Feast of Saint Peter Damian by Genevieve Pasquier

 Who is Peter Damian, Monk at the heart of Church's 11th-century reforms?

A Camaldolese monk, advisor to multiple popes, and author, Peter Damian life's greatest battle was the reform of the Church, particularly combating the clergy's licentious ways

By Geneviève Pasquier at  La Croix

February 21, 2024

Born into poverty in Ravenna, northeastern Italy, in 1007, Peter, the youngest of six, was abandoned by his mother after his father's death. Orphaned, he was taken in by a brother named Damian, a name he later added to his own in gratitude. Excelling in his studies in Faenza and Parma, he returned to Ravenna to become a renowned teacher.

As a Camaldolese hermit, drawn to a solitary and contemplative life, he in 1035 joined the small hermitage of Fonte Avellana in the Marches, Italy. The Camaldolese Order, a strict Benedictine monastic order founded by Saint Romuald, blends communal life with eremitism, with monks living secluded in their cells. In his short treatise Dominus Vobiscum, Peter Damian describes the cell as "the place where God converses with men... a witness to a secret dialogue with the divine; and what a sublime sight it is when the brother, secluded in his cell, sings the nocturnal psalmody, standing guard before the camp of God."

Tasked with reform

Quickly becoming the spiritual leader of small hermit groups, his fame spread, leading to invitations to teach at other monasteries. Eight years later, he was appointed prior of Fonte Avellana, where he reorganized the hermitage and founded others nearby. He connected with major monasteries of his time, like Cluny and Montecassino.

As an advisor to popes during a challenging period for the Church characterized by lax clerical lifestyles, Peter Damian fought against two prevalent issues: simony, or the buying of ecclesiastical offices, and nicolaitanism, the disregard of celibacy. His reputation for integrity and sanctity preceded his reaching Rome, and Pope Stephen IX called him in 1057 to assist in reforming the clergy, appointing him cardinal and bishop of Ostia. Over the next six years, the pope tasked him with missions of conciliation and reform, sending him as a legate to Milan, France, Florence, and Germany. In France, he defended the rights of Cluny's Benedictine monks against the Archbishop of Mâcon's abuses.

Doctor of the Church

He participated in the 1059 Lateran Synod, convened by Pope Nicholas II to combat investitures, the appointment of bishops and abbots by secular rulers. The synod reserved papal election rights to the cardinals alone and declared that no priest could receive a church from a layperson, a decision that faced opposition from monarchs who saw bishops as extensions of their authority. Peter Damian continued his reform efforts alongside Pope Gregory VII, challenging the Holy Roman Emperors' investiture practices. His confrontations with Emperor Henry IV of Germany, who insisted on appointing bishops and abbots, culminated shortly after Peter Damian's death. Henry IV, excommunicated and deposed, made a penitential journey to meet Pope Gregory VII at Matilda of Tuscany's castle in Canossa on January 28, 1077, giving rise to the phrase "to go to Canossa," meaning to submit to an opponent's demands.

A prolific writer, Peter Damian's theological works include an extensive correspondence with monks, clergy, popes, and kings. His surviving works comprise 158 letters, 75 sermons, poems, 60 saint biographies, and treatises addressing topics like the omnipotence of God, the Trinity, the Messiah, and simony. His moral rigor is evident in "The Book of Gomorrah," a pamphlet criticizing the clergy's misconduct, including illicit priestly unions and homosexuality. In 1067, he was permitted to return to Fonte Avellana, relinquishing the Ostia diocese. He died in February 1072, with the public acclaiming him a saint at his funeral. His sainthood was officially recognized by Pope Leo XII, who declared him a Doctor of the Church in 1828.

Read more at: https://international.la-croix.com/news/religion/who-is-peter-damian-monk-at-the-heart-of-churchs-11th-century-reforms/19221

Feast of Saint Peter Damian (Reprise)

Today is the feast of the Camaldolese Saint, Cardinal, and Doctor of the Church, St Peter Damian. Peter Damian is generally best known for his role in the Gregorian Reform. He fought Simony and worked tirelessly for the welfare of the church as a whole. Hermits know him best for a few of his letters, but especially #28, "Dominus Vobiscum". Written to Leo of Sitria, letter #28 explores the relation of the hermit to the whole church and speaks of a solitary as an ecclesiola, or little church. Damian had been asked if it was proper to recite lines like "The Lord Be With you" when the hermit was the only one present at liturgy. The result was this letter which explains how the church is wholly present in all of her members, both together and individually. He writes:

[[The Church of Christ is united in all her parts by the bond of love so that she is both one in many members and mystically whole in each member. And so we see that the entire universal Church is correctly called the one and only bride of Christ, while each chosen soul, by virtue of the sacramental mysteries, is considered fully the Church. . . .From all the aforementioned it is clear that, because the whole Church can be found in one individual person [Ecclesiola] and the Church itself is called a virgin, Holy Church is both one in all its members and complete in each of them. It is truly simple among many through the unity of faith and multiple in each individual through the bond of love and various charismatic gifts, because all are from one and all are one.]]

Or again, [[Just as in Greek man is called a microcosm, i.e., a little world (cosmos) because in essential physicality the human being consists of the same four elements of which the whole world is made, so also each one of the faithful [including hermits, Peter Damian's special interest in this letter] is a little Church (ecclesiola), as it were, because without violating the mystery of her inner unity, each person also receives all the sacraments that God has given the universal Church. . .]] Dominus Vobiscum, Letter #28 sec 25. (Emphasis added)

Because of this unity Damian notes that he sees no harm in a hermit alone in cell saying things which are said by the gathered Church. In this reflection, Damian establishes the communal nature of the solitary vocation and forever condemns the notion that hermits are isolated or "lone" persons. His comments thus have much broader implications for the nature of eremitical life than the licitness of saying certain prayers or using communal phrases in liturgy per se. In the latter part of the letter Damian not only praises the eremitical life but writes an extended encomium on the nature of the eremitical cell. The images he uses are numerous and diverse; they clearly reflect extended time spent in solitude and his own awareness of all the ways the hermitage or cell has functioned in his own life and those of other hermits. Furnace, kiln, battlefield, storehouse, workshop, arena of spiritual combat, fort and defensive edifice, [place assisting the] death of vices and kindling of virtues, Jacob's ladder, golden road, etc --- all are touched on here. Peter Damian's rich collection of images serves to underscore the classic observation of the Desert Fathers and Mothers: "Dwell (or remain) within your cell and your cell  will teach you everything."

On Assisting Others to Write Liveable Rules of Life

[[ Dear Sister Laurel, do you assist people in writing their Rule for c 603?]]

Great question!! The answer is, "yes and no" or maybe,"not quite". Let me explain. I believe that writing a liveable Rule requires experience of living as a hermit and, more and more, defining one's life in terms of Canon 603. As I have written in the past, the aim is to help engage the candidate for profession under c 603 in a process of discernment and formation that allows them to eventually write a livable Rule reflecting the way they live and will continue to live c 603 for the rest of their lives. I envision the person becoming increasingly capable of embodying the terms and spirit of consecrated solitary eremitical life lived in the name of the Church, and writing a Rule reflecting all of that within it.

