THE ORDER ON THE THRESHOLD OF THE
THIRD MILLENNIUM
(Conferences at the General
Chapters, October - November, 1999)
II
RENEWAL ON THE THRESHOLD OF THE
NEW MILLENNIUM
We Cistercians have a
long history to tell of and we like to think that a history to build lies
before us. We are invited to be
faithful to our past and to be creators of our future. Without creative fidelity, our tomorrow will
amount to a mere yesterday. On the
other hand, without sanctity and boldness, there will be neither fidelity nor
creativity (Cf. Vita Consecrata 37).
Six years ago, at the
1993 General Chapter, I shared my convictions about the necessity of inculturated
spiritual renewal. On that
occasion, I presented the causes, the context, the guiding ideas, the
instruments and the actors in a new stage of renewal. In short, it was a pressing invitation to center our lives on the
person of Jesus, following together in his footsteps, entering into the Mystery
of the Father. The program was and
is, therefore, christocentric, evangelical, cenobitic and mystical. Today I return to this same topic,
highlighting other aspects.
1. Unavoidable Urgency
In their recent years
of renewal, all forms of consecrated life have gone through a difficult and
trying period (...) The difficulties
however must not lead to discouragement.
Rather, we need to commit ourselves with fresh enthusiasm, for the
Church needs the spiritual and apostolic contribution of a renewed and
revitalized consecrated life (...)
As a consequence of the above, it is the Holy Father’s wish that
reflection will continue and lead to a deeper understanding of the great gift
of the consecrated life (...) and that
consecrated men and women, in full harmony with the Church and her Magisterium,
will discover in this Exhortation further encouragement to face in a spiritual
and apostolic manner the new challenges of our time (Vita Consecrata,
13).
Concerning the above,
I in no way mean to call into doubt the many assets our monastic life has received
from postconciliar renewal, whether on the institutional level or in daily
life. At the same time, I cannot
overlook the price that has been paid.
I mean by this a certain impoverishment in some aspects of our “monastic
culture.” Indeed, some values, as for
example fraternal correction and fasting, have all but disappeared. In like manner, we are feeling a certain
lack in the areas of law (the penal code...), ritual (the weekly mandatum...),
symbol (vestments, posture...), custom (prayer when beginning work...). It remains true that, with too much of this,
one lost sight of the essential, yet it is also true that we lacked creativity
at the time of the changes, for it is easier to eliminate than to substitute. The impoverishment of our monastic culture
could be the cause of a weakening of fraternal unity and of the structures of
coherent living. The mediation of
monastic culture is essential in the area of formation; without it, it proves
almost impossible to give “monastic form” to our own existence as monks and
nuns.
To be sincere, we must
also confess another serious limitation in our renewal effort. I am referring to misunderstandings
that need to be cleared up, such as between poverty and economy, personalism
and individualism, generosity and activism, liberty and independence, unity and
uniformity, pluralism and individualism, charity and tolerance, fidelity and
habit, authenticity and spontaneity, incarnation and conformity to the ways of
the world, dialogue and debate, asceticism and gymnastics, fasting and dieting,
prayer and emptiness, inculturation and folklore, charism and hobby, autonomy
and self-sufficiency, transformation and change, perseverance and survival...
These confusions are
no doubt different from those Saint Bernard evoked with a certain
mischievousness in his Apologia for Abbot William: they count
frugality avarice, and sobriety austerity, while silence is reputed gloom. Conversely, slackness is called discretion,
extravagance liberality, chattering becomes affability, guffawing cheerfulness,
soft clothing and rich caparisons are the requirements of simple decency,
luxurious bedding is a matter of hygiene, and lavishing things on one another
goes by the name of charity (Apology 17). Though the confusion be different, it remains true that a
disorder in language sustains a disorder in the mind.
There is yet another
reason urging us to welcome renewal as an ongoing process. The young monks and nuns were not
instrumental in the renewal of yesterday, but they are called to be so in the
renewal of today. They also have a
contribution to offer since the creative and renewing Spirit is also present in
their lives. It would be an idle
display of pride to consider renewal as something already complete, leaving no
room for further innovation.
In present day
literature on religious life there is no lack of an ever more urgent reflection
on the “refoundation” of religious institutes.
