Wouldn't it Be Better to Focus on Christ?

[[ Sister Laurel, did Bishop de Roo write the canon for your vocation? What was Remi de Roo's role in the creation of the canon? Was he pushed into it by the monks who came to him to ask him to lobby for them? Also, why are you so obsessed with this canon? Wouldn't it be better to focus on Christ? I guess I have the same question about trusting in a law made by man and not by God and being consecrated by a man and not by God.]]

Thanks for the questions. I don't believe Bishop Remi de Roo had anything to do with writing or creating Canon 603, per se. At least I hadn't considered that before this last conversation and series of posts. I suppose it is more than possible that Bishop de Roo, and perhaps the hermits he supervised, were consulted on the canon by the panel of Church Fathers charged with actually composing the canon because of his experience with these Hermits of St John the Baptist, but if that is the case, I was unaware of it. The same is true of the role of the Hermits of St John the Baptist. Bishop de Roo esteemed them and the life they led as well as the significant sacrifices they made to embrace secularization in a Church with no universal law recognizing eremitical life. Bp de Roo made a written intervention at the Second Vatican Council affirming the need to recognize the eremitical vocation as a state of perfection. As far as I know, that was the extent of his involvement in the creation of c 603.

Beyond this, the canon itself is a beautiful and integrally complete guide to solitary eremitical life. It is inspired by God and written by human beings, just as much in the Church is written, composed, sculpted, or otherwise created by human beings who were inspired by God, including the Scriptures themselves. We do not treat these as either/or kinds of things or texts, but rather as both/and -- both truly of God and of human hands. They are sacramental, just as bread and wine are "made from human hands," but come to us as gifts of God transformed into even greater gifts of God in the Eucharist. Thus, the Church believes canon 603, and the vocation it governs, come from God and from the many eremitic lives lived before and after its composition. It certainly reflects their lived experience and inspired wisdom. 

Each Rule of Life, written by each professed and consecrated hermit, acts similarly; each one incarnates the living wisdom of the Canon uniquely as this is reflected in a unique eremitical life. Each one is both inspired by God and constructed by human hands, hearts, and minds. The canon must be contextualized as an ecclesial text, one that cannot be understood or lived out effectively apart from the experience of the whole Church and the Living God who inspires it. We read Scripture and truly appreciate the sacraments the same way. Either/or ways of seeing things, especially when posed as "either of God or of human hands," don't generally work well in such a context.

Can the canon be misused or vocations lived under it be badly discerned and formed? Yes, of course. It can be and has been! It is a rich, yet unprepossessing text that surprises everyone approaching it with its hidden depths and presuppositions regarding what is required to live it well. Those who read it superficially, merely as law, for instance, or from one narrow and rigid ideological stance, for instance, are missing its very heart and charism. This is one reason I have chosen to write or post about the nature of this canon; also, I am concerned enough with the value of the life it governs to try to explain it. In Christ, it has incredible breadth, heights, and depths, and I believe I have been called by God to write about the significance of this life for others, not only for other hermits, but for the marginalized, the chronically ill, the entire Church, and the world beyond her. I believe this enterprise is one way (part of a very much larger way, of course) that I have been called to glorify God.

I did not start out trying to do this, but over the past almost 20 years, I have done so consistently, with deepening experience, reflection, insight, and wisdom. One can mistakenly see my focus as a personal obsession, or one can more rightly see it as a dedicated service to the God who received my profession and consecrated me through the hands of his Bishop, as well as to his Christ, his Church, and his larger world as well. It seems to me that this has sometimes called for significant attention because of the vociferously incorrigible lack of understanding some have apparently shown this canon and the life it codifies. 

Even so, and much more importantly, this canon is a blessing, and like all of God's blessings, it is also an obligation that has mainly been a joy to embrace. Those who believe it is an obsession driven by a need for prestige seem to believe they can read my mind and heart and attribute motives to me when they are absolutely incapable of any such thing. And those who truly know me, and other diocesan hermits, know c 603 is a gift from God that empowers ever greater humility as the nature, especially of its ecclesiality, is more deeply penetrated and embraced. While you may not have appreciated this, it is all about focusing on Christ!

