Questions on the Constituent Elements of c 603 and Writing a Rule of Life

[[Hi Sister Laurel. I read an older post you wrote about the beauty and depth of Canon 603. I was surprised at the way you read the canon and treat what you call "the constituent elements" of the Canon and the vocation itself. When a hermit writes a personal Rule for life under c 603, do they really have to write about all of these "constituent elements"? What does it mean if they don't write about everything? Isn't it possible to be living something without including it in your Rule? How long does it take before one can write about all of the constituent elements of C 603? . . . my own diocese is not really helpful in this process of writing a Rule, and I am really struggling to write one. . . . I am afraid my diocese will think I am goofing off, or that I am not really serious about becoming a diocesan process. . . .  Do you think that dioceses understand the time it takes to really live all of these elements and write about them?]]

Thanks for your questions! They are great and important. Moreover, even though the post you are talking about was written a while ago, it is one I am just now looking at again as part of another writing project. So let me take a shot at your questions. First of all, as kind of a backstory, or underlying foundation, I should note that I understand c 603 as a template of a lived vocation, not just a canon under which a person is professed and consecrated. Instead, I think of the canon as a model of one's embodiment of this vocation, a summary of the values one incarnates as one journeys to union with God in the silence of solitude. I think I said as much in the earlier post you referenced. Thus, while c 603 does not say everything about an individual's eremitic life, it does outline the elements critical to organically shaping what it means, in the Church, to live a consecrated solitary hermit life. (As a reminder for readers, these "constitutive" elements are 1) assiduous prayer and penance, 2) the silence of solitude, 3) stricter separation from "the world", 4) the Evangelical counsels, 5) A self-written and liveable Rule, 6) all lived under the supervision of the diocesan bishop.)

What is most striking to me is that, while c 603 does not literally mention the hermit's journey to union with God, each element presupposes, participates in, and provides necessary dimensions of this specific journey. This means the elements must be there in the hermit's Rule. She must explain what she understands by these elements, something of their spiritual and personal importance, and how she lives them because they are part of the template of a c 603 vocation and shape her as a hermit. If they are not present, or the hermit or hermit candidate does not demonstrate how she lives them and why, it may well be a sign of her incomplete embodiment of this vocation. That said, a couple of caveats are needed here. I don't mean one must live each element perfectly, only that they are substantive dimensions of the particular vocation and its journey to union with God, and need to be present. If they are not, the diocesan team has a good reason to enquire about this, how the candidate is planning to address the lack, and whether the diocese can help in some way. Without this attention, the hermit's journey to union with God and her witness to the Church and world will be frustrated and fail.

 This also means that one lives all of the constitutive elements of c 603 only with practice, prayer, study, or effort. One grows in one's understanding and living out of these elements. One needs to see them lived by others, discuss their importance in the consecrated eremitical life, and experiment with how one can best live them out at this particular stage of one's vocation. One needs to see them in conjunction with the other constituent elements and the whole tapestry of one's eremitical life. And one needs to understand the many ways in the life of the Church, each element has been legitimately lived in the Church, and why. So, for instance, despite some similarities, religious (or evangelical) poverty looks different for Franciscans than it does for Benedictines, and it certainly looks different for solitary hermits who are self-supporting. Moreover, religious poverty has a variety of levels or dimensions, some more superficial than others. Exploring these invites growth. So, what one says about this element of the canon and vocation, for instance, will say something about one's experience of religious poverty, and the pathways (or potential pathways) towards growth in eremitism that religious poverty provides. 

Similarly, stricter separation from the world looks different for the recluse and anchorite than for other hermits, etc. When I wrote my first Rule, I didn't even include stricter separation from the world. I wasn't sure I understood the term and didn't know if I believed in it anyway. I thought it might be consummately selfish and conflict with both the Christian eremite's mission and witness. It took study, reflection, prayer, and consultation before I could be sure of what I was proposing to commit myself to and why! Each of the constituent elements of the canon will reflect dimensions of our own growing maturity in the eremitical life. There are good reasons to refrain from writing about them in one's Rule, but not from a Rule which is written in preparation for profession and/or consecration. One may still be coming to greater clarity on the nature, the importance, or, for instance, the shape one of these elements takes in one's own eremitic life. One may not have adequate time to truly reflect on the element at all. Alternatively, one may have lived the element in one form of life and may be just coming to understand (or even just perceive!) the differences between this and c 603 life. Whatever the reason, what we write or fail to write can be a guide to our need for growth in the vocation.

I would encourage you not to worry about your own difficulty in writing a liveable Rule of Life. Treat the process of writing as part of a process of growth and trust that God is directing your work. Keep notes on what is changing for you, and in what way (i.e., note experiences, questions that have been raised, reading, conversations, etc.), during different periods. When you meet with diocesan staff or communicate with them, provide an overview of what has been happening for you over the months. Because very few dioceses have much, if any, experience with adequately implementing c 603, you will be educating your diocese on the nature and importance of the very process of writing a Rule of Life, even as you strengthen your working relationship with them. I do believe this kind of education is particularly important concerning the organically determined time frames involved, the role of the diocese in accompanying the candidate, the difference between writing a Rule and writing a liveable Rule, and especially, the use of the process of writing as a key to mutual discernment and personal formation.

