Sunday, October 29, 2006

Problems of BECs

BEC leaders not solely responsible for running BECs

Herald 29 October 2006

I refer to the open letter by Dr Chris to the Archbishop and Bishops on the blog: www.docchris.blogspot.com (Promoting and Developing BECs as Basic Functional Units in the Parish — September archive)

While I sympathise with Dr Chris on his passion to have well-run BECs, we have to consider why the problem exists in the first place. Let me list a few reasons why some of the BECs are ineffective.

First of all, BEC leaders can only do so much. Rhetoric gets one nowhere. We need people who can work and not just talk.

Secondly, when only four or five members turn up for a meeting (out of 20 families maybe) how much can be done? What can a leader do when members are not interested? Not everyone wants to shoulder responsibility. BEC leaders have to operate within great constraints. If this is misconstrued as doing things at the whims and fancies of the BEC leader, then it is an indication of the sad state of affairs of the Church today.

Thirdly, it may sound presumptuous, but I wonder how much Dr Chris has contributed to the growth of his own BEC. Being an educated man, I am sure he has many brilliant ideas that may prove to be beneficial to his own BEC. Ultimately, we can spread his ideas to other BECs to help them prosper. The idea is to confront the problem, not the personality.

Which brings me to human weakness. All of us have weaknesses. Helping out is better than pointing fingers. If Dr Chris can help troubleshoot the problems in BECs, perhaps we can achieve a higher level of greatness in our Christian faith.

Perhaps after all this, Dr Chris may consider taking over the leadership of his BEC and put it on a better footing. Action does speak louder than words.

St Paul in his letter to the Galatians 5:15 says, “if you go on snapping at each other and tearing each other to pieces, you had better watch or you will destroy the whole community.”

The decision to continue or to stop is then yours and mine.

Dr Cross,
via email

No comments: