Another look at Pope Leo's Address to Hermits

[[Hi Sister! I heard an online hermit [name omitted] complaining that Pope Leo "left out" the "traditional historic" hermit from his recent address to hermits in Italy. She felt it was divisive and argued that c 603 hermits wearing habits and styling themselves as Sister or Brother was about mimicking genuine religious and was basically false. She also wondered if the traditional, historic hermits were no longer welcome in the Church, especially since there is such an emphasis on diocesan hermit (sic) being social when the others were not. She thought not still being in the Church was a good thing for these reasons.  On another note, I was happy to see she spoke of everyone being called to union with God, but I was disappointed to hear her suggesting there was no difference in their vocations really. I don't think she picked up on Pope Leo's reference to diocesan hermits as exemplars of what is a universal calling. Oh, she also made a point of the fact that traditional historic hermits were not limited to a single diocese, but were hermits in or of the universal Church. I think you have written about this before, haven't you? (I couldn't locate the post myself.)]]

Thanks for your email! All of these topics, except the complaint against Pope Leo, "leaving out" the "traditional historic" hermit, are things I have heard or read over the years from the person you mentioned. It is the questions that I want to deal with here, however, not their source. The complaint against Pope Leo fails to appreciate the brevity and context of his address, namely, he was making his comments to diocesan hermits who had travelled to Rome for the Jubilee. I know this because I was invited to attend with (perhaps) some small (read tiny!!) chance to speak with Pope Leo while I was there. Unfortunately, I could not attend. If one is speaking to diocesan hermits about the significance of their vocation, and the address is to be a brief one, one's comments will necessarily be limited and focused as Pope Leo's were, to diocesan hermits!! (Still, as I note below, Leo did recognize the diocesan hermit's necessary engagement with the stream of history, so that must not be missed or dismissed.)

I thought Pope Leo's comments were amazing in the way they touched on the really central aspects of the c 603 vocation. Beginning with Jesus' conversation with the Samaritan woman, Leo outlined the fundamental vocation everyone has to worship God in Spirit and truth. That is incredibly important and absolutely foundational for understanding the nature of eremitical life and the way it is an exemplar for every person's fundamental vocation. It was a wonderful beginning that set the stage for hearing everything else Leo spoke of and understanding the paradoxical nature of a vocation to the silence of solitude. Leo also touched on the ecclesial nature of the vocation, especially its solidarity with others (per the great quote from Evagrius Ponticus) and its open relationship with the ecclesial body and body of history. Leo captured the dialogical nature of this vocation 1) with God and one's deepest Self in the secret sanctuary of the heart, 2) with others and all of creation, and 3) with the Church itself and the eremitical tradition, which the c 603 hermit embodies.  

It is interesting (though saddening) to me that the hermit you mentioned felt it was a good thing to leave the Church in light of the Pope's comments on solidarity (the deeply social nature of hermits). This solidarity is an expression of the vocation's ecclesiality and is an essential element of the eremitical vocation as the Catholic Church understands it. To reject it and the paradoxical way the elements of c 603 must be understood is perhaps to admit one is not really a hermit, but rather, remains simply a pious loner. The essential nature of eremitical life, as Pope Leo outlined it, may surprise some, but it is exactly the profoundly and canonically ecclesial vocation c 603 outlines and codifies. In any case, c 603 does not do away with non-canonical or lay hermits, nor does it push them out of the Church. This is a kind of destructive all-or-nothing way of thinking that lacks nuance and is invalid. Much of what Pope Leo said applies to non-canonical hermits as well. But again, in his brief address, he was speaking to an assembly of c 603 hermits called and commissioned to be exemplars of the solitary eremitical vocation and the universal call to union with God. He was not excluding anyone.

As I have written before (you were correct), the diocesan hermit is a hermit in and for the universal Church, though she especially serves her local diocesan Church. S/he lives eremitic life in the name of the Universal Church and has been granted and accepted the rights and obligations associated with that place in the Church's life. However, her immediate legitimate superior is the Bishop of the diocese where she resides and in whose hands she is professed. (Delegates serve as quasi-superiors on the Bishop's and the diocese's behalf.) This is an issue of subsidiarity and an example of the effective exercise of the ministry of authority. The Church always administers or exercises such things at the most local level possible. This respects the genuinely dialogical and loving character of such ministry; after all, superiors need to know and genuinely love those with and for whom authority is exercised. They need to know the local Church in which such persons are embedded and serve. I will try to locate the post you were thinking of and link it below.

Thanks again for your outline of the online comments. They were especially helpful in providing an opportunity to look again at Pope Leo's address and consider how truly complete and well-ordered his comments therein were. It is wonderful to hear the way these resonate with my own lived and reflected experience of c 603 life, and that of others I am in contact with. I especially loved the way he begins with Scripture, draws a picture of the very core of the vocation in speaking about the human heart where worship occurs, and then draws from significant representatives of the desert tradition, in this case, from Evagrius Ponticus. What Pope Leo did in this brief address was to also capture the dialogical nature of the eremitic life in regard to its contemporary manifestation and its historical origins and foundation. He essentially affirmed that this relatively new c 603 life is authentically eremitic and reflects the desert tradition with integrity, even when that surprises people and calls for reflection and explanation. 

Moreover, Leo made very clear the way this vocation is lived for others, and serves the Church it reflects. This service is not about an occasional or limited foray into active ministry, though hermits may engage this way. Neither is it about an occasional act of charity one may do for someone who comes to one's door seeking a word, though hermits will surely do this as well. Instead, it is the service flowing from the worship occurring in the inviolable tabernacle of the hermit's heart at every moment of the hermit's life as she grows more and more transparent to God and the love and truth God is. In this way, the hermit mediates God/love/truth in and to a world badly in need. Pope Leo also addressed this point beautifully. Yes. This was truly a very fine address and a gift of God to the Church and world for the sake of this vocation and those called to live it! Or, maybe better, I should have said this was a gift of God to this vocation and those who live it for the sake of God, the Church, and God's entire creation!

_______________________________________________________

I just realized I did not address your comment regarding c 603 hermits "mimicking religious". I have addressed this before, especially on the basis of comments made in the Handbook on Canons 573-746. For the dedicated post I put up on this topic 5 years ago, please see: Are C 603 Hermits Religious?

Diocesan Hermits and Subsidiarity (This linked post was written about six years ago and can also be found under the tag, "subsidiarity".)

Pope Leo's Jubilee Year Address to Hermits (For the post with the entire address)

Witnessing to Hiddenness, Both Inner and External Forms

[[Hi Sister Laurel, so when the catechism speaks of hermits being hidden from the eyes of men, are you saying this is not about being anonymous, or not wearing a habit, or not using the title Sister or Brother, for example? What I hear you saying is that eremitical hiddenness is about the inner and ordinary nature of the hermit's journey to deeper union with God. No one can look in at this journey; it is always a hidden part of a human being's life. I wonder, though, if there isn't some degree of external hiddenness from others. Are you saying that there is no hiddenness except for the inner journey the hermit makes to God?]]

Great question!! Important too, since the Catechism of the Catholic Church refers to the hermit's life being hidden from the eyes of men, not just the hermit's work or ministry. Yes, you have pretty well captured what I am saying. Still, let's look at the statement of the Catechism re hermits and see what it actually says, especially in paragraph 921: [[[Hermits] manifest to everyone the interior aspect of the mystery of the Church, that is, personal intimacy with Christ. Hidden from the eyes of men, the life of the hermit is a silent preaching of the Lord, to whom he has surrendered his life simply because he is everything to him. Here is a particular call to find in the desert, in the thick of spiritual battle, the glory of the Crucified One.]]

