Hermits

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='nunsense' date='19 September 2009 - 09:44 PM' timestamp='1253355285' post='1969093']
Barb, I have met other women who are in your position and who feel the same way. I guess some of us would like the "official" recognition of the Church just as people who are in love want to get married. But after saying that, I still understand that loving and serving God is more about the interior consecration than the exterior recognition. Perhaps it is just human nature to want or need the "titles". I mean, even St Paul made a point of calling himself an Apostle, even defending his position against the so-called "super-apostles" that were confusing his church in Corinth.

I have tried very hard to fight against this need to be recognized by the Church as a "religious" and God may have to wean me of it completely one day, but who knows. He often puts desires into our hearts to help us grow closer to Him, so I guess we will just have to leave it in His hands. The important thing is to know that nothing is more important than pleasing God and doing His will. After that, all else is good.
[/quote]


Hi Nunsense .......... I think that The Lord calls as He May and whom He may where He May - and while in the heart of one He Plants one desire and in another - another desire. St Paul again (I am a great fan of St. Paul) points out that The Church is a body (The Mystical Body of Christ) and how strange it would be if the ear wanted to talk or the tongue to hear - and how the body would misfunction under those circumstances - or words to that effect. We are all different and unique and what draws us into the one is Love - The Love of The Lord. He has much work to be done in His world and every single individual has been called into it to complete some aspect of that work.

That being said - and while I recognize that we are a monarchy and not a democracy with Christ as Head and King - I think there are too many 'squabbles' over 'good, better and best', or rank and status - what a person is to wear. This person with a right to this title - and another no right to it etc. etc. There is much misunderstanding about the state of perfection and the way of perfection and the way of perfection in Christ is open to all the baptized - while as lay people we do not live in the state of perfection. I think there is also perhaps generally speaking little appreciation of the wonder, great dignity and vocation of Baptism which is the means and call (vocation) to Unity with Christ or The Spritual Marriage and for some this vocation and call from The Lord to Union and The Spiritual Marriage as the ultimate on earth also embraces the secular life and lay state and witnessing to 'the world' and 'in the world'.

The Lord may well be calling you to a religious vocation and this is why you cannot shake certain aspects of it - perhaps He is using less perfect motivations (desire for 'recognition' and 'titles') to draw you to that state in life. I do not know. I have travelled along a similar path myself to where I am now - and this is not at all to state that it is THE PATH........rather that it is simply been my path and via many an imperfect route some still applying I recognize. "All things work together for those that Love God" (St. Paul again). I count it a splendid honour to witness simply to my Baptism and all it gifts.
To my finite mind, each give yourself whatever title you may - we are all truly brothers and sisters united to Christ through Baptism and Grace. Wear whatever you may "be not anxious about what you are to wear". "Who is not against us is for us". Put us all in same dress with titles if a person wishes - at least this way there is no mistaking that we are all each one Baptized Brothers and Sisters of Christ in the One Mystical Body of Christ, The Church. And away with all useless and empty squabbling and dividing elements. But this is only me and my particular most finite and faulted of minds.

The Holy Father has stated something very profound recently .......... very profound!!!
in a reflection on Peter Damien Zenit, September 9th 2009.

http://www.zenit.org/article-26818?l=english
[quote]"Communion with Christ creates unity among Christians. In Letter 28, which is a brilliant treatise of ecclesiology, Peter Damian develops a theology of the Church as communion. [quote]"The Church of Christ," he wrote, "is united by the bond of charity to the point that, as she is one in many members, she is also totally gathered mystically in just one of her members; so that the whole universal Church is rightly called the only Bride of Christ in singular, and every chosen soul, because of the sacramental mystery, is fully considered Church." This is important: not only that the whole universal Church is united, but that in each one of us the Church in her totality should be present.[/quote] Thus the service of the individual becomes "expression of universality" (Ep 28, 9-23). Yet the ideal image of the "holy Church" illustrated by Peter Damian does not correspond -- he knew it well -- to the reality of his time. "[/quote]

