A Brief Look at Cornelius Wencel's Writing on Work

 Dear Sister Laurel, you have written about Fr Cornelius Wencel before, and you know and like his writing. I can't give you the entire quote or the context but are you aware of a text that includes, [[there is nothing more foreign to the hermit than the clownery of a glittery career, success and all these vulgar illusions that tempt the modern world]]? I was wondering what the context of that statement is since [a vlogger I watch] posted about him denigrating other vocations, the pursuit of success in any vocation, and essentially being elitist about eremitical life. Do you know the passage or it's larger context?

Interesting question. Yes, I recognize the passage and know the context. It is from the section on "Work", pp119-125. What you describe represents a significant misreading of this passage because Wencel is speaking about the misguided drive to power, prestige, fame, and wealth so typical of worldliness --- a position I believe most hermits truly agree with. To read it properly, it is especially important to quote the rest of the paragraph (cf paragraph below in italics) and its immediate textual context as well as outlining a bit more of the larger context in which this passage occurs. Here that is.

Not in order to achieve his own perfection does the hermit set out on his solitary voyage. On the contrary,  he considers his way and mission to be part of a great and common effort to change and renew the cultural and spiritual life of humanity. . . .The hermit strongly opposes misdirected work, which aspires only to achieve success, domination, prestige, and fame, and which can easily destroy other people's good.

There is nothing more foreign to the hermit than the clownery of a glittering career, success, and all those vulgar illusions that tempt the modern world. For the hermit, his work is one of elementary and daily activities, necessary for his own sanctification as well as for the sanctification of the world. It is not a mere object, money-maker, and article of trade, but it is rather a way of realizing his life's calling and approaching his life's fulfillment. Thus the hermit becomes a sign of protest against all the vulgar tendencies of modern civilization, which view work only in terms of productivity and money. Such a way of thinking, and consequently of acting, testifies to how much worldly affairs have degenerated and have gone far astray from what would have been a humanitarian and harmonious course of events.

If human work is to use human abilities and talents in a wise and proper way, and if it is going to build up the good of the person and society, it should be performed in an atmosphere of love. . .Only when we see work in such a manner can we get satisfaction, joy, and a sense of personal fulfillment from our activity. Work, when performed wisely and seen as an expression of human, love-motivated solidarity and service, turns out to be out to be a very concrete way of liberation. . . Cornelous Wencel, Er Cam, The Eremitic Life, pp 119-121 

In this section on work in eremitic life, Wencel is discussing not only the work hermits do but also why they do it. He wants to indicate the vast distinction between why a hermit works as s/he does as opposed to the reasons many folks in the world work and what motivates them. It is not that Wencel denies the importance of success, but he does recognize there are vulgar notions of success that are unworthy of human beings. We can see it today when billionaires act politically and in every other way possible to secure themselves and their own wealth and reputation at the expense of everyone else and thus, without appropriate concern for humanizing the world for everyone. When the rich and powerful act in this way as though the world is their playground flaunting their wealth, ambition, and self-centeredness, while disregarding the bodies of starved and otherwise impoverished children and the situations of the truly and desperately needy, I think it could rightly be described as vulgar clownery.

Work in the eremitical life is both much more modest and also more elevated in import, meaning, and motivation. We follow our daily routine, take on the projects our life opens to us for our own sanctification and the sanctification of the rest of God's creation, and work in this way for the whole of our lives. We trust that the modest work and efforts we put forth every day fit into God's plan for the whole of reality even when we have no real concrete sense of where this leads. When I was first consecrated (c 603) a journalist asked me what it meant for me to "be successful"; how did I measure success as a diocesan hermit? Her question surprised me, but I came to see it shouldn't have. "Success" is a significant norm in our culture; eremitical life is hard to place within usual notions of what it means to be successful. I answered in terms of personal integrity and faithfulness. At the end of each day could I say I had lived this life humbly, faithfully, in a way that was true to myself and God's call? This is still the definition of success I would use in answering the question today, almost 20 years later. It is not the definition of success "the world" glorifies. 

We, hermits, are not about building the world's largest real estate empire, getting our pictures on the cover of Forbes or Fortune 500, gilding our living accommodations in gold and marble, dressing in designer clothes, or measuring success in terms of status, power, or material wealth. I believe Cornelius Wencel is correct when he refers to all of this in terms of glittering. . .vulgar illusions. These things are misguided. They are rooted in a falseness promising an ultimate happiness and satisfaction they can never provide; they cannot humanize or sanctify us. Instead, they demean and empty us of authentic humanity; they divide rather than unify and ensure the ongoing suffering of the least and the lost while adding even more persons to these ranks every day. They are precisely antithetical to what it means to be concerned with theosis or working towards the Kingdom of God.