The first thing I want to point out is that hermits' lives manifest something to others. That is, in their everyday way of being, they make something known that others might not be able to see so well via other vocations. That something is the interior aspect of the mystery of the Church and of the human person. So, right off the bat, we have the notion that something is hidden (or interior at this point in the text) and also that it is made universally known. Hermits are called to make the inner life of the Church, consisting in intimacy with Christ, manifest in a very specific and unusual way (I argue this way is most accurately defined as paradoxical), and they do this for the sake of everyone, not merely for a limited or elitist few.  

The paragraph goes on to describe another way of thinking about the inner or interior life of the Church, namely, as personal intimacy with Christ. Here is the real key to understanding the hiddenness of the hermit's life. It is about intimacy with the Risen Christ, and with the words "silent preaching," we are introduced explicitly to the paradoxical nature of making such a hidden reality manifest. Hermits' lives are all about the journey to ever deeper union with God in Christ, just as Jesus' life was about this same journey or pilgrimage through all the exigencies of a life and death burdened and shaped by human -- though not by personal -- sinfulness. Luke describes this journey as one where Jesus grew in grace and stature, and other NT writers describe the journey as one of, "being about his Father's business" and traveling from the heights of blessedness and divine intimacy to the depths and horror of apparent abandonment by God. Even so, in all of this Jesus' life is a pilgrimage to the depths of human existence and relatedness that we identify as union with God.

We all read the Scriptures as assiduously as we can, and the truth is, we are often struck by how little of Jesus' own journey we can truly know or how little of the nature of his pilgrimage to God we  comprehend. (Huge historical quests and theological debates have focused on this and related questions during the 19th, 20th, and into the 21st centuries.) This inner life and journey is a hidden reality, and Jesus himself, though a public figure with a strikingly public vocation, remains essentially obscure to us. 

So it is with the inner life of anyone we know, no matter how well we know them. However, with regard to hermits and paragraph 921 of the Catechism, it is important to recognize that the Church uses this paragraph, not merely to assert the fact of essential hiddenness associated with the hermit vocation, especially when hiddenness is mistaken by some to imply external isolation or remaining entirely anonymous or unknown to others, but rather to explain the nature of that hiddenness and the paradoxical forms of relatedness it requires or in which it is rooted and flourishes.

I believe it is true that large parts of the hermit's life, besides their inner life, will be hidden from others, though I also believe that apart from more ordinary requirements of privacy, this is really because the whole of the hermit's life is about growing in intimacy with God in the "silence of solitude". This requires more silence and solitude than most people experience or require. However, even those parts of the hermit's life that are public (in the common, not canonical sense of this word) and observable will remain obscure because they are motivated and colored by dedication to this inner relationship. The experience that corresponds to such hiddenness and that hermits may describe to others (especially directors and one another) is the sense that their vocation is not truly understood by anyone except those whose life commitments are similar. Even then, there will be a core of undisclosable truth which cannot be known by others --- just as is true regarding the inner life and personal mystery of any human being. 

So, no, I don't deny there are significant degrees of external "hiddenness" from others in a hermit's life. What I assert and know from experience is that these are always secondary to the inner mystery and obscurity to which this vocation is dedicated. They must reflect and serve this inner mystery, which is always primary. One makes a serious misstep if one primarily identifies the hiddenness of the eremitical vocation with externals like anonymity or a refusal to relate to others, especially if one absolutizes these as though they are what this vocation is all about. At the same time, it should be noted that some externals can also make manifest something of the fact and nature of this inner mystery and journey. Thus, besides the relative lack of active ministry, for instance, the Church celebrates such vocations publicly, and grants hermits permission to wear habits and prayer garments, style themselves as Sister or Brother, use post-nominal initials, and so forth. 

While some folks may believe these things are clearly and completely understood, my own sense is that in our contemporary world, they themselves are mysterious and point to something countercultural and even more profoundly mysterious, grounded in the Ineffable. In any case, I would argue that because c 603's focus is on mirroring (revealing) the inner nature of the Church and the exhaustive incarnational journey of the hermit doing so, and because such external elements have the power to point beyond themselves to Divine Mystery, there is a wisdom in the fact that c 603 does not require or even invite anonymity, that it involves public profession and consecration, and that it grants the use of visible signs of one's consecration. These are always balanced by the completely ordinary dimensions of the hermit's life, which also have a significant, if paradoxical, sign value. Even so, they have a place, and it has nothing to do (as some will argue) with self-aggrandizement or violations of eremitical hiddenness.

Pope Leo Addresses Hermits in Rome!

A link to this address was sent to me this morning. Given what I posted yesterday after almost a month of silence I have the sense the Holy Spirit was working overtime both here and in Rome! God is truly very good and it is wonderful to have Pope Leo addressing hermits and particularly diocesan hermits while stressing not only the universal yearning for God that is at the heart of every eremitical life, but the paradoxical way solitude reflects and even empowers community!! Enjoy!!

In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Peace be with you! Good morning to you all, and welcome!

Dear brothers and sisters, thank you for being here. This meeting offers us the opportunity to reflect on the vocation of the hermit life in the Church and in today’s world.

I would like to begin with a word that the Lord said to the Samaritan woman, which we read in the Gospel of John: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him” (Jn 4:23). Yes, the Father seeks and calls, in every age, men and women to worship him in the light of his Spirit and in the truth revealed by his only-begotten Son. He calls women and men to devote themselves entirely to him, to seek him and listen to him, to praise him and invoke him, day and night, in the secrecy of their hearts. “When you pray”, says Jesus, “go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you” (Mt 6:6). First of all, the Lord calls us to enter this hidden place of the heart, patiently delving into it; he invites us to make an inner immersion that demands a journey of emptying and divesting ourselves. Once we have entered, he asks us to close the door to bad thoughts in order to safeguard a pure, humble and meek heart, through vigilance and spiritual combat. Only then can we abandon ourselves with confidence to intimate dialogue with the Father, who dwells and sees in secret, and in secret fills us with his gifts.

You, as hermits, are called to live this vocation to worship and inner prayer, proper to every believer, in an exemplary way, in order to be witnesses in the Church to the beauty of the contemplative life. It is not an escape from the world, but a regeneration of the heart, so that it may be capable of listening, a source of the creative and fruitful action of the charity that God inspires in us. This call to interiority and silence, to live in contact with oneself, with one's neighbour, with creation and with God, is needed today more than ever, in a world increasingly alienated by the media and technology. From intimate friendship with the Lord, in fact, the joy of living, the wonder of faith and the taste for ecclesial communion are reborn.

Your distance from the world does not separate you from others, but unites you in a deeper solidarity. Evagrio Pontico writes: “A monk is one who, separated from all, is united to all” (Treatise on Prayer, 124), because prayerful solitude generates communion and compassion for all humankind and for every creature, both in the dimension of the Spirit and in the ecclesial and social context in which you are placed as leaven of divine life.

