The Surprising Face of Eremitical Solitude Through the Centuries

In my last post, I was asked about living in solitude and why it is that hermits don't always live strictly alone. My response presupposes a lot of what I said in that post regarding the meaning of words and especially on the nature of the constitutive elements of c 603, but it also involves the history of eremitical life, which is rather different than some believe it to be. Perhaps most surprising to those who believe solitude always means being absolutely alone is the fact that throughout the centuries hermits have often lived with one or two others. This was true of the Desert Abbas and Ammas because they accepted that novice hermits needed to be mentored and gradually introduced to eremitical life under the tutelage of an experienced hermit. There are other reasons two hermits might live together including safety, some degree of illness or debility, etc., and this has never been seen as a betrayal of the vocation's requirement of solitude, not least because it need not conflict with the cultivation of an interior solitude.

Saint Francis' Rule for Hermits is a very brief but really significant document for the way we look at eremitical life; it sets up a living situation in which two or three individuals live in solitude while being looked after by at least one other Friar who serves as "Mother" to the hermits. After a sufficient period of time in solitude roles are reversed and the one serving as Mother begins his period in solitude while the hermits take turns serving as Mother. All of the brothers spend their days in community in a broader sense, but the community allows for significant eremitical solitude for individuals. In other words, it makes safe and healthy Franciscan eremitical life possible. While life in this setup was not luxurious by any means, I am struck by the complete lack of accent on any kind of harsh, arbitrary, or externally imposed asceticism in the name of spiritual "purification". Solitude in this scheme is not some kind of brutal attempt to gut out absolute aloneness for aloneness' own sake or to learn the hard lessons that isolation might be able to teach. Rather, it is about giving generous and humble Friars the chance to spend significant time alone with God in genuine solitude within a loving community of brethren.

I recently cited the work of Edward L Cutts on "The Hermits and Recluses of the Middle Ages" and one of the insights his work gives is into the hermitages and living situations of some hermits who are not recluses. He notes that Richard Rolle lived for some time at the residence of Sir John Dalton who gave him a solitary chamber, clothed him in a hermit's habit and paid for his necessities. It was from this place that Rolle wrote books, counseled visitors, and was absorbed in prayer. Interestingly, Rolle had experiences of temptation and "demonic assault" and became most concerned with the spiritual consolation of recluses. Later he lived near a Cistercian monastery (nunnery) in Hampole and it was here that he died after a long history of writing devotional and mystical works.

While this may seem an exceptional account, Cutts also notes, [[It was not very unusual for hermitages to be built for more than one occupant; but probably in all cases, each hermit had his own cell, adjoining their common chapel. This was the original arrangement of hermits of the Thebais in their laura. The great difference between a hermitage of more than one hermit, and a small cell of one of the other religious orders, was that in such a cell one monk or friar would have been the prior, and the others subject to him; but each hermit was independent of any authority on the part of the other; he was subject only to the obligation of his Rule, and the visitation of his bishop.]]

I want to point out the similarity in what is being described here and what sometimes happens with c 603 hermits today. In the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, for instance, the current Bishop has professed and consecrated three older women who live together in the same house. I was asked several years ago how this could be allowed under c 603 and suggested a living situation very like the one Cutts has just described from the Middle Ages. Similarly, when c 603 hermits join together in a laura, the requirement that this not rise to the level of a religious institute, but that the c 603 hermits each have their own Rule, own bank account, etc., so each is self-supporting, sounds very like what was true in the Middle Ages. The same is true of Sister Beverly's Marymount hermitage in the Diocese of Boise, though Sister Rebecca no longer lives there. In these examples, eremitical solitude, which is not defined in terms simply of being alone but which implies significant time alone with God, yet also within a parish, diocesan, or neighboring community (and sometimes a small community of other solitary hermits) may, for some, be a surprising way of looking at solitude.

The point here is that eremitical solitude is a special form of solitude with a special purpose, namely communion with God for the sake of others. Yes, some of us live a significant degree of aloneness in our time with God and some find they are called to actual reclusion. This is critically important to the vocation and to the witness the vocation provides. (Here I am thinking of Thomas Merton's comment about nature, peace, and the grace of God and what the hermit's life says about these. cf last paragraph of Ministry of the Hermit.) Community, however, is always a dimension of (Christian) eremitical solitude precisely because the life is both rooted in and serves a faith community. Through the centuries this tendency to distinguish eremitical solitude from a dangerous and destructive isolation with practices like that of  Saint Francis, the Desert Abbas and Ammas, Anchorites and anchoresses living linked to churches and village or town communities, or the example of Richard of Hampole and others from the Middle Ages, is a recurring pattern of authentic eremitical life.