The meaning of the term "Stopgap vocations"

As a result of a recent  and simplistic mischaracterization of my position on another blog (Cloister Outreach), I wanted to clarify what I mean when I object to using Canon 603 as a "stop-gap vocation" and why that is. Let me be clear that I do not object to hermits becoming cenobites at some point in their religious lives. If a hermit feels genuinely called to do that at some point after discerning and living an eremitical life in good faith for some time, then well and good. But that is not what the term stopgap vocation implies nor is it the situation I have been concerned with.

The term stopgap means just what it says, something is being used to stop (close) the gap which exists between an immediate situation and  the ordinary options which exist to address or resolve the situation. An emergency tracheotomy is a stopgap solution to a more lasting and ordinary solution to the problem of respiratory problems due to blockage of the airway, for instance. Taping two pieces of broken eyeglass frames together is a stopgap solution to the problem of broken spectacles until one can either get the frames repaired or buy new ones. Employing untrained and incompetent people to fill security posts at the airport in a time of increased fear and terrorist threat is a stopgap solution. In the area of vocations when someone seeks to live a cenobitical (that is, a communal) life and to be publicly professed and consecrated as a cenobitical religious but have a number of mishaps in making this happen, turning to canon 603 to get themselves publicly professed and consecrated is a stopgap solution to the problem --- especially if they are doing so with an eye towards becoming a community when that becomes feasible in financial and other ways down the line. It is also an abuse of canon 603 which is meant to govern, profess and consecrate those who have seriously discerned a LIFE vocation to solitary diocesan eremitical life. Beyond this it is dishonest and COULD actually be a fraudulent act depending on circumstances.

Another example (and one which is ordinarily much less sinister but still requires caution) would be someone who is forced to leave religious life because of health issues and who seeks to use canon 603 to continue in public vows and consecration without actually ALSO and SUBSEQUENTLY discerning a true vocation to eremitical solitude. (As I have said many times, eremitical solitude is more than simply living a pious life alone and the call to eremitical solitude must be discerned separately from a call to ordinary monastic solitude or from one's own coming to terms with such loss.)  Similar but once again more sinister examples involve those who have failed at community life but who still want to be "Sisters" or "wear a habit",  those who have failed at life (work, relationships, schooling, individuation in general) and who are looking for a socially acceptable and even estimable way to validate that, and so forth. For many, canon 603 seems to offer a solution to their quandary. Again, however, in each of these cases (except perhaps that of the person who has been forced to leave religious life by illness -- a situation which requires extra caution and discernment) Canon 603 is being misused and the entire idea of a LIFE vocation with solemn commitments and consecration is being betrayed.

If one attempts to use Canon 603, which is geared to SOLITARY eremitical vocations and their protection and governance, to get someone consecrated so that they can THEREAFTER form a community of hermits and skip all of the necessary canonical steps to approval as an institute of consecrated life, this is using Canon 603 as a stopgap solution to the problem. Not only is this a betrayal of the Canon itself, but it is a betrayal of the charism or gift quality the vocation to solitary eremitical life brings to the Church and World. (Please see other posts on the charism of the vocation, or on "the silence of solitude as charism" and "the redemption of isolation" for an understanding of what I mean here.)

At the beginning of the history of Canons 603 and 604 some provinces (the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, etc) refused to profess and/or consecrate anyone according to canons 603 and 604 (consecrated virgins living in the world). They rightly worried that these canons could be used as fallback options or that they really indicated a merely fallback "vocation" for those who failed at religious life and they did not want that. Abuses can and have occurred with c 603 and 604 but the value of these canons and the vocations they govern cannot simply be denied as a result. Even so I know of a couple of other dioceses who have joined LA in its boycott of such vocations precisely because of such abuses. Of course, authentic vocations are also a reality and the Church recognizes this. Unfortunately, the misuse of canon 603, for instance, by those seeking to use it as a stopgap means to consecration could continue to be the basis for greater and greater caution in this regard and even to a functional or virtual suppression of its use. It is really imperative pastorally as well as theologically and spiritually that we do not allow such abuses and misuses to occur.

In any case, I hope my usage is clear, and the nature of my concerns regarding the importance of this abuse are demonstrated in the above, however briefly that may be.

Writing a Rule of Life, Negotiating the Tensions between tradition and the contemporary situation

[[Dear Sister O'Neal, when you write about writing a Rule of Life you speak of needing to draw from or even "subsume" the Rule under a larger "vital" Rule like that of St Benedict. You explain that most of us are not spiritual geniuses capable of writing a Rule which challenges to sufficient growth. At the same time you are clear that the hermit must write her own Rule and that it must be more than a list of things to do and not do. You don't like the idea of a hermit simply copying a Rule nor do you think someone should write the hermit's Rule of Life for them.

What I am wondering is if there isn't a conflict between some of these things. For instance, if we are not spiritual geniuses and need to subsume any Rule we write under a larger living Rule, why not simply adopt that one? Or why not allow someone else to write the Rule for us? Wouldn't it be safer spiritually? There have been times when the Church demanded new communities adopt already-established Rules. Doesn't canon 603's norm that the hermit write her own Rule fly in the face of the wisdom behind that decision? ]] [redacted]

What really terrific questions! You have clearly read everything I have written on this (meager though it is!) and thought about it along with some pertinent Church history I never mentioned. In responding I suppose the first thing I would suggest is that conflict is not the right word, but yes, I agree completely that there is tension between what we read in other Rules, what we live and write ourselves, and also between that and the larger Rule under which we might choose to subsume the Rule we write. The process of becoming able to write and then writing a Rule is complex. The work MUST be our own in some really deep and essential way --- and that will include the deficiencies and weaknesses in our own spirituality and lives which must be grown beyond with the help of spiritual leaders who surpass our own wisdom in every way. It is only in dialogue with these others (and other Rules) that we can truly find our own voice and, more importantly, the will of God which shapes the way we will live our vocations.

As with any dialogue there is the danger we will lose (or simply give away) our own voice, distrust our own perceptions and wisdom or our own experiences and sensibilities. On the other hand, there is the danger that we will not really engage the "other" in this dialogue but merely carry on a self-centered monologue. But a true conversation and this specific dialogue is essential; it is the way tradition is honored and extended in new ways and into new situations. It is the way genuine charisms are discovered and incarnated and mission fruitfully embodied and fulfilled. Dialogue of this sort has always been important. When we look at the relationship of canon law and proper law in religious life, or the similar relationship between the Rule and the congregation's constitutions we are looking at a dialogue. At every point the need to negotiate the tensions between these, to honor tradition and the universally valid and the new historical situation which also mediates God's call and will is a central piece of living our vocations --- whether we are contemplatives, ministerial or apostolic religious, hermits, lay persons, or priests.

Canon 603 requires the hermit write her own Rule because it requires the hermit be an active participant in the dialogue between contemporary eremitism and the long history of Christian (and other) eremitical life. As I have said before, no one can do this for her; it is part of being a diocesan hermit publicly professed under Canon 603. In a very real way, it is a key element in claiming this unique vocation for oneself and for the contemporary Church.

My limited sense of the reasons for the Church's practice of requiring the adoption of already-existing Rules by new congregations or commun-ities is that this was intended to limit the spread of heretical practices and beliefs within religious congregations.  There is some wisdom in this, especially when the proper law of the congregations can allow for necessary flexibility and adaptations in praxis and mission. What this means is that the dialogue mentioned above was and often still is carried out in this particular way in religious congregations. But, when it is authentic, eremitical life has always been more individual without being individualistic. In some ways each hermit, especially when they are solitary hermits as opposed to those belonging to a congregation of semi-eremites, is analogous to the founder of a congregation, the one in whom the tension between traditional and contemporary is specifically negotiated. The Rule they write and live by is not meant for a community but for an individual and a great deal of what characterizes cenobitical Rules and the spirituality of their founders simply will not apply to them in any meaningful way.