The diocesan hermit “is a figure in open relationship with the ecclesial body and the body of history” [1]. Your simple presence and your prayerful witness, through communion with the bishop and fraternal relationship with parish priests, become precious and fruitful, as they increase the “spiritual breath” of the Christian community. This is especially true in the inland areas of the country, rural contexts where priests and religious are becoming increasingly rare and parishes are impoverished of opportunities. Even in anonymous and complex urban contexts, marked by a bad kind of loneliness, hermit presences are oases of communion with God and with our brothers and sisters.

While you remain faithful to the legacy handed down by the Fathers of the Church in safeguarding the Word, through the lectio divina and the service of prayer and intercession with the prayer of the Psalms, you are at the same time called to interpret the new spiritual challenges with the creativity of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it is the Paraclete who opens you to dialogue with all seekers of meaning and truth, educating you in sharing and guiding their spiritual quest, often confused. All of you can encourage others to return to themselves, to rediscover the centre of gravity of the heart, as Pope Francis taught us in the Encyclical Dilexit nos. And there, in the depths of the soul, each person can discover the fire of the desire for God that burns and never goes out, as Saint Augustine teaches us: “Let us desire continually from the Lord our God; and thus let us pray continually” (Letter 130, 18-20). You are the guardians and witnesses of this desire that dwells within every person, so that each one may discover it and nurture it within themselves.

Dear friends, our troubled times ask you, finally, to “enter into the mystery of Christ’s intercession on behalf of all humanity, accepting to ‘place yourselves in the middle’ between creatures, fragile and threatened by evil, and the merciful Father, the source of all good” [2]. Called to stand in the breach, with your hands raised and your hearts alert, walk always in the presence of God, in solidarity with the trials of humanity. Keeping your gaze fixed on Jesus and opening the sails of your hearts to his Spirit of life, sail with the whole Church, our mother, on the stormy sea of history, towards the Kingdom of love and peace that the Father prepares for all. Thank you.

________________________________________________

[1] Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and the Societies of Apostolic Life, The hermit’s way of life in the particular Church. «Ponam in deserto viam (Is 43,19)». Guidelines (30 December 2021), 10.

[2] The hermit’s way of life in the particular Church, 18.

On Eremitical Hiddenness: Witnessing to the Journey to Deeper Union with God

[[Hi Sister Laurel, I wondered what it is that hermits witness to, especially since they live in solitude. Do hermits witness with the hiddenness of their lives? I think you have said something like that and it sounds nonsensical to me. At least I don't get it! I mean how can someone witness to something with the hiddenness of their life? (I guess if they are witnessing to hiddenness, then they do that with hiddenness, but that seems really silly to me.) But really, what is it hermits are most concerned with witnessing to? Do you do this in your solitude?]]

Thanks for your questions. Sometimes the paradoxes involved in Christianity seem silly or absurd, at least initially. I definitely understand that. Imagine trying to explain to someone without a sense of paradox how it is that "power is made perfect in weakness" (2 Cor 12:9) without that leading to some kind of oppressive and dehumanizing dynamic between the weak and the powerful in the equation or relationship! Or, imagine trying to tell some folks that poverty is really a form of wealth essential to human wholeness. Understanding the truth and wisdom of such assertions requires a sense of paradox, an ability to think in terms of paradox, and the ability to live at peace with and even in it. This is so because human existence is paradoxical, and paradoxes like these are some of the most important truths we are asked to grasp and, more importantly, allow ourselves to be grasped by. (At the top of the "paradox food chain," we Christians live from the conviction that a crucified Messiah is not only NOT the height of failure, literal godlessness, and offensiveness to Divine holiness, but is instead the epitome of human integrity, commitment to meaningful life, and the glorification of a loving, merciful God.) 

At the heart of our lives,  our Christian faith and vocations, is the absolute Mystery that (or who) we cannot comprehend in the way we might other realities we know. This is Mystery that we must allow ourselves to be known by instead (cf Galatians 4:8-11). Similarly, then, the paradox of witnessing to something precisely in the hiddenness of our lives represents a profound truth that hermits allow to take hold of them more deeply, and to define their lives and vocations more and more fully and completely. So, what is it hermits witness to, and why does this happen in hiddenness? To sharpen your questions somewhat, I might also ask why it is that the real heart of an eremitical journey can never be seen by others, even when it is something a hermit witnesses to with her life? Why is it that authentic hermits affirm that no one outside this vocation can really understand it? Why doesn't the Church require anonymity from her c 603 hermits, and why does she mark them and their vocations out in the various ways she does as something to be esteemed? Or, in other words, what is the Mystery the Church so regards that stands at the heart of the eremitical vocation that requires the paradoxical description, "revealed in hiddenness"?

In the past year or so, I have written more directly about the journey or pilgrimage hermits make to union with God, or, (probably a better way of describing this journey) toward deeper union with God. I say this is the better way of describing this because in our deepest self, we are already united with God, and our pilgrimage is one we make toward not only that deepest self, but the God who is its ground and source. To speak of human beings as sinful is to affirm we are estranged from that deepest self as well as from God (and from the rest of God's creation). The hermit commits to spending her life in pilgrimage to recover and live this profound truth that stands at the heart of her being. As she does this, she gradually brings all that she has experienced and all that she is to God so that her whole self may be redeemed by God's love. This is the inner journey no one sees, the journey no one can see. It is the pilgrimage that is always only partly clear to the hermit herself, the obscure but compelling journey she undertakes in faith and response to the often profoundly mysterious call of God into Mystery itself. And, of course, it is the heart of the eremitical journey, the only thing that could possibly make sense of its solitude and other forms of asceticism, its turn from much of God's good creation and its essential renunciation (or at least the relativization) of active ministry in visible service to others and to the Church.

While it is true that the hermit witnesses to hiddenness, she only does so secondarily. What comes first is the journey itself. It is a necessarily hidden journey into the depths of human yearning and fulfillment. The same can be said for a hermit's service of God, others, the Church, and this vocation. The hermit who lives her vocation well certainly serves all of these. Her life is, avowedly, a life of service. However, it is only this insofar as it puts the hidden journey to deeper union with God first. Service to others is not unimportant in the eremitical vocation; at the same time, it is an obscure service, often neither seen nor understood by others, because its heart is the mysterious inner journey no one can see or comprehend except analogously in light of their own inner pilgrimage to redemption and deeper union with God. 

When the Church discerns the presence of eremitical vocations in myself or others, what it is looking for are signs that the person is seeking God and is capable of committing their life to this specific quest as primary and definitive. That is, it and the yearning that underlies it must come before everything else and define every dimension of the hermit's life. Additionally, the church looks to see if the person is able and committed to making this pilgrimage in and to "the silence of solitude" for the sake of the Gospel and in the name of the Church. Because the journey to deeper union with God involves the healing and redemption of the whole person, the overcoming of the estrangement of sin and growth in genuine holiness, there will be signs that such persons have turned, and continue to turn more profoundly and completely, from that which is resistant or opposed to Christ (i.e., what is often unhelpfully called "the world") and have allowed themselves to be embraced by the God of life, love, selflessness, and grace. Such a vocation is a microcosm of the foundational vocation of the Church itself, and it summarizes the nature of human existence as well. (Cf Ponam In Deserto Viam, paragraph 15 and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars 920-21) Again, it is a hidden reality --- though it bears witness to itself in the fruit associated with it. 

