Abbey-Roads2

Puddles and puddles of water-stained silk. 

In one of his books, interior designer Billy Baldwin recounts an anecdote concerning his mentor, the famous interior designer, Ruby Ross Wood.  While working with a relatively nouveau riche client who insisted on an elaborate puddle for her drapery, Miss Wood, who loved simplicity and restraint as opposed to ostentatious display,  feigning acquiescence to her client’s wishes , responded,  “Well my dear, in that case, why don’t we let them puddle across the floor, through the foyer, and out the door, onto the street, so that your neighbors and passers-by may see how rich your husband is.”  I can’t remember if Miss Wood completed the design project for the client or not.

The story of puddling curtains comes to mind each time I see a photo of a prelate in a “cappa magna”.   Of course it is just my personal opinion, but I think this embellishment to the dress of a Cardinal is somewhat ostentatious. I’ve written about it before and readers have ‘corrected’ me, but I haven’t changed my mind.  (Although it doesn’t matter what I think, does it - I’m just a “hobbyist” when it comes to ecclesial fashion.)

Cappaphobia.

That said, Gerald Warner has an article at Telegraph.com.UK  insisting this subject poses a mental disorder for progressive Catholics, which he calls, “Cappaphobia”.  (He’s being cheeky, right?)  I’m hardly a progressive Catholic, and neither was Pius XII, whom he gently reproaches for modifying the cappa magna; “In 1952 Pius XII, in a misguided fit of radicalism, shortened the cardinalitial cappa from six yards to three.”  Oh!  The humanity!

An orgy of vandalism. 

The gentleman continues with his aesthete lament; “That moment marked the beginning of the Church’s downward trajectory. In 1969 Paul VI, in an orgy of vandalism reminiscent of the burning of patents of nobility in the French National Assembly in 1789, abolished the winter ermine hood on the cappa, along with the cardinals’ galero hat, the red tabarro cape, buckled shoes and just about everything that compensated for the sacrifices Catholicism imposes on the faithful.”  Such drama!

Widen the phylacteries and make those tassels long.

I know!  It is not the same thing.  However, I’m quite certain the origins of the cappa magna had a lot to do with vanity, status and ostentatious display - and yes, of course, it was the prevailing custom, and it made the obvious statement of power and authority.  Personally, I think a 3 foot train is more than adequate, whereas 6 feet of watered silk is a bit grand in any age.  These are essentially court trappings, which may be altered or modified according to custom; to like them or dislike them has less to do with one’s orthodoxy, but rather taste. 

So, as far as Ruby is concerned, let the cappa magnas train for blocks and blocks and see  how many souls are swept up into the Church because of them.  Although, then the question remains, will they tolerate the Gospel read in Latin or the vernacular?   

Links:

Cappaphobia

Ruby Ross Wood

Billy Baldwin

Photo credits: 

Top: From Crescat (That cappa is indeed magna - looks to be about 18 feet.)

Bottom: Zeferelli adjusting costumes on the set of  “Brother Sun, Sister Moon”

Share This

A friendly commenter posed this question on another post:

“Obviously, sexuality is a gift from God. How is a homosexual supposed to accept his sexuality, if not as part of their basic makeup?”

My answer:

Remember - this is only my personal opinion.  That said - yes, sexuality is a gift from God, “God made them male and female.”  He made us heterosexual, male and female.  At best, I believe homosexuality is really more a temptation for the heterosexual person, or an aberration of human sexuality.  Fundamentally, the person is always heterosexual.  The inclination to homosexuality is an objective disorder; Natural law, Tradition, the Church, psychology (up until recently) all agree on this.  God does not create disorder.  We can say the problem is the result of the fall of man - original sin - which is hotly contested in today’s world.  I’m convinced it is all basic anthropology, theology, and so on.  It just takes lots of humility and prayer and suffering to come to terms with that.

“Some men are incapable of sexual activity from birth.” 

However, some people claim they were born this way.  Maybe so - just as some people are born blind, others mentally challenged, other’s without arms or legs, others conjoined, and so on.  These are all disorders in the natural order.  Oftentimes these people seem to have extraordinary gifts that seem to compensate for the disorder they were born with, others may find a cure, most learn to live with it, and develop their other gifts. 

“Some have been deliberately made so.”