Thus, Canon 603 calls for each hermit to take on this task of  1) negotiating the tensions mentioned above and 2) writing a viable Rule themselves which is the expression of their ongoing commitment to this task. Living such a life may not be free of risk, but it is certainly the task every solitary hermit must embrace or cease to be solitary hermits. Similarly then, the Rule  the hermit writes is not free of risk either; one may lose one's voice entirely or fall into mere idiosyncrasy and individualism. When this happens the Rule one writes will either not be adequate to live eremitical life or to lives one's OWN eremitical life, but despite these risks, writing a Rule is the natural expression and codification of the dialogue the hermit is negotiating. Of course, there are a number of things which can help minimize the risk involved including subsuming this personal Rule under an established Rule, submitting to the supervision and input of Bishops, canonists, other hermits, and delegates, and reading widely in the history of eremitical life, but at the same time care must always be taken that these steps do not short-circuit or betray the dialogue the hermit is called to negotiate and embody in her daily response to her call. After all, in a very general sense this is part of the gift she brings to Church and World and a piece of the challenge with which she confronts every Christian seeking to live the Gospel in contemporary life.

In Memoriam: Newtown Children and Faculty

 Of course there are no words. We stand in silent solidarity with those who have been struck by this unspeakable tragedy. In our own prayer we entrust all of these lives to our great and merciful God who comes and entrusts himself to us as a helpless child. We pray that that same God --- who knows very well what it is to have a Son senselessly murdered at the hands of the angry and fearful --- will touch, heal, and, where needed, change the hearts of those involved in and touched by such atrocities.

Cloister Outreach - Caveat Emptor, Once again

Dear Sister Laurel,
I wanted to thank you for your posts regarding Cloister Outreach (CO) on the Phatmass Phorum recently. I don't know if you are aware of it but CO put up an explanation of the situation you described in 2010  after contacting the Diocese of Charlotte to check on the claims made by the "foundress" of CO. It tells a very different story than the one you posted and claims you violated the privacy of the hermit-canonist you contacted in an attempt to undermine the Cloisterite Hermits' Foundation. The explanation reads:

[[Gemma, Cloister Outreach coordinator, had been handling the "legal" part of the Cloisterite Hermits, to include interactions with the canonist. Because of this, we thought that the local ordinary was aware of the project. However, due to Gemma's autism, and the complexities involved with the language of canonical legalities, she (Gemma) did not understand a particular phrase used as meaning that the canonist had separated herself from the project. This was entirely Gemma's fault--not due to stupidity, but due to autistic deficit.

As a result, the Cloisterite Hermits had persevered in the development of their charism (entirely legal under canon law), thinking the canonist had still been retained. Critics went so far as to contact the canonist and posting her information online--thus violating her privacy which we had fought to maintain, as per her request--in an attempt to undermine the Cloisterite Hermits' foundation. Due to the information that we were working with at the time, we were under the impression that the Cloisterite Hermits were a work-in-progress known to the diocese. Now that we know the actual situation, the websites will be amended to reflect such.]] Is there anything in your March 2010 story that needs to be amended in light of this?

Thanks for the question. The issue of Cloisters Outreach continues to crop up from time to time and I get questions about the projects occasionally --- usually because they mention using canon 603 or "becoming diocesan hermits", and similar things. I have tended not to respond despite accusations of defamation, libel, malicious intent, etc though these are either incoherent or groundless. I think two things need to be clarified in light of these public comments. First, in the conversation an associate had with the canonist (Sister Sheila Richards, ESA) Sister made it clear that her own conversations with Gemma (not the person's real name) involved Gemma's own vocation, not projects of CO, and further, that as soon as those few conversations threatened to go further afield, Sister Sheila broke off communication. It also should be noted that at the very first stages of such a project it is premature to be having complex legal conversations. No one yet knows what, if anything, will come of the person's idea. This means that there were no conversations regarding legal complexities using a language of canonical legalities and especially no single phrase meaning the Sister had "separated herself from the project." She, as she herself made clear, had never been involved in the project in the first place.

Second, the claims being made all over the internet did not say simply that the Cloisterite Hermits were a project KNOWN to the Diocese of Charlotte though that too was certainly wondered about. The claims stated that CO had the SUPPORT of the Bishop,  diocesan supervision, and that Cloisters Outreach, especially the eremitical expression, was being guided by Sister Sheila "every step of the way." As you may recall,when questions were asked, folks were urged by Gemma herself to contact the diocese directly with their questions. We simply did that. Twice --- in case an error had been made the first time.

Thirdly, Sister Sheila is both a canonist and a diocesan hermit who works for the Diocese of Charlotte. In each of these roles she is a public person with commensurate rights, obligations, and responsibilities. Given some of the stuff coming out of CO with regard to eremitical life, formation, spirituality, use of canon 603, etc, questions were being raised about her competence and prudence. Now, it is true CO never mentioned her name but one really has to ask 1) how many diocesan hermits are there in the US? (Fewer than 60 or so) 2) How many are canonists? (we are in very low single digit numbers now), and 3) how many of those work for the Diocese of Charlotte? (The answer is just one and her name is listed on the Diocesan Website as both canonist and hermit.) ANYONE could have identified Sister with about 20 seconds worth of googling on the basis of the information provided by Gemma's own posts so that hardly argues CO was bound to maintain her privacy or that I (et al) was the one who violated that bond! Even so, we spoke with Sister Sheila directly, and, given the questions raised about her role in CO and her competence and prudence, as well as for the issue of transparency (which has been singularly lacking with regard to Cloisters Outreach) thought it was important to name the persons with whom we had spoken.

Fourthly, were we trying to undermine the eremitical project connected with CO? Not really, but the answer also depends on the nature of the project. What we were really trying to do was be sure that people asked sufficient questions and got straightforward answers, if not from Gemma, then from the Diocese she had implicated in her projects. These needed to be answers that comported with the answers given to us by the Diocese of Charlotte. Beyond this CO's spirituality and theology needs to be assured as well as their formation programs, etc. These are important elements which must be vetted (and led) by competent people. Finally, there are options or (in the latter case) a specific avenue for individuals to become either lay or consecrated hermits in today's Church; there is no need for the kinds of things CO offers in this regard and in some ways association with Cloisters Outreach could actually prove a hindrance to those discerning a call to canon 603 profession/consecration. So, to the extent CO's eremitical expression seems built on sand rather than rock, it is true that I was not adverse to pouring a little water on the sand and letting nature take her course. After all, to the degree the foundation was sound, then nothing would have been harmed at all and they might even have been helped by the confirmation. So no, there was no attempt to undermine the foundation. There was, however, a definite effort to establish the truth and demand that CO stand on that truth and no where else.

One final comment. While I am sorry for anyone with a condition which makes his or her ability to participate in discussions of the complex canonical issues involved in founding a religious congregation difficult or impossible, it seems imprudent then that they would be the ones in charge of such a task. At the very least such a person should have had someone who was not similarly impaired along with them for such discussions (and, presuming any really took place, certainly after the first one!). It seems to me that such a person should also let the canonist know that they are handicapped in this specific way and, as far as possible, require things to be stated in ordinary language. My own experience with canonists, limited though it is, (1 Bishop, 2 Vicars for Religious, 1 friend) is that they are VERY good in explaining canonical matters in straightforward language; I even have the sense that they enjoy doing so (after all, they enjoy canon law and this, as it is in theology or any other field, is a sign of their true expertise). I don't personally believe any heavily technical/canonical discussions took place, but even if they did does failing to take prudent steps to be sure these discussions were fully understood argue for such a person's competence to lead such a project?

Nothing, as far as I am aware, in the original article needs to be changed. It was a simple statement of fact. I said at the time that I would be more than happy to publish more if those facts changed, but no one notified me of changes (they did make charges of defamation, libel, and claimed serious misunderstandings had taken place, and so forth, so I know they saw the post). However, the comments in the post you sent do require some response. I hope this has helped.

The LandFILL Harmonic

Landfill Harmonic film teaser from Landfill Harmonic on Vimeo.