Though the term may be ambiguous, it fully retains its value when
referring to being faithful to the Lord
as he speaks through each new historical situation. For some institutes the challenge is
considerable, admitting only two alternatives, life or death. The situation of institutes of monastic life
is perhaps not so urgent. Nonetheless,
if we do not re-evangelize our concrete structures and ways of living out the
charism that sustains us, we will fall into ecclesial anonymity. We will be “bad news” for the man and woman
of today and end up in the wastebasket of history.
2. A Threefold Meaning
It now seems important
to me to clarify briefly the meaning of the programmatic phrase “inculturated
spiritual renewal.” We will take up
each of the three words separately in inverse order. We will see very quickly that they form an inseparable unity.
2.1. Renewal
Renewal obviously
refers to “newness,” not just any sort of newness, but rather that which is
contrary to both the “outmoded” and “the very latest.” The apostle Paul tells us this: since Christ
has risen from the dead, we walk in newness of life (Rom 6:4). The Exordium parvum defends the
newness of early Cîteaux, using an expression from Paul: stripping off the
old self, they rejoiced to clothe themselves with the new (XV,2; Cf. Eph 4:
22-24; Col 3: 9-10). Consequently, the
newness of renewal is quite different from mere “innovation” or the latest
fashion, which is intrinsically ephemeral.
Were fashion to endure, it would go out of fashion, all of which shows
the foolishness of such unstable transitoriness.
Our new life implies
above all else a return to the person of Jesus and to the good news of his
gospel. Moreover, as Cistercians, our
“newness” requires a return to our origins since the founding charism of
Cîteaux remains a life-giving source without which there is no possibility for
originality.
Let it also be said
that originality has the advantage of continually remaining in the present
time, just as the essential of what is truly traditional always remains
current. The present day situation of
an institute can be judged on the basis of its ability to incarnate values and
make them manifest in a way appropriate to the reality of its time. It is important therefore to know how to
avoid the modernization of inessentials and the kind of being-up-to-date that
lacks history. This return to our
origins requires a capacity for mobility, mobility like that of a circle that
turns on an unmoving center, mobility as opposed to settling in or being
unavailable. Returning to the origins
is a re-creation, not so much of the outer events, but rather to what inspired
them from within.
The history of
institutes of consecrated life show us that any effort towards renewal is a
cause of conflict. Clearly it is less a
matter of useless antagonisms occasioned by loud protagonists than of conflict
arising from faithfulness to Jesus and his Gospel. Whether or not a conflict is genuine is discerned by the fruit it
bears in terms of the regenerativity of persons, communities and structures,
regeneration that, starting with the personal, attains to the organizational,
by way of the communal.
2.2. Spiritual
The word “spiritual,”
in the context of renewal, refers above all to the activity of the Holy
Spirit. Indeed, it is thanks to Him
that we can live by the Spirit and be guided by the Spirit, that we can be
renewed in the spirit of our minds and clothe ourselves with the new self
(Gal 5: 25; Eph 4: 23-24).
Consequently, spiritual is opposed above all to “carnal” and not to
bodily or temporal. Moreover it refers
to “metanoia” or inner conversion of heart.
The interiority I
allude to at present implies at one and the same time: the human person as
conscious, free, responsible and social; living in order to love and be loved;
and the divinizing life that is present in sanctifying “grace” and expresses
itself in faith, hope and love. This
spiritual interiority must never lose sight of the fact that the human being is
a corporal being, that is to say, an embodied spirit.
Living in the Spirit
is both a gift and a task involving both receptivity and effort. And if it is to continue over time, the
initial grace must be brought to completion through the gift of perseverence.
2.3 Inculturated
Culture is something
distinctively human. Human beings alone
“cultivate” their relationship with God (religion, worship), with other humans
(language, social and political life) and with creation (economics, work,
technology, art). Since each people has
its own culture, we can speak of “cultures” in the plural. Each of us is at one and the same time the
child and the parent of the culture we live in. Thanks to our own culture, we live in a human way. Because of our culture, we live in a limited
way. Though every person exists in a
specific culture, there is more to us than just culture: there is something in
us that transcends culture (Cf. Pontifical Council for Culture, Towards a
Pastoral Approach to Culture, 1999).