When Thomas Merton spoke of this foundational calling, he referred to the primary responsibility of the hermit:  [[. . . to live happily without affectation in his solitude.]] Merton continued, [[(the Hermit) owes this not only to himself but to his community that has gone so far as to give him a chance to live it out. . . . this is the chief obligation of the . . .hermit because, as I said above, it can restore to others their faith in certain latent possibilities of nature and of grace.]] (Contemplation in a World of Action, p. 242) And here, in the reference to "certain latent possibilities of nature and grace", we also see what the hermit witnesses to, namely, the potential of each and every human life to reveal the essential unity that exists between God and the human person, that is, the essential relationship that makes a human being truly human. Hermits seek deeper union with God not only because Emmanuel (God With Us) is who God is and wills to be, but because Emmanuel also defines the nature of truly human existence. 

Merton described the hermit's pilgrimage as one of a profound seeking and exploration of Mystery that can only be done in hiddenness. Because this solitude is universal (all persons exist as made for God and estranged from God at the same time), some persons are called to witness to the pilgrimage every person is meant to make so that hope may triumph over despair in every life. As I have noted before, Merton writes, [[My brother, perhaps in my solitude I have become, as it were, an explorer for you, a searcher in realms which you are not able to visit -- except perhaps in the company of your psychologist. I have been summoned to explore a desert area of man's heart in which explanations no longer suffice, and in which one learns that only experience counts. An arid, rocky, dark land of the soul, sometimes illuminated by strange fires which men fear and peopled by spectres which men studiously avoid except in their nightmares. And in this area I have learned that one cannot truly know hope unless he has found out how like despair hope is.]] (The Monastic Journey, pages 169-173, section published posthumously)

And here is a central clue as to why the Church esteems eremitical vocations today. In their rarity, these vocations represent calls to authentic humanity that are lived out for the sake of others and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They witness to the universal call to union with God, and they do so with a directness and salience other vocations lack. (In saying this, I do not mean to denigrate the rich witness of other vocations that also depend upon degrees of union with God for their fruitfulness. However, it seems to me that eremitical life cannot be justified in any other way, except in terms of the universal yearning for and call to union with God, not in terms of active ministry, education, social service, pastoral ministry, direct service to the poor, etc.) Eremitical life is ALL about the mysterious hidden journey every human person is called to make to deeper union with God, and to be who we are in light of that journey with, to, and into ultimate Mystery. Rich or poor, educated or uneducated, powerful or powerless, celebrated or shrouded in obscurity, every person has been uniquely gifted with this same precious identity and calling.

In (perhaps) the most direct or dedicated way possible, where contemplative lives prioritize being over doing, eremitical life witnesses to the solitary call to be truly human in and with God by allowing God to be God With Us as completely as God wills. If one wants to understand what hermits DO with their lives, what it is that makes their lives so valuable to the Church and world, perhaps the best answer is that they are persons who are singularly focused on learning to BE themselves and to let God be God. In hermits, we find an unambiguous exemplar of ordinary human life given over to union with God and leading in its own way to the healing and fulfillment of reality that can only occur in communion with the Divine. Hermits witness to this profound and foundational giftedness and task, even when so many of their discrete gifts remain (and must remain) relatively unused, undeveloped, or relinquished entirely. Moreover, it is in the complete ordinariness and inner nature of this incarnational journey that the profoundly purposeful hiddenness of eremitical life is revealed (made known and made real in space and time). It is an incredible and divinely authored paradox that reminds us of all the other paradoxes that are so central to Christianity!! In and with Christ, in the power of the Spirit, this is who the hermit is called to be.

I hope this response is helpful. As always, if it raises more questions or fails to respond adequately to others, please get back to me, and I will revisit these.

Once Again on Suffering and the Will of God

[[ Sister Laurel, Hi! You said that in vocations to chronic illness you absolutely do not mean that God wills our suffering. You probably know that there are hermits out there who insist they are called to suffer and that God actually wills and even sends their suffering. How can there be such different views of God's relation to suffering within the Church? I must admit, I prefer your view of things. I struggle with chronic illness myself and while I find myself asking God "Why?" a lot of times, I don't really think God wills my illness or the suffering that goes with it. I am looking forward to that new heaven and new earth you write about when God will be all in all and there will be no more suffering!!!]]

Hi there, and thanks for your comments and question. I am aware of no true hermits who believe that suffering is the will of God, though I have met an isolated individual or two who insist on this. I can understand why they have come to such a position. I suppose all of us who suffer with chronic illness and especially chronic pain, have been tempted to take the same theologically perverse path to try and make sense of something in our lives which really adds absurdity or senselessness. One person I am thinking of suffers from a trauma-induced inflammatory disease affecting spinal nerves, resulting in the entrapment and clumping of those same nerves. From what I have read (and can imagine) of the condition, the pain is truly excruciating. Fortunately (in some ways), the condition is becoming far more common than it once was, and docs are finding new approaches to help deal not only with the pain, but with the problems that occur when spinal fluid leaks out of the spinal canal and irritates other tissues and organ systems, etc. One of the most hopeful things mentioned was the use of potent meds that can cross the blood-brain barrier and help deal with the inflammation involved, and even with the clumping. (The blood-brain barrier has been the main obstacle to getting these kinds of meds to the appropriate area until recently.)

So, I can understand why someone with such a condition could decide it is God's will that they suffer, and even that God sends the suffering. Unfortunately, the God this gives us is not the God of Jesus Christ, nor the God of unconditional love or entirely unmerited mercy who takes on suffering in order to dwell with us and redeem our lives. I think that is the answer to your difficult question about how there can be such different positions regarding God's relation to suffering. The God who wills and sends suffering is not the God of Jesus Christ. My own position on this has changed over time. In the article you asked about, I believe I said that God willed the suffering of his Son. I treated this as the single exception in my theology. Today, I do not believe this. I believe instead that God willed Jesus' integrity, especially in allowing his Father to accompany him, to be God with us, Emmanuel, in everything Jesus lived, and in doing this, that Jesus would love both his Abba and the whole of creation faithfully and without condition or limit.

While I believe it was clear that doing so would lead to profound suffering, I think we must get used to drawing this distinction when we think of God or God's will. Certain terrible things can happen to us when we live God's will faithfully. We will routinely love those others hate, we will speak truth to power whenever necessary, we will model a countercultural life that will trigger feelings of guilt and insecurity in those who live otherwise, and in every way we can, we will act to foster true justice in our lives and society. These are the things God wills, not the reactions and tragic consequences of those who are offended by our lives and actions. To think that God wills these consequences is to say that the people who mocked, tortured, and executed Jesus were doing the will of God. Surely no Christian can say such a thing!!! Of course not! They were doing the will of Satan and of a distorted humankind under the power of sin. As sin and death and all of the anti-divine powers and principalities were focused and concentrated on and in Jesus that day, so too did the Christ-event become the focus of God's mercy and love. God's judgment was that he would be sovereign, and the actions and consequences of the actions of all the powers and principalities trying to stand against him would not stand!

Of course, we can learn through suffering. God can be victorious in and through suffering. But what we learn, I think, is always a function of appreciating God's powerful mercy and love that is the overweening reality even in terrible suffering. Suffering allows us to learn about our deepest selves as well, the strength, courage, beauty, and incredible giftedness that suffering tends to stifle and reveal. These things are rooted in God; they are alive in us because they have their origin in the eternal God who gifts them to us without ceasing. And these things are the will of God, not the struggle or suffering. This is the distinction we must keep drawing if we wish to make sense of the problem of suffering and the will of God (often called Theodicy).

