Vision of the Order, 2002

(Based on the House Reports)

 

 

 

 

-                     The Phenomenon and Significance of Precariousness

 

“Our great surprise was to find that nearly all the communities are in a precarious situation.”  (Commission 7 of the MGM)

 

The key word of this MGM seems to be “precarious”: lacking in security, unsure, easily set off balance, dependent on the favor and help of others. Any community dependent on help from outside itself – be it material, personnel, superior – could fall into this category.

 

This fragility can be seen either as a threat or an opportunity. Instead of saying “despite our situation of precariousness, there is hope and vitality”, we must perhaps look for new life and vision precisely at the heart of our precariousness. Many, in fact, see the present situation as a grace, a time of change, a favorable time – at the deepest theological level, a liberation within the context of the Paschal Mystery. We find ourselves in a situation not very different that of from our founding fathers at Citeaux before the arrival of St Bernard.  We too experience an openness to the new, even though “we do not exactly know yet what that is”. There is a desire to return to the essentials, to radical evangelical simplicity which is made all the more possible by the fragility of our circumstances. 

 

What can enable us to profit from our precariousness ? Put another way : Why do we want to survive? It is a new form of St Bernard’s question: Ad quid venisti ? – Ad quid remanes ?  Our conviction as a Chapter, even if only partially explicitated, is : 

 

1. The monastic life is the path of salvation which God has chosen for me in this

     community.  I am happy and I hope others can find the same happiness.

2. The Cistercian life is a path of transformation in Christ within the monastic setting.

3. God wants to work through us so that we may be the incarnation of his Love in the world

    today. 

4. The world continues to move away from gospel values, yet the further it moves, the

    greater the need of communities that live and announce those values.

 

Ultimately, our concern is not with the survival of the Order but with the building up of the Church of Christ. Insofar as we are convinced that our life is a genuine charism that enables men and women to grow in communion in Christ, we have the mission of living it to the full and thereby transmitting it to others, to the next generation and generations.  Vocation and mission coincide. 

 

Within the Order, this fruitfulness manifests itself in the recent foundations and in the new diversity of liturgical rites. We are discovering that sometimes our charism is life-giving not so much in the continuance of life within a particular community, but rather in other communities, countries and forms of ecclesial life.  We thus transform our experiences of diminishment and precariousness in union with Christ, giving our lives that others may live. 

 

 

-                     The Present Situation of Our Communities

 

There is no question that we have arrived at the moment when substantial changes in our lifestyle are necessary. Apart from a slow and, to many, heretofore imperceptible decline in numbers and vigor in a number of monasteries, some communities are already experiencing themselves as “crushed” by the actual structures, in particular, by the disproportionate size of the buildings or by a complex economy.   Moreover, the weight of maintaining things “just as they always were” impinges negatively on the Cistercian equilibrium. Overwork and stress diminish the possibility of fully living the central contemplative dimension of our vocation.  Often the worst of the burden falls on the superiors. Many remarked on the quality and dedication of the superiors present but they need our pastoral care.

 

It is helpful to identify, as the Commissions of the MGM did, some of the aspects of precariousness which result from an imperfect correspondence to our vocation.  Acknowledging them offers the possibility for real change of direction. Perhaps the first among these is a lack of “chronological inculturation”.  In the past thirty years, the Order has encouraged each new foundation to root itself in the present day life of its culture, an impetus which in part accounts for its flourishing. However, up until now we have failed to realize that older houses in older cultures also need to inculturate into the contemporary reality of post-Christian society. When a community does not continually re-root itself in the salvation history of its people, it runs the risk of becoming first foreign and then anachronistic.

 

In the second place, the Commissions recognized that a number of communities have been marked by long term destructive interpersonal relationships The consequences of these do not automatically go away, even if the persons concerned have left the community. A process of memory, dialogue and reconciliation is necessary to restore the fabric of the community.

 

A third weakness has been the failure on the part of superiors and Father Immediates to face difficult persons or situations because of the fear of strong reactions. Avoidance of problems leads to bigger conflicts when the situation becomes unendurable.

 

            Fourthly, communities have sometimes showed themselves unwilling to acknowledge their precariousness, even when community members or other members of the Order have attempted to present it to them.  This denial empties precariousness of its capacity of stimulating a return to the essentials and leaves it simply as a harbinger of demise.