It is also possible to
speak of “sub-cultures” in reference to groups differentiated by reason of
gender (masculine and feminine culture), generation (culture of the elderly,
youth culture), vocation (monastic culture, military culture), place (urban
culture, rural culture), and so on.
Inculturation of our
Cistercian charism is an aspect of the inculturation of the Gospel, and
inculturation of the Gospel is a consequence and a prolongation of the mystery
of the Incarnation. The inculturation
of our charism is the process of its incarnation in a specific culture and the
consequent enrichment of both. It is a
natural process that cannot be induced artificially, though it can be given
orientation.
Our charism goes
beyond all cultures and yet is in and from cultures. This is to say that our Cistercian charism is transcultural, in
reference to what is specific to human beings and Christians, but that it
exists only within specific cultural forms.
Any process of renewal
implies an inculturation that occasions new forms. Early Cîteaux uprooted itself from feudal cultural forms in order
to inculturate itself in the cultural forms coming to light at that time. The whole of Cistercian history can be
interpreted as a succession of inculturations.
Today’s inculturation
has to take into account the pluricultural reality of the Order; it is
therefore not possible to produce formulas or orientations that apply to all
new places and situations. Certain
monastic cultural forms can be up-to-date in one context and out-of-date in
others. We are all aware that it is not
easy to live out unanimity within pluriformity, but difficult does not mean
impossible.
The purpose of
inculturation in any process of renewal is: to express the charism more fully
for the enhancement of cultures; to render our Cistercian life more viable,
credible and universal; to communicate monastic life to local churches in a
deeper way; to allow for the creation of other forms or models of Cistercian
life.
Inculturation is a
process that begins and never ends, for cultures change and interact. In like manner, the degree of
“enculturation” (the internalization of one’s own culture) among the members of
a given culture is also changeable.
The renewal and
inculturation of a charism such as ours is a process that knows no end. Each generation, on the basis of the
preceding one, is called to bring about progress in the way this charism is
lived out and interpreted. In this way
the charism is deepened and more fully expressed, along with the Body of Christ
as incarnate in history.
3. Realistic Utopianism
There will never be
true renewal without an unconditional openness to the One who says: See, I
make all things new. Among other
things, this means that we have to learn to envision or conceive of our life,
whether in its totality or in the elements it is made up of, with new categories or frameworks of
thought. Without at least a minimum of
freedom in thought and action, we will never be able to create what is not yet
from what already is.
I have already
explained elsewhere the meaning of the term “utopian.” Pope Paul VI, in his Apostolic Letter, Octogesimo
adveniens, speaks of utopias in the following way: this form of criticism of established
society often stimulates the imagination both to find previously unknown
possibilities latent in the present and also to provide orientation toward a
better future. It thus supports the
dynamics of society by giving confidence to the inventive powers of the human
mind and heart. Lastly, if it remains
completely open, it can also re-discover the Christian calling (37).
Consequently, I do not
consider utopian to be synonymous with impossible. The utopian is not something impossible to carry out, but rather
something that is premature. But in the
realm of human realities: What is truly possible? What is “utopian” (in quotation marks so as to mean unreal)? And what is in fact a real possibility? Many things once considered to be impossible
(or “utopian”), as for example the abolition of slavery or the elimination of
world hunger, were or still are considered to be so simply because they were
not really or are not really wanted.
The same can be applied to the Order:
mixed regional meetings, the Abbesses’ right to vote in the election of
the Abbot General or his Council... were considered to be “utopias” in the sense
of unrealistic or as things that simply could not be brought about, and yet...
Within the order of
divine grace, of new life in Christ, where is the dividing line between the
possible and the impossible? Even the
apostles considered monogamous and indissoluble marriage impossible (Mt
19:3-12)! Nevertheless, the Mother of
Jesus knew very well that with God nothing is impossible (Lk 1:37;
18:27). There is nothing more utopian
than the Gospel; one has only to reflect a little on the Sermon on the Mount or
on the Our Father: for new wine, new wine skins! (Mt 9:17). This was the understanding of the early
Christian community of Jerusalem (Acts 2:42-47; 4:32-35; 5:12-16) and of the
founders of the “New Monastery.”
