Rougemont, Theme 2

For the past few years, and especially since the Second Vatican Council, we have deeply reflected on this Church cell known as the religious institute.

. the biblical approach, with reflections on the apostolic commitment of Jesus, on the College of the Twelve, on the "vita apostolica", on the daily life of the first Christian communities;

. the historical approach, with research on primitive monasticism, on the evolution of the type of authority exercised in religious life, on the different monastic Rules, on the origins of each Order;

. the theological approach, especially studies that renewed the theology of the vows or shed light on the place of religious in the Church (based on Lumen gentium);

. and finally, the spiritual approach, inseparable from the preceding ones, and focusing mainly on the conversion of hearts and mentalities.

Today I thought of inviting you to take another approach, one that would complement the preceding; at first sight it may seem completely secondary or negligible. It will have all the earmarks of good common sense; it will deal with self-evident aspects of issues, but sometimes just talking about them simplifies everything. In fact, it will be a question of giving back to age-old truths all their impact. In one word it will consist in casting a sociological light on community life, but this will not prevent us from remaining steadily in the light of the Gospel.

I shall try to speak only from my own limited personal experience and often leave you the responsibility of filling in the dotted lines. Occasionally I may even dream as I visualize the future. You will forgive me this dreaming, I am sure, as you will forgive my little knowledge of your lived experience, which could sometimes make my comments sound unjust or inappropriate.

1. Crisis and Progress

We shall not speak of the changes, of the numerous improvements in "details" that you have already achieved, but more fundamentally of change itself, of this aptitude to change, to progress, to evolve that we must find in every human group as in every living organism.

And we shall speak of change as something wanted for the community and by the community, in order to better fulfill our vocation.

In fact, it often happens that change is imposed on a community from the outside, either for political reasons (example: the cloistered nuns of the Eastern bloc; the exodus of 1940); for economic reasons (example: the fuel crisis, or new social security laws); for cultural motives (example: the liturgy of our African sisters), or again, because of unforeseen material conditions. In all these circumstances change does not cause that many community problems.

This kind of imposed change has always been the lot of the people of God. Successively, it had to pass from a nomadic existence to a sedentary life, from a tribal organization to a central state government and then to a monarchy, from a relative peace in its own land to exile and deportation, from political independence to slavery under several conquerors.

In the same way today, like an outside force, God provides for the needs of his people during these mutations, occasionally very deep, in the life of the Church. It is God and God alone who has the key to their solution. In compensation there is a progressive mutation of communal life, a maturing, an evolution for the better, that God expects from each of our communities so that it will respond at every moment of its history to the call God ceaselessly sends to it. At this point, evidently, the will of each cloistered nun and the will of the group are directly involved, whether it concern moral conversion, or less importantly, taking concrete means to improve the quality of life and daily activities.

In general people do not change, feel no need to change, unless they reach an impasse, a deadlock, an almost intolerable situation, a tension or crisis situation.

The Church goes through crises; so do our communities. That is why we shall try to answer this first question rapidly: what procedure should be followed when a crisis erupt ? The answer will provide us with a kind of background for our reflections.

1. read the crisis, analyze it as objectively as possible by eliminating all emotional content and bids to get the upper hand. We feel our former inherited lifestyles threatened, contested, and rendered meaningless. Before all else, it is necessary to measure the real importance of this questioning;

2. cast the light of history on the problem. It is necessary to understand our origins because yesterday's conditioned responses explain today's situation. History gives us the opportunity to acquire a greater esteem of our heritage and make a relative evaluation of the crisis. What is often seen as a new difficult is nothing but a recurrence of an old problem or a timeless ailment of the community;

3. be open to new questions. The progress of social sciences, the changes in society, ethical standards, hygiene, culture, education, communications - all render certain things or certain type of behaviour intolerable. The Church accepts this challenge of the status quo without fear or sadness but with a critical watchfulness and therefore without allowing anybody to take away its memory or its right to speak out. It also expects the same constructive reaction from all religious institutes;

4. refer to the plan of Jesus Christ for his Church and to the project of the founders for serving Jesus Christ. It is a question of constantly returning to Gospel demands as well as to the great spiritual insights that have molded the features of each religious family;

5. take new orientations in life and in apostolic works . To be wholesome, these new orientations must simultaneously implement what is imperishable in Scripture and Tradition, what has been recognized as life-giving in new needs and new insights;

6. make decisions for here and now. These decisions must remain consistent with the chosen orientations (see n° 5 above), but they must cake into account the present life conditions of individual communities. Although a certain unity is possible or necessary among various communities having the same apostolic commitment, on the level of daily existence a certain pluralism is unavoidable.

It is a long road to travel, but no shortcut nor short circuit should be attempted, for unpleasant surprises would result. It is impossible to travel directly from 1 to 6, mechanically doing exactly the opposite of what has been done through the years.

A community's health, even on the evangelical level - especially on this level - can often be measured by its capacity for analysis and decision-making, or, if you wish, by its ability to face its own problems squarely and compassionately, and by its determination not to stagnate far away from solutions.

2. Group living and its laws

If we consult a dictionary, the word "community" gives us the following definition: "a social group whose members live together or have goods and interests in common".

The religious community, therefore, is a social reality and can analyze itself from a sociological viewpoint; moreover, its general characteristics are those of a group. We shall conveniently start from this concept to deepen our sociological understanding of community life.

A group exists when a certain interdependence can be found among several persons as they pursue commun or compatible goals. In the case of our communities, interdependence is permanent.

Evidently many kinds of groups exist. Some, more spontaneously formed, are based on compatibility and selective affinities (group of chessplayers); others, also spontaneous, are based on homogeneity such as identity of origin or formation (groups of former students). The group known as a religious community is an institutional one.

Group existence and group life (and, therefore, community life) suppose a commonality of some elements which we shall briefly examine. They will give us the opportunity to study group cohesiveness and group dynamism, and then two models of extreme group functioning.

A. Elements common to all groups

1. A cluster of values, e.g., love of Mozart's music, love of sport; for a religious community: love of contemplative prayer, of silence, of a special type of liturgy, etc.

2. Goals to reach, e.g., to be, at the very heart of the Church, a source of power for intercession, reconciliation, etc.

3. A system of roles and statuses, to define tasks and integrate them, e.g., in our communities are found the choir director, the bursar, the mistress of novices, the progress, etc.

4. A communication network: communication of information, orders and instructions; ascending, descending, and horizontal communication. For example, in our monasteries such means of communication are: community meetings, the council, ... the general intercessions, etc.

5. Methods of work and means of action, e.g. in education: courses, seminars, supervised research. In our communities: choir practice, photocopying, use of the ceramic kiln, celebrations at the chapel, etc.

6. A set of administrative norms regulating concrete affairs and daily life, e.g., social security contributions, in a cooperative establishment the agenda for the use of farm machinery; in our monasteries, the conventual library functioning, the timetable for the use of specific machines, gardening task distribution, etc.

7. A set of administrative norms regulating the group and each member, e.g., in an enterprise, recruiting the personnel, hospitality, orientation, formation, promotions; in our monasteries: organizing the postulate, the novitiate, ongoing formation, etc.

The seven elements normally found in all members of a group make it possible to plot the group's health chart at any given moment, and also to gauge its cohesiveness and dynamism.

In principle, cohesiveness and dynamism go hand in hand, for everything that strengthens the unity of members will enable the group to advance, and vice versa, everything that enables the group to advance reinforces the unity of its members.

In a group, if elements conducive to cohesiveness become separated from those leading to progress, it is then threatened either by sclerosis or by disintegration. For example, this is what happens when a very cohesive, very united group refuses to progress because it declines to question the comforts it enjoys such as tranquility and security. On the contrary, a less united group can sometimes be extremely dynamic and show much initiative when the task to accomplish or the goal to achieve allows them to push into the background or simply evade the problems of group unity. In such a case there is a certain understanding among group members to flee - but flee forward. Sooner or later, however, the question of group cohesiveness will be raised, and with increased urgency.

Let us now examine the problem in a positive light and ask ourselves what factors can ensure group dynamism and cohesiveness.

1. The group will be healthy and will progress if each of the seven elements previously defined is pertinent, clear, and accepted.

Pertinent, "pertaining exactly to the subject or matter in band"; especially when taking into account a long-term goal;

clear, because whatever is ambiguous divides a group, especially when this ambiguity is deliberately maintained;

Let us apply this test to values that are group commitments. For example, a monastery believes in the value of contemplative prayer, prayer that is silent, purely gratuitous, totally oblivious of self - an extremely pertinent value, but is it clear for everybody? Is it truly accepted by all?

Concerning the concrete goals the group has chosen, the test results will stand out more clearly. Are these concrete goals pertinent, that is, are they appropriate to a long-term objective, to the authentic vocation of the group, and to each member? For example: some cloistered nuns favour a certain kind of hospitality ; will it really be the expression of what is most deeply sought and experienced in their life? Is the project clear? Are there any ambiguous points ? Deliberately ambiguous ? Is the project accepted ? At the outset is there sufficient consensus ? Is the project pertinent ?

Let us now take the example of administrative rules for daily activities: are the prayer and work schedules clear? (In general yes: they are posted). Are they accepted (and therefore respected...)? Are they pertinent ? (Evidently in some cases they are not).

A last example: group regulations relative to persons. Is the type of formation destined for the younger members clear? Is it accepted by the community ? Finally, is it pertinent ?

Pertinence, clarity, and acceptance create an agreement between individual and group motivations. In fact they must be evaluated from time to time and reaffirmed as often as need be. That is why communication and sharing of ideas at different levels become so important; they make it possible to confront and harmonize individual reactions.

2. Another factor in developing cohesiveness and dynamism: affective ties, and beyond that, charity. I shall not dwell on this factor; it goes without saying.

3. Sometimes prestige can be an element of cohesiveness and progress, especially in the beginning years, whether it be the prestige of a leader (for example, a spiritual leader sensitive to some need in the Church); the prestige of a group (a monastery of high repute); or the prestige of the task undertaken (an institute is highly rated, enjoys a high profile, because of its achievements). For a certain period of time prestige can be a positive factor; but it is sometimes ambiguous and often transient. Generally, a group that has depended for several years on the prestige of a person or a group is eventually confronted by a test of truth, which reveals the true depth of their commitments.

4. Certain other elements are only apparent factors of cohesiveness, and do not lead to a true dynamism: for example, coercion and group pressure; or perhaps a member's impossibility of changing from one group to another, which is often expressed in these terms: "I am not wanted anywhere else", or "It is much worse elsewhere."

We never meet two completely identical groups and even though we retain only the main models of group functioning, we are confronted with a whole range of possibilities. To be brief, and to start off with strong typical characteristics, let us immediately examine two cases, one from each end of the scale.

But I hasten to add that in real life we never find these models in a pure state; we always deal with a mixture, a dosage, which is more or less accidental or more or less conscious.

. a place determined by habits or customs, with no exceptions allowed; example: the restrictive rules of the family hierarchy in many African ethnic groups;

. a place determined by reason; example: in western societies men are ranked according to their officially recognized expertise, their academic degrees.

b) Authority is impersonal, entrusted to someone who automatically accedes to a function because of seniority, education, capacity for capital investment.

c) Functions are precisely defined, and preference is given to action under orders, much to the detriment of the group-decision process; in other words, the least leeway possible is allowed; personal opinions are limited, and preferably each person is expected to conform to a code signposting the workday, and furnishing foolproof applicable criteria. The ideal, more or less conscious, more or less admitted, is to obtain conformist behaviour and compliant personalities (like the sergeant lining up his division and roaring, "I want to see only one head!").

d) The administration rules are firm and precise, especially concerning choice of persons, their promotion and salary.

There again life is "boxed in" to the utmost, to achieve before hand a maximum elimination of all deviations or difficulties. In such groups, initiative is always unwelcome and is considered harmful. Those who succeed are exactly those who show no initiative. At the very limit, the yardstick to measure people will not be personal qualities, nor even their achievements, no, it will be their ability to become a cog in the machinery: "Does he/she have the professional conduct required?" The essential consideration is the prescribed aspect of work rather than the presence of personal judgment.

e) Communication is depersonalized; people are never contacted wholistically, as they are, with particular personality traits and lifestyles, but rather according to their "rank" and "status". Individuals are not expected to have a personal history precisely because in the group "nobody wants to rock the boat."

Attempts are made to give concrete form to the age-old dream of a society without any historical past, an aseptic world that is always predictable. These people forever have to know how things stand. To achieve this goal they will sacrifice all human warmth, all personal and emotional spontaneity in their relationships.

Evidently these traits reinforce the "according to me" tendency of a person, and harden the façades, for each one feels he or she is, at any moment, a "role" in action.

f) Confrontations and conflicts are avoided at all costs, for they call into question the established order, and the static traits of the group.

. or accusations are levelled at some individuals, or scapegoats are created, "the only ones guilty" of the discord, just as in ancient times a goat was chased into the wilderness bearing all the iniquities of the tribe or clan.

When conflicts continue in spite of all this, institutional arbitration methods are brought into play; for example, no meeting is called for group discernment of dissension causes; on the contrary, the superintendent is called in, or a letter is sent to His Excellency .... or votes are prematurely called for.

The fear of conflict, added to the concern already mentioned to obtain conformity behaviour, explains certain ostracizing phenomena relative to troublesome individuals.

We also understand that in these "static" groups, confrontations are carried on with kid gloves, each side taking care not to upset anyone. This can rapidly result in:

. odd discrepancies between the results of a secret vote and the declarations made before the vote.

These are the main traits of a group according to the stability model. Let us repeat: the group type just described is nowhere to be found in a pure state.

We shall now characterize the group at the other extreme end of the scale, a group that functions completely otherwise and seeks cohesiveness not by tightening structures but by occasionally establishing a new balance.

Here again let us not be in a rush to reach conclusions about this process and let us not automatically canonize such groups, for not one really functions totally according to the model. Moreover, nothing proves this model, in pure state, would always be beneficial.

a) Notwithstanding the state in which a group finds itself, it can be called into question without creating a catastrophe. And the different elements of the group's life and activities can be re-oriented in order to reach a new level of balance.

b) The dynamism of this group rests totally on individual spontaneity, or the capacity to respond to newness by newness, to a novel situation by a novel attitude. Activities are therefore planned by a decisionmaking process that appeals to individual initiative.

c) A person's place is not fixed for all time. The social strata can change: roles and responsibilities are sufficiently flexible. As a last resort, on non-essential points members can accept a temporary de-structuration in order to re-structure the group or its activities in a more adapted, more satisfying way for members.

This group type has a new concept of what is rational. Acting and reacting in a rational way does not simply mean to eliminate past structures nor change objectives without prior experience; on the contrary it means to take into consideration all factors bearing on a specific situation. Let us take an example: a group wants to achieve greater work-efficiency leading to an increased production; and it intends to consider not only short-term (short view) but also long-term efficiency. Short-term efficiency would require shuffling workers from one team to another. It would perhaps also require a completely new composition of worker teams. Long-term efficiency would suggest a professional recycling for the whole group. In other words, both group and individual progress would be taken into consideration; equally so individual work rhythms.

d) Human relationships are honestly lived, no camouflage on either side; this could eventually create the risk of a minor transient confusion or certain disagreements. The group gradually learns to reflect positively on complex problems, and buckle down to tasks requiring expertise in various fields. For example: the musician and the poet collaborate with the sound technician; the liturgist acquires a better understanding of the flower arranger and vice versa.

e) Authority is less restraining, better shared, more decentralized. It is especially considered as the capacity of responding to the needs of the group at that particular stage of its evaluation.

Individuals are not automatically promoted according to seniority or the accumulation of prestigious diplomas, but rather by their ability to facilitate a group's ongoing development, and especially but not only, by their creativity, their new approaches.

f) The group acquires the habit of clear-headed conflict-resolving. Instead of dreaming about ideal accords, of being satisfied with superficial agreements, conflict-resolving seeks better cooperation. The "all or nothing" attitude is rejected, for it is often nothing but retarded adolescent behaviour; moreover, the group will not accept seeing their group-life become a perpetual tug of war, where some always lose what others gain.

g) The administrative rules, the group habits and customs are considered changeable since their role is to foster cohesiveness and progress. Moreover, the group is open to the creation of new norms. From this viewpoint group maturity does not consist in refusing all norms; on the contrary, it is measured by the group's capacity to assume and revitalize its norms as often as necessary.

In a word, the group's objective is not fixity but stability. Consequently, a group is stable, not when it does not move, but when it is able to find a new balance level at each important moment of its life.

- enables a group to last in spite of problems and conflicts, even though it does so by denying them, or preventing their overflow, or achieving a kind of encystment;

[The definition in the dictionary becomes a real parable when transferred to the sociological field: "encystment: the formation of a thick envelope of conjunctive tissues around a foreign body, thus isolating it from neighbouring tissues"]

- appears to ensure security; but a security sometimes dearly paid for in terms of personal happiness;

- gives a group the possibility, at least in the long run, of resolving most of its conflicts;

- provides less immediate security, but instead aims at achieving a greater dynamism in each person;

- develops a greater sensitivity to events, unexpected occurrences, spontaneity, and self-fulfillment.

One could say these two models of group functioning correspond to two definitions of peace. One is from St. Augustine: "tranquillitas ordinis" (the tranquility of order), and the other from Paul VI: "peace is balance achieved in movement".

For the sake of this analysis we have chosen the extreme ends of the scale, two models opposed on most points; but once again, these two models are nowhere to be found in pure state. Happily, for in absolute form they could lead a group to hard-line positions, or to excessive frailties. In concrete circumstances, during its different life phases, each community must search for the best possible blend of security and risk. A certain oscillation between these two poles is normal, and in fact general, and can be verified by following the evolution of a group to some extent. Every vibrant and vigorous group is obliged at some point to regulate the balance model of a group by the order/structure model and vice versa. The important factor is the group's ability to recognize the need and legitimacy of such regulating. It is even the starting point of true community humility.

Here, in a very special way, the analogy between personal maturity and group maturity comes into play. In fact, just as a person achieves maturity only when the past, the irreversible facts of personal life history, the need to journey with individual gifts and limitations are accepted, so a community's maturity is achieved only when it is able :

. to accept itself, without anguish, as a living being in a perpetual process of osmosis with its milieu, and in perpetual evolution,

What was true of Abraham "who left knowing not where he was going", what was true of Israel throughout its exodus, what was true of the Son of Man who had no place on earth to rest his head, is also true of every community, as a member of the Church : there is no permanent city for the community, no rest until one rests in God, and at every moment of its history it is journeying towards that city whose architect and builder is God himself.

Concerning the criteria a group has in hand for self-regulation, they can at once be found in a past acting as a reference point, in present objectives, and in its vision of the future.

Concretely, as each spiritual family has its own collective memory, its lived reality and its hopes, the right mixture of stability and creativity will be accomplished before all else by integrating the charism of the institute as expressed in its origins, and eventually in its reform or reforms. That is the reason for always giving so much importance in today's choices, to silence, to solitude, to joyous austerity, and to the life of this cell called community. Necessary updating will deal, before all else, with these essential points; otherwise a monastery would turn its back to the future.

Suppose the community has perceived the need for evolution, partial or global, suppose it has admitted it must change, how, then, can it plan and implement this evolution? And concretely, what ways and means can it choose to foster a reasonable mutation?

When a community seems to have reached a point of desperate stagnation, when mental blocks seem beyond remedy, when the community begins to doubt the future - even its own survival - then, this question becomes extremely urgent.

Certainly difficult situations arise when faith in the Lord becomes increasingly necessary; but there is no community situation when nothing can be done, nothing sought, nothing tried; the more our trust in God is authentic, the more it renders us clear-headed, courageous and creative to do what is in our power.

Something can always be done. The first step is to work with time, just as God has been doing since he placed human beings on this earth.

We shall, therefore, explore a whole series of possible initiatives, of improvable sectors. I shall begin by enumerating them, but without trying to list them all, and will do so with our monastic communities in mind.

A. Improving communication in the community means to promote the sharing of activities and motivations, to increase clear-headedness (and light) in all interpersonal relations.

The "window" diagram, well-known to sociologists, will give us an opportunity to summarize the difficulties of such a project and the most important efforts to make (Fig. 1).

Area I (Free to share) represents behaviour patterns and motivations known to the individual in question and to the others; therefore, everything free to share or be shared in community.

Area II (Blind) represents what others see in us (behaviour patterns and motivations), which we ourselves ignore. For example: a fanatic fails to see he is one, but his entourage quickly categorizes him as such.

Area III (Secret) fences in what we know about ourselves but do not wish to reveal to others.

Area IV (Unknown) comprises behaviour patterns or motivations of which neither the individual nor the others are aware. For example: the Superior's leadership style impedes group communication, but nobody can pinpoint the source of discomfort.

In a newly-formed group (or a community with poorly-developed communication skills) the areas are divided thus (Fig. 2):

Fig.2

I Free to share

II Blind

III Secret

IV Unknown

Area I (Free to share) is very small, and this can be verified by several symptoms:

. very little clear-sightedness, many rash judgments (to tell the truth a judgment is always rash...);

. feelings of anxiety and apprehension run high, and conversations are still stiff and starched;

. nothing gets off the ground: there is no follow-up to suggestions and ideas; most of what goes on in reality is hardly seen or heard; certain group members always seem to preach in the wilderness, without ever knowing if they have struck positive or negative chords, etc.

As members become more mature (and evangelical) the free to shore area tends to increase in size: each one feels freer to be his or her own self, and each one tries to see the others more clearly, as they truly are.

Evidently - and this is essential - Area I (free to share) cannot expand unless the other three shrink, which brings about the following changes:

. When Area 1 expands, Area III shrinks. In other words: when sharing increases, secrecy decreases; this does not mean there is less discretion. It becomes less necessary for each one to hide or hush what is known or felt, because the group atmosphere permits greater truth. Community members feel less apprehensive and will more freely dedicate their resources and expertise to the common good. Simultaneously, a greater openness to new suggestions and opinions becomes evident.

. Area II (blind) shrinks more slowly, for we often have "good reasons", more or less sub-conscious, psychological reasons, to 'remain blind' (cf. Jn 9:41), to refuse seeing how we behave, to flee the light given by others.

. Change is still slower for Area IV (the unknown). Oftentimes, to reveal one or the other illusion to an individual and to the group, unexpected events must occur or persons from outside coming in with a fresh look must intervene.

In a community which bas sufficiently developed its sharing skills, the 'window' shows some important modifications (Fig. 3).

I Free to share

II Blind

IV Unknown

III Secret

The secret zone bas diminished considerably: individuals are losing less time and energy fending off psychological territory invasions. Zones II and IV are also much smaller and are practically similar in size: the self-blindness of each individual is not much larger than the ignorance common to all.

Concerning freedom to share, one comment has to be made: improving communication in a community does not necessarily imply more occasions for conversation; it is rather an active search for quality in dialogue. Normally a more authentic sharing will lead community members back to a more genuine silence.

In regard to available concrete means to promote sharing, not one will ever be a miracle cure. Leaders on all levels must absolutely learn to use several reflexes or attitudes at the same time, and this knowledge is not obtained through books:

When the necessary transpositions are made, these simple means are still useful aids for all these who wish to work clear-sightedly for community advancement.

Rediscovering true priorities is often an effective means of helping a community progress:

. an inflated sensitivity in the community to fads or improper outside pressure;

. bitterness in others, who feel isolated or ignored because of their fidelity to essentials.

. in each individual an identity consciousness, the sense of membership in a truly specific community;

. on the intelligence level, efforts to present, clarify, persuade and bolster self esteem. Essentials must be recalled again and again; community leaders have the grace of state for this. The promulgation of new norms on a trial basis for all the monasteries may have been an appropriate moment to promote the value of essential goals;

. on the level of the will, of emotion, oftentimes courageous choices regarding the time-table, presences, absences, relationship style with the milieu, joyful austerity which is part of all communitarian monastic life, etc.

This means to aim, through community life, for maximum fulfillment of each destiny, of each personal vocation.

To tell the truth, this concern for personal promotion cannot be isolated from the other efforts we are now analyzing: it influences all attempts to improve communication, to re-focus the community on essentials, to give back quality to group achievements, etc.

But treating the theme of personal promotion separately will give us an opportunity to speak about a few special initiatives apt in the long run to help change the community atmosphere.

Religious institutes have made immense efforts, especially since Vatican II, to give their members an ongoing doctrinal formation and results were soon evident, and above all, spiritual results. For sometimes, individuals may become shipwrecked or adrift in stagnant waters, a situation resulting from a deficiency in faith nourishment; this may happen even in monastic communities.

Ongoing doctrinal formation: in addition to the ancient traditional conferences guaranteed in all monasteries by the diocesan clergy, or occasionally by renowned religious, the proper authorities organized biblical sessions that were sometimes intensive, always demanding; community study and research projects lasting several weeks were undertaken. They revealed the marvellous expertise and pedagogical giftedness of several sisters. Some hidden gifts never see the light of day until someone takes initiatives geared to the promotion of individuals.

In many elderly or middle-aged sisters this seemed to have revived not only the yearning for solid spiritual nourishment, not only the interest for the doctrine received, and received as a group, but also the desire to nourish themselves and be actively implicated in their own biblical or doctrinal culture, each according to her abilities and means.

I believe the time has came in the history of the Church to face, humbly and hopefully, a true personal approach to biblical and doctrinal culture. The means of implementation are not necessarily out of reach. They should fulfill three needs:

We dream of seeing in a few years' time each institute - or why not the UCRC - capable of responding indepedently to three these demands of the sisters.

More challenging is the task of forming the young sisters. Entrance and departure statistics prove it to a certain extent, for numbers are objective and impersonal.

Here again, whatever is undertaken to personalize formation can enrich the whole community, providing good will already exists in the community members towards the young sisters who seek to learn and towards the sisters in charge of formation. Already formation methods, organization, and criteria have undergone profound changes in numerous monasteries. But now, the young aspirants who must be welcomed to the postulate and then to the novitiate have cultural guidelines and a Christian background which can no longer be compared to those of twenty years ego. In addition to this new and unstable situation, the formation of young sisters is handicapped in several other ways:

1. The young are too poorly accompanied or helped in their spiritual life while still in the world, during the interval between the decision to enter the monastery and the beginning of the postulate.

2. A first discernment process enabling the young to seek freely light and guidance in their quest is often lacking. This would eliminate eventual failures that are almost certain to leave deep scars in a person's history. How often we welcome young women in our monasteries for a simple first-hand look but sometimes also for the postulate, whose demands have not been subjected to any discernment. Is there not some work to be done by the formation team to avoid misleading a young person for eighteen months in the postulate of some religious family when an in-depth discernment would have resulted in a fairly definite orientation?

3. The discernment within the monastery is sometimes much too long. This makes it so much more difficult for the person who leaves during the novitiate stage to re-adapt to another type of life and another Church ministry.

4. In some institutes the members of the formation team are not as adequately prepared as they should be to receive the young people who will came knocking at the monastery door during the 2000s.

5. Institutes as such, have not always sufficiently updated their vocational discernment methods; sometimes, to prolong the stay of aspirants or to keep them in the community, they will limit their discernment to superficial exterior traits or follow obsolete criteria concerning human behaviour and human evolution in a cloistered setting.

D. Check the circuits, that is to say, review the key area of life and activities in the monastery to ensure a fair and friendly sharing of responsibilities.

This involves a periodic examination of labour organization, incoming supplies and out-going finished products, division of time, and allocation of personnel for leisure hours, days of prayer, high creativity tasks, library service (the favourite spot for special circuits), etc.

Because the sisters voice no complainte is no reason to conclude things are running smoothly. Sometimes just knowing a superior is alert and quick to detect an unjust situation gives the more unobtrusive sisters a real inner freedom.

- Occasionally review the exact timetable of the community and of each sister; this verification is often a box of surprises.

- Eliminate overloading those community members who are more gifted in various fields or more generous, never able to say "no"; redress the situation of others too engrossed in lucrative or high-profile activities; or still others subconsciously seeking an alibi to flee the monotony of cloistered life.

- Eliminate obstacles. For example, certain sectors of community work are bottlenecked because one sister holding a key position clings to it although she is temporarily or permanently no longer able to cope with the situation.

- Eliminate pluralities of office. There are official, visible, sometimes inevitable pluralities of office, but it is always regrettable to see these situations persist (for example, the cumulation of a government post and a formation responsibility). Some cumulations are less evident or less conscious and tend to take root and flourish because of a combination of circonstances or force of habit. For example, certain responsibilities concerning liturgical animation, finances, or task distribution sometimes give some sisters a real power which can interfere with the superior's authority or be felt as a heavy burden by the sisters.

- Eliminate anomalies. A fairly frequent anomaly : one work area is monopolized by one sister who makes it her private stamping ground, or who tends to create (unconsciously) a dictatorship and dominate the other workers on the job... even those who simply cross her realm. Another anomaly : routing some services or pleasant community tasks for the sole benefit of one sister or a few.

- Prepare successors for posts demanding more technical knowledge; sometimes this may entail giving younger sisters a professional formation or working tools which were formerly beyond the reach of older sisters.

E. De-mythicize positions of responsibility

I shall not dwell very long on this subject of authority and responsibilities which must often be discussed as part of the reflection process within each institute.

Sometimes, there is an amazing contrast between the generosity of a sister, obvious in many ways, and her lack of inner freedom toward responsabilities and positions of power.

After Vatican II a large body of excellent work was published with a view to restoring the concept of authority as service, in a poor and servant Church. There still remains a problem which must one day be faced and given in-depth treatment : the psychological impact of posts, responsibilities, elections and nominations in small groups such as those found in monasteries.

We could easily be tempted to examine this issue solely or primarily from a guilt view-point, without looking closely enough at the personal difficulties of cloistered nuns on this subject, which are sometimes induced by group habits, by ingrained customs. These situations are vaguely perceived by the community but are finally endorsed with a fatalistic shrug: "Nothing can be done about it !"

Let us be fair : in many monasteries elections and nominations are opportunities for analyses and discernments that are thoroughly evangelical. However, can we truly say that the Lord can be proud of his monasteries at election time ?

Positions of authority must be de-mythicized. In fact it appears that twenty years after Vatican II, a myth is still lurking in the woodwork of our monasteries. Without caricaturing it that much, one can describe it in these terms: "To really succeed one's life as a cloistered nun, one must be or have been prioress or councilor"; or again: "Only those who are in authority or have been in authority contribute to the progress of a monastery"; and still again, "Going back to the rank and file is proof of rejection".

The whole situation sounds false and moreover is a direct contradiction of the Pauline theology concerning the complementarity of charisms. In any case, many who accept the responsibility of a monastery, even after judging the trust placed in them at its true value, they live their responsibility daily as a cross that molds them into the likeness of Christ the Pastor. But the problem is seen otherwise by sisters who have never acceded to important positions or who remain fixated on a failure. As the humorous saying goes: "To be a councilor is not much; but ... not to be one is a lot !" A malaise sometimes remains, diffuse but real, which may impede the progress of the sister or the community for a long time.

When mandates are being renewed several criteria can be used to judge whether or not the community is in good health:

- Debates reach a sufficiently high level of openness (cf. the "secret" window discussed above); evidently, transparency in a large group is rarely total.

- No significant difference can be seen between publicly expressed opinions and those expressed afterwards in a secret vote.

- No appeal has to be made to juridical restrictions.
- The positive aspects of a beneficial rotation of persons is recognized.
- Members loyally concur in the final community decision.

F. Give or give back quality to communal achievements

Nothing bonds a group together as much as undertaking a communal project demanding an extraordinary effort from all.

In the working world, monasteries striving to produce quality goods are already reaping the benefits. Formerly one would say: "This is a vast undertaking, the work of a Roman", or "This is work done by a Benedictine", but now in the different regions of France we are beginning to hear: "This is the work of cloistered nuns !"

It would be necessary to dwell at length on the subject of community relaxation so easily undermined by crowded conditions and routine.

Leisure time in a large group will always be a special moment demanding self-forgetfulness and attentiveness to others; and it would be an act of spiritual retrogression to contest or abolish this opportunity for evangelical asceticism. But the fact still remains that the goal of recreation is to re-create something and the forms of this necessary creativity change constantly, ever in step with the surrounding culture and personal development.

I have always been impressed by the relation between the dynamism of liturgical celebrations and that of community life. Let this be clear : it is not primarily a question of the rich sounds of melody and harmony or true high G flat notes. Some very ordinary liturgies strike a true note because they reveal the unity of hearts and souls, and the faithful who join you in prayer feel it very strongly. The essential element is not the artistic quality of the finished product, but the gospel love that contributes to its creation. In general, however, by a minor miracle the Holy Spirit, whose secret is known to him alone, the two tend to coincide: liturgical quality and gospel love quality go hand in hand.

Such, my dear sisters, are the few reflections I wished to share with you in order to apply the general laws of group progress to evangelical growth in our congregations.

I am sure you have understood that the risen Lord is not only at heart of all this, but that he also acts, through the Holy Spirit, at heart of all the dynamisms in your congregations. Between common sense and the Beatitudes no separation nor opposition exist. I simply mean that when we have taken together a thousand steps on the road of common sense, Jesus intervenes to say: "Together let us take another thousand steps". And the only difficult one is step 1001, for that is the one where charity can become heroic.

1. Crisis and Progress

2. Group living and its laws

A. Elements common to all groups

Known to self

Unknown to self

Known to others

Unknown to others

Fig.2

E. De-mythicize positions of responsibility

F. Give or give back quality to communal achievements