 Eremitical life (cf c 603) embraces and is partly defined in terms of "stricter separation from the world". In the passage you quoted, Wencel is talking about "the world" with which eremitical life (and all genuine Christian life) is in conflict. It is "the world" with no room at all for the Evangelical Counsels or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount with its Beatitudes. The plutocrats and kleptocrats of this "world" tend to laugh or scoff at such Christian values and vision. They ridicule those who embrace religious poverty, chastity, and obedience to image Christ and serve others. These are some of the folks Wencel has in mind when he draws two very different notions of success and work, the eremitical or radically Christian and the "worldly". In speaking as he does of hermits, Wencel also underscores that our work is rooted in concern for the world outside the hermitage. We do what we do for God's sake and the sake of all that is precious to God. 

I hope this is helpful.

Some questions on Eremitic Life, Canonical Status, "Success"!

This week I was interviewed for a local newspaper article --- apparently being a diocesan hermit is a bit of an unusual thing, and people are interested in it (no, this is not REALLY a surprise to me, at least not entirely). One whole area of interest is the question of canonical status versus non-canonical status, though raised in a new way. For instance, the reporter wondered why one would want to become a diocesan hermit if the diocese has no financial obligations toward the hermit. Why, afterall, would one want to become perpetually obligated with a vow of obedience, become "locked into" (not her actual words) the diocesan structure with delegates, Vicars, Bishop, etc, to whom one is answerable, if the diocese does not assume financial responsibility, provide a hermitage, insurance, etc?

I answered the question in terms of freedom and integrity, and I want to try to reprise and elaborate on some of that here --- if only because it is a common question, and one asked by others, including those who are or who desire to be noncanonical hermits. The simple fact is that as a diocesan hermit one acts in the name of the church. One prays in the name of the church, and if one does other ministry, she does so in the name of the church; in a society where contemplative life is a rare commodity anyway, and where there are constant pulls on the hermit of whatever status to join the rest of society in their quest for "success," having the commission to BE A HERMIT in the name of the Church is a freeing and empowering thing.

In my Rule, I described eremitism as an eccentric way of life, and one which I personally found impossible without canonical status. What I did not describe particularly well was the constant pull from society and even the church and religious life to engage in active ministry, to use one's gifts in more usual ways to benefit one's sisters and brothers, to help bring the Kingdom/Reign of God in fact. Of course other Christians are prayerful (no doubt as prayerful as hermits are); and of course contemplative prayer itself is esteemed and understood to some extent. But eremitic life is generally not, and it is a fragile thing, easily compromised, easily lost in activity and other things which are -- of themselves --- also quite positive. Acting in the name of the Church, remaining in one's hermitage when "cabin fever" hits, turning to prayer instead of to some other way of being a Christian in the world, trusting that one lives at the heart of the church and the heart of others' lives even when they are not aware of that, is part of what is empowered by canonical status.

For one given canonical status, and especially for one admitted to perpetual profession, the Church says, you are a hermit: "With the help of Almighty God we confirm you in this charism and choose you for this consecration as a diocesan hermitess." (Allen H Vigneron, Perpetual Profession Liturgy, Sept 2, 2007) All of the theoretical justifications of the eremitical life, all of the talk of the hermit's marginality, the reflections of the benefits and justification of the eremitical contemplative life, the confirmation and mediation of this as a Divine call, and all of the reasons for persevering in it come together in this one sentence. The canonical or diocesan hermit has been confirmed in this vocation from God and given the permission and freedom to live this life in whatever way GOD calls her to do, nevermind what society says or understands to be legitimate, nevermind even what other Christians say or understand to be legitimate. One has been given a context in which this can be accomplished, a context which frees and empowers --- and of course which challenges to consistency and integrity on a continuing basis.