It is impossible for a
utopian world to supplant an extant world without a certain freedom of mind and
action with regard to the latter. This
attitude implies overcoming a passive acceptance of the world as it is, and at
the same time avoiding a general condemnation of what is currently in place. Radical non-conformity is just as imprudent
as systematic and uncritical conformity.
It is not always easy to find one’s right place on the continuum between
passivity and refusal, intimacy and distance, fusion and divorce.
Living tradition is
the very source of consistent progress, and an open future is the necessary
condition for safeguarding the tradition as it moves on. Traditionalism, on the other hand, clings to
the material aspects of the tradition, whereas progressivism advocates novelty
without continuity, rootedness or coherence.
Tradition and progress
must learn to go hand in hand and not become “isms” (traditionalism,
progressivism...). The very worst is
when such “isms” become ideology, that is, a coherent, articulate and operative
system of thought that offers proofs and motivations for solving
everything. Ideology, by simplifying
reality, very often supplants it and modifies persons according to
pre-established patterns. Ideology can
become a mental straight-jacket that warps, bridles and hardens, in order to
justify the unjustifiable.
For progressivist
theology, evil lies in the past and good in the future, and vice-versa for
traditionalist ideology. Cistercian
history abounds in examples of tensions between traditionalists and
progressivists. Nor has the ideologist
demon been absent, though perhaps in a more subtle way, turning spirituality
into ideology.
The current stage of
renewal is urging us to give free scope to the creativity of our utopian
thought and practice. Here perhaps lies
the path most apt to provide answers for some of the challenges we have to
face. Concretely, I am thinking of the
question of the Cistercian Family and of the need to re-proportion economic and
work structures to fit the needs of the local reality. A bit of utopianism will perhaps be needed
likewise to find renewed meaning and new ways of incarnating certain monastic
values such as silence, separation from the world, evangelical poverty and
fasting.
4. Meaningful Presence
Lastly, I would like
to speak of another reality which, to a certain extent, encompasses all that
has been said thus far. I am referring
to the attractive evangelical witness we have to give simply by our presence. Our monastic life must be a sign of the
heavenly kingdom in the changing conditions of our time (Perfectae
Caritatis, 1 and 2): our very identity demands “meaningfulness.”
Our identity and the
vitality of this identity show themselves in the form of meaningful presence,
presence being the visible manifestation of our identity. Our monastic charism has drawing power
precisely because of its particular form of presence. Sociologically speaking, we exist because we are present and
seen.
Our presence
encompasses many different realities, bringing together all the fundamental
aspects of our life. The most
influential aspects of our presence are:
-For each one of us, monks and nuns of the
Order: the dedication of our lives, our
perseverence, our risk for the sake of the absolute, our radical daily options,
our joyfulness... or, to the contrary, our mediocrity, discouragement, greed,
selfishness...
-For each of our communities: the kind of
relationships among its members, how welcoming its, its sharing and communion,
its insertion into the local area, its prayerful witness...
-The kind of work activity and participation in a
given economy: agriculture, various types of factories, stores that sell
one’s own and others’ products, employees serving the monastery...
-Buildings and properties: where they are sited, the
type of construction, the amount of land...
-Other visible signs that indicate other realities:
clericalism, mediaevalism, mystery, welcome, separation...
Our various forms of presence, then, manifest our identity
and our charism to a greater or lesser degree.
We must also take into account in this context that the secularized
culture of certain areas of the globe is little inclined to recognize signs of
transcendent values. Nevertheless, we
might ask ourselves if our presence is:
-Production-oriented: we are there because of what we
do or make (cheese, beer, chocolate...)
-Patronizing: we are there because others depend on
us or are at our service (those who benefit from our presence, those we employ,
various monopolies...)
-Provocative: our simple life raises questions, makes
people wonder (what are they seeking?
They are like everyone else, and yet there is something more...).
-Contradictory: the signs are unintelligible or
self-contradictory (poor but at the same time wealthy, dressed up or disguised
in an out-moded way...)
-Prophetic: the Lord uses our presence to speak to
believers and unbelievers alike (the Kingdom of Heaven is already in your
midst...)