This is another of those truly inspiring stories friends send my way. This one came from a violist in the orchestra I play in. Some may question the existence of God, but the creative drive towards transcendence and life comes out in us in innumerable ways. Music and the need to make music is one of those. I was most struck by the comment that a violin in these places is worth more than a house. Of course, houses are very poor affairs in these parts, but the comment still challenges us to attend to how we determine and honor the genuine riches in our lives.

First Week of Advent: In What Story Will We Stand?

A Poignant Conversation

Last week I spoke to a friend I haven't seen in a number of years. She has Alzheimer's and now lives in a different state. We have known each other since the early 80's  when we were both working with the same spiritual director and sometimes stayed at the Center for dinner or made retreat together. Today Denise remembers that time clearly as a watershed period of her life and it is a complete joy for her to talk about it. Doing so is part of what allows her to remain a hopeful and faithful person. It is a major part of her ability to remain herself. But her capacity for story has been crippled and to some extent reduced by her illness.

We are Made for Story

For me this conversation helped underscore a deep truth of our existence. Human beings are made for story. Story is an inescapable part of being truly human and we are diminished without it. It is not only a profound need within us but a drive which affects everything we are and do. Nothing happens without story. Nothing significant that happens in our life is unmediated by story.  When scientists reflect on and research this truth, they conclude we are hardwired for story. Neuroscientists have even located a portion of the brain which is dedicated to spinning stories. This portion of our brain sometimes functions to "console" and compensate one for the loss of story in brain disorders (amnesia, for instance) and I sometimes hear it at work in my friend Denise as she fills in the holes in her own memory for herself; but it is implicated in our quest for connection, context, and meaning in all its forms.

Thus scientists explain that story is actually the way we think, the way we relate to and process reality, the way we make sense of things and get our own hearts and minds around them. Whenever we run into something we don't understand or cannot control --- something we need to hold together in a meaningful way we invariably weave a story around it. Children do it with their dolls and crayons; Abused children do it and often have to be helped in later life to let go of these so they may embrace their place in a better, truer story. Physicians do it when they determine diagnoses and prognoses. Historians do it in explaining the significance of events. Scientists spin stories to explain the nature of reality. The complex stories they author are called theories. Like the myths of religious traditions, these narratives often possess a profound explanatory power and truth. They work to allow the development of technology, medicine, and the whole of the sciences, but they are stories nonetheless. And of course, gossips, know-it-alls and scam artists of all sorts routinely spin stories to draw us in and exploit our capacity and hunger for story.

We all know that stories are essential to our humanity.  At their best they help create a context, a sacred space and healing dynamic where we can be ourselves and stand authentically with others: Thus, when someone we love dies it is natural (human!) and even essential that we gather together to tell stories which help reknit the broken threads of our story into something new and hopeful, something which carries us into a future with promise. In a way which is similarly healing and lifegiving we offer strangers places in our own stories and make neighbors of them. We do the same with friends. Ideally, there is no greater gift we can give another than a place in our own stories, no greater compassion than our empathy for and appreciation of another's entire story. For good and ill our humanity is integrally linked to the fact that we are made for story. We reside and find rest within stories; they connect us to others. They are vehicles of transcendence which make sense of the past and draw us into the future. They link us to our culture, our families, our communities, our faith, and our church; without them we are left bereft of identity or place and our lives are empty and meaningless. 

We have only to look at the place story holds in our life in the Church to appreciate this. The creed we profess is not a series of disparate beliefs or dogmas but a coherent story we embrace more fully every time we repeat it and affirm "I believe" this. Our liturgy of the Word is centered on stories of all sorts --- challenging, inspiring, consoling us as only stories can do. Even the act of consecration is accomplished by telling a story we recount and embrace in our "Amen" of faith: "On the night he was betrayed, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it saying. . . then he took the cup, blessed it saying. . .]] Stories like these, we know, provide the context and overarching narrative in which all things ultimately hold together and are meaningful.They make whole and holy. For this reason we yearn for them and honor them as sacred.

Our Capacity for Story is Both Blessing and Curse 

Augustine summarized all of this when he said, "O God, we are made for thee, and our hearts are restless until they rest in thee." He might well have said."O God your story is our own and our hearts are restless until they finally reside securely in that story". Just like physicists who are searching for that one theory of everything, we are each made for and in search of the story which makes complete and ultimate sense of our lives, the story which allows us to develop our own personal stories fully, the narrative framework which lets us be completely and exhaustively human. Christians recognize this blessed story as the Kingdom of God, God's own story.The challenge for each of us, I think, is to make this story our own. The problem? We already reside rather securely in other stories, other controlling narratives and myths. Because of our capacity and even our hunger for story our lives are full of scripts and tapes which conflict with the story we are offered in Christ. Some seem lifegiving but many do not serve us very well at all.

 For instance, when young persons opt to join a gang, they are choosing a particular story of status, community, belonging, power as opposed to powerlessness, and a place in a world which seems larger and more adult than the one they occupy already. Unless these things are distorted into badges of courage and achievement the narrative omits prison, death, the sundering of family relationships, loss of education, future, and so forth. Another example: when adults choose to have affairs they are buying into a story they tell themselves (and our culture colludes with this at every point) about freedom and love, youth, immediate gratification, sexuality and attractiveness. The part of the narrative they leave out or downplay is the part of the story we are each called to tell with our lives about personal integrity, commitment,  faithfulness, patience, and all the other things that constitute real love and humanity. 

What we are seeing here is the very essence of sin. It is no coincidence that the Genesis account of humanity's fall from "grace" (which is really a place in God's own life or "story") centers around the fact that at evil's urging Adam and Eve swap the story God tells them about themselves, their world, and their place in it for another one they prefer to believe. In THIS story eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil will not bring death; in THIS story God is a liar; in this story humanity grasps at godhead and lives forever anyway. So many of the scripts and tapes we have adopted are as distorted and destructive and they touch every part of our lives. Two of the most recent I heard are, "The poor are takers" and "Selfishness is a moral imperative and the key to the common good." But there are many others! Scripts about what real men and women do or don't do --- both in society and in our church --- about what freedom is, divine justice, what is required to gain God's love (despite the fact God gives it freely to anyone who will simply accept it), etc. As sinful human beings we are an ambiguous mixture of stories which make us true and those which stunt or distort us. Our capacity for story is both blessing and curse.

Story is also the way Home

If our capacity for story is both blessing and curse then it is also the way home. In particular the stories Jesus tells us are a primary way home. Jesus' parables are, in fact, one of the ways he works miracles. (If anyone --- even Webster's Dictionary --- ever tells you these parables are "simple religious stories with a moral" don't believe them! They are far more dynamic and dangerous than that!) Like every story, Jesus' parables draw us in completely, allow us to suspend disbelief, check our overly critical voices at the door, and listen with our hearts as well as our intellects. They create a sacred space in which we are alone with God and can meet ourselves and God face to face. No one can enter this space with us even if there are hundreds standing shoulder to shoulder listening to the same story. But Jesus' stories do more. As I have written here before: [[ When Jesus told parables, for instance, he did so for two related reasons: first, to identify and subvert some of the less than authentic controlling myths people had adopted as their own, and second to offer the opportunity to make a choice for an alternative story by which one could live an authentically human and holy life.

Parables, Jesus' parables that is, typically throw down two sets of values; two perspectives [or stories] are cast down beside one another (para = alongside, and balein = to throw down). One set represents the Kingdom of God; one the kingdom where God is not sovereign --- the realm the Church has sometimes called "the world". Because our feet are firmly planted in the first set of values, [the first set of stories or scripts], the resulting clash disorients us and throws us off balance; it is unexpected and while first freeing us to some extent from our embeddedness (or enmeshment) in other narratives, it creates a moment of "KRISIS" or decision and summons us to choose where we will finally put our feet down again, which reality we will stand firmly in and inhabit, which story will define us, which sovereign will author and rule us. ]]

Will we affirm the status quo, the normal cultural, societal, personal, or even some of the inadequate religious narratives we cling to, or will we instead allow our minds and hearts to be remade and adopt God's own story as our own? Who will author us? Will it be the dominant culture, or the God who relativizes and redeems it? Where indeed will we put our feet down? In which story will we choose to walk and with whom? These are clearly the questions that face us during this season of Advent as we prepare our hearts for Christmas and a God who tells us his story in a most unexpected way.The fresh cycle of readings are an invitation to approach God's story with fresh ears and a willingness to have our lives reshaped accordingly. It is the story we are made and hunger for, the story in which we are made true and whole, the story in which nothing authentic of our lives is ever lost or forgotten. What greater gift can we imagine or be given?