Other people, perhaps under duress, may have been “made this way” from some outside cause, or they may have mistaken temptation for sexual identity.  In other words, homosexuality may have become a coping mechanism, an acquired behavior, an accommodation, or an adaptation of sorts.  Possibly, but not always,  due to trauma, same-sex peer rejection, feelings of inferiority,  lack of identity with a same sex parent or sibling, sexual molestation or shaming, or any number of reasons, the person might be said to have “chosen” or “accepted” the inclination; albeit without total freedom or even informed consent - merely as an unconscious “adaptation”.  Upon discovery of the homosexual culture, the person may have recognized it as a “safe place”, a state of being, or lifestyle supported by like-minded, non-threatening people.   In this way, one eventually begins to believe and say, “Yeah!  That is me.  I’ve always been this way - so I’m gay!  I found my niche!”  This goes along with my theory that many people are deceived, and for whatever reasons, want to be deceived.  It is just that however, my theory.

Yes, yes, I know that is all very simplistic and some people would have us believe homosexuals are like angels, each an unique species unto himself, in an unique lifestyle.  But the basic fact is, the homosexual’s real sexual identity is heterosexual - male or female, the temptation or inclination, indeed in some cases, the compulsion to act out with the same sex is disordered.  I’m convinced that people with this disorder are called to chastity - they can, and oftentimes do, share their life with a partner - who both agree to abstain from sexual relations with one another and others, for the love of God and the peace of conscience.  (BTW - that is what I always mean by chastity for single people - NO SEX - not even “self-cultivation”, no porn, no cruising, no fantasizing, no sex.)

“Some there are who have freely renounced sex  for the sake of God’s reign.”

Other people with these inclinations may live in religious communities - I can’t really speak to that however.  Others find support in programs such as Courage.  Many will find support in same-sex friendship - if the friendships are chaste and they permit themselves to relate this way.  Yet all will find support in prayer, the sacraments, a life of service and charity, and living in obedience to Catholic Church teaching.  As another friend said, “Holiness is the opposite of homosexuality.”

“Deny your very self, take up your cross and follow me.”

If one chooses to live a chaste and celibate life, that person thinks they have done a great deal - and indeed they have.  But I’m convinced there is one thing more a person can do to become a saint, as in the story of the rich young man:  “If you wish to be perfect, you must sell what you have and give to the poor, and then follow Christ.”  I interpret that to mean, if one really wants to be free, they need to renounce their very self that identifies as gay - since saying - “I’m same-sex attracted”, “I’m gay”, “I’m homosexual”, holds the person captive in that milieu or cultural mindset.  The soul is still attached and held by that little thread, imprisoned in that broken image of self.  It is one of the most difficult things for gay people to do, to renounce their attachment to their unique-ness as gay people.  Very often it means taking a very hard look into the painful past, in order to understand the cause of their disorientation.  But, “what is impossible for man, is possible for God”. 

“Not everyone can accept this teaching.” - Matthew 19:10-12

And no - I am not saying one no longer experiences homosexual inclinations, or that all people are to be totally healed, or they should suddenly want to marry a member of the opposite sex.  But by the grace of God, and often times long effort, they can experience detachment from homosexuality as their core identity,  and will to live as the new creation the Blood of Christ won for them.  And most especially, find strength to resist the temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil, all of which conspire to cause the fall of one resolved to live chastely.

I know people who have done this - I know people who have been freed from the yoke of slavery the sin of homosexuality becomes.  While the very conflict and struggle can be a means to great sanctity.    

Share This

Courage

Courage is related to the virtue of fortitude.  As Garrigou-Lagrange writes; “Fortitude is the moral virtue which strengthens the soul in the pursuit of the difficult good so that it does not allow itself to be shaken by the greatest obstacles.  It should dominate the fear of danger, fatigue, criticism, and all that would paralyze our efforts toward the good.  It prevents a man from capitulating in a cowardly manner when he should fight - it also moderates audacity and untimely exaltation which would drive him to temerity.”-  III Ages 

As one considers the meaning of these terms on a deeper spiritual level, keeping in mind that what is most important in life is our sanctification and the salvation of souls, a person may more easily put into perspective some of the moral struggles each of us face in our pilgrimage.  While recognizing the need for divine grace; through perseverance in prayer, penance, and above all, the sacraments.

“The principle act of fortitude is endurance…” - St. Thomas

“Fortitude has two principal acts: to undertake courageously and to endure difficult things.  The Christian should endure them for the love of God; it is more difficult to endure for a long time than, in  moments of enthusiasm (fervor), to undertake something difficult.” - III Ages

This is often the case when one is required to live chastely and celibately, especially if one is inclined to habits  of auto-eroticism, or temptations associated with same sex attraction, and/or fantasizes or acts out homosexually.  Such a battle can be long and difficult for the young, and requires patient endurance, even if in one’s first fervor one was initially confident he had overcome these tendencies.  Nevertheless, as the philosopher says, if a man is overcome in his battle(s), “he is to be pardoned if he struggles against them.”