Exalting the Cross: Another Look at the Theology of the Cross and its Timeliness

Yesterday, a bit late, but also just as it needed to be, a group of us from the parish got together for lunch at a local restaurant to celebrate my birthday (Sept 1st) and 18th anniversary of eremitical consecration (Sept 2nd). It was a terrific party with about 20 of us! Because it didn't happen on the long Labor Day weekend, one person noted it may have been a better occasion than had we tried to celebrate on my actual anniversaries. Given the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, I was not surprised that one of the guests present, wearing a Camino T-shirt, asked me how I understood the cross and what it reveals to us. (At the same time, this is exactly the kind of thing this person would ask about, given her interests and faith!!) Anyway, given the timeliness of the question, I thought I would reprise and enlarge on the answer I gave my friend yesterday afternoon. 

My essential answer was that the cross reveals God to us as the One who wills to be Emmanuel, God With Us, in every moment and mood of our lives, including sin, death, and even godless death. Paul says this in a couple of ways. Our God is revealed in Christ as the One who will allow nothing to separate us from his love (Rom 8). He is the God who, where sin abounds, will be certain his grace (that is, his powerful presence) abounds all the more (Rom 5). Or again, he is the God whose power is perfected in weakness (2 Cor 12:9). And finally, God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself (2 Cor 5:19). To know Christ crucified, and thus, to understand the Cross, is to know God who comes to us in the unexpected and even the unacceptable place and dwells with us in unimaginable mercy and love.

There is another way of thinking about the Cross as revelatory, and that refers to the ways the Cross makes Human Existence known and also real in space and time (the term revelation has both of these meanings). The Cross of Christ not only reveals the nature of God, it also reveals (makes known and real in space and time) authentic humanity. Here Christ is the paradigm of what it means to be fully and truly human, allowing God to be God With Us even in the depths of that which we ordinarily consider godless, namely, sin and death --- even, as Paul says, death on a cross. Moreover, Jesus does this for our sake, for the sake of our reconciliation with God, leading us to human wholeness and fullness of life. To live life as those called to allow God to journey with us in every moment and mood of our lives, and to do so for God's sake, and for the sake of God's creation, is the essence of authentic humanity. All of this is symbolized by the phrases "Self-emptying" or "dying to self", where both of these imply our own incompleteness without God and the distortion we become whenever we try to go it alone or become a law unto ourselves.

A third way of seeing the Cross as revelatory has to do with the fact that it epitomizes our capacity for sin and inhumanity. God did not will Jesus' suffering and death, though I personally have no doubt he knew what he did will would entail Jesus' passion and death at the hands of godless men. God gives us innumerable gifts, and we trivialize, profane, idolize, and otherwise pervert and destroy them. When God gives his only begotten Son to us, the Cross reveals what, all too often, we do with such a precious gift, often in the name of religion! 

All of these forms of revelation depend upon human obedience or disobedience to God. That is, in the cases of Divinity and authentic humanity, Jesus reveals these by remaining open (attentive and responsive) to the will of God being Emmanuel at every moment of his life. This includes his passion and godless death on a Cross. It is because of this openness that God can be the God he wills to be. Because of Jesus' obedience unto death, even death on a cross, there is no moment or mood, no height nor depth from which God's merciful, loving, powerful presence is excluded any longer.  (This is nothing less than the will to reconcile all of creation and forgive sin!)  Jesus' openness, attentiveness, and responsiveness to God's will to be Emmanuel is the mark of authentic humanity and the measure of what it means to be God's own counterpart here in the created world. Its antithesis is disobedience, the refusal to remain open, attentive, and truly responsive to God in all of the surprising and even apparently offensive ways God wills to be present to and with us. 

The tragic irony here is that it is the religious leadership of Jesus' day that pretended to know and understand God, and that manifested the most destructive disobedience to God. When coupled with a civic authority capable of executing those who threaten their autonomy, the result is the torture and death of Jesus, the truly obedient and revelatory One --- a refusal to allow God to be Emmanuel, the one who, again, comes to us in the unexpected and even the unacceptable place. (In light of Christ's obedience even unto death on a cross, even this scandalous death no longer signals godlessness or its characterization as accursed. Instead, it is the exhaustive symbol of God's paradoxical will, mercy, and love, for it is the source of Romans 8's profound affirmation that nothing can separate us from the love of God, not sin, not death, not anything at all.)

Today, we are faced with religious (not faithful) approaches to life in this world that are truly allergic to the Cross of Christ and to the way God's power is perfected in weakness in Jesus' obedience to the One he called Abba. One of these is the movement in the US that goes by the name of "Christian Nationalism," with its roots in the so-called "prosperity Gospel" and its distorted reading of Matthew's criticism of those who, with a "violent or aggressive faith," try to take the Kingdom of God by force. But the Cross of Christ repudiates any such religion as anti-Christian. Instead, the feast of the Exaltation or Triumph of the Cross gives us a profoundly paradoxical power most truly revealed (made manifest or known and made real in space and time) in a love that allows an infinitely merciful and loving God to act in (his) own ways on (his) own terms. (This is also one of the reasons weakness (asthenia, ασθενια), and our acceptance of our limitations is such a powerful means to the revelation of God's sovereignty. Not only do they help make us aware of those profound needs we yearn for, but they can allow us to be open to God acting on God's own terms in God's own time.) Jesus, of course, shows us the way here, and it is the way of the Cross, not that of Caesar or Constantine, or a Nationalist ideological movement set on power and (in)human conquest!

Dioceses and c 603 Vocations: Minimizing Uncertainty and Risk in the Process of Discernment and Formation

In The Long Journey, I wrote about the journey to Union with God and something of the universality of that call. With c 603, it has sometimes been difficult for dioceses to adequately discern and assist in the formation of diocesan hermits. This prompted the following questions, which I promised I would return to: [[It seems to me that either a diocese has to be really patient and willing to take a risk with someone, or the person has to have made a long journey before contacting their diocese to request profession and consecration. The first problem with this is, what diocese has the patience to wait as long as needed to discern a solitary eremitical vocation with someone?]]

In my initial post, I quoted you, [[It seems to me that either a diocese has to be really patient and willing to take a risk with someone, or the person has to have made a long journey before contacting their diocese to request profession and consecration.]] and I responded: [[I believe both things are true. The person must have made a relatively long journey before contacting a diocese with the request to be professed under c 603 AND the diocese must be patient in a process of mutual discernment and formation that assists the person making their petition to truly know the way God is calling them, and to prepare for the necessary stages of commitment if they (both) find the person is called to c 603 eremitical life.]] Let me point out further that dioceses always take risks with vocations. No one comes in with a certified letter from God saying, "Consecrate her. She is called to be a c 603 hermit"! When I was consecrated, my diocese supplied a "Bishop's Decree of Approval of (my) Rule of Life". That decree expressed thanks to God for the gift of this vocation. At the same time, it included the following sentence. "I pray that this Rule of Life proves advantageous in living the eremitical life." So yes, there is always risk because vocations come from the Mystery we know as God, and discerning vocations is, as Sister Susan Blomstad, OSF, once noted, difficult and something of an art.