Hermits24, A Misrepresentation??

A couple of weeks ago another diocesan hermit and I discovered a website which we both have concerns about and which I personally want to gently caution readers about. It is called "Hermits24" and is linked to the Google search term "Catholic Hermits online" along with some sort of "Foundation of Bishop Hugh" (the title is in Polish as is their Facebook page and all the information about the "Foundation." The reference to Bishop Hugh is apparently a reference to Hugh who was linked to the Carthusians, so this may also be linked to a generally lay group of Hermits of St Bruno.

At the top of the page are tabs which link to various continents, regions, or countries. When you click on the tabs you are taken to a list of several hermits (at least some of which are diocesan and perpetually professed). Each name is linked to  text which is taken from that hermit's website or blog. It SEEMS to be a list of Catholic Hermits who have online presences. It is from these hermits that the site seems to have garnered its name. So, what is the problem? What are our concerns?

First, each of the pages, including the pages with text from each hermit's website, have a paypal button at the bottom and each one asks for contributions to "us." My own name and a link to this blog are included but no one got my permission for this, for instance, despite the fact that it looks as though I am a party to this appeal for money/financial support. Secondly, no where on the website do we learn who "us" is. It APPEARS to be the diocesan (and lay) hermits who are listed here as part of the "Foundation" in whose name the site is established or part of "Hermits24", but this is simply not true. No diocesan hermit I know on this list is receiving anything financial from this foundation or even knew about its existence. Third, the "Foundation" does indeed note a bank account,  but does not indicate whether this is a legitimate foundation with ecclesiastical and civil credentials (it should have both to be a true charity for hermits).  Though it is supposed to exist in Warsaw no diocese is noted, no way of contacting anyone for clarification is given (there is an email address in other Google search findings),. Fourthly, the site asks for one to join and login, but the login leads nowhere and it appears that the only button that actually works besides the one leading to the registration form is the paypal button.

The website has been up less than six months, so perhaps it is unfinished. (Addendum: NB, I visited today, 20 Nov. and temporary text was there when it had not been before so this seems very likely.) However, the Paypal account and linkage is certainly finished and the impression that contributions assist those of us listed there is certainly very real. It is very hard to shake off the impression that this is a site which takes advantage of real diocesan hermits' standing and ostensible poverty and need. Because of this I am asking folks who might consider contributing to this site to refrain from doing so at least for the time being. Whomever benefits from this, it is not the hermits listed. If you wish to contribute to diocesan hermits go to the various hermits' websites and contact them to see if they are open to such contributions. (Some of us will be; some of us will not.) If folks who read this blog are connected to this website in some official way and believe you have been misrepresented here, please contact me and clarify things. I would be MORE than happy to speak with you about it and correct anything here which is in error.

Sister Simone Campbell Meets with President Obama

STATEMENT BY NETWORK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SR. SIMONE CAMPBELL ON MEETING BETWEEN PRESIDENT OBAMA & CIVIC & FAITH LEADERS CONCERNING FISCAL DEBATE

Sister Simone Campbell released the following statement today regarding President Obama’s Friday meeting with civic and faith leaders about ongoing fiscal negotiations:

“I was honored to meet with President Obama yesterday and discuss the need for reasonable revenue for responsible programs that protect American families. I talked to the president about the many effective programs I encountered during the “Nuns on the Bus” tours, and we supported his effort to immediately end the Bush tax cuts for the top 2 percent and prevent a massive tax hike for the working poor and the middle class."

“I spoke strongly about how effective and accountable social service programs are, and told him that all departments of the government -- including the Pentagon – must be held to high standards. In tough economic times we need to make sure everyone contributes their fair share. That includes powerful special interests and the wealthiest among us.”

“While President Obama’s rhetoric centers on the middle class, he understands cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and the safety net endanger seniors, children and working poor families. He knows that the faith community is committed to ensuring that the plight of the working poor stays at the heart of these negotiations. Congress needs to work in good faith with the President to find a responsible way forward that honors the values of the American people.”

On the Appropriateness of the term Formation

[[Dear Sister, when you write about formation or ongoing formation very little of it involves formal instruction etc. Instead you begin with "custody of the cell" and most of your ongoing formation seems to be by yourself. Is the term formation appropriate since no one is forming you? Does formation for the hermit differ from that of other monastics? Is one more manipulative than the other?]]

I suppose the term formation does give the impression of formal classes and a kind of coercive shaping by others into a monk or nun or hermit. But formation really means being socialized in a way which, over time, forms us into persons of prayer, silence, solitude, community, and so forth. It is the case that when one enters a given congregation certain values will predominate so that one is socialized with the charism of a Franciscan or Dominican or Carthusian, etc. Still, today this process of being formed is not manipulative, nor is it coercive. It is instead a process of gradually shaping  or conforming one's heart, mind, habits, sensibilities, and so forth to a model one sees all around oneself. While one measures one's behavior, activities, and attitudes according to a Rule and horarium, even more important is the presence of community members who embody the Rule in a pervasive way. Some persons reject the term "formation" --- usually on the inadequate basis of older programs in religious life which have generally been replaced today --- but it seems to me that it is an appropriate term just as it is appropriate for the pitcher into which the potter is shaping or forming the clay or perhaps for the sculpture which Michelangelo perceived he actually freed from the stone in which it was imprisoned without form or identity.

Formation for hermits has always been something achieved with the help of an elder or mentor. Sometimes this has been through modeling and sometimes it has been more demanding and directly instructive or even punitive. For those who suggest this process was never coercive, etc, I would remind them of the story of Romuald who went to learn his hermiting from an elder. They would sit together and Romuald would read or recite. When he made a mistake the elder hermit would whack him on the ear with a rod. Eventually Romuald made a mistake and, before his master could strike him yet again on that ear, Romuald asked him to use the other ear as, he reported, he was almost deaf in the first ear. While the desert Fathers and Mothers seem to have been less heavy handed in their direction, I suspect there is no reason to think that this kind of practice was not fairly common and acceptable, not only around 1000 AD, but earlier on in the history of monastic life.

But even with this bit of history, eremitical formation certainly differs in some ways from highly structured cenobitic models. One is called to the silence of solitude and it takes silence and solitude, prayer and penance to contribute to it as the essential environment of the hermitage and further to reach it as a goal. When I spoke of custody of the cell I meant keeping the rhythm and customs which allow the hermitage to be a place where one can be "socialized" in this particular way of prayer, peace, and holiness. Rather than learning to live in community or being formed in the specific values which mark a religious belonging to a particular Order or religious family the solitary hermit learns the community of solitude and is formed in the compassion which attends knowing the truth of oneself more and more profoundly.  Meanwhile, one grows in the graced capacity for a gentle and loving self-discipline and self-direction and one certainly develops the capacities for solitary study, lectio, contemplative prayer, writing or other expressions, and so forth. The important thing to remember is that in any hermitage, God is the primary "formator" while others merely assist in the process. This really tends to be true in monasteries as well.

In the silent solitude of the hermitage two truths predominate: the fragility and weakness of the hermit and the unconditional love of God which marks the hermit as precious and gifted beyond reckoning. Together these two result in a growing humility, a more and more authentic and honest identity rooted in  the God of truth, which allows the hermit to love not only God and herself, but others as well. This will also entail letting go of much that was contrary to such an identity and healing past woundednesses. Again, I think it is appropriate to call all of this specific socialization "formation" though it is not in the least manipulative.  Of course, I would argue that contemporary monastic formation in general is not manipulative or coercive either.