What is the Diocese's Role in the Formation of a Diocesan Hermit?

 [[Sister, are you saying that dioceses are not responsible for forming c 603 hermits? I find that really surprising. What then is the role of the diocese? You speak of them discerning with a candidate, but aren't they also involved in the hermit's formation? Thank you.]]

Thanks for your questions! Yes, I am absolutely saying a diocese is not responsible for the formation of a solitary hermit under c 603. What a diocese is responsible for is discerning with the candidate whether or not they have a specifically ecclesial vocation and are called to live solitary eremitical life in the name of the Church. One may live as a hermit within the Catholic Church in different states of life including as a Catholic lay person, as a religious (if their congregation's particular or proper law says they may), or as a cleric (again, with one's bishop's permission). Beyond this, one can join an eremitical institute like the Carthusians or Camaldolese. However, if one wants to live as a solitary hermit in the consecrated state, c 603 is the route to this.

This, however, leaves the question of the diocese's responsibility open. Canon 603 does not speak to the diocese's responsibility for formation. The canon presumes significant formation, yes, but it does not make a diocese responsibile for this. Instead, canon 603's history and nature leave that responsibility in the hands of the candidate and the Holy Spirit. An eremitical vocation only emerges over significant time and with notable life experience. A diocese cannot be responsible for this; what they can do, and are responsible for doing is discerning with the candidate whether or not the eremitical call a person has discerned is also a specifically ecclesial one. For instance, is the person called to live this life in the name of the Church? Does her eremitism represent a sufficiently mature expression of eremitical life in the Church that it can be considered normative of the journey hermits are called to make? Does it witness to the Gospel, and to union with God in Christ in a way that underscores the truth of the Church's own proclamation or kerygma? Does it witness to the hidden heart of every Christian vocation, and the heart of the Church as well, and has the candidate consciously embraced (or clearly begun to embrace) all of this in the Rule she writes?

It will take a diocese time to discern these things as well as the more mundane characteristics and necessary underpinnings of an authentic eremitical life. It will take the candidate time to discover and explore these things sufficiently to write a liveable Rule. The diocese and candidate will walk together as she writes such a Rule, and discern the quality of the vocation she is seeing. In this synodal journey, formation will occur, most especially in the area of ecclesiality. It is important that a candidate works with someone with a strong sense of the ecclesial nature of such vocations, but it is the journeying together that helps inculcate ecclesial sensibilities, just as it also educates diocesan personnel on the nature of solitary eremitical life. Still, more general formation of the person as a hermit should occur long before they seek to be professed and consecrated under c 603; the diocese is not responsible for this!

When a diocese professes a c 603 hermit, they extend canonical rights and obligations to that person. They (in the person of the bishop and those whom he assigns) also assume a role in the supervision of the hermit beyond profession and eventual consecration. Further, because they have established a hermit in law in a specifically ecclesial vocation, it could be argued that a diocese must find ways to assist with ongoing formation and the deepening of the hermit's ecclesial sensibilities. Most dioceses fall far short of this latter role, though some allow for it by accepting a hermit's need for a delegate with a strong sense of an eremitical vocation's ecclesiality. (This is one reason delegates often tend to be religious men and women.) The point is, of course, that in an ecclesial vocation, the person's relationship with the Church must be a strong and intimate one. It seems to me this is one place the bishop's supervision can be most helpful, yet, at the same time, the diocesan office of Vicar for Religious (or Vocations, etc.) can assist, and will themselves benefit as they come to know the ways diocesan hermits grow, struggle, meet challenges, and mature in their journey to union with God.

In all of this, the bottom line remains: the initial and ongoing formation of a solitary hermit occurs mainly in solitude between the hermit and the Holy Spirit. A good spiritual director is essential in this process, as is a delegate for the diocese whom the candidate may choose. (A hermit does not outgrow the need for a competent spiritual director!!) An active liturgical and Sacramental life is also absolutely essential (and usually occurs in a parish setting). The diocese, however, will be mainly responsible for discerning the quality of a vocation once the candidate is ready to explore the ecclesial nature of their vocation, and will decide whether or not (and when) a candidate is ready to assume the canonical rights and obligations of such a vocation. The diocese plays an important part in this dimension of the hermit's initial and ongoing formation, while not being formators in the typical sense.

One final word of caution: what a diocese and diocesan bishop do is not merely a matter of "canonically approving" a person, as though a bishop could do this with the stroke of a pen, particularly if the person has lived a solitary life for some time already. This is a serious misunderstanding. Instead, they are responsible for admitting a person to profession (which is always public) and consecration so they may live their public-though-hidden lives in the consecrated state of life with all of the canonical rights and obligations that apply, and they do so for the sake of God's will to be Emmanuel, the sake of the Church who proclaims this God to the world, and the sake of the hermit's own humanity.