Because, despite profound similarities, each person will embody these terms differently than any other hermit, the process is a flexible one allowing for the candidate's exploration of all of the dimensions of canon 603, and providing the experience and guidance needed to write the Rule the canon requires. Thus, the assistance I provide often has nothing to do directly with the writing of the Rule itself; it is focused on a broader process which allows all participants to discern the presence and quality of a solitary eremitical vocation as well which includes providing space and time for the formation necessary to be admitted to profession and eventual consecration under c 603. At the same time, the writing of the various drafts (or draft portions) of the Rule, is part of what allows me (and any diocesan personnel I might work with) to assess the candidate's vocation and readiness for commitment over time.

When I first began envisioning this process I had a couple of thoughts. First, such a process which draws directly from the essential elements of the canon itself was a wiser and more effective approach than the increasing establishment of canonical hoops for those approaching their dioceses to jump through. Such canonical approaches tend to be arbitrary and provide no assurance that the person meeting such requirements develops the heart of a hermit or even truly lives the life. What Rule the person writes might or might not reflect adequate experience of living eremitism nor the wisdom needed to continue with ongoing formation. Secondly, I saw that using the canon's requirement that the hermit write a Rule of life was meant to reflect the person's readiness to live the canon in fullness. This, along with the formative nature of my own writing of my Rule, in turn led me to consider the process of writing as driving a process of both discernment and formation. Thirdly, I understood that this process could assist diocesan personnel in their work with candidates/petitioners so decisions re admission to profession and/or consecration would not be arbitrary. It would provide an effective path for both hermit and diocese to work together for as long as necessary without being onerous for either.

More recently I have come to see that my own accompaniment of those seeking formation as a c 603 hermit needs to include more frequent meetings than might be necessary for the entire diocesan team (though they will need to be apprised of how things progress), and that has also meant that the writing of the Rule itself, while the goal we keep in mind,  is not the direct topic of most meetings. It becomes more the direct topic as the person nears readiness for profession and the diocese approaches admission to this commitment. However, I do get requests to assist folks in writing their Rules and nothing more. I will certainly do what I can if the person is truly living as a hermit and has done for some time (say a couple of years). Otherwise, however, the attempt to write a Rule will be premature and fail to serve in the incredibly creative ways it can do in terms of the vocation's discernment and formation. 

I hope this is helpful. I received a request for help in writing a Rule in just the last couple of days, so I need to be clear that while I am happy to do that, it needs to be part of a larger process of discernment and formation and too, requires experience on the part of the candidate (petitioner) to even begin. Too often in the past dioceses have sent folks off to write a Rule as though it was simply a discrete item on a list of things to cover or get done. The writing of a liveable Rule is much more critical and integral to the entire eremitical project of one's life. It requires expertise and wisdom, and writing it teaches or inculcates some of the skills the hermit will need throughout her life. For these reasons I should underscore here that the hermit herself needs to write the Rule, not her bishop, her spiritual director, et al!! I can assist in this, but it is the hermit's own responsibility. Your question gives me the chance to explain some of that, so thank you.

On the Portrait for the Seville 2024 Holy Week Poster: Where is the real Blasphemy and Obscenity?

A new poster for Holy Week in Seville, Spain has caused an uproar. My first impression when I saw a close-up of its face and eyes was that it was beautiful and that in many ways, this is the Christ I know from prayer and the Scriptures. It represents a Risen Christ who is, perhaps, too young, and too European still, but the heart of this Jesus is very much the heart of the One who has accompanied me throughout my life. It is gentle, strong, receptive, and speaks of mercy. This Christ is marked with the signs of the cross, as any credible representation must be, but he is no longer overwhelmed by them. This is a courageous figure then, and an unassuming one. One can truly imagine that in him and in his abject and obedient helplessness before a brutal world of imperial and religious power, God has overpowered sin and death and brought a new life (which I think implies a new youthfulness) to the world. 

At the same time, one can begin to imagine what it will mean for God to re-embody us in what the book of Revelations calls a "new heaven and a new earth". What we should know is that we don't really have any clear idea what that will be like. Today, because we are baptized into Christ's death, and empowered by the Holy Spirit, We know what Mary Coloe, in one of her books on John, calls "Eternity Life" --- a share in what one day will be eternal life where we will be re-embodied as part of God's new creation. In this case, the newness and, for many people, the strangeness of this portrait will challenge them because it witnesses to a Christ not devoid of strength or masculinity, but certainly empty of machismo. And some of us will find a Christ with a significantly feminine strength as well --- the femininity of the One who listens deeply, comforts, and mothers us in our need.

I will not likely use this image of Christ any more than I use any other image of Christ in my prayer or reflection. Even so, neither will I look at such a figure as "blasphemous", "repulsive", or an insult to God. The artist used his own Son, Horacio, as a model. The portrait is as true and filled with love as he could make it. It is certainly a good reflection of some major dimensions of the Christ Event. Some of the critics decry the poster as effeminate or homoerotic. Others look at this work and compare it to "pictures in books" they have seen representing Christ; they judge it because it does not match these with some believing that these traditional portraits are accurate or even photographic images of Jesus or the Risen Christ; these folks also hold that the artist has betrayed them and offended God in veering from these "traditional" portrayals!!!

During this season of Lent, it is important to remember that our God is one of surprises. He has willed from the beginning of time to dwell with us and to reconcile us to Himself so that we live as part of his very life. We do not know what Jesus of Nazareth looked like except that he was a Middle Eastern Jew, and in that sense unlike our Medieval European portraits convey. As for the Risen Christ, the Gospel portrayals are clear that he is radically unfamiliar and escapes recognition; neither ghost nor revivified corpse, nor mere spirit, he is beyond all of the categories known to describe the dead or the living up to that point. Humility in all of this is marked by our openness to surprise and a strong sense of how God and his Christ always escape and transcend our limited intellects and imaginations. At the same time, humility is found in our willingness to allow God to reveal himself in whomever and whatever way he wishes to do that. It seems to me that the inability to see Emmanuel in this portrait (or in the groups of people some see it representing) is the true blasphemy, sacrilege, or obscenity.

Followup on Does a Rule Need to be Perfect: More on Writing Several Rules over Time (Reprise)

[[Dear Sister, thanks for your reply to my question. What happens if I don't want to write more than one Rule and my diocese doesn't ask me to? What I have written so far seems fine to me and I can't see revising it. Besides I am not much of a writer.]]

Good questions and similar to others I have been asked (another person said they weren't much of a writer, for instance, and wondered what then?). The purpose of the suggestion of writing and using several different Rules over time is first of all to assist both the candidate and the diocese in maintaining a discernment process that is both long enough but not onerous to either relevant diocesan personnel or the candidate herself.

Sometimes it takes a while for the quality of the vocation to become clear to the diocesan staff working with the candidate. Indications of growth can be more clearly seen in the quality of the Rule (or portions of the Rule) being submitted --- especially since the hermit's life is lived in solitude and not in a house of formation with intense oversight and more constant evaluation. Moreover, dioceses are not responsible for the formation of a hermit; that occurs in solitude itself. Even so dioceses must evaluate the way the individual's formation in eremitical solitude is proceeding and they may be helpful in making concrete suggestions or supplying access to resources from which the candidate might benefit. Several different Rules written over a period of years will uncover areas of strength, weakness, and even deficiency and allow the diocese to respond both knowledgeably and appropriately.

