Review for Religious - Issue 26.5 (September 1967)

Open Access

Abstract

Issue 26.5 of the Review for Religious, 1967. ; A Contemplative. House by Btrnard Hi#ing, C.Ss.R. 771 Institutional Business Administration by John J. Flanagan, S.J., and James L O'Connor, S.J. 779 An Attitude towards Cgmmunity by Andre Auw, C.P. 797 The Vows and Christian Life by Gary F. Greif, S.J. ~ 805 Stability of Personnel Assignments by James F. Gray, S.M. 834 Religious Obedience ¯ by Jean-Marc Laporte, S.J. 844 Bishops and Religious Life by Theodore J. St. Hilaire, S,J. 860 The Priest-Religious by Jam~s Kelsey McConica, G.S.B. 869 Modes of Prayer by Joseph J. Sikora, S.J. 884 Eucharist, Indwelling, Mystical Body by Thomas Dubay, S.M. 910~ Meeting the Vocation Crisis by Shaun McCarty, M.S.Ss. T. 939 Seminarians on a College Campus by Edward F. Heenan, S.J. 946 Survey of Roman Documents 954 Views, News Previews 961 Questions and Answers 964 Book Reviews 968 BERNARD HARING, C.Ss.R, A Contemplative House Notes from a Discussion Held at Notre Dame On March 12, 1967, two priests, a laywoman, and several sisters met at Lewis Hall on the Notre Dame campus to discuss the feasibility of establishing one or more contemplative houses in the midst of our active communities. We wished to examine our reasons for desiring such a thing, the concrete shape such a desire might take, and the objections against it. What emerged from the discussion were three different types of con-templative houses. Some of the issues raised and points discussed are given below: 1. A contemplative house designed primarily to meet the needs of an active community was proposed. Now that we are beginning to appreciate 'better the indi-vidual vocations within a community, an opportunity should be provided for those who feel themselves called to a life of more radical prayer to fulfill this calling. Not only are there differences of vocation within a community but also differences or evolution within an individual vocation itself. The house would provide an opportunity for mature religious, having already had apostolic experience, who now feel themselves called to greater contemplation. We felt that it would be better to leave the amount of time spent in the contemplative house completely open. Some might want to spend a few months there, others a year or a few years, others might enter on a permanent basis. The house would provide for the entire community a place of retreat, meeting various needs. It could be a center of spir-ituality, a source of refreshment for the community as a whole. Such a community would need a core group, really called to contemplation, who would perhaps spend a certain amount of time with an already estab-lished contemplative group to learn the life from within. There are contemplative groups which can pro-vide this opportunity. 2. Another proposal concerned a contemplative house with the double aim of providing an opportunity of 4. 4. 4. Bernard H~iring, C.Ss.R., is teaching at Union Theo-logical Seminary; :Apartment 412; Mc- Gifford Hall; 99 Claremont Avenue; New York 10027. VOLUME 26, 1967 Bernard Hdring, C.Ss.R. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS contemplative life to its members and of restoring con-templative values within the world, particularly in those areas most starved for those values. ~Vhat was intended here concerned slum neighborhoods, so profoundly de-humanized. The house would be completely accessible to the neighborhood and would provide, a place of quiet, prayerfulness, and beauty, combined with radical poverty. Many in the slum areas have never experienced these values. It was suggested that one of the main reasons why our young people are able to appreciate social action, Peace Corps, civil rights work, and so forth, but have no appreciation [or contemplation is that they have never really come into contact with contemplative values. This house would provide the opportunity for such an experience. The location would be flexible; a house might be rented, perhaps, so that the group could move with the needs. Not only physical poverty, but contemplative poverty ("receptivity") would be stressed--learning to see and hear, and to receive life as a gift. 3. Also discussed was a contemplative house with the double aim of providing an opportunity of contempla-tive life to its members and of bringing Christianity in its simplest, most essential form to newly Christianized cotmtries, for example, Africa. Such a setting provides a constant call to authenticity, being rooted in the places of greatest need. It would provide an opportunity for presenting Christianity in its evangelical simplicity, stripped of extraneous cultural accretions and "works." Religious who seek to realize their vocation in this way should have both a profoundly contemplative calli.ng and a missionary calling, since a great deal of adjust-ment would be required. Points raised with reference to one or all of these proposals: Why? --because this is an age of polarities, andjust as there is a thrust towards hyperactivism, there must be a corre-sponding thrt~st towards radical prayer, in order to re-store the balance --because of the possibility of an evolution in spir-ituality in the individnal; a person who has no incli-nation towards a contemplative vocation at one time in his life may be drawn to this later, and should find provision for fulfilling this call within his own community --for the witness, sorely needed, of a life of prayer as manifested by religious --to realize in our lives Christ's periodic withdrawal into the desert and the rhythm of the Apostles' lives, as seen in Acts (their labors in the field ~,ere punctuated by periodic returns to the community) --to provide for the unique experience of community which can be found most radically in a contemplative community --to deepen and vivify the active apostolate to which these religious will return, from which they withdraw, and in which they will continue to live --as a response to a demand the Holy Spirit seems to be making on us now --as an expression of the Christian life of simplicity and poverty --to become more consciously and intensely "aware"; to allow one's consciousness to expand, to listen con-templatively-- in ways which are not possible while we are "busy about many things" Where? --in a house which belongs to the community but is in some sense "away," as at a country home or in some such semi-secluded location --in a place of radical "authenticity" (see n. 3) --at the motherhouse (or "central" house), if novitiate and other satellite institutions are removed from this place --within a city slum (see n. 2) For Whom? --establish minimai age, then open it to anyone who feels the need or desire for this type of life --use norms of selectivity in order to prevent this from becoming a place of escape, a haven for neurotics, the malcontents, and so forth --exercise no authoritarian selectivity, recognizing the right of any individual, for any motive, to try, at least, such an experiment --for the artists, as well as the contemplatives, of a community, since their creativity requires a greater flexi-bility in spirituality and prayer How Long? --undetermined; perhaps for a summer, for a year, for a number of years --in some cases, perhaps with the nucleus or core group, this will become a permanent vocation How to Support the House? --by alms --by some form of agricultural work --by conducting retreats in connection with the house --by providing for some of the members of the com- + ÷ ÷ A Contemplative Hottse VOLUME 26, 1967 ÷ ÷ ÷ Bernard H;C~r~i$n.gR,. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS~ munity to go out to work, professionally or otherwise; perhaps members could take turns --by giving lessons there, as might be the case were this the community in which the artists lived, as men-tioned above --by doing work in connection with that of ~he in-stitute, for example, to be a "communication center" Miscellaneous Points --safeguard at all costs flexibility, creativity, originality, in initiating such an experiment --yet learn from long established contemplative commu, nities what they can offer ---distinguish cloister versus contemplative community --consider the problem of integrating some form of the apostolate with this contemplative house so that there is a constant feedback, yet so that the need for solitude, prayer, and withdrawal are respected --such a house might be a cooperative endeavor among several communities or among the third and second orders of such communities as the Dominicans, Fran-ciscans, and so forth --groups should be small and highly experimental --part of renewal tends to admit that within our exist-ing congregations the person can no longer be fitted to the structure; the structure, therefore, must be broad-ened enough for all "talents" in the community Objections and Dil~culties --would this lead to an unhealthy division in the com-munity and to an attitude that would relegate the need for contemplative prayer to those participating in the house of prayer? --what can be done to restore the concept of leisure and the desire for contemplation to all rather than to the few who will be involved in this experiment? --would this cause a disorientation in one's own life or in the life of the community? --how can this be reconciled with the spirit of a com-munity whose essential work is the social apostolate? ---in the work of renewal, is the revitalizing of the witness of a life of prayer absolutely fundamental (and thus to be given priority), or must secondary matters first be reconsidered in order to achieve a level of maturity without which such a contemplative vocation could develop? --if such a house is needed, is this only symptomatic or indicative that we have to discover a better means of integration of prayer and the apostolate within our existing structures? --would not clearing away the "rubble" (obsolete ob- servances, and so forth) pave the way to a deeper Christian life without this? (The Notre Dame group would be interested in re-ceiving support and suggestions from anyone genuinely concerned with promoting this cause. Please address correspondence to Sister Marie, Via Di Villa Lauchli, 180; Rome, Italy; and/or Box 216; Lewis Hall; Notre Dame, Indiana.) A Contemplative House in the Midst, of Active Com-munities Almost every week I receive letters from religious who are intensely interested in the idea of a contempla-tive house in the midst of our active religious com-munities. Many religious and laymen support this idea with their prayers and their thoughts. The issue is on the agenda of many general chapters. It is, I feel, one of the greatest hopes for an authentic understanding of Church renewal. Some of the reasons why I feel this to be so are as follows: I. "My house shall be a house of prayer" (Lk 19:46). In our dynamic society where man organizes and manages almost everything, one aspect of humanity is greatly endangered: man in his dignity before God, man in his receptivity and humble dependence on God's graciousness. The feverish pace of technical development, the quasi-religious belief in economic progress and organization threaten man's capacity to listen to the word of God, to treasure it in his heart, and to ponder it. All man-kind needs such a study of the problem of prayer with a view to helping modern man relearn what it means to pray. To achieve this goal it is not sufficient that some people retire totally from the active life into cloisters, giving up their contact with the "world." The value of the cloister and of stable contemplative vo-cations must not be overlooked, but neither must this be considered as the only way of restoring contempla-tive life or of witnessing to the prime importance of prayer. 2. The era of the Second Vatican Council is an epoch of change. Many of the changes are overdue. In some areas of the Church, calculated and uncalculated re-sistance to the approach of Pope John and the Council, even from men and women in authority, provokes an increasing impatience and restlessness. Changes are sometimes made in a spirit of counterreaction against reactionary attitudes. All of this unrest and ferment must be countered by a more contemplative and tran-quil approach to renewal. Only if we have brothers and sisters among us who can treasure in their heart the ÷ A Contemplative House VOLUME 26, 1967 775 Be~ard HiCir.i$nsg.R,. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS gospel and the salvific events in our tirn'e and ponder our needs before God in prayer, can we begin to find that peace which .bears fruit a hundredfold in wise activity and wise changes. 3. In our time the specialization and differentiation of society and of the Church have reached a new level o{ development, and legitimately so. Our. active re-ligious communities have developed a new style of ef-fective and well-planned activity, with excellent profes-sional training, and so forth. For the integrity of the person and the community we must now develop the agpect of integration. It is not,sufficient that besides the active congregations there exist also contemplative orders. There is not enough exchange and sharing be-tween these two different (and often all too different) modes of life, and communities tend to keep the two distinct. At least some of the contemplative commu-nities could and should be deepened in their spirituality and widehed in their horizons. They could then serve as schools of prayer for others who are engaged .for the greater, part of their life in apostolic or profes- Sional activity~ But for the present time it seems to me that, generally, the more expedient solution would b'e, not. a kind of .confederation between a contem-plative order or cloister and an active community-- although this might work out well in some cases---but rather the opening of a house of prayer as an 6ssentia'l and integrating part of the active community. 4.~Just as there is a need for integration in' every community---especially in the highly.efficient active com-munity- there is also need for integration in the life of the individual person. We have tides in our life during which we need another type of community and another style of life. This may be a need for more contemplation. On the one hand, in an active com-munity some may well develop an authentic permanent vocation for the contemplative life. There should be a place for such a vocation within the congregation. On the other hand, almost all of us would like a sabbatical year which wd could devote to spiritual renewal within a zealous, healthy contemplative com-munity. What Form Should Such a "House o[ Prayer" Take?. 1. Much consideration must be given to this ques-tion, and experiments should be made in somewhat different ways. After listening to many religious who are interested in this idea, I am sure that the Holy Spirit will move us in the right direction, though per-haps through humble experiments and some mistakes. Blot the greater mistake would be not to try to find a concrete solution. There must be exchange of thought and experience. 