On Battling Demons, St Anthony's Temptation, and the Importance of Myths

[[Dear Sister Laurel, you have written about demons in the past. Do you really believe in demons? How about powers at work from outside us? When I read the desert Fathers a lot of what they say is incredible to me because there is so much reference to demons. The story of Anthony and all the hideous noise that occurred as he battled demons while people passing by heard the fighting is part of that. I just can't buy it. Is there a way to understand this that is not so primitive or mythological?]]

St Anthony'sTemptation by Bosch

Thanks for the questions. The desert is known in two integrally related ways. It is first the place where we are closest to God and may know and be known by him most intimately, and secondly it is the place where people meet demons face to face and battle with them in order to come to terms with their own humanity and claim it more fully. A desert vocation, that is the vocation of the hermit, is especially therefore, a vocation where one does battle with demons and comes to terms with and claims her humanity more fully through the grace of God. But we need to know what the desert Fathers and Mothers were talking about when they spoke of demons and the place of the desert in all of this. Whenever I have written about this I have spoken mainly of doing battle with the demons inside my own heart --- because for me that is the primary struggle that goes on in my life. While there may have been more of a tendency to personify these demons at the time of the desert Fathers and Mothers, I think this is mainly what they were speaking of and secondly of the powers and principalities in our world which are also at work within and upon us.

Consider what the desert (or any wilderness) is like. You are there, God is there, and often, with the exception of wild animals and a barren landscape, that is pretty much all there is. At every moment you are thrown back upon yourself and God (though you may not realize God's presence at this point and may not have yet begun to seek him). To survive with the (perhaps unknown) grace of God you must find the resources within yourself to hunt, find water, create shelter, protect yourself from predators, stave off weather, hunger, boredom, hopelessness, and tedium; you must manage bodily needs, take care of injuries and illness, etc etc. This will mean dealing to some extent with your own insecurities, your own fears, prejudices, ignorance, and allergy to failure on a daily, even hourly basis. You will not survive otherwise. Further, you must deal with the loneliness, the isolation, the loss of all those things (role, position, money, relationships) that made your life valuable in worldly terms. There are no books, no electric lights, no TV's, no computers or internet, no musical instruments or iPods, nothing to distract you from yourself and the God who summons you to your truest self. Even while one is working quietly, one's mind is churning and one's heart is often in turmoil.

And perhaps you will begin to seek out God. If so, the heart that is in turmoil is the place you will enter now in a more concerted way. If you thought the region outside you was wild and threatening, wait until you enter your own heart. It is, after all, at times like these we begin to meet the darker or "shadow" parts of our selves as well as the giftedness and virtuous dimensions. In trying to feed and shelter ourselves we dealt to some extent with fears, insecurities, prejudices, ignorance, etc but now we face them full on --- now when there is nothing to distract us from looking into our own hearts. And besides these demons are so many more! Greed, arrogance, envy, pride, rampant ambition, perfectionism, laziness or a failure of will, a selfishness that rules out compassion, resentment, a tendency to manipulate others or the world around us in order to be loved or appreciated, evasiveness or outright dishonesty. The list goes on and on. If one has not been loved as one ought to have been there may be hatred and a really fearful rage and despair as well. And then there are the roots of these things --- for they do not come from no where! Thus, there are the "demons" which occupy our memories as well! They too must be exorcised in their own way.

One thing must be emphasized, however, especially given the focus of this question and answer. Our looking at the darknesses of our own hearts in such a situation is dependent upon the light and love of God (as well as upon our memory of all those who have loved us throughout our lives). It is the one who is loved and knows herself to be loved as only God loves who can look at her own sins against love and the darknesses of her own personality fully and honestly. But the process of coming to know God's love AND coming to see and deal with one's darker aspects is often a long and messy process. The desert Fathers and Mothers rightly described it in terms of a struggle which was fraught with temptation and which could even be described in the terms Anthony's battle was described. Like Jacob wrestling with an angel and coming away limping,  or Anthony coming out torn and haggard, we do not come away unmarked from our own battles with our demons --- even when God is fully victorious. This is true even when we are ministered to by angels and eventually come to (or usually dwell in!) a place of peace and light.

So, yes, there are certainly ways to make sense of the stories of Anthony's struggle or those of the other desert Fathers and Mothers which are less "primitive or mythological". Today we use Jungian psychology among other things to speak about the shadow side of ourselves, etc. But let's also be clear just how powerful those myths are. They tell us a story whose profound truth we can each recognize on some level, whether we are hermits or not. Imagine for a moment what it would feel like to have someone threaten to make a secret part of your life known to others at a business meeting. If you can feel this, even a little, then you know the truth of the fact that the revelation of the demons which inhabit our lives can be a terrifying proposition. Imagine instead unpacking a container full of secrets and private darknesses in front of someone who doesn't much like you or these things about you (the way some of us feel about ourselves, for instance, especially if we have not really known God's love).

Imagine doing this with someone who loves you profoundly. Still probably not very easy to undertake. But also imagine that these things you are trying to unpack LIKE the darkness, hate the light and that as you reach for each one it fights your efforts to reveal it and set it aside. Imagine it battles you and the God you seek as a betrayer of critical secrets and a threat to its very life. Or, imagine that once you have looked at the demon, even obliquely, you simply cannot get it out of your sight or mind.  If you are dealing with impatience (or an inability to resist being critical, or some form of inordinate desire etc.), impatience (etc) then becomes a howling animal struggling to insinuate and assert itself in every situation. Now imagine these things reside in your very heart and you are entering there instead to try to confront and deal with them. One's heart, precisely because it is by definition the place where God witnesses to Godself, is not always going to be the most placid of places; when we are battling its demons this is even truer. Images like these help us to see at least part of what we are all really up against in growing in intimacy with God. Stories like that of Anthony help us see what eremitical life (or life stripped of distractions and luxuries, what we call desert living) can involve. I would argue these stories are really quite sophisticated conveyors of profound truth, especially when seen as dramatizations of our inner lives, or externalizations of the hidden dynamics and struggles hermits and others live in order to come to healing and holiness.

It is easy to think that we do not carry within us some really dark and awful depths with the power to distort, disrupt, and destroy, or that these only come from outside us; this is especially so when they seem to take control of our lives and literally dehumanize us. I am not denying that forces outside us exist and influence our world (e.g, what Paul called powers and principalities), but on the whole I think this is a fuller picture of the reality of spiritual struggle and growth both now and in the days of the desert Fathers and Mothers.

I hope this is helpful.

Question on Diocese Shopping

[[Dear Sister Laurel, How do I find a diocese professing lay Catholics under canon 603?]]

Generally, I do not recommend diocese-shopping for such purposes. I don't know any dioceses which would not be pretty cautious, suspicious, and even outright rejecting of someone engaging in such diocese-shopping. Similarly, since the eremitical vocation has a strong component of stability, shopping around for a diocese that will profess you might well cause doubt about any possible vocation. There are few situations which would make such a solution necessary

I have written a more detailed response to a similar question. Please see the label "Diocese-shopping" for that post. That main response is dated 26. March.2011; another post speaks a bit about such diocese-shopping as I recall. It is dated 4.December.2011. Please be aware that in order to be taken seriously by such a diocese you will need to have lived as a hermit for some time under competent spiritual direction and be able to demonstrate a good track record of stability in your parish or diocesan commitments. By this I am referring to the monastic value of stability which (risking serious over-simplification) is mainly a commitment to grow wherever you find yourself. If a diocese you move to is to take you seriously as a potential candidate for admission to profession you will likely need to have either tried to have entered a discernment process with your diocese and have been treated in bad faith, or perhaps have belonged to a diocese/province which has refused across the board to profess or consecrate anyone under canon 603. The only other situation I can think of off hand which might allow a second diocese to seriously consider you for c 603 profession would be if years ago you tried to be accepted and were deemed unready but now, despite your own growth in the vocation, the diocese will not reevaluate the matter.

