറിയാനാവും. പൊണ്ണത്തടിയും പവര്‍കണ്ണടയും... നിസ്സഹായത നിറഞ്ഞ മുഖവുമായി അവരുണ്ടാവും. ആരോടും പരിചയപ്പെടാനാവാതെ... ആരോടും കലപില കൂട്ടാനറിയാതെ... ഒറ്റപ്പെട്ടുപോയ ഭാവിതലമുറ.. നാം ഒറ്റപ്പെടുത്തി വളര്‍ത്തുന്ന പുതുതലമുറ.

ഇതുവായിക്കുമ്പോള്‍ പലര്‍ക്കും തോന്നാം.. 'ഇവിടെ പഠിച്ച കുട്ടികള്‍ ഡോക്ടറും, എഞ്ചിനീയറും, കമ്പ്യൂട്ടര്‍ വിദഗ്ദ്ധരും ഒക്കെ ആയിട്ടില്ലെ എന്ന്...' 'നല്ല ഭാവി പടുത്തുയര്‍ത്തിയവരില്ലേ എന്ന്...' ഉണ്ടാവാം, ഇനിയും ഉണ്ടാവും.. ഉണ്ടാവണം... അതിലപ്പുറം ഒരു പ്രൊഫഷനില്‍ മാത്രം ശോഭിച്ചത് കൊണ്ടായില്ല. ഒരു ഡോക്ടറായ കുട്ടിക്ക് മറ്റൊരു മേഖലയിലേയും തന്റെ കഴിവ് പ്രകടിപ്പിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയുന്നില്ല. ഡോക്ടര്‍ ഡോക്ടര്‍ മാത്രമാവുമ്പോഴാണ്.... പഠിച്ചത് ഡോക്ടറാവാന്‍ മാത്രം.. പഴുപ്പിച്ചെടുത്തത് ഡോക്ടറായി മാത്രം... അതാണ് പ്രശ്്‌നം. മറ്റൊരു പ്രശ്്‌നത്തില്‍ ഇടപെടല്‍ നടത്താന്‍ ഇവിടുത്തെ കുട്ടികള്‍ക്കാവുന്നില്ല...സ്‌കൂള്‍ ബസ്സ് ഇറങ്ങുന്നതിന് തൊട്ടടുത്ത ജംഗ്ഷനില്‍ കുട്ടികളെ ഇറക്കിയാല്‍ ഫ്ലറ്റ് കണ്ടുപിടിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയാതെ... കുഴങ്ങിപോകുന്നവരെ നാം കാണുന്നു. മാതാവിന്റെ കൈപിടിച്ച്.... പിതാവിന്റെ കാറ് പിടിച്ച് സ്‌കൂളില്‍ പോകുന്ന എത്ര കുട്ടികള്‍ക്ക് സ്വന്തമായി സ്‌കൂളില്‍ പോകാന്‍ കഴിയും.

നമ്മളൊക്കെ സ്‌കൂളില്‍ പഠിക്കുമ്പോള്‍ ബസ്സ് സമരം സ്ഥിരം സംഭവമായിട്ടുപോലും നമ്മള്‍ പത്തും പന്ത്രണ്ടും കിലോമീറ്റര്‍ നടന്ന് വീട്ടിലെത്തുന്നു. സഹപാഠികളുടെ സൗഹൃദവും, പ്രതികരിക്കാനും പ്രതിഷേധിക്കാനും പഠിച്ചത് ഈ കൂട്ടുകെട്ടില്‍ നിന്നാണല്ലോ...

ഒരു മഷിതണ്ടിന്... ഒരു മഞ്ചാടിക്കുരുവിന്.... ഒരു പൊട്ടിയ സ്ലേറ്റ് പെന്‍സിലിന് നമ്മള്‍ കൂടിയ കലപിലകളെത്ര.. സഹപാഠിയുടെ അമ്മയ്്ക്ക്, അച്്ഛന് അസുഖമാണെന്നറിഞ്ഞാല്‍ നാം അവിടങ്ങളില്‍ സന്ദര്‍ശനം നടത്താറില്ലേ... മത്സരങ്ങള്‍ പരീക്ഷകളില്‍ മാത്രമല്ലല്ലോ.. കലാ സാഹിത്യ കായിക മത്സരങ്ങളില്‍ നാം പൊരുതിയില്ലേ... വളപ്പൊട്ടുകള്‍ പോലെ നാം സൂക്ഷിക്കുന്ന സൗഹൃദവും... കൂട്ടുകാരും... നമ്മള്‍ക്ക് തന്ന അറിവ്... പങ്ക് വെച്ച ലോകവിവരം... ഏത് സ്‌കൂളില്‍ നിന്ന് നമുക്ക് പഠിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയും.. ഉത്തരവാദിത്വബോധവും സ്വയം പരിരക്ഷയും... പ്രതിരോധവും സൂക്ഷിപ്പും നമ്മള്‍ക്ക് കിട്ടിയത് കൂട്ടുകുടുംബത്തില്‍ നിന്നുള്ള മുത്തശ്ശിമാരില്‍ നിന്നല്ലേ... ഈ അറിവ് കലാലയത്തില്‍ നിന്ന് നമുക്ക് പഠിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയുമോ...

എന്റെ ഒരു സുഹൃത്തിന്റെ വീട്ടില്‍ നിന്ന് ചില സാധനങ്ങള്‍ മോഷണം പോയി. ഭാര്യയും ഭര്‍ത്താവും ജോലി കഴിഞ്ഞ വന്നപ്പോഴാണ് മോഷണവിവരം അറിഞ്ഞത്. കമ്പ്യൂട്ടറില്‍ ഗെയിം കളിക്കുന്ന 13 വയസ്സായ മകനോട് അമ്മ ചോദിച്ചു. 'ഇവിടെ ഇരുന്ന സാധനങ്ങള്‍ എന്ത്യേ...' 'മോനെ ഇവിടെ ആരെങ്കിലും വന്നിരുന്നോ..' 'മമ്മീ... ഒരങ്കിള്‍ വന്നിരുന്നു..' കുട്ടി മറുപടി പറഞ്ഞു. കുട്ടിക്കറിയില്ല. കള്ളനായാലും... നല്ലവനായാലും... എല്ലാം അങ്കിളാണ്... ഈ 'അങ്കിള്‍'മാരാണ് ഇവിടെയുള്ള കുടുംബങ്ങളില്‍ പലപ്പോഴും തലവേദന സൃഷ്ടിക്കുന്നത്.

നമ്മുടെ മക്കള്‍ സ്വയംപര്യാപ്തതയില്‍ എത്തിയേ തീരൂ. അവരുടെ വളര്‍ച്ചയില്‍ നാം ശ്രദ്ധിച്ചേ പറ്റൂ. നന്നായി വളരണം... ഈ ലോകം അവരറിയണം. ഇവിടെ ജീവിക്കാന്‍ വിദ്യാഭ്യാസം മാത്രം പോര. സാഹചര്യങ്ങളുടെ സമ്മര്‍ദ്ദങ്ങളില്‍ വളരാന്‍ പഠിക്കണം. ഭക്ഷണത്തിന് കഞ്ഞിയും പയറുമാണെന്നറിയണം.. എരിവും പുളിയുമുണ്ടെന്നറിയണം... പാദരക്ഷകളില്ലാതെ നടക്കാന്‍ പഠിക്കണം. കൊതുകും പാറ്റയും ഉണ്ടെന്നറിയണം. പൂവിളിയും പൊന്നോണവും ഉണ്ടെന്നറിയണം. മഴയും... വേനലും.. കാണണം. മരണവും, സംസ്‌കാരവും പഠിക്കണം. കൂട്ടുകാരുടെ കൂടെ നടന്ന് തനത് സംസ്‌കാരം പഠിക്കണം. മുത്തശ്ശിമാരുടെ മൊഴിമുത്തുകളില്‍ നിന്ന് നാട്ടറിവ് പഠിക്കണം. ബാലപ്രസിദ്ധീകരണങ്ങള്‍ വായിക്കണം..

