« Kerry on Stem Cells | Main | Back again »
October 05, 2004
Not sure how this works
Presbyterian minister to take Benedictine vows.
When Smith makes her vows, she'll keep her role as an ordained Presbyterian minister and add the title of Benedictine sister. This seems fine with the Presbyterians.The Rev. Barbara Battin, Presbyterian minister from Ohio, will give the homily Saturday, and Rev. Ken Meunier, associate director of the John Knox Presbytery, the governing body of Presbyterian churches in this area, will also speak.
I couldn't reach the pope, but the Rev. Daniel Ward, a canon lawyer, said the pope supports other ecumenical religious communities, such as Taize in France.
"He can't do anything about it, anyway - she's not Catholic," said Ward, a member of the order of Benedict and executive director of the Legal Resources Center for the Religious in Maryland.
Update: Thanks to "b", we have an explanation. Pulled from comments:
I believe the subject community is part of the Federation of St. Gertrude, founded 1937, with houses in the US and Canada. The monastery in Richardton, ND, of which Kathleen Norris is an Oblate is also part of this Federation.St. Benedict Center was founded intentionally as an ecumenical monastery in the US. From their literature:
---
The Monastery of Saint Benedict Center is home for the community of the Sisters of Saint Benedict of Madison, Wisconsin, and Benedictine Women of Madison, Inc., the first ecumenical monastic community in North America. Hospitality flows through the heart of this community as the sisters share daily common prayer with co-workers and guests; offer personal retreats and spiritual growth programs for women and men of various faith traditions; sustain ecumenical communities of women and men in living Benedictine values in their families and professions; and maintain bonds of friendship with women’s monastic communities in Asia and Africa and welcome these sisters into their community.
---Regarding new vocations, their website says
---
We celebrate the diversity of our members. Each of us contributes our unique gifts to the shared life of community.We invite single women of any Christian tradition, 25-50 years old, into our community. Women who join the community do not change their denomination.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d83437d5a653ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Not sure how this works:
Comments
Huh?
This makes no sense.
I understand the Presby's not caring, but I don't see how you can take the vows and not be Catholic.
Posted by: meep at Oct 5, 2004 9:11:30 AM
Aren't the Benedictines Catholic?
Posted by: c matt at Oct 5, 2004 9:20:03 AM
There are Anglican Benedictines
http://www.osb.org/intl/angl/
Posted by: Chris at Oct 5, 2004 9:21:14 AM
How do you write an article like this without talking to someone from the Sisters of St. Benedict? Readers are left hanging after this article.
Posted by: Whitcomb at Oct 5, 2004 9:26:42 AM
"Smith said she was attracted to the sacraments and regular prayer of Catholic monastic life, but didn't have a way of living that life within the Protestant tradition. Interestingly, she feels called to a way of life that has become less attractive to Catholic women."
Wasn't it Andrew Greeley who said something to the effect that the minute Catholics throw something away, Protestants discover and embrace it?
Posted by: Christine at Oct 5, 2004 9:30:40 AM
"Benedictine spirituality" is one of the latest fads among the movement liberal Protestant clergy and lay activists. I'm not sure what it means other than it sees some commonalities - however slight - between a monastery and a liberal Protestant intentional community and that the monastic structure can somehow be used for their purposes. I don't get it all, really. The lived-in tradition and experience of the Benedictine monastic tradition has very little to do with their world view. They will get bored with "Benedictine spirituality" and go on to the next thing and who knows what that will be.
Posted by: Patrick Rothwell at Oct 5, 2004 9:47:47 AM
So, Protestants becoming Benedictine Oblates isn't a good thing?
Kathleen Norris, writer, Presbyterian, and Benedictine Oblate since 1986, was instrumental in my becoming a Catholic.
Don't underestimate the good that can come out of this sort of thing.
Posted by: David at Oct 5, 2004 9:58:34 AM
A few points.
There is really no such thing as a Catholic "Order" of St. Benedict in the sense of the "Order" (top down) of Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, etc. Benedict lived in the 6th century, monasticism has been in the Church since at least the 4th century. The Benedictine "Order" is a recent development. It was Pope Pius XII that explicitly ordered the formation of the Benedictine Confederation (OSB) of 17 or so independent Catholic Benedictine congregations, each with their own history and traditions and families of monasteries.