Regarding your question more specifically, as far as I know, there is no list of dioceses with diocesan hermits although I understand that last year the Vatican started keeping statistics on us for the first time. Fewer (perhaps far fewer) than 1/4th of dioceses in the US have diocesan hermits, however. The only way to find out if a diocese MIGHT be open in time to professing you if you were to move there would be to call the chancery and speak to the Vicar for Religious or Consecrated life. Again though, no one is likely to be more than seriously reserved in responding to such a query because allowing you to move to a diocese cannot be done with even a suggestion that you might one day be professed as a diocesan hermit. The most they could and would probably tell you is whether they have diocesan hermits presently and are/or are open to professing suitable candidates.

Prayer for the Election

We pray for our nation this week,

That we move beyond our fears and concerns

To discern what will serve the common good

for all members of our society.

We pray that we may respond to the call of solidarity

Rather than the call of separate interests.

May we be more concerned with successful community

Than with individual success.

We pray that we consider ways

Through difficult economic problems

That are compassionate and just

For all who struggle for their daily bread.

We pray that we dwell deeply on the call

To serve those in poverty

And recognize that all humans

Have the right to life with dignity

And with the basic services to promote human flourishing.

We pray that we take seriously

The call to be peacemakers,

Despite the complexities

In our local, national, and global conflicts.

We pray that we honor

Our responsibilities as citizens

Without resorting to the polarization

That limits our listening.

Guide us in the coming weeks in our process of discernment So we serve you Through our choices and

Our concern for the common good.

by Jane Deren educationforjustice.org

This prayer was taken from my parish bulletin. I am proud to share it here. It does not transgress the USCCB guidelines of Faithful Citizenship, nor does it increase the polarization in our church and world. It is a model of what Catholic engagement in the political process should look like and the principles it should be guided by.

On Disappointment with Bishops, Hypocrisy regarding Religious Liberty, and the Theology of Conscience in Voting

I heard today about at least one parish in a diocese in North Carolina which is putting out bumperstickers which say "I am Catholic and I vote". Well and good; we all should vote our consciences. The problem? On a table next to these are Romney bumper stickers. Does anyone REALLY need to be told that this is a violation of the USCCB Guidelines and document on faithful citizenship? (It would not have mattered if they had been Obama bumper stickers; the violation is the same and serious.) Do they really need to be told that it is a violation of the statutes which govern a Church's tax exempt status? Do they really want to claim the government is subtly violating the right to religious freedom while at the same time such parishes/dioceses are flagrantly violating the laws of the land regarding separation of Church and State which this Country uses to PRESERVE religious liberty? Is this really the tit for tat matter it seems? Is it a case where some are saying "If the government can violate our rights, then to heck with the laws of the land?" Does the word hypocrisy have any real meaning for these folks?  How about arrogance or short-sightedness then?

I find myself terribly disappointed with the Bishops who have become spokespersons for the Republican party in this election. (I would say the same for those speaking for Democratic candidates or a party platform, but I have not seen this myself.) They have quite literally sold their Offices and jeopardized the very thing they claim the government is transgressing --- the freedom of religion with its corresponding freedom and primacy of conscience. Had the USCCB as a whole restated the Catholic teaching on conscience and especially on primacy of conscience, and done so accurately while also saying, "Go with the help of the Holy Spirit and vote your consciences" the entire election process would have been so much more edifying. We would, as a Church, be FAR better off.  Instead we have a Church divided on the basis of false teaching on conscience, the specifics of the Health Care bill and complicity in objective evil, lies about what Nuns on the Bus members actually believe and proclaim, Bishops actually allowing or even encouraging their flocks to electioneer on Church property, and Episcopal scare tactics regarding endangering one's soul, going to hell, etc, because one votes one's conscience. All of this reminds me that the literal meaning of diabolic is that which throws apart, from dia (apart) and balein (to throw). It is a tremendously sad situation, I think.

The Cave of the Heart

So, since a couple of people have asked me about voting (they actually asked about how I am voting but I am not going there) let me restate 1) the pertinent part of the Church's teaching on the nature and primacy of conscience, and 2) Benedict XVI's analysis of elections which involve, for instance, the issues of abortion and contraception when neither candidate or party platform is really completely acceptable to Catholics.

First, we are to inform and form our consciences to the best of our ability. This means we are not only to learn as much as we can about  the issue at hand including church teaching, medical and scientific information, sociological data, theological data, and so forth (this is part of the way to an informed conscience), but we are to do all we can to be sure we have the capacity to make a conscience judgment and act on it. This means we must develop the capacity to discern all the values and disvalues present in a given situation, preference them appropriately, and then determine or make a conscience judgment regarding how we must act. Finally we must act on the conscience or prudential judgment that we have come to. (This latter capacity which reasons morally about all the information is what is called a well-formed conscience. A badly formed conscience is one which is incapable of reasoning morally, discerning the values and disvalues present, preferencing these, and making a judgment on how one must act in such a situation. Note well, that those who merely "do as authority tells them" may not have a well-formed conscience informed though they may be regarding what the Church teaches in a general way!)

There are No Shortcuts, No Ways to Free ourselves from the Complexity or the Risk of this Process and Responsibility:

There is no short cut to this process of informing and forming our consciences. No one can discern or decide for us, not even Bishops and Popes. They can provide information, but we must look at ALL the values and disvalues in the SPECIFIC situation and come to a conscientious judgment ourselves. The human conscience is inviolable, the inner sanctum where God speaks to each of us alone. It ALWAYS has primacy. Of course we may err in our conscience judgment, but if we 1) fail to act to adequately inform and form our consciences, or 2) act in a way which is contrary to our own conscience judgment we are more likely guilty of sin (this is  actually certain in the latter case). If we act in good faith, we are NEVER guilty of sin --- though we may act wrongly and have to bear the consequences of that action. If we err, the matter is neutral at worst and could even still involve great virtue. If we act in bad faith, we ALWAYS sin, and often quite seriously, for to act against a conscience judgment is to act against the very voice of God as heard in our heart of hearts.

And what about conscience judgments which are not in accord with Church teaching (or in this case, with what some Bishops are saying)? I have written about this before but it bears repeating. Remember that at Vatican II the minority group approached the theological commission with a proposal to edit a text on conscience. The text spoke about the nature of a well-formed conscience. The redaction the minority proposed was that the text should read, "A well-formed conscience is one formed in accord (or to accord) with Church teaching." The theological commission rejected this redaction as too rigid and reminded the Fathers that they had already clearly taught what the church had always held on conscience. And yet today we hear all the time from various places, including some Bishops, that if one's conscience judgment is not in accord with Church teaching the conscience is necessarily not well-formed. But this is not Church teaching --- not the teaching articulated by Thomas Aquinas or Innocent III, for instance, who counseled people that they MUST follow their consciences even if that meant bearing with excommunication.

Benedict XVI's Analysis:

Now then, what about Benedict XVI's analysis of voting in situations of ambiguity where, for instance, one party supports abortion but is deemed more consistently pro-life otherwise? What happens when this situation is sharpened by an opposing party who claims to be anti-abortion but has done nothing concrete to stop it? MUST a Catholic vote for the anti-abortion party or be guilty of endangering their immortal souls? Will they necessarily become complicit in intrinsic evil if they vote for the candidate or party which supports abortion? The answer is no. Here is what Benedict XVI said: If a person is trying to decide for or against a particular candidate and determines that one candidate's party is more consistently pro-life than the other party, even though that first party supports abortion or contraception, the voter may vote in good conscience for that first candidate and party SO LONG AS they do not do so BECAUSE of the candidate's position on abortion or contraception.