“Fortitude is accompanied by patience to endure the sorrows of life without being disturbed and without murmuring (without self-pity), by longanimity which endures trials for a long time, and by constancy in good, which is opposed to obduracy in evil.”- III Ages 

The vice of effeminacy and perseverance.

It is very difficult for the effeminate to endure the long struggle against inordinate affection and avoid sins against chastity.  I believe the primary cause of failure can be attributed to the degree of attachment to the pleasures derived from sinful sexual and/or emotional gratification, as well as the lack of courage to persevere in the struggle against it.  I found the following from St. Thomas Aquinas on the subject:

“…Perseverance is deserving of praise because thereby a man does not forsake a good on account of long endurance of difficulties and toils: and it is directly opposed to this, seemingly, for a man to be ready to forsake a good on account of difficulties which he cannot endure. This is what we understand by effeminacy, because a thing is said to be “soft” if it readily yields to the touch. Now a thing is not declared to be soft through yielding to a heavy blow, for walls yield to the battering-ram. Wherefore a man is not said to be effeminate if he yields to heavy blows. Hence the Philosopher says (Ethic. vii, 7) that “it is no wonder, if a person is overcome by strong and overwhelming pleasures or sorrows; but he is to be pardoned if he struggles against them.” Now it is evident that fear of danger is more impelling than the desire of pleasure: wherefore Tully says (De Offic. i) under the heading “True magnanimity consists of two things: It is inconsistent for one who is not cast down by fear, to be defeated by lust, or who has proved himself unbeaten by toil, to yield to pleasure.” Moreover, pleasure itself is a stronger motive of attraction than sorrow, for the lack of pleasure is a motive of withdrawal, since lack of pleasure is a pure privation. Wherefore, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. vii, 7), properly speaking an effeminate man is one who withdraws from good on account of sorrow caused by lack of pleasure, yielding as it were to a weak motion. - St. Thomas  

“When you come to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for trials.” 

From this exposition, it seems to me we might more easily understand why a man would abandon the struggle and give into homosexual inclination, or even return to such a lifestyle.  Many do not realize the cost, much less the long duration the struggle sometimes requires, and they succumb to the erroneous belief it (gay life) is God’s will.  “Do not then surrender your confidence; it will have great reward.  You need patience to do God’s will and receive what he has promised.” - Hebrews 10:35-36 

(Please understand, I’m using the word effeminate in more philosophical/theological terms.  Effeminacy is a vice opposed to manliness, as cowardice is to courage.  Although I do reference it in connection with homosexuality, I do so only to show how it is opposed to the virtue of fortitude and magnanimity.  It is not to be confused with, or limited to, modern definitions associated with outward feminine mannerisms or behavior.)

Art:  St. Sebastian, Martyr.  If Sebastian is to be a patron for people who suffer homosexual tendencies - then he ought to represent the virtue of fortitude and perseverance needed to give testimony to a truth of faith and the grandeur of Christian virtue, lived in opposition to transitory worldly values. 

Share This

And your ‘no’ mean ‘no’… - James 5

Today’s first reading at Mass reminded me of the Lord’s words from the Sermon on the Mount, “Say ‘Yes’ when you mean ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ when you mean ‘No.’  Anything beyond that is from the evil one.”  [Matthew 5:37]

Certainly these passages must give anyone pause when one considers the ongoing debate about admitting homosexuals to Holy Orders.  The Vatican just reiterated, indeed clarified Church policy regarding this issue.  All I can say is there must be a lot of homosexuals in the clergy and the episcopate to cause such an uproar over what the pronouncement means.

The Cardinal.

In fact Cardinal Rosales of Manila more or less contradicted  the Vatican’s prohibition shortly after it was made public:

Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales of Manila told reporters that homosexuals who do not “act out” can be good priests. His statement came immediately after the release of a letter in which Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (bio - news), the Vatican Secretary of State, confirmed that a Church policy barring homosexuals from priestly training applies to all the world’s seminaries.

Speaking on Radio Veritas in the Philippines, Cardinal Rosales said that the Vatican did not intend to ban chaste homosexuals from the seminaries. “A homosexual inclination is not bad but acting it out is an entirely different matter, and that is what is written in the sacred scriptures,” he said. - CWN 

So what does the Vatican really say?