Through our Baptism we are each fully The Church and Spouse of Christ while at the very same time we are all The Church - the Spouse of Christ.........while some are called through the religious vocation to witness to 'the world' in a unique and proclaimed and hopefully quite radical manner this very fact in the state of perfection. Rather and very sadly, destructively and falsely, it is perhaps more often generally considered that only religious are the Spouse of Christ - and perhaps it is the very aspects of recognition, title and unique dress that support these. That only religious are 'married to Christ' or united to Him into One in Grace. While religious vow the evangelical counsels quite radically - hopefully literally - and with the observable and radically witnessing aspect in hope, we are all called - each one and all Baptized person - to the evangelical counsels - to Chastity, Poverty and Obedience of spirit through Baptism.
My official recognition as belonging to Christ and of His Church is my Baptism - and I hope, Grace prevailing, that the way I live, who I am, witnesses to the fact that I embrace The Lord in Love and that He embraces me Lovingly, conferring on me and proclaiming my belonging, my espousal to Him, call and vocation, in my Baptism. It was no accident nor incidental event. And that I can witness to the distinct and profound honour and dignity of Baptism in Christ from which all else flows.
That The Church as human institution has not assigned any observable distinction, title nor dress to Baptism and the Baptized is incidental and 'accidental'. As lay people we may be 'in the world' to be as leaven and salt to the world in a certain manner, role, along with our priesthood and religious in their certain manner - we most certainly do not belong to the world......we are set apart from 'the world' for and as Christ's beloved.


Blessings and with my regards.........Barb

Edited September 19, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[AccountDeleted]

Barbara - while much of what you say makes a lot of sense, the fact of the matter is that there [u]are [/u]distinctions in this world - and in the Church - between one state of life and another. This may not seem "fair" or "equal" to some, but it is a reality.

For example, there are priests. I am not a priest. I can never be a priest. This is a fact. The priest has a special vocation and a title and recognition from the Church that I will never have. I accept this. I embrace the teachings of the Church and live within her holy guidelines. I don't think God see me as inferior to a priest, but certainly the priest is called to something that I am not, and as such, deserves respect. He also has a greater responsibility and God will certainly hold him accountable for his actions to a much higher standard simply because of the grace that he has been given.

A religious in vows is not the same as the laity. This is not "better" or "worse", but "different". It is similar to a marriage in that a religious is called to live their life totally committed to God, taking no other as lover.

What the laity have is the possiblity of living the "sacrament" of marriage (the religious vows are "sacramental" in nature, simply because the Church realizes that she needs marriage for procreation and population of the Church body but does not "need" the religious in quite the same way), even if they choose not to exercise this option.

Ok, we are all called to holiness, whatever our situation in life, and one state is not better than another. But they are not the same either. And wanting recognition from the Church as a religious (in my opinion) is no different than wanting the recognition of the Church in the sacrament and vows of marriage. It is a declaration and commitment, made in public, that one has committed themself to a particular person (in the case of the religious, to Christ Jesus).

Is every soul the Bride of Christ? Yes, every soul is called to holiness and to union with God, no doubt of that. But for a religious, this call goes beyond the simple evangelical call to live the gospels in a life of general chastity, poverty and obedience, to an actual vow that demands evidence of this commitment. What is real obedience? Surrender of one's will to a superior or to their Bishop. Until one has lived a life under obedience, it is hard to understand what this actually means. Self-will is very subtle and often a very well disguised form of self-love. Poverty? For a Carmelite, this can even mean asking permission for toilet paper! Chastity? This one is hardest of all in some ways, because in the world, our eyes are being forced to break chastity almost every time we even see an advertisement.

As for Baptism being underrated? Yes, I agree with you here. If even Our Lord felt it appropriate to be baptised, then He was obviously sending a message to us all of just how important it is. I was baptised 30 years ago as an adult, and even at that time, I didn't value it as I should have. Only now do I realize the incredible grace of being called, not only to Christ, but to the one, true, holy Catholic and apostolic Church! We can always use reminding of that great grace. Whether all Catholics should have their own distinctive clothing or not is up to individual I guess. The Plain Catholics certainly do this, although they can be confused with all the other "plain" communities like the Amish or Mennonites. I like to think of the laity as being "in the world but not of the world", and their witness for Christ is not in what they wear, but in how they live their lives. Everyone [u]expects [/u]a religious to act in a certain (good and holy) manner, but the expectations of the laity aren't the same, so they can actually make more of an impression by acting in a moral, ethical and holy manner simply as Christians. Just look at the Martins (St Therese's parents) - an shining example for all laity.

I am not disputing what you say, but merely looking at it from a different angle.