In other words, in such a situation abortion is not the single overarching issue which ALWAYS decides the case. One CAN act in good faith and vote for a candidate or party which seems to support life as a seamless garment better than another party, even if that candidate or party does not oppose abortion. One cannot vote FOR intrinsic evil, of course, but one can vote for all sorts of goods which are clearly Gospel imperatives and still not be considered complicit in intrinsic evil. By the way, this is NOT the same thing as doing evil in order that good may result!! Benedict XVI's analysis is less simplistic than some characterizations I have heard recently; theologically it seems to me to be far more cogent and nuanced than these, and it is one Bishops who are supposed to be in union with him when they teach as the ordinary Magisterium should certainly strongly reconsider and learn from.

In Thanksgiving for my own Parish:

Meanwhile, I want to take this opportunity to say how very grateful I am for my parish. We stand together around one Table; we share one Word; we drink from one Cup. We are very different from one another politically, theologically, economically, and so forth --- and we are all aware of it. Yet we trust one another to vote their consciences and pray that the will of God will be done. We do NOT allow differences in politics to divide us in a literally diabolical way. We may not agree on a specific issue or candidate, but we recognize the Church's theology of conscience allows that and respect one another in our disagreements. Thus, we continue to worship together and grow together in Christ. As the USCCB's  1999 document, "Faithful Citizenship" reminds us, "Our moral framework does not easily fit the categories of right or left, Democrat or Republican. Sometimes it seems few candidates and no party fully reflect our values. We must challenge all parties and every candidate to defend human life and dignity, to pursue greater justice and peace, to uphold family life, and to advance the common good." I find that in my parish at least, we are generally Christians first and trust one another to be that to the best of their ability. In this time especially, that is a very great gift and precisely what the Universal Church should be as a sign to the world!   

Followup Questions on Illness and Horarium Changes.

[[Dear Sister Laurel,
       Do you have to notify your Bishop when you are ill and need to change your horarium? How about his delegate? What if the change is not temporary? Do you stop being a hermit? Thank you.]]

The simple answer is no. That is especially true in the short term. I do ordinarily let my delegate know if I am not well, but that is more to inform and to reassure her that all is pretty well nonetheless. As for the changes in horarium what is more fundamental is to continue living the elements of the canon the best way I can in spite of illness. Everyone expects that and they expect me to be able to do that or to ask for assistance if I need it. The horarium, though not unimportant, is actually less important (and more flexible) than the Rule itself and the values it embodies from Canon 603.

In Cases of Serious Illness

In cases of serious illness, then yes, everyone is notified --- not so much regarding the change in horarium as in regard to the seriousness of the situation. Pastor, Bishop, delegate or director, friends, family, are all notified. If the change in the horarium needs to be long-term then no, I don't cease being a hermit. I simply have to accommodate the new circumstances as best as I am able. Again, it is the elements of  Canon 603 that have to be lived out no matter the situation. That may mean that someone comes in to assist me with chores a couple of times a week, or helps me shop, or brings over an occasional meal, for instance, but I don't cease being a hermit in such a situation. It may also mean meeting more frequently with my delegate or director for assistance in living well with the situation.

The horarium I keep at present is designed to serve me in living an eremitical life. It is not forced on me by someone else, nor did I copy it from someone. It is an expression of both my own strengths and weaknesses as well as the things that keeps my prayer life and capacity to minister to others in good shape; should these things change then the horarium also can and will change. I suppose I am saying it is not the horarium per se that makes the hermit; it is the hermit and her lived experience that makes the horarium. Thus, if an illness was to be long term that would mean changes in the  schedule and also in commitments to others (my parish, clients, etc), but I would remain a hermit nonetheless. Nothing necessarily changes in my relationship with God or the essential way in which I am made whole in the silence of solitude.

The More Important Questions of Formation Implicit in Your Question

You may not have been completely aware of this but your question bears on the posts that have been put up recently on the importance of formation and ongoing formation of the hermit. Eremitical life, like all forms of religious life, has stages and one needs to be able to negotiate these changes while living out the central values of one's life. The capacity to negotiate changes in this way is one of the things that marks the person as an authentic hermit. I remember being asked once by an aspirant for canon 603 profession about how they should deal with the difficulty of balancing hermit things vs worldly things. The essential problem was that this person had not made a significant break with her prior life, and was not a hermit in any essential way. Thus, she considered certain things (praying, lectio, etc) as hermit things and things like dishes, laundry, housecleaning, etc as worldly things. The answer to her question was that everything she did within the hermitage was to be done as a hermit. (For that matter, everything she did outside the hermitage was to be done as a hermit.)

The same principle applies here. When a hermit is ill, they will "pray" their illness and it will become a special expression of the silence of solitude --- perhaps more difficult to live without assistance and more painful than what was lived prior to this --- but it will be an eremitical reality because and to the extent the one who is ill is a hermit herself. The horarium may be more flexible, but it remains an eremitical horarium. Thus, again, the importance of a sufficient formation and ongoing formation. One must be able to embody the central elements of the Canon and especially to live the charism of the vocation without some of the external tools and protection required at another stage of the life. During illness most of us regress some and if the illness is serious that may be more true, For this reason it is important that the hermit be adequately formed so that they continue to live the mature eremitical life they are called to live in even more demanding circumstances.

Sister DK

Let me give you an example of what I mean. This Summer our parish put up a wall of faith in memory of those women in our lives who have inspired us. I put up a picture and description of a Sister I met when I was in initial formation. When I met Sister D. she had brilliant blue eyes and was bent over sideways due to scoliosis; she was also almost completely blind (and was completely blind within the year).

Once a great reader and even now always interested in the life of the community (she loved any chance to share news!), Sister still came to all community prayer and meals and spent the remainder of her day sitting in a straight chair in her room praying. To be honest, though I was tremendously impressed by her, what had happened to her terrified me then, and in some ways still does frighten me. However, she lived profoundly the silence of solitude in community and I feel her with me today. She reminds me of what it means to be a hermit at the end of one's life, and when one is ill and cannot do what one once did. Was this easy for her? No. Could she have lived this way without the ongoing formation of a faithfully lived religious life? I don't think so. My hope, of course, is that inspired by Sister D. and many others, I will live the truth of that  as well as I am called to do as a diocesan hermit. This is another piece of what perpetual vows mean.

What do you do When you are Ill and need to change your horarium?

Several times I have been asked what I do when I am sick and cannot keep my usual schedule (horarium) with regard to prayer and work, etc. Recently it was asked again because of comments I made about "hermits" using hours of TV to distract from their illness. I have not written about this mainly because I don't want to focus on my own illness, but there are some reasons to deal with these questions since everyone has periods when they feel really punk and just need to deal with the illness and do so prayerfully. One conversation on a Carthusian list came up in the past day regarding pain and what one does when one is in pain. From there the discussion moved to the place of music in dealing with pain. In any case it all raised the question for me regarding what I do when I am unable to keep my usual horarium.

Prostration prior to perpetual profession

Here is where a Rule is particularly helpful because a Rule reminds us of the values we must live and the things which are most important for living a healthy eremitical life. Optimally Rules are not about lists of things one must do so much as they are about who one is and what inspires and enables one to be that. Thus, the elements of the life remain how ever one is feeling: stricter separation from the world, assiduous prayer and penance, the silence of solitude, the vows, and (I'll include) whatever work one undertakes in the hermitage. Notice though that these elements are not defined in terms of specific things to do. They also have more to do with the person one is: a person of prayer, a person living the silence of solitude, a person more strictly separated from the world, bound by vows and committed to living this life for the salvation of others. So how does this help when one is ill, and what specifically do I do when I am not feeling well?

The first thing is that I take care of whatever physical needs I have. Medicines, fluids, food, and sleep (especially sleep) figure big time in caring for illness. I maintain my periods of quiet prayer usually (though not necessarily at 4:00am), but Office (for which I wear my cowl over my pajamas) is usually abbreviated to a single psalm prayed slowly. The canticle is usually added with a CD or iPod version, and I try to be sure to pray for people in my parish, those who have requested prayers. I may add another song I can listen to on iPod, etc. This works for all hours. Communion (for which I also wear my cowl over my pajamas) is similar except after a brief penitential rite, I read the Gospel out loud slowly, pray the Lord's Prayer and receive Communion. I will sometimes end this service with another hymn on my iPod or CD player and sometimes simply follow it with a period of quiet prayer.