“The Vatican policy on the question, explained in an Instruction that was released by the Congregation for Catholic Education in 2005, stipulates that a homosexual identity interferes with a man’s ability to achieve what the document termed “affective maturity and spiritual paternity,” even if the individual refrains from homosexual acts. The Instruction says that anyone who identifies himself as homosexual– whether or not he is sexually active– is not an appropriate candidate for priestly ministry.”- CWN

It was meant for other people. 

I’ve known a fair share of gay priests - how do I know, because they identify as such.  I don’t care if a person identifies as SSA, (same-sex-attracted), gay, queer, homosexual, homosexually attracted, what have you.  If a man identifies himself in this way, there is obviously something “deep-seated” going on.  But many do not believe the rules apply to themselves, or they may feel they are simply meant to placate the faithful.  (Dymphna  has a short post on how confusing this issue can become - it is related to the story of a Texas bishop’s assignment of a gay priest and that priest’s subsequent resignation.)

WDTPRS?  (What do the priests really say?)

Not every “SSA” priest admits his orientation outright, although there are other signs and signals to let another person know, if he wants him to know.  For those willing to discuss the issue, many say they have made peace with their orientation and have accepted it as a gift from God.  They claim to have arrived at a place in life wherein they can be faithful to their vocation, observing chaste celibacy.  So that is good, right?  Pretty much - if he kept himself pure…

Because…

For all of the challenges anyone faces when embracing a life of chastity - I think it is much easier for a gay priest to fall prey to temptation and satisfy the urges of nature, mainly because gay sex is easily had for the taking.  Just ask any married man, or gay man in a relationship, or one who just happens to like cruising and public sex.  (It isn’t always about self-hate when guys do this stuff.  When straight men go to a brothel or massage parlor is it because they hate their sexuality or something inside themselves, or do they just want a quickie, or happen to like dirty sex?) 

Then…

There is that “favored person status“, the “club” atmosphere.  All men hang out with the guys they like and share similar interests with.  Gay men hang out with gay people - and if they are hanging out with straight people, very often these people tend to be “gay” by association.   (J. McNeil, The Church and the Homosexual, 1976)  They’re pretty much open to the artistic, more spiritual and intellectual sensitivity of the SSA priest.  In addition, SSA priests know and cultivate friendships with like-minded priests.  When they become bishops, maybe even cardinals, they continue to cultivate and maintain these friendships and contacts.  The “old boys” - “old girls” club thing.

Cover ups.

The SSA priest understands the lonely isolation of gay men, the slips and falls, and frequent addictive behaviors they can become entangled in.  Therefore they more easily excuse and even cover up their brother priest’s  sin - sometimes assuring him that there was no sin.  It can be like “protective services” for errant priests.  You don’t have to agree with me on this, but you can believe me when I tell you I know what I’m talking about.

Circumventing the rules.

To me, it is a strange obedience when a priest or religious studies and disects a rule to discover all of its loopholes in order to legitimize one’s behaviour.  A priest once explained the loopholes of the Vatican ruling to me in this way:

I have had long discussions with folks in Rome on the three criteria published in the Instruction.  They were very carefully worded so as to respect the infinite variety of souls and of Our Lord’s work in them.  They were not intended to close the door absolutely.  They are principles; their application is entrusted to those who have the grace of state to do so.

.
The three criteria:  

1. those who practise homosexuality,
2. present deep-seated homosexual tendencies
3. or support the so-called “gay culture.”

Numbers 1 and 3 are self-explanatory.  Number 2 is more complex.  The deep-seated tendency is generally manifested in the individual for whom the SSA is very core of his identity.  All of his choices and all of his self-expression proceeds from what he perceives as being (ontologically) constitutional of who he is as a person.  Homosexuality as a state of being is a relatively new concept.  The traditional moral theology looks at one’s choices and behaviour: a question, not of being, but of doing, or saying, or acting out, or otherwise expressing what is an intrinsically disordered inclination. - Letter

Obedient dissent? 

Okay, perhaps SSA vocations can be reviewed on a case by case basis, thereby permitting a man with previous homosexual inclination to be ordained - that is a big risk to take though.  How can it be determined the man has resolved the issues of sexuality and the underlying psychological issues that affected the inclination in the first place?  What about a relapse?  It would definitely have to be an exception to obtain a dispensation to admit a “former homosexual” to a seminary or to ordination, and not the “rule” - as it seems to have been in the not too distant past.  That this is an issue for gay men already ordained suggests to me their personal issues have not at all been successfully resolved.