[osapientia]

[quote name='nunsense' date='20 September 2009 - 06:27 AM' timestamp='1253438822' post='1969563']

A religious in vows is not the same as the laity.
[/quote]

I think both Barb and nunsense make good points in their respective posts.

In the interest of clarity, however, I do think it is fair to point out that unless the "religious in vows" is ordained (and therefore, clergy)he/she is "the laity".

It is common practice to say "priests, religious and laity"....."religious" is a "distinction" within the laity not apart from it.

Perfection in the life, the witness of "clothing", consecration, apostolic, monastic, eremetical.......the subject and its myriad of nuances are broad and wide open to the creativity of persons (in consideration of legitimate authority).....and while I'm certain that distinctions have their place in the official Church and "out here" among the faithful, I'm not as convinced that those distinctions are meant to be thought of quite so "vertically" (except for - with respect to The Church - Jesus and The Magisterium).

Just my .02

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='osapientia' date='20 September 2009 - 10:50 PM' timestamp='1253443855' post='1969577']
I think both Barb and nunsense make good points in their respective posts.

In the interest of clarity, however, I do think it is fair to point out that unless the "religious in vows" is ordained (and therefore, clergy)he/she is "the laity".

It is common practice to say "priests, religious and laity"....."religious" is a "distinction" within the laity not apart from it.

Perfection in the life, the witness of "clothing", consecration, apostolic, monastic, eremetical.......the subject and its myriad of nuances are broad and wide open to the creativity of persons (in consideration of legitimate authority).....and while I'm certain that distinctions have their place in the official Church and "out here" among the faithful, I'm not as convinced that those distinctions are meant to be thought of quite so "vertically" (except for - with respect to The Church - Jesus and The Magisterium).

Just my .02
[/quote]


You are so correct in pulling me up on the terminology. I even got confused when I first heard about "secular priests" and wondered what this meant. That's the thing though, the Church does have distinctions about everything - that's just the way it is. I don't think that anyone means there is a "vertical" superiority of one state of life over another. I mean, after all, with no married people, there would be no priests (eventually) and with no priests there would be no sacramental marriages or Eucharist or all manner of things -- I guess that's why the Church makes both of these states sacraments. Religious life is the odd one out -- but it is a personal calling and the Church recognizes it as such. Let's face it, in a way, the religious life is nothing more than God's kind mercy because the Church could very well survive without religious!

As for the unmarried lay state, well, that's a choice too and I have heard it debated on both sides of the fence as to whether this is a vocation or not (not counting hermits and virgins and widows). I won't buy into that one because I don't feel qualified to address it. I do believe though, that to want to make a public statement of one's position (i.e. "vows") is a holy and healthy motivation inspired by the love of God. But once again, opinions are worth what one pays for them

[osapientia]

[quote name='nunsense' date='20 September 2009 - 08:23 AM' timestamp='1253445814' post='1969581']
I don't think that anyone means there is a "vertical" superiority of one state of life over another. [/quote]


God bless you for thinking the best of people, Nunsense. Unfortunately some who have thought this (i.e. "vertically") way over the many years since Jesus instituted His Church have caused great pain to the Church and Her people. It is not the teaching of our Church that one is "higher or better" than another, but imperfect teachers have sometimes communicated just that to waiting ears.....and of course in fairness to those who were/are doing the teaching, they have often been misunderstood by those who receive the teaching....despite their heroic effort to teach complicated concepts to (often) very young children.....whether chronoilogically or spiritually young.

And yet, on we go striving and yearning for perfection in Christ. And on goes the Church guided by the Holy Spirit, teaching all Truth as revealed in Christ. It realy is all about "IN CHRIST" for all us. Isn't that grand?

Pax!
Osap

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='osapientia' date='21 September 2009 - 12:38 AM' timestamp='1253450289' post='1969599']
God bless you for thinking the best of people, Nunsense. Unfortunately some who have thought this (i.e. "vertically") way over the many years since Jesus instituted His Church have caused great pain to the Church and Her people. It is not the teaching of our Church that one is "higher or better" than another, but imperfect teachers have sometimes communicated just that to waiting ears.....and of course in fairness to those who were/are doing the teaching, they have often been misunderstood by those who receive the teaching....despite their heroic effort to teach complicated concepts to (often) very young children.....whether chronoilogically or spiritually young.