Work periods vary. Usually I will simply journal or do some blogging. This is especially helpful for times I am in pain and waiting for meds to kick in (It is also one of the reasons posts get put up in the middle of the night here!) If I feel up to writing then I will do that, but I tend not to meet with clients during these times. Chores around the hermitage tend to go by the wayside for the time being. For the majority of the time I will read and sleep. (Reading may be some light spiritual reading but it also includes books by writers like Laurie King, Naomi Novik, Anne Perry, etc.) As for errands, depending on the situation I may run simple quick errands myself but for more than this I will accept help from people in my parish (shopping, dropping off a meal, trips to the doctor.)

And what happens when it seems just too difficult to pray or when I can't focus enough to work, etc. One thing I like to do is listen to liturgical music --- old favorites a lot, but also Taize. Taize is especially nice because of its repetitiveness as well as its multi-layered musical interest. I use these for prayer periods, not for long periods of just listening. Meanwhile I bring whatever I am feeling to God during the Taize. Otherwise I like to simply to rest in the silence, simply rest in my knowledge of God's presence and the fact that I am in his care. These periods may be relatively brief and interspersed with reading or journaling or sleeping, but they are very important. Another form of prayer I do is the Jesus Prayer using a small bracelet of beads I wear around my wrist --- usually in conjunction with prayer for people in my parish, etc. Ordinarily I reserve this for when I am traveling or on a train but it is helpful in times of illness as well. One activity I like to do when I am not really able to do much else but want to maintain silence or listen occasionally to music is to set up a large jigsaw puzzle; this kind of activity allows for a lot of  less formal prayer or reflection and is physically undemanding and restful as well. I have drunk a lot of hot tea while working on puzzles like this --- and also had some significant prayer experiences.

The question of TV comes up in some of the questions and the answer is yes, sometimes when I am sick I will watch TV --- but I really have to be pretty sick. I also have to be especially careful about this practice since as it helps to distract from how one is feeling, it can also keep a person from being aware of feeling well enough to get up and do something else. But yes, with caution and within limits, I sometimes watch TV when I am not feeling well. There are so many things about what TV does to me spiritually that I really don't like it ---- but it is fine for a movie or special program here or there. Otherwise I find it destructive of attentiveness and recollection. (I must say that as I learn more and more to "pray the situation" TV is especially dangerous to one's ability to do this!)

I hope this helps. I think that many could be helped by trying some of these things when they are not feeling well. The point is that one is as capable of praying when one is ill as when one is well, but that one may well need to change some things to do that. The main point is to be who you are, with all the limitations that are your own and to be this person WITH God.

Rethinking Perpetual Profession as "Graduation": More on Ongoing Formation

[[Dear Sister O'Neal, I had always thought of perpetual profession as a kind of graduation. Maybe that is silly but it is how I thought of it. When you write about it being analogous to an advanced degree which says one is educated enough to continue learning on their own that changes things for me. In a  way you are saying that perpetual profession is a kind of commitment to life-long formation though. Is that right? I guess I thought that after perpetual vows one was pretty free to go their own way but that is not quite true is it?]]

Exactly right. Remember that in monastic life one of the vows is conversatio morum, or the conversion of life. This vow is usually thought to include religious poverty and celibate love (chastity), so monks and nuns often make the vows of conversatio morum, obedience, and stability. Canon 603 requires the vows of poverty, chastity (celibate love), and obedience, but the life to which one is committing in either case is the same --- a life of continuing, thoroughgoing conversion which requires ongoing formation.

Perpetual Profession is not the same as graduation. Instead it is more like the end of an apprenticeship and the beginning of one's life as a journeyman. One is no longer under the watchful eye of a novice master or novice director nor even the director of the juniorate, (or in the case of a diocesan hermit, the semi-watchful eyes of Vicars for Religious, etc from the diocese) and one is free to follow the impulses of the Holy Spirit pretty much where one discerns he is calling, but this is not an absolute freedom. One still must answer to God, to the Diocese (both chancery personnel and the people of the diocese), to oneself and one's Rule, and also to one's delegate and director --- though in differing ways. But let me give you an idea of how this works out practically since there is usually no one around saying either, "You must do x" or "you may not do y."

Depending upon one's training, education, etc, over time a hermit is presented with a number of opportunities to minister in a limited way outside the hermitage. Generally, one's Rule provides one with the requirements one needs to live a healthy eremitical life, but some of these opportunities can be accommodated as well without difficulty. One prays about these, determines how they do or don't fit into one's life, what is needed in terms of time, preparation, etc, and also how this will benefit the individual's eremitical life. After this one will discuss the matter with one's director and/or delegate.

Occasionally the hermit may not have done sufficient discernment on the matter and will get themselves in trouble if they are not lucky! Still, they are not in this all alone and delegates and directors do help in determining what will be helpful and what will not --- even though they rarely if ever simply say, "Yes you may or no you may not!" (My own delegate almost NEVER directs me to do x or not do y, but she is keen to hear how I have discerned matters! Thus, I remember once mentioning a project I was considering doing to her and her response was a quiet, "I will be interested in hearing your discernment on this." At that moment the response that flew into my head was, "BUSTED!" In fact, I had NOT discerned this well and we both knew it! Needless to say, the proposed project was dropped and we never had much of a conversation about it either. At the same time I have not repeated such idiocy and learned from the exchange.)

I hope you heard the humor in this. I laughed when that incident happened and I still laugh at it today --- not only at my own silliness but at the marvelous way God works. What my delegate did was FAR more effective than a simple permission (or prohibition) might have been. She reminded me clearly of my own responsibility as perpetually professed, but also that I am responsible in direct ways to people who will assist me in my own decisions and growth. The freedom of the person who is perpetually professed is a freedom within limits or constraints --- a responsible freedom --- and for that reason, one does not stop growing so long as one lives the life. Thus, I meet regularly with my delegate and/or director to be sure that that growth continues and that my own discernment is not allowed to slip into carelessness or complacency, nor that my decisions become the fruit of mere impulsiveness.

At the end of a year I will meet with my Bishop to let him know how things are going, what is going especially well, what difficulties I have had in the past year, and how I am working things out. He may have suggestions or concerns which he then has a chance to express. A followup visit with my delegate may or may not be be necessary in light of the meeting with the Bishop, and a meeting between my delegate and the Bishop might also be helpful. Whatever needs doing will be done.

If one were to read through the past five years of this blog I think they would see someone who has grown in her vocation because of perpetual profession (not in spite of it). It is true that I am no longer an apprentice or novice in the eremitical life, but it has taken time for me to grow into a person who is concerned not with only my own vocation and profession, but into one who is concerned with the nature and future of this vocation itself. Perpetual profession granted a kind of freedom to explore the vocation, to reflect on it more widely than I had been able to do before this. It has freed me to allow my life to be one of prayer and other limited ministry precisely because I am sure of my eremitical identity. I think that particular freedom is akin to what you were thinking of when you referred to perpetual profession as graduation.

But what perpetual profession really means is that one assumes (and is canonically entrusted with) the role of inheritor and missioner of a tradition. With perpetual profession one becomes, for instance, a Religious living out the charism and mission of a particular congregation --- including carrying within her the tradition and history of all of those who have done so before. One knows or comes to know herself in this way where before she really did not. It was a role she was preparing to be entrusted with more and more. She is part of a larger story than her own quest to become a Dominican (etc). Instead, she IS a Dominican or a diocesan hermit or whatever it is and accepts a place in the living tradition of the vocation. Still, it is a living tradition --- one which others will be drawn to and live out; her life is one which, for good or ill, will be a model and inspiration for others who may desire to become part of this story and responsible for its continued telling. When considered this way thinking of perpetual profession as graduation hardly works --- not at least when we think of graduation as achieving the end of formal education, schooling, learning, and training! For the perpetually professed these things do not really end.