Bishop Remi de Roo and Indigenous Peoples in Canada

Dear Sr Laurel, Thank you for writing about the way the presence of privilege can lead one to greater humility. I have been listening to someone who clearly has problems with diocesan hermits. I think the truth is that she has problems with you and can't get past those, but I digress. I wanted to ask you about Bp Remi de Roo and the indigenous people of Canada. Do you think Bishop de Roo failed members of the Indigenous People of Canada via the schools the Church ran? I remember hearing a story about de Roo being made a chief of some indigenous tribe in Canada. Have you heard about that?

Thanks for your question. I don't have any details on whether Bp Remi failed the indigenous people of Canada or not, though I am aware of accusations, but yes, I have heard the story you mentioned and can fill in a few details on that. I believe it makes the likelihood of Bishop de Roo failing indigenous people difficult to assert because their esteem for him was something that meant a great deal to him. Further, as a Bishop he decried the "colonial amnesia" Canadians sometimes showed and stressed the tragedy that was the Church's participation in such "cultural domination"; Bp Remi notes in his own writing that all of this abominable treatment by missionaries was rooted in an inadequate reading and understanding of the Gospel, as well as a failure to recognize that God had preceded missionaries on their ambitious journeys and that they had misread and denigrated the symbols God had inspired and "fashioned with indigenous hands." But, regarding the esteem the Indigenous People showed de Roo, here is what he writes about the honor they showed him:

One of the most heartwarming encounters I had [with the First Nations Peoples of Vancouver Island] was a special event sponsored by several tribes that live in this territory. It took place on February 14, 1963, and was held in the huge Longhouse in the TSawout East Saanich Indian reserve near Sydney. It began with a ceremonial canoe ride, recalling the arrival of the first bishop, Msgr Demers. After the welcome by one of the leaders, I was invited to plant a large wooden cross fashioned from a cedar tree. We then processed to the longhouse, where a large crackling fire had been lit at both ends of the building. Chiefs from several tribes made speeches marking their accord with the purpose of the ceremony. I, in turn, presented a woolen blanket to each orator. Then two elderly women approached and placed a decorated blanket on my shoulders. "Now you are one of us," was the theme of the comments made by several of the Chiefs. I was given my new name, "Siem Le Pleet S'HWUWQUN," which translates as, "Great High Priest White Swan" indicating that I was now formally adopted into the [Indigenous] race.(Chronicles of a Vatican II Bishop, pp 82-83

Bishop de Roo goes on to note on another occasion,  

The Native Peoples gave me more than a new name. I am one of the few white people who have gone through the initiation into the native race. I'm a blood brother, not just an honorary chief. Of that I am very proud because it gives me a link with Canada which is more than an immigrant status. It's a link with these people who are the original Canadians. I'm very conscious of the fact that we are in their home here, enjoying their hospitality. We owe so much to the Native Peoples who are the original Canadians. . . The fact that Confederation was born in a context of and injustice towards the Native Peoples, we must right that wrong; otherwise, our Canadian democracy has nothing to say to the rest of the world. ("Keynote Speech," Mosaic's annual general meeting, Vancouver, British Columbia, September 23, 1986.)

Bishop Remi's funeral

So, while I don't know whether Bishop de Roo failed Indigenous Peoples from the infamous schools run by the Church, I recognize a sensitivity and mutual esteem between him and them that militates against the truth of such accusations. Given that Remi de Roo was ordained and consecrated as Bishop in 1962 and the Indigenous Peoples' adoption ceremony took place not quite a year later in 1963, it sounds like Bishop de Roo had a good relationship with the Indigenous Peoples of Vancouver Island before he was made a Bishop. And given the way he spoke about these Peoples in 1986, 23 years later, and just 13 years before he retired from his See, the idea that he failed them in some egregious way becomes truly doubtful. 

I also believe he was the simple (and truly wealthy) man I met in Northern California, and as he portrayed himself or was portrayed in several books. He was wealthy in Christ, in the richness of his commitment to serve God and the Church, and in the love so many had for him and he for them. The picture of his coffin at his funeral also says to me that he was buried as he lived and conveyed himself. I think he was an example of religious privilege leading to, as well as inspiring, greater and greater true humility. Until this recent discussion, I mainly esteemed Bp de Roo for helping move the Church to codify the eremitical life in universal law. Now, however, I recognize freshly just what an exemplary Church leader Bishop de Roo was, and in some ways, still is. I pray I can do half so well in my own public (canonical) life of eremitical hiddenness and praise!!! What perfect timing to return to all this freshly during Holy Week!! God is indeed so very good!!! Thank you for your questions, and my thanks to all those who prompted me to read and write about this once again!!