Or, Creative Fidelity?

Diogenes  has an interesting post on this same subject, he writes:

It’s no secret that the old line religious orders are the most fervid dissenters from the ban on homosexuals, and their superiors comprise a kind of Shadow Cabinet within the Church: hostile to the policy of the Holy See but outwardly deferential to its authority — and, most importantly, incubating in their ranks a parallel government and parallel apparat through which the “alternative” policies are discreetly advanced. The Shadow Cabinet’s own term for this genial subversion is Creative Fidelity, and any housewife whose husband protests he was “creatively faithful” to her during his Las Vegas business jaunt will be able to gauge the degree to which the Pope is reassured by the euphemism. - Ad dubiam. 

Yeah, so I don’t think that ”smoke of Satan” thing Pope Paul VI referred to was just about liturgical abuse either. 

Links:

David at Cosmos, Liturgy, Sex  has a couple of presentations which deal with these issues on a more anthropological, theological level, and are easier to understand. 

Nothing Extraordinary

The Vatican will ban gays from seminaries.

Share This

Change. 

Alcoholics usually hate it when a drinking buddy decides to quit drinking, and they definitely hate drinking heavily in front of a recovered alcoholic.  Unless of course they were like my dad, who told people they just thought they were alcoholics and they should just give in and have a drink with him - to be social.  Because an alcoholic’s best friend is drink, losing a drinking buddy is not the end of the world for them.

However, there is something in human nature that inclines all  of us to want to keep our companions, who support or enable us in some fault or weakness we find ourselves inordinately attached to.  Think of the gossip whose friend tells her she doesn’t want to hear or discuss that stuff any longer.  She may think to herself,  ‘Who will I tell these things to?  What will I talk about?  I’m all alone now.’  That is pretty simplistic, but I’m sure you get my point.

Symptoms of loneliness and heartache.

These fears may be intensified for the gay person whose friend announces he is going to quit the lifestyle, go into therapy, or even get married.  One fellow told me that after two of his friends actually fell in love (with women) and got married, he felt betrayed by them.  The three of them had been friends since grade school, and after college they went out to gay bars together - they were inseparable friends.  It was not long before the man’s two friends got tired of the gay scene, the drugs and drinking, and casual sex, and began going to church.  To make a long story short - his friends became more religious, each met a woman and fell in love, and both of them got married and have families today.

Much later, the forsaken friend was able to admit that he was angry with his friends, not only had they betrayed him by “going straight” - he felt abandoned by them as well.  He said he feared being alone and felt like an outcast because of his sexual orientation.  They would be normal now, and he would always be abnormal.  They would find happiness, fulfillment, and acceptance, while he would always be the outsider, the “interesting”  or “fun” one, but never “one of them”.  He rejected his friends, only keeping in touch through Christmas cards and birthday cards. 

Ex-gays expose the fears and insecurities of gay culture.

That is pretty extreme and an isolated case, yet it seems to me it may also be an unconscious motivation for gay people who virulently reject what is termed the “ex-gay movement”.  That is, men and women who have left the homosexual lifestyle, and through reparative therapy, come to accept their heterosexuality.  The folks who are successful are highly motivated to change, and although not all people may be able to overcome SSA issues entirely, many go on to live their lives with greater freedom of spirit.  Again, the Catholic Church does not require individuals to change their orientation, rather to live chastely and celibately.

Isn’t that special.

That said, I think the self-conscious-uniqueness  of being gay, reaffirmed by an artificial and separate cultural identity, helps to foster a sort of fundamentalist conviction that homosexuality is a natural variant of human sexuality.  Therefore the  ”gay community” promotes “coming out” as an act of solidarity amongst active homosexuals, who otherwise,  for a large majority,  led more or less quiet, normal lives prior to the late 1960’s.  The idea of safety and community, as well as power in numbers, led to the coming out campaign and gay activisim, based upon the feminist and civil rights movement. 

Any deviation from the agenda threatens the gay political movement which seeks parity for homosexuals with heterosexuals as far as marriage and family rights concerns,  and so on.  Hence, the ex-gay possibility is perceived as a heretical and rebellious act by proponents of the gay agenda.  I’m convinced the resistance of gay people to the idea is similar to the story above, of the man whose friends left the gay lifestyle to marry women, while he took it personally as a betrayal of their friendship.  