What tends to happen when a diocese does not have such a tool to use is either the relatively immediate acceptance of candidates as suitable for discernment or a more or less immediate dismissal as unsuitable. Dioceses cannot usually follow the hermit's progress sufficiently closely otherwise and without such a tool they may have neither the time, the expertise, nor the patience to extend the discernment period sufficiently. Likewise they may not have the basis for helpful conversations with the candidate that such Rules can provide. I have always felt fortunate to have had a Sister work with me over a period of five years and during those years to actually meet with me at my hermitage. She listened carefully, consulted experts in the eremitical life and its formation and discernment, and generally did what she could in my regard; still, I believe the tool being discussed here would have assisted her and the diocese more generally. It would have helped me as well.

Of course, you are free to write one Rule and trust that that is sufficient in providing insight into your vocation for your diocese. Perhaps it will be sufficient to govern your eremitical life for some time as well. If you have a background in religious life and are familiar with the way Rules are written and function that is much more likely. Similarly, of course, your diocese is free to adopt whatever approach works best for them as well. I personally suggest the use of several Rules written over several years so that dioceses have 1) sufficient resources (including time) for discernment, so 2) the process of discernment and formation will not be curtailed prematurely or stretched endlessly and fruitlessly. I also suggest it so that 3) the candidate herself has a kind of structure which allows what happens in the freedom of solitude to be made clear to her diocese while assuring sufficient time for that to mature. (It is important to remember that the process of writing is a very significantly formative experience itself and contributes to one's own discernment as well.)

Ordinary time frames (for candidacy, novitiate, juniorate, and perpetual profession) do not really work for solitary hermits because the hermit's time in solitude is not so closely observed; neither does it have the degree of social interaction which is a normal element of growth in religious life. Beyond these there is a rhythm to life in eremitical solitude which will include both "tearing down" and building up and which occurs according to God's own time, not to a more or less arbitrary or even more usual temporal schema. Something must replace or at least approximate some of the functions the more usual elements of life in community serve but do so instead in terms of the diocese's relation with the candidate. It must allow and assist both candidate and diocese to have patience with this unique and sometimes counterintuitive process of formation. Moreover, both hermit candidate and diocese must recognize that the eremitical life is about the quality of the journey with God itself and not become too focused on destination points per se (postulancy, novitiate, juniorate, etc).

To summarize then, the use of several Rules written to reflect stages or degrees of growth as the candidate herself is ready to do this helps ensure both individual flexibility from candidate to candidate as well as sufficient length of time and patience on everyone's part to assure adequate growth and discernment. It is merely a tool, though I believe it could be a very effective one in assuring authentic vocations are recognized and fostered.

On Some of the Purposes of Lent (Reprise)

I really love Sunday's Gospel, especially at the beginning of Lent. The thing that strikes me most about it is that Jesus' 40 days in the desert are days spent coming to terms with and consolidating the identity which has just been announced and brought to be in him. (When God speaks, the things he says become events, things that really happen in space and time, and so too with the announcement that Jesus is his beloved Son in whom he is well-pleased.) Subsequently, Jesus is driven into the desert by the Spirit of love, the Spirit of Sonship, to explore that identity, to allow it to define him in space and time more and more exhaustively, to allow it to become the whole of who he is. One of the purposes of Lent is to allow us to do the same.

A sister friend I go to coffee with on Sundays remarked on the way from Mass that she had had a conversation with her spiritual director this last week where he noted that perhaps Jesus' post-baptismal time in the desert was a time for him to savor the experience he had had at his baptism. It was a wonderful comment that took my own sense of this passage in a new and deeper direction. Because of the struggle involved in the passage I had never thought to use the word savor in the same context, but as my friend rightly pointed out, the two often go together in our spiritual lives. They certainly do so in hermitages! My own director had asked me to do something similar when we met this last week by suggesting I consider going back to all those pivotal moments of my life which have brought me to the silence of solitude as the vocation and gift of my life. Essentially she was asking me not only to consider these intellectually (though she was doing that too) but to savor them anew and in this savoring to come to an even greater consolidation of my identity in God and as diocesan hermit.

Hermitages are places which reprise the same experience of consolidation and integration of our identity in God. They are deserts in which we come not only to learn who we are in terms of God alone, but to allow that to define our entire existence really and concretely -- in what we value, how we behave, in the choices we make, and those with whom we identify, etc. In last year's "In Good Faith" podcast for A Nun's Life, I noted that for me the choice which is fundamental to all of Lent and all of the spiritual life, "Choose Life, not death" is the choice between accepting and living my life according to the way God defines me or according to the way the "world" defines me. It means that no matter how poor, inadequate, ill, and so forth I also am, I choose to make God's announcement that in Christ  I am his beloved daughter in whom he is well-pleased the central truth of my life which colors and grounds everything else. Learning to live from that definition (and so, from the one who announces it) is the task of the hermit; the hermitage is the place to which the Spirit of love and Sonship drive us so that we can savor the truth of this incomprehensible mystery even as we struggle to allow it to become the whole of who we are.

But hermitages are, of course, not the only places which reprise these dynamics. Each of us has been baptized, and in each of our baptisms what was announced to us was the fact that we were now God's adopted beloved daughters and sons. Lent gives us the space and time where we can focus on the truth of this, claim that truth more whole-heartedly, and, as Thomas Merton once said, "get rid of any impersonation that has followed us" to the [desert]. We need to take time to identify and struggle with the falseness within us, but also to accept and appreciate the more profound truth of who we are and who we are called to become in savoring our experiences of God's love. As we fast in various ways, we must be sure to also taste and smell as completely as we can the nourishing Word of God's love for us. After all, the act of savoring is the truest counterpart of fasting for the Christian. The word we are called to savor is the word which defines us as valued and valuable in ways the world cannot imagine and nourishes us where the things of the world cannot. It is this Word we are called both to grapple with and to savor during these 40 days, just as Jesus himself did.

Thus, as I fast this Lent (in whatever ways that means), I am going to remember to allow myself not only to get in touch with my own deepest hungers and the hungers I share with all others (another very good reason to fast), but also to get in touch anew with the ways I have been fed and nourished throughout my life --- the experiences I need to savor as well. Perhaps then when Lent comes to an end I will be better able to claim and celebrate the one I am in God. My prayer is that each of us is able to do something similar with our own time in the desert.

Merton quotation taken from Contemplation in a World of Action, "Christian Solitude," p 244.

Feast of the Conversion of St Paul, Ave Verum Corpus by Mozart

Ave verum corpus, natum

de Maria Virgine,

vere passum, immolatum

in cruce pro homine

cuius latus perforatum

fluxit aqua et sanguine:

esto nobis prægustatum

in mortis examine.

Hail, true Body, born

of the Virgin Mary,

truly suffered, sacrificed

on the cross for mankind,

from whose pierced side

flowed water and blood:

Be for us a foretaste [of the Heavenly banquet]

in the trial of death!