The risk that dioceses take in admitting someone to the profession and then to consecration as a diocesan hermit, however, can be minimized in ways that make the process less onerous for the diocese or its staff. In this blog, I have referenced a process of discernment and formation that focuses on the requirement that the hermit write a Rule of Life. This requirement, as I have explained a number of times, can be used to guide the formators and other diocesan staff in discerning the nature and quality of the vocation in front of them. Writing a Rule of Life is itself a formative process. To write about all of the elements of c 603, to describe a healthy eremitical life that embodies these elements and the whole spirit of c 603 in a contemporary setting, requires significant experience and reflection on that experience. Dioceses can schedule conversations at different points throughout this process, both to hear how God is working in this candidate's life and to determine if there are resources the hermit candidate could benefit from in her process of formation. 

At the same time, through this process, though no vow of obedience is involved, the candidate learns to work with diocesan personnel in ways that will help develop her sense of what such a vow might entail and what it may not. It can assist the candidate to develop a deeper sense of the ecclesial nature of this vocation. Contacts may be made with those special individuals who may accompany her in her vocation for many years to come. And of course, both the hermit and the diocese in question will come to understand c 603 much more fully and fruitfully, not simply as a law allowing the profession and consecration of solitary hermits, but as a rich, fertile template of solitary eremitical life, a source of guidance and inspiration for personal exploration in the hermit's lifelong journey** to union with God. The underlying focus in all of this work is the idea of this specific journey and the assurance that the hermit/candidate is committed to (or clearly moving toward) this above all things. (In the beginning years of a hermit's eremitical life, this commitment exists, but it may not yet be articulable in terms like "union with God".) None of this takes away all risk in professing and consecrating a diocesan hermit, but all of it can minimize risk and, down the line, allow for similar work and better discernment and formation with other candidates for c 603 profession and consecration.

The process referred to here can take some time, yes. There are different reasons for this. Sometimes candidates don't have sufficient experience of living in solitude, some are not contemplatives, some may find reflecting on c 603 and the way God calls them to embody it in their lives an extremely challenging task, while others may simply find writing this out in a Rule of Life very difficult. All of this takes time, and dioceses must understand that writing a Rule of Life is formative, challenging, and critical to the discernment of such a vocation. It is not the easiest, most concrete element of c 603, and therefore easily dispensed with via the instructions, "Now, all you need to do is go write a Rule of Life!" The diocese must allow the writing of a truly liveable Rule to take the time necessary for each candidate; they must also allow the task of writing the Rule to assist them (Diocesan personnel) with conversations regarding the discernment, formation, and writing processes at periodic points along the way. 

Mentors (other c 603 hermits with appropriate backgrounds) can assist the diocese and work with the diocesan team and candidate with the Rule and c 603, or, if there are insufficient diocesan staff to follow a candidate in the way that is needed, she may work with the candidate on the diocese's behalf. (In such cases, the mentor will report to diocesan personnel occasionally regarding how the process is proceeding.) What I am describing here is not onerous for either candidate or diocese, but it is critically important in discerning and forming such vocations. While such discerning and appropriately forming (or ensuring the formation of) such vocations takes time, I am not suggesting this process can or should be stretched out interminably. In my experience, it tends to become clear within two or three years (sometimes, though rarely, fewer) whether  or not one is working with someone with an authentic eremitical vocation. In other cases, uncertainty will be cleared up as the person engages or fails to engage with the process of formation. (This requires a significant degree of initiative and self-knowledge; it will be evident to formators.)

Often, the question of time is arbitrarily determined by reference to canon laws that fit religious living in community rather than solitude. Sometimes the addition of such time frames is meant to supplement what are perceived as deficiencies of c 603. Personally, I believe this is a significant mistake, especially in its misperception of the depth and breadth of c 603, but also in its complete failure to understand the uniqueness and flexibility of solitary eremitical life. The composition of a liveable Rule of Life truly rooted in the candidate's lived experience will take time. Of course it will!! The diocesan conversations accompanying such a process and contributing to its fruitfulness will allow discernment to take place without arbitrary time limits or time frames. Dioceses need to trust this! 

At the same time, should a candidate fail to adequately engage in the process, a diocese might well decide to suspend it for the time being. If the candidate had been doing well, the diocesan staff will want to understand what has happened. Depending on the circumstances, dioceses may or may not be open to restarting the process once the hermit candidate is in a better position to truly engage the discernment/formation process. Yes, all of this takes patience, skill, wisdom, prayer, and courage. It does not, however, ask for anything diocesan formation, vocation, or similar personnel should not have in abundance, particularly when dealing with such a significant and individual vocation!!

**Sister Rachel Denton, Er Dio, prefers the term pilgrimage here, and I understand her preference, not only because of her own specific experience with pilgrimage, but especially in light of Vatican II and its reflection on the People of God as a pilgrim people. I am just not yet personally comfortable enough with the term to use it easily myself, so, for the time being, I will continue to use the less specific "journey" here as I read about and reflect more on "pilgrimage" and all it implies. Readers, of course, should feel free to change the language and think of the c 603 vocation in terms of lifelong pilgrimage if that is more helpful!!

The Vocation to Chronic Illness (Reprise)

I received some questions about the notion of "chronic illness as vocation", and I am aware that there have been a number of visits to the article here in the blog about Eremitism as a vocation for the chronically ill and disabled. While I will write those who emailed me with questions, I thought I should also write a bit more about this idea here, not only because the Review For Religious article on Eremitism which was reprised here was a relatively brief introduction to the idea, but also because as positively provocative as the phrase "vocation to chronic illness" is, it is also easily misunderstood.

What a Vocation to Chronic Illness is NOT

First, therefore, let me say something about what a "vocation to chronic illness" does NOT mean!! In no way do I mean to suggest that God wills our suffering, much less that he calls us to this, especially in the forms of chronic illness or disability! We need to make sense of suffering, and we need to take seriously the sovereignty of God, but we cannot take these two pieces of the human puzzle, facilely slide them together as though they are related as effect and cause, and conclude that God wills suffering. In fact, I don't think we can speak of the suffering human beings endure as positively willed by God in any way, shape, or form with the single exception of Christ's own exhaustive participation in our human condition. (The permissive will of God is another matter, and, except for agreeing that it is real, I am not addressing that here.)

Our Essential Vocation: Authentic Humanity

The conjunction of human and divine often strikes us as paradoxical: expressions of brokenness, sin, alienation, weakness, hatred, untruth, and distortion stand in conjunction with wholeness, goodness, unity, power (authority), love, truth, and beauty themselves. But, to be less abstract, the human-divine equation, the community or dialogical event we are each called to be often looks to be composed of incredible contradictions: our sinfulness becomes the place where God's mercy/justice is exercised most fully; our weakness and brokenness the place where God's own strength and wholeness (holiness) is most clearly revealed; our fundamental untruth and distortion the place where God's own truth verifies and hallows us, authoring us in Christ as his own parables to speak the Gospel to a hungry world.

There are few images of human sinfulness and brokenness so vivid as that of illness, and especially of chronic illness or disability. It is not the case that the ill person is a worse sinner than others who are well or relatively well. Neither is it the case that illness is the punishment for sin, especially personal sin. Still, it IS the case that the chronically ill bear in their own bodies the brokenness, estrangement from God, and alienation from the ground of all wholeness, holiness, and truth, which are symptoms of the condition of human sinfulness. What is expressed in our bodies, minds, and souls is the visible reminder of the universal human condition. Chronic illness itself, then, is symbolic of one side of the truth of human existence, namely, that we exist estranged from ourselves, from others, and from our God. We are alienated from that which grounds us, establishes us as a unity, and marks us as infinitely precious and our lives as richly meaningful and fecund. We live our lives in contradiction to what we are TRULY called to be.