Soul Deep. 

Anyway - this lengthy analysis has been my introduction to the following article on Lifesite which deals with the issue of ex-gays:

ARLINGTON, VA, May 7, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Individuals who once considered themselves homosexuals but who have since left the lifestyle, often remain silent about their past life due to persecution from homosexual activists, an ABC News video revealed on Monday.

“A person may not be happy being gay, has anyone ever thought of that?” asked “David,” an anonymous man who has overcome his homosexual inclinations, on ABC News.

“I’ve found feelings could change,” David added.

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX) observed that “David’s” desire for anonymity reflects the wide-scale persecution individuals like him face from those supportive of homosexuality.

“Many ex-gays are afraid to come out of the closet because of the harassment they will receive - their names, phone numbers and personal information posted on gay websites, attacked at ex-gay exhibit booths, press releases issued against them, etc,” stated PFOX.

“The tactics of gay activists are to go after anyone who comes out publicly as ex-gay, force them back into the closet, and then claim that ex-gays don’t exist because there aren’t any out in public.” - Lifesite News 

Check out Abbey-Roads for a Will and Grace segment on the topic - it’s funny.  Oops!  People were offended so I took it down.

PFOX - parents and friends of ex-gays.  (I only know about them through Lifesite.)

Share This

And Divine Mercy Sunday

There are some priests and bishops, as well as faithful, who see no need for the institution of the feast of Divine Mercy on the Second Sunday of Easter.  Many consider it an innovation and out of character for the Easter season.  Yet when Our Lord requested the feast, he never asked that anything be changed as far as the liturgical prayers or readings and offices.  In essence, the very least our Lord asked for is that the Second Sunday of Easter be designated as the feast of Divine Mercy.  The conditions for recieving the great pardon/indulgence differ little from what the Church has always required of Catholics during Eastertide for centuries. 

Essentially, the Second Sunday of Easter is the perfect occasion for a Catholic to fulfill his Easter duty.  Canon Law defines it as such:

Canon 920 - 1. Once admitted to the blessed Eucharist, each of th faithful is obliged to receive holy communion at least once a year.

2.  This precept must be fulfilled during the paschal time, unless for a good reason it is fulfilled at another time during the year.

Contrast this with what Our Lord revealed to St. Faustina:

The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion (on that day) shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. (Diary 699) 

So yeah, the objections to the feast seem to me to be pretty lame.

Share This

“Let’s start our own religious order!” 

In the old Bing Crosby musicals, down on their luck actors, unable to find a show, get together and say, “Hey!  Let’s put on a musical!”  And then you get “White Christmas” and everyone lives successfully ever after.

Sometimes it’s the same way with men and women who have wanted to enter religious life but find the decadence they encounter in certain religious orders not to their liking.  In some cases, they themselves have been rejected by a good community, yet they remain convinced they have a vocation.  “Hey!  Let’s start our own religious order!”

Anybody can go and be a hermit.

When I was testing my vocation in the early 1970’s I came across countless experimental religious orders.  Men intent upon reviving the original charism of the Franciscan order seemed to be the most prevalent.  Although I knew a Carmelite prioress who claimed to experience locutions and decided to finish the reform of St. Teresa of Avila by founding individual communities of hermits.

She moved from diocese to diocese, leaving a trail of one or two nuns behind in each foundation who remained autonomous - “idiorythmic” hermits if you will.  (Her moving around was not always voluntary.)  One such hermitage had only one sister hermit, but her newsletters asking for donations always were worded as if there was a vibrant community.  Sister would write things like, ”The sisters are remembering you in our monthly novena.”  What “sisters”?  There is no community there.

The funny thing about this is that many of these people left an established monastery because the particular community had so few vocations, or failed to meet their expectations in some way.  These founders intended  to go and renew, or “refound” the order the way it was supposed to be.  I’ve always been a little dubious about these “upstarts”.  Especially when they solicit funds for the “community”.  What community?

Let’s dress up like a monk.

Yesterday I heard of a group of men - a “new” order who seem to be falling apart.  Rumors, hearsay, and unverifiable facts about money and that “other” stuff, surround the group.  I can’t write about that.  Although I know a great deal about their origins and some former members of the community.  I never really believed they were “healthy” - even though they looked like good religious in their habits.  (Yes, the men were sincere though.)