2. In my opinion a house of prayer also should be, if possible, a center for .the earnest study of theology --o[ that mystical and ascetical theology which is needed so badly by the whole Church. Contemplation and meditation must be solidly grounded on a deep knowl-edge of our Lord and of our brothers and sisters with whom we live. 3. There should be as far as possible a stable' nucleus of sisters (or fathers or brothers) with an authentic vocation for the contemplative life. Among them there should be at least one who is well trained in theology, and possibly another with thorough training in psychol-ogy. Methods of concentration and prayer should be studied, and these should include the best of the Yoga and the Zen traditions. Modern man is lost unless we discover how to reeducate him for a life of concen-tration, contemplation, and prayer. A group of people with an authentic and permanent vocation to the contemplative life would enrich all those who come on a temporary basis. A stable con-templative vocation, however, would not exclude the possibility that some who live this life might occasionally have a "sabbatical year" during which they might teach mystical theology or engage in religious forma-tion work. Just as a contemplative vocation can develop from an active one, so also a most fruitful active aposto-late can develop from a more contemplative vocation, and this would be especially appropriate in the area of interior renewal. 4. Active communities should grant to their members the right to apply for the house of prayer whenever the special need is felt. They should be encouraged to spend at least half a year or a year there once or twice in their life. Shorter periods should not be excluded, even a few weeks each year, on condition that the religious wills to join the serious contemplative life as fully as possible for that time. 5. Some of the members of such a house could be qualified to conduct, longer retreats on an individual basis, whenever there is a need for this. Sisters them-selves (and not only priests) should be so qualified for this work. 6. The financial care of the house.should be assumed by the active community to which it belongs. This should not, however, prevent the members of the con-templative house from doing some work for their liveli-hood. The spirit of poverty and simplicity should reign, but there should be no pressure from financial worries. 7. Such a house of prayer might be in a place of A Contemplative House VOLUME 26~ 1967 777 Bernard H~ring, C~s.R. seclusioh "or it might be in. the inner city. We must study the problem of how to create the atmosphere for contemplative fife in the modern environment, and this might require an establishment in the inner city. How-ever, this shofild not be the only type of experiment. Some experiments should also start in the most favora-ble external conditions for contemplation. I would not, however, suggest the traditional type of cloister with all its severe rules and grills: these new houses should be models for the formation of the mature Christian. 8. The house of prayer must at the same time be a real community, a school of fraternal love. Genuine contemplation goes hhnd in hand with growth in fra-ternal love. The chief objection qikely to be advanced against m), proposal is the following: We are already overworked without this house of prayer. Some would escape in this way from an overburdened life; but for the others, the burdens would just become worse. My tentative response is this: When the program for a better pro-fessional training of the sisters was inaugurated, many had the same objection. But since ,the leaders of this movement were convinced of the necessity for the pro-gram, they 'found ways to free the sisters. And today all realize that efficiency is much greater if all the sisters have received the best possible formation. Anal-ogously, we are confronted with a genuine need today: we lose much energy and quite a few vocations as a result of the tensions and frustrations which derive from our activism. The house of prayer as here con-ceived would be above all a source of divine energy and peace, but it would also be a source of peace and energy on the psychological level. If the need is genuine and if my proposed solution seems to have merit, men and women of faith will find the experiment a reasona-ble risk. It may well be that the presence of a house ¯ of prayer within the active communities would change our hectic style of life without diminishing our witness and our professional efficiency. Isn't.,it better to explore the possibility than simply to tolerate the evils it seeks to remedy? REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS JOHN J. FLANAGAN, S.J.,AND JAMES I. o'CONNOR, S.J. Institutional Business Administration and Religious Catholic institutions in education and in the health field have for many'years been embarrassed and handi-c; ipped because of a conflict between religious govern-ment and good acadenfic and good health administra-tion and because of a conflict of interest between wh~t is good for a religious house and what is proper for a facility which has assumed a public responsibility. This article is not intended to reconcile the two ob-jectives into an harmonious compromise; instead, it sug-gests that the two sets of objectives do not lend them-selves to a compromise into one common objective; rather, each set is a valid objective in its own right and should be allowed to function as separate and mutually exclusive endeavors. We contend that religious and, to some extent, ca-nonical provisions have attempted to force a marriage between two entirely divergent concepts. The results have been, in some instances, the weakening of religious government and the clouding of its primary objective. The results have also been frustration in academic and health administration bringing about a series of com-promises producing much mediocrity. Attempts have been made to expand the responsi-bilities of a religious house beyond its original purpose. Consequently,. the religious house has been burdened with responsibilities beyond its conceptual resources. Moreover, superiors have been tortured into a type of split personality which has given rise to a hybrid and curious end product. A religious house, in the eyes of the Church and in John J. Flana-gan, S.J., is execu-tive director of the Catholic Hospital Association; 1438 South Grand Boule-vard; St. Louis, Mis-souri 63104. James I. O'Connor, s.J., is professor o[ canon law at Bellarmine School of Theology; 230 South Lincoln Way; North Aurora, Illinois 60542. VOLUME 26, 1967 John J. Flanagan, S.J., and James I. O'Connor, S.J. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS its original canonical conception, was a home for re-ligious. Its definition, even today, is in terms of the minimum number of religious necessary to constitute it a canonical entity. The purpose of the religious house was to foster religious life and the personal growth of individuals in the pursuit of their religious lives. The term, religious house, means every house of any re-ligious institute whatever; a forrnal or formed house is every house in which dwell at least six professed religious, at least four of whom must be priests if it is a house of a clerical institute (c. 488, 5°). Ecclesiastical property is that which belongs to an ecclesiastical moral, that is, legal .person such as a com-munity, a province, or an institute (c. 1497, § 1). Canonical regulations are directed primarily to the welfare of religious as religious and to the preservation of the religious institute as such. Canons and rules governing ownership, control, disposition of property and the attendant permissions are in complete accord with the existence of a religious house and the life of religious in a convent or monastery or a religious house of studies. But they manifest no concern with nor un-derstanding of professional responsibility to the public in the area of health or for academic responsibility in education. There is nothing in canon law or religious constitutions which indicates an awareness of the prob-lems of operating a nniversity or college or an under-standing of the complexities of a modern hosptial. In the beginning, religious houses functioned in a purely religious environment. How did they'gradually change so much? An historical sketch will indicate the answer to this question. Schools In virtue of her divine commission, "Go, and make disciples of all nations" (Mr 28:19), the Christian Church is essentially a teaching organization. The Church was instituted by Christ to dispense the means of salvation, for example, the sacraments, and to teach the truths necessary for salvation. These truths are spiritual and moral. To impart this essential knowledge, catechu- + menal schools were instituted. Other truths, for example, those of science, history, and so forth, that is, those ÷ ÷ of a profane or secular character, are not intrinsic to the Church's teaching program or mission. However, the profane or secular branches of knowledge were gradually worked into the curriculum and "baptized" when circumstances showed that students could acquire knowledge of them only at the cost of grave danger to their faith or morals. 780 The first schools to introduce a non-religious subject into the plan of studies were the catechetical schools. Because of the conflict between pagan philosophy and Christian truth, a Christian philosophy was developed. As a result, catechetical schools were, for the most part, institutions of higher learning. An easy step was later taken from philosophical controversy to theological controversy. ¯ The safeguarding of faith and morals, especi.ally when it concerned children, was not, in the beginning, a task of the schools but of the parents whose obligation in this regard was particularly stressed. Schools simply provided additional help for parents to meet their re-sponsibility to teach their offspring. Thus parochial and other Church-related educational institutions had their start and have developed into our present-day systems. Even prior to the existence of the catechetical school, special schooling was provided for boys wishing to join the ranks of the clergy. Such schools were attached to the residence of the bishop where the students lived and learned. In view of the purpose of these episcopal schools, as they were called, all phases of their regimen were geared to the clerical life and not to secular life for themselves or others. Similarly, monasteries originally had schools simply to train candidates for the monastic life. Monasticism in itself was a protest against the corrupt and corrupting standards of pagan living. These norms of life had be-gun to influence not only the public but also the private and domestic life of Christians. To help main-tain the ideals of Christian life, the monasteries began to take in students who were not interested in becom-ing monks. To a more limited extent the episcopal schools also adopted this extension of their program, albeit their prihaary purp6se still remained the train-ing of boys for the clerical state. The type of life these students were subjected to is ~indicated by the fact that authorities of the clerical schools in Italy were com-manded by the Council of Vaison not to deny their students the right to marry if they wished to do so when they reached maturity.1 It is hardly likely that schools in other countries differed from those in Italy. Where monastic schools educated people for either the life of the cloister or [or life in the world, they distinguished the two departments into "internal" and "external" schools respectively. What monasteries did for boys, convents did for girls. As time passed, the Catholic schools adopted more and more of the curriculum of the public schools until the program of studies in both systems covered the 1 Concilium Vasense III (A.D. 529), canon 1; Mansi, Amplissirna collectio conciliorum, t. 8, c. 726. ÷ ÷ ÷ Business A dministc a tion + + + John ]. Flanagan, $.J., and James L O'Connor, S.l. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS same branches of knowledge except that the Catholic schools placed special emphasis on the two subjects of religion and religious morality. Furthermore, with the passage of time, the Catholic schools were not operated' primarily for pupils who were considering taking up the clerical or the religious life but, vice versa, for those whose walks, in life would be outside the ranks of the clergy and religious. Despite the developments in the course of studies and in the purpose of schooling,2 the Catholic schools never fully developed an administrative existence di-vorced from that which governed the residences of the religious who operated the schools. Hospitals Care of the sick was a work in which Christ mani-fested great interest as is especially shown in the nu-merous miracles He performed for the sick. His interest was also shown in His command to the Apostles to heal the sick (Lk 10:9) and in His promise to those who believed in Him that they would be able to heal the sick (Mk 16:18). The Apostles, following Christ's example and com-mand, went about curing and comforting the sick (see, for example, Acts 3:2-8; 5:15-6; 14:7-9). Care of the sick is also iiaculcated in the famous passage of the Epistle of St. James (5:14-5). Wealthy Christians in the first centuries made pro-vision for care of the sick who could not be pro~cided for at the bishop's residence. Epidemics were the chief occasions for bringing out this form of charity to the neighbor. Hospitals at times grew up in connection with cathedrals. Later, under Charlemagne, every ca-thedral and every monastery was ordered to have a hospital connected with it. The funds for the support of such hospitals did not come from the priests or religious but from government sources. Because of the confiscation of these funds or diversion of them to other purposes, the hospital suffered. To offset such misuse of hospital funds, the management of hospitals was, at times, turned over to religious for their business administration. The monasteries became the dominant factor in hos-pital work in the tenth century when they combined with an infirmary for their own members a hospital a For a fuller account, see The Catholic Encyclopedia, v. 13, under the heading, "Schools"; Conrad H. Boffa, Canonical Provisions for Catholic Schools [elementary and intermediate] (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 1939), pp. 3--55; and Alexander F. Soko-lich, Canonical provisions Ior Universities and Colleges (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 1956), pp. 3-63. for externs. Collegiate churches also set up hospitals and the canons attached to the church were ordered by local councils to contribute to the maintenance of the hospital. Even though religious and diocesan clergy set up hospitals, the institutions were supported either by mu-nicipal funds or by money, land, or other means pro-vided by private individuals, Quite often control of such hospitals passed from the hands of the religious or the diocesan clergy to the municipality because of the general viewpoint that municipal authority should step in since there was question of management of institutions on which the common welfare of the public largely depended. This viewpoint was that of people from the twelfth to the sixteenth centuries. Where control of the hospital remained in the hands of religious, the ruIes for its administration were those for the administration of the religious residence as set [orth in the community's constitutions. In the United States, religious women were eventually led into hospital work because government and civilians saw and appreciated the work they did, even as un-trained helpers, on the battle field. The first step was to bring the sisters into army hospitals during the Civil War; the second was to induce them to build hospitals of their own.s Religious House All of these educational and health expansions de-veloped under the one ecclesiastical title, religious house. Regardless of the size or complexity to which they attained, the same organizational pattern was continued, namely, that for administering a religious house. Thus we find in preCode, that is, pre-1918 canonical com-mentaries that religious house and ecclesiastical founda-tion were synonymous terms and comprised "the com-plex of temporal property which was destined in perpetuity or, at least, for a long time to a religious purpose, that is, to divine worship, or, to the spiritual or temporal advantage of the neighbor and which was either set up as a legal person by authority of the Church herself or handed over to an ecclesiastical in-stitute (a religious house) already in existence either by a donation inter vivos or by last will and testament on the condition or with the stipulation of rendering religious service." Such works were distinguished from l~hilanthropic functions which "cannot be counted among ecclesiastical ~ See also The Catholic Encyclopedia, v. 7, under the heading, "Hospitals." ÷ ÷ ÷ Business Administration VOLUME 26, 1967 + ÷ ÷ John ~. Flanagan, S.J., and James I. O'Connor, S.~. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS foundations because they, prescind totally ~rom reli-gious purpose and are erected for public utility a'nd other natural and temporal motives and not because of the sup.ernatural motive of religious service and Chris-tian charity." 4 When revising Father Wernz's work after the pro7 mulgation of the Code of Canon Law, Father, Vidal rewrote the above section as follows: In preCode law, religious house was a generic term which, in addition to monasteries, designated all pious places erected by authority of the bishops or like prelates, for example, churches, temples, chapels, guest houses for poor pilgrims, hospitals for, the sick, orphanages for the education bf orphans 0'r of foundling bo.ys or girls. Similarly included were confra-ternities, congregations, holy mounts and other places set aside for works of charity, mercy, religious service or other pious use. A house (or place) was called religious in contradistinction to a pious house (or place), that is, one set aside for a pious or re-ligious purpose by the private determination of the faithful without authorization Of ~cclesiastical authority.~ ' The differences brought out above between the un- ~erstan. ding of the term, religious' house, in preCodg and pos.tCode times are shown more easily and clearly, perhaps, in the following comment: In pr~sent-day law, the ancient understanding of religious house-is notably limited. In the Code religious house is a teCh, nical term and signifies' nothing more that a house of some religious institute. Other ecclesiastical, works or entities, fo~ example, hospitals, orphanages, which previously were also included under the term, religious house, are now designated in the Code by the generic term, ecclesiastical institutions. The same commentator then goes on to explain more exactly just what a religious house is: , In the Code and in law in general, a house is. occasionally used in a common or material sense as the place or building.of residence. In.a more technical sense, a house is understood in ¯ law as a moral or legal person, whether collegiate or non-collegiate. In the current law on religious life, a religious house in its formal and proper sense means a religious com-munity~ namely, a moral, collegiate person which forms the lowest division or society of those persons who, by common law, are members of religious institutes. Religious house, how-ever, does not sig~i[} a community in the abstract but in the concrete inasmuch as it has a site or residence in a plade.° ~ F. X. We.rnz, s.J., lus decretalium, 2nd ed. (Rome: PolygloF P[ess, 1908), t. 3, n. 195. Translation of this and other passages from various authors cited was made by Father O'Connor. ~ F. X. Wernz, S.J., and Petrus Vidal, S.J., lus canonicum (Rome: Gregorian University Press,'1933), t. 3, n. 43. nArcadio Larraona writing in Commentarium pro religiosis, w 3 (192,2), pp. 47-8. Father La~aona, a,Claretian, later became under-secretary and, eventually, secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Religious (1943-1959); he was created cardinal in 1959 and is pres-ently Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. See also Timotheus Schaefer, O.F.M.Cap., De religiosis, 4th ed. (Vatican City: Vatican Polyglot Press, 1947), nn. 163-4. Since, as Larraona points out, religious house pri-marily means a religious community, it is not necessary that the religious own their place of residence. As a result, Larraona later writes: "In order to be considered as a religious house, it makes no difference whether the community lives in rented buildings or on a single floor of some building." And he adds in a footnote: "None of these factors prevents it from being a really true religious house; as a result, it must be treated as such." z There is a special case in the Code, namely, in canon 514, § 1,s where religious house is used in a far brohder sense but in this instance there is no ques-tion of business administration; it concerns purely spir-itual care.~ While, technically, the term, religious house, was notably narrowed from its preCode interpretation, nevertheless, because of the definition given in canon 1497, § 1 to ecclesiastical property and because of the provision of canon 532, § l?° the work of religious institutes in education and health services has been developed, even in modern times, under the pattern of religious government. Consequently, many inconsist-ent and unwieldy situations have developed. Working under a system which was by its nature limited to the government of a religious house, re-ligious orders and congregations have undertaken the ownership and management of universities with schools of medicine, law, dentistry, engineering, liberal arts, teacher education, as well as schools of philosophy and theology. Religious congregations of women and men have carried the ahnost complete responsibility of the Cath-olic hospital system. Over ninety percent of the person-nel involved in carrying out these commitments are lay people who are in no way committed to the way of life of religious subjects. Notwithstanding this fact, their functioning, their growth and development, and their compensation are affected by the spirit and letter of a system primarily intended to govern the lives of re-ligious. The hospital situation finds an almost perfect paral- ~ Commentarium pro religiosis, v. 6 0925), p. 15, II, and footnote (408). ~ In every clerical institute the superiors have the right and duty to administer, either personally or by delegate, the Holy Viaticum and Extreme Unction, in case of sickness, to the professed members, to the novices, and to other persons dwelling day and night in the religious house by reason of service, education, hospitality, or health. ~ Commentarium pro religiosis, v. 9 (1928), p. 104. ~o The property of the institute, of the province, and of the house is to be administered conformably to the constitutions. ÷ + + Business Administration + 4, John I. Flanagan, S.l., and James I. O'Connor, $.1. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 786 lel on the. college and university levels of education and, in a far less degree, on the lower educational level~. The spirit of canon law and ~f the constitutions of religious congregations and orders' was conceived to foster a way of life which led to personal sanctification of religious as individuals and as a group. It was never intended to develop those people professionally or to control the growth and development of institutions which have a public responsibility in education and health, The financing of these endeavors has involved com-plex and basically secular activities which have been subjected to rules, policies, and restrictions formulated solely to govern finances of a religious house, that is, a residence or training center for religious as religious. Permissions, personal and corporate, appropriate within the religious institute,xt are completely incompatible with the intelligent, well-administered financing of, higher education and, for example, the management of a twenty million dollar ($20,000,000)health complex. These activities relate to the development of a service to the public and not to the welfare of a religious house. In mbst instances, the necessary financial support must be obtained from the public, in some cases from the government itself, whether.local, state, or f~deral, with an explicit or, at least, an implicit commitment to serve the public. Even when contributions come from private sources, such as well-to-do benefactors or business enterprises, the money is given not to the religious community as religious but to promote the public service the religious are engaged in, for example, education, health care. This view of contributions to religious institutions rendering a public service is brought out in the practical order by two actual cases which came to .the second author's attention in the last few months. One case involved a Catholic hospital, the other a Catholic col-lege. Each was operated by a different sisterhood. In the case of the hospital, the. sisters decided to close the hospital and sell all its property for what they could.get. Somehow word of the plan reached the capitol of the State in which the hospital was located. The sisters were notified that the only money they could take out of the sale price was what they could prove ~hey had contributed from the community to the hospital. Since all other moneys or their equivalent were giv,en ~ Even as regards financial administration o[ religious property in the narrow sense o[ the term, updating o[ canon law is needed. See Charles J. Ritty, "Changing Economy and the New Code of Canon Law," Jurist, v. 26 (1966), pp. 469-8't. to conduct the hospital as, a public: service, all money derived'from the sale after deducting money the re-ligidus community .could prove it contributed had to be turned over to the State. for disbursement to other health facilities for the public. In the case of the .college,. a like decision regarding closing and sale was arrived .at by the sisters. In this instance also, word of the plan reached the State capito,1. Similarly the sisters were notified that a!! they could take, from the sale. price was what they. could prove they had :contributed. Moreover, the only persons to whom' they could sell the institution were either an-other educational organization which would take over. the operation of the college or the State itself which would then take steps for the continued operation of the college. In both cases, through a 'belief that the sisters would never see the day when they would have to surrender the institution or through an oversight on the part of the civil lawyer consulted in setting up the charte~ of incorporation, there was no provision in either cha.rter~ for th6 dissolution of the corporation. If the articles of incorporation had provided that, in ,.the event of dissolution 'of the hospital or college corporation, the net assets, namely, after payment of bills and after de-ducting the proved contribution by the religious com-munity, were to be transferred to another health care or educational facility, .respectively, within the same sisterhood or, in the event that the religious institute had no other health care or educational facility, then to a like facility within the diocese and, if possible, in the same city or geographical area, there would, we are informed by civil lawyers, have been no problem with the respective State governments. While, very often, religious communities have con-tributed sums of money which are quite large in them-selves, such financial support is relatively small when the total financial picture is brought into focus. There are even instances where not one cent of the invest-ment in buildings and equipment has come from the religious community. And yet the institution is classi-fied as ecclesiastical property because it is incorporated in the name of the religious community. As religious institutions have become more and more involved in semipublic responsibilities, an increasing number of incompatible situations have been encoun-tered. One of the first noticeable situations was the manner of operating schools of nursing and boarding, schools. Having extended to them the aegis of the religious house and the authority of the religious superior, there + ÷ ÷ Business A dmin~tration VOLUME 26, 1967 787~ John J. Flanagan, S.]., and .lames L O'Connor, $.1. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS was. a natural tendency to impose upon the young stu-dents a manner of living suitable to young religious. Through a failure by both ~he religious themselves and by many of the laity to distinguish between money and property acquired and administered for public service and that which pertains to the religious com-munity as a religious community, a number of erroneous conclusions have been drawn by both groups. Here are some examples: The question of corporate poverty and its relation-ship to personal poverty is a matter of great concern to religious superiors, to Church officials, and to mem-bers of the laity. Today's arrangement with large institu-tional holdings and operating budgets is misunderstood by some members of the laity who see a concentration of too much ownership and financial consciousness in or-ganizations whose members publicly and officially profess personal poverty. The affluence of some institutions may affect the personal lives and practices of the members of the re-ligious congregation or order. On the other hand, in terms of professional academic needs of Catholic hos-pitals and educational institutions, the resources in facilities and finances are woefully inadequatK If re-ligious are to discharge their obligations to the public, the needs of Catholic institutions of learning and health care cannot be governed by policies primarily con-cerned with fostering the spirit of poverty in a re-ligious community. The mingling of funds of a pro~essional institution with the funds of the religious institute compounds the problem. In the past, the using of funds generated by the professional institution to construct chapels and colleges primarily for the benefit of the religious com-munity has intensified the issue as can be so well per-ceived in this post-Vatican II period. The legitimate concern of government and the general public to make money available to an institution for comprehensive civic service, when that institution has ambivalent objectives, is harming both the service to the civic community and the credible image of the given religious order or congregation. As the problems facing Catholic institutions today are studied, there is no need to think that Church-related and Church-influenced institutions should be surrendered to secular thinking or to management devoid of religious and moral in-fluence. In a pluralistic society, the Church-related in-stitution has much to offer and the American educational system and the health care system of the country would be seriously short-changed without them. There are various remedies for curing the indicated ills affecting Catholic educational and health care in-stitutions. None of the suggested remedies is a panacea. Ifi some instances the burden will not be removed but only made lighter. In other cases, the existing malady may be totally cured but the cure itself may generate side effects which, however, may be borne with, greater ease than the original ailment. Furthermore, in many instances authorization will be required from the Holy S~'e before the proposed mode of action can be legit-imately adopted. It should be obvious that the sug-gestions made here do not exhaust all possibilities for coping with tlie undesirable situations. As shown earlier in this article the term, religious house,~ has been narrowed very much in its meaning from that it had in preCode ~law, All that is necessary, then, as regards this term is to make sure it is under-stood in its postCode sense as pointed out above by Larraona. The term, ecclesiastical property (canon 1497, § 1), ought, it seems, to be redefined in the light of present-day s{tuations and worded somewhat as follows: Ecclesiastical property comprises 'only those temporal goods, both corpo~eal,whether movable or immovable, and incor-poreal which belong to the Church universal, or to the Apos-tolic See, 'or to any other ecclesiastical moral person in the Church and which directly and primarily service the ecclesias-tical moral person and do not primarily service the good of the general public. If this or similar wording were adopted by the com-mission f6r the revision of the Code of Canon Law, ecclesiastical property as concerns religious wouId be restricted to religious houses in the strict sense of the term, namely, residences of religious (including pro-vincialate and generalate residences), houses of forma-tion, community infirmaries, community cemeteries, community villas, community farms or lands, and shch like properties. Not .included would be all properties primarily .and directly serving the general public, for example, hospitals of any classification, orphanages, schools on all levels of education for the general public. The business administration of these latter institu-tions would be conducted according to the law and practice of the country, state, or civil province pertinent to like facilities whose officers and staff are all lay persons. Proposed also for consideration is the question whether the educational or health facility should be incorporated as a civil corporation totally distinct from the civil corporation composed of the religious house, province;, or,,institute: If the institution were incorpo-rated as an entity separate and distinct from. the re-÷ ÷ 4- Business Administration VOLUME :26, 1967 John I. Flanagan, S.l., and James L O'Connor, $.1. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS ligious community, several great advantages would follow. 1. The institution would not be part of the religious community. As a result, it would not be ecclesiastical property. The further consequence would be that in its business management, it would not be governed by the canon law of business administr.ation. It would be managed completely and solely by the law and practice of the civil jurisdiction in which it is located and in-corporated. In the existing situation, there is the anomaly that an institution which derives its legal ex-istence from the State and, in the case of educational institutions, derives its power to issue diplomas, grant degrees, and so forth from the State and not from the Church, should, nevertheless, be classified as ecclesi-astical property because it is owned by a religious house. This proposed solution of a problem rendered ex-tremely difficult in practice by th~ canonical definition of ecclesiastical property is applicable only as regards the future legal erection of institutions. Since hereto-fore all institutions were .listed as owned by the re-ligious community, they thereby became ecclesiastical fixed or stable capital property. As such, they are sub-ject to all the canonical prescriptions and limitations for such property. Consequently, from a canonical view-point, in order to set up the institution as a separate corporation which is not part of the religious corpora-tion, the more obvious procedure is to request an indult of alienation from competent ecclesiastical authority since the religious corporation is divorcing itself com-pletely from the ownership--such as it was---of the property whictt is the institution's. In seeking such an indult, in addition to the other requirements, it is. of paramount importance that the reasons for the re-quest be carefully and strongly expressed. Many such reasons are presented in this section of this study. "A less obvious method of providing for the separate incorporation is to deduct from the next quinquennial report on the financial administration of the total in-stitute the value of all property which has been pre-viously reported as ecclesiastical property but which has in fact been providing a public service facility, for example, school, hospital. An explanation, of course, must be given for the deduction. It can be modeled on that given in the case of two hospitals where this latter procedure was followed. Additional reasons, such as those proposed here, can and perhaps should be used to strengthen the case. In both cases the sisters had reported the hospitals as ecclesiastical property in two previous quinquennial reports to Rome. After the second such report, the sisters found out that they had to administer the hos-pital property completely in accord with the civil law of the States in which the hospitals" were located. Such a method of administration, for example, authority of the individual members of the governing board, use funds, and so forth, seriously conflicted with the canon law for the temporal administration of a religious house. As a result, on the third quinquennial report, the sisters deducted from the previously reported ec-clesiastical property the amount of the two hospitals. In so doing, they advised the Sacred Congregation for Religious that they (the sisters) no longer considered the hospitals as ecclesiastical property but only as secular property since it was impossible to conduct the temporal administration of the institutions in accord with canon law. In the acknowledgment of the report by the Sacred Congregation for .Religious, no word of objection or criticism was made on the reported change of classification of the hospital properties nor was any indication given that the sisters needed an indult of alienation for the two cases. This approach to a heretofore very difficult case may be viewed by the Sacred Congregation for Religious as canonists have viewed a somewhat similar instance, namely, if religious are in any way compelled by the State to sell or otherwise alienate part or all of their capital property, such alienation is not subject to the canonical prescriptions concerning alienation. An ex-ample is had where the State obliges religious to sur-render part of their property to provide a right of way for constructi6n of a road.lg 2, In the event of separate incorporation of the in-stitution, question 90 (78) of the formula for the quinquennial report (Q. R.) by religious institutes would, of course, be applicable: In cases where works which are not the property of the house, such as clerical or religious residence halls, hospitals, churches, and so forth, are entrusted to the religious house, are these properties kept clearly distinct from those which be-long to the religious house itself? = Observance of this requirement would remove the problem arising from the commingling of institutional funds with those of the religious house as such. 3. An unhealthy identification of the institution with = See Joseph F. Gallen, S.J., R~wzw Fog RELIGIOUS, V. 19 (1960), p. 51, n. 3. =The open number refers to the formula for institutes of pon-tifical law; the number in parentheses refers to the same question in the diocesan law formula. See T. Lincoln Bouscaren, S.J., and James I. O'Connor, S.J., Canon Law Digest lor Religious, v. 1 (Mil-waukee: Bruce, 1964), pp. 227-73. 4. 4. 4. Business Administration VOLUME 26, 1967 791 ÷ John J. Flanagan~ $.J., and lames !. O'Connor~ REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS the religious and o[ the religious with the institutio)a would be destroyed with great advantages for the re-ligious. To indicate some of them: (a) Institutional assets and debts would not be identi-fied as possegsed by the local religious community. As things are today, there is no distinction in financial reports to State or other agencies or to the general public between the assets and debts of the ins.titution as such and those of the religiouS' who operate it. Because of the identity of religious with the institu-tion, the financial statement, when issued, is unsler-stood as a statement of the finances or their equivalent possessed by the religious community. ~ (b) The above erroneous conclusion, occasioned, how-ever, by the prevailing practice and common c~anonical understanding, in turn, leads to confusion in the minds of outsiders, Catholics as well as non-Catholics, who cannot reconcile personal poverty with corporate wealth. If separate incorporation were effected, the financial report is that of the institution alone and independent of that of the religious community which administers it. In view of past history, it may well take some time for the realization of this divorce to sink into the minds of outsiders. In itself, it is no more difficult a concept than distinguishing the assets and liabilities, for example, of Harvard University from those of the members of the board of trustees and the faculty, of the university. The problem is had relative to C~ttholic institutions because of the mutual identity of institu-tion with religious community and of religious com-munity with the institution. That identity iso not had between Harvard University and its trustees and faculty. (c) Conversely, the religious themselves would be disabused of the notion that, though personally poor, their community is very well of[. More or less suddenly it would dawn on them that both they personally and their community as such are poor. (d) Allied to advantages (b) and (c) is that of ~iving credit where credit is due. This pertains to both the public and the religious community. By far most of the financial support of the facility comes from the public in one way or another. The public should be given credit for this support and the financial statement ought to reflect this fact. If, as is usually the case, the.religious community also con-tributes to the financial maintenance of the institution, this act by them ought also to appear on the financial report. Its appearance there will help. to bring out their personal and communal involvemer~t in the needs ~and interests of the public good in a very concrete manner. ~.Vhile it is true that this appreciation of the common-weal is manifested in their administration and working in the institution, this fact can be overlooked or can lack appreciation by the public because the religious can be classified just like any outside administrator, nurse, or teacher, namely, it is simply a job for which their services have been engaged. Furthermore, by donating a substantial amount of money to the support of the institution, the common impression that somehow the school or hospital is con-ducted for the monetary benefit of the religious order or congTegation can be effectively dissipated. Moreover, such a contribution is a way of discharg-ing the wish of Vatican II in its decree concerning religious where it is set down that: "Let them [re-ligious] willingly contribute something from their own resources., to the support of the poor, whom reli-gious should love with the tenderness of Christ." 14 (e) Separate incorporation with its financial conse-quences for the religious community would enable the community to implement another of Vatican II's pro-visions in the same decree: Depending on the circumstances of their location, communi-ties as such should aim at giving a kind of corporate witness to their own poverty . To the degree that their rules and constitutions permit, re-ligious communities can rightly possess whatever is necessary for their temporal life and their mission. Still, let them avoid every appearance of luxury, excessive wealth, and accumulation of possessions.1~ Relative to the point of financial contributions by the religious community to educational institutions, a change will be necessary in the common current practice of simply making book entries of what is frequently, if not always, referred to as "living endowment." In this procedure no actual transfer of money, namely, by check, is made to the religious community for the services rendered to the school by the individual re-ligious. Further, a certain amount of cash is deducted from the cash receipts of the institution for the main-tenance of the religious community, for example, food, clothing, health, contributions to province or/and generalate support, and so forth. This procedure can lead to questioning by outsiders: Are the religious ac-tually claiming as equivalent salaries, salaries which are actually higher than those paid to lay persons in like positions? Is the religious community, in some sense, deriving double indemnity, namely, a cash indemnity "Quoted from The Documents o[ Vatican 11, ed. Walter M. Abbott, S.J. (New York: America Press, 1966), pp. 475-6. ~a Ibid. 4- 4- ÷ Business Administration VOLUME 26, 1967 ÷ ÷ John J. Flanagan, S.I., lames I. O'Connor, REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS .794 through the amount deducted :for living expenses and a second indemnity in the form of a stated "living endowment" made to the school? Separate incorporation would also help in this area since the fi.nances of the school would be totally dis-tinct and distinguishable from those of the religious, community. Moreover, the school would issue checks to the religious just as it does to the ngn-religious members of the administrative and teaching staffs. Thus a.ny and all questions concerning the salary scale of the religibus personnel in comparison with that of other personnel could and should be easily answered. It would banish the idea or confusion, where had, that the re-ligious are receiving more than they should, whether that amount .equal double indemnity or less than that amount. Furthermore, any questioning or criticism of contri-butions. by the local religious community to the n~eds of the province or to the generalate or to any worthy cause outside the re.ligious institute would be stopped since all such contributions would now come out of the sum resulting from the salary checks to the local religious community. ¯ This method of explicit transfer of cash in the form of check for services rendered by individual religious to the institution .they staff is not in itself a new idea, It has been in effect in the Catholic hospital field for a number of years. It was brought about through pressure from outside agencies who refused to accept as identifiable operati~Jnal costs mere book entries without any actual transfer of cash. Moreover, it forced the religious community to be honest in its assignment of salaries for sisters. In some instances in the past there were cases where full salaries were set down for aged or for more-or-less incapacitated sisters who rendered absolutely no or very little health care service to the patients. Furthermore, this procedure of actual transfer of salary money produced a true picture of the actual operational costs'of the hospital and, thereby, gave it a just comparison with all other hospitals in the area 'not under Cath61ic auspices. It also disabused the public of the false notion that the religious need no or ex-tremely little mone~; for their own support and educa-tion, both as individuals and as a community. There is no reason why like benefits should not ac-crue also to religious ~engaged in the educational field. At least one religious teaching institute has already adopted this compensation procedure. It goes without saying that if checks are issued to individual religious, this action does not dispense them from the obligations of common life and those of their vow of poverty. All such compensation belongs actually to the religious community (c, 580, § 2). To avoid income tax.problems, it should be shown that the individual religious, because of his (her) vow of poverty, is simply a conduit from the institution to the religious community to which the money ac-tually goes and belongs. Another device to achieve the same purpose is a single check issued in the name of the local religious community and accompanied by a statement listing the names and amounts for each re-ligious on the institutional staff. Another phase of the business management of Catho-lic institutions concerns the intrqduction of lay trustees, lay.