We sense this instinctively, and this is the reason, I believe, personal sin has so often been associated with illness as its punishment (rather than simply as consequence or symptom). We know that this state (estrangement symbolized by illness) is not as things SHOULD be, not as we are meant to exist, not appropriate to persons gifted in their capacity for dreaming and effecting those dreams beyond anything else known in creation. Chronic illness, in particular, is an expression of what SHOULD NOT BE. It is a metaphor for the reality of (the state of) sin; of itself, it is paradigmatic of ONE PART of the human condition, that of brokenness, alienation, and degradation. Of course, there is another part, another side to things for the Christian, especially, and it is this which transforms chronic illness into a context for the visible and vivid victory of God's love in our lives.

The Image of sinfulness transformed

Authentic humanity is modeled for us and mediated to us by Christ. And above all, it is a picture of a life which implicates God in every moment and mood of this existence. More, it is a life which is an expression of the deep victories and individual healing and unity God's grace occasions when it is allowed to reign. Whether to the heights of union with God, or the depths of godless sin and death, Christ's life is an expression of that openness and responsiveness to God which constitutes truly human being, and the supreme example of what it means for God's creative sovereignty to triumph over human sinfulness. Paul expresses the paradox in this way: "My grace is sufficient for you, my power is made perfect in weakness." Jesus' entire life is an expression of the response to the vocation to allow this truth to be realized in human history in a way that makes it a possibility for all of us. It is an image of the unseen (and sometimes unfelt) God whose presence transforms human sinfulness into abundant and eternal life and wholeness. It is, in brief, what we ourselves are called to, what we yearn most deeply for, and to what those with chronic illness and disability in particular can make manifest with a unique vividness and poignancy.

During the Christmas season, there is another figure who particularly captures our attention in her own capacity to embody the paradox which Paul affirms. Mary, in her own way, is an exemplar of the dynamic of God's power, which is made perfect in conjunction with human weakness and even barrenness [especially when coupled with great potentiality and faithfulness]. The result is a fruitfulness beyond all imagining, a truly miraculous and awesome humanity, which, precisely in its lowliness, can, through the power of the Holy Spirit, spill over with the majesty of God's own life in our world. This too is what we ourselves are called to, and what those with chronic illness and disability can especially reveal with special poignancy and vividness.

What a Vocation to Chronic Illness Actually IS:

First of all, then, a vocation to chronic illness is a call by God to live an authentically human life. It is a vocation to ESSENTIAL wellness and wholeness. This will mean it is a human life which mirrors Jesus' own, as well as that of Mary, and the other Saints, in allowing God to be God-with-us (Emmanuel). Concretely, this means living a life which manifests the fact of God's love for us, and the intrinsic inestimable worth of such a life despite the ever-present values of a world which defines worth (and happiness!) in terms of productivity, earning power, wealth, health, and superficial beauty.

After all, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the good news that there is NOTHING we can do to earn God's love, and nothing we NEED DO except allow it! God loves us with an everlasting love, and he does so, as Ezekiel tells us, for the sake of his own self, for the sake of his own "holy Name". It is further, therefore, the very good news that with God being for us, nothing and no one can prevail against us. God has entered into our human estate and done so definitively. Objectively, there is no dark corner, no place at all from whence God is absent --- for Jesus has implicated God even into the realms of sin and sinful or godless death. In fact, these become the privileged places that reveal God's face to us, the places where he is definitively present. I personally believe we have to say the same, therefore, of illness, which is ordinarily so clearly a metaphor for human brokenness, alienation, and godlessness. For the Christian, chronic illness in particular can become a metaphor for the triumph of God's love in the face of such brokenness. It can become a sacrament of God's presence in a world that needs such sacraments so very badly.

The vocation to chronic illness or disability is, like all Christian vocations, a call not to remain alone and self-sufficient, but instead to rest securely in God and in the esteem in which he holds us so surely. Like all Christian vocations, it is a call to holiness, that is to ESSENTIAL WHOLENESS and perfection in and of God's own power, God's own "Godness". This requires that we accept an entirely different set of values by which we live our lives from those put forward so often by our consumer-driven, production-defined world. It is a call to find meaning in a life lived simply with and for God, and to carry our convictions about this to a world that is so frantically in search of such meaning.

And, it means to learn to accept the suffering that comes our way as best we can so that He may "make up what was lacking" in the sufferings of Christ and one day be all in all. (Let me be clear that in no way is Paul suggesting Jesus' death was inadequate or did not definitively implicate God into the world of sinful godlessness; however, Paul is also clear that God's victory is not yet total; God is not yet all-in-all. Each of us has a part to play in the extension of Jesus' victory into the concrete and very personal parts of our own stories, where God ALSO wills to be triumphant. While Jesus's victory makes God present here in principle, because these realms are personal, we must also allow him in to them. Even so, we do so IN CHRIST, and in the power of the Holy Spirit, so this victory is an extension of Christ's, not our own in some falsely autonomous sense.)

Christians, above all, do not suffer alone, nor are they ultimately dehumanized by their suffering. On the contrary, suffering, as awful as it still can be, now has the capacity to humanize. This is not because of some power suffering has of itself. Rather, it is because suffering opens us to rely on someone larger and more powerful than ourselves, and to allow meaning to come to us as gift rather than achievement. It can open us in particular ways to the power and presence of God because it truly strips us bare of all pretensions and false sense of self. At the same time then, suffering can humanize because ours is a God who ultimately brings good out of evil, life out of death and barrenness, and meaning out of meaninglessness. This is, after all, the good news of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. If those with chronic illness can live up to their calls to allow these simple truths to be realized in their own lives and become clear to others, they will, in large part, have accepted and fulfilled their vocations.

Sister Laurel, Whom Does it Hurt? (Reprise)

 [[Dear Sister Laurel, why does it bother you so much if someone who is Catholic wants to live like a hermit and is not consecrated by the Church wants to call themselves a Catholic Hermit? I'm sure some people don't know that the term is a technical one or that canon law applies to the use of the term Catholic in this sort of thing. And so what? Why not let people just do as they wish? Who does it hurt anyway? I think you are hung up on this and need to let it go --- after all, really what does it matter in the grand scheme of things except for those who, like you, seem to be hung up on minutiae? (I'm betting you won't post this question but thanks for answering it if you do!)]]

Thanks for your questions. Almost everything I write about on this blog, whether it has to do with the commitments made by the hermit, the canon(s) governing her life, approaches to writing a Rule of Life, the rights, obligations, and expectations associated with her vocation, the nature and significance of ecclesial vocations like this one, the nature of authentic humanity and the witness value of the hermit's life, the hope she is called to mediate to those who live lives marginalized by chronic illness and disability, the discernment and formation associated with the vocation, or the importance of elders and mentors in her life (and other topics) --- all of this speaks either explicitly or implicitly to the meaning and importance of the much more than technical term Catholic Hermit. That said, some posts will deal with your questions as central to understanding this specific eremitical vocation. These will most often be found under the labels:  ecclesial vocation(s),  silence of solitude as charism,  and rights and obligations of canon 603 vocations (and variations thereof). Since I cannot reprise everything written in the past 14 years of blogging on these topics, I would suggest you read or reread some of those posts.