What I know for a fact, whenever their fund-raising newsletter went out, communal spending went up.  Which caused me to wonder how they were any more observant of their vow of poverty than the order they hoped to renew was.  Their founder originally sought entrance into a new diocesan group on the East Coast in the 1970’s.  (That group, which rarely had one or two members, will soon die out as the founder is elderly and not in good health.)  The founder of the local group realized he could do the same thing in his own archdiocese, so he came back to start his own community.  His new group appeared more successful than the East Coast group, but today it may be crumbling.

Safety in numbers.

There are of course major new  religious groups, along with renewed  existing groups, and a few smaller communities, who have all the hallmarks of authenticity.  (Groups such as the Nashville Dominican Sisters, the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, the Hawthorne Dominicans, and so on.)  The main characteristic attesting to a particular group’s authenticity may be indicated by the numbers they attract to their respective congregations, as well as the approval they receive from the Holy See - not to mention a viable apostolate.

Not a few smaller groups have often been formed based upon the idiorythmic spirituality or “piety” of one person, just as major orders have often been formed in the past.  Thus the discernment process on the part of candidates can oftentimes be even more difficult.  Many times the new communities gradually adopt the exact same lifestyle as the orders they intended to re-found.  Though their community life can be observant as far as prayer and religious decorum, frequently they simply seem to imitate an archetype of an idealized religious life they understand from books and movies, and they become stagnant.  Instead of re-founding - they really just re-institutionalize themselves - hence they become as impotent as the orders they intended to do better than - or so it seems to me.

Is there an apostolate?

New forms of eremetic, monastic, and contemplative groups have mushroomed since the Council, while the revision of Canon Law once again allows for diocesan hermits.  Which means a few fervent souls went off to live as a hermit, one may even be living in an apartment complex near you.  The term hermit can be manipulated to mean anything you want it to mean.  Hence, the new contemplative groups, whether cenobitic or eremetic, can be unverifiable as to authentic charism.  (I’m not referring to daughter-houses established by existing monastic orders.)

On the other hand, communities with a genuine apostolate are fairly easy to recognize as either healthy or unhealthy.  The healthy communities normally demonstrate a clear purpose, while they successfully combine the contemplative life with the active life of the apostolate.  Their spirituality appears to be well integrated.

Religious life is a witness to the Gospel.

While reading Bl. Mother Teresa’s letters, I came across letters involving the difficulties she encountered in beginning the Missionaries of Charity.  Her Bishop took a very long time while he examined her case, insisting that he could not proceed hastily.  He explained that he needed certitude that it was truly God’s will because if it failed, it could be a source of scandal to the faithful, as well as disrupt, if not ruin the lives and vocations of the women who would enter the congregation in good faith.   

Religious life is a witness in the Church, therefore it is not something to play with, or attempt to recreate to suit one’s personal piety, or satisfy one’s desire for companions.

[Thanks to Jeffrey  for the beautiful photo.]

Share This

Mourning. 

A close friend of mine is really having difficulty getting over last Wednesday’s catastrophe.  First of all, I don’t think people have to “get over it” - much to the contrary - one simply cannot dismiss the loss of life and injuries, along with the sorrow and pain caused by this tragedy.  Nevertheless, my friend keeps talking about it, repeating over and over the names of those who have died, expressing great pity for the survivors, and wondering why it happened.  (He is not at all religious, so I wouldn’t bother with pious platitudes.) 

On the other hand, I’m far too cynical - even angry about it.  Of course I feel sorrow and I pray for the dead as well as the survivors.  I’m impressed, along with the rest of the city and nation at the heroism and compassion of the survivors and rescuers, but I keep thinking this whole thing could have been avoided.  In an earlier post I wrote, “it’s the infrastructure stupid!”  I reminded readers of the steam-pipe explosion a few weeks ago in NYC, which pointed to the deteriorating infrastructure in our cities.  It hasn’t exactly been a secret that our Interstate highways, as well as city roads are in need of updating, replacement, or at best, heavy maintenance.

It’s about politics and spending.

People seem to have forgotten the problems with the levy  systems in New Orleans during Katrina.  Apart from the storm, that was pretty much all infrastructure stuff.  However, until there is a disater, nothing gets done because our tax dollars are misspent on the showy things.  Short term spending for short term profits.  We build sports stadiums, bike paths, we renovate National Parks, and fund things like a Teapot museum - all because it shows and may increase revenue.  Yet the infrastructure continues to decay.  The deterioration doesn’t reveal itself until something tragic occurs - then it grabs our attention for a few news cycles.