Fundamental Questions from a Reader in China Interested in Eremitical Life

[[Sister Laurel M O'Neal, Praised be Jesus Christ! I am Chinese and live in China. I am seriously considering Eremitical Monasticism, now I decide to visit the Chartreuse in France. I was attracted to Eremitical life and Carthusian way of life by the examples of Desert Fathers. I found your blog by chance and I have to say your articles are great! It brings much edification and inspiration to me! I have some questions. Could you share what draws you to Eremitical life in the form of Diocesan Hermit? Did you consider other forms of Eremitical Monasticism like Carthusian or Camaldolese? I wonder what is life like being a hermit under the provision and guidance of a Bishop? It seems very strange for me because a Diocesan Bishop is not a hermit, he is not even a "monk" (In the traditional usage), how could you live your hidden, solitude and ascetic life under a man who is not a monk? I also wonder, as a hermit, how do you practice the commandment of loving thy neighbour? I am certain hermit loves God, but I am not certain do they love people. Besides, have you ever consider Eastern Orthodox or Eastern Catholic, I think you know the Eastern Christianity always honour hermit, if you ever consider them, why do you remain Latin Catholic?]]

Hi there and many thanks for your questions. I will try to answer them here, but please know that I have written about all but one of them before so will also try to link you to those posts if I can. First, let me say how glad I am you are considering eremitical life with the Carthusians. If you have not yet read An Infinity of Little Hours, you might try it. It can give you a good idea (a kind of snapshot) of the Carthusian life from the perspective of five men who entered in roughly the same timespan; it gives a good sense of the men's personalities and what they struggled with during their first five years of Carthusian life (if they remained for those years). Another is Halfway to Eternity. They are different books and I return to them occasionally as I (sometimes) reflect on Carthusian life and how it differs from c 603 eremitism. There is also a series of small paperbacks under the rubric Novice Conferences on different aspects of Carthusian life: prayer, silence, liturgical seasons, etc. which you might find interesting.

What draws me to eremitical life under c 603? I have come to the conviction that c 603 allows for a sound eremitical life that also corresponds in necessary ways to contemporary life in the church, though when I first read the canon I had never considered eremitical life at all. I had lived as a religious, worked as a hospital chaplain, and was becoming more a contemplative, but I also struggled with chronic illness myself. This was both an opportunity for inner work and prayer and a challenge I needed to work with and through every day of my life. Eremitical Life seemed to be the appropriate context for both of these dimensions (opportunity and challenge). Beyond that, my education was in Systematic Theology and I wanted to continue pursuing that and doing some limited ministry to others, particularly if it could be done via writing. All of these things suggested I needed to live on my own rather than in a community where I would be limited by or to a community horarium, but how to do that in a way that was truly faithful to religious (later, eremitical) life per se? 

At the beginning of the church year, Advent 1983, the Revised Code of Canon Law was published and I read c 603 for the first time early in 1984. It treated solitary eremitical life, not life in a community and listed central elements that either already shaped my life, or could well do if I found I was called to this. One of the things that was compelling to me was the way all of the above elements of my life could work together within this framework to produce a truly fruitful eremitical life. In other words, it looked to me like a God-given grace that answered many of my needs and called me beyond what often looked merely like limitations. It allowed these "limitations" to become opportunities for a new, and unimagined fullness --- meaningful parts of a whole rather than divisive and conflicting parts of some great and incoherent absurdity.

You ask about the Camaldolese and whether I considered them. Well, first remember the only woman's Camaldolese Motherhouse was in Italy. I had no thought at all of moving to another country to pursue eremitical or semi-eremitical life. The monks of New Camaldoli and their spirituality appealed to me more and more as I read about these. I came to know some of the monks and eventually became an oblate with them, however, I made my oblature with a small women's monastery in Windsor, New York I had become aware of during this time. (Ironically, when my diocese was trying to decide what was required to live a healthy eremitical life, the Vicar for Religious and another Sister in the chancery traveled to Big Sur to speak to the prior there. I only learned of this years later after I had become an oblate with the Camaldolese.)  The world of hermits in the Church is a small one!! I remain an oblate with Transfiguration Monastery in Windsor (and within the larger Camaldolese family of New Camaldoli, particularly with Incarnation Monastery in Berkeley, CA); this relationship with the Camaldolese is a good piece of my c 603 identity because the Camaldolese triple good (solitude, community, and evangelization/witness/martyrdom) in my estimation, suits c 603 and eremitical life lived within a diocese/parish very well. 

Regarding your question about hermits and diocesan bishops, one of the wisest things my diocese asked me to do before profession under c 603 was to choose a delegate or Director (not a spiritual director!) who would serve both me and the bishop in the supervision of my life and vocation. S/he would serve as a "quasi-superior" for me. The diocese recognized that hermits may need time with their Director beyond that which a bishop is truly able to give. There is something similarly true regarding a bishop's expertise in such things. As you say, bishops are not hermits (Peter Damian was a notable exception) and are, generally speaking, unlikely to be able to direct a hermit's spiritual life. Most recognize this and some few are well-trained to do this kind of work.

My own delegate (and co-delegate) are both religious women with backgrounds in leadership and formation. One of them was Vicar for Religious in my early years of seeking admission to profession and consecration under c 603; the other was my spiritual director when I discovered c 603. I don't think it takes a hermit to be a spiritual director or delegate to a hermit, but I do think such a person needs to be profoundly prayerful and have a strong background in psychology and spirituality. Expertise in formation (initial and ongoing) is also critical. Meanwhile, bishops are called to supervise c 603 hermits under their purview, not to direct them or their formation. I meet far more often with my Director (delegate) than with my bishops and they typically have turned to her if there is a need. It is a good and effective arrangement. 

All the canonical hermits I know love God and God's good creation which includes human beings. Most hermits simply love people and they love being of service to them and the whole of God's creation. Most of us do some limited form of ministry and have some limited contact with friends and relatives precisely because we love them --- and need such persons to be able to love fully. However, the greater indicator for me of the hermit's capacity for love of others is the reason we live lives of solitude. Solitude is actually the redemption of isolation; it is motivated by love for God, for oneself and for all that is precious to God. I once wrote the following in considering the question of fraudulent hermits and "whom does it hurt?" to profess those who are not really called to this rare vocation. I think it is a good, if an indirect, indicator of the love that must motivate and sustain a hermit if she is to be faithful to her call and empower others to be the persons they are called to be: 

[[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 . . . but claims instead to be something else . . ..]]

The way I personally live this vocation for others includes allowing them to share in any insights, wisdom, or examples that come from my life. I write and accompany others in spiritual direction or on their way to eremitical profession and consecration under c 603. I also teach Scripture at my parish (and, since ZOOM, to those who are interested from beyond my parish boundaries). I write/give reflections or homilies to various communities. But the life itself is lived for others to remind them of the unique dignity of the human person in covenant with God. God wills to dwell with us; we are made to dwell with God, and to do so together --- even in solitude. This is what true Divinity and true humanity consist of. Eremitical Solitude is not about isolation but communion; so are humanity and divinity about communion. The poverty, chastity, and obedience of the Evangelical counsels each point to and empower one to become an expression of the human person whose only completion comes in and with God for the sake of God's own will and for the whole of God's creation. To give one's life for such a purpose is, as I understand it, an act of love.