There are, of course, Catholic Benedictines outside of the OSB, and there are Anglican Benedictines, as mentioned above. And there are ecumenical monastic communites like Taize. In general, it is not a good idea to assume that "Benedictine" == "Catholic" unless you know more about the community. This confuses the press endlessly.
Who is America's most famous monk? Thomas Merton. But the Cistercians (OCist) and Trappist (OCSO) are not part of the OSB. They continue as separate monastic traditions in the Church.
Who is the most popular lay writer about monasticism in the US? Kathleen Norris, I'd say. She is a Presbyterian (correct me if I'm wrong), and also an Oblate ofthe Catholic Assumption Abbey in North Dakota.
Benedictines, perhaps because of their deep tradition of hospitality, have been tasked by the Church with many work of an ecumenical and inter-religious nature.
Posted by: b at Oct 5, 2004 10:06:01 AM
The article is admittedly unclear, but it indicates that that unlike Norris, Smith is becoming a fully professed member of the community - not an oblate.
Here is a page on being a Benedictine Oblate, which is slightly different than a third order Franciscan, for example, and is open to all:
4) The Oblate should participate frequently in the Sacraments of the Eucharist and Reconciliation. (If the Oblate is not Roman Catholic, then he or she should be faithful to his or her beliefs concerning church and prayer.
But that's not what Smith is doing, so...just wondering.
Posted by: amy at Oct 5, 2004 10:19:57 AM
I believe the subject community is part of the Federation of St. Gertrude, founded 1937, with houses in the US and Canada. The monastery in Richardton, ND, of which Kathleen Norris is an Oblate is also part of this Federation.
St. Benedict Center was founded intentionally as an ecumenical monastery in the US. From their literature:
---
The Monastery of Saint Benedict Center is home for the community of the Sisters of Saint Benedict of Madison, Wisconsin, and Benedictine Women of Madison, Inc., the first ecumenical monastic community in North America. Hospitality flows through the heart of this community as the sisters share daily common prayer with co-workers and guests; offer personal retreats and spiritual growth programs for women and men of various faith traditions; sustain ecumenical communities of women and men in living Benedictine values in their families and professions; and maintain bonds of friendship with women’s monastic communities in Asia and Africa and welcome these sisters into their community.
---
Regarding new vocations, their website says
---
We celebrate the diversity of our members. Each of us contributes our unique gifts to the shared life of community.
We invite single women of any Christian tradition, 25-50 years old, into our community. Women who join the community do not change their denomination.
----
That's pretty clear.
Posted by: b at Oct 5, 2004 10:28:15 AM
I wonder if she'll be able to truly live as a vowed Benedictine, in community, without becoming Roman Catholic. True monastic spirituality is hard for me to conceive separate from the Mass and an active Sacramental life, to say the least. Perhaps the Rev. Abbess could, under vow of Obedience, order her conversion. :)
Of course, the article doesn't clarify whether she's taking full-fledged vows, which probably require one to be a Catholic.
Posted by: John Heavrin at Oct 5, 2004 10:35:01 AM
Posted the above before seeing the updates. While I'm still unclear as to the nature of the "vows" to be taken, it sounds like this community is open to all comers, which is fine, I suppose, but the article should have pointed this out, instead of giving the "This just in --Catholic Religious Orders Now Open to Presbyterian Ministers" tone that it did.
I still don't see how one can be a true, full-fledged Benedictine without being Catholic, but I'm sure half a dozen posters will explain it to me.
Posted by: John Heavrin at Oct 5, 2004 10:41:23 AM
Dear John,
May I ask why you feel that true monastic spirituality is hard to conceive of apart from the Mass and an active sacramental life? How many places are the Mass and sacraments mentioned in the Rule of Benedict? How often are they mentioned in the writings of the Desert Fathers?
Throughout the history of the Church, monasticism has engaged and withdrawn, blended and separated out, been ruled a great influence, and a great useless burden in its dance with the Church. I think, however, that perhaps you could say that "Catholic spirituality" is not possible without the Mass and sacraments; perhaps "monastic spirituality" is not possible without the Office, Lectio Divina, silence, contemplation, and most especially the Psalms.