Nevertheless, our attention span is about the length of a sit-com.  10 or 12 fatalities are simply collateral damage, we say it’s a miracle more people were not killed - and in a couple of weeks, we will forget about it.  The big focus will be to rebuild of course - commerce must go on.  The investigations will come out and people will resign or get fired, but will this change anything?  I don’t think so.  Not until the next tragedy, the next catastrophe, or the next disaster.  Hopefully they will happen in quick succession - otherwise it won’t hold our attention long enough and nothing will get done. 

Sentimental journey.

My friend’s grief, not unlike that of so many others we see on the news, is genuine.  I can’t help grow a little impatient with it however.  Unlike the attack of 9/11, these so-called accidents could have been avoided.  I’m convinced the I-35W collapse was the result of negligence by Government concerned more with a fiscal budget than the safety of citizens.  On the other hand, our politicians misuse our tax dollars, and we let them get by with it - we want our sports centers, our bike paths, along with all the other showy stuff.

What Government ends up doing is like a homeowner remodeling his house cosmetically - without reinforcing the floors, replacing the outdated wiring and plumbing, or reinforcing the foundation.  It looks okay - but is it?  I think we are a superficial, self-indulgent nation.  Towers, levies, and bridges can collapse, along with the housing market, and yet we can’t bring ourselves to believe something is wrong with the system.

Vanity of vanities.

Today’s Gospel is so appropriate for us as a nation. We are the rich man who built larger, more expansive barns to store his riches, saying to himself; “Now as for you, you have so many good things stored up for years to come, rest, eat, drink, and be merry!”  But God said to him; “You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you; and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong?”  Or in our case, what is happening to them?  They seem to be collapsing before our eyes, while only a few lives are lost in the process.

The Gospel begins with a warning we all need to take to heart on several levels; “Take care to guard against greed, for though one may be rich, one’s life does not consist of possessions.”

Aside from the supernatural reality Christ is addressing here - for my purposes, and in these circumstances, it really is the infrastructure stupid.

Share This

You say you want a revolution…

Everyone likes to blame the baby-boomers for all the liberalism we have become accustomed to in the Church today.  Few realize it all started long before the boomers were even capable of expressing a revolutionary thought.  How many young people today understand that the push for liturgical reform, modernizing the liturgy, and using the vernacular was a desire experimented with before the Council?  How many people realize that it was Pius XII who called for women religious to modify their habits to adapt to the demands of modern life, such as the nuns who drove cars or worked in medicine?  (Although later, many modified themselves out of the habit entirely.)

When I was in grade school, the nuns taught us - way back then - songs such as ”Kumbaya” - and we listened to the Congolese Missa Lubaand had to sing Negro spirituals.  (Although black kids in the class were disciplined until they spoke without an “accent”.)  I think it was probably the missionary sisters who came back to the motherhouse with stories of how fervent the African Catholics were, and how much the native people enlivened the liturgy with their exuberant participation and singing, which motivated the sisters to jump on board as regards the reform of the liturgy.  When Vatican II came along, it was a dream come true for a good share of them.

I di’n't know nothin’ ’bout Civil Rights.

Then in the very late 1950’s, early 1960’s the nuns began to get deeply involved in politics - in and through the Civil Rights movement.  (Of course, we had a Catholic President then as well.)  The nuns marched alongside priests and ministers, protesting segregation and demanding the right to vote for black people.  Without doubt it was a good thing, except, in the mid-’60’s the revolutionary spirit suddenly crept into the convent, along with a strong feminist understanding of power, individualism, and independence.  Which happens to be another reason why we have the American Catholic Church we have today.

“Yes Sister, whatever you say Sister!”

So don’t put all the blame on boomers - blame the Sisters of St. Joseph of Margaret Sanger, and the other storm trooperorders who taught us.  (After all, many of them were from the same generation as my parents and your grandparents.)  Funny, what they subsequently failed to realize, their habits spoke louder than words.

(Disclaimer:  The religious women who taught us are to be highly praised for their sacrifice and dedication, no doubt about it.  Just as they ought to be commended and honored for their heroic work in the Civil Rights struggle.  This has been my personal reflection on what, in part,  may have contributed to the decline of religious life in the U.S., as well as an offering towards understanding why the American Catholic Church got to be so liberal.) 

[Update: 7/31/07 - I just found a post at Cafeteria is Closed on this subject; an article by Benedict Groeschl in First Things, discussing the theological and psychological dynamics at work in the decline of established religious communities in the U.S..] 

Share This