-Mystical: the offering of one’s life and the primacy
of personal and communal dialogue with God are clearly visible to all (the
mystery is revealed to the simple and pure of heart...)
Surely our presence
will communicate more than one message and will have more than one
meaning. I consider it urgent, at the
present time (in the era of social communication), to evaluate the visibility
of our charism and identity, since our witness depends on them. This will imply at least:
-Distinguishing whatever might obscure or confuse the witness
of our life.
-Shortening or lengthening distances to avoid con-fusion or
e-strangement.
-Being attentive to the signs of the times and knowing how
to inscribe new signs into the times.
-Learning the difficult art of public and social
communication.
Our monasteries are
present in 44 different countries. The
cultural, religious, political, social and economic circumstances are extremely
varied. Nonetheless there are common
demands and necessities. Contemporary
reality invites us see how our presence and witness measure up against:
-The poor and poverty in all its forms.
-The young people who want to play an active role
today and certainly will tomorrow.
-The thirst for spirituality on the part of the men
and women of today.
-The desire for communion in a world torn by so many
divisions.
I don’t think I am
mistaken in affirming that the quality of our meaningful presence and witness
depends, in the final analysis, on a single reality: the deep living out of an integral spirituality abounding in divine
and human values. Only thus will we be
able to make visible the marvels wrought by God in the frail humanity of
those who are called (Vita consecrata 20).
Our simple presence
must make our monastic charism and the distinguishing characteristics proper to
it visible. This presence must inspire,
within our immediate environment, the desire to share in the life that shines
forth in us. There is no better
vocational program than the witness of a meaningful presence.
While it is true that
every presence has something about it that remains unclear or inexpressible, it
is also true that some signs can only be read by means of faith and openness to
mystery. Nonetheless, today it is
imperative that we ask ourselves if indeed our light shines before others,
so that they may see our good works and give glory to our Father in heaven
(Mt 5:16).
5. A Basic Requirement
Because renewal
requires effort and is likely to occasion conflict, the only ones who persevere
in it are those who have a good sense of humor. Indeed, if you take life with a sense of humor, God will free you
from what is tragic. If you are able to
distinguish between mountains and mole-hills, you will avoid a lot of
worries. More concretely, if you
reflect before you set to work, and if you laugh while you’re reflecting, you
will avoid doing a lot of foolish things.
A sense of humor – an
expression of Cistercian joy – in the context of renewal keeps one from
absolutizing the relative and allows one to relativize the absolute in relation
to the one and only Absolute. This gift
of God, which renders human beings so attractive, is:
-Something more serious than just funny, better understood
by the humble than by the joker or the wit.
-A vaccine or an antidote against the venom of pride or
megalomania.
-The ability to see the seriousness of what is foolish and
the foolishness of what is serious.
-A source of relaxation and refreshment when we are tense
and hot.
-The simplicity of the child with the experience of the
elder.
A great mediaeval
reformer and advocate of renewal, Bernard of Clairvaux, reminds us of a truth
that we mustn’t forget: charity is laughter, for it is joyful (Various
Sermons, 93; Letter 87:12). Scripture,
for its part, teaches us to call on God saying: Lord let your face shine on
(smile at) your servant (Ps 31:17; 119:35). And likewise recommends that we look to him and be radiant; so
your faces shall never be ashamed (Ps 34:6).
The unavoidable and
urgent task of taking a step forward in renewal leads us to call on the
intercession of that Mother who received into good soil the seed of God’s humor
and brought forth fruit a hundred-fold:
To you, our Mother, who desire the spiritual and
apostolic renewal of your sons and daughters in a response of love and complete
dedication to Christ, we address our confident prayer. You who did the will of the Father, ever
ready in obedience, courageous in poverty and receptive in fruitful virginity,
obtain from your divine Son that all who have received the gift of following
him in the consecrated life may be enabled to bear witness to that gift by
their transfigured lives, as they joyfully make their way with all their
brothers and sisters towards our heavenly homeland and the light which will
never grow dim. We ask you this, that
in everyone and in everything glory, adoration and love may be given to the
Most High Lord of all things, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit
(Vita Consecrata, 112).
D. Bernardo Olivera
Abbot General