"Monoastic spirituality" is lived quite successfully in non-Catholic, less sacramental communities.
Posted by: b at Oct 5, 2004 10:44:25 AM
"Monoastic spirituality" is lived quite successfully in non-Catholic, less sacramental communities"
True, but in order to fully profess in a Benedictine Community of the Roman Catholic Church, at some point I would guess one would have to live the sacramental life. Our local Benedictine Abbey is very much centered around the Mass as much as lectio divina. Several priests from the community staff Catholic parishes.
Posted by: Christine at Oct 5, 2004 11:00:35 AM
Well, has anyone noticed St. Benedict statues starting to cry yet?
This is a good example of the sort of confusion that ecumenism/interreligious dialogue is fostering. It's far from the only one, though. When the fruits are judged, hopefully this rotten fruit of confusion will also be considered. At the rate we are going, we will end up with a religious soup no one can recognize anymore.
Posted by: Carrie at Oct 5, 2004 11:04:50 AM
When you're talking about Benedictine nuns in America, it's important to remember that most of their congregations are a very American phemomenon. German Benedictine monks served as missionaries to German towns from Pennsylvania through the midwest, and appealed to German Abbesses for nuns.
These nuns, who had been monastic and enclosed, came to the USA and discovered that they were expected to found and staff schools for immigrants. They developed from "nuns" to active orders of "sisters" which kept some monastic traditions and language but dropped a great deal (for example, dropping the Divine Ofice for the little office of the BVM).
Dominican Sisters in this country, by the way, have the same history. Dominican Nuns are second order Dominicans, enclosed. The Dominican sisters many of us had in school had morphed into "Third Order Regular," active teaching sisters.
So, a lot of "monastic communities" and "monastic tradition" talk you get in this country has little to do with monasticism at all; that's why you can get so puzzled trying to figure out how Benedictine sisters in this country differ from active orders. They don't. And a lot of what they talk about isn't monastic.
From the looks of the linked websites, I'd guess that the Congregation of St Gertrude was founded in 1937 as a group which intended to recover and preserve the monastic tradition in their Order. That's a great need in America.
As for the ecumenical dimension here, that is very interesting. A Religious taking vows, particularly solemn vows, has status in canon law (for example, solemn vows can be dispensed only by the Holy See). I wouldn't think this applies to a Protestant member of the community, which gives them a kind of two-tier status. A Protestant making 'solemn vows' wouldn't have any relationship to the authority of the Catholic Church, and I guess would be making a personal commitment to God and the community.
Necessarily, they should have a two-tier status sacramentally as well. I understand that at Taize, Protestant and Catholic identities are carefully respected regarding the Eucharist; at least, that was the case years ago. The ecumenical witness of this community could have a certain value, I think, if they join together in what they legitimately can, but refrain from false ecumenism regarding the sacraments.
I'd recommend much of the writings of Esther DeWaal to anyone interested in seeing what Benedictine spirituality looks like from an ecumenical perspective. She is the wife of the Dean of Canterbury cathedral, and has a gift for shedding light on the Rule of Benedict.
Posted by: Father Wilson at Oct 5, 2004 11:24:55 AM
b, *life* is hard for me to conceive without the Mass and an active Sacramental life. That sounds like I'm dodging your question, but it's the best answer I can think of. One could be a monk without being a Christian, as are Buddhist monks, but to join a Benedictine Community, yet not receive the Sacraments, or be unable to share the Marian devotion of Benedictine community life, would seem to me impossible. My point is not that she should be "banned" or anything of the sort; but that I find it hard to conceive of living in a Benedictine Community without wanting to enter fully into Catholicism (by being a Catholic). Otherwise, one is divided from the brethren (sistren?) on the most fundamental level. The place in question is an ecumenical experiment, apparently, in living the rule of St. Benedict despite not necessarily being Catholic, so my first comments are less apposite than if it were a "traditional" (to use a word free of all freight in these environs...) monastery.
Posted by: John Heavrin at Oct 5, 2004 11:30:25 AM
Mr Rothwell is so dismissive; this is just the lastest fad of liberal Protestants. Carrie describes this community as "the rotten fruit of confusion," I suppose because she is confused by it. Taize has been around for something like half a century and many people have witnessed to the deep spirituality there.