Let me point out that it may well be that in our country and even in our world today the truth doesn't much matter and individualism is the way of life most value. Similarly, it may well be that liberty has edged out genuine freedom in such a world and generosity been supplanted by a "me first", "win at any cost" philosophy and corresponding set of values. Similarly, our world seems to have forgotten that what some decry as "socialism" today was identified in the New Testament's Acts of the Apostles as the only true shape of  community in the new Family (or Kingdom) of God in Christ.  (cf Acts 2:44-45) Christianity has never truly been the most popular or pervasive way of living in our world --- even when most folks went by the name "Christian"; still, Christianity is built on truth and this truth leads to a responsible freedom marked by generosity and humble (lovingly truthful) service to others. Countercultural as that may be, the place which stands right at the point of sharpest conflict with the values of the contemporary world is the life of the canonical (consecrated) hermit.

The hermit's life is both most easily misunderstood and most easily distorted in living. The freedom of the hermit can slide into a selfish libertinism, its individuality can devolve into a "me first" individualism, and its lack of an active apostolic ministry can be mistaken quite easily for selfishness and a refusal to serve others. Those who neither understand the nature of the life, nor the Church's role in ensuring that these distortions do not occur, will ask the kinds of questions you pose in your query. They are not the folks I generally write about -- though their ignorance of this calling can be problematical.  Others who are equally ignorant of the distinctions which stand between world and Kingdom of God will valorize their own selfish individualism with the name "hermit" and some of these will, even when initial ignorance has been corrected, insist on calling themselves "Catholic Hermits" despite never having been called by the Church to live this life in her name, and despite being unprepared and sometimes unwilling to accept the rights and obligations incumbent upon someone petitioning the Church for admission to public profession and consecration. It is these I call counterfeit or even fraudulent for they have taken ignorance and raised it to the level of lie.

Whom Does it Hurt?

Whom does it hurt? First of all it hurts the vocation itself. There is no more stark example of the truth of the way God relates to human beings than when a hermit stands face to face with God in the solitude of her cell and praises God for her life, her call to holiness, the challenge to love ever more deeply, and consents to be a witness to a God who desires to be everything for us because (he) values us beyond all imagining. It is even more striking because she says this is true no matter how poor, how broken or wounded, how sinful or shamed, and how seemingly unproductive her life is in a world marked by consumerism and an exaggerated focus on productivity --- a world which very much values the opposite of all of these challenging realities (brokenness, woundedness, etc.) and considers the hermit to be "nothing" and "a waste of skin". In Christ, the hermit stands before God consenting to be the imago dei she was made to be, entirely transparent to God's truth, beauty, and love, and says with her life that this is the common call of every person. Quite a precious witness! For someone to call themselves a Catholic Hermit when the Church herself has not discerned or admitted her to a public eremitical commitment is to strip away the humble commitment to the truth which is meant to be part of the vocation's foundation and to insert self-definition and self-centeredness in its place. Those who look to this person as an example of the Church's vision of eremitical life may find that, rather than a "Catholic Hermit," they are faced instead with the validation of many of the same distortions and stereotypes that have plagued eremitical life throughout the centuries. They will likely find, if they scratch below the surface, a core of worldliness, deep hunger and fear covered with a veneer of piety.

What they will not find is a person who humbly accepts her poverty before God insofar as this means accepting the vocation to which one is truly called. Lay (non-canonical) eremitical life is profoundly meaningful and important in the life of the church; it should be honestly embraced in that way. A secondary result can be that the Church herself (in individual dioceses) will refuse to consider professing diocesan hermits at all; the vocation is a rare one with, relatively speaking, very few authentic examples; fraudulent "hermits" who represent distortions, stereotypes, and caricatures (as well as sometimes being nutcases and liars) unfortunately can serve to cast doubt on the entire vocation leading to dioceses refusing to give those seeking profession any real hearing at all.

Secondly, it hurts those who most need the witness of this specific vocation, namely those who for whatever reason find themselves unable to compete with the world on its own terms: the chronically ill, disabled, and otherwise marginalized who may believe the world's hype that wealth is measured in terms of goods and social status, able-bodiedness, youth, productivity, and so forth.  Hermits say to these people that they are valued beyond all reckoning by a God who knows them inside out. Hermits say to these people that real wealth is measured in terms of love and that one of the most precious symbols of Christianity is that of treasure contained in clay pots, while real strength is perfected and most fully revealed in weakness. To attempt to witness to the truth of the Gospel by living a lie and building it into the foundation of one's eremitical life destroys the capacity of the "hermit" to witness effectively to these truths. To proclaim the fundamental truth that in Christianity real treasure is contained in clay pots is made impossible if one refuses to be the pot one has been made by the potter to be (a lay hermit, for instance) but claims instead to be something else (e.g., a consecrated Catholic Hermit).

Thirdly, it hurts the one doing the lying or misrepresentation, especially if she actually comes to believe her own lies. In this way, her capacity for truth, humility, generosity, and gratitude is all equally injured --- and thus, too, her own authenticity as a human being. We cannot image God as we are called if we cannot accept ourselves or the vocation to which he calls us. And finally, it hurts the Church herself, which is responsible for all that goes on "in her name" and for commissioning those who live eremitical life in this way.

As part of this injury to the Church, it may hurt anyone who is influenced by the fraudulent "Catholic Hermit" in her lies and misrepresentations. Sometimes this happens because the person follows the directions the counterfeit gives to "become a Catholic Hermit" and then, after spending time following this advice and building hopes on a false dream or pathway to realize their dream, is confronted by their parish or diocese with the truth of the matter. Terrible damage can be done in this way, just as it is done to those who are scandalized by the disedifying example of "hermits" who embody all the worst stereotypes associated with eremitical life, whether canonical or non-canonical. Unfortunately, the individual fraudulent "Catholic Hermit" is ordinarily not held nearly as responsible as the Church is in such cases, so the damage or injury can be far-reaching and relatively ungovernable.

Summary:

I am bothered by all of this because I see the value in eremitical life, most particularly as it stands as a witness against the distorted notions of humanity and community so prevalent in today's world. I am bothered by this because I am committed to live this vocation well for the sake of others,  but especially for the sake of God and God's Church, which is the steward of this vocation. I care so much because I have come to know how important this vocation is --- especially as a countercultural witness to the nature of authentic human existence and all the things the world puts up as values today. Finally, I care because God has called me to care, and to embody this caring in my own living, witnessing, teaching, mentoring, direction, and prayer. I care because the truth matters and because God and God's Church care even as they commissioned me to do so as well. 

You may consider this a personal "hang-up" of mine. That's not a problem, and you are free to your opinion, but if you wish me to "let it go," I would note that I am responding to your questions here, and your questions prompt me to think about and even research it further --- not the best way to get me to let go of something! You also used the term minutia, and I would ask you to consider what portions of my response deal with minutia; I don't see anything in all of this that is not significant in many ways for many, many people, and the witness of the Church as a whole. My answer to the question, [[Whom does it hurt?]] would have to be anyone such dishonesty or fraud touches, even if they are not aware of it at the time. The Church is to minister truly and to assist others to live the truth of their deepest selves in Christ. That is made much more difficult when fraud and dishonesty are enacted or purported to be enacted in the name of that same Church. In a world hungry for truth, no one, I would argue, is untouched by this.