~ administrators, lay vice-presidents, or even a lay president. Use of lay people in positions of administra-tion of Catholic institutions is not, a new concept in the Church. It was set down for consideration as long ago as 1947 in question 94 (82), sections a) and b) of the quinquennial report formula: Wbr6 all the persons to whom ~e administration or manage-ment o~ property is entrusted, chosen with due care, after making all the previous investigations which were necessary or useful? Were the members of the institute itself given the preference over' outsiders for offices of administration, whenever this could prudently be done without loss? The actual as well as the potential role of lay people in ecclesiastical organizations and institutions was strong!~ emphasized by Vatican II. How to use lay persons in business management of Church-related in-stitutions is not an easy question to answer in view of current canon law.16 If the .suggestion of separate civil incorporation of the educational or health care facility is combined with that of introducing lay persons onto the board of trustees, the issue of alienation of the facility comes up for serious thought. Since all or nearly all existing Catholic schools, hospitals, and so forth serving the general public have heretofore been included in the quinquen-nial report as ecclesiastical property, they may not simply be omitted from the next such report without a manifestati6n of how they ceased to be ecclesiastical property.17 Some suggestions on how to handle this matter have been given above. When considering the possibility of complete separa-tion of Catholic institutions and the introduction of lay trustees and other lay officers of administration, In See James I. O'Connor, S.J., "Investing Administrating Au-thority," Hospital Progress, v. 46 (June, 1965), pp. 66-74, 79. See Q.R., 101-2 (88-9). Businesi Administration VOLUME 26, 1967 795: there is need to consider the values at stake. The value which has most influenced religious in the past is the guaranteed control of course content and practices which have religious and moral values. These are values which deal with the preservation of faith and moral practices. The values themselves are of essential im-portance and meaning to the Church and Christian life. They are values also through which religious wish to influence all aspects of American life.18 Christian lay men and lay women cherish these values as much as do priests and religious. The question is whether administrative control by religious is any longer the best or necessary mechanism to preserve and spread these values. Religious expect the Christian banker, manufacturer, and professional man to function according to Christian principles but they do not attempt to exercise an administrative con-trol over his activities. One of the objectives of Catholic education has been to develop Christian leaders. As these leaders emerge, should they not share with religious the responsibility of policy-making and management of Catholic institu-tions? It is important today that everything be done to strengthen religious houses and religious life. It is equally important that Catholic educational and health care institutions be permitted to reach full use-fulness in their respective spheres. The challenge fac-ing religious is to organize themselves in such a manner that these two objectives may be reached as effectively and as quickly as possible. x~Well worth reading relative to the educational apostolate are: "The New Catholic College" by Nell G. McCluskey, s.J., America, v. 116 (March 25, 1967), pp. 414-7; and " 'Laicization' of Catholic Collegcs" by Andrew Greeley, Christian Century, v. 82 (March 22, 1967), pp. 372-5. 4. + John J. Fianagan, S.J., and James I. O'Connor, REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS ANDRE AUW, c.P. An Attitude towards Community So much has been written on community that we are almost tired of the word. And yet we must continue to explore together the reality of community and to share together our common and separate failures in creating community. For it seems that we have never been more conscious of our need for community, and at the same time we have never felt more helpless in bringing it about. As one publication put it, during the past Christ-mas season: "This Christmas, too, we must celebrate the failure of community." We find ourselves rather confused, for many of our best efforts have not only failed to produce greater to-getherness, but have, in fact, produced greater isolation. Dialogue, intended to unify, has been, in many in-stances divisive. Liturgical renewal which was to serve as a bond of closer unity has all too often been a separat-ing factor. This is disturbing, because both dialogue and a meaningful liturgy must be at the very center of any structural renewal in religious life. Perhaps we have oversimplified the problem of com-munity. It is a very delicate and intricate problem and thus a problem for which there cannot be ready or easy answers. Community involves not only interper-sonal relationships but also superior-subject relation-ships. Past traditions and training affect it, as do current tides of }enewal. Commonality and differences of per-sonality, interest, needs, and work have to be considered. Other elements include such things as the size of the group, whether they work together as well as live to-gether, and how homelike is the atmosphere of their re-ligious houses. The list could be expanded considerably. Its purpose is merely to highlight the multifaceted char-acter of.the problem, so that we do not expect answers which are too ready or too easy. With this in mind, I would like to select one aspect of the problem of commuriity which might serve as a basis Andre Auw, C.P., writes ~rom 700 North Sunnyside Avenue; Sierra Ma-dre, California 91024. ~ ~' VOLUME 26, 1967 FOR 798 for a deeper study of the entire problem. I refer to a cer-tain "attitude" towards community which is an essen-tial first step towards the ultimate realization of an ex-perienced sense of community. A Sense ol Community Before discussing the elements that comprise this at-titude, let me describe in a general way what I mean by the term "community" as something experienced. Com-munity is, first of all, an experience of belonging, of feeling at home with people who need you and who know that you also need them. It is a liberating ex-perience, the freeing awareness that you can discard some of your masks with people whose primary concern is your welfare and with whom you can really relax. Community is a reassuring experience, which gives you the security of knowing that people are able to accept you even though they do not fully understand you; that they recognize your weaknesses without ever wanting to use this knowledge as a weapon against you. And if community is to be truly Christian, it must also be a joyful experience, the quietly joyful experience of being able to receive as well as to give Christian love. The sadness of non-community is the sadness of Christ not experienced. For when Christians discover the art of living together in community, when a new community is formed or an old community is formed anew, it is Christ who is born anew, made present in an incarnational manner, and who grows to maturity in the membe~:s. It is Christ's life which is shared and Christ's love which is experienced when community is experienced. However, growth from within presumes nourishment and care from without. The climate for growth must be right. Similarly, the climate for community, the attitude of the members towards community, must be right. The following remarks may serve as a background for a better understanding of a helpful attitude t,owards com-munity. Desire for Community A helpful attitude towards community contains many elements. One of these is a desire for community. This seems so obvious, and yet, existentially, it cannot be pre-sumed. Community as we have just described it involves a much deeper form of relating to one another than most religious have been accustomed to in the past. It de-mands greater openness; it pulls us more immediately and more personally into the lives of each other. This is not always understood or accepted as a positive value by religious who have been trained to regard close relation-ships as dangerous and openness as a quality reserved for dealings with one's confessor or spiritual director. For these religious, community can appear very threatening, and thus they have little, if any, desire for it. How to bring such religious to the experience of com-munity is in itself a very challenging and difficult ques-tion but is not the primary focus of this article. Later remarks may help to cast some light in this area of shadows, but the importance of its consideration as an element in the formation of a helpful attitude toward community is that we cannot presume at the outset that everyone in a religious group desires community. If the desire for community is there, we can build on that foundation, but we must determine this first. Sensitivity When the desire for community is present, another element must be considered, and that is a sensitivity towards the needs and feelings of others. This is very important, because community is a rather fragile thing in the beginning. It can never be forced or engineered. It is not the end product of any series of things-to-be-done, but rather the emergent of many adventures in interpersonal sharing. Many attempts at creating com-munity have ~ailed because they were based on the false premise that if enough things-to-be-done-together could be devised, a sense of togetherness would be the result. Doing things together is, of course, a part of the sharing necessary for community, but this can never be financed at the cost of real personal needs and feelings of the in-dividual members. Togetherness and community are not ends in themselves. This means that no matter how objectively good a project or activity might appear to be, if a large por-tion of the religious find it uncomfortable or distasteful, it should not be pursued. An evident application is in the area of the' liturgy. Most adult religious are willing to try out new liturgical practices which might render the act of worship more meaningful. But at the same time, as adults, they demand that the new liturgical expression be authentic for them. That which is authentic for a college student might not be meaningful for his teacher. A heightened sensitivity for the needs and feelings of others in such a situation could lead toward the dis-covery of some other and more personally communica-tive liturgical expression, Among other things, sensitivity brings to open aware-ness the strength level of the group. It helps us to make better use of appropriate timing in our dealings with one another and to gain a certain proficiency in detect-ing the prevailing emotional temperature of the indi-viduals as well as of the group. Sensitivity makes pru-÷ ÷ ÷ Community VOLUME 26, 1967 '/99 Andre Auw, C.P. REVIEW FOR REL[('qOUS 800 dence a living force in community'relationships,,iand thus it enables, love to grow, as it turns our ~attention, in a beautiful spirit of .listening, to the needs of othe~rs, rather than to our own. Love is an outgoing and out-pouring process, and these qualities increase as our sen-sitivity for others deepens. Sensitivity .must, in turn, be rooted in another ele~ ment which makes for a. healthy attitude toward com-munity, and that is reverence. Reverence is a deep, sacred respect for theperson. It sees in the person, a unique mirroring of God Himself, and bows down before this uniqueness. Community is experienced whe~ the uniqueness of each person, the singularly beautiful in-carnation of Christ in each of us, is shared, one with another. In fact, it is only our uniqueness that makes the unity of community possible, the integration and inter-weaving of disparate reflections into the one-prismed splendor.~ Unfortunately, something of the richness of the per-son has been lost through the years in our accent on the common life. A juridical approach to community led, historically, to a distorted concept of the commonness of the common life. An effort was made to rub out die lines of distinction so that there would be a kind of qniformity among religious. But what began, with a good inten-tion gradually developed into an aberration. The com-mon life was reduced more to the. level of a life of com-monness, Recreation, for example, became more of a devotion to rule than a time of personal re-creating. "Being there" became the prime concern, since this was a literal "fulfillment of the law," ~and a religiou.s was, very, often, harshly criticized for not being, or not want-ing to be, at recreation. The n, eeds of the person were not always considered under this heavily juridical stress on the commonality of the religious life. Community must not be so perverted. Any attempt to reduce these elements of the religious life to the lowest common denominator will also rob the individuals of the basic distinctions that they must retain and main-tain in order to create community, A fundamental rev-erence for the needs of the person must underline all community demands. Some peoplb need more group in, terraction than others; some need less. Reverence for one another recognizes these differences and respects them as sacred. If I, at times, must withdraw from the group, it does not necessarily imply that I am unwilling to share with them. It may simply mean that at the moment I am psychologically incapable of it. On the other hand, there will be times when, by the very demands of love, I will forego the satisfaction of my needs in order to meet the needs of others, even at great personal cost. But this is a decision which I must make, and for which I alone am responsible before God. The community, in a spirit of reverence, will respect this decision, communicating their acceptance of my many moods as well as of my community contributions. Love Relationships Another element that is involved in a helpful atti-tude toward community is our understanding of love relationships. We must bear in mind that love relation-ships exist on many different levels. The main levels are those of husband and wife, of parent and child, of friend and friend. But in addition there are those brief but nevertheless genuine encounters with others who may have b(en acquaintances or even strangers and who bring to us love in the form of a gift or of shared con-cern or valuable insights. Each level of love has its own beauty and its own par-ticular norms. The love of a man for his neighbor is no less sacred because it lacks something of the richer di-mension of the love he shares with his wife. These loves are simply different. This distinction has application in. the religious life, for many religious are not really very secure in the knowledge of just what kinds Of love relationships are permissible for them or appropriate for them. Some be-lieve that the only level of relating that would be ap-propriate would be a relationship marked by kindness and consid6ration but.also protected by a thick insula-tion of what is termed, psychologically, as "distance." This kind of relating is in itself good and helpful; but it is by no means adequate for a religious, espe-cially a celibate religious. For such a man or woman, deep and warm relationships as friends, are absolutely necessary. It is ironic that the greatest aid in enabling celibates to remain celibate has been for so long con-sidered celibacy's greatest enemy. Today we recognize rich human love between men and men, between women and women,°and between men and women, a love that is outgoing and selfless, a love that makes us experience our dignity and worth as persons, that makes us feel needed and wanted and lovable--this, too, is a level of love which is open to us as religious. And, in fact, it is only this~ kind of love that will enable us to grow to ma-ture fulfillment as persons. It goes without saying that such love relationships do contain a possible threat of overinvolvement, just as parenthood always contains the danger of overposses-siveness or domination. But this is abuse, and as such, Community 801 'something .to be.considered but not to be made the focal poini ~of examination. As we understand ourselves and the nature Of these love relationships, we should also grow more mature in dealing with them. A great deal of overinvolvement has beeninduced by an adolescent understanding of love relationships and bY a preoccu-pation with the fear of uncontrolled emotion. Love relationships in the religious life will vary. The rich I-Thou relationships of close friends are as r~re as they 'are beautiful. More often there will be elements a. kind o[' neighlSor~neighbor relationship :interwoven wi~h parent-child, friend,friend, and yet alwa.ys marked by a warmth that,is as Christian ag it is human, a warmth that slieaks from ,heart to heart. Our understanding of the ,varieties of. love's expres-sion as' well as the' different levels of~love relationships is 'a very important, element in the formation, of,a~healthy and helpful:.attitude,towards community. Fo~,it will be principal!