I don't think we can speak as if Protestants have no interior life, or as if God isn't working through them, or as if He can't call them to a certain state of life. I don't think we can presume to know His intentions or the way He is working in every circumstance. We don't own God, we can't tell Him to buckle down and follow the rules and not do things which confuse us!
In this community I presume the sisters will say the office together, live and work together, but receive the sacraments...or whatever sacrament like rituals their own religious tradition observes, in local churches of their own tradition. It seems awkward, but not impossible. I suspect that actually they will all go to mass together. It doesn't bother me if the Presbyterian minister comes to mass and even takes communion, as long as she believes Jesus is truly present. I wouldn't ask her to sign on to any particular theological/philosophical language ie 'transubstantiation' although I think quite highly of that language, but I would want her to agree to "really present" in such a way that she would absolutely know that you can't put left over hosts back in the cabinet with the unconsecrated ones, that Jesus remains present in them. I know the arguments about the signification of unity, I understand them, but I am not sure the rigid application of those arguments is the best thing in every circumstances. What would make me really uncomfortable would be if the Presbyterian minister were regarded as if she were a priest, or if they took turns having 'communion services' from their various traditions and all partook. I am sure Jesus makes Himself present in some way to Presbyterians when they have a Holy Communion service...after all, they are following His command to "Do this in remembrance of me" as well as they understand it. But how can a Catholic recieve in such a circumstance? Do they think Jesus is truly present at a real mass, whereas this is just a memorial service, but a good thing anyway...or do they fail to understand the difference?
But again, the article doesn't tell us what forms of worship the sisters will share.
Susan F. Peterson
Posted by: Susan Peterson at Oct 5, 2004 11:58:27 AM
I am not sure about the specifics of Benedictine life or canon law, but I think that we should be optimistic about this. The Holy Father has written, "Thanks to ecumenism, our contemplation of 'the mighty works of God' (mirabilia Dei) has been enriched by new horizons, for which the Triune God calls us to give thanks: the knowledge that the Spirit is at work in other Christian Communities, the discovery of examples of holiness, the experience of the immense riches present in the communion of saints, and contact with unexpected dimensions of Christian commitment." The significance of these new horizons means no less than that "the entire life of Christians is marked by a concern for ecumenism; and they are called to let themselves be shaped, as it were, by that concern." The risk of ecumenism, then, is never optional - we must always search for communion with "unexpected dimensions of Christian commitment" if we are to be truly faithful to the Spirit.
This sort of faithfulness demands, I think, first, that we recognize that Reformed Christians are not necessarily "less sacramental" than us. They have a different (and we would say problematic) understanding of the sacraments, to be sure, but an intelligent Reformed Protestant will argue that he is actually more sacramental than a Catholic. After all, the 18th Article of the Church of England claimed that transubstantiation "overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament" by turning a effective sign of God's forgiveness into a fetishized sacred object vulnerable to manipulation and power. And when the Catholic accuses the Reformed of symbolizing the presence of God in the Eucharist, the Reformed Christian can suggest that transubstantiation renders the Second Coming of Christ symbolic if not completely superfluous (a certain ubiquitous Flannery O'Connor quote can backfire). I do not mean to get into arguments about these arguments; honesty simply compels us to acknowledge that they exist. Presbyterians may be very sacramental indeed - at least sacramental enough, so to speak, for monastic life.