Your last question is about remaining a c 603 hermit in the Latin or Western Church when the Eastern Church has a stronger history of honoring eremitical life. It's a great question and not one I have ever been asked here before. At the same time, while my spirituality and theology often happen to tend toward the Eastern Church, I have never considered changing Churches in this. I remain impressed with c 603 and the fact that it honors solitary eremitical life in a way the Eastern Church has never really done. As I understand it, a connection with a monastery is a prerequisite of eremitical life in the Eastern Church. At the same time, I recognize that to be able to return to a monastery when one can no longer live alone with God is important, and something c 603 cannot protect. Even so, C 603 allows the solitary hermit to find the resources she personally needs to live a healthy eremitical life --- which could well result in the best of both worlds, so to speak.

Sorry, no links yet! As soon as I have time to add the labels for those links I will.

Responses to Questions about Friends, Family, Wills, "the World" and Similar Questions

[[. . .I've read some of your notes on friendships and the importance of them, but since you said only clients or your director ever come visit you, do you never have visits with friends? And I haven't seen any mention of family. I feel in an eremetical life it would be hard to see family, because they are such a connection to life on earth, memories, attachments, and not the looking forward to life in Heaven. Do you have any family you ever see? (I hope I'm not trying too much). . . A bit more Memento Mori related-what will happen to the few things you do own when you die? Do you write out a will just like a non-hermit? And is it more fitting to the vow of poverty to rent or own your living space? If you rent, you obviously can't claim it as yours, but if you own it, it may be more confusing to the vow of poverty if you're not having to pay for it forever. ]]

Hi there, I have cited part of your email to respond to what you said about family and memento mori. First, I now have only my sister and niece living. We see each other rarely --- a function of distance and finances!! When we have been able to get together, it has been wonderful; in those cases, I go to where my sister lives and we spend time together talking, watching her favorite movies, eating favorite dishes, and even going to Disneyland! One thing I know is that loving family, communicating with them in whatever way one has available (including occasional visits, internet, phone calls, etc), thinking about and praying for them, and remembering life at home, do not need to detract from life with God or from looking forward to eternal life with God.

One of the things you may have gathered from earlier posts or emails is that I do not refer to everything outside the hermitage as "the world". Instead, while I do live within my hermitage embracing and moving toward "the silence of solitude," and while God draws me more and more deeply into intimacy with him, what has often denigratingly been called, "the world," is more accurately defined as that which is resistant to Christ, resistant to love, and tending to reject the God who is the source and ground of all creation. My family is not necessarily part of "the world" in that sense any more than I am or a convent or hermitage is part of the world in the way you use the term. Moreover, God dwells with and in them, just as he does with anyone I know in "life on earth". It is important to recognize that what we call heaven is less a place "out there somewhere" than it is a state wherein the very life of God is shared with us and also (importantly) through us. We don't know what that final sharing will be like once God is "all in all" and there is "a new heaven and a new earth," but we do know that life here shares in the One's life who is Emmanuel, God with us, and one day will do so fully.

I am not pulled away from life with God by my loves, memories, friendships, and so forth; they do not necessarily detract from my life with God, i.e., my life in heaven or what Mary Coelho, in writing about the Gospel of John, calls "eternity life". Quite often these things can mediate God's presence/love to me and turn me towards God more fully and intimately. I recognize this is a different perspective than that which is often associated with "contemptus mundi" or similar dated monastic motives; I also note the need to cultivate the silence of solitude that allows the hermit to spend quality time with God alone. At the same time I recognize that my own heart is marked and marred by "the world" in the way this phrase might be most familiar to you; if I speak so easily about "leaving the world" in entering a convent or "returning to the world" when leaving the convent or hermitage behind perhaps, I will never recognize the way I have closed "the world" up inside the hermitage right with me. That would be the real and blind tragedy!!

Speaking to Parish During the Pandemic

As for visits with friends, yes, I see friends from the parish on Fridays for coffee after Friday Mass as often as I can. Another friend and I travel a short way to Church each Sunday morning. I also see good friends and others in classes I teach each Thursday morning. I no longer play violin or see the friends I saw once a week in orchestra (effects of a broken wrist), nor do my Dominican friend and I go out for coffee after Sunday Mass because she no longer travels this way each week. Still, I occasionally go out for a meal with another Sister or meet via ZOOM with my former pastor (a good friend and in many ways, the (slightly) older brother I never had) as well as with other good friends I see all too rarely! There are no hard and fast rules in this regard except that my life with God is something I must and do take care to give priority, and it is actually richer and fuller to the extent my eremitical solitude is seasoned with such life-giving relationships. Were that to shift, I would need to change whatever it took to make sure friendships, etc., contribute demonstrably to my eremitical life with God.

So, what happens to the things I own when I die? Some will be gifted, others sold, and a lot will probably simply be thrown away. Every person in the church preparing for public profession is required to make up a will before that day and to keep it updated as needs change. Also, since diocesan hermits need to support themselves, and since for me that means a theological library, clothes, furniture, music, computer and equipment for ZOOM, etc. I have a small household of "stuff" to get rid of at some point. Other kinds of provisions are also my responsibility, insurance, DPOAH, and so forth. Whether it is more fitting to rent or own, I can't say. But since I cannot own, I must rent. I would prefer to own (or to have a secure hermitage on church property) --- I would like to own a hermitage (I would actually love to have a tree house as we see on the TV show, Treehouse Master), but it has never been possible. Poverty implies living simply, of course, but for me personally, I define it mainly or primarily in terms of my dependence upon God alone as the sole source of strength, meaning, and validation of my life. So long as I truly put that first and continue to grow in it, everything else tends to fall into place --- no matter the material or financial circumstances.

From the Desert Fathers and Mothers: The Hermit's Need for Human Relationships in Achieving Genuine Holiness (Reprise)

 

[[Sister Laurel, you wrote once about hermits not separating themselves from people to pursue personal holiness, but I thought that was what being a hermit was all about. Could you address this question again or repost what you wrote?]]

Sure, I can repost one of the articles I have written on this; I think it is the one you are asking about. It was based on two things, 1) a quote from the Desert Abbas and Ammas, and 2) a central element of c 603 that says we live this life for the sake (salvation) of others. Together they provide a perspective on eremitical life that precludes selfishness even in the name of seeking personal holiness, and which contributes to notions of eremitical solitude as a unique but very real form of community. Here is that post. If it leaves you with questions, please get back to me.

[[When one desert father told another of his plans to “shut himself into his cell and refuse the face of men, that he might perfect himself,” the second monk replied, “Unless thou first amend thy life going to and fro amongst men, thou shall not avail to amend it dwelling alone.”]] (Sayings of the Desert Fathers and Mothers)

I think this Desert apothegm is fascinating and especially important because it explicitly forbids one to move into solitude and away from others merely in some attempt to perfect oneself. This flies in the face of the way many conceive of eremitical life as well as the way some would-be-hermits describe the vocation. But it should not surprise anyone who carefully reflects on the Great Commandment and the interrelatedness of its two elements, love of God and love of neighbor. Especially it should not surprise those who live eremitical life in the name of the Church; we know the communal nature of our eremitical solitude --- nuanced and rare as it may be. 

We know too that our formation as hermits generally comes after (and requires) years of life in community, whether religious or parish (along with all of the other forms of community we experience throughout life). Similarly, ongoing formation requires personal work with directors and delegates --- and usually some degree of life in a parish community. It can certainly and especially benefit from extended periods in a monastic community whenever that is possible. (As I have written here before, actual eremitical reclusion today (reclusion is a much stricter solitude than most hermits are called to) is allowed by the Church in only two congregations: Camaldolese and Carthusian, and even in these very rare cases it is important to recognize the community context, supervision, and support this vocation requires and implies.)

The genuine human perfection we call holiness is the wholeness of the reconciled and integrated person who is therefore alive in God and the fullness of his or her personal truth. This implies reconciliation with God, with self, and with all else in God. It implies a profound capacity for compassion, the ability to see Christ in others, and the willingness to spend oneself for the sake of others while becoming more and more completely dependent upon God as the source of our Selves. 

Desert elders knew the desire to seek perfection in physical reclusion by simply turning one's back on people was doomed to failure; it is frequently badly motivated, is paradoxically guided by a spirit of perfectionism and competition which is a betrayal of genuine humility, and can lack the preparation necessary for becoming a hermit and moving into, much less sustaining a healthy eremitical solitude. They knew that solitude is a demanding and dangerous environment particularly so for those unprepared for or not called to it. Even in those who are called to it, eremitical solitude can be the source of illusory and delusional thinking and perceptions -- especially about oneself and God. Thus, the requirement for ongoing direction by experienced spiritual directors and the supervision by bishops and/or their delegates.

The Desert Fathers were convinced that the way human beings come to achieve the necessary experience leading to repentance for sin and amendment of life is through one's ordinary interactions with other human beings. Contrary to popular opinion perhaps, the authentic eremitical vocation is not one where an individual moves into the desert merely to pursue personal or "spiritual" perfection in some sort of "solitary splendor" or in an interpersonal and relational vacuum. One moves into solitude 1) because solitude has truly opened her door to one, and 2) because with the church one discerns this is what God is calling one to and is prepared to live for the whole of her life as the fulfillment of the Great Commandment. Discernment that one is called in this way will include a sense that one is healthy in terms of interpersonal relationships and that one has achieved relative maturity in one's spirituality and Catholic identity. This is a traditional stance. St Benedict, for instance, affirms that hermits must have lived in community for some time and, of course, not be in the first blush of conversion.

I want to emphasize the place of discernment here, not only the discernment we each do on our own but the discernment we do with the Church itself in the person of legitimate superiors and directors, i.e., bishops, vicars of religious, delegates, et al. Part of this discernment, and indeed initial and ongoing formation is meant to ensure that the hermit or hermit candidate's motives are not selfish or otherwise misguided and that solitude has indeed opened the door to this vocation herself. What this means is that the hermit/candidate is responding to a Divine call; the Church will also make sure the hermit/candidate is prepared not only to live in solitude but more, that she will grow and thrive in it in ways that will be a gift to the Church and thus, to others. There are subtleties involved here and nuances that the hermit/candidate may not appreciate until much later and may not be able to determine on her own. It is also important to remember that since a hermit does not do apostolic ministry** the ways she lives her solitude and the meaning her life embodies within and as a result of this solitude are themselves the gift God gives the Church through the hermit. Supervision and discernment (mutual and otherwise) are required not only early on for a candidate not yet admitted to profession but throughout the hermit's life. ***

One of the reasons I stressed the need for supervision and discernment and the way they are ensured is because they are a part of the hermit's integral need for others in her life. Whether we are hermits or even recluses we need others who know us well and are capable of assessing in a continuing way the quality of our vocational life, as well as encouraging and assisting us to grow in our responsiveness to God's call to abundant life. Canonical (consecrated) hermits are called to ecclesial vocations and the Church has the right and obligation to oversee these just as she expects us to continue to grow as human beings; canonical hermits have accepted the obligation to grow and participate in those "professional" relationships which help ensure that. Yes, hermits do grow in light of their experience of the love of God; they grow in authentic humanity and as hermits through their experience of Christ in the silence of solitude and the disciplined and attentive living of their Rule and horarium, but what growth there is in these things is often dependent on the hermit's work with her director and delegate, and also with her interactions and relationships with folks from her parish and/or diocese.

In eremitical (or any other) solitude it is simply too easy to say, "God wills this," or "God is calling me to that," when discernment is done by the hermit alone. In such a situation the temptation is to canonize or apotheosize one's own opinions, perceptions, tendencies, and so forth as the movement of the Holy Spirit. God does not literally speak to us as human beings do but instead does so through Sacred texts, sacraments, prayer, and the fruits of our choices and actions; since we learn to love and be loved in our connection with others, hermits must 1) be well-formed in learning to hear (discern) and respond to God in authentic ways, and 2) they must be adequately supervised and directed in this. This does not mean one meets every week or even every month with one's delegate or spiritual director. "Adequate" means whatever is sufficient to allow the hermit/candidate to grow in her vocation first as a human being called to live from and mediate the love of God (and others) and to do this as a hermit in the silence of solitude.

** Hermits may do some very limited apostolic ministry but are not and cannot be identified in terms of this ministry as are apostolic or ministerial religious. The silence of solitude is always primary and definitive for the hermit's life. Still, while the hermit will certainly seek her own maturation in holiness, she will do this for the sake of others, not as a selfish quest for isolated personal perfection (itself an impossible and self-contradictory quest). 

*** Some have written that the need for direction and supervision cease to be important when the hermit has lived the life for some time. I believe this is a false conclusion. It is true that the nature of direction and the supervisory relationships change with time and maturity, but it seems to me they may become even more critical over time. Whether that is generally true or not, the need for ongoing formation and discernment continues throughout the whole of the hermit's life. Given the thin line drawn above between an isolating, selfish quest for holiness and what is instead an other-centered maturation in holiness, the need for a good spiritual director is actually urgent for a hermit her entire life.

Why Canon 603?

Hi Sister, I found the following questions written to another hermit but I couldn't find an answer anywhere. Could you answer them? Also, I especially wondered if there were no formal or institutionalized forms of eremitical life before 1983. The person writing this question seems to say there was only one traditional form of eremitical life until then and the 1983 canonical form is somehow a perversion or at least a negation of the "traditional form". 

Here is what I read: [[But I do sense and have cited instances noticed, of the division that is being created, plus some detraction even if subtle or recently reworded. Eventhough you state correctly that the centuries-and-into-antiquity style of hermit vocation should not be demeaned, the traditional historic way of hermit life is in effect being negated or presented/treated as illegal by virtue of having the relative recent, diocese hermit path "legalized" by a canon law with procedural structure created by humankind, albeit clerics, but perhaps some who wanted this structure and stature developed, lobbied for and assisted in the creation of the canon law.

So again, to re-cap; my sincere appreciation if you can shed light at least on the reason why a canon law to legalize and make public, organized, and structured a diocese hermit vocation--was determined necessary to begin with, or who promoted the diocese hermit or "by law" type of public profession into the hands of a bishop over private profession in and consecration by God?]]