~t through these love relationships that the ex-perience of community will. be shared with the individ-uals in the group. ~he Size o[ the C'o'mmunity One final factor which should be considered, although it is in.a different category from the previous elements, is the size of the .community:~ Our attitude toward the size of'the group will: affect our ability to develop a sense~ of community., 0 This has particular.meaningS for religious~who live in ¯large convents' br monasteries. The question arises: "Is it possible to have a genuine sense of community.in such large groupings of'~religious?'' Experience seems to an, swer~ in the negative; and rather than frustrate ourselves further in trying to create community in these~ large gatherings, we might think creatively~ towards, other so-lutions . dPsychologists, specializin~ in group dynamics, are un-animous, in their opinion that. the experience of com-munity is almost impossible in large groups. They pre-fer smaller cell groups of from six to eight people~ And ~ven in Sensitivity and Basic Encounter Groups, the fire" "community" of :these°smaller groups is'. seldom more than forty. But~!the principal work of ~ommunity + is achieved in the smaller gatherings.: '÷ ~ ,A number of seminaries in Europe and a fe~, in this + country have been experimenting with a sim'il~r ~concept of community. The larger community, is broke'n down .4~Ire.~luw, ~.t'. into 'sinaller."families" of seminarians clustered a~ound a~v~w ~0~ one 15riest. Most of _~the formation program is handled ~u~0us by these smaller, groups in dialogue, rather than inqec- 802 ~ture forin, as previously was done., . , Also,. on the parish, level, a number of experim, ents are going on in the inner city sections of our ,larger ~cities, using the same principle of smaller groups, formed along the lines of their common interests, and:a common desire to share together. ' This is the type of "new community" which Father Andrew Greeley refers to in a recent article. We find here a pattern which may well fit the frame of religious life. Is it not possible that the formation of smaller subgroups could be fostered within a large com-munity? At one time such a notion would have been considered anti-community. But psychology .and experi-ence both indicate that most likely the only way the entire community is going to be brought to a genuine ex-perience, of community is through the formation-of smaller subgroups, which in turn could act a.s real. leav-ening agents for the whole group. Again, there is always the possibility of sma.ller grgups turning into cliques which ingest j upon themselyes, and every~ prudent means must be taken to preclude this .eventuality. However, cliques more often than not are formed ~by people who feel rejected by the community and use these devices as means to strike back at a group they .feel: is basically unloving and non-accepting. The greatest reason for the community to give its in~- dividual ,and. collective blessing to the formation of smaller groups is that only when the individuals can open themselves up to the experience, of shared love in a smaller group will they be able to relate in a more loving way to the. community-at-large. For religious living in smaller houses, the problem is slightly different. Where there are only from five to ten religious living together, it. is hard to, have smaller sub-groups, yet even the recognition of smaller grouping as a valuable thing and the understanding of friendship as integral to a community can be of great help. But for these smaller houses, is it not possible to project the ideal of religious selecting the houses or the groupings to whichthey would feel best suited? Some communities of sisters are already experimenting with this plan. The complications are as obvious as they are numerous, and for many superiors they would be too great to imple-ment. However, it is a factor that must not be brushed aside lightly. The Church in every line of its function-ing is moving into greater dimensions of ecclesial ac-tion. Team work is becoming the hallmark of our apos-tolic activities; and team work, to be effective, presumes a gathering together of people who can and who want to work together. More and more we are beginning to appreciate the value of small groups. As our appreciation of this value ¯ Community ~ ~ ¯ VOLUME 26, 1967 :803 becomes an extended application to our religious com-munities, so our attitude towards the creation of com-munity will be increasingly helpful. Small groups are not magic gatherings. It is simply that a person can experi-ence the warmth of love better in a smaller room. Large buildings are both easy to get lost in, and impossible to heat, and too many religious, for too long, have re-mained lost, hidden, and cold, within our Christian communities. Conclusion These, then, are the elements which comprise an at-titude which is conducive to creating the experience of community: a desire for community, an increased sen-sitivity for the needs and feelings of others, a reverence for the uniqueness of persons, and an understanding of the different levels of love relationships. Finally, in the practical working-out-of-things, there is the considera-tion of the size of the group. For many these reflections will be repetitious, for some they may appear novel, and for others they may even seem rather frightening. But for all of us, they can serve as an opportunity to take a good hard look at our own attitude towards community. And hopefully our looking would lead to some kind of action. Because even talking about community is no longer good enough. We must be brave enough to risk new ventures in commu-nity and to experiment with new structures. The secular city and the inner city with their maelstrom of an-guished problems cannot wait much longer for us to dis-cover the meaning and experience of community. These people need us united in love so that we can communicate to them Christ's all embracing love and draw them into the circle of His family, of His com-munity. But none of this can be accomplished until we know, by experience, the reality of community. There is, in the very air around us, a note of urgency. We need community. We need it desperately. And we need it now. Andre Auw, C.P. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 804 GARY F. GREIF, S.J. The Vows and Christian t fe The life of the vows, as a form of Christian life, pre-sents special problems today for understanding. It has always been clear that this is merely one of the forms of Christian life and that the other forms are equally valid. Nevertheless, the life of the vows has been pro-posed traditionally as something special in Christian life; and 'for this reason its adoption has been said to demand a special call from God. As not everyone, is called to live this form of Christian lif~, not everyone can be expected to live it; and besides, there are other forms of ChriStian life. And if these are not as exalted as the life of the vows, they are just as valid. This is the traditional view. But today one can clearly sense severe doubts about this position, if not complete repudiation of its central thesis. It may be granted that not everyone is called .to live with vows; but it may also be asked whether anyone should live such a life, and therefore whether, in our day, such a call may not be a passing reality, to be perpetuated only through delusion. This sceptical attitude stems partly from a growing awareness of the dignified role of the layman in Chris-tian life, and as well from an understanding of human life which seems to render traditional arguments for the perfection of the vows fallacious. If the layman is not simply to await the nod from ecclesiastical authority before taking initiative in the Christian community for its welfare but is to act responsibly according to the legitimate inspirations he receives from the Holy Spirit, then leadership in the Christian community does not be-long exclusively to a privileged class,x Every Christian 1 See ~iatican II, Lumen gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church), The Documents of Vatican II, ed. Walter ~M. Abbott, s.J. (New York: America Press, 1966), p. 30: %. [the Holy Spirit] dis-tributes special graces among the faithful of every rank. By these gifts He makes them fit and ready to undertake the various tasks or offices advantageous for the renewal and upbuilding of the + + + Gary GreiL S.J., is a member of Regis College; 3425 Bayview Avenue; Willowdale, On-tario; Canada. ~ , VOLUME 26, 1967,. ;~ , 805 ÷ ÷ plays an important role in the concerns of the Church; and it is becoming increasingly more evident that the layman can perform as well, if not at times better, func-tions previously reserved to priests and religious. Fur: thermore, wherea~ men and women with vows are in-capable of experiencing directly many of the common aspects of Christian life, such as raising a family, provid-ing for one's own economic security, and the often pain-ful decisions this entails, the layman can speak with firsthand acquaintance with these affairs in attempting to improve and advance Christianity. With this aware-ness, much advice from religious can sound like de-tached theory with little or no connection with the data. And since the greater part of mankind is in fact not bound by the three vows, it may seem that those who are cannot possibly relate realistically to problems where they arise with greatest frequency. Then there are the traditional arguments for the life of the vows, arguments which at present appear lacking in appreciatio.n of immanent human values. Through the vows, it has been argued, a Christian. empties him-self, ,undergoes a sort of martyrdom, and thereby makes' it possible for God to fill his .being.2 This emptying proceeds by denying oneself possessions, sexual pleasure, and personal decision. The, problem with this argument, of course, is that none of these is, of itself, an obstacle to the life of God. God works in and through human values and not in spite of them; or, to speak tradition-ally, grace builds on nature. And though there is risk in living according .to human potentiality, nothing is gained simply by placing oneself in a situation in which risk is eliminated. For elimination of risk e.ntails elimi-nation of possibility for growth and development. And besides, if pr)vate possessions, the use of sexuality, and personal decision were simply obstacles, to growth in the life of God, most Christians would be unable to live with unreserved dedication their roles in the world. The more seriously they would dedicate themselves to living Church . " Also, see Apostolicam actuositatem (Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity), p. 64: "An individual layman, by reason of the knowledge, competence, or outstanding ability which he may enjoy, is permitted and sometimes even obliged to express his opinion on things which concern the good of the Church)' Here-after, all references to thd documents of Vatican lI will be to the Abbott edition: 2Thus, according to Jacques Gervais, O.M.I., in "The End and' the Means in Religious Life," (Donum Dei, n. 10 [Ottawa, 1965],~' pp. 86-7), the purpose of the vows "is to produce that empty space in the heart, that interior poverty and complete detachment that opens the door for the flood of paschal grace. That void and that poverty are essential tb every Christian life . The vows dispose us more surely, more completely, more efficaciously to create this void." a Christian life, the more guilty they would have to feel~for involving themselves in normal human affairs. Another argument for the life of the vows looks upon involvement in normal human affairs as at best a detour on the road. to God. Through the vows a Christian fs enabled to proceed directly to God, without the neces-sity of entanglement in "worldly" concerns,a Through the vows, one can live only for God, and thus can move with greater speed toward the common goal of all Chris-tians. Or, if one prefers a different metaphor, we can consider the route of those without the vows as the usual way to God, and the course of those with the vows as a shortcut. Whichever way we view it, this argument is based on the premise that what is relinquished through the vows hinders a life of union with God. The argu-ment therefore suffers the same inadequacy as the pre-vious one. Because these arguments have seemed deficient, a more positive argument for the life of the vows has become popular today. Through the vows a Christian gives wit-ness to the eschatological nature of the ChurchA For by renouncing fundamental temporal values, the Christian bears witness to the transcendental or transtemporal as-pect of the Church's nature. A life of the vows thus bears public witness to the eschatological nature of the Church, representing the goal or final purpose of the life of the Church as prefigured in those of her members who live only for that goal and who make this explicit and public. Clearly, all Christians must live in the faith and hope of this goal. But, on this theory, only those Christians publicly manifest this fact who explicitly re-nounce in their lives fundamental and purely temporal values. As appealing as this theory seems to many, as an ar-gument for the central and fundamental meaning of the life of the vows it suffers from two defects. The first stems from de facto considerations. If this argument is to s Robert F. Lechn'er, C.PP.S. seems to say this in his article "In the Light of Divine Love" (Donum Dei, no. 4 [Ottawa, 1962], p. 34): "The religious, however, with a boldness and excess we allow only to lovers, does not deny creatures but simply turns his back upon them and forgets everything but God." 4See J. M. R. Tillard, O.P., "Religious Life, Sacrament of God's Presence," in REvmw FOE RELtCIOUS, V. 23 (1964), pp. 6-14; Robert F. Lechner, G.PP.S., "In the Light of Divine Love," pp. 36-40; John D. Gerken, S.J., Towards a Theology of the Layman (New York: Herder and Herder, 1963), esp. pp. 56-71, in which the author sets out Karl Rahner's theory on the meaning of the vows according to their value for wituess. A translation of one of Rahner's recent articles on this subject can be found in Religious Orders in the Modern World (Westminster: Newman, 1966), pp. 41-75, under the title "The Theology of the Religious Life." The theory here is essentially the witness-theory. 