Furthermore, our "irrevocable" commitment to ecumenism forces us to ask in humility how the Reformed tradition can help us see new horizons in monasticism. In 1968, Thomas Merton wrote, "The Reformation experience is something badly needed in monasticism to recover its own identity in the contemporary Church. ... The Reformation can make monasticism conscious of and faithful to its own truth." How can this be? Merton writes,
"Monastic determination after Trent bore fruit now in a fantastically single-minded intentness on 'heroic virtue,' now in touching, though bizarre, manifestations of mystical camp. Not only among monks, but in all kinds of sectarian milieux, this state of struggle and of tension sustains an illusion of special election and of incorruptible truth. The endemic disease of monasteries and of sects is that people in them do so much to save their souls that they lose them: not in the sense that they are damned for being good, but in the sense that they concentrate on such peculiar, limited aspects of good that they become perverse and singular. This singularity begets blindness and deafness to Christ. The tense concentration of sect or monastery on some completely peripheral concern can give an impression of heroic faith - but so can the feat of engraving the Lord's Prayer on a pinhead. Fidelity to tedious but predictable rules can become an easy substitute for fidelity, in openness and risk, to the unpredictable word. But the whole point of monastic 'desert' life is precisely to equip the monk for risk, for walking with God in the wilderness, and wrestling with Satan in vulnerable freedom. The monk should by rights be one who knows that faith is his only true protection against the power of great evil. But the monastic institution has surrounded him with so many other protections that the seed which is called to grow, in pure trust, in the desert, is in fact nurtured in a greenhouse. The rationalization is that the greenhouse is really a desert in intention and that God, through kindly representatives, provides a steady supply of water. Instead of wilderness faith and the peril of death by dryness or exhaustion, one accepts faith in another kind of desert: that of protective authoritarian routine."
The witness of a Presbyterian, heir to the Reformation critiques of formalism, may remind monks of the danger of this other kind of desert and the need for a risky fidelity to the "unpredictable word." Indeed, a Presbyterian's presence may help keep monks accountable to authentic monastic renewal, which, according to Merton, must involve an eschatological orientation, mission to the unbeliever, but also an ecumenical openness, since a monk, who walks with God in the wilderness, must be "able to share on the deepest level the risks and agonies of Christian crisis." And that sharing on the deepest level is what true ecumenical dialogue is all about.
Thank you.
Neil
Posted by: Neil at Oct 5, 2004 11:58:40 AM
Fr. Wilson, thank you for some very clear explication.
Carrie, don't worry about it so much -- I think it is the (secular) press and the casually disinterested who are confused by it. Look at this as an opportunity for those of us who ARE interested to look into it, see where the confusion lies, and make it clearer to others.
We are having a problem with some of the EMHCs at my church -- they do not understand why, when they make a sick call, they shouldn't also offer the Body of Christ to the nice Baptist lady in the next bed.
We must accept the fact of the (admittedly GROSS) catechetical failure that has allowed an adult Catholic (let alone an extraoridnary minister!) to be so ignorant of his own faith.
But having accepted the fact, we must also seize it as an opportunity to teach.
We Catholics need to remember our mission to evangelize -- and sometimes the targets of our evangelical fervor need to be our co-religionists.
I think what is attractive and acessible in Catholic practice ought to be offered as freely as possible to non-Catholics.
So, someone says liberal Protestants currently look on monasticism as something trendy? GREAT. Let them join us to sing psalms, pray contemplatively, live in community.
Use holy water! Make the sign of the cross! Chant Latin prayers!
Our practices are not idle forms -- they are FORMATIVE.
Do you think our our disciplines have somehow lost the power they had for over a thousand years to reveal our DOCTRINES? and to help impart them to others? And to evangleize?
I don't.
FINALLY, perhaps, VCII will bear its intended fruit -- not to nudge us toward protestantism but to bring our separated sistren and brethren back to the fullness of truth that is the Church.
Posted by: Joyfully hopeful at Oct 5, 2004 12:11:04 PM
Joyfully Hopeful believes only those outside of the faith or those marginally catechized are being confused. I would submit that the recent developments in Fatima indicate that priests and bishops are also confused.
Posted by: Carrie at Oct 5, 2004 1:24:34 PM
As others have mentioned, the Anglicans "recovered" monastic orders in the wake of the Oxford Movement in the 19th century. Here is a website that describes the All Saints' Sisters, based outside Baltimore. These Anglican sisters are in communion with the Episcopal Church--somewhat strained at times, I have heard.
http://ralphandsue.com/Convent/
Posted by: George at Oct 5, 2004 1:24:57 PM
Neil:
Thank you for the clear explanation of differences between Catholic and Reformed sacramentality. I know you don't want to get into a discussion on the merits, but I think it is important to point out, particularly in a comment on differing sacramentality, that this is a significant issue with the Reformed approach. Symbols are not sacraments. A symbol is something that represents something else; a sacrament IS the something else. Thus, if a Reformed considers their communion service symbolic (as opposed to real presence), he cannot at the same time claim it as sacramental. Symbols do not carry any particular grace with them (eg, a crucifix, while it can focus one's attention and meditiation, does in itself carry any special grace). On the other hand, sacraments are no mere symbols - they are vehicles of grace. It just seems to me you can't have things both ways - you can't claim something is merely a symbol, but yet argue it is sacramental. (As I understood it, in the second coming, Christ will come IN GLORY, not under the appearance of bread and wine).