Interestingly, there are actually arguments against canonical status put forward by those who choose not to pursue it. For instance, in the earliest history of the eremitical life hermits were marginalized even from the institutional church. One of the reasons for leaving for the deserts (remember eremites are desert dwellers, from eremos, Gk for desert) was the fact that the Church's own integrity was compromised to some extent by the surrounding culture, and the struggle to be a Christian in the world was no longer as it once was. Not only were Christians not persecuted for their faith, but over time Christianity had become a state religion. Martyrdom simply was not the everyday vocation it had once been, and as a result, everyday faith suffered as well. So, some went off to the deserts to lead a more penitential and integral Christianity. They did so as lay people without the benefit of canonical or other official status --- though they also became highly esteemed, and the vocation sought after. For those who argue that eremitic life should be lived with this particular kind of purity, the idea of canonical status can seem a kind of betrayal.

At the same time, there are those among the institutional church who do not encourage or foster vocations to diocesan eremitism. It is hard to know the number of times I have heard stories from those who either want to try, or believe they are called, to be diocesan hermits who were told by their local Vicar, Bishop, Spiritual Director, or Vicar General, "just go live in solitude; that is all that is necessary." Of course, I understand that in the initial (or other) stages of discernment, a person SHOULD be able to go off and live in solitude --- and in fact, this period of time might last for years! I also understand that simply because one approaches a diocese regarding canonical status and eremitical consecration, this does not mean one should be encouraged in this, much less actually professed and consecrated; the capacity to "just go and live in solitude" is an important one and needs to be gauged. Evenso, the eremitic vocation (and I am thinking especially now of canonical forms of this life) is essentially an ECCLESIAL vocation, and it makes sense that the hermit should ask, "Just going off and living in solitude is all that is necessary for WHAT?" If one wants to live an eremitic life in the heart of the Church, and in service to the church, then the Church should be open to it ---- careful and assiduously discerning, of course, but open to it.

Let me be clear, the ability to go off and live in physical solitude itself is NOT enough for a person to live as a Christian hermit, much less be professed and consecrated as a diocesan hermit, and telling a person that this is all that is required indicates a failure to understand (or at least to communicate!) the essence of the vocation itself. Living in physical solitude is only one aspect of the ecclesial vocation we call eremitism, and the misanthrope or otherwise psychologically wounded can manage this as well as (and sometimes with a good deal less struggle than) the genuine Christian hermit. One must also relate well to the community of the church, manage to balance the demands of the community and those of solitary life (this is true even in reclusion), be genuinely prayerful, hopeful, faithful, and loving (not only of God, but of oneself, one's sisters and brothers, and the whole of creation), and in one's life witness to the triumph of Grace that God manages when the truly humble and poor are empowered by and made to be truly rich in Him! The question, "Just going off alone and living in (physical) solitude is enough for WHAT?" has to be asked of diocesan representatives by hermit candidates precisely because the diocesan hermit represents an ecclesial vocation which is far richer than this flawed advice sometimes given by Vicars for Religious and Consecrated Life, or Vocation Directors itself reflects. The same is true of the non-canonical Christian eremitic vocation, though in somewhat different ways. Evenso, as critical an element of discerning an eremitic vocation as it may be, just going off and living in solitude is especially NOT enough for the diocesan hermit.

There is nothing demeaning in admitting that one cannot live this vocation without the assistance of the church. No, the church does NOT offer financial support or assistance, and this opens a whole other set of questions which some diocesan hermits are legitimately raising at the present time, but the Church DOES validate and mediate God's call to the individual, and she does offer the context which frees the hermit to live her life with integrity and consistency. In a world which seems to have less and less time or inclination for reflection, silence or solitude, prayer or penance, or even a personal orientation to reality which is other-centered, this is a tremendous gift, for it means being given a place to stand where the meaning of life can be discovered and lived out without reference to what one spends, or produces, or exploits, or consumes.

The reporter asked me what success meant in terms of this life. What would success at the end of the day mean? I answered in terms of integrity: A successful day would be one I lived with real integrity. I probably should have spelled that out more directly, and I am sorry I did not. For instance, I should have said that integrity means living a life of prayer, penance, silence and solitude where one's love for God and one's fellow human beings, as well as one's ability to suffer with and for them (compassion) grows, where communion and reconciliation are central values, where one can say at the end of the day, "With the grace of God, I did the best I could do and I was obedient to the will of God in my life today." I know this is not an unusual goal for most Christians (at least I think it is not!), but for the diocesan hermit it is a goal which canonical status makes easier or more approachable --- something that is good not only for the individual hermit, but for the Church herself and the world she touches -- sometimes secretly, and always mysteriously --- as leaven at every point.