4, 4, ÷ The Vows VOLUME 26, 1967 80'/ 4. 4. 4. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 808 carry any real force, it must be possible to maintain that the Christian who lives according to the values foregone through the vows cannot in fact bear the type of public witness which is possible through a life of the vows. If he were able to give such witness, the vows would serve no purpose as such. But is this in fact impossible? Does not the married man who makes great sacrifices out of love for God bear witness to God's transcendence over purely temporal values? And does the manager of a busi-ness not give this same witness when he foregoes mone-tary gain through love and respect for the Church's teaching on social justice? It may be argued that this witness is not formally given, by such Christians since their precise motive cannot be made public in their ac-tions. It does not take long, however, for the reasons for true Christian behavior to become known, especially in a society permeated with non-Christian values.5 The second defect of this theory is that the vows, con-sidered as means for giving witness to the transcendent aspect of the Church, can only indirectly affect personal growth in perfection. In order for one to grow in love of God by giving witness, he must do so because this is how God wants him to serve the Church. Even if we. admit that pronouncing the vows is necessary in order to achieve this, we cannot hold, on this theory, that pronouncing the vows is directly intended by God in calling a person to be a witness. The witnessing itself is what God would directly want, whereas He would only indirectly desire that vows be pronounced, since these would be essential conditions for the type of witness to be given. This means that a person answering such a call would fulfill what it primarily and directly intends only while actually witnessing. And this is not achieved simply through .existing with the vows but demands further activity and circumstances whereby others may recognize what existence with the vows implies. If it be-came impossible for one existing with the vows per-sonally tO give witness, his vows would become per-sonally meaningless, since they would not be a means for his serving the Church and thus would cease to be a means for personal perfection. It cannot be denied that one living a life of the vows gives witness, nor that this witness is valuable. But the question in point is, what is the precise character of this witness. If the vows achieve some personal value for the one l~ronouncing them, this ~ See Vatican II, Lumen gentium, pp. 59-60: "Thus every layman, by virtue of the very gifts bestowed upon him, is at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church herself . " And ibid., p. 65: "Each individual layman must stand before the world as a witness to the resurrection and life of the Lord J'esus and as a sign that God lives." should govern the specific nature of whatever witness can be given through them. It is the value that is achieved through the life of the. vows that makes wit-nessing possible, and not witnessing that makes possi-ble a value for the life of the vows. What is, then, the value achieved through the vows? .s, simple answer does not seem initially possible. And' at the present stage of reflection 6n the meaning of the vows, a stage in history conditioned by extreme complex-ity, any attempt at an answer must be strictly an attempt, open to revision and clarification. The attempt that fol-lows is meant, then, to be merely a sketch of a possible approach to the meaning of the vows. And because the vows do not place one outside the general flow of Chris-tian life but are one of the forms of its realization, it will be important, in attempting to determine the mean-ing of the vows, to consider briefly the meaning of Chris-tian life itself. For it is this meaning that is realized in manifold manners; and if any of the forms which realize it are to be understood properly, that which they realize must be understood. All that is true of Christians in gen-eral must .hold true of Christians with vows. Not only, then, can one with vows not sacrifice what belongs es-sentially to being a Christian, but the meaning of the vows cannot adequately be grasped apart from an un-derstanding of the meaning of Christian life in general. Christian Life in General The realization of God's lov(for man, through Christ, is the meaning of Christian life in general. But due to the essentially historical nature of Christ's redeeming act, no man can realize God's love apart from the living activity of the Church, This means that, if man is to realize to any extent at all the meaning of his existence, the People of God will play an essential role in his life. Whateve~ the abstract possibilities may be for encounter-ing God, there can be no encounter of Him by man, as he presently exists, apart from the mediating activity of the Church.6 This consideration is of prime impor-tance for achieving any proper understanding of the pos-sibilities open to man in his radical search for the mean-ing of life in general and of his own life in particular. Perfection cannot be achieved by man through a ground-ing of free choice in a philosophical World-absolute. Nor can it be realized by simply answering a totally trans-cendent being who calls from the distant regions of an unperceivable kingdom. God's call to man now is neces-sarily vocalized through the Church. His call, there-n See E. Schillebeeckx, O. P., Christ the Sacrament, trans. Paul Barrett, O. P. and N. D. Smith (New York: Sheed and Ward, Stag-books, 1964). The ltows " VOLUME 26, 1967 809 4. Gary l~ : Greiy, $.I. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 810 fore, comes, to us. immediately as something concrete, per-ceptible, temporal, and human: This is true, even though the source of this call is in itself, unperceivable, eternal, and divine. And it is .true, even though men who receive it may not be aware of its immediate source. Anyone who thinks that he has a relationship with God which is simply immediate, or totally unmediated, is far from the truth. It would be just as erroneous to conceive one's relationship with God as a totally per-so. n-to-person,, individual-to-individual affair. For God can be encountered only' thro.ugh the activity of His Church, and therefore all personal,relationship.with God is essentially communal. The Church is precisely a peo-ple, a community established in the loving power of God and r~tufning that love through_ .its personal response.¢ God does, through Christ,, open Himself to individuals in lov~ and2.asks for their individual response in love. But this of~dr, is made through the comm.unity .of the People of God,,~and it is in this community that God is encountered. Whoever, therefore, responds to God's call for personal love of Himself is included ~within the com-munity through which and in which the call is made. No one, .therefore, approaches the, Father except through the Son; and since the Son is incarnate and made present to us now through His Church, all must encounter God through Christ as present in His com-munity. A further point to be attended to is that the mediating role of the Church is not aft undifferentiated, inert instrum~ntality of some sort. For.the Church is a living community, 'a complex reality as alive and com-plex~ as Christ Himself who she is and whose love and life she continues visibly in the temporal order. In medi-ating God's .love to man and man's response in love to God, the Church has diverse manners of expressing its life, among which" seven are primary. As visible embodi-ments and mediators of the personal love of God, these are called sacraments. And as deriving their meaning and role. frbm~,the Church itself, they ,are means .of en-countering' God in Christ; Man can,~ of course; encounter Christ in' all human and temporal,reality and activity. But every contact a man has with God in Christ finds its culmination and proper realization in~ ,the sacraments. For every ,realization of God's love is sacramental, in-cluding that which, as achieved apart from the 'sacra- . 7See Lumen gent~urn, p. 25: "It has pleased God, however to make men 'holy a~hd save them not merely as~ individuals witho6t any mutual bonds, but bymaking them into a single people,, a people which acknowlddges Him in truth and_ serves Him in holi-ness." The Latin text i~ more forceful, saying simply "Placuit tamen Deo homines non singulatim, quavis mutua connexion~ seclusa, sanctificare ~t salvare . " (,4eta ,4t~ostolica~' Sedis, ~. ~7 [Jan. 30, 1985], pp. 12-1~, n. 9 [italics added]). ments themselves, reaches its fullness only in the sac-raments. Therefore, though God can be encountered outside the sacraments, such encounter is always achieved as an incipient realization of full and proper encounter with Christ, the sacrament of the encounter with God, in the seven sacraments. And since these sacraments achieve meaning and reality in and ,through the. life of the Church, we can say that man encounters God only in and through encounter with the Church.s Man initially encounters God in His Church, in an explicit and fully committed mahner, when he is bap-tized. 9 In this, sacramental act he is committed funda-mentally and totally to the love of God, thus entering in a" radical manner an unconditional love relationship with the People of God through whom the relationship is made possible and realized. Since this commitment is unconditional, it necessarily calls forth and centers all the vital aspects of the baptized in the person who has opened Himself in love. This means that the commit ment is visible, expressing outwardly .the total dedication arid transformation of the entire person. This expres-sibn in visibility of the baptismal commitment, since it is mediated through the community which is explicitly and visibly in union with God through love of Christ, entails explicit commitment, to the community of the People of God.'~ Since this commitment is of the entire person/it trans-cends thd limitations of space and time. In this one act 0[ dedication, the entire past and future' of th~ person is ~ollect'ed in a single moment. All that the person has been is called upon to direct and channel all that he will become in and through the single act of loving commitment.' His entire future is prelived through the ac~ of present realization of all he has been. The bap-tismal commitment dferefore encompasses the total real-ity of tl~e person so entering a love relationship with God. But a person's Iife work is not finished in this single act: For though he is committed for all time and in every place and circumstance, he has not lived out his entire 'life, in this act, through all its concrete actuality. His commitment, though complete as such, must be in-tensified and developed through the fuller development and intensification of his personal existence. This is what it'means to live out a commitment. Nevertheless, though the*initial act of total love made possible through bap-tis'm must be' developed, the lines along which it can be developed are initially structured by the meaning of the commitment itself. The commitment made at baptism is one of love and See Schilleb.eeckx, Christ the Sacrament, esp. pp. 223-9. 8 Ibid., pp. 176-9. + + + .The ,Vows VOLUME 26, 1967 81:1 specifically of love for God in Christ through the com-munity of the People of God. The meaning of this com-mitment can therefore be sketched briefly according to the meaning of human love and according to the spe-cific constituents of the Christian love situation. 4- 4- 4- Gary F. GreiF, $.]. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 812 The Meaning of Human Love Human love always involves the entire being of the individual.10 For love is achieved when an individual offers himself, by all that he is, to another, and in this act receives the other's total offer of himself. Love arises in a situation of complete mutuality, such that the to-tal giving of oneself is at the same time a total receiving of oneself. This total giving and receiving in the situa-tion of love, however, never constitutes concretely the complete perfection of the individuals involved as long as it occurs within the purely human order. Neverthe~ less, it does constitute their complete perfection in prin~ ciple; that is, it establishes the basis for meaningful hu-man development. For, as open by nature to indefinite possibility for self-realization, man in fact proceeds by degrees to the realization of what he is in principle; and there can be no a priori limits set to the degree of per-fection he can achieve concretely. Furthermore, what governs his development is what in principle is unlim-ited in perfection. He can, and does, develop according to the realization of values which in principle are lim-ited; but his development according to such values pro-ceeds in an undistorted manner only if it is governed constantly by a value which in principle is proportion~ ate to his nature, that is, by a value which is in princi-ple unlimited. And since, in the human order, only hu-man individuals can constitute in principle the value according to which a man's entire development can proceed properly, since only human individuals are in principle unlimited as capable of indefinite develop-ment, it is only in and through love that an individual can discover true meaning to his life. For each human individual is unlimited openness, ~in openness which is not some empty space to be filled up, but which is a dynamic activity to be progressively real-ized in greater perfection. What, therefore, no one hu-man individual can constitute through himself alone, each can discover through another. No one individual can constitute for himself unlimited value, for every lo The phenomenology for what follows can be found in Martin Buber's 1 and Thou (trans. Ronald Gregor Smith [New York: Scrib-ner's, 1958]), a, nd Between Man and Man (trans. Ronald Gregor Smith [London: Fontana Library, 1947]); and in F. J. J. Buytendijk's Phdnomdnologie de la rencontre (trans~ Jean Knapp [Descl& de Brouwer, 1952]). human individual is in fact limited. But when one in-dividual, as dynamic openness, offers himself, by all that he is and can be, to another such openness, and the other responds by all that he is and can be by offering himself to the first, each becomes ordered to being totally ful-filled through the active self-giving of the other. And though this fulfillment exists only in principle, or as a value to be progressively realized, it establishes the basis for the life project of working out fulfillment in