Posted by: c matt at Oct 5, 2004 1:29:28 PM
It is really not difficult to see how Benedictine life could be incarnated in an ecumenical setting.
The three Benedictine vows are stability, obedience and conversion of manners. The community lives in a particular place, together; a place which offers them quiet and solitude, as well as the opportunity to offer hospitality. Monastic enclosure, provisions for silence at times, and always in certain places, silent meals etc. all provide for the living together of a large group of people in the same place, but each having the space/silence in which to grow in prayer and to study.
They live together in obedience, under a Superior whom they have freely elected; the Superior governs the community, but in a strongly consultative way (the monastic chapter, consisting of all the professed, discuss any matter of importance, and Benedict insists that even the youngest are heard).
The rhythm of the house is a deliberate seeking after balance between work, rest, prayer, study and leisure. Benedict deliberately edited the monastic tradition he had received, reducing both the strenuous provisions for liturgical prayer of the older Rules and the excessive penances. Everything in the Benedictine way is a matter of balance.
"Nothing is to be preferred" to the Divine Office; seven times daily, once at night (Matins or Vigils), but each Hour of the Office of reasonable length. Most of Benedict's monks were laymen, not priests; indeed, in the early days often the Abbot was not ordained.
A balanced Benedictine community serves us all as a sacrament -- a sign -- of what we all aspire to in our own lives: that balance between work, rest, prayer, study and leisure; the focused, constant, attentive reading of/listening to God's Word; a disciplined way of living among and with others, of 'hospitality.' Because it serves as such a sign to us all, Benedictine houses have always drawn seekers (I myself became an Oblate of St Benedict, sort of like a third order, at nineteen years of age). It is interesting and a welcome development if some houses are deliberately becoming a more evident sign to all Christians as well. Benedictine life is extraordinarily rich, and certainly most of its aspects can be fully lived out in an ecumenical context.
I say this with the caveat: this must be a true ecumenism, not a blurring of distinctions we have no right to minimize, or a seeking after an easy "unity" rather than doing the work for unity we really need to do.
Posted by: Father Wilson at Oct 5, 2004 1:37:52 PM
A few links to non-RomanCatholic Benedictine monasteries in the US:
St. Augustine's House, a Lutheran Benedictine monastery of the Congregation of the Servant's of Christ, in Michigan.
Holy Cross Monastery, an Episcopal Benedictine monastery of the Order of the Holy Cross, in New York.
St. Gregory's Abbey, an Episcopal Benedictine monastery.
National Catholic Reporter article on the founding of St. Brigid of Kildare Monastery in Minnisota, for Methodist women.
And here is a brief summary of Protestant Monasticism since 1841 when the first Anglican monastery was founded since the dissolution of monasteries by Henry VIII about 300 years earlier.
And a nice quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "...the restoration of the church will surely come only from a new type of monasticism which has nothing in common with the old but a complete lack of compromise in a life lived in accordance with the Sermon on the Mount in the discipleship of Christ. I think it is time to gather people together to do this..."
Esther De Waal, as mentioned earlier, has a number of wonderful books looking at Benedictine monasticism from an Anglican perspective, such as "Seeking God: The Way of St. Benedict," and "Living with Contradiction: An Introduction to Benedictine Spirituality." And don't forget the writings of Sr. Joan Chittister, OSB, such as "Wisdom Distilled from the Daily: Living the Rule of St. Benedict Today."
There are many great and wonderful Benedictine Roman Catholics, today and through the centuries.
But Benedictine is not necessarily Roman Catholic.
Christian monasticism is not necesarily Benedictine (there are many traditions including Eastern, Desert and experimental, eremitic and cenobitic).
Monastic spirituality and life is not necesarily Christian. See, for example, the Monastic Interreligious Dialogue.
Posted by: b at Oct 5, 2004 2:00:10 PM