നാവില്‍ ഒരു രുചിയുമില്ലാത്ത ബര്‍ഗറും പിസ്സയും മാത്രമല്ല ഭക്ഷണം. ജീന്‍സും ടീഷര്‍ട്ടും ഷൂസുമല്ല വസ്ത്രങ്ങള്‍. കമ്പ്യൂട്ടറും ഇന്റര്‍നെറ്റുമല്ല കളികള്‍. ഇംഗ്ലീഷ് പറയലല്ല സംസ്്കാരം. ഹാരിപോട്ടറും മിക്കിമൗസും മാത്രമല്ല കാണേണ്ടത്. ഇങ്ങനെ മാത്രമാണ് എന്റെ മകന്‍... എന്റെ മകള്‍ വളരേണ്ടത് എന്ന് ശഠിക്കുന്ന എന്നെപോലുള്ള വീട്ടമ്മമാര്‍... അവര്‍ക്ക് അനുഭവിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയാത്ത സൗകര്യങ്ങളില്‍ മതിമറന്ന് പോയത് കൊണ്ടാണ് നമ്മുടെ ചെറുപ്പകാലത്ത് നമ്മള്‍ക്ക് ലഭിക്കാത്തത് - ഇംഗ്ലീഷില്‍ സംസാരിക്കാന്‍ കഴിയാത്തത്- മക്കളിലൂടെ കേള്‍ക്കുമ്പോള്‍.. തോന്നുന്ന അഭിമാനവും... അഹങ്കാരവും കൊണ്ടാണ്... നാടെന്ന് പറയുമ്പോള്‍ ഡേര്‍ട്ടിയെന്നും... വീടെന്ന് പറയുമ്പോള്‍ 'ലോട്ടോഫ് പീപ്പിള്‍' എന്ന് പറയുന്നതും നമ്മളാണ്. ഈ സംസ്‌കാരം കേട്ടാണ് അവര്‍ വളരുന്നത്. നാം അവരെ ശിക്ഷിക്കുകയാണ്.

തടിച്ച് തുടുത്ത് ദുര്‍മേദസ്സുള്ള കണ്ണടവെച്ച ഒരമൂല്‍ ബേബിയെ വളര്‍ത്തിയെടുക്കുകയാണ്. സ്‌കൂളില്‍ ഒന്നാമതെത്താന്‍, പരീക്ഷയില്‍ ഒന്നാമതെത്താന്‍ നാം അവരെ ഓടിക്കുകയാണ്. മണ്ണിന്റെ മണമറിയിക്കാതെ... പുല്ലിന്റെ, പൂവിന്റെ ഗന്ധമറിയിക്കാതെ... മണ്ണില്‍ വീണ് മുട്ട് പൊട്ടാതെ.. ചൊറിയും... ചിരങ്ങും വരാതെ... നാം അവരുടെ തൊലി മുട്ട പാടപോലെ കാത്ത് സൂക്ഷിക്കുകയാണ്. വളരുമ്പോള്‍ പ്രതിരോധിക്കാന്‍ പ്രതിരോധ ശക്തിയില്ലാതെ അവര്‍ വളരുകയാണ്, വളര്‍ത്തുകയാണ് 'ഷോക്കേയ്‌സ് പീസായി'. ഇതും പ്രവാസിയുടെ തലയിലെഴുത്ത്.

നമ്മുടെ കുട്ടികള്‍ നാട്ടില്‍ പോകണമെന്നും പൂവും പുല്‍ക്കൊടിയും ഉത്സവവും പൂരവും കാണണമെന്നും എല്ലാവരും പറയും. അതിനുള്ള സാഹചര്യമില്ലാത്തവര്‍ ടൂറിസ്റ്റ് കാര്‍ പിടിച്ച് കുട്ടനാട്ടില്‍ പോയി മക്കള്‍ക്ക് നെല്‍വയലും കായലും കാണിക്കണമെന്നല്ല ഇതിനര്‍ത്ഥം. ലീവ് കിട്ടുമ്പോഴൊക്കെ കുട്ടികളെ നാട്ടിലയക്കുക.. മാതാപിതാക്കള്‍ക്ക് പോകാന്‍ പറ്റിയില്ലെങ്കിലും... അവരെ അയക്കാന്‍ ശ്രമിക്കുക... ഒരു വര്‍ഷത്തില്‍ രണ്ട് മൂന്ന് തവണ പോകാന്‍ പറ്റിയെങ്കില്‍ അവരുടെ മാറ്റം നിങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് മനസ്സിലാക്കാന്‍ പറ്റും. നാടുമായുള്ള പൊക്കിള്‍കൊടി ബന്ധം മാനസികവും ശാരീരികവുമായ വളര്‍ച്ചയ്ക്കാവശ്യമാണ്.
Author is unknown.