con-crete detail. It is in this situation of mutual self-giving that the human individual discovers what alone can ful-fill his nature. Only what is unlimited perfection can constitute a value adequate for the development of the human individual. And only through the situation of mutual and total self-giving can this value be recognized. It is therefore in the situation called love that a per-son discovers and properly begins to realize the meaning of his existence. And though this meaning is revealed through human love, it points beyond the merely hu-man situation to that person who is not simply in prin-ciple unlimited in perfection but is unlimited in fact. In every human love situation, there is a built-in in-adequacy stemming from the necessary limitation in fact of the human individual. For man is in principle a dynamic possibility for indefinite development in per-fection, and as such, can never be unlimited perfection in fact. When one person opens himself to another com-pletely and thus accepts the other in an unlimited manner, he commits himself to the other as in principle unlimited in perfection. Nevertheless, he is aware of the factual limitation of the other and intends both for him-self and the other fulfillment through realization of re-lation with one who is unlimited in fact. In this sense, God is present in every purely human love situation, and it is God alone who can perfectly situate man in a to-tally fulfilling act of love. Implications of Human Love The term "love" is used so widely these days, in so many diverse contexts and with so many different mean-ings, that it seemed imperative to give this brief outline of its meaning as the fundamental value in man's life. On the basis of what we have indicated, we can make a few observations about the manner in which the love situation must be lived out by all who are consistent with the value it constitutes. Since this situation involves mutuality of self-giving, those situated in it must be at-tentive to the needs, desires, projects, judgments, and in general, to all the vital forces operative in one another's lives. This attention must be sincere, that is, given with the entire being of those involved, for the mutuality of VOLUME 26, 1967 81,~ ÷ ÷ Gary F. Gre~, REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 814 the love situation calls for the concrete realization of what it entails i~t principle. This attention to the existence of the other does not mean, therefore, that one person simply subordinates himself completely to an-other, such that the other becomes his complete master and he becomes a slave. Such complete subordination would preclude any realization of the mutuality de-manded by love. Nevertheless, within the context of mu-tuality, it may be the case that one person will be more capable than the other in certain areas of life; and thus, though the more capable can never demand respect at the expense of mutuality in self-giving, he can desire and has a right to hope that the other will allow him to exercise his capability for the other's benefit. For both are dedicated to the well-being of the other by giving themselves to one another in love. This means, of course, that the one exercising his capability for the other, will himself constantly be open to receiving the being of the other in this exercise and will himself receive what the other has to offer him. The .love situation thus entails a spirit of obedience, which is fundamentally the attentiveness of those in-volved to one another in all the concrete details of the life-project to which they have mutually committed themselves. It has its source in mutuality of self-giving which is total and uncompromising. If this spirit is not present, dedication in love is empty of meaning and reality; and what is announced as love is merely some form of selfishness and self-centeredness. Only that person who is completely perfect in fact can claim the right never to commit himself in obedience to another. For only such a person could claim absolute ability to know what is best for the other and could give promise of achieving this. And yet, not even such a completely perfect person, acting consistently with love, could de-mand slavery of the other; for this would mean that he would not be offering himself to the other but only us-ing the other for his own ends. If love, as the fundamental value in man's life, must situate all other values, it nevertheless does not, of it-self, spell out all the values which man can discover in life, Among these values are those which arise from man's need to possess goods for his continued existence and well-being. It is the nature of possession that what is possessed is subordinate to the possessor; for it de-rives its value as existing simply for him, to be used by him for his own well-being. Such use is legitimate, if what is possessed has in principle of itself perfection less than that of the possessor. For then there is no distortion in subordinating it to oneself. On the other hand, the use of one man by another would constitute distortion of the reality of both, for no man is by nature inferior to another. The only valid stance that can be taken to a human individual is that which regards the other as perfect in principle as oneself. There can only be a material similarity between the way we at times treat other men and the way we treat what is inferior to men. For though men must at~times be operated-on, or analyzed, or taught to perform certain functions, none of these activities can ever be conducted in abstraction fromthe fact that they regard what in principle is far superior to a mere living organism or a set of subhu-man data. Mere organisms and mere data can be pos-s: essed and controlled by man; but possession and un-qualified control of man by man is inconsistent with the meaning of human existence. There is, therefore, a spirit which breathes through th~ love situation precluding the possession and use of another. Possession can be valid when there is question of satisfying human needs through what is, by its na-ture, subordinate to man. But not even possession such as this can lay any claim to. totally fulfilling human existence. As a valid means for living out this existence, it must always be situated within the one absolute value f6r man. Any activity which either contradicts or is car-ried on in abstraction from the context of love must ultimately bear distorted fruit. Because man is bodily and his drive for ultimate satis-faction in perfection involves himself as bodily, one of the common forms of possession and use of others is subordination for mere sexual gratification. One cannot prescind from the sex of the person loved, for the total being of the person is situated in love. On the other hand, because the human individual is open to an in-definite degree of perfection, his perfection does not consist simply in bodily fulfillment. Whoever therefore would seek"in another merely bodily satisfaction, even though iu this act looking to the bodily, satisfaction of the other, would be acting outside the context of love and thus would effect distortion of himself and the other. For love situates human individuals in total and mutual self-giving, and any approach to another less than total, prescinding frbm the nature of man as such, cannot be situated in love. We can enter love only if we enter it bodily; there can never be for man in this life an angelic form of love. But the meaning of man's bod-ily being depends upon the context in which it is de-termined. Its fullest meaning can therefore be deter-mined only in the context of love, for it is this context which reveals the fullest meaning of man himself. If the meaning° of sex is established from a purely bio-logical or psychological basis, questions concerning its ÷ ÷ ¯ The Vows VOLUME 26, 1967 815 ÷ ÷ Gary F. Greit, $4. REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS 816 proper role in human activity can never adequately be resolved. For human bodily relations achieve their full and proper meaning only in the context of full and proper 'human self-realization. And since man can only properly realize himself through another in love, he will never properly understand himself and his bodily, ac-tivity if~ he prescinds from this context. All use of sex must proceed through a spirit of chastity, for it is this spirit which is operative in the recognition of the human person's value. Sexuality is by no means of itself evil, but it can be distorted and thus made evil, if it is conducted at the expense of an-other's total meaning. Within the-context of love, one can determine the manner in which he will effectively work out his relationship with others; and this may or may not entail the exercise of genital sexuality. When it does, the love which situates the exercise of genital sex-uality will give it a properly human meaning. For there is no one simple meaning to genital sexuality. We can designate it minimally as that expression and realiza-tion of man's sexuality which is genitally oriented. But the further meaning this has in the concrete will vary according to the contexts which realize it. Genital sex-uafity, then, will be fully human if it emerges in the context of true human love, for then it will he inte-grated in the true meaning of the person. Since, how-ever, total mutual self-giving establishes a situation which, because of the dynamic natures of those it situ-ates, must be lived out in varying concrete detail, it need not entail communication through bodily existence according to all the possibilities for its realization. When it is realized through exercise of genital sexuality, the communication must be governed by the fundamental situation which gives full meaning to all forms' of human expression. The moment one truly enters love, all misuse of sex is precluded as a possibility, to the extent that the love situation is effectively maintained. Christian Love These three aspects of love clearly embody the spirit of the evangelical counsels. We have been discussing, how-ever, the meaning of human love in general; :and there-fore more has to be said before the specific meaning of explicit Christian love can be brought into focus. Love is explicitly Christian when it' situates a community of people in receptive openness to God in the person of Christ. When one loves as a Christian, explicitly in-volving himself in this love, he enters a community, established through the love of Christ, whose sole mean-ing is the realization of God's love for man. As an ex-plicit community, it entails structure and organization; but this is subordinate to the primary meaning of the community as a people responding to, and making pos-sible response to the self-giving of God to man. All that has been said so far concerning the general mean-ing of love becomes more determinate in the context of explicitly Christian love; for Christian love is not some totally unrelated form of love. It embodies whatever can be' said of love in general, and does so in a pecu-liarl~ significant nianner. Christian love promises what no merely human love can validly promise. It promises the complete.fulfillment of man through personal union with the absolutely perfect person of the Father, achieved through the equally perfect person of His Son, bb~h of whom pour out their love in the person of the Holy Spirit. The distinguishing factor in Christian love, then, is that'it situates the human individual in personal union with God in and through a community established by Christ for this. purpose. The communal aspect of Chris-tian love is of the highest 'significance. Just as those situ-ated in merely human love are committed to look after the needs and to respect the freedom of one another, so those~situated in explicitly Christian love must look to the needs and responsible decisions of the community. This means that the Christian must be seriously con-cerned, not only with the properly ecclesial affairs o[ the Church, but must also take seriously the temporal needs and concerns of the People of God. It means further that, not only the needs and concerns of those who explicitly belong to the Christian community but also the needs and concerns of all those who are in-cipiently and implicitly Christian and of all who are or-dered to Christian life by the dignity of their being must be looked after by the Christian. For Christ meant His love to embrace all men, and whoever professes to love Christ must share this same concern. The meaning of Christian life in general therefore in-volves, in broadest outline, love of God, realized through love of Christ in and through a community established for and by this love in the life of the Spirit. But it in-volves as well the three characteristics of human love we indicated previously. Since these play an essential role in understanding the place of the three vows in Christian life, it is important that their implications for Chris-tian life in general be clearly understood. The first of these characteristics is that of responsiveness to the in-sights, judgments, opinions, and convictions of those situated in love. Anything less would imply that real mutuality were absent, and thus that no real love situa-tion existed. In the Christian community of love, this means that everyone, no matter what his status, must be The Vows VOLUME 26, 1967 817 ÷ ÷ respected in the decisions which each member of the commudity takes in regard to the ~whole. No one can simply be excluded from the formatio.n of such de-cisions, for everyone in the com_munity is interrelated through the personal love of~ God, and the ,community itself exists to bring men into~ intimate union,with God through personal response ~to Christ's love. Some in the community clearly have the role of finally determi~ning courses of action, of-~ taking,~ the initiative in certain spheres of activity, of passing final judgment on affairs. But~no matter,, what the status of any member ,[._the community may be, if the situation of IQve which funda-, mentally constitutes the commu.nity is to be seriouslyLre.- sp~cted, all must be respected in whatever action or. de-cision is taken. Purely authoritarian or autocratic rule has no place in the People of God. God alone0can claim perfection sufficient to indicate what is right and wrong without ~onsulting. But not ev~en God expects a pure)y p~issive submission from His people; for His relationship, to them is one of love; and this means that He awaits constantly, their response to: Him through.all that~ they are, including their powers of decision and judgment. , The ~econd characteristic of love ,is that it is achieved only, if possession is never allowed to extend to another person. This ~means that possession and possessions are always 6f secondary value.to,.a true Christian and that no, person, can be uged for one's own ~well-being. Wealth may-play an important role in the Christian community, .but its role is always secondary to the role of strictly per-sonal values., Real scandal can be caused by Christians "who give the impression that their possessions, are what matter most,,'to them or who ,~seem .to identify their Christianity with the value of wealth.~Being poor .does not necessarily,° in this context, mean that one is desti-tute, nor that one does not live comfortably; but it does mean that one considers .all.his possessions secondary to the value of giving and receiving in love. It would be just as fal.se for a Christian .to amass great wealtti at the exp~fi'se of.the personal well-being of others, as it would for a~ Christian to be very frugal in matters of material possessi6ns .while~.sa(rificing the, sensibil