 

There are, however, many initiatives being taken in the Order.  A good number of communities have adapted or are now adapting their economy, buildings, liturgy, health care programs, etc., to their present circumstances. Others have called for the formation of ‘commissions for the future’ – small groups of superiors called in to discern God’s present call to the community and the best ways of responding to it. In some monasteries in which the communal affective climate has been complex and difficult over a long period, outside experts have been invited to help the community emerge from blocked situations where its vital resources were at least partially consumed by conflict.

 

Adapting the structures of monastic life to the realities of diminishment is a positive step but it is not sufficient.  The communities may be simplified while basically continuing the same life. There is the danger of a certain spiritualization of faithfulness that thinly veils mere resignation to a slow process of death.  A deeper renewal of the charism is needed.

 

 

-                     Towards the Future

 

Repeatedly the belief has been expressed that the Order continues to be vital.  This vitality must be directed to ongoing formation, understood as conversion.  The community must live its conversatio with sufficient intensity so as to itself experience the warmth of the Spirit and to invite others into its midst.  Not to do so is to give in to sadness and resignation.  It must constantly go back to the gospel and its simplicity as the criterion for its concrete decisions as to how to express the essential elements of our monastic life.

 

What kind of initial formation is necessary in the monastic Church at the beginning of the 21^st century?  Clearly we are seeking a formation towards commitment: one that goes to and into the person’s core, so that in the inevitable moments of radical crisis he or she once again chooses the Cistercian Christ.  We ourselves must rediscover and embody the complementarity of observances, values and communion so that it can be communicated to new members. To put these three dimensions in opposition is to create confusion and self-doubt in the young right at the outset of their vocation.

 

In regard to the formators, whose pivotal importance was underlined, they must above all  be persons who have entered profoundly into the process of monastic transformation in Christ and continue to abide in it, thus becoming capable, by the mercy of God, of begetting it in others.

 

What is the role of the superior in all this?   He/she is to be the person at the center of the community and likewise a seer – someone that perceives the true situation of the community. He animates the brothers in the process of recognizing their God-given reality, accepting responsibility for it, discerning and putting into practice the appropriate steps. He trusts the brothers enough to dare to name things and to invite all to continual conversion.  Developing and deepening his/her own human and spiritual possibilities is indispensable, because in some mysterious way, the community comes to take on his features.  Yet the responsibility of the community in forming and supporting the superior by their faith and desire to live under an abbot is likewise essential to any meaningful leadership.

 

 

 

-                     Prophetic Voices

 

Two new voices have made themselves heard with greater clarity at this MGM: the young communities and the Cistercian laity. For more recent communities, precariousness is their natural habitat. Lacking some of the traditional structures and far away from the possibility of collaboration with nearby monasteries, they necessarily lead a simpler life. This poverty is a privileged experience in which the members of a fragile community can discover together for themselves the evangelical reasons for the monastic observances. Their survival does not depend on carrying out any previously formulated program but rather on their clinging to the Lord wherever He may lead them. 

 

It is important that the older communities of the Order benefit from this particular type of fruitful precariousness. Striving to maintain at all costs their traditional economic, academic and aesthetic wealth, they might be obstructing the very renewal they desire. For their part the younger communities must resist the temptation of seeking to reproduce older more elaborate models and realize that they themselves possess the means for their own formation.

 

The Cistercian Associates testify to the value of our tradition as a means of sanctification for lay men and women of today. At the same time their enthusiasm confirms our belief in the vitality of our charism. It is clear that they are not only desirous of receiving from us but of supporting us in this time of transition.  Can they not be counted among the new vocations to the Cistercian Family ?

 

 

-                     Conclusion

 

Other Chapters have worked to create legislation or to consider the life of the communities in the light of central monastic themes. The MGM of 2002 has been essentially pastoral. One simple but symbolic expression of this has been the establishment of an intercommunity fund. This has brought us closer to the original spirit of the General Chapter in the Charter of Charity. Would it be possible to continue this pastoral activity between now and the next meeting of the Central Commissions by reflecting in our communities and Regions on the meaning of and our response to the phenomenon of precariousness?  What began as a ‘surprise’ would thus become the impetus for newness of life.

 

 

 

 

Possible themes to be considered :

 

What is the theological, evangelical value of precariousness ?

 

Why is adaptation of the size of structures not yet sufficient ?

 

What does formation to commitment mean ?

 

To what extent should superiors name things in order to invite conversion and to what extent to they generate new life by their prayer and compassion ?

 

 

                        Return to the page :  Program and Decisions of General Chapters of 2002