And yet, on we go striving and yearning for perfection in Christ. And on goes the Church guided by the Holy Spirit, teaching all Truth as revealed in Christ. It realy is all about "IN CHRIST" for all us. Isn't that grand?

Pax!
Osap
[/quote]

Is it co-oincidence or what (I would say "or what") that today's readings were about ambition and vanity, and then the gospel was about Jesus' disciples arguing over who was the greatest among them. He had to sit them down and set them straight then, and it looks like things still haven't changed in many ways! It is our weak human nature to want to compare and categorize and judge, but good thing for us God judges differently than we do!

I had a religious sister asking me today why we had to listen to what the Archbishop says, and when I said that he is our shepherd appointed by Rome and therefore deserving of our love and respect and support; she asked why we even needed a shepherd! Then she said she didn't think it was fair that homosexuals weren't allowed to receive communion, and asked whose business it was anyway if they wanted to live that way. This is from a sister who has been in religion since she was 19 (she is 79 now)! I certainly didn't want to lecture her, but I had to remind her that Jesus set up His church with shepherds to watch over us, and that even in the time of the apostles things weren't perfect between them all. Then I had to explain that those with same-sex attraction always had the same option that she and I do - to live chaste lives. What was truly amazing is that she appeared not to have ever even thought about these things before. What has happened to our beloved Church??? I think we have a very good and conservative Archbishop here, although I don't know him personally yet, but I can see that he certainly has his job cut out for him, if this is the kind of thinking that is going on.

The way I look at it, even if there is a "hierarchy" or sorts, which there has to be in any organization really, what do I care if I am at the bottom? Didn't Jesus tell us that if we wanted to be first, we had to be last? And that if we wanted to lead, we had to serve? If only we could all truly let go of all that "importance" stuff and just see as St Paul said, that when one part of the body gets honored, then the whole body in honored!

Sorry, bit of a late night rant from me. It's just that none of this stuff matters in one way, but in another, it is so nice to have the structure and hierarchy and authority of our Church, because at least we know where we stand... and our beloved Church has been around for over 2000 years - pretty good going..... I want to be like St Teresa, a true daughter of the Church!

[osapientia]

[quote name='nunsense' date='20 September 2009 - 10:34 AM' timestamp='1253453643' post='1969608']

Then she said she didn't think it was fair that homosexuals weren't allowed to receive communion,

The way I look at it, even if there is a "hierarchy" or sorts, which there has to be in any organization really, what do I care if I am at the bottom?
[/quote]

This may be getting far afield from the original topic but I don't know how to bring the discussion (intact) to another forum, so I will respond again here...

Perhaps I am quite uninformed but I believe the only homosexuals barred from receiving Holy Communion in The Roman Catholic Church are those who are either not in Communion with Her or Her sons/daughters who are in a state of mortal sin. Wouldn't that be the same for any kind of "sexual"?????

Sometimes people hear only what they want to hear - sometimes because they have a need to be/stay angry and sometimes because they have an internal struggle/pain/wound keeping them from hearing the whole story. Compassion is always in order....though I understand how frustrating it can be to deal with those who might not WANT to hear/listen.

As for hierarchy....dictionary.com has both these definitions (with two othes in between)....which seems odd to me as the two seem quite different to my mind.

1. any system of persons or things ranked one above another
4. an organized body of ecclesiastical officials in successive ranks or orders: the Roman Catholic hierarchy

It is particularly curious to me that the 4th definiton using the word "successive" has a specific reference to The Church. To me "successive" conveys a sense of "time" rather than of some vertical rank/order. So I looked up "successive" and here is what I found:

1. following in order or in uninterrupted sequence; consecutive: three successive days.
2. following another in a regular sequence: the second successive day.
3. characterized by or involving succession.

I have often said to myself the word is HIERarchy not HIGHERarchy. BUT having said that, I want to state clearly that I believe that the Magisterium of th Church has LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY and that I am bound to obey. I do so to the best of my ability, hoping always to become more obedient tomorrow than I am today. Whether I'm on top or bottom, I'm still bound to obey those to whom Christ has given the charge of teaching in His Church. If in the vertical way of thinking that puts me at the bottom, so be it....persons will think how they think. I choose to think that Jesus desires me to be ever more conformed to His Image. If Jesus was ANYTHING, He was obedient and quite frankly, you don't get any more "on top" than being God.

Pax,
Osap

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='osapientia' date='21 September 2009 - 02:27 AM' timestamp='1253456860' post='1969621']
I choose to think that Jesus desires me to be ever more conformed to His Image. If Jesus was ANYTHING, He was obedient and quite frankly, you don't get any more "on top" than being God.

[/quote]




ok - that was so good that now I can go to bed happy! Thank you!

[osapientia]

[quote name='nunsense' date='20 September 2009 - 11:53 AM' timestamp='1253458389' post='1969624']


ok - that was so good that now I can go to bed happy! Thank you!
[/quote]

You're welcome...it's lovely to know that I've contributed to HAPPY rest.

[cmaD2006]

Wow ... its the FIRST time that a topic I start gets this much foot traffic :-). Even if there was digression!

Any more on hermits? The info I've read has been wonderful.

[Starets]

We have a hermit in our community, Br. Xavier, OSB. he has been a monk for several decades. He started in St. Meinrad's. He is also one of the founders of Prince of Peace monastery in California. He also served in a Benedictine community near Lima. He has been here for a couple decades, though not all of them as a hermit. His hermitage was initally build in the early days of my community. He used to make and sell quilts. I think he still does, to some extent. But, he is 80 so he isn't as fast at it as he used to be. Contrary to what was claimed on the TLC show "The Monastery", his hermitage is not a mile away from the main abbey building. I don't think it is much more than a quarter mile away!

He usually only shows up for Daily Mass. He says the Divine Office in his hermitage, using the same books we use. He also comes to Chapter Meetnbs of the Finally Professed and participates in community decisions.

[BarbTherese]

[quote]Replying to: nunsense
Posted Yesterday, 08:57 PM
Post Link: http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=98760&view=findpost&p=1969563 [/quote]


Hi again Nunsense and thank you for the reply.....there are differences of course between the states of life and vocations and I fully appreciate this........and there is nothing more perfect more holy for any person than to discern and follow God's Will for them - for their life - and there is nothing whatsoever that will draw them into Unity moreso than the fulfilling for the Love of God the duties of their state in life, their vocation. The priesthood and the religious life, the deaconate, consecrated virgins and the consecrated eremitical life are demanding I am sure, and it is God who grants all Graces necessary for the demands of any vocation or call of His. The secular life can also be equally demanding although different in kind and it is the same Lord who grants all Graces necessary to fulfill these demands. And were it not as demanding as any other state, then The Lord would send sufficient to make great saints anyway. ........Blessings and my regards..........Barb

Edited September 21, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='osapientia' date='20 September 2009 - 10:20 PM' timestamp='1253443855' post='1969577']


[quote]..............Perfection in the life, the witness of "clothing", consecration, apostolic, monastic, eremetical.......the subject and its myriad of nuances are broad and wide open to the creativity of persons (in consideration of legitimate authority).....and while I'm certain that distinctions have their place in the official Church and "out here" among the faithful, I'm not as convinced that those distinctions are meant to be thought of quite so "vertically" (except for - with respect to The Church - Jesus and The Magisterium).[/quote] Well said! Ideally the consecrated life (and the priesthood) are meant (in part) to be witnesses to the "vertical" or the relationship with God and ideally to witness to that which exists ("vertical" relationship with God) in all the faithful - not something which exists in their vocations only and alone. The ordained/consecrated vocations are also meant to witness to an aspect of the Life of Jesus (or His prayer life- His "vertical" relationship in which all Baptized into Him ideally are drawn) - Jesus (smiling here) was secular and a lay person. Ideally each of us in our own way, our own vocation and call, witness to an aspect of the life of Jesus - ideally. The Life of Jesus continues in His Mystical Body, The Church, and each of us has our special place and role, duty and this is ideally ordained by God and nothing more special, more holy - more anything - than The Will of God ............Blessings and my regards.......Barb

There is an interesting article on religious life on this link. I am not endorsing every word - but it does have interesting aspects worth considering I thought
http://ncronline.org/news/discerning...ous-life-today

Edited September 21, 2009 by BarbaraTherese

[Orans]

[quote name='cmariadiaz' date='20 September 2009 - 03:55 PM' timestamp='1253476510' post='1969806']
Any more on hermits? The info I've read has been wonderful.
[/quote]

From the blog of a Franciscan Hermit, Br. Rex, at Little Portion Hermitage:

[url="http://littleportionhermitage.blogspot.com/2009/04/email-to-potential-hermit.html"]http://littleportion...ial-hermit.html[/url]

[url="http://littleportionhermitage.blogspot.com/2009/04/email-to-potential-hermit.html"][color="#956839"]Email to a potential hermit[/color][/url]

Here is an email I sent earlier today to a person considering a vocation to the eremitic (read "hermit") life. NB: The email has been edited for purposes of anonymity and confidentiality.

Hello _____.

As for your discernment process: Know that your secret is safe with me until such time as you decide to go public. I'm not the best person to recommend something re: your discernment process to the eremitic life. I am probably the least well-read hermit and certainly the least experienced (in terms of time-in-vocation) of all the hermits in the diocese.

What I do know is that women and men who are practicing their eremitic vocation are all over the map with regards to how they practice. I know of a hermit in the archdiocese of Philadelphia who lives in an previously abandoned row-house in North Philadelphia, the poorest, most drug infested and dangerous section of the city. I know of hermits, like Srs. _______ and ____ , who live in cabins secluded in the woods.

Some solitaries believe that being canonically recognized is of the utmost importance, a recognition by the Church of the authenticity of their vocation. On the other hand, not a few solitaries I know think of canonical recognition as a load of croutons, an attempt by the hierarchy of the Church to "micro-manage" them.

Some solitaries--living off monies coming from their religious order, or retirement income, other pensions, or kept financially afloat by the generosity of benefactors--do not leave their hermitage except to run quick errands and/or attend mass at a nearby parish. Others must work a minimal amount of hours [in a secular or church profession] to pay the bills.

Many hermits remain in near-total solitude for the better part of every hour of every day, believing, (rightly so), that this is their primary vocation. Many others leave their hermitage as they feel lead. These solitaries believe, (rightly so), they must follow the promptings of the Lord to go as and where the Holy Spirit sends them to serve the needs of God's People.

(St. Francis of Assisi lived as such in the early stages of his religious life before "the Lord sent [him] brothers. " And countless spiritual sons and daughters of St. Francis have lived as "apostolic hermits" their entire religious life.)

Finally, hermits, if not careful, can become rather judgmental of their sister and brother solitaries who do not live the eremitic life in the way they themselves do. Alas, the virus of pride can infect even those of us vowed to the humble existence of a hermit. LOL!!

All that said, here are some links that might prove of some passing interest to you:

[url="http://www.hermitary.com/"]http://www.hermitary.com/[/url]

[url="http://www.ravensbreadministries.com/"]http://www.ravensbreadministries.com/[/url]

[url="http://notesfromstillsong.blogspot.com/"]http://notesfromstil...g.blogspot.com/[/url]
(Sr. Laural is something of a scholar on the theology of the eremitic life.)

Hope something in all the above has been helpful to you. Know that I hold you in my heart in prayer in a special way during this Holy Week and beyond.

Pax et Bonum,
Brother Rex, just another raggedy-ass Franciscan

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='cmariadiaz' date='21 September 2009 - 07:25 AM' timestamp='1253476510' post='1969806']
Wow ... its the FIRST time that a topic I start gets this much foot traffic :-). Even if there was digression!

Any more on hermits? The info I've read has been wonderful.
[/quote]

I fear I am the guilty party for dragging this thread off topic! Apologies. This Forums is for the journey into the religious life or matters connected to religious life I have noted and this thread specifically about hermits. I am a lay woman living under private vows (with direction) living alone - have done for 35 years or so now and with spiritual direction - and am not called to the religious life per se in traditional understanding. I think I might fall into this however from the Catholic Catechism - which like Canon 603 does not say a lot, but says much, and embraces the lay state under certain conditions, which I think perhaps I meet.

[quote]920 Without always professing the three evangelical counsels publicly, hermits "devote their life to the praise of God and salvation of the world through a stricter separation from the world, the silence of solitude and assiduous prayer and penance."460
921 They manifest to everyone the interior aspect of the mystery of the Church, that is, personal intimacy with Christ. Hidden from the eyes of men, the life of the hermit is a silent preaching of the Lord, to whom he has surrendered his life simply because he is everything to him. Here is a particular call to find in the desert, in the thick of spiritual battle, the glory of the Crucified One. [/quote]

Apolgies again to the person who initiated this thread and other posters..........blessings all - and with my regards........Barb

.