::Sigh:: I have written about this an awful lot over the past 17 years or so, so let me be brief and point you to past posts. First of all, while one form of eremitical life is called canonical (because it is an ecclesial life that is normative of what the Catholic Church understands such a life to be) and another is called non-canonical (that is, not normative nor appropriately governed as such vocations need to be), this does not mean the second one is "illegal" (nor that those living it are not leading exemplary lives the church respects). Only one person I know of has called the lay eremitical vocation illegal; she did that in a way that tended to demean her own non-canonical vocation and I wrote a piece against this. Later, I had the sense she thought I had said lay eremitical vocations were "illegal".

Some forms of eremitical life have been made canonical (normative) for hundreds and hundreds of years --- long before there was a universal Code of Canon Law. These include monasteries or hermitages associated with the Carmelites, the Carthusians, the Camaldolese, and so forth. In the Middle Ages anchoresses and anchorites (women and men) as well as hermits (always men) were supervised by local bishops and practices governing anchorholds including liturgical praxia were developed as were regulations for hermits seeking permission to wear the hermit tunic or preach openly. In such cases, local dioceses had canons (norms) regarding such vocations, despite the lack of a universal code in their regard. So, no, it is not the case that there has been only one kind of hermit living "traditional" hermit life on their own until 1983 when Canon 603 came to recognize the new possibility of consecrated solitary eremitical life.

Bishop Remi de Roo

The Church, however, came to recognize that God had entrusted her with all forms of eremitical life, and she had failed to sufficiently regard the solitary eremitical life as well as it deserved. Perhaps she distrusted these solitary hermits; perhaps she felt they were too hard to regulate or even shepherd. Sometimes, eccentricity replaced authenticity and individuality detracted from one's participation as a member of the body of Christ. (Paul Giustiniani wrote that solitary hermits were no longer valid given Eucharistic and other sacramental changes in the Church.) 

Whatever the reasons (and there were likely many along the lines noted!) when long-solemnly-professed monks discerned callings to live lives of eremitical solitude, they had to leave their congregations and seek laicization so that they might live as hermits because their congregations did not include this option for members in their proper law. About a dozen of these monks came together as lay (or ordained) hermits under Bishop Remi de Roo in BC, who became their bishop protector and eventually gave a very perspicacious intervention at Vatican II regarding how the Church should esteem these vocations. De Roo recognized that this tiny group of men represented the tip of a potentially very large iceberg and wanted the Church to esteem these vocations as they deserved.

During Vatican II seemingly nothing happened as a result of De Roo's intervention --- none of the documents even mentioned eremitical life. Still, in light of the shifts in church life, attitudes, and praxis brought about by Vatican II, the Code of Canon Law needed to be rewritten. Amid this re-writing, the Church added canons 603-605, recognizing solitary hermits, consecrated virgins living in the world, and the bishop's responsibility to remain open to new forms of consecrated life respectively. What the Church has tried to do with Canon 603 is honor the solitary eremitical vocation as a gift of God to the Church. She has come to recognize its importance to her life and she has provided a canonical (normative) way for individuals who feel called to live this way, to be professed and consecrated by God through the Church's mediation. Hermits whose consecration and professions are canonical become Catholic Hermits, meaning they are permitted to live their lives in "the name of the Church" as God has called them to. Such vocations are mutually discerned while such an identity (Catholic Hermit) is a right and obligation entrusted to the person by the Church herself in a public (canonical) Rite of consecration beyond that of baptism. 

I am convinced that by making the solitary eremitical vocation canonical, the church will say to all genuine hermits, whether canonical or non-canonical, that the church esteems such vocations as a gift of God to the world. At the same time, the Church has recognized that this vocation is a difficult one and relatively rare since few human beings will be called (or able) to achieve the fullness of authentic humanity in the silence of solitude. Far more frequent will be those who seek isolation or individualism, who say with Charlie Brown, [[ I love humanity!! It's People I hate!!]], or who are seeking escape in what contemporary culture calls "Cocooning". The reason for Canon 603 is to codify and provide for the supervision of an ecclesial life that is truly given over to love --- the love of God, of self, and of the whole of God's creation. Hermits generally need such a context if they are not to slide into these forms of eremitical "heresy" or even "apostasy". Common knowledge recognizes and reflects this tendency to distortions and selfishness in all of the stereotypes and derogatory notions it holds regarding what constitutes a "hermit". The establishment of stable forms and states of consecrated life is the task of the Church, and C 603 is part of this achievement for those called to solitary eremitical life.

As I think again about "Why Canon 603?" I remember that when I first googled hermits what showed up was a long list dedicated to "hermit crabs". Second, came all of the eccentric or stereotypical references to "hermits" --- misanthropes, psychopaths, social failures, and so forth. Finally, there were a very few references to authentic hermits whose lives witnessed to a serious commitment to God and authentic humanity lived for the sake of the other. Over the past 40 years, C 603 has become part of helping others reconsider the nature of healthy eremitical life and appreciate the importance of the silence of solitude in every life.

Please check the labels to the right of this post to find similar responses. See especially Canon 603 - history.

Feast of Jesus' Baptism (Reprise)

 Of all the feasts we celebrate, the feast of the baptism of Jesus is one of the most difficult for us to understand. We are used to thinking of baptism as a solution to original sin instead of the means of our initiation into the death and resurrection of Jesus, or our adoption as daughters and sons of God and heirs to his Kingdom, or again, as a consecration to God's very life and service --- a new way of being human. When viewed this way, and especially when we recall that John's baptism was one of repentance for sin, how do we make sense of a sinless Jesus submitting to it?

I think two points need to be made here. First, Jesus grew into his vocation. His Sonship was real and completely unique but not completely developed or historically embodied from the moment of his conception. Rather it was something he embraced more and more fully over his lifetime. Secondly, his Sonship was the expression of solidarity with us and his fulfillment of the will of his Father to be God-with-us. Jesus will incarnate the Logos of God definitively in space and time, but this event we call the incarnation encompasses and is only realized fully in his life, death, and resurrection -- not in his nativity. Only in allowing himself to be completely transparent to this Word, only in "dying to self," and definitively setting aside all other possible destinies does Jesus come to fully embody and express the Logos of God in a way that expresses his solidarity with us as well.

It is probably the image of Baptism-as-consecration and commissioning then which is most helpful to us in understanding Jesus' submission to John's baptism. Here the man Jesus is set apart as the one in whom God will truly "hallow his name." (That is, in Jesus' weakness and self-emptying God's powerful presence (Name) will make all things Holy and a sacrament of God's presence.) Here, in an act of manifest commitment, Jesus' humanity is placed completely at the service of the living God and of those to whom God is committed. Here his experience as one set apart or consecrated by and for God establishes God as completely united with us and our human condition. This solidarity is reflected in his statement to John that together they must fulfill the will of God. And here too Jesus anticipates the death and resurrection he will suffer for the sake of both human and Divine destinies which, in him, will be reconciled and inextricably wed to one another. His baptism establishes the pattern not only of HIS humanity but that of all authentic humanity. So too does it reveal the nature of true Divinity, for ours is a God who becomes completely subject to our sinful reality to free us for his own entirely holy one.

