Many forms of Hermit Life Means all are similarly Valuable

[[Hi Sister Laurel, As you write about many forms of hermit life are you also saying that c 603 hermits are not better than non-canonical hermits? Are canonical hermits not better than non-canonical hermits? Is an ecclesial vocation not better than a non-ecclesial vocation? Why would God want some people to be canonical and others non-canonical? It seems to me that the Church regards ecclesial vocations more than non-canonical one, isn't that so? I also wondered if you regret that the process of discernment and formation as a hermit takes such a long time (I mean it took a long time for you and I have heard for others as well) -- was that a problem for you? My last question is are c 603 hermits considered religious? I heard someone say you are not.]]

Many thanks for these questions! Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. I am saying that every vocation to eremitical life is valuable and valued (esteemed, regarded as precious) by God. They are a gift of God to the Church and world. The Scriptures tell us this about every person and their call by God. We are part of a single body and every member is empowered and embued with the Holy Spirit and is valuable to the whole Peoples' being and doing what the whole is supposed to be and do. Is any one part or role better than another? No, but they are different at the same time. Every hermit needs to discern not just the call to eremitical solitude, but the way in which God is calling them to live it out. It could be in an institute of consecrated life of hermits, in a small laura of c 603 hermits, or as a solitary consecrated hermit under c 603; it could also be as non-consecrated in the lay state. Again, all are valued, all are important, but they do differ in the way they witness --- both in what way they witness and to whom!

Why does God call People to different forms of Eremitical Life?

I could never say why God chooses one calling for one thing and another for someone else, but I can see why God called me to this vocation and what, in particular, I bring to this vocation, to the Church to whom this vocation belongs first of all, and therefore to the People of God and others. From the time I discovered c 603 and the fact that eremitical life was still a vital and vibrant life, I lived some years as a religious and hermit, some years as a lay hermit, and then years as a consecrated solitary hermit under c 603. When I first petitioned for consecration under the canon I met with the Vicar for Religious and over the next 5 years she and I continued to meet (she came to my place). There was no indication I would not be approved for profession and consecration, but at this point the current bishop decided he was not going to profess anyone under the canon for the forseeable future. I continued living as a hermit and exploring both c 603 specifically and the eremitical life more generally. 

At some point, before this bishop retired, I came to realize I had something specific and even somewhat unique to offer the Church in my eremitical life both because of disability and because of my theological background, my developing spiritual direction ministry, as well as my understanding and appreciation of the canon. (Those things have grown into this blog as well as into a process to assist dioceses and inquirers with discernment and formation of c 603 candidates based on the requirements of the canon itself and will include a written guide to this process generally available to the Church.) Additionally, though I could not have foreseen this, it permitted a deep inner journey toward human wholeness and holiness, and in some ways, I am more grateful for that than for anything else. As a result, I reactivated my petition under Bp John Cummins. Perpetual profession and consecration occurred several years later under the new bishop (Allen H Vigneron) once he had met me and completed what had been a long discernment process. (Remember until final profession and consecration, one is still discerning the vocation, as is the Church herself. While if due care is taken this is unlikely, one can be temporarily professed and subsequently not admitted to perpetual profession and consecration several years later.) 

Do I have Regrets re the Length of Time. . .?

I sometimes regret that the entire process took 23 years, yes, but generally speaking, I learned a lot about both non-canonical and canonical eremitical life. I also had time to discover what I was bringing to the vocation, though I suppose that in time I would have discovered that anyway had I been canonically professed under c 603 sooner. So, my regrets are passing and most of the time I am simply grateful to be who and where I am in this vocation. I lived as a hermit during these 23 years anyway, and grew in the life, so I cannot necessarily say that I lost anything during the time of waiting for admission to profession and consecration. However, I recognize I also gained a lot during these years, so again, any regrets I have are occasional and passing. Certainly my vocation is stronger because of all of this. 

It is true that now that the canon is known and understood better, the process of discernment and formation should NOT take this long for anyone. However, I believe an adequate period of discernment and formation does need to take from five** to 12 years, particularly if one has no history of religious life! What I mean here is that it ordinarily takes at least five years to be admitted to temporary profession even if one has already lived as a religious (some bishops won't consider taking such an important step for at least this long) and up to another seven years to be admitted to perpetual profession and consecration. For those with a history of religious life and who left because they felt called to greater solitude, admittance to temporary profession still takes from 3-4 years. (There is a great deal to set up, significant transitions to make (including grief over loss of one's community), and differences in the way the vows are lived.) Admittance to perpetual profession and consecration usually occurs within another three years. Longer periods of discernment and formation naturally take place for those with no history of religious life, and those who left community for reasons other than feeling called to greater solitude. 

A Few Less-Common Reasons Discernment Can be Lengthy:

One major reason for this is that it takes significant time for a candidate to write a liveable Rule of life that demonstrates genuine understanding and experience of living the terms of the canon. Another is that there are many forms of and reasons for solitude. Most are not eremitical solitude, for instance, cocooning is not the same as living as a Hermit. Reclusion does not mean isolation from the Community of faith.  Discerning the healthiness of an eremitical vocation in the presence of options such as these can be more difficult and take longer. Other situations with specific candidates also complicate initial discernment, and can cause delays because the diocese must determine how to handle matters charitably when the candidate is not suitable for c 603.

Are c 603 Hermits Considered Religious?

[[I have answered this question on the blog before so you might look for it in other places here, but the answer to your question is yes, c 603 hermits are considered religious. In the Handbook on Canons 573-746  and in the section on “Norms Common to Institutes of Consecrated Life” looking at canon 603 specifically, canonist Ellen O’Hara, CSJ writes, [[The term “religious” now applies to individuals with no obligation to common or community life and no relationship to an institute.]]

** Archbishop Cordileone said in a conversation with me while he was Bishop of the Diocese of Oakland, that he would not even entertain a petition for profession until the person had lived as a hermit for at least 5 years. I agreed with him then and still do. 12 years is the outer limit provided by canon law for religious formation in community (novitiate and juniorate). It works as well for solitary hermits, though what tends to be more important is to gauge the degree of growth that has occurred and is still occurring. Still, though not carved in stone, these are the typical limits recognized by dioceses.