I suspect that even at the end of the Christmas season we are still scandalized by the incarnation. (Recent conversations on CVs and secularity make me even surer of this!) We still stumble over the intelligibility of this baptism, and the propriety of it especially. Our inability to fathom Jesus' own baptism, and our tendency to be shocked by it because of Jesus' identity,  just as JohnBp was probably shocked, says we are not comfortable, even now, with a God who enters exhaustively into our reality. We remain uncomfortable with a Jesus who is tempted like us in ALL THINGS and matures into his identity as God's only begotten Son.

We are puzzled by one who is holy as God is holy and, as the creed affirms, "true God from true God" and who, even so, is consecrated to and by the one he calls Abba --- and commissioned to the service of this Abba's Kingdom and people. A God who wholly identifies with us, takes on our sinfulness, and comes to us in smallness, weakness, submission, and self-emptying is really not a God we are comfortable with --- despite three weeks of Christmas celebrations and reflections, and a prior four weeks of preparation -- is it? In fact, none of this was comfortable for Jews or early Christians either. The Jewish leadership was upset by JnBp's baptisms generally because they took place outside the Temple precincts and structures (that is, in the realm we literally call profane). Early Christians (Jewish and otherwise) were embarrassed by Jesus' baptism by John --- as Matt's added explanation of the reasons for it in vv 14-15 indicates. They were concerned that perhaps it indicated Jesus' inferiority to John the Baptist and they wondered if maybe it meant that Jesus had sinned prior to his baptism. And perhaps this embarrassment is as it should be. Perhaps the scandal attached to this baptism signals to us we are beginning to get things right theologically.

After all, today's feast tells us that Jesus' public ministry begins with a ritual washing, consecration, and commissioning by God which is similar to our own baptismal consecration. The difference is that Jesus freely accepts life under the sway of sin in his baptism just as he wholeheartedly embraces a public (and one could cogently argue, a thoroughly secular) vocation to proclaim God's sovereignty. The story of the desert temptation or testing that follows this underscores this acceptance. His public life begins with an event that prefigures his end as well. There is a real dying to self involved here, not because Jesus has a false self that must die -- as each of us has --- but because in these events his life is placed completely at the disposal of his God, his Abba, in solidarity with us. Loving another, affirming the being of another in a way that subordinates one's own being to theirs --- putting one's own life at their disposal and surrendering all other life possibilities always entails a death of sorts -- and a kind of rising to new life as well. The dynamics present on the cross are present here too; here we see only somewhat less clearly a complete and obedient (that is open and responsive) submission to the will of God, and an unfathomable subjection to that which human sinfulness makes necessary precisely so that God's love may be exhaustively present and conquer here as well.

Christmas 2023 - New Year's 2024 and the Canticle of the Turning

I have posted this in the past at points when I have experienced something in the day's liturgy that speaks directly to me in a way that lets me know God is present and active, and intimately so. I have written in the past that my spiritual director and I have been doing a particular kind of inner work that leads to the healing of various forms of personal woundedness. There have been moments in the past 7.5 years where I have experienced significant healing and the sense of newness that comes with that and I have written about this occasionally --- the last time with the publication of "Classical Gas" which so well-reflected the way I was feeling. 

This Christmas/New Year's has been the same kind of season: a time of great promise and the realization of that promise achieved in unimaginable ways. God's grace and a lot of hard work (made possible via Grace!) have achieved the deepest and most fundamental healing Sister Marietta and I have been working towards. As a result, the language of Mary's Magnificat has been strong in my mind, along with the promise associated with Paul's letter to the Romans, and also this song that so beautifully echoes the Magnificat. (Because some of my own experience is the result of trauma (childhood and young adult) whose deepest effects reach into the present, many lines in this song speak to me vividly; today it was, [[. . .Your mercy will last from the depths of the past to the end of the age to be.]] God is doing something new (kainetes) in our world with the Christ Event; God is doing something new in (and through) us in Christ. 

Unimaginable healing and growth can come to us when we let the Spirit of the Risen Christ and his Abba work in us in this way. He does not spurn our weakness; instead, it is in and through our weakness that God's power is perfected! (2 Cor 12:9) Through the transformation of that same weakness into the medium of God's grace, our own brokenness can become the astonishing revelation of God's wisdom and justice. Let us open our hearts to God's creative presence in ways that resonate with Mary's song and with this Canticle of the Turning as well! 

My thanks again to Sister Michelle Sherliza, OP for the wonderful video version of this song.

New Year's Day 2024

Some will remember posts on the two Greek words used to speak about newness, particularly kainetes or kaine which refers to the qualitative newness that comes when God heals, renews, and gives us a place to stand in God's life. It contrasts with the form of newness (neos) that is used to refer toa situation like getting a new pair of shoes --- something that is new today and old tomorrow and doesn't really remake us or our future in substantive ways. Our celebration of Christmas is the celebration of God, together with Jesus and his family, beginning something brand new in our world, namely, God's own assumption of a  personal place in space and time. He does this so that he might be the God who dwells with us and in and through us is allowed to touch and recreate the whole of reality so that God might be all in all. This is our vocation. It is also what constitutes us as truly human. At the same time, it constitutes God's own will and destiny. 

I am getting ready to teach Romans this year (Jan-June) and I am anticipating the Spirit of God bringing newness to birth in the lives of those who are participating in the class. Romans will surprise and even shock folks in some ways --- especially if they have tended to hear it in short elections at Mass, or if their notion of salvation is too-highly individualized. One of the most striking things that Paul teaches the early Church is precisely that our God-willed destiny is not about going to heaven, and even less about existing as a disembodied soul after death, but instead is about being part of the new heaven and new earth that will come when God is all in all. As noted above, it is the whole of reality that is recreated, a process that began especially with Jesus' resurrection (the climax of the Incarnation of God in Jesus' life) and the victory of God over godlessness, sin, and death.

We have so focused on "getting to heaven" that many of us have disregarded and even participated without care in the destruction of God's good creation --- as though salvation is an "us and God only" affair. Similarly, Christians have treated God's Chosen People as though God has changed his mind and rejected them, rather than recognizing God's election has been extended to us and to all the nations in the world. We tend to treat the Risen Christ as though he is still locked in his tomb (though we may exchange a tabernacle for a rock-hewn cave here) rather than alive and active in the Holy Spirit everywhere and for/with everyone.

As we begin this new year, we might first take note of what we think we know about God, ourselves, and the future we look forward to -- usually without asking mature and searching questions. How many theological words do we use routinely without ever asking what they really mean? How many know, for instance, that heaven is not so much a place, but a euphemism for God's own self and that it can thus refer to God's own life shared with us? Christian Theologians will recognize that a central task of their work is guarding the docta ignorantia future (the "learned unknowing" of the future). 

Rahner wrote that the "critical role of theology is to resist closure with regard to the future, to recognize what we do not know". (cf. Theological Investigations, vol XII, "The Question of the Future") Christian humility involves this kind of awareness --- though, too often our teachers may have failed to give us a real sense of this. When coupled with a radical trust in God's promise we can enter our world with greater hope and commitment to work in Christ and the power of the Spirit toward that new heaven and earth God so yearns for. While we cannot do this ourselves alone, science tells us time is short and prudent action is urgent; our faith tells us the choice is a critical one (in every sense of the term critical!!).

All good wishes for a fruitful and truly New Year!!